EISSN 2277-4955

“A STUDY OF THE CUSTOMER SATISFACTION OF HDFC BANK”
Dr. B.P. Mishra
Ex-Principal, MLB Girl’s PG College, Kila Maidan, Indore,M.P. India
Mukesh Keshari
Assistant professor, Department of Commerce, Christian Eminent College, MIG Colony, Indore, M.P. India,
keshrimukesh0@gmail.com

ABSTRACT
Government of India took major steps in the Indian banking sector bringing reforms through liberalization policy.
In the cutting edge of this competing world where liberalization is at its peak, only those companies can survive
which are maintaining its service quality. The service sector is going through revolutionary changes, which is
dramatically affecting the way in which we live and work. New service are continually being launched to satisfy our
existing needs and to meet needs that we did not even know we had. Therefore, it is important for Private sector
banks to determine what customers expect and then develop service products that meet or exceed their perception.
At present this advantage is challenged by private players like HDFC Bank. Therefore, the purpose of this study is
measuring customer satisfaction by using of difference between customers’ expectation and perception in the
context of HDFC Bank customer .In this study, we are using Pre-tested SERVQUAL scale of Parasuraman, Zithmal
and Berry. In addition, Gap score with regards to each dimension of service quality was computed and gap score
has been analyzed for expectation and perception section of questionnaires’ to find out the weak areas where more
attention is required. Furthermore, suggestions and limitation of this study, as well as future scope of this study are
discussed.

Key words: customer satisfaction, perceived service quality, customer expectation, customer perception, HDFC
Bank.

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND OF

and the Joint stock Companies Act, 1850 gave birth

THE STUDY:

to the modern commercial banks in England and

Banks play an important role in the economic

India respectively.

development of a country. The banking system
provides finance to trade, commerce, and industry
and agriculture sector also. The banking business is
as old as the human civilization. In our country,
money lending business dates back to the Vedic
times of Ramayana and Mahabharata. Banking
institutions in the modern form developed around the
nineteenth century. The British Companies Act, 1933

BAUDDHIK

The first bank of India, thought conservative, was
established in 1786. From then till today, the journey
of Indian banking system can be classified into three
distinct phases. Phase 1: Early phase from 1786 to
1969 of Indian banks. Phase 2: Nationalization of
Indian banks up to 1991 prior to the Indian banking
sector reforms. and Phase 3: New phase of Indian

VOLUME 5, NO.-1, JANUARY-APRIL -2014

36

EISSN 2277-4955

banking system with the advent of Indian Financial

happy with the quality and value of the service they

and Banking Sector Reform after 1991.

receive. Presently Service providers face stiff

RBI’s liberalisation of the Indian Banking Industry in

competition. Many owners and managers complain

1994 gave The Housing Development Finance

about how difficult it is to make a profit, to find

Corporation Limited (HDFC) ‘in principle’ approval

skilled and motivate employees, or to place customer.

to set up a bank in the private sector. The bank was

The service sector is going through revolutionary

incorporated in August 1994 in the name of 'HDFC

changes, which is dramatically affecting the way in

Bank Limited'. HDFC Bank's mission is to be a

which we live and work. New service are continually

World-Class Indian Bank. The objective is to build

being launched to satisfy our existing needs and to

sound customer franchises across distinct businesses.

meet needs that we did not even know we had.

st

As on 31 March, 2014 the authorized share capital

Today’s customers face a vast array of product and

of the Bank is Rs. 550 crore. The paid-up capital as

brand choices, prices, and supplies. When making

on said date is Rs. 478, 24,96,320/- (23912418160

choice, customers form an expectation of value and

equity shares of Rs. 2/- each) Mr. C.M. Vasudev has

act on it. A rational buyer’s action word may be to

been appointed as the Chairman of the Bank with

buy from whoever offered the highest delivered

effect from 6th July 2010

value. ‘Satisfaction is the level of person’s felt state

HDFC Bank offers a wide range of commercial and

resulting from comparing a product’s perceived

transactional banking services and treasury products

performance (or outcome) in relation to the person’s

to wholesale and retail customers. The bank has three

expectations.’

key business segments i.e. Wholesale Banking

Therefore, the satisfaction level is a function of the

Services, Retail Banking Services and Treasury.The

difference between perceived performance and

Bank has its deposit programmes rated by two rating

expectations.

agencies - Credit Analysis & Research Limited

“Perceived service quality is a rational perception

(CARE) and Fitch Ratings India Private Limited.

where a satisfaction is an emotional of feeling
reaction.”(Rust,Zahorik and Keiningham 1999). ‘The

1.2

SERVICE QUALITY AND CUSTOMER

SATISFACTION:

word satisfaction comes from the Latin words Satis
(Enough) and Facre (to do or make).These word

