Laujiali Thesis

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SERVICE QUALITY AND CUSTOMER

SATISFACTION: A CASE STUDY OF TGL EXPRESS SDN. BHD.

LAU JIA LI

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

♦

CATATAN: * Potong yang tidak berkenaan. ** Jika tesis ini SULIT atau TERHAD, sila lampirkan surat daripada pihak berkuasa/organisasi berkenaan dengan menyatakan sekali sebab dan tempoh tesis ini perlu dikelaskan sebagai SULIT atau TERHAD.

Tesis dimaksudkan sebagai tesis bagi Ijazah Doktor Falsafah dan Sarjana secara

penyelidikan, atau disertasi bagai pengajian secara kerja kursus dan penyelidikan, atau Laporan Projek Sarjana Muda (PSM).

BORANG PENGESAHAN STATUS TESIS

JUDUL: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SERVICE QUALITY AND

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION: A CASE STUDY OF TGL

EXPRESS SDN. BHD. SESI PENGAJIAN: 2009/2010

Saya LAU JIA LI

(HURUF BESAR)

mengaku membenarkan tesis (PSM/Sarjana/Doktor Falsafah)* ini disimpan di Perpustakaan

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia dengan syarat-syarat kegunaan seperti berikut:

1. Tesis adalah hakmilik Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.

2. Perpustakaan Universiti Teknologi Malysia dibenarkan membuat salinan untuk tujuan

pengajian sahaja.

3. Perpustakaan dibenarkan membuat salinan tesis ini sebagai bahan pertukaran antara institusi pengajian tinggi.

4. **Sila tandakan ()

(Mengandungi maklumat yang berdarjah keselamatan atau

kepentingan Malaysia seperti yang termaktub di dalam

AKTA RAHSIA RASMI 1972)

(Mengandungi maklumat TERHAD yang telah ditentukan

oleh organisasi/badan di mana penyelidikan dijalankan)

Disahkan oleh

__________________________ ___________________________

(TANDATANGAN PENULIS) (TANDATANGAN PENYELIA)

SULIT

TERHAD

TIDAK TERHAD

Alamat Tetap: No.22, JLN KILANG KECIL,

BKT JENUN, 06720,

PENDANG, KEDAH.

Tarikh: 20 April 2010

DR. AHMAD BIN JUSOH

Nama Penyelia

Tarikh: 20 April 2010

“I hereby declare that I have read this thesis and in my opinion this thesis is

sufficient in terms of scope and quality for the award of Bachelor Degree in

Management (Technology)”.

Signature : ………………………..

Name : DR AHMAD BIN JUSOH

Date : 20 APRIL 2010

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SERVICE QUALITY AND CUSTOMER

SATISFACTION: A CASE STUDY OF TGL EXPRESS SDN. BHD.

LAU JIA LI

This report is proposed

To fulfill the requirement of

Bachelor of Management (Technology) Conferment

The Faculty of Management and Human Resources Development

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

APRIL 2010

ii

I declare that this thesis entitled “ The Relationship Between Service Quality and

Customer Satisfaction: A Case Study of TGL Express Sdn. Bhd.” Is the result of my

own research except as cited in the references. The thesis has not been acepted for

my degree and is not concurrently submitted in candidature of any other degree.

Signature : ______________________

Name : LAU JIA LI

Date : 14 April 2010

iii

This research is especially to my beloved mother and father and friends for their kindness

and support and everything they’ve done for me…

Thanks…

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude towards my

supervisor, Dr. Ahmad bin Jusoh, for his thorough guidance throughout the process

of completing this research. He had offered advices and explanation that had helped

me better understand the topic, without which it will be impossible to complete the

research.

Besides that, I would like to thank Ms. Lee Siew Im, secretary of TGL

Express Sdn. Bhd. (TGL) and all the staffs. They have been providing me with a lot

of information and feedback to enable me to successfully complete my research. For

instance, they have been helping me in distributing the questionnaires to their

customers.

I would also like to thank all my friends and seniors who had helped me in

providing information, care and support, especially Lee Lip Voon, who have been

providing useful and inspirational ideas regarding the research. Without them, it will

difficult to fulfill all the objectives of the research within the given period of time.

Last, I would like to thank to my parents and siblings who was constantly

being caring, understanding and supportive of my efforts throughout the duration of

the research. I would also like to express my appreciation for the financial support

that my family have provided, without which the research would not be possible.

Thank you.

v

ABSTRACT

In the fast-paced and highly competitive market, service quality and customer

satisfaction play an important role in determining success of an organization. Many

companies or industries, especially the service-based organizations, are paying

attention in service quality and customer satisfaction in order to obtain competitive

advantages. This because the performance of a service-based company is based

solely through their ability to provide good service to their customers in orders to

satisfy their needs. This research will be carried out on TGL Express Sdn. Bhd.

(TGL), which is a truck freight brokering company. The research will measure the

service quality of TGL using SERVQUAL instrument, the customer satisfaction and

also examine the relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction of

TGL. A total of 80 sets of questionnaires were distributed randomly to the customers

of TGL and the Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS) was used to

process the data. Based on the SERVQUAL instrument, the service quality (P-E)

will be obtained from the difference between the customers’ perception (P) and

expectation (E) (Parasuraman et al., 1985). From the data analysis it was found that

the service quality was low based on the SERVQUAL model while the customer

satisfaction was average. The Spearman correlation is used to test the relationship

between service quality and customer satisfaction and the results yield that there is

no relationship between the TGL’s service quality and their customers’ satisfaction.

vi

ABSTRAK

Dalam pasaran yang bersaing pantas dan kuat ini, kualiti perkhidmatan dan

kepuasan pelanggan memainkan peranan yang penting bagi menentukan kejayaan

sesuatu organisasi. Semakin banyak syarikat dan industri-industri terutamanya

syarikat yang berdasarkan perkhidmatan telah mengambil pehatian ke atas kualiti

perkhidmatan dan kepuasan pelanggan untuk tujuan memenangi kelebihan

kompetitif. Ini adalah kerana prestasi sesuatu syarikat yang berdasarkan

perkhidmatan hanya bergantung kepada kebolehan syarikat tersebut memberikan

perkidmatan yang baik demi mencapai permintaan pelanggan. Kajian ini

ditumpukan kepada TGL Express Sdn. Bhd. (TGL) yang menawarkan perkhidmatan

pembrokeran kargo trak. Kajian ini menguji kualiti perkhidmatan TGL dengan

menggunakan instrumen SERVQUAL, tahap kepuasan pelanggan, dan juga tentang

hubungan di antara kualiti perkhidmatan dengan kepuasan pelanggan TGL. Sejumah

80 set soal selidik diagihkan secara rawak kepada pelanggan-pelanggan TGL dan

Statistical Package for the Social Science Version (SPSS) digunakan untuk

menganalisa data. Berdasarkan intrumen SERVQUAL, kualiti perkhidmatan (P-E)

akan diperolehi daripada perbezaan di antara tanggapan (P) dan jangkaan (E)

pelanggan-pelanggan tersebut (Parasuraman et al., 1985). Berdasarkan analisa data

kajian, kita mendapati bahawa kualiti perkhidmatan adalah dalam tahap rendah

berdasarkan model SERVQUAL, manakala tahap kepuasan pelanggan berada di

tahap sederhana. Korelasi Spearman digunakan untuk menguji hubungan di antara

kualiti perkhidmatan dengan kepuasan pelanggandan hasil kajian menyatakan

bahawa tidak terdapat hubungan di antara kualiti perkhidmatan dan tahap kepuasan

pelanggan TGL.

vii

TABLES OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

TITLE OF RESEARCH i

DECLARATION ii

DEDICATION iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv

ABSTRACT v

ABSTRAK vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS vii

LIST OF TABLES xi

LIST OF FIGURES xiv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xv

LIST OF APPENDICES xvi

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2 Company Background 2

1.3 Problem Statement 3

1.4 Purpose 4

1.5 Objectives 5

1.6 Scope 5

1.7 Research Limitations 5

1.8 Significance of the Study 6

viii

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction 8

2.2 Definition 8

2.2.1 Quality 8

2.2.2 Service 9

2.2.3 Service Quality 10

2.2.4 Customer Satisfaction 11

2.2.5 Expectation 11

2.2.6 Perception 12

2.3 Quality Dimensions 13

2.4 Difference Between SERVQUAL and

SERVPERF 18

2.5 SERVQUAL 19

2.5.1 Selection of Service Quality

Measurement Model 19

2.5.2 SERVQUAL Instrument 20

2.6 Customer Satisfaction Measurement 23

2.7 Previous Studies on Service Quality based

on SERVQUAL Instrument 26

3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction 29

3.2 Research Design 29

3.3 Conceptual Framework 31

3.4 Data Collection Method 31

3.4.1 Primary data 32

3.5 Research Instrument 32

3.5.1 Section A: Demographic Data 34

3.5.2 Section B: Customer’s Expectation

and Perception 34

3.5.3 Section C: Customer Satisfaction 35

ix

3.6 Population and Sampling 36

3.7 Data Analysis 37

3.7.1 Descriptive Analysis 37

3.7.2 Correlation Analysis 39

4 DATA ANALYSIS

4.1 Introduction 42

4.2 Demographic Data 42

4.2.1 Ethnic 43

4.2.2 Location 44

4.2.3 Period of Time being a Customer of

TGL 45

4.2.4 Frequency of Usage 46

4.3 Service Quality Perception 46

4.4 Customers’ Perception based on

SERVQUAL Five Dimensions 47

4.4.1 Customers’ Perception on

Tangibility 47


Reliability 48


Responsiveness 49

4.4.4 Customers’ Perception on Assurance 49

4.4.5 Customers’ Perception on Empathy 50

4.5 Service Quality Expectation 51

4.6 Customers’ Expectation based on

SERVQUAL Five Dimensions 52

4.6.1 Customers’ Expectation on

Tangibility 52


Reliability 53

4.6.3 Customers’ Expectation on 53

x

Responsiveness


Assurance 54

4.6.5 Customers’ Expectation on Empathy 55

4.7 Level of Service Quality (Service Quality =

Perception – Expectation) 56

4.8 Customer Satisfaction 57

4.9 Relationship between Service Quality and

Customer Satisfaction based on the Service

provided by TGL

58

5 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Introduction 60

5.2 Research Conclusion 60

5.2.1 Level of Service Quality 61

5.2.2 Customer Satisfaction 62

5.2.3 Relationship between Service

Quality and Customer Satisfaction 63

5.3 Recommendations 65

5.5 Future Researches 66

REFERENCES 68

APPENDICES 75

xi

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE

2.1 Definition of Quality 9

2.2 Definition of Service 9

2.3 Definition of Service Quality 10

2.4 Definition of Customer Satisfaction 11

2.5 Definition of Expectation 12

2.6 Definition of Perception 12

2.7 Lehtinen and Lehtinen’s Three Dimensions 13

2.8 Gronroos’s Three Global Dimensions 14

2.9 Garvin’s Eight Dimensions 14

2.10 Chakrapani’s Three Dimensions 15

2.11 Service Quality Determinants Ten Dimensions 16

2.12 SERVQUAL’s Five Dimensions 17

3.1 22-Item List with SERVQUAL 5 Dimensions 34

3.2 7-Point Likert Scale of Customers Expectation and

Perception

35

3.3 7-Point Likert Scale of Customers Satisfaction 35

3.4 Determining Sample Size from a given Population 36

3.5 Method of Analysis for Objectives Research 37

3.6 Mean of Customers’ Expectation, Perception and

Satisfaction

38

3.7 Interpretation of Pearson or Spearman’s r Value 39

4.1 Frequency Distribution of Respondents based on

Ethnic

43

4.2 Frequency Distribution of Respondents based on 44

xii

Location

4.3 Frequency Distribution for Period of Time being a

Customer of TGL

45

4.4 Frequency Distribution of the Frequency of Usage

of TGL Service

46

4.5 Frequency Distribution for Customers Perception

on Overall Service Quality

47


on the Level of Service Quality Provided by TGL

Based on Tangibility

48



Based on Reliability

48



Based on Responsiveness

49



Based on Assurance

50



Based on Empathy

51

4.11 Frequency Distribution for Customers Expectation

on Overall Service Quality

51



Based on Tangibility

52



Based on Reliability

53



Based on Responsiveness

54

xiii



Based on Assurance

54



Based on Empathy

55

4.17 Normality of Service Quality 56

4.18 The Difference of mean between the Customers’

Perception and Expectation based on SERVQUAL

Dimensions

56

4.19 Frequency Distribution of Customers’ Satisfaction

based on the Service Quality Provided by TGL

57

4.20 Normality of Customer Satisfaction 57

4.21 Relationship between Service Quality and

Customer Satisfaction of TGL

58

5.1 Summary of Service Quality Mean Values 61

5.2 Relationship between Customer Perception and

Customer Satisfaction of TGL

64

xiv

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE

2.1 Gaps Model of Service Quality 21

2.2 The Measurement Model for American Customer

Satisfaction Index (ACSI)

25

3.1 Flow Chart of Research Process 30

3.2 Conceptual Framework 31

3.3 Items in Questionnaire 33

3.4 Positive Correlation 40

3.5 Negative Correlation 41

3.6 No Correlation 41

4.1 Ethnicity of the Respondents 44

4.2 Location of the Respondents 45

4.3 Scatter Diagram between Service Quality and

Customer Satisfaction

59

5.1 Scatter Diagram between Customer Perception and


65

xv

LIST OF ABBREVIATION

ACSI : American Customer Satisfaction Index

CSI : Customer Satisfaction Index

SPSS : Statistical Package for Social Science

TGL : TGL Express Sdn. Bhd.

UTM : Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

xvi

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX TITLE PAGE

A Questionnaire (Borang Soal Selidik) 75

B SPSS Data Analysis 83

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

Since the 1980s, the attainment of quality in products and services has

become a major concern in the business world (Parasuraman et al., 1985). It has a

strong impact on business performance, customer satisfaction, customer loyalty,

profitability and cost reduction (Seth et al., 2005). Today’s companies are trying to

maintain higher level of quality to meet the demands of the increasingly competitive

conditions (Solis et al., 1998). In order to maintain their position in the market,

companies are required to provide valuable services and at the same time with lower

cost. This will ensure customer satisfaction and thus give the company an advantage

over its competitors. Customer satisfaction along with service quality is important

concepts used by organizations as a means of creating customer loyalty and

competitive advantages (Iacobucci et al., 1995). In order to achieve customer

satisfaction, the organizations have to ensure that their service quality must exceed or

at least be at par with the customers’ expectation.

