A RESEARCH PROJECT

On

MEASUREMENT OF SERVICE QUALITY OF THE

AUTHORIZED SERVICE CENTRES FOR THE
AUTOMOBILE BRANDS IN DELHI/NCR REGION

Submitted to

Dr. S.K. Pandey

Faculty, Fore School of Management

On 08/03/2011

Submitted By

Group 6- FMG19C

Ankit Garg – 191126

Ankita Garg – 191127

Gaurav Sakhuja – 191140

Madhur Gautam- 191144

Sonal Saraogi – 191175

Sudarshan Chitlangia – 191177

1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We express our sincere thanks and acknowledgements to Dr. S.K. Pandey who has been our
mentor in this research project. We are thankful to him for taking pains to provide us the
necessary guidance and support. We would also like to thank all the respondents for their
cooperation.

Thanking all,
Group – VI
FMG XIX C
FORE School of Management, Delhi

2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Competitiveness and search for profits have called more attention towards customer’s
satisfaction and increased researcher’s interest on the topic of service quality. In this context,
this study applies SERVQUAL for assessing service quality in the automobile authorized
service centres. The main objective is to assess quality service dimensions that are delivered
through the perspectives of managers and customers. A questionnaire was developed based
on the service quality dimensions from which results were analyzed. The results of this study
show the quality dimensions and characteristics that call managerial attention.
Since the sample size for Maruti Suzuki and Hyundai is large, the study is concentrated on
the two brands of automobiles. Among Honda, Hyundai and Maruti Suzuki we have found
that the average percentage of unsatisfied customers are highest in Maruti Suzuki 9.02
percentage. The unsatisfaction percentage is particularly notable for Reliability dimension in
Hyundai 13% and Responsiveness in Maruti Suzuki 25%. Maruti Suzuki has a gap of 0.6129
in Responsiveness dimension. Hyundai has a gap of 0.6428 in Reliability dimension. . This
suggests that there is a difference between the expectations and the perceived service quality
of the customers.

3
 Contents

INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................................7

Automobile Industry in India..........................................................................................................................8

Services..........................................................................................................................................................8

Service Quality...............................................................................................................................................9

LITERATURE REVIEW.................................................................................................................................12

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE...............................................................................................................................18

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.....................................................................................................................19

Research Design...........................................................................................................................................19

Scope of the study........................................................................................................................................19

Method of Data Collection...........................................................................................................................19

Sampling Plan..............................................................................................................................................19

Sampling Unit..............................................................................................................................................19

Sample Size..................................................................................................................................................20

Process Flow Chart.......................................................................................................................................20

Methodology................................................................................................................................................20

ANALYSIS......................................................................................................................................................22

FINDINGS.......................................................................................................................................................33

LIMITATIONS................................................................................................................................................34

CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................................35

REFERENCES.................................................................................................................................................36

ANNEXURE....................................................................................................................................................37

4
LIST OF TABLES

5
LIST OF GRAPHS

6
LIST OF ANNEXURES

7
INTRODUCTION

Automobile Industry in India

Since the 90’s many service companies have pursued to enhance their performance and
effectiveness in search of achieving differentiation in the market. An example of that is the
attempt to convince customers that their quality is superior to the competitors. In addition, the
importance of service sector has sharply increased at both developed and developing
countries.
India's automotive industry is one of the key drivers of the country's economy. With an
estimated size of around USD 40 billion, it accounts for 5 percent of India's GDP. The
industry has been growing at a rate of 12 percent CAGR over the past 7 years (2002-03 to
2009-10), with both domestic and export markets growing during the period. The
Government's Automotive Mission Plan 2016 envisages the industry to grow to
approximately USD 145 billion by 2016, thereby contributing 10 percent to the GDP. The
automotive service market is estimated between Rs.50, 000 crores to Rs 60,000 crores, in
terms of turnover. As a consequence, Service quality is one of the major issues facing
operations managers but it is an area characterized by debate concerning the need for
assessing customer expectations and service quality assessment.
In this sense, the objective in this study is to identify which quality dimensions are most
important to customers of an automobile service centre. In addition, it also assesses the
service that is delivered to them.

Services

Services are commodities that cannot be stored or disappear in use, or as activities that
require personal contact. The distinct characteristics of services are intangibility; perish
ability, heterogeneity of the product, and simultaneity of production and consumption. Two
economic units are required for a service to be produced – the consumer and the producer.
While the consumer cannot retain the actual service after it is produced, the effect of the
service can be retained. Managing a service operation requires the manager to understand the
service concept, service delivery system, and service levels. As the consumer has a key role

8
in the definition and evaluation of all three elements, it is imperative that service managers
have a clear understanding of consumer expectations and perceptions. Services may be
provided by private or public agencies. These characteristics enhance the importance of
certain marketing strategies that are unique to services marketing, such as service
customization, managing evidence, making the service tangible, and synchronizing supply
and demand patterns.

