mvessay.com · web viewthe relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction: the...

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SERVICE QUALITY AND CUSTOMER

SATISFACTION: THE CASE OF MUONG THANH HOTEL, HANOI

1. CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCING THE STUDY

1.1. Background of research topic

Academics and practitioners have progressively noticed service performance in the

hospitality field. Upchurch (2008) stated that from an academic view, studies in the hospitality

field have been regarded as a subject of multi-disciplinary investigation and provided knowledge

into some sectors like customer attitude, economics, marketing, education, and the like. When

considering the practical view, many academic projects in the hotel industry have been

conducted, which is regarded as a primary area of research increasingly over the globe. For

example, according to the International Council on Hotel (1999), in the United States, there has

been an increase in hundreds of projects associating with the hotel industry, conducted by

tertiary academics.

Client gratification is commercial thinking that leads to the constitution of benefits for

clients, expecting and administrating their anticipations and illustrating capability and credibility

to fulfill demands. It is essential to understand and to expect the client's desires and to be capable

of pleasing them so that client gratification can be obtained. Businesses that are capable of

comprehending and fulfill clients' demands can gain more beneficial profits than organizations

that can not perceive and serve them (Barsky & Nash, 2003). Because the price of getting new

clients is more significant than the price of maintaining the present customers, employers should

focus on keeping current clients by exercising efficient methods of client gratification and

commitment. It is particularly correct in the hospitality field. Currently, offering and maintaining

client contentment are significant difficulties for employers in the hospitality field. Lam & Zhang

(1999), Yen & Su (2004) stated that client demands for good merchandises and performance in

the hospitality field have turned out to be essential to experts. In the hotel industry, good

connections can result in client's superior loyalty and raise their profit. Choi & Chu (2001)

maintained that continuing and reciprocated beneficial correlations between clients and the

hospitality institution are getting increasingly significant as a result of the significantly positive

relationship between customers' general gratification degrees and the chances of their reciprocal

benefits to the similar institution. Jones et al. (2001) claimed that hospitality organizations are

raising their funds to enhance performance features and the comprehensible benefits for

customers to obtain superior guest gratification and commitment, hence leading to excellent

correlations with each client. Kim et al. (2001) stated that the correlation aspect influences

positively on customers' feelings; it gives positive verbal promotion and profit repeated customer

proportions.

The hospitality field has achieved numerous significant successes after the Vietnamese

authority changed its commercial policy from a command economy to a market economy in

1986, which is named the "New Innovation" policy. The nation provides a good instance of a

transition country (Pham, 2013). Bui & Holliffe (2011), Lai & Vinh (2013) stated that Vietnam

has turned out to be a prevalent tourist location for global travelers, and its hospitality field has

developed continuously in recent years.

Notwithstanding, it seems that study in the hospitality sector can not keep up with

practical life because it examines in the environment of developing nations such as Vietnam, and

this is only the situation for Hanoi. Eventually, it is crucial to focus on attempts to specifically

investigating service operation and guest gratification in the tourism field. The perceptions and

understanding achieved from such empirical study are fundamental for practitioners and

authority to improve the hospitality field in Hanoi; specifically, it is Muong Thanh hotel.

1.2. Aims

The investigation aims are two-fold. First of all, it analyses the perceptions and

evaluation of service operation in Muong Thanh hotel (Hanoi, Vietnam). Additionally, the

correlation between service operation and guest gratification is investigated.

1.3. Research question and hypotheses

The investigation aims to answer the question: What are the factors pertaining to service

quality influence the satisfaction of customers when staying in Muong Thanh Hotel, Hanoi?

Even though there exist multiple conceptual models concerning service quality, the

SERVQUAL model proposed by Parasuraman et al. (1985) dominates the existing research

papers on service quality. SERVQUAL has five levels, and it measures service quality by

calculating the gap between the expectation and experience of customers. This method is

developed by a group investigating the marketing aspect, including Berry, Parasuraman, and

Zeithaml (1985). The model identifies five constructs of service quality that customers consider

to be the most important while assessing any types of services as follows

Tangibles: The outlook of the infrastructures, equipment, employees,

transportation, and traditional materials.

Reliability: the ability to satisfy demands credibly and precisely.

Responsiveness: the willingness to please customers and provide services quickly.

Assurance: the knowledge and behavior of employees and the capability of

creating joys and trust to the customers.

Empathy: The attention not only to everyone but also to individual customers.

Five hypotheses were developed as follows to answer the above investigation questions:

H1: Tangibles has a significant relationship with customer satisfaction.

H2: Reliability has a significant relationship with customer satisfaction.

H3: Responsiveness has a significant relationship with customer satisfaction.

H4: Assurance has a significant relationship with customer satisfaction.

H5: Empathy has a significant relationship with customer satisfaction.

2. CHAPTER 2: MAPPING THE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK – A LITERATURE

REVIEW

2.1. Customer satisfaction

In the literature, for over three decades, there has been much attempt to define the

concept of “customer satisfaction”. According to Oliver (1980, p. 460), satisfaction refers to “a

function of an initial standard and some perceived discrepancy from the initial reference point”.

Customer satisfaction was considered by scholars to be an antecedent to customer loyalty, and

thus, a crucial determinant of a firm’s performance and profitability (Heskett, Sasser and

Schlesinger, 1997). Generally speaking, there are two main approaches to defining customer

satisfaction. Some of the scholars see customer satisfaction as an outcome. For instance,

Churchill and Surprenant (1982) described the concept as an outcome of purchase and

consumption stemming from the customers’ juxtaposition of costs and rewards of their shopping

with reference to the expected consequences. In addition, Westbook (1981) considered customer

satisfaction to be an emotional response that a customer has when he or she experiences a service

or a product. The definition proposed by Churchill and Suprenant (1982) indicates that

satisfaction is reliant on a cognitive process of collating what purchasers are offered (rewards)

and what they exchange to obtain the service or product (cost). On the other hand, the latter

description considers customer satisfaction to be an emotional feeling stemming from a process

of evaluation. Woodruff et al. (1991) also adopted the same approach to defining the term.

Other researchers, on the other hand, regard customer satisfaction as a process. Tse and

Wilton (1988) defined customer satisfaction as customers’ reaction to the assessment of the

perceived difference between their expectation and the actual quality of a service/ product after

using it. Oliver (1980) was among the first scholars to describe in details how satisfaction

judgements are delivered by customers from the lens of the expectation confirmation theory.

