Discussion
In recent times service excellence has emerged as a significant part of concern to practitioners, executives and observers mounting to its extensive influence on business growth performance condensed cost, consumer contentment, customer enthusiasm and productivity. A diminutive section would disagree with the actuality that services play a decisive role to the economy is of the world’s most developed nations (Kitapci, Akdogan and Dortyol 2014). In the United States services signify over 85% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as well as workforce. Furthermore it is relevant that services are getting amplified as an economic determinant in nations such as China, India and other rapidly emergent and rising countries (Shi, Prentice and He 2014). The growth of services is professed to be persistent global phenomenon that exhibits a propensity to shape the economy of the world and intensely impact the lives of people. However regardless to the profitable domination of services, there can be witnessed an insignificant level of focus within organisations, government and institutions on the concepts related to service superiority, service analysis as well as service improvement in comparison to the level of contemplation given on concrete goods and technologies. Within this milieu of unabated increase of service market, and industry practitioners have addressed to the needs for mechanism, tools, methods as well as metrics in order to support quality and ingenuity in providing services across businesses (Kaura, Durga Prasad and Sharma 2015). While some of the mechanisms already dominated within the industry a significant section are still to be developed. These tools and mechanism however will play an essential role for service science.
The following essay intends to highlight one vital framework that is the Gaps Model of Service Quality which has been presented as a strategic groundwork for organisations aiming to deliver service excellence to its clients and consumers (Kitapci, Akdogan and Dortyol 2014). In addition to this the paper will highlight factors related to customer relationships and satisfaction by analysing linkages between gap model and customer relationships.
Gap Model Analysis- Identifying Gaps in the Model
The gaps model fundamentally offers an incorporated framework for supporting service superiority, eminence and purchaser oriented service modernization. Since its introduction, service quality, improvements along with consumer responsiveness have emerged as elevating factors of competitive strategies for organisations (Kitapci, Akdogan and Dortyol 2014). This has led integrative methods to have substantial relevance across more industries than ever. Imperative characteristic of this model is associated with anchoring on the consumers and incorporation of the purchaser all through all the gaps within the gap model (Gaiardelli 2014). It is important to note that every gap as well as every strategy implemented to diminish or secure the gaps and issues in the model tends to retain a focus on the consumer at its core. However the fundamental objective of the model is to attain or surpass customer outlooks as well as approaches utilised to attain that purpose which comprises operations like human resource services or technology oriented services which are eventually anchored on the consumer (Kitapci, Akdogan and Dortyol 2014).
The gap model essentially distinguishes for specific gaps which lead to the 5th overall gap between consumer expectation and perceived service. Consumers exhibit certain level of expectations for service familiarities and they utilise them to determine against the perceived service presentation in the judgement of service quality (Yarimoglu 2014). This develops an essentiality for managers to efficiently identify those expectations while designing or proposing any services. The first gap identified in the gap model of service quality characteristically occurs with ineffectiveness of the management to precisely distinguish consumer expectations (Murali, Pugazhendhi and Muralidharan 2016). This gap known as the knowledge gap signifies the disparity in customer anticipations and the perception of the management related to customers expectations. For example, it is highly essential for managers performing in hospitality sector to develop the understanding on the expectations of their guests including all tangible as well as intangible components (Wang and Kim 2017). The second gap referred as the design gap is primarily assessed by the degree to which service design specifications can correspond to the perspectives of consumer prospects perceived by the management. The extent of the gap however is determined by the management ideas and perception that service quality is imperative and that is easily achievable along with the resources that are accessible for the provision of such services (Shi, Prentice and He 2014).
