IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Development of a measurement scale for business-to-business service quality: assessment in the facility services sector

Listed author(s):




Registered author(s):

    The prominence of business services in the global economy has become self-evident. The amount of money involved in sales of products and services to business buyers are ever-increasing and much higher than those to individual consumers (Kotler, 2003, Jackson and Cooper, 1988). As organizations have increasingly invested in the business services sector with the hope of gaining sustained competitive advantage, the delivery of quality service has taken on an important role in the strategic planning of service organizations (Westbrook and Peterson, 1998). Since service quality has become the overriding concern of purchasers of business services, service providers focused on not only surviving but also thriving in turbulent national and international markets by delivering a certain level of service quality (Jackson and Cooper, 1988). However, the management of service quality in a business-to-business (B2B) environment is not as widely discussed in literature as it is in the businessto- consumer (B2C) context (Parasuraman, 1998, White and Galbraith, 2000). The most widely spread instrument to measure service quality in a B2C environment is the SERVQUAL scale developed by Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1988). Researchers who applied this scale in B2B environment were not always successful (Brensinger and Lambert, 1990) indicating that the SERVQUAL scale might not be directly transferable to the business sector (Durvasula, Lysonski and Mehta, 1999). This could be due to the contrast between business markets and consumer markets (Kotler, 2003) wherein business services and their marketing are regarded as being more complex (Jackson and Cooper, 1988). Even the dimensions of perceived service quality (the basis for service quality measurement) are considered to be different across the two service settings (Kong and Mayo, 1993). Thus, the development of a measurement scale for perceived service quality adjusted to the needs of the business context appears imperative. In this study we develop a scale to measure the perceived service quality in business settings. The study is based on the exploratory research of Westbrook and Peterson (1998). Consistent with the B2B service quality dimensions they defined, we draw up a scale to actually measure the perceived service quality in a business environment. This newly developed scale will be called the B2B SERVQUAL scale. The SERVQUAL scale developed by Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1988) will occasionally be called the B2C SERVQUAL scale to avoid confusion. Thus, the research focus of this study can be formulated as follows: To develop and test a reliable, valid instrument for measuring perceived service quality in a B2B setting and determine its dimensions. This research focus evokes other questions like which service quality dimensions need to be added to the B2C service quality dimensions to more completely encompass the perceived service quality in a business setting and accordingly are there specific B2C service quality dimensions that are unimportant in a B2B environment. Additionally, we are interested in identifying service quality dimensions that have the most influence on perceived service quality in a business context. The newly developed B2B SERVQUAL scale will help us to gain new insights into not only measuring perceived service quality in a B2B setting, but also in managing the service quality in such an environment thereby improving the service relationship between companies. In this research study the emphasis will be on how service quality is perceived in the facility services sector, like cleaning, catering and security. In the following section we give a short overview of the research on B2C SERVQUAL scale (Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry, 1988) and its applicability in a business environment. This section also gives a short overview of the current research done on perceived service quality in a B2B environment and addresses the issue of the dimensions needed to capture perceived service quality in a B2B context. These dimensions are defined and compared with those in a B2C context. Subsequently we discuss the methodology used to assess the B2B SERVQUAL scale. The analyses and results are then described in another section. In the last section the limitations of our study are mentioned. This section also covers the discussion of the results and gives possibilities for future research.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration in its series Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium with number 04/259.

    in new window

    Length: 35 pages
    Date of creation: Sep 2004
    Handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:04/259
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    Hoveniersberg 4, B-9000 Gent

    Phone: ++ 32 (0) 9 264 34 61
    Fax: ++ 32 (0) 9 264 35 92
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. JS Armstrong & Terry Overton, 2005. "Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys," General Economics and Teaching 0502044, EconWPA.
    2. Peter, J Paul & Churchill, Gilbert A, Jr & Brown, Tom J, 1993. " Caution in the Use of Difference Scores in Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(4), pages 655-662, March.
    3. Caruana, Albert & Ewing, Michael T. & Ramaseshan, B., 2000. "Assessment of the Three-Column Format SERVQUAL: An Experimental Approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 57-65, July.
    4. Babakus, Emin & Boller, Gregory W., 1992. "An empirical assessment of the SERVQUAL scale," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 253-268, May.
    5. Brady, Michael K. & Cronin, J. Jr. & Brand, Richard R., 2002. "Performance-only measurement of service quality: a replication and extension," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 17-31, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:04/259. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Nathalie Verhaeghe)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.