Tabassum, Rahman & JahanSoon after the <strong>in</strong>dependence <strong>of</strong> Bangladesh, the government <strong>of</strong> the newborn staterealized the importance <strong>of</strong> tourism <strong>in</strong> its economic and social life. Therefore, thegovernment decided to re<strong>org</strong>anize the tourism sector by comb<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g both the tourismdepartment and the private corporation <strong>in</strong>to one <strong>org</strong>anization, br<strong>in</strong>g<strong>in</strong>g it undergovernment responsibility for better coord<strong>in</strong>ation, promotion, development andmarket<strong>in</strong>g (Hossa<strong>in</strong> & Nazm<strong>in</strong> 2006). Consequently, the government established theNational Tourism Organization (NTO) <strong>in</strong> the name <strong>of</strong> Bangladesh ParjatanCorporation under Presidential Order No. 143, declared <strong>in</strong> November 27, 1972. BPCbegan <strong>in</strong> January 1973 with limited assets <strong>of</strong> the former “Pakistan TourismCorporation” and TK.10 million ($US147,059) sanctioned by the government. TheCorporation was entrusted with the dual responsibility <strong>of</strong> develop<strong>in</strong>g tourism<strong>in</strong>frastructure and promot<strong>in</strong>g Bangladesh as a tourist dest<strong>in</strong>ation. Otherresponsibilities <strong>of</strong> the Corporation <strong>in</strong>cluded regulation and operation <strong>of</strong> tourismactivities <strong>in</strong> the country. Thus, Bangladesh Parjatan Corporation came <strong>in</strong>to be<strong>in</strong>g asthe NTO <strong>in</strong> Bangladesh (MoCAT 2011). The major problems <strong>of</strong> tourism <strong>in</strong>dustry <strong>in</strong>Bangladesh are over population, natural disasters, unemployment, and economicunderdevelopment (Hall & Page 2000). At present, there are a number <strong>of</strong> touristfacilities and tourist hotels <strong>in</strong> Bangladesh. But <strong>in</strong> some cases <strong>in</strong>formation <strong>of</strong> thesefacilities and hotels are not available to the tourists (Hasan 1992).3.2 <strong>Service</strong> <strong>Quality</strong> and SERVQUAL Model<strong>Quality</strong> refers to the ability <strong>of</strong> a product or service to consistently meet or exceedcustomer expectations (Stevenson 2002). Schoenberger (1990) found twelvedimensions that customers associate with quality products and services, although allthe dimensions <strong>of</strong> quality are not relevant to all products and services. Thesedimensions are: conformance to specification, performance, quick response, quickchangeexpertise, features, reliability, durability, serviceability, aesthetics, perceivedquality, humanity, and value. <strong>Quality</strong> is considered as the cornerstone <strong>of</strong> success forany bus<strong>in</strong>ess, as it is the key factor for the susta<strong>in</strong>able competitive advantages(Hampton 1993). For the success <strong>of</strong> any service <strong>org</strong>anization, quality is a critical and<strong>of</strong> paramount importance to service providers (Bebko 2000), as services are the<strong>in</strong>tangible outcomes <strong>of</strong> a tangible or <strong>in</strong>tangible process. Over the past several years,there have been a variety <strong>of</strong> studies on different issues perta<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g to service quality.Traditionally service quality has been def<strong>in</strong>ed as the difference between thecustomer expectations <strong>of</strong> the service to be received and perception <strong>of</strong> the serviceactually received (Gro¨nroos 1984; Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry 1985, 1988).These researchers posited that measur<strong>in</strong>g service quality as “disconfirmation” that isthe difference between perceptions and expectations, is valid. Thus such a modelallows service providers to identify certa<strong>in</strong> def<strong>in</strong>ed gaps <strong>in</strong> the service provided(Wang, Lo & Hui 2003).The <strong>in</strong>strument used to explore service quality <strong>in</strong> this study was adapted fromSERVQUAL model (Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry 1985, 1988). SERVQUALmodel is one <strong>of</strong> the first service quality models, measured service quality us<strong>in</strong>g theexpectancy disconfirmation framework on the five dimensions <strong>of</strong> tangibles,responsiveness, reliability, assurance, and empathy (Parasuraman, Zeithaml andBerry 1985, 1988). Parasuraman et al. (1988, 1991) found that the five-dimensionalformat <strong>of</strong> SERVQUAL allows researchers to assess the level <strong>of</strong> service quality alongeach dimension, as well as overall. The purpose <strong>of</strong> this model is to serve as a47
Tabassum, Rahman & Jahandiagnostic method for uncover<strong>in</strong>g broad areas <strong>of</strong> weaknesses and strengths <strong>in</strong> thequality <strong>of</strong> service an <strong>org</strong>anization delivers.The five dimensions <strong>of</strong> SERVQUAL model identified by Parasuraman et al. (1988)are:1. Reliability: Ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately.2. Responsiveness: Will<strong>in</strong>gness to help customers and provide prompt service.3. Assurance: Employees’ knowledge and courtesy and their ability to <strong>in</strong>spire trustand confidence.4. Empathy: Car<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>in</strong>dividualized attention given to customer.5. Tangibles: Appearance <strong>of</strong> physical facility, equipment, personnel and writtenmaterials.Parasuraman et al. (1988) def<strong>in</strong>e five gaps from their research data:Gap 1. The discrepancy between customers’ expectations and management’sperceptions <strong>of</strong> these expectations.Gap 2. The discrepancy between management’s perceptions <strong>of</strong> customers’expectations and service quality specifications.Gap 3. The discrepancy between service quality specifications and actual servicedelivery.Gap 4. The discrepancy between actual service delivery and what is communicatedto customers about it.Gap 5. The discrepancy between customer’s expected service and perceived servicedelivered.The first four gaps contribute to Gap 5, that is, the gap between customerexpectations and customer perceptions <strong>of</strong> service received- and it is this last gapwhich has been the ma<strong>in</strong> focus <strong>of</strong> this research. The figure <strong>of</strong> the gaps <strong>of</strong>SERVQUAL Model is represented <strong>in</strong> Figure 1.48
- Page 1 and 2: World Journal of Social SciencesVol
- Page 3: Tabassum, Rahman & JahanAkinci 2003
- Page 7 and 8: Tabassum, Rahman & Jahandifferences
- Page 9 and 10: Tabassum, Rahman & JahanH4 0 : The
- Page 11 and 12: Tabassum, Rahman & Jahanhas been ch
- Page 13 and 14: Tabassum, Rahman & Jahanpoint 0.70
- Page 15 and 16: Tabassum, Rahman & Jahan(observed)
- Page 17 and 18: Tabassum, Rahman & Jahanconsistent
- Page 19 and 20: Tabassum, Rahman & JahanGro¨nroos,
- Page 21: Tabassum, Rahman & JahanStevenson,
Change language