Variance in Service Quality across Demographic Variables ... · PDF fileenable companies to...

Abstract

Service operations worldwide are affected by the new

wave of quality awareness and importance. As a result,

service-based companies are obligated to provide

excellent services to their customers in order to have

sustainable competitive advantage especially in the

current trend of trade, liberalization and globalization.

Since service quality predominantly is about meeting

customers' needs and requirements and how well the

s e r v i c e l eve l d e l i ve re d m atc h e s c u sto m e r

expectations, delivering high quality services will

enable companies to achieve customer satisfaction

and, in turn, gain loyal customers. Moreover,

successful cellular companies of the future will be

those that will analyze markets based on customer

perceptions, design a service delivery system that will

meet customer needs, and enhance the level of

service performance in order to delight their

customers rather than merely satisfying them. In view

of this well-known belief, an attempt has been made in

the present study to measure service quality variation

in cellular companies under study across demographic

variables in Kashmir Valley with a view to offering

suggestions to make the overall services in cellular

companies more effective and efficient. The study is

based on data gathered from four hundred (400)

respondents; the results lead us to the conclusion that

service quality of Aircel and Airtel is comparatively

better than Vodafone and BSNL, and suggests

improvement in all dimensions to augment the quality

of cellular services. Finally, the study also brought to

light that there exists insignificant variation in service

quality on majority of demographic variables in all

cellular companies under reference.

Key words: Service Quality, Customer Satisfaction,

SERVQUAL, SERVPERF, Demographic Variables,

Cellular Companies and Kashmir Valley.

Variance in Service Quality acrossDemographic Variables: An Assessment of

Cellular Service Companies in Kashmir Valley

Mushtaq Ahmad BhatFozia Sajad

Variance in Service Quality across Demographic Variables:An Assessment of Cellular Service Companies in Kashmir Valley

ISSN: 0971-1023 | NMIMS Management ReviewVolume XXIX April-May 2016

Introduction

In a very limited period, cellular services have become

an increasingly needed service with a very high

penetration rate in most of the countries. With the

extensive usage of mobile telecommunications, the

cellular services market is now recognized as the most

competitive part of the telecommunications sector.

The telecommunications sector is one of the most

important sectors of any economy and its contribution

remains the greatest to the GDP of the economy

(Ahluwalia, 1998). There are 4.7 billion mobile

customers across the globe with growth of around 20%

per annum over the last three years (Vodafone Group

Plc, 2010). The majority of customers are in emerging

markets such as India and China (Vodafone Group Plc,

2 0 1 0 ) . M o b i l e n e t w o r k s , p a r t i c u l a r l y 3 G

communication networks, are becoming critical

infrastructure and major factors in driving substantial

economic growth in developing countries. In 2009, the

'World Bank Information and Communications for

Development' report showed that wireless

connectivity in the telecommunications sector matters

a lot i.e. a 10% increase in mobile phone penetration

results in an increase of 0.81% in per capita GDP and a

10% increase in internet/broadband penetration

results in an increase of 1.38% in GDP (Wang, 2010). As

more and more people join the global information

society and high-speed communication networks

become indispensable infrastructure, the tracking and

measurement of developments in information and

communication technologies (ICT's) remain as

relevant as ever. According to International

Telecommunication Union (ITU) estimates, there will

be 6.8 billion mobile-cellular subscriptions by the end

of 2013, almost as many as the number of people on

the planet. While the ubiquitous availability of mobile-

telephone services is undeniable with close to 100 per

cent of the population covered by a mobile signal, not

everyone has a mobile phone.

Studies have shown that the rapid increase in mobile

penetration has contributed significantly to the

economic growth of nations. Fuss, Meschi and

Waverman (2005) considered 92 countries, both

developed and developing, to estimate the impact of

mobile phones on economic growth for the period

1980 to 2003; they found that a 10% difference in

mobile penetration levels over the entire sample

period implies a 0.6% difference in growth rates

between otherwise identical developing nations. The

effect of mobiles was twice as large in developing

countries as in developed ones (Waverman, 2005).

Research has repeatedly shown a positive relationship

of service quality with customer satisfaction (Danaher

and Mattesson, 1994; Kim, Park, and Jeong, 2004),

customer preference (Ranaweera and Neely, 2003),

profitability (Fornell, 1992; Danaher and Rust, 1996)

and competitiveness (Rapert and Wren, 1998). In light

of the above-mentioned research studies, it can safely

be argued that cellular companies can improve their

p r o f i t a b i l i t y, c u s t o m e r p r e f e r e n c e , a n d

competitiveness through excellent service quality.

Objectives of the Study

In view of the growing importance of service quality in

cellular service companies, an attempt has been made

in the present study, to measure service quality of

cellular companies under study, across demographic

variables in Kashmir Valley. Such an analysis will

provide cellular companies a quantitative estimate of

their services being perceived by their respective

customers and also to suggest, on the basis of study

results, ways and means for improving service quality

of cellular companies with a view to make overall

cellular services more effective and efficient.

Changes

cities of India, and therefore street

Contents

mall farmers. Majority of the

farmers (82%) borrow less than

Rs 5 lakhs, and 18% borrow

between Rs 5 – 10 lakhs on a

per annum basis. Most farmers

(65.79%) ar

** p < .01 + Reliability coefficie

References

Table 23: The Results of Mann-Whitney U Test for DOWJONES Index Daily ReturnsDr. Rosy Kalra

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

Abstract

Service operations worldwide are affected by the new

wave of quality awareness and importance. As a result,

service-based companies are obligated to provide

excellent services to their customers in order to have

sustainable competitive advantage especially in the

current trend of trade, liberalization and globalization.

Since service quality predominantly is about meeting

customers' needs and requirements and how well the

s e r v i c e l eve l d e l i ve re d m atc h e s c u sto m e r

expectations, delivering high quality services will

enable companies to achieve customer satisfaction

and, in turn, gain loyal customers. Moreover,

successful cellular companies of the future will be

those that will analyze markets based on customer

perceptions, design a service delivery system that will

meet customer needs, and enhance the level of

service performance in order to delight their

customers rather than merely satisfying them. In view

of this well-known belief, an attempt has been made in

the present study to measure service quality variation

in cellular companies under study across demographic

variables in Kashmir Valley with a view to offering

suggestions to make the overall services in cellular

companies more effective and efficient. The study is

based on data gathered from four hundred (400)

respondents; the results lead us to the conclusion that

service quality of Aircel and Airtel is comparatively

better than Vodafone and BSNL, and suggests

improvement in all dimensions to augment the quality

of cellular services. Finally, the study also brought to

light that there exists insignificant variation in service

quality on majority of demographic variables in all

cellular companies under reference.

Key words: Service Quality, Customer Satisfaction,

SERVQUAL, SERVPERF, Demographic Variables,

Cellular Companies and Kashmir Valley.

Variance in Service Quality acrossDemographic Variables: An Assessment of

Cellular Service Companies in Kashmir Valley

Mushtaq Ahmad BhatFozia Sajad

Introduction

In a very limited period, cellular services have become

an increasingly needed service with a very high

penetration rate in most of the countries. With the

extensive usage of mobile telecommunications, the

cellular services market is now recognized as the most

competitive part of the telecommunications sector.

The telecommunications sector is one of the most

important sectors of any economy and its contribution

remains the greatest to the GDP of the economy

(Ahluwalia, 1998). There are 4.7 billion mobile

customers across the globe with growth of around 20%

per annum over the last three years (Vodafone Group

Plc, 2010). The majority of customers are in emerging

markets such as India and China (Vodafone Group Plc,

2 0 1 0 ) . M o b i l e n e t w o r k s , p a r t i c u l a r l y 3 G

communication networks, are becoming critical

infrastructure and major factors in driving substantial

economic growth in developing countries. In 2009, the

'World Bank Information and Communications for

Development' report showed that wireless

connectivity in the telecommunications sector matters

a lot i.e. a 10% increase in mobile phone penetration

results in an increase of 0.81% in per capita GDP and a

10% increase in internet/broadband penetration

results in an increase of 1.38% in GDP (Wang, 2010). As

more and more people join the global information

society and high-speed communication networks

become indispensable infrastructure, the tracking and

measurement of developments in information and

communication technologies (ICT's) remain as

relevant as ever. According to International

Telecommunication Union (ITU) estimates, there will

be 6.8 billion mobile-cellular subscriptions by the end

of 2013, almost as many as the number of people on

the planet. While the ubiquitous availability of mobile-

telephone services is undeniable with close to 100 per

cent of the population covered by a mobile signal, not

everyone has a mobile phone.

Studies have shown that the rapid increase in mobile

penetration has contributed significantly to the

economic growth of nations. Fuss, Meschi and

Waverman (2005) considered 92 countries, both

developed and developing, to estimate the impact of

mobile phones on economic growth for the period

1980 to 2003; they found that a 10% difference in

mobile penetration levels over the entire sample

period implies a 0.6% difference in growth rates

between otherwise identical developing nations. The

effect of mobiles was twice as large in developing

countries as in developed ones (Waverman, 2005).

Research has repeatedly shown a positive relationship

of service quality with customer satisfaction (Danaher

and Mattesson, 1994; Kim, Park, and Jeong, 2004),

customer preference (Ranaweera and Neely, 2003),

profitability (Fornell, 1992; Danaher and Rust, 1996)

and competitiveness (Rapert and Wren, 1998). In light

of the above-mentioned research studies, it can safely

be argued that cellular companies can improve their

p r o f i t a b i l i t y, c u s t o m e r p r e f e r e n c e , a n d

competitiveness through excellent service quality.

Objectives of the Study

In view of the growing importance of service quality in

cellular service companies, an attempt has been made

in the present study, to measure service quality of

cellular companies under study, across demographic

variables in Kashmir Valley. Such an analysis will

provide cellular companies a quantitative estimate of

their services being perceived by their respective

customers and also to suggest, on the basis of study

results, ways and means for improving service quality

of cellular companies with a view to make overall

cellular services more effective and efficient.

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

Literature Review

Quality Conceptualization

The changing paradigm of business has made the

provision of quality of services as top priority for

organizations. Researchers have emphasized distinct

conceptualizations of quality (Holbrook, 1994). In

operations management, reliability and fitness of use

define quality; whereas in marketing and economics,

attributes of products constitute quality. Crosby (1979)

defines quality of goods/services as conformance to

requirements. Requirements must be clearly stated so

that they cannot be misunderstood. Garvin (1983)

measures quality by counting the incidence of

―internal failures (those observed before a product

leaves the factory) and external failures (those

incurred in the field after a unit has been installed).

Juran (1974) defines quality as fitness for use, the

extent to which the product successfully serves the

purpose of the user usage. Similarly Ennew, Reed and

Binks (1993) express it as the ability of a service or a

product to perform its specified tasks. In all definitions,

the common aspect is the customers' needs and

expectations that define good quality. Quality has a

long term impact on customer sat isfact ion

(Omachonu, Johnson and Onyeaso, 2008). Atalik and

Arslan (2009) found that creating value and offering

quality services to customers creates loyal customers.

Quality is what a customer expects in the product/

service he/she is buying. If a customer expects

“excellence” in everything he/she purchases, then

his/her expectations are high. However, this could

prove to be elusive to a customer when he actually gets

a product/service that he has paid for. For instance, a

passenger travelling in an economy class on a flight

cannot expect service like a passenger who is travelling

in the first class. While the quality in tangible goods has

been described and measured considerably by

researchers, quality in services, on the other hand, has

largely remained much less researched due to its

peculiar nature. Thus instead of borrowing the

concept of quality from the manufacturing sector,

service marketing researchers based their own works

on developing a service quality concept on models

from consumer behaviour literature (Brown, and

Swartz, 1989). Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry

(1985) also state that it may be inappropriate to use a

product-based definition of quality when studying the

service sector and, therefore, developed the

expression service quality.

Service Quality

Service quality has been described as a form of

attitude, related but not equivalent to satisfaction that

results from the comparison of expectations with

performance (Bolton and Drew, 1991; Cronin and

Taylor, 1992; Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry 1988;

Shepherd, 1999). Much of the initial work in defining

and assessing service quality has been conducted by

Parasuraman, et. al., (1985). Parasuraman, et. al.,

(1985) asserted that service quality can be assessed by

measuring the “discrepancies or gaps” between what

the customer expects and what the consumer

perceives he receives. In other words, they mean that

service quality as perceived by customers stems from a

comparison of what they feel service firms should offer

(i.e., from their expectations) with their perception of

the performance of the firm providing the services. In

line with the above research, Gronroos (1982)

developed a model in which he contended that

consumers compare the service they expect with

perception of the service they receive in evaluating

service quality. Similarly Johnston (1995) defined

service quality as customers' overall impressions of an

organization's service in terms of relative superiority

or inferiority. Lyord and Cheung (1998) asserted that

service quality should not only meet but also exceed

customers' expectations, and include a continuous

improvement process. Service quality arises from a

comparison of the difference between service

expectations developed before an encounter with the

service establishment and the performance

perceptions gained from the service delivery process

(Bloemer, Ruyter, and Peeters, 1998).

