A Study of Customer Apprehension for Quality in Telecom ... … · Reference to Airtel and BSNL Consumers in Bikaner) 2 Review of Literature According to a Survey, 2007, Telecom Services

Professional Panorama : An International Journal of Management & Technology

A Study of Customer Apprehension for Quality in Telecom Services (With Special

Reference to Airtel and BSNL Consumers in Bikaner) 1

Volume: V | Issue: I Jan. - June 2018

ISSN(P)2369-6919 ISSN(O)2454-8340

A Study of Customer Apprehension for Quality in Telecom Services (With Special Reference to Airtel and BSNL

Consumers in Bikaner)

Dr. Pankaj Meel1 Abstract

The study was steered to scrutinize the service quality in the telecom sector because in the

existing strenuous broadband market, the continuation of wireline telecom sector banks on

the service quality rendered to the purchaser that obliges as a key tool for contention.

Though there befall numerous paradigms to gauge service quality, the investigation puts

into action performance items of service quality, and surveying tool was used to garner data

from the sample. Grounded on the investigation, the tiered cataloging of service quality was

exemplified, which rendered an unblemished scheme for the telecom service providers to spot

the service quality traits that give rise to amplification in their performance in an

extraordinarily competitive marketplace.

Keywords: Service Quality, Telecom, Customer

Introduction

elecommunication is one of the prime support services needed for the rapid growth

of any developing country. It is one of the fastest developing sectors in India,

growing at an average annual rate of 140-150%. The Indian telecom sector is

largely dominated by private operators that control a share of 87.9 % share of the entire

sector. Among the top players in the telecom sector, Bharti Airtel owns the largest share at

20.09 %, followed by Reliance 16.7%, Vodafone 16.54%, state-owned BSNL 11.41%, Tata

11.08% and Idea 10.97%. As per statistics, the total number of mobile phone base in the

country will rise to 900 million by the end of 2012 and it is further expected that this

figure will steadily rise to 1.25 billion by 2015.

1 Associate Professor, Faculty of Management Studies, Vivekananda Global University, Jaipur

T




Review of Literature

According to a Survey, 2007, Telecom Services Poor in India, India Economic Times, Crisil,

even as wireless service providers make huge investments to keep pace with the rapid

growth in subscriber numbers, poor quality of service is rapidly emerging as a concern,”

Gartner, a research firm (December 2008, Improve quality: Gartner to Indian Telecom Cos,

Journal of Telecom). Gartner principal telecom analyst Chee Eng Said- “The country needs

to improve its service quality quickly if it wants to be the IT and outsourcing hub for

multinational corporations.”

In the last few years, the mobile telecom market has observed a considerable growth and

speedy variations globally as well as domestically. (Setayesh Sattari (2002), The theory

tries to catch a model which can best define the customer fulfillment creation in the

mobile telecom sector and will relate and appraise it in the Indian marketplace of this

area. It will also investigate the extents of service quality (SERVQUAL) on the apparent

performance of the regulars in the marketplace. For doing so, an assessment has been

accomplished on customers of the only prepaid mobile service operator in India,

questionnaires were disseminated among them and the outcomes scrutinized based upon

the anticipated research queries and hypotheses and finally, the conclusions and

implications were made. (Jessica Mascareigne, (2003), in this research, how telecom

service providers maintain their beleaguered regulars over time will be studied through

four case lessons in the telecom service sector. The pragmatic data was garnered through

interviews with four Swedish telecom agencies. The outcomes of this investigation first

specify that telecom service providers do not have any proper nor homogenous procedure

which they follow when it comes to holding their customers. Thomas Eugene (2004), this

research encompasses an experiment which was considered to gauge perceived service

quality based upon the manipulation of pre-service encounter and the outcome of a

service encounter.

Methodology

Structured Questionnaire

According to many scholars, in the use of survey strategy, the main instruments used are

self- administered/ interviewer administered or structured/ unstructured interviews and

questionnaire or a combination of both2. In this study, a self-administered, structured

questionnaire was used to collect data from respondents. The questions sought

respondents' feelings about overall customer satisfaction, satisfaction for dimensions




service quality, the importance of dimensions of service quality, and switching intention of

customers.

Sampling Technique

In selecting the sample of seven hundred (700) respondents, a stratified simple random

sampling was used. This was done by, first of all, identifying each of the two mobile

telecom networks, BSNL and Airtel, within the target population as a stratum. Then the

region was further divided into rural and urban areas. Finally, a simple random method

was used to select respondents for each of the mobile networks.