At the time of independence, Indian economy was
predominantly agricultural economy, highest GDP

suggest

the

full

meaning

of

satisfaction

is

‘fulfillment’

was contributed by the agricultural sector. That time
it was an assumption that service is just an

1.2 SERVICE QUALITY GAPS:

augmentation of the physical product. In the 1980s’,

In order to develop greater understanding of the

as the quality concern gain drive throughout the

nature of service quality and how it is achieved in an

world; researcher like Berry and Christian Gronross

organisation, a service quality model was developed

began to realize that quality was a critical factor in

by Parasuraman et al. in 1985. Their model clearly

the success of service marketing. As a result of this,

indicated that consumer’s quality perceptions are

the eminence in thinking shifted to the service

influenced by a series of five distinct gaps occurring

quality. Unfortunately, Customers are not always

BAUDDHIK

VOLUME 5, NO.-1, JANUARY-APRIL -2014

37

EISSN 2277-4955

in organizations. These gaps, which can impede

Private sector banks and among Public, private and

delivery of service that consumers perceive to be of

foreign banks.several studies have been conducted on

high quality, are:

the Gap of expectation and perception of customers.

(I)

most
ap

1:

Difference

between

consumers’

G conducted on the level of
studies has been

Customer Satisfaction of selected public sector banks

expectations and management’s perception

and a number of on private sector banks

of consumer expectations

Service

(II)

quality

model

G
performance(SERVPERF),

(SERVQUAL),

taking
Service

and Business service

ap 2: Difference between management’s

quality model (BSQ), etc developed by Parasuramn

perception of consumer expectations and

et.al 1985, 1988 and Groonos etc.

service quality specifications

Out of literature review quite a few Researchers’

(III)

G are given in the following
views and their finding
ap 3: Difference between service quality

lines:

specifications and the service actually
Banwari Mittal, Walfried M. Lassar (1998) pointed

delivered.
(IV)
ap 4: Difference between service delivery
and what is communicated about the service

Gap 5: Difference between the perceived
service and expected service.

This gap

If perceived quality is higher than expected, the
will

be

successful bank brand can be created with strong
value proposition, ensuring customer satisfaction and
creating and maintaining strong brand image.

depends on the size.

result

satisfaction alone will guarantee customer loyalty.
Bhagyalakshmi Venkatesh, Dr Suresh Ghai say that a

to consumers
(V)

out that one of the most unexamined assumptions
G
marketing firms have made in recent years is that

satisfaction

otherwise

dissatisfaction. This study focuses on measuring
the level of customer satisfaction, quality of
service provided. Also it is a study that identifies
the Gap between Expectations and Perceptions
of customers’ of HDFC Bank under Private

Bloemer and Kasper 1995; Oliver 1999, said it is
possible for a customer to be loyal without being
highly satisfied. Bowles 1992; Grant et al., 1994;
Zingheim and Schuster, 1992 drew a critical link
between

quality

improvement

and

customer

satisfaction. Chidambaram and Alamelu (1994)
studied the problem of declining profit margin in
Indian public sector banks as compared to their

sector banks.

private sector counterpart on the basis of customer
2. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE:
It has been found that, the many studies have been
conducted on the level of customer satisfaction and
perceived service quality. Some studies has also been
conducted on the comparison of the Customer
Satisfaction and service quality of public sector and

satisfaction. DuBrin (1997) suggests that employees
can bring customer satisfaction if given the authority
to take care of customer problems and needs.
Gronroos (1990) describes the quality of service as
having two dimensions–a technical or outcome
dimension and a functional or process related
dimension. Gronroos (1990) describes the quality of

BAUDDHIK

VOLUME 5, NO.-1, JANUARY-APRIL -2014

38

EISSN 2277-4955

service as having two dimensions – a technical or

Level of Customer Satisfaction of HDFC BANK.

outcome dimension and a functional or process

3.3

related dimension.Mike Asher (1989) asserted that

The Main objective of the study is to compare the

organisations must be swift in identifying and

Expectation and Perceptions of Customer of HDFC

meeting customer satisfaction in order to remain in

Bank.

competition. He examined the methods of identifying

In order to achieve the main objective the

customer satisfaction.S. Prabhakaran, and Satya, S.

following Sub- objectives also considered-

examined various service attributes in the banking

To identify service attributes those are essential

OBJECTIVES

sectors using SERVQUAL. Arasli, Huseyein, Sailh,
Turan, Mehtap, Smadi, and Salime (2005), analyzed

for customer satisfaction.
To

Measure

and compared service quality in commercial banking
sector. Scott M Broetzmann, John Kemp, Mathieu

the

customers’

expectation,

perception, and the level of satisfaction.
To analyze the gaps between expectation and

