The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0969-9988.htm
ECAM
20,4
420
Engineering, Construction and
Architectural Management
Vol. 20 No. 4, 2013
pp. 420-440
r Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0969-9988
DOI 10.1108/ECAM-06-2011-0057
Users satisfaction survey
on building maintenance in
public housing
Anthony W.Y. Lai and W.M. Lai
Division of Building Science and Technology, City University of Hong Kong,
Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR, China
Abstract
Purpose A building maintenance scheme introduced by the Hong Kong Housing Authority in
January 2006 employed contractors and public housing owners frontline representatives to provide
inspection in the public rental housing tenants units and arrange corresponding repair works.
This study aims to base on the public rental housing (PRH) tenants perceptions to measure
maintenance contractor service quality performance.
Design/methodology/approach Questionnaire is used as the assessment tool which is derived
based on the SERVQUAL approach to measure public rental housing tenants expectations and
perceptions on maintenance contractor performance.
Findings The findings illustrate that dimensions of tangible and reliability have the largest
discrepancy between expectation level and perception level. They are mainly related to the concern of
disturbance to PRH tenants brought by maintenance contractors in respect of manpower arrangement.
These findings support that there is a need for maintenance contractors to impose more manpower
resources to minimize the adverse impacts to PRH tenants.
Research limitations/implications The service quality performance survey could provide a
reference for conducting the survey continuously which could help develop a systematic benchmark in
matching service delivery and expectation for future improvement. The SERVQUAL gap analysis
would help identify any gaps between expectations and perceptions among various concerned parties,
i.e. services providers (contractors) and direct customers (owners frontline representatives).
Practical implications The service quality gap findings could provide a reference for the frontline
representatives to organize and improve services of the building maintenance scheme to be
implemented in other public rental housing units.
Social implications The paper promotes the awareness of the building maintenance contractors of
the service quality to the public rental housing tenants.
Originality/value The value of this study could serve as a framework for further study in
conducting service quality performance survey in other public housings and extend the performance
measurement approach to other similar tasks in construction project areas.
Keywords Service quality, Contractor performance assessment, Service quality assurance, Housing,
China
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
The Hong Kong Housing Authority (HKHA) is the largest landlord in Hong Kong
which provides more than 600,000 subsidized public rental housing (PRH) flats to families
in need. It provides generally good management and maintenance for the common and
external areas in PRH estates. However, the standard of inside maintenance of tenants
flats is less satisfactory (Hong Kong Housing Authority (HKHA), 2005). The past
practices to carry out inspections and maintenance in tenants housing units mainly relied
on the reports or complaints from tenants. Tenants concern more about their inside living
environment nowadays. In order to meet the rising expectations from PRH tenants, the
HKHA launched the customer-oriented total maintenance scheme (TMS) in January 2006.
 The final targets of this customer-oriented maintenance services are tenants of PRH. Users
A customer-focused service requires the measures of service quality (SQ) to be based satisfaction
on the expectations and perception from customers point of view (Samson and Parker,
1994). The objective of this study is to base on the expectation and perception of survey
the end-users, the tenants living in a public housing estate to assess contractor
performance on SQ issues. The TMS has just been completed in the selected public
housing estate for more than six months up to the time of conducting this study. 421
This study includes review of the literature on the background of the TMS, the
theoretical framework underlying contractor service performance measurement,
external customer concept and SQ nature. This study adopts the SERVQUAL model
which was developed by Parasuraman et al. (1988) to develop a questionnaire for data
collection. It is expected that the analytical results will identify any gap of SQ between
tenants expectation and perception on contractor performance on the implementation
of TMS on the selected case study. The selected estate had just finished its inspections
and maintenance work by the end of 2010.

Background of the TMS

TMS is an over five-year scheme for all PRH tenants to provide a comprehensive
one-stop maintenance service. Its purpose is to prevent dilapidation, eliminate health
and safety hazards, minimize breakdowns and avoid unnecessary expenses by
carrying out inspections in all PRH domestic flats one by one which is carried out by an
in-flat inspection team. The team is formed by at least two persons, one inspection
ambassador and one contractor representative. In the inspection, the team diagnoses
defects, explains possible causes of the defects, suggests remedial methods and advises
tenants on necessary preventive works to avoid the reoccurrence and deterioration of
defects. The team records the in-flat conditions and issues an inspection report
to the tenants right after the inspection. Arrangement of remedy works is also done
during the inspection. Such one-stop services approach enables fast inspection and
repair of defects. Contractor performance is monitored to enable that contractors
provide sufficient enhanced protection work and prompt and minimum disturbance
services to tenants. After completion of contractors repair, a certificate will be
issued. HKHA envisages that the implementation of TMS will achieve higher level of
tenants satisfaction.

Measuring contractor performance

Traditionally, people focus greatly on time, cost and quality to assess their degree of
performance when people manage a project. It is also a common scenario in past
construction industry that time, cost and quality were predominate performance
measurement (Ward et al., 1991; Kagioglou et al., 2001). However, with the increasing
awareness on peoples requirements on SQ, SQ is one of the most important problems
facing management today (Cronin and Taylor, 1992). Ward et al. (1991) suggested that
looking back on the conduct of a project, what sticks in the mind is often not so much
financial success or early completion, but memories of other people involved and
abiding impressions of harmony, goodwill and trust or, conversely, of arguments,
distrust and conflict. The clients willingness to pursue a given procurement route to
achieve a future project is likely to be strongly influenced by these factors. Kagioglou
et al. (2001) also emphasized that traditional measures of the performance of
construction projects are not enough to assess their true performance. According to
Yasamis et al. (2002), a construction quality approach is proposed to deal with the
ECAM service and product. In other words, performance measurement nowadays tends
20,4 to adopt both customer-oriented approach, i.e. the process of delivering products, and
result-oriented approach, i.e. quality of end products. This suggested that the
performance measurement of TMS should deal with two aspects, the quality of repair
works by contractor and contractors attitude when they carry out maintenance works.
The owner (HKHA) and the end-users (PRH tenants) are two groups of people who will
422 contribute measuring contractor performance and therefore their interrelationships
will be further explored. Lai and Pang (2010) have explained the contractor
performance based on measuring the public housing owners representatives
expectations and perceptions. However, the end-users who are involved in the project
from the very beginning to the end seem to be left behind. Some PRH tenants
experience the terminal services and products provided by contractors, it could be said
that PRH tenants have strong relationship in assessment of contractor performance.

