IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rug/rugwps/04-259.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Development of a measurement scale for business-to-business service quality: assessment in the facility services sector

Author

Listed:
  • D. VANDAELE
  • P. GEMMEL

Abstract

The prominence of business services in the global economy has become self-evident. The amount of money involved in sales of products and services to business buyers are ever-increasing and much higher than those to individual consumers (Kotler, 2003, Jackson and Cooper, 1988). As organizations have increasingly invested in the business services sector with the hope of gaining sustained competitive advantage, the delivery of quality service has taken on an important role in the strategic planning of service organizations (Westbrook and Peterson, 1998). Since service quality has become the overriding concern of purchasers of business services, service providers focused on not only surviving but also thriving in turbulent national and international markets by delivering a certain level of service quality (Jackson and Cooper, 1988). However, the management of service quality in a business-to-business (B2B) environment is not as widely discussed in literature as it is in the businessto- consumer (B2C) context (Parasuraman, 1998, White and Galbraith, 2000). The most widely spread instrument to measure service quality in a B2C environment is the SERVQUAL scale developed by Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1988). Researchers who applied this scale in B2B environment were not always successful (Brensinger and Lambert, 1990) indicating that the SERVQUAL scale might not be directly transferable to the business sector (Durvasula, Lysonski and Mehta, 1999). This could be due to the contrast between business markets and consumer markets (Kotler, 2003) wherein business services and their marketing are regarded as being more complex (Jackson and Cooper, 1988). Even the dimensions of perceived service quality (the basis for service quality measurement) are considered to be different across the two service settings (Kong and Mayo, 1993). Thus, the development of a measurement scale for perceived service quality adjusted to the needs of the business context appears imperative. In this study we develop a scale to measure the perceived service quality in business settings. The study is based on the exploratory research of Westbrook and Peterson (1998). Consistent with the B2B service quality dimensions they defined, we draw up a scale to actually measure the perceived service quality in a business environment. This newly developed scale will be called the B2B SERVQUAL scale. The SERVQUAL scale developed by Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1988) will occasionally be called the B2C SERVQUAL scale to avoid confusion. Thus, the research focus of this study can be formulated as follows: To develop and test a reliable, valid instrument for measuring perceived service quality in a B2B setting and determine its dimensions. This research focus evokes other questions like which service quality dimensions need to be added to the B2C service quality dimensions to more completely encompass the perceived service quality in a business setting and accordingly are there specific B2C service quality dimensions that are unimportant in a B2B environment. Additionally, we are interested in identifying service quality dimensions that have the most influence on perceived service quality in a business context. The newly developed B2B SERVQUAL scale will help us to gain new insights into not only measuring perceived service quality in a B2B setting, but also in managing the service quality in such an environment thereby improving the service relationship between companies. In this research study the emphasis will be on how service quality is perceived in the facility services sector, like cleaning, catering and security. In the following section we give a short overview of the research on B2C SERVQUAL scale (Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry, 1988) and its applicability in a business environment. This section also gives a short overview of the current research done on perceived service quality in a B2B environment and addresses the issue of the dimensions needed to capture perceived service quality in a B2B context. These dimensions are defined and compared with those in a B2C context. Subsequently we discuss the methodology used to assess the B2B SERVQUAL scale. The analyses and results are then described in another section. In the last section the limitations of our study are mentioned. This section also covers the discussion of the results and gives possibilities for future research.

