Effects of Airline Service Quality on Airline Image and Behavioural Intention

2 THE JOURNAL OF TOURISM STUDIES Vol. 16, No. 1, MAY ‘05

Investigating theEffects of Airline

Service Quality onAirline Image and

Passengers’ FutureBehaviouralIntentions:

Findings from Australianinternational air passengers

Jin-Woo ParkRodger Robertson

andCheng-Lung Wu

Introduction

The research related to service quality and customersatisfaction in the airline industry has been growing in interestbecause the delivery of high service quality is essential for airlines’survival and competitiveness. A number of researchers have appliedservice quality related theories and methods in the airline industry.However, most previous airline service studies have relied mainly oncustomer satisfaction and service quality to describe customerevaluations of services and have focused on the effect of airline servicequality at the aggregate construct level. Although examining theeffect of individual dimensions of service attributes has potentiallygreat utility for airline managers, the effects of individual dimensionsof airline service quality has not been fully investigated in previousairline service studies (Patterson & Spreng, 1997). Sinceinvestigating the effects of individual dimensions of airline servicequality is an important factor for airline marketers to develop theirmarketing strategies, the individual dimensions of airline servicequality are considered as an important variable in this paper.

Mr. Jin-Woo Park is a PhD Student,Department of Aviation, University ofNew South Wales, Australia.Mr. Rodger Robertson is a SeniorLecturer, Department of Aviation,University of New South Wales,Australia.Dr. Cheng-Lung Wu is a Lecturer,Department of Aviation, University ofNew South Wales, Australia.

AbstractThis paper investigates howindividual dimensions ofairline service qualitydetermine airline image andpassengers’ future behaviouralintentions. To investigate theeffects of individualdimensions of airline servicequality, Structural EquationModeling using a maximumlikelihood estimator, wasapplied to data collected fromAustralian international airpassengers. It was found thatthere were significantrelationships between thevariables except one path. Thedimension of in-flight serviceand the dimension ofconvenience and accessibilitywere each found to have apositive effect on airline image,which was directly related toAustralian international airpassengers’ future behaviouralintentions.

In recent years, research relatedto corporate image and consumerbehaviour in the field of servicemarketing has progressed. Thereis some evidence that corporateimage is an important factor inthe overall evaluation of theservice and the company(Gronroos, 1984). Corporateimage can influence customers’perception of services offered andcustomers’ choice of company(Andreassen & Lindestad, 1998).However, understanding the roleof corporate image in thecustomer retention decision is akey issue that has received littleattention in the servicemarketing area (Nguyen &LeBlanc, 1998). The role and theeffect of corporate image inairline service setting has oftenbeen ignored in previous airlineservice studies.

This paper aims at improving ourunderstanding of air passengers’future behavioural intentions byproposing and testing aconceptual framework thatconsiders airline service quality,airline image, and passengers’behavioural intentions simul-taneously. In particular, previousairline service studies have oftenignored the effects of individualdimensions of airline servicequality. Therefore, this paperderives airline service dimensionsand investigates the effects ofindividual dimensions of airlineservice quality on airline imageand passengers’ futurebehavioural intentions bydeveloping a structural equationmodel to study related effectssimultaneously.

Literature review

This paper proposes a conceptualframework that investigates theeffects of individual dimensions ofairline service quality and airlineimage on passengers’ behaviouralintentions. The following reviewpresents an overview of relevantliterature leading to theestablishment of the proposedconceptual framework. Com-ponents of the proposedconceptual framework including

service quality and corporateimage are discussed in thissection.

Service quality

Service quality is a consumer’soverall impression of the relativeinferiority/superiority of theorganisation and its services(Bitner & Hubbert, 1994). Theimportance of service quality hasbeen widely discussed byresearchers. For example,Parasuraman, Zeithaml & Berry(1991) argued that deliveringhigh quality in the serviceindustry has been recognised asthe most effective means ofensuring that a company’sofferings are uniquely positionedin a market f illed with “look-alike” competitive offerings.Goodman (1989) also assertedthat businesses should beconcerned with service qualityissue because problems withservice quality can makecustomer loyalty decline by 20%.