Application to the external customers concept

According to Arditi and Gunaydin (1997), customers may be either internal or external
in total quality management (TQM). The customer concept in TQM is further
explained by Low and Peh (1996) that everyone should seek to identify what his/her
customer needs. This must be coupled with the idea that everyone has a customer both
within (internal) and outside (external) the organization. The customer requirements
and expectations are satisfied by the organizations careful planning. The following
review attempts to base on the concept of customer in TQM to identify the role and
relationship of service providers and service receivers, i.e. the contractors provide
maintenance services and the owner/owners frontline representative and end-users
(PRH tenants) receive the output of maintenance works in the TMSs organization.
Generally, the owners frontline representative, contractors and PRH tenants are three
major parties involved in the TMS. The PRH owners organization is the TMS
organization who is the employer of the maintenance contractors and is also the direct
external customer of the contractor. The PRH tenants are direct external customers of
the TMS organization and end-users of finished maintenance works provided by the
contractors. The owners frontline representative works on behalf of the owners
organization and in turn, is the direct external customer of the contractor and the
PRH tenants are direct external customers of the owners frontline representative. PRH
tenants and the contractors have no direct contractual relationship but the former is the
external customers of the latter as well. In such relationship, the contractors are
supposed to provide satisfactory maintenance works under instructions of the owners
organization which are supervised by the owners frontline representative. The owners
frontline representative has the responsibility to ensure contractors works up to
standard with constant monitoring. On the other hand, the owners organization shall
provide customer services to his direct external customer, PRH tenants. For day-to-day
works, the owners frontline representatives serve different roles, i.e. as direct
internal customers of the owners organization and as the direct external customers of
the contractor.
In order to ensure the provision of satisfactory services to the external customers,
i.e. the PRH tenants, perception and expectation from them is significant as they
experience the contractors SQ and are the end-users of the finished works. Participants
in the TMSs organization, e.g. the contractors as the performers and the owners
frontline representatives as the assessor, will contribute towards ensuring the quality
output products to end-users, i.e. PHR tenants.
Critical review of the TMS from a SQ perspective Users
Service is widely covered in many industries but not only confined in retail industry satisfaction
nowadays. Gronroos (1990) defines service as an activity or a series of activity
of more or less intangible nature that normally, but not necessarily, take place in survey
interactions between the customer and the service employees and/or physical
resources goods and/or systems of the service provider, which are provided as
solutions to customer problems. Services quality is different from product quality. 423
Unlike goods quality, which can be measured objectively by such indicators as
durability and number of defects (Crosby, 1979; Garvin, 1983), SQ is an abstract and
elusive construct because of three features unique to services: intangibility,
heterogeneity and inseparability of production and consumption (Parasuraman et al.,
1985). The following review attempts to elucidate the three features of services and
examine the application of these features into the TMS.
The owner organization (HKHA) of PRH envisage that the TMS would lay a
foundation of fostering a service-oriented culture among PRH tenants, their staff
(owners frontline representatives) and all service providers (maintenance contractors)
in order to provide a better quality and effectiveness of repair and maintenance works
and customer-oriented maintenance service to PRH tenants (HKHA, 2005). The
expectation of HKHA supports that the quality of maintenance works is not the only
concern of TMS but also the quality of customer services. This increases difficulties in
achieving the target because of the intangibility of SQ which cannot be measured and
standardized. Because of intangibility, the service providers may find it difficult to
understand how consumers perceive their services and evaluate SQ (Zeithaml, 1981).
That is, the increase of inventoried variables could make maintenance contractors
being in doubt about PRH tenants perception on their services. The maintenance SQ
not only involves the outcome, i.e. maintenance products, but also the delivery manner
of the maintenance services.
Parasuraman et al. (1988) identified five broad dimensions (i.e. tangibility, reliability,
responsiveness, assurance, empathy) which are widely applied in many service
organizations to measure the SQ. The following five dimensions are modified as
follows to suit the context of the TMS:
. tangibility: physical facilities, equipment and appearance of personnel;
. reliability: ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately;
. responsiveness: willingness to help customers and provide prompt service;
. assurance: knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to inspire
trust and confidence; and
. empathy: caring, individualized attention the firm provides for its customers.
The second feature of services is heterogeneous as suggested in Parasuraman et al.
(1985). Services are considered to be heterogeneous in that variations in performance
can occur from producer to producer, from customer to customer and from day-to-day
(Parasuraman et al., 1985). This is best examined in services which involve high labour
content of different categories. The context of TMS provides similar services and
appears heterogeneous that the evaluation of SQ relies on services provided by
maintenance contractors workers and perception of the HKHA (owners frontline
representatives) and PRH tenants. The SQ provided by maintenance contractors are
difficult to standardize because of the personal involvement of these three parties.
ECAM The third feature of services is the inseparability of production and consumption
20,4 (Parasuraman et al., 1985). Lehtinen and Lehtinen (1982) suggested that in labour-
intensive services, quality occurs during service delivery, usually in an interaction
between the client and the contact person from the service firm. In the context of TMS,
the SQ occurs in the interaction of the three parties, owners frontline representatives,
PRH tenants and maintenance contractors workers.
424 With respect to TMS, the above review on three features of services suggests three
underlying themes:
. The maintenance SQ should be evaluated on both maintenance products and
services delivered by maintenance contractors workers.
. The SQ is examined based on comparison between clients expectation and
service performance perceived by clients.
. SQ evaluation involves the interaction between different parties, i.e. maintenance
contractors workers and PRH tenants.
In the past, it is a common scenario that maintenance contractors emphasis much more
on time, cost and quality for provision of services (Siu et al., 2001) whereas nowadays
the main concern from clients seems to be wider that more aspects related to
customers feeling are taken into account which is congruent to one purposes of TMS
to promote customer-oriented culture (HKHA, 2005). Whether the proposition will be
proved correct or not, it certainly would benefit the management to know what would
be the PRH tenants concern to the SQ. This study is therefore based on the perception
of end-users to address if the maintenance contractor has fulfilled the basic objectives
of TMS. An improvement plan could be formulated to supplement any deficiencies of
the contractors identified from the study.