Measurement Instruments

T-Test: This is a statistical procedure that tests whether a single variable deviates from a

specified constant or a cut-off point. The cut-off point may be known population mean or a

hypothesized value. It assumes that the sample is normally distributed; it is a fairly robust

test that the tests departure from normality. This procedure was deemed appropriate

because researcher wanted to find out customers who said they were satisfied with the

services quality received or at least the service quality was equal to their desire or

expectation. One sample T-test was used to test the hypothesis and to answer research

questions.

Likert Scale: For measuring the responses of the respondent's Likert Scale was be used. A

Likert scale is a psychometric scale commonly involved in research that employs

questionnaires.

Finding Measurement

Five points Likert scales will be used in the research. Then, researcher assigned the

number 1 to the most extreme ‘agree’ response for backward-scored items and assign

successively larger numbers to each response up to the most extreme ‘agree’ response.

using a five-point Likert scale, the following values are assigned to each type of response:

‘Strongly Agree’ = 1; ‘Agree’ = 2; ‘Neutral’ = 3; ‘Disagree’ = 4; ‘Strongly Disagree’ = 5. Where

frequency of usage of a service will be calculated following values assigned to each type of

response: ‘Never’ =1, ‘Seldom’ =2, ‘Often’ =3, ‘Sometimes’ =4 and ‘Always’ =5.

Hypothesis one is “Consumer apprehension plays an important role to improve service

quality” and another hypothesis “The gap between consumer expectations and consumer

experience does exist in telecom services” were tested using the procedure outlined at the

beginning in this study. The results are grouped accordingly which is as follows:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychometrics

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Questionnaire




Analysis and Interpretation of Bikaner Region

Majority of the respondents 68% use Airtel followed by BSNL 32% in the urban area of

Bikaner. 72% is comprised of 52% prepaid and 16% post-paid whereas 32% is made up of

24% prepaid and 8% post-paid. Majority of the respondents 52% use Airtel followed by

BSNL 48% in the rural area of Bikaner. 52% is comprised of 34% prepaid and 18% post-

paid whereas 48% is made up of 32 % prepaid and 16% post-paid.

Factors Considered While Choosing Mobile Service Provider

Table: 1 Factors Considered While Choosing Mobile Service Provider (Urban)

Statement

Strongly Agree

Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree

Un responded

Total

Urb. % Urb. % Urb. % Urb. % Urb. % Urb. % Urb. %

Brand Image 20 40% 15 30% 5 10% 5 10% 5 10% 0 0% 50 100%

Network

Connectivity 21 42% 14 28% 5 10% 5 10% 5 10% 0 0% 50 100%

Call Tariff 26 52% 13 26% 5 10% 4 8% 1 2% 1 2% 50 100%

Service Quality 26 52% 15 30% 3 6% 4 8% 2 4% 0 0% 50 100%

Reliability 19 38% 14 28% 7 14% 9 18% 1 2% 0 0% 50 100%

Advertisement 15 30% 15 30% 6 12% 8 16% 5 10% 1 2% 50 100%

Sales Promotion 19 38% 13 26% 4 8% 8 16% 6 12% 0 0% 50 100%

Availability &

Recharge facility 20 40% 13 26% 6 12% 5 10% 6 12% 0 0% 50 100%

Customer Care 23 46% 15 30% 7 14% 4 8% 1 2% 0 0% 50 100%

Voice Clarity 27 54% 14 28% 5 10% 3 6% 1 2% 0 0% 50 100%

Transparency in

Billing 20 40% 13 26% 4 8% 2 4% 8 16% 3 6% 50 100%

Dealer Services 22 44% 14 28% 6 12% 3 6% 3 6% 2 4% 50 100%

Mouth Publicity 25 50% 13 26% 4 8% 5 10% 3 6% 0 0% 50 100%

Friends/

Relatives’ Advice 23 46% 15 30% 5 10% 4 8% 3 6% 0 0% 50 100%

The table 1 shows that 40% of urban respondents strongly agree with the brand image as

an important consideration whereas 10% strongly disagree. In terms of network

connectivity, 42% strongly agree whereas 10% strongly disagree. 52% respondents

strongly agree with tariff call as the important consideration whereas 2% strongly

disagree. 52% of respondents strongly agree with service quality whereas 4% strongly

disagree. 38% respondents strongly agree with reliability as the important consideration




whereas 2% strongly disagree. 30% strongly agree with the advertisement as an

important consideration whereas 10% strongly disagree.