Firstly, customers build up particular expectations of the commodity or service before they make

the purchase decision. After that, their usage of the product or service uncovers a perceived

quality degree affected by their expectations under the condition that the discrepancy between

expectation and real quality is modest. Thirdly, perceived quality might verify or repudiate pre-

purchase expectations.

In the literature, there have been several studies confirming that in service-based

industries, the thriving of a firm is decided by its capability to satisfy the needs of their guests in

a consistent and continual manner (Azmian, Nasrinahr, and Foroughi, 2012). In the hotel

segment, the service provided for customers entails mixed characteristics of perishable services

and tangible products. Subsequently, customer satisfaction is shaped upon both services and

products (Forozia, Zadeh and Gilani, 2013).

As postulated by Irawan (2008), there are three factors affecting customer satisfaction in

connection with a service or product. The first one is emotional factor, which is of utmost

importance since customer satisfaction can be reliant on the degree of connectedness with the

commodities or services they receive. Albeit extremely intangible, this factor exerts a significant

effect on customer satisfaction. The second factor to be taken into account is the ease of

obtaining a service or product. Specifically, if a customer finds it challenging to communicate

with the provider of a service or product, this might wield a negative influence on his or her

satisfaction. The last factor is service quality, which will be discussed in details later in this

chapter (Irawan, 2008). According to Poon and Low (2015), customer satisfaction, in the

hospitality industry, is reliant on accommodation, recreational activities, hospitality, additional

services, safety, food and beverage, innovation, location, transportation and appearance, coupled

with more fundamental elements like payment or pricing.

2.2. Service quality

2.2.1. The concept “Service quality”

The concept of service quality has kindled significant interest in the literature due to the

challenges of measuring and conceptualizing it in the absence of overall consensus among

scholars (Wisniewski, 2001). There exist varying schools of thoughts when it comes to defining

the term. One frequently-adopted approach is describing the concept as the degree to which a

service satisfies the needs or expectations of purchasers (Lewis and Mitchell, 1990).

Subsequently, service quality is considered to be the discrepancy between perceived service and

customer expectations. If customer expectations of the service are higher than its actual

performance, perceived quality is not sufficiently satisfactory and subsequently, customers

would feel dissatisfied (Parasuraman et al. 1985).

2.2.2. The SERVQUAL model and the RATER dimensions

2.2.2.1. The SERVQUAL model

Several scholars have formulated their own models identifying different constructs of

service quality measurement. For instance, in 1984, the Nordic model was popularized by

Gronroos (1984). According to the model, customers take into account three components of

service quality, namely image, functional quality and technical quality. However, the

SERVQUAL model by Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1985) is the best-known framework

which has been adopted in a wide array of research papers. To formulate the SERVQUAL

model, the authors designed a list of questions so that customers can rate the services with

regards to their expectation and the actual performance. After analyzing the datasets, the revised

scale was distributed to a second group of respondents, and the questions were tested.

Eventually, a multi-item scale that measures five fundamental constructs including tangibles,

reliability, empathy, responsiveness and assurance was suggested Parasuraman, Zeithaml and

Berry (1985).

The primary purpose of the model is to function as a diagnostic methodology for

revealing the strengths and limitations of a firm’s service quality and at the same time,

recognizing the principle requirements for providing customers with excellent service quality.

The model highlights the comparative differentiation in terms of service quality in reference to

the perceptions and expectations of customers towards the service they receive, as they evaluate

the actual performance of the service acquired in a specified period of time (Parasuraman,

Zeithaml and Berry, 1985). The discrepancy between customer expectations and perceptions of

service quality is applicable to the model. And the results decide the perceived service quality. If

the gap is small, it means that customers feel satisfied with the service quality.

The SERVQUAL model has been tested, adjusted and extended by several researchers

(Knutson et al., 1990; Cronin and Taylor, 1992). Those who disapprove of the model argued that

it has limitations in terms of the measurement and methodological facets. It concentrates on the

unidimensional construct instead of carrying out measurements on the basis of the five-

dimensional construct. For instance, Carman (1990) argued that the model should be adjusted by

changing the wording or adding items. Peter, Churchill and Brown (1993) criticized the fact that

the model largely depends on the difference in scores between customer expectation and

perception to decide their satisfaction with five primary constructs (Parasuraman, Zeithaml and

Berry, 1988). They argued that the approach leads to a low degree of reliability and restriction of

variance (which makes it difficult to display relationships with other variables). The gap score

approach adopted by the SERVQUAL model, as stated by Schneider and White (2004), also

suffers from questionable validity, specifically with regards to showing a construct is different

from other constructs. Brown, Churchill and Peter (1993) even pointed out that every issue

associated with the difference scores approach can be found in the SERVQUAL model. In terms

of content validity, as stated by Lapierre and Filiatrault (1996), the definitions of two constructs,

reliability and empathy are considered to be confusing and the reliability dimension appears to

overlap with the “technical quality” dimension proposed by Gronroos (1984). In addition, while

tangible and reliability appear to be distinct constructs, the rest of the constructs seem to embody

one single dimension (Getty and Thompson, 1994).

Such criticisms have given rise to multiple industry-specific models. For instance, the

LODGSERV model developed by Knutson et al. (1990) contains 26 lodging-related items and is

aimed at measuring customer expectation in the lodging segment. Nonetheless, the adoption of

the model remains limited in the hospitality industry since it was only utilized in a modest

quantity of research papers (Lockyer, 2003). Additionally, on the basis of the SERQUAL model,

Stevens et al. (1995) proposed a service quality model for the restaurant segment called

DINESERV. The researchers revealed that for restaurants, the most crucial dimension of service

quality is reliability. It is also worth mentioning the SERVPERF model by Cronin and Taylor

(1992), which is regarded as an alternative of the traditional service quality model. Jain and

Gupta (2004) suggested that this model is more parsimonious than the model proposed by

Parsuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1985) since it has fewer questions and provides a better

explanation for the service quality dimensions.