Questionnaire survey
The above review elucidates services features presented in the TMS which is a
building maintenance services provided by maintenance contractors to the HKHA.
As the services will have the major impact on the daily lives of PRH tenants, they will
have the actual experience on the service delivery and final maintenance products
provided by maintenance contractors, and are also the external customers of
maintenance contractors as depicted in the customer concept in TQM. Therefore,
measuring the SQ of maintenance contractors from PRH tenants view is the direct and
effective way to understand and assure the satisfaction of PRH tenants.
The survey conducted in the selected estate is a typical PRH estate which is rather
old with the year of initial intake for tenant occupation on 1982. It is one of the targeted
estates to carry out improvement scheme on buildings of age over 20 years. As the
targeted estate has just completed maintenance inspection and works to each tenants
unit in 2010, questionnaire survey was therefore carried out to the users of each
tenants unit in 2011 to explore the feedback from the tenants on the maintenance
services provided by the maintenance contractors.
The measurement of SQ is largely based on the expectations and perceptions
(Samson and Parker, 1994). The SERVQUAL model by Parasuraman et al. (1985) has
been extensively applied for SQ measurement on how the delivered services level
matches customers expectations (Wisniewski, 2001). The SERVQUAL model is
modified and applied widely in many organizations. A number of articles have adopted
this SERVQUAL instrument with suitable modification on measuring SQ of Users
construction professionals in the construction area. They are summarized as follow: satisfaction
(1) Cravens et al. (1985) made reference to the SERVQUAL model to evaluate survey
architectural services quality.
(2) A study by Hoxley (1994) made reference to the SERVQUAL model to compare
the attitudes of 169 firms and 126 clients to 22 items which were considered 425
important to the overall quality of service provided by building surveying
firms.
(3) Samson and Parker (1994) adopted the SERVQUAL survey with substantial
amendments to accommodate the characteristics of the construction industry
to measure client expectations and perceptions of the SQ provided by
consulting engineers to determine the relative importance of the service features.
(4) Siu et al. (2001) used the SERVQUAL approach to investigate the SQ in the
maintenance services.
(5) Hoxley (2000) based on the SERVQUAL scale to develop a 26-item scale which
was referred as SURVEYQUAL for assessing SQ in a UK construction
professional service context.
The above studies reflected that the SERVQUAL approach has been widely adopted for
measuring SQ in the construction and maintenance industry. Based on Parasuraman
et al. (1985), quality is a comparison between expectation and performance. Since
the PRH tenants are also treated as external customers of maintenance contractors
whose SQ is also measured based on their performances and PRH tenants
expectations. A proposition is therefore deduced to make suitable modification to the
SERVQUAL model to formulate a questionnaire in order to explore the expectation and
perception of PRH tenants on measurement of contractor performance. This
proposition is further bolstered in the study of Lai and Pang (2010) who conducted a
measurement on the performance of the maintenance contractor based on the public
housing owners representatives expectations and perceptions. The second author of
this paper had the experience as the frontline supervisory personnel and got the actual
involvement in the supervision and inspection of the maintenance contractor works
under the building maintenance scheme at the time for carrying out the study. This
study therefore attempts to base on Lai and Pang (2010) to modify the SERVQUAL
model and devise 19 variables (as listed in Table I) to reflect the characteristics and
requirements of the maintenance contractor works under the scheme to explore the
PRH tenants perception.
Respondents from each tenants unit of the targeted estate were requested to answer
two sides of each variable, i.e. measuring respondents expectation level of service
for the implementation of TMS on the left hand side and measuring respondents
perceived level of service offered by maintenance contractors on the right-hand side
correspondingly. With reference to Hoxley (1996), the two constructs were provided
with five ranges of different answer categories in a Likert-type scale, ranging from 5 to
1 representing excellent, very good, good, satisfaction, less than satisfaction.
The mean score of each construct scales for the SQ variables were calculated and
ranked in the descending order to find out PRH tenants expected level of performance
to be provided by the maintenance contractors, and perceived level of services that the
maintenance contractors have already provided.
ECAM Tangibles The staff are visually appealing (e.g. wear tidy uniform, neat appearance, etc.)
20,4 Work environment being still comfort and habitable while working
Cleanliness and tidiness after repair works
Provide correct and necessary information to tenants before work
Reliabilities The staff provide their services at the time they promise to do so
The staff complete the work within the time schedule
Considerations for tenants units while working (e.g. keep clean to tenants units or
426 enhance protection work to tenants fixture)
Assurance Tenants feel safe while the workers carry out the works in the tenants unit
Behaviour of workers instills confidence to tenants
Degree of politeness and kindness of the workers
The staff have knowledge to answer tenants enquiries
Duration of the work contract, including leaving the site idle for a period of time
Empathy Operating hours convenient to tenant
Sincerely solving problems with tenants
Having tenants best interest in mind
Responsiveness Appropriate, accurate and clear communication to tenants during works
Prompt response to tenants requests
Table I. The staff are willing to help tenants
Questionnaire content Willing to accommodate special request from tenants

At the time of conducting the survey, there are 308 occupied units. The questionnaire
was collected by face-to-face interview with the tenants living in the estate and lastly a
returned sample size of 94 was valid for further statistical analysis. The return rate
was about 30.5 per cent of the estimated sample size of 308.

Findings and analysis

The whole questionnaire is divided into three parts. The first part is the background
information of respondents which includes group of age, education level and the period
of PRH tenants staying at home during the maintenance period. Tables II-IV show the
percentage of different categories in each item. While 93.6 per cent of respondents in
the age below 50, they are considered to be the middle age group and would be
expected to have a clear mind to finish the questionnaire (Table II). Over 90 per cent of
respondents have reached the least education level of secondary school which
indicated that most respondents are expected to have sufficient knowledge to answer
the questionnaire (Table III). Only o15 per cent of respondents seldom stayed in home,
i.e. the selected estate, during the maintenance period which helps enhance the validity
of the returned questionnaire because their answers on the questionnaires are based on
their own actual experience on the maintenance contractors services (Table IV).

Frequency % Valid per cent Cumulative per cent

Below 20 6 6.3 6.4 6.4

21-30 30 31.6 31.9 38.3
31-40 30 31.6 31.9 70.2
41-50 22 23.2 23.4 93.6
Table II. 51-60 6 6.3 6.4 100.0
Group of age Total 94 98.9 100.0
The second part of this questionnaire is about the types of maintenance works which Users
had finished for more than six months by the time of conducting this survey. The in- satisfaction
flat maintenance works include defects on tile debonding, windows, gates, laundry
racks, drainage, ceiling seepage and concrete spalling. The number of each work item survey
is shown in Figure 1 which help evaluate the quality of maintenance products. Crosby
(1979) and Garvin (1983) stated that durability is one of the factors to measure the
goods quality. It could be said that the quality of maintenance work completed by 427
maintenance contractors is high since no repair failure is observed until the end of
questionnaire collection, i.e. more than six months up to the time for conducting this
survey (Figure 1).
The third part is the main concern of the study, measuring contractor performance
based on the expectation and perception of PRH tenants.
The mean of PRH tenants expectations for each SQ variable is calculated and
ranked in descending order of significance as shown in Table V. The range of mean
scores lies between 4.83 and 3.83 in a five-point scale. Only one variable with mean
score below 4 and the rest 18 variables with mean scores higher than 4 reflect that
expectations of respondents tend to higher side in general. The three highest
mean scores are all about the time aspect which is one of the traditional measurements
of contractor performance. This reflects that time is still the major concern nowadays.
One of the reasons may be due to the typical fast pace of lives in Hong Kong. The third
to fifth high mean scores are related to customer oriented which indicate the
importance of interaction between maintenance contractors and PRH tenants. These
results are all congruent to the agenda of TMS.
The least important variable is knowledge of site staff of maintenance contractors
to answer tenants enquiries. Though it is considered as least important, its mean score
is also near to 4 (3.83) on the five-point scale.
Similar to expectation level of PRH tenants on maintenance contractor performance,
the mean scores for each variables of the actual level of service offered by maintenance
contractors is also calculated and ranked in descending order of significance.
The result in Table VI illustrates the mean scores of the perceived level of SQ ranging

