Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR)
Vol-2, Issue-3 , 2016
ISSN : 2454-1362 , http://www.onlinejournal.in
A Study on the Customer’s Expectation and
Perception of Service Quality of Retail
Grocery Stores Using SERVQUAL Model
R.Ayyamperumal1 and Dr.B.Senthil Arasu2
1
Associate Professor of Management Studies, VHNSN College, Virudhunagar – 626 001.
Tamilnadu, India.
2
Associate Professor of Management Studies, NIT, Trichy. Tamilnadu, India.
Abstract : The purpose of the study is for the
improvement of the retail service quality of grocery
stores in five major cities in Tamilnadu, India. It
covers four retail formats. The grocery stores are
normally open around 8.30 am in the morning.
Sometimes when the respondent needs to purchase
during the opening hours, they need to wait as it
takes some time to setup. First, this study aims to
calculate service quality score of the individual
respondent and based on the SERVQUAL
dimensions, Then study aims at predicting the
customer’s willingness to wait, to buy grocery with
the contribution of demographics and SERVQUAL
score using binary logistic regression. There are 7
predictors. The important factor that contributes to
the prediction is identified along with the group in
specific. A Few suggestions are given in the
conclusion to build customer relationship and
ultimately improve the service quality.
1. Introduction
Measuring service quality is an interesting task
because of its distinctive characteristics:
Intangibility, heterogeneity, inseparability and
perishability (Buttle, 1996) [1]. Service quality is
about the concepts of perceptions and expectations of
service (Parasuraman et al., 1985, 1988) [2] .
Customers’ perceptions of service are the result of a
comparison of the expectations of services with the
actual-service experience. When perceptions exceed
expectations the service has resulted in consumer
surplus; it is adequate, when it just equals with the
expectations; the service will be said as bad, poor or
insufficient, when it does not meet their expectations
and has led to customer frustration (Gitomer, 1998)
[3].
Based on this perspective, Parasuraman et al.
developed a scale for measuring service quality,
which is well known as SERVQUAL. This scale
operationalises service quality by calculating the
difference between Expectations and Experiences of
the respondents in five major places in Tamilnadu,
evaluating both in relation to the 22 items that
Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR)
represent five service quality dimensions known as
‘tangibles’, ‘reliability’, ‘responsiveness’,
‘assurance’ and ‘empathy’.
The SERVQUAL scale has been tested and
adapted in a large number of researches conducted in
various service settings, cultural contexts and
geographic locations and it is suggested that they
require customization to the specific service sector in
which they are applied [4]. The researcher has
customized for Grocery retailing. After finding the
SERVQUAL, the researcher aims at predicting the
customer willingness to wait, to buy grocery with the
contribution of demographics and servqual score.
2. Literature Review
It is a universal fact that customer satisfaction is
the base for repeated purchase. For example, when
customers perceive a good product or service, each
one of them will typically share their experience few
people in their circle. It is a fact that nearly one-half
of Indian’s business is built upon this informal,
“word-of-mouth” communication. Improvement in
customer retention by even a few percentage points
can increase profits by 25 percent or more [5]. The
University of Michigan found that for every
percentage increase in customer satisfaction, there is
an average increase of 2.37% of return on investment
[6]. Most people praise the businesses that service
them the way they like to be serviced; they will even
pay more for that service.
The message is obvious finally that the
customer’s willingness to wait is an indication that
the customers are satisfied and customers not willing
to wait may not be loyal to the store at present and
chances are there that they might also change.
Customer satisfaction is an asset that should be
monitored and managed just like any physical asset.
This is true for both service-oriented and product-
oriented organizations [7].
Page 458
 Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR)
Vol-2, Issue-3 , 2016
ISSN : 2454-1362 , http://www.onlinejournal.in

3. Statement of the Problem 7.1. SERVQUAL Calculation

Research has concentrated on measuring The below diagram explains the steps in the
SERVQUAL for the retail services. In addition, this calculation of SERVQUAL in two ways to find the
study aims Predicting the Customer Willingness to weighted average SERVQUAL score.
Wait, during the opening hour with the Contribution
of factors in the Constructs of SERVQUAL. 355
respondents who said that they would not wait for
the shop to be opened and 187 respondents who said
that they would wait when the shop is yet to open.

4. Scope of the Study

The study is confined to the following retail store
formats. Format of stores covered: Kirana Stores,
Discount stores, Supermarket, Hyper Market in five
major cities of Tamilnadu. India.

5. Research Objectives
In accordance with the study, the research
encompasses the following objective:

a. To find the service quality of retail grocery

store based on individual respondent and
then based on the dimensions of
SERVQUAL.
b. Predicting the customer willingness to wait,
to buy grocery with the contribution of . Fig. 1: Methods of calculating SERVQUAL score
demographics and SERVQUAL score using
Binary Logistic Regression. The above two methods serve its purpose. The
individual method helps the researcher to find the
6. Methodology result of the SERVQUAL score of each respondent.
This is helpful to make a detailed study based on
Research study is descriptive in nature. A demographics of the respondents of the research.
descriptive describes the study systematically,
methodologically, rationally and ethically utilizing Table SA1: Analysis of SERVQUAL Score Based on the
opinion, behaviour and its relevance to the Constructs:
phenomenon being studied [8]. Weight
Average for Weighted
Average Gap
Weight Score1= Average
Sl.No. Constructs score of the
totalling Average of the
SERVQUAL is calculated using the SERVQUAL Construct
to 100 weight/ Construct
model. A structured questionnaire was constructed 100

