Developing zones of tolerance for managing passenger rail service quality

Abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this article is to develop and empirically test an extension to the three-column format SERVQUAL instrument to evaluate passenger rail service quality. Design/methodology/approach -This article combines the literatures of service quality and rail transport quality to develop the conceptual framework. Three new transport dimensions (comfort, connection, and convenience) are added to the original five SERVQUAL dimensions (assurance, empathy, reliability, responsiveness, and tangibles). The instrument was tested on a passenger line in Wellington, New Zealand. Valid responses to 340 questionnaires were statistically analyzed. Findings -High Cronbach alpha values supported the reliability of the instrument. Content and construct validity are demonstrated also. Regression analysis identified assurance, responsiveness and empathy as the quality factors that had significant effects on overall service quality. In addition, customers indicated that reliability and convenience were also very important factors. Service quality "zones of tolerance" were identified for each dimension and attribute. Research limitations/implications -There are not many published studies to confirm or compare the results of the three-column SERVQUAL instrument, either in the general service literature or in the rail passenger literature. Although the five original SERVQUAL dimensions have been tested quite extensively, the three new rail transport dimensions require further development and testing, particularly since the sample was drawn from a single passenger line in New Zealand. More development and empirical testing are required to refine this measure. Practical implications -Based on the eight dimensions, the practical use of the "zones of tolerance" for identifying areas of quality shortfall and managing quality are illustrated in this paper. Originality/value -This paper provides one of the few empirical applications of the three-column SERVQUAL instrument and extends it to make it more suitable for evaluating rail passenger service quality.

Journey towards World Class Stations: An Assessment of Platform Amenities at Allahabad Junction

“…Our findings correspond to the study of Cavana, Corbett, and Lo (2007), in which connectivity was established as an important factor affecting passenger perception of service quality.…”

“…Appropriate and timely information is what passengers expect from railways, and information emerged as an important predictor of passenger satisfaction in earlier studies (e.g., Cavana, Corbett, and Lo 2007;Rahman and Rahman 2009;Geetika and Nandan 2010;Swami and Parida 2015).…”

A classification tree approach to identify key factors of transit service quality

“…That is why recent years have seen the development of derived importance methods based on CSS (Weinstein, 2000;Cavana et al, 2007;Pakdil and Aydin, 2007;Eboli and Mazzulla, 2007;Joewono and Kubota, 2007;Dell'Olio et al, 2010;Nurul--Habib et al, 2011;Jen et al, 2011) and from stated preference surveys (Hensher and Prioni, 2002;Hensher et al, 2003;Eboli and Mazzulla, 2008a;2008b;Dell'Olio et al, 2011;Cirillo et al, 2011).…”

Age Segmentation for Predicting Behavioural Intention of Using Railway Services in Indonesia

“…In their study looking at New Zealand, Cavana et al (2007) found assurance to be the most important service quality factor followed by responsiveness and empathy. In Malaysia, majority of the passengers of public transport indicated that they still have doubts over the safety assurance level provided by public transportations (Dahalan, D'Silva, Abdullah, Ismail & Ahmad, 2015).…”

“…De Ona, De Ona, Eboli, & Mazzulla, 2015;Cavana, Corbett, & Lo, 2007;Prasad & Shekhar, 2010;Irfan, Kee, & Shahbaz, 2012). Some researchers (Brons, Givoni, & Rietveld, 2009;Rahaman & Rahaman, 2009;Geetika & Shefali, 2010;Chou, Kim, Kuo, & Ou, 2011;Eboli & Mazzulla, 2012) also focussed on examining the relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction.…”