PZB...

2012 101.12.07

PZB

1* 2

1 2

*lincy@mail.dyu.edu.tw

ParasuramanZeithaml and Berry (SERVQUAL )

H

200 126

51 31 40

6

2 -4 ()

H

PZB SERVQUAL

1.

(intangibility)

(heterogeneity)(inseparability)(perishability)(Parasuraman et al.,1988)

(Parasuraman, Zeithaml & Berry1985)

(Zenithal

& Bitner 1996) H

H 12

500M

700

Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry(1985) SERVQUAL

H

2012 101.12.07

H H H

H

2.

2.1

1 (Riddle,1986)

1

1 (business services)

2 (trade services)

3 (infrastructure services)

4 (social/personal services)

5 (public administration)

H

H

2.2

(heterogeneous)(perishable)ZeithamlParasuraman

Berry(1985)

1.(intangibility)

2. (inseparability)

3. (heterogeneity)

2012 101.12.07

4. (perishability)

2.3

ParasuramanZeithaml

Berry(1985)(ES)

(PS) ESPS ES>PS

2.4

ParasuramanZeithamlBerry 1985 P.Z.B

1

(Gap)

~

1 PZB

2012 101.12.07

Parasuraman et al.,(1985) 1

2

2

Parasuraman et al. 1988

1tangibles

2reliability

3responsiveness

4assurance

5empathy

2012 101.12.07

2.5

CS (Customer Satisfaction

management) 2 (Alan,1994)

2

Parasuraman et al.(1988)

SERVOUAL

;

2.6

Parasuraman et.al(1985)

Oliver (1981)

Cronin & Taylor (1992)

(2005)

(2004)

(2003)

Parasuraman et al.,

2012 101.12.07

3. 3.1

Parasuraman et al.,1990

H

3 H

3

3.2

1-1

1-2

1-3

1-4

1-5

2-1

2-2

2-3

2-4

2-5

3-1

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

ANOVA

2012 101.12.07

3.3

(descriptive statistic)

(reliability analysis)

(trustworthiness)(consistency)(stability)

1965 Cuieford Cronbach

Cronbach

0.35 0.7 0.7 0.35

(validity analysis)

Parasuraman et al.,(1991) SERVQUAL

(Content

Validity)

H (GAP)

t-(t-test)

(one-way ANOVA)

(Analysis of Correlation)

4.

4.1

3

3

4.342 3 3.905 1

4.349 2 3.819 3

4.351 1 3.800 4

3.873 5 3.869 2

4.340 4 3.765 5

2012 101.12.07

4.2

4 16

17 3.468 3.325

4

54.492 6 19

17 16

1

4

1 4.063 22

2 4.389 6

3 4.302 18

4 4.317 16

5 4.492 1

6 4.490 2

7 4.333 13

8 4.286 19

9 4.398 4

10 4.381 7

11 4.315 17

12 4.349 12

13 4.325 14

14 4.397 5

15 4.365 9

16 3.468 23

17 3.325 24

18 4.254 21

19 4.444 3

20 4.364 10

21 4.362 11

22 4.373 8

23 4.324 15

24 4.270 20

2012 101.12.07

4.3

5 3

44.198

3 6

3.962 3.96 243.67

1 12

1 21

5

1 3.683 23

2 3.722 21

3 3.962 2

4 4.198 1

5 3.905 5

6 3.960 3

7 3.754 19

8 3.840 13

9 3.865 7

10 3.817 16

11 3.810 17

12 3.683 24

13 3.802 18

14 3.857 10

15 3.849 11

16 3.857 8

17 3.865 6

18 3.913 4

19 3.842 12

20 3.746 20

21 3.722 22

22 3.838 14

23 3.835 15

24 3.856 9

4.4

PZB 6

2012 101.12.07

16 17

2 12

21

6 -

1 -0.38 6

2 -0.667 24

3 -0.340 4

4 -0.119 3

5 -0.587 19

6 -0.530 13

7 -0.579 18

8 -0.446 8

9 -0.533 14

10 -0.564 17

11 -0.505 10

12 -0.666 23

13 -0.523 12

14 -0.540 16

15 -0.516 11

16 0.389 2

17 0.540 1

18 -0.341 5

19 -0.602 20

20 -0.618 21

21 -0.640 22

22 -0.535 15

23 -0.489 9

24 -0.414 7

4.5

7 4

3.960

2012 101.12.07

7

1 4.024 3

2 4.087 2

3 4.294 1

4

3.960 4

5.