Rossano, Joy Marwaha (1995) presented a research

perception of customers of HDFC Bank

based simple four step procedure to measure
customer satisfaction, manage service quality; assess
market

damage;

implement

formulate

policy.Vijay

action

Kumar-

a

plan;

and

relationship

between a customer and a service provider is long
when the customer is satisfied. Zeithaml et al (1996)
suggested

expressing

could

manifest

loyalty

preference over others.
3.

primary and secondary sources.On the basis of the
literature review, keeping the objectives in mind,
different

RATIONALE, RESEARCH QUESTION

dimensions

of

service

quality

and

satisfaction, this study intends to test the 05 null
Hypotheses based on that
“There

is

no

significant

difference

between

Expectation and Perception of Customer of HDFC
Bank

AND OBJECTIVES:
3.1

4.
RESEARCHMETHODOLOGY:
Qualitative and quantitative data are collected from

in

terms

of

Tangibility,

Reliability,

Responsiveness, Assurance and Empathy dimension

RATIONALE

As by opening of private sector after 1999, market
becomes very vibrant and consumers are moving
from public sector to private sector due to quality of
service, schemes offer by private sector bank,

of service quality”
HDFC bank has a large customer base in Indore. The
universe was the total customer base of Indore region
of HDFC Bank. A sample of 150 respondents was
selected with the help of random sampling method.

personalized care etc.

Researcher has used structured instrument for
The present study is an investigation into the extent

primary data collection. The questionnaire is used the

of level of customer satisfaction, what is the

scales used were SERVQUAL-7 point Likert scale

difference between the Expectation and Perception of

type 2. Questionnaire was separately typed both in

customers of HDFC Bank?

English and Hindi font presented to respondents in an
arranged manner. Pre-tested SERVQUAL scale of

3.2

RESEARCH QUESTION

To reach the below purposes following research

Parasuraman, Zithmal and Berry were used.

question is emerge.

BAUDDHIK

VOLUME 5, NO.-1, JANUARY-APRIL -2014

39

EISSN 2277-4955

A pilot test was conducted on a very small sample in

and this score has been analyzed for Expectation and

order to determine whether the questionnaire and the

Perception sections of questionnaires’ of Customer to

scales are easily understood and responded by the

find out the weak areas where more attention is

respondents. To check the Reliability of the data,

required. If difference between Mean Expectation to

Chronbach’s alpha test was performed by using

perception is more than 0.35 (5%) in positive side, it

SPSS, 16 Software. Normality of data has been

represent high dissatisfaction and in negative side it

checked by applied Normal P-P Plot method

represent high satisfaction of Customer.

performed by using SPSS-16 Software. To check
overall

structure

of

the

questionnaires’

5.

and

INTERPRETATION:

qualitative assessment, factor analysis was conducted

Researcher has divided testing for each hypothesis

using Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin of sampling Adequacy

into two Sections. Various tools are applied and

(KMO) and Bartlett’s test of Sphericity by suing

output is represented in the tabular/graphical form in

SPSS-16 Software, the Eigen value has been

section I and section II - Deals with the interpretation

computed through sum of squares of individual

and validation of hypothesis. P-P Plot and results of

component score.

Paired sample-t test are prearranged in appendices.

In order to analyze the hypothesis Paired Sample ttest,

which

DATA ANALYSIS &

computes

the

difference

between

customer Expectation and Perception was applied. It
was also carried out by using the SPSS-16. Software.
To check the Result of Paired sample-t test, gap score
with regards to each dimension was also computed

Section: I
5.1

RELIABILITY STATISTICS OF CHRONBACH’S ALPHA
Dimensions

Tangibility

Reliability

Responsiveness

Assurance

Empathy

E

P

E

P

E

P

E

P

E

P

0.749

0.664

0.659

0.664

0.657

0.742

0.655

0.654

0.763

0.806

(Table: 01 Chronchbach’s Alfa)
To check the reliability of the data, Chronbach’s

dimensions

of

alpha method was used, for a measure not to be

section

questionnaires

rejected Crhonbach’s alpha should be more than

HDFC Bank is tested and it is found that the

0.70

for

items have produced consistent output and it

study

shows (Table: 01) that all the statements met the

reliability test for the Tangibility, Reliability,

reliability criteria; Hence, it is taken on the

Responsiveness, Assurance and Empathy

record that the scale is reliable.

for

high

satisfactory

BAUDDHIK

reliability

reliability.