Further, Gronroos (2007) suggested that the quality of

service as perceived by customers is the result of an

evaluation process in which they compare their

perspective of service outcome against what they

expected. On the other hand, service quality means

zero defection (Reichheld and Sasser, 1990). Fogli

(2006) defined service quality as a global judgment or

attitude relating to a particular service, the customer's

overall impression of the relative inferiority or the

superiority of the organization and its services.

Similarly, Berry, Parasuraman, and Zeithaml, (1990)

pointed out that since customers are the “sole judge of

service quality”, an organization can build strong

reputation for quality service when it can constantly

meet customer service expectations. Likewise,

Howcorft (1991) defined service quality as meeting

customers' needs satisfactorily by matching their

expectations. Haddad, Fournier, and Potvin (1998)

defined service quality as the difference between the

actual performance of service and the customers'

expectation from the service. The customers'

perception of quality of service is based on the degree

of agreement between expectations and experiences

(Kandampully, 1998). Similarly, Lewis and Booms

(1983) stated that service quality is a measure of how

well the service level delivered matches customer

expectation. Delivering quality service means

conforming to customer expectation on a consistent

basis. Previous research studies on service quality

support this notion that perceived service quality

stems from customers' comparison of what they wish

to receive from firms and what they perceive actual

service performance to be – which is formed on the

basis of previous experience with a company, its

competitors, and marketing mix inputs (Sasser, Olsen

and Wyckoff, 1978; Gronroos, 1982; Lehtinen and

Lehtinen, 1982; and Parasuraman, et. al., 1985; 1988).

Service quality and customer satisfaction are

interlinked. Service quality helps the customer to

decide whether the services received justify the cost of

the service or not. Since customer satisfaction has

been considered to be based on the customer's

experience with a particular service encounter (Cronin

and Taylor, 1992), it is in line with the fact that service

quality is a determinant of customer satisfaction,

because service quality comes from outcome of the

services provided by the service provider.

Khan, M. A., (2010) adds to the service literature by

conducting an empirical study to examine the

dimensions of users' perceived service quality of

cellular mobile telephone operators in Pakistan by

using SERVQUAL dimensions as tangible, reliability,

assurance, empathy, responsiveness, and additional

dimensions of network quality and convenience. The

results of the study clearly indicate that the

dimensions of network quality, convenience, and

reliability are important aspects that need managerial

attention to attract and retain customers, and the

regulators in the telecommunications industry should

take appropriate measures in safeguarding customers'

interest. Communication and price were the most

influential and most preferential factors in selecting a

telecommunications service provider (Paulrajan and

Harish, 2011). However, product quality and

availability had a significant impact on consumer

Variance in Service Quality across Demographic Variables:An Assessment of Cellular Service Companies in Kashmir Valley54 55

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

Literature Review

Quality Conceptualization

The changing paradigm of business has made the

provision of quality of services as top priority for

organizations. Researchers have emphasized distinct

conceptualizations of quality (Holbrook, 1994). In

operations management, reliability and fitness of use

define quality; whereas in marketing and economics,

attributes of products constitute quality. Crosby (1979)

defines quality of goods/services as conformance to

requirements. Requirements must be clearly stated so

that they cannot be misunderstood. Garvin (1983)

measures quality by counting the incidence of

―internal failures (those observed before a product

leaves the factory) and external failures (those

incurred in the field after a unit has been installed).

Juran (1974) defines quality as fitness for use, the

extent to which the product successfully serves the

purpose of the user usage. Similarly Ennew, Reed and

Binks (1993) express it as the ability of a service or a

product to perform its specified tasks. In all definitions,

the common aspect is the customers' needs and

expectations that define good quality. Quality has a

long term impact on customer sat isfact ion

(Omachonu, Johnson and Onyeaso, 2008). Atalik and

Arslan (2009) found that creating value and offering

quality services to customers creates loyal customers.

Quality is what a customer expects in the product/

service he/she is buying. If a customer expects

“excellence” in everything he/she purchases, then

his/her expectations are high. However, this could

prove to be elusive to a customer when he actually gets

a product/service that he has paid for. For instance, a

passenger travelling in an economy class on a flight

cannot expect service like a passenger who is travelling

in the first class. While the quality in tangible goods has

been described and measured considerably by

researchers, quality in services, on the other hand, has

largely remained much less researched due to its

peculiar nature. Thus instead of borrowing the

concept of quality from the manufacturing sector,

service marketing researchers based their own works

on developing a service quality concept on models

from consumer behaviour literature (Brown, and

Swartz, 1989). Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry

(1985) also state that it may be inappropriate to use a

product-based definition of quality when studying the

service sector and, therefore, developed the

expression service quality.

Service Quality

Service quality has been described as a form of

attitude, related but not equivalent to satisfaction that

results from the comparison of expectations with

performance (Bolton and Drew, 1991; Cronin and

Taylor, 1992; Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry 1988;

Shepherd, 1999). Much of the initial work in defining

and assessing service quality has been conducted by

Parasuraman, et. al., (1985). Parasuraman, et. al.,

(1985) asserted that service quality can be assessed by

measuring the “discrepancies or gaps” between what

the customer expects and what the consumer

perceives he receives. In other words, they mean that

service quality as perceived by customers stems from a

comparison of what they feel service firms should offer

(i.e., from their expectations) with their perception of

the performance of the firm providing the services. In

line with the above research, Gronroos (1982)

developed a model in which he contended that

consumers compare the service they expect with

perception of the service they receive in evaluating

service quality. Similarly Johnston (1995) defined

service quality as customers' overall impressions of an

organization's service in terms of relative superiority

or inferiority. Lyord and Cheung (1998) asserted that

service quality should not only meet but also exceed

customers' expectations, and include a continuous

improvement process. Service quality arises from a

comparison of the difference between service

expectations developed before an encounter with the

service establishment and the performance

perceptions gained from the service delivery process

(Bloemer, Ruyter, and Peeters, 1998).

Further, Gronroos (2007) suggested that the quality of

service as perceived by customers is the result of an

evaluation process in which they compare their

perspective of service outcome against what they

expected. On the other hand, service quality means

zero defection (Reichheld and Sasser, 1990). Fogli

(2006) defined service quality as a global judgment or

attitude relating to a particular service, the customer's

overall impression of the relative inferiority or the

superiority of the organization and its services.

Similarly, Berry, Parasuraman, and Zeithaml, (1990)

pointed out that since customers are the “sole judge of

service quality”, an organization can build strong

reputation for quality service when it can constantly

meet customer service expectations. Likewise,

Howcorft (1991) defined service quality as meeting

customers' needs satisfactorily by matching their

expectations. Haddad, Fournier, and Potvin (1998)

defined service quality as the difference between the

actual performance of service and the customers'

expectation from the service. The customers'

perception of quality of service is based on the degree

of agreement between expectations and experiences

(Kandampully, 1998). Similarly, Lewis and Booms

(1983) stated that service quality is a measure of how

well the service level delivered matches customer

expectation. Delivering quality service means

conforming to customer expectation on a consistent

basis. Previous research studies on service quality

support this notion that perceived service quality

stems from customers' comparison of what they wish

to receive from firms and what they perceive actual

service performance to be – which is formed on the

basis of previous experience with a company, its

competitors, and marketing mix inputs (Sasser, Olsen

and Wyckoff, 1978; Gronroos, 1982; Lehtinen and

Lehtinen, 1982; and Parasuraman, et. al., 1985; 1988).

Service quality and customer satisfaction are

interlinked. Service quality helps the customer to

decide whether the services received justify the cost of

the service or not. Since customer satisfaction has

been considered to be based on the customer's

experience with a particular service encounter (Cronin

and Taylor, 1992), it is in line with the fact that service

quality is a determinant of customer satisfaction,

because service quality comes from outcome of the

services provided by the service provider.

Khan, M. A., (2010) adds to the service literature by

conducting an empirical study to examine the

dimensions of users' perceived service quality of

cellular mobile telephone operators in Pakistan by

using SERVQUAL dimensions as tangible, reliability,

assurance, empathy, responsiveness, and additional

dimensions of network quality and convenience. The

results of the study clearly indicate that the

dimensions of network quality, convenience, and

reliability are important aspects that need managerial

attention to attract and retain customers, and the

regulators in the telecommunications industry should

take appropriate measures in safeguarding customers'

interest. Communication and price were the most

influential and most preferential factors in selecting a

telecommunications service provider (Paulrajan and

Harish, 2011). However, product quality and

availability had a significant impact on consumer

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

perception in selecting a cellular mobile service

provider as consumers' perception widely varies in

accordance with the communication quality, call

service, facilities, price, customer care and service

provider's attributes. Further, OluOjo, (2010)

investigated the relationship between service quality

and customer satisfaction in the telecommunications

industry with a focus on Mobile Telecommunication

Network (MTN) Nigeria. The study revealed that

service quality has an effect on customer satisfaction

and that there is a positive relationship between

service quality and customer satisfaction. Likewise,

Nasser, Salleh, and Gelaidan, (2012) found that the

relationship between perceived value, perceived

quality and corporate image have a significant positive

influence on customer satisfaction.

According to Khan and Afsheen, (2012) price fairness,

customer services and coverage are major factors

which can highly affect customer satisfaction. Petzer

and Meyer, (2011) also aimed to determine different

generations' perceived quality of services and

satisfaction levels with services provided by cell phone

network service providers, as well as their behavioural

intentions towards these providers. The study results

of Petzer and Meyer (2011) found that young

generation Y consumers perceive the service quality

levels and service satisfaction levels of these providers

as significantly lower than other generations implying

that providers should strongly focus their efforts on

satisfying the needs and improving the service

satisfaction of young generation Y consumers in order

to retain them in the future.

Ode Egena, (2013) tried to measure customer

satisfaction with service delivery of mobile

telecommunications networks and found that the

respondents would likely stay with their telecom

service providers as long as the companies are able to

satisfy their changing needs and meet customer

requirements beyond expectations. Agyapong, G.

(2011) also attempted to examine the relationship

between service quality and customer satisfaction in

the utility industry (telecom) in Ghana and found that

service quality is a good predictor of customer

satisfaction.

From the above discussion, it is clear that service

quality revolves around customer expectations and

their perceptions of service performance. Hence, it is

characterized by the customers' perception of service

and the customers are the sole judges of the quality.

Parasuraman, Berry and Zeithmal, (1991) rightly

exp la ined that cons istent conformance to

ex p e c ta t i o n s b e g i n s w i t h i d e n t i f y i n g a n d

understanding customer expectations to develop

effective service quality strategies.

Research Hypotheses

Many researchers (Ahnand Lee, 1999; Wareham and

Levy, 2002; Madden, Coble, and Dalzell, 2004; Birke

and Swann; 2006; Clements and Abramowitz., 2006;

Andonova., 2006; Karaçuka, Nazif, and Haucap, 2012

and Olatokun and Nwone., 2013) have studied

variation in the quality of cellular services across

demographic variables. Although research has

suggested that demographic variables are significant

factors in perception of service quality (Webster, 1989

and Stafford, 1996), there has been little direct

analysis of those differences (Webster, 1989; Stafford,

1996). Atkin and LaRose (1999) in their study found

age, gender, education, occupation and income to be

antecedents in new media adoption. Moreover,

Clements and Abramowitz, (2006) in their study on the

development and adoption of broadband service

(household level analysis) concluded that income, age

and educational attainment do influence adoption of

broadband service. Likewise, Birke and Swann, (2006)

in their study on network effects and choice of mobile

phone operator, observed that the choice of mobile

phone operators is strongly coordinated within

households where gender differences in the use of

telecommunications products exist. Similarly,

Wareham and Levy, (2002) in their study also reported

that education is a steady indicator of wireless phone

diffusion because achieving higher education has a

positive association with being comfortable with

higher technology use. Scott (2004) also, in his study,

reports that educated people who used phones more

have a strong intention to use phones in future as well

and have a more positive attitude towards phones.

Olatokun and Nwone (2013) too, in their study on

influence of socio-demographic variables on users'

choice of mobile service providers, concluded that

categories in age, religion, occupation, monthly

income and expenditure on mobile services are

influenced by price, service quality, promotion and

brand image. Emphasizing the significance of

demographic factors on users' choice of telecom

operators, Karaçuka's, (2012) in his study on

consumer choice and local network effects in mobile

telecommunications, showed that being male rather

than female has a positive impact on choice of mobile

operator, while being married has a negative impact. In

line with the above research studies, the following

hypotheses have been framed to study variance in

service quality across demographic variables among

cellular service companies, under reference.

