Service Quality Analysis of McDonald’s Pakistan
Submitted By:Ammara Anjum (12-BS-R-34)Noraiza Aslam (12-BS-R-16)
Submitted To: Dr. Amani Mozzam
1
Abstract
Service quality and customer satisfaction are very essential concepts that organizations must
understand in order to remain competitive in business and to grow. It is very important for
companies to know how to measure these concepts from the consumers’ perspective in order to
develop better understanding and to know their needs to satisfy them. Service quality is
considered very important because it leads to higher customer satisfaction, success, cost-
effectiveness, customer loyalty and tells the organization that how to retain customers.
The purpose of our study is to explore service quality dimensions in fast food restaurant services.
The restaurant we have chosen as our subject is McDonald’s Pakistan. The study examines the
effect of the service dimensions on customer satisfaction and the gap analysis between
expectation and perception within the restaurant. The findings are expected to help the owners of
restaurant to reduce or deal with the gaps and improve satisfaction level of their customers,
thereby bringing about repeat business and improving profits.
2
Table of ContentsMcDonald’s Introduction.............................................................................................................................3
McDonald’s Pakistan...............................................................................................................................4
Research Question.......................................................................................................................................4
Research Objective......................................................................................................................................5
Literature Review........................................................................................................................................5
Research methodology..............................................................................................................................11
Type of research....................................................................................................................................12
Focus of research...................................................................................................................................12
Universe of population..........................................................................................................................13
Target population...................................................................................................................................13
Tools for data collection........................................................................................................................13
Sampling size........................................................................................................................................13
Limitations............................................................................................................................................13
Theoretical framework..............................................................................................................................14
Different Theories of Customer Satisfaction.........................................................................................14
Assimilation Theory...........................................................................................................................14
Contrast Theory.................................................................................................................................15
Assimilation-Contrast Theory............................................................................................................16
Negativity Theory..............................................................................................................................18
SERVQUAL Model..............................................................................................................................18
The Gaps Model of Service Quality......................................................................................................19
Data Analysis.............................................................................................................................................19
Gap scores analysis................................................................................................................................23
Department-wise Analysis.....................................................................................................................23
Demographics........................................................................................................................................25
Conclusion.................................................................................................................................................26
Recommendations.....................................................................................................................................27
Quality Criteria..........................................................................................................................................28
Bibliography...............................................................................................................................................29
Appendix...................................................................................................................................................30
3
McDonald’s Introduction
McDonald’s Corporation, incorporated on December 21, 1964, operates and franchises
McDonald’s restaurants. McDonald’s global system comprises both Company-owned and
franchised restaurants. The Company manages its business as distinct geographic segments: the
United States (U.S.); Europe, and Asia/Pacific, Middle East and Africa (APMEA). The
Company’s operations in Canada and Latin America, as well as its corporate activities are
reported under Other Countries & Corporate. The Company’s restaurants offer a substantially
uniform menu, although there are geographic variations to suit local preferences and tastes.
McDonald’s franchised restaurants are owned and operated under one of the following
structures: conventional franchise, developmental license or affiliate. Under a conventional
franchise arrangement, the Company owns the land and building or secures a long-term lease for
the restaurant location and the franchisee pays for equipment, signs, seating and decor.
Franchisees are also responsible for reinvesting capital in their businesses over time. The
Company’s typical franchise term is 20 years. Conventional franchisees contribute to the
Company’s revenue through the payment of rent and royalties -based upon a percent of sales,
with specified minimum rent payments, along with initial fees paid upon the opening of a new
restaurant or grant of a new franchise.
Under a developmental license arrangement, licensees provide capital for the entire business,
including the real estate interest. The Company does not invest any capital under a
developmental license arrangement. The Company receives a royalty -based upon a percent of
sales, as well as initial fees upon the opening of a new restaurant or grant of a new license. This
structure is used in over 70 countries with a total of approximately 5,228 restaurants. The largest
developmental licensee operates approximately 2,100 restaurants in 19 countries in Latin
America and the Caribbean.
The Company also has an equity investment in foreign affiliated markets, referred to as
Affiliates. In these markets, the Company receives a royalty -based on a percent of sales. The
largest of these affiliates is Japan, where there are nearly 3,100 restaurants.
4
McDonald’s PakistanMcDonald’s first restaurant opened its door to the people of Pakistan in September 1998 in
Lahore. This launch was met with unprecedented enthusiasm from the citizens of Lahore, who
are known for their liveliness, vigor and penchant for quality food. Karachi opened its first
restaurant a week after Lahore. Ever since they opened the doors of our restaurants both in
Karachi & Lahore, they have been proud to provide our customers the same great taste,
outstanding value and superior service that is synonymous with the Golden Arches all over the
world.
There are now 34 restaurants in 8 major cities of Pakistan. (Karachi, Hyderabad, Lahore,
Faisalabad, Kala Shah Kaku, Sialkot, Gujranwala, Islamabad and Rawalpindi)
Today millions of Pakistanis place their trust in McDonald’s to provide them with food of a very
high standard, quick service and value for money. So next time you walk into one of our
restaurants, please remember, McDonald’s Pakistan is here now, to put a smile on your face,
each and every time you visit us.
McDonald’s is firmly committed to giving back to the community where it operates. They are
happy to become involved because they recognize that organizations have a role to play in
helping communities to work successfully. The contribution they enjoy most is the experience of
working together with others in the community to achieve worthwhile benefits for those who
need it most.