In

and

0.65–0.70

the

present

of

VOLUME 5, NO.-1, JANUARY-APRIL -2014

expectation
of

and

Perception

respondents

of

40

EISSN 2277-4955

5.2

P-P PLOT METHOD:

dimensions (diagrams- 1to 10 prearranged in

Normality of data has been checked by applied

appendices) shown are laid on the line or near the

Normal P-P Plot method, all the data of Expectation

line. Hence it is observed that the data is normally

and Perception section related to Tangibility,

distributed.

Reliability, Responsiveness, Assurance and Empathy

5.3 VALIDITY OF DATA- FACTOR ANALYSIS-KMO AND BARTLETT'S TEST
Dimensions
Tangibility
E
KMO Test

0.630

Bartlett’s
test of
sphercity

Reliability

P

E

0.601

0.746

Responsiveness

P

E

0.524

Assurance

P

0.503

E

0.659

Empathy

P

0.584

E

0.583

P

0.719

0.766

Significance

Significance

Significance

Significance

Significance

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

0.000

(Table: 02 KMO & Bartlett’s test)

The factor analysis was undertaken using Kaiser-

and

Empathy

dimension

of

Expectation

and

Meyer-Olkin of Sampling Adequacy (KMO) and

Perception section of questionnaires’ of Customers of

Bartlett’s test of Sphericity. If the result is greater

HDFC Bank. hence the scale is valid

than 0.5.This suggests that the data is adequate for

significance value of Bartlett’s test of Sphercity is

factor analysis. In the present study the result of

0.000(Table: 02) also tells us that there is a

KMO is greater than 0.5 (Table: 02) with regards to

correlation with each other.

The

Tangibility, Reliability, Responsiveness, Assurance

5.4 VALIDITY OF DATA-EIGEN VALUES
DIMENSIONS
Tangibility

Reliability

E

P

E

P

1.84014

2.01490

1.60130

2.45682

(E=Expectation; P= Perception)

Responsiveness
E
1.51600

Assurance

P

E

P

2.27040

1.97640

1.61176

to

computed.

Assurance

explains

E

P

2.6260

2.82031

(Table: 03 Eigen values)

To interpret the factor, the Eigen value has been
It

Empathy

the

total

variance

Tangibility,

Reliability,

and

explained by each factor. Any factor has an

Expectation

and

Eigen value of less than 1, does not have

questionnaires’

enough total variance explained to represent a

dimensions

unique factor. In the present study the Eigen

Section is valid.

Hence

of

Responsiveness,

Empathy

dimension

of

Perception

section

of

on

all

the

Expectation

scale
and

the

Perception

value is greater than 1.0, (Table:3) with regards

BAUDDHIK

VOLUME 5, NO.-1, JANUARY-APRIL -2014

41

EISSN 2277-4955

Section: II
5.5

VALIDATION AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
5.5.1

SAMPLE PAIRED T- TEST-RESULTS
DIMENSIONS

Tangibility
(H01)

Reliability
(H02)

Responsiveness
(H03)

Assurance
(H04)

Empathy
(H005)

,307

,000

,000

,000

,040

(Table: 04 summary of Hypothesis test)

It is observed from the (Table: 4) that, the Null

It is also observed that the Null hypotheses H01 and

hypothesis, Ho2, H03 and H04 (Table: 04) was rejected

H05 (Table: 04) were accepted at 5% level of

at 5% level of significance. Therefore, it can be

significance. Therefore it can be concluded that there is

concluded that there is significant difference between

no significant difference between customer expectation

customer expectation and their Perception in terms of

and their perception with regard to Tangibility, and

Reliability, Responsiveness and Assurance dimensions.

Empathy dimensions of questionnaires of customers of
HDFC Bank.

5.5.2

GAP SCORE ANALYSIS

QNo.
01

Tangibility
0.63

Q.NO
05

Reliability
0.46

Q.NO
10

Responsiveness
2.44

Q.NO
14

Assurance
0.57

Q.NO
18

Empathy
-0.31

02

0.21

06

0.95

11

0.43

15

0.62

19

-0.61

03

-0.48

07

̶ 0.65

12

-0.44

16

0.40

20

0.08

04

0.22

08

0.88

13

-0.19

17

0.81

21

0.00

09

0.32

22

-0.35

Total

0.58

1.96

2.24

2.40

-1.19

AoA

**0.14

**0.39

0.56

0.60

-0.24

(AoA=Average of Averages)

(Table: 05 Gap Score analysis)

One of the objectives of this study is to analyze the

identify

gaps

satisfaction/dissatisfaction level, mean score of each

between

Expectation

and

Perception

of

reason

for

Customer’

Customer of HDFC Bank. For this mean score of

item of all dimensions was computed.

