EMERGING TRENDS AND CONCLUSIONS:DEFINING SERVICE QUALITY

DEFINING SERVICE QUALITY

Quality is an elusive and fuzzy concept and as a result is extremely hard to define (Garvin 1984a, b; Parasuraman et al. 1985; Reeves and Bednar 1994; Steenkamp 1989). This may partly be caused by the different perspectives taken by scholars from different disciplines in defining quality. Multiple approaches to defining quality have been identified by various authors (Garvin 1984a, b; Reeves and Bednar 1994). Garvin (1984b) distinguishes five major approaches to define quality.

The transcendent approach defines quality as ‘‘innate excellence’’ (Garvin 1984b, p. 25): Pro- ponents of this approach contend that quality cannot be precisely defined but rather is absolute and universally recognizable. This approach finds its origins in philosophy, particularly in metaphysics (Reeves and Bednar 1994; Steenkamp 1989). However, its practical applicability is rather limited because quality cannot be defined precisely using this perspective (Garvin 1984a, b; Steenkamp 1989).

The product-based approach posits that quality differences amount to differences in the quantity of a particular desired attribute of the product (Steenkamp 1989). Garvin (1984b, p. 26) provides the following illustration of this approach: ‘‘[H]igh-quality ice cream has a high butterfat content, just as fine rugs have a large number of knots per square inch.’’ The assumption underlying this approach suggests two corollaries (Garvin 1984b). First, higher quality products can only be obtained at higher cost because quality is reflected in the quantity of a particular desired attribute. Secondly, quality can be evaluated against an objective standard, namely quantity.

The user-based approach to defining quality is based on the notion that ‘‘quality lies in the eye of the beholder’’ (Garvin 1984b, p. 27). In essence, this approach contends that different consumers have different needs. High quality is attained by designing and manufacturing products that meet the specific needs of consumers. As a result, this approach reflects a highly idiosyncratic and subjective view of quality. Juran (1974, p. 2-2), a proponent of this approach, defines quality as ‘‘fitness for use.’’ This approach is rooted in the demand side of the market (cf. Dorfman and Steiner 1954). Two issues should be addressed with regard to this approach (Garvin 1984b). The first issue concerns the aggregation of individual preferences at the higher level of the market. The second issue deals with the fact that this approach essentially equates quality with (a maximization) of satisfaction. In other words, as Garvin (1984b, p. 27) puts it: ‘‘A consumer may enjoy a particular brand because of its unusual taste or features, yet may still regard some other brand as being of higher quality.’’ As opposed to the user-based approach, the manufacturing-based approach to quality originates from the supply side of the market, the manufacturer. This approach is based on the premise that meeting specifications connotes high quality (Crosby 1979). The essence of this approach boils down to this: quality is ‘‘conformance to requirements.’’ (Crosby 1979, p. 15). This approach to defining quality is quite elementary, being based on an objective standard or specification (Reeves and Bednar 1994). A critical comment on this approach is articulated by Garvin (1984b), who finds that although a product may conform to certain specifications or standards, the content and validity of those speci- fications and standards are not questioned. The perspective taken in this approach is predominantly inward. As a result, firms may be unaware of shifts in customer preferences and competitors’ (re)actions (Reeves and Bednar 1994).

The ultimate consequence of this approach is that quality improvement will lead to cost reduction (Crosby 1979; Garvin 1984b), which is achieved by lowering internal failure costs (e.g., scrap, rework, and spoilage) and external failure costs (e.g., warranty costs, complaint adjustments, service calls, and loss of goodwill and future sales) through prevention and inspection.

The value-based approach presumes that quality can be defined in terms of costs and prices. Garvin (1984b, p. 28) uses the following example to clarify this perspective: ‘‘[A] $500 running shoe, no matter how well constructed, could not be a quality product, for it would find few buyers.’’ Reeves and Bednar (1994) emphasize that this definition of quality forces firms to concentrate on internal efficiency (‘‘internal conformance to specifications’’) and external effectiveness (‘‘the extent to which external customer expectations are met’’). However, this approach mixes two distinct, though related, concepts: quality and value (Reeves and Bednar 1994). Because of its hybrid nature, this concept lacks definitional clarity and might result in incompatible designs when implemented in practice.

Reeves and Bednar (1994) propose one additional approach to quality: quality is meeting and / or exceeding customers’ expectations. This approach is based on the definition of perceived service quality by Parasuraman et al. (1988, p. 17): ‘‘Perceived service quality is therefore viewed as the degree and direction of discrepancy between consumers’ perceptions and expectations.’’ This defini- tion was initially conceived in the services marketing literature and as such takes an extremely user- based perspective (Gro¨nroos 1990; Parasuraman et al. 1985). Gro¨nroos (1990, p. 37) in this respect emphasizes: ‘‘It should always be remembered that what counts is quality as it is perceived by the customers’’ (emphasis in original).

Relying on only a single approach to defining quality might seriously impede the successful introduction of high-quality products; a synthesis of the above approaches is clearly needed. Garvin (1984b) proposes a temporal synthesis, in which emphasis shifts from the user-based approach to the product-based approach and finally to the manufacturing-based approach as products move from design to manufacturing and to the market. The user-based approach is the starting point because market information must be obtained using marketing research to determine the features that connote high quality. Next, these features must be translated into product attributes (the product-based ap- proach). Finally, the manufacturing approach will need to ensure that products are manufactured according to specifications laid down in the design of the product. This notion is readily recognizable in the conceptual model of service quality conceived by Parasuraman et al. (1985).