Service Quality Management - Allpress Espresso - Case Study Example

Service Quality Management Institution Name Introduction Quality is a motivating force for enhanced competitiveness, greater profitability, and improved customer satisfaction. When it comes to service quality, Chingang (2010) defines it as a study area that describes methods of service delivery to make the service recipient satisfied. Shahin and Janatyan (2011) posit that high quality service is a service delivery that satisfies or surpasses customer expectations. In the case of a service encountered with Allpress Espresso’s, this essay takes the perspective that service quality should be based on customer evaluation of the outcomes of the service, the processes of service delivery and evaluation of customer expectations with the performance of the service (Tolpa, 2012). This also means that service quality could be toyed as the fit between Allpress Espresso’s existing service level and expectations of the customers. Service quality is, therefore, the total customer impression of Allpress Espresso and its service efficiency. The underlying argument is that Allpress Espresso has failed to recognise the difference between hygiene and enhancing factors. According to Wirtz and Johnston (2003, p 12) Singapore Airlines “recognizes that while all the components of a service are important, there is a difference between the hygiene and enhancing factors.” Implying that while Singapore Airlines regards all the services it offers as vital, hygiene is not the only driving force for quality. This is since other airlines can offer the service, in addition to a long list of what the customers expects, regarding quality service, such as safety, seat comfort, punctuality, technical skills and flight schedules. Conversely, the enhancing factors consist of softer skills, such as warmth, anticipation of customer needs, compassion, understanding and caring. Indeed, Allpress Espresso is one such company that has failed to recognise the difference between hygiene and enhancing factors. The concept of service quality has been tricky for Allpress Espresso. Parasuraman et al. (1985) views service quality as the discrepancy between what the customers perceive of the services render by a certain service provider and what they expect about companies offering the same service. This means that if what the perception of Allpress Espresso’s customers is lower than their expectation, then the customers will judge the company’s service to have low quality. Conversely, when Allpress services meet its customer’s expectations, then the customers are likely to perceive quality as high. In measuring service quality, Shahin and Janatyan (2011) cites Zeithaml and Berry (1990) to explain that RATER model is simplified version of SERVQUAL. RATER model applies fittingly in the case of Allpress Espresso. As hypothesised by the RATER model, quality is a comparison between what the customers expect and their performance, or how efficiently the service delivered parallels customer expectations. RATER model measures the efficiency of the customer service that highlights five key areas: Reliability, Assurance, Tangibles, Empathy and Responsiveness. Chingang (2010) proposes that Gap Analysis should be used in describing each of the five dimensions while reflecting on a company’s services. The first gap relates to the issues of reliability dimension of the RATER model. It is the gap between what the customers expect and what the management perceives (Grzinic, J. (2007). In the case of Allpress, the gap would arise when the management fails to recognize what the customers want. Indeed, Allpress Espresso’s management perceives that customers want high quality coffee. The company has always been preoccupied with serving coffee that has the natural taste of Arabica beans. While this could be justified based on the high demand for quality coffee in Australia, the management has failed to conceive that customers have become more concerned with the responsiveness of the baristas (BeanScene, 2013). The factors that may have contributed to this gap include the varied front layers between the company’s executive management and the front line personnel. Additionally, the company conducts deficient marketing research and tends to misinterpret information regarding what the customers want when they talk of quality. In this regards, while the company has established a reputation for providing high quality service and space, the staff serving the coffee are not very friendly and compassionate. The second gap relates to assurance. It is the gap between what the management perceives and the service quality standards or specifications. In the case of Allpress, the company is yet to fill this gap (Shahin & Janatyan, 2011). While the management perceives that the customers want high quality service served speedily, it has failed to set the right performance standards that guide the fastness of delivery. For instance, when the company’s supervisors often instruct the barista to respond fast to orders, they often fail to stipulate the speed they should respond. In fact, the management at Allpress acknowledges that among the biggest challenges facing its service delivery is implementing an effective performance standard, having grown from six employees in the 1990s to 200 today (BeanScene, 2013). As mentioned by Shahin and Janatyan (2011), among the causes of Gap 2 are insufficient planning procedures, non-specific service design and non-systematic process of launching new services. The third gap relates to tangibles dimensions of RATER model. It is the gap between the specification