expectation and perception had been computed & the

It is observed that the Q-10 has highest average

gap

or

Gap score i.e. 2.44 (Table: 05) in the positive

dissatisfaction level of Customer of HDFC Bank. If

side. It means the performance of HDFC Bank

difference between mean score is more than 0.35

is highly dissatisfied in this category.The Q-7

(05%) in positive side represent dissatisfaction and

has the highest average Gap score i.e. (-) 0.65

negative side represent Satisfaction level. As to

(Table: 05) in the negative side, it means the

score

BAUDDHIK

was

analyzed

for

satisfaction

VOLUME 5, NO.-1, JANUARY-APRIL -2014

42

EISSN 2277-4955

performance of HDFC Bank is highly satisfied

6.

in this category.The Overall average of Average

SUGGESTIONS &CONCLUSION:

gap score of Assurance dimension is 0.60 shows

6.1

highest gap score than all other dimensions like

Government of India took major steps in the Indian

Tangibility

0.39

banking

0.24

liberalization policy. In the cutting edge of this

dissatisfaction

competing world where liberalization is at its peak,

0.14,

Reliability

Responsiveness

0.56

(Table:05)

represent

that

and

Empathy
high

DISCUSSION OF RESULT,

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS:

sector

bringing

reforms

through

regarding the Assurance dimension.

only those companies can survive which are

It was found that the Customer of HDFC Bank

maintaining its service quality. At present this

have

from

advantage is challenged by private players like

employees of HDFC Bank. Therefore, Training

HDFC Bank. In this study, Customer satisfaction of

and development programs for employees must

HDFC Bank under private sector was measured in

be carried out frequently. This will improve

Indore

service

Interpretations is prearranged in under mentioned

complaints

quality

of

and

adequate

thereby

support

contributing

to

enhancement of customer satisfaction.

city.

Results

of

Hypothesis

test

and

table.

HYPOTHESIS- RESULTS -INTERPRETATIONS
HYPOTHESIS

RESULTS

Ho1- There is no significant difference
between Expectation and Perception of
Customers of HDFC Bank in terms of
Tangibility dimension.
Ho2- There is no significant difference
between Expectation and Perception of
Customers of HDFC Bank in terms of
Reliability dimension.
Ho3- There is no significant difference
between Expectation and Perception of
Customers of HDFC Bank in terms of
Responsiveness dimension
Ho4- There is no significant difference
between Expectation and Perception of
Customers of HDFC Bank in terms of
Assurance dimension.
Ho05- There is no significant difference
between Expectation and Perception of
Customers of HDFC Bank in terms of
Empathy dimension

INTERPRETATION

Accepted

It represents that customer satisfaction
level is high regarding Tangibility
dimension

Rejected

It explains a high Gap that represents
high customer dissatisfaction regarding
the Reliability dimension

Rejected

It explains a high Gap that represents
high customer dissatisfaction regarding
Responsiveness dimension

Rejected

It explains a high Gap that represents
high customer dissatisfaction regarding
Assurance dimension

The Overall average gap score of
Empathy dimension is (-) 0.24 (Table:
05) in negative side, It represent a higher
Rejected
customer satisfaction regarding the
Empathy dimension.
(Table: 06 Summaries of Hypothesis Results)

BAUDDHIK

VOLUME 5, NO.-1, JANUARY-APRIL -2014

43

EISSN 2277-4955

6.2

CONCLUSION & SUGGESTIONS:

The main finding of this study is that the expectations

been

of the customers on service quality items except

qualifications and Income group of the respondents.

Tangibility and Empathy dimensions were higher than

Researcher has used SERVQUAL model on leading

the bank's performance, i.e. the perception. The largest

Private sector bank (HDFC Bank).Any new kind of

discrepancy between expectation and perception of

offer or value added service or news may have

customer was in terms of the “Assurance” dimension

impact on the result. There may be slight difference

(Table:15 appeared in appendices)It is indicating a

in Mean difference between Gap score and Sample

service quality Gap

which requires immediate

Paired-t test which has been computed through SPSS-

attention. It is an indication of the customer

16 software.This is a pioneering study on this topic,

dissatisfaction and can also be considered as an

hence is limited to the fundamental result.

opportunity for the HDFC Bank for meeting Customer

8.

expectations in a better manner.

