International Research Symposium in Service Management ISSN 1694-0938

An Assessment on Service Quality in the Mauritian

Banking Sector

Ushad Subadar Agathee

Department of Finance and Accounting,
Faculty of Law and Management,
University of Mauritius.
Email: u.subadar@uom.ac.mu

An Assessment on Service Quality in the Mauritian

Banking Sector

Le Meridien Hotel, Mauritius, 24-27 August 2010 1

 International Research Symposium in Service Management ISSN 1694-0938

Paper type: Research Paper

Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to determine the relationship between service
quality and customer satisfaction in the Mauritian Banking Sector, using the
SERVQUAL model.

Design / Methodology / Approach: A sample of 90 individual customers from different

bank service counters have been targeted for this study. The SERVQAUL model was
applied. The study focused on the five dimensions of service performance i.e tangibles,
reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy.

Findings: The results shows huge gap between customer’s perception and expectation
for reliability and responsiveness. Thus, the results of this study highlight the need for
bankers to gear customer service and quality improvements efforts towards components
of reliability and responsiveness. In addition, high scores and lowest gaps were noted
for tangibles, indicating that customers are generally satisfied with the banks’ physical
facilities, equipment and appearance of personnel. Finally, the result shows that those
falling in the highest income groups are more likely to be unsatisfied with the banks’
services.

Originality: This paper contributes to the existing literature on service quality in the
Mauritian Financial Sector.

Keywords: Service quality, SERVQUAL, Banking, Mauritius

Le Meridien Hotel, Mauritius, 24-27 August 2010 2

 International Research Symposium in Service Management ISSN 1694-0938

Introduction
With the advent of Globalization, there are increasingly more pressures on banks to be more
competitive. Indeed, the development of new financial products by non-bank financial
intermediaries creates an opportunity for the customers to have a widened choice. As such,
banks need to review their strategies for their services offered to both commercial and
individual customers. In this respect, service quality and customer satisfaction are nowadays
of utmost importance for all banking institutions.

Various studies 1 have defined service quality as the extent to which a service meets
customers' needs or expectations. In simple terms, service quality can be defined as the
difference between customer expectations of service and perceived service. Broadly speaking,
according to Lewis and Mitchell (1990), when expectations are greater than performance,
then perceived quality is less than satisfactory such that customer dissatisfaction occurs.

With the advent of internet banking, the nature of customer relationship has changed. Banks
are becoming more aware that technical support are more or less standardized almost
everywhere and that as such, they should focus more on their “high-touch” factors in terms of
their personal support. For instance, Kotler (1997) argues that banks should adopt a unique
selling proposition in terms of personal banking services as automatic teller machines
(ATMs) are branded as “standardized” services which are provided by almost all banks.

Service quality has also become an essential research subject as it is critically a determinant
factor towards to a firm’s financial performance. According to Parasuraman et al. (1988,
1991, 1994), service quality can be appropriately measured using the SERVQUAL method
which accounts for customer’s perceptions of service quality. In particular, service quality is
assessed through the gap between expectations and performance. The SERVQUAL model
assess service quality by considering it as a multi-dimensional construct comprising of five
key dimensions namely the tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy.

The aim of this study is to assess the service quality from the Mauritian banking sector using
the SERVQUAL model. As such, a survey was carried to determine their perceptions only

1
 Lewis and Mitchell, 1990; Dotchin and Oakland, 1994a; Asubonteng et al., 1996; Wisniewski and 
Donnelly, 1996 

Le Meridien Hotel, Mauritius, 24-27 August 2010 3

 International Research Symposium in Service Management ISSN 1694-0938

and, expectations and perceptions, of service of their respective banks. The structure of the
paper is as follows; section 2 provides a brief prior research on service quality issues, section
3 discusses the research methodology used, section 4 presents findings, while section 5
concludes the study.

2.0 Prior Research

There are indeed no unique definitions of service quality. According to Kasper et al. (1999),
service quality is “the extent to which the service, the service process and the service
organisation can satisfy the expectations of the user” while Parasuraman et al. (1988)
described service quality as “a function of the difference between service expected and
customers perceptions of the actual service delivered”.