Parasuraman, Zeithaml & Berry(1988) developed a 22-iteminstrument representing the fivedimensions, called SERVQUAL,for assessing customer perceptionof service quality in service andretailing organisations. It isbased on the premise thatcustomers can evaluate servicequality by comparing theirperceptions with theirexpectations of its service. Todevelop the SERVQUAL scale,data were gathered for f ivedifferent service categories:appliance repair and main-tenance, retail banking, long-distance telephone, securitiesbrokerage, and credit cards.Since the development of theSERVQUAL scale, a number ofstudies have been conducted onservice quality using this scale.The SERVQUAL has been usedwidely to evaluate service qualityin various industries. However,several researchers notedlimitations of the SERVQUALand presented modified andalternative methods. Forexample, Carmen (1990) assertedthat it is difficult to use the 22

SERVQUAL items exactly asproposed and some modificationsin items or wording were alwaysrequired. Cronin & Taylor (1992)argued that there are limitationsin the SERVQUAL due to the factthat the d isconfirmationparadigm does not perform wellstatistically and the authorpresented a performance-basedalternative method called theSERVPERF.

Since service quality is animportant factor for airlines,several researchers have appliedservice quality related theoriesand methods in the airlineindustry (Alotaibi, 1992; Chang &Yeh, 2002; Chen, 1997; Kaynak,Kucukemiroglu & Kara, 1994;Ostrowski, O’Brien & Gordon,1993; Sultan & Simpson, 2000).Most of the previous airlineservice studies have used theSERVQUAL method to evaluateservice quality. However, the 22-item scale of SERVQUALrepresenting five dimensions isnot appropriate for measuring allaspects of airline service qualitydue to the characteristics ofairline service quality. Airlineservice quality is different fromservices in other industries. Anairline service comprises tangibleand intangible attributes.Airlines carry passengers to thedestination using aircraft, andpassengers experience diverseintangible services from airlinessuch as on time performance, in-flight service, service frequencyand so on. Shostack (1977)asserted that airline travel isintangible-dominant. It does notyield physical ownership of atangible good. As shown inFigure 1, airline travel is moreinfluenced by intangibles thantangibles.

The perceptions of airline servicequality are quite diverse and donot seem to fit any single existingquality model such as theSERVQUAL or the SERVPERF(Haynes & Percy, 1994). Thestability of the service dimensionsacross different branches ofindustry has proved to be weakand some modifications in items

THE JOURNAL OF TOURISM STUDIES Vol. 16, No. 1, MAY ‘05 3

or wording were always requiredby the setting, or by results oftests of the questionnaire(Carman, 1990). Hence, modifi-cations and adaptations should bemade to selected questions anddimensions to make them morerelevant to airline service quality.

Previous airline service studiesare concentrated in modelling theeffect of perceived service qualityat the aggregate construct level,though examining the effects ofindividual dimensions of serviceattributes has potentially greatutility for airline managers(Patterson & Spreng, 1997). Theeffects of individual dimensions ofairline service quality have notbeen fully investigated, if any,they have concentrated on theSERVQUAL’s five dimensions,namely tangibles, responsiveness,reliability, assurance, andempathy (Alotaibi, 1992; Sultan& Simpson, 2000; Tsaur, Chang& Yen, 2002). Since it is requiredto modify and adapt SERVQUALquestions and dimensions tomake them more relevant toairline service quality, it is worthderiving the nature of airlineservice quality dimensions andinvestigating the effects deriveddimensions of airline servicequality rather than just applyingthe SERVQUAL dimensions andquestions for measuring airlineservice quality.

Corporate image

Corporate image can be definedas perceptions of an organisationreflected in the associations heldin consumer memory (Keller,1993). A planned and well-managed corporate image is themost promising marketing

strategy for attracting currentconsumers (Fombrun & Shanley,1996). A company with a goodimage is more likely to stand outin the marketplace because itdraws both repeat customers andtrial users (Connor & Davidson,1997). The more favourable acompany’s image, the more likelyconsumers will assume that theservices tendered by thatcompany are better, of higherquality and worth more in actualprice (Dowling, 1994). Similarlyin the airline industry, the morefavourable image passengershave, the more likely negativeelements about the airline will befiltered out of passengers’consciousness. Passengers whohave a favourable image of theairline consider a particularly badflight to be an exception to theirimpression of the airline(Ostrowski et al., 1993). Thus, afavourable image separates anddistinguishes the company fromits competitors.

