CHAPTER - I

INTRODUCTION

1
 INTRODUCTION
Services marketing is a specialised branch of marketing. Services marketing emerged as a
separate field of study in the early 1980s, following the recognition that the unique
characteristics of services required different strategies compared with the marketing of physical
goods.
Services marketing typically refers to both business to consumer (B2C) and business-to-
business (B2B) services, and includes marketing of services such as telecommunications
services, financial services, all types of hospitality, tourism leisure and entertainment
services, car rental services, health care services and professional services and trade services.
Service marketers often use an expanded marketing mix which consists of the seven Ps: product,
price, place, promotion, people, physical evidence and process. A contemporary approach,
known as service-dominant logic, argues that the demarcation between products and services that
persisted throughout the 20th century was artificial and has obscured that everyone sells service.
The S-D logic approach is changing the way that marketers understand value-creation and is
changing concepts of the consumer's role in service delivery processes.
The four most commonly cited characteristics of services are:
Intangibility – services lack physical form; they do not interact with any of our senses in
a conventional way, they cannot be touched or held.
Implications of intangibility: Ownership cannot be transferred, value derives from
consumption or experience, quality is difficult to evaluate prior to consumption or
purchase.
Inseparability – production and consumption cannot be separated (compared with goods
where production and consumption are entirely discrete processes)
Implications of inseparability: Services are typically high contact systems and are labour-
intensive; fewer opportunities to transact business at arm's length, fewer opportunities to
substitute capital for labour; subject to human error.
Perishability – service performances are ephemeral; unlike physical goods, services
cannot be stored or inventoried.
Implications of perishability: Demand is subject to wide fluctuations, no inventory to
serve as a buffer between supply and demand; unused capacity cannot be reserved; high
opportunity cost of idle capacity.
Variability (also known as heterogeneity) – services involve processes delivered by
service personnel and subject to human variation, customers often seek highly customised
solutions, services are inherently variable in quality and substance.
Implications of variability: Service quality is difficult to manage; fewer opportunities to
standardise service delivery.
There are many ways to classify services. One classification considers who or what is being
processed and identifies four classes of services: people processing (e.g. beauty services, child
care, medical services); mental stimulus processing (e.g. education services, counselling
services, life-coaching), possession processing (e.g. pet care, appliance repair, piano tuning) and
information processing (e.g. financial services, data warehousing services).[22][23] Another
method used to classify services uses the degree of customer interaction in the service process
and classifies services as high contact (e.g. hospitality, dental care, hairdressing) or low
contact (e.g. telecommunications, utility services)

2
Service marketing includes the services cape referring to but not limited to the aesthetic
appearance of the business from the outside, the inside, and the general appearance of the
employees themselves. Service Marketing has been relatively gaining ground in the overall
spectrum of educational marketing as developed economies move farther away from industrial
importance to service oriented economies. Marketing is the flow of goods and services from the
producer to consumer.

It is based on relationship and value. In common parlance it is the distribution and sale of goods
and services. Service Marketing mix adds 3 more P's, i.e. people, physical evidence, process
service and follow-through are keys to a successful venture. The major difference in the
education of services marketing versus regular marketing is that instead of the traditional "4 P's,"
Product, Price, Place, Promotion, there are three additional "P's" consisting of People, Physical
evidence, and Process. Marketing includes the services of all those indulged may it be then the
wholesaler retailer, Warehouse keeper, transport etc. In this modern age of competition
marketing of a product or service plays a key role. It is estimated that almost 50% of the price
paid for a commodity goes to the marketing of the product in US.

Marketing is now said to be a term, which has no particular definition as the definitions change
everyday. However, it is worth remembering that many of the concepts, as well as many of the
specific techniques, will work equally well whether they are directed at products or services. In
particular, developing a marketing strategy is much the same for products and services, in that it
involves selecting target markets and formulating a marketing mix.

The service sector is growing rapidly worldwide. Majority of developed and developing
countries experience the development of many service industries, which participate
significantly in the national economies.

P. Kotler suggested that ‖service is an activity or benefit that one party can offer to another that
is essentially intangible and does not result in the ownership of anything. Its production may or
may not be tied to a physical product‖.

There are four characteristics of service: Intangibility, Inseparability, Variability, and

Perishability (Kotler and Keller, 2007).

 As service's nature is intangibility, therefore manufacturing and service delivery is more

complex than a product.

 Inseparability is a significant characteristic that distinguishes a service from a product

according to the simultaneous production and consumption.

 Due to the service's variability, it's difficult to be controlled, because it greatly relies on
the service's provider, moreover when, where and how it's provided.

3
  Perishability is one of the major characteristics of service, that it can't be stored for later
use or sale (No inventory).

In order to deliver the overall service offer to a target market, the marketing mix elements should
be coherent, coordinated, integrated and consistent with each other to produce the synergistic
effect of them. (Lovelock, 2001).

The main objective of service marketers is to create and provide service that satisfies consumer
needs and expectations, therefore achieving organizational goals. Consequently, marketers
should work on understanding how people make their buying decisions and what determines
their satisfaction during the service consumption stages: pre-purchase, service encounter, and
post-encounter.

To gain a competitive advantage in the global market, successful organization should adopt the
marketing strategy (overall cost leadership / differentiation / focus) that is based on the
marketing concept which holds that the key to achieving company‘s organizational goals is being
more effective than competitors in creating, delivering, and communicating superior customer
value to target customers, and therefore ensuring profits through customer satisfaction.

The positioning of services is even more important than the positioning of goods because
services tend to be intangible, so differentiation becomes a key issue in making the service
distinctive in the perception of the customer's mind. Positioning is concerned with the
identification, development, and communication of the attributes which a service company
intends to use to make its market offering recognizable and superior to the competing services.

A customer-focused organization requires improving service quality as a critical element of

differentiation. It's related to the long-term evaluation of the service performance and is crucial
to customer satisfaction which is the difference between perception and expectation, moreover,
customer satisfaction will become a key factor for business success in the future.

In order to develop long-term relationships, it is necessary to build customer involvement,

commitment, and trust. In service companies focused on building loyalty, customer service plays
an important role in their marketing strategies and is an essential element in creating service
quality and customer satisfaction.

An organization which strategy focuses on delivering service excellence was more successful.
This era is the era of customers and for the success and survival in this competitive market,
organizations should emphasize on quality service and this should be integrated into the strategy
(Chowdhary and Prakash, 2007).

