The impact of people, process and Physical Evidence

and Tourism, Hospitality and Leisure Service Quality

The experience of great service vanishes in the blink of an eye. It is timeless, unobtrusive and
invisible while poor service is remembered, great service goes unnoticed. Creating a service
environment where customers are given the gift of experience without interference from the
service provider is the challenge in restaurants, hotels, transportation system and national parks.

Understanding the components of a quality service experience is critical to long term business
health in the hospitality, tourism and leisure (HTL) organization. The lifeblood of HTL industries is
the customer. Ensuring that the customer receives an appropriate level of service is critical to
success. Establishing service at a level beyond what the customer expects or is willing to pay for
is as problematic as establishing a level of service below what the customer expects. Customer
perception of quality in an HTL contexts depends on his or her expectations. Some firms aim to
delight the customer by exceeding expectations. However, is this prudent business strategy for all
firms? Business has the ability to manage customer expectations and, therefore, the expertise of
service.
The first challenge to anyone who sets out to discuss quality service is to establish a common meaning of what
service is.
Different meaning of service according to different author:
1. Albreeht and Zemke (1990) and others suggestion that service is intangible. If service is intangible, how can
understand for defining service and quality for the HTL industries. One definition might be that service is useful
labor that does not produce a tangible commodity. But is thee act of being served somehow tangible? How do
customers know they have been served and, if they have been served, how will they determine if the delivered
service was of acceptable quality? Quality could be interpreted as the degree of excellence do not capture the
experience of quality service in HTL context. The truth is, there is no single or simple definition of this complex
phenomenon. And if we ask our customer what quality service is, they may know ultimately tell us that quality
service is not a “what” but a feeling “I don’t know what it looks like or what it takes to bring it together, but I know
what I feel like when I have experienced it. “ It is difficult to evaluate a feeling, but the service encounter has
tangible artifacts that we can evaluate.
2. “Service quality refers to customer,apprairsal of the service core, the provider, or the entire service organization’
(Duffy and Ketchand, 1998). Langevin (1998)suggested that meeting expectation and need done.
3. “Service quality refers to customer’ appraisal of the service core , the provider , or the entire
service organization” (Duffy and Ketchand,1998).Langevin (198) suggested that meeting
expectations and needs of customer was the central issue in the perception of the service
quality.
4. Parasuraman,Zeilthaml, and Berry (1998) postulated that the difference between actual
service provider and the cutomer’s expectation was true measure of customer service. SERQUAL
measure five dimension of service space (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry,1998).

Perceived service quality measurement is based on gaps between the expected level of service
in each of the domains and an evaluation of the actual service received.
Three central components work in concert to produce a quality service experience in HTL: the
people, the process and the physical evidence of the experience.
People
Analysis reveals three distinct groups of people who participate in the customer’s experience of quality service
(Bateson, 1985; Schneider, 1980, 1990)
1. customers
2. Employees
3. Management

A distinct most is drawn between different types of customers. It is important to manage to customer mix with this
reality in mind. Before developing a service strategy in HTL, management and employees must be understand will
result in organizational waste and dissatisfied customers (Lewis and Nightingale, 1991), Baker and Fesenmaier
(1997) used a modified SERQUAL instrument to measure responses from the three constituencies, managers and
customers. Interestingly, managers attributed significantly higher service expectations to customers than frontline
employees dis. This occurred in spite of the assumption that management was aware of marketing research and the
nature of the relationship between product and customer. Balancing the level of service is requisite to successfully
serve the customers needs and maintain an economically viable presence in the marketplace
 J.W Marriott had a simple philosophy about the treatment of employee. “Take care of your
employees, and they will take care of your customers” (Marriott and Brown, 1997). Diaz and Park
(1992) found that employees who work in Geographically isolated hotels and resorts experienced
high levels of job satisfaction despite a significant dislike of a isolation. The employees reported
significant positive feed from management, Pizam and Neumann (1998) noted two significant in
employee satisfaction: meaningful work and feedback form peers and supervisors. Setting
standards and communication them to service employees is not enough to guarantee quality
service in an environment devoid of other positive motivators and stimuli.
The service encounter and the customer’s evaluation of the quality of the service encounter
are critical to service business success. A common thread in creating a successful service climate
is the employee who ultimately provide customer service capacity. It is important for the
“health” of both individual and the organization to select qualified candidates. However,
management must cultivate a service environment, which is not accomplished by words alone
but by observable actions that promote good service. Service must be part of the culture.
Management’s task is to identify viable and homogenous markets, then create a service climate
responsive to those markets. That service climate is neither overwhelming nor underwhelming,
but a carefully orchestrated response to customer expectation. However, people are not the
component of a quality service experience. The process that have been developed to aid
Employees in delivering a quality service experience are critical.
Quality service is a willful act. An intrinsic desire and willingness to serve distinguishes great
service employees (Heskett, 1986). The challenge to managers in the service arena is to identify
employees who demonstrate “flexibility, tolerance for ambiguity, the ability to monitor and
change behavior during the service encounter and emphaty with customer. Identifying quality
service, employees is difficult. However, there is growing body of research on selection and
retention of employees in the HTL industries.
 THE SELF MONITORING SCALE
The practice of pre-employment screening was first introduced in the 1920s and q1930s
(Anastasi, 1985) and has recently increased in the United States (Kicchel, 1985). Service
settings have seen the use of personality measure designed to evaluate an individual’s
service orientation and predict the qualities of the employee in the service encounter
(Hogan, and Bussch, 1984). The self-monitoring scale which measure the ability of an
individual to monitor and change his or her behavior (Snyder, 1974) was used in a hospitality
customer service orientation, Samenfink suggested that implementation of the self
monitoring scale might decrease employee turn over, increase the number of guest service
employees likely to actively sell products, thereby increasing revenue and aid in identifying
employees with ability to adjust there behaviour to customer needs. Private companies often
construct pre-employee screening programs designed to identify qualified candidates.
However, management action play a crucial role.
PROCESSES