Previous research has identifiedcorporate image as an importantfactor in the overall evaluation ofthe service and the company(Gronroos, 1984). The relation-ship between corporate image,service quality and loyalty hasbeen investigated in previousstudies. Andreassen & Lindestad(1998) noted that corporate imagehas an impact on customer’schoice of company when serviceattributes are diff icult toevaluate. Zeithaml & Bitner(1996) also asserted that imagecan influence customers’perceptions of the goods andservices offered. Even thoughprevious studies have presentedthe role and the effect ofcorporate image, it is still unclear

whether there is a directrelationship between image andconsumer behaviour (Bloemer,Ruyter & Pascal, 1998). Under-standing the role and the effect ofcorporate image in the customerretention decision is a key issuethat has received little attentionin the service marketing area.Neither the role nor the effect ofcorporate image in the airlineindustry have been fullyinvestigated yet (Nguyen &LeBlanc, 1998). Hence, airlineimage is considered as a sig-nificant variable that influencespassenger’s choice of airline inthis paper.

Methodology

Questionnaire design andmeasurements

To develop the SERVQUAL scale,Parasuraman et a l. ( 1 9 8 8 )gathered data from five differentservice categories. Even thoughthese categories represent abroad range of services,SERVQUAL’s five dimensionsand 22 item scales drawn fromthose industries are difficult toapply to airlines. This is becausethe SERVQUAL instrument doesnot address other importantaspects of airline service such asin-fl ight meals, frequent flyerprograms, seat space andlegroom. Against this back-ground, the present studyendeavours to include theimportant determinants of airlineservice quality that have beenneglected in the previousliterature and service qualitymodels. This study strived todevelop an instrument to betterunderstand the determinants ofpassengers’ perception of airline


Tangible Dominant

IntangibleDominant

SaltSoft

DrinksDeter-gents

Cos-metics

Adver-tising

agencies

Airlines Invest-ment

management

Con-sulting

Teaching

Auto-mobiles

Fast-food outlets

Figure 1: Scale of market entitiesSource: Shostack, 1977, p. 77.

service quality. To get acquaintedwith the characteristics of airlineservices and to identify theimportant factors involved, aninvestigative study related toairline service quality wasundertaken.

This study adapted theSERVQUAL scale to the specificcontext of aviation by generatingadditional quality relatedmeasures or items other than theones already included in theSERVQUAL instrument. Thisstudy changed the measurementitems and the dimensions todevelop a more appropriate scalefor measuring airline servicequality. To develop airline servicequality measures, in-depthinterviews and focus groups wereheld with airline staff andpassengers. In the interviews,people were asked about airlineservices – particularly what kindof services airlines provide andpassengers receive from flightreservation to arriving at thefinal destination. In addition,they were asked how

SERVQUAL’s dimensions anditems could be adapted tomeasure airline service quality.Respondents were also asked tosuggest service quality items thatwere not included in theSERVQUAL instrument.

A pilot study was conducted inorder to see if any of thestatements are difficult forsubjects to understand and toassess face validity. A number ofsamples of Australian inter-national passengers who haverecent experience of internationaltravel were used in the pilotsurvey. Passengers were asked tocomplete the questionnaire andgive their overall comments aboutthe questionnaire. Based on thepassengers’ comments, onerevision was made. Severalpassengers mentioned that twoitems, ‘variety of routes’ and‘understanding the specific needsof passengers’, were difficult toevaluate with their experienceand knowledge. Therefore, thesetwo measurement items weredeleted on the final survey

questionnaire, so the finalquestionnaire contained 22measurement items. The airlineservice quality items drawn fromthese interviews and pilot studywere examined by academicsfamiliar with the airline industryand questionnaire design. Theseled to the development of servicequality measurement itemssuitable for the airline industry.

Service quality was measured by22 measurement items andairline image was measured byasking passengers threemeasurement items as shown inTable 1. Behavioural intentionswere measured using passengers’intention to repurchase andwillingness to recommend theairline to other people. All theitems were measured using a 7-point Likert-type scale.

Sample

The survey was conducted at theinternational terminal (T1) ofSydney Airport in September2003. Sampling was done by


Table 1: Measurement Items.