There are several studies which have established the positive relationship between service
quality and performance. For instance, according to Buzzell and Gale (1987), higher service
quality entails the possibility for firms to attain a higher than normal market share. Similarly,
Gummesson (1992) argues that service quality impacts on positively on profits through
improved market shares. In effect, customer satisfaction is the result of buyer’s perception of
service quality which leads to customer retention as purchases are repeated and there are more
scope for relationship building and ‘hear-say’ recommendation. In effect, Reichheld and
Sasser (1990) argued that profitability can be increased if there is a slight increase in
customer retention.

There is also the fact that employee’s satisfaction and service quality moves positively
together. In effect, Hallowell (1996) observed that “while job satisfaction may not lead to
customer satisfaction directly, service organisations rarely have satisfied customers without
having satisfied employees”. Similarly, some studies 2 argue that commitment to customer
service and service capability are important drivers of customer satisfaction, service quality
and performance. According to Roth and Jackson (1995), “commitment to customer service
depends on recruiting the ``right'' employees and rewarding good service while Service
capability depends on internal service quality, processes, IT, and equipment”.

In general, customer satisfaction will be high when the customers believe that the institutions
or the firms have surpassed their service desires. According to Berry et al. (1989), excellence
in service quality entails that a firm will have to excel along the five dimensions of service

2
 (Garvin, 1988; Hallowell et al., 1996). 

Le Meridien Hotel, Mauritius, 24-27 August 2010 4

 International Research Symposium in Service Management ISSN 1694-0938

performance i.e tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy. In particular,

the tangibles represent the physical facilities, equipment, and appearance of personnel and
presence of users, the reliability refers to the ability to perform the promised service
dependably and accurately, the responsiveness relates to the willingness or readiness of
employees to provide service, the assurance contains elements of trust and confidence while
the empathy dimension includes caring and individual attention to users. It is observed that
these dimensions may be of unequal significance to various market segments. However, on a
general basis, these five key dimensions are all important.

In measuring service quality, Robinson (1999) observed that “it is apparent that there is little
consensus of opinion and much disagreement (about how to measure service quality)”.
However, based on the work of a handful of researchers (Sasser et al., 1978; Gonroos, 1984;
Letinen and Letinen, 1985, Parasuraman et al. 1985, 1988,1996), a SERQUAL model has
been developed and is extensively being used in different industries for measuring service
quality.

The SERVQUAL model developed by Parasuraman et al (1988) is based on the

conceptualisation of service quality as the difference between customers' expectations and
perceived performances. In other words, the gap between what the customer expects from a
class of service providers and their evaluations of the performance of a particular service
provider within that class represents the assessment of service quality. Service quality is
presented as a multi-dimensional construct which is measured by SERVQUAL along the five
key dimensions, namely, tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy.
However, it must be pointed out that though the SERVQUAL instrument has been criticised
by some studies 3 , it is still regarded as a leading measure of service quality.

3.0 Research Methodology

The purpose of this study is to assess the importance of five service quality dimensions from
the customer viewpoints. Service dimensions (tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance
and empathy) are thoroughly examined. This research is to identify the gap between
perceptions and expectations of external customer on service dimensions.

In the course of collecting data, a questionnaire was designed. In particular, the survey was
appropriate as it is the least expensive, least time consuming and requires fewer skills as

3
 (e.g. Carman, 1990; Cronin and Taylor, 1992; Teas, 1993) 

Le Meridien Hotel, Mauritius, 24-27 August 2010 5

 International Research Symposium in Service Management ISSN 1694-0938

compares conducting interviews. Typically, the list of service attributes based on different
service dimensions are ranked and rated by the customer to identify the importance of each
service attributes. Due to limited means and time constraints, a quota sampling strategy was
used based on gender and education at different service counters of banking institutions. In
total, a sample of 90 individual customers from different bank branches across Mauritius has
participated in this survey.

