© 2020 IJRAR August 2020, Volume 7, Issue 3 ...ijrar.org/papers/IJRAR19W1514.pdfsector has been...

© 2020 IJRAR August 2020, Volume 7, Issue 3 www.ijrar.org (E-ISSN 2348-1269, P- ISSN 2349-5138)

IJRAR19W1514 International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews (IJRAR) www.ijrar.org 148

SERVICE QUALITY AND CUSTOMER

SATISFACTION IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR

ORGANIZATIONS: Evidence from selected transport

service departments in Amhara Regional State, Ethiopia

1Belayneh Aniley, 2Yebcha Fenta

1Lecturer, 2Lecturer 1Department of Marketing Management 2Department of Marketing Management

1Bahir Dar University, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia, Post Box 79,

Abstract

Evolution of economies worldwide highlights the fact that the service industry is growing faster than any other sectors.

In contrary, the productivity and consequently the quality of this sector seems to be declining. Therefore, designing

quality service is considered as a major challenge in service organizations and especially in those who want to have a

customer based design.

The purpose of this study is to identify the factors determining service quality in the road and transport sector, and ways

of improving service delivery and customer satisfaction. By using a SERVPERF approach, the study focuses on the

measurement of service quality, and examines overall customer satisfaction with the services of the five road and

transport business processes under the control of Amhara regional state transport authority. Consequently, a model

depicting overall service quality was developed and tested empirically among the respondents. Reliability (Cronbach

Alpha coefficients) analyses were carried out to determine the consistency of the construct. Moreover, five factors

were used to address quality of services, and satisfaction levels of service users whose opinions and concerns are deemed

vital in making public services in the region better organized, need based, and more competitive.

With respect to the correlations among variables, almost all the service quality dimensions were found to have

statistically significant associations with customer satisfaction. From multiple regression analysis, while the dimension

of ‘reliability’ and ‘assurance’ were reported to have significant effects on customer satisfaction, the largest contribution

was made by overall service quality. The ‘reliability’ and ‘responsiveness’ elements of service quality were also emerged

as the most important factor in estimating overall service quality, in the context of road and transport related services.

Thus, while the importance of service factors are prioritized in view of the findings pertaining to Amhara region transport

authority service delivery, all the service quality attributes identified with the SERVPERF dimensions are equally

applicable in ascertaining quality problems and improving service quality standards to consistently deliver the

required services based on customer needs.

Keywords: Service Quality, SERVPERF, Customer Satisfaction, Public Transport Service,

Ethiopia

http://www.ijrar.org/



1. Introduction

The service industry (both in the public and private organizations) plays an increasingly important role in the economy

of many countries. As the largest sector in many countries, the services industry has to adjust to the dynamic changes of

regulations as set by the government and the growing demands of the customers as well as the diversified and

sophisticated technology. Differing with private sector, the public sector aims to serve all citizens’ basic needs and

services meanwhile the private sector being more aggressive to gain profit and big market share. Over the three decades

the public sector has undergone something of a ‘service revolution’. This is due to the vast global economic reform,

whereas community entities have brought about widespread reformation to their economic activities ranging from public

service productions to service operations to create greater efficiency and productivity as well as to reduce administrative

cost similar with private sector (Beckett, 2000).

In most developed countries, quality concepts such as total quality management (TQM) and new public management

(NPM) have been adopted by public sector organizations since the early 1990s. These new market based reforms have

also been initiated by different developing countries as well in the last two decades. As such, the New Public Management

(NPM) reform movement is characterized by the provision of high quality services that citizens value demanding,

measuring and rewarding improved organizational and individual performance advocating managerial autonomy,

particularly by reducing central agency control recognizing the importance of providing the human and technological

resources managers need to meet their performance target and maintaining receptive to competition and open mindedness

about which public purposes should be performed by public servants as opposed to the private sectors or non-

governmental organization (Borins, 1995 as cited by Mohammed, 2008). However, regardless of the growing

applicability of quality concepts in public service management, the issue remains largely under investigated.

