New Ways of Listening to Library Users: New Tools for

Measuring Service Quality

A. Parasuraman
University of Miami
Washington, DC
November 4, 2005

Defining, Assessing, and Measuring Service

Quality: A Conceptual Overview

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

Multi-Phase, Multi-Sector, Multi-Year

Program of Research to Address the
Following Issues
How do customers perceive and evaluate service
quality?
What are managers perceptions about service
quality?
Do discrepancies exist between the perceptions
of customers and those of managers?
Can customers and managers perceptions be
combined into a general model of service quality?
How can service organizations improve customer
service and achieve excellence?
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

Determinants of Perceived Service

Quality
Word of
Mouth

Personal
Needs

Expected
Service
Service
Quality
Gap

Past
Experience
External
Communication
to Customers
Perceived
Service
Quality

Perceived
Service
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

A GAPS MODEL OF SERVICE QUALITY

CUSTOMER

Customers
Service
Expectations
Service
Quality
Gap
Customers
Service
Perceptions

SERVICE ORGANIZATION
Market
Information
Gap

Organizations
Understanding of
Expectations

Service
Standards
Gap
Organizations
Service Standards

GAP 1
GAP 2

Service
Performance
Gap

GAP 5
GAP 3
GAP 4

Organizations
Communications to
Customers

Organizations
Service
Performance
Internal
Communication
Gap

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

POTENTIAL CAUSES OF
INTERNAL SERVICE GAPS
[GAPS 1 - 4]

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

GAP 1
Customer
Expectations
Key Factors:
Insufficient marketing research
Inadequate use of marketing research
Lack of interaction between
management and customers
Insufficient communication between
contact employees and managers
Management
Perceptions of
Customer Expectations

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

Lack of
Upward
Communication

GAP 2
Management
Perceptions of
Customer Expectations
Key Factors:
Inadequate management commitment
to service quality
Absence of formal process for setting
service quality goals
Inadequate standardization of tasks
Perception of infeasibility -- that
customer expectations cannot be met
Service
Quality
Specifications

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

GAP 3
Service
Quality
Specifications
Key Factors:
Lack of teamwork
Poor employee - job fit
Poor technology - job fit
Lack of perceived control (contact personnel)
Inappropriate evaluation/compensation system
Role conflict among contact employees
Role ambiguity among contact employees
Service
Delivery

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

GAP 4
Service
Delivery
Key Factors:
Inadequate communication between
salespeople and operations
Inadequate communication between
advertising and operations
Differences in policies and procedures
across branches or departments
Puffery in advertising & personal selling
External
Communications
to Customers

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

Lack of
Horizontal
Communication

10

SUGGESTIONS FOR CLOSING

INTERNAL SERVICE GAPS
[GAPS 1 - 4]

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

11

Suggestions for Closing

the Market Information Gap
Conduct systematic marketing research
Make senior managers interact with customers
Make senior managers occasionally perform
customer-contact roles
Encourage upward communication from
customer-contact employees

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

12

Suggestions for Closing

the Service Standards Gap
Make a blueprint of the service and standardize as
many components of it as possible
Institute a formal, ongoing process for setting service
specifications
Eliminate perception of infeasibility on the part of
senior managers
Make a true commitment to improving service quality

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

13

Suggestions for Closing

the Service Performance Gap
Invest in ongoing employee training
Support employees with appropriate technology and
information systems
Give customer-contact employees sufficient flexibility
Reduce role conflict and role ambiguity among customercontact employees
Recognize and reward employees who deliver superior
service

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

14

Suggestions for Closing

the Internal Communication Gap
Facilitate effective horizontal communication
across functional areas (e.g., marketing and
operations)
Have consistent customer-related policies and
procedures across branches or departments
Resist the temptation to promise more than the
organization can deliver

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

15

Process Model for Continuous Measurement and

Improvement of Service Quality
YES

Do your customers perceive

your offerings as meeting
or exceeding their expectations?