H1: Service quality varies significantly across all age

groups;

H2: Service quality varies significantly across all

gender groups;

educational groups;

H4: Service quality varies significantly across all time

periods of network experience groups; and

H5: Service quality varies significantly across groups

with all connection types.

Sample Design

Since the present study aims at measuring service

quality variation in cellular service companies under

study across demographic variables in Kashmir Valley,

an attempt has been made to make the sample as

representative as possible. However, due to time and

financial constraints, the study is confined to district

Srinagar only. District Srinagar is further divided into

eight assembly constituencies and out of eight, four

assembly constituencies are selected for the present

study. The selected constituencies have a significant

relationship with the sampled companies in terms of

customer density, geographical presence and

competition. The study is further restricted to four

selective cellular service operators namely Airtel,

Vodafone, Aircel and BSNL. The decision regarding

sample organization has been made in view of the fact

that among the best cellular service providers Airtel,

Vodafone, Aircel and BSNL have maximum market

share as per TRAI report as on 31st January, 2013.

These service providers have greater customer base,

business operations, customer service centres and

retail outlets than any other cellular service provider in

district Srinagar. The size of the sample was limited to

four hundred (400) respondents selected from four (4)

cellular companies by following convenience sampling

method. All important demographic characteristics

like age, gender, level of education, time of network

experience and connection type were taken into

consideration while seeking the response from the

customers regarding their perception of service

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

perception in selecting a cellular mobile service

provider as consumers' perception widely varies in

accordance with the communication quality, call

service, facilities, price, customer care and service

provider's attributes. Further, OluOjo, (2010)

investigated the relationship between service quality

and customer satisfaction in the telecommunications

industry with a focus on Mobile Telecommunication

Network (MTN) Nigeria. The study revealed that

service quality has an effect on customer satisfaction

and that there is a positive relationship between

service quality and customer satisfaction. Likewise,

Nasser, Salleh, and Gelaidan, (2012) found that the

relationship between perceived value, perceived

quality and corporate image have a significant positive

influence on customer satisfaction.

According to Khan and Afsheen, (2012) price fairness,

customer services and coverage are major factors

which can highly affect customer satisfaction. Petzer

and Meyer, (2011) also aimed to determine different

generations' perceived quality of services and

satisfaction levels with services provided by cell phone

network service providers, as well as their behavioural

intentions towards these providers. The study results

of Petzer and Meyer (2011) found that young

generation Y consumers perceive the service quality

levels and service satisfaction levels of these providers

as significantly lower than other generations implying

that providers should strongly focus their efforts on

satisfying the needs and improving the service

satisfaction of young generation Y consumers in order

to retain them in the future.

Ode Egena, (2013) tried to measure customer

satisfaction with service delivery of mobile

telecommunications networks and found that the

respondents would likely stay with their telecom

service providers as long as the companies are able to

satisfy their changing needs and meet customer

requirements beyond expectations. Agyapong, G.

(2011) also attempted to examine the relationship

between service quality and customer satisfaction in

the utility industry (telecom) in Ghana and found that

service quality is a good predictor of customer

satisfaction.

From the above discussion, it is clear that service

quality revolves around customer expectations and

their perceptions of service performance. Hence, it is

characterized by the customers' perception of service

and the customers are the sole judges of the quality.

Parasuraman, Berry and Zeithmal, (1991) rightly

exp la ined that cons istent conformance to

ex p e c ta t i o n s b e g i n s w i t h i d e n t i f y i n g a n d

understanding customer expectations to develop

effective service quality strategies.

Research Hypotheses

Many researchers (Ahnand Lee, 1999; Wareham and

Levy, 2002; Madden, Coble, and Dalzell, 2004; Birke

and Swann; 2006; Clements and Abramowitz., 2006;

Andonova., 2006; Karaçuka, Nazif, and Haucap, 2012

and Olatokun and Nwone., 2013) have studied

variation in the quality of cellular services across

demographic variables. Although research has

suggested that demographic variables are significant

factors in perception of service quality (Webster, 1989

and Stafford, 1996), there has been little direct

analysis of those differences (Webster, 1989; Stafford,

1996). Atkin and LaRose (1999) in their study found

age, gender, education, occupation and income to be

antecedents in new media adoption. Moreover,

Clements and Abramowitz, (2006) in their study on the

development and adoption of broadband service

(household level analysis) concluded that income, age

and educational attainment do influence adoption of

broadband service. Likewise, Birke and Swann, (2006)

in their study on network effects and choice of mobile

phone operator, observed that the choice of mobile

phone operators is strongly coordinated within

households where gender differences in the use of

telecommunications products exist. Similarly,

Wareham and Levy, (2002) in their study also reported

that education is a steady indicator of wireless phone

diffusion because achieving higher education has a

positive association with being comfortable with

higher technology use. Scott (2004) also, in his study,

reports that educated people who used phones more

have a strong intention to use phones in future as well

and have a more positive attitude towards phones.

Olatokun and Nwone (2013) too, in their study on

influence of socio-demographic variables on users'

choice of mobile service providers, concluded that

categories in age, religion, occupation, monthly

income and expenditure on mobile services are

influenced by price, service quality, promotion and

brand image. Emphasizing the significance of

demographic factors on users' choice of telecom

operators, Karaçuka's, (2012) in his study on

consumer choice and local network effects in mobile

telecommunications, showed that being male rather

than female has a positive impact on choice of mobile

operator, while being married has a negative impact. In

line with the above research studies, the following

hypotheses have been framed to study variance in

service quality across demographic variables among

cellular service companies, under reference.

H1: Service quality varies significantly across all age

groups;

gender groups;

educational groups;

H4: Service quality varies significantly across all time

periods of network experience groups; and

H5: Service quality varies significantly across groups

with all connection types.

Sample Design

Since the present study aims at measuring service

quality variation in cellular service companies under

study across demographic variables in Kashmir Valley,

an attempt has been made to make the sample as

representative as possible. However, due to time and

financial constraints, the study is confined to district

Srinagar only. District Srinagar is further divided into

eight assembly constituencies and out of eight, four

assembly constituencies are selected for the present

study. The selected constituencies have a significant

relationship with the sampled companies in terms of

customer density, geographical presence and

competition. The study is further restricted to four

selective cellular service operators namely Airtel,

Vodafone, Aircel and BSNL. The decision regarding

sample organization has been made in view of the fact

that among the best cellular service providers Airtel,

Vodafone, Aircel and BSNL have maximum market

share as per TRAI report as on 31st January, 2013.

These service providers have greater customer base,

business operations, customer service centres and

retail outlets than any other cellular service provider in

district Srinagar. The size of the sample was limited to

four hundred (400) respondents selected from four (4)

cellular companies by following convenience sampling

method. All important demographic characteristics

like age, gender, level of education, time of network

experience and connection type were taken into

consideration while seeking the response from the

customers regarding their perception of service

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

quality in the cellular industry. All these aspects have

an important bearing on the user's evaluation of

cellular services. Effort was made to give a balanced

representat ion to the above demographic

characteristics to make the sample representative.

A sizeable number of respondents belonged to the age

group of up to 20 years (59.5%) followed by the age

group of 21-30 years (26.5%) whereas the age group of

above 30 years (14.25%) were the least. In terms of

gender, the sample has a greater number of males

(57.5% males and 42.5% females). The data further

shows that under-graduates were the largest number

of participants (36.25%) followed by post-graduates

(33%) and graduates (30.75%). Respondents with

network experience of more than a year were highest

in number (75%) followed by the respondents with

network experience of up to 7-12 months (14.5%)

whereas respondents with network experience of up

to 6 months were least in number (10.5%). As per

connection type, majority of the respondents in the

sample belonged to the prepaid category (79.5%)

followed by postpaid category (20.5%).

Data Collection

To achieve the objective of the study, data was

collected from both primary and secondary sources.

The study, however, is based on primary data gathered

through a self-developed questionnaire. The

questionnaire was designed in a structured objective

pattern focusing on the research objectives. In case

customers were unable to understand the

questionnaire or were illiterate, the investigator

herself filled up the questionnaire after seeking their

responses. Secondary data has been collected from

previous research findings, scholarly reports,

telecommunications reports and respective marketing

departments.

Research Instrument

Literature provides evidence of the availability of two

important/popular service quality measurement

instruments: SERVQUAL (Parasuraman, et. al., 1988)

and SERVPERF (Cronin and Taylor, 1992). The

SERVQUAL model developed by Parasuraman, (1985,

1988) consists of 22 items for assessing customer

perceptions and expectations regarding the quality of

service. A level of agreement or disagreement with a

given item is rated on a seven point Likert-type scale.

The level of service quality is represented by the gap

between perceived and expected service. The

SERVQUAL model is based on five service quality

dimensions, namely tangibles (physical facilities,

equipment and personnel appearance), reliability

(ability to perform the promised service dependably

and accurately), responsiveness (willingness to help

customers and provide prompt service), assurance

(knowledge and courtesy of employees and their

ability to gain trust and confidence) and empathy

(providing individualized attention to the customers).

SERVQUAL means service quality which is the

discrepancy between customer's expectations of

service offering and the customer's perceptions of the

service received (Parasuraman, et. al., 1988).

Despite its wide usage, the model has been criticized

by a number of researchers (Carman 1990; Babakus

and Boller 1992; Teas 1994). Criticism was directed at

the conceptual and operational base of the model -

mostly its validity, reliability, operationalization of

expectations, and dimensional structure. In other

words, criticism against the SERVQUAL model was

directed to the use of (P-E) gap scores, length of the

questionnaire, predictive power of the instrument,

etc. (Babukus and Boller, 1992; Cronin and Taylor,

1992; Teas, 1993, 1994; Dabholkar, Shepherd, and

Thorpe, 2000). As a result, Cronin and Taylor (1992 and

1994) proposed an alternate scale to SERVQUAL -

what is referred to as the 'SERVPERF' scale. They

argued that performance is the measure that best

explains customers' perceptions of service quality, so

expectations should not be included in the service

quality measurement instrument. Besides theoretical

arguments, Cronin and Taylor (1992) also provided

empirical evidence across four industries (namely

banks, pest control, dry cleaning and fast food) to

corroborate the superiority of their “performance-

only” instrument over disconfirmation based

SERVQUAL Scale. Under the SERVPERF, a higher

perceived performance implies higher service quality

and customer satisfaction (Jain and Gupta, 2004). It

eliminates the expectation on the twenty-two items

and measures only performance on the original

version of SERVQUAL dimensions i.e., tangibility,

reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy

(Bolton and Drew, 1991; Babakus and Boller, 1992;

Hartline and Ferrell, 1996). In equation form, the

SERVPERF can be expressed as:

KSQi =∑ Pij

Where:

SQi = perceived service quality of an

individual 'I'

K = number of service attributes / items

Pi = perception of individual 'I' with

respect to performance of a service

firm attribute 'j'

In terms of methodology, the SERVPERF scale

represents a marked improvement over the

SERVQUAL scale. Not only is the scale more efficient in

reducing the number of items to be measured by

about 50 percent, it has also been empirically found

superior to the SERVQUAL scale for being able to

explain greater variance in the overall service quality

and customer satisfaction measured through the use

of single-item scale. This explains the considerable

support that has emerged over time in favour of the

SERVPERF scale (Churchill and Suprenant, 1982;

Bolton and Drew, 1991; Babukus and Boller, 1992;

Boulding, Kalra, Staelin, and Zeithaml, 1993; Gotlieb,

Grewal, and Brown, 1994). Realizing the advantages of

the SERVPERF scale over SERVQUAL, researchers

have increasingly started making use of the

performance only measure of service quality (Brady

and Robertson, 1992; Cronin and Taylor, 1992, 1994;

Andaleeb and Basu, 1994; Cronin, Brady and Hult,

2000; Bigne, Moliner, and Sanchey, 2003; Duncan and

Elliot, 2004). Conceding its superiority, even Zeithmal

(one of the founders of the SERVQUAL scale) in a

recent study observed that, “Our result is incompatible

with both the one-dimensional view of expectations

and the gap formation for service quality.” Instead we

find that perceived quality is directly influenced only

by perceptions of performance (Jain and Gupta, 2004).

This admittance cogently lends a testimony to the

superiority of the SERVPERF scale.

Recognizing the superiority of SERVPERF over

SERVQUAL, the present study has also used modified

SERVPERF scale to measure the service quality of

cellular companies under study. This 27-item

SERVPERF has been modified to suit the context of

cellular customers. Modifying the original SERVPERF

was intended to improve the validity and reliability of

the instrument. The questionnaire was divided into

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

quality in the cellular industry. All these aspects have

an important bearing on the user's evaluation of

cellular services. Effort was made to give a balanced

representat ion to the above demographic

characteristics to make the sample representative.

