Quality versus satisfaction

Based on a combination of literature review and empirical investigation, Oliver (1980), Parasuraman et al. (1988) and Cronin and Taylor (1992) all suggest that service quality and consumer satisfaction are related, but distinct, constructs. Their explanation of the difference between the two is that service quality is a long-term overall evaluation, whereas consumer satisfaction is a transaction-specific measure (cf. Parasuraman et al. 1988; Carman 1990; Cronin & Taylor 1992). By taking a

46

closer look at the service quality literature and the consumer satisfaction literature, the researcher not only aims to clarify the difference between service quality and consumer satisfaction, but also to resolve the confusion related to the definition and operationalisation of service quality. With reference to service quality literature, Parasuraman et al. (1994) argued that the disconfirmation of perception-minus expectations conceptualisation of service quality is supported by various researchers (e.g. Parasuraman et al., 1988; Bolton & Drew 2002; Parasuraman et al., 1991).

Based on empirical evidence, Parasuraman et al. (1988) argued that in measuring service quality the level of comparison is what a consumer should expect, whereas in measuring satisfaction the level of comparison is what a consumer would expect. This differentiation stems from their recognition that ―the term ‗expectation‘ as used in the service quality literature differs from the way it is used in the consumer satisfaction literature. Specifically, in the consumer satisfaction literature, expectations are viewed as predictions made by consumers about what is likely to happen during an impending transaction. In contrast, in the service quality literature, expectations are viewed as desires of consumers, i.e. what they feel a service provider should offer rather than would offer.‖

As stated previously, Parasuraman et al. (1988) concluded that service quality results from the comparison of perceptions with expectations. Similarly, Bolton and Drew (2010:221) concluded in their research that the gap between performance and expectations is a key determinant of overall service quality. In the same article, however, Bolton and Drew also stated that ―a consumer‘s assessment of overall service quality is directly affected by perceptions of performance levels.‖

Following the suggestion by Woodruff et al. (2009:3) that expectations are to be based on experience norms (i.e. what consumers should expect from a given service provider given their experience with that specific type of service organisation), Parasuraman et al. (1991) found two different comparison norms for the assessment of service quality: desired service (i.e. the level of service a consumer believes can

47

be delivered) and adequate service (i.e. the level of service the consumer considers acceptable).

Regarding consumer satisfaction literature, Oliver (2000:217) found that service quality (as a form of attitude) is initially a function of expectations and subsequently a function of the prior attitude toward satisfaction. In addition, he suggested that this attitude affects purchase intentions. The initial attitude, however, can be affected by the level of (dis)satisfaction experienced and subsequently influence purchase intentions.

Bolton and Drew (2010:221) affirmed that satisfaction mediates prior perceptions of service quality to form current perceptions of service quality. However, Cronin and Taylor (1992:57) noted that ―their results suggest that perceived service quality is strongly affected by current performance and that the impact of disconfirmation (at the satisfaction level) is relatively weak.‖

According to Oliver (2000:217), it is consumer satisfaction that is determined by disconfirmation judgements (better-than-expected or worse-than-expected) on the basis of comparing the actual performance of a product with consumer expectations. In the case of services, however, where performance dimensions are hard to quantify, consumers may not be able to make such calculated comparisons between (perceived) performance and expectations.

In line with this observation, Smith and Houston (2011:37) claimed that consumer satisfaction with services is related to confirmation or disconfirmation of expectations. In addition, Churchill and Suprenaut (2000:19) argued that satisfaction is related to the size and direction of the disconfirmation experience where disconfirmation is related to a consumer‘s initial expectations. By using these latter two references in defining service quality as resulting from the comparison of perceived performance with expectations and arguing that perceived service quality is a function of the discrepancy between consumers‘ perceptions and expectations,

48

Parasuraman et al. (1985; 1988) are partially to blame for the confusion related to the operationalisation of service quality.

In the opinion of the researcher, the above overview of ‗service quality literature‘ and ‗consumer satisfaction literature‘ solves a range of issues related to service quality. First and foremost, it implies that service quality (as a form of attitude) is a function of expectations (prior to any service encounter) or a function of experiences (upon the first service encounter) only. This suggests using performance perceptions as a measure of service quality (Cronin and Taylor 2012:82). Secondly, it implies that consumer satisfaction mediates the effect of prior perceptions of service quality to cause revised perceptions of current service quality. This finding suggests that the disconfirmation paradigm of perceptions-minus-expectations is more closely related to consumer satisfaction than to service quality. Thirdly, it implies that service quality is an antecedent of consumer satisfaction. In line with Cronin and Taylor (2012:92), the researcher believes that service quality should not be derived from the difference between consumers‘ expectations about the performance of a general class of service providers and their assessment of the actual performance of a specific firm within that class.

Relationship between quality and satisfaction: According to Cronin and Taylor (2012:90), Teas (1993) and Parasuraman et al. (1994), both service quality literature and consumer satisfaction literature have left confusion as to the nature and causal direction of the relationship between service quality and consumer satisfaction. Many researchers (Parasuraman et al. 1988; Carman 1990; Cronin and Taylor 1992; Parasuraman et al. 1994), however, agree that service quality is an overall evaluation or a global value assessment (consistent with the service quality literature), whereas customer satisfaction is a transaction-specific assessment (consistent with customer satisfaction literature).

Based on this distinction, some service quality researchers, such as Bolton and Drew (2010:221), argued that an accumulation of transaction-specific assessments leads to a global assessment (i.e. customer satisfaction is an antecedent of service

49

quality). Based on theoretical and empirical evidence by Parasuraman et al. (1988) and Cronin and Taylor (2012:90), however, the reverse is true in that service quality is an antecedent of customer satisfaction (i.e. higher levels of perceived service quality result in increased consumer satisfaction).

Furthermore, it is implied that both service quality and consumer satisfaction are antecedents of purchase intentions. According to Oliver (2000:27), perceived service quality modifies a consumer‘s purchase intentions. In addition, Oliver (1981) stated that ―satisfaction soon decays into one‘s overall attitude towards purchasing products.‖ Moreover, both Parasuraman et al. (1988) and Cronin and Taylor (2012:72) have proven that both service quality and consumer satisfaction affect purchase intentions. Cronin and Taylor (2012:72), however, noted that consumer satisfaction exerts a stronger influence on purchase intentions than does service quality.