4
 CHAPTER - II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

5
 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Adam Smith's seminal work, The Wealth of Nations (1776), distinguished between the outputs
of what he termed "productive" and "unproductive" labor. The former, he stated, produced goods
that could be stored after production and subsequently exchanged for money or other items of
value. But unproductive labor, however "honourable, ...useful, or... necessary" created services
that perished at the time of production and therefore didn't contribute to wealth.
French economist Jean-Baptiste Say argued that production and consumption were inseparable in
services, coining the term "immaterial products" to describe them.[3] In the 1920s, Alfred
Marshall was still using the idea that services "are immaterial products."[4]
In the mid nineteenth century John Stuart Mill wrote that services are "utilities not fixed or
embodied in any object, but consisting of a mere service rendered ...without leaving a permanent
acquisition."[5]
When services marketing emerged as a separate sub-branch within the marketing discipline in
the early 1980s, it was largely a protest against the dominance of prevailing product-centric
view.[6][7] In 1960, the US economy changed forever. In that year, for the first time in a major
trading nation, more people were employed in the service sector than in manufacturing
industries.[8] Other developed nations soon followed by shifting to a service based
economy.[9] Scholars soon began to recognise that services were important in their own right,
rather than as some residual category left over after goods were taken into account. This
recognition triggered a change in the way services were defined. By the mid twentieth century,
scholars began defining services in terms of their own unique characteristics, rather than by
comparison with products.[10] The following set of definitions shows how scholars were
grappling with the distinctive aspects of service products and developing new definitions of
service.[11][12]

 "Goods are produced: services are performed." (Rathmell, 1966) [13]

 "A service is an activity or a series of activities which take place in interactions with a
contact person or a physical machine and which provides consumer satisfaction." (Lehtinen,
1983[14]
 "The heart of the service product is the experience of the consumer which takes place in real
time... it is the interactive process itself that creates the benefits desired by the consumer."
(Bateson, 1992) [15]
[16]
 "Services are deeds, processes and performances." (Zeithmal and Bitner, 1996)
 "Services are processes (economic activities) that provide time, place, form, problem-solving
or experiential value to the recipient." (Lovelock, 2007) [17]
 "The term 'service'... is synonymous with value. A supplier has a value proposition, but value
actualization takes place during the customer's usage and consumption process."
(Gummesson, 2008) [18]
A recently proposed alternative view is that services involve a form of rental through which
customers can obtain benefits.[19] Customers are willing to pay for aspirational experiences and
solutions that add value to their lifestyle. The term, rent, can be used as a general term to
describe payment made for use of something or access to skills and expertise, facilities or

6
networks (usually for a defined period of time), instead of buying it outright (which is not even
possible in many instances)
What exactly are the characteristics of a service? How are services different from a product? In
fact many organizations do have service elements to the product they sell, for example
McDonald‘s sell physical products i.e. burgers but consumers are also concerned about the
quality and speed of service, are staff cheerful and welcoming and do they serve with a smile on
their face. The Characteristics of a service that are:
(1) Lack of ownership
(2) Intangibility
(3) Inseparability
(4) Perishability
(5) Heterogeneity.

The Service marketing mix involves analyzing the 7‘p of marketing involving, Product, Price,
Place, Promotion, Physical Evidence, Process and People. To certain extent managing services
are more complicated then managing products, products can be standardized, to standardize a
service is far more difficult as there are more input factors i.e. people, physical evidence, process
to manage then with a product. There are five characteristics to a service, which will be
discussed below.

1. Lack of ownership. You cannot own and store a service like you can a product. Services are
used or hired for a period of time. For example when buying a ticket to the USA the service lasts
maybe 9 hours each way, but consumers want and expect excellent service for that time. Because
you can measure the duration of the service consumers become more demanding of it.

2. Intangibility You cannot hold or touch a service unlike a product. In saying that although
services are intangible the experience consumers obtain from the service has an impact on how
they will perceive it. What do consumers perceive from customer service? The location and the
inner presentation of where they are purchasing the service?

3. Inseparability Services cannot be separated from the service providers. A product when
produced can be taken away from the producer. However a service is produced at or near the
point of purchase. Take visiting a restaurant, you order your meal, the waiting and delivery of the
meal, the service provided by the waiter is all apart of the service production process and is
inseparable, the staff in a restaurant are as apart of the process as well as the quality of food
provided.

4. Permissibility Services last a specific time and cannot be stored like a product for later use. If
travelling by train, coach or air the service will only last the duration of the journey. The service
is developed and used almost simultaneously. Again because of this time constraint consumers
demand more.

5. Heterogeneity It is very difficult to make each service experience identical. If travelling by

plane the service quality may differ from the first time you travelled by that airline to the second,

7
because the airhostess is more or less experienced. A concert performed by a group on two
nights may differ in slight ways because it is very difficult to standardize every dance move.
Generally systems and procedures are put into place to make sure the service provided is
consistent all the time, training in service organizations is essential for this, however in saying
this there will always be subtle differences.

Having discussed the characteristics of a service, let us now look at the marketing mix of a
service. The service marketing mix comprises off the 7‘ ps. These include: 

Product

Price

Place

Promotion

People

Process

Physical evidence.

The history of the service field has been the subject of several examinations all of which date
back to the early 1990s (Berry & Parasuraman 1993; Fisk et al. 1993; Swartz et al. 1992). Of
these, the one proposed by Fisk et al. (1993) represents perhaps the most attractive and has
widely been accepted.1 Using a biological evolutionary metaphor as a framework, Fisk and
colleagues traced the progress of the ―services marketing literature‖ from its embryonic
beginnings in 1953 to its stance as a well-established field of study yet firmly ensconced within
the marketing discipline in 1992. They identified three stages in that evolution that were termed:
Crawling Out (pre-1980), Scurrying About (1980-1985), and Walking Erect (1986-1992) (see
Figure 1).

Pre-1980 1980-1985 1986-1998

Crawling Out Scurrying Walking

About erect

Source: Inspired from Fisk et al. (1993). Figure 1. Original Stages in the Evolution of the
Services Marketing Thought

However, the field (i.e., both practice and academia) has undergone massive changes since then.
Currently, the service sector makes up almost 80% of the gross domestic product (GDP) of

8
established countries like the United Kingdom or the United States and developing nations such
as Tunisia or Uruguay are not too far behind (US Central Intelligence Agency 2009). Many
service firms (e.g., retailers, banks, and telecommunication operators) are now seeking new
opportunities and are expanding into international markets.2 Manufacturing and goods-
dominated companies are trying to grow and be more competitive through services (Ostrom et al.
2010). Information technology infusion in services is currently providing opportunities as well as
challenges for service managers (Bardhan et al. 2010; Connolly & Olson 2001). All of these
have led to the exponential growth of interests in service research among marketing,
management, and information systems scholars (Furrer & Sollberger 2007; Smith et al. 2007;
Rai & Sambamurthy 2006). Indeed, the knowledge infrastructure of the field has been
considerably strengthened via the inception of new service research centers (e.g., the Center for
Excellence in Service at the University of Maryland in 2000), special interest groups (e.g., the
American Marketing Association [AMA] Services Marketing Special Inte-rest Group
[SERVSIG] in 1993), sections (e.g., the Institute For Operations Research and Management
Sciences [INFORMS] Service Science Section in 2007), and peer-reviewed journals (e.g.,
Journal of Service Science 2009). Numerous intriguing insights have also been developed (e.g.,
Lovelock & Gummesson 2004; Sampson & Froehle 2006; Vargo & Lusch 2004a). Service
articles have noticeably sharpened both theoretically and methodologically (e.g., Paul et al. 2009;
Xia & Dube 2007). Presently, it is more appropriate to talk about a science of service that has its
own distinct identity and research priorities (Ostrom et al. 2010). In short, the picture is wholly
different today from what it was in 1992. But despite all the aforesaid facts, there have been
relatively scant efforts directed to examining the evolution of the service field from 1993 to
2010.