Customer satisfaction and service quality are important for service based

companies. Examples of organisations in the service industry include banks,

hospitals, hotels, courier services, recreational services, and so on. These

organisations do not gain profits from products but depend on providing certain kind

of service to their customers. The successes of these companies depend on the

quality of their service as well as the level of satisfaction of customers. According to

2

Parasuraman et al. (1985), “service quality is more difficult for the consumer to

evaluate than goods quality”, due to the fact that service quality is intangible,

heterogeneous and also that the production and consumption of many services are

inseparable. Thus, unlike product based companies, their customers’ satisfactions

depend on how well they are served while dealing with the company.

A truck freight broker connects the shippers that need to transport their goods,

with carriers that provide transport services (www.bluemarblelogistics.com). Their

business activities include contacting the shippers and carriers to coordinate the time

and service required to satisfy the needs of all parties involved in the transaction.

For example, when a shipper needs to transport a container from Kedah to Johor by a

certain time, the broker will have to provide a carrier which will be able to fulfill the

task reliably, and like wise, when a carrier needs goods to be transported, the broker

will make use of his contacts to look for shippers in need. All the processes involved

require experience and systematic planning in order to ensure that everything is

coordinated properly.

Since truck freight brokers need to constantly deal with their customers, their

service quality is very important to achieve customer satisfaction. They need to have

access to important information such as the availability of shipments, availability of

equipments, rates, market conditions, weather and so on so that they will be able to

effectively complete their tasks (Taff, 1979). The high competition in today’s

scenario is affecting their daily decisions (Solis et al., 1998), especially in terms of

quality. Thus, the quality of service is very important to ensure the level of customer

satisfaction, and a high level of customer satisfaction will ultimately increase the

level of success of the truck freight brokers.

1.2 Company Background

Mr Lau Hoh Chu has started his business in truck freight brokering from

home since year 2005 before he officially founded TGL Express Sdn. Bhd. (TGL) on

3

the 1st of July 2008. Services provided by TGL include connecting the shippers that

needs to transport their goods, with carriers that provide transport services and

connecting the carriers who have transport but do not have goods, with shippers.

Currently, TGL is a small and medium company with only six employees

involved in land trucking freight broker, which includes services utilising lorries,

trucks and containers. The services provided by TGL ranges throughout the

Peninsular Malaysia, and even into Thailand (until Bangkok) and Singapore.

1.3 Problem Statement

TGL’s customers are becoming more demanding in their services. Due to

fierce competition, customers nowadays always expect to receive high level of

quality in order to meet their demands. Since TGL is only a small and medium

company, the challenge is rather great for them to maintain their position among

their competitors.

According to Abu (2004), service-based companies used service quality to

gain advantageous competitive position among their rivals, and generally, good

service quality signifies good business performance. When facing stiff market

competition, it is better for companies to compete in terms of service quality rather

than in prices. For instance, when facing a stronger and more financially stable

competitor, it is very difficult for a company to offer lower prices; thus, the only way

to gain a competitive edge is by providing excellent service quality. Only then, these

small companies will be able to gain an advantage and survive in the industry.

Besides, customers play an important role in the market place. The

customers will only continue to obtain goods and services from the companies which

can meet their needs and also satisfaction. More over, if the company can provide

their customers better experience or performance that exceeds the customers’

expectation, more customers will be attracted. One of the main functions in

4

determining how successful a company is the level of customer satisfaction. In this

competitive environment, companies which do not offer customer-oriented services

will be at a disadvantage (Fečiková, 2004). The companies which intend to survive

must produce very good quality of goods or services to fulfill their customers’

expectation and satisfaction. In this matter, TGL is facing the same scenario

discussed above, where they need to keep up with the development of the

competition by constantly maintaining the satisfaction level of their customers.

Even though there are a lot of researches on the different dimensions to

measure service quality in the service sector (Abu, 2004), there is still lack of studies

regarding the service quality dimensions and improvement strategies for truck freight

brokers. TGL is a small and medium company that lacks a system or model to

control their service quality and their customer satisfaction. Thus, in order to remain

competitive in the trucking freight brokering market, TGL needs to direct their

service policy towards achieving their customers’ satisfaction. As a customer-based

company, TGL has to maintain its customer satisfaction in order to achieve

maximum profit.

1.4 Purpose

The purpose of this research is to know the level of service quality provided

by TGL, their customer satisfaction and the relationship between them. These

information can be used by TGL for their improvements. According to Zineldin

(2005), the level of success of a given company depends on the quality and value of

service provided. Therefore, it is important for the TGL management to improve

their service quality in order to attract more new customer, while maintaining

customer loyalty. Besides, this research also proposes the use of SERVQUAL

instrument of five dimensions which include tangibles, reliability, responsiveness,

assurance and empathy to help TGL to improve their service quality.

5

1.5 Objectives

The objectives of this study are:-

(a) To determine the level of service quality provided by TGL.

(b) To determine the level of satisfaction among its customers.

(c) To determine the relationship between service quality and customer

satisfaction.

1.6 Scope

This study will focus on the customers of TGL. It is important to determine

the service quality of TGL that will influence the customers’ satisfaction. The data

of this research will be collected from the customers of TGL by using questionnaires.

1.7 Research Limitations

Several research limitations are found during the study and they are listed in

the following section:

(a) The survey is done only among TGL customers, thus, the results are

generally only applicable for TGL only. Since the scope of the survey is

very small, the results cannot be used to picture the condition of the

whole truck freight brokering industry.

(b) The sample size is too small to be analyzed statistically. As a result, the

outcome of the test will not perfectly follow the normal statistical

conditions. Since TGL is a small-and-medium sized company, the

customer population is relatively small, and not sufficient to produce a

6

reliable result. For instance, the customer satisfaction value failed the

normality test due to the lack of sample size.

(c) The accuracy of the data might be doubtful. Since the questionnaire is

prepared only in English and Malay, a small number of respondents,

especially from Chinese and Indian background might not fully

understand each statement in the questionnaire. Inaccuracy of data in

these cases will often cause inconsistent results.

(d) The survey might not be suitable for the industry. This is due to the fact

that the truck freight brokering business in Malaysia is almost unheard of.

Even though there are some organisations which offer logistics services

such as EAE Group of Companies, there is still little research done on

small companies which deal only with trucking freight brokering such as

TGL. As a result, it is very difficult to obtain relevant information

regarding truck freight brokering companies in Malaysia, thus making it

impossible to customize the study according to local conditions.

1.8 Significance of the Study

The findings of this research will show the level of satisfaction on the service

quality among customers of TGL by using suitable instruments such as the

SERVQUAL. The finding of the research can help TGL to improve the service

quality. By understanding the customers’ perceptions and expectations, the level of

service quality can be improved consequently, the company will gain positive image

and become more competitive.

This research also provides useful information that can be implemented not

only by TGL, but also other companies of the same scale and type. Thus, in future,

companies can shape their service policy based on the findings of the study, in order

7

to achieve continuous advancement to meet the ever-growing demand of today’s

market.

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This section discusses the literature review of the research. The main purpose

of the literature review is to take a critical look at the literature that already exists in

the area of research. Among topics that will be discussed in this section include the

definitions of important terms such as quality, service, service quality, customer

satisfaction, expectations and perceptions. The definitions are followed by quality

dimensions as described by various authors, selection of service quality measurement

models, SERVQUAL instrument, difference between the SERVQUAL and

SERVPERF, customer satisfaction measurement and finally, past studies related to

the relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction.

2.2 Definition

2.2.1 Quality

There are many different views to defining quality. The definitions by

different authors are shown in Table 2.1. Thus, quality can be defined as a form of

overall measurement on whether the product or service has the ability to satisfy the

given needs.

9

Table 2.1: Definition of Quality

Authors Definition of Quality

Juran et al. (1974) Quality is “fitness for use.”

Crosby (1984) “Quality is conformance to requirements, not as goodness.”

Olshavsky (1985) Quality is a form of overall evaluation of a product, similar

in many ways to attitude.

Morgan and

Murgatroyd (1994)

Quality is “the totality of features of a product or service

that bears its ability to satisfy given needs.”

2.2.2 Service

Table 2.2: Definition of Service

Authors Definition of Service

Norman (1984) Service is “social act(s) which take place in direct contact

between the customer and representatives of service

company.”

Gronroos (1990) “A service is an activity or series of activities of a more or

less intangible nature that normally, but not necessarily,

take place in interaction between the customer and service

employees and/or physical resources or goods and/or

systems of the service provider, which are provided as

solutions to customer problems.”

Zeithaml and Bitner

(1996)

Services are defined as “deeds, processes and

performances.”

Kotler (1999) Service is “any benefit or activity that one party offers to

another, which is essentially intangible and does not result

in the ownership of anything. Its production may or may

not be tied to a physical product.”

10

Table 2.2 shows the definitions of service given by different authors. Service

can be defined as an intangible activity, which takes place in the interaction between

customers and the service provider in order to meet the customers‟ demands.

2.2.3 Service Quality

Service quality is an intangible concept that is difficult to conceptualize and

measure (Lee, 2007). Table 2.3 shows the definitions of service quality as given by

different authors. The authors have similar views that service quality is based on the

difference between the customer‟s expectation and the perceived actual delivered

performance of the service provider.

Table 2.3: Definition of Service Quality

Authors Definition of Service Quality

Lewis and Booms

(1983)

“Service quality is a measure of how well the service level

delivered matches the customer expectations. Delivering

quality service means conforming to customer expectations

on a consistent basis.”

Parasuraman et al.

(1985)

Service quality is the difference between the customer‟s

expectation and perceived actual delivered performance.

Bitner et al. (1994) “The consumer‟s overall impression of the relative inferiority

or superiority of the organisation and its services.”

Roest and Pieters‟

(1997)

A relativistic and cognitive discrepancy between experience-

based norms and performances concerning service benefits.

Edvardsson (1998) Service quality is the measure of effort provided by the

organisation in order to help their customers meet and satisfy

what they expect and need.

11

2.2.4 Customer Satisfaction

Customer satisfaction has been defined by a number of researchers as shown

in Table 2.4. Customer satisfaction will only occur after the customers have tried the

product or service. Customers will evaluate the quality of a product or service based

on their expectations or hopes before using the product or service. Generally, the

customer will be satisfied if the perceived quality exceeds or is at least at par with

their expectations.

Table 2.4: Definition of Customer Satisfaction

Authors Definition of Customer Satisfaction

Cadotte et al.

(1987)

The impression that is created after the evaluation of a used

product or service.

Tse and Wilton

(1988)

Customers make feedback to the evaluation of the difference

between the expectation and the final consequence after

expensing.

Zeithaml et al.

(1993)

The difference of predicted service (what a customer believes

will happen) and the perceived service (what a customer

believes actually did happen).

Peter and Olson

(1996)

“The degree to which a consumer‟s pre-purchase expectations

are fulfilled or surpassed by a product.”

Gunderson et

al. (1996)

“A guest‟s post-consumption judgment of a product or service

that can, in turn, be measured by assessing guest‟s evaluation of

a performance on specific attributes.”

2.2.5 Expectation

The definitions of expectation by different authors are shown in Table 2.5.

There are two different contexts in defining expectation, depending on whether it is

defined in the service quality literature or the customer satisfaction literature

(Parasuraman et al., 1988). Oliver (1981) defined expectation according to the

12

customer satisfaction literature while the definition provided by Parasuraman et al.

(1988) was based on the service quality literature. Loosely defined, the former refers

to the outcome which customers predict or forecast while the latter refers to the hope

or desires set by the customers themselves.

Table 2.5: Definition of Expectation

Authors Definition of Expectation

Oliver (1981) “Expectation is consumer-defined probabilities of the

occurrence of positive and negative events if the consumer

engages in some behavior.”

Parasuraman et al.

(1988)

Expectation is “desires or wants of consumers, i.e. what

they feel a service provider should offer rather than would

offer.”

Boulding et al.

(1993)

Expectation is “pre-trial beliefs” of a product or service.

2.2.6 Perception

Table 2.6 shows the definitions of perception by different authors. Perception

is the key factor used to measure the service quality, as supported by Parasuraman et

al. (1988), Cronin and Taylor (1992) and Boulding et al. (1993). In the context of

service quality, perception can be defined as the quality of service received based on

the customer‟s judgment.

Table 2.6: Definition of Perception

Authors Definition of Perceptions

Parasuraman et al.

(1988)

Perception of service quality is “the consumer‟s judgment

about an entity‟s overall excellence or superiority.”

Boulding et al. Perception of service quality can defined as “prior

13

(1993) expectations of what will and what should transpire during

the contact and the actual delivered service during the

service encounter.”

Robbins (2005) Perception is “a process by which individuals organize and

interpret their sensory impressions in order to give meaning

to their environment.”

2.3 Quality Dimensions

Since the development of service quality research in early 1980s, the

dimensionality of quality is distinguished by several of authors over the time. They

are as explained in the following:-

(a) Lehtinen and Lehtinen (1982) with three dimensions of service quality,

which are interactive, physical and corporate quality. The dimensions

will be defined in Table 2.7.

Table 2.7: Lehtinen and Lehtinen‟s Three Dimensions

Dimensions Definition

Interactive

Quality

Interactive quality is the interaction between contact

personnel and customers as well as between customers and

other customers.

Physical Quality Physical quality is the physical aspect of the service such as

equipment or building.

Corporate Quality Corporate quality is the quality that involves the company‟s

image or profile.

Source: Lehtinen and Lehtinen (1982)

14

(b) Gronroos (1984, 1988) developed three global dimensions, which are

functional quality, technical quality and corporate image. The

dimensions will be defined as the following in Table 2.8.

Table 2.8: Gronroos‟s Three Global Dimensions


Technical Quality Technical quality is the quality of the service actually

delivered, whether the service performed correctly and

accurately.

Functional

Quality

Functional quality is the way which the service is delivered

such as friendliness, helpfulness, politeness and so on.

Corporate Image Corporate image is built by both technical and functional

quality and others factors like traditional marketing activities.

Sources: Gronroos (1984, 1988)

(c) Garvin (1987) list eight dimension of product quality; there are

performance, features, reliability, conformance, durability,

serviceability, aesthetics and perceived quality as Table 2.9.