Research QuestionResearch Questions The main issues we are addressing in this research are service quality and
customer satisfaction using the SERVQUAL model in the context of fast food restaurant. We are
interested in the dimensions of service quality from the consumer’s perspective through
assessing their expectations and perceptions of service quality. We therefore will like to answer
the following questions in our study:
What are the consumer’s expectations about the service quality of McDonald’s?
5
How do consumers perceive service quality in McDonald’s?
Are consumers satisfied with service quality offered by McDonald’s?
Research Objective
The objective of this research is to find out the:
Level of service of McDonald’s pakistan.
Factors that satisfy and dissatisfy the customers related to their services.
Reasons for McDonald’s’s preference.
Reasons for disliking the restaurant.
Factors that need improvement with respect to service quality.
Literature ReviewAccording to Asubonteng (1996), due to strong competition and the unfriendliness of
environmental factors, service quality has become a foundation for marketing strategy for
corporations. This highlights how vital is to improve service quality for organizations for their
survival and development since it could help them deal with these challenges they experience in
the competitive markets. This means that service-based organizations are bound to provide
excellent services to their consumers in order to have a viable competitive advantage. There is a
need for these organizations to understand what sort of service quality is needed in order to attain
their objectives. Service quality is usually defined as the overall valuation of a service by the
consumers, (Eshghi,2008). One of the authors explains it as the degree to which a service meets
customer’s needs or expectations, (Asubonteng,1996) .Service quality is defined as “The
discrepancy between consumers’ perceptions of services offered by a particular firm and their
expectations about firms offering such services” (Parasuraman,1985). If what is perceived is less
than expectation if what is perceived is a smaller amount than expectation, client judges quality
as low and if what's perceived is meets or exceeds expectation then customer sees quality to be
high.
6
The Crucial factor of service quality is consumer’s expectation that is seen as what they feel
service provider should offer and this is influenced by his/her personal needs, past experience,
word-of-mouth and service provider’s communications,(Parasuraman,1985).Though, this
meaning of expectation is that of service quality literature which is dissimilar from expectation in
the customer satisfaction literature which defines expectation as forecasts made by consumer
about what is likely to happen during an awaiting transaction. Consumers’ perception of
performance is what he/she experiences (Parasuraman,1988). Usually, it is stimulating to study
expectations and experiences of consumers in different contexts. It is of particular interest to
study these concepts in the context of Fast food restaurant because Fast food restaurant are
playing an instrumental role in the lives of youth for the last few years. Therefore, in this study,
we will define consumer’s expectation as what consumers think should be offered by the ideal
Fast food restaurant while consumer’s perception will be defined as what they experienced in the
Fast food restaurant and this is assessed after the performance. Furthermore, service quality is
predominantly focused on meeting the customer’s needs and also how good the service presented
meets the customer’s expectation of it. It is however challenging according to preceding studies
to measure service quality due to its intangible nature and also because it contracts with
expectations and perceptions of consumers which is challenging as well to determine due to the
complexity of human behavior. The intangible elements of a service that are inseparability,
heterogeneity and perishability are the critical factors influencing service quality perceived by a
consumer. This means that a service must be perfect by the provider in terms of its
characteristics in order to understand how service quality is perceived by consumers. (Douglas &
Connor,2003; Parasuraman,1985; Ladhari,2008) A service could mean an industry, a
performance, yield, contribution or a process and it is defined contrarily in various service
productions. The modifications in service industries are based on the features of service which
include; intangibility, heterogeneity, perishability and inseparability (Johns, 1999).
Intangibility means the product that is enable to be touched , no physical presence, tasted, not
having odor or cannot be heard before being purchased and this means that it is hard for
consumer to understand the nature of what they receive. An example would be a mobile
company offering services to customers; here the consumer makes just calls and does not obtain
any physical product. In Fast food restaurant, it is very challenging to assess intangibility
because their activities are centered on the physical products. This means that service suppliers
7
must try to determine the level of intangibility of services and try to contain tangible elements
that could help understanding of expectation from the customer’s perspective (Beamish &
Ashford, 2007).
Heterogeneity means the quality of being diverse and difference in the level of delivery of
service due to the difference in human behavior of those offering services and the consumer.
Example occurs when seller offers assistance to one customer at the counter, that same person
cannot offer exactly the similar thing to the following customer because of differences in
behaviors. This is why it is challenging to determine the quality and level of service provided
because customers and service suppliers are different; the same consumer could act contrarily
with the same service provider (Beamish & Ashford, 2007).
Perishability means that as services are produced and disbursed at the same time implying they
cannot be stored for future usage. If the services are not used then they cannot be used again.
This does not though hold in every service business (Beamish & Ashford, 2007). An example
occurs when a person books a hotel room for a night and does not use it, no other person can use
at that same time. Inseparability means services are consumed as they are bought. This infers that
the consumer is involved in the production and delivery of the service which means he/she takes
distinct note of what is actually made by the service provider (Beamish & Ashford, 2007).These
above mentioned facets of service make it very thought-provoking measure service unlike
product quality which is measured objectively using factors such as resilience and number
defects because of its tangible nature (Parasuraman,1988).
The first model to live service quality is developed by Gronroos. He acknowledged three
elements of service quality; the technical quality cares with what's delivered (outcome), the
practical quality deals with the method of service delivery (how it's delivered) and therefore the
image quality that is known as company image of company ensuing from each technical and
practical qualities of service elements (Gronroos,1982).
