Incorporating disservice analysis to enhance perceived service quality

Abstract

PurposeTo ensure the service quality, it is very important and necessary for a company to systematically identify and prioritize the critical failure modes that result in disservice of quality, and take the required remedial actions before the service is delivered to customers. The purpose of this paper is to propose an approach to enhance perceived service quality by incorporating disservice analysis with failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA).Design/methodology/approachThe approach, first, identifies the potential failure modes that might have explicit effects on the service quality. Subsequently, the risk priority number (RPN) is computed to identify the risk priority for each potential failure mode. Furthermore, a disservice index that represents the extent of composite adverse effect of service failures on quality perceptions is computed to recognize the disservice priority for each quality dimension. Based on which, vital quality dimensions are determined as those quality dimensions that have higher disservice indices. The critical failure modes are, then, confirmed as those failure modes that have higher RPNs in the vital quality dimensions. Finally, the effects and root‐causes of the critical failure modes are determined by thoroughly exploiting the service infrastructure, service design, and service encounter for the company to take effective remedial actions to enhance perceived service quality. A practical case regarding a hypermarket service was used to demonstrate the proposed approach. Managerial implications and suggestions are provided to the case company, the hypermarket industry, and other service industries. Possibilities for future research are also addressed.FindingsThe vital quality dimensions are determined as responsiveness and reliability for the hypermarket case. Six critical failure modes are confirmed, by the order of criticality, as “unstable supply of goods/merchandise,” “no goods/merchandise on designated shelf of the sales floor,” “slowness of cashier speed,” “tardiness of warranty/repair goods/merchandise,” “nonconforming quality of goods/merchandise,” and “unable to find first‐line server in the sales floor.” These critical failure modes should be eliminated or reduced in top priority to enhance perceived service quality. Note that the determination of vital quality dimensions and the confirmation of critical failure modes depend on the applicable company resources.Originality/valueThe proposed approach improves both the academic and the practical developments of service quality in five aspects: explicitly identifying potential mistakes or failures of the service system that might result in disservice of quality. Arousing notices and focuses on those failure modes that have higher risk priorities by performing FMEA. Identifying how seriously the service failures adversely affect each of the quality dimensions and determining what the vital quality dimensions are by carrying out disservice analysis. Confirming the critical failure modes as those failure modes that have higher risk priorities in the vital quality dimensions with higher disservice indices. Knowing what actions need to be taken in advance to enhance perceived service quality by identifying the root‐causes that result in those critical failure modes.