Although there exist several debated methodological issues surrounding the SERVQUAL

model, it is considered to be the most frequently used framework and probably the most

powerful model of service quality measurement (Ahmad, Ahmad and Papastathopoulos, 2019). It

was even argued that “service quality has effectively become SERVQUAL and vice versa”

(Woodall, 2001). One of the main reasons for such a popular application is that the model seeks

to comprehend general factors of service quality that are popular for several services and

applicable to varying industries (Polyakova and Mirza, 2015). In addition, as postulated by

Carrillat, Jaramillo and Mulki (2017), who conducted a meta-analytic study on the adoption of

two service quality models (SERVPERF and SERVQUAL) in 17 years across five continents,

the SERVQUAL model is useful for practitioners because of its richer diagnostic value.

Subsequently, it is generally approved that the model is a reliable predictor of service quality

(Msoka and Msoka, 2014).

2.2.2.2. The RATER dimensions

The five constructs of service quality, which are frequently referred to as the RATER

dimensions, are explained as below:

Responsiveness: This dimension represents employees’ readiness to provide assistance

for customers and offer them prompt service (Cronin and Taylor, 1992). Such a construct is

specifically important when guests have requests or complaints regarding a firm’s services

(Ahmad, Ahmad and Papstathopoulos, 2019). According to Oschell (2009), different age groups

hold different perceptions on the responsiveness dimension. Specifically, what an older customer

views as responsive and attentive might be regarded by a younger customer as unnecessary and

frustrating. It is also worth mentioning the recent study by Lo et al. (2015), which revealed that

this construct can be achieved through standardized employee training courses and service-

related procedures.

Assurance: The assurance construct revolves around employees’ courtesy and knowledge

as well as their capability to pass on confidence or trust. This is of utmost importance for firms

providing legal, health and financial services (Lu et al., 2015). According to Aleshaiwy (2015),

in the hotel segment, to optimize the assurance dimension, hotels need to display a high degree

of confidence and ensure that every customer feels secure during their stay at the property. It is

also worth mentioning the study by Wattanacharoensil and Yoopetch (2012), which seeks to

examine the service quality offered by the airline industry in Thailand. The research revealed

that while the flight attendants perform excellently in terms of the empathy construct, they are

considered to be ineffective in optimizing the assurance dimension. The reason for such a

phenomenon, as explained by the authors, is that Thailand is characterized by a strong emphasis

on personal relationship and sometimes a negligence on adhering to particular protocols – which

is highly expected by international passengers.

Tangibles: The tangibles facet of service quality refers to every tangible item of the

service provider, such as appearance of staff, facilities, equipment that customers can see and

touch, coupled with materials used to interact with customers (Howard, 1998). The application of

this construct varies across industries (Aleshaiwy, 2015). For instance, the tangibles dimension

of a hospital is manifested through the cleanness of patient rooms, the modern medical

equipment, and so on. Liang (2008) argued that in the luxury hotel segment, this construct makes

a significant contribution to service quality since luxury hotels are frequently perceived by the

public as manifesting an elegant, beautiful appearance through their facilities and employees. In

addition, Kim (2005) argued that the tangibles dimension of a golf course contributes

significantly to the satisfaction of Generation Y since they hold the greatest expectation of

service among the studied age groups.

Empathy: This dimension appears to be quite confusing from some scholars. It is related

to the company’s understanding the demands of each customer, and delivery the service in a

caring manner (Presbury, 2009). Small-sized enterprises perform better than their larger

competitors in terms of treating their consumers as individuals. In the context of the hospitality

industry, this construct entails a high degree of communication between employees and guests so

that employees can grasp a profound understanding of customers’ demands, and thereby,

offering them enough attention (Shafiq, Mostafiz and Taniguchi, 2019). In addition, Mbuthi,

Muthoni and Muchina (2013), who studied the relationship between service quality and

satisfaction of domestic guests in Kenya’s hotels, pointed out that even when customers feel

contented with the physical aspects of their hotel, they might still rate their overall experience as

not satisfactory if they feel dissatisfied with the empathy dimension of the service.

Reliability: The reliability construct refers to the service provider’s capability to deliver

the promised service in a dependable, consistent and accurate fashion (Miyoung and Haemoon,

1998). As posited by Markovic and Jankovic (2013), this dimension makes a significant

contribution to customer satisfaction and might be beneficial to helping a firm generate a

competitive advantage. However, the measurement of this dimension is heavily criticized since it

takes into account the outcome of the service. In contrast, the four above-mentioned dimensions

are associated with the process of the service. Shafiq, Mostafiz and Taniguchi (2019) argued that

in the hotel industry, a firm’s inability to fulfill its promises with customers would give rise to

their negative emotions, and eventually exert a detrimental effect on the firm’s image.

2.2.3. Service quality in the hotel industry

As mentioned above, the SERVQUAL model reckons effective in measuring service

quality in several industries. Several studies also revealed that the model is beneficial to

measuring service quality of the hotel segment (Kandampully, Juwaheer and Hu, 2011; Ahmad,

Ahmad and Papastathopoulos, 2019, ABC). And some of these studies targeted at hotels located

in developing countries such as China, Mauritius, Malaysia, etc. For instance, the research paper

by Kandampully, Juwaheer and Hu (2011) adopted the SERVQUAL model to examine the

service quality gaps of nearly 1,5000 customers staying at a lodging company in Mauritius for at

least six nights. The research findings revealed that service quality wields a significant influence

on the company’s image, and thereby, affecting customer retention. It can be suggested that a

positive corporate image results in customer satisfaction. Also targeting at Mauritius, Juwaheer

(2004) was aimed at measuring the five constructs of service quality in more than 400 beach

hotels in the country. The results revealed that the service quality of these lodging companies

was rated poorly due to the lack of reliability, the attitude of hotels’ staff, the interior design of

the rooms and the surrounding areas of the hotels.

Similarly, the research paper carried out by Akbaba (2006) involved 234 hotels in

Turney. The authors pointed out that the most crucial dimension was tangibles

The study also argued that the SERVQUAL model is deemed conducive to assessing

service quality in the lodging industry. Nevertheless, it might be better if scholars make some

adjustments so that the model can be tailored

2.3. Customer gratification

Hoffman and Bateson (2010) claimed that although there are many clarities of guest

gratification, the most popular definition is that it is a guest's assessment by valuing between

typical anticipations of a service type and comprehension of a specific service by the experience

of the service. The evaluation is fundamentally formed by a model, which is named as the

expectancy disconfirmation paradigm. It is if the guest's comprehensions satisfy his

anticipations, the anticipations are considered to be stated; hence, the guest is pleased. In

contrast, if the client's comprehensions can not meet the assumptions, the assumptions are

regarded as unstated. Moreover, gratification is defined as a concluded mental state experienced

by the customer when agreed or disagreed anticipations subsist with a particular experience

transaction through service (Getty and Thompson, 1995).