The technical quality element of product unlike services is easy to assess as a result of area unit
they’re involved with palpability (services cape) like physical features that are visible to the
buyer. Servicescape is outlined because the physical facilities of a service company and this idea
is expounded to the SERVQUAL model in this the tangible aspects of the physical atmosphere
8
are lined within the SERVQUAL model. Servicescape thus plays a good role in this it influences
consumers’ evaluations of alternative factors determining perceived service quality like
sympathy, reliability, responsiveness, and assurances (Reimer & Kuehn, 2004).
Servicescape is a lot of in service setting attributable to the distinctive characteristics of services
(intangibility, perishability, inseparability and heterogeneity) (William & ; Dargel,2004).
Summarily, services cape is implausibly important inside the delivery of services and affects
perceived service quality that any leads either consumer satisfaction or not. Service quality may
be a vital space to academicians because of its association to service organizations and then
many researchers have tried to develop varied models to measure it, even if some claim it's
arduous to live because of its intangibility that's powerful to quantify (Eshghi,2008;Stephen
Arnold Douglas &Connor,2003).This is why as services are intangible in nature, evaluating
the customer’s perception of quality may be done through communication with the folks
providing services (Magi &Julander,1996). It is explicit that “The veritable gains of a top
quality revolution return solely from client delight, that once more to an awfully nice extent
depends on the customer’s perceptions of overall service quality”. This is why it's terribly
imperative to grasp that however customers understand service quality and the way these
perceptions might have an effect on their behavior of rebuying things or services as a result of
through this manner firms can be ready to determine that gaps exists or not and may take
corrective actions to enhance their services. During this manner, organizations will implement
appropriate quality systems that might result to client satisfaction. (Sureshchander,2002)
It is tested that if you give smart service quality to customers you'll retain them simply and
afterwards attract new customers by this company’s company image may be increased and it
could lead on towards profitableness (Negi, 2009; Ladhari,2009).
Numerous models are developed to live service quality following these approaches either
behavior-based measures or disconfirmation models. In step with an author Shahin it's vital to
live service quality as a result of it permits the comparisons of before and when changes,
categorizes quality connected issues, and aids in developing clear principles for service delivery.
The SERVPERF model is developed by Cronin & Taylor in 1992 uses the performance
approach methodology that measures service quality supported customer’s overall feeling
9
towards service. This model is sweet to live service quality however doesn't give info on
however customers can like service to be so as for service suppliers to create enhancements.
Teas in 1993 developed the Evaluated Performance model that measures the gap between
perceived performance and also the ideal quantity of a dimension of service quality, instead of
the customer’s expectation. This was to unravel a number of the criticism of some previous
models Gronroos, (1984); Parasuraman et al., (1985, 1988).
(Parasuraman ,1985), developed a model of service quality when ending a study on four service
settings: retail banking, MasterCard services, repair and maintenance of electrical appliances,
and long-distance phone phone services.
The SERVQUAL model represents service quality because the inconsistency between a
customer’s expectations of service providing and also the customer’s perceptions of the service
received. This primarily makes a behavior live (Parasuraman,1985). What this model tries to live
specifically is that the client perception of the service quality that is dependable on the
dimensions of the gap between expected service and perceived service that in go, depends on the
gaps beneath the management of the service provider like delivery of service, promoting of your
services etc. (Parasuraman,1985).
This mensuration of service quality relies on each on however client evaluates the service
delivery method and also the outcome of the service. a decent service quality is taken into
account united that meets or exceeds consumer’s expectation of the service (Parasuraman, 1985).
The SERVQUAL model was made from 10 dimensions of service quality once created;
tangibles, responsibility, responsiveness, communication, quality, security, competence,
courtesy, understanding the client, and access, (Parasuraman,1985) however anon these
dimensions were squeeze right down to five as a result of some dimensions were overlapping
and that they enclosed,
Tangibles (physical facilities, equipment, and workers appearance)
Reliability (ability to perform the secure service faithfully and accurately)
Responsiveness (willingness to assist customers and supply prompt service)
10
Assurance (knowledge and courtesy of workers and their ability to inspire trust
and confidence)
Empathy- caring, individual attention the firm provides its customers
(Parasuraman,1988)
The higher than dimensions in the main specialize in the human aspects of service delivery
(responsiveness, responsibility, assurance, and empathy) and also the tangibles of service.
According to study administrated by (Ladhari,2009), it's suggested that the SERVQUAL model
may be a smart scale to use once measure service quality in varied specific industries however
that it's acceptable to settle on the foremost vital dimensions of this model that fit that specific
service being measured so as to assure reliable and valid results. We are going to use this model
as a result of it takes into consideration customer’s expectation of a service similarly as
perceptions of the service that is best thanks to live service quality in service sector
(Shahin,2005). Many researchers that have used the SERVQUAL model in varied industries
(retailing, restaurant, banking, telecommunication trade, airline line, government, hotels,
hospitals, and education).
Furthermore service quality has become a very important topic due to its apparent relationship
to prices, profitableness, client satisfaction, client retention and positive word of mouth
and it's wide thought of as a driver of corporate market and monetary performance (Buttle,1996).
In our study, we tend to square measure additional inquisitive about service quality and client
satisfaction by victimization the SERVQUAL model to assess them in alimentation eating place.
Service quality and client satisfaction have received an excellent deal of attention
from each students and practitioners due to their connection and relationship (Eshghi,2008).
The main reason for that specializes in these problems is up overall performance of organizations
(Magi & Julander, 1996).
Customer satisfaction has been studied by some researchers employing a single item scale
(Cronin & Taylor,1992) means that customer’s overall feeling towards a service is asked to
live satisfaction whereas others use a multiple item scale (Parasuraman et al,1985,1988)
satisfaction is measured victimization varied dimensions as an example the SERVQUAL
dimensions.