Measures Variables Scale Items

Up-to-date aircraft and in-flight facility Meal service (items, tastes, freshness, quantity, appearance, etc)Seating comfort Seat space and LegroomIn-flight entertainment services (books, newspapers, movies, magazines, etc.)Convenience of reservation and ticketing Promptness and accuracy of reservation and ticketingFrequent flyer programOn-time performance Sincere interest in solving problems (flight cancellation, baggage loss, etc.) 7-point

Service Safety record Likert 22 itemsQuality Chcek-in service (waiting time, efficiency, etc) Scale

Promptness and accuracy of baggage deliveryThe amount imposed for overweight baggage Providing seat that passengers preferNeat appearance of employee Employees who are willing to help passengersCourtesy of employeesEmployees who have the knowledge to answer passengers’ questionsGive passengers personal attentionConvenient flight scheduleNon-stop flight

Airline I have always had a good impression of this airline 7-pointImage I believe that this airline has a better image than its competitors Likert 3 items

In my opinion, this airline has a good image in the minds of passengers ScaleBehavioural Would you consider flying on this airline again in the future? 7-pointIntentions Would you recommend this airline to other people? Likert 2 items

Scale


Table 2: Passenger Profiles.

Attributes Distribution Sample Number Frequency (%)

Gender Male 276 55.1%Female 223 44.5%Missing 2 0.4%

Age Less than 20 39 7.8%20 - 29 137 27.3%30 - 39 80 16.0%40 - 49 82 16.4%50 - 59 91 18.2%60 and over 68 13.6%Missing 4 0.8%

Occupation Professional 72 14.4%Student 76 15.2%Management 52 10.4%Housewife 29 5.8%Employee of company 97 19.4%Government employee 38 7.6%Private business 60 12.0%Others 71 14.2%Missing 6 1.2%

Income AUD 17,999 or less 43 8.6%AUD 18,000 – 35,999 76 15.2%AUD 36,000 – 53,999 106 21.2%AUD 54,000 – 71,999 85 17.0%AUD 72,000 or more 164 32.7%Missing 27 5.4%

Note: $1 AUD is equivalent to $0.75 USD (in April, 2004)

Table 3: The Result of Factor Analysis.Factor Eigen Cumulative

Factor Variables loadings value % of Variance

Reliability Courtesy of employees (E1) .871and Employees who are willing to help passengers (E2) .855

customer Employees who have the knowledge to answer passengers’ service questions (E3) .811

(Factor 1) Give passengers personal attention (E4) .723 10.576 48.072Neat appearance of employee (E5) .716Safety of flying (E6) .636Sincere interest in solving problems (E7) .623On-time performance (E8) .543

Convenience Convenience of reservation and ticketing (A1) .791and Promptness and accuracy of reservation and ticketing (A2) .783

accessibility Chcek-in service (A3) .664(Factor 2) Frequent flyer program (A4) .602 1.548 55.106

Promptness and accuracy of baggage deliver (A5) .586Non-stop flight (A6) .505Convenient flight schedule (A7) .500Providing seat that passengers prefer (A8) .497The amount imposed for overweight baggage (A9) .350

In-flight Seating comfort (F1) .833service Seat space and Legroom (F2) .824

(Factor 3) Meal service (F3) .709 1.284 60.944In-flight entertainment services (F4) .556Up-to-date aircraft and in-flight facility (F5) .523

interviewing randomly selectedpassengers, at different times ofthe day, on every day of the week,over a two week period. To reducethe refusals to participate or to

answer specific questions, themembers of the survey teamcontacted passengers politely byexplaining the purpose andcontribution of research. The

data was gathered fromAustralian internationalpassengers who had admitted tohaving been on at least oneinternational flight in the pasttwelve months. A total of 600questionnaires were distributedto Australian internationalpassengers. Of the 600questionnaires, 554 completedquestionnaires were collected and53 questionnaires were incom-plete. Hence, 501 questionnaireswere used for data analysis. Thepassenger profiles are presentedin Table 2. The distribution interms of age, occupation, andincome factors seem reasonable.