A sizeable number of respondents belonged to the age

group of up to 20 years (59.5%) followed by the age

group of 21-30 years (26.5%) whereas the age group of

above 30 years (14.25%) were the least. In terms of

gender, the sample has a greater number of males

(57.5% males and 42.5% females). The data further

shows that under-graduates were the largest number

of participants (36.25%) followed by post-graduates

(33%) and graduates (30.75%). Respondents with

network experience of more than a year were highest

in number (75%) followed by the respondents with

network experience of up to 7-12 months (14.5%)

whereas respondents with network experience of up

to 6 months were least in number (10.5%). As per

connection type, majority of the respondents in the

sample belonged to the prepaid category (79.5%)

followed by postpaid category (20.5%).

Data Collection

To achieve the objective of the study, data was

collected from both primary and secondary sources.

The study, however, is based on primary data gathered

through a self-developed questionnaire. The

questionnaire was designed in a structured objective

pattern focusing on the research objectives. In case

customers were unable to understand the

questionnaire or were illiterate, the investigator

herself filled up the questionnaire after seeking their

responses. Secondary data has been collected from

previous research findings, scholarly reports,

telecommunications reports and respective marketing

departments.

Research Instrument

Literature provides evidence of the availability of two

important/popular service quality measurement

instruments: SERVQUAL (Parasuraman, et. al., 1988)

and SERVPERF (Cronin and Taylor, 1992). The

SERVQUAL model developed by Parasuraman, (1985,

1988) consists of 22 items for assessing customer

perceptions and expectations regarding the quality of

service. A level of agreement or disagreement with a

given item is rated on a seven point Likert-type scale.

The level of service quality is represented by the gap

between perceived and expected service. The

SERVQUAL model is based on five service quality

dimensions, namely tangibles (physical facilities,

equipment and personnel appearance), reliability

(ability to perform the promised service dependably

and accurately), responsiveness (willingness to help

customers and provide prompt service), assurance

ability to gain trust and confidence) and empathy

(providing individualized attention to the customers).

SERVQUAL means service quality which is the

discrepancy between customer's expectations of

service offering and the customer's perceptions of the

service received (Parasuraman, et. al., 1988).

Despite its wide usage, the model has been criticized

by a number of researchers (Carman 1990; Babakus

and Boller 1992; Teas 1994). Criticism was directed at

the conceptual and operational base of the model -

mostly its validity, reliability, operationalization of

expectations, and dimensional structure. In other

words, criticism against the SERVQUAL model was

directed to the use of (P-E) gap scores, length of the

questionnaire, predictive power of the instrument,

etc. (Babukus and Boller, 1992; Cronin and Taylor,

1992; Teas, 1993, 1994; Dabholkar, Shepherd, and

Thorpe, 2000). As a result, Cronin and Taylor (1992 and

1994) proposed an alternate scale to SERVQUAL -

what is referred to as the 'SERVPERF' scale. They

argued that performance is the measure that best

explains customers' perceptions of service quality, so

expectations should not be included in the service

quality measurement instrument. Besides theoretical

arguments, Cronin and Taylor (1992) also provided

empirical evidence across four industries (namely

banks, pest control, dry cleaning and fast food) to

corroborate the superiority of their “performance-

only” instrument over disconfirmation based

SERVQUAL Scale. Under the SERVPERF, a higher

perceived performance implies higher service quality

and customer satisfaction (Jain and Gupta, 2004). It

eliminates the expectation on the twenty-two items

and measures only performance on the original

version of SERVQUAL dimensions i.e., tangibility,

reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy

(Bolton and Drew, 1991; Babakus and Boller, 1992;

Hartline and Ferrell, 1996). In equation form, the

SERVPERF can be expressed as:

KSQi =∑ Pij

Where:

SQi = perceived service quality of an

individual 'I'

K = number of service attributes / items

Pi = perception of individual 'I' with

respect to performance of a service

firm attribute 'j'

In terms of methodology, the SERVPERF scale

represents a marked improvement over the

SERVQUAL scale. Not only is the scale more efficient in

reducing the number of items to be measured by

about 50 percent, it has also been empirically found

superior to the SERVQUAL scale for being able to

explain greater variance in the overall service quality

and customer satisfaction measured through the use

of single-item scale. This explains the considerable

support that has emerged over time in favour of the

SERVPERF scale (Churchill and Suprenant, 1982;

Bolton and Drew, 1991; Babukus and Boller, 1992;

Boulding, Kalra, Staelin, and Zeithaml, 1993; Gotlieb,

Grewal, and Brown, 1994). Realizing the advantages of

the SERVPERF scale over SERVQUAL, researchers

have increasingly started making use of the

performance only measure of service quality (Brady

and Robertson, 1992; Cronin and Taylor, 1992, 1994;

Andaleeb and Basu, 1994; Cronin, Brady and Hult,

2000; Bigne, Moliner, and Sanchey, 2003; Duncan and

Elliot, 2004). Conceding its superiority, even Zeithmal

(one of the founders of the SERVQUAL scale) in a

recent study observed that, “Our result is incompatible

with both the one-dimensional view of expectations

and the gap formation for service quality.” Instead we

find that perceived quality is directly influenced only

by perceptions of performance (Jain and Gupta, 2004).

This admittance cogently lends a testimony to the

superiority of the SERVPERF scale.

Recognizing the superiority of SERVPERF over

SERVQUAL, the present study has also used modified

SERVPERF scale to measure the service quality of

cellular companies under study. This 27-item

SERVPERF has been modified to suit the context of

cellular customers. Modifying the original SERVPERF

was intended to improve the validity and reliability of

the instrument. The questionnaire was divided into

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

two parts. The first part was designed to measure the

perception of customers regarding cellular services

provided by select cellular companies. The second part

of the questionnaire contained questions relating to

socio-demographic data about the respondents. The

researchers introduced the tool of measurement in

such a way that it briefly illustrated the topic of the

study and procedures of response. The measurement

grades were placed according to the 10-point Likert

scale. The scale was ordered regressively as Strongly

Agree (10) to Strongly Disagree (0). The study was

conducted in district Srinagar of Kashmir valley for four

months during the year 2013.

In order to analyze the collected data and confirm the

usefulness of the modified SERVPERF model to the

cellular companies' context, the statistical package for

the social science (SPSS-19) was used. The researcher

performed factor analysis on 27 items using the

Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Furthermore, the

construct validity was tested by applying Bartlett's Test

of Sphericity and the Kaiser–Mayer–Olkin measure of

sampling adequacy to analyze the strength of

association among variables. The result of Bartlett's

Test of Sphericity is 0.000, which meets the criteria of

value lower than 0.05 in order for the factor analysis to

be considered appropriate. Furthermore KMO

measure for sample adequacy for service quality

scores is 0.909 which exceeds satisfactory value of 0.6

(Tabachnik and Fidell, 2001) and revealed a Chi-Square

at 3731.731, (P≤0.000) which verified that correlation

matrix was not an identity matrix, thus validating the

suitability of factor analysis (Table 1.1).

Table: 1.1 - KMO and Bartlett's Test

KMO and Bartlett’s Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy 0.909

Bartlett’s Test of Spher icity (Approx. Chi-

Square)

3731.731

p-value 0.000*

*Significant at 1% level.

After these preliminary steps, factor analysis with

Principal Component Analysis as an extraction method

was performed using 400 questionnaires. To explore

the dimensionality of the twenty-seven (27) item

scale, the study used R-mode Principle Component

Analysis with a Varimax Rotation and Eigen value equal

to or more than 1, which extracted six factors with

explained variance of 55.921 percent in the data (Table

1.2). Most of the factor loading were greater than 0.50,

implying a reasonably high correlation between

extracted factors and the individual items. The

procedure resulted in six factors/dimensions totalling

27 items. These six factors are labelled as F1-'Network

quality'(excellent network coverage), F2-'Pricing'

(providing all the benefits for the price paid), F3-

'Reliability'(ability to perform the promised service

dependably and accurately), F4-'Assurance'

ability to inspire trust and confidence), F5-'Empathy'

(caring, individualized attention the firm provides to its

customers) and F6-'Responsiveness' (willingness to

help customers and provide prompt service). The first

factor (Network Quality) contains most of the items (8)

and explains most of the variance (12.402 percent) and

hence, is the important determinant of perceived

service quality dimensions in cellular services.

Table: 1.2 Summary of Results from Scale Purification: Dimensions, Factor Loadings,Communalities, Eigen Value, Explained Variance and Cronbach's Alpha

Items Factors Communalities

F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6

Emp 1 .100 .290 .170 .321 .627 -.061 616

.191 -.047

Rel 10

Res 11

Rel 12

Prc 14

Prc 15

Prc 16

Prc 17

Ass 23

Ass 24

Ass 25

Res 26

Res 27

Eigen value

15.099

(Total)

Percentage (%) of Variance

12.402

11.080

55.921

Cronbach’s Alpha .801 .791 .768 .666 .737 .730 0.911

Number of Items 8 4 6 3 3 3 27

Cronbach's Alpha Test of Reliability

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

two parts. The first part was designed to measure the

perception of customers regarding cellular services

provided by select cellular companies. The second part

of the questionnaire contained questions relating to

socio-demographic data about the respondents. The

researchers introduced the tool of measurement in

such a way that it briefly illustrated the topic of the

study and procedures of response. The measurement

grades were placed according to the 10-point Likert

scale. The scale was ordered regressively as Strongly

Agree (10) to Strongly Disagree (0). The study was

conducted in district Srinagar of Kashmir valley for four

months during the year 2013.

In order to analyze the collected data and confirm the

usefulness of the modified SERVPERF model to the

cellular companies' context, the statistical package for

the social science (SPSS-19) was used. The researcher

performed factor analysis on 27 items using the

Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Furthermore, the

construct validity was tested by applying Bartlett's Test

of Sphericity and the Kaiser–Mayer–Olkin measure of

sampling adequacy to analyze the strength of

association among variables. The result of Bartlett's

Test of Sphericity is 0.000, which meets the criteria of

value lower than 0.05 in order for the factor analysis to

be considered appropriate. Furthermore KMO

measure for sample adequacy for service quality

scores is 0.909 which exceeds satisfactory value of 0.6

(Tabachnik and Fidell, 2001) and revealed a Chi-Square

at 3731.731, (P≤0.000) which verified that correlation

matrix was not an identity matrix, thus validating the

suitability of factor analysis (Table 1.1).

Table: 1.1 - KMO and Bartlett's Test

KMO and Bartlett’s Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy 0.909

Bartlett’s Test of Spher icity (Approx. Chi-

Square)

3731.731

p-value 0.000*

*Significant at 1% level.

After these preliminary steps, factor analysis with

Principal Component Analysis as an extraction method

was performed using 400 questionnaires. To explore

the dimensionality of the twenty-seven (27) item

scale, the study used R-mode Principle Component

Analysis with a Varimax Rotation and Eigen value equal

to or more than 1, which extracted six factors with

explained variance of 55.921 percent in the data (Table

1.2). Most of the factor loading were greater than 0.50,

implying a reasonably high correlation between

extracted factors and the individual items. The

procedure resulted in six factors/dimensions totalling

27 items. These six factors are labelled as F1-'Network

quality'(excellent network coverage), F2-'Pricing'

(providing all the benefits for the price paid), F3-

'Reliability'(ability to perform the promised service

dependably and accurately), F4-'Assurance'

ability to inspire trust and confidence), F5-'Empathy'

(caring, individualized attention the firm provides to its

customers) and F6-'Responsiveness' (willingness to

help customers and provide prompt service). The first

factor (Network Quality) contains most of the items (8)

and explains most of the variance (12.402 percent) and

hence, is the important determinant of perceived

service quality dimensions in cellular services.

Table: 1.2 Summary of Results from Scale Purification: Dimensions, Factor Loadings,Communalities, Eigen Value, Explained Variance and Cronbach's Alpha

Items Factors Communalities

F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6

Emp 1 .100 .290 .170 .321 .627 -.061 616

.191 -.047

Rel 10

Res 11

Rel 12

Prc 14

Prc 15

Prc 16

Prc 17

Ass 23

Ass 24

Ass 25

Res 26

Res 27

Eigen value

15.099

(Total)

Percentage (%) of Variance

12.402

11.080

55.921

Cronbach’s Alpha .801 .791 .768 .666 .737 .730 0.911

Number of Items 8 4 6 3 3 3 27

Cronbach's Alpha Test of Reliability

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

Cronbach's Alpha Test of Reliability is the most popular

estimate for measuring the internal consistency

(reliability) of items in a scale. In other words, it

measures the extent to which the responses collected

for a given item correlate with each other (Garson,

2002). The results of this test produce an α- score,

which is a number ranging between 0 and 1. According

to Garson (2002), the higher α -score is, the more

reliable the measured construct is. Furthermore,

according to Nunnally and Bernstein (1994), a score

exceeding 0.7 indicates high internal reliability of the

scale items, but there are still researchers who use

different cut-off α -scores like 0.8 or even 0.6 (Garson,

2002). However, the scores increase when the number

of items in a scale increases (Garson, 2002).