Table 2.9: Garvin‟s Eight Dimensions

Dimensions Definitions

Performance Refers to the efficiency with which a product achieves its

intended purpose.

Features Attributes of a product that supplement a product‟s basic

performance.

Reliability The propensity for a product to perform consistently over its

useful design life.

Conformance Numerical dimensions for a product‟s performance, such as

capacity, speed, size, durability, colour, and so on.

Durability The degree to which a product tolerates stress or trauma

without failing.

Serviceability Resolution of problems and complaints, ease of repair.

15

Aesthetics Subjective sensory characteristics, such as taste, feel, sound,

look, and smell.

Perceived

Quality

The quality of a service or product based on the customer‟s

opinion. Customers imbue products and services with their

understanding of their goodness.

Source: Garvin (1987).

(d) Chakrapani (1998) propounded three dimensions of quality, which are

service or product, dependability or support and exceeding

expectation. Table 2.10 shows the definition of the dimensions.

Table 2.10: Chakrapani‟s Three Dimensions


Service or

Product

Refers to what is offered to the customers and whether the

product or service meets the customer needs.

Dependability Dependability refers to the customer confidence in the

organisation‟s continued commitment to the product or

service being sold.

Exceeding

Expectation

Exceeding expectation is what provides depth to the service

or quality. The service offered exceeds customer expectations

and makes the customer „feel important‟.

Source: Chakrapani (1998)

(e) In their initial research, Parasuraman et al. (1985) developed ten

dimensions and labeled them as “service quality determinants”.

These ten dimensions are reliability, responsiveness, competence,

access, courtesy, communication, credibility, security, understanding

or knowing the customer and tangibles as shown in Table 2.11. After

few years, Parasuraman et al. (1988) refined the dimensions into only

five dimensions which are tangibles, reliability, responsiveness,

assurance and empathy. Table 2.12 shows the definitions of these five

dimensions.

16

Table 2.11: Service Quality Determinants‟ Ten Dimensions


Reliability Being reliable means that the organisation performs the

service right at the first time and that it honors its promises.

For example provide the correct service, keep the correct

record, delivery the service on time.

Responsiveness The willingness and readiness to provide service. For example

the organisation will always give response to their customer

as fast as possible like calling back customer quickly.

Competence “Possession of the required skills and knowledge to perform

the service.” For example, operational support personnel

need the relevant skill and knowledge about the operations.

Access The organisation can be easily approachable and contactable.

For example customer can easily get the service by using

telephone because the lines are not busy.

Courtesy Concerns proper behaviour like politeness, respect,

consideration and friendliness of personnel in face-to-face or

telephone contacts with the end customer.

Communication Refers to communicating with customers in a suitable

language when providing information, for instance when

explaining the service, costs, transaction processes and so on.

Credibility Good image which include trustworthiness, believability and

honesty, so that customers trust and believe with the service

they provide.

Security Freedom from risk, danger and doubt for example physical

safety, financial security and confidentiality.

Understanding/

knowing

Efforts to understand what their customers really needs, for

instance learning the customers‟ specific requirements.

Tangibles Physical evidence of the service such as tools to provide the

service or the appearance of the personnel.

Source: Parasuraman et al. (1985).

17

Table 2.12: SERVQUAL‟s Five Dimensions


Tangibles The appearance of physical facilities, equipment, appearance

of personnel, and communication materials.

Reliability The ability to dependably and accurately perform the

promised service.

Responsiveness The willingness to be helpful to customers and respond

quickly to their queries and requests.

Assurance The knowledge and courtesy of employees which enables

customers to trust in their ability to perform the promised

service.

Empathy The ability to provide customized or individualized attention

based on each customer‟s needs and requirements.

Source: Parasuraman et al. (1988).

The models mentioned above are developed based on different types of

companies. For instance, Garvin‟s eight dimensions and Chakrapani‟s three

dimensions takes into account the performance and quality of products, which are not

relevant for service-based companies. Thus, in order to evaluate the service quality

of a company, a few models can be used, namely the Lehtinen and Lehtinen‟s three

dimensions, Gronroos‟ three global dimensions, and also Parasuraman‟s models

explained above.

In addition to these four models, Cronin and Taylor (1992) have also

developed a model named SERVPERF in reaction to Parasuraman‟s SERVQUAL

model. The dimensions of SERVPERF are same as SERVQUAL, namely tangibles,

reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy. The main difference is that, as

opposed to SERVQUAL model which compares the expectation of the customer

with the performance of the company, the SERVPERF considers only the

performance of the company.

18

2.4 Difference Between SERVQUAL and SERVPERF

Even though the SERVQUAL instrument has been widely used to measure

the service quality in many researches in the service sectors (Sachdev and Verma,

2004), some have expressed criticism towards this instrument. Cronin and Taylor

(1992) have developed a “performance-based” service quality measurement called

SERVPERF which measures the service quality based only on the customers‟

perception. It differs from the SERVQUAL instrument, which uses the gap between

the expectation and perception of the customer to measure the service quality.

Cronin and Taylor (1992) argued that their unweighted SERVPERF

instrument was better than weighted SERVQUAL instrument on measuring the

service quality. This is because the unweighted SERVPERF used only the

performance to measure the service quality, while the weighted SERVQUAL used

the gap between the customers‟ perception and expectation. Cronin and Taylor

(1992) also argued that the SERVPERF instrument is more consistent on reliability

and validity, and according to Lee (2007), this is supported by Babakus and Boiler

(1992), Babakus and Mangold (1992) and also Oliver (1993).

SERVQUAL and SERVPERF are always being compared to determine

which one of them is a better method to measure service quality in the service sector.

These instruments have their respective advantages and disadvantages. Generally, if

the study is based on the performance of service quality, SERVPERF instrument will

be more stable than the SERVQUAL instrument. However, if it is a multi-cultural

study, SERVQUAL instrument will be more accurate to measure the service quality

(Lee, 2007). This is because multi-cultural studies will involve samples of different

culture and thus varying expectations. Therefore, it is necessary to use the

SERVQUAL instrument to measure the performance by taking into account the

expectations of the samples.

19

2.5 SERVQUAL

2.5.1 Selection of Service Quality Measurement Model

As explained above, there are many different models that can be used to

measure a company‟s service quality, such as models developed by Lehtinen and

Lehtinen, Gronroos, Parasuraman, Cronin and Taylor and so on. In this study, the

SERVQUAL model will be used to determine the service quality of TGL Express

Sdn. Bhd. (TGL) as perceived by their customers.

SERVQUAL has been widely used by researchers in many different

industrial, commercial and non-profit settings like tyre retailing, dental services,

hotels, hospitality, banking, recreational services, hospitals and so on (Sachdev and

Verma, 2004). According to Nyeck et al. (2002), “SERVQUAL model remains the

most complete attempt to conceptualize and measure service quality.” SERVQUAL

is more suitable in cross-cultural studies which include the variance expectations in

each culture (Lee, 2007). Besides, SERVQUAL is a “multiple-item scale with good

reliability and validity” (Parasuraman et al., 1988), because the companies can

understand the expectations and perceptions of customers and they can improve it.

Parasuraman et al. (1994) also stated that the expectation in the SERVQUAL is

important in measuring the customer satisfaction.

There are also some criticisms about the SERVQUAL model. Cronin and

Taylor (1992) have stated that though the expectation-perception gap might be able

to be used to infer customers‟ disconfirmation, the actual perceptions are more

reliable than the calculated values. According to Buttle (1996), the SERVQUAL

model focused only on how the service is delivered rather than the outcomes of the

service encounter. In order to solve the problem, he suggested Gronroos‟s three

global dimensions where the technical quality will focus on what service is delivered

and functional quality will focus on how the service delivered.

Despite criticisms on the SERVQUAL model, it is still suitable for this study.

Baki et al. (2009) have used the SERVQUAL model in their study on logistic

20

services. Since TGL is a similar type of company, the SERVQUAL model can be

applied for this research. This research will also study on the relationship between

the service quality and customer satisfaction and according to Parasuraman et al.

(1988) SERVQUAL will provide the customers‟ perception and expectation to

measure service quality. Since customer satisfaction as defined by Zeithaml et al.

(1993) and Peter and Olson (1996) involve comparing the perceived performance

with the expectations of the customer, the SERVQUAL instrument can be used for

the purpose of this study.

2.5.2 SERVQUAL Instrument

Starting from the 1980s, only companies which are able to deliver high

quality service quality will have the chance to be successful (Parasuraman et al.,

1988). This situation leads to a lot of researchers studying on the measurement of

service quality. SERVQUAL is one of the most widely accepted methods of service

quality measurement (Parasuraman et al., 1988).

SERVQUAL instrument is developed by Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry in

1988 to measure the service quality. SERVQUAL instrument is well known with its

22-item list and five dimensions model, which are tangibles, reliability,

responsiveness, assurance and empathy as the key dimensions or determinants of

service quality. Based on the five SERVQUAL dimensions, SERVQUAL is used to

measure the gap between the customers‟ expectation (E) and perception (P) based on

the disconfirmation model (whereby, SERVQUAL = P-E). The disconfirmation

model will show 3 types of result:

(a) Positive effect, which is a satisfying result (P>E);

(b) Negative effect, which is a dissatisfying result (E>P); and

(c) Zero effect, means do not shows satisfy or not satisfy (P=E).

21

Word of Mouth

Communications

Personal

Needs

Past

Experience

Expected

Service

Perceived

Service Customer

Company Service Delivery

(including pre- and

post-contact)

External

Communications

to Customers

Management Perception

of Customer

Expectations

Translation of

Perceptions into

Service Quality

Specifications

Gap 1

Gap 3

Gap 2

Gap 4

Gap 5

Besides that, the gap model which was developed by Parasuraman et al.

(1985) discussed about the gaps between customers‟ expectation and perception of

service quality can be identified in the Figure 2.1. There are:

Figure 2.1: Gaps Model of Service Quality

GAP 1 : The gap between the customer expectation and management

perception on the customers‟ expectation. The management might not

know what level is required to be perceived as high quality.

GAP 2: The gap between management perception and service quality

specifications. The service quality specification might not fully meet

the management‟s perception of the customers‟ expectation due to

reasons like resource constraints, market conditions and poor service

designs.

22

GAP 3: The gap between service quality specifications and service delivery.

The actual delivered service might not be as stated in the service

quality specifications as it depends largely on the employees‟

performances.

GAP 4: The gap between service delivery and external communication.

Media advertising and other forms of communications can affect

customer expectation. If a company promises more than they can

deliver, the customers‟ expectations will increase and thus, their

perception on the quality of the actual delivered service will be

reduced.

GAP 5: The gap between expected and perceived service. This is the

difference between the service expected by the customers and the

actual service that they received.

According to Parasuraman et al. (1988), SERVQUAL instrument will be

divided into two columns, the first used to measure the customers‟ expectation of the

research company and the second was used to measure the customers‟ perception.

Both the customers‟ expectation and perception will use seven-point scale ranging

from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The overall service quality score

will be determine by using the mean score of the five dimensions. Lastly, the score

of expectations will be subtracted from the score of perceptions. The gap is positive

when the perception is greater than the expectation while the gap is negative when

the expectation is greater than the perception. If the gap is negative, it means that the

customers‟ satisfaction are not met because they expect more, so the company need

to further improve to reach the customers‟ needs.

23

2.6 Customer Satisfaction Measurement

Customer satisfaction is the key point to ensure the successes of the

organisations because only the organisations which are able to retain their customers

will be successful and gain profit. Thus measuring the level of customer satisfaction

is very important in order to be able to carry out improvements.

According to Fečiková (2004) the market research techniques that are used

to measure the customer satisfaction are as below:-

(a) Customer satisfaction survey methodologies;

(b) Focus group to study the customer satisfaction issue;

(c) Standardized packages for monitoring customer satisfaction; and

(d) Various types of computer software.

Hill et al. (2003) stated that “customer satisfaction is a measure on how the

organisation‟s „total product‟ performs in relation to a set of customer requirements.”

Hence, customer satisfaction measurement is very important for an organisation to

measure the level of their customers‟satisfaction. Organisations are willing to spend

a lot of money to improve the customer satisfaction management because the

quantitative measurement of customer satisfaction is very important to

comprehensively measure the effect of a product quality on the customer behavior

(Fečiková, 2004).

According to Strydom (2004), before the changing levels of customer

preferences and satisfaction, management can take early action to measure their

customer satisfaction, there are few methods of customer satisfaction measurement:-

(a) Complaint and suggestion system: Businesses should allow their

customers to give suggestions and make complaints. For example

companies can provide form, suggestion boxes or toll-free telephone

number for their customers to make complaint or suggestions. This

24

method will help the companies resolve their problems rapidly

(Strydom, 2004).

(b) Customer Satisfaction Index (CSI): CSI is a survey used to measure

the experiences on the quality of goods or service by the people who

have used it. For example, a detailed questionnaire will be sent out to

the customer and ask for the experiences with the seller. The replies

are tabulated and ranked from the best to the worst. CSI survey

should include the additional questions posed to measure the

customers‟ repurchase intention, this is very important because only

satisfied customers will repurchase the product or service (Strydom,

2004).

(c) Customer value analysis: The use of a customer information database

to make a forecast on the customers based on their purchase histories.

This method normally will use computerized, list information on

current and potential customers. The main records are identification

and personal data, product purchases, product usage and consumption

patterns (Strydom, 2004).

(d) American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI): ACSI (Figure 2.2) is a

cause-and-effect model used to measure the customer satisfaction

across the U.S economy. This method will link the drivers of

satisfaction (customer expectations, perceived quality and perceived

value) to customer satisfaction. Besides, customer satisfaction is also

linked to outcomes of satisfaction (customer complaints and customer

loyalty which is measured by price tolerance and customer retention)

(www.theacsi.org).

25

Figure 2.2: The Measurement Model for American Customer Satisfaction Index

(ACSI)

On the other hand, based on Fečiková‟s (2004) study, monitoring customer

satisfaction is also important for a company. The company needs to follow the

systematically manage and consider their actual condition. The company should:-

(i) Identify the customers by recognizing the internal and external

customers. Internal customers are the customers within the company

(employees) while the external customers are the customers which are

in the marketplace. Then, the critical dimension is that the company

needs to classify their customers according to their importance, such

as key customers, important customers, less important and so on.