Consumer gratification includes two different factors, consumer anticipations and

comprehensions (Gronroos, 1990; Williams and Uysal, 2003). Client gratification is defined by

how the merchandise satisfies consumer anticipations for the merchandise. Additionally,

consumer gratification is considered as the method that clients are pleased when they experience

service equals or surpasses their hopes (Williams and Uysal, 2003).

2.3.1. Expectations

Standards like word of mouth, individual demands, exterior interactions, and prior

experiences influence consumer's anticipations (Zeithaml et al., 1987). Moreover, additional

causes, such as consumer's actual demands and the expectations of the services, are added by

Williams and Uysal (2003). Apparent feature of comprehended risk and value will impact client

anticipation before purchasing a merchandise or service. These are the products, which have

personally, and constitute a consumer gratification in provided services and resulted in

contentment.

2.3.2. Perception

The way how a consumer thinks about a service is based only on as an assessment to high

quality in provided service by consumers (Taylor, 1994). Zeithaml et al. (1997) stated that the

perceptions of a client and where the consumer attitude to the service begins to show is the time

when a service operates and after the ending of the proceeded service.

Consumer service comprehension is combined groups of discernments conducted during

and at the finish stage of the experience, which when they fulfill or surpass anticipations from

consumer gratification.

2.4. Importance of Customer Satisfaction

For decades, customer-centered firms have placed a significant emphasis on building a

more profound understanding of their customers demands so that they can transform it into the

ability to provide their customers with what they want, or in other words, improve customer

satisfaction (Ekinci, 2004). Tam (2004) even claimed that customer satisfaction is an important

determinant of a company’s survival and thriving. In addition, as stated by Huang, Lee and Chen

(2017), a firm which continuously seeks to satisfy its customers has a higher chance of achieving

higher customer retention level as well as gaining more profitability, which arise from customer

loyalty.

Service assessment and its aspects are a challenge to investigate and evaluate it.

Moreover, it may be efficiently assessed; if consumer gratification nearly starts to be shown out,

its feature might be very significant and operates fundamentally in the extremely competitive

context. The following years will be the time when the hotel industry will provide services at

growingly perceived people, who may not be ready to experience deficient service operation;

they will make judgments and ostracize the render of service performance (Callan, 1994). This

statement matches the real clarity that the present consumer is conscientious about the demands

and wants. Current clients are dealing with difficulty relating to a wide variety of merchandise

and service, which are the foundation to maintain and underpin the guest base. Existing

businesses cope with their most challenging competition features, and things will become worse

in the following years (Kotler et al., 1996). Williams & Uysal (2003) stated that because of the

complexity of the client gratification, they are typically practiced to the operation of the tourism

service, which is palpable and unpalpable features and also challenging to work out.

Besides, previously, hospitality has been repeatedly regarded as the natural result of the

contextual and cultural properties of a particular area. In this perspective, the significance of

tourism businesses may not be able to affect need degrees and is simply refrained from the

provision of services to travelers. Marketing attempts have to be exercised to illustrate the

contextual features of the destination to obtain new clients (Le Blanc & Nguyen, 1996). The

consistent rise of the need of hospitality services, and the demand for better criteria by the

customers, has raised the competitive feature among tourism companies and show the

relationship between hospitality location attraction and the requirements of the hotel service

provisions. In this view, offering excellent services and enhancing guest gratification are

extensively realized as vital elements to increase the enterprises' operations in the hospitality

field (Barsky & Labagh, 1992; Opermann, 1998). Oh & Parks (1997) maintained that hotels that

have high service performance would eventually enhance their return. Choi & Chou (2001)

stated that because the hotel industry provides identical services, meaning that the field is very

competitive, hospitality companies have to be capable of pleasing clients superior to their

opponents. Hospitality companies must have an excellent guest gratification degree for the

service provided to gain commitment and surpass counterparts. The demands and wants of

travelers are investigated in some researches. The hotel feature comprehension is stated as the

level to which customers can have numerous services and infrastructures for their visit to a hotel.

Atkinsons (1988), McCleary et al. (1993) claimed that features like sanitation, cost, destination,

safety, individual service, tactile appeal, relaxing chances, service criteria, attractive appearance,

and prestigiousness are considered as determinants by tourists to evaluate the hotel operation.

3. CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH

3.1. Research paradigm

There exist four main forms of research philosophies, including positivism, realism,

interpretivism (Saunders et al., 2009). As stated by Sullivan (2001), positivism is related to the

the situation in which the existence of the world or knowledge is assumed to be separate from

people’s thoughts about it and the fact that science adopts objective methods to investigate what

exist in the world. Irshaidat (2019) also argued that positivism paradigm involves the generation

of hypotheses through existing theoretical frameworks and the testing of such hypotheses

through quantitative and logic-based techniques. In addition, the positivistic philosophy must not

involve the personal values of the scholar to gain a neutral result (Savigny, 2008). In this

dissertation, the philosophy of positivism is used. Subsequently, existing theoretical frameworks

and models related to service quality and customer satisfaction are used throughout this

dissertation, and on such a basis, hypotheses are proposed.

3.2. Research approach and strategy

The deductive approach first involves the formulation of hypotheses or theories and then

includes the formulation of an appropriate strategy to to test these hypotheses or theories

(Saunders et al., 2016). According to Bryman and Bell (2001), the deductive research approach

is appropriate for the philosophy of positivism and most frequently adopted in quantitative

studies. Additionally, this approach can identify the correlations among distinctive variables and

validate the proposed hypotheses (Saunders et al. 2016). In the thesis, the online questionnaire

containing open ended questions, is the only method for gathering necessary datasets. A total of

five hypotheses are proposed on the basis of the research objectives and previous research papers

by Parasuraman et al. (1985)

H1: Tangibles has a significant relationship with customer satisfaction.

H2: Reliability has a significant relationship with customer satisfaction.