Customer satisfaction is outlined as a operate of the customer’s expectations and perceptions of
11
performance in keeping with the expectation - disconfirmation paradigm (Tse & carpet, 1988)
and it's a construct closely associated with perceived service quality (Magi &
Julander,1996) varied studies that centered on a link between satisfaction and quality argued for
various views in terms of relationship. This shows that there's some link between service quality
and client satisfaction that highlights that importance of client fulfillment as process of quality
(Wicks & Roethlein,2009).
This ensure a relationship between service quality and client satisfaction however in keeping
with (Asubonteng,1996) there's no agreement on the precise reasonably relationship between the
two constructs and points of out that almost all researchers agree that service quality and
client satisfaction have attributes that square measure measurable. This is why we tend to shall
use the SERVQUAL instrument with its dimensions to live these ideas (service quality
and client satisfaction) and for the very fact that service quality results in client satisfaction we
'll build that assumption in our research in order to measure customer satisfaction.
Research methodologyThe overall objective of this research study is to establish the Gap Analysis between the
Perception and Expectation scores for all the customers of McDonald’s Pakistan. Figure 1
illustrates the overall research design. A questionnaire already was pre-designed. A review of the
literature showed a previous scale measuring this construct.
The questionnaire which will be been tested is a world renowned scale known as SERVQUAL.
The authors of this SERVQUAL framework are Valerie Zeithaml, Parasuraman, and Mary Jo
Bitner. Thus the primary objective of this phase was to describe the appropriateness, reliability,
and validity of using the SERVQUAL questionnaire items (questions). In addition, annotated
questionnaire was constructed by merely adjusting the questions towards a restaurant scenario.
The sampling frames that will be used are the respondents based on rules as set in its respective
section ‘sampling’ mentioned under.
12
Type of researchThis study has been conducted on the basis of descriptive research design. Descriptive
studies involve a one-time interaction with a group of people (cross-sectional study) or a
study may possibly follow individuals over time (longitudinal study). The ultimate objective of
this research study is to analyze the Perception scores for all the customers of the fast food
restaurant McDonald’s. This section includes a discussion of the research’s objectives.
The questionnaires are tested in a world renowned scale known as SERVQUAL. The authors of
this SERVQUAL framework are Valerie Zeithaml, Parasuraman, and Mary Jo Bitner. Thus the
primary objective of this phase was to describe the appropriateness, reliability, and validity of
using the SERVQUAL questionnaire. In addition, questionnaire was constructed by adjusting the
questions towards restaurant scenario.
Focus of researchResearch focuses on the service quality of the restaurant, customer satisfaction and the gaps
between expectations and perception. This can provide invaluable information regarding the
service quality of the restaurants so evaluation can be done.
Data Analysis
Data Collection
Pre-testing of Questionnaire
Sample Selection
Annotation of Instrument (SERVQUAL Questionnaire)
13
Universe of populationThe people of Pakistan are fond of dinning in fast food restaurants so a huge crowd visits the fast
food restaurants per day. But this research will target the university going students because a
large percentage of those people are students and it would convenient for us to target a particular
rather than everyone.
Target populationThe target population of this research is basically the youth or university going students who are
habitual of visiting restaurants more than any other. So they can better evaluate the service
quality of the restaurants. The target population relates to faculty of management of University
of The Punjab Quaid-e-Azam campus Lahore.
Tools for data collectionThe questionnaire will request respondents to evaluate the service quality of the restaurants.
There are total 16 questions that were needed by customer to answer.
Sampling sizeWe selected a sample size of 150 respondents to fill the questionnaire because the population
was unknown to us so taking the time limitation into account we opted the minimum requirement
of questionnaires i.e. 150 by using simple random sampling method. So that the estimate is
accurate and the margin of error can be tolerated.
LimitationsThere are some hurdles that came in a way of research:
1) It was hard to find people who have visited all the three restaurants.
2) People are less willing to fill the questionnaire.
3) Time limitations were also another factor.
14
Theoretical frameworkTheoretical frameworks are also significant in descriptive studies, a descriptive study is
one within which data is collected without changing the surroundings (i.e., nothing is
manipulated). Generally these are referred to as “correlational” or “observational” studies.
There are two motives why theoretical frameworks are vital here. First, no matter how slight you
think you know about a subject, and how unprejudiced you reason you are, it is difficult for a
human being not to have defined notions, even if they are of a very broad nature. The theoretical
framework is a structure that identifies and defines the major elements, variables, or constructs of
the research. It is used to hypothesize, understand, or give sense to the relationships between the
elements that impact, affect, or predict the events or outcomes we specify. A theoretical
framework guides the researcher that which variables should be measured and what statistical
relationships he/she should look for.
Different Theories of Customer Satisfaction Consistency theories suggest that when the expectations and the actual product performance do
not match the consumer will feel some degree of tension. In order to relieve this tension the
consumer will make adjustments either in expectations or in the perceptions of the product’s
actual performance. Four theoretical approaches have been advanced under the umbrella of
consistency theory:
(1) Assimilation theory
(2) Contrast theory
(3) Assimilation-Contrast theory
(4) Negativity theory
Assimilation Theory Assimilation theory is based on Festinger’s (1957) dissonance theory. Dissonance theory posits
that consumers make some kind of cognitive comparison between expectations about the product
and the perceived product performance. This view of the consumer post-usage evaluation was
introduced into the satisfaction literature in the form of assimilation theory. According to
Anderson (1973), consumers seek to avoid dissonance by adjusting perceptions about a given
15
product to bring it more in line with expectations. Consumers can also reduce the tension
resulting from a discrepancy between expectations and product performance either by distorting
expectations so that they coincide with perceived product performance or by raising the level of
satisfaction by minimizing the relative importance of the disconfirmation experienced.