(ii) Carry out preliminary study to determine the critical features of the

product, using it to understand customers‟ demands and obtaining

feedback from customers.

(iii) Design an effective questionnaire to achieve useful information.

(iv) Design the most suitable method for monitoring their customer

satisfaction, using “the right method for the right customer” which

means to provide a unique questionnaire for unique respondents.

Perceived

Quality

Customer

Expectations

Perceived

Value

Customer

Satisfaction

(ACSI)

Customer

Complaints

Customer

Loyalty

26

(v) Evaluate the questionnaire with the suitable statistical methods to

consider the four important factors which are level of importance of

customers, level of satisfaction, type of customer and type of method.

(vi) Ensure feedback.

Thus, customer satisfaction measurement provides the companies with

significant information for the modern management processes and also an early

warning signal for the future businesses (Edvardsson and Gutafson, 1999). It is

important to understand the level of satisfaction of the customers in order to carry out

improvements.

2.7 Previous Studies on Service Quality based on SERVQUAL Instrument

Kook‟s (2007) study was on Measuring Customer Satisfaction of Tesco

Stores (M) Sdn. Bhd. in Malacca. Through the analysis, there were six factors used

to measure the customer satisfaction in Tesco Malacca, namely product features,

personnel performances, service quality, environment, location and prices. The

finding of the research was that, the prices were the main factor affecting the

customer satisfaction, and then it was followed by the service quality, then product

features, environment and location. The finding of this research has shown that

service quality is important to measure the customer satisfaction. SERVQUAL

dimensions are used to measure the service quality and the dimension which satisfies

the customers most is empathy. The main factor is the operation time of Tesco,

because the operation time is convenient for their customers. However, the lack of

good and systematic complaint management system is one of the reasons that

customers were dissatisfied with the service quality. Thus, the service quality is an

important factor that may affect the customer satisfaction. If the service quality (like

complaint management system) increases, the customer satisfaction may also

increase.

27

Another study was done by So (2007) entitled “A Study of Service Quality

from the Perspective of Customers at Hong Leong Bank at Jln Wong Ah Fook, Johor

Bahru.” The objectives of the study are i) to determine the level of customers‟

expectation of the service provided by the bank, ii) to determine the level of

customers‟ satisfaction from the service provided by bank, iii) to determine the

quality of service provided by bank. The research was analyzed through the five

dimensions of SERVQUAL instrument, namely tangibles, reliability, responsiveness,

assurance and empathy. SERVQUAL instrument also included computing the

difference between the customers‟ ratings to pair their expectation and perception

statement. The findings have shown that the customers have very high expectation,

as well as perception on the service quality provided by the Hong Leong Bank at Jln

Wong Ah Fook. The SERVQUAL dimension that satisfied the customer most is the

dimension of tangibility. However, even if the customers‟ perception on service

quality is high, it is most likely lower than their expectation. This is because the

customers of Hong Leong Bank have higher expectations than what they perceive

they were getting at that time. They are not satisfied with the service quality, thus

Hong Leong Bank need to improve their service quality to meet their customers‟

expectation, in order to maintain or expand their customer base.

Samsudin‟s (2007) study was entitled “Kualiti Perkhidmatan Kaunter dengan

Kepuasan Pelanggan: Satu Kajian Kes di Majlis Bandaraya Melaka Bersejarah.”

Through the research, SERVQUAL instrument is used to measure the 5 dimensions

which are tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy. Pearson

Analysis is used to analyze the relationship between the service quality and customer

satisfaction. Coefficient of correlation, r is used to find the strength between the

service quality and customer satisfaction. The closer the r value to number 1, the

stronger the relationship between the two variables. According to the findings, the r

values for the dimensions tangibility, reliability, assurance, responsiveness and

empathy is 0.913, 0.93, 0.902, 0.932 and 0.928 respectively. Based on the finding,

we know that the relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction is

very high and strong because for all 5 dimensions, the coefficient of correlation, r is

very close to 1. This study also shows that the relationship between service quality

and customer satisfaction is very strong and is always affecting one another.

28

Zisis et al. (2009) conducted a research entitled “The Application of

Performance Measurement in the Service Quality Concept: The Case of a Greek

Service Organisation.” It is a case study on a Greek postal company to assess and

improve their service quality by applying performance measurement in service

quality concept. The researchers have used Parasuraman‟s SERVQUAL survey as a

tool to determine the level of performance of the company. The SERVQUAL survey

consist of two parts, 22-statements of what an excellent postal company should be

like and in the second part the same 22-items, but this time on what the company is

really practicing. The results of the study yields that the customers‟ perception

minus customers‟ expectation (P-E) value for dimensions responsiveness and

reliability is below zero, thus indicating that customers feel that the postal company‟s

service does not meet their expectations with respect to these dimensions and in

order to further improve, the company will have to focus on improving the

responsiveness and reliability.

Wang et al. (2004) carried out a study entitled “An Integrated Framework for

Service Quality, Customer Value, Satisfaction: Evidence from China‟s

Telecommunication Industry.” The study focused on the measurement model of

service quality in China‟s mobile communication market based on SERVQUAL

model. In addition, the authors have modified the SERVQUAL model to specifically

suit the industry attributes and local culture of China. Thus, their survey is designed

based on the five basic dimensions of SERVQUAL and also some added customized

dimensions such as network quality, customer value, customer satisfaction and so on.

This research yields SERVQUAL related results such as:-

(a) “Tangibles” affect service quality as well as customer value and customer

satisfaction.

(b) “Empathy” is not directly significant in customer satisfaction but contributes

in improving customer value, which then helps customers make their

purchasing decisions and indirectly increase customer satisfaction.

(c) “Reliability” is also a very important factor which contributes positively to

customer satisfaction.

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This section discusses the methodology of this research. The main purpose of

having a research methodology is to help the researcher to conduct the research in a

systematic way. Among topics that will be discussed in this section include the

research design, conceptual framework, data collection, research instrument,

population and sampling and finally, the data analysis method.

3.2 Research Design

The research design is important to help the researcher to understand the

whole process of the research. The researcher should follow the steps or procedures

as shown in Figure 3.1 to achieve the target of the research.

The first step of designing the research is to identify the problems which lead

to the need of carrying out the research. Then, the purpose and the objectives of the

research will be identified in order to understand the outcome that is expected from

the study. After that, the scope of study will be defined so that the research will be

not too extensive, followed by the limitations of this particular study at this particular

setting. Then, in the literature review, past researches will be studied to gain

30

Purpose and objectives

Scope and limitation

Problems statement

Start

Literature review

Data collection

Primary data

Sufficient data?

Data analysis

No

Yes

Conclusion and recommendation

Final report

End

background knowledge regarding matters related to the topic of research. The next

step is to collect the data which are then analyzed in order to provide the desired

results. The primary data for this research will be collected and, once sufficient, the

data will be analyzed and the conclusion as well as recommendations will be made

based on the findings from the data analysis.

Figure 3.1: Flow Chart of Research Process

31

3.3 Conceptual Framework

Figure 3.2 shows the conceptual framework of this research. This research

will focus only on the customers of TGL Express Sdn. Bhd. (TGL). The research is

designed to determine the service quality of TGL from their customers’ expectation

and perception by using five dimension of SERVQUAL which are tangibles,

reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy and to determine whether the

customers of TGL are satisfied with their service quality. From this measurement of

service quality, it will be possible to find out the relationship between the service

quality and customer satisfaction.

Figure 3.2: Conceptual Framework

3.4 Data Collection Methods

Data can be divided into two types, which are primary data and secondary

data. However, in this research, only primary data is collected to achieve the

objectives of the study.

Customers

Customers’

Expectation

Customers’

Perception

Customers’

Satisfaction

Service

Quality Gap

32

3.4.1 Primary Data

Primary data is the information that is collected by the researcher himself

from a specific project or study (Burns and Bush, 2003). Primary data is normally

collected by using quantitative research like surveys using questionnaires or

qualitative research through interviews or discussions. Quantitative measurement is

objective, and it always involves a very large number of respondents for the research.

Besides, it is statistically valid and is in the form of numbers for example percentages,

mean, mode, average and so on. Questionnaire is one of the method that mostly used

by researchers to obtain primary quantitative data. On the other hand, the qualitative

measurement is more subjective, and it involves a small number of respondents.

Qualitative data presents itself in the form of concepts, meanings, definitions,

characteristics, description and so on, as opposed to the quantitative data which are

mainly counts and measures of things,

Thus, in this study, the questionnaire is used as the method of survey to

obtain primary data from the customers of TGL. The use of questionnaire is selected

due to the fact that the method is flexible, inexpensive and quick to obtain results.

The survey can be conducted through few modes such as by using e-mail, telephone,

face to face meeting, and postal service and so on. E-mail and postal surveys will be

used in this research because the customers of TGL are from all over Peninsular

Malaysia.

3.5 Research Instrument

The research instrument used in a study must be able to accomplish or meet

the purpose and objectives of the study, and the most suitable instrument for this

research is the questionnaire. This is because surveys using questionnaire is

inexpensive and can be done quickly and flexibly. The questionnaire used in this

research is designed based on the SERVQUAL instrument which was developed by

33

Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry in 1988. The questionnaires are distributed to the

customers of TGL by using fax, e-mail, by post and also by hand.

The questionnaire is adapted from the SERVQUAL instrument. Each item is

evaluated by using the 7-point Likert scale. In addition, there will also be a few

questions to measure the customers’ level of satisfaction. These questions are used

to test whether the customers are satisfied with the service of TGL.

The questionnaire used bilingual i.e. English and Bahasa Malaysia, because

the customers of TGL are from various races and background. The questionnaire

consists of three sections namely Section A, Section B, and Section C as Figure 3.3.

Figure 3.3: Items in Questionnaire

Questionnaire

Section A

Demographic

Respondents

Section B

Customer’s

Expectation

Customer’s

Perception

Tangible Reliability Empathy

Responsiveness Assurance

Section C

Customer’s

Satisfaction

34

3.5.1 Section A: Demographic Data

This section aims to obtain demographic information of the customers such as

ethnic, location, frequency of usage and the period of time being a customer of TGL.

The demographic information is obtained solely to better understand our respondents,

and will not be used in the data analysis.

3.5.2 Section B: Customer’s Expectation and Perception

In this section, the respondents are requested to rate TGL’s service quality

based on their expectation and perception. There will be 22 questions (22-item list)

based on the SERVQUAL’s five dimensions as shown in Table 3.1.

Table 3.1: 22-Item List with SERVQUAL 5 Dimensions

Dimensions 22-Item List

Tangible 1-4

Reliability 5-9

Responsiveness 10-13

Assurance 14-17

Empathy 18-22

The level of customers’ expectation and perception will be rated using a 7-

point Likert scale which ranges from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) as the

Table 3.2.

35

Table 3.2: 7-Point Likert Scale of Customers’ Expectation and Perception

Scales Level of Feedback

1 Strongly Disagree

2 Disagree

3 Slightly Disagree

4 Average

5 Slightly Agree

6 Agree

7 Strongly Agree

3.5.3 Section C: Customer Satisfaction

In this section, the customers are required to rate their satisfaction level on

certain areas of the company’s service quality in order to determine their overall

level of satisfaction on the quality of service provided by TGL. Like in the previous

sections, the rating is done using a 7-point Likert scale as in Table 3.3.

Table 3.3: 7-Point Likert Scale of Customer Satisfaction

Scales Level of Feedback

1 Strongly Dissatisfied

2 Dissatisfied

3 Slightly Dissatisfied

4 Average

5 Slightly Satisfied

6 Satisfied

7 Strongly Satisfied

36

3.6 Population and Sampling

Table 3.4: Determining Sample Size from a given Population

Note: “N” is population size

“S” is sample size.

Source: Krejcie and Morgan (1970)

Berenson et al. (2008) “a population consists of all items or individuals about

which you want to draw a conclusion.” It is made up of all members of the group on

which statistical inferences are to be made upon. According to Coldwell and Herbst

(2004), “a population is a group of individual persons, objects or items from which

samples are taken for measurement such as a population of presidents or professors,

books or students.” Thus the population of TGL’s customers refers to every single

company which had ever received service from the company. The current total

number of customers is approximately 100.

Berenson et al. (2008) said that “a sample is the portion of population

selected for analysis.” A sample is a subset of the population, therefore is definitely

smaller than the population. A set of sample is chosen from the population to

conduct statistical calculations in order to make inferences or extrapolations from the

sample to the populations. In order to get an unbiased and representative result,

random samples have to be selected. Based on Table 3.4, since the customer

37

population of TGL is at approximately 100, the suitable sample size will be 80

randomly chosen customers.

3.7 Data Analysis

After collecting the data using the questionnaires, the data will be analyzed,

processed and transformed into useful information. This piece of information is

expected to be able to meet all the objectives of the study, and from there, the

conclusion can be drawn. There are a lot of methods that can be used to analyze the

data, but in this research two types of data analysis will be used. They are the

descriptive analysis and correlation analysis. Analysis of the data will be carried out

by using the computer software, Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS). The

SPSS is the most suitable because there is a big number of data to be analyzed. The

analysis method for each objective is shown in Table 3.5.

Table 3.5: Method of Analysis for Objectives Research

No Objectives Research Method of Analysis

1 To determine the level of service

quality provided by TGL.

- Descriptive Analysis:

Mean Score / Median Score

2 To determine the level of

satisfaction among its customers.

- Descriptive Analysis:

Mean Score / Median Score

3 To determine the relationship

between service quality and

customer satisfaction.

- Correlation Analysis:

Pearson / Spearman & Scatter

Diagram

3.7.1 Descriptive Analysis

According to Barenson et al. (2005), descriptive analysis “focuses on

collecting, summarizing, presenting and analyzing a set of data.” In this research, the

38

first and second objectives, which are to determine the level of service quality

provided by TGL and level of satisfaction among its customers respectively, were

done using mean or median values, depending on the normality of the data.

According to Downing and Clark (2003), the mean value is used to “calculate the

average of all the number” while median is “the halfway point of the data”. Leech et

al. (2005) on the other hand stated that mean is used when the data is normally

distributed or is considered a parametric statistic, while median is used when the data

is non-normal or non-parametric statistics.

Below is the equation to calculate the mean:

iX

Xn

Where, X = Mean

i

X = Score

n = Number of scores

As discussed in the research instrument, 7-point Likert scale will be used to

provide the range in customers’ expectation, perception and satisfaction. To

calculate the mean, 7-point Likert scale will be distributed into three levels as Table

3.6.

