Esther-R. Mbise a & Ronald S. J. Tuninga b a College of Business Education, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Published online: 23 May 2013.

Transcription

1 This article was downloaded by: [University of Maastricht] On: 31 August 2013, At: 13:20 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: Registered office: Mortimer House, Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Journal of Transnational Management Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: The Application of SERVQUAL to Business Schools in an Emerging Market: The Case of Tanzania Esther-R. Mbise a & Ronald S. J. Tuninga b a College of Business Education, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania b Open University of The Netherlands, The Netherlands Published online: 23 May To cite this article: Esther-R. Mbise & Ronald S. J. Tuninga (2013) The Application of SERVQUAL to Business Schools in an Emerging Market: The Case of Tanzania, Journal of Transnational Management, 18:2, , DOI: / To link to this article: PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content ) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

2 Journal of Transnational Management, 18: , 2013 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: print/ online DOI: / The Application of SERVQUAL to Business Schools in an Emerging Market: The Case of Tanzania ESTHER-R. MBISE College of Business Education, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania RONALD S. J. TUNINGA Open University of The Netherlands, The Netherlands Quality of business schools is often measured in the form of rankings in major newspapers and journals. However, this limited discussion of quality has largely concentrated on a small number of business schools in Western Europe and North America. Given the importance of education for economic development it is important to study also the service quality of business education in emerging markets. The purpose of this study is to answer five research questions related to students and staff s perceptions of service quality received/delivered in business schools in Tanzania, an emerging market, and examine the relative importance they attached to the service quality dimensions. A cross-sectional survey design was adopted using a re-phrased original SERVQUAL instrument to suit an educational setting. Service quality of education institutions has traditionally been assessed based on factors not linked to students perceptions. An empirical insight about students perceptions of service quality received in emerging markets is provided. Comparison of gap scores between students and staff indicate no significant difference. Importance attached to different dimensions by staff and students is found to be significantly different. Practical implications for service quality monitoring, evaluation and improvement with students and staff as focus groups are highlighted. Received November 2012; revised January 2013; accepted February Address correspondence to Esther-R. Mbise, College of Business Education, P.O. BOX 1968, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. ermbise@yahoo.com 101

3 102 E-R. Mbise and R. S. J. Tuninga KEYWORDS service quality, SERVQUAL, business schools, emerging market, Tanzania INTRODUCTION Service quality has been widely studied in the past few decades. However, there has been no agreement as to its definition or its measurement. Unlike in the case of the production of physical products, service quality is not a function of statistical measures, looking at defects or managerial judgment (Koslowski III, 2006). Some scholars have put forward different definitions for the quality construct such as: Suitability for use; all about fitness (satisfying customer needs) (Juran, 1974, 1982); consistent with needs (Crosby 1979; 1984) as cited in Ming and Ing (2005); Palmer (2001); pleasing consumers not just protecting them from annoyances (Garbin, 1987); consumer s judgment about a product s overall excellence or superiority (Gabbott & Hogg, 1997) whereas Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry (1985) define quality as conforming to requirements that have been set by the organization. The aforementioned definitions imply that quality can only be defined by customers and occurs where an organization supplies goods or services to a specification that satisfies their needs (Palmer, 2001). Customers have difficulties in assessing the quality of the services they are going to receive beforehand. This brings about uncertainties (Gabbott & Hogg, 1997; Venetis, 1997; Zeithaml, Bitner & Gremler, 2006). Furthermore, the evaluation of service quality is a process in which a consumer compares own expectations with the service one perceives to have received (Grönroos, 1984). Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry (1988) define perceived service quality as the degree and direction of discrepancy between the consumer s perception and expectations. On the other hand, Getty and Thomson (1994) state that perceived service quality may be viewed as a global attitudinal judgment associated with the superiority of the service experience over time (Palmer, 2001). Addressing education specifically, the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) for the UK, as cited in Eagle and Brennan (2007, p. 47), defines education quality as A way of describing how well the learning opportunities available to students help them to achieve their award. It is making sure that appropriate and effective teaching, support, assessment and learning opportunities are provided for them. In contrast, Cheng and Tam (1997, p. 23) states: Education quality is a character of the set of elements in the input, process, and output of the education system that provides services that completely satisfy both internal and external strategic constituencies by meeting their explicit and implicit expectations. The World Declaration on Higher Education (UNESCO, 1998) stated that quality in