The reliability of the scale was also tested by using

Cronbach's Alpha (α) test. The present generated scale

achieved the scores of 0.911 (Table-1.2) which is highly

acceptable reliability coefficient (Nunnally, 1978). The

Cronbach's Alpha was also applied to each

factor/dimension which revealed an Alpha (α) score of

0.80 (network quality); 10.791 (pricing); 0.768

(reliability); 0.737 (empathy); 0.730 (responsiveness)

and 0.666 (assurance) which are all above 0.7 and are

highly reliable to measure the construct to which they

pertain except on assurance which is very close to 0.7

and can be regarded as pretty reliable.

Other Statistical Tools Used

For testing the various hypotheses set for the study,

various statistical tools and techniques were

employed. Common among these tools include

significance tests like students t-test and f-test. Data

gathered from respondents was processed and

analyzed with the help of SPSS 19.0 version. The

interpretation of data has been made on the basis of

mean and average scores. Keeping in view the control

variables in the study like gender and the connection

type, Student's t-Test was employed to test the

significance of means, if any. Variables like age, level of

education and time of network experience that were

more than two in number necessitated the use of f-test

to measure various statistical differences, if any.

Analysis

Service Quality in Cellular Companies

In line with the objectives, the present study seeks to

find out the service quality scores of customers of

different cellular companies. As mentioned earlier,

service quality was measured on a ten-point Likert

type (strongly disagree/ strongly agree) scale. To

measure the overall service quality of a sample

organisation, mean service quality scores on all

dimensions were calculated separately for each

service provider under study. The data in Table 1.4

presents information regarding the overall service

quality in cellular service companies. The table clearly

shows that all service providers, under reference, are

providing relatively better service quality to their

respective customers as the overall service quality

mean score is above 5. However, the overall service

quality score of Aircel is relatively high (6.19) followed

by Airtel (6.02), whereas service quality score of BSNL

(5.21) is the lowest followed by Vodafone (5.93).

Dimension-wise analysis in Table 1.4 clearly reveals

relatively better service performance of Aircel on

network quality with high service quality score of

(6.08) followed by Vodafone with the service quality

score of (5.83) while BSNL's service performance on

the said dimension is relatively poor with low service

quality score of (5.15) followed by Airtel with the

service quality score of (5.78). The data on pricing

dimension brings to light that the customers are

overall comfortable with the pricing option/best

pricing plans of Aircel followed by Airtel with the high

service quality scores of (6.24 and 5.96 respectively)

while Vodafone's and BSNL's performance on the said

dimension is relatively poor with low service quality

scores of (5.95 and 5.26 respectively). Further, the data

in Table 1.4 also reveals that both Airtel and Vodafone

have outperformed all other service providers under

reference on the reliability dimension with high

service quality scores (6.40 and 6.10 respectively)

whereas BSNL and Aircel have performed relatively

poor with low service quality scores of (5.24 and 6.4

respectively) on the said dimension. The service

quality score of Airtel on the assurance dimension has

been reported high at (6.35) followed by Aircel with

the service quality score of (6.34), while BSNL's

performance on the said dimension is reported

comparatively low with a low service quality score of

score of (6.31). Service quality scores on the empathy

dimension evidences that both Aircel and Vodafone

reference with high service quality score of (6.38 and

6.19 respect ively) whi le Airte l and B S N L 's

performance on the said dimension is relatively low

with the low service quality scores of (6.07 and 5.40

respectively). On the responsiveness dimension,

Aircel's service quality score followed by Airtel are

comparatively high (5.73 and 5.58 respectively) while

BSNL's scores followed by Vodafone are relatively low

(4.79 and 5.25 respectively) on the same dimension.

Table: 1.4- Overall Comparative Service Quality Scores of Cellular Service Providers Averaged on all Dimensions

S.N. Dimensions Airtel N=(100)

Vodafone N=(100)

Aircel N=(100)

N=(100)

1 Network quality 5.78 (3)

5.83 (2)

6.08 (1)

5.15 (4)

Pricing

Reliability

Assurance

6.35 (1)

6.31 (3)

6.34 (2)

5.45 (4)

Empathy

6.19 (2)

6.38 (1)

5.40 (4)

Responsiveness

Overall

(Averaged on all dimensions)

Rank 2 3 1 4

Note: Figures within parenthesis are ranks to each dimension across all service providers

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

Cronbach's Alpha Test of Reliability is the most popular

estimate for measuring the internal consistency

(reliability) of items in a scale. In other words, it

measures the extent to which the responses collected

for a given item correlate with each other (Garson,

2002). The results of this test produce an α- score,

which is a number ranging between 0 and 1. According

to Garson (2002), the higher α -score is, the more

reliable the measured construct is. Furthermore,

according to Nunnally and Bernstein (1994), a score

exceeding 0.7 indicates high internal reliability of the

scale items, but there are still researchers who use

different cut-off α -scores like 0.8 or even 0.6 (Garson,

2002). However, the scores increase when the number

of items in a scale increases (Garson, 2002).

The reliability of the scale was also tested by using

Cronbach's Alpha (α) test. The present generated scale

achieved the scores of 0.911 (Table-1.2) which is highly

acceptable reliability coefficient (Nunnally, 1978). The

Cronbach's Alpha was also applied to each

factor/dimension which revealed an Alpha (α) score of

0.80 (network quality); 10.791 (pricing); 0.768

(reliability); 0.737 (empathy); 0.730 (responsiveness)

and 0.666 (assurance) which are all above 0.7 and are

highly reliable to measure the construct to which they

pertain except on assurance which is very close to 0.7

and can be regarded as pretty reliable.

Other Statistical Tools Used

For testing the various hypotheses set for the study,

various statistical tools and techniques were

employed. Common among these tools include

significance tests like students t-test and f-test. Data

gathered from respondents was processed and

analyzed with the help of SPSS 19.0 version. The

interpretation of data has been made on the basis of

mean and average scores. Keeping in view the control

variables in the study like gender and the connection

type, Student's t-Test was employed to test the

significance of means, if any. Variables like age, level of

education and time of network experience that were

more than two in number necessitated the use of f-test

to measure various statistical differences, if any.

Analysis

Service Quality in Cellular Companies

In line with the objectives, the present study seeks to

find out the service quality scores of customers of

different cellular companies. As mentioned earlier,

service quality was measured on a ten-point Likert

type (strongly disagree/ strongly agree) scale. To

measure the overall service quality of a sample

organisation, mean service quality scores on all

dimensions were calculated separately for each

service provider under study. The data in Table 1.4

presents information regarding the overall service

quality in cellular service companies. The table clearly

shows that all service providers, under reference, are

providing relatively better service quality to their

respective customers as the overall service quality

mean score is above 5. However, the overall service

quality score of Aircel is relatively high (6.19) followed

by Airtel (6.02), whereas service quality score of BSNL

(5.21) is the lowest followed by Vodafone (5.93).

Dimension-wise analysis in Table 1.4 clearly reveals

relatively better service performance of Aircel on

network quality with high service quality score of

score of (5.83) while BSNL's service performance on

the said dimension is relatively poor with low service

quality score of (5.15) followed by Airtel with the

service quality score of (5.78). The data on pricing

dimension brings to light that the customers are

overall comfortable with the pricing option/best

pricing plans of Aircel followed by Airtel with the high

service quality scores of (6.24 and 5.96 respectively)

while Vodafone's and BSNL's performance on the said

dimension is relatively poor with low service quality

scores of (5.95 and 5.26 respectively). Further, the data

in Table 1.4 also reveals that both Airtel and Vodafone

reference on the reliability dimension with high

service quality scores (6.40 and 6.10 respectively)

whereas BSNL and Aircel have performed relatively

poor with low service quality scores of (5.24 and 6.4

respectively) on the said dimension. The service

quality score of Airtel on the assurance dimension has

been reported high at (6.35) followed by Aircel with

the service quality score of (6.34), while BSNL's

performance on the said dimension is reported

comparatively low with a low service quality score of

score of (6.31). Service quality scores on the empathy

dimension evidences that both Aircel and Vodafone

reference with high service quality score of (6.38 and

6.19 respect ively) whi le Airte l and B S N L 's

performance on the said dimension is relatively low

with the low service quality scores of (6.07 and 5.40

respectively). On the responsiveness dimension,

Aircel's service quality score followed by Airtel are

comparatively high (5.73 and 5.58 respectively) while

BSNL's scores followed by Vodafone are relatively low

(4.79 and 5.25 respectively) on the same dimension.

Table: 1.4- Overall Comparative Service Quality Scores of Cellular Service Providers Averaged on all Dimensions

S.N. Dimensions Airtel N=(100)

Vodafone N=(100)

Aircel N=(100)

N=(100)

1 Network quality 5.78 (3)

5.83 (2)

6.08 (1)

5.15 (4)

Pricing

Reliability

Assurance

6.35 (1)

6.31 (3)

6.34 (2)

5.45 (4)

Empathy

6.19 (2)

6.38 (1)

5.40 (4)

Responsiveness

Overall

(Averaged on all dimensions)

Rank 2 3 1 4

Note: Figures within parenthesis are ranks to each dimension across all service providers

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

Service Quality Variation across

Demographic Variables

Service organizations need to provide consistent

service quality in order to maintain/increase their

profitability. In an attempt to study whether service

providers, under study, provide the same service

quality to all their customers, respondents were

divided into different groups, based on demographic

variables like age, gender, level of education, time of

network experience and connection type. Service

quality scores for different groups and for each service

provider were computed accordingly which are

presented below. T-Test and F-test were accordingly

performed to determine the level of significant

difference among all groups.

Service Quality Variation and Age

With a view to measure service quality variation, if any,

of different age groups of sample organizations,

respondents were categorized in three age groups viz.,

up to 20 years, 21-30 years, and above 30 years.

Service quality scores were calculated for each age

group of the respective service providers separately

followed by f-test which is presented in Table 1.5. The

data in the said table shows that there exists an

insignificant difference (P>0.05) in the overall quality

of services offered by Airtel and BSNL for all the three

age groups, whereas there exists a significant

difference in the overall quality of services offered by

Vodafone and Aircel as revealed by the p-value (p<

0.05).

From the analysis of data, it is further evident that the

service quality score of Airtel is comparatively high

(6.28) across all dimensions of service quality for all the stthree age groups (ranked 1 ) followed by Aircel (ranked

nd2 ) whereas the service quality scores of BSNL is

thlowest (ranked 4 ) across all the age groups, followed rdby Vodafone (ranked 3 ).

The dimension-wise analysis of the said table reveals

that the service quality scores of Airtel are relatively

high on the pricing dimension (6.62 and 5.86 st ndrespectively) in the 1 and 2 age groups followed by

empathy and reliability, whereas the company is

relatively low on network quality and responsiveness

dimensions. The service quality score of Airtel as rdreported by the 3 age group is relatively high on

network quality followed by reliability and assurance.

On the pricing dimension, the service quality score of

Vodafone is relatively high for all the three age groups,

followed by reliability and empathy dimensions.

However, it has scored relatively low scores in all the

three age groups as far as the responsiveness,

assurance and network quality dimensions are

concerned.

Aircel, on the other hand, has received the highest

scores on the pricing dimension for the first two age

groups i.e. up to 20 years and 21-30 years (6.78 and

6.37 respectively) followed by the empathy

dimension. On the reliability dimension, Aircel has st rdscored relatively high in the 1 and 3 age groups. As far

as the assurance and network quality dimensions are

concerned, all the three age groups have given low

scores. BSNL on the other hand, has received relatively

high scores on the pricing and reliability dimensions in st nd st ndthe 1 and 2 age groups (ranked 1 and 2

respectively) followed by the empathy dimension,

whereas it has scored relatively low on the assurance st nd and network quality dimensions in the 1 and 2 age

groups.

Service Quality Variation and Gender

The impact of gender differences, if any, of sample

organizations on service quality was also studied. The

gender-wise service quality scores of each service

provider are presented in Table 1.6 followed by t-test

to determine the level of significant difference. The

data in the said table brings to light that gender-wise,

there exists an insignificant difference (P>0.05) on

overall quality of cellular services among all cell phone

service providers under study, which means that

service providers do not consider gender while

providing cellphone services.