The aim of this paper, therefore, is to fill this gap. It picks up where Fisk and colleagues (1993)
had left off and continues tracing the development of the service literature. Table 1 provides a
detailed description of what we consider to be the three new stages in the evolution of the service
field from 1993 until now (i.e., 2010): Racing Ahead (1993-1999); Looking Back and Moving
Forward (2000-2003); and Airborne (2004-Now).

The periodization exhibited in Figure 2 represents our conclusion based on the study of a variety
of documents spanning multiple disciplines-including journal articles, editorial notes, citation
analyses, commentaries, literature reviews, working papers, textbooks, edited volumes, and
conference proceedings-that were published during the period under scrutiny. It should be
recognised, however, that in choosing the names of the stages we were inspired by Agarwal
(2001) and Cronin (2003).

In what follows, we will address the three new stages of the service field evolution in
chronological order. For each stage, we first identify some key observations that make it
distinguishable from the other stages, and then specifically highlight the major contributions that
were made. Then a discussion indicates some issues that need careful examinations by service
thinkers. Finally, we conclude by highlighting this literature review contributions.
9
 CHAPTER - III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

10
 NEED OF THE STUDY
1. Rented goods services: These services enable customers to obtain the temporary right to
use a physical good that they prefer not to own (e.g. boats, costumes)
2. Defined space and place rentals: These services obtain use of a defined portion of a larger
space in a building, vehicle or other area which can be an end in its own right (e.g.
storage container in a warehouse) or simply a means to an end (e.g. table in a restaurant,
seat in an aircraft)
3. Labor and expertise rental: People are hired to perform work that customers either choose
not to do for themselves (e.g. cleaning the house) or are unable to do due to the lack of
expertise, tools and skills (e.g. car repairs, surgery)
4. Access to shared physical environments: These environments can be indoors or outdoors
where customers rent the right to share the use of the environment (e.g. museums, theme
parks, gyms, golf courses).
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
 "Goods are produced: services are performed." (Rathmell, 1966) [13]
 "A service is an activity or a series of activities which take place in interactions with a
contact person or a physical machine and which provides consumer satisfaction." (Lehtinen,
1983[14]
 "The heart of the service product is the experience of the consumer which takes place in real
time... it is the interactive process itself that creates the benefits desired by the consumer."
(Bateson, 1992) [15]
 "Services are deeds, processes and performances." (Zeithmal and Bitner, 1996) [16]
 "Services are processes (economic activities) that provide time, place, form, problem-solving
or experiential value to the recipient." (Lovelock, 2007) [17]
 "The term 'service'... is synonymous with value. A supplier has a value proposition, but value
actualization takes place during the customer's usage and consumption process.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The method of sampling used was random sampling. The main aim of the study was to cover
employee‘s at all hierarchical levels. Therefore, a sample of respondents was chosen at each
level of hierarchy in all the departments and services. The sample size was taken as 50. The
respondents were from 4 categories as Scientific Staff, Technical Staff, Administrators, and
Supporting Staff.

11
 Respondents
Employee Details Supporting Technical Scientific
Administrators
Staff Staff Staff
Total No. of.
700 100 105 100
Employees
Sample No. of.
20 10 10 10
Employees
Sample selection is random from all the 4 categories.
DATA COLLECTION:
Data is recorded measure of phenomena. While deciding about the method of data collection, the
researcher should keep in the mind about two types of data. They are, Primary Data and
Secondary Data.
PRIMARY DATA:
The primary data has been collected through Questionnaire. The Questionnaire has been properly
prepared in order to cover all the information required for the study. This Primary data was also
collected through personal interview and interaction with the officials and staff in the
organization.
SECONDARY DATA:
Secondary data has been collected through the annual reports of the organization & from the
manuals. Some data was collected from the website of the organization (www.hul.com) and
(www.who.com).

The data was also collected from various publications in the magazines like HRM Review, HRD,
sap, people soft , oracle hr payroll process and policy‘s and journal like Indian Journal of
Industrial Relations and the various articles published in them.

COMPANY ADDRESS

Address:- NO.97, Banjara Hills Rd Number 3, Sagar Society, Sri Nagar Colony, Aurora
Colony, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, Telangana 500034

12
 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

There are many ways to classify services. One classification considers who or what is being
processed and identifies four classes of services: people processing (e.g. beauty services, child
care, medical services); mental stimulus processing (e.g. education services, counselling
services, life-coaching), possession processing (e.g. pet care, appliance repair, piano tuning) and
information processing (e.g. financial services, data warehousing services).[22][23] Another
method used to classify services uses the degree of customer interaction in the service process
and classifies services as high contact (e.g. hospitality, dental care, hairdressing) or low
contact (e.g. telecommunications, utility services).

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

Risk perception drives the information search process. Heightened risk perception may become a
barrier to the natural progression of the purchase decision process and prevent customers from
making a final brand choice. Consumers who are risk-averse tend to spend more time and effort
engaged in information acquisition in the pre-purchase stage and look for specific types of
information that will alleviate their perceptions of risk. Typical risk relievers might include such
things as a reliance on personal sources of recommendation including word-of-mouth referrals;
reliance on known and trusted brands, reading manufacturers' specifications, limited scale trial,
reliance on warranties or guarantees etc.[32]
Risk relievers that are especially relevant in service settings include:[32][33]
High price maintenance: Some evidence suggests that risk-averse consumers often use
high price as a guide to quality. Low prices may therefore be counter-productive since
they suggest lower quality. Prestige pricing or premium pricing strategies are more likely
to be indicated in service settings.
Limited scale trial: While some services cannot be fully trialled, marketers should think
about limited scale trial or a virtual trial. e.g. use computer-aided design to visualise
hairstyles, plastic surgery, Many virtual brand sites found online have successfully built
of the notion of limited trial. Other examples include: test driving a software application.
Standardise the Product and Delivery: This is sometimes known as the McDonald's
approach. Since variations in quality contribute to higher levels of perceived risk, one
technique is to minimise variations by using production line techniques to control
standards. This approach may be limited because many customers expect high levels of
flexibility and customisation as part of the process. Standardisation needs to be fully
communicated to customers – existing and potential – to be fully effective.
Purchase from a known or trusted brand: Consumers of services may be more
predisposed to use a known, reputable brand as an indicator of quality merchandise. For
this reason, service providers are presented with greater opportunities to engage in
relationship marketing

