Service Quality in the E-Retailing Industry

Table of Contents

i. Abstract

iii. List of Tables and Figures

iv. List of Appendices

1. Introduction

2. Literature Review

3. Methodology

4. Findings and Analysis
4.1. Service Recovery
4.2. CustomerSupportService
4.3. Delivery Quality
4.4. Product Quality
4.5. Importance Ratings

5. Conclusions

6. Recommendations

v. Bibliography

vi. Appendices
Appendix A: Service Quality - Critical Incident Questionnaire
Appendix B: Questionnaire Analysis - Gender Distribution
Appendix C: Questionnaire Analysis - Age Distribution
Appendix D: Questionnaire Analysis - Online Shopping Frequency

i. Abstract

This study aims to identify, analyze and prove dimensions contributing to the e-service quality (e­SQ) and satisfaction of online shopping. It takes ‘amazon.com’ as a case study and utilizes the critical incident technique in order to gather meaningful primary data for both satisfying and dissatisfying critical incidents. For this research, a probability sample was adopted, by distribution an electronic questionnaire to potential participants. The questionnaire comprised of a total of nine questions and was completed by 25 participants, generating 50 critical incidents.

The content analysis of the primary data led to four main emergent themes from which three could be attributed to both satisfying and dissatisfying service encounters, whereas one was solely based on dissatisfying incidents. The categories include service recovery (SR), customer support service (CSS), delivery quality and product quality. Throughout the analysis of the findings, the intangibility of e-SQ became apparent, as many incidents were related to behavioral traits. This study further. This study emphasized the multiplicity of academic opinions regarding e-SQ and followed the stance of Collier and Bienstock (2006), by examining their dimensions and was consequently trying to either prove or reject the statements within their study.

Resulting from the findings as well as the related conclusions of this study, recommendations were drawn on the specific example of ‘amazon.com’ as well as the overall e-retail industry and future research.

Word Count: 2,795

iil. List of Tables and Figures

Table 2.1.: Overview of E-Service Quality Conceptualizations and Dimensions

Table 2.2.: E-Service Quality Dimensions by Collier and Bienstock (2006)

Table 4.1.: Exemplified CIT Responses of Service Recover

Table 4.2.: Exemplified CIT Responses of Customer Support Service

Table 4.3.: Exemplified CIT Responses of Delivery Quality

Table 4.4.: Exemplified CIT Responses of Product Quality

Table 6.1.: Recommendations

Figure 2.1.: Conceptual Framework for Measuring E-Service Quality

Figure 4.1.: Distribution of Critical Incidents

Figure 4.2.: Mean Importance Ratings for Critical Incidents

Figure 4.3.: Importance Ratings Comparison

Figure 4.4.: Mapping of emergent themes against e-service quality dimensions

iv. List of Appendices

Appendix A: Service Quality - Critical Incident Questionnaire

Appendix B: Questionnaire Analysis - Gender Distribution

Appendix C: Questionnaire Analysis - Age Distribution

Appendix D: Questionnaire Analysis - Online Shopping Frequency

1. Introduction

The electronic commerce industry witnessed extensive growth over the last decade and it can be observed that a multitude of solely internet based companies, like ‘amazon.com’ have surfaced in addition to conventional offline companies adopting to the internet as a means for distributing their products and services. Competition among e-businesses, has therefore become rigorous (Zhilin et al., 2004). According to Choi et al. (2013), the success in e-commerce is not only determined by low price strategies but by its e-SQ. Finn (2011) states that, managers need to comprehend the extent to which the service performance influences customer satisfaction, as customers do have clear expectations of online shops and demand high levels of service quality (Ingle and Connolly, 2006). E-businesses should shift their focus from relying on solely transactional processes, being e-commerce, towards a more holistic point of view, namely e-service, which includes all service encounters before, during and after the transactions (Parasuraman et al., 2005). This study aims to find and prove dimensions contributing to e-SQ and satisfaction of online shopping, taking ‘amazon.com’ as a case study.

2. Literature Review

There is no unified conformity among academics in relation to e-SQ dimensions in e-retailing. Several studies modified the SERVQUAL model (Parasuraman et al., 1988), originally containing five dimensions, to explain perceptions of service quality. Collier and Bienstock (2006) list the existing approaches to measure e-SQ in their study, highlighting the multitude of opinions. They start with the WEBQUAL model which was developed by Loiacono et al. (2000) consisting of twelve separate dimensions and the SITEQUAL model, which incorporates four dimensions, developed by Yoo and Donthu (2001). A subsequent study by Wolfinbarger and Gilly (2003) also used the original SERVQUAL model as a basis for developing the four dimensions forming the eTailQ model. Several academics favor the E-S-QUAL as well as E-RecS-QUAL model by Parasuraman et al. (2005) who came up with four dimensions for e-SQ and three dimensions for SR. Collier and Bienstock (2006) and Fassnacht and Koese (2006) developed conceptualizations. Both include three main categories which are then sub-divided into single dimensions. The following table provides an overview on the various approaches to measure e-SQ.