Continue to monitor
customers expectations
and perceptions

NO

Do you have an accurate

understanding of
customers expectations?

NO

Take corrective action

YES

Are there specific

standards in place to meet
customers expectations?

NO

Take corrective action

YES

Do your offerings meet or

exceed the standards?

NO

Take corrective action

YES

Is the information
communicated to customers
about your offerings accurate?

NO

Take corrective action

YES
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

16

SERVQUAL: Development, Refinement, and

Empirical Findings

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

17

Determinants of Perceived Service

Quality
Dimensions of Service
Quality
1. Access
2. Communication
3. Competence
4. Courtesy
5. Credibility
6. Reliability
7. Responsiveness
8. Security
9. Tangibles
10. Understanding/Knowing
the Customer

Word of
Mouth

Personal
Needs

Expected
Service

Service
Quality
Gap

Past
Experience

External
Communication
to Customers

Perceived
Service
Quality

Perceived
Service

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

18

Correspondence between SERVQUAL Dimensions and

Original Ten Dimensions for Evaluating Service Quality
Original Ten
Dimensions for
Evaluating Service
Quality

SERVQUAL Dimensions
TANGIBLES

RELIABILITY

RESPONSIVENESS

ASSURANCE

EMPATHY

TANGIBLES
RELIABILITY
RESPONSIVENESS
COMPETENCE
COURTESY
CREDIBILITY
SECURITY
ACCESS
COMMUNICATION
UNDERSTANDING/
KNOWING THE
CUSTOMER
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

19

Definitions of the SERVQUAL Dimensions

Tangibles: Appearance of physical facilities, equipment, personnel,
and communication materials.
Reliability: Ability to perform the promised service dependably and
accurately.
Responsiveness: Willingness to help customers and provide prompt
service.
Assurance: Knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability
to inspire trust and confidence.
Empathy: Caring, individualized attention the firm provides its
customers.

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

20

Relative Importance of Service

Dimensions When Respondents
Allocate 100 Points [Study 1]
RELIABILITY 32%
TANGIBLES 11%

RESPONSIVENESS
EMPATHY 16%

22%

ASSURANCE 19%
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

21

Relative Importance of Service Quality Dimensions [Study 2]

Mean Number of Points Allocated out of 100 Points
37

33

23

11

23

14

21

15

13

18

32

19

Computer Manufacturer

All Companies

Retail Chain

29

28
12

12
23

23

18

17
19

20

Auto Insurer
Reliability

15

18

Responsiveness

Life Insurer
Assurance

Empathy

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

Tangibles
22

Mean SERVQUAL Scores by Service Dimension [Study 1]

1.00

0.00

-1.00

-2.00
Tangibles Reliability Responsive- Assurance
ness
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

Empathy

23

Nature of Service Expectations

Desired Service

Level Customers
Believe Can and Should Be
Delivered

Zone
of
Tolerance
Adequate Service

Minimum Level
Customers Are Willing
to Accept

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

24

The Two Levels of Expectations Imply Two

Corresponding Measures of GAP 5:
Measure of Service
Adequacy (MSA)

Measure of Service
Superiority (MSS)

Perceived
Service

Adequate
Service

Perceived
Service

Desired
Service

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

25

TWO APPROACHES FOR

MEASURING MSA AND MSS
Two-Column Format Questionnaire
Direct measures of MSA and MSS

Three-Column Format Questionnaire

Difference-score measures of MSA and MSS

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

26

TWO-COLUMN FORMAT
Please think about the quality of service ________ offers compared to the two different levels of
service defined below:

MINIMUM SERVICE LEVEL - the minimum level of service performance you consider
adequate.
DESIRED SERVICE LEVEL - the level of service performance you desire.

For each of the following statements, please indicate: (a) how ______s performance compares
with your minimum service level by circling one of the numbers in the first column; and (b) how
______s performance compares with your desired service level by circling one of the numbers
in the second column.