H3: Responsiveness has a significant relationship with customer satisfaction.

H4: Assurance has a significant relationship with customer satisfaction.

H5: Empathy has a significant relationship with customer satisfaction.

H6: Customer satisfaction has a significant relationship with repurchase intention

H7: Customer satisfaction has a significant relationship with word of mouth

3.3. Time Horizon

A research design might be cross-sectional or longitudinal. A research that is deemed cross-

sectional investigates a specific phenomenon (sample) in a specific time span (Saunders et al.,

2016). In this dissertation, the time horizon is cross-sectional as datasets will be gathered from

customers of Muong Thanh hotel at a specific point of time.

3.4. Sampling Method

Non-probability, judgmental sampling (also known as purposive sampling) was adopted which

requires the researcher to approach specific targeted respondents who are judged appropriate to

provide the necessary information (Malhotra, 2007; Bryman, 2016). In particular, customers who

have had experiences with Muong Thanh Hotel are selected. A minimum of 100 responses will

be gathered to ensure the reliability of the thesis.

3.5. Data Collection Method

The questionnaire developed for this research is adapted from Kim-Soon et al. (2014), with few

amendments made in order to suit this research. The modifications are primarily grammatical

and sentence structure. Past tense is used in the sentences to match the context since only those

customers are contacted who had already had the service experience. At some places the helping

examples were changed to better explain the meaning. In all these changes, it is ensured that the

meaning of the questions remains the same.

The questionnaire consists of three parts: first contained filter and demographic questions which

aimed to accept responses only from the appropriate respondents. The second part sought

answers regarding the service quality of Muong Thanh Hotel. This part constituted the five

dimensions of SERVQUAL, measured on a five-point Likert scale (Cooper and Schindler, 2008;

Sekaran and Bougie, 2010), where 1 represented “strongly disagree” and 5 represented “strongly

agree.” The third part of the questionnaire sought responses on customer satisfaction on a five-

point Likert scale.

3.6. Analysis, results and discussion

3.6.1. Reliability

In order to establish the internal consistency among the items of the questionnaire reliability tests

are applied (Sekaran, 2003; Ponbamrungwong and Chandsawang, 2009). Reliability coefficient,

or Cronbach’s α, values range from 0 to 1, where a value close to 1 means higher internal

consistency and close to 0 means lower reliability (Ponbamrungwong and Chandsawang, 2009).

The Cronbach value must be at least 0.7 to ensure the reliability.

3.6.2. Correlation test

Pearson’s correlation is the coefficient used to measure the association of the independent

variables with the dependent variable (Sekaran, 2003; Pallant, 2007; Ponbamrungwong and

Chandsawang, 2009). The coefficient values range from 0 to 1, where values near to 1 indicate a

strong correlation, while those near to 0 indicate a week correlation (Ponbamrungwong and

Chandsawang, 2009).

3.6.3. Multiple linear regression

After establishing the reliability of the items and confirming a correlation between the

independent and the dependent variables, the next step was to establish whether or not, and by

how much, are the independent variables predictive of the dependent variable. This is done

through multiple linear regression (Ponbamrungwong and Chandsawang, 2009), which allows

researchers to quantify the impact of various simultaneous influences upon a single dependent

variable (Pallant, 2007).

4. CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

This chapter presents the SPSS-based analysis of the primary data and the content analysis of

the secondary data. It includes five main parts.

The section discusses the frequencies of each construct of the questionnaire, followed by a

statistically descriptive analysis. The correlations among variables are also displayed. Lastly, the

section presents the mediation analysis.

4.1.1. Frequencies

The questionnaire has a total of 25 questions. The first part of the questionnaire covers the

demographic data of the respondents (2 questions). Respondents were asked to provide

information about their age and gender. The total number of responses was 131 in which 11

responses were excluded due to the fact that these respondents did not answer all the questions

asked. As result, 120 responses were used for further analysis.

The proportions of male and female respondents are relatively equal. Men accounted for 45% of

the respondents, the figure for female customers was 50.8%. 4.2% of the respondents did not

want to reveal their gender (see Figure 1).

Male45%

Female51%

Prefer not to say 4%

Gender

Male Female Prefer not to say

Figure 1. Gender of the Respondents

In terms of the age group, the majority of the respondents are aged between 35 and 44 years old

(28.3%). 20% of the respondents belong to the 45-54 age group. The 25-34 age group is the third

popular, accounting for 17.5% of the respondents. 16 respondents are under 18 years old

(13.3%). The figures for the under 18 and above 55 age groups are 13.3% and 10.8%

respectively.

Under 1813%

18-2410%

25-3418%

35-4428%

45-5420%

Above 5511%

Age

Under 18 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 Above 55

Figure 2. Age of the Respondents

4.1.2. Descriptive Analysis

The lowest mean value is 3.45 and the highest mean value is 4.24. In order to eliminate the

question error, the researcher also checked the Skewness and Kurtosis measures. For Skewness,

the accepted value should be within -1 to +1 and for Kurtosis, it should be within -3 to +3

(Landau & Everitt, 2004). No questions are removed since the Skewness and Kurtosis measures

of all questions are within the accepted level.