Frequency % Valid per cent Cumulative per cent

Primary 9 9.5 9.8 9.8

Secondary 36 37.9 39.1 48.9
College 30 31.6 32.6 81.5
University above 17 17.9 18.5 100.0 Table III.
Total 92 96.8 100.0 Level of education

Frequency % Valid per cent Cumulative per cent

Very few 3 3.2 3.3 3.3

Few 10 10.5 10.9 14.1
Sometimes 29 30.5 31.5 45.7 Table IV.
Often 27 28.4 29.3 75.0 How long you stay in the
Very often 23 24.2 25.0 100.0 flat during the
Total 92 96.8 100.0 maintenance period?
ECAM Tile defects

Tile defects
Windows

Windows
20,4 47 47
10 10

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

ep ys

Tw pa th

ep hs

ep hs

ep hs

no ntil

ep ys

ep th

ep hs

ep hs

ep hs

no ntil
r r on

r r on
r r da

r r da
r r nt

r r nt

r r nt

r r nt

r r nt

r r nt
r

af o m r

Tw air

w
u

u
ai

ai

ai

ai

ai

ai

ai

ai
te o

te o

te o

te o

te o

te o
te m

te m
ot

ot
af Few

af Few
af e m

af r m

af o m

af e m

af r m
e

N
af A

af A
428

u
re

re
te

te
Fo

Fo
Th

Th
Tile How long does the repaired area fail again Windows How long does the repaired area fail again
defects

Gates Laundry racks

22 Gates 22 7 Laundry racks 7

0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
ep ys

Tw pa th

ep hs

ep hs

ep hs

no ntil
r r on
r r da

r r nt

r r nt

r r nt
r

af o m r

w
u
ai

ai

ai

ai
te o

te o

te o
te m

ot

ep ys

ep th

ep hs

ep hs

ep hs

no ntil
af Few

af e m

af r m
e

r r on
af A

r r da

r r nt

r r nt

r r nt
r

Tw air

w
u
ai

ai

ai

ai
u

te o

te o

te o
re

te m

ot
te

Fo

af Few

af o m

af e m

af r m
Th

N
af A

u
re
te

Fo
Th
Gates How long does the repaired area fail again Laundry
racks How long does the repaired area fail again

Seepage Concrete spalling

Seepage 64 Concrete spalling 64
30 30

0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
ep ys

ep th

ep hs

ep hs

ep hs

no til
un
r r on
r r da

r r nt

r r nt

r r nt
r

w
ai

ai

ai

ai

ai
ep ys

Tw pa th

ep hs

ep hs

ep hs

no ntil

te o

te o

te o
te m

ot
af Few

af m

af e m

af r m
r r on
r r da

r r nt

r r nt

r r nt
r

af o m r

N
u

af A
ai

ai

ai

ai

o
te o

te o

te o
te m

Figure 1.
ot

u
af Few

Tw

re
af e m

af r m

te

Fo
e

N
af A

Th
u
re
te

Fo

Nature of repair works

Th

and durability of repair Concrete

Seepage How long does the repaired area fail again spalling How long does the repaired area fail again

from 3.99 to 3.12. The highest mean scores of variables of actual level of SQ perceived
are related to attitude of maintenance contractors personnel and human behaviour.
These reflect that the maintenance contractors generally have adopted the spirit of
TMS to build up a customer-oriented approach.
In contrast with the above, the following four variables have the lowest mean scores
which are unsatisfied by the PRH tenants:
(1) cleanliness and tidiness after repair works;
(2) the staff are visually appealing (e.g. wear tidy uniform, neat appearance, etc.);
(3) during working period, work environment is still comfort and habitable; and
(4) willing to accommodate special request from tenants.
The first three variables above are those pertaining to issues of tangible
dimension while the last one is related to responsiveness dimension. The first
and third variables reflect the lack of caring and consciousness on PRH tenants
place of living, while the second variable reflects lack of self-image of maintenance
workers. The fourth variable reflects that the workers conscious on customer care or
need is still at low level.
Rank Question number Variables Type Mean
Users
satisfaction
1 Q6 The staff complete the work within the time
schedule
Reliability 4.83 survey
2 Q5 The staff provide their services at the time Reliability 4.67
they promise to do so
3 Q13 Operating hours convenient to tenants Empathy 4.50
4 Q4 Provide correct and necessary information to Tangible 4.43
429
tenants before work
5 Q16 Appropriate, accurate and clear Responsiveness 4.40
communication to tenants during works
6 Q12 Duration of the work contract, including Assurance 4.32
leaving the site idle for a period of time
7 Q3 Cleanliness and tidiness after repair works Tangible 4.31
8 Q7 Considerations for tenants units while Reliability 4.28
working (e.g. keep clean to tenants units or
enhance protection work to tenants fixture)
8 Q8 Tenants feel safe while the workers carry out Assurance 4.28
the works in the tenants unit
10 Q2 Work environment being still comfort and Tangible 4.26
habitable while working
11 Q10 Degree of politeness and kindness of the Assurance 4.20
workers
12 Q14 Sincerely solving problems with tenants Empathy 4.15
13 Q17 Prompt response to tenants requests Responsiveness 4.12
14 Q19 Willing to accommodate special request from Responsiveness 4.09
tenants
14 Q15 Having tenants best interest in mind Empathy 4.09
16 Q18 The staff are willing to help tenants 4.07
17 Q9 Behaviour of workers instills confidence to Assurance 4.06
tenants Table V.
18 Q1 The staff are visually appealing (e.g. wear Tangible 4.05 Ranking of important
tidy uniform, neat appearance, etc.) variables of expectation of
19 Q11 The staff have knowledge to answer tenants Assurance 3.83 contractor SQ
enquiries performance

SERVQUAL score
As stated by Parasuraman et al. (1985), quality is a comparison between expectation
and performance. Samson and Parker (1994) define the gaps between service
expectations and perceptions of services as delivered. Based on these studies, the
formulation of calculating the SERVQUAL gap is:

SERVQUAL gap Expectation score  Perception score

The result of SERQUAL gap is illustrated in Table VII and Figure 2.