Assimilation Theory – Criticism: Payton et al (2003) argues that Assimilation
theory has a number of shortcomings. First, the approach assumes that there is a
relationship between expectation and satisfaction but does not specify how
disconfirmation of an expectation leads to either satisfaction or dissatisfaction. Second,
the theory also assumes that consumers are motivated enough to adjust either their
expectations or their perceptions about the performance of the product. A number of
researchers have found that controlling for actual product performance can lead to a
positive relationship between expectation and satisfaction. Therefore, it would appear
that dissatisfaction could never occur unless the evaluative processes were to begin with
negative consumer expectations.
Contrast Theory Contrast theory was first introduced by Hovland, Harvey and Sherif (1987). Dawes et al (1972)
define contrast theory as the tendency to magnify the discrepancy between one’s own attitudes
and the attitudes represented by opinion statements. Contrast theory presents an alternative view
of the consumer post-usage evaluation process than was presented in assimilation theory in that
post-usage evaluations lead to results in opposite predictions for the effects of expectations on
satisfaction. While assimilation theory posits that consumers will seek to minimize the
discrepancy between expectation and performance, contrast theory holds that a surprise effect
occurs leading to the discrepancy being magnified or exaggerated. According to the contrast
theory, any discrepancy of experience from expectations will be exaggerated in the direction of
discrepancy. If the firm raises expectations in his advertising, and then a customer’s experience
are only slightly less 94 than that promised, the product/service would be rejected as totally un-
satisfactory. Conversely, under-promising in advertising and over-delivering will cause positive
disconfirmation also to be exaggerated.
Contrast Theory – Criticism: Several studies in the marketing literature have
offered some support for this theory. The contrast theory of customer satisfaction
16
predicts customer reaction instead of reducing dissonance; the consumer will magnify
the difference between expectation and the performance of the product/service.
Assimilation-Contrast Theory Assimilation-contrast theory was introduced by Anderson (1973) in the context of post-exposure
product performance based on Sherif and Hovland’s (1961) discussion of assimilation and
contrast effect. Assimilation-contrast theory suggests that if performance is within a customer’s
latitude (range) of acceptance, even though it may fall short of expectation, the discrepancy will
be disregarded – assimilation will operate and the performance will be deemed as acceptable. If
performance falls within the latitude of rejection, contrast will prevail and the difference will be
exaggerated, the produce/service deemed unacceptable.The assimilation-contrast theory has been
proposed as yet another way to explain the relationships among the variables in the
disconfirmation model.This theory is a combination of both the assimilation and the contrast
theories. “This paradigm posits that satisfaction is a function of the magnitude of the discrepancy
between expected and perceived performance. As with assimilation theory, the 95 consumers
will tend to assimilate or adjust differences in perceptions about product performance to bring it
in line with prior expectations but only if the discrepancy is relatively small.
Assimilation-contrast theory attempts illustrate that both the assimilation and the contrast theory
paradigms have applicability in the study of customer satisfaction.
17
Assimilation-Contrast theory suggests that if performance is within a customer’s range of
acceptance, even though it may fall short of expectation the discrepancy will be disregarded –
assimilation will operate and the performance will be deemed as acceptable. If performance falls
within the latitude of rejection (no matter how close to expectation), contrast will prevail and the
difference will be exaggerated, the product deemed unacceptable.
Assimilation-Contrast Theory – Criticism: Anderson (1973) argues that
Cardozo’s (1965) attempt at reconciling the two earlier theories was methodologically
flawed. The attempts by various researchers to test this theory empirically have brought
out mixed results. Olson and Dover (1979) and Anderson (1973) found some evidence to
18
support the assimilation theory approach. In discussing both of these studies, however,
Oliver (1980) argues that only measured expectations and assumed that there were
perceptual differences between disconfirmation or satisfaction.
Negativity Theory This theory developed by Carlsmith and Aronson (1963) suggests that any discrepancy of
performance from expectations will disrupt the individual, producing ‘negative energy’.
Negative theory has its foundations in the disconfirmation process. Negative theory states that
when expectations are strongly held, consumers will respond negatively to any disconfirmation.
“Accordingly dissatisfaction will occur if perceived performance is less than expectations or if
perceived performance exceeds expectations. This theory developed by Carlsmith and Aronson
(1963) suggests that any discrepancy of performance from expectations will disrupt the
individual, producing “negative energy.” Affective feelings toward a product or service will be
inversely related to the magnitude of the discrepancy
SERVQUAL ModelThe SERVQUAL instrument has been widely applied in a variety of service industries, including
tourism and hospitality. The instrument was used to measure hotel employee quality as
well.Parasuraman, Zeithamal and Berry (1988) built a 22-item instrument called SERVQUAL
for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. SERVQUAL addresses many elements
of service quality divided into the dimensions of tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance,
and empathy. A number of researchers have applied the SERVQUAL model to measure service
quality in the restaurant industry, with modified constructs to suit specific hospitality situations.
According to the SERVQUAL model, service quality can be measured by identifying the gaps
between customers’ expectations of the service to be rendered and their perceptions of the actual
performance of service. SERVQUAL is based on five dimensions of service:
1.Tangibility: Tangibility refers to the physical characteristics associated with the service
encounter.