In today’s global competitive environment delivering quality service is considered as an essential strategy for success

and survival (Parasuraman et al., 1985; Reichheld and Sasser, 1990; Zeithaml et al., 1990). These days, customers have

become more knowledgeable and sophisticated in demanding for their rights partly due to technological upsurge and

industrial interplay. As a result, their expectations of service quality delivery have risen considerably. Thus, the pursuit

of quality services in both private and public sector organizations is driven by the need to survive and remain competitive.

Consequently, research on how to enhance customer service quality has raised considerable attention in public service

sector. Most studies on marketing literature have proposed that government services should be more entrepreneurial

oriented. Due to the public sector reforms, many government agencies have been encouraged to adopt private sector

management practices in their administrative system (Mabey& Skinner, 1998), an increased competition and the abolition

of monopolies (Morley &Vilkinas, 1997), cost effectiveness, accountability, and an emphasis on developing a customer

focus akin to the private sector (Kouzmin et al., 1999).

Public sector organizations are responsible and accountable to the citizens and communities of their countries as well as

to their customers or clients. In our context, the government of Ethiopia has undergone different public sector reforms of

which one is the civil service reform with the impetus to meet the needs and aspirations of the society. As such, the public

sector has been given increasing attention to improve upon service delivery and to demonstrate that it is customer-

centered. According to Gowan et al (2001), service provision is more complex in the public sector than in the private

sector. This is because it is not simply a matter of meeting expressed needs but of finding out unexpressed needs, setting

priorities, allocating resources and publicly justifying and accounting for what has been done.

Indeed, the survival of any organization (business, government or non-government) depends on the satisfaction of its

stakeholders. Customers being the major and critical ones among those stakeholders, they are the sources of profits for a

profit making organizations and the primary reason for being in operation for any non-profit making organizations. Thus,

customers are considered as the backbone of any organization (Robert-Phelps, 2003).

However, often organizations fail to know the importance of their customer. Service quality is given high premium in

the private sector as it holds the key to survival, competitiveness, customer satisfaction and customer loyalty. However,

a lot of public sector organizations lack the culture, systems and processes to deliver high quality services. In light of

these, the purpose of this study is devoted to examine the service quality delivery, performance and customers’ (clients’)

satisfaction with reference to the services of city administration transport business processes or departments under

Amhara national regional state transport authority.




2. Objectives of the Study

The main objective is to assess the service quality of transport related services and customer satisfaction, with particular

reference to city administration transport offices in Amhara regional state.

More specifically the study intends:

1) To see the applicability of SERVPERF instrument in public transport service sector.

2) To determine the level of customer satisfaction with transport related services.

3) To explore the relationship among service quality dimensions, and customer satisfaction.

4) To examine the relative importance of service quality dimensions in enhancing overall service quality and

customer satisfaction.

5) To assess the degree of influence overall service quality maintain in determining customer satisfaction.

3. Research Questions

The key research questions explored are:

1) What are the variables affecting the process of delivering quality service in public offices administering road and

transport services?

2) What are the relationships among service quality dimensions, overall service quality and customer satisfaction?

3) How service quality dimensions and overall service quality affects satisfaction of customers?

4) What are the causes for customer dissatisfaction with the transport related services provided by city administration

transport offices in Amhara region, Ethiopia?

4. Research Instrument

For this study, questionnaire is selected as appropriate instrument for obtaining primary data in survey research method.

Cronin and Taylor (1992) developed SERVPERF instrument which is mostly applicable for measuring service quality in

various sectors with minimum reduction and improvement (Newman, 2001; Cui et al., 2003). SERVPERF is a

performance only (based on customer’s perceptions of service delivery) measure to service quality.

This study is therefore employed the SERVPERF scale designed by Cronin and Taylor (1992) to measure service quality.

These included five service dimensions identified by initially by Parasuraman et al. (1988). The questions in the surveys

are tailored to identify customer perceptions of service quality practices and outcomes within the Amhara region public

service sector (particularly, transport).

Perceived service quality was assessed through a series of statements directly related to the five SERVPERF dimensions

noted above with a 7-point likert format of ‘strongly agree’ (7) up to ‘strongly disagree’ (1). The service performance will

be obtained by computing the mean score from the customers’ perception rating for each item and dimension. With the

same fashion, respondents were required to indicate the level of overall service quality and satisfaction with the services

of city administration level transport offices (table 1).