Service Quality

 Quality is a strategic tool for attaining operational efficiency and improved business
performance. Importance of quality to service firms and have demonstrated its
positive relationship with profits, increased market share, returns on investment,
customer satisfaction, and future purchase intentions. Service quality has been
described as a form of attitude, related but not equivalent to satisfaction, which results
from the comparison of expectations with performance (Parasuraman, Zeithaml and
Berry 1988).
 Service quality involves a comparison of expectations with performance: it is a
measure of how well the service level delivered matches customer expectations on a
consistent basis. Service quality has been conceptualized as a function of consumer
expectations towards the service situation and process, and of the output quality they
perceived themselves to have received. The ultimate goal of service quality
measurement is to assist managers in ensuring service quality and customer
satisfaction (Webster, 1988).
 Measurement is a necessary step towards devising any action plan. However, because
of its elusiveness and indistinctness, explication and measurement of quality also
present problems for researchers, who often bypass definitions and use
unidimensional self-report measures to capture the concept. The emergence of service
quality and its assessment has attracted the attention of numerous researchers in the
past two decades or so.
 In this sense, there are two main lines of thoughts on measuring service quality an
American and an European perspective. The focus on functional quality attributes is
referred to as the American perspective of service quality while the European
perspective suggests that service quality considers two more components. The

9
 European perspective considers the quality of a service as perceived by customers
consists of three dimensions: functional (the process of service delivery to customers),
technical (the outcomes generated by the service to the customers), and image (how
the customers view the company). Considering those dimensions, the quality of the
service is dependent upon two variables: the expected service and the perceived
service.
 Functional quality of a service is often assessed by measures of customers’ attitudes,
as in customer satisfaction questionnaires. The process of identifying customers’
attitudes begins with determining customers’ requirements or quality dimensions. The
author, Parasuraman et al. (1985) explains two ways of identifying important quality
dimensions of services: quality dimension development approach and critical incident
approach. The first one uses different sources of information, such as opinions of
providers and literature. The other one is a process to obtain information from
customers.
 The 10 determinants of service quality established by Parasuraman et al. (1985)
provide a list that can guide investigation on the first approach. The authors
subsequently developed SERVQUAL (Parasuraman et al., 1988), a two-part
instrument for measuring service quality that was refined later (Parasuraman et al.,
1991). SERVQUAL provided a means of measurement for researchers to determine
how well service level is delivered and how it matches customer expectations on a
consistent basis. There are 10 potentially overlapping dimensions: tangibles,
reliability, responsiveness, communication, credibility, assurance, competence,
courtesy, understanding/knowing the customer, and access. Afterwards, these
dimensions were reduced to five, namely: tangibles, reliability, responsiveness,
assurance, empathy.
The five key gaps or discrepancies on the service provider's side that are likely to affect
consumers' perceptions of service quality are:-
Gap 1: Consumer expectation-management perception gap, which is the gap between
consumer expectations of service quality and management perceptions of these expectations
Gap 2: Management perception-service quality perception gap, that is, the gap between
management perceptions of consumer expectations and the firm's service quality
specifications

10
Gap 3: Service quality specifications-service delivery gap, the gap between service quality
specifications and actual service quality.
Gap 4: Service delivery-external communications gap, or the gap between actual service
delivery and external communications about the service
Gap 5: Expected service-perceived service gap, which is the gap between expected service
and perceived service.

Applications of the SERVQUAL scale have been made to measure service quality in
hospitals, hotels, travel and tourism, telecom companies, insurance companies and banks,
business school placement centre, retail stores and acute care hospital physicians, dentists,
attorney, financial and banking institutions, laundry/dry cleaning and automobile companies.

11
LITERATURE REVIEW

Sasser et al. (1978)

 The paper defines services as commodities that cannot be stored or disappear in use,
or as activities that require personal contact. The distinct characteristics of services
are intangibility, perish ability, heterogeneity of the product, and simultaneity of
production and consumption Two economic units are required for a service to be
produced – the consumer and the producer. While the consumer cannot retain the
actual service after it is produced, the effect of the service can be retained. Managing
a service operation requires the manager to understand the service concept, service
delivery system, and service levels. As the consumer has a key role in the definition
and evaluation of all three elements, it is imperative that service managers have a
clear understanding of consumer expectations and perceptions.
 Services may be provided by private or public agencies. These characteristics enhance
the importance of certain marketing strategies that are unique to services marketing,
such as service customization, managing evidence, making the service tangible, and
synchronizing supply and demand patterns. Service quality is more difficult for the
consumer to evaluate than goods quality. Perceptions of service quality result from a
comparison of consumer expectations with actual service performance. Quality
evaluations are not made solely on the outcome of a service; they also involve an
evaluation of the process of service delivery.

Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1985,1988)