The calculated gap values are all positive figures ranging from 1.14 to 0.40. These
denote that the perceived SQ dose not match or exceed the corresponding expectations
from PRH tenants. The result reflects that there is an insufficiency of service delivery in
the perception of PRH tenants.
The positive figures of gap values indicate that maintenance contractors have little
communication or lost touch with PRH tenants on the base of their needs and
expectations. Obviously, maintenance contractors require understanding PRH tenants
ECAM Rank Question number Variables Type Mean
20,4
1 Q16 Appropriate, accurate and clear Responsiveness 3.99
communication to tenants during works
2 Q12 Duration of the work contract, including Assurance 3.91
leaving the site idle for a period of time
3 Q6 The staff complete the work within the time Reliability 3.80
430 schedule
3 Q4 Provide correct and necessary information to Tangible 3.80
tenants before work
5 Q5 The staff provide their services at the time Reliability 3.77
they promise to do so
6 Q13 Operating hours convenient to tenants Empathy 3.69
7 Q8 Tenants feel safe while the workers carry out Assurance 3.51
the works in the tenants unit
8 Q14 Sincerely solving problems with tenants Empathy 3.50
8 Q9 Behaviour of workers instills confidence to Assurance 3.50
tenants
10 Q7 Considerations for tenants units while Reliability 3.49
working (e.g. keep clean to tenants units or
enhance protection work to tenants fixture)
11 Q10 Degree of politeness and kindness of the Assurance 3.46
workers
12 Q18 The staff are willing to help tenants Responsiveness 3.40
13 Q11 The staff have knowledge to answer tenants Assurance 3.31
enquiries
14 Q17 Prompt response to tenants requests Responsiveness 3.26
15 Q15 Having tenants best interest in mind Empathy 3.24
16 Q3 Cleanliness and tidiness after repair works Tangible 3.19
17 Q1 The staff are visually appealing (e.g. wear Tangible 3.16
Table VI. tidy uniform, neat appearance, etc.)
Ranking of important 18 Q2 Work environment being still comfort and Tangible 3.12
variables of perceived habitable while working
level of contractor SQ 18 Q19 Willing to accommodate special request from Responsiveness 3.12
performance tenants

expectation at the stage of inspection and through owners frontline representatives

to align themselves better with the expectations of PRH tenants and meet those
expectations better.
The three variables with the highest gap scores of 41 indicate that they have the
greatest effect in the TMS. The outcome is illustrated and discussed in graph in Figure 2.
The three variables include following:
(1) Work environment being still comfort and habitable during working: this
variable has the highest gap score among three, i.e. 1.14, which indicates its
significance from PRH tenants point of view because the site of maintenance
work is located in the flat of PRH tenants and their daily activities will greatly
be affected during the long maintenance period. Such direct impact on PRH
tenants will engrave the impression of tenants on the efficiency of TMS since
PRH tenants experience the whole maintenance period. PRH tenants generally
consider that maintenance contractors shall have better arrangement to
provide a better environment to tenants when carrying out maintenance work.
 Degree of Perceived level
Users
Question expectation of satisfaction SERVQUAL satisfaction
number Variables mean mean gap mean Rank survey
Tangible
Q1 The staff are visually appealing (e.g. wear 4.05 3.16 0.89 6
tidy uniform, neat appearance, etc.)
Q2 Work environment being still comfort and 4.26 3.12 1.14 1
431
habitable while working
Q3 Cleanliness and tidiness after repair 4.31 3.19 1.12 2
works
Q4 Provide correct and necessary information 4.43 3.8 0.67 13
to tenants before work
Overall mean of tangible variables 4.26 3.32 0.95
Reliability
Q5 The staff provide their services at the time 4.67 3.77 0.9 5
they promise to do so
Q6 The staff complete the work within the 4.83 3.8 1.03 3
time schedule
Q7 Considerations for tenants units while 4.28 3.49 0.79 10
working (e.g. keep clean to tenants units
or enhance protection work to tenants
fixture)
Overall mean of reliability variables 4.59 3.68 0.91
Assurance
Q8 Tenants feel safe while the workers carry 4.28 3.51 0.77 11
out the works in the tenants unit
Q9 Behaviour of workers instills confidence 4.06 3.5 0.56 16
to tenants
Q10 Degree of politeness and kindness of the 4.2 3.46 0.74 12
workers
Q11 The staff have knowledge to answer 3.83 3.31 0.52 17
tenants enquiries
Q12 Duration of the work contract, including 4.32 3.91 0.4 19
leaving the site idle for a period of time
Overall mean of assurance variables 4.14 3.54 0.6
Empathy
Q13 Operating hours convenient to tenants 4.5 3.69 0.81 9
Q14 Sincerely solving problems with tenants 4.15 3.5 0.65 15
Q15 Having tenants best interest in mind 4.09 3.24 0.84 8
Overall mean of empathy variables 4.24 3.48 0.77
Responsiveness
Q16 Appropriate, accurate and clear 4.4 3.99 0.41 18
communication to tenants during works
Q17 Prompt response to tenants requests 4.12 3.26 0.86 7
Q18 The staff are willing to help tenants 4.07 3.4 0.67 13 Table VII.
Q19 Willing to accommodate special request 4.09 3.12 0.93 4 Mean value of
from tenants SERVQUAL gap and its
Overall mean of responsiveness variables 4.17 3.45 0.72 ranking

(2) Cleanliness and tidiness after repair works: this variable occupies the second
highest gap score of 1.12. It is similar to the variable with the highest gap score
as stated in (1) above. Both of them are related to the provision of comfortable
environment to PRH tenants when on-site maintenance works are being carried
ECAM Less than
Satisfaction Satisfaction Good
Very
Good Excellent
20,4 0 1 2 3 4 5
The staff are visually appealing (e.g. wear tidy uniform, neat
Q1
appearance, etc.)
Work environment being still comfort and habitable while 1.14
Q2

working
Q3

432 Cleanliness and tidiness after repair works

Provide correct and necessary information to tenants before

Q4

1.12
work.
The staff provide their services at the time they promise to do
Q5

so
1.03
Q6

The staff complete the work within the time schedule.

Considerations for tenants units while working (e.g keep clean

Q7

to tenants units or enhance protection work to tenants fixture).

Tenants feel safe while the workers carry out the works in the
Q8

tenants unit.
Q9

Bahaviour of workers instills confidence to tenants

Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19

Degree of politeness and kindness of the workers.

The staff have knowledge to answer tenants enquiries

Duration of the work contract, including leaving the site idle for
a period of time.

Operating hours convenient to tenants

Sincerely solving problems with tenants

Having tenants best interest in mind

Appropriate, accurate and clear communication to tenants

during works

Prompt response to tenants requests

The staff are willing to help tenants

Willing to accommodate special request from tenants

Figure 2.
Factor important to the
Degree of Expectation Mean
overall quality of
maintenance service Perceived Level of Satisfaction Mean
SERVQUAL Gap Mean