Analysis and Results

Factor analysis results

Exploratory factor analysis wasused for airline service qualitymeasures to determine thedimension of airline servicequality. Factor analysis is ageneral name denoting a class ofprocedures primarily used fordata reduction and sum-marisation (Malhotra, Hall, Shaw& Crisp, 1996). In the factoranalysis, principal components


A1

A2

A3

A4

A5

A6

A7

A8

A9

F1 F2 F3 F4 F5

I1 I2 I3 B1 B2

E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8

Reliability and customer service

Convenience and accessibility

In-flight service

Airline image Behavioural intentions

Figure 2: Structural equation model

is best described by threedimensions, called “reliabilityand customer service”(Dimension 1), “convenience andaccessibility” (Dimension 2), and“in-flight service” (Dimension 3).Each service dimension ismodelled as a latent variable,which is further described by anumber of observed variables asshown in Figure 2.

• Dimension 1 (reliability andcustomer service): from E1through E8

• Dimension 2 (convenience andaccessibility): from A1 throughA9

• Dimension 3 (in-flight service):from F1 through F5

Observed variables, e.g., E1 ~ E8

are based on passengers’ actualresponses to correspondingmeasurement items on thesurvey form. Observed variablesin the same group, e.g., A1 ~ A9,are used as indicators of thecorresponding service dimension,i.e. convenience and accessibility.Airline image and behaviouralintentions are also representedby observed variables, i.e. I1 ~ I3and B1 ~ B2 calculated frompassengers’ survey responses.

The proposed conceptualframework was analysed usingStructural Equation Modeling.Structural Equation Modeling(SEM) is one of the most effectiveand reliable methods for findingrelationships between variablesbecause SEM allows a completeand simultaneous test of all therelationships. It is the only

analysis with VARIMAX rotationwas utilised. Only factors witheigenvalues greater than 1 wereretained. The overall pattern ofrotated factor loadings suggesteda three-dimensional solution andfactors are labelled as follows:“reliability and customer service”(Dimension 1), “convenience andaccessibility” (Dimension 2), and“in-flight service” (Dimension 3).Those three factors were used asairline service dimensionsrepresenting latent variables,which will later be used in thestructural equation model. Theresult of factor analysis forservice quality items is presentedin Table 3.

The structural equationmodel

Previous studies have shown thatperceived service quality has adirect impact on forming theimage of a company. Forexample, Nguyen & Leblanc(1998) asserted that bankcustomers who receiving higherlevels of service quality, form acorresponding favourable image,in the banking services industry.It is generally recognised thatmany aspects of corporate imageare derived from past experience,and word-of-mouth communi-cations. However, providinghigher service quality can have adirect effect on forming afavourable image of a company.This study seeks to investigatethe formation of airline imagebased on passengers’ experiencesof airline services. Hence, thispaper proposes and tests aconceptual framework thatinvestigates the relationshipbetween individual dimensions ofairline service quality, airlineimage, and passengers’behavioural intentions as shownin Figure 2.

The model hypothesises a causalstructure among a set of latentvariables and observed variables,which are used as indicators ofthese latent variables. All thepaths are hypothesised to bepositive. Factor analysissuggested airline service quality


Table 4: Reliability of Measures.

Measure Cronbach

Reliability and customer service .9336Convenience and accessibility .8595In-flight service .8549Airline image .9077Behavioural intention .9452

Table 5: The Result of Correlation Analysis.

RC CA IS AI BI

Reliability and customer service (RC) 1.000Convenience and accessibility (CA) .748* 1.000In-flight service (IS) .648* .670* 1.000Airline image (AI) .471* .493* .506* 1.000Behavioural intention (BI) .507* .492* .473* .727* 1.000

Note: * Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

analysis that allows a completeand simultaneous test of all therelationships when thephenomena of interest arecomplex and multidimensional(Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001). Toanalyse the data and to verify thehypotheses, SPSS 11.5 andAMOS 4.01 statistical softwarewere used. AMOS is a statisticalsoftware package that computesthe general approach to dataanalysis known as structuralequation modeling.

Reliability of measures

The reliability of the model andits internal consistency requirestatistical verification. C r o n b a c h ’ salpha was used to assess internalconsistency. Cronbach’s alpha isthe average of all possible split-half coefficients resulting fromdifferent ways of splitting thescale items and a value of 0.6 orless generally indicates unsatis-factory consistency reliability(Marhotra et al. , 1996). TheCronbach’s alpha of each measureis presented in Table 4. Theinternal consistency reliability ofeach measure was higher than0.8, which implies the reliabilityof the measure is very high.