 The paper pointed out that the concept of quality prevalent in the goods sector is not
extendable to the services sector. Being inherently and essentially intangible,
heterogeneous, perishable, and entailing simultaneity and inseparability of production
and consumption, services require a distinct framework for quality explication and
measurement. As against the goods sector where tangible cues exist to enable
consumers to evaluate product quality, quality in the service context is explicated in
terms of parameters that largely come under the domain of ‘experience’ and
‘credence’ properties and are as such difficult to measure and evaluate (Parasuraman,
Zeithaml and Berry, 1985; Zeithaml and Bitner, 2001).
12
 One major contribution of Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1988) was to provide a
terse definition of service quality. They defined service quality as ‘a global judgment,
or attitude, relating to the superiority of the service’, and explicated it as involving
evaluations of the outcome (i.e., what the customer actually receives from service)
and process of service act (i.e., the manner in which service is delivered). In line with
the propositions put forward by Gronroos (1982) and Smith and Houston (1982),
Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1985, 1988) posited and operationalized service
quality as a difference between consumer expectations of ‘what they want’ and their
perceptions of ‘what they get.’ Based on this conceptualization and operationalization,
they proposed a service quality measurement scale called ‘SERVQUAL.’ The
SERVQUAL scale constitutes an important landmark in the service quality literature
and has been extensively applied in different service settings.
 Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988) initially identifies ten
dimensions regarding service quality in their SERVQUAL model, however these
were reduced to five dimensions namely: Reliability, Assurance, Tangibles, Empathy
and Responsiveness. Zanudin b .Hj. Awang., Mohd Azuhari b. Che Mat. & Meer
Farouk Amir Razli., uses SERVQUAL approach after its customization, here they
have added 15 more service quality items relevance to higher education environment.
Adele Berndt (2009) explains these five dimensions with respect to automobile
service centre as follows:
 Reliability (Promised delivery): Dealerships are known to contact the customer
promising that the vehicle will be ready for delivery at a specific time. It is the most
important dimension of service quality.
 Assurance (Confidence and trust): At dealership, the main source of assurance is with
the service adviser, their knowledge and manner of interaction with the customer
inspires trust in the organization.
 Tangibles (Physical cues): Tangible cues that form part of this dimension include the
signage, parking and layout of the dealership itself.
 Empathy (Importance): In the case of dealership, this can be seen in the interactions
between the organization and the customer, and the nature of this interaction.
 Responsiveness (Willingness to serve): This refers to the changes that have been
observed in service hours from just being weekdays to include weekend and night
services, due to the changes in the needs of customers.

13
Boulding et al. (1993) perceived the dimensions of service quality as a function of a
customer's prior expectations of what will and what should transpire during a service
encounter, as well as the customer's most recent contact with the service delivery system.
These perceptions of quality dimensions form the basis for a person's intended behaviour.
Their findings suggest that the two different types of expectations have opposing effects on
perceptions of service quality and that service quality perceptions positively affect intended
behaviours.

Zeithaml et al. (1993)

 The paper explored the gap between expectations and perceptions to better understand
expectations as they pertain to customer assessment of service quality and to extend
the theoretical work that exists in the customer satisfaction literature. Based on their
study, the gap between customer expectations and perceptions as proposed by
Parasuraman et al. (1985) can be conceptualized to reflect two comparison standards:
desired service which reflects what customers want, and adequate service which
indicates the standard that customers are willing to accept.
 The comparison between desired service and perceived service or the level of service
customers believe is likely to occur, called perceived service quality (PSQ) is the
perceived service superiority gap. The comparison between adequate service and
perceived service, called PSQ Gap 5 is the perceived service quality adequacy gap.
The smaller the gap between desired service and perceived service, the higher is the
perceived superiority of the firm. The smaller the gap between adequate service and
perceived service, the higher is the perceived adequacy of the service.

Lowndes and Dawes (2001) have found that Service quality is commonly thought to
comprise of five generic dimensions - responsiveness, assurance, tangibles, empathy and
reliability. These dimensions form the basis for service measurement tool SERVQUAL. This
tool predominantly focused on customer perceptions and expectations of quality and helps the
organizations to improve upon their service quality resulting in greater customer retention.

Jain and Gupta (2004) have done a comparative analysis of two major service quality
measurement scales: SERVQUAL and SERVPERF. An ideal service quality scale is one that
is not only psychometrically sound but is also diagnostically robust enough to provide

14
insights to the managers for corrective actions in the event of quality shortfalls. This study
assesses the diagnostic power of the two service quality scales. Using data collected through
a survey of consumers of fast food restaurants in Delhi, the study finds the SERVPERF scale
to be providing a more convergent and discriminant valid explanation of service quality
construct. However, the scale is found deficient in its diagnostic power. It is the SERVQUAL
scale which outperforms the SERVPERF scale by virtue of possessing higher diagnostic
power to pinpoint areas for managerial interventions in the event of service quality shortfalls.
SERVPERF scale should be used for assessing overall service quality of a firm because of its
psychometric soundness and greater instrument parsimoniousness. One should employ the
The SERVPERF scale should also be the preferred research instrument when one is
interested in undertaking service quality comparisons across service industries.

Arasli et al (2005)
 They have analyzed and compared service quality in the commercial banking sector
of a small island economy – Cyprus. The author with others investigated the
relationship between overall bank customer satisfaction in the Turkish- and Greek-
speaking areas of Cyprus and positive word-of-mouth about their banks. There is
disparity in the banking sector of a divided Cyprus, where banks in the South have
undergone significant restructuring before EU accession and banks in the North are
affected by the economic crisis and need to restructure if they want to join the EU.
 After descriptive and factor analysis, multivariate regression was used to estimate the
impact of service quality dimensions on overall customer satisfaction and word of
mouth. It was found that the responsiveness dimension failed to load and thus the
SERVQUAL scale proved to be of a four-dimensional structure in this study.
Research results revealed that the expectations of bank customers in both areas were
not met and that the largest gap was found in the empathy dimension. The assurance
dimension had the largest influence on customer satisfaction and overall satisfaction
of bank customers in both areas of Cyprus had a positive effect on their word-of-
mouth. The study helped the banks in both areas of Cyprus to redefine their corporate
image to one that is customer-focused and driven by service quality.
Prajapati and Kachwala (2006)
 The study has found out that the delivery of information i.e. knowledge transmission
in the case of Management Education Institutes (MEI) is intangible in nature.