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Table 2.1.: Overview of E-Service Quality Conceptualizations and Dimensions Source: Collier and Bienstock (2006) and Fassnacht and Koese (2006) adapted by the author

This study will further elaborate on the conceptualization of Collier and Bienstock (2006) as it encompasses the aspects of the majority of the previously mentioned studies. Collierand Bienstock (2006) alongside Rafiq et al. (2012) are generally favoring the approach of Parasuraman et al. (2005) as it provides a useful starting point for assessing e-SQ. Collier and Bienstock (2006) start with the overall process dimension which is categorized as the state when customers interacts with the online platform of an e-retailer. The first process affecting dimensions is privacy, focusing on customer data security and the visual support of it, through the provision of symbols indicating a secure connection, this dimensions finds support in the study of Wolfinbarger and Gilly (2003). Design refers to the graphical appearance of the website, as the significance was of web site design was previously established as having great impact on e-SQ by several academics (Loiacono et al., 2000; Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2003). Collier and Bienstock (2006) describe information accuracy as the correctness of a web site presenting product and service related information. It was argued that accurate information also positively contributes to customer satisfaction and behavioral intentions to revisit the web site. A similar approach of information accuracy can be seen in the information quality dimension of Fassnacht and Koese (2006). According to the study of Collier and Bienstock (2006) and Parasuraman et al. (2005) ease of use and efficiency is among the most important dimensions for perceived service quality, as it enables the customer to get access to important information in a timely manner, with the least amount of effort. This is in line with most of the academics mentioned in the above table (Loiacono et al., 2000; Yoo and Donthu, 2001; Fassnacht and Koese, 2006). Process quality is lastly also affected by the functionality dimension, meaning the mere fact if the web site is processing the commands, like fast page loading and functioning links as well as payment option, of the customers appropriately (Loiacono et al., 2000; Wolfinbarger and Gilly, 2003; Parasuraman et al., 2005; Collier and Bienstock, 2006).

Collier and Bienstock (2006) criticize that the approach of Parasuraman et al. (2005) uses the fulfillment dimension as a means to capture the whole service experience. They argue that it is unlikely that one construct can appropriately cover the unique dynamics, influencing the outcome of a service process. Collier and Bienstock (2006) therefore separate the outcome quality process into 3 dimensions, describing the last stage of the transaction, which displays extreme importance in terms of the final evaluation of the perceived service quality. Fassnacht and Koese (2006) support this theoretical stance by following the same approach. The dimensions, order timeliness, order accuracy and order condition, refer to the reception of the product or service within the promised timeframe, the extent to which the product or service is specified exactly as processed while ordering it, and the faultlessness of delivered product (Collier and Bienstock, 2006). The study of Fassnacht and Koese (2006) despite following a similar approach, however utilize different dimensions as seen in the above table. In terms of service quality perceptions on online platforms, it was stated that customers are majorly concerned with the outcome of the service as well as the overall process of how services are delivered (Collier and Bienstock, 2006).

However, SR is also of high significance to the customers and represents the extent to which companies are able to offer solutions to problems in a timely and correct manner (Holloway and Beatty, 2003; Parasuraman et al., 2005). This is especially important, as Holloway and Beatty (2003) found that e-retailing is highly affected from customers’ dissatisfaction, as consumers only need few clicks to switch from one e-retailer to another. Even though SR appears to have high significance in e-SQ, Fassnacht and Koese (2006) accentuate the original desire of customers to receive high quality service and not SR. Thus, it should not be the primary focus to deliver good SR, but rather good service quality. This inclination by Fassnacht and Koese (2006) towards overall e-SQ is in line with the fact that Parasuraman et al. (2005) and Collier and Bienstock (2006) separated SR from service quality. Collier and Bienstock (2006) consequently included 3 separate dimensions for SR in their study. They define SR through interactive fairness, procedural fairness and outcome fairness. The criticality of SR was recapitulated by Collier and Bienstock (2006), stating that bad experiences are likely to create a ripple effect, thus influencing the overall perception of the service. They further stress that bad experiences regarding the interactivity or functionality of the online shop, will result in a premature judgment of the e-SQ. The following table summarizes the dimensions utilized by Collier and Bienstock (2006), and links them to other academics.

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Table 2.2.: E-Service Quality Dimensions by Collier and Bienstock (2006) Source: Collier and Bienstock (2006) adapted by the author

Collier and Bienstock (2006) present a conceptual framework for measuring e-SQ, which then underwent hypotheses testing. Their findings suggest that the dimensions of process quality influence a customer’s satisfaction and behavioral intentions. The final outcome evaluation could be associated with the evaluation of the process quality. Outcome quality was further evaluated to contribute to satisfaction. Lastly, it was found that SR impacts on the customer’s satisfaction but not on behavioral intentions. Satisfaction however, directly influences future behavioral intentions.

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Figure 2.1.: Conceptual Framework for Measuring E-Service Quality Source: Collier and Bienstock (2006)

In summary, e-SQ can be defined as the customer’s evaluations regarding the extent to which an online marketplace represents quality in its processes and outcomes and facilitates shopping and delivery, while maintaining an appropriate SR quality.

This literature review accentuated the differences in measuring e-SQ, by presenting a variety of conceptualizations and elaborated on the approach of Collier and Bienstock (2006) in more detail.

[...]