13
 CHAPTER – IV
THEORETICAL FRAME WORK

14
 THEORETICAL FRAME WORK
Service marketing emerged in response to the shortfalls of product marketing. Although earlier
traces exist, it gained traction in the mid 70s. The field‘s evolution can be divided into phases in
which critical incidents can be identified that have led the service field in new directions. Central
to the discipline is the service encounter. Research referred to here consists of ways of
understanding customer experiences with the service encounter and consequences of the
encounter. We summarize various methods or approaches that have been and are applied to
understand the service encounter

The service sector is likely to be the most important sector in any developed economy. In
developed countries the service sector now generates more than 70% of a country‘s GDP
(Ostrom et al., 2010). The importance of the service economy is still increasing; the largest
growth in the number of firms is in the service sector, which in turn means that the number of
employees is also increasing in the sector. New, more service-oriented business models are being
implemented, seen in manufacturing companies that are turning into service suppliers. For
instance, IBM has totally shifted its business such that it no longer produces goods, but produces
and delivers services only. We also see a rise in the collaborative economy and companies such
as Airbnb, Uber, and Craigslist are shifting the competitive rules in service industries (Benoit,
Baker, Bolton, Gruber, & Kandampully, 2017). Furthermore, business models are shifting in the
retail industry, where companies such as AliExpress and Amazon are forcing changes in
competition. To survive, companies must be able to deliver good service with a perception of
high quality that is adapted to customers‘ needs. But this is just a necessary condition; to be
competitive, they must go even further. Companies must understand and enhance customer
engagement and experience in all parts of any service encounter. Consequently, there is no way
around the fact that the service sector is increasing in importance and will continue to be
relevant. To be relevant, researchers and organizations must develop new and better tools built to
get a deeper understanding of the customer perspective. Companies must balance how much
their customers want an organization to know about them with what they should find out. It is a
fact that, with still emerging technology, organizations can acquire very deep knowledge about
their customers.

Service researchers typically build on Shostack‘s (1985, p. 243) definition of a service encounter
as ―a period of time during which a consumer directly interacts with a service.‖ It is during these
encounters that customers form their perceptions of service quality. As customers experience
multiple encounters, not only directly, but also indirectly through commercials or social media,
various encounters may result in loyalty and relationship formations. The focus in a service
encounter is usually on the core encounter, but what happens prior to and after the core will also

15
influence the customers‘ perception of the core service encounter and the overall relationship
with an organization (Voorhees et al., 2017)

Service researchers have focused on trying to measure and understand the nuances in service
encounters. Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry (1988) developed their SERVQUAL model as an
effort to understand the transaction-specific perception of service quality in a service encounter.
This was followed by Fornell, Johnson, Anderson, Cha, and Bryant (1996), who recognized that
relationships are formed over a series of transactions, a phenomenon known as the cumulative
perspective of customer satisfaction. The next step is a realization that not all relationships are
created equal and that companies must study portfolios of relationships (Johnson & Selnes,
2004) and understand where in a relationship formation a customer is (e.g., acquaintances,
friends, and partners). These ideas were the start of a development to understand how to invest in
customers to maximize customer lifetime value, that is, the accumulated cash flow a customer
accrues during his or her lifetime (Kumar & Pansari, 2016). Companies need all of these in order
to be profitable in the long term. The state-of-the-art thinking of service encounters from a
cumulative perspective is to understand customer experiences over a customer journey across
different channels or touchpoints (e.g., online, in-store, and customer service). These customer
experiences can cut across a multitude of service providers.

Early stages of research in service—the importance of service quality

Even if there are earlier traces, Shostack‘s 1977 article is generally stated as somewhat of a
starting point of service as a field of research. She stated that product marketing fell short when
marketing services and that ―new concepts are necessary if service marketing is to succeed‖
(Shostack, 1977, p. 73). It was around the same time as the quality movement had started to gain
momentum, with important figures such as Crosby, Deming, and Juran. In this school of thought,
the quality of products was defined in terms of consistency and low variation in the production.
This quality management perspective received extensive attention and enthusiasm, some of
which was carried over to service research. For this quality perspective to be properly
implemented, service as a phenomenon had to be understood, which was followed by ways to
measure and analyze the customer‘s perspective of a service encounter.

The initial focus in service research was on defining major concepts of what the differences are
between services and products. Zeithaml, Parasuraman, and Berry (1985) summarized the
discussion on the nature of services to consist of four characteristics, services are intangible,
heterogeneous, inseparable, and perishable (the so-called IHIP) and that the focus in service was
on the process components rather than on the final product or the outcome of a process
(Grönroos, 1998). A joke sometimes told to better describe what a service was, was that a
service, as opposed to a tangible good, did not hurt if it was dropped on your foot. Another very
important and highly cited concept was the gap model (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1985).
The gap model identifies five gaps—―these gaps can be major hurdles in attempting to deliver a
service which consumers would perceive as being of high quality‖ (Parasuraman et al., 1985, p.

16
44). The natural conclusion from these concepts was that service quality is seen as something
different from product quality and it must be measured and managed differently. For instance,
quality attributes can be categorized as being search, experience, and credence attributes
(Zeithaml, 1981). For products, search attributes (attributes that can be determined prior to
purchase) are usually more important, while for service, experience and credence attributes are
more important. It is from these perspectives that the development of SERVQUAL should be
seen. SERVQUAL is designed to measure and understand the service quality in one service
encounter; in other words, SERVQUAL takes a transaction-specific view because it focuses one
transaction. In the SERVQUAL model, service quality is said to be constituted of five
dimensions (Parasuraman et al., 1988): tangibles (physical facilities, equipment, and appearance
of personnel), reliability (ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately),
responsiveness (willingness to help customers and provide prompt service), assurance
(knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to inspire trust and confidence), and
empathy (caring, individualized attention the firm provides its customers). The general idea in
SERVQUAL is to focus on the dimension that has the largest gap between expectation and
performance and close this gap. The SERVQUAL has been very influential and heavily cited,
and it does capture the low-hanging fruit when it comes to quality problems. It has, however,
been criticized because there is no way of knowing that the identified gaps actually will affect
customer satisfaction. In other words, even if there is a large gap between expectation and
performance, there is no way of knowing that closing this gap will influence customer
satisfaction, because we do not estimate the statistical effect from the gap on customer
satisfaction. Also, since the service sector today covers more than 70% of everything that is
produced in a country, it includes multiple contexts with multiple understandings of what
constitutes quality. In light of this development, SERVQUAL having predefined dimensions and
questions might not be sufficient to diagnose details of how to improve business. This paved the
way for the next phase of the evolution; instead of focusing entirely on understanding quality,
firms started focusing on what drives customer satisfaction and loyalty.