The structure of the questionnaire was divided into three sections, namely; Section A:
Customers’ Expectations, Section B: Customers’ Perceptions and Section C: Personal
Information. The questionnaire was customised for the local banks operating in Mauritius
using the “battery of expectations and perceptions statements” proposed by Parasuraman et
al.,(1988,1991) and “the perceptions only statements” proposed by Cronin and Taylor (1992,
1994).

In particular, a list of 22 questions measuring five key dimensions of reliability,

responsiveness, empathy, assurance and tangibles on expectations of service quality were
addressed. Similarly, another 22 parallel questions were asked to evaluate perceptions of
service quality.

With regards to the level of agreement and disagreements, the rating for each statement
started with 1 indicating “strongly disagree” and ended with 5 being “strongly agree”, with 2,
3, and 4 for a rating between “strongly disagree”to“strongly agree”. Quality was measured as
the gap between performance and expectations for each pair of questions.

The following table illustrates the corresponding dimensions that are being assessed by the
questions set in this section.

Take in Table 1 about here

Table 1: Questions related to the five key dimensions of service quality

4.0 Data Analysis

Three major statistical analysis tools were used in this study. These are reliability
analysis, descriptive analysis and statistical inference analysis. Before undertaking any
statistical analysis, it is of great importance to ensure that the data collected is reliable. As

Le Meridien Hotel, Mauritius, 24-27 August 2010 6

 International Research Symposium in Service Management ISSN 1694-0938

such, the Cronbach’s Alpha is calculated to measure the reliability of the underlying
dimensions, namely, tangible, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy. Based on
Nunnaly (1978), the coefficient of the alpha should be greater than 0.7 for the measure to be
deemed reliable.

In this study, 44 items were tested on its reliability. Table 2 shows the results of the
coefficients of Cronbach Alpha for all the five dimensions of the SERQUAL model.

Take in Table 2 about here

Table 2: Result of reliability analysis for five dimensions

From table 2, it is observed that the reliability coefficients are all above 0.7 for all
dimensions. In particular, the Cronbach's alpha is a measure of internal consistency, that is,
how closely related a set of items are as a group. In this case, a high alpha would indicate that
the questions which have selected may be sufficiently related to one another to form a given
dimension.

4.1 Profile of Respondents

The profiles of the respondents are shown in table 3 below.
Take in Table 3 about here
Table 3: Profile of Respondents

From the above table, there are 90 respondents, out of which 53.3% of the respondents are male and
46.7% are female. This highest level of education attained by most respondents was secondary
education, followed by tertiary and primary education. In terms of household income, more than half
of the respondents are earning less than Rs 15,000.

4.2 Study of Demographic Factors on Service Quality

Different tests were used to assess the effect of demographic factors on service quality in the banking
sector. The hypothesis is as follows;
Ho: Demographic factors have no influence on the SERVQUAL mean score of the banking service
counters.
H1: Demographic factors have influence on the SERVQUAL mean score of the banking service
counter.

Based on whether variables are normally distributed or not, the study employs either the Independent
samples test or the Mann-Whitney test to determine the SERVQUAL dimensions perceived by the
gender in assessing the service quality. On the other hand, subject to the given distributions of the

Le Meridien Hotel, Mauritius, 24-27 August 2010 7

 International Research Symposium in Service Management ISSN 1694-0938

variables, either ANOVA or Non-Parametric tests such as Kruskal-Wallis are used in determining the
SERVQUAL dimensions for the other demographic factors, namely education and household income.
The Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test is performed to test whether the demographic factors follow a normal
distribution. It is observed that the p-value is less than 5% for all variables, implying non-normal
distributions. As such, non-parametric tests will be used for this study.

The table below indicates that the analyses of the Mann-Whitney test in determining the differences of
SERVQUAL dimensions perceived by gender in assessing service quality.

Take in Table 4 about here

Table 4: Independent Samples Test of Gender and Actual Service Quality Assessment

The result from table 4 indicates that male and female perceptions for all dimensions of service quality
are indifferent as the p-value is greater than 5% in all cases.