5.1

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

5.2

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

5.3

1.

2012 101.12.07

2.

3.

4.

5.

1. (2003)

2. (2004) ADSL

3. (2005)

1. Cronin, J.J. & Taylor, S.A., (1992), Measuring Service Quality: A Reexamination and Extension, Journal of

Marketing, 56 (July), 55-68.

2. D .Alan ,(1994), AMA Handbook for Customer Satisfaction.New York:American Library.

3. Oliver, R. L., & Richard L.(1981), Measurement & Evaluation of Satisfaction Process in Retail Setting,

Journal of Retailing, 57(Fall), 25-48

4. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A. & Berry, L. L.(1985), Problems and Strategies in Services Marketing ,

Journal of Marketing, 49, Spring, 33-46.

5. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A.,& Berry, L. L.(1988), The SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring

consumer perceptions of service quality , Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12-40.

6. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L .L. (1991). Delivering quality serviceBalancing Perceptions and

Expectations.

7. Riddle, Dorothy I. (1986), Service-Led Growth, New York:Praeger.

8. Zenithal, V. A.& Bitner, M. J.(1996), Services Marketing, New York, NY: The McGraw-Hill Companies. Inc.

2012 101.12.07

An Investigation of Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction with the PZB Service Quality Deficiency Model

Chuay-Yuan Lin1* , Yi-Ting Chin1

1 Institute of Industrial Engineering and Management of Technology, Da-Yeh University *lincy@mail.dyu.edu.tw

ABSTRACT

Among all service industries, the service quality standards and the customer service satisfaction level have

been raised ever-increasingly stricter due to rapid increase of service industry varieties, the deteriorating market

competition in the whole service industries, increasing consumer self-awareness and consumer rights, the

perpetual improvement of social public life standards. For all various service industries, the top priority has been

reaching the solution for improvement of service quality and enhancement of customer satisfaction level. With

those aforesaid prerequisites, it has thus been decided to apply the SERVQUAL Framework and Rater

(developed by Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry in around 1985) in analyzing the customer service level in

terms of five major rating aspects of this model, including Reliability, Assurance, Tangibles, Empathy and

Responsiveness. The questionnaire survey is adopted as the major methodology for this research whose major

research objects are the customers attending corporate banquet or celebration events in the H Resort. There had

issued out 200 questionnaires in total with retrieval of 126 effective and valid questionnaires.

The research analysis results indicate that there exists a huge difference between the average customer

expectation for service quality and actual experience or perception of customer service quality. The actual

average service quality ratings are lower than the social public average customer expectation for service quality.

Principally, the average male customer satisfaction level and experience for the service quality is higher than the

average female counterpart. When analyzed in age groups, the group of aged more than 51 years old has an

average customer satisfaction level higher than that of the group of aged between 31 and 40 years old. When

analyzed by education background level, the average satisfaction level of the consumers with high-school

diploma is higher than that of consumers with junior college diplomas. If analyzed by vocations, the average

customer service levels of other vocations are higher than that of the housewives. The average customer

satisfaction level for the consumers with monthly income of more than NT$60,000 would tend to have a higher

customer satisfaction level in average than that of the consumers with monthly income of NT$ 20,000 to

NT$40,000 (exclusive of 40,000); In overall, there is a positive counteracting relevancy between the average

customer satisfaction level and the actual service quality.

Finally, deriving from the research analysis results, the conclusions and suggestions for this research are

submitted for the evaluation references adopted by the service industries in the H Resort and also improving the

gap between service quality ratings and customer satisfaction levels.

Keywords: PZBservice qualitySERVQUAL scalecustomer satisfaction