Table 1: SERVPERF Dimensions/Items

Dimension Code Items

Tangibility TAN1

TAN2

TAN3

TAR4

The service departments have up-to-date equipment.

Physical facilities of the department are visually appealing.

The employees at different service departments are well dressed and neat

in appearance.

The service departments have visually appealing materials associated with

the service.

Reliability REL1

REL2

REL3

REL4

REL5

Employees show sincere interest in solving customers’ problems.

When any transport related service is promised, it will be done.

Service employees perform the service right the first time.

Service departments provide services at the time promised.

The service department keeps customers’ records accurately.

Responsiveness

RES1

RES2

RES3

RES4

Employees tell customers exactly when services will be performed.

Employees offer prompt services to customers.

Employees are always willing to help customers.

Employees are never too busy to respond to customers’ request.

Assurance ASU1

ASU2

ASU3

ASU4

Service employees are capable to instill confidence in customers.

Customers feel safe in their transactions with employees.

Service employees are courteous at all times.

Employees have the knowledge to answer customers' questions.

Empathy EMP1

EMP2

EMP3

EMP4

EMP5

Employees give individual attention to each customer.

Have convenient operating hours to all customers.

Employees give personal attention to all customers.

Employees have customers’ best interests at heart.

Employees understand customers' specific needs.

5. Population and Sampling Procedure

All customers of the transport departments’ services in the selected city administration in Amhara region are considered

to be the target population. These are vehicle owners (including taxi, Bajaj, automobiles, buses, and trucks), drivers, taxi

and Bajaj associations, drivers training organizations, vehicle inspection organizations, and garages. The study focuses

on five (5) selected city administration level transport departments operate under the umbrella of Amhara national

regional state transport authority. The selected city administrations include Bahir Dar, Gondar, Dessie, Debre-birhan,

and Debre-Markos. The city administration’s transport office has four (4) transport business processes (or departments)

namely; road safety, driver-vehicle competency certification, transport service arrangement, and transport service

infrastructure business processes (departments). The above locations are chosen among other cities in the region

primarily because of the fact that a large number of customer populations have been served with diversity of services

which may in turn lead to high prevalence of quality issues. The other reason is time and other resource constraints by

the researchers.

Sample Size determination:

Yamane Taro (1967) provides a simplified formula to calculate sample sizes. This formula is used to calculate the sample

size taking into account 95% confidence level, 5% precision level and total population size.

Hence, the sample size of customers is computed using the following formula:

𝑛 =𝑁

1 + 𝑁(𝑒2)

Where:

n = size of sample




e = maximum tolerable sampling error=5%

N= population size

Consequently, the ultimate figure is computed as:

𝑛 =43,336

1 + 43,336(𝑒2)

𝑛 = 396 Respondents Therefore, the total customer respondents will be selected using simple random sampling technique, (specifically the

lottery method). To arrive at the respective sample size for each respondent, the population of each selected city

administration transport office is divided by the total population for the study, multiplied by the total sample size. Below

is a table depicting the sample for the study and those for the different transport offices (Table 2).

Table 2 Table showing population and sample of the study for customers

City Administration

Transport office

Customers

Population Sample

Bahir Dar 14,238 130

Gondar 7,464 68

Dessie 9,209 84

Debre-birhan 4,157 38

Debre-Markos 8,268 76

Total 43,336 396

Source: ANRS, Transport Authority (2014)

Conceptual Framework

The proposed conceptual model (as depicted in Figure 1) is developed based on literature and four service factors such as

service dimensions, service quality, service performance and customer satisfaction. This model uses a five dimensional

and slightly modified SERVPERF instrument developed by Cronin & Taylor (1992) in exploring service quality, service

performance and client satisfaction in a public sector organization. The SERVPERF has proved to be an invaluable tool

for service organizations to better understand what their customers or clients value and how well they are meeting the

needs and expectations of customers and clients. It provides a benchmark based on customer opinions of an excellent

organization, on the ranking of key attributes and on comparison to what employees of service organizations believe

customers feel.