out in the PRH tenants houses. The key difference between these two variables
is the stage of carrying out maintenance works, i.e. during works and after
works. This finding indicates that PRH tenants generally consider that the
after works action shall be carefully arranged by contractors to clean and tidy
up the remained debris of maintenance works and reinstate the standard of
hygiene as before works.
(3) The staff complete the work within time schedule: this variable ranks the
third highest gap score of 1.03. It may be related to shortage of manpower
in labour market and resulted in insufficient manpower to digest works order
and maintenance works cannot be completed within the stated time frame.
The impact of this variable would create risks of extension of maintenance
work tasks. The progress of maintenance work cannot match with the agreed
 schedule, and in turn induce the inefficiency of TMS. This variable also has the Users
highest expectation score from PRH tenants because any delay of maintenance satisfaction
works could create troubles to PRH tenants.
survey
The SERVQUAL values for the five dimensions are obtained by calculating the
difference between expectation and each perception mean scores of each dimension.
Table VIII and Figure 3 illustrate the summary of overall mean score of the five
dimensions. It indicates that tangible and reliability dimensions have the greatest 433
variance between expectation and perception from the point of PRH tenants view.
Tangible relates to physical facilities, equipment, appearance of personnel,
communication material (Parasuraman et al., 1985). PRH tenants generally consider
that maintenance contractors have low score in this dimension because of poor image
of construction industry and it is consistent with the consideration of building up a
tidy, systematic and professional image for construction workers (Hong Kong
Development Bureau, 2010).
Reliability ranks the second position of highest SQ gap scores. Variables of this
dimension relate to the ability of performing the promised service dependably and
accurately (Parasuraman et al., 1985) by maintenance contractors in terms of time, cost
and quality, which is directly affected by the organizations resources base in terms of
budgets and systems (Siu et al., 2001). Though the SQ gap of this dimension is the
second highest, its perception mean score is the highest among the five dimensions.
Generally, the higher the SQ gap indicates the larger the rooms of improvement as
the perceived level is below the expected level. The above two dimensions with the

Expectation Perception mean Services quality

Dimensions mean (E) (P) gap (G) G EP Rank

Tangible 4.26 3.32 0.95 1

Reliability 4.59 3.68 0.91 2
Assurance 4.14 3.54 0.6 5 Table VIII.
Empathy 4.24 3.48 0.77 3 SERVQUAL values for
Responsiveness 4.17 3.45 0.72 4 five dimensions

5
4.5
4 Expectation
mean (E)
3.5
3
Perception
Mean

2.5 mean (P)

2
1.5 Servioes
quality gap
1
(G) G=EP
0.5
0
Figure 3.
le

ce

ss
lit

th
ib

ne
n
bi

pa
ng

ra
ia

ve

SERVQUAL values for the

Em
su
Ta

el

si
R

As

five dimensions
po
es
R

Dimensions
ECAM highest SQ gap scores reflects that PRH tenants have the most dissatisfaction on these
20,4 two dimensions. Maintenance contractor shall notice this and put more effort and
resources on these dimensions to meet the expectations of PRH tenants.
The assurance dimension which relates to human factors has the lowest SQ gap
score among all dimensions. Though the perception level is lower than the expected
level, the perception mean score as the second highest one reflects that PRH tenants
434 generally satisfy with contractor performance.
The variables of higher SERVQUAL gap score in the five dimensions are
highlighted to indicate impact level on each dimension and help assigning the
priority of actions to be taken in alleviating the impacts. Following is the highlights
of variables:
(1) Variables of tangible dimension, work environment being still comfort and
habitable while working and cleanliness and tidiness after repair works
have higher gap scores among four variables. The two variables, i.e. work
environment being still comfort and habitable while working and cleanliness
and tidiness after repair works, are related to the poor awareness of
maintenance contractor on personal comfort of PRH tenants in their house
during and after maintenance work.
(2) Variables of reliability dimension, the staff complete the work within the
time schedule and the staff provide their services at the time they promise to
do so have higher gap scores among three variables which reflect that during
arrangement of maintenance works, greater concern shall be paid in reducing
the disturbance to PRH tenants.
(3) Variables of assurance dimension, tenants feel safe while the workers carry
out the works in the tenants unit and degree of politeness and kindness of
the workers have higher gap scores among five variables which relates to the
ability of maintenance contractors to inspire trust and confidence from PRH
tenants on their knowledge and courtesy of maintenance works.
(4) Variables of empathy dimension, having tenants best interest in mind and
operating hours convenient to tenants have higher gap scores among the
three variables which relate to the caring, individualized attention of
maintenance contractors provided to PRH tenants.
(5) Variables of responsiveness dimension, willing to accommodate special
request from tenants and prompt response to tenants requests have higher
gap scores among four variables which relates to the willingness of maintenance
contractors to help and provide prompt services to PRH tenants.
The above analysis explains dimensions of tangible and reliability having the largest
discrepancy between expectation level and perception level, which is in turn influenced
mostly by the four variables, i.e. work environment being still comfort and habitable
while working, cleanliness and tidiness after repair works, the staff complete the work
within the time schedule and the staff provide their services at the time they promise
to do so, respectively. Both four variables are mainly related to the concern of disturbance
to PRH tenants brought by maintenance contractors in respect of manpower
arrangement. These findings support that there is a need for maintenance contractors
to impose more manpower resources to minimize the adverse impacts to PRH tenants and
TMS, i.e. disturbance to tenants and inefficiency of TMS operation.
Paired-samples t-test Users
An individual paired-samples t-test is used to determine whether there are significant satisfaction
differences among the degree of expectation (E) and perceived level of satisfaction (P)
on each respective maintenance service items provided by the maintenance contractor. survey
The mean scores and standard deviations of the expectation and perceived level of
each respective maintenance service items are reported in Table IX. The observed
significance level for all paired samples is o0.0005, so the null hypothesis (Ho: E P) 435
of each paired samples is rejected. It shows that the two constructs, degree of
expectation (E) and perceived level of satisfaction (P) on all respective maintenance
service items have significant difference. This finding concedes with the gap analysis
outcome that tenants expectation appears to be higher than the perception level.
Both the SERVQUAL gap analysis and the paired-samples t-test support that there
is a significant difference between tenants expectation and perception level on each
maintenance service variables. The two variables (i.e. Q2 and Q3) related to work
environment during and after works have the highest positive paired mean difference,
suggesting that the work environment conditions during or after maintenance works,
among the other maintenance service items, seriously underperforms. On the contrary,
the maintenance contractor comparatively performs much better in the two service
variables, Q12 and Q16 (i.e. Q12: duration of the work contract, including leaving the
site idle for a period of time, and Q16: appropriate, accurate and clear communication
to tenants during works) since they have the lowest positive paired mean difference.
The lowest one is related to time factor. This finding corresponds with Chan (1999)
that most construction projects in Hong Kong are developed on a fast track schedule.
Time is always the top concern in the construction industry in Hong Kong.

