Service Quality on Tourism: Application of Structural Equation Modeling B. Prabaharan*, A. Arulraj**, V. Rajagopal*** Introduction There have been numerous studies relevant to service quality, focused on service equality measurement and instrument development but a few studies on service quality on tourism. Marketing researchers have made attempts to measure service quality since the 1980s. Further, these qualities influenced the image the customers had and this image had an effect on the process from expected quality to perceived quality. Parsuraman et al. (1985) conducted qualitative research with twelve focus sections and several executives. They found that the subjects showed a similar pattern of perceived service quality with discrepancy between their expectation and actual service performance. Based on these findings, they proposed a conceptual model containing five gaps. Consequentially, Parasuraman et al. (1988) later introduced the SERVQUAL instrument including 22 items in five dimensions: reliability, tangibles, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy. Even though this instrument has been used in various studies, the SERVQUAL has received many criticisms from other scholars (e.g., Cronin & Taylor, 1992; Peter, Churchill, & Brown, 1993). The major concern about the SERVQUAL was its use of measurement with different scores which resulted in different numbers of factor dimensions, improper managerial approaches, and conceptual problems (Brady, 1997). Carman (1990) and Cronin and Taylor (1992) have argued that the performanceonly measure increases variance when they removed the expectation measure. Based on this result, Cronin and Taylor (1994) suggested the use of SERVPERF by arguing that only the performance part of the SERVQUAL should be included. Another weakness was that SERVQUAL did not include an outcome dimension. Even though service process has been emphasized, no attention has been paid to what customers achieved after receiving a service. Despite many efforts and debates, there has been no consensus on the measure of service quality across industries. In order to overcome this problem, Dabholkar et al.(1996) presented the hierarchical model of service quality consisting of three levels. The first level was consumers overall perception of service quality. The second level included five dimensions: physical aspects, reliability, personal interaction, problem solving, and policy. The third level was a sub-dimension of the second dimension. Brady (1997) conceptualized a hierarchical model of perceived service quality again based on Dabholkar et al. s (1996) model. This study included interaction quality, outcome quality, and physical environment. Each dimension also had a sub-dimension like in Dabholkar et al. s (1996) model. By a hierarchical approach, service quality research attempted to include various components in service quality by adjusting different situations with various types of service quality. Parasuraman et al. (2005) developed a multiple-item scale (E-S-QUAL) based on theoretical foundations for evaluating the service quality delivered by Web sites in the process of placing an order. They collected 549 questionnaires through an online survey. The findings revealed that two scales were possible for online customers: E-SQUAL (the basic scale) and E- RecS-QUAL. The former included 22 items of four components: efficiency, fulfillment, system availability, and privacy. The latter was relevant only to customers who experienced non-routine encounters and included 11 items with three components: responsiveness, compensation, and contact. Collier and Bienstock (2006) extended service quality research on e-service quality to include both Web site interactivity and outcome quality. Unlike the previous studies, this study used a formative model instead of a factor model including three second-order dimensions to conceptualize e-service quality. Three hundred and thirty eight college students participated in the survey. The results found that customers evaluated the design, information accuracy, privacy, functionality, and ease of use of a Web site in the process for placing orders. This process quality had positive impact on their perception of the outcome quality of the transaction. In addition, the handling of service is recovery positively influenced customer satisfaction. Lastly, they found that there was a mediating effect of customer satisfaction on the relationship between recovery and outcomes to behavioral intentions. McElwee and Redman (1993) used a model of service quality dimensions (SERVQUAL) developed by Parasuraman et al. (1985, 1988) as a basis for an adapted model for higher education. In view of the framework structure of SERVQUAL, their main emphasis was placed on functional (interactive) aspects of quality. Hill (1995) also investigated the implications of service quality theory for higher education. Briefly addressing some quality dimensions, he focused mainly on the application of a perception-expectation *Research Scholar, Adaikalamtha Institute of Management Thanjavur ** Dept. of Economics, R.S. Government College, Thanjavur *** Principal, R.G. Government College, Mannarkudi