4 Application of SERVQUAL to Business Schools 103 higher education is a multi-dimensional concept, which embraces all its functions, and activities, teaching and academic programs, research and scholarship, staffing, students, buildings, facilities, equipment, services to community and the academic environment, interactive networking. Clearly, the aforementioned definitions of the concept of service quality all focus on the conformance to customer needs and requirements and how well the level delivered by a service provider matches customer expectations. The customer is the judge of the service quality (Cuganesan, Bradley, & Booth, 1997). Given the intangible nature of services and the fact that quality is an attitudinal construct related to, but not equivalent to, satisfaction (Parasuraman et al., 1988), it can be described as the degree and direction of the discrepancy between customer s expectations and perceptions of the service (Bigné, Martinez, & Miquel, 1997; Ham, 2003). Services performance is evaluated after the service experience and is based on the extent of the match between customer expectations and the perception of services received. If the customers expectations are high compared to the perceived service quality received, this results in dissatisfaction. Conversely, if customer expectations are below the perceived service quality received, then the customer is satisfied. Indeed, continuous measurement of service quality is crucial. Recognizing the shortfall in service delivery allows service organizations to adjust the standards they set which are necessary for acceptable/ adequate services delivery (Zeithaml et al., 2006). According to Parasuraman et al. (1988) and Zeithaml et al. (2006) the underlying factors that consumers use to judge quality of services are their perceptions of the technical outcome provided by the process with which that outcome was delivered, the quality of physical surroundings, and interaction with employees. These factors are measured in terms of the five service quality dimensions: Reliability, Responsiveness, Assurance, Empathy, and Tangibles (Parasuraman et al., 1988). Parasuraman et al., (1985; 1988) developed a SERVQUAL model which measures the perceived service quality as a difference between customer expectations and the perceived service experience based on the above five dimensions. PURPOSE OF STUDY The intent of this study is to investigate the discrepancy between students expectations and the perceived service quality received using the SERVQUAL instrument, adapted to education services (Parasuraman et al., 1988; Parasuraman, Berry, & Zeithaml, 1991) in an emerging economy. The study is grounded in the Gaps model by which Parasuraman et al. (1988) five dimensions are measured. Furthermore, the study seeks the perceptions of the managers (CEOs, heads of department) and employees (academic and administrative staff) of business schools on the perceived quality of services they deliver.

5 104 E-R. Mbise and R. S. J. Tuninga Students and staff have many service requirements. The service requirements may not carry equal weights in the determination of the perceived service quality received (Zeithaml et al., 2006) among individuals. The study further investigates whether there are differences in the relative importance of the service quality dimensions between students and staff in Tanzania. SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY Monitoring service quality performance of organizations is an important undertaking for quality assurance and a means of achieving the competitive advantage over other organizations (Zeithaml et al., 2006). The conceptualization of service quality as the discrepancy between customers expectations and the actual performance of the institutions using the SERVQUAL model will inform managers of business schools in Tanzania of particular areas in need of improvement. As students have different service quality requirements, the assessment of the importance attached to the service quality dimensions by students will enable managers in Tanzania to set priorities in order to make appropriate investment decisions and, hence, strengthen the business schools. The students service quality assessment using SERVQUAL measures service quality performance from all service deliverers/actors in business schools in contrast to popular tools used to measure lecturers performance in classroom only. Results obtained using SERVQUAL will be a useful starting point for investigating service quality. They can be supplemented with additional qualitative research to identify problems causing the gaps. During the present globalization era in which emerging and mature economies are forging partnerships, it is important to test whether the service models developed and applied in mature economies work equally well in emerging economies. To the extent that this is the case then there is common ground for service quality performance evaluation. Given the limited literature on perceived service quality focusing on students as customers in education services, in general, and with regard to emerging markets, in particular, this inquiry contributes to the literature in service quality in the marketing and business education fields. LITERATURE REVIEW SERVQUAL (Parasuraman et al. 1988) has been the most popular and welltested measurement instrument in the services industry. The psychometric qualities of the instrument can be applied across a broad range of service organizations. According to Cronin and Taylor (1992, p. 58) the SERVQUAL