of the service quality and the actual delivery of the service (Shahin & Janatyan, 2011). In the case of Allpress, the gap arises when the baristas are deficiently trained and fail to meet the set service standards. This is because of the deficient human resource policies, including role conflict and improper employee evaluations, despite effective recruitment and reward scheme. Indeed, Allpress acknowledges that it is yet to have a comprehensive policy, which caters for its 200 plus employees, as the current-one targeted less than 50 employees, it had in the early 2000s. Additionally, it may have been caused by failure of the company to match demand to supply due to problems of internal marketing. The fourth gap relates to empathy dimension of the RATER model. It is the gap between external communication and the service delivered (Grzinic, 2007). The high customer expectations that customers have to the services offered by Allpress are highly influenced by the statement the company makes, through its advertisements and its staff. Due to this, customers expect empathy from the company, which, however, is not realised quite often. At Allpress, the gap arises when these anticipated expectations fail to be fulfilled at the time the service is delivered. For instance, the company has printed brochures showing customers who visit its Roasterry Café will have the opportunity to taste and purchase fresh roasted beans that they can brew at home. However, all customers may not always have the opportunity to taste, since the company may run out of stock of the samples (Businessview, 2014). Secondly, the company states in its website that the café-canteen style menu has been developed using the ‘freshest’ seasonal produce, and that the quality of the company’s suppliers is often the key to the efficiency of its menu (Businessview, 2014). Hence, customers have often sought the coffer made from the ‘freshest’ produce. However, thus has often not been realised as the company has had problems with its supply chain, leading to late delivery of coffee. The fifth gap relates to responsiveness dimension of the RATER model. According to Shahin and Janatyan (2011), the responsiveness dimension is concerned with the proficiency in providing high quality and fast service. The gap rises when the customers tend to misinterpret the quality of the service. In the case of Allpress, a gap exists between the expected service and perception of the service gap. For instance, the gap may arise when the baristas keep asking the patrons about the coffee they have been served with just to show that they care about customer experience (Businessview, 2014). However, the patrons may interpret this to mean that there could be something wrong with the coffee. Conclusion Allpress Espresso has failed to recognise the difference between hygiene and enhancing factors. As established, using the RATER model, Allpress management has been obsessed with serving coffer that has the natural taste of Arabica beans while what customers want are baristas. The company has also failed on its assurance. While it perceives that the customers want high quality service served speedily, it has failed to set the right performance standards that guide the fastness of delivery. The tangible aspect is also wanting. At Allpress, the baristas are deficiently trained and fail to meet the set service standards due to deficient human resource policies, role conflict and improper employee evaluations. The empathy dimension also shows a default in the company’s services. At Allpress has failed to deliver the empathies it advertises on its website to customers. Concerning responsiveness, the company’s customers tends to misinterpret the quality of the service due to the company’s poor tactics of responding to customer demands. Despite its success and rapid growth from a small company, comprising a staff of six into a multinational company with some 200 employees, Allpress Espresso still cannot afford to be complacent. It should take each available opportunity to develop its systems and staff, delivering high quality service and reinvent its services by anticipating the right customer needs. In addition to delivering services that satisfy what every customer would want, maintaining consistent service excellence is critical. References BeanScene. (2013). Allpress Espresso Opens Roastery and Café in Melbourne. Retrieved: Businessview. (2014). Allpress Espresso: The perfect cup. National Australia Bank Limited. Retrieved: Chingang, D. (2010). Using the SERVQUAL Model to assess Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction: An Empirical study of grocery stores in Umea. retrieved: Grzinic, J. (2007). Concepts of Service Quality Measurement In Hotel Industry. Ekon. Misao Praksa Dbk. 1(1). 81-98 Tolpa, E. (2012). Measuring Customer Expectations of Service Quality: case Airline Industry. Retrieved: Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. & Berry, L. (1985). A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implication for Future Research. Journal of Marketing, 49(1), 41-50 Shahin, A. & Janatyan, N. (2011). Estimation of Customer Dissatisfaction Based on Service Quality Gaps by Correlation and Regression Analysis in a Travel Agency. International Journal of Business and Management 6(3), 99-107 Wirtz, J. & Johnston, R. (2001). Singapore Airlines: What It Takes To Sustain Service Excellence – A Senior Management Perspective. NUS Business School Research Paper Series, December 2001 Zeithaml, V. Parasuraman, A. & Berry, L. (1990). Delivering Quality Service; Balancing Customer Perceptions and Expectations. Free Press Read More