38% respondents strongly agree with sales promotion as the important consideration

whereas 8% are neutral. 40% strongly agree with availability and recharge facility as the

important consideration whereas 10% disagree. 46% strongly agree with customer care

as the important consideration whereas 2% respondents strongly disagree. 54% strongly

agree with voice clarity whereas 2% strongly disagree. 40% strongly agree with

transparency in billing as an important consideration whereas 4% disagree. 44% of

respondents strongly agree with dealer services whereas 6% strongly disagree. 50%

respondents strongly agree with mouth publicity as the important consideration whereas

6% strongly disagree. Lastly 46% respondents strongly agree with friends/ relatives’

advice as the important consideration whereas 6% strongly disagree.

Table: 2 Factors Considered While Choosing Mobile Service Provider (Rural)

Statement

Strongly Agree

Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree

Unresponded Total

Rur % Rur % Rur % Rur % Rur % Rur % Rur %

Brand Image 21 42% 13 26% 6 12% 7 14% 3 6% 0 0% 50 100%

Network

Connectivity 24 48% 13 26% 4 8% 5 10% 4 8% 0 0% 50 100%

Call Tariff 17 34% 15 30% 6 12% 6 12% 6 12% 0 0% 50 100%

Service Quality 18 36% 18 36% 5 10% 6 12% 2 4% 1 2% 50 100%

Reliability 11 22% 13 26% 10 20% 12 24% 4 8% 0 0% 50 100%

Advertisement 11 22% 14 28% 8 16% 10 20% 7 14% 0 0% 50 100%

Sales Promotion 13 26% 15 30% 8 16% 7 14% 5 10% 2 4% 50 100%

Availability &

Recharge facility 15 30% 19 38% 6 12% 5 10% 5 10% 0 0% 50 100%

Customer Care 15 30% 14 28% 8 16% 5 10% 7 14% 1 2% 50 100%

Voice Clarity 18 36% 20 40% 5 10% 6 12% 1 2% 0 0% 50 100%

Transparency in

Billing 14 28% 14 28% 8 16% 10 20% 4 8% 0 0% 50 100%

Dealer Services 15 30% 12 24% 9 18% 8 16% 4 8% 2 4% 50 100%

Mouth Publicity 22 44% 12 24% 9 18% 5 10% 2 4% 0 0% 50 100%

Friends/ Relatives’

Advice 25 50% 13 26% 5 10% 4 8% 3 6% 0 0% 50 100%

The table 2 shows that 42% of urban respondents strongly agree with the brand image as

an important consideration whereas 6% strongly disagree. In terms of network




connectivity, 48% of respondents strongly agree whereas 8% strongly disagree. 34%

respondents strongly agree with tariff call as the important consideration whereas 12%

are neutral, disagree and strongly disagree with each. 36% strongly agree and agree each

with service quality whereas 4% strongly disagree. 26% respondents agree with

reliability as the important consideration whereas 8% strongly disagree. 28%

respondents agree with the advertisement as the important consideration whereas 14%

strongly disagree.

30% of respondents agree with sales promotion whereas 10% strongly disagree. 38%

respondents agree with availability and recharge facility as the important consideration

whereas 10% strongly disagree. 30% of respondents strongly agree with customer care

whereas 10% disagree. 40% respondents agree with voice clarity as the important

consideration whereas 2% strongly disagree. 28% strongly agree with transparency in

billing whereas 8% respondents strongly disagree. 30% of respondents strongly agree

with dealer services whereas 8% strongly disagree. 44% of respondents strongly agree

with mouth publicity whereas 4% strongly disagree. Lastly 50% respondents strongly

agree with friends/ relatives’ advice as the important consideration whereas 6% strongly

disagree.

Company Representatives

Table: 3 Ranking of Customer Care Services (Urban)

Company Representative

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Unrespo

nded Total


Easily available 4 8% 5 10% 5 10% 14 28% 20 40% 2 4% 50 100%

Polite/soft spoken 6 12% 4 8% 4 8% 16 32% 19 38% 1 2% 50 100%

Able to deliver a

complete solution

6 12% 3 6% 5 10% 16 32% 19 38% 1 2% 50 100%

Total ranking 6 12% 5 10% 4 8% 13 26% 22 44% 0 0% 50 100%

The table highlights that 40% urban respondents think that the company representatives

were easily available and they have given 5 out of 5 to this attribute and 8% respondents

have given 1 out of 5 to the same. 38% respondents have given 5 out of 5 to the

characteristic of being polite and soft-spoken and 32%, 8 %, 8% and 12% respondents

have given 4, 3, 2 and 1 respectively to this attribute. 38% of respondents think that the

company representatives were able to deliver a complete solution and they have given 5

out of 5 to this attribute and 12% respondents have given 1 out of 5 to this attribute. 44%




respondents have given 5 out of 5 as a total ranking to different attributes of company

representatives and 26%, 8 %, 10% and 12% respondents have given 4, 3, 2 and 1

respectively to the same where 5 is considered the best and 1 is the worst.