6 Application of SERVQUAL to Business Schools 105 instrument has validity because the 22-scale items adequately define the domain of service quality. Moreover, the SERVQUAL has been found to be a reliable instrument (Bigné et al., 1997; Brown & Bond, 1995). However, the SERVQUAL has also received criticisms. Analysis of empirical studies indicates that the number of service quality dimensions remain unresolved. A range of one to seven/eight has been revealed, varying according to the service sector in question. The pioneers of SERVQUAL acknowledge the instability of the factors on the scale (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1994). Nevertheless, the strengths of SERVQUAL more than outweigh its deficiencies (Ladhari, 2009; O Neill & Palmer, 2001). Specifically, SERVQUAL has been recommended as an appropriate instrument to assess students perceptions (Joseph, Yakhou, & Stone, 2005). Application of SERVQUAL SERVQUAL has been applied to measure perceived service quality in various service industries financial services (Al-Tamimi & Al-Amiri, 2003; Angelis, Lymperopoulos, & Dimaki, 2004; Cuganesan et al., 1997; Goyal, 2006; Ming & Ing, 2005; Walker & Johnson, 2006), the leisure industry (Bigné et al., 1997; Fowdar, 2007; Getty & Getty, 2003; Yu, Morais, & Chick, 2005; McQuilken, Breth, & Shaw, 2000), professional business services (Venetis, 1997), health care (Brown & Swartz, 1989; Gabbott & Hogg, 1997; Harte & Etchart, 1997; Rapert & Wren, 1998) and information systems (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Malhotra, 2005; Van Dyke, Prybutok, & Kappelman, 1999). In education services, Franklin and Shemwell (1995) investigated students satisfaction in the College of Business at a comprehensive regional university in Tennessee using the SERVQUAL instrument with 44 items. Oldfield and Baron (2000) studied student perceptions of service quality over time in higher education using 24 perception items. Pariseau and McDaniel (1997) assessed the service quality of university business schools. O Neill and Palmer (2001) investigated the effects of survey timing on consumer perceptions of service quality using SERVQUAL with 22 items at two points in time. Holdford and Reinders (2001) study used a modified SERVQUAL instrument (10 original dimensions + technical quality) to measure service quality of pharmaceutical education. Smith, Smith, and Clarke (2007) used the SERVQUAL instrument to measure expectations and perceived service quality of students and staff of a computer service department in a higher learning institution in an attempt to establish the dimensions to which staff and students attach more importance. Similarly, Aghamolaei and Zare (2008) administered the SERVQUAL instrument to determine the quality gap in education services provided by a medical sciences university. The above-mentioned empirical studies were undertaken in Europe, the United States, and Australia. These empirical studies show that service quality can be conceptualized and operationalized using service quality performance

7 106 E-R. Mbise and R. S. J. Tuninga measures in the education sector. Student perceptions of service quality are formed over time on the basis of multiple interactions with the institution (a global attitudinal concept). Service quality can be measured as a gap between students perceptions of business schools performance against their expectations. This study attempts to identify if SERVQUAL yields similar or different results at business schools in an emerging economy compared to those in a mature economy. In this study service quality is addressed from the perspective of the student as customer. Research Questions Undertaking service quality improvement can best be done with an understanding of customers and their requirements (Zeithaml et al., 2006). Many factors and settings influence experiences/perceptions, which in turn, have an impact on quality evaluation. In the course of service delivery, for example, discrepancies between customer expectations and the actual service delivered may exist due to the variability of customers and the service providers. Zeithaml et al. (2006) hold that services are intangible, heterogeneous, and perishable and, at the same time, that consumption and production are inseparable. Oldfield and Baron (2000) suggest that students in higher learning institutions have a complex set of expectations and that student evaluations along functional and technical dimensions vary as a result of the student s experience. Clewes (2003) study of part-time postgraduate students revealed instances of lecturers who could not deliver what students wanted in terms of service design. Students service perceptions were negatively impacted by organizational issues. Likewise, students satisfaction with services delivered by a college of business of a comprehensive university was disconfirmed (Franklin & Shemwell, 1995). Aghamolaei and Zare (2008) also report deviations of students perceptions from expectations of service delivery at a medical sciences university. In view of the above, five research questions (RQ) on service performance assessment of business schools in an emerging market, Tanzania, are posed. RQ1: To what extent do students expectations match the perceived educational service quality received? RQ2: Is the importance attached to service quality dimensions by students (reliability, responsiveness, assurance, empathy, and tangibles) during the service encounter relatively the same? RQ3: Is the perception of service quality delivered relatively the same for all employees (academic, administrative staff and managers) from various levels in the institutions? RQ4: Do students and staff have relatively the same perceptions of the services received/performed? RQ5: Is there a difference in the importance attached to service quality dimensions between students and staff?

