Research Service Quality

“IMPACT OF SERVICE QUALITY DIMENSIONS ON CUSTOMER
SATISFACTION IN TELECOM SECTOR OF PESHAWAR

PAKISTAN”
By
Faryal Tahir
CITY UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND INFORMATION

TECHNOLOGY
DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCES
SESSION [2012-2013]
SATISFACTION IN TELECOM SECTOR OF PESHAWAR PAKISTAN”
By
Faryal Tahir
A Thesis Submitted to City University of Science and Information

Technology, Peshawar in Partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Degree of
MBA 1.5 (Marketing)
DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCES
CITY UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY,

PESHAWAR
SESSION [2012-2013]
Certificate of Approval
I certify that I have read “Impact of Service Quality Dimensions on Customer

Satisfaction in Telecom Sector of Peshawar Pakistan” by Faryal Tahir and that in
my opinion this work meets the criteria for approving a thesis submitted in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MBA 1.5 (Marketing) at the City
University of Science and Information Technology, Peshawar.
_________________________
Dr. Raza Ullah
Supervisor
_________________________
Mr. Saqib Shahzad
External Examiner
__________________
_______
Prof. Dr. Jehanzeb
Head of Department
Declaration
I, hereby declare that the research submitted to Department of Management

Sciences at City University of Science and Information Technology, Peshawar by
me is my own original work. I am aware of the fact that in case if my work is
found to be plagiarized or not genuine, City University has the full authority to
cancel my research work and I am liable to panel action.
Faryal Tahir
Date:
ii
Dedication
To my loving and affectionate parents who have polished my personality

and helped me reaching this position
iii
Abstract
The basic aim of this thesis is to measure the impact of service quality
dimensions on consumer satisfaction and then to find out that dimension which
needs to be paid more attention in order to increase the levels of consumer
satisfaction. Service quality is the extent to which a service meets customers’
needs or expectations. It can be measured on five dimensions which are
reliability, responsiveness, assurance, tangibles and empathy. Different types of
scales have been used different studies conducted by different scholars all of
which are based upon the basic SERVQUAL measure of measuring the service
quality. SERVQUAL calculates the service quality by calculating the difference of
consumer expectations of service and their perceptions. Next a performance only
scale was developed known as SERVPERF. This scale has been the basis of the
instrument used in this research. A questionnaire was developed based upon the
SERVPERF scale of service quality measure which was distributed amongst a
total of 100 respondents. Demographic factors were also considered while
collection of data. Quantitative research methods were used for analyzing data
such as data was analyzed through SPSS and statistical test i-e regression was
used. The results show that all five dimensions were affecting the consumer
satisfaction. But the most important dimension that could bring out the greatest
consumer satisfaction was the reliability dimension.
iv
Acknowledgement
All admirations to Almighty Allah, the most merciful and the most
beneficent, who has blessed me with the resolution, power, understanding and
willpower to complete my task. Of course, research project is a tiresome work;
however with the support of my supervisor this tiresome work became easy.
I am highly obliged to my supervisor Dr. Raza Ullah for the constant and
end-less backing in my Masters’ research project through his enormous
information; he directed me and facilitated me in my project report. It is essential
to say that without his backing this research wouldn’t have been possible, if he
denied.
It provides me excessive pleasure in recognizing and giving my heartfelt

acknowledgments to the esteemed Head of the Department Prof. Dr. Jehanzeb
for his honorable support and supervision in the accomplishment of this research.
His backing gave me the self-assurance to work hard till the completion of the
project and all along the entire degree program.
Moreover, my parents, whatever I am today is totally because of their

devotions, prayers and supervision and their desire to see me as a better person
and above all, vision to see me educated.
Faryal Tahir
v
TABLE OF CONTENT
Declaration..............................................................................................................ii
Dedication...............................................................................................................iii
Abstract..................................................................................................................iv
Acknowledgement...................................................................................................v
CHAPTER1: INTRODUCTION...............................................................................1
1.1 JUSTIFICATION OF STUDY........................................................................1
1.2 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES...........................................................................2
1.3 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY.................................................................2
1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY..............................................................................3
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW....................................................................4
2.1 PERCEIVED SERVICE QUALITY................................................................4
2.2 SERVICE QUALITY MEASUREMENT.........................................................5
2.3 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION AND SERVICE QUALITY..........................10
2.4 SERVQUAL’S VALIDITY.............................................................................13
2.5 CRITICSMS OF SERVQUAL......................................................................13

2.6 SERVPERF SCALE....................................................................................16
2.7 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK..................................................................19
2.8 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS........................................................................20
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY......................................................21
3.1 METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION............................................................21
3.2 POPULATION OF THE STUDY..................................................................21
3.3 SAMPLE SIZE.............................................................................................21
3.4 DATA ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE..................................................................22
3.5 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE.........................................................................22
3.6 DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS..................................................22
3.6.1 DISTRIBUTION AND RETURN OF QUESTIONNAIRES...................22
3.6.2 DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS..............................................................22
CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS, FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS................................25
4.1 ANALYSIS...................................................................................................25
4.1.1 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS....................................................................25
4.1.2 TESTING FOR HYPOTHESIS ONE...................................................28
4.1.3 TESTING FOR HYPOTHESIS TWO..................................................30
4.1.4 TESTING FOR HYPOTHESIS THREE..............................................32
4.1.5 TESTING FOR HYPOTHESIS FOUR................................................34

4.1.6 TESTING FOR HYPOTHESIS FIVE...................................................36
4.2 FINDINGS...................................................................................................38
4.3 DISCUSSIONS............................................................................................39
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS................................40
5.1 CONCLUSION.............................................................................................40
5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS...............................................................................41
5.3 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY..................................................................42
CHAPTER 6: REFERENCES...............................................................................43
ANNEXURE A: QUESTIONNAIRE......................................................................51
CHAPTER1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 JUSTIFICATION OF STUDY

As the telecom sector has become a highly competitive industry, services have
gained core importance for attaining a viable competitive edge in the market.
Throughout last part of the current century, the service area has turned out to be
the main growing industry, and, it contributes around 67% of the GNP of Canada
and 71% of the GNP of the USA (Philip and Hazlett 1996).In India, the service
industries have anticipated higher economic significance over the preceding era
and hold a major portion in Gross Domestic Product. As financial and banking
services, are essential fragment of service sector, they are confronting with
serious challenges to strive along the worldwide players while satisfying clients
by proposing quality services(Adil, Ghaswyneh et al. 2013).Subsequently, the
struggle of service managers is focused in the direction of understanding how
consumers perceive the quality of service. It would be of minor importance to
debate about improving service quality without the prior knowledge of what is
service quality, its perception by the consumer and the ways of its improvement
and enhancements. Researchers have undertaken different aspects of quality of
service and they all agree to the point that customers should always be
emphasized. Here customer attitude is very important, which fallouts by
comparing the customers’ expectations with perceptions of performance (Philip
and Hazlett 1996).
As the nature of the service is very specific, it becomes quite difficult to

maintain and measure the service quality. Though, Zeithaml, Parasuraman and
Berry (1985, 1988) designed the servqual measurement scale that was
recognized to be the utmost prevalent tool for quantifying service quality. The two
utmost noticeable scales, SERVQUAL and SERVPERF, are establishing the
origins for assessment of service quality in diverse service areas(Adil,
Ghaswyneh et al. 2013).
1.2 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
1. To identify if the tangibles of Telecom company have impact on customer

satisfaction.
2. To identify if the reliability of Telecom company has impact on customer
satisfaction.
3. To identify if the responsiveness of Telecom company has impact on
customer satisfaction.
4. To identify if the assurance of Telecom company has impact on customer
satisfaction.
5. To identify if the empathy of Telecom company has impact on customer
satisfaction.
1.3 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
By conducting the following research the telecom sector will have

knowledge about the dimensions of the quality of service and their influence on
the service quality and in turn on consumer satisfaction. This will help the
telecom sector managers to identify and work on the dimensions in which they
are weak and can work on them to enhance the quality of the services which they
are providing.
This research report is very significant for the researcher because it will enhance
my personal knowledge and ability. It is not only academic requirement but also a
type of basic research to enhance researcher’s knowledge. So it is very
significant for both the researcher and the telecom sector as well.
1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
The following study’s scope is based on determining consumer

satisfaction in the telecom sector of Peshawar, Pakistan. The determinants of
consumer satisfaction include reliability, responsiveness, assurance, tangibles
and empathy. Hence this study will help the telecom sector to recognize those
dimensions of quality of service on which they can work to increase the service
quality to bring more customer satisfaction.
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 PERCEIVED SERVICE QUALITY
The keyword for persistence of firms in the international economy is

