GOOGLESCHOLAR

END OF UNIT ASSESSMENT: Assignment

FACULTY: Social Science

SCHOOL: Business

MODULE: Research Design and Dissertation

MODULE CODE: MGT9049

LEVEL: M

MODULE CO-ORDINATOR: Liz Price and Rebecca Herron

NAME: Xinjing LAI

STUDENT ID: LAI13441475

HAND-IN DATE: 31st August 2014

WORD COUNT: 3100

A report based on analyzing data from a survey of service quality at a University Sports Center.

Service quality is regarded as a major influence in customer satisfaction and retention. A significant quantity of management and academic literature has developed since the concept of service quality first emerged as a mainstream consideration over 20 yeas ago (Parasuraman et al, 1988). The quantitative research is important way to measure the quality of service (Bryman and Cramer, 1997). The important objective of quantitative study is not a simply summarizing and giving descriptive data for analyzing models and relationships within the data of sports center. Usually, it is include two sections. Firstly, difference between subgroup in the data. Anarchically techniques are associated with statistical tests of difference. The next is Co-variance, or the extent to which one variable is related to another. For example, the extent of usage usually plays a important role in the rating of service quality (Anderson, 2006). Therefore, ‘servqual’ as a methodology to measure the quality of services produced (Bryman and Bell, 2007). The reliability, tangibles, empathy, responsiveness and assurance are important features in the methodology (Bryman and Bell, 2007). In the report, the ‘servqual’ devote to evaluate the service quality in the context of the sports center in the University of Lincoln.

Evaluation of Questionnaire Design

The undergraduate students are main interviewees in the research. Basing on analyzing data from a survey of service quality at the Sports Center of university of Lincoln, a result of the study produced.

In the autumn of 2009, a questionnaire was used. Using the random sampling, 200 participants concluded in the final sample, even has the potential sampling error of 9%, it still was seemed appropriate. In the process, the probability sample as a basic method by using e-mail to send for all of the university's students. It is difference with the original exception. In the initial sample, 300 participants were contacted, and were emailed directing them to a weblink to the survey hosted by surveymonkey.com. Two weeks later, the research achieves 202 useable feedbacks. As a result, 67% of feedback is reasonable for the research. Subsequent analysis of late respondents suggested no statistically significant differences between early and late respondents. In this feedback, the female made up 37.1% in the sample, and the male made up 62.4%. Non-members who pay each time the sports center makes up 48.4% of the sample and the member made up 51.6% of the sample. Otherwise, the business students made up 20.3%, media students made up 11.9%, other course made up 34.2%, and the sports students made up 33.7%. In addition, about the use of frequency in a week. The percentage of people who use once and less once a week is 23.3% in the sample, the percentage of people who use twice a week is 23.3% in the sample, and the percentage of people who never use is 22.8% in the sample.

A standardize questionnaire was used in the report, and it made up with three sections of questions. In the question one, it includes 21 separate questions about five dimensions of service quality. The 5 point scale was used to allow respondents to rate the service performance, 1 being the very dissatisfactory and the 5 very dissatisfactory. Sub-questions t1 to t6 concentrated on tangible elements of the service of sports center. Sub-questions d1 to d4 concentrated on reliability with r1 to r5 measuring responsiveness. Then, c1 to c4 are confidence/assurance, the E1 to E2 are empathy. The second question is about description. Using five areas relating to the University Sports Center and the service that it offers that to attempt to get the respondents to weight the importance. More point means more important and add up to a total of 100 point. The third questions are to determine and identify some background information. The respondent's characteristic is the key independent variables in the process of measured. In the pre-tested for potential users of the sports center, the questionnaire was no problems with face validity and deemed to be reliable. 

Therefore, the sample could be seemed representative of the people Statistical Product and Service Solution (SPSS) for analysis.

Analysis of survey data

A: Sample Composition

The sample composition is the first way to analysis the data of the 'serqual', even the sample has a robust strategy, but it is important to examine the outcomes and comment upon the issues (Field, 2009). Because of the composition can referring to the way in which its various parts are put together and arranged, it is useful to understand the aim, structure and characteristics of a sample clear (Anderson,2006). In the questionnaire, the gender, usage, year, member and course, they reflect characteristics of the respondents. There are effectively the ‘independent’ variables which measure respondent characteristics. The composition focus on the the Valid Percentage Column.

Gender - are you male or female?

Usage - how often do you use the center?

Year - what year at university are you currently in?

