An analysis of the five gap model

Quality of service has been studied in the area of business management for years because the market is more competitive and marketing management has transferred its focus from internal performance such as production to external interests such as satisfaction and customers’ perception of service quality.

Based on this traditional definition of service quality, Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry (1985) developed the “Gap Model” of perceived service quality.

This model has five gaps:

Gap 1. Consumer expectation – Management perception gap

Gap 2. Management perception – Service quality specification gap

Gap 3. Service quality specifications – Service delivery gap

Gap 4. Service delivery – External communication gap

Gap 5. Expected service – Experienced service

Gap One–Positioning

Between customer’s expectation and management’s perceptions of those expectation i.e. not knowing what customers expect

This gap occurs when management were either totally unaware of certain critical consumer expectations or were misreading the importance of those expectations to consumers. Therefore, management does not understand how the service should be designed, what support or secondary services the customer requires or what the right quality for the customer is. Besides consumers, employees can be defined as internal consumers as well.

The big problems that for the management is:

We know what they really want (without asking them)

This is related to both consumers and employees, no matter how an intelligent manager you are, you will never know what are your customer and employee want at different levels and different times. So the communication between both external and internal consumers must be kept very well. Lack of marketing research is the most common problem for doing a business. The insufficient upward communication between contact personnel to management is another cause. Maybe there are too many levels between them, reducing the levels between the two departments is essential to increase effectiveness of communication and understanding between the two.

Researching customers’ expectations could be done through listening to customer complaints, finding out what customers want in similar industries, researching intermediate customers, conducting key-client studies, and conducting customer expectation and satisfaction surveys. Feedback is essential to continuous improvement. How else would we know if our goals are being reached? These feedback mechanisms may be simple oral or written reports, information systems, or complex automated statistical analyses integrated with our expert systems. The key is to receive the information in time to allow initiating corrective action.

I am working in a hotel as a breakfast waitress, what we do when guests come in, we let them choose a table, and give each guest two slices of fresh toast leave on the table, then ask them if they want tea or coffee. Although we always found untouched toast when we clearing tables, but roles never change until the day we got complained. One guest wrote on the questionnaire: I think it is better to ask if we want toast or not before you sever it. I never eat toast when I am having breakfast but I had this morning because I felt that was such a waste just thrown it in the bin.” Then our manager realized at the time that offer more is not always meets customer’s expectation, it may make them felt uncomfortable sometimes.

Gaps in service also occur when top management fails to seek, stimulate and facilitate the flow of information from employees at lower levels. These employees are often the most valuable source of real and relevant information about customer service. Related to my example as well, staffs actually noticed about the problem. But our manager did not ask us for recommendations on our job. So this Gap may also occur when too many levels separate top managers, who make critical decisions, from those responsible for dealing with and serving customers.

And, interaction between management and customers could be increased, for example, by spending time and interacting with customers and experiencing service delivery.

In addition, management has to ensure that all employees understand exactly what the customer wants within organizational constraints. This way, an organizational infrastructure is built that allows each employee, individually or collectively, to work towards a common goal of providing customers with what they want so that a quality service is provided.

Gap Two–Specification

Between management perceptions of customer expectations and service quality specifications i.e. the wrong service-quality standards

This gap may occur when management is aware of customers’ expectations but may not be willing or able to put systems in place that meet or exceed those expectations. For example, putting systems in place may require changes in fundamental organizational work processes, acquiring expensive new technology, or refocusing organizational attitudes to understand service from the customer’s point of view.

The first factor responsible for this gap is an inadequate commitment to service quality. Management of effective organizations must view service quality as a key strategic goal; the absence of an organizational commitment to service quality is a virtual guarantee of a wide Gap 2. Several key questions to ask when evaluating the extent of Gap 2 are as follows:

Are resources committed to departments to improve service quality?

Do internal programs exist for improving the quality of customer service?

Are managers who improve customer service quality more likely to be rewarded?

Does the company emphasize sales goals as much or more than it does customer service?

Gap 2 can be closed when the following questions can be answered positively:

Does the company have the capabilities to meet customer requirements for service?

Can customer expectations be met without hindering financial performance?

Do existing operating systems enable customer expectations to be met?

Are resources and personnel available to deliver the service levels that customers demand?

Does management change policies and procedures to meet the needs of customers?