Table: 4 Ranking of Customer Care Services (Rural)

Company representatives

are

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Unresponded Total

Rur. % Rur. % Rur. % Rur. % Rur. % Rur. % Rur. %

Easily available

5 10% 3 6% 13 26% 16 32% 11 22% 2 4% 50 100%

Polite/soft spoken

2 4% 3 6% 14 28% 17 34% 13 26% 1 2% 50 100%

Complete solution

4 8% 2 4% 7 14% 14 28% 22 44% 1 2% 50 100%

Total ranking 3 6% 1 2% 9 18% 18 36% 17 34% 2 4% 50 100%

The table highlights that 32% urban respondents think that the company representatives

were easily available and they have given 4 out of 5 to this attribute and 6% respondents

have given 2 out of 5 to the same. 26% have given 5 out of 5 to the characteristic of being

polite and soft-spoken and 34%, 28 %, 6% and 4% respondents have given 4, 3, 2 and 1

respectively to this attribute. 44% think that the company representatives were able to

deliver a complete solution and they have given 5 out of 5 to this attribute and 4%

respondents have given 2 out of 5 to this attribute. Lastly, 34% respondents have given 5

out of 5 as a total ranking to different attributes of company representatives and 36%,

18%, 2% and 6% respondents have given 4, 3, 2 and 1 respectively to this attribute.

Convincing with the factors of Service Quality

Table: 5 Factors of Service Quality (Urban)

Statement

Strongly

Agree Agree Neutral Disagree

Strongly

Disagree Unresponded Total


Net.

Connectivity

25 50% 11 22% 4 8% 3 6% 5 10% 2 4% 50 100%

Call Rate 28 56% 11 22% 3 6% 4 8% 2 4% 2 4% 50 100%

VAS 20 40% 15 30% 7 14% 4 8% 3 6% 1 2% 50 100%

Advertisement 17 34% 13 26% 8 16% 5 10% 6 12% 1 2% 50 100%

Sales Promo. 18 36% 13 26% 12 24% 2 4% 5 10% 0 0% 50 100%

Recharge Facility 27 54% 15 30% 3 6% 2 4% 2 4% 1 2% 50 100%




Customer Care 19 38% 17 34% 6 12% 3 6% 4 8% 1 2% 50 100%

Voice Clarity 22 44% 15 30% 5 10% 6 12% 2 4% 0 0% 50 100%

Transparency

in Billing

5 42% 1 8% 2 17% 2 17% 2 17% 0 0% 12 100%

Dealer Services 20 40% 12 24% 7 14% 5 10% 5 10% 1 2% 50 100%

Roaming 14 28% 13 26% 8 16% 6 12% 7 14% 2 4% 50 100%

The table 5 highlights that while dealing with network connectivity in the urban area, 50%

of respondents strongly agree whereas 10% respondents strongly disagree over this

variable. 56% of respondents strongly agree over call rates and only 4% of respondents

strongly disagree. 40% strongly agree in terms of value added services as one of the

factors of service quality and 6% strongly disagree. While dealing with the advertisement

as one of the factors, 34% of respondents strongly agree whereas 10% disagree. 36% of

respondents strongly agree with sales promotion whereas 4% disagree. 54% of

respondents strongly agree with availability and recharge facility as one of the pivotal

considerations whereas 4% respondents strongly disagree. 38% of respondents strongly

agree with customer care services whereas 6% of respondents disagree over the same

variable. 44% respondents strongly agree and 4% strongly disagree with voice clarity.

Transparency in billing has cropped up very significantly. 42% subscribers strongly agree

and 8% respondents agree over this variable. 40% subscribers strongly agree with dealer

services whereas 10% respondents strongly disagree. Eventually, in terms of roaming

facility, 28% respondents strongly agree whereas 12% disagree.

Table: 6 Factors of Service Quality (Rural)

Statement Strongly

Agree

Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

Disagree

Unresponded Total

Rur. % Rur. % Rur. % Rur. % Rur. % Rur. % Rur. %

Net. Connectivity 10 20% 12 24% 13 26% 6 12% 7 14% 2 4% 50 100%

Call Rate 13 26% 13 26% 9 18% 6 12% 8 16% 1 2% 50 100%

VAS 8 16% 11 22% 6 12% 10 20% 14 28% 1 2% 50 100%

Advertisement 12 24% 14 28% 9 18% 5 10% 7 14% 3 6% 50 100%

Sales Promotion 13 26% 13 26% 11 22% 6 12% 6 12% 1 2% 50 100%

Availability and

Recharge Facility

21 42% 12 24% 7 14% 7 14% 3 6% 0 0% 50 100%

Customer Care 12 24% 14 28% 8 16% 6 12% 7 14% 3 6% 50 100%

Voice Clarity 15 30% 12 24% 15 30% 4 8% 4 8% 0 0% 50 100%

Transparency in

Billing

6 35% 3 18% 2 12% 4 24% 2 12% 0 0% 17 100%




Dealer Services 15 30% 9 18% 12 24% 7 14% 7 14% 0 0% 50 100%

Roaming Facility 9 18% 6 12% 11 22% 10 20% 12 24% 2 4% 50 100%

The table 6 highlights that while dealing with network connectivity in the rural area, 26%

