Pengaruh Dimensi Service Quality Terhadap Kepuasan Konsumen Hotel dan Dampaknya Terhadap Behaviour Intention (Studi Kasus Pada Hotel Aston Kuningan Suites - Jakarta)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis pengaruh dimensi kualitas layanan pada kepuasan pelanggan dan dampaknya pada kepuasan pelanggan. Pelanggan dari Aston Hotel Kuningan Suites, Jakarta diambil sebagai responden. Kedua data primer dan sekunder dikumpulkan. Data sekunder dikumpulkan dari berbagai sumber seperti jurnal, buku dan publikasi terkait lainnya. Data primer dikumpulkan dengan menggunakan kuesioner yang dibagikan kepada responden sasaran. Menggunakan teknik purposive sampling, sebanyak 100 responden dikumpulkan datanggapan yang valid adalah sebanyak 75 responden. Berbagai uji statistik seperti validitas, keandalan, dan asumsi tes klasik dilakukan. Menggunakan Metode Analisis ditemukan bahwa kecuali empati semua dimensi kualitas pelayanan memiliki pengaruh positif dan signifikan terhadap kepuasan pelanggan dan juga kepuasan pelanggan memiliki pengaruh positif dan signifikan terhadap niat perilaku. Sementara itu, dimensi kualitas layanan kecuali jaminan memiliki pengaruh positif dan signifikan terhadap niat perilaku. Disarankan bahwa perusahaan harus membayar lebih banyak perhatian pada berbagai aspek seperti aspek emosional dan teknis. Penelitian lebih lanjut tentang harga dirasakan dan hubungan yang perlu. Kata kunci: kualitas pelayanan, kepuasan pelanggan, dan behaviour intention Abstract This study aims to analyze the effect of Service Quality dimensions on customer satisfaction and it's impact on customer satisfaction. Customers of Aston Hotel Kuningan Suites, Jakarta were taken as respondents. Both primary and secondary data were gathered. Secondary data were gathered from various sources such as journals, books and other related publications. Primary data were collected using questionnaire which were distributed to the target respondents. Using a purposive sampling technique, a total of 100 respondents were gathered of which 75 responses were valid . Various statistical tests such as validity, reliability and classical assumptions tests were employed. Using a Path Analysis it was found that except empathy all service quality dimensions had a positive and significant effect on customer satisfaction. and also customer satisfaction had a positive and significant effect on behavior intention. Meanwhile, service quality dimensions except assurance had a positive and significant effect on behavior intention. It is suggested that the company should pay more attention on various aspects such as emotional and technical aspects. Further research on perceived prices and relationship is need. Keywords: service quality, customer satisfaction, behavior intention. Daftar Pustaka Angelova. B. 2011. Measuring Customer Satisfaction and Service Quality Using American Customer Satisfaction Model (ACSI Model). Internasional Joournal of Academic Research in Bussiness and Science, Vol 1, No 3. 2011. Atmadja dan Lukas, S 2009. Statistik Untuk Bisnis Dan Ekonomi. Andi. Yogyakarta. Barnes, J.G, 2009. Secrets of Customer Relationship Management. McGraw Hill. New York. Brito, C. 2011. “Relationship Marketing: Old Wine in a New Bottle?”, Innovative Marketing Journal, Vol. 7, Issue 1. Chih Tung Shiao and Jie Shin Lin, 2008 A Study of Service Quality in Public Sector.International Journal of Electronic Business Management. Vo 6 No 1. Dimitriades, Z.S. 2006. Customer Satisfaction, Loyalty and Commitment in Service Organization. Management Research News Volume 29. No 12. 