15
 Therefore, the inputs in terms of delivery of this knowledge - faculty, equipment and
the entire environment and infrastructure are very important for quality. A gap was
found between the quality rendered by faculty and service provider, and quality
required by students. It is essential to understand the exact quality required by the
students to develop a course and curriculum that suit their requirements.
 Service quality needs to be quantified and thus it can be described in terms of
objective and perceptual characteristics: Objective characteristics include things like,
lecture time, wait time, etc., and can be easily quantified. Perceptual characteristics on
the other hand, depend on the students' perceptions, which include dimensions of
service quality based on the SERVQUAL and other service quality instruments. The
study encompassed Business Schools in Mumbai as perceived by students are
evaluated. The questionnaire is on the basis of a hypothesized model for service
quality. Factor analysis of the responses helped to develop a working model for the
perceived service quality factors in Management Education Institutes. This helped in
identifying the improvements in Service Quality in Management Education Institutes.

Cauchick Miguel et al (2007) have highlighted the fact that competitiveness and search for
profits have called for more attention towards customer’s satisfaction and increased
organizations interest in service quality. SERVQUAL technique is applied on a multinational
company service chain including one hundred shops located throughout the country, to assess
quality service dimensions that are delivered through the perspectives of managers and
customers. It was found that the certain quality dimensions and characteristics call for
managerial attention. Responsiveness and assurance were found to be the most relevant to
shop managers and customers, respectively. Quality improvement initiatives were proposed
to enhance the service rendered by the car repair shops. The paper concludes that there are
differences among the perspectives of shop owners and customers with regard to quality
dimensions.

Hii Geng Hing (2007) has examined Service Quality (SERVQUAL) variables from the
perspective of hotel guests in Sibu. Since Sibu is an emerging market for tourism industry so
the information obtained from hotel guests can be utilized to attract more guests. Stanley has
used Gap 5 (Gap between expected service and perceived service) and factor analysis to
analyze the data obtained in order to determine satisfaction and perception of the guests. Data

16
obtained from 189 respondents revealed a negative Gap 5 perception and a rich expectation
and perception factors. Recommendations for managers and future studies are presented.

Saravan and Rao (2007) have highlighted that in service firms the practitioners are
interested to know the customer perceptions of service quality for identifying shortfalls and
improving service delivery. This study has analyzed the discrimination among the three
groups (customer oriented, employee oriented and technology oriented) of overall service
quality from the customers’ perspective. The results indicate that both the technological
factors and the people-oriented factors appear to contribute more in discriminating the three
groups of overall service quality. Further, the service quality indices in the Indian automobile
service sector as a whole indicate a satisfactory performance.

Swaid and Wigand (2007) in their study have found that to satisfy and retain customers the
organization has to offer a superior service quality. The study indicates that the key
dimensions of ecommerce service quality are website usability, information quality,
reliability, responsiveness, assurance and personalization. Secondly customer satisfaction is
influenced mostly with the perception of reliability, while customer loyalty is affected by the
perception of assurance and customer retention is predicted by the customer satisfaction
index.

Rajagopal (2008) has analyzed the impact of market orientation strategies and performance
of customer services on customer acquisition, retention and sales of automobiles which
reveals overall performance of automobile dealers in Mexico. The study comprehends
understanding on customer-dealer relationship in the automobile market segment referring to
key factors which establishes service quality encompassing tangibility, responsiveness, trust,
accuracy and empathy. It was found that the customers perceive better quality of relationship
in a given frame of functions that are performed effectively by the dealer lowering the extent
of conflicts thereof. High conformance quality services of dealers and value added customer
relationship to offer high customer satisfaction develop life time customer value and
strengthen the customer-dealer.

17
RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

 The objective of this research is to measure the current service quality level of the
authorized service centres for the automobile brands. Service quality level depends on
satisfaction /dissatisfaction of the customers. Dissatisfaction may be caused by
various reasons. The reason(s) may be on all dimensions of the SERVQUAL model.
We have tried to focus on two fold objectives. First, to find out the most influencing
factor of dissatisfaction. Second, to find the gap if any in the perceived and expected
service quality.
 The purpose of this project is to utilize the SERVQUAL scale to assess customers'
perceptions of the service quality offered by major Automobile brands. The various
dimensions of service quality of the automobile services, the overall level of service
of the authorized service centres and the relative importance of each of the
dimensions in influencing consumers' perception of service quality is examined.
Service quality is more difficult for the consumer to evaluate than goods quality.
 Perceptions of service quality result from a comparison of consumer expectations
with actual service performance. Quality evaluations are not made solely on the
outcome of a service; they also involve an evaluation of the process of service
delivery. In judging quality of service provided, consumers perceive the actual service
performance in the context of what they expected. Thus the perceived service quality
is the result of the consumer's comparison of expected service with perceived service.
It is to be noted that the dimensions of service quality as a function of a customer's
prior expectations of what will and what should transpire during a service encounter,
as well as the customer's most recent contact with the service delivery system. These
perceptions of quality Dimensions form the basis for a person's intended behaviour.
 The comparison between desired service and perceived service or the level of service
customers believe is likely to occur, called perceived service quality (PSQ) is the
perceived service superiority gap. The comparison between adequate service and
perceived service, called PSQ, is the perceived service quality adequacy gap. The
smaller the gap between desired service and perceived service, the higher is the
perceived superiority of the firm. The smaller the gap between adequate service and
perceived service, the higher is the perceived adequacy of the service.