model in this context. In another study, Anderson (1995) used SERVQUAL to evaluate the quality of an administrative section in a university (office of student services). This appeared to be successful due to the compatibility between the environments in this case and that around which SERVQUAL was developed. The list by Parasuraman et al. (1985) was used as a basis 1994; Zimmerman and Enell, 1988) can facilitate generalizing service quality dimensions for this sector. However, the specific characteristics of any service industry necessitates find its unique dimensions in addition to the common features with other ser- vices. More careful generalization is required for the case of Tourism regarding its complex characteristics. Backman & Veldkamp (1995) stated that quality of service is an essential factor involved in a service provider s ability to attract more customers. Unlike the quality of goods, which may be measured objectively by such indicators as durability and number of defects, service quality is an elusive construct that is difficult to measure (Crosby 1979). Mackay and Crompton (1990) defined service quality as the relationship between what customer s desires from a service and what they perceive that they receive. Additionally, service quality is also a way of thinking about how to satisfy customers so that they hold positive attitudes toward the service they have received (Ostrowski, O Brian, & Gordon 1993). To help service providers identify their strengths and weaknesses, Parasuraman, Zeithaml & Berry (1988) developed the SERVQUAL model, a diagnostic tool including 22 items to appraise five key service factors: tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy. Parasuraman etal. (1988,1991) found that the five-dimensional format of SERVQUAL allows researchers to assess the level of service quality along each dimension, as well as overall. The purpose of this model is to serve as a diagnostic method for uncovering broad areas of weaknesses and strengths in the quality of service a company delivers. A lot of service-related research was evaluated by SERVQUAL and they might have results consistent with Parasuraman etal. s (1988,1991) suggestions. SERVQUAL has offered a model for measuring service quality for over 10 years. However, some researchers have suggested that a revised measurement scale is needed specifically for providers of tourism services. The new service instrument might be needed for research in tourism fields. The quality of service involved with tourism plays an important role in the process of delivery (Wyllie 2000) and thus is the standard used to assess the effectiveness of a particular leisure service agency, including the tourism service sector (Godbey1997). Service quality is an intangible, but crucial, area of interest to travel service providers. As described above, the major service evaluation tool is SERVQUAL model, and Parasuraman etal.stated that this model could apply to various service contexts. Many tourism researchers use this model to evaluate the quality of services provided in tourism and affiliated industries (Baker & Fesenmaier 1997; Childress & Crompton 1997; Fick & Ritchie 1991;Leblanc 1992; Ostrowski, O Brien, & Gordon 1993; Vogt & Fesenmaier 1995). For example, SERVQUAL was tested by Mackay (1987) in the Canadian municipal parks, and he extracted the same five dimensions as Parasuraman etal. s(1985) model (as cited in Crompton etal. 1991). In another study, Brown and Swartz (1989) expanded SERVQUAL and found that service providers do not understand the level at which customers evaluate their experiences. Bigne etal. (2003) also employed SERVQUAL to test the quality of service received from travel agencies, and they found that it is still a valid and reliable model with which to evaluate the service quality provided by travel agencies. Although SERVQUAL was designed to measure service quality, it provides only a framework or skeleton and thus has had to be adapted and modified to evaluate specific services (Parasuraman etal.1988, 1991;Beckman & Velfkamp 1995). MacKay and Crompton (1988) proposed a conceptual framework for studying service quality in the recreation and leisure industries the REQUAL model (REQUAL). In addition, Crompton etal. (1991) stated that SERVQUAL cannot be used to evaluate service quality in the different types of recreation services sectors and suggested the need to develop a new scale to fit tourism or other recreation services sectors. Thus, in 1990, using SERVQUAL as a basis, Mackay and Crompton developed REQUAL, which is used to evaluate the quality of recreational services. In 1995, Backman and Veldkamp (1995) reviewed and offered empirical studies; they concluded that these findings from current empirical studies suggest that the new model in the YMCA project, REQUAL, can serve as a template for other researchers to use in their investigation of recreational service quality. The present study reveals the service quality dimension of tourism in Kerala. The above literatures speak on the service quality of marketing but there is research gab between the service quality marketing and service quality of tourism. The objective of the study: (a) To study the service quality perceptions of domestic as well as foreign tourists in the service quality of tourism (b) to find out the mediating factor for service quality in tourism. Conference on Tourism in India Challenges Ahead, 15-17 May 2008, IIMK 144
Methods and Materials: The data were collected from Kerala Tourism during the month of January & February 2008 from 100 domestic respondents (tourist) from various tourist place of Kerala. On other hand, 50 foreign respondents are foreign countries who visited in Kerala tourist places. The data were collected following method: By administering the questionnaire based on the SERVQUAL model and six major dimensions; Tangibility, Responsiveness, Reliability, Service product, Assurance and Service Responsibility. A proposed hypothetical Model was developed for the purpose of applying SEM (Structural Equation Modeling). Collected data were processed in the statistical software package of SPSS-15 and AMOS -16 (Analysis of Moment Structure) used to prove the hypothetical model and checked various goodness of fit indexes shows the model fit. The following aspects were examined under the SERQUAL dimensions: (1) Assurance dimensions: Being served by the appropriate personnel: Reinforcement of tourists confidence; Experienced and competent tour and hotel escorts; and Fluent and understandable communication with tourists. (2) Responsiveness dimension: Sincere interest in problem-solving; Provision of adequate information about the service delivered; Prompt response to tourists requests; Provision of information on local entertainment; Willingness to help tourists; and advice on how to use free time. (3) Reliability dimension: Right first time; Keeping promises; Insisting on error-free service; Meeting the tour schedule; and No sudden increase in tour cost. (4) Service Responsibility dimension: Pleasant, friendly personnel; Understanding of specific needs; and Cultivation of friendly relationship. (5) Tangibility dimension: Modern and technologically relevant vehicles; Appealing accommodation facilities; Availability of information documents and notes; Physical appearance of tour and hotel escorts (tidiness etc.); and High-quality meals. (6) Service Product Dimension: Easy contract on arrival at airport; Easy location of and contact with tour and hotel escorts; Services delivered on time; Conference on Tourism in India Challenges Ahead, 15-17 May 2008, IIMK 145