2.Reliability: The service provider’s ability to provide accurate and dependable services;
consistently performing the service right. The physical surroundings represented by objects (for
example, interior design) and subjects (for example, the appearance of employees).
19
3. Responsiveness: A firm’s willingness to assist its customers by providing fast and efficient
service performances i.e. the willingness that employees exhibit to promptly and efficiently solve
customer requests and problems.
4. Assurance: Diverse features that provide confidence to customers (such as the firm’s specific
service knowledge polite and trustworthy behavior from employees).
5. Empathy: The service firm’s readiness to provide each customer with personal service.
The Gaps Model of Service Quality Khan and Dutt cited that Parasuraman (1985) developed a model which depicts how various gaps in the service process may affect the customer’s assessment of the quality of the service. The foundation of the model (see Figure 1) is a set of four gaps which are the major contributors to the service quality gap which customers may perceive:
Gap 1 (Consumer Expectation – Management Perception Gap): In formulating its service
delivery policy, management does not correctly perceive or interpret consumer expectations.
Gap 2 (Management Perception – Service Quality Specification Gap): Management does not
correctly translate the service policy into rules and guidelines for employees.
Gap 3 (Service Quality specification – service delivery Gap): Employees do not correctly
translate rules and guidelines into action.
Gap 4 (Service Delivery – External Communications Gap): External communications –
promises made to customers – do not match the actual service delivery.
Data Analysis
STATEMENTS McDonald’s
PERCEPTI EXPECTATI GAP
20
ON
SCORE
ON SCORE
P E P - E
TANGIBLES
1 Restaurant shall/has modern equipment. 3.78 4.18 -0.4
2 Physical facilities will/are visually appealing. 3.66 4.14 -0.48
3 Employees shall be/are dressed properly and
appear neat.
3.92 4.39 -0.47
4 Physical environment will be/is clean 3.94 4.6 -0.66
Overall Score 3.82 4.32 -0.5
RELIABILITY
1 When customer has a problem, restaurant show
a sincere interest
3.54 4.44 -1.04
2 Restaurant should perform/performs service
right first time.
3.44 4.23 -0.79
3 Should perform services at the time they
promised to do so.
3.71 4.45 -o.74
4
Should keep their records accurately.
3.59 4.06 -0.47
Overall Score 3.57 4.29 -0.72
RESPONSIVENESS
1 Employees should make information easily
obtainable by the customers
3.61 4.03 -0.42
2 Employees should give prompt to customers 3.62 4.23 -0.61
3 Employees should always be willing to help
customers
3.68 4.25 -0.57
4 Employees in restaurants should/are never be 3.40 4.17 -0.77
21
too busy to respond to customers.
Overall Score 3.57 4.23 -0.66
ASSURANCE
1 Behavior of employees in restaurants should
instill confidence in customers
3.46 4.10 -0.64
2 Customers should be able to feel safe in their
transactions with employees in the restaurants
3.79 4.26 -0.47
3 Employees should be polite 4.09 4.27 -0.18
4 Employees of the restaurant should have the
knowledge to answer customers' questions
3.58 4.31 -0.73
Overall Score 3.73 4.23 -0.5
EMPATHY
1 Restaurant should give customers individual
attention
3.42 3.95 -0.53
2 Their operating hours should be convenient to
all their customers
3.8 4.27 -0.47
3 They should have their customers best interest
at heart
3.67 4.10 -0.43
Overall Score 3.63 4.10 -0.47
Product
1 Restaurant should have enough variety of
products
3.9 4.27 -0.37
2 The products in restaurants should be of good
quality
3.76 4.48 -0.72
22
Overall Score 3.83 4.32 -0.49
MEAN SCORES OF THE QUALITY DETERMINANTS
# SERVICE
QUALITY
DETERMINANTS
McDonald’s
PERCEPTION
SCORE
EXPECTATION
SCORE
GAP
P E P - E
1 TANGIBILITY 3.82 4.32 -0.5
2 RELIABILITY 3.57 4.29 -0.72
3 RESPONSIVENESS 3.57 4.23 -0.66
4 ASSURANCE 3.73 4.23 -0.5
5 EMPATHY 3.63 4.10 -0.47
6 Product 3.83 4.32 -0.49
Overall Mean Score 3.69 4.24
Gap scores analysis
23
The gap score analysis is to enable us find out how consumers perceive service quality in
McDonald’s and try to identify what dimensions of service quality they are satisfied with.
According to (Parasuraman,1985) the higher (more positive) the perception (P) minus
expectation (E) score, the higher the perceived service quality and thereby leading to a higher
level of customer satisfaction. In this regard, the gap scores were calculated based on the
difference between the consumers’ perceptions and expectations of services offered by
McDonald’s. In general, it was found that, customers’ perceptions of service quality offered by
McDonald’s did not meet their expectations (all gaps scores the dimensions are negative).
Dimensions that reported larger mean gaps were reliability (-0.72), responsiveness (-0.66) and
assurance (-0.5) while smaller mean gaps obtained were products (-0.49), tangibles (-0.5) and
empathy (-0.47). These values show that the perception of performance in Monalds' is less than
the expected level of service quality.