Member - are you a member or do you pay each time.

Course - subject area.

Table 1: Sample Composition

	%
Member or pay each
Member	51.6
Pay each time	48.4
Gender
Female	37.1
Male	62.4
3	0.5
Subject area
Sports	33.7
Business	20.3
Media	11.9
Other	34.2
Usage
Never	22.8
Once a week or less	19.3
Twice a week	23.3
3 times a week	16.8
4 times a week	12.4
5 times a week	5.4
Year
1st year	33.7
2nd year	41.6
3rd year	21.8
4th year	2.0
Master	0.5
Other	0.5
N=202

It is noted that, the table shows that the member of the sports center made up 51.6%, and the others made up 48.4%. This finding may need to explore further. As an independent variable, the member will relate with difference dimensions, for example tangible, reliability, and others dimensions in the approach. Using the cross-tabulations to look at the all responses given to Questionnaire. Then, the statistically significant results will report in the approach by the way.

B: Analysis of satisfaction level reported in Question 1 of the Questionnaire

Descriptive Statistics of aspects of service quality using perception

Table 2 Descriptive Statistics of aspects of service quality using perception

Descriptive Statistics	Mean	Std. Deviation
	Statistic	Statistic
1 C1manner well mannered and informative staff	3.76	0.848
2 T1equipment modern sports/gym equipment	3.71	0.78
3 D1service providing a reliable service that is promised	3.7	0.821
4 R4willingness willingness to help facility users	3.69	0.842
5 T3Visual visually appealing facilities	3.67	0.827
6 T2Modchange modern changing facilities	3.66	0.891
7 D2firsttime service carried out as promised first time	3.64	0.82
8D4informing informing customer of new and changing schedule/timetables	3.63	0.881
9 D3promisetime service performed at promised time	3.62	0.87
10 R3prompt prompt service to facility users	3.62	0.87
11 E2 custservice staff with good customer service	3.6	0.875
12C3transaction secure transaction e.g. Membership payments and booking facilities	3.6	0.939
13 T4samrtsstaff smart, professionally appearing staff	3.57	0.815
14 R5userrequests readiness to respond to user request	3.54	0.947
15 T6hours convenient hours of operation	3.53	0.865
16 C4knowledgeable knowledgeable and reliable staff	3.48	0.843
17 E1one 2 one attending to the needs of every customer e.g. On a personal one to one basis	3.48	0.843
18C2motivating highly motivated staff for example encouraging gym staff	3.48	0.858
19T5information informative, relevant and appealing documentation such as gym and class timetable and opening times	3.44	0.928
20 R1complaints dealing with customer complaints	3.31	0.743
21 R2feedback prompt action based on customer feedback	3.29	0.766
N= 177

From the table 2, the mean of C1, T1 and D1 are gain more than 3.7, it is higher than others. This means majority of participants focus on the well mannered and informative staff, equipment modern sports/gym equipment, and service providing a reliable service that is promised than other variables. The C1, T1, and D1 show a high level of satisfaction. Opposite, the R1 and R2 gain a lower level. So the author suggested the management of the sports center need to pay more attention to the part of CI, T1 and D1 than other factors, and the R1 and R2 need to improve in the future. However, the R1 and R2 are lower than others, which means, the management of the sports center can give less priority to the dealing with customer complaints and prompt action based on customer feedback from the table 2.

About the standard deviation of, R1 (0.743) and R2 (0.766) are lower than others. Then, these numbers are close to the mean comparing to the other dimensions. Which, means, most of participants evaluate the satisfaction levels of complaints and feedback very close to the mean (3.31 and 3.29 respectively).

Cross-tabulations analysis

The table 3 reflects the results of a chi-square test. In the report, the sports center management was interested to understand whether the level of satisfaction varied depending on whether respondents are members of the sports center or not. Using the Chi-test, we can see from the table 3. Majority of dependent variables are no value less than or equal to 0.05, but it is noted that, only the D2fristtime is less than 0.05, that is 0.022. Therefore, there is a statistically significant difference between member and the level of satisfaction depending on the D2 firsttime. The significant values of the Chi-test for other dependent variables are more than 0.05, therefore, there are statistically insignificant.