A second factor that can influence Gap 2 is task standardization. This gap can be closed when hard and soft technologies are used to standardize service tasks. When the answers to the following questions are negative, Gap 2 widens.

Is automation used to achieve consistency in customer service?

Are programs in place to improve operating procedures so that consistent service is provided?

A third relevant factor that can close Gap 2 is goal setting–the extent to which service quality standards are based on customers’ expectations rather than company standards. Formal processes to set the quality of service goals for employees must be put in place. The company must have clear goals for customer service and must measure its performance against these goals. As well, service-quality standards should be based on customers’ standards rather than company standards.

Gap Three–Delivery

Between services specified and that actually delivered

i.e. the service performance gap

Organizational policies and standards for service levels may be in place, but is front line staff following them? A very common gap in the service industry, Gap 3 is the difference between organizational service specifications and actual levels of service delivery.

The causes of the gap could be employee role ambiguity, role conflict, poor employee-job fit, poor technology-job fit, inappropriate supervisory control systems, lack of perceived control, and lack of teamwork.

To close this gap, employees must first believe they are able to perform their jobs well, should be communicated on areas such as what is expected of them. When they doing their jobs, follow the job descriptions, and what they have been taught in the training. Be aware of the goals, strategies, and, objectives within the company.

For the management, they have to ensure that they choose on the right person to fit the job. They must devote sufficient time and resources to hiring and selecting employees. Then provide the effective training and evaluation programs. Assess employee’s job performance, talk with them about their problems with the job and ask them for suggestions that how to do their jobs better.

There have differing expectations of service levels between managers and customers. So employees and managers should working together toward a common goal.

And finally, organizations must ask themselves whether their employees are empowered to deliver service; do employees have to receive approval from other departments before delivering service?

The questions that should list here are:

Are employees given the freedom to make decisions to satisfy customers’ needs?

Are employees encouraged to learn new ways to better serve their customers?

Are employees required to get approval from other departments before delivering service?

Gap Four–Communication

Between the service delivery and external communications to customers about service delivery i.e. when promises do not match delivery

Companies’ advertisements always brag about the organization’s exceptional service, and raise its customers’ expectations. But are they able to deliver on the promise?

Customers perceive that organizations are delivering low-quality service when a gap appears between promised levels of service and the service that is actually delivered. This gap is created when advertising, personal selling or public relations over-promise or misrepresent service levels.

This gap can also occur when companies did improve their service levels, but it is not visible to customers.

Making customers aware of these standards or efforts can heighten their service perceptions. If either or both of the following indicators are present, Gap 4 probably exists.

Lake of communication within and across departments (operations, marketing, and human resources) and branches can be responsible for Gap 4.

Another major cause of Gap 4 is a propensity to over promise in external communications. As a result, the company’s promises do not accurately reflect what customers receive in the service encounter.

I am quite disappointed on advertising, not because they are all annoying, some of them are seems very attractive, but when you get in to it, it always not I expected. Once I read about free installation of eircom broadband in the paper, it was a fully page on the paper, and a big fund of customer inquires number on it. I can still remember it now, because I dialed hundreds of times. It was actually a number that not in use. And I talked to my friends about this. They were experienced the same. The company may put thousands euros on the advertisement try to get customer’s attention and bring more profits in. But they did not even sell their products to customers because a silly mistake.

Gap Five–perception

Between customers’ expectation and perceived service

The total of the other four gaps

As mentioned above, gap theory identifies this perception gap as the most important in terms of the assessment of ‘actual’ service quality.

The difference can be negative or positive, in that it could be that the service is disappointing or that the quality of service exceeds expectations. When the outcome is negative, then the customer will feel dissatisfied but when the outcome is positive, the customer will feel satisfied and possibly delighted with the service. The reason that gap five is the total of the four gaps is because customers will measure the whole service as their experience of the business.

Conclusion

In summary, the Gap Analysis Model can help identify causes of poor service. In particular, the questionnaire in the Appendix may be helpful in applying the Gap Analysis Model. Knowing the causes, we can work to remedy them, to close gaps, and to improve service quality.

References:

R. Stein, The Next Phase of Total Quality Management.

Macel Dekker, Inc.,1994.

T. Cartin, Principles and Practices of TQM.

ASQC Quality Press.,1993.

A Service Quality Audit:

Application of the Gap Analysis Model

CIRAS Review Paper

Paul R. Messinger, University of Alberta