8 Application of SERVQUAL to Business Schools 107 METHODOLOGY A cross sectional survey using the original SERVQUAL instrument adapted to measure service quality encounters in business schools was conducted. The wording of items constituting the five dimensions was rephrased to suit education services. All 22 items were used to maintain the integrity of the scale (Parasuraman et al., 1991) (See Appendix). The SERVQUAL instrument was back translated (English-Kiswahili-English) before it was administered. Pre-testing of the instrument was done at the Maastricht School of Management in the Netherlands in an MBA class with students from emerging and developing economies. No revision of the instrument s items was made as a result of the pilot study. Permission from the Commission for Science and Technology and CEOs of business schools in Tanzania was obtained before administration of the instrument. The SERVQUAL instrument was administered in two business schools to students in their final year of study and staff. The questionnaire for staff was nominally identical to that administered to students except that it contained rephrased items requiring them to assess the service they offer. To ensure an objective assessment, only staff with similar qualifications to the students were asked to volunteer. Questionnaires were personally administered to students during their class time after receiving permission from their lecturers. The questionnaires for staff were hand delivered to their offices and collected on the agreed dates later. Sample Characteristics The sample consisted of students from two business schools, namely, the College of Business Education (CBE) located in a commercial city of Dar es Salaam with a total enrollment of 6,150 (51.9% male and 47.1% female) and the Institute of Accountancy Arusha (IAA) with a total enrollment of 2,644 (54.0% male; 46.0% female). Students in their final year of study were the sampling frame: 593 (57% male (341); 43% female (252)) in the first institution and 730 (39% male (284); 61% female (446)) from the second institution (see Table 1). A total of 364 students voluntarily participated in the survey. Staff demographic distribution is shown in Table 2. The gender balance in the staff was about 72% male and 28% female. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION Aggregated gap mean scores (ΣP-E/N) and standard deviation of responses corresponding to each dimension of the SERVQUAL model were computed. Cronbach s alpha, indicating internal consistencies for the various items, is The combined reliability for all service quality dimensions in this study is therefore excellent (George & Mallery, 2006).

9 108 E-R. Mbise and R. S. J. Tuninga TABLE 1 Students Demographic Distribution Demographic Frequency Percentage Gender Male Female Total Age group Not stated Total Professional specialization Business administration Accountancy Procurement and supply/logistic management Marketing Legal and industrial metrology Information technology Tax administration Banking and finance Computer science Total Marital Status Married Single Living together Divorced Separated Not stated Total Employment status Currently employed Not currently employed Total The findings and discussion on the five research questions are given as follows. RQ1: To what extent do students expectations (on the factors reliability, responsiveness, assurance, empathy, tangibles) match the perceived education service quality received? Students gap score indicates the highest gap on Reliability followed by Empathy, Responsiveness, Assurance, and Tangibles ranking fifth (see

10 Application of SERVQUAL to Business Schools 109 TABLE 2 Staff Demographic Distribution Demographic Frequency Percentage Gender Male Female Total Marital Status Married Single Living together Widow/Widowed Total Age Group Not stated Total Type of Staff Academic Administrative Managers Total Table 3). Students had a negative gap score of , which is relatively small, compared to an extreme of 6 (on a scale of 1 7). Students perceptions of service quality received did not match their expectations. Students expectations were higher than the perceived quality of services delivered by the business schools. It is then evident that quality of services delivered by the two business schools in Tanzania was less than satisfactory. With such results managers of business schools in Tanzania are able to understand the service quality perceptions of students, who are their customers. Reliability has received the highest negative gap indicating that business schools in Tanzania, for example, do not keep their promises of doing things at certain times or employees do not give students enough personal attention. However, this observation from Tanzania, with its emerging economy, is not very different from observations made in a mature economy. Franklin and Shemwell (1995) report students expectations were disconfirmed at a college of business in the United States and Pariseau and McDaniel (1997) observed negative gap scores in two private business schools in the Northeast region of the United States. Similarly, Aghamolaei and Zare (2008) have

11 TABLE 3 Staff and Students Mean Gaps Score and Importance Attached to Dimensions Staff Students Deviation Mean (N = 61) Standard deviation Rank Degree of importance Standard deviation Rank Mean (364) Standard deviation Rank Degree of importance Standards deviation Rank Tangibles Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Empathy Overall gap