18
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Design

The research design is descriptive in nature as it involves studying the perceptions and
expectations of customers in order to measure the service quality provided by the service
provider. The study thus finds out the major areas of improvement so that company services
to the customers can be improved.

Scope of the study

The study is limited to Delhi/NCR Region.

Method of Data Collection

The primary data was collected with the help of a structured, non disguised electronic
questionnaire. Secondary data was collected from journals, books & research papers with a
view to supplement the primary data. The study of secondary sources made the structuring of
questionnaire easy.

Sampling Plan

1. Universe of the study: This involves all the people using the product or the service. For
this project all the people who are availing automobile services from authorized service
stations in the world, forms the universe.
2. Population of the study: This involves all those people using the product/service residing
in a particular area. So here the population will be all those people who are availing the
service from authorized service stations in Delhi/NCR region.
3. Sampling frame: The sampling frame is the list of respondents from where the researcher
draws the sample. In this research study, sampling frame is the database comprising of
friends, families and relatives.
4. Sampling technique: The sampling technique applied is snowball sampling technique.

19
Sampling Unit

Every single individual undertaken in the research study is called the sampling unit. In this
research study sampling unit is every single individual in the data base who gets his vehicle
serviced at an Authorized Service Station.

Sample Size

The sample size undertaken in this research study is 148.

Process Flow Chart

Customer satisfaction /dissatisfaction is now the key element in the measurement of the
service quality level. Dissatisfaction may occur at any interaction between customer and
dealer. At service centre customers come for after-sales service. Servicing of vehicle is
carried out through a sequential process. Figure shows flow process chart includes different
activities. According to customer’s view, whole activities can be categorized as visible
actions and invisible actions. In this process service advisor plays important role because he
always being in the direct contact with the customer.

Figure 1: PROCESS FLOW CHART

Methodology

This study used the SERVQUAL scale designed by Parasuraman et al. (1988) to measure the
perceived service quality of DADA MOTORS automobile service users. This approach has

20
practical appeal, operational simplicity and potential for immediate and long-term strategic
impact. This study follows closely the steps taken to measure the unweighted average
SERVQUAL scores To measure the unweighted average SERVQUAL scores several steps
were taken.
 The first step was the calculation of the SERVQUAL score for each of the 5 pairs of
expectation/perception items. The SERVQUAL score was defined and computed as
follows: SERVQUAL score = Perception - Expectation score
 The next step was to compute the SERVQUAL score for each dimension by adding
the SERVQUAL score for each item pair obtained in the first step, across all the items
which pertain to that dimension and dividing by the number of items.
 In step 3, for each dimension, the SERVQUAL scores were then added for all the
respondents and divided by the total number of the respondents.
 In step 4, the overall SERVQUAL score was then obtained, the five SERVQUAL
scores obtained for each of the five dimensions were added up and divided by 5. This
gave the overall SERVQUAL score which was an unweighted average of the five
scores computed in step 3.

21
ANALYSIS

Figure 2: CATEGORIZATION OF DIMENSIONS

The expected service quality and perceived service quality variables are categorized
according to the five dimensions of service quality in the above figure. Descriptive statistics
of the 148 respondents based on brand of car, car segments are mentioned in tables and pie
charts below.
Occupation  
Gender   Service 55
Male 115 Student 76
Female 33 Business 12
Table 1: GENDER AND OCCUPATION House Wife 5

22
 Gender Occupation
House
Business Wife
Female 8% 3%
22%
Service
37%
Student
Male 51%
78%

GRAPH 1: GENDER AND OCCUPATION PERCENTAGE

Brand Name  
Car Segment   Maruti Suzuki 62
Hatchback 68 Hyundai 42
Sedan 62 Tata Motors 9
SUV 18 Honda 24
Toyota 11

23
 Car Segment Brand name
SUV Toyota
12% 7%
Honda
16% Maruti
Hatchbac
k Tata Suzuki
46% Motor 42%
Sedan s
42% 6%
Hyund
ai
28%

Hatchback SUV
HouseWife Business HouseWife
1% 9% 6%

Student
Student 28%
47% Service Service
43% 67%

Sedan
House Busine
Wife ss
5% 10%
Service
23%

Studen
t
62%

24
 Honda Hyundai
HouseWife Business
4% Business
17% 15%

Service Student
17% 49%
Student Service
63% 37%

Maruti Suzuki Tata Motors

HouseWife Business HouseWife
8% 3%
11%

Service Service
42% 44%
Student Student
48% 44%

Toyota
HouseWif
e
9%
Service
45%
Student
45%

25
 1. There is no significant difference between the mean score of male and female for the
service quality at the authorized service centre as a factor for buying a car. This result
is derived from the t-test below.