Considering the other demographic factors, namely education and income, the Kruskal Wallis test is
performed. The results are as summarized below;

Take in Table 5 about here

Table 5: K-Independent Sample Test of social demographic and Actual Service Quality
Assessment

With regards to education, the test statistics for reliability, assurance and empathy indicates significant
differences at 5% significant level. Those in the secondary education score the highest level of
consensus in relation to the banks’ reliability and assurance. On the other hand, those in the primary
education scores highest mean in terms of belief that banks provide empathy. Considering household
income, the test statistics for all dimensions indicate significant differences at 5% level, implying that
household income as a social demographic factor has an influence on the SERVQUAL mean score of
banks. In particular, the group of household income under Rs 10,000 compared to the other level of
income scores the highest level of consensus across all dimensions. On the other hand, those in the
highest income group are most likely to unsatisfied across all dimension of service quality.

4.3 The Actual and Desire Service Quality

The perception and expectation of the service quality of five dimensions based on SERVQUAL model
is discussed in this section.

4.3.1 The perception and Expectation on Tangibles

Take in Table 6 about here
Table 6: Mean of Perception and Expectation on Tangibles

Le Meridien Hotel, Mauritius, 24-27 August 2010 8

 International Research Symposium in Service Management ISSN 1694-0938

Table 6 shows the mean score of attributes for the tangible dimension in terms of perception and
expectation. With regards to all four statements on tangibles, the mean expectations scores are greater
than the mean perception scores. Broadly speaking, according to Lewis and Mitchell (1990), when
expectations are greater than performance, the perceived quality is less than satisfactory such that
customer dissatisfaction occurs. However, the gap between expectations and perceptions is more or
less close to zero. In terms of both expectations and perceptions, attribute 3 or ‘neat appearance of
staff’ scores highest while the lowest attribute is attribute 1 which relate to modern looking of
equipments. In particular, the high score of attribute 3 can be explained by the fact that all banks in
Mauritius generally provide most of their employees with neat and attractive uniforms. Table 6 also
shows that there are some differences in magnitude of gap score among the four items with the highest
gap being observed for attribute 3. This indicates the extent to which the quality of service fell short of
the customer's expectation.

4.3.2 The perception and Expectation on Reliability

Take in Table 7 about here
Table 7: Mean of Perception and Expectation on Reliability
From table 7, the highest score on expectation is attribute 5 or “Promise to do something by a certain
time” and the lowest is attribute 6 which refer to how far banks show genuine interest in solving
problems. In terms of perception, the attribute 9 or “insist on error free services” scores highest and
attribute 7 which refer to performance of services for the first time at the start scores the lowest. In
particular, this shows that customer perceived that employees do not generally perform the service
right the first time. Table 7 also shows that there are some differences in magnitude of gap score
among the five items with the highest gap being observed for attribute 5. This indicates the customers
perceived that bank employees generally not able to fulfill their promises in a timely manner.

4.3.3 The perception and Expectation on Responsiveness

Take in Table 8 about here
Table 8: Mean of Perception and Expectation on Responsiveness
As illustrated in Table 8, attribute 12 or “staff always willing to help customers” and attribute 11 or
“staff give prompt services to customers” score highest on expectation and perception respectively. On
the other hand, it is observed that customers generally perceived that staffs are generally busy to
respond to them. In particular, the high gap for attribute 13 between perception and expectation
indicates that the long waiting time or slow service turnaround.

4.3.4 The perception and Expectation on Assurance

Take in Table 9 about here
Table 9: Mean of Perception and Expectation on Assurance

Le Meridien Hotel, Mauritius, 24-27 August 2010 9

 International Research Symposium in Service Management ISSN 1694-0938

Table 9 illustrates the mean score of four attributes selected in the assurance dimension. Attribute 14
which relates to staffs reassuring the customers scores highest in expectations. In terms of perception,
attribute 15 which relates to customers feeling safe in their transactions. Indeed, customers need to
reveal certain confidential information to banks and will be do so if they perceived that employees to
behave honestly. The gaps indicate how far the perceived elements of trust and confidence diverge
from their expectations. Table 9 shows that there are some differences in magnitude of gap score
among the four items with the highest gap being observed for attribute 14.