Table 3.6: Mean of Customers’ Expectation, Perception and Satisfaction

Mean Level

5.01-7.00 High

3.01-5.00 Average

1.00-3.00 Low

39

3.7.2 Correlation Analysis

According to Joseph et al. (2003), correlation analysis is a group of statistical

techniques used to measure the strength of the relationship (correlation) between two

variables. The correlation analysis will clearly explain the relationship between the

two variables. There are two types of correlation analysis that are common in data

analysis, namely the Pearson correlation and the Spearman correlation. According to

Morgan et al. (2001), Pearson correlation is suitable when both of the variables are

normally distributed, while Spearman correlation will be used when the data is non-

parametric or not normally distributed. The correlation is said to be significant if the

p-value is less than 0.05. For both methods, the range of correlation value is similar,

which is negative (-) 1 to positive (+) 1 (Morgan et al., 2001). Positive value means

that there is a direct relationship between the variables, while negative value means

that there is an inverse relationship. If the value is close to -1 or +1, it means that

there is a very strong relationship between the variables. On the other hand, if the

value of r is close to 0, it means that the variables are not related. Besides that, if the

correlation is not significant, where the p-value is greater than 0.05, there will be no

association or relationship between two variables (Morgan et al., 2001). The

interpretation of Pearson or Spearman’s r value is as shown in Table 3.7.

Table 3.7: Interpretation of Pearson or Spearman’s r Value

r Value (+/-) Correlation

0.81 – 1.00 Very Strong

0.61 – 0.80 Strong

0.41 – 0.60 Moderate

0.21 – 0.40 Weak

0.01 – 0.20 Very Weak

Source: Joseph et al. (2003)

Besides that, scatter diagram also used to clearly show the relationship

between two variables. According to Taylor (2008), “a scatter diagram, also known

as scatter plot, is a tool used to graphically illustrate the possible relationship

40

between two quantitative variables.” There are three variables that have to be

defined in the scatter diagram, namely the y-axis, the x-axis, and the plane. The y-

axis is used to plot the dependent variable while the x-axis is used to plot the

independent variable and the plane is used to plot the observations (Taylor, 2008).

Figure 3.4 shows a positive correlation between x-axis and y-axis, where the values

in the y-axis increases as the values in the x-axis increases. Figure 3.5 shows a

negative correlation between x-axis and y-axis, where as x-axis values increases, the

y-axis values decreases. Figure 3.6 shows a very scattered pattern in the plots

indicating that there are no relationship between the x-axis values and the y-axis

values.

Source: Taylor (2008)

Figure 3.4: Positive Correlation

X Axis Independent Variable

Y A

xis

Dep

en

den

t V

ari

ab

le

41


Figure 3.5: Negative Correlation


Figure 3.6: No Correlation

Y A

xis

Dep

en

den

t V

ari

ab

le

Y A

xis

Dep

en

den

t V

ari

ab

le



CHAPTER 4

DATA ANALYSIS

4.1 Introduction

This section discusses the data analysis of the research. The data analysis

was carried out using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) software after

the questionnaires were collected from the customers of TGL Express Sdn.

Bhd.(TGL). A total of 80 sets of questionnaires were distributed but the staffs only

managed to retrieve 74 sets. Out of the 74 sets of questionnaires, only 70 sets were

considered in the analysis as the remaining 4 were thought to be outliers, where the

data were considered extreme and thus not suitable for analysis. The analysis of the

data will be aimed to meet the objectives proposed in Chapter 1, which are:

(a) To determine the level of service quality provided by TGL.



satisfaction.

4.2 Demographic Data

This section describes the demographic background of the respondents of

TGL. The demographic information of the respondents includes ethnic, location,

43

frequency of usage and the period of time being a customer of TGL. The

demographic data section provides us with basic background information about the

respondents.

4.2.1 Ethnic

The frequency and the percentage for the ethnic of respondents are shown as

in Table 4.1 and Figure 4.1.

Table 4.1: Frequency Distribution of Respondents based on Ethnic

Table 4.1 shows that majority of the respondents of TGL are Chinese, in

which they cover 55.7 percent of the total respondents. This is followed Malay,

covering 27.1 percent and Indian, covering 15.7 percent of the total respondents, and

lastly 1.4 percent of the respondents are from other ethnicity. These results show

that customers of TGL are mostly Chinese.

Ethnic Frequency Percent

Chinese 39 55.7

Malay 19 27.1

Indian 11 15.7

Others 1 1.4

Total 70 100.0

44

OthersIndianMalayChinese

Ethnic

40

30

20

10

01

11

39

19

Figure 4.1: Ethnicity of the Respondents

4.2.2 Location

The frequency and the percentage for the location of respondents are shown

as in Table 4.2 and Figure 4.2.

Table 4.2: Frequency Distribution of Respondents based on Location

Location Frequency Percent

Kedah 17 24.3

Selangor 13 18.6

Pulau Pinang 10 14.3

Pahang 6 8.5

Johor 5 7.1

Kuala Lumpur 4 5.7

Kelantan 4 5.7

Perak 4 5.7

Melaka 3 4.3

Perlis 2 2.9

Negeri Sembilan 2 2.9

Total 70 100.0

45

Even though TGL has customers from all over Peninsular Malaysia,

according to the Table 4.2, we can see that most number of customers is from Kedah,

accounting for 24.3 percent of the respondents. This is because since TGL is located

in Kedah, naturally the number of customers from Kedah will be greater. This is

followed by Selangor with 18.6 percent, Pulau Pinang, 14.3 percent, Pahang, 8.5

percent, 7.1 percent from Johor, 5.7 percent each from Kuala Lumpur, Kelantan and

Perak, Melaka with 4.3 percent, and finally Perlis and Negeri Sembilan with 2.9

percent.

223

4

4

4

5

6

10

13

17

Perlis

Negeri Sembilan

Melaka

Kelantan

Perak

Kuala Lumpur

Johor

Pahang

Pulau Pinang

Selangor

Kedah

Location

Figure 4.2: Location of the Respondents

4.2.3 Period of Time being a Customer of TGL

Table 4.3: Frequency Distribution for Period of Time being a Customer of TGL

Period of Time Frequency Percent

Below 1 year 4 5.7

1 year 3 4.3

2 years 11 15.7

3 years 9 12.9

4 years 43 61.4

Total 70 100.0

46

Based on the Table 4.3, most number of customers have been cooperating

with TGL for 4 years, in which these customers account for 61.4 percent of the total

respondents. This is followed by 15.7 percent cooperating for 2 years, 12.9 percent,

3 years, 5.7 percent new customers below 1 year cooperating period and lastly 4.3

percent who have cooperated for 1 year.

4.2.4 Frequency of Usage

Table 4.4: Frequency Distribution of the Frequency of Usage of TGL Service

Frequency of Usage Frequency Percent

Below 1 time 18 25.7

1-2 time(s) 25 35.7

3-4 times 19 27.1

5-6 times 6 8.6

7 times 2 2.9

Total 70 100.0

Table 4.4 above shows the respondents’ usage frequency of TGL service in

one week. Most number of respondents used the service between 1 to 2 time(s) a

week, accounting for 35.7 percent of the total respondents. This is followed by 27.1

percent of the total respondents who used the service 3 to 4 times a week and 25.7

percent of respondents who used the service less than 1 time a week. A small

number of respondents use TGL service 5 times or more, accounting for 8.6 percent

for those who use TGL service 5 to 6 times a week and lastly 2.9 percent for those

using it everyday in a week.

4.3 Service Quality Perception

According to Table 4.5, 64.3 percent from the total respondents feel that

TGL’s service quality is in high level, while the remaining 35.7 percent feel that the

47

service quality is of average level. Thus, it can be said that the customers of TGL

perceive their level of service quality as high. This supported by the overall mean of

the customer perception at 5.133 and the standard deviation of 0.273.

Table 4.5: Frequency Distribution for Customers Perception on Overall Service

Quality

Level Mean Score Frequency of Respondents Percent

Low 1.00 – 3.00 - -

Average 3.01 – 5.00 25 35.7

High 5.01 – 7.00 45 64.3

Total 70 100.0

Mean: 5.133

Standard Deviation: 0.273

4.4 Customers’ Perception based on the SERVQUAL Five Dimensions

This section discusses about the TGL’s customers perception on the level of

TGL’s service quality. The data analysis will based on the SERVQUAL five

dimensions which are tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy.

These dimensions will be used to evaluate the perception of TGL’s customers on the

service quality.

4.4.1 Customers’ Perception on Tangibility

According to Table 4.6, 58.6 percent of the total respondents perceive that the

tangibility of TGL’s service is in average level, while the remaining 41.4 percent

feels that it is in high level. Thus, the overall mean of the customer’s perception

based on the dimension tangibles is 5.036 and the standard deviation is 0.45. From

the data analysis, even though more customers feel that the level of TGL’s service

48

quality based on tangibility is average, the overall mean value still falls in the high

level category.

Table 4.6: Frequency of Customers Perception on the Level of Service Quality

Provided by TGL Based on Tangibility


Low 1.00 – 3.00 - -

Average 3.01 – 5.00 41 58.6

High 5.01 – 7.00 29 41.4

Total 70 100.0

Mean: 5.036


4.4.2 Customers’ Perception on Reliability


Provided by TGL Based on Reliability


Low 1.00 – 3.00 - -

Average 3.01 – 5.00 35 50.0

High 5.01 – 7.00 35 50.0

Total 70 100.0

Mean: 5.114


According to Table 4.7, the customers’ perception based on the dimension

reliability on the level of service quality that provided by TGL, half of the

respondents (50%) rate it as average level while the remaining half (50%) rate it at

high level. The value of overall mean is 5.114 and the standard deviation is 0.452.

Thus the customer perception of service quality provided by TGL based on its

reliability is high. Besides that, the overall mean of the customers’ perception of

49

service reliability is higher than that of the service tangibility, which yields overall

mean of 5.036.

4.4.3 Customers’ Perception on Responsiveness


Provided by TGL Based on Responsiveness


Low 1.00 – 3.00 - -

Average 3.01 – 5.00 33 47.1

High 5.01 – 7.00 37 52.9

Total 70 100.0

Mean: 5.229


Table 4.8 shows the customers perception on the level of service quality

provided by TGL based on responsiveness. The number of respondents who rate the

level of service quality as average is almost equal with those who rate it at high level,

with percentage of 47.1 percent and 52.9 percent respectively. The overall mean is

5.229 and the standard deviation is 0.366, indicating that the customers’ perception

on the level of service quality based on responsiveness is in high level. The overall

mean for responsiveness at 5.229 is higher than that for tangibility at 5.036 and

reliability at 5.114. Thus, the customers of TGL feel that this company have the

willingness to help the customers and provide prompt service.

4.4.4 Customers’ Perception on Assurance

Table 4.9 shows the customers perception on the level of service quality

provided by TGL based on assurance. The results show that 54.2 percent of the total

respondents rate the service quality as in high level while the remaining 45.7 percent

50

rate it as average. The analysis also shows that the overall mean value of the

customers’ perception based on assurance is 5.154 and the standard deviation is

0.398. This indicates that the respondents perceive that the knowledge and courtesy

displayed by TGL employees are able to give trust and confidence to the customers.


Provided by TGL Based on Assurance


Low 1.00 – 3.00 - -

Average 3.01 – 5.00 32 45.7

High 5.01 – 7.00 38 54.3

Total 70 100.0

Mean: 5.154


4.4.5 Customers’ Perception on Empathy

According to Table 4.10, it shows the customers perception on the level of

service quality provided by TGL based on empathy. In the context of SERVQUAL

dimensions, empathy is the caring, individualized attention the firm provides to its

customers (Parasuraman et al., 1988). The results show that 51.4 percent of the total

respondents feel that the level of service quality based on empathy is high while 48.6

percent feels that it is average. Furthermore, the overall mean and standard deviation

of the customers’ perception on the level of service quality based on empathy is

5.131 and 0.398, indicating that generally, the level of service quality based on

empathy is high. The value of overall mean is higher than that of tangibility and

reliability but lower than that of responsiveness and assurance.

51


Provided by TGL Based on Empathy


Low 1.00 – 3.00 - -

Average 3.01 – 5.00 34 48.6

High 5.01 – 7.00 36 51.4

Total 70 100.0

Mean: 5.131


4.5 Service Quality Expectation

Table 4.11: Frequency Distribution for Customers Expectations on Overall Service

Quality


Low 1.00 – 3.00 - -

Average 3.01 – 5.00 - -

High 5.01 – 7.00 70 100.0

Total 70 100.0

Mean: 5.537


Table 4.11 shows the customers’ expectations of the overall service quality

provided by TGL. The results show that all respondents expect TGL to provide high

level of service quality. The mean value of service quality based on the customers’

expectation is 5.537 and the standard deviation is 0.257. Thus, TGL’s customers

have very high expectation on the service quality provided by them.

52

4.6 Customers’ Expectation based on the SERVQUAL Five Dimensions

This section will discuss the customers’ expectation on the level of TGL’s

service quality. The data analysis will be based on SERVQUAL five dimensions

which are tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy. These

dimensions are used to evaluate the expectation of TGL’s customers on the service

quality.

4.6.1 Customers’ Expectation on Tangibility

Table 4.12: Frequency Distribution of Customers Expectations on the Level of

Service Quality Provided by TGL Based on Tangibility


Low 1.00 – 3.00 - -

Average 3.01 – 5.00 18 25.7

High 5.01 – 7.00 52 74.3

Total 70 100.0

Mean: 5.454


Table 4.12 shows the customers expectation on the level of service quality

provided by TGL based on tangibility. Most of the respondents, specifically 74.3

percent of the total, expressed that they expect the TGL’s service quality based on

the dimension tangibles to be at the high level. The rest of the respondents which

covers 25.7 percent of the total expect average level of service quality based on

tangibility. The overall mean of the customers expectation on the service quality

provided by TGL based on tangibility is 5.454 and the standard deviation is 0.476.

From the data, the respondents of TGL have high expectation on the appearance of

physical facilities and equipments (such as fax and printer), and also the appearance

of personnel (such as being well dressed and appearing neat and professional).