From service quality to customer satisfaction and loyalty

The logic behind the next phase of service research is that service quality is not the only aspect
that is important for a company to gain market share. The focus should be on how to change or
improve attributes in order to make their customers even more satisfied and in the process make
existing customers more loyal and attract new customers (Anderson, Fornell, & Lehmann, 1994).
Also, no company has endless resources and will therefore have to carefully consider where an
investment in quality should be made. Resource limitation makes improved quality an
optimization process rather than a maximization process; in other words, where should a
company invest to get the largest return on investment (Rust, Moorman, & Dickson, 2002). As
previously noted, the original interest in marketing and consumer research was on transaction-
specific satisfaction, or a customer‘s experience with a product episode or service encounter.
Although the transaction-specific approach had its merits, it does not perform well when

17
predicting subsequent consumer behaviors and economic performance of firms (Fornell et al.,
1996; Johnson, Anderson, & Fornell, 1995). In response to the low predictive ability of the
transaction-specific approach, researchers started to focus more on what is called cumulative
satisfaction (Johnson et al., 1995). The cumulative approach defines satisfaction as a customer‘s
overall experience to date with a product or a service provider; this includes the experience of all
service encounters (Johnson & Fornell, 1991). At this stage we would like to point out that we
cannot forget about the transaction; it is still important, but organizations need more tools to
understand the holistic customer perspective. One of the most well-known approaches in this
research is the national customer satisfaction models. The Swedish Customer Satisfaction
Barometer (SCSB) model contains two primary drivers of customer satisfaction: expectations
about how well the firm would perform when delivering quality and an assessment of how well
the firm actually performed (Fornell, 1992). The model contained two consequences of customer
satisfaction: customer complaints and customer loyalty. Later, perceived value was added as an
antecedent of satisfaction.

The SCSB model is likely to be one of the most well-known models for measuring the causes
and consequences of customer satisfaction. Over the years, the SCSB has been used an indicator
of various important performance metrics such as market share (Rego, Morgan, & Fornell,
2013), stock market (Fornell, Mithas, Morgeson III, & Krishnan, 2006), and profitability
(Anderson, Fornell, & Lehmann, 1994). The national customer satisfaction indexes are useful for
the purpose of comparing an organization‘s performance across industries to get a sense of how
well it performs in its own industry and compared to companies in other industries. We will use
the Norwegian Customer Satisfaction Barometer (NCSB) to exemplify this comparison. The
same approach can, however, be used to measure and manage any organization‘s more detailed
understanding of the customer perspective (Johnson & Gustafsson, 2000). One of the most
important aspects therefore is to create a good lens on the customers‘ perception of the benefits
an organization delivers to its customers. These benefits are not measurable using single
indicators but instead must be measured using a latent variable. For instance, easy access as a
latent variable may be measured by ease of parking, opening hours, and ease of finding. The
benefits will lead to attitudes or a perception of satisfaction which in turn leads to a behavior.

The Norwegian Customer Satisfaction Barometer

A change from focusing on service quality to focusing on customer satisfaction as the crucial
variable of interest took place throughout the 1990s and in the beginning of the new millennium.
It all started in Sweden. Claes Fornell, professor at the University of Michigan, first launched the
SCSB already in 1989 (Fornell, 1992). This model served as the prototype when developing the
American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) introduced in 1994 and the NCSB introduced in
1996 (Fornell, 1992). In the early days, the NCSB reported results from more than 42 companies
across 12 industries; today NCSB reports results from 169 companies across 30 industries
annually. NCSB has gained significant influence over the years and represents an important
performance metric for companies as well as a benchmark toward competitors. The best
18
performers in each industry, that is, the companies with the highest customer satisfaction scores,
typically use their achievements for marketing purposes. The very first NCSB model was
identical to the ACSI model, which was an evolution of the SCSB model. The only difference
from the ACSI model was that the NCSB model included the variable ―corporate image‖ and its
relationship to customer satisfaction and customer loyalty (Johnson et al., 2001). However, at the
core of the model we find the relationship between quality, cumulative customer satisfaction, and
customer loyalty, which has been measured since the very beginning of NCSB‘s existence, thus
providing great insights for both the companies and researchers on how the level of customer
satisfaction has developed over the years. Due to the shortcomings of the transaction-specific
approach, the first version of the NCSB model was later expanded to include two relational
dimensions, that is, calculative and affective commitment (ibid.). While the calculative
commitment reflects customers‘ economic and rational reasons to continue the relationship,
affective commitment reflects customers‘ warmer and more emotional motivations. Including
commitment in the model led to a significant improvement in explaining customer loyalty. While
the previous transaction-specific model explained only 20–30 percent of customer loyalty, the
new model explained between 50 and 70 percent, depending on the type of industry (Johnson et
al., 2001). In addition to including the relationship dimensions, value was replaced by a purely
price construct to avoid methodological problems between the earlier modeled quality and value
variables.

The current NCSB model includes six dimensions that customers evaluate in a service encounter
(i.e., the price/value, tangibles, information, digital solutions, product quality, and service
quality) in determining their satisfaction. Satisfaction in turn is related to both types of
commitment as well as loyalty. Furthermore, satisfaction helps building the company‘s
reputation. The company‘s sustainability and CSR efforts play a central role in customers‘
evaluations of the company and affect satisfaction, affective commitment, reputation, and
customer loyalty.

The evolution of the customer satisfaction barometer models does to a great extent reflect the
evolution of three decades of service marketing research. First, applying the total quality
management perspective to service marketing led to a focus on understanding quality in the
1980s. The focus shifted, however, to customer satisfaction in the 1990s as a response to the
legitimate question, Why is quality so important? asked by both managers and academics. The
answer of course being, We want satisfied customers. From around 1995 to 1999 the focus
shifted to customer loyalty as a response to yet another legitimate question, that is, Why do we
need to have satisfied customers? The answer was, Because we want loyal customers that come
back, spread positive word of mouth and recommend the company to family and friends
(Zeithaml, Berry, & Parasuraman, 1996). At that time, it was established that it is less expensive
to maintain existing customers than to constantly hunt for new ones. However, applying both
strategies would be necessary, because the customer base is a leaky bucket.

19
While the customer satisfaction barometer models grasp the quintessence of the service
encounter, they do not really include what is going on inside the company and how the inside
affects the outside in terms of customer loyalty and profitability. The service-profit chain
established the relationship between employee satisfaction on the inside and growth and
profitability on the outside (Heskett, Jones, Loveman, Sasser, & Schlesinger,1994). More
specifically, the logic of this model is that the internal service quality (i.e., the work
environment) influences employees‘ satisfaction, productivity, and loyalty. Satisfied employees
will be more productive and loyal, they will create greater value for customers, thus leading to
customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction drives loyalty, which ultimately affects both the
company‘s growth and its profitability. This model has had a tremendous influence both in
academia and for practitioners. For example, educational programs have been developed in line
with the logic, while leaders across industries have changed their practices accordingly.