Table3 Chi-test

Chi-square test	Sig
T1Equipment	0.947
T2Modchange	0.809
T3Visual	0.554
T4smartstaff	0.362
T5information	0.412
T6hours	0.690
D1service	0.954
R1complaints	0.504
R2feedback	0.681
D2firsttime	0.022
D3promisetime	0.346
D4informing	0.177
R3prompt	0.179
R4willingness	0.162
R5userrequests	0.372
C1manners	0.801
C2motivating	0.332
C3transactions	0.105
C4knowledgeable	0.195
E1one2one	0.883
custservice	0.287

Table 4 Service carried out as promised first time * are you a member or do you pay each time

Chi-Square Tests

	Value	df	Asymp. Sig.(2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square	11.461a	4	0.022
Likelihood Ratio	12.173	4	0.016
Linear-by-Linear Association	0.907	1	0.341
N of Valid Cases	186

a.2 cells (20.0%)have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 49.

Therefore, the results of the chi-square are statistically significant (the Sig value is less than 0.05). The result is Chi =11.4, df=4, and Sig=0.02 (from the table 4). This suggests that the people who pay each time are more likely to be satisfied with the service carried out as promised first time than members of sport center. However, a large proportion of people who pay each time are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied (31% of pay each time compared with 22% of member).

C: Analyzing the important given to different dimensions of service quality

The Question 2 of the survey respondents were asked to sate the importance the questionnaire to each of 5 performance dimensions of service quality by giving a score between 0 and 100 for each. Then, the authors use the descriptive statistics to describe the responses given. The output of SPSS showed in the Table 5.

Table 5 Descriptive Statistics of the importance of each dimension of service quality

	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation
	Statistic	Statistic	Statistic	Statistic
Q1 The appearance of the Sports Center, physical facilities such as staff, gym equipment, the sports hall, and changing rooms.	5	96	25.34	11.399
Q2 The ability of the Sports Center and its staff to implement the service promised reliably and accurately.	1	60	18.25	7.425
Q3 The Sports Center’s willingness to help users and provide a prompt and friendly service.	1	60	18.29	8.075
Q4 The knowledge and manners of the Sports Center’s staff, and their ability to supply and maintain confidence and trust within its customers.	1	41	17.26	7.133
Q5 The attention to detail given when dealing with a customer on a one to one basis, through being caring and sympathetic to any problems that may have arisen.	0	51	20.95	10.101

From the table, the mean of the Q1 dimension is the highest that is 25.34. In other words, the appearance of the Sports Center, physical facilities such as staff, gym equipment, the sports hall, and changing rooms plays more important role for most respondents than other dimensions. Thus, the sports center need to pay more attention to improve the appearance of the Sports Center, physical facilities such as staff, gym equipment, the sports hall, and changing rooms than other service suggested by sample. Opposite, the mean of Q4 dimension is 17.26 that are lowest in the five dimensions. In other words, the knowledge and manners of the Sports Center’s staff, and their ability to supply and maintain confidence and trust within its customers, that is not most important for more respondents. As a result, the sports center should reduce focus on the knowledge and manners of the Sports Center’s staff, and their ability to supply and maintain confidence and trust within its customers.

In addition, the standard deviation of Q1 is the highest, that is 11.399. It means the data are offered to a big range of value when compare with other dimensions. In addition, it means that the most of respondents evaluate the importance of Q1 that is not near to the mean (25.34) when it compare with Q4. Thus, the standard deviation of Q2, Q3 and Q4 which means that how the more people in the sample are near to the mean of these five dimensions.

Calculate the mean values for these weighted variables (t1-E2) and rank these (From highest to lowest)

Table 6 using weighted perception and ranked according to the mean of t1 to E2

Descriptive Statistics (table 6)	Mean	Std. Deviation
	Statistic	Statistic
1 t1 Equipment Rating Weighted	95.4378	51.10232
2 t3 Appearance Weighted	94.4850	52.34568
3 t2 Changing Facilituies Weighted	93.8000	51.14527
4 t4 Smart staff weighted	91.9554	53.12112
5 t6 Convenience weighted	89.2624	48.78010
6 t5 information weighted	87.6250	50.05800
7 E2 Staff with good customer care weighted	73.0251	36.84111
8 E1 Attending to needs of every customer weighted	70.8376	36.25356
9 d1 Reliable Serice weighted	67.4650	31.25288
10 r4 readiness to respond to user requests weighted	67.2915	33.01401
11 d4 Informing Customers pf changes weighted	66.7500	32.74736
12 r3 willingness to help users weighted	66.7214	33.83285
13 d2 Service carried out 1st time weighted	66.3485	31.58109
14 d3 Service provided as promised weighted	66.1100	32.25196
15 r5 dealing with customer complaints weighted	65.7551	35.55195
16 c1 well mannered and informative staff weighted	65.1832	32.41078
17 c3 secure transactions weighted	62.2289	32.59459
18 c4 knowledgeable and reliable staff weighted	60.8763	28.91632
19 r2 prompt service to users weighted	60.7199	32.42134
20 r1 prompt actions on customer feedback weighted	60.5471	31.46946
21 c2 highly motivated staff weighted	60.0578	28.65315
N= 177
t1-t6 are tangibles
d1-d4 are reliability
r1 -r5 are responsiveness
c1-ca are confidence/assurance
E1-E2 are empathy