Correlation analysis

Correlation analysis wasconducted between three airlineservice dimensions, airline imageand passengers’ behaviouralintentions. The relationshipsbetween the variables wereanalysed using Pearson cor-relation coefficients. The resultas shown in Table 5 showed thatthree dimensions of air lineservice quality and airline imagehad positive correlations withbehavioural intentions at the0.01 level of statisticalsignificance.

Model fitness

Generally in Structural EquationModeling, the fit of the modelevaluated by Chi-square measureis not always straightforward,because Chi-square is verysensitive to the sample size. Due

to this drawback, various kinds offit indexes have been developedthat are independent of samplesize (Hoyle, 1995; Marsh, Balla &McDonald, 1988). Among variousfit indexes, the Tucker-LewisIndex (TLI) and the ComparatveFit Index (CFI) are relativelyunaffected by sample size (Marshet al., 1988). The model developedhere has a relatively largesample size and various indexeswere used here to assess the fit ofthe model in this study, includingGoodness-of-Fit Index (GFI),Adjusted Goodness-of-Fit Index(AGFI), Tucker-Lewis Index(TLI), Comparative Fit Index(CFI), and Root Mean SquareError of Approximation(RMSEA). The fit of the con-ceptual model is presented inTable 6. The theoretical modelprovided an excellent fit to thedata on a number of fit statistics.

Testing hypotheses

Except for one causal path, allthe hypothesised relationshipswere statistically significant(p<0.05). The one statisticallyinsignificant path was the effectof the dimension of reliability andcustomer service on airlineimage. In this model, significantrelationships were found betweenthe dimension of convenience andaccessibility, the dimension of in-flight service, airline image, and

behavioural intentions. Theresult of hypotheses testing ispresented in Table 7.

The dimension of convenienceand accessibility was found tohave a positive effect on airlineimage. This result indicates thatif air passengers are satisfiedwith services related to con-venience and accessibility, theyare more likely to form a strongimage of that airline. In-flightservice had a positive effect onairline image. This f indingimplies that in-flight service isone of the key drivers of formingairline image. Airline image hada significant positive influenceon behavioural intentions. Thisimplies that passengers who forma positive overall impression ofthe image of the airline are morelikely to fly the airline again andrecommend the airline to others.The analysis also showed thatthe dimension of convenience andaccessibility and the dimension ofin-flight service had a positiveinfluence on passengers’behavioural intentions throughairline image. This findingsuggests that the dimension ofconvenience and accessibilityand the dimension of in-flightservice influence passengers’repurchase intention and theintention to recommend theairline to others indirectly, bymeans of airline image.


Table 6: Goodness of Fit Measures.Fit

Measure 2 GFI AGFI TLI CFI RMSEA

Value 850.580 0.890 0.862 0.935 0.944 0.061(d.f. = 301, p = .000)

Table 7: The Result of Hypotheses Testing.Standardised P

Relationships regression weights values Results

Reliability and customer service dimension -Airline image 0.013 0.882 Not supported

Convenience and accessibility dimension -Airline image 0.287 0.013 Supported

In-flight service dimension -Airline image 0.353 0.000 Supported

Airline image - Behavioural intentions 0.793 0.000 Supported

Although the dimension ofreliability and customer servicewas hypothesised to have apositive influence on airlineimage, the analysis showed thatit was statistically insignificant.The possible explanation is thatmost international airlinesoperating from/to Australia havegood reliability and providesimilar customer services at ahigh lead. Therefore, there is noairline differentiation on thevariables of this dimension. Inaddition, it is possible that notmany passengers have ex-perienced problems such as flightcancellation or baggage loss. Ifthere are few passengers havingproblems, it may be difficult formost passengers to evaluate somefactors such as ‘sincere interestin solving problems’ , ‘givepassengers personal attention’,and ‘employees who are willing tohelp passengers’. These mightreflect on passenger surveys andhence results suggested that thedimension of reliability andcustomer service is not animportant driver of forming afavourable image of the airline.

