Measuring business schools’ service quality in an emerging market using an extended SERVQUAL instrument

Abstract

An extended SERVQUAL instrument is developed, validated and used to measure perceived service quality delivered to students by business schools in an emerging market economy. A longitudinal survey is conducted with selected students in their final year of study from two business schools in an emerging market economy. The use of the extended SERVQUAL model is suggested to monitor student/employee expectations and perceptions during and after the education service delivery process. Students attach different weights to the service quality dimensions. A new Process Outcome dimension is found to substantially add to the SERVQUAL model and is more important than the other dimensions. The validity of the extended SERVQUAL model for practical use is α >0.95. Prediction of the level of service quality delivered, using four dimensions, indicates that the level of service quality is explained mostly by Process Outcome and Tangibles dimensions. It is suggested that using the extended SERVQUAL model as a tool can enable managers of business schools to identify the factors on which students/employees base their quality assessment of the education services they receive. Knowledge of these factors will enable managers in emerging economies to periodically assess, sustain and improve quality of the whole service delivery process. Priorities can be set to allocate scarce resources properly to make effective investment decisions to improve quality per school and in higher education, in general. The paper further suggests that regulatory bodies make use of this model when comparing performance of business schools, focusing on student experiences as a supplement to the traditional performance measures.

Service quality in higher education institutions: qualitative evidence from the students’ perspectives using Maslow hierarchy of needs

“…The SERVQUAL instrument by Parasuraman et al (1988) is the most popular tool among researchers, followed by SERVPERF by Cronin and Taylor (1992) and HEdPERF by Abdullah (2006b). SERVQUAL and SERVPERF have been used as the measurement of SQ in a plethora of empirical studies ( -Donlagi c and Fazli c, 2015;Galeeva, 2016;Mbise and Tuninga, 2016). However, little attention has been given to qualitative aspects of SQ in HEIs; especially SQ from students' perspectives.…”

Methods of Service Quality Assessment – Preliminary Results of Survey for Enterprises

“…Often such analyses is too long according to customers, it contains difficult terms, so they do not want to waste their time. Very often they fill in surveys carelessly, answer questions randomly or interrupt the study when they get bored (Ciavolino & Calcagni, 2015;Gołąb-Andrzejak & Badzińska, 2015;Lupo, 2015;Mbise & Tuninga, 2016).…”

Service Quality Framework for private higher open distance e-learning institutions in South -Africa

“…A thorough review of the relevant academic literature revealed that HEIs acknowledge that for the sake of competitive advantage, their long-term success depends on the quality of services they render to their external stakeholders (Mbise & Tuninga, 2016;Surman et al, 2019). Thus, the quality of the educational services offered by public or PHEIs might be their strong strategy over others to gain a competitive advantage.…”