Role of SERVPERF measure in evaluating Gap Model
Performance gap is known as the third gap that emerges during an inconsistency between service quality standards and employees’ performance in offering services (Kaura, Durga Prasad and Sharma 2015). This leads to an outcome of deficit in appropriateness of both technology and the operating mechanisms which tend to emerge from organizational complexities or associated to descending level of communication. Communication gap is referred as fourth gap which distinguishes the differentiation between assurance given to the customers and delivered services (Leong et al. 2015). Studies reveal that business enterprises engaged in hospitality sector use service promotion, advertising individual selling as well as sales promotions to remind the consumers about their products along with services they offer. Promoting exceptional goods and services in product endorsements intends to target greater level of customers (Shi, Prentice and He 2014). The extent of communication or effective interaction between business enterprise and the advertising agencies might generate critical impact on the size of the gap. However this gap reveals increasing impact from the preceding gaps. The fifth gap is identified as the aggregated accretion of deviation ranging from gap 1 through 4 and signifies the divergences between customer expectations and perceived services (Hult et al. 2017). Moreover customers exhibit a tendency to analyse perceives services along these five quality dimensions.
Service quality gap model has encountered several criticisms on both methodological and theoretical grounds. Gaiardelli (2014) have witnessed a deficit of evidence underlying the consumer expectation performance gap as an analytical measure of service quality. It has been believed that evaluating customer perception is satisfactory for analysing service quality and furthermore it is inconsequential to evaluate customer outlooks in service quality research. Stefano et al. (2015) claim assessing service quality by calculating the dissimilarity between customers’ perception and customer Expectations (PE). Indeed Brach et al. (2015) define service quality as a customer insight approach without expectations and further recommended that the performance-reliant dimension approach SERVPERF expose greater level of proclivity in conformance with the presented attitude and customer gratification studies and is advanced to the perception expectation gap approach (Mullins et al. 2014).
Liou, Chuang and Tzeng (2014) have posed question on the corroboration of perception expectation gap with certain theoretical and operational subjects in the considering consumer expectation. However, perception is comprehensive and considerable in an undemanding manner as the consumer perception about service is experienced. Further expectation is acknowledged as subjective to various interpretations by diverse range of researchers (Murali, Pugazhendhi and Muralidharan 2016). Furthermore it has been believed that conceptualization related to consumer anticipation is uncertain and conceptualized owing to the theory of expectation in the field of service quality studies. Such expectation is understood as normative expectation with concern to organisation confines (Iglesias, Ind and Alfaro 2017). These limitations tend to deal with human resource or services and equipments constraints or superlative prospects devoid of any concern of restraint and control. These limitations mean that consumer perceptions are also determined by service brilliance or value. At this juncture, the psychometric concerns are important to be noted developed by Liou, Chuang and Tzeng (2014) involving to be utilisation of distinction score. These uses would expand the understanding that the gap model would have susceptibility to exhibit and constructive reliability as customer expectation and perception could be positively correlated. Stefano et al. (2015) further suggested that if the statistical alternatives of performance score and prospects tend to reveal discrepancies in evaluation of statistical significance would tend to undergo greater level of complexities.
Iglesias, Ind and Alfaro (2017) have revealed certain reservations on the assessment of consumer outlooks, expectations and organisation perceptions as to different components. These areas further signify unified approach which aims to study perceptions as an outcome of the cognitive process of the consumer. Furthermore authors confirm that expectations are reliant on certain level of predispositions based on services which are difficult to be interpreted and further may encounter alterations with the definite experience and the fluency which the consumer developed regarding product or services (Wang and Kim 2017). The SERVPERF skill based on the perception based on relation between perceptions and expectations which the customers develop involuntarily in their minds. It has been observed that the SERVPERF skill exhibit greater level of incompetence in considering the set of factors which are referred to consumer expectations and further simplifies the assessment to perception measurement (Ali and Raza 2017). The efficacy of such an approach determined by perceptions does not purposely disregard the magnitude of consumer expectations but further intends address the substantial value of perception in influencing service quality (Paul, Mittal and Srivastav 2016). However other critical endeavours to implement the SERVPERF skill disclose the critical need to approve to the perceived quality dimension to business services (Ali and Raza 2017). However it has been widely recognised that market associations are highly essential for expectations and perception development and also for identification of quality standards as well as to evaluate definite performance of business (Brach et al. 2015).