of respondents are neutral whereas 12% respondents disagree. 26% strongly agree over

call rates and only 12% respondents disagree. Only 12% of respondents are neutral in

terms of value-added services and 28% strongly disagree. While dealing with the

advertisement, 28% respondents agree whereas 10% disagree. 26% of respondents

strongly agree with sales promotion whereas 12% strongly disagree. 42% of respondents

strongly agree with availability and recharge facility whereas 6% respondents strongly

disagree over the same factor. 28% agree with customer care services whereas 12%

respondents disagree. 30% strongly agree whereas only 8% strongly disagree in terms of

voice clarity. Transparency in billing has cropped up very significantly. 35% subscribers

strongly agree and 12% respondents strongly disagree over this variable. 30%

subscribers agree whereas 14 % strongly disagree over dealer services. In terms of

roaming facility, 24% respondents strongly disagree whereas only 12% respondents

agree.

Network Connectivity

Table: 7 P value for Network Connectivity

Urban Mean Std.Dev N T-TEST Rural Mean Std.Dev N T-TEST

Airtel 1.750 1.199 34 Airtel 2.462 1.216 26

BSNL 2.500 1.458 16 -1.792 BSNL 3.091 1.345 24 -1.730

P Value 0.0794 P Value 0.09

In the table, the null hypothesis is that there is no difference in average network

connectivity between Airtel and BSNL for the urban area. The p is 0.0794, at 48 d.f, which

is more than 0.05 (5 % confidence level). Therefore, there is need to accept the null

hypothesis in favor of an alternative hypothesis that there is no significant difference in

average network connectivity of these two mobile service providers. Whereas in rural

Bikaner, the null hypothesis is "there is no difference in average network connectivity

between Airtel and BSNL for the rural area." The p-value is 0.09. Therefore, null

hypothesis is accepted in favor of an alternative: that there is no significant difference in

average network connectivity between Airtel and BSNL for the rural area.




Call Rate

Table: 8 P value for Call Rate

Urban Mean Std. Dev. N T-TEST Rural Mean Std.Dev N T-TEST

Airtel 1.515 0.857 34 Airtel 2.320 1.191 26

BSNL 2.333 1.445 16 -2.097 BSNL 3.000 1.528 24 -1.746

P Value 0.0412 P Value 0.087209

In the table, the p-value from our test is 0.0412, at 48 d.f, which is less than 0.05 (5 %

confidence level). Therefore, we have to reject the null hypothesis in favor of an

alternative hypothesis that there is a significant difference in the average call rate of these

two mobile service providers. While in the rural area of Bikaner, the null hypothesis is

"there is no difference in average call rate between Airtel and BSNL for the rural area." The

p-value output from our test here is 0.087209. Therefore, we decide to accept our null

hypothesis in favor of an alternative: that there is no significant difference in the average

call rate between Airtel and BSNL for the rural area.

Value Added Services

Table: 9 P value for Value Added Services

Urban Mean Std.Dev N T TEST Rural Mean Std.Dev N T Test

Airtel 1.848 0.988 34 Airtel 2.880 1.478 26

BSNL 2.563 1.413 16 -1.822 BSNL 3.583 1.382 24 -1.739


In the urban area of Bikaner, the null hypothesis is "there is no difference in average

value-added services between Airtel and BSNL for the urban area." The p-value output

from test here is 0.0746. Therefore, null hypothesis is accepted in favor of an alternative:

that there is no significant difference in average value-added services between Airtel and

BSNL for the urban area. In the above table, the null hypothesis is that there is no

difference in average value-added services between Airtel and BSNL for the rural area.

The p-value from our test is 0.088, at 48 d.f, which is more than 0.05(5% confidence level).

Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted in favor of an alternative hypothesis that there

is no significant difference in the average value-added services of these two mobile service

providers.