53

4.6.2 Customers’ Expectation on Reliability

Table 4.13 shows the customers’ expectation at the level of service quality

provided by TGL based on reliability. The majority of the respondents, amounting to

82.9 percent of the total respondents expect the level of service quality provided by

TGL based on reliability to be at high level, while the remaining 17.1 percent expects

the service quality based on reliability of their service to be in average level. Thus,

the overall mean of the customers’ expectation based on reliability of the service is

5.509 and the standard deviation is 0.414. This indicates that the customers strongly

expect the company to deliver and accomplished the tasks that have been promised.

The overall mean based on reliability is higher than that of tangibility.


Service Quality Provided by TGL Based on Reliability


Low 1.00 – 3.00 - -

Average 3.01 – 5.00 12 17.1

High 5.01 – 7.00 58 82.9

Total 70 100.0

Mean: 5.509


4.6.3 Customers’ Expectation on the Level of TGL’s Service Quality Based on

Responsiveness

Table 4.14 shows the customers’ expectation on the level of service quality

provided by TGL based on responsiveness of their service. Majority of the

respondents, amounting to 91.4 percent of the total, expects that the TGL’s service

quality based on responsiveness to be high, while the remaining 8.6 percent feels that

it is sufficient at average level. The overall mean of customers’ expectation is 5.69

54

and the standard deviation is 0.365. Thus, most customers expect that TGL’s

employees are able to provide prompt and efficient service.


Service Quality Provided by TGL Based on Responsiveness


Low 1.00 – 3.00 - -

Average 3.01 – 5.00 6 8.6

High 5.01 – 7.00 64 91.4

Total 70 100.0

Mean: 5.69


4.6.4 Customers’ Expectation on Assurance


Service Quality Provided by TGL Based on Assurance


Low 1.00 – 3.00 - -

Average 3.01 – 5.00 11 15.7

High 5.01 – 7.00 59 84.3

Total 70 100.0

Mean: 5.579


Table 4.15 above shows the customers’ expectation on the level of service

quality provided by TGL based on assurance. Most number of respondents,

accounting for 84.3 percent of the total expects the service quality based on the

assurance it provides to be at high level while the remaining 15.7 percent feel that it

is sufficient at the average level. The overall mean of customer expectation based on

assurance is 5.579, and this value is higher than the overall means based on

tangibility and reliability but lower than that of responsiveness, while the standard

55

deviation is at 0.407. The high value indicates that customers strongly expect that

the knowledge and courtesy of TGL’s employees are able to provide trust and

confidence to the customers to continue cooperating with TGL.

4.6.5 Customers’ Expectation on Empathy


Service Quality Provided by TGL Based on Empathy


Low 1.00 – 3.00 - -

Average 3.01 – 5.00 11 15.7

High 5.01 – 7.00 59 84.3

Total 70 100.0

Mean: 5.454


Table 4.16 shows the customers’ expectation on the level of service quality

provided by TGL based on empathy. The results show that 84.3 percent of the total

respondents expect the service quality based on the dimension of empathy to be at

high level, while the remaining 15.7 percent would be satisfied with average level.

The overall mean and standard deviation of customers’ expectation on the service

quality provided by TGL based on empathy is 5.454 and 0.359 respectively. The

overall mean of empathy is same as overall mean of tangibles, but lower than

dimension reliability, responsiveness and assurance. The high value of overall mean

indicates that the customers strongly expect TGL employees to be caring and able to

provide individualized attention according to their respective needs.

56

4.7 Level of Service Quality (Service Quality = Perception – Expectation)

Table 4.17: Normality of Service Quality

Mean: -0.404


This section discusses the service quality provided by TGL. Table 4.17

shows the normality of the service quality. The result shows that the value of the

computed service quality is significant since the value of significance is 0.200 which

is greater than 0.05.

Based on the SERVQUAL instrument, service quality is measured by using

the gap between the customers’ perception and customers’ expectation, which is

customers’ perception minus customers’ expectation (P-E). Dimensions of tangibles,

reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy are used in this data analysis. A

positive value of service quality means that the service quality is more than expected

by the customer, thus indicating good performance of service quality while a

negative value simply means the quality of service received by the customers is less

than the customers expected level, thus indicating poor service quality performance.

According to Table 4.18 below, the difference of mean between the customers’

perception and expectation yields negative values for all dimensions. Generally, it

indicates that TGL is performing below the expected level of their customers.

Table 4.18: The Difference of mean between the Customers’ Perception and

Expectation based on SERVQUAL Dimensions

Perception (P) Expectation (E) P-E

Tangible 5.036 5.454 -0.418

Reliability 5.114 5.509 -0.395

Responsiveness 5.229 5.690 -0.461

Assurance 5.154 5.579 -0.425

Empathy 5.131 5.454 -0.323

Overall Service Quality 5.133 5.537 -0.404

Kolmogorov-Smirnov(a)

Statistic df Sig.

Service Quality .077 70 .200(*)

57

4.8 Customer Satisfaction

Table 4.19: Frequency Distribution of Customers’ Satisfaction based on the Service

Quality Provided by TGL


Low 1.00 – 3.00 - -

Average 3.01 – 5.00 41 58.6

High 5.01 – 7.00 29 41.4

Total 70 100.0

Median: 5.000


Table 4.20: Normality of Customer Satisfaction

Table 4.19 shows the level of customers’ satisfaction towards the service

quality provided by TGL. Customer satisfaction can only be measured after the

customers have really tried the service or product, and generally customers will be

satisfied if the service or product meets their expectations. From the results of this

study, more than half of the respondents, amounting to 58.6 percent from the total

expressed that their level of satisfaction is average, while the remaining 41.4 percent

feels that they are highly satisfied with TGL’s service quality. Referring to Table

4.20, the significance value of zero also indicates that the result for customer

satisfaction is not distributed normally (result is only significant if p > 0.05). Since

the distribution is not normal, the median should be used to determine the central

tendency of the customer satisfaction level (Morgan et al., 2001). From our results,

the customer satisfaction median is 5.000 with a standard deviation of 0.469.

Therefore, the level of customer satisfaction falls in the ‘Average’ range.

Kolmogorov-Smirnov(a)

Statistic Df Sig.

Customer Satisfaction .163 70 .000

58

4.9 Relationship between Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction based

on the Service provided by TGL

Table 4.21 shows the relationship between service quality and customer

satisfaction of TGL. Correlation of Spearman is used to test the relationship between

service quality and customer satisfaction of TGL. According to the research

methodology at Chapter 3, we know that Spearman rank correlation is used to

measure nonparametric correlations. If the result is significant, then there is either

positive or negative correlation between the two variables, while if the result is

insignificant, then we can conclude that there is no systematic association between

them. According to Table 4.21, we know that the result is not significant since the p-

value is 0.127 (result is only significant if p < 0.05) and there is no correlation

between service quality and customer satisfaction (Morgan et al., 2001). This is also

supported by the correlation scatter plot in Figure 4.3 where the fit line is almost

horizontal showing that there is no significant relationship between the service

quality and customer satisfaction (Taylor, 2008).

Table 4.21: Correlations of Spearman

1.000 .184

. .127

70 70

.184 1.000

.127 .

70 70

Correlation Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

Correlation Coefficient

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

Service Quality


Spearman's rho

Service Quality


59

6.005.505.004.504.00


0.50

0.00

-0.50

-1.00

-1.50

Serv

ice

Qua

lity

R Sq Linear = 0.032

Figure 4.3: Scatter Diagram between Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Introduction

This section discusses the research conclusion from the data analysis in this

study. There are three points that will be discussed in this section; they are

discussions and conclusions of the result which relate to the research objectives,

research limitations and research recommendations for future research work.

5.2 Research Conclusion

The conclusion to this research can be drawn based on the objectives of the

study. The objectives of this study are:

(a) To determine the level of service quality provided by TGL Express Sdn.

Bhd. (TGL).



satisfaction.

Based on the data analysis results described in Chapter 4, the objectives of

this research can be achieved.

61

5.2.1 Level of Service Quality

The service quality of TGL measured in this research can be summarized as

in Table 5.1. The summary compares the service quality based on the different

SERVQUAL dimensions as well as the overall service quality in the form of

customers’ perception (P), expectations (E) and also the SERVQUAL service quality

value (P-E).

Table 5.1: Summary of Service Quality Mean Values

Perception (P) Expectation (E) SERVQUAL (P-E)

Tangible 5.036 5.454 -0.418

Reliability 5.114 5.509 -0.395

Responsiveness 5.229 5.690 -0.461

Assurance 5.154 5.579 -0.425

Empathy 5.131 5.454 -0.323

Overall Service Quality 5.133 5.537 -0.404

The results show that the service quality of TGL based on SERVQUAL is -

0.404. This simply indicates that the quality of service provided by TGL does not

meet the expectations of their customers, thus the negative value.

However, it must be noted that the service quality provided by TGL as

perceived by their customers has a mean value of 5.133, which falls in the ‘High’

range. This shows that the customers perceive TGL’s service as good. The reason

that the service quality based on SERVQUAL is negative in value is due to the fact

that the expectation of the customers, which yields a mean value of 5.537, is

comparatively higher. Basically, we can conclude that TGL’s service quality is high,

but is still insufficient to meet the increasing expectations in the highly competitive

current scenario. This is supported by Fečiková (2004), who stated that it is

important that a company be customer-oriented in the heavily competitive world to

ensure customer satisfaction and loyalty.

Besides that, the service quality of TGL can also be evaluated by considering

separately the five dimensions of SERVQUAL. The research shows that TGL scores

62

highest in responsiveness, followed by assurance, empathy, reliability, and lastly

tangibles. All the mean values are in the ‘High’ range, showing that the customers

actually feel that the service quality provided by TGL is good, but they are simply

expecting better. Though the values are all in the ‘High’ range, the lower values

indicate areas that TGL should improve in order to further improve the overall

service quality.

Another point worth discussing is the view of the customers in terms of

which dimension to prioritize. From the customers’ expectations, we can conclude

that the customers perceive that the most important dimension is responsiveness,

followed by assurance, reliability, tangibles and finally empathy. This result tallies

with the case study on the postal company conducted by Zisis et al. (2009) which

also yields responsiveness as the most important dimension in service quality. The

customers feel that it is crucial that their request and queries are attended to promptly

to since there usually is time limitations for the delivery of goods.

Lastly, a large gap between the perceived and expected values of service

quality indicates that particular area requires attention. In our case, though

responsiveness yields highest value in terms of customers’ perception, it is has the

biggest gap between the perception and expectation of customers. Thus, TGL should

focus on closing the gap between the two in order to improve on their service quality

based on SERVQUAL.

5.2.2 Customer Satisfaction

Since the distribution of the data is not normal, the median is used to measure

the central tendency of the customers’ satisfaction. From the research, the median

value is 5.000, which falls in the upper-limit of the ‘Average’ range. Thus, it

indicates that the customers of TGL are moderately satisfied with their service

quality, with more tendencies towards the ‘High’ side. This occurred despite the

SERVQUAL service quality value being negative, due to the fact that the customers

63

are fairly satisfied with what TGL is providing, but their expectations on what an

excellent company should be like is relatively too high for TGL.

However, the fact that the customers’ satisfaction value is only in the

‘Average’ range should not be taken lightly as, it serves as an early warning of how

the customers are feeling, according to Edvardsson and Gutafson (1999). Besides,

Fečiková (2004) also proposed that it is important for companies to monitor their

customers’ satisfaction since it affects their behaviour and purchasing decisions. In

short, customers’ satisfaction must be maintained at a high level in order to ensure

customer loyalty and company popularity.

5.2.3 Relationship between Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction

The relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction is tested

using the Spearman correlation method since the value of customer satisfaction is not

significant, causing the variable to be non-parametric. From the analysis, there is no

relationship between the service quality and customer satisfaction, which means that

the service quality provided by TGL does not affect the customer satisfaction.

Basically, this should not have occurred as, it is common knowledge that the service

quality relates directly with customer satisfaction and the customers should be more

satisfied as the quality of service improves. However, there might be a few

possibilities where exceptions might happen, the main possibility being that the five

dimensions of SERVQUAL might not accurately portray the situation in the

company. This means that the customers’ satisfaction level is not only influenced by

the five basic SERVQUAL dimensions, and there are other dimensions related to the

service which we have left out. This is also the reason that some researches such as

the study on the telecommunications industry in China by Wang et al. (2004) uses a

modified SERVQUAL model which includes additional dimensions to suit the actual

industry attributes and local conditions. There might also be some other reasons,

such as the fact that there might be inaccuracy of data due to the small sample size

64

and also the possibility that the customers did not express what they really felt in

terms of their satisfaction level.

On the other hand, if we were to relate the service quality as perceived by the

customers with the customer satisfaction, the result will yield positive relationship as

shown in Table 5.2 and Figure 5.1. Based on Table 5.2, we have a significant

correlation which is at 0.000 (result is only significant if p < 0.05). Besides that,

there is a positive relationship between customer satisfaction and customer

perception at 50.8 percent. This supports by the findings of Yan (2006), which states

that satisfaction is indeed affected by the service quality and excellent service quality

is one of the criteria which increases customer satisfaction. The reason that

relationship becomes weak when using SERVQUAL service quality value is that the

expected value is given based on the customers own judgement, and thus the scores

will be influenced by several factors, such as place of origin, past experiences and so

on. As proposed by Cronin and Taylor (1992), the unweighted SERVPERF used

only the performance to measure the service quality, while the weighted

SERVQUAL used the gap between the customers’ perception and expectation. Thus,

we find that the unweighted SERVPERF instrument might be more suitable than the

SERVQUAL instrument in terms of measuring the relationship between service

quality and customer satisfaction.

Table 5.2: Relationship between Customer Perception and Customer Satisfaction of

TGL

Correlations

1.000 .508**

. .000

70 70

.508** 1.000

.000 .

70 70

Correlation Coeff icient

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

Correlation Coeff icient

Sig. (2-tailed)

N

Customer Perception


Spearman's rho

Customer

Perception

Customer

Satisfaction

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

65

6.005.505.004.504.00


5.80

5.60

5.40

5.20

5.00

4.80

4.60

Cust

omer

Per

cept

ion

R Sq Linear = 0.249

Figure 5.1: Scatter Diagram between Customer Perception and Customer

Satisfaction

5.3 Recommendations

The objectives of this study include determining the service quality provided

by TGL, their customers’ satisfaction and the relationship between these two

variables. Thus, the result can be used to further improve the performance of TGL in

order to gain success and advantage over their competitors. The results of the

research can be used to understand what the customers actually think about them, as

well as what they actually want from them. Therefore, by analyzing the results, TGL

will be able to know which specific area needs immediate attention and proper

planning and management of resources can be arranged. The recommendations for

the improvement of TGL’s performance based on the findings of this research are as

follows:

(a) Customers in this industry places greatest importance on the responsiveness

of the service. It is important that the company is able to respond promptly to

the customers request as the delivery services are often urgent matters which

requires immediate attention. This is further supported by the fact that the

66

gap between customer perception and expectation is greatest for

responsiveness, indicating that responsiveness is most critical to the

customers.