Compared to My Minimum
Service Level ____s
Service Performance is:
The
Same

Compared to My Desired
Service Level ____s
Service Performance is:

No
Higher Opinion

The
Same

No
Opinion

When it comes to

Lower

1.

Prompt service
to policyholders

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

2.

Employees who are

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
consistently courteous

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Lower

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

Higher

27

THREE-COLUMN FORMAT
We would like your impressions about ________s service performance relative to your expectations. Please think
about the two different levels of expectations defined below:

MINIMUM SERVICE LEVEL - the minimum level of service performance you consider
adequate.
DESIRED SERVICE LEVEL - the level of service performance you desire.

For each of the following statements, please indicate: (a) your minimum service level by circling one of the numbers
in the first column; and (b) your desired service level by circling one of the numbers in the second column; and (c)
your perception of ___________s service by circling one of the numbers in the third column.

My Minimum
Service
Level is:

When it comes to

Low

High

My Desired
Service
Level is:

Low

My Perception
of ____s Service
Performance is:

High

Low

No
High Opinion

1.

Prompt service
to policyholders

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

2.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Employees who are
consistently courteous

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

28

Measurement Error: Percent of

Respondents Answering Incorrectly
Type of
Company

Two-Column
Format

Three-Column
Format

Computer
Manufacturer

8.6%

0.6%

Retail Chain

18.2%

1.8%

Auto Insurer

12.2%

1.6%

Life Insurer

9.9%

2.7%

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

29

Mean Service Quality Scores

(Combined Across All Companies)

SERVQUAL
Dimensions

TWO-COLUMN FORMAT
QUESTIONNAIRE
MSA Scores MSS Scores

THREE-COLUMN FROMAT
QUESTIONNAIRE
MSA Scores

MSS Scores

Reliability

6.8

5.9

0.2

-1.0

Responsiceness

6.7

5.7

0.3

-1.1

Assurance

6.8

5.9

0.4

-0.9

Empathy

6.5

5.6

0.2

-1.2

Tangibles

7.1

6.4

1.1

-0.2

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

30

Revised SERVQUAL Items

Reliability
1. Providing services as promised
2. Dependability in handling customers' service problems
3. Performing services right the first time
4. Providing services at the promised time
5. Keeping customers informed about when services will be performed
Responsiveness
6. Prompt service to customers

Tangibles

7. Willingness to help customers

17. Modern equipment

8. Readiness to respond to customers' requests

18. Visually appealing facilities

Assurance
9. Employees who instill confidence in customers
10. Making customers feel safe in their transactions

19. Employees who have a neat, professional appearance

20. Visually appealing materials associated with the service
21. Convenient business hours

11. Employees who are consistently courteous

12. Employees who have the knowledge to answer customer questions
Empathy
13. Giving customers individual attention
14. Employees who deal with customers in a caring fashion
15. Having the customer's best interest at heart
16.Employees who understand the needs of their customers

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

31

Service Quality Perceptions Relative to Zones of Tolerance by Dimension

Computer Manufacturer
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Empathy Tangibles

Zone of Tolerance

S.Q. Perception

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

32

Service Quality Perceptions Relative to Zones of Tolerance by Dimension

Computer Manufacturer
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Empathy Tangibles

Zone of Tolerance

S.Q. Perception

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

33

Service Quality Perceptions Relative to Zones of Tolerance by Dimension

On-Line Services
9
8
7
6

6.8

8.4

8.3

7.0

7.0

7.0

8.4

6.7

6.8

8.3
6.7

6.8

7.5
6.8
5.7

5
4
3
2
1
0

Reliability

Responsiveness

Assurance

Zone of Tolerance

Empathy Tangibles

S.Q. Perception

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

34

Service Quality Perceptions Relative to Zones of Tolerance by

Dimension
Tech-Support Services
9
8
7
6
5
4
3

8.5

8.4

6.9

6.7

6.6
6.1

8.3

8.1

6.3

6.8

6.4

6.3

2
1
0

Reliability Responsiveness

Zone of Tolerance

Assurance

Empathy

S.Q. Perception

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

35

LIBQUAL+: An Adaptation of SERVQUAL

Association of Research Libraries, Washington DC (2003)