The SERVPERF instrument is accepted as a standard tool for assessing various dimensions in service quality. The five

service dimensions are considered to relate to distinctive features of public service quality and are therefore incorporated

in the present conceptual model. These dimensions are:

1) Tangibles- physical characteristics of the service, such as the decor, ambience, technology, and equipment that are

viewed as contributing to a public servant’s ability to provide a desired level of service;

2) Reliability- a public servant’s ability to perform promised services in a dependable and accurate manner;

3) Responsiveness- a public servant’s willingness to assist users and provide prompt service while being aware of the

need for flexibility in customizing services to the needs of individual customers;

4) Assurance (including competence, courtesy, credibility and security)- The knowledge and courtesy public service

providers show to customers and their ability to convey trust and confidence; 5) Empathy (including access, communication, understanding the customer) - The degree of caring and individual

attention a public servant shows to the users of various transport department services.

This model equips the public sector and related decision making sectors managers with information about the present

services customer's perception, that they understand and perceive what is the customer's needs and expectation (Alvani




& Riahi, 2003). Below is a conceptual model of the relationship among service dimensions, overall service quality and

customer satisfaction; developed based on review of extant literature.

Figure 1. Conceptual framework

6. Results

6.1 Reliability Analysis

The reliability of the scale was assessed by dimension reliability in order to look into the measurement of public service

quality in the subsequent sections. Cronbach coefficients (alpha) values were computed for each factor to assess the

reliability of each dimension and the total scale. The results in column 3 of Table 3 shows that Cronbach’s alpha values

were found to be within the range of 0.607 for ‘tangibility’ and 0.868 for ‘responsiveness’, indicating that all of the

service quality dimensions have reasonable reliability. Based on the reliability test all the values for each dimension is

high except ‘Tangibility’ and ‘Assurance’ (0.664) dimensions which is fairly below 0.7, the widely accepted limit for

high reliability test as recommended by Nunnally (1998).

Besides, the value of alpha for the total scale (i.e. overall scale reliabiity) were computed and found to be 0.89 (Table 3),

indicating a high level of consistency of service quality measurement items. On top of this, the foregoing analysis

indicated that the adapted SERVPERF items were practically reliable and can thus reflect a sound measure of service

quality in public service setting.

Service

Quality

Tangibility

Reliability

Responsiveness

Assurance

Empathy

Customer

Satisfactio




Table 3: Service Performance Scores and Scale reliability

Factor/Items Mean Alpha

Factor 1: Tangibility 4.0642 0.607

Modern/ up-to-date equipment 3.2729

Physical facilities are visually appealing 4.3721

The employees are well dressed and neat in appearance 4.1744

Visually appealing materials associated with the service 4.4372

Factor 2: Reliability 3.4505 0.804

Showing sincere interest in solving customers’ problems 3.2628

When transport related service is promised, it will be done 3.4070

Service employees perform the service right the first time 3.2140

Service departments provide services at the time promised 3.3558

The service provider keeps customers’ records accurately 4.0128

Factor 3: Responsiveness 3.3467 0.868

Telling customers exactly when services will be performed 3.3837

Employees offer prompt services to customers 3.3237

Employees are always willing to help customers 3.5442

Employees never too busy to respond to customers’ request 3.1352

Factor 4: Assurance 3.6263 0.664

Employees are capable to instill confidence in customers 3.4302

Customers feel safe in their transactions with employees 4.2262

Service employees are courteous at all times 3.5512

Knowledgeable employees to answer customers' questions. 3.2977

Factor 5: Empathy 3.5271 0.813

Employees give individual attention to each customer 3.7442

Have convenient operating hours to all customers 3.3837

Employees give personal attention to all customers 3.6628

Employees have customers’ best interests at heart 3.4884

Employees understand customers' specific needs 3.3562

Reliability of the total scale 0.890

Table 3 shows the result of perception score and scale reliability of the service quality items.

6.2 Mean Scores of Performance Ratings

The average service performance for public service on the five dimensions is computed and presented in Table 3. The

SERVPERF score of each dimension as computed by average values shows: factor 1 consisted of 4 attributes relating to

‘Tangibility’ (Mean=4.0642); factor 2 included 5 attributes of public service quality which is referred to ‘Reliability’

(Mean=3.4505); factor 3 is identified as ‘Responsiveness’ (Mean=3.3467) with 4 attributes; factor 4 composed of 4

attributes which is labeled as ‘Assurance’ (Mean=3.6263); and factor 5 is termed as ‘Empathy’ (Mean=3.5271) with 5

variables.