From the table 6 (the mean of weighted variables). The tangible dimension (t1to t6) gains more attention from the respondents than other dimensions. Then, the respondents give more on empathy dimensions than reliability, responsiveness and empathy dimensions. However, from the table 2, the means of each dimension have not a close relationship. Which means, the change of these dimension will produces positive influence on these participants of the sample, and these influence is sensitive. When we compare table 6 and table 2. The mean of each dimension have a close relationship in table 6 than table 2. Which means, these participants’ attachment to each dimension less varies among the variables of the each dimension. In other words, the original unweighted result shows a closer relationship of the mean of these dimensions than weighted variables from the two tables. The weighted variable plays a positive in the analysis, cause of it can offers more precise measure to help the analysis the service of sports center.

Summary, Conclusion and Recommendations

Firstly, using the SPSS data analysis, the service performance of the university’s sports center can be understood better then before. More overall information provided by the questionnaire. A highlight point is found in the analysis. The tangibles dimension plays a more important role than other dimensions for the respondents in the survey. Moreover, the levels of satisfaction and membership are statistically significant. Using the cross-tabulations and Chi-test, the firsttime are statistically significant. In addition, the weighted values provided some useful information to analysis the importance. The original unweighted result (i.e. ‘T1 equipment’ to ‘custservice’) was not enough to measure the service perception. The new weighted result can provide a more clear, and detail for the survey, it is a sensitive way to reflect the respondents’ information about the quality of service. Otherwise, the five dimension of service performance (i.e. tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, confidence/assurance, and empathy) produce the data by the model. Each factor can represents each of the dimensions of the service quality. For example, the t1 to t6 are tangibles dimension, and the analysis shows the tangibles dimension obtain more attention than other from respondents. As a result, the management of sports center should pay more attention the part, particularly, the equipment, changing facilities, appearance, smart staff and so on.

It is a useful way to understand the quantitative research. The author learns some skill of SPSS to analysis a service quality. For example, using the descriptive statistics to understand the sample composition, how to use the cross-tabulations to analysis the responses given to a questions in relation to independent variables. On the one hand, the five dimensions of service quality can be reflected better, it is a useful way to understand the survey by these distensions. On the other hand, using the five dimensions to reflect these 21 questions, it is a easy and clear way. Because of it can reduce the complexity of these questions in the analysis. Moreover, the descriptive analysis provided a way to the attachment in the future research. For example, the mean represents the attachment of the respondents to some elements of the analysis.

However, the SERVQUAL model is not without its critics (Kai and Jacob, 2012). A central issue has been the fact that experiences/perceptions and expectations are measured at the same time. A importance problem produced that expectations and experiences/perceptions are measured at the same time. This means, it is unclear to understand a gap between exception and perception (Kristensen and Eskildsen, 2012). In addition, how to analysis of quantitative with SPSS, it is a onerous task. This means, the task need to a group to analysis a survey, and need to base on a qualitative research. If a report only based on a one person to analyzing more dates, that is a hard and huge task. Therefore, a limitation produced, cause of one person’s time, knowledge is finite, it is not useful to produce a high level report. In the future research, more people to analyzing a survey that is necessary. Because of, more people can provide more information, skill and knowledge to analyzing a topic.

Reference

Anderson P (2006) Statistics for Business and Economics London: Thomson.

Bryman, A. and Cramer, D. (1997) Quantitative Data Analysis with SPSS for Windows Routledge.

Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2007) Business Research Methods 2nd Edition Oxford University Press.

Field, A. (2009) Discovering Statistics Using SPSS 3rd Edition SAGE.

Kristensen, K. and Eskildsen, J. (2012) The Relationship Between SERVQUAL, National Customer Satisfaction Indices, and Consumer Sentiment. Quality Management Journal 19(2) 47-61.