“quality”. Organizations are undertaking a swing from a production-led approach
to a customer-focused attitude (Rahaman, Abdullah et al. 2011). A number of
authors have defined quality in different ways. Some noticeable definitions
include conforming to requisites, suitability for use (Juran 1988) or one that
pleases and satisfies the client (Eiglier and Langeard 1987). Production
philosophy of Japanese describes quality as, nil deficiencies in the firm’s
offerings (Jain and Gupta 2004). Quality can be designated as all characteristics
and features of services, products or processes (Rahaman, Abdullah et al. 2011).
Bitner and Hubert in 1994 said that Service quality is a client’s total imprint of
comparative superiority/inferiority of organization and the services it provides
(DU, E et al. 2012). A common description of quality of service is the degree to
which service matches with prospects or desires of customers (Shahin and
Janatyan 2011).
Conferring to Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1990), perception about
service quality is the degree to which a business productively attends the drive of
consumers. Consumers conclude cognitive/perceived worth of service built on
their experiences by the service provided. Consumers’ expectations, the
procedure of delivering the service and service results have an effect on
perceptions about the quality of service. Expectations of customers, process of
service delivery and the outcomes of service have an influence on perception
about service quality (Ghobadian, Speller et al. 1994). Employees play a serious
role in improving perception about service quality as they are considered a
fundamental part of the service process (Yoo and Park 2007). Perceptions about
the quality of the services are shaped in the course of the production, provision
and consumption process of the services (Edvardsson 2005). The cooperative
background of expert services plus their instantaneous creation and consumption
specify a want to inspect professionals and clients perceptions engaged in the
service meeting. Overall, perceptions of the professional straight away impact the
design and provision of services presented, while customer perceptions more
directly control estimation of the consumed services. Henceforth, from a
marketing viewpoint, both parties are precisely significant and necessarily be
taken in to consideration if a more detailed understanding of quality service is to
be obtained (Brown and Swartz 1989).As service delivery happens when the
interactions occur between the customers and contact employees, behaviors and
attitudes of the employees that come in contact with the client can effect opinions
of customers about the quality of service (Ramseook-Munhurrun, Lukea-
Bhiwajee et al. 2010). Perceived worker satisfaction, perceived worker
faithfulness, and perceived worker commitment had a substantial influence on
perception of product quality and on perception about service quality (Beatson,
Lings et al. 2008). When judging their service offerings, service marketers can
obtain more and more information if they look beyond the old paradigm of
satisfaction/dissatisfaction. Although client evaluations are essential, the
professional's vision, when joined with the client's viewpoint, can deliver surplus
insights in areas where alteration is desired (Brown and Swartz 1989).
2.2 SERVICE QUALITY MEASUREMENT
The SERVQUAL tool has been the leading technique used to calculate
customers’ opinions of quality of service. Service quality concept has provoked
substantial consideration and discussion in research writings because of the
complications in describing and measuring it (Rahaman, Abdullah et al. 2011).
Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1985) laid down a concrete basis for research
in this area in the mid of 18 th century though preliminary struggles in measuring
and defining service quality derived basically from the goods sector. They were
the first researchers who gave the view that idea of quality prevailing in goods
sector cannot be stretched to services sector. As services are intangible,
perishable, heterogeneous, and produced and consumed simultaneously,
services have need of a different background for quality explanation and
measurement (Jain and Gupta 2004).
Conceptual modifications are needed to be made as the current service
quality concept is unable to fit the multidimensional circumstances across
different countries. There exists a strong requirement to consider
multidimensional feature of quality of service. The problem of evaluating service
quality through numerous service sectors has been discovered (Cronin and
Taylor 1992) (Brady and Cronin 2001). Servqual tool is one of the most widely
used tools for quantifying quality of the services delivered by the service
industries. The servqual instrument was introduced by Parasuraman, Berry and
Zeithaml. Though SERVQUAL as a gadget for gaging service quality was utilized
in several researches, it was altered to be suitable for specific sectors and
settings, such as for electronic sector it was altered to E-SQUAL and for service
preference it was changed to SERVPERF. Therefore there exists a possibility for
SERVQUAL scale to be additionally altered for worldwide standardization
(Randheer, AL-Motawa et al. 2011). SERVQUAL scale is a standard gadget with
worthy reliability and validity and extensive applicability. SERVQUAL scale is
used to aid as an analytical approach for revealing wide areas of quality of
service lacks and powers of a company (Shahin and Janatyan 2011).
SERVQUAL scale is constructed on scheme that quality of service can be
calculated as gap between what clienteles expect from service and how the
service actually performs (Landrum, Prybutok et al. 2009). When consumers are
disinclined to report or criticize about an undesirable service encounter,
particularly if it is a matter of a professional service, it becomes manager’s duty
to take into account a proactive approach in observing service quality. Gap
analysis can be used as such an approach (Brown and Swartz 1989). The
SERVQUAL tool discovers the level of quality of service and moreover
recognizes where gaps in service occur and to what degree. Seven most
important gaps underlie the service quality concept that are explained as below:
(Parasuraman, Zeithaml et al. 1985)
GAP 1: It is positioning gap and is defined as “Managers’ perceptions of
consumers’ expectations and the relative importance consumers attach to
the quality dimensions”. This gap arises due to the deficiency of marketing
research, a lot of layers of management and insufficient or poor upward
communication.
GAP 2: It is the specifications gap and is defined as “The difference
between what management believes the consumer wants and what the
consumers expect the business to provide”. This gap is the result of
insufficient assurance to quality of service, a perception of impracticality,
insufficient task regulation or standardization and nonexistence of
objective setting.
GAP 3: It is delivery gap and is defined as per “The difference between
the service provided by the employee of the business and the
specifications set by management”. This gap occurs due to role doubts
and clashes, employees do not fit to their jobs and lack of required or
latest technology, unsuitable administrative control structures, and
shortage of perceived control and deficiency of cooperation amongst the
team members.
GAP 4: It is the communication gap and is defined as “The
promises communicated by the business to the consumer do not match
the consumers’ expectations of those external promises”. It occurs as a
consequence of insufficient parallel interactions and communications and
inclination to exaggerated promises.
GAP 5: It is Perception gap and is defined as “the difference
between the consumers’ internal perception and expectation of the
services”. This gap arises due to the effects put forth on the client’s edge
and lacks or gaps on edge of provider of the service. In such a scenario,
consumer prospects and expectations are affected by magnitude of
individual wants, word of mouth endorsement plus experiences of the
previous service.
GAP 6: “The discrepancy between customer expectations and
employees’ perceptions: as a result of the differences in the understanding
of customer expectations by front-line service providers”.
Gap7: “The discrepancy between employee’s perceptions and
management perceptions: as a result of the differences in the
understanding of customer expectations between managers and service
providers”.
Gap model is considered as one of the finest acknowledged and utmost
heuristically valued contribution to literature in service sector (Brown and Bond
1995). Six of the above mentioned gaps, i.e. Gap 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 are
recognized as utilities of method in which delivery of service occurs. While Gap 5
relates to client. The SERVQUAL methodology has been settled by keeping in
mind the Gap 5 (Parasuraman et al. 1985, 1988, 1991, 1993).
But thing is that SERVQUAL scale emphases greater on the service
delivery procedure than on other service attributes, such as service-encounter
outcomes (Rahaman, Abdullah et al. 2011). The dimensions and items of
SERVQUAL signifies fundamental evaluation standards that transcend specific
industries and companies (Shahin and Janatyan 2011).
Servqual is presented as a multidimensional construct. The SERVQUAL
tool is a scale that consists of multiple items which is used for quantifying
expectations and perceptions about quality of service as observed by customers
(Aghamolaei and Zare 2008). Several researchers have argued that expectations
scores are misrepresentative since the expectations statements of service
delivery are mostly responded as “strongly agree” (Brandon-Jones and Silvestro
2010).The gadget is administered two times in altered arrangements, firstly for
measuring expectations and secondly for measuring perceptions (Buttle 1996).
Initially ten components were identified in servqual which are reliability,
responsiveness, competence, access, courtesy, communication, credibility,
security, understanding/knowing the customer, tangibles (Parasuraman, Zeithaml
et al. 1985). These components were conceded into five dimensions in the work
done by Parasuraman in 1988 (Meybodi 2012). Five service quality dimensions
can be explained as follows:
a. RELIABILITY: It defines the capability to execute the guaranteed
service reliably as well as perfectly (Iwaarden, Wiele et al. 2003).
Reliability is every so often seen as capability of service suppliers to
implement guaranteed service reliably as well as perfectly (Juwaheer
and Ross 2003; Raza, Siddiquei et al. 2012)
b. RESPONSIVENESS: It is the readiness to help consumers and offer
quick service (Iwaarden, Wiele et al. 2003). It is frequently described
as the readiness of suppliers of service to run service speedily plus
correctly (Juwaheer and Ross 2003).
c. ASSURANCE: It signifies the familiarity and consideration of
employees and their capability to gain confidence and trust (Iwaarden,
Wiele et al. 2003). Assurance is commonly mentioned to as integrity,
proficiency and safety in conveying services (Juwaheer and Ross
2003; Raza, Siddiquei et al. 2012)
d. TANGIBLES: Tangibles represent the look of the physical
conveniences or facilities, staffs and equipment (Iwaarden, Wiele et al.
2003). Tangibility is regarded as the appearance that service
providers present regarding good equipment, facilities, personnel and
communication resources when providing their services (Raza,
Siddiquei et al. 2012).
e. EMPATHY: Empathy is to provide individualized care and attention to
the clients (Iwaarden, Wiele et al. 2003). Empathy is associated with
concern, care, consideration and understanding client needs while
delivering service (Juwaheer and Ross 2003; Raza, Siddiquei et al.
2012).
SERVQUAL model can be a measure of gaps in quality of service and therefore