Are service delivery system and quality service experience mutually

exclusive? How do we build a service delivery system with the flexibility
to adapt to individual needs? We need to examine the processes
associated with quality service. Processes cover a spectrum of activities
related to quality service delivery and deal with the procedures and
policies company establishes to deliver quality service. A service
environment must be planned for the specific service activity that will
take place. Significant processes related to quality service delivery
discussed here at benchmarking, continuous quality improvement
strategies, service evaluation and application of technology.
• Pye (1994) classified six approaches to service improvement:
1. Task analysis: task were viewed as a series of trainable steps
2. Models of Behavior : Makes a comparison of good and bad through
video and pictures
3. Influencing the environment: service training done with a whole
group: little headway can be made if the manager fails to set a good
example
4. Recruitment approach: hiring people with a service orientation
5. Objective setting approach: based on analysis of customer service
ratings and setting appropriate objectives to meet future gaols
6. Structure approach: empowerment and moving the fucos of control
to the frontline employee.
• Pye suggest that these approaches are not universal in application.
Management must consider 3 factors before implementing or hanging
process:
1. Customer satisfaction level or expectations
2. Organization culture
3. Nature of the transaction

Quality Service improvement is not a perspective process but an analytical

and dynamic process.Successful process implementation requires a
systematic approach. The six change strategies Pye identified have
appropriate applications. Applying them without consideration of the
genesis of the problem may lead to unsatisfactory or less than optimum
results. Increasingly, to bench marking has been used to examine internal
practices as well as the practices of competitors to determine if a best
practical exist.
Bench marking
Benchmarking measures performance in conjunction with
improvement initiatives to measure comparative operating
performance and identify best practices. Benchmarking which is used
by management to improve service quality and remain competitive,
measures four domains:
1. Profitability
2. Service Quality
3. Marketing effectiveness
4. Productivity
The National Association of accountants specifies seven steps to
implement a process called Multidimensional Balanced Benchmarking
(MBB)
1. Define the service unit, which could be based on individual units
such as the front desk of a hotel of the entire hotel. It could be the
reservation center for a large travel agency or restaurants in a
particular region of the country.
2. Identify the data needed to measures and rank the service unit on
the four dimensions.
3. Compare the required measures with existing data and determined
if additional measures must be made. Complete additional data
collection as required.
4. Identify comparative service units and rank performance of the
units in terms of strongest performer to weakest performer in each
of the four domains. Verify with the operation managers that no
anomaly existed during the data collection period.
5. Compare the best practices with the weaker units identify
differences between operating practices. This comparison should be
made in all tour domains.
6. Implements best practices where applicable and consistent with
company culture and philosophy.
7. Begin the analysis again, applying it to the other service units and
operating methods.
 Service Quality Management in Hospitality,
Tourism, and Leisure
• Answered is, does this activity add value? If it does not add value, why do
we do it (LeBouef, 1993)? For example, during the 1970s and carly 1980s it
was popular in many restaurants to serve a chilled salad fork. The forks
were ceremoniously presented to each customer to ensure they were
aware of added “service”. But, in the kitchen, we continued to hold the
salad greens at room temperature and proceeded to put the greens on hot
plates, fresh from the dishwasher! The amenity war of the late 1980s was
another example of misplaced service. Hotels loaded guests up with
toiletries but kept them waiting in line to check out. Example of service
gone awry in HTL are legion. Blueprinting is a way to systemically analyse
the service process to ensure that customers are receiving the appropriate
level of service.
• Blueprinting requires to assumptions to be effective. First, the overall
service design determines the quality of the service encounter.
Second, the design and control of sensory input determines the
nature of the service encounter (Shostack, 1984). The three areas
