Company’s Problems Through a Servqual Analysis

Words: 594 Pages: 4

Gap Analysis

Service Quality Dimensions for Expectations

Dimensions	Items
Tangibles	1-4
Reliability	5-9
Responsiveness	10-13
Assurance	14-17
Empathy	18-22

A Comparison of Perception and Expectation Scores

Item Number	Perception Rating	Average Expectation
1	6	5.2
2	5	4.2
3	7	5
4	5	4.4
5	4	3.2
6	4	4.2
7	5	5
8	3	3.4
9	4	4.4
10	7	5
11	6	4.8
12	5	4.6
13	3	4
14	6	4.8
15	6	4.2
16	7	5.6
17	6	5.6
18	4	4.8
19	4	3.8
20	5	5.8
21	4	5
22	3	4

Averages of the Perception and Expectations

Perception averages		Perception Rating	Average Expectation	Expectation Averages
Tangibles	5.75	6	5.2	Tangibles	4.7
		5	4.2
		7	5
		5	4.4
Reliability	4	4	3.2	Reliability	4.04
		4	4.2
		5	5
		3	3.4
		4	4.4
Responsiveness	5.25	7	5	Responsiveness	4.6
		6	4.8
		5	4.6
		3	4
Assurance	6.25	6	4.8	Assurance	5.05
		6	4.2
		7	5.6
		6	5.6
Empathy	4	4	4.8	Empathy	4.68
		4	3.8
		5	5.8
		4	5
		3	4

Overall Averages Computation

Graph 1. Two-Dimensional Differencing Planes

	Perception		Expected
Tangibles difference =	5.75	less	4.7	equals	1.05
Reliability difference =	4	less	4.04	equals	-0.04
Responsiveness difference =	5.25	less	4.6	equals	0.65
Assurance difference =	6.25	less	5.05	equals	1.2
Empathy difference =	4	less	4.68	equals	-0.68

Expectation

Perception

Assurance
Responsiveness
Tangibles
Empathy
Reliability

Discussion

The data indicate clearly that there is a clear disparity in the dimensions of empathy and reliability with negativity mismatch. The company has a lower perception of these services and performs poorly as opposed to the customer’s high regard for the service. As such, the company ought to improve in individual attention, consider a more flexible schedule that falls in line with the customers, while maintaining the optimum operation of the organization (refer to Appendices A1 and B1). Again, personal attention, and understanding consumer preferences and needs need to be given much attention. Develop Frequently Asked Questions page attached with the pass email that informs clients not to request a pass through the internet again. In addition, attach a tick-box for the clients to confirm only one receipt of pass. On the other hand, the company has won an assurance from their customers as well as to the knowledge of the management. Tangibles and Responsiveness are quality services that meet consumer expectations and company perception proportionately.

The quality management system is a combination of work ethics and practices for enhancing passenger safety and upgrading boarding services in the aviation industry (Smith, 2002). For example, the airline has upgraded its mobile messaging system to provide quality services at affordable prices (Mulholland, 2005). The airline has launched an SMS-based boarding pass and installed novel self-service check-in reception desks at airports to provide customers with efficient and swift check-in services (English 2004).

From the above, it is clear that that the identified gaps will help increase the quality of service and products in the Airline service. The gaps that exist hindered the organization and its passengers (the clients) from attaining an optimal operation that fully satisfies the customers. The priorities set up meet the expected demands as opposed to the real quality presently being achieved. The identity of the reasons for the presence of the gaps through a SERVQUAL analysis has made it possible to develop a number of programs that not only save time but also prove convenient to the clients. The achievement of the suitable processes through the service quality framework has proved to have reliability, assurance, tangibles, empathy, and responsiveness.

References

Das, S 2007, ‘Quest for Quality: Thoughts, Ideas, Concepts, Views on Quality and Process Improvement in the Information technology‘.

English, L 2004, putting Quality Process in Place to Exploit Technology. DataFlux Corporation, Cary, NC.

Leney, A 2004, ‘Vehicle Recycling on South Tawara’.

Milojkovic, D 2011, ‘Australian airline introduces SMS boarding passes’.

Smith, M 2002, ‘Safety Management Systems: What’s in it for you’ Web.