2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2009.10.015
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An empirical study of employee loyalty, service quality and firm performance in the service industry

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

12
248
0
13

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 334 publications
(273 citation statements)
references
References 89 publications
12
248
0
13
Order By: Relevance
“…Recently, Yee et al (2010) found that employee loyalty is considerably related to service quality, which in turn will have an impact on both customer satisfaction and customer loyalty, which ultimately will lead to firm profitability in high-contact service industries (Yee et al, 2010). Calabrese (2012) argued that perceived service quality and service productivity are two leading enablers of good performances in service companies (p. 800).…”
Section: Service Quality In Operationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, Yee et al (2010) found that employee loyalty is considerably related to service quality, which in turn will have an impact on both customer satisfaction and customer loyalty, which ultimately will lead to firm profitability in high-contact service industries (Yee et al, 2010). Calabrese (2012) argued that perceived service quality and service productivity are two leading enablers of good performances in service companies (p. 800).…”
Section: Service Quality In Operationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Service Quality: Service quality refers to the overall perceptions of performance the services offered by employees in a particular service shop (Yee et al, 2010).…”
Section: Firm Performance (The Dependent Variable)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Firm performance as a sole dependent variable in this research will be assessed by using four dimensions related to the nonfinancial performance: innovation and employee satisfaction as suggested by Kaplan and Norton (2001), service quality as suggested by Kuo (2011), and reputation as suggested by Ariff et al (2014). 16 items to measure the firm performance, 3 items to innovation adapted from Chen et al (2010), 5 items to measure the firm's reputation adapted from Petrick (2002), 5 items to measure service quality adapted from Parasuraman et al (1991), the five items are chosen to be appropriate with the study as suggested by Yee et al (2010), and 3 items to measure employee satisfaction adapted from (Huang and Rundle-Thiele, 2014). Whereas all items were measured using a five-point rating scale, rating from one: "Strongly disagree", two:…”
Section: Inspirationalmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since customer satisfaction is a function of customer perceptions, it involves the quality of the organization's product or service and customer expectations. Therefore, IPA measures the satisfaction from customer satisfaction surveys based on two components of product or service attributes: the importance of a product or service to a customer and the performance of organization in providing that product or service (Yee, Yeung, & Cheng, 2010). The four quadrants are typically identified as 'keep up the good work' (Q1), 'concentrate here' (Q2), 'possible overkill' (Q3) and 'low priority' (Q4) for a quadrant divided by the center point (Hosseini & Bideh, 2014;Rial, Rial, Varela, & Real, 2008).…”
Section: The Ipa Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%