Expero meeting
Discovering theoretical frames for Expero model
Ljubljana 23rd and 24th January 2006
• Scientific literature about:
– Quality of the Service
– Customer Satisfaction
– Psychologic and Economic field
– Studies about Quality in Education
• Applied models/surveys in partners
countries …
Main theoretical models
•
Servqual Parasuram et al, 1988-19911994
•
•
ServPerf Taylor & Cronin, 1994
Evaluated Performance Model Teas,
1993
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
HedPerf - Firdbaus 2004-2005
MultiDimensional models by European
School Kang & James, 2005
Retailed Service Quality & Perceived
Value Model -Sweeney, 1997
Needs Analyses - Chiu & Lin, 2005
Application of Herzberg’s factors to
•
Customer Based View Valdani &
Busacca, 1998, 2005
•
•
•
•
•
ServQual -Kara, DeShields, 2005
ServPerVal (Petrick, 2004)
•
Cognitive Dissonance and Stability of
Service Quality Perception (O’Neil & Palmer
•
2004)
Value as Second Order Multidimensional
Formative Construct (Lin, Sher, Shih, 2005) •
CRM – Customer Relationship
Management Kotler
SYNTHESISED MODEL OF
SERVICE QUALITY, Brogowicz,1990
ATTRIBUTE SERVITE QUALITY
MODEL Hallywood, Farmer, 1988
ANTECEDENTS AND MEDIATOR
METHOD - Dabholkar, 2000
SERVICE QUALITY, CUSTOMER
VALUE AND CUSTOMER
SATISFACTION MODEL - Oh, 1999)
MODEL OF PERCEIVED SERVICE
QUALITY AND SATISFACTION
(Spreng and Mackoy 1996)
INTERNAL SERVICE QUALITY
MODEL Frost, Kumar ,2000
PCP ATTRIBUTE MODEL Philips and
Hazlett, 1997
IDEAL VALUE MODEL OF SERVICE
QUALITY(Mattsson ,1995)
All these models are related to the SERVICE…
Quality models applied in Higher
Education
• The congruence of quality values in higher education
(Telford and Masson, 2005)
• Examination of the dimensions of quality in higher education
(Stefan Lagrosen, Roxana Seyyed-Hashemi and Markus Leitner,
2005)
• Examination of the dimensions of quality in higher education
(Stefan Lagrosen, Roxana Seyyed-Hashemi and Markus Leitner,
2005)
• Application of Quality Meanings in Education - Harvey and Green
(1993)
• Stakeholder in higher education - Srikanthan and Dalrymple (2003)
All these models are related to the SERVICE…
Customer Satisfaction vs Quality of the
Service
• Customer Satisfaction (CS)  WILL
– The customer is satisfied if s/he receives what
s/he foresaw (or something more…)
(expectation = foreseen)
• Quality of the Service (QS)  SHOULD
– It is the level of correspondence between
what s/he would like to receive and her/his
perception
(expectation = should be)
Difference between CS and QS
• A student foresees that the teacher WILL
BE able to answer to a technical question
Focus on a specific match
• A student would like to have competent
teachers
Generic carachteristic required
Expectation
• Cognitive schema linked to:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
past experiences (Woodruff Jenkins, 1987: average or a particular one)
similar experiences
word of mouth
personal needs
environment
social (opinion leader, group, culture)
costs
• As prediction/ foreseen  will happen
– Confirm vs disconfirm (Miller, 1977, Swan 1980, Boulding e Zeithalm 1993)
• As factual desires  should happen
– Desires mediated through prediction
Which kind of satisfaction?
• Related To foresee
• Related To IDEAL EXPECTATION (factual
desires)
• Related To the minimum level of tolerance
• Related To comparison with alternatives
(Parakash, 1984)
Human
needs
What we would like the
service to offer, despite past
schemas
DESIRES (D)
… direct and indirect
experiences…
PAST SCHEMA (PS)
Ideal Expectation (IE)
IE = f (D,PS)
Ideal Expectations are composed by desires and
past schemas
Imagine
• It is a vehicle of meaning able to create
values and to fix them in different frames
(immaterial) continuously connected to the
service (factual).
• It becomes the social memory of the
service able to give identity to it and make
the difference among other similar
services.
Educational Outcome
• Expero focuses on Educational Outcome
– It means NOT the global school SERVICE
– Educational Outcome is only a part of the global service:
it is the main result
Definition “competencies acquired in attending a
training course, they are formed from the
knowledges, the abilities and the professional
behaviours acquired by the trainee”
The models have been reframed into the Educational
Outcome
Stakeholders
3 main categories
−Trainees (participating to the training)
−Internal (teachers, tutors, employees, ecc.)
