Originally from Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985). A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of marketing, 49(4), 41-50. this model identifies 5 gaps in successful service delivery. It has important marketing implication in managing customers expectation (e.g., word of mouth, prior experience, and advertising) which are put by customers against the service they perceived. In the following table, I summarize the characteristics of each gaps, along with a real-life example: MBA education.
| 1st gap: customer expectation vs. management perception
Gap between marketer and customer. Management fails to know the true needs of customer, leading to an undesirable service proposition. |
MBA director perceives that prospect applicants want international networks for breadth, such as exchange programs whereas applicants actually want oversea dual degree that offers more depth than breadth.
– Result: less applicant and less enrollment – Solution: market survey to know your customers |
| 2nd gap: management perception vs. service specification
Gap within marketer side. The perceived needs are not converted into performance standards, ending up with an unappealing service specification. |
MBA director orders its international coordinator to sign dual degree partnerships as many as possible, while does not specify which country, ranking, compatibility between programs, and cost of partners to sign with.
– Result: many dual degree partnerships are up to the staff’s personal preference or convenience – Solution: Quality Function Deployment |
| 3rd gap: service specification – service delivery
Gap within marketer side. The standards are not properly carried out due to inability or unwillingness of employees, or conflicting each other standards.
|
Possible scenarios include:
(i) international coordinator cannot understand the education system or visa formality for each of the dual degree partners (ii) as a university clerk, he is poorly trained in terms of a study abroad consultant (iii) he may be reluctant to check latest information for students, thus not encouraging applications (iv) he hard sells to students who fill the quota per partnership, but ignores student satisfaction – Result: bad service execution, wasting resources, arising dissatisfaction from students and partners – Solution: evaluation framework (e.g., key performance indicator for service appraisal) |
| 4th gap: service delivery – external communication
Gap within marketer side. External communication (e.g., sales agents and commercials) misaligns with the service, causing an overestimation which may lead to lawsuit and image damage. |
MBA admission officer highlights the benefit of dual degree programs but hides the cost (i.e., tuition) and risk (i.e., such program may last up to four years and its quota is up to severe competitions).
– Result: high expectation from new students, feeling of cheating when they discover the cost; drop-out from program – Solution: communication review panel jointly formed by admission and international office |
| 5th gap: perceived service – expected service
Gap within consumer side. Consumer misperceives the service, having fault interpretations. Leaving the company’s efforts of service design, execution, and communication in vain. |
MBA international office frequently tracks their study abroad students, while students perceive that the school makes commission by referring them to a partner.
– Result: students are not completely satisfied, may spread negative word of mouth (e.g., complaint on personal blog) – Solution: establish faculty liaison office, active follow-up, spread helpful message |