12 Application of SERVQUAL to Business Schools 111 reported deviations of students perceptions from expectations of service quality delivered by a medical sciences university. RQ2: Is the importance attached to service quality dimensions (reliability, responsiveness, assurance, empathy, and tangibles) by students during the service encounter relatively the same? Students attach different degrees of importance to the various quality dimensions (see Table 3). The relative importance of service quality on the dimensions is ranked by students in (descending) order: Tangibles, Responsiveness, Assurance, Empathy, and, last, Reliability. These results suggest to the management of business schools in Tanzania the need of addressing the service quality deficiencies in this order. Students evaluate the service quality of business schools in Tanzania in terms of availability of up-to-date equipment, appealing physical facilities, the promptness of service delivery, and knowledgeable employees to answer students questions. Although the Reliability dimension features last, this does not mean that this is unimportant. Students do, of course, want a reliable school, which keeps its promises. Non-reliability of services delivery is, however, a normal occurrence in Tanzania due to many factors such as power shortages or lack of resources. It would be undesirable for students to adopt this behavior as normal and proceed to work with this attitude. Performance at work would be adversely affected which would have multiple negative effects including on the reputation of the schools. Investment decisions geared toward service quality improvement should be prioritized according to the indicated order of need. The meager public funds should be utilized in areas which students consider important when assessing the quality of the (business) schools. Management should, therefore, start with attending to the physical facilities and equipment followed by responsiveness, which is next important to them as consumers. Given research results obtained in mature economies may differ. For example, Pariseau and McDaniel (1997) indicate students in the United States attach more importance in the dimensions Assurance followed by Responsiveness and Tangibles the least. However, differences with Tanzanian students may be attributed to social, political, cultural, economic, and legal factors. Furthermore, the type of ownership of business schools can contribute to the differences as well. Tanzanian schools are public. Investment decisions of management may be limited by availability of resources and/or government priorities at any given point in time. This is typical of public institutions in emerging markets (Sheth, 2011). RQ3: Is the perception of service quality delivered relatively the same for all employees from various levels in the institutions? The gap scores for all staff are negative on all dimensions. Academic staff indicates the highest overall gap followed by administrative staff and managers

13 TABLE 4 Gap Scores From Various Levels of Staff Levels of staff Academic Administrative Managers Mean Std deviation Mean Std deviation Mean Std deviation F df p Tangibles , Reliability , * Responsiveness , Assurance , Empathy , Overall gap , Note. *significant at p =

14 Application of SERVQUAL to Business Schools 113 (see Table 4). This research question was tested using between groups ANOVA (analysis of variance). There was no significant difference between the groups overall mean gap score (Table 4). However, there was a significant difference on the Reliability dimension. To identify which groups differed on this dimension, a post hoc test using the Tukey HSD test was used and revealed that a mean score for Academic staff was significantly different from managers on the dimension Reliability (Table 5). This deviation of managers is noteworthy. Managers perception of reliability is different from the staff s perception of it. If the operating staff feels that management cannot keep their promises on issues that affect their welfare, good staff may leave the institutions. If the staff quits, the quality of services provided to students in business schools in Tanzania will negatively be affected and costs of recruiting good new staff may be high. However, if the management of business schools communicates to staff readily when they fail to address a certain promised issue, this would hopefully alleviate the tension between managers and academic staff and retain staff. Recognition of deficiencies in service delivery by staff from various levels in Tanzanian business schools indicates an awareness of existing needs and, perhaps, a readiness to make improvements, accordingly. RQ4: Do students and staff have relatively the same perceptions of the services received/performed? The overall negative gap scores from both staff ( ) and students ( ) provide evidence that service quality falls short of expectations. However the magnitudes of the various gaps differ in both groups. Reliability received the highest gap score from both students and staff though the gap was larger for staff than for students. Thus, employees, who are the service providers, feel more keenly that they are not delivering to their/ students expectations and are aware of their shortcomings with regard to keeping promises and promptness. Next staff found Tangibles and Responsiveness most in need of attention. The dimensions Assurance and Empathy were the TABLE 5 Post Hoc Test: Gap Scores Between Staff Levels Multiple comparisons Tukey HSD Dependent variable (I) Type of staff ( J) Type of staff Mean difference (I J) Std. error Sig. Reliability gaps Academic staff Administrative staff aggregated Managers Managers * Administrative staff Academic staff Managers Academic staff Administrative staff Note. *significant at the p = 0.05.