4.3.5 The perception and Expectation on Empathy

Take in Table 10 about here
Table 10: Mean of Perception and Expectation on Empathy

Table 10 shows that the mean score for attribute 22 or “staffs understand the specific needs of their
customers” is highest in terms of expectations and lowest in terms of perception. Table 10 also shows
that there are some differences in magnitude of gap score among the four items with the highest gap
being observed for attribute 22. In effect, this indicates that customers strongly expect staff to
understand their specific needs though they perceived that this is not generally the case.

4.3.6 SERVQUAL Scores for all dimensions

Take in Table 11 about here
Table 11: Mean of Perception and Expectation on five dimensions
From table 11, it can be observed that tangibles score highest on both expectation and perception.
Empathy scores lowest in expectation while responsiveness and reliability scores are among the lowest
on perceptions. The highest gaps are noted for responsiveness and reliability. From the above table, it
is clear that the customers are not satisfied not only with the willingness or readiness of employees to
provide service but also with the banks’ ability to perform the promised service in a timely manner and
with accuracy. On the other hand, the high scores for tangibles indicate that customers are generally
satisfied with the banks’ physical facilities, equipment and appearance of personnel.

5.0 Conclusion
The main aim of this study is to assess customers’ general expectation and perception towards the
current performance of bankers in terms of their services offered. With the number of bank branches
growing across the island leading to more price competition, there are increasingly urgent needs for
bankers to meet customer expectations for faster and better service. The study reveals that there are no
gender differences across all dimensions of service quality. However, perceptions across income
groups were observed for the five dimensions of service quality. In particular, those in the highest
income group are most likely to be less satisfied across all dimension of service quality. The result
also shows a huge gap for reliability and responsiveness, implying that the customers are not satisfied
with the willingness or readiness of employees to provide service as well as with the banks’ ability to
perform the promised service in a timely manner and with accuracy. However, high scores and lowest
gaps were noted for tangibles, indicating that customers are generally satisfied with the banks’ physical

Le Meridien Hotel, Mauritius, 24-27 August 2010 10

 International Research Symposium in Service Management ISSN 1694-0938

facilities, equipment and appearance of personnel. Thus, the results of this study underscore the need
for bankers to gear customer service and quality improvement efforts towards components of
reliability and responsiveness.

6.0 References
Asubonteng, P., McCleary, K.J. and Swan, J.E. (1996), "SERVQUAL revisited: a critical review of
service quality", Journal of Services Marketing , Vol. 10, No. 6, pp. 62-81.

Buzzell, R.D. and Gale, B.T. (1987), “The PIMS Principles: Linking Strategy to Performance, Free
Press”, New York, NY.

Berry, L.L., Bennett, D.R., and Brown, C.W., (1989), “Service Quality. A Profit Strategy for Financial
Institutions”, Irwin, New York, NY.

Cronin, J. and Taylor, S., (1992), “Measuring service quality: A reexamination and extension”, Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 56, No. 3, pp. 55-68

Cronin, J. and Taylor, S. (1994), “SERVPERF versus SERVQUAL: reconciling performance based
and perceptions minus expectations measurement of service quality”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 58, No. 1, pp.125-31.

Le Meridien Hotel, Mauritius, 24-27 August 2010 11

 International Research Symposium in Service Management ISSN 1694-0938

Dotchin, J.A. and Oakland, J.S. (1994a), "Total quality management in services: Part 2 Service
quality", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 27-
42.

Garvin, D. (1988). “Managing quality”, New York: Macmillan.

Gronroos, C., (1984), “A Service Quality Model and its Marketing Implications”, European Journal of
Marketing, 18, 35-44.

Gummesson, E., (1992), “Quality Dimensions: What To Measure In Service Organisation”, Swartz,
T.A., Bowen,

Hallowell, R. (1996), "The relationships of customer satisfaction, customer loyalty, and profitability:
an empirical study", International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 7, pp. 27-42.