This study has been undertaken on the respondents of

It was observed that there is a need for change of

HDFC bank under private sector bank. Public sector

behaviors of the employees of HDFC bank which is

banks for comparison can also be used. This study is

indeed very hard to solve but is equally important.

around SERVQUAL dimension for comparison of

This could be possible if some training sessions to

Expectation and Perception. So, a self developed

enlighten employees with the customer service values

model or other models like perceived Service quality

were organized. The top management should also

model developed by Christian Gronroos in 1982,

thank the employees for their commitment towards

Performance based model on the service quality

their work which ultimately results in employee

SERVPERF Model etc.can be used for comparison.

performed

irrespective

of

age,

gender,

FUTURE SCOPE OF THE STUDY:

satisfaction and which is reflected in customer
satisfaction.
7

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY:

The study has certain limitations like the sample size
was relatively small and was drawn from a specific
geographical region i.e. one district (Indore) of the
central part of the country, which makes the
generalization of the findings difficult. This study has

BAUDDHIK

VOLUME 5, NO.-1, JANUARY-APRIL -2014

44

EISSN 2277-4955

REFERENCES:

JOURNAL REFERENCES:
A Jamal, K Naser (2002), “Customer Satisfaction and

service providers’ own and perceived viewpoints",

Retail banking: an assessment of some of the key

International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 15 Iss:

antecedents

7, pp.264 – 278

banking”,

of
The

customer

satisfaction

International

Journal

in

retail

of

Bank

Marketing, Vol. 20 (4) 146-160.

Arasli, Huseyin, Salih Turan Katircioglu, and Salime
Mehtap-Smadi (2005), “A Comparison of Service

A Parasuraaman, V A Zeithaml, L L Berry (1985),

Quality in the Banking Industry:

“A conceptual model of service quality and its
implications for future research” , Journal of

Bahia, K., & Nantel, J. (2000). A Reliable and Valid

Marketing Vol. . 49, 41-50

Measurement Scale for the Perceived Service Quality
of

A Parasuraaman, V A Zeithaml, L L Berry (1988),

Banks”,

International

Journal

of

Bank

Management, 18 (2), 84-91

“SERVQUAL: A Multiple-item scale for measuring
consumer perception of service quality” , Journal of

Bhagyalakshmi Venkatesh, Suresh Ghai, Branding

Retailing Vol. 64,(1) 12-40

and Customer Satisfaction in the Indian Banking
Industry: Some Essential Propositions’, Vinimaya,

Aldlaigan, A.H., & buttle, F.A. (2002), SYSTRA-

Vol.xxx,No. 1,2009-10, 29-37

SQ: A new measure of bank service quality.
International

Journal

of

Service

Industry

Management . 13 (4) 362-381

Cadotte, E R R B Woodruff, and R L Jenkins, 1987,
‘Expectations and Norms in Model of Consumer
Satisfaction’, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.

Al-Tamimi, H.A.H. Jabnoun, N. (2005) “Service

24, 305-314

quality and bank performance: a comparison of the
UAE

national

and

foreign

banks’,

Finance

India,20:1,181-197.

Charles Blankson, Stavros P. Kalafatis, (1999)
"Issues and challenges in the positioning of service
brands: a review", Journal of Product & Brand

Angelis, V.A., Lymperopoulos, C. and Dimaki, K.

Management, Vol. 8 Iss: 2, pp.106 - 118

(2005) “Customer perceived service quality of bank,
Customer perceived value for private and state-

Chidambaram, R M and Alamelu, K, (1994):

controlled Hellenic banks”, Journal of Financial

“Profitability in Banks, a Matter of Survival”, The

Services Marketing, 9:4.360-374.

Banker, 8 may, 1-3

Antreas D. Athanassopoulos, (1997) "Another look

Crosby, L A., K.R. Evans and D. Cowels (1990),

into the agenda of customer satisfaction: focusing on

“Relationship

BAUDDHIK

quality

VOLUME 5, NO.-1, JANUARY-APRIL -2014

in

services

selling:

An

45

EISSN 2277-4955

interpersonal influence perspective,” Journal of

among Private, public and foreign banks” The ICFAI

Marketing (July): 68-81.

Journal of Marketing Management, 5 (3), 6-17

Crosby, L.A. and N. Stephens (1987);, “ Effects of

H. Arasli, S T Katircioglu, S Mehtap- Smadi (2005),

Relationship Marketing on Satisfaction, Retention

“A comparison of Service quality in the banking

and Prices in the Life Insurance Industry, ”Journal of

industry: some evidence from Turkish-and Greek-

Marketing Research,25;,405-11

speaking areas in Cyprus”. International Journal of
Bank marketing, Vol23(7),508-526

Dabholker, P A, 1995, ‘A Contingency Framework
for

Predicting

Causality

between

Customer

J Kim, J Lee K Han, M Lee (2002), “Businesses as

Satisfaction and Service Quality’, Advance in

building: metrics for the architectural quality of

Consumer Research, Vol. 22 101-8

internet businesses”, Information System Research,
Vol13 (3),

Dwyer, F.R., P.H. Shurrr, and S.Oh (1987),
Developing buyer seller relationships, “ Journal of