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

36

MULTIPLE METHODS OF LISTENING TO

CUSTOMERS
Transactional surveys*
Mystery shopping
New, declining, and lost-customer surveys
Focus group interviews
Customer advisory panels
Service reviews
Customer complaint, comment, and inquiry
capture
Total market surveys*
Employee field reporting
Employee surveys
Service operating data capture
*A SERVQUAL-type instrument is most suitable for these
methods
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

37

The Role Of Technology In Service Delivery:

Electronic Service Quality (e-SQ) and Technology
Readiness (TR)

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

38

Technologys Growing Role in Marketing to

and Serving Customers: Pyramid Model

Company
Internal
Marketing

External
Marketing

Technology

Employees

Customers

Interactive
Marketing
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

39

Ongoing Research on e-Service

Quality: Conceptual Framework and
Preliminary Findings

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

40

Research Phases and Questions

PHASE 1:
What is good service on the Web?
What are the underlying dimensions of superior
electronic service quality (e-SQ?)
How can e-SQ be conceptualized?
PHASE 2:
How do these dimensions compare to those of
traditional service quality?
How can e-SQ be measured and thereby assessed?

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

41

Definition of e-Service
Quality (e-SQ)
e-SQ is the extent to which a Website facilitates
efficient and effective shopping, purchasing
and delivery of products and services

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

42

Dimensions of e-Service
Quality from Focus Groups

Access
Ease of Navigation
Efficiency
Customization/
Personalization
Security/Privacy

Responsiveness
Assurance/Trust
Price Knowledge
Site Aesthetics
Reliability
Flexibility

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

43

Reliability
DEFINITION
Correct technical
functioning of the
site and the
accuracy of service
promises, billing
and product
information.

SAMPLE ATTRIBUTES
Site does not crash
Accurate billing
Accuracy of order
Accuracy of account
information
Having items in stock
Truthful information
Merchandise arrives
on time

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

44

Efficiency
DEFINITION

SAMPLE ATTRIBUTES

Site is well organized

The site is simple to use, Site is simple to use
structured properly,
Site provides
and requires a
information in
minimum of
reasonable chunks
information to be
input by the customer. Site allows me to click
for more information if
I need it

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

45

Means-End Model

Concrete
Cues

Perceptual
Attributes

Dimensions

SPECIFIC/
CONCRETE

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

Higher-level
Abstractions

ABSTRACT

46

Means-End Model of
e-Service Quality
Concrete
Cues

Tab Structuring
Site Map
Search Engine

One-click Ordering

Perceptual
Attributes

Dimensions

Higher-Level
Abstractions

Easy to Maneuver
through Site
Easy to Find
What I Need

Ease of
Navigation

Speed of
Checkout

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

47

Concret
e Cues

Perceptual
Attributes

Dimensions

Higher-Level
Abstractions

Access
Ease of
Navigation
Efficiency
Flexibility
Reliability
Personalization

Perceived
e-Service
Quality

Security/
Privacy
Responsiveness
Assurance/
Trust
Site
Aesthetics
Price
Knowledge
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

48

Means-End Model of e-Service Quality

Behaviors
Higher-Level
Abstractions
Dimensions
Perceptual
Attributes
Concrete
Cues

Purchase
Loyalty

Perceived
Convenience

W.O.M

Perceived
e-Service
Quality
Perceived
Control

Perceived
Value

Perceived
Price
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

49

Conceptual Model for Understanding and Improving e-Service Quality

Customer

Fulfillment
Gap

Customer
Web site
Requirements

Customer
Web site
Experiences

Perceived
e-SQ

Perceived
Value

Company

Purchase/
Repurchase

Information
Gap

Design and
Operation
of the
Web site

Marketing
of the
Web site
Communication
Gap

Managements
Beliefs
about Customer
Requirements
Design
Gap

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

50

Dimensions of e-SQ
Core Dimensions
[E-S-QUAL]
Efficiency
Fulfillment
System Availability
Privacy