Ho: There is no significant difference between

the mean score of male and female for the
   
service quality at the authorized service centre
as a factor for buying a car
Ha: There is a significant difference between the
mean score of male and female for the service
 
quality at the authorized service centre as a
factor for buying a car
   
t-Test: Two-Sample Assuming Unequal
   
Variances
     
Variable Variable
 
1 2
Mean 4.242424 4.434783
Variance 0.814394 0.475973
Observations 33 115
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0  
Df 43  
t Stat -1.13314  
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.131717  
t Critical one-tail 1.681071  
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.263435  
t Critical two-tail 2.016692  
   
Fail to Reject Null Hypothesis    

1. There is a significant difference between the mean scores of the five brands (Honda,
Hyundai, Maruti Suzuki, Tata Motors and Toyota) of automobile for the service
quality at the authorized service centre as a factor for buying a car. This result is
derived from the annova test below.
2. There is a significant difference between the mean scores of the segments of car
(hatchback, sedan, SUV) for the service quality at the authorized service centre as a
factor for buying a car. This result is derived from the annova test below.
3. There is a significant difference between the mean scores of the type of occupation
(Business, Housewife, Service, and Student) for the service quality at the authorized
service centre as a factor for buying a car. This result is derived from the annova test
below.

26
4. The five dimensions of service quality are segregated into tables. The Expected
dimensions are mentioned as Important and Unimportant, while the neutral values are not
taken into account. A Chi Square test for Independence is performed to check the dependence
of dimensions of expected service quality on the brands of authorized service stations. The
perceived dimensions are mentioned as Satisfied and Unsatisfied, while the neutral values are
not taken into account. A similar Square test for Independence is performed to check the
dependence of dimensions of perceived service quality on the brands of authorized service
stations.

Ho: Tangibles expected at the service centre

Tangibles Expected   does not depend upon the Brand of Automobile  
service Station
Ha: Tangibles expected at the service centre
Unimportan
  Important depends upon the Brand of the Automobile  
t
Service Station
9.48
Honda 22 1 Critical Chi Value
8
Hyundai 36 2 Observed Chi Value 2.85
Maruti
56 1 Fail to Reject Null Hypothesis
Suzuki
Tata Motors 7 1
Toyota 10 1
Ho: Reliability expected at the service centre
Reliability Expected   does not depend upon the Brand of Automobile  
service Station
Ha: Reliability expected at the service centre
Unimportan
  Important depends upon the Brand of the Automobile  
t
Service Station
9.48
Honda 23 1 Critical Chi Value
8
Hyundai 40 0 Observed Chi Value 8.74
Maruti
56 0 Fail to Reject Null Hypothesis  
Suzuki
Tata Motors 8 1    
Toyota 10 0    

Ho: Assurance expected at the service centre

Assurance Expected   does not depend upon the Brand of Automobile  
service Station
Ha: Assurance expected at the service centre
Unimportan
  Important depends upon the Brand of the Automobile  
t
Service Station
9.48
Honda 23 0 Critical Chi Value
8
Hyundai 34 3 Observed Chi Value 5.37
Maruti
58 1   Fail to Reject Null Hypothesis  
Suzuki
Tata Motors 8 1    
Toyota 9 0    
Empathy Expected   Ho: Empathy expected at the service centre  
27
 does not depend upon the Brand of Automobile
service Station
Ha: Empathy expected at the service centre
Unimportan
  Important depends upon the Brand of the Automobile  
t
Service Station
Honda 21 2 Critical Chi Value 9.488
Hyundai 31 2 Observed Chi Value 0.94
Maruti
42 3  Fail to Reject Null Hypothesis  
Suzuki
Tata Motors 5 1    
Toyota 10 1    

Ho: Responsiveness expected at the

Responsiveness Expected   service centre does not depend upon the  
Brand of Automobile service Station
Ha: Responsiveness expected at the
  Important Unimportant service centre depends upon the Brand of  
the Automobile Service Station
Honda 19 2 Critical Chi Value 9.488
Hyundai 30 1 Observed Chi Value 4.29
Maruti Suzuki 48 1  Fail to Reject Null Hypothesis  
Tata Motors 6 1    
Toyota 10 0    

Ho: Tangibles perceived at the service

Tangibles Perceived   centre does not depend upon the Brand of  
Automobile service Station
Ha: Tangibles at the service centre
  Satisfied Unsatisfied depends upon the Brand of the Automobile  
Service Station
Honda 22 1 Critical Chi Value 9.488
Hyundai 35 3 Observed Chi Value 6.29
Maruti
50 2  Fail to Reject Null Hypothesis  
Suzuki
Tata Motors 5 2    
Toyota 9 1    

Ho: Reliability perceived at the service

Reliability Perceived   centre does not depend upon the Brand of  
Automobile service Station
Ha: Reliability at the service centre
  Satisfied Unsatisfied depends upon the Brand of the Automobile  
Service Station
Honda 21 2 Critical Chi Value 9.488
Hyundai 34 5 Observed Chi Value 5.48
Maruti
54 3  Fail to Reject Null Hypothesis  
Suzuki
Tata Motors 6 1    
Toyota 8 3    