The table clearly reveals that Aircel evidences the

highest service quality scores across all dimensions in

both male and female categories, followed by Airtel nd(ranked 2 ) while Vodafone and BSNL have scored

rd thcomparatively low (ranked 3 and 4 respectively) in

both the above mentioned categories.

The dimensions-wise analysis of Airtel clearly shows

that it has scored the highest on the pricing dimension

for both the male and female categories, followed by ndthe reliability and empathy dimensions (ranked 2 and

rd3 respectively). However, it has scored low as far as

the assurance and network quality dimensions are

concerned (6.27, 6.17 and 6.00, 5.91 respectively).

Vodafone respondents on the other hand, have

different perceptions about the service quality

received from their provider. Analysis shows that

Vodafone has scored high on the pricing and reliability st nd dimensions (ranked 1 and 2 respectively) followed

by empathy and responsiveness, whereas it has scored

comparatively low on assurance and network quality

(5.83,6.08 and 5.49,5.80 respectively).

On the pricing dimension, Aircel has scored the highest

for both the male and female categories followed by

reliability, responsiveness and empathy dimensions nd rd th(ranked 2 , 3 and 4 respectively). However, it has low

scores as far as the assurance and network quality

dimensions are concerned (6.18, 5.34 and 6.27, 5.20

respectively).

stBSNL has been ranked 1 on pricing and reliability

dimensions by both male and female respondents. As

far as the empathy, responsiveness, assurance and

network quality dimensions are concerned it has

relatively low service quality scores.

Service Quality Variation and Education

With a view to study the service quality variation, if

any, of the sample organizations, at different levels of

education, respondents were grouped into three st nd levels viz., 1 level - up to secondary; 2 level -

rdGraduation; and 3 level - post-graduation. Service

quality scores at different levels of education were

calculated for each service provider separately

(presented in Table 1.7) followed by f-test. The analysis

in the table reveals that there exists an insignificant

difference (P>0.05) in the overall quality of service

among the different education groups among all the

service providers provide the same services to all

customers irrespective of their educational

background.

Moreover, the overall analysis shows that Airtel scores

are the highest on each dimension of service quality

for all educational groups, followed by Aircel and nd rdVodafone (ranked 2 and 3 respectively) whereas

BSNL scores are low among all educated groups as threported by the respective customers (ranked 4 ).

The dimension-wise analysis in the said table reveals

that Airtel has received the highest score on the pricing

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

Service Quality Variation across

Demographic Variables

Service organizations need to provide consistent

service quality in order to maintain/increase their

profitability. In an attempt to study whether service

providers, under study, provide the same service

quality to all their customers, respondents were

divided into different groups, based on demographic

variables like age, gender, level of education, time of

network experience and connection type. Service

quality scores for different groups and for each service

provider were computed accordingly which are

presented below. T-Test and F-test were accordingly

performed to determine the level of significant

difference among all groups.

Service Quality Variation and Age

With a view to measure service quality variation, if any,

of different age groups of sample organizations,

respondents were categorized in three age groups viz.,

up to 20 years, 21-30 years, and above 30 years.

Service quality scores were calculated for each age

group of the respective service providers separately

followed by f-test which is presented in Table 1.5. The

data in the said table shows that there exists an

insignificant difference (P>0.05) in the overall quality

of services offered by Airtel and BSNL for all the three

age groups, whereas there exists a significant

difference in the overall quality of services offered by

Vodafone and Aircel as revealed by the p-value (p<

0.05).

From the analysis of data, it is further evident that the

service quality score of Airtel is comparatively high

(6.28) across all dimensions of service quality for all the stthree age groups (ranked 1 ) followed by Aircel (ranked

nd2 ) whereas the service quality scores of BSNL is

thlowest (ranked 4 ) across all the age groups, followed rdby Vodafone (ranked 3 ).

The dimension-wise analysis of the said table reveals

that the service quality scores of Airtel are relatively

high on the pricing dimension (6.62 and 5.86 st ndrespectively) in the 1 and 2 age groups followed by

empathy and reliability, whereas the company is

relatively low on network quality and responsiveness

dimensions. The service quality score of Airtel as rdreported by the 3 age group is relatively high on

network quality followed by reliability and assurance.

On the pricing dimension, the service quality score of

Vodafone is relatively high for all the three age groups,

followed by reliability and empathy dimensions.

However, it has scored relatively low scores in all the

three age groups as far as the responsiveness,

assurance and network quality dimensions are

concerned.

Aircel, on the other hand, has received the highest

scores on the pricing dimension for the first two age

groups i.e. up to 20 years and 21-30 years (6.78 and

6.37 respectively) followed by the empathy

dimension. On the reliability dimension, Aircel has st rdscored relatively high in the 1 and 3 age groups. As far

as the assurance and network quality dimensions are

concerned, all the three age groups have given low

scores. BSNL on the other hand, has received relatively

high scores on the pricing and reliability dimensions in st nd st ndthe 1 and 2 age groups (ranked 1 and 2

respectively) followed by the empathy dimension,

whereas it has scored relatively low on the assurance st nd and network quality dimensions in the 1 and 2 age

groups.

Service Quality Variation and Gender

The impact of gender differences, if any, of sample

organizations on service quality was also studied. The

gender-wise service quality scores of each service

provider are presented in Table 1.6 followed by t-test

to determine the level of significant difference. The

data in the said table brings to light that gender-wise,

there exists an insignificant difference (P>0.05) on

overall quality of cellular services among all cell phone

service providers do not consider gender while

providing cellphone services.

The table clearly reveals that Aircel evidences the

highest service quality scores across all dimensions in

both male and female categories, followed by Airtel nd(ranked 2 ) while Vodafone and BSNL have scored

rd thcomparatively low (ranked 3 and 4 respectively) in

both the above mentioned categories.

The dimensions-wise analysis of Airtel clearly shows

that it has scored the highest on the pricing dimension

for both the male and female categories, followed by ndthe reliability and empathy dimensions (ranked 2 and

rd3 respectively). However, it has scored low as far as

the assurance and network quality dimensions are

concerned (6.27, 6.17 and 6.00, 5.91 respectively).

Vodafone respondents on the other hand, have

different perceptions about the service quality

received from their provider. Analysis shows that

Vodafone has scored high on the pricing and reliability st nd dimensions (ranked 1 and 2 respectively) followed

by empathy and responsiveness, whereas it has scored

comparatively low on assurance and network quality

(5.83,6.08 and 5.49,5.80 respectively).

On the pricing dimension, Aircel has scored the highest

for both the male and female categories followed by

reliability, responsiveness and empathy dimensions nd rd th(ranked 2 , 3 and 4 respectively). However, it has low

scores as far as the assurance and network quality

dimensions are concerned (6.18, 5.34 and 6.27, 5.20

respectively).

stBSNL has been ranked 1 on pricing and reliability

dimensions by both male and female respondents. As

far as the empathy, responsiveness, assurance and

network quality dimensions are concerned it has

relatively low service quality scores.

Service Quality Variation and Education

With a view to study the service quality variation, if

any, of the sample organizations, at different levels of

education, respondents were grouped into three st nd levels viz., 1 level - up to secondary; 2 level -

rdGraduation; and 3 level - post-graduation. Service

quality scores at different levels of education were

calculated for each service provider separately

(presented in Table 1.7) followed by f-test. The analysis

in the table reveals that there exists an insignificant

difference (P>0.05) in the overall quality of service

among the different education groups among all the

service providers provide the same services to all

customers irrespective of their educational

background.

Moreover, the overall analysis shows that Airtel scores

are the highest on each dimension of service quality

for all educational groups, followed by Aircel and nd rdVodafone (ranked 2 and 3 respectively) whereas

BSNL scores are low among all educated groups as threported by the respective customers (ranked 4 ).

The dimension-wise analysis in the said table reveals

that Airtel has received the highest score on the pricing

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

dimension and received low scores on assurance,

responsiveness and network quality dimensions for all

educational groups. Among the graduate and post-

graduate respondents, Vodafone has received the

highest score on the pricing dimension followed by

reliability, empathy, responsiveness and assurance nd rd th thdimensions (ranked 2 , 3 , 4 and 5 respectively). On

the other hand, on the network quality dimension,

Vodafone has received a low score from all educational

groups.

The data for Aircel shows that it has received the

highest score from all educational groups on the

pricing dimension followed by the empathy dimension nd(ranked 2 ). Analyzing the responsiveness, assurance

and network quality dimensions, the data reveals low

scores among the secondary level and graduate rd th threspondents (ranked 3 , 4 and 5 respectively). BSNL

however, has received the highest score on the

reliability dimension among the secondary level and

post-graduate respondents followed by low scores on thassurance and network quality dimensions (ranked 5

thand 6 respectively).

Service Quality Variation and Time of

Network Experience

With a view to study the service quality variation if any,

with regard to time of network experience of the

sample organizations, respondents were divided into stthree groups, viz., up to 6 months (group 1 ), 7-12

nd rdmonths (group 2 ) and more than a year (group 3 ).

Service quality scores were calculated for each group

and for each service provider separately (presented in

Table 1.8) followed by f-test. From the analysis in the

table, it is quite evident that there exists an

insignificant difference (p >0.5) in the overall quality of

services among all service providers under study, in

terms of time of network experience for all the groups.

The data in Table 1.8 reveals that Airtel has received

the highest score on overall service quality (6.46)

followed by Aircel and Vodafone (6.34 and 6.11

respectively). BSNL, however, figures lowest on overall

service quality among all the three groups as disclosed

by the analysis (5.1). The dimension-wise analysis of

the said table shows that on the pricing dimension,

Airtel has scored the highest as reported by the three

groups of network experience, followed by reliability. nd rdIn the 2 and 3 group (network experience) Airtel has

received low scores as far as the responsiveness and

network quality dimensions are concerned. Vodafone

respondents on the other hand, have different

perceptions about their network experience. Analysis

shows that Vodafone has scored the highest on the

pricing dimension for all the three groups, followed by

reliability, empathy and responsiveness, whereas it

has scored comparatively low on assurance and

network quality.

Aircel has scored high on the pricing and empathy st nddimensions (ranked 1 and 2 respectively) as

nd rdreported by the 2 and 3 groups respectively.

However, it has scored relatively low in all the three

groups as far as the assurance and network quality th th dimensions are concerned (ranked 5 and 6

respectively).

BSNL has scored the highest on the reliability nd rddimension by the 2 and 3 groups of network

experience, followed by responsiveness, assurance nd rd thand network quality dimensions (ranked 2 , 3 and 4

strespectively) whereas in the group 1 , it has low scores

on assurance and network quality dimensions (ranked th th5 and 6 respectively).

Service Quality Variation and Connection

With a view to study service quality variation if any,

with regard to connect ion type of sample

organizations, respondents were divided into two

groups, viz., prepaid and post-paid. Service quality

scores were calculated for each group and for each

service provider separately (presented in Table 1.9)

followed by t-test. Respondents of all the cell phone

service providing companies under study have

reported an insignificant difference (P>0.05) in the

overall quality of services for both the prepaid and

post-paid categories meaning thereby that all cell

phone service providers are delivering the same

service quality to both pre and post- paid customers.

The table clearly reveals that Airtel followed by Aircel

have received relatively high service quality scores stacross all dimensions of service quality (ranked 1 and

nd2 respectively) while Vodafone, followed by BSNL, rd thhave scored comparatively low (ranked 3 and 4

respectively) on all dimensions of service quality.

The dimension-wise analysis shows that in both the

groups i.e. prepaid as well as the post-paid group,

Airtel has received fairly high scores on the pricing

dimension, followed by the reliability dimension st nd(ranked 1 and 2 respectively) while it figures

relatively low on responsiveness, assurance and rd th thnetwork quality dimensions (ranked 3 , 4 and 5

respectively). Vodafone scores relatively high on the st ndpricing dimension in both the groups (ranked 1 and 2

respectively) followed by the empathy dimension

while it figures relatively low on responsiveness, rdassurance and network quality dimensions (ranked 3 ,

th th4 and 5 respectively).

Aircel has received the highest score on the pricing

dimension followed by empathy and responsiveness nd rddimensions (ranked 2 and 3 respectively). On the

assurance and network quality dimensions, it has

received low service quality scores (6.28, 6.32 and

5.98, 6.18) as is revealed by the analysis.

BSNL however, has scored the highest on the pricing

dimension for prepaid services, followed by low scores

on the network quality dimension on post-paid

services. However, post-paid users gave a high score on

the reliability dimension, followed by low scores on the

pricing dimension.

