Executive summary and implications for the practitioner (Supplied by Marketing Consultants for MCB University Press) By asking whether it's better to eliminate the causes of errors or improve the overall efficiency of a system Jensen and Markland cast some light on the question of managing for service quality. As they note, quality is not an accidental event -good service is the result of a systematic approach to delivery and an environment or culture conducive to high standards. However, the

more »

... asons for service breakdowns are, as we all know, many and varied. Most services are complex and involve a range of tangible and intangible elements. As a result improvements to service quality involve more than changing a few screws or making the packaging better. Most importantly the role of those who deliver all or part of the service must be assessed since good service is, in the end, determined by the performance of the individuals delivering that service and any changes to systems impact on their daily work. Failing to acknowledge this fact may result in wonderful systems on paper but a regimented and uncooperative workforce. knowledge not usually held by service managers. However, since this is an initial exercise, we can hope for a more accessible model to emerge in due course and the model presented does show how service quality measurement approaches are developing. While service systems are important much of what constitutes good service is already known -subjective analysis is always a good start in improving any service operation. However, as our authors remind us, service quality is determined by the customer not the business and this makes it hard for a manager to assess service failings solely through his own subjective observation. The oft heard comment that managers are too close to the problem really to see it holds much truth and managers should never assume they understand better than their staff or their customers. If a customer thinks your service is bad, it is bad. Too often we fall back on the belief that half our customers are moronic idiots who expect to be treated like royalty and charged nothing. What more scientific measures of customer satisfaction show consistently is that people expect occasional mistakes, are tolerant of delay when they understand it and are willing to pay for superior service. Businesses should take time and, if necessary, spend money, to learn about quality measurement systems such as SERVQUAL and should work on how to apply them in their organizations. Otherwise too many managers will address the wrong problem or only hit on the right problem by luck. The models may be daunting and often couched in incomprehensible terminology but their use could assist many businesses in improving quality, retaining more customers and delivering improved profits. This more scientific approach doesn't negate traditional means of assessing quality such as mystery shoppers and counting complaints but using measures like SERVQUAL supports qualitative analyses with quantitative information showing the key areas of service quality as identified by your customers. Finally, Jensen and Markland show how service quality measures can be used over time. Taking a snapshot of quality standards from time to time is useful but a continuous measure of performance is far more useful. From this such issues as the effects of seasonality (are your staff grumpier in the winter?) and employee changes can be measured and the effects of any system changes analysed as they occur. For many service businesses quality is often the only differentiator and firms that neglect proper analysis are running the risk of losing customers and even going out of business.