Recovery Dimensions
[E-RecS-QUAL]
Responsiveness
Compensation
Contact

Source: Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Malhotra, E-S-QUAL: A Multiple-Item Scale for Assessing Electronic Service Quality,
Journal of Service Research, February 2005.
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

51

Definitions of e-SQ Dimensions

E-S-QUAL Dimensions
Efficiency: The ease and speed of accessing and using the site.
Fulfillment: The extent to which the sites promises about order delivery and
item availability are fulfilled.
System Availability: The correct technical functioning of the site.
Privacy: The degree to which the site is safe and protects customer
information.

E-RecS-QUAL Dimensions
Responsiveness: Effective handling of problems and returns through the site.
Compensation: The degree to which the site compensates customers for
problems.
Contact: The availability of assistance through telephone and online
representatives.
Source: Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Malhotra, E-S-QUAL: A Multiple-Item Scale for Assessing Electronic Service Quality,
Journal of Service Research, February 2005.
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

52

An Important Implication of the

Pyramid Model
An organizations ability to use
technology effectively in
marketing to and serving
customers critically depends on
the technology readiness of its
customers and employees
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

53

What is Technology
Readiness [TR]?
TR refers to peoples
propensity to embrace
and use new
technologies for
accomplishing goals in
home life and at work
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

54

Multinational Research Studies on

Technology Readiness
Began in 1997 in the USA and still ongoing
Being conducted in collaboration with Charles Colby,
President, Rockbridge Associates
Have thus far involved several qualitative and
quantitative studies
Completed studies include three National Technology
Readiness Surveys in the USA [NTRS 1999, 2000,
2001, 2002 and 2004]
National studies also have been done or are underway
in Austria, Chile, Germany, Singapore and Sweden

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

55

Key Insights from Qualitative

Research Studies
TR doesnt just refer to possessing technical
skills; TR is much more a function of peoples
beliefs and feelings about technology
Peoples beliefs can be positive about some
aspects of technology but negative about
other aspects
The relative strengths of the of positive and
negative beliefs determine a persons
receptivity to technology
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

56

Technology-Beliefs Continuum

Resistant to
Technology

Neutral

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

Receptive to
Technology

57

Link between Technology Beliefs

and Technology Readiness

Technology
Readiness

High

Medium

Low
Resistant to
Technology

Neutral

Receptive to
Technology

Technology-Beliefs Continuum
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

58

Quantitative Survey Methodology

Each NTRS in the U.S. included a random
sample of adults:
1000 respondents 1999 & 2000 and 500
respondents in 2001, 2002 & 2004

Data collected via computer-assisted

telephone interviewing
Survey included questions about
technology beliefs, demographics,
psychographics, and technology-related
behaviors and preferences

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

59

Key Insights from Quantitative

Research Studies
TR consists of four facets or dimensions that
are fairly independent of one another
Peoples ratings on a set of belief statements
about technology can be combined to create a
reliable and valid measure of TR -- i.e., a
Technology Readiness Index [TRI]
The TRI is a good predictor of peoples
technology-related behaviors and preferences
A meaningful typology of customers can be
created based on their TR scores on the four
dimensions
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

60

Drivers of Technology Readiness

Contributors

Optimism

Innovativeness

Technology Readiness

Inhibitors

Discomfort

Insecurity

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

61

Definitions of the TR Drivers

Optimism: Positive view of technology;
belief that it offers increased control,
flexibility and efficiency
Innovativeness: Tendency to be a
technology pioneer and thought leader
Discomfort: Perceived lack of control over
technology and a feeling of being
overwhelmed by it
Insecurity: Distrust of technology and
skepticism about its working properly
A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