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Skewness Kurtosis

Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic Std. Error

TAN1 120 1.00 5.00 3.9667 .09897 1.08414 -.859 .221 -.070 .438

TAN2 120 1.00 5.00 4.1750 .08588 .94079 -1.221 .221 1.309 .438

TAN3 120 1.00 5.00 3.4917 .07577 .83006 -.511 .221 -.092 .438

TAN4 120 2.00 5.00 4.1333 .08529 .93425 -.900 .221 -.053 .438

TAN5 120 1.00 5.00 3.4833 .08198 .89802 -.551 .221 .527 .438

REL1 120 2.00 5.00 3.5000 .06482 .71007 .072 .221 -.209 .438

REL2 120 1.00 5.00 4.0833 .06960 .76239 -1.183 .221 2.667 .438

REL3 120 2.00 5.00 4.1000 .06525 .71479 -.851 .221 1.422 .438

REL4 120 2.00 5.00 4.0500 .07376 .80805 -.772 .221 .455 .438

REL5 120 1.00 5.00 3.5083 .07001 .76692 -.256 .221 .293 .438

RES1 120 1.00 5.00 3.5250 .08110 .88842 -.589 .221 .725 .438

RES2 120 1.00 5.00 4.0833 .08980 .98376 -1.031 .221 .825 .438

RES3 120 1.00 5.00 3.5583 .07742 .84809 -.690 .221 .429 .438

RES4 120 1.00 5.00 4.1083 .08435 .92397 -.999 .221 .606 .438

RES5 120 1.00 5.00 3.9917 .09650 1.05716 -1.198 .221 1.051 .438

ASS1 120 2.00 5.00 4.1583 .08199 .89814 -.744 .221 -.409 .438

ASS2 120 1.00 5.00 3.9583 .07237 .79278 -.646 .221 .859 .438

ASS3 120 2.00 5.00 4.2417 .08368 .91666 -.901 .221 -.298 .438

EMP1 120 2.00 5.00 3.5500 .07086 .77622 -.115 .221 -.334 .438

EMP2 120 2.00 5.00 3.9667 .07192 .78786 -.780 .221 .675 .438

SAT 120 2.00 5.00 3.9833 .07483 .81975 -.807 .221 .532 .438

REP 120 1.00 5.00 3.4583 .07090 .77672 -.242 .221 .166 .438

WOM 120 1.00 5.00 3.6583 .07343 .80436 -.481 .221 .373 .438

Valid N

(listwise)

120

4.1.3. Reliability – Cronbach’s’ Alpha

After data gathering for the pilot study, the researcher has measured internal consistency, using

Cronbach’s alpha. Cronbach’s alpha is the most commonly used for measuring the internal

consistency reliability, associated with scores derived from a scale. Cronbach’s alpha is the basic

measure for reliability (Green & Salkind, 2008). Mackey & Gass (2015) defined reliability as

consistency of a score or a test. A good Cronbach’s alpha value should be more than 0.77. After

conducting the reliability test, one item of the reliable dimension is removed due to their low

level of Cronbach’s alpha.

Variables related to the tangible dimension

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's

Alpha N of Items

.834 5

Item-Total Statistics

Scale Mean if

Item Deleted

Scale

Variance if

Item Deleted

Corrected

Item-Total

Correlation

Cronbach's

Alpha if Item

Deleted

TAN1 15.28 7.818 .713 .778

TAN2 15.08 8.860 .637 .800

TAN3 15.76 9.311 .654 .798

TAN4 15.12 9.364 .538 .827

TAN5 15.77 9.021 .647 .798

No variables are removed because all the Cronbach alpha values are higher than 0.6.

Variables related to the reliable dimension

Reliability StatisticsCronbach's Alpha N of Items

.759 5

Item-Total StatisticsScale Mean if

Item Deleted

Scale Variance if

Item Deleted

Corrected Item-

Total Correlation

Cronbach's Alpha

if Item Deleted

REL1 15.74 6.126 .170 .825

REL2 15.16 4.420 .694 .653

REL3 15.14 4.980 .544 .710

REL4 15.19 4.291 .682 .654

REL5 15.73 4.701 .582 .695

The REL1 variable (My reservation was handled efficiently) is removed because the corrected

item-total correlation value is smaller than 0.3.


.825 4


Item Deleted

Scale Variance if

Item Deleted

Corrected Item-

Total Correlation

Cronbach's Alpha

if Item Deleted

REL2 11.66 3.605 .670 .771

REL3 11.64 3.862 .624 .792

REL4 11.69 3.375 .707 .753

REL5 12.23 3.743 .605 .801


Variables related to the responsive dimension


.842 5


Item Deleted

Scale Variance if

Item Deleted

Corrected Item-

Total Correlation

Cronbach's Alpha

if Item Deleted

RES1 15.74 9.034 .715 .793

RES2 15.18 8.840 .656 .808

RES3 15.71 9.771 .594 .825

RES4 15.16 9.143 .653 .809

RES5 15.27 8.588 .635 .816


Variables related to the assurance dimension


.736 3


Item Deleted

Scale Variance if

Item Deleted

Corrected Item-

Total Correlation

Cronbach's Alpha

if Item Deleted

ASS1 8.20 2.128 .585 .619

ASS2 8.40 2.477 .545 .670

ASS3 8.12 2.138 .556 .657


Variables related to the empathy dimension


.712 2


Item Deleted

Scale Variance if

Item Deleted

Corrected Item-

Total Correlation

Cronbach's Alpha

if Item Deleted

EMP1 3.97 .621 .552 .

EMP2 3.55 .603 .552 .


4.1.4. Exploratory Factor Analysis

KMO and Bartlett's TestKaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .838

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 957.566

df 171

Sig. .000

Total Variance Explained

Component

Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings

Total

% of

Variance

Cumulative

% Total

% of

Variance

Cumulative

% Total

% of

Variance

Cumulative

%

1 6.059 31.887 31.887 6.059 31.887 31.887 3.417 17.985 17.985

2 2.701 14.215 46.102 2.701 14.215 46.102 3.114 16.391 34.376

3 1.524 8.024 54.125 1.524 8.024 54.125 2.651 13.952 48.329

4 1.226 6.455 60.580 1.226 6.455 60.580 1.830 9.632 57.960

5 1.159 6.102 66.681 1.159 6.102 66.681 1.657 8.721 66.681

6 .778 4.092 70.774

7 .687 3.617 74.391

8 .631 3.319 77.709

9 .600 3.158 80.868

10 .565 2.975 83.842

11 .482 2.538 86.380

12 .425 2.239 88.619

13 .398 2.097 90.716

14 .361 1.898 92.614

15 .344 1.813 94.427

16 .332 1.749 96.176

17 .273 1.437 97.613

18 .241 1.271 98.884

19 .212 1.116 100.000

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Rotated Component Matrixa

Component

1 2 3 4 5

RES1 .774

RES3 .757

RES4 .750

RES5 .731

RES2 .711

TAN1 .814

TAN2 .793

TAN3 .761

TAN5 .724

TAN4 .674

REL3 .776

REL4 .772

REL2 .762

REL5 .710

ASS3 .805

ASS1 .779

ASS2 .567 .588

EMP1 .856

EMP2 .734


Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

a. Rotation converged in 6 iterations.

The ASS2 variable is removed.

KMO and Bartlett's TestKaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .832

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 867.312

df 153

Sig. .000

The KMO value is equal to 0.832, which indicates that the sampling is adequate. The sig value is

less than 0.05, indicating that the scale can do factor analysis.

