2001
DOI: 10.3727/108354201108749764
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluating Customer Satisfaction: A Contingency Model Approach

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2004
2004
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Overall satisfaction can be defined as the extent to which the level of service perceived by the customer matches the anticipated level of service (Bolton and Drew, 1991;Sulek et al, 1995). It is a function of satisfaction from each of the service components according to its relative importance for the user (Chudy and Sant, 1993;Toy et al, 2002). A user's overall satisfaction is not only a key criterion for level of service, but also a motivation for the behavioral patterns of users as expressed in selection, frequency and manner of use of the service systems (Boulding et al, 1993;Cronin and Taylor, 1992).…”
Section: The Level Of Service Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Overall satisfaction can be defined as the extent to which the level of service perceived by the customer matches the anticipated level of service (Bolton and Drew, 1991;Sulek et al, 1995). It is a function of satisfaction from each of the service components according to its relative importance for the user (Chudy and Sant, 1993;Toy et al, 2002). A user's overall satisfaction is not only a key criterion for level of service, but also a motivation for the behavioral patterns of users as expressed in selection, frequency and manner of use of the service systems (Boulding et al, 1993;Cronin and Taylor, 1992).…”
Section: The Level Of Service Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nasution and Mavondol., (2005) postulate that the underlying theory of service quality defined by Parasuraman et al (1988) can be open to question as it is not well supported by theoretical and empirical evidence on the relevance of the expectationsperformance gap. Toy et al (2002) in their assessment of the SERVQUAL model take Parasuraman et al (1988) to task for failing to explain the variability of the outcomes of the SERVQUAL model. They have suggested a contingency model approach.…”
Section: Limitations Of the Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%