The gaps model since its development has essentially proven to be flexible in attaining transitions in the domain of international business environment. Recent times several well established organisations engaged in expertise and industrialized sectors have perceived themselves as service businesses by proficiently implementing this model to propose their services (Mullins et al. 2014). Furthermore another significant development has been noticed in the intervening years relies on the hasty advancement of technologies which have played a decisive role on the way services are being communicated, framed and delivered. Previous discourses based on the peculiarity of services based on the existent reason that these services could not deliver any productivity in isolation (Eichorn 2018). This further raised the idea that service was identified as a narrow function provided in the integrated situation of a contributor customer connection. Technical development have relaxed such primary interpersonal real time demand which has been consequential to the augmentation of availability and globalisation of services which can now be easily delivered as well as consumed at the ease of consumers (Iglesias, Ind and Alfaro 2017).
Hult et al. (2017) have thrown light on the significant gaps in the model and further intensifying on the way approaches are implemented to condense or close those gaps. The consumer gap is identified as the centrepiece of the gaps model which implies the differentiation between consumer expectation and organisation perception of service performances (Gaiardelli 2014). Such model proposes that closing this gap by corresponding exceeding demands and outlooks of consumers will result in the successful attainment of service eminence from the consumers’ outlook. The gaps model since its introduction has attained considerable level of eminence because of its focus on demand and expectations of customers and perceptions in regards to conceptualizing these constructs and creating measures to analyse them and further observe their degree of impact (Shi, Prentice and He 2014). Considerable research concerns on the understanding of factors related to service quality that ranges from the recognition of five principal dimensions. However the five magnitudes of service quality namely reliability, empathy, assertion, responsiveness and tangibles along with the SERVQUAL measure implemented and permitted in various industries (Leong et al. 2015).
However investigation has stated in correspondence to the evaluation of service typically intends to encounter customer satisfaction, customer dedication and the association with service quality. Furthermore the essential concern of the customer gap fundamentally relied on level of outlook or expectations demands as well as perceptions of services which have been delivered by interpersonal employee services such as telephonic services or through e-mails (Foroudi et al. 2016). It has been noted that SERVQUAL measures and theoretical models of consumer expectation pattern and service challenges determine by interpersonal services. However some of the previously identified issues highlighted the gaps related to the way consumers develop the understanding of services and form their own outlooks for intangible factors which they cannot identify or observe prior service delivery (Eichorn 2018). On the other hand other domain of study contested these ideas and addressed factors related to the way consumers developed judgements of service quality and excellence as well as the level of containment while receiving words of communication about the product of services represented during an interaction with employee. Studies revealed that over the past two decades rapid expansion of technology advances has critically influenced the customer gap (Mullins et al. 2014).
One of the significant changes brought by technological advances has been the concept of self services that has led consumers to attain a co-production role resulting to the shift to the nature of service delivery (Foroudi et al. 2016). This dramatic evolution has resulted contemporary consumers to develop high level of demands and expectations as well as perceptions in terms of their own competence and performance which will create impact on the generalized evaluation of service quality excellence beyond what service any provider may put forward. Furthermore to the development approaches to which these services will be delivered, advanced technical expertise have developed improved services which was not even imagined even a decade ago (Iglesias, Ind and Alfaro 2017). Advanced technologies have not only shifted the way consumers perceive the understanding of services but also enhanced their level of expertise and proficiency to seek the dynamics of advanced technologies and develop their own level of expectations. Such easy accessibility of information has been influential to the level of expectations and capacity in order to draw comparisons or review services of diverse business enterprises.
Though word of mouth communication has typically been significant for developing knowledge and structuring expectations for service contributors, hasty progress in expertise has efficiently altered the attributes related to word of mouth communication process (Wang and Kim 2017). Such advancements have led majority of business enterprises to create websites primarily involving customer recommendations, suggestions, feedback and grievances for any type of services which are imaginable and accessible. Blut et al. (2014) state that well established organisations as well as start-ups in developed and developing nations are also endorsing these types of interactive websites for themselves to incorporate and engage their clientele base to aid each other. These technological advances have posed geometrical influence on the way consumers attain knowledge about services and develop their own understanding and outlook and further evaluate services which they purchase (Wang and Kim 2017). However these transformations or development have led various business enterprises encounter complexities in challenges and comprehending the emerging expectations, demands and further developing framework and delivering services in order to accomplish them (Mullins et al. 2014).