28
 Ho: Assurance perceived at the service
Assurance Perceived   centre does not depend upon the Brand of  
Automobile service Station
Ha: Assurance at the service centre
  Satisfied Unsatisfied depends upon the Brand of the Automobile  
Service Station
Honda 18 1 Critical Chi Value 9.488
Hyundai 29 1 Observed Chi Value 1.48
Maruti
48 3  Fail to Reject Null Hypothesis  
Suzuki
Tata Motors 8 1    
Toyota 10 0    

Ho: Empathy perceived at the service

Empathy Perceived   centre does not depend upon the Brand of  
Automobile service Station
Ha: Empathy at the service centre depends
  Satisfied Unsatisfied upon the Brand of the Automobile Service  
Station
Honda 21 1 Critical Chi Value 9.488
Hyundai 28 1 Observed Chi Value 2.75
Maruti
37 2  Fail to Reject Null Hypothesis  
Suzuki
Tata Motors 4 1    
Toyota 8 1    

Ho: Responsiveness perceived at the

Responsiveness Perceived   service centre does not depend upon the  
Brand of Automobile service Station
Ha: Responsiveness at the service centre
  Satisfied Unsatisfied depends upon the Brand of the Automobile  
Service Station
Honda 18 2 Critical Chi Value 9.488
Hyundai 28 2 Observed Chi Value 6.19
Maruti Suzuki 30 10 Fail to Reject Null Hypothesis  
Tata Motors 4 2    
Toyota 7 1    

In all the above cases we Fail to reject the Null Hypothesis. This suggests that the expected
and perceived level (Important or Unimportant and Satisfied or Unsatisfied) of the service
dimensions like Tangibles, Assurance, Reliability, Empathy and Responsiveness does not
depend upon the Brand of the Automobile service station.

Frequency of Unsatisfied Customers for the Five Dimensions of Service Quality

29
 Honda Unsatisfied Hyundai Unsatisfied
2.5 6
2 5
4
1.5
3
1 Honda Hyundai
Unsatisfied 2 Unsatisfied
0.5 1
0 0
les ity ce hy ss

e
Re les

s
As lity

on thy
ig b abil ran apt ene

es
nc
ib

bi

en
p
ra
n li su Em nsiv

ng

Re ma
lia

su
Ta

siv
Re As

Ta

E
o
sp

sp
Re

Maruti Suzuki Unsatisfied Tata Motors Unsatisfied

12 2.5
10
2
8
1.5
6
Maruti Suzuki Tata Motors
Unsatisfied 1
4 Unsatisfied
2 0.5

0 0
Re Em ce

e
Re bles

s
As ility

Re les

s
siv y

As ility

on thy
es

es
nc
on th
n

ib
en

en
sp ap

p
ra

ra
b

b
i
ng

Re Ema
ng
lia

lia
su

su

siv
Ta

Ta

sp

Toyota Unsatisfied
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5 Toyota
1 Unsatisfied
0.5
0
les ilit
y
nc
e
th
y
es
s
gib b r a ap en
n lia su Em iv
Ta Re As o ns
sp
Re

Percentage of Unsatisfied Customers for brands with respect to the Five Dimensions

30
 Percentage of Unsatisfied Customers
35

30

25

20

15

10

0
Tangibles Reliability Assurance Emapthy Responsiveness

Honda Hyundai Maruti Suzuki Tata Motors Toyota

Average Percentage Unsatisfied across all Dimensions

25

20

15

10

0
Honda Hyundai Maruti Suzuki Tata Motors Toyota

31
Since the number of respondents for Tata Motors and Toyota are 9 and 11 respectively, we
are not going to concentrate on the two brands of automobiles. Among Honda, Hyundai and
Maruti Suzuki we can see that the average percentage of unsatisfied customers are highest in
Maruti Suzuki around 9 percentage. Also if we segregate the average score across the five
dimensions of service quality, we can comment that Hyundai can improve its Reliability
dimension, i.e deliver the service on time as promised to the customer since the
unsatisatisfaction percentage for reliability is 13%.

Surprisingly, Maruti Suzuki which is well known for its service delivery and large service
network has to focus on the responsiveness aspect. The unsatisfaction in responsiveness
suggests that the customers have to wait long for the initial check up their cars in the
authorized service centre. The unsatisfaction rate is as high as 25%.

Serqual Scores

Compute the ‘gap’ for each statement pair for each consumer.
SERVQUAL score = Perceptions Score - Expectations Score

Serqual Tangible Empath

Reliability Assurance Responsiveness
Score s y  
             
Average
Serqual
Brand           Score
             
Honda -0.2083 -0.4583 -0.375 0 -0.25 -0.25832
Hyundai -0.2619 -0.6428 -0.4761 -0.1907 -0.2619 -0.36668
Maruti
Suzuki -0.2581 -0.4838 -0.4838 -0.2258 -0.6129 -0.41288
Tata Motors -0.5555 -0.5555 -0.5555 -0.1111 -1 -0.55552
Toyota -0.3636 -0.8181 -0.0909 -0.0909 -0.4545 -0.3636

In the serqual score table, we can see all but one score is negative. This suggests that there
exist a gap in each of the service quality dimensions for all the brands. The maximum gap
that can exist is of 4 negative points. So, even though there exists a gap, it’s not comparable
to the maximum score which is a positive sign for the automobile brands. But still there is a
scope of improvement if we consider Maruti Suzuki and Hyundai. Maruti has a gap of 0.6129
in Responsiveness. This suggests that there is a difference between the expectations and the

32
perceived service of the customers. Customers have to wait more than their expectation for
the initial check up of their car a Maruti Suzuki Authorized Service Station.