it acts as an analytical instrument to facilitate administration to detect quality of
service underperformances. The calculation of the gap score is done through
deducting scores of statements of perception from statements of expectations. If
some of the gap scores seem to be positive, this indicates that client’s
expectations have truly been surpassed. This lets the administrators of the
services to assess whether if there is a need to re-deploy assets to zones of
underperformance (Ramseook-Munhurrun, Lukea-Bhiwajee et al. 2010). The
more positive or higher the perception less expectation points, the greater level
of service quality is perceived (Jain and Gupta 2004).
2.3 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION AND SERVICE QUALITY
The service encounter evaluation can produce two types of outcomes, either
dissatisfaction or satisfaction. Satisfaction/dissatisfaction are often seen as
contrasting ends of continuum (Brown and Swartz 1989). Satisfying the customer
is a serious concern in achieving success by any industry system. When the
actual performance of service surpasses the client’s, that are being served,
expectations, customer satisfaction is attained. If the performance of the product
is poorer than the performance that was being expected, undesirable feelings
occur and indicate displeasure and dissatisfaction (Dehghan, Shahin et al. 2012).
Amazingly, a systematic and detailed review of quality management programs
discovered that the capability of service suppliers to accurately implement
service quality in performing jobs can have a substantial influence on individual
behavior and attitude, specifically satisfaction of customer. From the perspective
of quality management, satisfaction of customer is often viewed by way of a
consequence of comparing what client is expecting about services delivered by a
service supplier and what services are actually rendered by the service supplier.
When service delivered by a business meets a customer’s needs, desires and
expectations, it might be directed to an enriched level of customer pleasure and
satisfaction (Raza, Siddiquei et al. 2012). Numerous studies of marketing have
discovered the applied influence of quality of service quality along with its
influence on buyer attitudes. They all agree to the point that greater service
quality should result in higher level of satisfaction of consumer. This must move
towards healthier long time associations among service suppliers and service
receivers (Etgar and Fuchs 2009). An optimistic client behavior regarding service
quality will result to greater returns (Parasuraman et al. 1991, 1993). Readiness
of suppliers to properly implement tangibility, responsiveness, reliability,
empathy, and assurance in providing services might lead to increased client
satisfaction in service industries (Raza, Siddiquei et al. 2012). When outcomes of
the services exceed or at least meet up the client’s expectations results in
satisfaction. When a negative discrepancy occurs between the client's estimated
outcome and the real outcome, this results in dissatisfaction. These expectations
possibly will be grounded, in total or in part, on previous relevant experiences.
Cadotte in 1983 and Woodruff and Jenkins in 1987 proposed an alternate view
on dissatisfaction/satisfaction. They suggested that experience-based standards
are more suitable than expectations to function as a benchmark when comparing
with product experiences (Brown and Swartz 1989). Clients’ unfavorable and
favorable past experience and exposure, plus their desirable and undesirable
sentiments might possess an essential influence on perception about quality of
service (Markovi'c and Raspor 2010). Perceptions of customers about quality of
service to a great level, may be effected by amount of their former knowledge
and experience of using a certain service (O’Neill and Palmer 2003). Henkel and
his co-researchers in 2006 found in their research in the telecommunication
sector, that satisfied and pleased customers have greater degree of service
utilization and intents to repurchase in coming time (Hassan, Malik et al.). DU, E
et al. (2012) cites the words of Goodman (1989) that companies should be
worried towards service quality problem since issues with service quality can
cause decline in customer loyalty by 20%. SERVQUAL is fundamentally
grounded on model of disconfirmation which was given by Oliver in 1980. He
projected three categories of disconfirmation:
“Positive disconfirmation – when perceptions exceed the customer

expectation that results in high customer satisfaction.
Negative disconfirmation – when perceptions left behind the
expectations that results in customer dissatisfaction.
Zero disconfirmation – when perceptions equal the expectations”

(Hassan, Malik et al.).
The difference concerning expectations of customer from service

delivered and customers’ own thinking and perceptions about quality of service is
called the customer gap (Zeithaml, Bitner et al. 2005). Berry suggested in 1995
that service has essential part in boosting value, as well as can certainly impact
an organization's success. Considering and computing purchaser beliefs
(expectations) and presentation (performance) are necessary constituents that
may be utilized to enrich a business's service providing (Aghamolaei and Zare
2008).In 1989, Goodman stated that companies should be alarmed with service
quality matter because customer loyalty may decline by 20% due to glitches in
service quality (DU, E et al. 2012). There are two kinds of service quality i-e
technical quality that suggests what the client is really getting from service. The
other is functional quality that suggests procedure in which the service is
delivered (Parasuraman, Zeithaml et al. 1985). The needs of the clients must be
addressed in three levels. The first level is providing basic needs. The second
level is to satisfy their needs in a way that they return to us. The third level is to
furnish their needs more than they expect (Shafirad, Shamsi et al. 2012). Service
delivery happens when the employees and clients come in contact with each
other and hence, behaviors and attitudes of the contact employees can impact
clients’ perceptions of service quality (Ramseook-Munhurrun, Lukea-Bhiwajee et
al. 2010).
Service quality has been well-defined in several ways. One common

definitions of service quality is “the extent to which a service meets customers’
needs or expectations”. It is also described as the difference amid perceived
service and customer expectations of service. Superior expectations of customer
than product performance, indicates that observed service quality is inferior than
acceptable and henceforth results in customer dissatisfaction (Dehghan, Shahin
et al. 2012).The presence and involvement of people throughout the service
delivery procedure significantly raises the likelihood of inaccuracy on the side of
customers and employees. The inaccuracy occurs because of intangible
behavioral procedures that are quite difficult to be controlled or monitored
(Ramseook-Munhurrun, Lukea-Bhiwajee et al. 2010).
2.4 SERVQUAL’S VALIDITY
The face validity of Servqual is the subjective standard imitating the

degree to which the items on the scale are significant. A study showed that
Servqual with slight phrasing alterations in some articles had face validity.
Similarly, in 1991 Babakus and Boller authenticated the appropriateness of
servqual instrument for industry of utility. In 1990, Brensinger, Lambert and in
1991 Finn, Lamb did not clearly debate face validity of Servqual. The point,
however, that complete 22 Servqual articles were utilized in both researches
entails backing for significance of the articles in the situations involved. Hence,
with some exceptional situations, the articles of the Servqual scale seem to
remain suitable for evaluating quality of service in a diversity of situations
(Parasuraman, Berry et al. 1991).
2.5 CRITICSMS OF SERVQUAL
The five-factor arrangement of SERVQUAL has not been sustained or