Establishing relationships by comprehending and attaining consumer demand and needs eventually has also been facilitated by technological advances. Customer Relationship Management (CRM) is recognised as a vital and prevailing form of affiliation building mechanism that was nearly unfeasible to be considered prior to developments in technology based CRM software as well as systems (Khodakarami and Chan 2014). CRM evaluates consumers individually in order to develop reports of their entity needs, expectations, conducts and retorts towards promotion. Such an approach facilitates organisations to develop integration with millions of customers and further to distribute services exceptionally to every individual purchaser (Eichorn 2018). However one of the most pioneering examples of database promotion involve Hallmark Gold crown. It has been evaluated that hallmarks database possess high competence of distinguishing consumers in all Hallmark retail outlets, follow purchases, contacts and further establishes interactive foundation in order to develop awareness of values and standards of each customer possesses in relationship to the company. This information primarily involves which core product or services possess maximum eminence to the procurer and factors which differentiates trademark from its competition (Trainor et al. 2014).
Studies reveal that CRM has been implemented efficiently as well as creatively by some of world’s leading organisations. Reports revealed that Tesco’s achievements in retail sector have been attributed to its CRM initiatives along with the implementation of knowledge gained from these initiatives such as the club card scheme. This significant inventiveness of club cards game introduced in the year 1995 comprising over 12 million of consumers has been identified as one of the typical examples of CRM innovation. Tesco has been introduced to impel family members such as Tesco kid’s club world of Wine Club in order to diversify and enhance the value of the brand. Furthermore as with emerging number of supermarkets, Asda’s fundamental aim with its CRM is to develop enhanced understanding of their customers preferences by critically evaluating their purchasing habits (Eichorn 2018). This approach facilitated the organisation to offer customers the most efficient services along with highly effective marketing strategies in order to retain its clients. From its diverse CRM initiatives Asda has been able to develop the competence to associate transactional data to every single purchaser. Such a competence allows the organisation to amplify its knowledge on clientele base and further facilities to excavate data in ways that market competitors take for serious consideration. These benefits to organisations for implementing ground-breaking types of CRM systems are distinct. However (Ojasalo and Ojasalo (2015) witnessed a critical potential for the exploitation, if these mechanisms are functional in ways so as to consider beneficiary factors of consumers or enter into their confidentiality. Thus supporting precise balance between pertaining and implementing customer knowledge in order to establish desirable associations for organisations and consumers as well as exploiting information through discarded approaches can be a persistent challenge which technology advances cannot solve (Foroudi et al. 2016).
Conclusion
Thus to conclude, it can be stated that gaps model of service quality can be recognised as one of the essential frameworks for service knowledge advancements. The fundamental contributions delivered by gap model are its traverse functionality from a industry stance, its involvement of theories, perspectives and frameworks from diverse academic disciplines and unique centre on consumer is much appreciable. The essay has developed the model of service quality gaps on the basis of critical discourse to certify gap model which can be executed by efficiently verifying the recently developed components associations and gaps and validating the develop module in realistic investigations. The paper provided comprehensive evaluation of strengths of gap model which certainly depends on its relative minimalism in the linearity of its structure along with the rationality of the organization’s performance which tend to determine its simplicity as well as unrestrained force.
References
Ali, M. and Raza, S.A., 2017. Service quality perception and customer satisfaction in Islamic banks of Pakistan: the modified SERVQUAL model. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 28(5-6), pp.559-577.
Blut, M., Beatty, S.E., Evanschitzky, H. and Brock, C., 2014. The impact of service characteristics on the switching costs–customer loyalty link. Journal of Retailing, 90(2), pp.275-290.