Hyundai has a gap of 0.6428 in reliability dimension, which suggests that the delivery of the
car is not done according to the date promised to the customer. Reliability is an issue for all
the brands, as can be seen by the gap in service quality for these brands and hence there is a
scope for improvement.

33
FINDINGS

1. Since the sample size for Maruti Suzuki and Hyundai is large, the study is
concentrated on the two brands of automobiles. Among Honda, Hyundai and Maruti
Suzuki we can see that the average percentage of unsatisfied customers are highest in
Maruti Suzuki 9.02 percentage.
2. If we segregate the average score across the five dimensions of service quality, we
can comment that Hyundai can improve its Reliability dimension, i.e deliver the
service on time as promised to the customer since the unsatisatisfaction percentage for
reliability is 13%.
3. Maruti Suzuki which is well known for its service delivery and large service network
has to focus on the responsiveness aspect. The unsatisfaction in responsiveness
suggests that the customers have to wait long for the initial check up of their cars in
the authorized service centre. The unsatisfaction rate is as high as 25%.
4. There exists a gap in each of the service quality dimensions for all the brands. The
maximum gap that can exist is of 4 negative points. So, even though there is a gap,
it’s not comparable to the maximum score which is a positive sign for the automobile
brands.
5. Maruti has a gap of 0.6129 in Responsiveness dimension. This suggests that there is a
difference between the expectations and the perceived service quality of the
customers. Customers have to wait more than their expectation for the initial check up
of their car a Maruti Suzuki Authorized Service Station.
6. Hyundai has a gap of 0.6428 in Reliability dimension, which suggests that the
delivery of the car is not done according to the date promised to the customer.
Reliability is an issue for all the brands, as can be seen by the gap in service quality
for these brands and hence there is a scope for improvement.

34
LIMITATIONS

1. Location: Our research is conducted in Delhi/NCR region where authorized service

centres can be easily found. There may be difference in opinion of people living in
other cities where service centres are limited.
2. Wide Scope: The scope of the project is wide. In future we would like to limit our
study to a particular service centre for a particular brand of automobile.
3. Sample Size: Our sample size is very small as compared to the population. The
sample size is 148 and the total number of registered cars in Delhi/NCR is more than
2 million. There is a huge gap between the population and the sample size.

35
CONCLUSION

36
REFERENCES

1. Cauchick Miguel, Paulo A; Terra da Silva, Márcia ; Chiosini, Elias L. and Schützer
Klaus, Assessment of service quality dimensions: a study in a vehicle repair service
chain.
2. Hii Geng Hing, Stanley , Hotel Guest Satisfaction: A Gap 5 Study in Sibu. The Icfai
Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 18-38, September 2007.
3. Jain ,Sanjay K and Gupta, Garima, Measuring Service Quality: SERVQUAL vs.
SERVPERF Scales, Vikalpa ,Volume 29 , No 2 , April - June 2004.
4. Lowndes, Michelle; Dawes John , Distinct SERVQUAL dimensions: A measure of
service quality. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, Vol. 16, 2, 2001 pp. 41-53
5. Prajapati, B.A.; Kachwala Tohid, Service Quality Measurement in Management
Education Institutes. The Icfai Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 35-
52, November 2006
6. Rajagopal , Effects of customer service efficiency and market effectiveness on dealer
Performance http://www.geocities.com/prof_rajagopal/homepage.html
7. Saravan, R and Rao, K.S.P, Service Quality From the Customer’s Perspective:
An Empirical Investigation, Quality Management Journal, VOL.14, NO.3, 2007.
8. Swaid, I.Samar; Wigand, Rolf T., Key dimensions of E-commerce service quality and
its relationships to satisfaction and loyalty .20th Bled e-Conference e-Mergence: Merging
and Emerging Technologies, Processes, and Institutions June 4 - 6, 2007; Bled, Slovenia.
9. M.K.Rampal, S.L.Gupta., 2008, “Chapter 21-23: Service Marketing: Concepts,
Applications and cases,” Galgotia Publishing Company, New Delhi, 289-315.
10. I. Kolanovic., J. Skenderovic., Z. Zenzerovic., “Defining the Port Service Quality
Model by using the Factor Analysis”, Pomorstvo, god. 22, br. 2 (2008), str. 283-297.
11. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). “SERVQUAL: A multiple-
item scale for measuring consumer perceptions”. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12-40.
12. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1993). “Research note: More on
Improving Service Quality Measurement,” Journal of Retailing, 69(1), 140-147.
13. KPMG Huazhen, 2007 a Sino-foreign joint venture in the People’s Republic of China
and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with
KPMG International, a Swiss cooperative.

37
ANNEXURE

Questionnaire

38
39
40