supported by most of the researches and administration of the expectation items
is also considered pointless (Ramseook-Munhurrun, Lukea-Bhiwajee et al.
2010). In 1992 a measure based on performance only, SERVPERF was
developed. This scale measures the unweight perceptions/observations
constituents of SERVQUAL, that comprises of 22 perception articles
consequently eliminating any expectations involvement (Cronin and Taylor
1992). In spite of disapprovals, SERVQUAL has always been used to calculate
quality of service in a number of settings that included universities, police
services, hospitals, public utilities, banks, travel agencies etc. (Ramseook-
Munhurrun, Lukea-Bhiwajee et al. 2010). Additionally, further studies proposed
that SERVQUAL has unbalanced dimensions. For instance, four dimensions
were used by Jiang, Klein, and Carr (2002) in their report, whereas in
2004Prybutokand Landrum used five dimensions of service quality. In 1996,
Nitecki projected a SERVQUAL model which was three dimensional, which
opposed the five dimensional model suggested by Zeithaml, Parasuraman, and
Berry given in year 1990. As we observed, such matters are all fixed if beliefs of
customers are eradicated from model (Landrum, Prybutok et al. 2009). Though
some researches did flop to support the structure of SERVQUAL, the use of the
varied dimensions that was grounded on practical and conceptual basis was
defended (Parasuraman, Berry et al. 1993). Even though it might be required to
amend or else alter certain items on scale, until now SERVQUAL tool is
appropriate in an extensive series of corporate service (Parasuraman, Zeithaml
et al. 1988). However, it is warned that the deletion/addition of items of the scale
and/or dimensions possibly will end in the damage of the measure’s reliability
(Parasuraman, Berry et al. 1991). Furthermore, web of science exposed that
both, SERVPERF and SERVQUAL, have got more than 46% of its reference
during the five years from 2002 to 2007. This demonstrates that conceptual
arguments given by Cronin and Taylor in approval of SERVPERF model, do not
have any effect on the usage and attractiveness of SERVQUAL scale amongst
researchers (Hassan, Malik et al.). Quality of service is affected by national or
local culture of a specific state. Researchers have forced the other scholars to
augment the dimension of culture to service quality literature as the existing
dimensions SERVQUAL might not be significant in all circumstances and
environments (Kueh and Voon 2007). An investigation on the dimensions of
service consumption behavior of American and Japanese was conducted. When
the results of both countries were compared, it was revealed that Americans
desired and preferred quality, provision and cooperativeness while Japanese
desired for coordination and customization. Cross-cultural customer behavior
reveals that client exhibit different types of attitudes in countries like India i-e the
developing countries, where customers are not provided with higher quality in
any field and so, are little on complaining. Developed countries such as USA,
where extraordinary and superior quality is the demand in every walk of life,
customers don’t compromise when it comes to quality, they incline faster towards
registering complains (Winsted 1997). A great difference lies in the perceptions
about service quality among clients of developed and developing states
(Malhotra, Ulgado et al. 2005). Cultural issue of service quality has been
explored by the researchers. The service quality was assessed by SERVQUAL
on the basis of ten variables: reliability, competence, tangibles, responsiveness,
access, communication, courtesy, credibility, knowing/understanding the
consumer, and security. The research was directed to associate the service
quality among consumers of America and Mexico. They found substantial
dissimilarities present among consumers of America and Mexico relative to
service quality (Herbig and Genestre 1996).
As a result of these criticisms, alternative measures of service quality for
specific service settings were developed (Markovi'c and Raspor 2010). Lodgserv
model was developed for the tourism and hospitality industry (Knutson, Stevens
et al. 1991) which was derived to measure the service delivery process in the
lodging business. This model is built on five basic dimensions of servqual and
consists of 26 items. A lodgqual model was introduced in 1994 which was
another model developed for hoteling industries (Getty and Thompson 1994).
Tangibles, reliability and contact were the three dimensions which were identified
in the lodgqual model. Dineserv was another model given in 1995 which was
designed to measure the quality of restaurant services (Stevens, Knutson et al.
1995). It has 29 items and five basic dimensions of servqual. The diveperf model
was developed for judging perceptions of services of diving. The model was
constructed keeping in mind the five basic servqual dimensions and 27 items
(O’Neill, Williams et al. 2000). Ecoserv model was given in 2003 and was
developed to measure the quality of service in eco-tourism, which was built by
using 30 items and five basic servqual dimensions (Khan 2003). All of the models
mentioned in here are the modifications or alterations of the servqual model,
targeting to improve its actual approach.
In spite of extensive work commenced in this area, there lies no
agreement so far as to which one of the measuring scales is vigorous enough for
the measurement and comparison of service quality. Moreover, minor work has
been done to scrutinize the application of these measuring scales to the service
businesses in developing countries (Jain and Gupta 2004).
2.6 SERVPERF SCALE
It is due of the imprecision of the concept of expectation that some

investigators forced upon the need for evolving an operationally more accurate
scale (Bolton and Drew 1991; Babakus and Boller 1992; Brown, Churchill et al.
1993). The SERVPERF measuring scale that was developed by Cronin and
Taylor in 1992 is amongst the essential alternates of the SERVQUAL scale. As it
is grounded upon the perception component only, it has been theoretically and
operationally suggested as an improved scale than the SERVQUAL scale.
Cronin and Taylor were among the investigators who leveled extreme attack on
SERVQUAL scale. They raised the question on the conceptual basis of
SERVQUAL measure and it appeared to be puzzling with service satisfaction.
Therefore, they suggested that Performance (P) component should be used only
and the expectation (E) component should be eliminated. Hence they projected
the ‘SERVPERF’ scale of measuring service quality. Cronin and Taylor in 1992,
apart from their theoretical arguments, gave empirical proves as well across four
different sectors i-e banking, pest control industries, dry cleaning sector, and fast
food industries to substantiate the supremacy of their ‘performance-only’ tool
over disconfirmation-based SERVQUAL measure (Cronin and Taylor 1992).
Cronin and Taylor further said that being an alternate of the SERVQUAL
measure and comprising of perceived performance element only, “performance
only” measure contained of merely 22 items. A greater perceived performance
infers greater service quality (Jain and Gupta 2004). Operationally, the
SERVPERF measure characterizes noticeable upgrading over SERVQUAL
measure. The SERVPERF scale not only performs more efficiently by reducing
the amount of items to be gauged by 50 %, it has also been found empirically
supreme to the SERVQUAL measure for being capable to describe higher
variance in the overall measurement of service quality through the usage of
single item measure. This clarifies the substantial backing that has developed
over time in favor of the SERVPERF measure (Churchill and Surprenant 1982;
Bolton and Drew 1991; Babakus and Boller 1992; Boulding, Kalra et al. 1993;
Gotlieb, Grewal et al. 1994). Although still lying behind the SERVQUAL measure
in applicability, investigators have progressively started using the performance-
only scale of service quality (Babakus and Boller 1992; Cronin and Taylor 1992;
Boulding, Kalra et al. 1993; Andaleeb and Basu 1994; Cronin, Brady et al. 2000;
Brady and Robertson 2001; Brady, Cronin et al. 2002). Moreover, when used in
combination with SERVQUAL gauge, the SERVPERF gauge has outclassed the
SERVQUAL measure (Brady, Cronin et al. 2002). In the context of India,
SERVPERF tool has outclassed SERVQUAL tool as it not only reduces the
amount of variables but also compact the work burden of client analysis and
aided in producing impartial responses (Adil, Ghaswyneh et al. 2013).
SERVPERF measure has been empirically verified and confirmed to be a
superior tool in measurment of service quality (Cronin and Taylor 1992; Brown,
Churchill et al. 1993). The literature in marketing seems to propose substantial
backing for the supremacy of simple performance-based measuring tools of
service quality (Churchill and Surprenant 1982). Additionally, the usage of a
perception gauge is defensible by the energetic personality of the expectations of
the Indian client’s and by the superior struggle needed by the respondents to
complete two survey forms, one expectations i-e before the use of services and
another other perceptions i-e after experiencing the services. That would
noticeably decrease the amount of respondents eager to answer their honest
opinion in the study. The SERVPERF gauge is considered to be supreme not
only as the gauge is effective in catching the actual client’s perceived service
quality as also additionally operative in decreasing the amount of items to be
gauged by half 22 items in comparison to SERVQUAL scale’s 44 items (Bolton
and Drew 1991; Babakus and Boller 1992). Much scholarly work has been
directed by implementing the SERVPERF scale; several of the most related are
shown in Table 1 (Adil, Ghaswyneh et al. 2013).
Table 1. Studies conducted by adopting SERVPERF.
Authors Country
Beerli et al (2004) Spain

Wang et al (2003) China
Lee and Hwan (2005) Taiwan
Zahoor (2011) Pakistan
Mensah (2010) Ghana
Sulieman (2011) Jordan
2.7 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Service Quality Dimensions
Reliability
Responsiveness
Assurance
CUSTOMER
Empathy
SATISFACTION
Tangibles
Reliability, responsiveness, assurance, empathy and tangibles are the

dimensions for measuring service quality and are considered hereby the
independent variables. Customer satisfaction will arise if the service quality is up
to the expectations hence customer satisfaction is the dependent variable.
Reliability means to deliver the service as you have promised. Responsiveness

shows the willingness to help the customer. Assurance is to inspire trust and
confidence. Treating your customer individually is to show empathy and tangibles
physically represent your service. All these dimensions can be measured through
SERVQUAL that contains 4-5 statements on each of the service quality
dimension using a five point likert scale (Zeithaml, Bitner et al. 2005).
2.8 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS
H1: Reliability of Telecom Company has a positive impact on consumer

satisfaction.
H2: Responsiveness of Telecom Company has a positive impact on
consumer satisfaction.
H3: Assurance of Telecom Company has a positive impact on consumer

satisfaction.
H4: Tangibles of Telecom Company have a positive impact on consumer

satisfaction.
H5: Empathy of Telecom Company has a positive impact on consumer

satisfaction.
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The research’s methodology is mainly focused on quantitative method and

research technique used hereby is the survey method. The quantitative research
approach is based upon objectives, measurable reports, statistical analysis; it is
often regarded as a scientific methodology of management sciences research.
3.1 METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION
Random sampling technique was used for the selection of samples in this study.
Primary data were collected from the customers of different telecom companies
within Peshawar city by using the SERVPERF method of data collection. This
questionnaire has been designed in a compact and understandable language to
avoid misunderstanding and misinterpretation and make them easy and
understandable for the respondent. The questionnaire is composed of questions
based upon demographics and others based upon likert scale.
3.2 POPULATION OF THE STUDY
The following study is meant to measure service quality of telecom sector.