Conclusion and Managerial Implications

In this study, a scale for measuring the service quality

of cellular service companies was proposed through

exploratory factor analyses result ing in s ix

factors/dimensions namely: 'Network quality',

'Pricing', 'Reliability', 'Assurance', 'Empathy' and

'Responsiveness'. The first factor - Network quality -

followed by Pricing and Reliability contained most of

the elements (8, 4 and 6 respectively) and explained

most of the variance (12.402 percent, 11.080 percent

and 9.435 percent respectively); this clearly indicates

that the most important factor in predicting cellular

service quality evaluation is network quality, followed

by pricing and reliability. These research findings are in

harmony with the research findings of Cavana,

Corbett, and Lo, (2007), Khan (2010), OluOjo (2010),

Rakumar and Harish (2011), Siew, Ayankule, Hanisah

and Alan, (2011), Shahzad and Saima (2012) and Ode

Egana (2013). Along with the important findings

related to quality of cellular services, two more

dimensions i.e. network quality and pricing were

added to the original SERVPERF scale which is itself

another important contribution. At the same time, the

modified questionnaire can also provide guidelines

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

dimension and received low scores on assurance,

responsiveness and network quality dimensions for all

educational groups. Among the graduate and post-

graduate respondents, Vodafone has received the

highest score on the pricing dimension followed by

reliability, empathy, responsiveness and assurance nd rd th thdimensions (ranked 2 , 3 , 4 and 5 respectively). On

the other hand, on the network quality dimension,

Vodafone has received a low score from all educational

groups.

The data for Aircel shows that it has received the

highest score from all educational groups on the

pricing dimension followed by the empathy dimension nd(ranked 2 ). Analyzing the responsiveness, assurance

and network quality dimensions, the data reveals low

scores among the secondary level and graduate rd th threspondents (ranked 3 , 4 and 5 respectively). BSNL

however, has received the highest score on the

reliability dimension among the secondary level and

post-graduate respondents followed by low scores on thassurance and network quality dimensions (ranked 5

thand 6 respectively).

Service Quality Variation and Time of

Network Experience

With a view to study the service quality variation if any,

with regard to time of network experience of the

sample organizations, respondents were divided into stthree groups, viz., up to 6 months (group 1 ), 7-12

nd rdmonths (group 2 ) and more than a year (group 3 ).

Service quality scores were calculated for each group

and for each service provider separately (presented in

Table 1.8) followed by f-test. From the analysis in the

table, it is quite evident that there exists an

insignificant difference (p >0.5) in the overall quality of

services among all service providers under study, in

terms of time of network experience for all the groups.

The data in Table 1.8 reveals that Airtel has received

the highest score on overall service quality (6.46)

followed by Aircel and Vodafone (6.34 and 6.11

respectively). BSNL, however, figures lowest on overall

service quality among all the three groups as disclosed

by the analysis (5.1). The dimension-wise analysis of

the said table shows that on the pricing dimension,

Airtel has scored the highest as reported by the three

groups of network experience, followed by reliability. nd rdIn the 2 and 3 group (network experience) Airtel has

received low scores as far as the responsiveness and

network quality dimensions are concerned. Vodafone

respondents on the other hand, have different

perceptions about their network experience. Analysis

shows that Vodafone has scored the highest on the

pricing dimension for all the three groups, followed by

reliability, empathy and responsiveness, whereas it

has scored comparatively low on assurance and

network quality.

Aircel has scored high on the pricing and empathy st nddimensions (ranked 1 and 2 respectively) as

nd rdreported by the 2 and 3 groups respectively.

However, it has scored relatively low in all the three

groups as far as the assurance and network quality th th dimensions are concerned (ranked 5 and 6

respectively).

BSNL has scored the highest on the reliability nd rddimension by the 2 and 3 groups of network

experience, followed by responsiveness, assurance nd rd thand network quality dimensions (ranked 2 , 3 and 4

strespectively) whereas in the group 1 , it has low scores

on assurance and network quality dimensions (ranked th th5 and 6 respectively).

Service Quality Variation and Connection

With a view to study service quality variation if any,

with regard to connect ion type of sample

organizations, respondents were divided into two

groups, viz., prepaid and post-paid. Service quality

scores were calculated for each group and for each

service provider separately (presented in Table 1.9)

followed by t-test. Respondents of all the cell phone

service providing companies under study have

reported an insignificant difference (P>0.05) in the

overall quality of services for both the prepaid and

post-paid categories meaning thereby that all cell

phone service providers are delivering the same

service quality to both pre and post- paid customers.

The table clearly reveals that Airtel followed by Aircel

have received relatively high service quality scores stacross all dimensions of service quality (ranked 1 and

nd2 respectively) while Vodafone, followed by BSNL, rd thhave scored comparatively low (ranked 3 and 4

respectively) on all dimensions of service quality.

The dimension-wise analysis shows that in both the

groups i.e. prepaid as well as the post-paid group,

Airtel has received fairly high scores on the pricing

dimension, followed by the reliability dimension st nd(ranked 1 and 2 respectively) while it figures

relatively low on responsiveness, assurance and rd th thnetwork quality dimensions (ranked 3 , 4 and 5

respectively). Vodafone scores relatively high on the st ndpricing dimension in both the groups (ranked 1 and 2

respectively) followed by the empathy dimension

while it figures relatively low on responsiveness, rdassurance and network quality dimensions (ranked 3 ,

th th4 and 5 respectively).

Aircel has received the highest score on the pricing

dimension followed by empathy and responsiveness nd rddimensions (ranked 2 and 3 respectively). On the

assurance and network quality dimensions, it has

received low service quality scores (6.28, 6.32 and

5.98, 6.18) as is revealed by the analysis.

BSNL however, has scored the highest on the pricing

dimension for prepaid services, followed by low scores

on the network quality dimension on post-paid

services. However, post-paid users gave a high score on

the reliability dimension, followed by low scores on the

pricing dimension.

Conclusion and Managerial Implications

In this study, a scale for measuring the service quality

of cellular service companies was proposed through

exploratory factor analyses result ing in s ix

factors/dimensions namely: 'Network quality',

'Pricing', 'Reliability', 'Assurance', 'Empathy' and

'Responsiveness'. The first factor - Network quality -

followed by Pricing and Reliability contained most of

the elements (8, 4 and 6 respectively) and explained

most of the variance (12.402 percent, 11.080 percent

and 9.435 percent respectively); this clearly indicates

that the most important factor in predicting cellular

service quality evaluation is network quality, followed

by pricing and reliability. These research findings are in

harmony with the research findings of Cavana,

Corbett, and Lo, (2007), Khan (2010), OluOjo (2010),

Rakumar and Harish (2011), Siew, Ayankule, Hanisah

and Alan, (2011), Shahzad and Saima (2012) and Ode

Egana (2013). Along with the important findings

related to quality of cellular services, two more

dimensions i.e. network quality and pricing were

added to the original SERVPERF scale which is itself

another important contribution. At the same time, the

modified questionnaire can also provide guidelines

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

through which service planners can design marketing

strategies that will help to improve the overall quality

of cellular services.

The analysis of service quality scores across all

demographic variables reveals that all service

providers under reference, are providing relatively

better service quality to their respective customers, as

their overall service quality mean score is above 5.

However, service quality of Aircel is the best (ranked st nd1 ) followed by Airtel (ranked 2 ) while the overall

thservice quality of BSNL is the poorest (ranked 4 ) with rdVodafone ahead (ranked 3 ). Further, the analysis of

service quality scores across demographic variables

also reveals that there exists an insignificant variation

(p>0.05) in service quality on nearly all demographic

variables in all cellular companies under reference,

meaning that cellular service operators provide the

same service quality to all customers alike and don't

differentiate their services on demographic basis.

Measuring service quality enables an organization to

know its position in the market and provides a strategic

advantage to enhance its competitiveness. It also

presents areas of strengths/ weaknesses that offer

opportunities to the organization to initiate an

appropriate response to focus and improve salient

attributes of customer perceived service quality. The

research instrument used in the present study, if

implemented in the right perspective, will surely go a

long way in identifying the area/s for improvement and

the area/s to be capitalized to meet/beat competition.

Mobile operators are vigorously investing in network

coverage, up-gradation and quality, competitive

pricing, and diversified offering to attract new/retain

existing customers. The results of this study

substantiate the response strategy of mobile phone

operators to enhance network quality, competitive

pricing and reliability dimensions that are vital to affect

the customers' perception of quality of cellular

services.

ara�

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

through which service planners can design marketing

strategies that will help to improve the overall quality

of cellular services.

The analysis of service quality scores across all

demographic variables reveals that all service

providers under reference, are providing relatively

better service quality to their respective customers, as

their overall service quality mean score is above 5.

However, service quality of Aircel is the best (ranked st nd1 ) followed by Airtel (ranked 2 ) while the overall

thservice quality of BSNL is the poorest (ranked 4 ) with rdVodafone ahead (ranked 3 ). Further, the analysis of

service quality scores across demographic variables

also reveals that there exists an insignificant variation

(p>0.05) in service quality on nearly all demographic

variables in all cellular companies under reference,

meaning that cellular service operators provide the

same service quality to all customers alike and don't

differentiate their services on demographic basis.

Measuring service quality enables an organization to

know its position in the market and provides a strategic

advantage to enhance its competitiveness. It also

presents areas of strengths/ weaknesses that offer

opportunities to the organization to initiate an

appropriate response to focus and improve salient

attributes of customer perceived service quality. The

research instrument used in the present study, if

implemented in the right perspective, will surely go a

long way in identifying the area/s for improvement and

the area/s to be capitalized to meet/beat competition.

Mobile operators are vigorously investing in network

coverage, up-gradation and quality, competitive

pricing, and diversified offering to attract new/retain

existing customers. The results of this study

substantiate the response strategy of mobile phone

operators to enhance network quality, competitive

pricing and reliability dimensions that are vital to affect

the customers' perception of quality of cellular

services.

ara�

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

ara�

Up to secondary

Gradua�on

Post-gradua�on

Up to secondary

Gradua�on

Post-gradua�on

Up to secondary

Gradua�on

Post-gradua�on

Up to secondary

Gradua�on

Post-gradua�on

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

ara�

Up to secondary

Gradua�on

Post-gradua�on

Up to secondary

Gradua�on

Post-gradua�on

Up to secondary

Gradua�on

Post-gradua�on

Up to secondary

Gradua�on

Post-gradua�on

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

ara�

Up to 6

months

7-12 months

More than a

Up to 6

months

7-12 months

More than a

Up to 6

months N=12

7-12 months

More than a

Up to 6

months

7-12 months

More than a

.88 (5)

.32 (1)

.22 (2)

ara�

Prepaid

paid N=14

Prepaid

paid N=17

Prepaid

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

ara�

Up to 6

months

7-12 months

More than a

Up to 6

months

7-12 months

More than a

Up to 6

months N=12

7-12 months

More than a

Up to 6

months

7-12 months

More than a

.88 (5)

.32 (1)

.22 (2)

ara�

Prepaid

paid N=14

Prepaid

paid N=17

Prepaid

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

Table: 1.10 Hypothesis Tes�ng: Service Quality Variance Across Demographic Variables

Hypothesis Statements Operators F/T- value P- Value Status

H 1 Service quality varies

significantly among all age

groups.

Airtel 2.054 .134 Rejected

Vodafone 4.692* .011* Accepted

Aircel 4.280* .017* Accepted

BSNL 1.107 .335 Rejected

significantly among all

gender groups.

Airtel .754 .454 Rejected

Vodafone -1.496 .138 Rejected

Aircel -.912 .364 Rejected

BSNL .464 .643 Rejected

educa�onal groups.

Vodafone .819 .444 Rejected

Aircel .376 .687 Rejected

Service quality varies

significantly among network

experience groups.

Airtel

Rejected

Vodafone

Rejected

Aircel

Rejected

connec�on types groups.

Airtel

Rejected

Vodafone

Rejected

Aircel

Rejected

References

• Ahluwalia, J. S., (1998), “Total Quality Management”, New Delhi, India.

• Ahn, L., and Lee, M., (1999), “An Econometric Analysis of the Demand for Access to Mobile Telephone

Networks,” Information Economics and Policy, Vol. 11, Pp. 297-305.

• Andonova, A., (2006), “Mobile Phones: The Internet and the Institutional Environment,” Telecommunications

Policy, Vol. 30, Pp. 29-45.

• Atkin, D. J., and Larose, R., (1999), “An Analysis of the Information Services Adoption Literature,” In Hanson, J.

(Ed.), Advances in Telematics Vol. 2, Pp. 91-110.

• Atalik O., and Arslan M., (2009), “A Study to Determine the Effects of Customer Value on Customer Loyalty in

Airline Companies operating: Case of Turkish Air Travelers”, International Journal of Business and

Management, Vol. 4 No. 6, Pp. 154-162.