As shown from the above table, the summated mean scores of most factors revealed that public services delivery by road

and transport service providers (such as road safety, driver-vehicle competency certification, transport service

arrangement, and transport service infrastructure) is poorly performed, as maintaining below average (less than 4 on a 7-

point scale), on all service quality dimensions. Specifically, the results of descriptive analysis depicted that the dimension

of ‘responsiveness’ (M=3.3467) was perceived to be the lowest by the respondents followed by ‘reliability’ (M=3.4505),

‘empathy’ (M=3.5271), and ‘assurance’ (M=3.6263). This pointed out that customers come to perceive public service

providers’ performance on most of the service variables particularly; immediate response to customers’ request, on time

service performance/ delivery, interest in solving customers’ problems, provide services as and at the time promised,




willingness to help customers, capability to instill confidence in customers, politeness in serving customers,

understanding & meeting customers' specific needs, convenient operating hours to all customers, giving personal

attention to all customers, availability of modern equipment/facilities, etc. more negatively and unfavorably. To put it

another way, the results have shown that customers were reported to be disagreed with most service dimensions

explaining the service quality parameters of the selected road and transport service departments.

On the other hand, the mean scores further revealed that the selected transport departments performed relatively better in

‘tangibility’ (mean= 4.0642) comprising of items referring visually appealing materials associated with the service

(mean=4.4372), and visually appealing physical facilities’ (mean=4.3721).

6.3 Correlation Analysis

As suggested by Croft (1983), it is essential to undertake correlation analysis between independent SERVPERF

dimensions and dependent variables (overall service quality and satisfaction) before conducting regression analysis in

developing a model. The size of the correlation coefficient can be used to quantitatively describe the strength of the

association between two variables.

Tables 4 illustrates the Pearson-correlation coefficients obtained between various variables (public service quality

dimensions, overall service quality, and satisfaction) used in the study. It has been reported that all the service quality

dimensions were found to have a statistically significant (p<0.01) correlation with each other, and a strong

association(r=0.740) was reported between ‘assurance’ and ‘reliability’, followed by ‘empathy’ and ‘responsiveness’

(r=0.639).

Table 4: Summary of Correlations coefficients

TAN REL ASU RES EMP

OSQ

OSA

TAN Pearson

Correlation 1

Sig. (2-tailed)

REL Pearson

Correlation

0.287**

1

Sig. (2-tailed)

ASU Pearson

Correlation

0.272**

0.740**

1

Sig. (2-tailed)

RES Pearson

Correlation

0.464**

0.665**

0.541**

1

Sig. (2-tailed)

EMP Pearson

Correlation

0.204**

0.652**

0.514**

0.639**

1

Sig. (2-tailed)

OSQ Pearson

Correlation

0.372**

0.414**

0.464**

0.552**

0.412**

1

Sig. (2-tailed)

OSA Pearson

Correlation

0.426**

0.480**

0.440**

0.492**

0.427**

0.777**

1

Sig. (2-tailed)

Note: ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)




TAN- Tangibility, REL- Reliability, ASU- Assurance , RES- Responsiveness, EMP- Empathy, OSQ- Overall

Service Quality, OSA- Overall Satisfaction.

Additionally, perceived dimensions of public service quality were found to be significantly associated with overall service

quality and satisfaction (p<0.01), except that the correlation between tangibility and overall service quality was relatively

weak (Table 4). Besides, all the SERVPERF dimensions have a positive relationship to overall public service quality and

customer satisfaction. From such relationships, a relatively higher correlation (r=0.552) was established between

‘responsiveness’ and overall service quality. And the next good association (r=0.492) was found between ‘responsiveness’ and overall customer satisfaction.

As for the relationship among service quality dimensions, overall service quality and overall satisfaction, it was found

that only overall service quality has a strong positive association with customer satisfaction (r = 0.777, p<0.01).