addressed in blueprinting are processes, means, and evidence
(Shostack 1992). Process relates to the procedures involved in service
provision. An example would be scripting the reservation interaction
in a hotel or airline reservation center. Means may include the
frontline employee and increasingly technological interfaces over the
internet and in the facility. Evidence would include the ambiance, the
physical facilities, the product, as in the case of a meal or a seat on
an airline, or the ease and speed of navigating a Web site. In spite of
our best efforts to provide quality service breakdowns are handled is
critical to the guest’s quality service.
• Handling Service Problem
There is an old saying, “It is not what you say but how you ssay it”.
Research in service breakdown and complaint resolution is receiving
increased attention in the literature and is the subject of Chapter 11 in
this book. Anyone who has managed or worked in operations knows the
challenge of dealing with deffirent sitautions and customer. HTL
customers hope that everything swill flow smoothly, but sometimes it
does not happen that way. The way a service breakdown is dealt with
will determine customer experience. Sparks and Callan (1996) measured
the perceived level of effort in service recovery and the effect of effort
on service evaluation. Effort was measured using explanations, offers,
and communication style. Explanations were either internal, “this was
our responsibility.
Customer Comment Cards
Customer comment cards enjoy widespread use because they are
economical and easy to administer. However, is the information provided by
comment cards sufficient to facilitate analysis of the central issues of quality
service? Prior work by Cadotte and Turgeon (1988), Herberg, Mausner, and
Snyderman (1959), Johnston (1995a), Johnston and Heineke (1998), and
Silvestro et al. (1990) suggested that service evaluation consisted of four
distinct factors:

1. Satisfiers
2. Disatisfiers
3. Criticals
4. Nuetrals
Satisfiers do not detract from a service evaluation if they are not present. But ,
when added to the service equation, satisfiers significantly improve the
customer’s perception of service. For example, fresh cut flowers and a heated
towel rack would add significantly to a customer’s quality service evaluation. In
the absence of fresh flowers and heated towels, the service quality would not
suffer.
Dissatisfiers can be classified as adequate or inadequate. HTL organizations will
have service quality problems if the room is dirty or the food is cold. However,
service providers will not be rewarded with higher evaluations for a clean room
or hot foods.
Criticals are the elements significantly impacting service evaluation positively
and negatively. Timeless would be a critical determination of customer service, as
would responsiveness to customer needs.
Neutrals have the smallest impact on customer service evaluation. New
employee uniforms or an expensive change in china patterns may be examples of
actions that have no impact on customer service evaluation. There is a debate as
to whether customers’ service antennae are as finely tuned as we give them
credit for (Johnston and Heineke, 1998).
 Technology
technology is finding increasing application in HTL. Today technology
allows customers to check into a hotel at an automated lobby kiosk and be
issued a smart card for room access and charges. This scenario may not be
appropriate for all settings but has dynamic application in HTL. Customers
can click on Mariott Corporation’s Web page and obtain a listing if available
dates and rates for Mariott properties worldwide. A road map from either
the local airport or places hundreds of miles away can be selected.
Seamless technology is critical to quality service. As a matter of fact,
travellers increasingly expect these technology enhancements, thus making
them a competitive necessily (Sussman and Baker,1996). But successful
technology implementation in hospitality has produced mixed results.
Productivity improvement, one of the hoped-for and touted results of
technology, is often not realized without a change in management
approach and the preparation of the personnel affected (haywood, 1990).
Three types of technology have been discussed in the business literature( Grosse, 1996):
1. Product technology
2. Process technology
3. Management technology
A system approach to technology applications yields a somewhat different classification
scheme:
1. Operating systems
2. Communication systems
3. Manageent systems
Specifically in hospitality, we have seen application of technology in four areas,
according to Kirk (1996)
1. Building technology
2. Environment management technology
3. Food production and service technology
4. Information technology