Discussions and implications of the study

The gap analysis illustrates PRH tenants expectation and perception on the
maintenance contractor performance and the relationship between expectation level
and perception level of PRH tenants on contractor performance. The expectation of
PRH tenants is generally high, i.e. mean score of each dimension higher than 4 in the
five-point scale. This outcome is consistent with the agenda of TMS, i.e. achieving high
level of tenants satisfaction (HKHA, 2005). The past decade or so has witnessed an
increasing emphasis on perceived SQ and customer satisfaction in both research and
practice (Shemwell et al., 1998). The perceived level of PRH tenants on contractor
performance is generally up to satisfaction level with the corresponding mean scores of
higher than 3 but lower than 4 in five-point scale. PRH tenants marginal satisfaction
indicates that maintenance contractor performance could become downhill if resources
allocation are reduced by contractors, particularly in variables with low scores, i.e.
work environment being still comfort and habitable while working and willing to
accommodate special request from tenants.
The SERVQUAL gap analysis demonstrates the positive variances between
expectation and perception of services delivered by maintenance contractors.
The demonstration reflects that there is a service delivery deficiency of maintenance
contractors in the eyes of PRH tenants. There may be two possible reasons to explain
the scenario. First reason is that the PRH tenants expectation may be unrealistically
higher than the available services provided by maintenance contractors. This suggests
that maintenance contractors true ability is not properly presented and delineated to
PRH tenants. As a result, an unreal anticipation from PRH tenants on service delivery
may arise. Second reason is that there may be misinterpretation between maintenance
 20,4

436

variables
ECAM

Table IX.

samples t-test for the

expectation and level of
Mean scores and paired-

perceived performance of
each maintenance services
Paired-samples t-test
Mean scores and standard deviations (df 93) 95 per cent confidence interval of the
(n 94) Paired difference difference Significance
Mean SD SE mean Mean SD SE mean Lower Upper Difference t (two-tailed)

Pair 1 for Q1 E1 and P1 4.05 0.662 0.068 0.894 1.092 0.113 0.670 1.117 0.447 7.933 0.000
3.16 0.998 0.103
Pair 2 for Q2 E2 and P2 4.26 0.585 0.060 1.138 0.649 0.067 1.005 1.271 0.266 16.998 0.000
3.12 0.483 0.050
Pair 3 for Q3 E3 and P3 4.31 0.656 0.068 1.117 0.716 0.074 0.970 1.264 0.294 15.120 0.000
3.19 0.644 0.066
Pair 4 for Q4 E4 and P4 4.43 0.559 0.058 0.634 0.656 0.068 0.499 0.769 0.270 9.329 0.000
3.80 0.523 0.054
Pair 5 for Q5 E5 and P5 4.67 0.516 0.053 0.904 0.951 0.098 0.709 1.099 0.390 9.217 0.000
3.77 0.710 0.073
Pair 6 for Q6 E6 and P6 4.83 0.378 0.039 1.032 0.835 0.086 0.861 1.203 0.342 11.976 0.000
3.80 0.756 0.078
Pair 7 for Q7 E7 and P7 4.28 0.557 0.057 0.787 0.620 0.064 0.660 0.914 0.254 12.311 0.000
3.49 0.563 0.058
Pair 8 for Q8 E8 and P8 4.28 0.537 0.055 0.766 0.612 0.063 0.641 0.891 0.250 12.131 0.000
3.51 0.503 0.052
Pair 9 for Q9 E9 and P9 4.06 0.525 0.054 0.564 0.597 0.062 0.442 0.686 0.244 9.161 0.000
3.50 0.503 0.052
Pair 10 for Q10 E10 and P10 4.20 0.540 0.056 0.745 0.842 0.087 0.572 0.917 0.345 8.579 0.000
3.46 0.683 0.070
Pair 11 for Q11 E11 and P11 3.83 0.666 0.069 0.521 0.758 0.078 0.366 0.677 0.311 6.666 0.000
3.31 0.549 0.057
Pair 12 for Q12 E12 and P12 4.32 0.659 0.068 0.404 0.645 0.066 0.272 0.536 0.264 6.081 0.000
3.91 0.650 0.067
Pair 13 for Q13 E13 and P13 4.50 0.635 0.065 0.809 0.737 0.076 0.658 0.960 0.302 10.632 0.000
3.69 0.704 0.073
Pair 14 for Q14 E14 and P14 4.15 0.639 0.066 0.649 0.667 0.069 0.512 0.786 0.274 9.428 0.000
3.50 0.563 0.058
(continued)
 Paired-samples t-test
Mean scores and standard deviations (df 93) 95 per cent confidence interval of the
(n 94) Paired difference difference Significance
Mean SD SE mean Mean SD SE mean Lower Upper Difference t (two-tailed)

Pair15 for Q15 E15 and P15 4.09 0.698 0.072 0.840 0.780 0.080 0.681 1.000 0.319 10.444 0.000
3.24 0.599 0.062
Pair16 for Q16 E16 and P16 4.40 0.535 0.055 0.415 0.646 0.067 0.283 0.547 0.264 6.226 0.000
3.99 0.558 0.058
Pair 17 for Q17 E17 and P17 4.12 0.565 0.058 0.862 0.697 0.072 0.719 1.004 0.285 11.983 0.000
3.26 0.527 0.054
Pair 18 for Q18 E18 and P18 4.07 0.626 0.065 0.670 0.753 0.078 0.516 0.825 0.309 8.626 0.000
3.40 0.555 0.057
Pair 19 for Q19 E19 and P19 4.09 0.654 0.068 0.968 0.786 0.082 0.806 1.130 0.324 11.867 0.000
3.12 0.673 0.070
satisfaction
Users

Table IX.
437
survey
ECAM contractors and PRH tenants. The differences of SERVQUAL imply that maintenance
20,4 contractors may not fully understand what PRH tenants needs which are obvious
from the analysed outcome of the three variables with highest gap scores. In order to
minimize the gap between expectation and perception of PRH tenants on contractor
performance, more communication shall occur during the in-flat inspection stage in
PRH tenants house. This could help maintenance contractors to understand what PRH
438 tenants need and how they can provide suitable services.
The empirical results from this study may provide a rich agenda for particular
industrial practices and further research as follow:
(1) The information of perception level of contractor performance could provide
insights in need for the owners frontline representatives who supervise and
manage maintenance contractors works to meet the end-users expectations,
i.e. PRH tenants. This would especially important for the three variables, i.e.
the staff are visually appealing, cleanliness and tidiness after repair works
and the staff complete the work within the time schedule which have relative
low mean scores of the perceived SQ level and high SERVQUAL gap scores.
(2) Conducting SQ performance survey continuously could help develop a
systematic benchmark in matching service delivery and expectation for future
improvement. The SERVQUAL gap analysis would help identify any gaps
between expectations and perceptions among various concerned parties, i.e.
services providers (contractors) and direct customers (HKHA or owners
frontline representatives).
(3) The information of SQ performance of maintenance contractor from the
surveyed estate could provide feedback information as a reference for the
owners frontline representatives to organize and improve services of TMS in
other PRH units which are on the schedule of TMS. Consequently the purpose
of providing a customer-oriented service to PRH tenants could be achieved.
This case study could further bolster the practice and knowledge on measuring
maintenance contractor performance based on the tenants as the users perception. The
study could also serve as a framework for further study in areas mentioned above.