Marketing implications

This paper provides somepractical implications for airlinemarketing managers. Firstly, itis essential to meet passengers’expectations to improve servicequality. The analysis showedthat two factors, the dimension ofin-flight service and thedimension of convenience andaccessibility were significantdrivers of airline image, whichdirectly influence passengers’behavioural intentions. Althoughneither of the two factors had adirect effect on passengers’

behavioural intentions, airlinemarketers should realise thatimprovements in these twofactors would enhancepassengers’ repurchase intentionand their recommendation toother passengers via a favourableairline image. Airline marketersshould allocate appropriateresources to the variablesinvolved in these two factors. Todo so, airline marketers need todeliver all the promises theymake to meet passengers’expectations, because passengers’basic expectations are related tothe service that is promised topassengers. In addition, airlinemarketers should developstrategies to improve servicequality such as meetingpassengers’ desired service levels,improving the qual ity of in -fl ight meal, solving serviceproblems effectively, developingconvenient reservation andticketing system, makingconvenient schedules forpassengers, preventing serviceproblems from occurring and soon. These strategies will enhanceairline image and will result inkeeping existing passengers andenticing passengers from otherairlines.

Secondly, this paper hasimportant implications regardingairline image. The analysisshowed that airline image had asignificant effect on passengers’behavioural intentions. This

indicates that Australianinternational passengers wouldrespond to strategies thathighlight a favourable image intheir choice of airlines. Therefore,the inference for airlinemarketers is to continue toemphasise building a favourableimage as a means of improvingpassengers’ repurchase rate andtheir recommendation to otherpassengers.

Finally, this paper showed thatreliability and customer service isnot a significant driver ofAustralian internationalpassengers’ airline image for-mation. Although the effect ofreliability and customer servicedimension was not statisticallyvalidated in this paper, airlinemarketers must not overlook thisd imension. In particular,reliability is one of the mostimportant requirements of airlineoperations. The relationshipbetween the dimension ofreliability and customer serviceand airline image was notsupported in this paper becauseit is difficult for passengers todifferentiate airlines on thisdimension. Most internationalairlines provide very similarcustomer service and have goodre liability. However, ifpassengers recognise the dif-ference in this service dimensionby receiving inferior customerservices and reliability, thismight induce the formation of a


negative airline image.Therefore, airlines operatingfrom/to Australia should strive tokeep a good safety record and on-time performance in order toattract potential passengers.

Conclusions

This study investigated therelationships between individualdimensions of airline servicequality, air line image andpassengers’ behavioural inten-tions. Based on the proposedconceptual framework of thelinkages between constructs, allhypothesised relationshipsappeared to be statisticallysignificant except for one causalpath. This study disclosed thatthere were significant relation-ships between the dimension ofconvenience and accessibility, thedimension of in-flight service,airline image and passengers’behavioural intentions. Thesevariables were directly orindirectly related to passengers’repurchase intentions and word-of-mouth communications.

Results of this paper imply thatairline marketing managersshould develop various strategiesto guarantee providing qualityservices to passengers becauseairline service dimensions werefound to have significant andpositive influences on airlineimage and passengers’behavioural intentions. Failureto provide quality services topassengers may damage theformation of airline image andcause negative impact onpassengers’ behaviouralintentions.

There are some limitations andadditional research areas ofinterest remaining for futurestudies. Firstly, this study hasmainly focused on economy classpassengers. Compared toeconomy passengers, not manyfirst class and business classpassengers were contacted. Theeffect of individual servicedimensions could be differentbetween first class, businessclass, and economy class

passengers. Therefore, additionalempirical studies could beconducted to see if there aredifferences in the effect ofindividual dimension of servicequality between cabin classes.

Secondly, this study was limitedin the context of airline servicesfor international passengers.Domestic passengers’ perceptionof service quality and behaviouralintentions might be differentfrom that of internationalpassengers. Hence, an empiricalexamination needs to assess howdomestic passengers’ perceptionof service quality and behaviouralintentions are different frominternational passengers.

Finally, the formation of airlineimage and passengers’

behavioural intentions mightdiffer according to demographicfeatures such as gender, income,age, and education level. Thus,future research that includes theanalysis of demographic variableswith respect to airline servicequality, airline image, andpassengers’ behaviouralintentions would be valuable.

Acknowledgements

The assistance and co-operationof Sydney Airport for permissionto conduct the survey of thisstudy is very much appreciatedby the authors.

ReferencesAlotaibi, K.F. (1992). An empirical investigation of passenger

diversity, airline service quality, and passenger satisfaction.Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. Arizona State University, AZ.

Andreassen, T.W., & Lindestad, B. (1998). Customer loyalty andcomplex services: The impact of corporate image on quality,customer satisfaction and loyalty for customers with varyingdegrees of service expertise. International Journal of ServiceIndustry Management, 9(1), 7-23.

