The importance and formalization of service quality dimensions: a comparison of Chile and the USA
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose – Services account for a very large portion of the economic activity in most countries. While there is abundant academic research on service quality, which has focused mainly on determining service quality dimensions, understanding service quality antecedents, and relating service quality to key outcomes, such as customer satisfaction and performance, there is, however, limited research on an increasingly relevant issue, which is how service quality perceptions differ among cultures. The aim of this research is to address this question. Design/methodology/approach – The research used two identical surveys administered to managers in two different cultures. One survey was in English for the US sample and one was in Spanish for the Chilean sample. The surveys measured the importance of the five SERVQUAL service dimensions as well as relevant information about the respondent's experience, position and type of company at which he/she worked. Each country was examined for significant characteristics using Hofstede's cultural dimensions. Hypotheses were developed reflecting the differences expected by the characteristics of the cultures in which the respondents worked. Data was analyzed to extract meaning from the data using ANOVA. Findings – Of the five service quality dimensions (tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy), reliability is the most important in both countries. Responsiveness is the second most important. Three of the hypotheses testing the difference in perceived importance among service quality dimensions between Chile and the USA, were supported. H1: no difference exists between the two countries in the importance of tangibles, is supported (p=0.000). H2: reliability is more important in Chile than in the USA, is also supported (p=0.039). H3: responsiveness is more important in the USA than in Chile, is supported as well (p=0.012). Research limitations/implications – Use of MBA students as survey respondents limits the generalizability of the results. Despite the fact that each subject was employed in a managerial position within a firm, each subject was also enrolled in an MBA program. Arguably, the subjects are all employed in business but differ from others who are not in degree programs. Practical implications – The research highlights the need to attend to perceptions of service quality globally. The Hofstede cultural dimensions provide a clear and easy to apply framework that allows companies to identify what is important in a host culture. That information will enable service quality adjustments that offer the potential of improving customer satisfaction and firm success. Originality/value – The current research is the first to use two tested conceptualizations to assess differences in service quality importance across cultures. It explores the relationship of Hofstede's cultural dimensions, with perceptions of service quality. It hypothesizes which service quality dimensions will be important based on the characteristics of the culture in which they are delivered. No other study has compared service quality perceptions between the USA and Chile. Each country has a vibrant, free market economy. The study provides a foundation for approaching other markets in Latin America and in countries with similar cultural dimensions.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».