(b) TGL should always monitor and maintain their customer satisfaction level by

obtaining feedback from their customers. This will provide them with early

warning if their customers are not comfortable with any aspect of their

operation. As proposed by Strydom (2004), TGL should always be aware of

their customers’ satisfaction level through methods such as complaint and

suggestion system, Customer Satisfaction Index (CSI), customer value

analysis and so on.

5.4 Future Researches

Even though all the objectives of this research have been achieved in this

report, there are still issues, which have arisen during the study, which need to be

addresses in future researches. The issues include:

(a) The study shows that the five basic dimensions of SERVQUAL might not be

suitable in measuring the service quality of the company, since there might be

other dimensions that might have a greater impact on the customer

satisfaction. Further more, even among the five basic dimensions of

SERVQUAL, there are dimensions which customers feel is less important to

them. This is in line with a statement by Dayang and Francine (2009) that the

importance of each dimension in the SERVQUAL model varies across

industries. In another study, Wang et al. (2004) modified their SERVQUAL

model by adding extra dimensions such as network quality to obtain better

result in their research on the telecommunication industry in China. In

addition to the service quality factors, there might also be other determinants

which might have an impact on the customer satisfaction. This statement can

be supported by Yan’s (2006) study on customer satisfaction based on the

67

perceived value model for auto repair shops. Yan (2006) stated that price and

personnel attitude are also factors which affect customer satisfaction. Thus,

focus group discussions and expert opinions should be carried out to

determine the suitable dimensions which will be able to obtain the best results

regarding the service quality of a truck freight broker, and its relationship

with the customers.

(b) A similar study should be carried out using the SERVPERF model which

measures solely performance. The selection of SERVQUAL model in the

initial stages of our study was due to the fact that it has been widely used by

researchers in many different industrial, commercial and non-profit settings

(Sachdev and Verma, 2004). We felt that the SERVQUAL model can be

used in our truck freight brokering setting since the credibility has been

proven in various different industries. Furthermore, it was used by Baki et al.

(2009) in their study on logistic services. However, during our study, we

found that there are many instances where the SERVPERF would be a more

suitable model to measure the service quality, and also to find out the

relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction. Since the

SERVPERF model measures performance based solely on the customers’

perception (Lee, 2007), it is believed that more significant figures could be

obtained on the actual performance of TGL. Besides, by having more

significant values for service quality, the relationship between service quality

and customer satisfaction will also be stronger.

REFERENCES

Abu, N. K. (2004). Service Quality Dimensions: A Study on Various Sizes of

Grocery Retailers - A conceptual Paper. Proceeding of IBBC. 633-642.

American Customer Satisfaction Index. (2006). ACSI Methodology. Retrieved on

September 26, 2009, from http://www.theacsi.org/index.

Baki, B., Basfirinci, C. S., AR, I. M. and Cilingir, Z. (2009). An Application of

Integrating SERVQUAL and Kano’s Model into QFD for Logistics Services.

Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics. 21(1), 106-126.

Berenson, M. L., Levine, D. M. and Krehbiel, T. C. (2008). Basic Business Statistics:

Concepts and Applications. (11th ed.) Upper Saddle River, N. J.: Pearson Prentice

Hall.

Bitner, M. J., Booms, B. H. and Mohr, L. A. (1994). Critical Service Encounters: The

Employee Viewpoint. Journal of Marketing, 58(4), 95–106.

Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Staelin, R. and Zeithaml, V. A. (1993). A Dynamic Process

Model of Service Quality: From Expectations to Behavioral Intentions. Journal

of Marketing Research. 30, 7-27

Burns, A. C. and Bush, R. F. (2003). Marketing Research: Online Research

Applications. (4th ed.) Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Buttle, F. (1996). SERVQUAL: Review, Critique, Research Agenda. European

Journal of Marketing. 30(1), 8-31.

69

Cadotte, E. R., Woodruff, R. B. and Jenkins, R. L. (1987). Expectation and Norms in

Models of Customer Satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research. 24(3), 305-314.

Chakrapani, C. (1998). How to Measure Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction.

Chicago: American Marketing Association.

Coldwell, D. and Herbst, F. J. (Eds.) (2004). Business Research. Cape Town, South

Africa: Juta and Co Ltd.

Cronin, J. and Taylor, S. (1992). Measuring Service Quality: A Reexamination and

Extension. Journal of Marketing. 56 (July), 55-68.

Crosby, P. (1984). Quality without Tears. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Abdullah, D. N. M. And Rozario, F. (2009). Influence of Service and Product

Quality towards Customer Satisfaction: A Case Study at the Staff Cafeteria in the

Hotel Industry. World Academy of Science. 53, 185-190.

Downing, D. and Clark, J. (2003). Business Statistics. (4th ed.). New York: Barron's

Educational Series.

Edvardsson, B. (1998). Service Quality Improvement. Managing Service Quality.

8(2), 142–149.

Edvardsson, B. and Gustafsson, A. (1999). The Nordic School of Quality

Management. Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Fečiková, I. (2004). An Index Method for Measurement of Customer Satisfaction.

The TQM Magazine. 16(1), 57-66.

Garvin, D.A. (1988). Managing Quality: The Strategic and Competitive Edge. New

York: MacMillan.

70

Garvin, D.A. (1987). Competing on the Eight Dimensions of Quality. Harvard

Business Review. 65(6), 101-109.

Gronroos, C. (1990). Service Marketing and Management. Managing the Moments

of Truth in Service Competition. Lexington, Mass: Lexington Books.

Gronroos, C. (1988). Service Quality: The Six Criteria of Good Perceived Service

Quality. Review of Business. 9(3), 10-13.

Gronroos, C. (1984). A Service Quality Model and Its Marketing Implications.

European Journal of Marketing. 8(4), 36-44.

Gunderson, M., Heidee, G. M. and Olson, U. H. (1996). Hotel Guest Satisfaction

Among Business Travelers. The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration

Quarter. 37(2), 72-81.

Hill, N., Brierley, J. and MacDougal, R. (2003). How to Measure Customer

Satisfaction. (2nd

ed.) England: Gower.

Iacobucci, D., Ostrom, Amy. and Kent, G. (1995). Distinguishing Service Quality

and Customer Satisfaction: The Voice of the Consumer. Journal of Consumer

Psychology. 4(3), 277-303.

Joseph, F. H., Barry, B., Arthur, H. M. and Phillip, S. (2003). Essentials of Business

Research Method. NJ: Willey.

Juran, J. M., Gryna, F. M. J. and Bingham, R. S. (1974). Quality Control Handbook.

(3rd

ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill.

Kook, Shu Fen. (2007). Measuring Customer Satisfaction of Tesco Stores (M) Sdn.

Bhd. in Malacca. Bachelor of Management (Marketing), Universiti Teknologi

Malaysia, Skudai.

71

Kotler, P. (1999). Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation, and

Control. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Krejcie, R. V. and Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining Sample Size for Research

Activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 30(3), 607-610.

Lee, Jungki. (2007). SERVQUAL vs SERVPERF: Round 2 in a Multi-Cultural

Setting. Journal of Academy of Business and Economics. 7(3), 77-89.

Lehtinen, U. and Lehtinen, J. R. (1982). Service Quality: A Study of Quality

Dimensions. Helsinki Finland: Service Management Institute.

Lewis, R. and Booms, B. (1983). The Marketing Aspects of Service Quality. In Berry,

L. L., Shostack, L. G. and Upah, G. D. (Eds.). Emerging Perspectives on Services

Marketing. (pp. 99–107). Chicago: American Marketing Association.

Logistics Resources. (n.d.). Trucking Freight Broker. Retrieved on August 15, 2009,

from http://bluemarblelogistics.com/trucking-freight-broker.html

Morgan, C. and Murgatroyd, S. (1994). Total Quality Management in the Public

Sector: An International Perspective. Open University Press: Buckingham.

Leech, N. L., Barrett, K. C. and Morgan, G. A. (2005). SPSS for Intermediate

Statistics: Use and Interpretation. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Morgan, G. A., Griego, O. V. and Gloeckner, G. W. (2001). SPSS for Windows: An

Introduction to Use and Interpretation in Research. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Norman, R. (1984). Service Strategy and Leardership. New York: Willey.

Nyeck, S., Morales, M., Ladhari, R., and Pons, F. (2002). 10 years of service quality

measurement: reviewing the use of the SERVQUAL instrument. Cuadernos de

Difusion, 7(13), 101-107.

72

Oliver, R. L. (1981). Measurement and Evaluation of Satisfaction Processes in Retail

Settings. Journal of Retailing. 57(3), 25-48.

Olshavsky, R. W. (1985). Perceived Quality in Consumer Decision Making: An

Integrated Theoretical Perspective. In Jacoby, J. and Olson, J. C. (Eds).

Perceived Quality: How Consumers View Stores and Merchandise. (pp. 3–29).

Lexington, Mass: Lexington Books.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A. and Berry, L. L. (1994). Reassessment of

Expectations as a Comparison Standard in Measuring Service Quality:

Implications for Further Research. Journal of Marketing. 58(1), 111-124.

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.

Parasuraman, A., Zeitham, V. A. and Berry, L. L. (1985). A Conceptual Model of

Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research. Journal of Marketing.

49 (fall), 41-50.

Peter, P. J. and Olson, J. C. (1996). Consumer Behaviour and Marketing Strategy.

(4th

ed.) Chicago: Irwin.

Robbins, S. P. (2005). Organization Behavior. (11th

ed.) Upper Saddle River:

Prentice Hall.

Roest, H. and Pieters, R. (1997). The Nomological Net of Perceived Service Quality.

International Journal of Service Industry Management. 8(4), 336–351.

Sachdev, S. B. and Verma, H. V. (2004). Relative Importance of Service Quality

Dimensions: A Multisectoral Study. Journal of Service Research. 4(1), 93-117.

Seth, N., Deshmukh, S. G. and Vrat, P. (2005). Service Quality Models: A Review.

International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management. 22 (9), 913-949.

73

Sharidah binti Samsudin. (2007). Kualiti Perkhidmatan Kaunter dengan Kepuasan

Pelanggan: Satu Kajian Kes di Majlis Bandaraya Melaka Bersejarah. Doctor

Philosophy. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai.

Solis, E. L., Rao, S., Ranhu-Nathan, T. S., Chen, C. Y. and Pan, S. C. (1998). Quality

Management Practices and Quality Results: A Comparison of Manufacturing and

Service Sectors in Taiwan. Managing Service Quality. 8 (1), 46-54.

So, Poo Ann. (2007). A Study of Service Quality from the Perspective of Customers

at Hong Leong Bank at Jln Wong Ah Fook, Johor Bahru. Bachelor of

Management (Technology), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai.

Strydom, J. (2004). Introduction to Marketing. (3rd

ed.) Cape Town: Juta.

Taff, C. A. (1979). A Study of Truck Brokers of Agricultural Commodities Exempt

from Economic Regulation. In Wilson, W. W. (Ed.) Market Choice, Entry

Regulation, and Joint Production: Market Access and Market Service in Motor

Carrier Markets. (pp. 5–15). Netherlands: Springer.

Taylor, G. M. (2008). Lean Six Sigma Service Excellence: A Guide to Green Belt

Certification and Bottom Line Improvement. New York: J. Ross Publishing.

Tse, D. K. and Wilton, P. C. (1988). Models of Consumer Satisfaction Formation:

An Extension. Journal of Marketing Research. 25(2), 204-212.

Wang, Y., Lo, H. P. and Yang, Y. (2004). An Integrated Framework for Service

Quality, Customer Value, Satisfaction: Evidence from China’s

Telecommunication Industry. Information Systems Frontiers. 6(4), 325-340.

Yan Q. F. (2006). The Study of Customer Satisfaction based on the Perceived value

Model for Domestic Auto Repair Shops. Doctor Philosophy. National Cheng

Kung University.

74

Zeithaml, V. A. and Binter, M. J. (1996). Service Marketing. New York: McGraw-

Hill.

Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A. and Berry, L. L. (1993). The Nature and

Determinants of Customer Expectations of Services. Journal of the Academy of

Marketing Science. 21(1), 1-12.

Zineldin, M. (2005). Quality and Customer Relationship Management (CRM) as

Competitive Strategy in the Swedish Banking Industry. The TQM Magazine.

17(4), 329-344.

Zisis, P., Garefalakis, A. and Sariannidis, N. (2009). The Application of Performance

Measurement in the Service Quality Concept: The Case of a Greek Service

Organisation. Journal of Money. (9), 19-45.

APPENDIX A

BORANG SOAL SELIDIK

QUESTIONNAIRE

FAKULTI PENGURUSAN DAN PEMBANGUNAN SUMBER MANUSIA

FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT AND HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT

“HUBUNGAN ANTARA KUALITI PERKHIDMATAN DAN KEPUASAN

PELANGGAN: SATU KAJIAN KES DI TGL EXPRESS SDN. BHD.”

“THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SERVICE QUALITY AND CUSTOMER

SATISFACTION: A CASE STUDY OF TGL EXPRESS SDN. BHD.”

Saya merupakan pelajar tahun akhir Universiti Teknologi Malaysia dalam jurusan

Pengurusan Teknologi. Kajian ini bertujuan untuk menyempurnakan Projek Sarjana

Muda yang telah ditetapkan oleh universiti. Oleh itu, kerjasama daripada anda

amatlah dihargai dan diucapkan ribuan terima kasih diatas kesudian menjawab soal

selidik ini. Semua jawapan dan maklumat yang diberikan hanya digunakan untuk

tujuan pembelajaran sahaja.

I am a final year student of Universiti Technologi Malaysia majoring in the field of

Technology Management. This research is being done for the purpose of completing

the degree programme set by the University. Your co-operation in this survey is

much appreciated and I sincerely thank you for taking time to respond to this

questionnaire. All information provided will be treated strictly confidential and will

be used for academic purposes only.