Kasper, H., Helsdingen, Piet v. and Jr, Wouter de V. (1999), “Services Marketing Management”, West
Sussex, England, John Willey & Sons Ltd.

Kotler,Philip (1997), “Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation and Control”

(Ninth Edition), New Jersey: Prentice Hall International.

Lehtinen, V. and Lehtinen, J.R. (1985), “service Quality: A Study of Quality Dimensions”, Helsinki
Service Management Institute, Finland.

Lewis, B.R. and Mitchell, V.W. (1990), "Defining and measuring the quality of customer service",
Marketing Intelligence & Planning , Vol. 8, No. 6, pp. 11-17.

Nunnally, J. C. (1978) “Psychometric theory”, New York: McGraw-Hill

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. and Berry, L., (1985), “A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and its
Implications for Future Research”, Journal of Marketing, 49, 41-50.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1986), "SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale for
measuring customer perceptions of service quality", Report No. 86-108, Marketing Science
Institute, Cambridge, MA.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1988), "SERVQUAL: a multi-item scale for
measuring consumer perceptions of the service quality", Journal of Retailing, Vol. 64, No. 1,
pp. 12-40.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1991), "Refinement and reassessment of the
SERVQUAL scale|", Journal of Retailing , Vol. 67, pp. 420-450.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1993), "Research note: more on improving service
quality measurement", Journal of Retailing , Vol. 69, No. 1, pp. 140-147.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1994), "Reassessment of expectations as a
comparison standard in measuring service quality: implications for future research", Journal
of Marketing , Vol. 58, pp. 111-124.

Robinson, S. (1999), "Measuring service quality: current thinking and future requirements", Marketing
Intelligence & Planning , Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 21-32.

Reichheld, F. and Sasser, W. (1990)"Zero defects: quality comes to services", Harvard Business
Review, Sept-Oct, 1990, pp 105-111.

Roth A. V. and W. E. Jackson (1995), “Strategic determinants of service quality and performance:
Evidence from the banking industry”, Management Science, 41(11):1720–1733.

Le Meridien Hotel, Mauritius, 24-27 August 2010 12

 International Research Symposium in Service Management ISSN 1694-0938

Sasser W.E., Olsen R.P and Wyckoff D.D., (1978), “Management of Service Operations: Text”, Cases
and Readings. Boston Allyn and Bacon, pp 41-50.

Wisniewski, M. and Donnelly, M. (1996), "Measuring service quality in the public sector: the potential
for SERVQUAL", Total Quality Management , Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 357-365.

Le Meridien Hotel, Mauritius, 24-27 August 2010 13

 International Research Symposium in Service Management ISSN 1694-0938

List of Tables

Table 1: Questions related to the five key dimensions of service quality

Questions Dimensions
1-4 Tangibles
5-9 Reliability
10-13 Responsiveness
14-17 Assurance
18-22 Empathy

Table 2: Result of reliability analysis for five dimensions

Dimensions Number of Expected (Desired) Perception (Actual)
Attributes
Tangibles 4 0.797 0.712
Reliability 5 0.778 0.781
Responsiveness 4 0.797 0.792
Assurance 4 0.701 0.711
Empathy 5 0.715 0.719

Table 3: Profile of Respondents

Gender
Frequency Percent
female 42 46.7
male 48 53.3
Total 90 100.0

Education Frequency Percent

primary 5 5.6
secondary 54 60.0
tertiary 31 34.4
Total 90 100.0
Income
Frequency Percent
< 10000 31 34.4
10000-15000 28 31.1
15000-25000 23 25.6
> 25000 8 8.9
Total 90 100.0

Table 4: Independent Samples Test of Gender and Actual Service Quality Assessment
Variables Dimensions (Mean)
Tangibles Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Empathy
Gender Female 3.857143 3.557143 3.630952 3.827381 3.571429
Male 3.973958 3.629167 3.536458 3.755208 3.6625
Sig. 0.261415 0.86122 0.290255 0.938142 0.346487

