SERVPERF

From CEOpedia | Management online
(Redirected from Servperf)
Jump to: navigation, search
SERVPERF
Primary topic
Related topics
Methods and techniques

SERVPERF (Service Performance) was created on basis of critique of SERVQUAL by J.J. Cronin and S.A. Taylor in 1994. They claimed that Parasuraman's study of relations between expected and experienced quality is not proper approach to quality assessment.

SERVQUAL critique

Evaluation of service quality is difficult, because of the difference between quality perceived by customer and expected by him/her. Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry in 1988 proposed SERVQUAL model which described five gaps between those two visions of quality. Elimination of those gaps should help the organization to improve service quality.

This approach is inconsistent with some research results, which show that customer's expectations should be based on experiences. What's more, higher level of perceived service quality only sometimes is a cause of increased consumer satisfaction. In many cases, the satisfaction is an antecedent of service quality.

According to Boldon and Drew, perceived service quality (Attitudet) is a function of residual perception of the service's quality (Attitudet-1) and level of (dis)satisfaction of the current service performance (CS/Dt).

Attitudet = f(CS/Dt; Attitudet-1)

Service quality is then a function of Disconfirmation, Expectations and Performance:

Service Quality = f(Disconfirmation; Expectations; Performance)

Cronin and Taylor proposed modification of SERVQUAL based on analysis of 730 enterprises offering different areas of services (banks, pest control, dry cleaning, fast food).

SERVPERF Model

The SERVPERF measures quality as an attitude, not satisfaction. However it uses an idea of perceived service quality leading to satisfaction. But it goes further, and connects satisfaction with further purchase intentions.

The SERVPERF is a modification of SERVQUAL, and thus uses the same categories to assess service quality (RATER model):

  • Tangibles
  • Reliability
  • Responsiveness
  • Assurance
  • Empathy

In each of the categories there are statements that are evaluated on 7 step Likert scale. The SERVQUAL proposed 44 statements (expectations and performance related), while SERVPERF only 22 (performance related).

The SERVPERF questionnaire

The following statements are related to the enterprise being evaluated. Some of them are "the more the better" type, and some "the less the better":

  1. Has up-to-date equipment
  2. Physical facilities are visually appealing
  3. Employees are well dressed and appear neat
  4. The appearance of physical facilities is in keeping with the type of service provided
  5. When company promises to do something by certain time, it does so
  6. When you have problems, company is sympathetic and reassuring
  7. Is dependable
  8. Provides its services at the time it promises to do so
  9. Keeps its records accurately
  10. Does not tell its customers exactly when the services will be performed
  11. You do not receive prompt service from company employees
  12. Employees are not always willing to help customers
  13. Employees are too busy to respond to customer requests promptly
  14. You can trust employees
  15. You can feel safe in your transactions with company employees
  16. Employees are polite
  17. Employees get adequate support to do their jobs well
  18. Company does not give you individual attention
  19. Employees do not give you personal attention
  20. Employees do not know what your needs are
  21. Company does not have your best interests at heart
  22. Company does not have operating hours convenient to all their customers

Evaluation of the questionnaire

Each statement from part 1 should be compared with the statement from part 2. They describe expectations and perception.

Dimension Statement Expectation score Perception score Gap score Average for the dimension
...


Scores are summed up and weighted. The weights are chosen based on expert assessment of top management.

Dimension Score Weight Weighted score
...
Average weighted score

References

Author: Slawomir Wawak