Population means the totality of individuals from which some sample is drawn.
The population of this study is all the clients of private telecom industries living in
Peshawar. Therefore, N= All clients of private telecom companies living in
Peshawar.
3.3 SAMPLE SIZE
Having the large size of the population and the fact that population is spread all
over Peshawar; therefore only 100 clients are selected for study in Peshawar
city. 100 questionnaires were distributed among the respondents. Therefore
n=100.
3.4 DATA ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE
For analyzing the data collected through survey technique, appropriate statistical
tools were applied. To analyze variables, tables and simple percentages were
used. For the analysis of hypothesis, Regression Analysis was used.
3.5 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
5% level of significance is taken which means that we are 95% confident about
the accuracy of decisions undertaken.
3.6 DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
3.6.1 DISTRIBUTION AND RETURN OF QUESTIONNAIRES
Questionnaires were distributed by hand in the 100 clients of the private telecom
companies living in Peshawar. The entire questionnaires distributed were
returned exclusively with almost no missing data.
3.6.2 DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
Table 3.1 to table 3.5 shows the demographic analysis of the study.
Table 3.1 shows that out of the 100 respondents 48% belonged to the age group
of 15-24, 31% belonged to age group 25-34, 16% belonged to age group of 35-
44 and 5% belonged to age group 45-54.
Table 3.1: Age Analysis
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent
(15-24) 48 48.0 48.0 48.0
(25-34) 31 31.0 31.0 79.0
Valid (35-44) 16 16.0 16.0 95.0
(45-54) 5 5.0 5.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

Table 3.2 is showing that out of 100 respondents, 44% were male and
66% were female respondents.
Table 3.2: Gender Analysis

Percent
Male 44 44.0 44.0 44.0
Valid Female 56 56.0 56.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0
Table 3.3 suggests that Post Graduates, Graduates and Under Graduates
comprised of 56%, 34% and 10% of the respondents respectively.
Table 3.3: Education Analysis

Percent
Post Graduate 56 56.0 56.0 56.0
Graduate 34 34.0 34.0 90.0

Valid
Under Graduate 10 10.0 10.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0
Table 3.4 shows that 23% respondents had their own business, 36% were
private salaried employees, 23% were students and 18% belonged to other
profession.
Table 3.4: Profession Analysis

Percent
Own Business 23 23.0 23.0 23.0
Private Salaried Employee 36 36.0 36.0 59.0
Valid Student 23 23.0 23.0 82.0
Others 18 18.0 18.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

Table 3.5 is showing that Mobilink, Ufone, Telenor, Zong and Warid
telecommunication networks were used by 9%, 29%, 25%, 18% and 19% of the
respondents respectively.
Table 3.5: Telecommunication Network People Use

Percent
Mobilink 9 9.0 9.0 9.0
Ufone 29 29.0 29.0 38.0
Telenor 25 25.0 25.0 63.0

Valid
Zong 18 18.0 18.0 81.0
Warid 19 19.0 19.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0
CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS, FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1 ANALYSIS
4.1.1 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS
Reliability Analysis for Variable “Reliability”
The table 4.1 shows a Cronbach’s Alpha for the reliability variable is 82.3%
hence the items of this variable are quite reliable.
Table4.1: Reliability Analysis
Case Processing Summary Reliability Statistics

N % Cronbach's Alpha N of Items
Valid 100 100.0
Cases Excludeda 0 .0 .823 8
Total 100 100.0
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the

procedure.
Reliability Analysis for Variable “Responsiveness”
The table 4.2 shows a Cronbach’s Alpha for the responsiveness variable is
78.8% hence the items of this variable are quite reliable.
Valid 100 100.0

a
Cases Excluded 0 .0 .788 6
Total 100 100.0
a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in the

procedure.
Reliability Analysis for Variable “Assurance”
The table 4.3 shows a Cronbach’s Alpha for the assurance variable is 81.3%
Valid 100 100.0

a
Total 100 100.0

a. Listwise deletion based on all variables in
the procedure.
Reliability Analysis for Variable “Tangibles”
The table 4.4 shows a Cronbach’s Alpha for the assurance variable is 88.2%
Valid 100 100.0

a
Total 100 100.0
b. Listwise deletion based on all variables in

the procedure.
Reliability Analysis for Variable “Empathy”
The table 4.5 shows a Cronbach’s Alpha for the empathy variable is 88.6%
Cases Valid 100 100.0
Excludeda 0 .0 .886 6
Total 100 100.0
c. Listwise deletion based on all variables in

the procedure.
Reliability Analysis for Variable “Customer Satisfaction”
The table 4.6 shows a Cronbach’s Alpha for the customer satisfaction variable is
95% hence the items of this variable are quite reliable.
Valid 100 100.0
Cases Excludeda 0 .0 .950 5
Total 100 100.0
d. Listwise deletion based on all variables in

the procedure.
4.1.2 TESTING FOR HYPOTHESIS ONE
H1: Reliability of Telecom Company has a positive impact on consumer

satisfaction.
MODEL SUMMARY:
The R value is 0.826, which represents the simple correlation and,

therefore, indicates a high degree of correlation i-e the customer satisfaction is
highly dependent upon the Reliability dimension of service quality. The R Square
value indicates how much of the dependent variable i-e customer satisfaction,
can be explained by the independent variable i-e reliability of service quality. In
this case, 68.2% can be explained, which is quite large. The higher the value of
the R-square the better the independent variable is in predicting the dependent
variable. This means that 68.2% of the total variation in the customer satisfaction
is accounted for the variation in reliability dimension.
Table 4.7: Model Summary of Reliability
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate

a
1 .826 .682 .679 .67737 ANOVA:
a. Predictors: (Constant), Reliability
This
table
indicates
that the regression model predicts the outcome variable significantly well. This
indicates the statistical significance of the regression model that was applied.
Here, Sig value is 0.000 which is less than 0.05 and indicates that; overall, the
model applied is significantly good enough in predicting the outcome variable.
Table 4.8: Regression Analysis Test Results (ANOVA)
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Regression 96.468 1 96.468 210.247 .000b
1 Residual 44.966 98 .459
Total 141.434 99
a. Dependent Variable: CustomerSatisfaction

b. Predictors: (Constant), Reliability
The “Unstandardized Coefficients column” shows two statistics which are

the regression coefficient B and the standard error. Under B two statistics are
reported: one is Constant and the other is Reliability and this is the regression
coefficient which measures the slope of the line.
The next part of the table shows the t-statistics and the significance or p-value.
We can see that the t-value is greater than 2 i-e t-value is 14.50 and p-value is
less than 0.05 i-e p-value is 0.000 so the results show a positive and significant
influence of reliability on customer satisfaction. This means that each additional
unit of this explanatory variable (reliability) is associated with an equal increase in
the value of the dependent variable (customer satisfaction).
Table 4.9: Coefficientsa Results
Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized t Sig.

Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) -.928 .306 -3.038 .003

1
Reliability 1.270 .088 .826 14.500 .000
4.1.3 TESTING FOR HYPOTHESIS TWO
H2: Responsiveness of Telecom Company has a positive impact on

MODEL SUMMARY
The R value is 0.545, which represents the simple correlation and, therefore,
indicates a high degree of correlation i-e the customer satisfaction is highly
dependent upon the Responsiveness dimension of service quality. The R Square
value indicates how much of the dependent variable i-e customer satisfaction,
can be explained by the independent variable i-e responsiveness of service
quality. In this case, 29.7% can be explained. The higher the value of the R-
square the better the independent variable is in predicting the dependent
variable. This means that 29.7% of the total variation in the customer satisfaction
is accounted for the variation in responsiveness dimension.
Table 4.10: Model Summary of Responsiveness

a
1 .545 .297 .289 1.00749
a. Predictors: (Constant), Responsiveness
ANOVA:
This table indicates that the regression model predicts the outcome
variable significantly well. This indicates the statistical significance of the
regression model that was applied. Here, Sig value is 0.000 which is less than
0.05 and indicates that; overall, the model applied is significantly good enough in
predicting the outcome variable.
Table 4.11: Regression Analysis Test Results (ANOVAa)
Regression 41.959 1 41.959 41.338 .000b
1 Residual 99.474 98 1.015
Total 141.434 99

b. Predictors: (Constant), Responsiveness

reported: one is Constant and the other is Responsiveness and this is the
regression coefficient which measures the slope of the line.
influence of responsiveness on customer satisfaction. This means that each
additional unit of this explanatory variable (responsiveness) is associated with an
equal increase in the value of the dependent variable (customer satisfaction).
Table 4.12: Coefficientsa Results

Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) .418 .473 .884 .379

1
Responsiveness .862 .134 .545 6.429 .000
4.1.4 TESTING FOR HYPOTHESIS THREE
H3: Assurance of Telecom Company has a positive impact on consumer

satisfaction.
MODEL SUMMARY
indicates some correlation i-e the customer satisfaction is dependent upon the
Assurance dimension of service quality. The R Square value indicates how much
of the dependent variable i-e customer satisfaction, can be explained by the
independent variable i-e assurance of service quality. In this case, 9.2% can be
explained. The higher the value of the R-square the better the independent
variable is in predicting the dependent variable. This means that 9.2% of the total
variation in the customer satisfaction is accounted for the variation in assurance
dimension.
Table 4.13: Model Summary of Assurance

a
1 .303 .092 .082 1.14503
a. Predictors: (Constant), Assurance
ANOVA:
Regression 12.946 1 12.946 9.874 .002b
1 Residual 128.488 98 1.311
Total 141.434 99

b. Predictors: (Constant), Assurance

reported: one is Constant and the other is assurance and this is the regression
influence of assurance on customer satisfaction. This means that each additional
unit of this explanatory variable (assurance) is associated with an equal increase
in the value of the dependent variable (customer satisfaction).
Table 4.15: Coefficients Results

Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) .874 .809 1.080 .283

1
Assurance .644 .205 .303 3.142 .002
4.1.5 TESTING FOR HYPOTHESIS FOUR
H4: Tangibles of Telecom Company have a positive impact on consumer

satisfaction.
MODEL SUMMARY
indicates a high degree of correlation i-e the customer satisfaction is highly
dependent upon the Tangibles dimension of service quality. The R Square value
indicates how much of the dependent variable i-e customer satisfaction, can be
explained by the independent variable i-e tangibles of service quality. In this
case, 43.4% can be explained. The higher the value of the R-square the better
the independent variable is in predicting the dependent variable. This means that
43.4% of the total variation in the customer satisfaction is accounted for the
variation in tangibles dimension.
Table 4.16: Model Summary of Tangibles

1 .659a .434 .428 .90397
a. Predictors: (Constant), Tangibles
ANOVA:
Regression 61.351 1 61.351 75.078 .000b
1 Residual 80.082 98 .817
Total 141.434 99

b. Predictors: (Constant), Tangibles

reported: one is Constant and the other is Tangibles and this is the regression
influence of tangibles on customer satisfaction. This means that each additional
unit of this explanatory variable (tangibles) is associated with an equal increase
in the value of the dependent variable (customer satisfaction).
Table 4.18: CoefficientS Results

Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) .602 .334 1.800 .075

1
Tangibles .858 .099 .659 8.665 .000
4.1.6 TESTING FOR HYPOTHESIS FIVE
H5: Empathy of Telecom Company has a positive impact on consumer

satisfaction.
MODEL SUMMARY
indicates some correlation i-e the customer satisfaction is dependent upon the
Empathy dimension of service quality. The R Square value indicates how much
of the dependent variable i-e customer satisfaction, can be explained by the
independent variable i-e empathy of service quality. In this case, 13.1% can be
explained. The higher the value of the R-square the better the independent
variable is in predicting the dependent variable. This means that 13.1% of the
total variation in the customer satisfaction is accounted for the variation in
empathy dimension.
Table 4.19: Model Summary of Empathy
1 .362a .131 .122 1.11987
a. Predictors: (Constant), Empathy

ANOVA:
Regression 18.532 1 18.532 14.777 .000b
1 Residual 122.902 98 1.254
Total 141.434 99

b. Predictors: (Constant), Empathy

reported: one is Constant and the other is Empathy and this is the regression
influence of empathy on customer satisfaction. This means that each additional
unit of this explanatory variable (empathy) is associated with an equal increase in
the value of the dependent variable (customer satisfaction).
Table 4.21: Coefficients Results

Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) 1.605 .478 3.357 .001

1
Empathy .534 .139 .362 3.844 .000
4.2 FINDINGS
 Reliability dimension of service quality was found to be positively and

significantly related to consumer satisfaction. It was found that improving
the service quality on its reliability dimension resulted in increase in
 Responsiveness dimension of service quality was found to be positively
related to consumer satisfaction. It was found that improving the service
quality on its responsiveness dimension resulted in increase in consumer
satisfaction.
 Assurance dimension of service quality was found to be positively related
to consumer satisfaction. It was found that improving the service quality on
its assurance dimension resulted in increase in consumer satisfaction.
 Tangibles dimension of service quality was found to be positively related
to consumer satisfaction. It was found that improving the service quality on
its tangibles dimension resulted in increase in consumer satisfaction.
 Empathy dimension of service quality was found to be positively related to
consumer satisfaction. It was found that improving the service quality on
its empathy dimension resulted in increase in consumer satisfaction.
 Hence it was found that in Telecom sector in Peshawar, consumers can
be more satisfied if telecom companies work more on these five
dimensions of service quality i-e reliability, responsiveness, assurance,
tangibles and empathy.
 Moreover, it was found that among all these five dimensions the most
important dimensions that need to be worked on for improvement of
service quality are the reliability and tangibles dimensions.
 Improving the reliability and tangibility of the service quality can bring
greater consumer satisfaction.
4.3 DISCUSSIONS
Service industry is the growing industry and has gained a lot of importance
in today’s world. The level of competition has highly increased in the service
sector as markets today have become customer oriented. Organizations are
continuously striving to give and serve their customers with the best ever
possible. People seek for better and improved services now. Therefore, the aim
of this thesis is to find out the impact of service quality dimensions on consumer
satisfaction in the telecom sector of Peshawar and then to find out those
dimensions which need the most attention.
Responsiveness, assurance and empathy all have impacts on consumer

satisfaction and all these dimensions need to be worked on. But the most
important dimensions of service quality that need attention on and that need to
be improved are the reliability and tangibles dimensions. Working on the
reliability and tangibles dimension of service quality increases the quality of
service and can bring on greater improvement in consumer satisfaction.
Delivering the service reliably as well as perfectly brings out greater

consumer satisfaction. When the telecom service industry delivers the service as
perfectly as they have guaranteed and promised, consumers will become more
and more satisfied. The more perfect and reliable the service delivery, the more
the consumer will be satisfied. Similarly, when the companies use latest
technologies, upgraded equipment, and well trained personnel for the delivery of
their services, enhances the consumer satisfaction levels. Improving and working
on all the five dimensions of service quality will bring out the best of the industry
and will lead to highest levels of consumer satisfaction.
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 CONCLUSION
This research shows that in telecom sector of Peshawar, reliability and

tangibles are the key dimensions of the service quality that play an important
role to satisfy the consumer. Telecom sector in Peshawar needs to deliver its
services more reliably and promptly using the latest technologies and
upgraded equipment to satisfy their clients. The more the industry becomes
reliable in its service delivery the more the clients will become happy with
their purchase and use experience and more they will be satisfied.
The study shows that all the five dimensions of service quality are important
to be considered while delivering the services. The service providers must
keep these dimensions in mind while delivering the services to give their
clients the best experience of using their services. Most of all, amongst these
five dimensions the most important dimensions according to the results of this
study is the reliability and tangibles dimensions. The clients showed a more
concerned attitude towards the reliability and tangibility of the service delivery
of telecom sector. Hence it can be concluded that the telecom sector show a
more serious attitude towards the reliability and tangibility dimensions. The
more they work on these two, the more the service quality will be increased
and this can lead to greater satisfaction of their clients.
Not only the reliability and tangibility dimensions should be improved but
the other 3 dimensions of service quality i-e responsiveness, assurance and
empathy should also be kept in mind while the delivery process of the
services by the telecom industry.
Hence we can conclude that if telecom companies want to achieve higher

