The paper "Service Marketing - Andrew Breweries Limited " is a good example of a marketing case study. Grant solutions company Limited offers a range of variable services. The core services are accounting, and audit and assurance. Other supplementary services offered by the company include tax services, financial and investment advisory, financial consultancy services, and enterprise development services. It is clear that the firm offers competitive services. Thus, it has serious competitors offering similar services. Its competitors include KPMG Australia, PWC Australia, Ernest & Young, Grant Thornton Australia, BDO, and Deloitte among others. The customer base for these firms is varied.
The customers range from those seeking accounting, audit and assurance services to those seeking financial advisory. Thus, their customers include sole proprietors, partnerships, cooperative societies, private and public companies, and corporations. These customers require high professional ethics and high professional duty of care. Cause and Effect Analysis Andrew Breweries Limited complained about the delayed submission of accounting and audit reports. The company also complained about material misstatements in the financial statements and audit reports. The delay and financial misstatements impacted negatively on its financial status.
This was as a result of poor service delivery by its service provider, the Grant Solutions Limited company. Several factors have been identified that cause poor performance of service providers and customer complaints (Herrera, Goldschmidt & Hoffman. 2004 p. 246). Some of these factors that relate to accounting and audit service providers, and especially Grant Solutions Limited, are shown in the fishbone diagram below. The factors have been classified into two broad categories, the organizational factors and employee factors. The organizational factors include heavy workload, lack of enough training and development, and system and equipment failure.
The employee factors include inappropriate planning to execute work delegated, incompetence and slowness in work. Organizational Factors The heavy workload is associated with fatigue and stress. This may make an employee incapable of concentrating and focusing on finer details (Buchnan, Debyer, Jaina, Kelliher, Moore, Parry, & Pilbean. 2013 P. 7). This may cause errors and material misstatements in financial statements. Grant Solutions Limited might have delegated a lot of work to one or a few employees leading to their poor service delivery. Training and development enhance employees’ skills and experience.
If employees are not well trained, they may lack the necessary skills to handle certain jobs (Maxwell, Watson & Quail. 2004 p. 156). This may make its service delivery inefficient. This might be the case of Grant Solutions employees. For quality service delivery, one must acquire certain skill levels and prior experience that must be continuously learned (Cohen & Levinthal. 2001 p. 131). Another organizational cause of failure in service delivery is the systems and equipment failure. It is true that modern technology has made work easier in many areas. The software has been developed to handle accounting and auditing services.
If systems and equipment fail due to poor installation or maintenance, they cause an overall failure in service delivery (Goldstein, Johnston, Duffy & Rao. 2002 P. 122).
Bitner, M.J., Booms, B.H., & Tetreault, M.S. 1990. The Service Encounter: Diagnosing Favorable and Unfavorable Incidents, Journal of Marketing, 54(3), 71-84.
Boshoff, C., & Gray, B. 2004. The Relationship between Service Quality, Customer Satisfaction and Buying Intentions in the Private Sector. South African Journal of Business Management, 35(4), 27-37.
Buchanan, D.A., Denyer, D., Jaina, J., Kelliher, C., Moore, C., Parry, E. & Pilbean, C. 2013. How do they manage? A Qualitative Study of the Realities of Middle and Frontline Management Work. Health Services and Delivery Research, 1(4), 1-268.
Cohen, W.M. & Levinthal, D.A. 2001. Absorptive Capacity: A new Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34(4), 128-152.
Demirel, Y., Yoldas, M.A. & Divanoglu, S.U. 2009. The Determinants of Service Quality Satisfiers and Dissatisfiers. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 6(5), 353-371.
Goldstein, S.M., Johnston, R., Duffy, J. & Rao, J. 2002. The Service Concept: The Missing Link in Service Design Research? Journal of Operations Management, 20(2), 121-134.
Herrera, B. G. C., Goldschmidt, N. & Hoffman, K.D. 2004. Customer and Employee Views of Critical Service Incidents. Journal of Services Marketing, 18(4), 241-254.
Johnston, R. 1995. The Determinants of Service Quality: Satisfiers and Dissatisfiers. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 6(5), 53-71.
Kandampully, J. & Butler, L. 2001. Service Guarantees: A strategic Mechanism to Minimize Customers’ Perceived Risk in Service Organizations. Managing Service Quarterly, 11(1), 112-121.
Maxwell, G., Watson, S., & Quail, S.2004. Quality Service in the International Hotel Sector: A Catalyst for Strategic Human Resource Development? Journal of European Industrial Training, 28(4), 159-182.
Mbecke, Z.M.P. 2014.Resolving the Service Delivery Dilemma in South Africa through a Cohesive Service Delivery Theory. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 12(4), 265-276.
Odera, O., Chepkwony, J., Lagat, C., Korir, M.K. & Mumbo, H.M. 2012.Effects of Distributive Justice Complaints Resolution Strategies on Customer Satisfaction in Kenya’s Banking Industry. European Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 1(6), 87-96.
Petrick, J.F. 2009. The Role of Quality, Value, and Satisfaction in Predicting Cruise Passengers’ Behavioral Intentions. Journal of Travel Research, 42, 397-400.
Singh, S. &Ranchod, A. 2004. Market Orientation and Customer Satisfaction: Evidence from British Machine Tool Industry. Industrial Marketing Management, 33(2), 135-144.
Sun, B. &Shibo, L. 2005. Learning and Acting upon Customer Information- With Empirical Application to the Service Allocations with off-shore Centres. Marketing Science, 24(3), 430-443.