Brach, S., Walsh, G., Hennig?Thurau, T. and Groth, M., 2015. A dyadic model of customer orientation: mediation and moderation effects. British Journal of Management, 26(2), pp.292-309.
Eichorn, F.L., 2018. Internal customer relationship management (IntCRM) a framework for achieving customer relationship management from the inside out. Management, 2, p.1.
Foroudi, P., Jin, Z., Gupta, S., Melewar, T.C. and Foroudi, M.M., 2016. Influence of innovation capability and customer experience on reputation and loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 69(11), pp.4882-4889.
Gaiardelli, P., Resta, B., Martinez, V., Pinto, R. and Albores, P., 2014. A classification model for product-service offerings. Journal of cleaner production, 66, pp.507-519.
Hult, G.T.M., Morgeson, F.V., Morgan, N.A., Mithas, S. and Fornell, C., 2017. Do managers know what their customers think and why?. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(1), pp.37-54.
Iglesias, O., Ind, N. and Alfaro, M., 2017. The organic view of the brand: A brand value co-creation model. In Advances in Corporate Branding (pp. 148-174). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Kaura, V., Durga Prasad, C.S. and Sharma, S., 2015. Service quality, service convenience, price and fairness, customer loyalty, and the mediating role of customer satisfaction. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 33(4), pp.404-422.
Khodakarami, F. and Chan, Y.E., 2014. Exploring the role of customer relationship management (CRM) systems in customer knowledge creation. Information & Management, 51(1), pp.27-42.
Kitapci, O., Akdogan, C. and Dortyol, I.T., 2014. The impact of service quality dimensions on patient satisfaction, repurchase intentions and word-of-mouth communication in the public healthcare industry. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 148, pp.161-169.
Leong, L.Y., Hew, T.S., Lee, V.H. and Ooi, K.B., 2015. An SEM–artificial-neural-network analysis of the relationships between SERVPERF, customer satisfaction and loyalty among low-cost and full-service airline. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(19), pp.6620-6634.
Liou, J.J., Chuang, Y.C. and Tzeng, G.H., 2014. A fuzzy integral-based model for supplier evaluation and improvement. Information Sciences, 266, pp.199-217.
Mullins, R.R., Ahearne, M., Lam, S.K., Hall, Z.R. and Boichuk, J.P., 2014. Know your customer: How salesperson perceptions of customer relationship quality form and influence account profitability. Journal of Marketing, 78(6), pp.38-58.
Murali, S., Pugazhendhi, S. and Muralidharan, C., 2016. Modelling and investigating the relationship of after sales service quality with customer satisfaction, retention and loyalty–a case study of home appliances business. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 30, pp.67-83.
Ojasalo, K. and Ojasalo, J., 2015. Adapting business model thinking to service logic: an empirical study on developing a service design tool. The Nordic School, 309.
Paul, J., Mittal, A. and Srivastav, G., 2016. Impact of service quality on customer satisfaction in private and public sector banks. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 34(5), pp.606-622.
Rauch, D.A., Collins, M.D., Nale, R.D. and Barr, P.B., 2015. Measuring service quality in mid-scale hotels. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 27(1), pp.87-106.
Shi, Y., Prentice, C. and He, W., 2014. Linking service quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty in casinos, does membership matter?. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 40, pp.81-91.
Stefano, N.M., Casarotto Filho, N., Barichello, R. and Sohn, A.P., 2015. A fuzzy SERVQUAL based method for evaluated of service quality in the hotel industry. Procedia CIRP, 30, pp.433-438.
Trainor, K.J., Andzulis, J.M., Rapp, A. and Agnihotri, R., 2014. Social media technology usage and customer relationship performance: A capabilities-based examination of social CRM. Journal of Business Research, 67(6), pp.1201-1208.
Wang, Z. and Kim, H.G., 2017. Can social media marketing improve customer relationship capabilities and firm performance? Dynamic capability perspective. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 39, pp.15-26.
Yarimoglu, E.K., 2014. A review on dimensions of service quality models. Journal of Marketing Management, 2(2), pp.79-93.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