level of customer satisfaction, service quality dimensions should be improved,
especially, the reliability and tangibility dimensions.
5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
Based upon the findings of this research, following are some of the
recommendations:
 Telecom sector of Peshawar should deliver their services to the client as

reliably as promised. Services should be delivered as they have
guaranteed.
 Queries of the customers and their problems should be responded as

quickly as possible.
 Services should be delivered with complete safety and proficiency.
 Use of good and latest equipment and technology, excellent facilities,

efficient personnel and communication resources will bring out the best.
 They should pay individualized attention and care to the needs of their
clients.
5.3 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
Following are mentioned some of the limitations of this study:
1. The collection of the data was made limited to be collected only from
Peshawar city.
2. The data collection techniques were made limited to questionnaire
distribution only. No personal or group interviews or other survey methods
were used.
3. Time availability for the compliance of this research is another of its
limitations.
CHAPTER 6: REFERENCES
Adil, M., Ghaswyneh, D. O. F. M. A., & Albkour, A. M. (2013). SERVQUAL and
SERVPERF: A review of measures in services marketing research.
Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 13(6), 64-76.
Aghamolaei, T., & Zare, S. (2008). Quality gap of educational services in

viewpoints of students in Hormozgan University of medical sciences. BMC
Medical Education.Andaleeb, S. S., & Basu, A. K. (1994). Technical
complexity and consumer knowledge as moderators of service quality
evaluation in the automobile service industry. Journal of Retailing, 70(4),
367-381.
Babakus, E., & Boller, G. W. (1992). An empirical assessment of the Servqual

scale. Journal of Business Research, 24(3), 253-268.
Beatson, A., Lings, I., & Gudergan, S. (2008). Employee behaviour and
relationship quality: impact on customers. The Service Industries Journal,
28(2), 211-223.
Bolton, R. N., & Drew, J. H. (1991). A multistage model of customer’s

assessment of service quality and value. Journal of Consumer Research,
17, 375-385.
Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Staelin, R., & Ziethaml, V. A. (1993). A dynamic process
model of service quality: From expectations to behavioral intentions.
Journal of Marketing Research, 30, 7-27.
Brady, M., & Cronin, J. (2001). Some new thoughts on conceptualising perceived
service quality: a hierarchical approach. Journal of Marketing, 65(3), 34-
49.
Brady, M. K., Cronin, J., & Brand, R. R. (2002). Performance–only measurement
of service quality: A replication and extension. Journal of Business
Research, 55(1), 17-31.
Brady, M. K., & Robertson, C. J. (2001). Searching for a consensus on the

antecedent role of service quality and satisfaction: An exploratory cross-
national study. Journal of Business Research, 51(1), 53-60.
Brandon-Jones, D. A., & Silvestro, D. R. (2010). Measuring internal service

quality: Comparing the gap-based and perceptions-only approaches. The
International Journal of Operations and Production Management(Special
Issue of the EUROMA 15th International Annual Conference, Groningen).
Brown, S. W., & Bond, E. U. (1995). The internal market/external market

framework and service quality: Toward theory in services marketing.
Journal of Marketing Management, 11(1-3), 25-39.
Brown, S. W., & Swartz, T. A. (1989). A gap analysis of professional service

quality. Journal of Marketing, 53, 92-98.
Brown, T. J., Churchill, G. A., & Peter, J. P. (1993). Improving the measurement
of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 69(1), 127-139.
Buttle, F. (1996). SERVQUAL: review, critique, research agenda. European

Journal of Marketing, 30(1).
Churchill, G. A., & Surprenant, C. (1982). An investigation into the determinants

of customer satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 491-504.
Cronin, J., Brady, M. K., & Hult, G. T. M. (2000). Assessing the effects of quality,
value and customer satisfaction on consumer behavioral intentions in
service environments. Journal of Retailing, 76(2), 193-218.
Cronin, J. J., & Taylor, S. A. (1992). Measuring service quality: a re-examination

and extension. Journal of Marketing, 56, 55-68.
Dehghan, A., Shahin, A., & Zenouzi, B. (2012). Service quality gaps & six sigma.
Journal of Management Research, 4.
DU, C., E, E., & A, E. (2012). Evaluation of service quality of Nigerian airline
using servqual model. Journal of Hospitality Management and Tourism,
3(6), 117-125.
Edvardsson, B. (2005). Service quality: Beyond cognitive assessment. Managing

Service Quality, 15(2), 127-131.
Eiglier, P., & Langeard, E. (1987). Marketing Et Services. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Etgar, M., & Fuchs, G. (2009). Why and how service quality perceptions impact
consumer responses. Managing Service Quality, 19(4), 474-485.
Getty, J., & Thompson, K. (1994). A procedure for scaling perceptions of lodging
quality. Hospitality Research Journal of Marketing, 18(75-96).
Ghobadian, A., Speller, S., & Jones, M. (1994). Service quality: Concepts and
models. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 11(9),
43-66.
Gotlieb, J. B., Grewal, D., & Brown, S. W. (1994). Consumer satisfaction and
perceived quality: Complementary or divergent constructs. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 79(6), 875-885.
Hassan, M. u., Malik, A. A., & Faiz, M. F. An empirical assessment of service

quality and its relationship with customer loyalty evidence from the
telecom sector of Pakistan. International Journal of Asian Social Science,
2(10), 1647-1663.
Herbig, P., & Genestre, A. (1996). An examination of the cross-cultural

differences in service quality: The example of Mexico and the USA.
Journal of Consumer Marketing, 13(3), 43-53.
Iwaarden, J. v., Wiele, T. v. d., Ball, L., & Millen, R. (2003). Applying SERVQUAL
to Web sites: an exploratory study. International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management, 20(8), 919-935.
Jain, S. K., & Gupta, G. (2004). Measuring Service Quality: SERVQUAL vs.
SERVPERF Scales. Vikalpa, 29.
Juran, J. M. (1988). Juran on Planning for Quality. New York: The Free Press.
Juwaheer, T. D., & Ross, D. L. (2003). A study of guest perceptions in Mauritius.

International Journal of Hospitality Management, 15(2), 105-115.
Khan, M. (2003). ECOSERV: Ecotourists’ quality expectations. Annals of

Tourism Research, 30(1), 109-124.
Knutson, B., Stevens, P., Wullaert, C., & Patton, M. (1991). LODGSERV: A
service quality index for the lodging industry. Hospitality Research Journal
of Marketing, 14(7), 277-284.
Kueh, K., & Voon, B. H. (2007). Culture and service quality expectations:
Evidence from Generation Y consumers in Malaysia. Managing Service
Quality, 17(6), 656-680.
Landrum, H., Prybutok, V., Zhang, X., & Peak, D. (2009). Measuring IS system
service quality with SERVQUAL: Users’ perceptions of relative importance
of the five SERVPERF dimensions. Informing Science: the International
Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline, 12.
Malhotra, N. K., Ulgado, F. M., Agarwal, J., Shainesh, G., & Wu, L. (2005).
Dimensions of service quality in developed and developing countries:
multi-country cross-cultural comparisons. International Marketing Review,
22(3), 256-278.
Markovi'c, S., & Raspor, S. (2010). Measuring perceived service quality using
servqual: A case study of the Croatian Hotel industry. Management, 5(3),
195-209.
Meybodi, A. R. (2012). Measuring service quality using servqual model: A case

study of brokerage offices in Iran. International Journal for Quality
research, 6(1).
O’Neill, M., & Palmer, A. (2003). An exploratory study of the effects of experience
on consumer perceptions of the service quality construct. Managing
Service Quality, 13(3), 187-196.
O’Neill, M. A., Williams, P., MacCarthy, M., & Groves, R. (2000). Diving into
service quality – the dive tour operator perspective. Managing Service
Quality, 10(3), 131-140.
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1991). Refinement and

reassessment of the SERVQUAL scale. Journal of Retailing, 67(4), 420.
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1993). Research note: more on
improving service quality measurement. Journal of Retailing, 69, 140-147.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of

service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of
Marketing, 49.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: a multiple-

item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal
of Retailing, 64(1), 12-40.
Philip, G., & Hazlett, S.-A. (1996). The measurement of service quality: a new P-
C-P attributes model. International Journal of Quality & Reliability
Management, 14(2), 260-288.
Rahaman, M. M., Abdullah, M., & Rahman, D. A. (2011). Measuring service

quality using SERVQUAL model: A study on PCBs (Private Commercial
Banks) in Bangladesh. Business Management Dynamics, 1.
Ramseook-Munhurrun, P., Lukea-Bhiwajee, S. D., & Naidoo, P. (2010). Service
quality in the public service. Internaional Journal of Management and
Marketing Research, 3(1).
Randheer, K., AL-Motawa, A. A., & J, P. V. (2011). Measuring commuters’

perception on service quality using SERVQUAL in public transportation.
International Journal of Marketing Studies, 3.
Raza, M. A., Siddiquei, A. N., Awan, P. D. H. M., & Bukhari, K. (2012).

