MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410452299 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v18n3p104

Assessment of Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction from Local Transport Company: A Case Study of Niazi Express Pakistan

2025· article· en· W4410452299 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Muhammad Usman Akram, Aamir Iqbal Ghazanvi, Muhammad Abubakar

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCustomer Service Quality and Loyalty
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsService qualityBusinessCustomer satisfactionMarketingService (business)Customer retentionQuality (philosophy)Operations managementProcess managementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluates the service quality and customer satisfaction of Niazi Express, a leading transport company in Pakistan. The research uses the SERVQUAL model to examine key factors such as punctuality, cleanliness, pricing, and staff way of behaving that influence customer perceptions. A quantitative approach was adopted, collecting data from 200 passengers and 50 employees through structured surveys. Statistical analysis reveals that punctuality and staff conduct significantly impact customer loyalty, while issues like fare transparency and service inconsistencies remain concerns. Findings indicate that enhancing service quality can improve customer retention and competitiveness. The study recommends improvements in operational efficiency, employee training, and fare policies to align services with passenger expectations. By addressing these areas, Niazi Express can enhance overall customer satisfaction and strengthen its market position. Future research can expand this study by comparing different transport services or incorporating qualitative insights from customer interviews to better understand service quality dynamics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.101
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.339 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business ResearchSame topicCustomer Service Quality and LoyaltyFrench-language works237,207