Le Meridien Hotel, Mauritius, 24-27 August 2010 14

 International Research Symposium in Service Management ISSN 1694-0938

Table 5: K-Independent Sample Test of social demographic and Actual Service Quality
Assessment
Dimensions (Mean)
Variables Tangibles Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Empathy
Education Primary 4.3000 3.6000 3.7000 3.5500 3.7600
Secondary 3.9444 3.7481 3.6806 3.9398 3.7481
Tertiary 3.8145 3.3290 3.3871 3.5645 3.3742
Sig. 0.2623 0.0131* 0.3085 0.0284* 0.0090*
Dimensions (Mean)
Variables Tangibles Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Empathy
Income <10000 4.1290 3.8710 3.9032 4.0887 3.7935
10000-15000 3.9911 3.7071 3.6071 3.7946 3.6571
15000-25000 3.8696 3.2783 3.3152 3.5652 3.4522
>25000 3.0000 3.0500 3.0000 3.2500 3.3000
Sig. 0.0003* 0.0010* 0.0001* 0.0017* 0.0367*

Table 6: Mean of Perception and Expectation on Tangibles

Attributes Mean Perceptions Mean Expectations Gap
Scores Scores
1.Modern Looking
equipments 3.7778 3.9889 -0.2111
2. Physical facilities 3.9778 4.1444 -0.1667
3. Neat appearance of
staff 4.0667 4.3667 -0.3000
4. Materials associated
with service 3.8556 4.0556 -0.2000

Table 7: Mean of Perception and Expectation on Reliability

Attributes Mean Perceptions Scores Mean Expectations Gap
Scores
5. Promise to do
something by a certain
time 3.6000 4.2000 -0.6000
6. Show genuine interest
in solving problems 3.6333 3.8889 -0.2556
7. Perform services right
the first time 3.4667 4.0222 -0.5556
8. Provide services at time
promised 3.5444 4.0333 -0.4889
9. Insist on error free
services 3.7333 4.0000 -0.2667

Le Meridien Hotel, Mauritius, 24-27 August 2010 15

 International Research Symposium in Service Management ISSN 1694-0938

Table 8: Mean of Perception and Expectation on Responsiveness

Attributes Mean Perceptions Scores Mean Expectations Gap

Scores
10. Staff able to tell
customers exactly when
services would be
performed 3.5667 3.9778 -0.4111
11. Staff give prompt
services to customers 3.6000 3.9111 -0.3111
12. Staff always willing to
help customers 3.5889 4.1222 -0.5333
13. Staff never too busy to
respond to customers 3.4667 4.0667 -0.6000

Table 9: Mean of Perception and Expectation on Assurance

Attributes Mean Perceptions Scores Mean Expectations Gap

Scores
14. Behaviour of staff
instils confidence in
customers 3.7556 4.1667 -0.4111
15. Staffs are trustworthy
and honest 3.9778 4.0667 -0.0889
16. Staff are consistently
courteous with customers 3.8556 3.9659 -0.1104
17. Staff have the
knowledge to answer
customers 3.5667 3.9444 -0.3778

Table 10: Mean of Perception and Expectation on Empathy

Attributes Mean Perceptions Scores Mean Expectations Gap

Scores
18. Give customers
individualized attention 3.6556 3.8667 -0.2111
19. Services are
convenient to customers 3.6667 3.9889 -0.3222
20. Staff gives customers
personalized attention 3.7889 3.9667 -0.1778
21. Customers best interest
at heart 3.3889 3.8000 -0.4111
22. Staff understand the
specific needs of their
customers 3.6000 4.1333 -0.5333

Table 11: Mean of Perception and Expectation on five dimensions

Dimensions Mean Perceptions Mean Expectation Scores Gap
Scores
1. Tangibles 3.9194 4.1389 -0.2194
2. Reliability 3.5956 4.0289 -0.4333
3. Responsiveness 3.5806 4.0194 -0.4389
4. Assurance 3.7889 4.0537 -0.2648
5. Empathy 3.6200 3.9511 -0.3311

Le Meridien Hotel, Mauritius, 24-27 August 2010 16