Suggested Citation

  • D. Vandaele & P. Gemmel, 2004. "Development of a measurement scale for business-to-business service quality: assessment in the facility services sector," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 04/259, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
  • Handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:04/259
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://wps-feb.ugent.be/Papers/wp_04_259.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Caruana, Albert & Ewing, Michael T. & Ramaseshan, B., 2000. "Assessment of the Three-Column Format SERVQUAL: An Experimental Approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 57-65, July.
    2. Babakus, Emin & Boller, Gregory W., 1992. "An empirical assessment of the SERVQUAL scale," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 253-268, May.
    3. Brady, Michael K. & Cronin, J. Jr. & Brand, Richard R., 2002. "Performance-only measurement of service quality: a replication and extension," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 17-31, January.
    4. Armstrong, J. Scott & Overton, Terry S., 1977. "Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys," MPRA Paper 81694, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Peter, J Paul & Churchill, Gilbert A, Jr & Brown, Tom J, 1993. "Caution in the Use of Difference Scores in Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 19(4), pages 655-662, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thomas Schmidlin, 2009. "Human fatalities from wind-related tree failures in the United States, 1995–2007," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 50(1), pages 13-25, July.
    2. Dragan Benazić & Đurđana Ozretić Došen, 2012. "Service quality concept and measurement in the business consulting market," Tržište/Market, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, vol. 24(1), pages 47-66.
    3. H. T.J. Smit & W. De Maeseneire, 2005. "The role of investor capabilities in public-to-private transactions," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 05/290, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Karsten Hadwich & Corina Keller, 2015. "Interne Servicequalität in Unternehmen: Eine empirische Untersuchung der Einflussfaktoren und Auswirkungen," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 67(2), pages 170-205, May.
    2. Gleitsmann, Sinje & Guttzeit, Mandy & Roschk, Holger, 2010. "Die kundenseitige Wahrnehmung der Servicequalität bei der Nutzung von SST," Ilmenauer Schriften zur Betriebswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Ilmenau, Institut für Betriebswirtschaftslehre, volume 3, number 32010.
    3. Son K. Lam & Thomas E. DeCarlo & Ashish Sharma, 2019. "Salesperson ambidexterity in customer engagement: do customer base characteristics matter?," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 659-680, July.
    4. Sang-June Park & Youjae Yi, 2016. "Performance-only measures vs. performance-expectation measures of service quality," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(15-16), pages 741-756, December.
    5. Pablo Gutiérrez Rodríguez & José Vázquez Burguete & Roger Vaughan & Jonathan Edwards, 2009. "Quality dimensions in the public sector: municipal services and citizen’s perception," International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing, Springer;International Association of Public and Non-Profit Marketing, vol. 6(1), pages 75-90, June.
    6. Calabrese, Armando, 2012. "Service productivity and service quality: A necessary trade-off?," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(2), pages 800-812.
    7. Akter, Shahriar & Wamba, Samuel Fosso & D’Ambra, John, 2019. "Enabling a transformative service system by modeling quality dynamics," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 207(C), pages 210-226.
    8. Spiros Gounaris, 2005. "An alternative measure for assessing perceived quality of software house services," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(6), pages 803-823, September.
    9. Brady, Michael K. & Cronin, J. Jr. & Brand, Richard R., 2002. "Performance-only measurement of service quality: a replication and extension," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 17-31, January.
    10. Ya Lan WANG & Tainyi LUOR & Pin LUARN & Hsi-peng LU, 2015. "Contribution and Trend to Quality Research—a literature review of SERVQUAL model from 1998 to 2013," Informatica Economica, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 19(1), pages 34-45.
    11. Akamavi, Raphaël K. & Mohamed, Elsayed & Pellmann, Katharina & Xu, Yue, 2015. "Key determinants of passenger loyalty in the low-cost airline business," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 528-545.
    12. Nikhil Chandra Shil & Bhagaban Das, 2012. "Satisfaction management in retail financial services: an analysis of gap in perceived quality," International Journal of Financial Services Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 5(3), pages 256-271.
    13. Glunk, U. & Heijltjes, M.G., 2003. "Changes in the top management team: performance implications of altering team composition," Research Memorandum 050, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    14. Babic-Hodovic Vesna & Arslanagic-Kalajdzic Maja & Imsirpasic Amina, 2017. "Perceived Quality and Corporate Image in Mobile Services: The Role of Technical and Functional Quality," South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 12(1), pages 114-125, April.
    15. Smith, Anne M., 1999. "Some Problems When Adopting Churchill's Paradigm for the Development of Service Quality Measurement Scales," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 109-120, October.
    16. Jaya Sangeetha, 2017. "Development of Scale for Service Quality, Satisfaction and Behavioral intentions: Middle Eastern Context," Advances in Management and Applied Economics, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 7(2), pages 1-4.
    17. Andreas Kakouris & Elina Meliou, 2011. "New Public Management: Promote the Public Sector Modernization Through Service Quality. Current Experiences and Future Challenges," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 351-369, December.
    18. Halil Nadiri, 2011. "Customers’ zone of tolerance for retail stores," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 5(2), pages 113-137, June.
    19. Nugroho, Adi, 2021. "Study of Airport Service Quality and Profitability in Indonesia," OSF Preprints ah2ns, Center for Open Science.
    20. Hartline, Michael D. & Jones, Keith C., 1996. "Employee performance cues in a hotel service environment: Influence on perceived service quality, value, and word-of-mouth intentions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 207-215, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:04/259. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Nathalie Verhaeghe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ferugbe.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.