ARAHAN / INSTRUCTION:

A) Borang selidik ini mempunyai tiga bahagian iaitu:

This questionnaire has three sections as follows:

BAHAGIAN A / SECTION A : Demografi Responden / Demographic Data

BAHAGIAN B / SECTION B : Jangkaan dan Persepsi Pelanggan /

Customer’s Expectation and Perception

BAHAGIAN C / SECTION C : Kepuasan Pelanggan / Customer Satisfaction

B) Responden dikehendaki menjawab semua soalan yang dikemukakan.

Respondent is required to answer all the questions.

76

Bahagian A / Section A: Demografi Responden / Demographic Respondent

Sila tandakan ( ) di dalam ruangan yang di telah disediakan.

Please answer the following questions by ticking ( ) in the appropriate box.

1. Etnik / Ethnic:

Melayu / Malay

Cina / Chinese

India / Indian

Lain-lain / Others

2. Lokasi / Location:

_____________________________ (Sila Nyatakan / Please State)

3. Tempoh masa menjadi pelanggan TGL Express Sdn. Bhd. (TGL) /

Period of time being a customer of TGL Express Sdn. Bhd. (TGL):

Kurang daripada 1 tahun / Below than 1 year

1 tahun / 1 year

2 tahun / 2 years

3 tahun / 3 years

4 tahun / 4 years

4. Berapa kali mengunakan perkhidmatan TGL dalam 1 minggu/

How often used service of TGL in 1 week:

Kurang daripada 1 kali / Below than 1 time

1 – 2 kali / 1 – 2 time(s)

3 – 4 kali / 3 – 4 times

5 – 6 kali / 5 – 6 times

7 kali / 7 times

77

Bahagian B / Section B: Jangkaan dan Persepsi Pelanggan / Customer’s Expectation and Perception

Sila bulatkan jawapan anda mengikut skala seperti berikut /

Please circle your answer based on the following scales:

Skala / Scales Penerangan Jawapan / Answer Explanation

1 Sangat Tidak Bersetuju / Strongly Disagree

2 Tidak Bersetuju / Disagree

3 Agak Tidak Bersetuju / Slightly Disagree

4 Sederhana / Average

5 Agak Beretuju / Slightly Agree

6 Bersetuju / Agree

7 Sangat Bersetuju / Strongly Agree

Jangkaan / Expectation Persepsi / Perception

1. TGL sepatut mempunyai kelengkapan yang moden cth: fax,

pencetak.

TGL should provides up-to-date equipment e.g. fax, printer.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

2. TGL sepatut mempunyai persekitaran yang selesa dan 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

78

menarik.

TGL’s physical facilities should be visually appealing.

3. TGL sepatut memberikan kenderaan pengangkutan seperti

lori dalam keadaan yang baik.

TGL should be provide transportation e.g. lorries in well

condition.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

4. Pekerja TGL sepatut mempunyai penampilan yang baik

seperti cara pakaian.

TGL’s employees should be well dressed and appear neat.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

5. Apabila pekerja TGL berjanji untuk melakukan sesuatu

tugas, mereka sepatut menepati janji.

When TGL’s employees promise to do something by a

certain time, they should do so.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

6. Apabila anda menghadapi masalah, TGL sepatut memberi

pertolongan dengan ikhlas untuk menyelesaikannya.

When you have problems, TGL should shows a sincere

interest in solving the problems. .

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

7. TGL sepatut memberikan perkhidmatan yang bertepatan

dengan kehendak pelanggan.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

79

TGL should provides correct services to meet their customer

needs.

8. TGL sepatut memberikan perkhidmatan pada masa yang

dijanjikan.

TGL should provides their services at the time they promise

to do so.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

9. TGL sepatut menyimpan rekod urus niaga secara tepat.

TGL should keep their transaction records accurately.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

10. Pekerja TGL sepatut memberitahu anda bila pekhidmatan

akan dilakukan.

TGL’ employees should tell you exactly when services will

be performed.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

11. Pekerja TGL sepatut memberikan perkhidmatan yang cekap

dan pantas kepada anda.

TGL’s employees should provide you with prompt service.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

12. Pekerja TGL sepatut membantu pelanggan pada bila-bila

masa.

TGL’s employees should be always willing to help.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

13. TGL sepatut tidak menggunakan alasan tiada masa untuk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

80

memberikan tindak balas kepada anda.

TGL should not used too busy as a reason to respond to your

requests promptly.

14. Tabiat pekerja TGL patut menyakinkan anda.

The behaviour of TGL’s employees should instill confidence

in you.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

15. Anda sepatut merasai selamat apabila berurusan dengan

TGL.

You should able to feel safe performing transactions with

TGL.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

16. Pekerja TGL sepatut berbudi bahasa dan bersopan-santun.

TGL’s employees should be patient and courteous.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

17. Pekerja TGL sepatut mempunyai pengetahuan yang baik

dalam menjawab soalan anda.

TGL’s employees should be equipped with the necessary

knowledge to answer your question(s).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

18. TGL sepatut memberikan perkhidmatan kepada setiap

pelanggan secara individu.

TGL should gives you individual attention.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

81

19. Pekerja TGL sepatut bersedia untuk menyelesaikan masalah

secara individu.

TGL’s employees should prepare to solve problems

individually.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

20. Pekerja TGL sepatut memahami kehendak anda.

TGL’s employees should understand your needs.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

21. TGL sepatut mengambil berat kehendak anda.

TGL should have their customer’s best interest at heart.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

22. TGL sepatut beroperasi pada waktu yang sesuai bagi semua

pelanggan.

TGL operating hours should be convenient to all of their

customers.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

82

Bahagian C / Section C

Sila bulatkan jawapan anda mengikut skala seperti berikut /

Please circle your answer based on the following scales:

1. Secara keseluruhannya, anda amat berpuas hati

terhadap perkhidmatan TGL.

You are extremely satisfied with TGL’s overall

service quality.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

2. Anda akan menggunakan perkhidmatan TGL

lain kali.

You will definitely use TGL’s service again.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

3. Anda akan mencadangkan perkhidmatan TGL

kepada orang lain.

You would strongly recommend TGL’s service

to the others.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Sekian, terima kasih

Thank you very much

Skala / Scales Kepuasan Pelanggan / Customer Satisfaction

1 Sangat Tidak Memuaskan / Strongly Dissatisfied

2 Tidak Memuaskan / Dissatisfied

3 Agak Tidak Memuaskan / Slightly Dissatisfied

4 Sederhana / Average

5 Agak Memuaskan / Slightly Satisfied

6 Memuaskan / Satisfied

7 Sangat Memuaskan / Strongly Satisfied

83

APPENDIX B

SPSS DATA ANALYSIS

Descriptives

5.1327 .03267

5.0675

5.1979

5.1309

5.0900

.075

.27330

4.62

5.73

1.11

.37

.114 .287

-.679 .566

5.5369 .03070

5.4756

5.5981

5.5329

5.5500

.066

.25685

5.04

6.23

1.19

.40

.119 .287

-.300 .566

Mean

Low er Bound

Upper Bound

95% Confidence

Interval for Mean

5% Trimmed Mean

Median

Variance

Std. Deviation

Minimum

Maximum

Range

Interquartile Range

Skew ness

Kurtosis

Mean

Low er Bound

Upper Bound

95% Confidence

Interval for Mean

5% Trimmed Mean

Median

Variance

Std. Deviation

Minimum

Maximum

Range

Interquartile Range

Skew ness

Kurtosis

Customer Perception

Customer Expectation

Statistic Std. Error

Tests of Normality

.105 70 .055 .980 70 .308

.050 70 .200* .984 70 .539

Customer Perception

Customer Expectation

Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

Kolmogorov-Smirnova

Shapiro-Wilk

This is a low er bound of the true signif icance.*.

Lilliefors Signif icance Correctiona.

84

Perception Tangibles

2 2.9 2.9 2.9

13 18.6 18.6 21.4

13 18.6 18.6 40.0

13 18.6 18.6 58.6

14 20.0 20.0 78.6

8 11.4 11.4 90.0

5 7.1 7.1 97.1

2 2.9 2.9 100.0

70 100.0 100.0

4.25

4.50

4.75

5.00

5.25

5.50

5.75

6.25

Total

Valid

Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cumulative

Percent

Perception Reliability

2 2.9 2.9 2.9

1 1.4 1.4 4.3

2 2.9 2.9 7.1

7 10.0 10.0 17.1

9 12.9 12.9 30.0

14 20.0 20.0 50.0

14 20.0 20.0 70.0

3 4.3 4.3 74.3

11 15.7 15.7 90.0

5 7.1 7.1 97.1

2 2.9 2.9 100.0

70 100.0 100.0

4.00

4.20

4.40

4.60

4.80

5.00

5.20

5.40

5.60

5.80

6.00

Total

Valid


Cumulative

Percent

Perception Responsiveness

2 2.9 2.9 2.9

5 7.1 7.1 10.0

26 37.1 37.1 47.1

17 24.3 24.3 71.4

11 15.7 15.7 87.1

3 4.3 4.3 91.4

5 7.1 7.1 98.6

1 1.4 1.4 100.0

70 100.0 100.0

4.50

4.75

5.00

5.25

5.50

5.75

6.00

6.25

Total

Valid


Cumulative

Percent

Perception Assurance

2 2.9 2.9 2.9

5 7.1 7.1 10.0

9 12.9 12.9 22.9

16 22.9 22.9 45.7

19 27.1 27.1 72.9

10 14.3 14.3 87.1

7 10.0 10.0 97.1

2 2.9 2.9 100.0

70 100.0 100.0

4.25

4.50

4.75

5.00

5.25

5.50

5.75

6.00

Total

Valid


Cumulative

Percent

85

Perception Empathy

4 5.7 5.7 5.7

8 11.4 11.4 17.1

8 11.4 11.4 28.6

14 20.0 20.0 48.6

10 14.3 14.3 62.9

11 15.7 15.7 78.6

12 17.1 17.1 95.7

1 1.4 1.4 97.1

2 2.9 2.9 100.0

70 100.0 100.0

4.40

4.60

4.80

5.00

5.20

5.40

5.60

5.80

6.00

Total

Valid


Cumulative

Percent

Expectation Tangibles

1 1.4 1.4 1.4

11 15.7 15.7 17.1

6 8.6 8.6 25.7

9 12.9 12.9 38.6

16 22.9 22.9 61.4

17 24.3 24.3 85.7

5 7.1 7.1 92.9

3 4.3 4.3 97.1

1 1.4 1.4 98.6

1 1.4 1.4 100.0

70 100.0 100.0

4.50

4.75

5.00

5.25

5.50

5.75

6.00

6.25

6.50

6.75

Total

Valid


Cumulative

Percent

Expectation Reliability

1 1.4 1.4 1.4

3 4.3 4.3 5.7

8 11.4 11.4 17.1

7 10.0 10.0 27.1

20 28.6 28.6 55.7

10 14.3 14.3 70.0

9 12.9 12.9 82.9

6 8.6 8.6 91.4

3 4.3 4.3 95.7

2 2.9 2.9 98.6

1 1.4 1.4 100.0

70 100.0 100.0

4.60

4.80

5.00

5.20

5.40

5.60

5.80

6.00

6.20

6.40

6.60

Total

Valid


Cumulative

Percent

86

Expectation Responsiveness

1 1.4 1.4 1.4

5 7.1 7.1 8.6

6 8.6 8.6 17.1

16 22.9 22.9 40.0

20 28.6 28.6 68.6

16 22.9 22.9 91.4

4 5.7 5.7 97.1

2 2.9 2.9 100.0

70 100.0 100.0

4.75

5.00

5.25

5.50

5.75

6.00

6.25

6.50

Total

Valid


Cumulative

Percent

Expectation Assurance

3 4.3 4.3 4.3

8 11.4 11.4 15.7

8 11.4 11.4 27.1

20 28.6 28.6 55.7

17 24.3 24.3 80.0

4 5.7 5.7 85.7

10 14.3 14.3 100.0

70 100.0 100.0

4.75

5.00

5.25

5.50

5.75

6.00

6.25

Total

Valid


Cumulative

Percent

Expectation Empathy

1 1.4 1.4 1.4

2 2.9 2.9 4.3

8 11.4 11.4 15.7

12 17.1 17.1 32.9

20 28.6 28.6 61.4

9 12.9 12.9 74.3

9 12.9 12.9 87.1

7 10.0 10.0 97.1

1 1.4 1.4 98.6

1 1.4 1.4 100.0

70 100.0 100.0

4.60

4.80

5.00

5.20

5.40

5.60

5.80

6.00

6.20

6.40

Total

Valid


Cumulative

Percent

87

Descriptives

-.4041 .02862

-.4612

-.3470

-.3983

-.3900

.057

.23946

-1.02

.06

1.08

.34

-.313 .287

-.192 .566

5.0476 .05605

4.9358

5.1594

5.0423

5.0000

.220

.46896

4.00

6.00

2.00

.67

.093 .287

-.700 .566

Mean

Low er Bound

Upper Bound

95% Confidence

Interval for Mean

5% Trimmed Mean

Median

Variance

Std. Deviation

Minimum

Maximum

Range

Interquartile Range

Skew ness

Kurtosis

Mean

Low er Bound

Upper Bound

95% Confidence

Interval for Mean

5% Trimmed Mean

Median

Variance

Std. Deviation

Minimum

Maximum

Range

Interquartile Range

Skew ness

Kurtosis

Service Quality


Statistic Std. Error

Tests of Normality

.077 70 .200* .985 70 .541

.163 70 .000 .945 70 .004

Service Quality


Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

Kolmogorov-Smirnova

Shapiro-Wilk

This is a low er bound of the true signif icance.*.

Lilliefors Signif icance Correctiona.


1 1.4 1.4 1.4

7 10.0 10.0 11.4

18 25.7 25.7 37.1

15 21.4 21.4 58.6

16 22.9 22.9 81.4

9 12.9 12.9 94.3

1 1.4 1.4 95.7

3 4.3 4.3 100.0

70 100.0 100.0

4.00

4.33

4.67

5.00

5.33

5.67

5.67

6.00

Total

Valid


Cumulative

Percent

Laujiali Thesis

Documents

norm ality

lau jia li

low er bound

point likert

upper saddle

truck freight

universiti

hong leong