Bitner, M.J., & Hubbert, A.R. (1994). Service quality: New directionsin theory and practice. In R.T. Rust & R. Oliver (Eds.),Encounter satisfaction versus overall satisfaction versus quality(pp. 77). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Bloemer, J., Ruyter, K., & Pascal, P. (1998). Investigating drivers ofbank loyalty: The complex relationship between image, servicequality and satisfaction. International Journal of BankMarketing, 16(7), 276-286.

Carman, J.M. (1990). Consumer perceptions of service quality: Anassessment of SERVQUAL dimensions. Journal of Retailing,66(1), 235-255.

Chang, Y.H., & Yeh, C.H. (2002). A survey analysis of service qualityfor domestic airlines. European Journal of OperationalResearch, 139(1), 166-177.

Chen, K.J. (1997). Consumer tolerance zone: Implications onPhilippine Airlines domestic service delivery. Journal of GlobalMarketing, 11(2), 93-105.

Connor, D., & Davidson, J. (1997). Marketing your consulting andprofessional services. New York: John Wiley and Sons.


Cronin, J.J., & Taylor, S.A. (1992). Measuring service quality: Areexamination and extension. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 55-68.

Dowling, G.R. (1994). Corporate reputation. New York: LongmanPublishing.

Fombrun, C.J., & Shanley, M. (1996). What’s in a name? Reputationbuilding and corporate strategy. Academy of ManagementJournal, 33, 210-250.

Goodman, J. (1989). The nature of customer satisfaction. QualityProgress, 22(2), 37-40.

Gronroos, C. (1984). A service quality model and its marketingimplications. European Journal of Marketing, 18(4), 36-44.

Haynes, R., & Percy, J. (1994). Perception paradox: Airline servicequality issues. Proceedings of Decision Sciences Institute 1994Annual Meeting, 3, 1950-1952.

Hoyle, R.H. (1995). Structural Equation Modelling: Concepts, issues,and applications. Thousand Oaks, California: SagePublications.

Kaynak, E., Kucukemiroglu, O., & Kara. A. (1994). Consumers’perceptions of airlines: A correspondence analysis approach in aglobal airline industry. Management International Review, 34,235-254.

Keller, K. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managingcustomer based equity. Journal of Marketing, 1(1), 1-22.

Malhotra, N.K., Hall, J., Shaw, M., & Crisp, M. (1996). M a r k e t i n gresearch: An applied orientation. Sydney: Prentice Hall.

Marsh, H.W., Balla, J.R., & McDonald, R.P. (1988). Goodness-of-fitindexes in confirmatory factor analysis: The effect of samplesize. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 391-410.

Nguyen, N., & LeBlanc, G. (1998). The mediating role of corporateimage on customers’ retention decisions: An investigation infinancial services. International Journal of Bank Marketing,16(2), 52-65.

Ostrowski, P.L., O’Brien T.V., & Gordon G.L. (1993). Service qualityand customer loyalty in the commercial airline industry.Journal of Travel Research, 32(2), 16-24.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A., & Berry, L.L. (1988). SERVQUAL:A multiple-item scale for measuring customer perceptions ofservice quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12-40.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L.L. (1991). Refinementand reassessment of the SERVQUAL scale. Journal ofRetailing, 67(4), 420-450.

Patterson, P.G., & Spreng R.W. (1997). Modelling the relationshipbetween perceived value, satisfaction, and repurchaseintentions in business-to-business, services context: Anempirical examination. International Journal of ServiceIndustry Management, 8(5), 414-434.

Shostack, G.L. (1977). Breaking free from product marketing.Journal of Marketing, 41(2), 73-80.

Sultan, F., & Simpson, M.C. (2000). International service variants:Airline passenger expectations and perceptions of servicequality. Journal of Services Marketing, 14(3), 188-216.

Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics.Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Tsaur, S.H., Chang T.Y., & Yen, C.H. (2002). The evaluation ofairline service quality by fuzzy MCDM. Tourism Management,23, 107-115.

Zeithaml, V.A., & Bitner, M.J. (1996). Services marketing. New York:McGraw-Hill.

Documents

Effects of Airline Service Quality on Airline Image and Behavioural Intention