JoseÂe Bloemer, Linking perceived service quality

Marketing (April):1-19

and service loyalty: a multi-dimensional perspective,
European Journal ofMarketing33,11/12

E Tsoukatos, G K Rand (2006), “ Parth analysis of
perceived service quality, satisfaction and loyalty in

Kruti Dutta, Anil Dutta, “Customer Expectations and

Greek insurance”, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 16

perceptions across the Indian Banking industry and

(5) 501-519

the resultant financial implications” , Indian Journal
of marketing

Fornell, C.(1992) “ A National Customer Satisfaction
Barometer’. The Swedish Experience,” Journal of

L. Gary Moore, Willie E. Hopkins, Shirley A.

Marketing, 55,1-21

Hopkins,

(1998)

"Quality

and

empowerment

programs: dual paths to customer satisfaction?",
G.Bharati

kamath,

Measuring

Service

Quality

(SERVQUAL) in Banks; Prajanan- Journal of Social

Managing Service Quality, Vol. 8 Iss: 2, pp.133 –
141

Management Sciences;Vol.xxxix,No.1,2010-11 4151

Lo Liang Kheng; The Impact of Service Quality on
Customer Loyalty: A Study of Banks in Penang,

Groonoors, C.(1983) “Strategic management and

Malaysia; International Journal of Marketing Studies

marketing in the Service sector,” Cambridge, mass:

Vol. 2, No. 2; November 2010

Marketing Science Institute.
Lovelock,

Christopher

H.(1979).

“Theoretical

Gudep, V.K. & Elango, R. (2006). “A comparative

Contributions from Services and Non business

study on the service quality and customer satisfaction

Marketing,”

BAUDDHIK

in

VOLUME 5, NO.-1, JANUARY-APRIL -2014

conceptual

and

Theoretical

46

EISSN 2277-4955

Development in Marketing”, O.C. Ferell, Stephen W.

Peter Kangis, Vassilis Voukelatos, (1997) "Private

Brown, and Charles W. Lamb, 147-165. Chicago:

and public banks: a comparison of customer

AMA

expectations and perceptions", International Journal
of Bank Marketing, Vol. 15 Iss: 7, pp.279 - 287

Lovelock,

Christopher

H.(1983),

“Classifying

Services to Gain Strategic Marketing insight,”

Porter, M E (1985), Competitive

Journal of Marketing,47 (Summer),9-20

Creating and sustaining Superior Performance, Free

Advantage:

Press, and New York.
Luther Denton, Allan K.K. Chan, (1991) "Bank
Selection Criteria of Multiple Bank Users in Hong

R K Teas (1993), “Expectations, performance,

Kong", International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol.

evaluation, and consumers’ perception of quality”,

9 Iss: 5, pp.23 - 34

Journal of Marketing, Vol. 57 (4), 18-34

Mangi, P (2009), customer satisfaction and service

ii.

quality: An empirical study of public and private

www.rbi.org.in last accessed on 14th March,2014

sector banks. The IUP Journal of Management

www.proquest.com/products_pq/.../pq_resear

Research, 8 (9), 7-17

chlibrary. shtm last accessed on 20th March

Merkwick, N and C fill (1985), “Towards a

WEB SITES VISITED:

,2014

Framework for maintaining Corporate identity”.
European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31, Nos. 5-6,

www.ebscohost.com/academic/academic-

396-409

search-premier

last

accessed

on

14th

March,2014
Oliver, R L, 1980, ‘Cognitive Model of the
Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction

www. HDFC bank.com

Decisions’, Journal of Marketing Research Vol. 460-

April,2014

469

last accessed on 18th

Oliver, R.L. Zahorik, A.J., (1993) “Customer
Satisfaction, Customer Retention, and Market Share”,
Journal of Retailing, Vol.69 No.2 193-215

BAUDDHIK

VOLUME 5, NO.-1, JANUARY-APRIL -2014

47

EISSN 2277-4955

2.