Department-wise Analysis
Institute of Administrative Sciences (IAS)
Serial no. Factors Perceptions Expectation GAPP E P-E
1 Tangibles 3.83 4.29 -0.462 Reliability 3.53 4.27 -0.743 Responsiveness 3.5 4.15 -0.654 Assurance 3.73 4.27 -0.545 Empathy 3.61 4.14 -0.536 Product 3.76 4.47 -0.71
Institute of Business Administration (IBA)
Serial no. Factors Perceptions Expectation GAPP E P-E
24
1 Tangibles 3.79 4.32 -0.532 Reliability 3.62 4.30 -0.683 Responsiveness 3.70 4.14 -0.444 Assurance 3.79 4.24 -0.455 Empathy 3.67 4.08 -0.416 Product 3.81 4.23 -0.42
Institute of Business and Information Technology (IBIT)
Serial no. Factors Perceptions Expectation GAPP E P-E
1 Tangibles 3.855 4.37 -0.512 Reliability 3.56 4.32 -0.763 Responsiveness 3.545 4.225 -0.684 Assurance 3.675 4.2 -0.5255 Empathy 3.60 4.1 -0.56 Product 3.91 4.43 -0.52
We have taken the faculty of management of University of the Punjab, Quaid-e-Azam campus as our target population. According to the students of IAS the gap in tangible factors (physical facilities, uniform, and machinery) was the most as compared to other factors which means their expectations were high and what they perceived was low. On the other hand the scores of respondents of IBIT and IBA showed that the gap in empathy was high as compare to other factors.
25
Demographics
157%
243%
Gender
Male=1 Female=2
195%
25%
Age
1=18-24 years 2=25-30 years
26
185%
213%
31%
41%
Income
1=0-1000, 2=1000-2000, 3=2000-3000, 4=3000 and above
Conclusion
Gap analysis of McDonald’s has been done in this project by using the Servqual Model Gap
Analysis. According to the perception and expectations score there are improvements needed.
From the gap score analysis carried out, it was found that, the overall service quality is low as
perceived by consumers in McDonald’s and hence no customer satisfaction. Consumers have
higher expectations than what they actually receive from McDonald’s even though the difference
is not wide. To answer our research questions which are; how consumers perceive service quality
and are consumers satisfied with service offered by McDonald’s, the gap scores analysis carried
out provided answers to these questions. The overall perceived service quality is low as
expectations exceed perceptions meaning consumers desired more than what was offered to
them. As a result of this gap, it is clear that consumers are not satisfied. Evaluating the
perceptions and expectations of consumers, it can be seen that no dimension of service quality
brings customer satisfaction.
27
As we have taken faculty of Management as our sample so the trends were seen the same in all
three departments IAS, IBA and IBIT. In all the departments perception score was lower than the
expectations score so ultimately the satisfaction level was lower as well.
Evidence from the study show that, McDonald’s have to improve performance on all the
dimensions of service quality in order to increase customer satisfaction since consumers expect
more than what is been offered by it. This will enable them maintain high level of
competitiveness.
It has been found that the Average Perception Score of the Reliability among 6 quality
determinants is the highest and because of that the customers consider it the best for dinning.
Average Perception score of the factor 'responsiveness' is slightly lower than that of reliability
then comes tangibility and assurance at same level and in the end product and empathy which
needs highest improvement among all.
McDonald’s is preferred by customers due to their facilities and reliability in the Pakistani
Restaurant Industry. Customers would like to dine in a hygienic, reliable and reputable
restaurant.
According to the scores McDonald’s need to improve the product quality and need to bring more
variety in its existing product line. And also they lack individual attention to the customers'
which is making customers less comfortable.
Recommendations
Bring innovations in the menu.
Dining area should always be comfortable enough for the customers like the tables need to
be spaced far enough apart that you don’t feel you are being eavesdropped in your
conversation.
Should provide a calm dining atmosphere, it doesn’t need to be crammed so full that the
noise level becomes intolerable.
Quick service should be the main focus.
28
Provide discounts and special deals.
Should do more advertising to remain in the minds of the customers and to show they care
for their customers.
Must assist customers and empathize them when they face any problem.
Must give their regular customers special rewards or discounts. This can be done if they
keep a record of them.
Employees should have scheduled training and their behavior should be noted and
compared with their future performance.
Telephone operators and call centers should be more active and must immediately answer
customer’s calls and take orders.
Customer satisfaction has to be improved by giving customer’s quick response from
placing the order till delivering it.
Friendly workforce should be available to assist customer queries.
Quality Criteria
In our study, which is using a cross-sectional design, the external validity would be weak
because we did not apply a probability sampling technique meaning our results could not
be generalized to a larger population.
Our study could be consider credible because we tried at all cost to obtain unbiased
answers from our respondents and we analyzed exactly what we had as data from them
with doing any additional to primary data on our part. This means a high degree of honesty
was applied in the study.
29
Bibliography1. Parasuraman, Valarie A. Zeithaml and Leonard Berry (1988) “SERVQUAL: A Multiple Item
Scale for Measuring Customer Perceptions of Service Quality”
2. Christopher H. Lovelock (2005) “Services Marketing in Asia: Managing People, Technology and
Strategy”
3. Jin – Woo Park, Rodger Robertson and Cheng – Lung Wu “The Effects of Individual Dimensions
of Restaurant Service Quality: Findings from Australian Domestic Air Customers”
4. Robert E. Miller, Bill Hardgrave and Thomas W. Jones “The Impact of Presentation Order on
Service Quality Dimensions”
5. Anthony Perrone and Antony Ward “Enhancing the Gronroos Model of Service Quality”
6. Sanjay K. Jain and Garima Gupta “Measuring Service Quality: SERVQUAL VS SERVPERF
Scale”
7. Dr. M. Naveed Khan and Vippan Raj Dutt. “Consumer Expectations, Perceptions and Gaps
Model in Service Quality”
8. Fareena Sultan and Merlin C .Simpson “International Service Variants: Restaurant
Customer Expectations and Perceptions of Service Quality”
9. Simon Nyeck, Miguel Morales, Riadh Ladhari and Frank Pons “10 Years of Service Quality
Measurement: Reviewing the Use of the SERVQUAL Instrument”
10. John Gountas and Robin N. Shaw “Personality, Quality and Satisfaction in Restaurant Services”
11. Philemon Oyewole , Muthulakshmi Sankaran, , Pravat Choudhury “ Marketing
Restaurant Services in Malaysia: A Customer Satisfaction Orientation Approach
12. http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/4835/13/13_chapter%204.pdf
30
Appendix
Questionnaire
We are the students of BS (hons) Management from IAS and carrying out a study that what students
expect and how they perceive service quality of McDonald’s. We request you to fill the
questionnaire with relevant answers . Thank you.