– External (companies…)
Factory
Tutor
Trainer
Ministery
Parents
Trainees
Evaluation and Assessment
• To give an evaluation to school outcome
– Quantitative ….to be put in the matrix
• To give indication about what to improve
– Qualitative … to give contents to reflect on
Quality of the service (less importance to CS)
perceived quality and ideal expectation
Different stakeholders (I-STK, T-SK and ESTK)
 with different needs and perceptions
Indicators for educational outcome
A. External - evaluation of the knowledge and abilities developed during the training
by T-STK
–
Differences between initial and final status
EE - Educational Effectiveness
B. Self - evaluation of the personal improvement about the acquired knowledge and
abilities by the trainees
–
Self evaluation
CK - Consciousness of the knowledge
C. Trainees satisfaction of the training outcomes
–
relation between expectation (will) and perception
by EX-STK
SR - Satisfaction of the result
D. Stakeholders’ evaluation of the training outcomes
–
QR -Quality of the result
EVALUATION of the OUTCOME
E. Imagine
–
by I & T-STK
relation between ideal expectation (should) and perception
value associated to the brand (social memory and identity)
QB - Quality of the brand
F. Trainees & Internal Stakeholders’ expectation of the training process
–
ideal expectation (should)
WHAT and HOW TO IMPROVE
TP
EE
CK
SR
QR
QB
TP
A -External - evaluation of the knowledge and abilities
developed during the training
• Pre training theoretical knowledge
• Pre training practical abilities
• Background (previous studies and job experiences, surrounding)
• Post training theoretical knowledge
• Post training practical abilities
• Final grades
• Already in use?
• Standardization of scores
B. Self - evaluation of the personal improvement about
the acquired knowledge and abilities by the trainees
• Adults are supposed to be conscious
about their own learnt
• Subjective perception of
– what s/he has learnt, both theoretically both
practically;
– how much s/he has improved;
C. Trainees satisfaction of the training outcomes
• WILL
• Problem “expectation vs perception”
• ServPerf vs ServQual
• How I feel satisifed about…
– What learnt theoretically
– What learnt practically
– Level of personal improvement
• Scores + qualitative explanation about negative
scores
D. Stakeholders’ evaluation of the
training outcomes
• SHOULD = Ideal Expectation
• What should a student learn in this course?
• What have the student learnt in this course?
• How much the student competencies fit for the purpose
(satisfied Your needs)?
• 2 different moment of questioning
• Qualitative interview translated in quantitative score
E. Imagine
• Have You previously know about institute
• How?
• Which level of affidabilità
• Which level from outside?
F.
• How should be the training process?
– Lesson timetable
– Workload
– Evaluation activities
– Laboratories
– Didactical aspects
– stages
Glossary
• Which terms need to be included?
• Work group
ServQual
(Parasuram et al, 1988-1991-1994)
Satisfaction = Expectation – Perception
• 5 indicators:
–
–
–
–
–
reliability,
answer capability,
ensuring capability,
empathy,
factual aspects
• Internal and External customer survey
• 4 gaps:
–
–
–
–
don’t know what the customer wants
Wrong standard in quality of the service
Differences between standards and offered service
Promises that not responding to results
ServPerf
(Taylor & Cronin, 1994)
• Perceptions contain Expectations
Model perception only
• It uses the same questionnaire of
ServQual limited to the perception scale
Teas, 1993
• semantic differential New scale (taken from Osgood)
measuring opposite meanings using bipolar pairs
• Multidimensional factors
Qi = –1[Σm j=1 wj I(Ajk –Ij )I ]
where:
• Qi =The individual’s perceived quality of object i.
• wj = Importance of attribute j as a determinant of
perceived quality.
• Aij = Individual’s perceived amount of attribute j
possessed by object i.
• Ij = The ideal amount of attribute j as conceptualized in
classical ideal point
• attitudinal models.
• m = Number of attributes.
IDEAL VALUE MODEL OF SERVICE QUALITY
(Mattsson ,1995)
PCP ATTRIBUTE MODEL
Philips and Hazlett, 1997
INTERNAL SERVICE QUALITY MODEL
Frost, Kumar ,2000
European School
Brady and Cronin (2001)
MODEL OF PERCEIVED SERVICE QUALITY
AND SATISFACTION
(Spreng and Mackoy 1996)
RETAIL SERVICE QUALITY AND PERCEIVED
VALUE MODEL
(Sweeney, 1997)
SERVICE QUALITY, CUSTOMER VALUE AND
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION MODEL
(Oh, 1999)
ANTECEDENTS AND MEDIATOR METHOD
(Dabholkar, 2000)
A study on the cognitive and affective components
of service quality.
(Hung-Chang Chiu, 2002)
Chiu, Lin (2005)
VALUE AS A SECOND ORDER
MULTIDIMENSIONAL FORMATIVE CONSTRUCT.
(Lin, Sher , Shih, 2005).
CBV (Customer Based View)
(Valdani, Busacca, 1998-2005)
soddisfazione pianificata
dal management
soddisfazione desiderata
dal cliente
Gap sintonia
Gap coinvolgimento
Gap realizzazione
soddisfazione offerta
dall’impresa
Gap allineamento
Gap progettazione
soddisfazione recepita
dal personale
Gap valore
Gap percezione
Gap consonanza
soddisfazione percepita
dal cliente
COGNITIVE DISSONANCE AND THE STABILITY
OF SERVICE QUALITY PERCEPTIONS
O’Neill , Palmer , 2004
ATTRIBUTE
SERVITE
QUALITY
MODEL
(Hallywood
, Farmer,
1988)
SYNTHESISED MODEL OF SERVICE QUALITY
(Brogowicz,1990)
Determinants of business student satisfaction and
retention in higher education: applying Herzberg’s twofactor theory
DeShields Jr, Kara, e Kaynak, 2005
The congruence of quality values in higher education
(Telford and Masson, 2005)
Examination of the dimensions of quality in higher
education
(Stefan Lagrosen, Roxana Seyyed-Hashemi and Markus Leitner,
2005)
Harvey and Green (1993)
Stakeholder in higher education
Srikanthan and Dalrymple (2003)