Advertisement

Table: 10 P value for Advertisement

Urban Mean Std.Dev N T TEST Rural Mean Std.Dev N T-TEST

Airtel 2.242 1.303 34 Airtel 2.250 1.090 26

BSNL 2.688 1.446 16 -1.047 BSNL 2.957 1.517 24 -1.878


The null hypothesis is that there is no difference in average advertisements between Airtel

and BSNL for the urban area. The p-value from test is 0.300, at 48 d.f, which is more than

0.05 (5% confidence level). Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted in favor of an

alternative hypothesis that there is no significant difference in average advertisements of

these two mobile service providers. For the rural area, the null hypothesis is "there is no

difference in average advertisements between Airtel and BSNL for the rural area." The p-

value output from our test here is 0.066. Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted in

favor of an alternative: that there is no significant difference in average advertisements

between Airtel and BSNL in the rural area.

Sales Promotion

Table: 11 P value for Sales Promotion


Airtel 1.971 1.014 34 Airtel 2.231 1.085 26

BSNL 2.875 1.495 16 -2.194 BSNL 2.957 1.459 24 -1.983


In the table 11, for the urban area of Bikaner, the null hypothesis is there is no difference

in average sales promotion between Airtel and BSNL for the urban area. The p-value

output from test here is 0.033. Therefore, null hypothesis is rejected in favor of an

alternative: There is a significant difference in average sales promotion between Airtel and

BSNL for the urban area. In the above table, the null hypothesis is that there is no

difference in average sales promotion between Airtel and BSNL for the rural area. The p-

value from test is 0.053, at 48 degree of freedom, which is more than 0.05 (5% confidence

level). Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted in favor of an alternative hypothesis that

there is no significant difference in average sales promotion of these two mobile service

providers.




Availability and Recharge Facility

Table: 12 P value for Availability and Recharge Facility

Urban Mean Std.Dev N T-TEST Rural Mean Std.Dev N T TEST

Airtel 1.588 0.943 34 Airtel 1.846 1.063 26

BSNL 2.000 1.155 16 -1.244 BSNL 2.542 1.384 24 -1.981


In the table, the null hypothesis is that there is no difference in average availability and

recharge facility between Airtel and BSNL for the urban area. The p-value from our test is

0.220, at 48 d.f, which is greater than 0.05(5% confidence level). Therefore, the null

hypothesis is accepted in favor of an alternative hypothesis that there is no significant

difference in average availability and recharge facility of these two mobile service

providers. In the rural area of Bikaner, the null hypothesis is there is no difference in

average availability and recharge facility between Airtel and BSNL for a rural area. The p-

value output from test here is 0.053. Therefore, null hypothesis is accepted in favor of an

alternative. There is no significant difference in average availability and recharge between

Airtel and BSNL for the rural area.

Customer Care Services

Table: 13 P value for Customer Care Services


Airtel 1.939 1.099 34 Airtel 2.346 1.239 26

BSNL 2.438 1.368 16 -1.276 BSNL 2.952 1.463 24 -1.575


In the table, the null hypothesis is that there is no difference in average customer care

services between Airtel and BSNL for the urban area. The p-value is 0.208, at 48 d.f., which

is greater than 0.05(5% confidence level). Therefore, null hypothesis is accepted in favor

of an alternative hypothesis that there is no significant difference in average customer

care services of these two mobile service providers. In terms of the rural area of Bikaner,

the p-value is 0.122, at 48 d.f, which is greater than 0.05(5% confidence level). Therefore,

the null hypothesis is accepted in favor of an alternative hypothesis that there is no

significant difference in average customer care services of these two mobile service

providers.




Voice Clarity

Table: 14 P value for Voice Clarity


Airtel 1.824 1.014 34 Airtel 2.038 0.898 26

BSNL 2.438 1.368 16 -1.397 BSNL 2.792 1.384 24 -1.768


In the table 14, the null hypothesis is that there is no difference in average voice clarity

between Airtel and BSNL for the urban area. The p-value from our test is 0.169, at 48 d.f,

which is greater than 0.05(5% confidence level). Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted

in favor of an alternative hypothesis that there is no significant difference in average voice

clarity of these two mobile service providers. In terms of the rural area of Bikaner, the p-

value from our test is 0.083, at 48 d.f, which is greater than 0.05 (5% confidence level).


is no significant difference in average voice clarity of these two mobile service providers.

Transparency in Billing

Table: 15 P Value for Transparency in Billing


Airtel 2.500 1.414 8 Airtel 2.000 1.054 9

BSNL 2.750 1.785 4 -0.244 BSNL 3.250 1.561 8 -1.910


In the table, the null hypothesis is that there is no difference in average transparency in

billing between Airtel and BSNL for the urban area. The p-value is 0.812, at 10 d.f, which is

more than 0.05 (5% confidence level). Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted in favor

of an alternative hypothesis that there is no significant difference in average transparency

in the billing of these two mobile service providers. In terms of the rural area of Bikaner,

the p-value from test is 0.075, at 15 d.f., which is more than 0.05 (5 % confidence level).


is no significant difference in average transparency in the billing of these two mobile

service providers.