Relationship between service quality, perceived value, satisfaction and
revisit intention in hotel industry. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary
Research in Business, 4(8), 788-805.
Shafirad, G. R., Shamsi, M., Pirzadeh, A., & Farzanegan, P. D. (2012). Quality
gap in primary health care services in Isfahan: Women's perspective.
Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 1.
Shahin, A., & Janatyan, N. (2011). Estimation of customer dissatisfaction based

on service quality gaps by correlation and regression analysis in a travel
agency. International Journal of Business and Management, 6, 99.
Shahin, A., & Janatyan, N. (2011). Estimation of customer dissatisfaction based

on service quality gaps by correlation and regression analysis in a travel
agency. International Journal of Business and Management, 6, 99.
Stevens, P., Knutson, B., & Patton, M. (1995). DINESERV: A tool for measuring
service quality in restaurants. The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly, 36(2), 56-60.
Winsted, K. F. (1997). The service experience in two cultures: a behavioural
perspective. Journal of Retailing, 73(3), 337-360.
Yoo, D. K., & Park, J. A. (2007). Perceived service quality: Analyzing

relationships among employees, customers and financial performance.
International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 21(9), 908-926.
Zeithaml, V. A., Bitner, M. J., & Gremler, D. D. (2005). Services marketing (4th
ed.).
ANNEXURE A: QUESTIONNAIRE

SATISFACTION IN A SELECTED TELECOM COMPANY
PESHAWAR PAKISTAN”
Age: (15-24) (25-34) (35-44) (45-54) (55-64)
Gender: (Male) (Female)
Education: (Post Graduate) (Graduate) (Under Graduate) (Higher Secondary)
Profession: (Own business) (Public Salaried Employee) (Private Salaried Employee)

(Student) (Others)
Which mobile service provider connection do you have?
a. Mobilink b. Ufone c. Telenor d. Zong e. Warid
The following questionnaire is designed to conduct a study on “IMPACT OF

SERVICE QUALITY DIMENSIONS ON CUSTOMER SATISFACTION IN A
SELECTED TELECOM COMPANY PESHAWAR PAKISTAN” which is a part of
my Master’s program and is a final research report.
You are requested to kindly carefully read the questions, fill in the responses,
and send back the questionnaire. I am looking forward to your kind co-operation.
NOTE: If you have any queries regarding this questionnaire, you can ask me
back.
Please tick marks the appropriate number column against each statement,
according to the scale given below.
Strongly Disagree [2] Neutral [3] Agree [4] Strongly

Disagree [1] Agree [5]
S.No Reliability 1 2 3 4 5
.
1 Network coverage is reliable.
2 Voice quality is good.
3 Delivery of SMS, MMS and other services is

timely.
4 Services are delivered promptly.
5 When telecom company promises to do

something by a certain time, they do.
6 When a customer has a problem, telecom

companies show interest in solving it.
7 Telecom companies perform the service right

the first time.
8 Telecom companies insist on error free

records.
S.No Responsiveness 1 2 3 4 5
.
1 Service providers are always willing to help

you.
2 Service providers give attention to your

problem.
3 They consider your feedback.
4 Employees of telecom companies tell

customers exactly when services will be
provided.
5 Employees of telecom companies give prompt

services to customers.
6 Employees of telecom companies are always

willing to help customers.
7 Employees of telecom companies are never

too busy to respond to customer’s requests.
S.No Assurance 1 2 3 4 5
.
1 Service providers communicate clearly.
2 Service providers understand your problems.
3 Service providers are capable of answering

your queries.
4 Service providers are patient in resolving your

problems.
5 Customers of telecom companies feel safe

while recharging or billing.
6 Employees of telecom companies are

consistently courteous with customers.
S.No Tangibles 1 2 3 4 5
.
1 Information on recharge cards is useful.
2 Promotional offers are communicated

properly.
3 Billing methods are simple.
4 Retail outlets are enough in number and

easily accessible.
5 Telecom companies have modern looking

equipment.
6 The physical facilities at telecom companies

are visually appealing.
7 Employees at telecom companies are neat in

appearance.
S.No Empathy 1 2 3 4 5
.
1 Telecom companies have convenient periods

and terms of recharge.
2 Telecom companies have convenient working

hours for all customers.
3 Telecom companies apologies for

inconvenience caused to customers.
4 Telecom companies give customers individual

attention.
6 Telecom companies’ employees’ have their

customer’s best interest at heart.
7 Telecom companies’ employees’ understand

the specific needs of their customers.
S.No Customer Satisfaction 1 2 3 4 5
.
1 Quality of the services you receive from your

network provider is satisfactory.
2 You are very much satisfied from your

network provider.
3 You are very much likely to continue using

the same network.
4 You are very much likely to recommend your

network to others.
5 Your purchase experience with your selected

telecom company is satisfied.

Research Service Quality

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research Service Quality

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

“IMPACT OF SERVICE QUALITY DIMENSIONS ON CUSTOMER

SATISFACTION IN TELECOM SECTOR OF PESHAWAR

CITY UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND INFORMATION

A Thesis Submitted to City University of Science and Information

MBA 1.5 (Marketing)

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCES

CITY UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY,

I certify that I have read “Impact of Service Quality Dimensions on Customer

I, hereby declare that the research submitted to Department of Management

To my loving and affectionate parents who have polished my personality

It provides me excessive pleasure in recognizing and giving my heartfelt

Moreover, my parents, whatever I am today is totally because of their

1.1 JUSTIFICATION OF STUDY........................................................................1

1.2 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES...........................................................................2

1.3 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY.................................................................2

1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY..............................................................................3

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW....................................................................4

2.1 PERCEIVED SERVICE QUALITY................................................................4

2.2 SERVICE QUALITY MEASUREMENT.........................................................5

2.3 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION AND SERVICE QUALITY..........................10

2.4 SERVQUAL’S VALIDITY.............................................................................13

2.5 CRITICSMS OF SERVQUAL......................................................................13

2.7 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK..................................................................19

2.8 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS........................................................................20

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY......................................................21

3.1 METHOD OF DATA COLLECTION............................................................21

3.2 POPULATION OF THE STUDY..................................................................21

3.3 SAMPLE SIZE.............................................................................................21

3.4 DATA ANALYSIS TECHNIQUE..................................................................22

3.5 LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE.........................................................................22

3.6 DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS..................................................22

3.6.1 DISTRIBUTION AND RETURN OF QUESTIONNAIRES...................22

3.6.2 DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS..............................................................22

CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS, FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS................................25

4.1.1 RELIABILITY ANALYSIS....................................................................25

4.1.2 TESTING FOR HYPOTHESIS ONE...................................................28

4.1.3 TESTING FOR HYPOTHESIS TWO..................................................30

4.1.4 TESTING FOR HYPOTHESIS THREE..............................................32

4.1.5 TESTING FOR HYPOTHESIS FOUR................................................34

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS................................40

5.3 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY..................................................................42

1.1 JUSTIFICATION OF STUDY

As the nature of the service is very specific, it becomes quite difficult to

1. To identify if the tangibles of Telecom company have impact on customer

1.3 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

By conducting the following research the telecom sector will have

The following study’s scope is based on determining consumer

2.1 PERCEIVED SERVICE QUALITY

The keyword for persistence of firms in the international economy is

2.2 SERVICE QUALITY MEASUREMENT

SERVQUAL model can be a measure of gaps in quality of service and therefore

2.3 CUSTOMER SATISFACTION AND SERVICE QUALITY

“Positive disconfirmation – when perceptions exceed the customer

Zero disconfirmation – when perceptions equal the expectations”

The difference concerning expectations of customer from service

Service quality has been well-defined in several ways. One common

2.4 SERVQUAL’S VALIDITY

The face validity of Servqual is the subjective standard imitating the

2.5 CRITICSMS OF SERVQUAL

The five-factor arrangement of SERVQUAL has not been sustained or

2.6 SERVPERF SCALE

It is due of the imprecision of the concept of expectation that some

Beerli et al (2004) Spain