15 114 E-R. Mbise and R. S. J. Tuninga least worrisome aspects for staff and Overall gap was more on par with student expectations with the smallest gap score. See Table 3 for details. In order to address student needs, management must work on the dimensions with the largest discrepancies (gaps) between the expected and received, starting with Reliability, Empathy, and Responsiveness. Education services in business schools in Tanzania are expected to be reliable since students enroll in courses with a specified time frame. The highest gap resulting on the Reliability dimension is consistent with the contention by Parasuraman et al. (1988) that service quality is largely determined by the Reliability dimension. In the context of Tanzania and its public business schools, improvement on this dimension depends also on many other external organs, like the government. Smith et al. (2007) also report a negative gap score ( 1.52) from students on the Reliability dimension. Staffs have high negative gap score for Tangibles in a University/IT department in the UK. Staff at the Tanzanian business schools are also concerned about the Tangible dimension. This is not surprising due to the low level of infrastructure development and limited resources in emerging economies and in Tanzania, in particular. Emerging economies are infrastructural handicapped (Sheth, 2011). Staff in Tanzanian business schools may be ready to undertake corrective measures within their control on Reliability when an institution promises to do something by a certain time, and it does so. However, in the event of failure by the management to keep promises, staff and students should be informed as soon as possible. Staff sees the out-dated equipment and physical facilities which are not appealing and/or inadequate. Clearly, management of business schools in Tanzania should address the needs to improve Tangibles in order to retain good staff and attract students. RQ5: Is there a difference in the importance attached to service quality dimensions between students and staff. Between groups ANOVA was used to establish whether the difference between students and staff gap scores is statistically significant. Comparison of the overall mean gaps between the two groups indicates nonsignificant results. Comparison of the aggregated (importance) mean scores (Table 3) using the between group ANOVA indicates no significant difference in the degree of importance attached to the five dimensions between staffs and students at p = 0.05 (Table 6). The degree of importance attached to the dimensions Tangibles, Reliability, Responsiveness, Assurance, and Empathy between staffs and students is relatively similar. Although the magnitude of scores on the importance attached to the dimensions between students and staff is identical (not significantly different), the ranking of the dimensions degree of importance by both students and staffs indicate that staff rank Responsiveness first followed by Assurance, Reliability, Tangibles, and then Empathy while students rank Tangibles first

16 Application of SERVQUAL to Business Schools 115 TABLE 6 ANOVA Degree of Importance Between Staff and Students ANOVA Tangibles degree of importance aggregated Reliability degree of importance aggregated Responsiveness degree of importance aggregated Assurance degree of importance aggregated Empathy degree of importance aggregated Sum of squares followed by Responsiveness, Assurance, Empathy, and last, Reliability (see Table 3). This means the perceived service quality for students will increase if the tangibles are improved. For example, students pursuing courses in Information Technology or Computer Science would prefer to work with up-to-date computers and software. On the other hand, staff feels that improvement in responsiveness will enhance their perceived service quality they deliver. Staff of the business schools would prefer a quick response to their requests from management for issues under management s control (e.g., keeping promises) or from other relevant organs for issues outside management s control. These results can prompt management of business schools to invest in Tangibles, which are important to students when evaluating service quality received and on Responsiveness, the factor used by staff to evaluate the service quality in business schools. Difference in emphasis on service quality dimensions between students and staff is not only found in Tanzanian business schools. It has also been reported in mature economies. For example, Pariseau and McDaniel (1997) found that staff and students from a private U.S. business school ranked the various quality dimensions differently. Staff ranked tangibles as the second most important factor while students ranked responsiveness as second most important with tangibles last. df Mean square F Sig.(0.05) Between Groups Within Groups Total Between Groups Within Groups Total Between Groups Within Groups Total Between Groups Within Groups Total Between Groups Within Groups Total

17 116 E-R. Mbise and R. S. J. Tuninga CONCLUSION Students in business schools are now demanding better services than ever before to satisfy their needs. The consumer-driven awareness of the importance of a quality education makes quality improvement for business schools in Tanzania important. This awareness pushes students to evaluate institutions before choosing one that provides the highest possible standard of education. Although business schools in Tanzania have considered students expectations and have always tried to meet them, these expectations keep changing. While a number of empirical studies have been undertaken on education services, few or none have been conducted to address service quality in business schools in emerging markets and in Tanzania, specifically. The underlying reason could be that service providers feel they understand students/staff needs and, hence, ignore the importance of student perception the educational services they offer. The objective of this study was to fill in the gap in services marketing by empirically investigating students perceptions of service quality offered by two business schools in Tanzania. The gap between students expectations and students perceptions was measured. The study also sought the perceptions of the managers (heads of departments, CEOs) and employees (academic and administrative staff) of business schools on the perceived quality of services they deliver. Comparison of staff and students service quality delivered/received was made. Furthermore, the relative importance of the service quality dimensions between students and staffs was sought. These were addressed by answering five research questions. RQ1: To what extent do students expectations (on the factors reliability, responsiveness, assurance, empathy, tangibles) match the perceived education service quality received? Measurements of the service quality indicate that business schools did not meet students expectations in all 22 items. Overall there was a negative gap score. The largest gap was observed in the Reliability dimension followed by Empathy. Tangibles had the smallest gap. However, there was no significant difference between the overall gaps. The negative scores across the dimensions indicate there is room for improvement. These results are consistent with Pariseau and McDaniel, (1997) who report negative gap scores from students. Nevertheless the order of the gaps is different (Empathy followed by a tie of Reliability and Tangibles). A discrepancy between students expectations and perceptions of services delivered can be minimized but not be eliminated altogether since there are individual differences among staff and there are always new students enrolling. RQ2: Is the importance attached to service quality dimensions by students (reliability, responsiveness, assurance, empathy, and tangibles) during the service encounter the same?