Conclusions
The above analysis illustrates the quality of final maintenance products, i.e. remedial
works for various items of defects, such as concrete spalling and tile debonding
defects. The PRH tenants act as the end-users of these final products who though may
not have the sufficient technical knowledge to justify the final quality could also help
provide visual inspection to report any observed symptoms of defects. As no failure
occurs in the six items of defects after the completing the remedial works for about six
months in the selected estate, the maintenance quality hardware, i.e. maintenance
products, is up to the standard which is referred as the technical quality achieved by
the maintenance contractors.
The main part of this study was to adopt the gap analysis to enable identification of
the stronger and weaker dimensions of maintenance SQ achieved, and apply the t-test
to test the hypothesis proposed to find if there was significant differences in the
outcomes of the two constructs under consideration. Accordingly the t-test supported
the argument that the null hypothesis stands rejected and it was concluded that the
constructs, i.e. expectation and perceived level of satisfaction, differed significantly in
each maintenance service variables. Also the gap analysis concluded that tangibles Users
and reliability were the two dimensions with the highest gap differences when satisfaction
ranking in descending order. Empathy dimension achieved a moderate gap difference,
whereas, responsiveness and assurance dimension achieved the least gap difference. survey
All the five services dimensions obtain a positive gap score value which delineated
higher expectation than perception level. Among these five dimensions, the assurance
dimension with the lowest positive gap difference of 0.6 indicated low level of 439
dissatisfaction.
In essence, this paper has made some important contributions to the body of
knowledge. The first is that this study further extends the gap analysis concept for
measuring satisfaction on external customers, the end-users of the maintenance
products and services. Satisfaction is viewed widely as involving both perceived
quality and expectations. Perceived quality is an important antecedent of satisfaction,
while expectation has a very weak negative relation with satisfaction (Siu et al., 2001).
This approach provides benchmark for regular assessment on maintenance quality
and identification of shortcoming of training or communication between the
maintenance contractors and the tenants for continuous improvement. Second, the
case study research has given a stream of thinking to apply this kind of research
in other buildings or estates where maintenance services have been completed, and in
other similar service sectors, such as property management and condition survey,
to check whether they concur in their outcomes. The insights and denotation from
the study will hopefully bring interests from both academic and practitioners in
maintenance SQ.
References
Arditi, D. and Gunaydin, H.M. (1997), Total quality management in the construction process,
International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 235-243.
Chan, K.L. (1999), Home building quality: collaborative effort in enhancing building quality,
Proceedings of Housing Conference Better Homes in the Next Millennium, Hong Kong
Housing Authority, Hong Kong, 24-25 November, available at: www.housingauthority.
gov.hk/eng/events/conf/conferen/pdf/echankl.pdf (accessed 12 January 2010).
Cravens, D.W., Dielmam, T.E. and Kent, C. (1985), Using buyers perceptions of service quality to
guide strategy development, in Lusch, L.F. Ford, G.T., Frazier, G.L., Howell, R.D., Ingene,
C.A., Reilly, M. and Stampfl, R. (Eds), AMA Educators Proceedings, American Marketing
Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 297-301.
Cronin, J.J. and Taylor, S.A. (1992), Measuring service quality: a reexamination and extension,
The Journal of Market, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 55-68.
Crosby, P.B. (1979), Quality is Free: The Art of Making Quality Certain, New American Library,
New York, NY.
Garvin, D.A. (1983), Quality on the line, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 61 No. 5, pp. 64-75.
Gronroos, C. (1990), Strategic Management and Marketing in the Service Sector, Swedish School
of Economics and Business Administration, Helsinki.
Hong Kong Development Bureau (2010), Contractors recognised for outstanding safety
performance, press release, Hong Kong Development Bureau, Hong Kong, 10 May.
Hong Kong Housing Authority (HKHA) (2005), Total maintenance scheme, Memorandum for
the Housing Authority Paper No. HA 40/2005, HKHA, Hong Kong.
Hoxley, M. (1994), Assessment of building surveying service quality: process or outcome?,
RICS Research Series Paper No. 1, Issue 8, Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors,
London.
ECAM Hoxley, M. (1996), Assessment of building surveying services: outcome or process?, RICS
Research Paper Series, Vol. 1, Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, London.
20,4
Hoxley, M. (2000), Measuring UK construction professional service quality: the what, how, when
and who, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 17 Nos 4/5,
pp. 511-526.
Kagioglou, M., Cooper, R. and Aouad, G. (2001), Performance management in construction:
440 a conceptual framework, Constr. Manage. Econom, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 85-95.
Lai, W.Y. and Pang, S.M. (2010), Measuring performance for building maintenance providers,
Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 136 No. 8, pp. 864-876.
Lehtinen, U. and Lehtinen, J.R. (1982), Service quality: a study of quality dimensions,
unpublished working paper, Service Management Institute, Helsinki.
Low, S.P. and Peh, K.W. (1996), A framework for implementing total quality management in
construction, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 8 No. 5, pp. 39-46.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1985), A conceptual model of service quality
and its implications for future research, J. Marketing, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 41-50.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1988), SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale for
measuring consumer perceptions of service quality, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 64 No. 1, pp. 12-37.
Samson, D. and Parker, R. (1994), Service quality: the gap in the Australian consulting
engineering industry, Asia Pacific Journal of Quality Management, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 43-59.
Shemwell, D.J., Yavas, U. and Bilgin, Z. (1998), Customer-service provider relationships: an
empirical test of a model of service quality, satisfaction and relationship-oriented
outcomes, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 155-168.
Siu, G.K.W., Adrian, B. and Martin, S. (2001), Assessing the service quality of building
maintenance providers: mechanical and engineering services, Constr. Manage. Econom,
Vol. 19 No. 7, pp. 719-726.
Ward, C.D., Curtis, B. and Chapman, C.B. (1991), Objectives and performance in construction
projects, Constr. Manage. Econom, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 343-353.
Wisniewski, M. (2001), Perspectives using SERVQUAL to assess customer satisfaction with
public sector services, Manag. Serv. Qual, Vol. 11 No. 6, pp. 380-388.
Yasamis, F., Arditi, D. and Mohammadi, J. (2002), Assessing contractor quality performance,
Constr. Manage. Econom, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 211-223.
Zeithaml, V.A. (1981), How customer evaluation process differ between goods and services, in
Donnelly, D.H. and George, W.R. (Eds), Marketing of Services, Proceedings, American
Marketing Association, Chicago, IL, pp. 186-190.

Further reading
Carman, J.M. (1990), Consumer perceptions of service quality: an assessment of the SERVQUAL
dimensions, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 66 No. 1, pp. 33-55.
Gronroos, C. (1984), A service quality model and its marketing implications, European Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 36-44.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1991), Refinement and reassessment of the
SERVQUAL scale, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 67 No. 4, pp. 12-37.

Corresponding author
Anthony W.Y. Lai can be contacted at: bswylai@cityu.edu.hk

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.