62

The TRI: A 36-Item, 4-Dimensional

Scale to Measure TR
Optimism
Innovativeness

10 items
7 items

Discomfort

10 items

Insecurity

9 items

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

63

Customer Beliefs About Technology

Example of Optimism: Technology gives people more control
over their daily lives
% of respondents agreeing:

61% in 1999

68% in 2000
65% in 2001
65% in 2002
67% in 2004

Example of Innovativeness: You keep up with the latest

technological developments in your areas of interest
% of respondents agreeing:

68% in 1999

69% in 2000
65% in 2001
59% in 2002
60% in 2004

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

64

Customer Beliefs About Technology

Example of Discomfort: It is embarrassing when you have
trouble with a high-tech gadget while people are watching
% of respondents agreeing:

52% in 1999

54% in 2000
55% in 2001
51% in 2002
46% in 2004

Example of Insecurity: Any business transaction you do

electronically should be confirmed later with something in
writing
% of respondents agreeing:

87% in 1999

88% in 2000
82% in 2001
82% in 2002
78% in 2004

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

65

TR Scores by Dimension and

Overall TRI

Mean TR
Scores

OPT.
1999

INN.
2000

DIS.
2001

INS.
2002

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

TRI
2004
66

High TR
Low TR

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

67

TRI Scores by Demographics (NTRS

2004)

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

68

Predicted Change in TR of Age

Cohorts over Time
Age
Cohort X

Age
Cohort X

Age
Cohort 1

Age
Cohort 1

Age
Cohort 2

Age
Cohort 2

TR
Age
Cohort N

Age
Cohort N

Age
Cohort Y

Age
Cohort Y

Year 1-5

Age
Cohort X
Age
Cohort 1
Age
Cohort 2

Age
Cohort N
Age
Cohort Y

Age
Cohort X
Age
Cohort 1
Age
Cohort 2

Age
Cohort N
Age
Cohort Y

Age
Cohort X
Age
Cohort 1
Age
Cohort 2

Age
Cohort N
Age
Cohort Y

Age
Cohort X
Age
Cohort 1
Age
Cohort 2

Age
Cohort N
Age
Cohort Y

Year 6-10 Year 11-15 Year 16-20 Year 21-25 Year 26-30

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

Age Range
Covered in
TR Surveys

Time

69

Five TR-Based Customer Segments

Optimism

Innovative Discomfort Insecurity

-ness

Explorers

High

High

Low

Low

Pioneers

High

High

High

High

Skeptics

Low

Low

Low

Low

Paranoids

High

Low

High

High

Laggards

Low

Low

High

High

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

70

Typology of Technology Customers:

Percent of Population in Each Segment

1999

2000

2001

2002

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

2004
71

TR Segments and Technology

Adoption
Explorers
Pioneers

Technology
Readiness

High

Skeptics
Paranoids
Laggards

Low
Early

Late

Time of Adoption of New Technologies

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

72

 A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

73

High-Tech versus High-Touch

Customer Service
High
Appeal of High-Tech
Service Channels

Explorers
Pioneers
Skeptics
Paranoids
Laggards

Low
Low

High
Appeal of High-Touch
Service Channels

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

74

In Conclusion, to Deliver Superior Service in Library

Environments:
Understand customers service expectations and how well those expectations
are being met
Work systematically to remove organizational barriers that lead to poor
customer service -- offline and online
Recognize and capitalize on the increasing role of technology in serving
customers, but
Be cognizant of customers and employees readiness to embrace technologybased services
Recognize that e-service quality as perceived by customers involves much more
than having a state-of-the-art website
Put in place a solid behind-the-scenes infrastructure -- information systems,
logistics, and human resources -- to deliver what a websites faade promises.
Continuously monitor customers and employees reactions to and experiences
with your electronic interfaces

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

75

Sources of Information about Customer Service and

Technology Readiness

www.technoreadymarketing.com
76

Thank You!

A. Parasuraman, University of Miami; not to be reproduced or disseminated without the authors permission

77