• Agyapong, G. K, Q., (2011), “The Effect of Service Quality on Customer satisfaction in the Utility Industry: A

Case of Vodafone (Ghana)”, International Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 6, No. 5, Pp. 203-210.

• Andleeb, S. S., and Basu, A. K., (1994), “Technical Complexity and Consumer Knowledge as Moderators of

Service Quality Evaluation in the Automobile Service Industry,” Journal of Retailing, Vol.70, No.4, Pp.367-381.

• Bloemer, J., Ruyter, K. D., and Peeters, P., (1998), “Investing Drivers of Bank Loyalty: The Complex Relationship

between Image, Service Quality and Satisfaction”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 16, No. 7, Pp.

276-286.

• Bitner, M. J., and Hubert, A. R., (1994), “Encounter Satisfaction versus Overall Satisfaction versus Quality”, in

Rust, R.T., and Oliver, R.L., (Eds), Service Quality: New Directions in Theory and Practice, Sage Publications,

London, Pp. 72-94.

• Birke, D., And Swann, P., (2006), “Network Effects and Choice of Mobile Phone Operator, Journal of

Evolutionary Economics,” Vol. 16, Pp. 1-2.

• Babukus, E., and Boller, G. W., (1992), “An Empirical Assessment of SERVQUAL Scale”, Journal of Business

Research, Vol. 24, No. 3, Pp. 253-268.

• Bolton, R. N., and Drew, J. H., (1991), “A Longitudinal Analysis of the Impact of Service Changes on Customer

Attitudes”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 55, Pp. 1-9.

• Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Staelin, R., and Zeithaml, V., (1993), “A Dynamic Process Model of Service Quality: From

Expectations to Behavioral Intentions”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 30, (February), Pp. 7-27.

• Brady, M. K., Robertson, C. J., (2002), “Performance-only Measurement of Service Quality: A Replication and

Extension”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 55, No.1, Pp.127-139.

• Bigne, E., Moliner, M. A., and Sanchey, J., (2003), “Perceived Quality and Satisfaction in MultiService

Organizations: The Case of Spanish Public Services”, Journal of Service Marketing, Vol. 17, No.4, Pp. 420-442.

• Berry, L. L., Parasuraman, A., and Zeithaml, V. A., (1990), “Five Imperatives for Improving Service Quality”, Sloan

Management Review, Vol. 31, (summer) Pp. 29-38.

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

Table: 1.10 Hypothesis Tes�ng: Service Quality Variance Across Demographic Variables

Hypothesis Statements Operators F/T- value P- Value Status

significantly among all age

groups.

Vodafone 4.692* .011* Accepted

Aircel 4.280* .017* Accepted

BSNL 1.107 .335 Rejected

gender groups.

Airtel .754 .454 Rejected

Vodafone -1.496 .138 Rejected

Aircel -.912 .364 Rejected

educa�onal groups.

Vodafone .819 .444 Rejected

Aircel .376 .687 Rejected

significantly among network

experience groups.

Airtel

Rejected

Vodafone

Rejected

Aircel

Rejected

connec�on types groups.

Airtel

Rejected

Vodafone

Rejected

Aircel

Rejected

References

• Ahluwalia, J. S., (1998), “Total Quality Management”, New Delhi, India.

• Ahn, L., and Lee, M., (1999), “An Econometric Analysis of the Demand for Access to Mobile Telephone

Networks,” Information Economics and Policy, Vol. 11, Pp. 297-305.

• Andonova, A., (2006), “Mobile Phones: The Internet and the Institutional Environment,” Telecommunications

Policy, Vol. 30, Pp. 29-45.

• Atkin, D. J., and Larose, R., (1999), “An Analysis of the Information Services Adoption Literature,” In Hanson, J.

(Ed.), Advances in Telematics Vol. 2, Pp. 91-110.

• Atalik O., and Arslan M., (2009), “A Study to Determine the Effects of Customer Value on Customer Loyalty in

Airline Companies operating: Case of Turkish Air Travelers”, International Journal of Business and

Management, Vol. 4 No. 6, Pp. 154-162.

• Agyapong, G. K, Q., (2011), “The Effect of Service Quality on Customer satisfaction in the Utility Industry: A

Case of Vodafone (Ghana)”, International Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 6, No. 5, Pp. 203-210.

• Andleeb, S. S., and Basu, A. K., (1994), “Technical Complexity and Consumer Knowledge as Moderators of

Service Quality Evaluation in the Automobile Service Industry,” Journal of Retailing, Vol.70, No.4, Pp.367-381.

• Bloemer, J., Ruyter, K. D., and Peeters, P., (1998), “Investing Drivers of Bank Loyalty: The Complex Relationship

between Image, Service Quality and Satisfaction”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 16, No. 7, Pp.

276-286.

• Bitner, M. J., and Hubert, A. R., (1994), “Encounter Satisfaction versus Overall Satisfaction versus Quality”, in

Rust, R.T., and Oliver, R.L., (Eds), Service Quality: New Directions in Theory and Practice, Sage Publications,

London, Pp. 72-94.

• Birke, D., And Swann, P., (2006), “Network Effects and Choice of Mobile Phone Operator, Journal of

Evolutionary Economics,” Vol. 16, Pp. 1-2.

• Babukus, E., and Boller, G. W., (1992), “An Empirical Assessment of SERVQUAL Scale”, Journal of Business

Research, Vol. 24, No. 3, Pp. 253-268.

• Bolton, R. N., and Drew, J. H., (1991), “A Longitudinal Analysis of the Impact of Service Changes on Customer

Attitudes”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 55, Pp. 1-9.

• Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Staelin, R., and Zeithaml, V., (1993), “A Dynamic Process Model of Service Quality: From

Expectations to Behavioral Intentions”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 30, (February), Pp. 7-27.

• Brady, M. K., Robertson, C. J., (2002), “Performance-only Measurement of Service Quality: A Replication and

Extension”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 55, No.1, Pp.127-139.

• Bigne, E., Moliner, M. A., and Sanchey, J., (2003), “Perceived Quality and Satisfaction in MultiService

Organizations: The Case of Spanish Public Services”, Journal of Service Marketing, Vol. 17, No.4, Pp. 420-442.

• Berry, L. L., Parasuraman, A., and Zeithaml, V. A., (1990), “Five Imperatives for Improving Service Quality”, Sloan

Management Review, Vol. 31, (summer) Pp. 29-38.

Changes

Contents

(65.79%) ar

References

Mr. Piyuesh Pandey

• Brown, S. W., and Swartz, T. A., (1989), “A Gap Analysis of Professional Service Quality”, Journal of Marketing,

Vol. 53, (April), Pp. 92-100.

• Crosby, P. B., (1979), “Quality is Free. The Art of Making Quality Certain”, New York: New American Library, Vol.

12, Pp. 125-148.

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

Dimensions”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 66, (spring), Pp. 33-35.

• Cronin and Taylor, S. A., (1992), “Measuring Service Quality: A Re-Examination and Extension”, Journal of

Marketing, Vol. 56 (July), Pp. 55-67.

• Cronin, J; Brady, M. K., and Hult, T.M. (2000), “Assessing the Effects of Quality, Value Environments,” Journal of

Retailing, Vol. 76, No. 2, Pp.193-218.

• Cavana, R.Y., Corbett L. M., and Lo, Y. L., (2007), “Developing Zones of Tolerance for Managing Passenger Rail

Services Quality”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol. 24, No.1, Pp.7-31.

• Churchill, G. A., and Supernant, C., (1982), “An Investigation into the Determinants of Customer Satisfaction”,

Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 19 (November), Pp.491 504.

• Clements, M., and Abramowitz, A., (2006), “The Development and Adoption of Broadband Service: A th Household Level Analysis,” Paper Presented at the 35 Research Conference on Communication, Information

and Internet Policy, Arlington, VA, September.

• Danaher, P. J., and Mattesson, J., (1994), “Customer Satisfaction during the Service Delivery Process”,

European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 28, No. 5, Pp. 5-16.

• Danaher, P. J., and Rust, R. T., (1996), “Indirect Financial Benefits from Service Quality”, Quality Management,

Journal, Vol. 3, No. 2, Pp. 63-75.

• Dabholkar, P. A, Shepherd, D. C., and Thorpe, D. I., (2000), “A Comprehensive Framework of Service Quality: An

Investigation of Critical, Conceptual and Measurement Issues through a Longitudinal Study”, Journal of

Retailing, Vol. 76, No. 2, Pp. 139-173.

• Duncan, E., and Elliot, G., (2004), “Efficiency, Customer Service and Financial Performance among Australian

Financial Institutions”, The International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol.22, No.5, Pp.319-342.

• Ennew, C. T., Reed, G. V., and Binks, M. R., (1993), “Importance-Performance Analysis and the Measurement of

Service Quality”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 27, No. 2, Pp. 59-70.

• Fuss, M., Meschi, M., and Waverman, L., (2005), “The Impact of Telecoms on Economic Growth in Developing

Countries, in Africa: The Impact of Mobile Phones”, the Vodafone Policy Paper Series, No. 2, Pp. 10-23.

• Festus, O., Maxwell, K. H., and Godwin, J. H., (2006), “Service Quality, Customer Satisfaction and Behavioral

Intentions in the Service Factory”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 20, No. 1, Pp. 59-72.

• Fornell, (1992), “Customer Satisfaction: The Fundamental Basis for Business Survival”, Siebel Magazine, Vol.

51, Pp. 19-25.

• Fogli, L., (2006), “Customer Service Delivery”, Research and Best Practice, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

• Garvin, D. A., (1983), “Quality on the Line”, Harvard Business Review, No. 61 (September-October), Pp. 65-73.

• Gronroos, C., (1982), “Strategic Management and Marketing in the Service Sector”, Swedish School of

Economics and Business Administration, Helsinki.

• Gronroos, C. A., (1984), “Service Quality Model and its Marketing Implications” European Journal of

Marketing, Vol. 18, No. 4, Pp. 36-44.

• Gronroos, C., (1990), “Service Management Focus for Service Competition”, International Journal of Service

Industry Management, Vol. 1, No. 1, Pp. 6- 10.

• Gronroos, C., (2007), “Service Management and Marketing: Customer Management in Service Competition”,

third Edition, West Sussex: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.

• Gotlieb, J., Grewal, D., and Brown, S.W., (1994), “Consumer Satisfaction and Perceived quality: Complimentary

and Divergent Constructs,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 79, No.6, Pp.875-885.

• Garson, D. A., (2002), “Guide to Writing Empirical Papers, Theses and Dissertations”, CRC Press, Grosuch, R. L.,

(1983), “Factor Analysis”, Hillsdale, N. J: Erlbaum.

• Holbrook, M. B., (1994), “The Nature of Customer Value”: An Axiology of Services in the Consumption

Experience.

• Hartline, M. D., and Ferrell, O. C., (1996), “The Management of Customer Contact Service Employees: An

Empirical Investigation”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 69, (October), Pp. 52-70.

• Howcroft, J. B., (1991), “Customer Satisfaction in Retail Banking”, Service Industry Journal, (Jan), Pp. 11-17.

• Haddad, S., Fournier, P., and Potvin, L., (1998), “Measuring Lay People's Reception of the Quality of Primary

Health Services in Developing Countries: Validation of 20-Item Scale”, International Journal for Quality in

Health Care, Vol. 10, Pp. 93-104.

• Juran, J. M., (1974), “Quality Control Handbook”, Third Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, Pp. 18-3.

• Jain, S. K., and Gupta, G., (2004), “Measuring Service Quality: SERVQUAL V/s SERVPERF Scales”, Vikalpa, Vol.

29, No. 2, Pp. 25-37.

• Johnston, R., (1995), “The Determinants of Service Quality: Satisfiers and Dissatisfiers”, International Journal

of Service Industry Management, Vol. 6, No. 5, Pp. 53-71.

• Jacoby, J., Jerry, C. O., and Rafael, A. H., (1973), “Price, Brand Name and Product Composition Characteristics as

Determinants of Perceived Quality”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 55, No. 6, Pp. 570-579.

• Kandampully, J., (1998), “Service Quality to Service Loyalty: A Relationship Which Goes Beyond Customer

Services”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 9, No. 6, Pp. 431- 443.

• Karaçuka, M., Nazif, A., and Haucap, J., (2012), “Consumer Choice and Local Network Effects in Mobile

Telecommunications in Turkey”.

• Khan, M, A., (2010), “An Empirical Assessment of Cellular Mobile Operators in Pakistan”, Journal of Asian Social

Sciences, Vol. 6, No. 10, Pp. 164-177.

• Khan, S., and Afsheen, S., (2012), “Determinants of Customer Satisfaction in Telecom Industry: A Study of