The questionnaire is in two parts, expectations and experience.
Demographic questions
Gender: Male Female
Age: 18-24 25-30
Department __________________
Level of Education: Undergraduate Masters Others
How much do you spend in restaurants monthly?
0 – 1000PKR 1001 – 2000PKR 2001 – 3000PKR above 3000PKR
You should rank each statement as follows; strongly Disagree=1, disagree=2, Neutral=3, Agree=4,
Strongly Agree =5, Put a cross (X) on your choice of answer.
Expectations: This section deals with your opinion of restaurants. Please, show the extent to which you
think restaurants ‘should’ possess the following features. We are interested in knowing your expectations
from ideal restaurants service.
Statement Scores
T1. Ideal restaurants should have modern equipment. 1 2 3 4 5
Tang
ible
s
31
T2. Their physical facilities (shelves, counters, fridges,
computers, lights) should be visually appealing.
1 2 3 4 5
T3. Their employees should be well dressed and appear
neat.
1 2 3 4 5
T4. The physical environment of the restaurants should
be clean.
1 2 3 4 5
RL1. When a customer has a problem, restaurants should
show a sincere interest in solving it.
1 2 3 4 5
RL2. Restaurants should perform the service right the
first time.
1 2 3 4 5
RL3. They should provide their services at the time they
promise to do so.
1 2 3 4 5
RL4. They should keep their records accurately. 1 2 3 4 5
RN1. Employees should make information easily
obtainable by the customers.
1 2 3 4 5
RN2. Employees should give prompt service to
customers.
1 2 3 4 5
RN3. Employees should always be willing to help
customers.
1 2 3 4 5
RN4. Employees in restaurants should never be too busy
to respond to customers' requests.
1 2 3 4 5
A1. The behavior of employees in restaurants should
instill confidence in customers
1 2 3 4 5
A2. Customers should be able to feel safe in their
transactions with employees in the restaurants.
1 2 3 4 5
A3. Their employees should be polite. 1 2 3 4 5
Relia
bilit
y (R
L)Re
spon
siven
ess (
RN)
Assu
ranc
e
32
A4. Employees of restaurants should have the knowledge
to answer customers’ questions.
1 2 3 4 5
E1. Restaurants should give customers individual
attention.
1 2 3 4 5
E2. Their operating hours should be convenient to all
their customers.
1 2 3 4 5
E3. They should have their customers' best interest at
heart.
1 2 3 4 5
P1. Restaurants should have enough variety of products 1 2 3 4 5
P2. The products in restaurants should be of good quality 1 2 3 4 5
Actual Experience: The following statements deal with the perceptions of service experienced in
restaurants. Please, show the extent to which these statements reflect your perception of service in
restaurants in Pakistan.
Strongly Disagree=01 to Strongly Agree =5, Put a cross (X) on your choice of answer.
Statement scores
T1. Restaurants have up-to-date equipment. 1 2 3 4 5
T2. Physical facilities (like shelves, fridges) are 1 2 3 4 5
Tang
ible
sEm
path
yPr
oduc
t
33
visually appealing
T3. Employees are well dressed and appear neat 1 2 3 4 5
T4. The physical environment of the restaurants is
clean
1 2 3 4 5
RL1. When a customer has a problem, they show a
sincere interest in solving it
1 2 3 4 5
RL2. Restaurants perform the service right the first
time
1 2 3 4 5
RL3. Restaurants provide the service at the time they
promised to do so
1 2 3 4 5
RL4. Restaurants keep their records accurately 1 2 3 4 5
RN1. Employees make information easily obtainable
by customers
1 2 3 4 5
RN2. Employees give prompt service to customers. 1 2 3 4 5
RN2. Employees are always willing to help
customers.
1 2 3 4 5
RN4. Employees are never too busy to respond to
customers 76 requests.
1 2 3 4 5
RN5. The behavior of employees instill confidence in
customers
1 2 3 4 5
A1. Customers feel safe in their transactions with
employees in the restaurants.
1 2 3 4 5
A2. Employees are polite with customers. 1 2 3 4 5
A3. Employees of restaurants have the knowledge to
answer customers’ questions.
1 2 3 4 5
E1. Restaurants give customers individual attention. 1 2 3 4 5
Relia
bilit
y (R
L)Re
spon
siven
ess (
RN)
Assu
ranc
eEm
path
y
34
E2. Their operating hours are convenient to all their
customers.
1 2 3 4 5
E3. Restaurants have their customers' best interest at
heart.
1 2 3 4 5
P1. Restaurants have enough variety of products. 1 2 3 4 5
P2. The products of restaurants have good quality 1 2 3 4 5
Empa
thy
Prod
uct
Top Related