Service Quality & Customer Satisfaction in Dublin Hotels - A Review

This assignment is a literature review exploring the effects of service quality on customer satisfaction within the hotel industry in Dublin, Ireland. It begins with an introduction to service quality and customer satisfaction, defining key concepts and highlighting their importance in the hospitality sector. The study background emphasizes the competitive global market and the need for hotels to differentiate themselves through service quality. Research questions focus on identifying factors impacting customer satisfaction and the relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction in Dublin hotels. The literature review covers various definitions and measures of service quality, including the SERVQUAL and SERVPERF models, and discusses empirical studies examining the link between service quality and customer satisfaction, noting debates and gaps in existing research.

Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction 1
Effects of service quality on customer satisfaction: A study on Hotels in Dublin, Ireland.
by
Course:
Tutor:
University:
Department:
Date:

Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction 2
Table of Contents
Section One: Introduction.......................................................................................................3
1.0 Introduction...................................................................................................................3
Section Two: Study Background...............................................................................................4
2.1 Background of the Study..................................................................................................4
2.2 Study Justification............................................................................................................4
2.3 Relevant areas of Academic Research and Business Discipline......................................4
2.4 Research Questions..........................................................................................................5
Section Three: the Literature review.....................................................................................6
3.1 Service Quality.................................................................................................................6
3.2 Measures of Service Quality............................................................................................6
3.2.1 The SERVIQUAL Model..........................................................................................7
3.2.2 Performance Only Model (SERVPERF)...................................................................7
3.3 Customer Satisfaction.......................................................................................................8
3.4 Empirical Review.............................................................................................................9
3.4.1 Conceptual Framework............................................................................................10
Section Four: Critical Analysis of Texts..............................................................................11
References................................................................................................................................19

Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction 3
Section One: Introduction
1.0 Introduction
Service quality is one of the most significant tools in the hospitality sector. Both service
quality and customer satisfaction are intangible. Bergman and Klefsjö (2010) define customer
satisfaction as a psychological concept that comprises of a sense of well-being and pleasure
that is as a result of attaining the expectations that one intends from a product or service. On
the other hand, Hill and Alexander (2017) consider the definition of customer satisfaction as
one built on the perspective of expectation disconfirmation. Before the purchase of a given
product or service, customers always have own expectations concerning its performance.
Once the product or service is bought, the customers compare the outcome with their
expectations, and they are equal or much better, then there is definite confirmation. On the
other hand, if the outcome is lower than expectation, then there is negative confirmation.
Only positive confirmation of the expectations produces customer satisfaction. Nonetheless,
the level of customer satisfaction differs amongst different customers because of the distinct
individual needs, demands, and experiences.
The current demand for quality goods and services is ever on the rise due to stiff competition.
The term quality is understood differently by different people. The review carried out by
Ladhari (2009) in different service sectors views quality as a phenomenon that is identical
with distinctive excellence that is identifiable. That is to say that a product or service is
considered of quality if it meets the highest standards. Quality depends on the satisfaction of
the customers. Therefore, quality service is a technique on how to manage business processes
to derive total customer satisfaction at all levels. It is an approach that results in improved
competition, efficiency, and flexibility.

Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction 4
Section Two: Study Background
2.1 Background of the Study
The ever-changing and competitive global market has forced organizations to expand their
business into the world economy. This has resulted in the emergence of the concept of
international business which is applied interchangeably with globalization. International
business brings with it both opportunities such as additional market share and challenges like
stiff competition from international organizations. The globalization of an organization’s
products and services necessitates new approaches to market and uniquely present their
products or services. The financial success of a business in the world economy substantially
relies on its ability to functionally promote products and services to a market with a markedly
different culture and belief system.
2.2 Study Justification
The study by Onditi et al. (2012) shows that competitiveness is majorly influenced by service
quality. Hotels can uniquely position themselves in the dynamic market by offering
outstanding quality service. Bucak (2014) researched the implications of service quality on
customer satisfaction in hotels and found out that most people consider empathy as a standard
measure of satisfaction. These studies have been conducted in various hotels. However, the
effect of the multiple dimensions of service quality on customer satisfaction has not been
carried out in Dubline hotels. This study seeks to merge this research gap by ascertaining the
effects of service quality on customer satisfaction.
2.3 Relevant areas of Academic Research and Business Discipline
This study is on the discipline of hospitality industry which majorly comprises of three
categories namely travel and tourism, accommodations, and food and beverage. More
specifically, this study is based on the hotel industry which is primarily dependent on
customer service. The significance of service quality has been researched on by several
researchers (Mohsin and Lockyer, 2010; Yılmaz, 2010; Marković and Raspor, 2010). The

Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction 5
factors that determine service quality have also been researched, and these include reliability,
particular character, assurance, empathy, etc. (Eleren and Kiliç, 2015). Similarly, the
implication of service quality on customer satisfaction in the hospitality sector has been done
by various scholars (Bucak, 2014, Clemes, Gan, and Ren, 2011; Chen and Chen, 2010).
2.4 Research Questions
i. What are the factors that impact customer satisfaction?
ii. What is the relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction among hotels
in Dublin, Ireland?

Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction 6
Section Three: the Literature review
3.1 Service Quality
Service quality has been defined differently by different authors. Parasuraman et al. (Ladhari,
2009) define service quality as a proportional function between customer expectations and
real service rendered. Rodrigues et al. (2011) define service quality as a perception that
represents the general evaluation of the service performance. Various tangible elements are
used by customers to evaluate quality when making purchase decisions; these can include
physical appearance, durability, style, and packaging. However, in instances where there are
intangible aspects, customers rely on other elements to judge quality. The study by
Parasuraman et al. (Ladhari, 2009) lists several factors that influence the judgment of the
customer concerning service quality of products or services. They include dependability,
receptiveness, tangibility, communication, reliability, safety, aptitude, civility,
comprehension, and access. And additional research by Berry et al. (Ladhari, 2009) led to
the consolidation of the dimensions of service quality into five namely dependability,
receptiveness, tangibles, assurance and empathy (Parasuraman et al. in Ladhari (2009)
3.2 Measures of Service Quality
The measurement of the service quality is a significant element in the process of enhancing
the quality of service because it offers feedback on the nature of service offered and the
degree to which it meets the demands of the customers (Warren et al., 2009). Several models
have been developed as a result of in-depth studies by various scholars. LODGSERV model
was developed by Knutson (Wu, and Ko, 2013) to measure service quality in the lodging
sector. The model is built on the five dimensions of SERVQUAL model. The
LODGEQUAL model was developed by Getty and Thompson (Raspor, 2010) to ascertain the
quality of service in the hotel sector. Only three dimensions are highlighted by the model
which include interaction, tangibles, and dependability. Stevens, Knutson, and Patton
(Marković, Raspor, and Šegarić, 2010) established the DINESERV model which determines

Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction 7
service quality in restaurants. The model comprises of five SERVQUAL dimensions in
addition to 29 items. All of the models mentioned are alterations of the SERVQUAL model
which are geared towards enhancing the initial approach.
3.2.1 The SERVIQUAL Model
Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry (Krishnamurthy, SivaKumar, and Sellamuthu, 2010)
coined the SERVQUAL model as a technique for determining service quality deficit. The
SERVQUAL model is founded on the fact that customers can assess the service quality of an
organization by relating their perception of its service with individual expectations.
The model ascertains the expectations and perceptions of the customers about service quality.
The difference between the expectation (E) and the Perception (P) gives the quality gap (Q),
i.e., P-E=Q. The model is a similar tool that has been used in the service industry.
The model’s scale is divided into two: one section measures the customer expectations
concerning the service and the second one ascertains the perception about the firm whose
service is to be measured. The model has five dimensions of dependability, receptiveness,
assurance, empathy and tangibility, and 22 items. 22 statements are developed from the five
dimensions and customers are expected to rate using a five-point Linkert scale on how they
feel the service provider should offer the services to be rated the best. An additional but
similar scale is placed next to the initial one, and the participants measure the real quality of
service offered to them by the firm regarding their perceptions. Then the variation between
the understanding and expectation for each statement is calculated and the mean score
determined (Krishnamurthy, SivaKumar, and Sellamuthu, 2010).
3.2.2 Performance Only Model (SERVPERF)
Cronin and Taylor (Rodrigues et al., 2011) is the developer of the SERVPERF model which
is an outcome of the alteration of the SERVQUAL based on conceptualization and
determination of service quality. The SERVPERF model shows that service quality is a

Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction 8
customer attitude concept. The model ascertains service quality purely on a performance
basis, implying that customer expectation should be excluded in the tool for measuring
service quality. SERVPERF considers the five dimensions of SERQUAL but with different
statements of expectation items which add up to 22. The 22 comments are the ones used to
determine customer perceptions while evaluating the quality services of the company under
assessment.
3.3 Customer Satisfaction
According to Hill and Brierley (2017), customer satisfaction is the feedback of the customer
in the evaluation of the perceived variation between the above expectations and the real
performance of a service or product based on the consumption aftermath. Kotler (2015) also
defines customer satisfaction as the level to which the perceived performance of an item
agrees with the expectations of the consumer. A mismatch between these expectations results
in dissatisfaction. Customer satisfaction is affected by many factors such as product and
service features, consumer attitudes, understanding of equity and justice, and the customer's
close friends and colleagues (Torres and Tribó, 2011). Nam, Ekinci, and Whyatt (2011)
observe that the degree of customer satisfaction is measured by the quality of customer
service offered and the equity of price charged.
Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction (substitute WITH LATEST REFS UNDER THIS)
Some studies contend that service quality is a precursor of customer satisfaction (Nandan,
2010) whereas others contend that it is customer satisfaction that is a precursor of service
quality (Hu, Kandampully, and Juwaheer, 2009.; Verhoef et al., 2009). Nonetheless, most of
the latest research supports the former conclusion (Bayraktaroglu, and Atrek, 2010;
Angelova, and Zekiri, 2011). According to Sumaedi et al. (2011), there is a definite link
between service quality and customer satisfaction. Several studies have concluded that a high

Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction 9
level of the perceived service quality results to high customer satisfaction (Chen and Chen,
2010; Kassim, and Asiah Abdullah, 2010; Naik et al., 2010).
3.4 Empirical Review
Lovelock (2011) observes that customers parallel between the expected service and the actual
one after accomplishing a purchase. The consumers then decide on their satisfaction level
with the performance of service and judge the quality. Increased performance on various
dimensions of service quality leads to high customer satisfaction levels Lovelock, 2011).
A study by Naik et al., (2010), demonstrated that there are high expectations on the side of
consumers about the efficiency of service, precision of transactions and safety matters. The
study concluded that the expectations and perceptions of customers are subjective and the
outcomes can only be applied to specific market situations.
Kassim and Asiah Abdullah (2010) conducted a study on the implications of various
dimensions of customer satisfaction and found out that customer satisfaction was
substantially affected by perceived service quality. However, the research did not find any
vital variation between the influence of perceived service quality on satisfaction, trust, and
loyalty on the respondents who had the same cultural background.
Siddiqi (2011) carried out a study on the interrelationships between the qualities of service
dimensions and customer satisfaction attributes in the service sector of banks. The author
found out that a positive correlation exists between all service quality attributes and customer
satisfaction which is in turn related positively to customer loyalty. The most significant
quality attribute with a positive correlatioin with customer satisfaction is empathy while
tangibility is the least significant.
Chen and Chen (2010) evaluated the experience of heritage tourism guests and examined the
associations between the quality of their encounters, perceived value, satisfaction and

Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction 10
interactive objectives. The findings show that there is a direct impact of the quality of the
encounters on perceived value and satisfaction.
3.4.1 Conceptual Framework
A theoretical framework which evaluates the relationship between service quality and
customer satisfaction was developed based on the literature reviewed as illustrated in Figure
3.1 below.
The dependent variable in the study is general customer satisfaction whereas service quality
is the independent variable which determines the customer satisfaction level. The moderating
variable will be the customer type while the dimensions include dependability, receptiveness,
assurance, empathy, and tangibility.
Figure 3.1 A relationship framework for Service quality and customer satisfaction
Source: Modified from Amin et al., (2013)
Assurance
Receptiveness
Empathy
Dependability
Independent Variable Dependent Variable
Tangibility
Customer Satisfaction

Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction 11
Section Four: Critical Analysis of Texts
Critical Analysis of a Text
Full Reference of Peer Reviewed Text:
Chen, C.F. and Chen, F.S. (2010) Experience quality, perceived value, satisfaction and behavioral intentions
for heritage tourists. Tourism management, 31(1), pp.29-35.
1. What review question am I asking of this text?
(e.g. what is my research question? why select this text? does the Critical Analysis of this text
fit into my investigation with a wider focus? what is my constructive purpose in undertaking a
Critical Analysis of this text?)
What is the relationship between perceived service quality and customer satisfaction in hospitality
sector? This text perfectly fits into my general investigation because of two main reasons. First, it is
in the hospitality sector, and second, it considers significant service quality attributes that are
important to my research topic
2. What type of literature is this?
(e.g. theoretical, research, practice, policy? are there links with other types of literature?)
Research. The text has additional links with other relevant texts under the literature review
3. What sort of intellectual project for study is being undertaken?
a) How clear is it which project the authors are undertaking? (e.g. knowledge-for-understanding,
knowledge-for-critical evaluation, knowledge-for-action, instrumentalism, reflexive action?)
Knowledge for understanding. The authors clearly indicate the objective of the research under the
discussion and conclusion section that it is motivated by the need to provide an in-depth
understanding
b) How does the sort of project being undertaken affect the research questions addressed? (e.g.
investigating what happens? what is wrong? how well does a particular policy or intervention
work in practice?)
It outlines some of the factors that affect customer satisfaction in the hospitality industry
c) How does the sort of project being undertaken affect the place of theory? (e.g. is the
investigation informed by theory? generating theory? atheoretical? developing social science
theory or a practical theory?)
Practical theory: Structural modelling technique (SEM)
d) How does the authors’ target audience affect the reporting of research? (e.g. do they assume
academic knowledge of methods? criticize policy? offer recommendations for action?)
Offer recommendations for action
4. What is being claimed?
a) What are the main kinds of knowledge claim that the authors are making? (e.g. theoretical
knowledge, research knowledge, practice knowledge?)
Research and practical knowledge
b) How clear are the authors’ claims and overall argument? (e.g. stated in an abstract,
introduction or conclusion? unclear?)

Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction 12
Stated in abstract
d) With what degree of certainty do the authors make their claims? (e.g. do they indicate
tentativeness? qualify their claims by acknowledging limitations of their evidence?
acknowledge others’ counter-evidence? acknowledge that the situation may have changed
since data collection?)
They qualify their claims by acknowledging limitations of their evidence by recommending for a
more detailed and established scale of measurement of service quality.
e) How generalized are the authors’ claims – to what range of phenomena are they claimed to
apply? (e.g. the specific context from which the claims were derived? other similar contexts?
a national system? a culture? universal? implicit? unspecified?)
Claims applicable to heritage tourists only
5. To what extent is there backing for claims?
a) What, if any, range of sources is used to back the claims? (e.g. first hand experience? the
authors’ own practice knowledge or research? literature about others’ practice knowledge or
research? literature about reviews of practice knowledge or research? literature about others’
polemic?)
Research and existing literature
b) If claims are at least partly based on the authors’ own research, how robust is the evidence?
(e.g. is the range of sources adequate? are there methodological limitations or flaws in the
methods employed? do they include cross-checking or ‘triangulation’ of accounts? what is the
sample size and is it large enough to support the claims being made? is there an adequately
detailed account of data collection and analysis? is a summary given of all data reported?)
There are adequate range of sources, the sample size is enough for representation (447
respondents). And there is detailed account of data collection and analysis
6. To what extent are claims consistent with my experience?
The claims that service quality affects perceived value and customer satisfaction agrees with my
understanding
7. What is my summary evaluation of the text in relation to my review question or issue?
a) How convincing are the authors’ claims, and why?
The authors claims are very much convincing because it is based on practical research on a
representative sample of heritage tourists
b) How, if at all, could the authors have provided stronger backing for their claims?
By carrying a similar study on other types of customers in the tourism industry
Critical Analysis of a Text
Full Reference of Peer Reviewed Text:
Kassim, N. and Asiah Abdullah, N. (2010) The effect of perceived service quality dimensions on customer
satisfaction, trust, and loyalty in e-commerce settings: A cross cultural analysis. Asia Pacific Journal of