Dealer Services

Table: 16 P value for Dealer Services

Urban Mean Std.Dev N T TEST Rural Mean Std. D N T-TEST

Airtel 1.970 1.114 34 Airtel 2.231 1.187 26

BSNL 2.813 1.590 16 -1.911 BSNL 3.083 1.470 24 -2.246


In the table, the null hypothesis is that there is no difference in average dealer services

between Airtel and BSNL for the urban area. The p-value from our test is 0.062, at 48 d.f,

which is more than 0.05 (5 % confidence level). Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted

in favor of an alternative hypothesis that there is no significant difference in average

dealer services of these two mobile service providers. In terms of the rural area of

Bikaner, the p-value from test is 0.046, at 48 d.f, which is less than 0.05(5% confidence

level). Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected in favor of an alternative hypothesis that

there is a significant difference in average dealer services of these two mobile service

providers.

Roaming Facility

Table: 17 P value for Roaming Facility

Urban Mean Std. Dev N T-TEST Rural Mean Std. Dev N T-TEST

Airtel 2.313 1.285 34 Airtel 2.846 1.321 26

BSNL 3.063 1.478 16 -1.483 BSNL 3.636 1.432 24 -1.571


In the table, the null hypothesis is that there is no difference in the average roaming

facility between Airtel and BSNL for the urban area. The p-value is 0.145, at 48 d.f, which is

greater than 0.05 (5% confidence level). Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted in favor

of an alternative hypothesis that there is no significant difference in the average roaming

facility of these two mobile service providers. In the rural area of Bikaner, the null

hypothesis is there is no difference in average roaming facility between Airtel and BSNL

for the rural area. The p-value is 0.123. Therefore, we decide to accept our null hypothesis

in favor of an alternative: There is no significant difference in the average roaming facility

between Airtel and BSNL for the rural area.




Table: 18 Satisfied with the Service Provider in Totality

Strongly Satisfied Moderate Satisfied Satisfied Little Satisfied

Strongly Unsatisfied Total

Urban % Urban % Urban % Urban % Urban % Urban %

23 46% 18 36% 6 12% 3 6% 0 0% 50 100%

Rural % Rural % Rural % Rural % Rural % Rural %

18 36% 15 30% 10 20% 5 10% 2 4% 50 100%

The table 18 highlights that in an urban area, 46% of people are strongly satisfied, 36%

are moderately satisfied, 12% are merely satisfied, 6% are little satisfied and only 0%

respondents are strongly unsatisfied with their service provider whereas, in terms of rural

area, 36% people are strongly satisfied, 30% are moderately satisfied, 20% are only

satisfied, 10% are little satisfied and only 4% respondents are strongly unsatisfied.

Satisfaction with the service provider-

Table: 19 P Value for Satisfaction with Service Provider


Airtel 1.647 0.800 34 Airtel 1.808 0.785 26

BSNL 2.063 0.966 16 -1.495 BSNL 2.542 1.322 24 -2.362


In the table 19, the null hypothesis is that there is no difference in average satisfaction

between Airtel and BSNL for the urban area. The p-value is 0.141, at 48 d.f, which is

greater than 0.05 (5 % confidence level). Therefore, null hypothesis is accepted in favor of

an alternative hypothesis that there is no significant difference in the average satisfaction

of these two mobile service providers. In the rural area of Bikaner, the null hypothesis is

there is no difference in average satisfaction between Airtel and BSNL for the rural area.

The p-value is 0.0222. Therefore, null hypothesis is rejected in favor of an alternative:

There is a significant difference in average satisfaction between Airtel and BSNL for the

rural area.




Customer Information

Age

Table: 20 Information about Customer’s Age

Below 18 18-25 25-40 Above 40 Total

Urban % Urban % Urban % Urban % Urban %

10 20% 24 48% 12 24% 4 8% 50 100%

Rural % Rural % Rural % Rural % Rural %

7 14% 20 40% 16 32% 7 14% 50 100%

The table 20 shows that in the urban area of Bikaner, 20% respondents were below the

age of 18. 48% of respondents were of the age group from 18 to 25 years. 24% of

respondents were between 25 to 40 years of age. 8% of respondents were above 40 years

of age. In the rural area, 14% respondents were below the age of 18. 40% of respondents

were of the age group from 18 to 25 years. 32% of respondents were between 25 to 40

years of age. 14% of respondents were above 40 years of age.