Total Variance Explained

Component

Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings

Total

% of

Variance

Cumulative

% Total

% of

Variance

Cumulative

% Total

% of

Variance

Cumulative

%

1 5.685 31.581 31.581 5.685 31.581 31.581 3.162 17.567 17.567

2 2.659 14.771 46.352 2.659 14.771 46.352 3.077 17.093 34.661

3 1.484 8.243 54.594 1.484 8.243 54.594 2.634 14.632 49.292

4 1.181 6.563 61.158 1.181 6.563 61.158 1.669 9.274 58.566

5 1.053 5.850 67.008 1.053 5.850 67.008 1.520 8.442 67.008

6 .771 4.285 71.293

7 .687 3.815 75.108

8 .606 3.368 78.475

9 .584 3.245 81.720

10 .545 3.026 84.746

11 .475 2.637 87.383

12 .422 2.343 89.726

13 .377 2.094 91.821

14 .357 1.981 93.801

15 .343 1.908 95.709

16 .303 1.685 97.394

17 .244 1.358 98.752

18 .225 1.248 100.000


The eigenvalue of the fifth component is equal to 1.053, which is higher than 1. Rotation Sums

of Squared Loadings (Cumulative %) = 67.008% > 50 %, which means a total of 67.008% of the

variance can be explained by five components

4.1.5. Pearson Correlation

SAT

TAN Pearson Correlation 0.420*

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000

REL Pearson Correlation 0.238**


RES Pearson Correlation 0.335*


ASS Pearson Correlation 0.292**


EMP Pearson Correlation 0.380**


WOM Pearson Correlation 0.641**


REP Pearson Correlation 0.646


Table 1. Pearson Correlation

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

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

The p-values for the correlations between five dimensions of service quality and customer

satisfaction are all less than the significance level of 0.05, which indicates that the correlation

coefficients are significant. The same goes for the correlation between word-of-mouth,

repurchase intention and customer satisfaction.

4.1.6. Linear Regression

In this study, two linear regressions were conducted respectively. The first regression was to test

the relationship between the five dimensions of service quality and customer satisfaction. The

five dimensions are treated as independent variables while customer satisfaction is considered to

be dependent variables.

The second regression aimed to investigate customer satisfaction and their behavioral intention.

Customer satisfaction is regarded as independent variables, and behavioral intention is treated as

dependent variables.

4.1.6.1. Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction

Model R R

Square

Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 0.532a 0.283 0.251 0.70937

Table 2. Model Summary 1

Table 6 is used to evaluate the appropriateness of the linear regression model. As can be seen

from the table, the Adjusted R Square is 0.251, meaning 25.1% of the variance on the dependent

variables can be explained by the independent variables. According to Landau & Everitt (2004),

the higher the value of the Adjusted R Square is, the better the hypothesis is tested. In other

words, 25.1% of customer satisfaction can be elucidated by the five dimensions of service

quality.

Model Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardize

d

Coefficients

t Sig. Collinearity

Statistics

B Std.

Error

Beta Tolerance VIF

Constant 0.823 0.532 1.547 0.125

TAN 0.354 0.099 0.315 3.561 0.001 0.802 1.246

REL -0.078 0.127 -0.059 -0.614 0.541 0.683 1.465

ASS 0.108 0.094 0.103 1.151 0.252 0.780 1.282

RES 0.240 0.105 0.216 2.292 0.024 0.706 1.417

EMP 0.193 0.112 0.162 1.730 0.086 0.714 1.400

Table 8 provides necessary statistics to test explain the correlations between the five dimensions

of service quality and customer satisfaction. As can be seen from the table, the tangible and

responsive dimensions of service quality are correlated to customer satisfaction (p<0.05). This

indicates that H1 and H5 are supported and H2, H3, H4 are rejected.

4.1.6.2. Customer Satisfaction and Word of Mouth

Model R R

Square


Estimate

1 0.641a 0.411 0.406 0.61981

Table ABC is used to evaluate the appropriateness of the linear regression model. As can be seen

from the table, the Adjusted R Square is 0.406, meaning 40.6% of word of mouth can be

elucidated by customer satisfaction.


Coefficients

Standardize

d

Coefficients

t Sig. Collinearity

Statistics

B Std.

Error

Beta Tolerance VIF

Constant 1.152 0.282 4.087 0.000

SAT 0.629 0.069 0.641 9.078 0.000 1.000 1.000

Table ABC provides necessary statistics to test explain the correlation between repurchase

intention and customer satisfaction. As can be seen from the table, customer satisfaction is

significantly correlated to repurchase intention (p<0.01). This indicates that H6 is supported.

4.1.6.3. Customer Satisfaction and Repurchase Intention

Model R R

Square


Estimate

1 0.646a 0.417 0.412 0.59567

Table ABC is used to evaluate the appropriateness of the linear regression model. As can be seen

from the table, the Adjusted R Square is 0.412, meaning 41.2% of repurchase intention can be

elucidated by customer satisfaction.


Coefficients

Standardize

d

Coefficients

t Sig. Collinearity

Statistics

B Std.

Error

Beta Tolerance VIF

Constant 1.022 0.271 3.772 0.000

SAT 0.612 0.067 0.646 9.183 0.000 1.000 1.000

Table ABC provides necessary statistics to test explain the correlation between repurchase

intention and customer satisfaction. As can be seen from the table, customer satisfaction is

significantly correlated to repurchase intention (p<0.01). This indicates that H7 is supported.

4.2. Summary of Results

Table ABC summarizes the test results of the proposed hypotheses

No Hypothesis Result

Hypothesis 1

(H1)

There is a statistically significant relationship between

the tangible dimension and customer satisfaction

Supported

Hypothesis 2

(H2)


the empathy dimension and customer satisfaction

Rejected

Hypothesis 3

(H3)


the reliable dimension and customer satisfaction

Rejected

Hypothesis 4

(H4)


the assurance dimension and customer satisfaction

Rejected

Hypothesis 5

(H5)


the responsive dimension and customer satisfaction

Supported

Hypothesis 6

(H6)


repurchase intention and customer satisfaction

Supported

Hypothesis 7

(H7)


word of mouth and customer satisfaction

Supported

Questionnaire

Online questionnaire for “The impact of service quality on customer satisfaction in Muong

Thanh Hotel, Ha Noi, Viet Nam”

Thank you for participating in an online data collection for my dissertation which is part of my

study in Master Degree in Hospitality, Events and Tourism. You have read and understand the

participation and consent form. You can opt out of completing the form at any time. All data

collected will be processed and kept according to the data protection law. Please complete the

form by filling the provided spaces. Once you have submitted the form you cannot edit.