APPENDICES:

NORMALITY OF DATA- P-P PLOT

BAUDDHIK

Expectation

Perception

Expectation

(1) Tangibility
P-P
Plot

(1) Tangibility
P-P Plot

(2) Reliability
P-P
Plot

Perception

Expectation

Perception

(2) Reliability
P-P Plot

(3) Responsiveness
P-P
Plot

(3) Responsiveness
P-P Plot

Perception

Expectation

Expectation

(4) Assurance
P-P
Plot

(4) Assurance
P-P
Plot

(5) Empathy
P-P Plot

VOLUME 5, NO.-1, JANUARY-APRIL -2014

48

EISSN 2277-4955

Perception
(Diagrams No.1, 2, 3,4,5,6, 7, 8, 9 & 10 P-P plots)

(5) Empathy
P-P Plot

Tangibility Dimension- Paired Sample t- testPaired Samples Statistics
(Table:07)

Pair 1

Mean

N

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

HETPTT1

5,3933

150

,83463

,06815

HPTPTT1

5,3067

150

,91187

,07445

Paired Samples Test
(Table:08)
Paired Differences

Mean Std. Deviation

Pair 1

HETPTT1 HPTPTT1

BAUDDHIK

,08667

1,03585

Std. Error

95% Confidence Interval of
the Difference

t

df

1,025

149

Sig.
(2-tailed)

Mean

,08458

Lower

Upper

-,08046

,25379

VOLUME 5, NO.-1, JANUARY-APRIL -2014

,307

49

EISSN 2277-4955

Reliability Dimension- Paired Sample t- testPaired Samples Statistics
(Table:09)

Pair 1

Mean

N

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

HERPtt2

5,5333

150

,81650

,06667

HPRPtt2

5,1733

150

1,00833

,08233

Paired Samples Test
(Table:10)t
Paired Differences

Std.
Std. Error
Deviation Mean

Mean

Pair 1 HERPtt2
HPRPtt2

,36000

1,14856

95% Confidence Interval
of the Difference

,09378

Lower

Upper

,17469

,54531

T

df

Sig.
(2-tailed)

3,839

149

,000

Responsiveness Paired Sample t- test
Paired Samples Statistics
(Table:11)

Pair 1

Mean

N

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

HEResptt3

3,9867

150

1,04263

,08513

HPResptt3

3,4200

150

1,35245

,11043

Paired Samples Test
(Table:12)
Paired Differences

Mean

Std.
Std. Error
Deviation Mean

95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Lower

Pair 1 HEResptt3 –
HPResptt3

,56667

1,44898 ,11831

,33289

t

df

Sig.
(2-tailed)

Upper
,80045

4,790

149 ,000

Assurance- Paired Sample t- test
Paired Samples Statistics
(Table:13)

BAUDDHIK

VOLUME 5, NO.-1, JANUARY-APRIL -2014

50

EISSN 2277-4955

Mean
Pair 1

N

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

HEAptt4

5,7067

150

,75571

,06170

HPAptt4

5,1467

150

,86998

,07103

Paired Samples Test
(Table:14)
Paired Differences
Mean

Pair HEAptt4
1

,56000

-HPAptt4

Std.
Error
Mean

Std.
Deviation

,97265

95% Confidence Interval of
the Difference
Lower

,07942

t

Sig.
(2tailed)

df

Upper

,40307

,71693

7,051

149

,000

Empathy- Paired Sample t- test
Paired Samples Statistics
(Table:15)
Mean
Pair 1

N

Std. Deviation

Std. Error Mean

HEEptt5

3,3667

150

1,30778 ,10678

HPEptt5

3,6000

150

1,34114 ,10950

Paired Samples Test
(Table:16)
Paired Differences

Mean

Pair 1

Std.
Std. Error
Deviation Mean

95% Confidence Interval
of the Difference
Lower

Upper

-,45641

-,01026

t

Df

Sig.
(2-tailed)

-2,067

149

,040

HEEptt5 HPEptt5

BAUDDHIK

-,23333

1,38262

,11289

VOLUME 5, NO.-1, JANUARY-APRIL -2014

51

EISSN 2277-4955

Full forms of various terms used in above tables
HETPTT1 =H-HDFC Bank; E-Expectation; T- Tangibility; PTT- Paired T-test
HPTPTT1= H-HDFC Bank; P-Perception; T- Tangibility; PTT- Paired T-test
HERptt1 =H-HDFC Bank; E-Expectation; R-Reliability; PTT- Paired T-test
HPRptt1= H-HDFC Bank; P-Perception; R- reliability; Ptt- Paired T-test
HEResptt3 =H-HDFC Bank; E-Expectation; Res-Responsiveness; Ptt- Paired T-test
HPRptt3= H-HDFC Bank; P-Perception; R- reliability; Ptt- Paired T-test
HEAesptt4 =H-HDFC Bank; E-Expectation; A-Assurance; Ptt- Paired T-test
HPAptt4= H-HDFC Bank; P-Perception; A-Assurance; Ptt- Paired T-test
HEEptt5 =H-HDFC Bank; E-Expectation; E-Empathy; Ptt- Paired T-test
HPEptt5= H-HDFC Bank; P-Perception; E-Empathy; Ptt- Paired T-test

BAUDDHIK

VOLUME 5, NO.-1, JANUARY-APRIL -2014

52