2006. Duchessi, P. 2002. Crafting Customer Value : Art and Science. Purdue University Press. USA. Fandy. C, Yanto. C dan Anastasia. D. 2004. Analaisis Data Penelitian Ekonomi dan Manajemen Penerbit. Andi. Yogyakarta. Gilmore, J. Pine II, B. Mermiri, T. 2009. Beyond Experience: Culture, Consumer, and Brand. British Library. UK. Ginting. A.S. 2002. Not Just A Smile. PT Alex Media Komputindo. Jakarta. Griffin, Jill, 2006. Customer Loyalty : How To Earn It, How To Keep It. Jossey-Bass. USA. Hadiyati, E. 2014. Service Quality and Performance of Public Sector : Study on Immigration Office Indonesia. International Journal of Marketing Studies. Vo 6 N0 6. Published by Canadian Centre of Science and Education. Handoko Hendroyono. 2012. Brand Gardener. Literati. Jakarta. Jalaludin Rakhmat. 2009. Metode Penelitian Komunikasi. Remaja Rosdakarya. Bandung. Jin Woo Park et al (2004). Effect of Airline Service quality on Psssenger’s Behaviour Intentions : a Korea case Study. Journal of Air Transpot Mangement. 10-435-439. Kartajaya, H dan Ridwansyah, A. 2012. Service With Character. PT Gramedia Pustaka Utama. Jakarta Kartajaya, H. 2004. Marketing In Venus. PT Gramedia Pustaka Media. Jakarta. Kisang Rye Hye-Rin Lee Woo Gon Kim. 2012. Influence of Quality of Phisical Environment, Food and Service on Restaurant Image, Customer perceived Value, Customer Satisfaction anf Behaviour Intention. International Journal of Comtemporary Hospitality Manager. Emerald Insight. Kottler, Kellen, K.L. 2012. Marketing Management, ed.14. Pearson. Lupiyoadi, Rambat, 2006. Manajemen Pemasaran Jasa, Edisi Kedua. Penerbit Salemba Empat. Jakarta. Margaretha, Moren, 2007. Studi Mengenai Loyalitas Pelanggan. Jurnal Sains Pemasaran Indonesia Vol III No. 3. Hal 289 – 308. Munhurun, PR, Bhiwajee, SDL and Naidoo, P. 2010. Service Quality in Public Service. International Journal of Management and Marketing. Volume 3 No 1. Munusamy. J, Shellial. S and Hor Wai Min. 2010. Service Quality Delivery and Its Impact on Satisfaction in Banking Sector in Malaysia. Internasional Journal of Innovation, Managemen and Technology. Oktober 2010. Nde Daniel. C and Berinyuy. 2010. Using the SERVQUAL Model to Assess Service quality abd Qustomer Satisfaction. UMEA School of Business. Noor, J. 2014. Analsiis Data penelitian Ekonomi dan Manajemen. Gramedia Widiasarana Indonesia. Jakarta. Nyec. S, Morales. M and Pons, F, 2002. Ten Years of Service quality Measurement : Reviewing the Use of Serqual Instrument. Afio 7 number 13. Esan cuadernos de diffusion. Osterwalder. A and Pigneur. Y. 2010 Business Model generation. John Wiley & Sons. Inc. New Jersey. Pena. MM, Maria-Santos, D, Tronchin, D.M.R and Melleiro, M.M, 2013. Use of Quality Model of Parasuraman, Zeithalm and Berry in YThe Healt Service. Rev Esc Enferm USP. Ramseok. P, Lukea-Bhiwaje, S.D andNasidoo. P, 2010. Service quality in the Public Sector. Internasional Journal in Management and Marketing Research. Vol 3 No 1. 2010. Ravichandran (2010) Influence of Service quality on banking Customer’s Behaviour Intentions. International Journal of Economic and Finance. Vol 2 No 4 2010. Reichheld, F.F., Markey, R.G. Jr. and Hopton, C. (2010), The loyalty effect: the relationship between loyalty and profits, European Business Journal, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 134-9. Rini, Endang Sulistya. 2009. Menciptakan Pengalaman Konsumen Dengan Experiential Marketing. Jurnal Manajemen Bisnis Volume 2 Nomor 1. Siregar, S. (2013). Statistik Parametrik. Bumi Aksara. Jakarta. Sumardi, Marlin.S dan Harsono. 2011. Customer Loyality. Upnormal Publishing. Jakarta. Tileng, MY, Utomo, WH dan Latuperissa, R. 2013. Analysis of Service Quality Using Serqual Methode and Importance Performance Analysis (IPA) in Population Department, Tomohon City. International Journal of Computer Aplication.Volume 17 No 19. Wieseke. J, Geigenmuller. A and Kraus. F, (2012) On the Role of Empathy in Customer Employee Interaction. Journal of Service Research. Zeithaml, VA, Bitner, MJ and Gremler, DD. 2009. Services Marketing, integrating costumer focus accross the firm. McGraw Hill International edition.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".