Furthermore, significant associations between SERVPERF dimensions and overall customer satisfaction were reported

from a low with the dimension of ‘tangibility’ (0.426) to a high with ‘responsiveness’ (0.492).

6.4 Regression Analysis

Multiple Linear Regression (MLR) analysis was conducted to investigate the influence of various variables (independent)

in predicting the outcome of another variable (dependent). A regression analysis is a statistical method used to estimate

the strength of a relationship between one or more dependent variable and one or more independent variables. In this

regard, while the SERVPERF dimensions, adapted for this study, were used as independent variables in the multiple

regression model to test their ability to explain and predict overall public service quality and customer satisfaction, the

same analysis was also conducted to see the effect of overall service quality on overall customer satisfaction as well

(Figure 3).

Furthermore, the data were exposed to multiple regression analysis to check the predictive validity of each dimension or

variable using SPSS 16.0 version. In order to study the relationship among overall service quality and overall customer

satisfaction, regression analysis was conducted hierarchically for testing significant interaction effects over and above

the simple effects of the independent variable. Alternatively, scholars suggest that if a correlation coefficient matrix

reveals the degree of association between variables about 0.75 or higher, there may be the condition of multicollinearity,

and must be rectified before using such variables as predictors in regression analysis. However, the level of associations

in the study, as given in Table 4, were not found to be reached to this value, thus the analysis was assumed to be restraint

from the unacceptable levels of multicollinearity.

6.4.1 The Relationship between service quality dimensions and overall service quality

As can be observed from figure 3, the rating of overall service quality and satisfaction was regressed for each

of the five dimensions. In a standard regression analysis, when all the five dimensions are allowed to draw a model for

overall service quality, only reliability, assurance,

and responsiveness were emerged as the most critical determinant to overall public service quality with a beta

value of (β= 0.586, 0.396, 0.295, p<0.001) respectively. As evidenced from

the result, the strongest impact on tourist satisfaction was made by reliability (β= 0.586), followed by assurance

(β=0.369).The explanatory power of this model, as reported by the adjusted R2 value is 0.421, suggesting that 42 percent

of the variability in the service quality is predicted by the SERVPERF dimensions. This implies that the elements of

service quality such as provision of services and facilities as promised; providing license and competency

certification for vehicle inspection and driver training organizations, providing renewal services and monitoring the

performance of these organizations, providing license for repair and maintenance service delivery organizations

(garage, ‘gomesta’, car wash, etc.) as per the requirement, offering driver training facilities, arranging appropriate parking

places and ‘fermata’, offering timely driving license, arranging appropriate transport facilities to various routes in the

city/town, opening new routes when needed together with additional fermata and assigning vehicles, monitoring

and controlling the appropriateness and fairness of transportation services (city-buses, taxi, bajaj) assigned to different routes by transport enterprises and/or taxi/bajaj associations, ensuring the safety of transportation vehicles through

technical inspection, arranging additional vehicles (code-3) whenever shortage of transportation encounters in the city,




ensuring the safety of transport users by controlling illegal drivers, checking for the right driving license and taking

action for wrong licenses; providing continuous education on road safety, traffic accident, traffic rules and

regulations, etc. to drivers and the community at large; knowledgeable, friendly and careful staffs; polite and respectful

service staffs; minimum time to get license are the aspects those customers used in their assessment of transport

related service quality.

Besides, the results of multiple regression analysis (Fig.3) shows that when each of the

SERVPERF dimensions together with overall service quality was examined in predicting overall

customer satisfaction in the model, overall service quality contributed the highest (β=0.777,

p<0.001), followed by ‘reliability’ (β=0.350, p<0.001), and ‘responsiveness’ (β=-0.203, p<0.01).

Notably, the present study revealed that among the SERVPERF dimensions, only reliability and responsiveness were

found to be statistically important in predicting overall customer satisfaction in the context of city administration

transport departments in Amhara region.

Figure 3: Framework for Overall Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction

Note: *** Significant at 0.001 level; ** Significant at 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The proportion of explained variance as measured by R-square for overall service quality was relatively higher (R2=

0.603) compared to the SERVPERF dimensions (R2= 0.397) in predicting overall satisfaction. In other words, almost

60% of the variation in overall customer satisfaction is explained by overall service quality in the regression analysis.