18 Application of SERVQUAL to Business Schools 117 Students attached a different degree of importance to the dimensions. Tangibles ranked first then Responsiveness, Assurance, Empathy, and last, Reliability. Following the order of importance attached to various dimensions, prioritizing improvement efforts on service quality according to the indicated order would be appreciated by students. Management in Tanzania business schools should start with Tangibles, followed by responsiveness, etc. RQ3: Is the perception of service quality delivered relatively the same for all employees from various levels in the institutions? All employees from various levels indicated a negative gap of services they deliver on all 22 items. The overall gap was not statistically significant. However the magnitude of the gap was highest from academic staff, followed by administrative staff, and then managers. The academic staff and managers differ on the Reliability dimension. Given that all staff members recognize the deficiencies in services they are delivering, they may be ready for improvement efforts on all dimensions. RQ4: Do students and staff have relatively the same perceptions of the services received/performed? Comparison of staff and students overall gap is not statistically significant. The dimensions Assurance and Empathy received a high rating from staff, whereas Tangibles received a high rating from students. Reliability received the highest gap from both students and staffs. Apparently, business schools do not keep their promises or take adequate steps to solve students problems promptly. This is undesirable as students with unattended problems may opt to transfer to a competitor to continue their education. Another recourse for students is to organize a strike to exert pressure on management to effect the changes and improvements they want. If this occurs, business schools will incur high costs. This may require government intervention as well. The overall gap scores of about 1.2 of students and staff are, however, relatively small compared to 6 (the extreme of 1 7). RQ5: Is there a difference on the importance attached to service quality dimensions between students and staff? The order of importance attached to the dimensions between students and staff is different. While students rank tangibles first, staff ranks responsiveness first. In this regard, improvement on tangibles will increase perceived service quality from the students point of view while, for staff, responsiveness counts with regard to perceptions of the service quality they deliver.

19 118 E-R. Mbise and R. S. J. Tuninga MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Public business schools in Tanzania are semi-autonomous entities. The fees paid by students are retained by these schools to cover operational costs. The fact that students are increasingly selective about their choice of an educational institution at which they will pursue their studies, business schools must strategically improve their services to gain and maintain a competitive advantage over other institutions offering similar services. Students expectations change over time. It is, therefore, also important for business schools to monitor the quality of services they deliver on an ongoing basis and make improvements accordingly. Moreover, what management in business schools in Tanzania thinks would improve service quality may not be what counts from the students point of view while evaluating the service quality received. Using the importance attached to the service quality dimensions by students can guide management to make strategic investment decisions. SERVQUAL instrument as a tool has shown the ability to aid this undertaking in Tanzania s business schools. The results of service quality assessment from students/ staff in this study provide insight into and useful information for quality assurance, control and improvement. Different dimensions may be more or less important depending on one s role/perspective. From a public policy point of view it is recommended to the Tanzania regulatory body, the National Council for Technical Education, to empower students to evaluate service quality received from the business schools where they study. This information will be a useful supplement to traditional measures used. LIMITATIONS The survey was cross-sectional and, therefore, lacks internal validity, which would otherwise be high, if it were a longitudinal survey. Only two business schools were involved in the study. The sample frame for this study included only students in the final year and staff with a degree comparable to that of the students in the study. Other students and staff members were excluded. Some of these other staff members also delivered services to and interact with the students in the study. Further Research Avenues The study covered students evaluation of how services are delivered only. While this is important, the effect of outcomes from business schools services on students expectations and perceptions also needs to be measured. The study was limited to only two business schools in Tanzania. Future studies should include more business schools/ higher learning institutions in Tanzania and schools in similar, but different contexts, in other emerging markets. A follow up of a qualitative study with a more in-depth inquiry into