I ………………….. (name) agree and consent to participate in the research. I have read

and understood the Participants information and Consent form.

Sign ……………..………………………….. Date ………………………..

1. Age

a. Under 18

b. 18-24

c. 25-34

d. 35-44

e. 45-54

f. Above 54

2. Gender

a. Male

b. Female

c. Prefer not to say

3. Nationality

4. Service quality

1 = totally disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree, 5 = totally agree

Tangible 1 2 3 4 5

The employees had clean, neat

uniforms

The guestroom met my needs

The TV, radio, telephone, A/ C, lights,

and other mechanical equipment were

modern and clean

The food was good

The facilities (health club, pool,

meeting rooms, banquet halls, etc.)

were clean and inviting

Reliability

My reservation was handled efficiently

My guestroom was ready as promised

I received the type of room requested

TV, radio, A/C, lights, and other

mechanical equipment worked properly

The employees did what they said they

would do

Responsiveness

Employees responded promptly to my

requests

Employees were willing to answer my

questions

Employees responded quickly to solve

my problems

Room service was prompt

Check-in and check-out procedures

were fast and efficient

Assurance

Employees were consistently courteous

Employees treated me with respect

Employees were polite when answering

my question

Empathy

I was given personal attention

Employees understood and satisfy my

individual needs

Customer Satisfaction

I will visit Muong Thanh Hotel again

I will recommend the hotel to other

people

References

Atkinson A. (1988). Answering the eternal question: what does the customer want? The Cornell

Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 29 (2): 12–14.

Barsky J., and Labagh R. (1992). A strategy for customer satisfaction. The Cornell Hotel and

Restaurant Administration Quarterly 35 (3): 32–40.

Barsky J., and Nash L. (2003). Customer satisfaction: Applying concepts to industry- wide

measures. The Cornell

Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 44 (4): 173-183.

Bui, H. T., and Jolliffe, L. (2011). Vietnamese domestic tourism: an investigation of travel

motivations. Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies, 4(1), 10-29.

Callan, R. J. (1995). Hotel classification and grading schemes a paradigm of utilisation and user

characteristics. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 14, 271-284

Choi T. Y., and Chou R. (2001). Determinants of hotel guests’ satisfaction and repeat patronage

in Hong Kong hotel industry. International Journal of Hospitality Manag

Choi T. Y., and Chu R. (2001). Determinants of hotel guests’ satisfaction and repeat patronage in

Hong Kong hotel industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 20: 277-297.

Getty, J. M., and Thompson, K. N. (1995). The Relationship Between Quality, Satisfaction, and

Recommending Behavior in Lodging Decisions. Journal of Hospitality and Leisure Marketing.

Gronroos, C. (1990). Service Management and Marketing: Managing the Moments of Truth in

Service Competition. Lexington Books.

Hoffman, K. D., and Bateson, J. E. G. (2010). Services Marketing: Concepts, Strategies, and

Cases: Concepts, Strategies, and Cases. Cengage Learning.

International Council (1999). A Guide to College Programs in Culinary Arts, Hospitality, and

Tourism A Directory of CHRIE Member Colleges and Universities. New York, N.Y: Wiley.

Jones D. L., Mak B., and Sim J. (2007). A New Look at the Antecedents and Consequences of

Relationship Quality in the Hotel Service Environment. Services Marketing Quarterly, 28(3): 15-

31.

Kim W. G., Han J. S., and Lee E. (2001). Effects of relationship marketing on repeat purchase

and word of mouth. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 25 (3): 272-288.

Lai, W. H., and Vinh, N. Q. (2013). How promotional activities and evaluative factors affect

destination loyalty: evidence from international tourists of Vietnam. International Journal of

Marketing Studies, 5(1), 70-85.

Lam T., and Zhang H. (1999). Service quality of travel agents: the case of travel agents in Hong

Kong. Tourism Management, 20: 341–349.

LeBlanc G., and Nguyen N. (1996). An examination of the factors that signal hotel image to

travelers. Journal of Vacation Marketing 3 (1): 32–42.

McCleary K.W., Weaver P.A., and Hutchinson J.C. (1993). Hotel selection factors as they relate

to business travel situations. Journal of Travel Research, 32 (2): 42–48.

Oh H., and Parks, S.C. (1997). Customer satisfaction and service quality: a critical review,of the

literature and,research implications for the hospitality industry. Hospitality, Research Journal, 20

(3): 35–64.

Oppermann M. (1998). Destination Threshold Potential and the Law of Repeat Visitation,

Journal of Travel Research, 37 (2): 131-137.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., and Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A Multiple-item Scale

for Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12-40.

Pham, H. (2013). Vietnam is a country, not a war-trauma and nostalgia in the anthology The

Perfume River. Creative Industries Journal, 6(1), 17-27.

Rivera, M. A., and Upchurch, R. (2008). The Role of Research in The Hospitality Industry: A

Content Analysis of the IJHM Between 2000 and 2005. International Journal of Hospitality

Management, 27(4), 632-640.

Taylor, S. A., and Baker, T. L. (1994). An Assessment of the Relationship Between Service

Quality and Customer Satisfaction in the Formation of Consumers’ Purchase Intentions. Journal

of Retailing, 70(2), 163-178.

Williams, J. A., Uysal, M., 2003. Introduction. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality and

Tourism, 4(3/4), 1-27.

Wuest B.E.S., Tas R.F., and Emenheiser D.A. (1996). What do mature travelers perceive as

important hotel/ motel customer service?, Hospitality Research Journal, 20 (2): 77–93.

Yen A., and Su L. (2004). Customer satisfaction measurement practice in Taiwan hotels.

Hospitality Management, 23: 397–408.

Zeithaml, V. A. (1987). Defining and Relating Price, Perceived Quality, and Perceived Value.

Marketing Science Institute.

mvessay.com · web viewthe relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction: the...

Documents