On the other hand, two items were asked to answer freely about the reasons for any dissatisfaction with their service

experience and their suggestions that can help further improve the delivery of quality service. Accordingly, the following

major concerns of service quality and areas of improvement are justified.

It takes lengthy procedure for registration and training of driving license together with unreasonably high cost of fee

to get the license at different level. So, it should be changed or reduced.

Some people said that transport service arrangement main department is failed to manage balanced distribution of

Bajaj and taxi to different routes in the city.

7. Conclusion The study has demonstrated how the SERVPERF instrument could help transport departments identify the service

characteristics that are considered important by customers. In this way, the

office can improve the level of quality and the effectiveness of the model can be monitored

overtime, with resources being shifted to those areas which most heavily influence customer perceptions of

service quality. As the overall perceived service quality is found to be a vital determinant of customer satisfaction in the

transport sector, service providers can benefit from increased investment in quality improvements. Besides, reliability

and responsiveness were also significant in explaining customer satisfaction. According to this result, the researcher




suggests that greater gains in customer satisfaction can be realized by attending to reliability and responsiveness in the

road and transport environment.

The study provides initial empirical evidence as to the understanding of a number of issues concerning important service

quality measurement dimensions and how these variables impact customer satisfaction. Managers of transport business

processes can use the current findings to develop service marketing strategies that deepen and enhance customer

satisfaction.

References

Andaleeb, S. S. and Conway, C. (2006). Customer Satisfaction in the Restaurant Industry: An Examination of the

Transaction-specific model. Journal of Services Marketing, 20 (1), Beckett, J. (2000). The government should run like

a business’ mantra. American Review of Public Administration, Vol. 30, pp. 185- 204.

Babakus, E. and Boller, G.W. (1992). An Empirical Assessment of the SERVQUAL Scale. Journal of Business

Research, Vo. 24, pp. 253-268.

Babakus, E. and Mangold, W.G. (1992). Adapting the SERVQUAL Scale to Hospital Services: An Empirical

Investigation. Health Service Research, Vo. 26 (6), pp. 767-780.

Bitner, M. J. (1990). Evaluating service encounters: The effects of physical surrounding and employee Responses.

Journal of Marketing, 54, 69-82.

Bolton, R. N., & Drew J. H. (1991). A multistage model of customers’ assessments of service quality and value.

Journal of Consumer Research, 4 (17), 375-384.

Carman, J.M. (1990). Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality: An Assessment of the SERVQUAL dimensions.

Journal of Retailing, Vol. 66 (1), pp 33-55.

Churchill, G.A. Jr., Tom, J.B. and Peter, J.P. (1993). Improving the measurement of service quality. Journal of

Retailing, Vol. 69 (1), pp. 127-139.

Cronin, J.J Jr. and Taylor, S.A. (1992). Measuring service quality: A reexamination and extension. Journal of

Marketing, Vol. 56 (July), pp. 55-68.

Curry, A. and Herbertt, D. (1998). Continuous improvement in public services – A way forward, managing service

quality. Journal of Marketing, Vol.8 (5), pp 339-349.

Gowan, M., Seymour, J., Ibarreche, S., & Lackey, C. (2001). Service quality in public agency: same expectations but

different perceptions by employees, managers and customers. Journal of Quality Management, 6, 275-291.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1084-8568 (01)00040-2

Gronroos, C. (1984), “A service quality model and its marketing implications. European Journal of Marketing,

Vol. 18 (4), pp. 35-44.

Har, K. K. L. (2008). Service dimensions of service quality impacting customer satisfaction of fine dining

restaurants in Singapore, University of Nevada, Las Vagas.

Hayes, B. E. (1997) measuring customer satisfaction–survey design, use and statistical analysis methods. Milwaukee,

WI: ASQ Quality Press.

Hedvall, M. B. and Paltschik, M.(1989). An Investigation in and Generation of Service Quality

Concepts” in A vionitis, G. et al (Eds) Marketing Thought and Practice in the 1990s, European Journal of

Marketing Academy, Athens, pp 473 – 483.

Hong, S. and Jun, I. (2006). An evaluation of the service quality priorities of air cargo service providers and

customers. World review of intermodal transportation research, Vol. 1 (1), pp. 55-68.