Profession

Table: 21 Information about Customer’s Profession

Student Professional Govt. Employee Self Employed Other Total


8 16% 28 56% 10 20% 2 4% 2 4% 50 100%


5 10% 18 36% 13 26% 12 24% 2 4% 50 100%

The table 21 shows that in the urban area of Bikaner, 16% of respondents were students,

56% were professionals, 20% were government employees, 4% were self-employed and

4% were others whereas, in the rural area of Bikaner, 10% were students, 36% were

professionals, 26% were government employees, 24% respondents were self-employed

and 4% were others.




Gender

Table: 22 Information about Customer’s Gender

Male Female Total

Urban % Urban % Urban %

30 60% 20 40% 50 100%

Rural % Rural % Rural %

32 64% 18 36% 50 100%

Gender

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Urban Rural Urban Rural

Male Female

Nu

mb

er

of

Resp

on

den

ts

Gender

The table highlights that in the urban area of Bikaner, 60% were male and 40% were

female whereas in terms of rural area, 64% were male and 36% were female.

Education

Table: 23 Information about Customer’s Education

Secondary

Senior

Secondary Graduate Post Graduate Other Total


3 6% 8 16% 20 40% 16 32% 3 6% 50 100%


8 16% 12 24% 24 48% 4 8% 2 4% 50 100%

The table highlights that in urban area of Bikaner, 6% were having secondary education,

16% were having senior secondary education, 40% were graduate, 32% were

postgraduate and 6% were having other education whereas in rural area 16% were

having secondary education, 24% were having senior secondary education, 48% were

graduate, 8% were postgraduate and 4% were having other qualifications.




Conclusion

It can be settled that service operators should create an emotional relationship with the

customers through innovative plans and enhance their service quality, better connectivity

and goodwill with customers because customers always want more from their operators.

And ultimately, this emotional relationship influences a customer's choice over Mobile

Service Provider. It is also concluded that consumers prefer prepaid plans and all most

every consumer treat their mobile phone as a necessity. They generally use their mobile

phone for their personal use and for both incoming and outgoing calls. The study reveals

that Airtel and BSNL are the prominent mobile phone service providers among consumers

followed by Vodafone and others. As pointed out in the above analysis it has been verified

that desire and expectation play a complementary role in determining overall customer

satisfaction for service quality. Statistical T-Test reveals the p-value result of different

service quality influencing factors like network connectivity, call rate, value-added

services, advertisement, sales promotion, availability, and recharge facility, customer care

services, voice clarity, transparency in billing, dealer services and roaming facility while

considering the two telecom outfits viz. Airtel and BSNL.

It is summed up from the study of Bikaner, Rajasthan that urban consumers are sentient

about the services offered by their mobile phone operators rather than rural areas. The

research also reveals that consumers are mollified with the services offered by their

mobile phone operators with differences. Sometimes, consumers face problems of poor

voice clarity, call drop, and poor network but overall, they are satisfied with the services

offered to them. In this age of ever-increasing competition, it is very important for mobile

phone operators to keep a constant eye on preferences and behavior of their consumers in

order to capture the largely untapped market both in rural and urban areas of India.

References 1. Sattari Setayesh (2002), A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for

Future Research, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49, pp.41-50.

2. A. Q. Othman, L. Owen (2000), The Multidimensionality of Carter Model to Measure

Customer Service Quality (SQ) in Islamic Banking Industry: A Study in Kuwait Finance

House, International Journal of Islamic Financial Services, 3(4).

3. M.T. Izah, W. Z. W. Ismail (2005), Service Quality in the Financial Services Industry in

Malaysia: The Case of Islamic Banks and Insurance, International Review of Business

Research Papers, 1(2): 10-21.




4. P. Hernon, D. A. Nitecki (2000), Service Quality: A Concept Not Fully Explored Library

Trends, 49(4): 687-708

5. Mascareigne Jessica (2003), Customer Satisfaction, Market Share, and Profitability:

Findings from Sweden, Journal of Marketing, July, 53-66.

6. K.Randheer, A. A. AL-Motawa, V.J.Prince (2011), Measuring Commuters' Perception of

Service Quality Using SERVQUAL in Public Transportation, International Journal of

Marketing Studies, 3(1): 1-14

7. C. Cook, B.Thompson (2000), Reliability and Validity of SERVQUAL Scores Used to

Evaluate Perceptions of Library Service Quality, Journal of Academic Librarianship,

26(4), 248-258.

8. Engene Thomas (2004), Service Marketing: Integrating Customer Focus across the

Firm, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2004

A Study of Customer Apprehension for Quality in Telecom ... … · Reference to Airtel and BSNL Consumers in Bikaner) 2 Review of Literature According to a Survey, 2007, Telecom Services

Documents