Conference on Tourism in India Challenges Ahead, 15-17 May 2008, IIMK 146
Conference on Tourism in India Challenges Ahead, 15-17 May 2008, IIMK 147
. The model reveals that the service quality depends up on the tangibility service made any tourist sectors. The hypotheses reveal that the tangibility is mediating factors for service quality in the domestic tourist. The responsiveness and tangibility are very important for sustainability tourism development in India. 76 percent is influenced in the service quality as responsiveness. The assurance is very low influence in the service made by kerala tourism. There is no invariance between the reliability and tangibility. Hence the Kerala tourism should follow above dimension for improving the service in he tourism. Conference on Tourism in India Challenges Ahead, 15-17 May 2008, IIMK 148
The above model reveals that the service quality of foreign tourists depends upon responsiveness dimension. The hypotheses reveals that the responsiveness is mediating factor cum expecting factor for service quality of foreign tourists service responsibility and responsiveness are more influencing factors which means 81% influenced. Reliability and service products are influenced more than 50%. Hence, the Kerala tourism should follow the above dimensions for improving service quality in tourism. Conclusion From this empirical SERVQUAL research, we have identified the mediating factor for service quality of Domestic and foreign tourists are totally different. The Tangibility dimension of SERVQUAL influences domestic tourists and the Responsiveness dimension of service quality influences the foreign tourists. Hence, the researchers concludes that the Kerala Tourism Staff have got a low impact of commitment towards the Domestic as well as Foreign tourists. Conference on Tourism in India Challenges Ahead, 15-17 May 2008, IIMK 149
References Babakus,E.and Ho, S.K. 1998. Service quality and tourism.,journal of Travel Research. 37: 71-75 Backman, S.J., and Veldkamp, C. 1995.Examination of the Relationship between service quality and user loyalty. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration. 13(2):29-41. Baker, D.A., and Fesenmaier, D.R. 1997. Effects of service climate on managers and employees rating of visitors service quality expectations. Journal of Tourism Research. 36(1): 15-22. Bigne, J.E., Martinez, C., Miquel, M.J., and Andreu, L. 2003. SERQUAL reliabilityand Validity in travel agencies. Annal of Tourism Research. 30(1): 258-262. Brown, S.W., and Swartz, T. 1989. A gap analysis of professional service quality. Journal of Marketing. 53: 92-98. Childress, R.D., and Crompton, J.L. 1997. A comparison of alternative direct and discrepancy approaches to measuring quality of performance at a festival. Journal of Tourism Research. 36(2): 43-57. Citation: In: Peden, John G.; Schuster, Rudy M., comps., eds. Proceedings of the 2005 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium; 2005 April 10-12; Bolton Landing, NY. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-341. Newtown Square, PA: U.S. Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station Collins Vogt, C.A., and Fesenmaier, D.R. 1995. Tourist and retailers perceptions of services. Annals of Tourism Research. 22(4): 763-780. Corsby,P.B., ed. 1979. Quality is free: The art of making quality certain. New York: New American Library. Crompton, J.L., Mackay, K.J., and Fesenmaier, D.R. 1991. Identifying dimensions ofservice quality in public recreation. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration. 9(3):15-27. Cronin, J.J. and Taylor, S.A. 1992. Measuring service quality: A reexamination and extension. Journal of Marketing. 56:55-68. LeBlanc, G. 1992.Factors affecting customer evaluation of service quality in travel agencies: An investigation of customer perceptions. Journal of Travel Research. 30(4): 10-16. MacKay, K.J., and Crompton, J.L. 1988. A conceptual model of consumer evaluation of recreation service quality.leisure Studies. 7: 41-49. MacKay, K.J., and Crompton, J.L. 1990. Measuring the quality of recreation services. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration.8(3): 47-56. Mertler, C.A., and Vannata, R.A.2002. Advanced and multivariate statistical methods: Practical application and interpretation. Los Angels: Pyrczak. Ostrowski, P.L., O Brien T.V., and Gordon, G.L.1993. Service quality and customer loyalty in the commercial airline industry. Journal of Marketing. 22(2):16-24. Otto, J.E., and Ritchie, R.B. 1996. The service experience in tourism. Tourism Management. 17(3): 165-17an, 4. Pan, Z., Chaffee, S.H., Chu, G.C., and Ju, Y. 1994. To see ourselves: Comparing traditional Chinese and American Cultural Values. Boulder: Westview Press. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. 1991.Refinement and reassessment of the SERVQUAL scale. Journal of Retailing. 67: 420-450. 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. Tabachnick, B.G. and Fidell, L.S. 1996. Using multivariate statistics. 3rd ed. New York: Harper Wyllie, R.W.2000. Tourism and society. State College, PA: Venture Publishing. Conference on Tourism in India Challenges Ahead, 15-17 May 2008, IIMK 150