20
 CHAPTER – V
COMPANY PROFILE

21
 COMPANY PROFILE
Associated Broadcasting Company Private Limited is a Private incorporated on 09 May 2003. It
is classified as Non-govt company and is registered at Registrar of Companies, Hyderabad. Its
authorized share capital is Rs. 500,000,000 and its paid up capital is Rs. 313,360,992. It is
inolved in News agency activities

Associated Broadcasting Company Private Limited's Annual General Meeting (AGM) was last
held on 21 September 2020 and as per records from Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA), its
balance sheet was last filed on 31 March 2020.

Associated Broadcasting Company Private Limited was founded in 2003 by Ravi Prakash and a
group of young journalists. The company is active in broadcast television, filmed entertainment,
cable network programming, and broadcast television outside India including the USA and
Africa. The company works with Dish Network in the USA and Simba TV in Africa. The
company runs television news channels under the TV9 brand name including TV9 Telugu, TV1
Hyderabad, TV9 Marathi, TV9 Gujarati, TV9 Kannada, News9 Bangalore and TV9 USA. In
March 2019, the company launched a new channel, TV9 in Hindi called ―TV9 Bharatvarsh‖
(TV9 India).

HISTORY

After the launch of TV9 Telugu, it stated the plans to make it as National News network,
launching of regional news channels in several states. In August 2018, Srini Raju sold his stakes
in ABCL to Alanda Media and Entertainment for ₹450 crores

The Indian media has a long history spanning from the colonial past in the second half of the
18th century to the present as the largest functioning democracy of the 21st century.
When the British were firmly entrenched in the country and the Indian freedom movement was
still in its nascent stage the newspapers of the late 18th century entered the country not only
through the rulers but also to, a great extent, for the British readers in India and abroad. Back
then, publishing houses were created as private commercial enterprises, which has not changed
much throughout the years. The Indian newspaper saga started with an Irishman - James
Augustus Hicky. Hicky launched the ―Bengal Gazette‖ in 1780, India‘s first newspaper, in
English. Before that, the British East India Companies‘ rules did not encourage the
establishment of newspapers in India. Just to make sure that his paper was perceived as
―independent‖, Hicky added a line to his masthead – ―A weekly Political and Commercial Paper
- Open to all parties, but influenced by none‖. Hicky‘s paper was a bit tabloid, and a bit satire
paper. It lacked the tone of overly ―serious news‖ evident in other British papers of that time. He

22
initially used the paper to take on personal adversaries by usually mocking them. Copying the
British newspaper style, it initially targeted only the British residents as readers. A campaign
against the first Governor General of India however caused what can be pointed out as the first
censorship in India when the ―Bengal Gazette‖ was banned from circulation through official
channels.
It was that incident that reportedly sharpened Hickey‘s perception of how free the press should
be to be able to serve its purpose. He devoted lots of space to social issues and anti-war content,
including the voice of the general public. After a period of fighting back, delivering his
newspapers in neighbourhoods, even keeping the publishing going during him being arrested, the
first newspaper of India was finally crashed by the previously targeted Governor General and the
Supreme Court in 1782. Although the reach and its time of existence where limited one can say it
inspired others to launch newspapers, too.
Alongside the Bengal Gazette newspapers like the ‗Bombay Herald‘ and ‗Bombay Courier‘ in
1789 and 1790 respectively, and ‗Bombay Gazette‘ in 1791 entered the market. But soon the
government clamped down on the freedom of press, obviously rattled by extensive criticism by
the latter. For more than two decades after that, the gagging of the press continued as successive
Governor Generals in India refused to cede freedom to the press.

23
 CHAPTER - VI
DATA ANALYSIS AND
INTERPRETATION

24
 DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF THE RESPONDENTS

1. AGE GROUP OF THE RESPONDENT

S.NO AGE No. Of respondent Percentage

1 15-24 22 15
2 25-34 38 25
3 35-44 60 40
4 Above 45 30 20
Total 150 100

INTERPRETATION

From the above table it is inferred that 40% of the respondents age group is 35-44, 25% of the
respondents are in the age group is 25- 34, 20% of the respondents are in the age group above
45 and 15% of the respondents are in the age group of 15 -24.

AGE GROUP OF THE RESPONDENTS

AGE
20% 15%
15-24

25-34
25%
35-44

40% Above 45

25
2. GENDER OF THE RESPONDENT

S.NO Gender No. Of respondent Percentage

1 Male 100 33
2 Female 50 67
3 Total 150 100

INTERPRETATION:

From the above table it is inferred that 67% of the respondents are male and 33 %of the
respondents are female.

GENDER OF THE RESPONDENT

80%

70% 67%

P 60%
E
50%
R
C 40%
E 33%
N 30%
T
A 20%
G
10%
E
0%
Male Female

GENDER

26
3. EDUCATION QUALIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS

S.NO Educational No. of respondent Percentage

qualification
1 SSLC 38 25
2 Hsc 32 21
3 Graduate 37 25
4 Diploma 20 13
5 Other specify 23 16
Total 150 100

INTERPRETATION

From the above table it is inferred that 25 % of the respondents completed SSLC & Graduation
respectively, 21% of the respondents completed HSC,13 % of the respondents completed
diploma and 16 %the respondents completed technical courses.

EDUCATION QUALIFICATION OF RESPONDENTS

25% 25%
25%

21%

P 20%
E
16%
R
C 15% 13%
E
N
T 10%
A
G
E 5%

0%
SSLC hsc Graduate Diploma Other specify

EDUCATION QUALIFICATION

27
4. MARITAL STATUS OF RESPONDENTS

S.NO Marital status No. Of Respondent Percentage

1 Married 120 80
2 Un married 30 20
3 Total 150 100

INTERPRETATION

from the above table it is infered that 80%of respondents are married and 20 % of respondents
are unmarried.

MARITAL STATUS OF RESPONDENTS

80%

70%
P
E
60%
R
C
E 50%
N
T 80%
40%
A
G
E 30%

20%

20%
10%

0%
Married Un married

MARITAL STATUS

28
5. How is our brand doing compared to our competitors?

S.NO Level of satisfaction No.of respondent Percentage

1 Very good 10 10
2 Good 55 55
3 Neither good or bad 20 20
4 Bad 10 10
5 Very bad 5 5
Total 100 100

INTERPRETATION

From the above table it is inferred that 10% of the respondents are gave good,55%of the
respondents are gave very good,20%of the respondents are gave bad,10%of the respondents are
gave neither good or bad, and 5% of the respondents are gave very bad.

60

50

40

30
No.of respondent
20 Percentage

10

0
Very good Good Neither Bad Very bad
good or
bad

29
6. How do our competitors effectively attract customers?