Kouzmin A., Loffler, E., Klages H. and Korac, N.K. (1999). Benchmarking and performance measurement in public

sectors. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 12 (2), 121-144.

Lehtinen, J. R. and Lehtinen, U. (1982). Service quality: A study of quality dimensions, “Unpublished Working

Paper”, Service Management Institute, Helsinki.

Levesque, T. and McDougall, H.G. (1996). Determinants of customer satisfaction in retail banking. International

Journal of Banking, Vol. 14 (7), pp 12-20.

Mabey C. and Skinner, D. (1998). Empowerment in an executive agency? A grass-roots assessment of strategic intent.

International Journal of Public Sector Management, 11 (6), 494-508.

Mehta, S., Lawani, A. and Han, S. (2000). Service quality in retailing: relative efficiency of alternative

measurement scales for different product-service environment. International Journal of Retail & Distribution

Management, Vol. 28 (2), pp. 62-72.

Martilla, J.A. and James, J.C. (1977). Importance-Performance Analysis. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 41(1) pp 77-79.




Mohammedhussen M (2008). Customer satisfaction in land delivery service: by urban local governments:

A case study of Bishoftu town Administration. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis), Addis Ababa University,

Ethiopia.

Morley K. and Vilkinas, T. (1997). Public sector executive development in Australia: 2000 and beyond. International

Journal of Public Sector Management, 10 (6), 401- 416.

Newman, K. (2001), Interrogating SERVQUAL: A critical assessment of service banking quality measurement

in a high street retail bank. International Journal of Banking Marketing, Vol.19 (3), pp. 126-139.

Nyeck, S., Morales, M., Ladhari, R. and Pons, F. (2002). 10 years of service quality measurement: review of the

use of the SERQUAL instrument. Cuadernos de Diffusion, 7(13), 101-107.

Oliver, R.L. (1993). A conceptual model of service quality and service satisfaction: Compatible goals, different

concepts” in Swartz, T.A., Bowen, D.E and Brown, S.W (Eds), Advances in service marketing and management:

Research and Practice, JAI Press, Greenwich CT. pp 65-85

Palmer, A. (1995). Service marketing: Principles and practice. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. and Berry, L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications

for future research. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49, fall, pp. 41-50.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. and Berry, L. (1988). “SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer

perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, Vol. 64, Spring, pp. 12-40.

Paul, D. (2003). What is the best approach for measuring service quality of periodontists? Clinical Research and

Regulatory Affairs, Vol. 20 (4), pp. 457-468.

Paulos Chanie (2001). The challenges of the civil service reform in Ethiopia

Rechheld.F and Sassier.W (1990). Zero detection: Quality comes to service, Harvard Business Review

Sachdev, S.B. and Verma, H.V. (2004). Relating importance of service quality dimensions: A multi sectoral study.

Journal of Services Research, Vol.4, (1) (April – Sept. 2004).

Sureshchander, G.S., Rajendran, C. and Anantharaman, R.N. (2002). The Relationship between service quality and

customer satisfaction – A factor specific approach. Journal of Service Marketing, 16(4), 363-379.

Taylor, S.A. and Baker, T.L. (1994). An assessment of the relationship between service quality and customer

satisfaction in the formation of consumers' purchase intentions. Journal of Retailing, Vol. 70 (2), pp. 163-178.

Teas, K.R. (1993). Consumer expectations and the measurement of perceived service quality. Journal of

Professional Services Marketing, Vol. 8 (2), pp. 17-21

Zeithaml, VA (1987). Defining and relating prices, perceived quality and perceived value, Marketing Science

Institute, Cambridge, M.A.

Zeithaml, V. A., & dan Gremler, B. (2009). Service Marketing – Integrating Customer Focus across the Firm. New

York: Mc. Graw Hill.


© 2020 IJRAR August 2020, Volume 7, Issue 3 ...ijrar.org/papers/IJRAR19W1514.pdfsector has been...

Documents

Transcript of © 2020 IJRAR August 2020, Volume 7, Issue 3 ...ijrar.org/papers/IJRAR19W1514.pdfsector has been...