20 Application of SERVQUAL to Business Schools 119 quality assessment and reliability would be a good addition to the current research. Last, a longitudinal/further study with the same panel members can be undertaken to monitor their perceptions of the service quality received from business schools over time. REFERENCES Aghamollaei, T. & Zare, S. (2008). Quality gap of educational services in viewpoints of students in Hormozgan University of medical sciences. BMC Medical Education, 8, 34. Retrieved from Al-Tamimi, H. A. H. & Al-Amiri, A. (2003). Analyzing service quality in the UAE Islamic Banks. Journal of Financial Service Marketing, 8(2), Angelis, V. A., Lymperopoulos, C., & Dimaki, K. (2004). Customer perceived value for private and state-controlled Hellenic banks. Journal of Financial Marketing, 9(4), Bigné, E., Martínez, C., & Miquel, J. (1997). The influence of motivation, experience and satisfaction on the quality of service of travel agencies. In Kunst P. & Lemmink J. (Eds.), Managing service quality (Vol. III) (pp ). London, UK: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd. Brown, S. W. & Bond, E. U. III. (1995). The internal /external framework and service quality: toward theory in services marketing. Journal of Marketing Management, 11, Brown, S. W. & Swartz, T. A. (1989). A gap analysis of professional service quality. Journal of Marketing, 53, Cheng, Y. C. & Tam, W. M. (1997). Multi-models of quality in education. Quality Assurance in Education, 5(1), Clewes, D. (2003). A student-centered conceptual model of service quality in higher education. Quality in Higher Education, 9(1), Cronin, J. J. Jr, & Taylor, S. A. (July 1992). Measuring service quality: A re-examination and extension. Journal of Marketing, 56, Crosby, P. B. (1979). Quality is free. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Crosby, P. B. (1984). Quality without tears. New York, NY: New American Library. Cuganesan, S., Bradley, G., & Booth, P. (1997). Service quality and organizational performance indicators. In Kunst P. & Lemmink J. (Eds.), Managing service quality (Vol. III) (pp ). London, UK: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd. Eagle, L. & Brennan, R. (2007). Are students customers? TQM and marketing perspectives. Quality Assurance in Education, 15(1), Fowdar, R. R. R. (2007). Developing a service quality questionnaire for the hotel industry in Mauritius. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 13(1), Franklin, K. & Shemwell, D. W. (1995). Disconfirmation theory: An approach to student satisfaction assessment in higher education. Retrieved from ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/ b/80/23/2c/5d.pdf Gabbott, M. & Hogg, G. (1997). Service dimensions and service quality: An asymmetric approach. In Kunst P. & Lemmink J. (Eds.), Managing service quality (Vol. III) (pp. 1 9). London, UK: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd. Garbin, D. A. (1987). Competing on the eight dimensions of quality. Harvard Business Review. 65,

21 120 E-R. Mbise and R. S. J. Tuninga Getty, J. M. & Getty, R. L. (2003). Lodging quality index (LQI): Assessing customers perceptions of quality delivery. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality, 15(2), Getty, J. M. & Thompson, K. N. (1994). The relationship between quality, satisfaction, and recommending behaviour in lodging decisions. Journal of Hospitality & Leisure Marketing, 2(3), George, D. & Mallery, P. (2006). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc. Goyal, A. (2006). Consumer perceptions towards the purchase of credit cards. Journal of Services Research, 6(Special issue), Grönroos, C. (1984). Defining marketing: A market-oriented approach. European Journal of Marketing, 23(1), Ham, C. L. (2003). Analyzing the value of service quality management: Gaining competitive advantages. International Journal of Value-Based Management, 16(2), Harte, H. & Etchart, G. (1997). Quality and change in the provision of health care: The relationship between chaos and quality. The case study of a Seattle clinic. In P. Kunst & J. Lemmink (Eds.), Managing Service Quality (Vol. III), (pp ). London, UK: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd. Holfold, D. & Reinders, T. P. (2001). Development of an instrument to assess student perceptions of the quality of pharmaceutical education. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 65, Joseph, M., Yakhou, M., & Stone, G. (2005). An educational institution s quest for service quality: Customer perspective. Quality Assurance in Education, 13(1), Juran, J. M. (1974). Quality control handbook (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Juran, J. M. (1982). Upper management and quality. New York: Juran Institute. Koslowski, F. A. III (2006). Quality and assessment in context: A brief review. Quality Assurance in Education, 14(3), Ladhari, R. (2009). A review of twenty years of SERVQUAL research. International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 1(2), McQuilken, L., Breth, R., & Shaw, R. N. (2000). Consumer expectations and satisfaction levels: An evaluation of tourism in Otway Region. Paper presented at ANZMAC 2000 Visionary Marketing for the 21st Century: Facing the Challenge. Ming C. L. & Ing, S. H. (2005). Relationship among service quality, customer satisfaction and profitability in the Taiwanese banking industry. International Journal of Management, 22(4), Oldfield, B. M., & Baron, S. (2000). Student perception of service quality. Quality Assurance in Education, 8(2), O Neill, M. & Palmer, A. (2001). Survey timing and consumer perceptions of service quality: An overview of empirical evidence. Managing Service Quality, 11(3), Palmer, A. (2001). Principles of services marketing (3rd ed.). Maidenhead, UK: McGraw-Hill. Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1991). Refinement and reassessment of the SERVQUAL scale. Journal of Retailing, 67(4), Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implication for future research. Journal of Marketing, 49,