S.NO Level of satisfaction No.of respondent Percentage

1 Very good 40 40
2 Good 10 10
3 Neither good or bad 30 30
4 Bad 10 10
5 Very bad 10 10
Total 100 100

INTERPRETATION

From the above table it is inferred that 40% of the respondents are gave good,10%of the
respondents are gave very good,30%of the respondents are gave bad,10%of the respondents are
gave neither good or bad,and 10% of the respondents are gave very bad.

45
40
35
30
25
20 No.of respondent
15 Percentage
10
5
0
Very good Good Neither Bad Very bad
good or
bad

30
7. How many inbound links do our competitors have?

S.NO Inbound No. of respondent Percentage

1 More than 1 40 40
2 Less than 1 50 50
3 zero 10 10
Total 100 100

INTERPRETATION

From the above table it is inferred that the inbound links for competitors are 40% for more than
1 and less than 1 it is 50 and for zero it is 10%.

60

50

40

30 No. of respondent
Percentage
20

10

0
More than 1 Less than 1 zero

31
8. How long have you been a customer?

S.NO usage No. of respondent Percentage

1 Regularly 40 40
2 occasionally 50 50
3 Rarely 9 9
4 Never 1 1
Total 100 100

INTERPRETATION

From the above table it is inferred that the customer who have respondent for usage is 40% for
regularly, 50% was given by occasionally, and for rarely it was 9%, the 1% was given to never.

60

50

40

30 No. of respondent
Percentage
20

10

0
Regularly occasionally Rarely Never

32
9. How well does [product/service] meet your needs?

S.NO Levels of satisfaction No. of respondent Percentage

1 Highly satisfied 30 30
2 Satisfied 10 10
3 Neutral 20 20
4 Dissatisfied 10 10
5 Highly dissatisfied 10 10
Total 100 100

INTERPRETATION

From the above table it is inferred that the respondents for satisfaction for
highly was 30%, for satisfied it is 10%, and for neutral it is 20%, and for 10,10% it is
dissatisfied and highly dissatisfied.

35
30
25
20
15
No. of respondent
10
Percentage
5
0

33
10. How would you rate your last experience with us?

S.NO RATINGS No. Of respondent Percentage

1 1 10 10
2 2 10 10
3 3 10 10
4 4 40 40
5 5 30 30
Total 100 100

INTERPRETATION

From the above table it is was analysed 100 employees from different company and the response
were for 1 rating 10 percentage and for the 2nd rating the percentage was 10 per cent and for 3
rating it was 10 per cent, for the fourth rating the percentage was 40 and the last 5 rating it was
30 percentage.

45

40

35

30

25 RATINGS

20 No. Of respondent

15 Percentage

10

0
1 2 3 4 5

34
11. How is our brand doing compared to our competitors?

S.NO Level of satisfaction No.of respondent Percentage

1 Very good 40 40
2 Good 20 20
3 Neither good or bad 20 20
4 Bad 10 10
5 Very bad 10 10
Total 100 100

INTERPRETATION

From the above table it is inferred that the brand‘s performance respondents
were 40% for very good, and for good it is 20%, for neither good nor bad it is 20%, and for bad
and very bad the respondents opted for 10&10%.

45
40
35
30
25
20 No.of respondent
15 Percentage
10
5
0
Very good Good Neither Bad Very bad
good or
bad

35
12. How does the [product/service] fit into your daily workflow?

S.NO Level of satisfaction No.of respondent Percentage

1 Very good 60 60
2 Good 40 40
Total 100 100

INTERPRETATION

From the above table it is inferred that the daily use workflow respondents were 60%
for very good and for good it is 40%.

70

60

50

40
Very good
30 Good

20

10

0
No.of respondent Percentage

36
 13. Rate how clearly the representative communicated.

S.NO Gender No. Of respondent Percentage

1 Male 65 33
2 Female 35 67
3 Total 100 100

INTERPRETATION:

From the above table it is inferred that 33% of the respondents are male and 67 %of the
respondents are female.

100
90
80
70
60
50 YES

40 NO

30
20
10
0
No. Of respondent Percentage

37
14. Rate the friendliness of the representative.

S.NO Gender No. Of respondent Percentage

1 Male 48 45
2 Female 52 55
3 Total 100 100

INTERPRETATION:

From the above table it is inferred that 45% of the respondents are male and 55 %of the
respondents are female

100
90
80
70
60
50 YES

40 NO

30
20
10
0
No. Of respondent Percentage

38
 CHAPTER - VII
RESEARCH FINDINGS &
SUGGESTIONS

39
 RESEARCH FINDINGS

 From the above table it is inferred that 25 % of the respondents completed SSLC &
Graduation respectively, 21% of the respondents completed HSC,13 % of the
respondents completed diploma and 16 %the respondents completed technical courses.
 From the above table it is inferred that 10% of the respondents are gave good,55%of the
respondents are gave very good,20%of the respondents are gave bad,10%of the
respondents are gave neither good or bad, and 5% of the respondents are gave very bad.
 From the above table it is inferred that 40% of the respondents are gave good,10%of the
respondents are gave very good,30%of the respondents are gave bad,10%of the
respondents are gave neither good or bad,and 10% of the respondents are gave very bad.
 From the above table it is inferred that the inbound links for competitors are 40% for
more than 1 and less than 1 it is 50 and for zero it is 10%.
 From the above table it is inferred that the customer who have respondent for usage is
40% for regularly, 50% was given by occasionally, and for rarely it was 9%, the 1% was
given to never.
 From the above table it is inferred that the respondents for satisfaction for highly was
30%, for satisfied it is 10%, and for neutral it is 20%, and for 10,10% it is
dissatisfied and highly dissatisfied.
 From the above table it is was analysed 100 employees from different company and the
response were for 1 rating 10 percentage and for the 2nd rating the percentage was 10 per
cent and for 3 rating it was 10 per cent, for the fourth rating the percentage was 40 and
the last 5 rating it was 30 percentage.
 From the above table it is inferred that the brand‘s performance respondents were 40%
for very good, and for good it is 20%, for neither good nor bad it is 20%, and for bad and
very bad the respondents opted for 10&10%.
 From the above table it is inferred that the daily use workflow respondents were 60% for
very good and for good it is 40%.
 From the above table it is inferred that 33% of the respondents are male and 67 %of the
respondents are female.

40
 SUGGESTIONS

Services marketing is marketing based on relationship and value. It may be used to market a
service or a product. Marketing a service-base business is different from marketing a goods-base
business. A doctor interview‘s a patient, does some tests, and prescribes some medicine – the
patient answers the questions, cooperates with the tests, and takes the medicine faithfully.
Perhaps technologies and other people are involved in the tests or in the assignment and filling of
prescriptions. Together, doctor, patient, others, and technologies co-create value – in this case,
patient health. These relationships and dependencies can be viewed as a system of interacting
parts. In many cases, a service system is a kind of complex system – a system in which the parts
interact in a non-linear way.

As such, a service system is not just the sum of its parts, but through complex interactions, the
parts create a system whose behavior is difficult to predict and model. Service involves both a
provider and a client working together to create value. So Service Marketing has been relatively
gaining ground in the overall spectrum of educational marketing as developed economies move
farther away from industrial importance to service oriented economies

41
 CHAPTER -VIII
SUGGESTIONS &
RECOMMENDATIONS

42
 SUGGESTIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

Services marketing is marketing based on relationship and value. It may be used to market a
service or a product. Marketing a service-base business is different from marketing a goods-base
business. A doctor interview‘s a patient, does some tests, and prescribes some medicine – the
patient answers the questions, cooperates with the tests, and takes the medicine faithfully.
Perhaps technologies and other people are involved in the tests or in the assignment and filling of
prescriptions. Together, doctor, patient, others, and technologies co-create value – in this case,
patient health. These relationships and dependencies can be viewed as a system of interacting
parts. In many cases, a service system is a kind of complex system – a system in which the parts
interact in a non-linear way.

As such, a service system is not just the sum of its parts, but through complex interactions, the
parts create a system whose behavior is difficult to predict and model. Service involves both a
provider and a client working together to create value. So Service Marketing has been relatively
gaining ground in the overall spectrum of educational marketing as developed economies move
farther away from industrial importance to service oriented economies

Another view is that marketing has a number of processes that integrate together to create an
overall marketing process, for example - telemarketing and Internet marketing can be integrated.
A further view is that marketing processes are used to control the marketing mix, i.e. processes
that measure the achievement marketing objectives. All views are understandable, but not
particularly customer focused. For the purposes of the marketing mix, process is an element of
service that sees the customer experiencing an organization‘s offering. It's best viewed as
something that your customer participates in at different points in time.

Here are some examples to help your build a picture of marketing process, from the customer's
point of view. Going on a cruise - from the moment that you arrive at the dockside, you are
greeted; your baggage is taken to your room. You have two weeks of services from restaurants
and evening entertainment, to casinos and shopping. Finally, you arrive at your destination, and
your baggage is delivered to you. This is a highly focused marketing process. Processes
essentially have inputs, throughputs and outputs (or outcomes). Marketing adds value to each of
the stages. Take a look at the lesson on value chain analysis to consider a series of processes at
work.

43
BIBLIOGRAPHY

44
 BIBILIOGRAPHY
1. Christopher Lovelock and Jochen Wirtz (2011), Services Marketing: People, Technology,
Strategy, 7th ed., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, Prentice Hall
2. ^ Furnham, A.and Milner, R., "The Impact of Mood on Customer Behavior: Staff Mood
and Environmental Factors," Journal of Retail and Consumer Services, Vo. 20, 2013, p.
634
3. ^ Smith, A., The Wealth of Nations,1776
4. ^ Marshall, A., Principles of Economics, 8th edition (1920), Macmillan, London
5. ^ Mill, J.S., Principles of a Political Economy, 1852 vol. 1, J.W. Parker, London, 1852
6. ^ Gummesson, E., "Implementing the Marketing Concept: From Service and Values to
Lean Consumption," Marketing Theory, [Invited Commentary], vol. 6, no. 3, 2006, pp
291–293
7. ^ Schembri, S., "Rationalizing Service Logic, or Understanding Services as
Experience?" Marketing Theory, vol 6, no. 3, 2006, pp 381–392.
8. ^ Bell, D., The Coming of a Post-Industrial Economy, (1973), Basic Books, 1999
9. ^ Jones, B., Sleepers Wake! Technology and the Future of Work, Oxford University
Press, 1996
10. ^ Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A., "Building a New Academic Field: The Case of
Services Marketing," Journal of Retailing, Vol. 69, no. 1, 993, pp 13-60
11. ^ Furrer, O. and Sollberger, P., "The Dynamics and Evolution of the Service Marketing
Literature: 1993–2003," Service Business, vol. 1, no. 2, 2006, pp 93-117
12. ^ Fisk., R. and Grove, S.J., "The Evolution of Services: Building a Multi-disciplinary
Field", [unpublished manuscript], 2007
13. ^ Rathmell, J.M., "What is Meant By Services?" Journal of Marketing, October, 1966
14. ^ Lehtinen, U., "On Defining Service", Proceedings of the X111th Annual Conference of
the European Marketing Academy, Bruekelen, 1983

Bitner, J. en Booms, B. "Marketing strategies and organizational structures for service firms", in
Donnelly, J. en George, W. (1981) "Marketing of services", American Marketing Association, 2.
Peter, S. and Rada, J. (1988) "Servicitization of business: Adding value by adding services",
European Management Journal of, vol. 6, no. 4, 1988.Shamoon Malik 3. Chicago Levitt, T.
(1981) "Managing intangible products and product intangibles", Harvard Business Review, May-
June, 1981, pp.94-102 4. Ng. Irene (2007) "Service Marketing" "The Concept of the Marketing
Mix" from the Journal of Advertising Research, June 1964 pp 2-7 5. I. Mootee. High Intensity
Marketing. SAPress, 2001 6. "Marketing Management: Strategies and Programs", Guiltinan et al,
McGraw Hill/Irwin, 1996 7. "In the Mix: A Customer-Focused Approach Can Bring the Current
Marketing Mix into the 21st Century". Chekitan S. Dev and Don E. Schultz, Marketing
Management v.14 n.1 January/February 2005 8. "Swarming the shelves: How shops can exploit
people's herd mentality to increase sales?" The Economist (2006-11-11), p. 90.

45
QUESTIONNAIRE

46
 QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Name :

2. Age group :15-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 above54

3. Gender : Male Female

4. Education qualification : SSLC HSC Graduate Diploma

Other specify

5. Marital status : Married Unmarried

6. How is our brand doing compared to our competitors?

Very good good Neither good or bad Bad very bad

7. How do our competitors effectively attract customers?

Very good good Neither good or bad Bad very bad

8. How many inbound links do our competitors have?
1 More than 1

2 Less than 1

3 zero

9. How long have you been a customer?

Regularly occasionally Rarely Never

10. How well does [product/service] meet your needs?

1 Highly satisfied

2 Satisfied

3 Neutral

4 Dissatisfied

5 Highly dissatisfied

11. How would you rate your last experience with us?

47
A) 1 B) 2 C) 3 D) 4 E) 5

12. How is our brand doing compared to our competitors?

Very good good Neither good or bad Bad very bad

13. How does the [product/service] fit into your daily workflow?

Very good good

14. Rate how clearly the representative communicated.
A) 1 B) 2 C) 3 D) 4 E) 5

15. . Rate the friendliness of the representative.

Male female

48