taking into account SERVQUAL dimensions such as 1 Tangibility

-
19.04059 0.190406 -0.24609
1.29244
Tangibles, Reliability, Responsiveness, Assurance, -
2 Reliability 23.67159 0.236716 -0.34197
Empathy and demographics. Convenience sampling 1.44465
3 Responsiveness -1.4774 21.64022 0.216402 -0.31971
Method is employed. The questionnaire is collected -
4 Assurance 19.46679 0.194668 -0.28868
from the 542 people who have grocery shopping 1.48293
-
experience. 5 Empathy
1.49594
16.18081 0.161808 -0.24206
Weighted Average of
SERVQUAL = -0.2877
the Construct/5
Analysis method, First SERVQUAL is calculated Source: Primary Data
for individual respondent and for the dimensions of
SERVQUAL. Binary Logistic Regression - This Analysis is helpful to know the average gap
willingness to wait as dependent variable and six score that is arrived for each construct. This helps to
demographic variables and servqual score as understand the gap in each dimension. The above
covariates/predictors. table SA1 shows the calculation of arriving
SERVQUAL score based on the constructs. Empathy
7. Results and Discussion has high gap score of -1.49594 and the lowest gap
was the tangibility with -1.29244. Reliability has
The results and discussion are as follows in the gained the highest average weight and empathy has
two sections. gained the lowest average weight. The gap score was

Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR) Page 459

 Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR)
Vol-2, Issue-3 , 2016
ISSN : 2454-1362 , http://www.onlinejournal.in

multiplied by the weight (converted to 1), to get the Table 2: Model Summary
weighted average score in the construct. Then, -2Log Cox & Snell Nagelkerke
calculated the average of “Weighted Average of the Step likelihood R Square R Square
Construct” to arrive the SERVQUAL score of - 1 633.246a .113 .156
0.2877. This score says that the expectation of the a. Estimation terminated at iteration number 4 because
service quality is more than their experience while parameter estimates changed by less than .001.
shopping grocery. The SERVQUAL score is not
highly negative (-0.2877, the maximum negative The Table2 provides us with the R square
score is -7) which means that the retail service statistics and there are two measures, Cox & Snell
quality is close to normal. [9] and Nagelkerke. Both these uses a little different
formula, but both are equally valid. In this case, Cox
Table SA2: Analysis of SERVQUAL Score - Individual Respondent & Snell is 0.113, and Nagelkerke is 0.156. These
Sl.No Servqual score of a No. of Respondent numbers indicate scope for improvement in fit over
. Respondent Respondent s (%)
the baseline model. The value shows that there is
1 -1 to -0.75 32 5.90%
little scope to contribute to the improvement of the
2 -0.75 to -0.5 109 20.11% fit over the baseline model.
3 -0.5 to -0.25 142 26.20%
Table 3: Hosmer and Lemeshow Test
4 -0.25 to 0 177 32.66% Step Chi-square df Sig.
5 0 to 0.25 75 13.84% 1 5.755 8 .675
6 0.25 to 0.5 7 1.29%
In Table3, A chi-square statistic is computed by
Grand Total 542 100.00% comparing the observed frequencies with those
expected under the linear model. The significance
The above table SA2 shows the servqual score of value is 0.675. A nonsignificant chi-square indicates
the respondent. 5.90% of the Respondents scored that the data fit the model the best. This test is also to
between -1 to 0.75, 20.11% of the respondent scored know the goodness of fit and since the significance
between -0.75 to -0.5, 26.20% of the respondent value is 0.675, it fits the Best.
scored between -0.5 to -0.25, 32.66% of the The below table4 helps us to predict the
respondent scored between -0.25 to 0, 13.84% of the covariates that aids the prediction of the respondents
respondent scored between 0 to 0.25, 1.29% of the those who have the intention to wait to shop grocery
respondents scored between 0.25 to 0.5. when the shop is yet to open. The equation to find
the probability value to predict is as below. The “B”
7.2. Prediction - Who Will Wait to Shop values refer to the log-odds of being willingness to
Grocery wait, to buy grocery during the opening hour. We
can insert these into the binary logistic regression
The below is the summary and discussion of the equation as below:
results of binary logistic regression.
The below is the summary and discussion of the Binary Logistic Regression= α + β1X1 + β2X2 + ….+
results of binary logistic regression. β7X7
= -1.905 + (-0.172) (city)
Table 1: Omnibus Tests of Model Coefficients + 0.534 (gender)
Chi-square df Sig. + 0.584 (education)
Step 1 Step 65.184 16 .000
Block 65.184 16 .000
+ (-1.192) (occupation)
Model 65.184 16 .000 +0.141 (spending)
+ 0.065 (saving)
The Table1 here gives us the ‘omnibus test of + 0.245 (SERVQUAL)
model coefficients’. These values give us an idea of
whether or not the model with our independent Table 4: Variables in the Equation
B S.E. Wald df Sig. Exp(B)
variables fits the data better (i.e. Gives us a better Step City .772 4 .942
prediction of individual scores) than the baseline 1a City (1) -.029 .308 .009 1 .926 .972
model. We can find significance in the final column City (2) -.143 .310 .212 1 .645 .867
on this table 0.000, and this means (significance is City (3) .107 .340 .098 1 .754 1.112
less than .05) the model is significant, which means City (4) -.172 .305 .318 1 .573 .842
Gender(1) .534 .255 4.380 1 .036 1.706
that this model with the 7 predictors is a PERFECT Education 11.338 3 .010
Fit. It shows the goodness of fit [10]. Education(1) 1.044 .326 10.260 1 .001 2.840
Education(2) .699 .276 6.440 1 .011 2.012
Education(3) .584 .286 4.167 1 .041 1.793
Occupation 15.355 5 .009

Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR) Page 460

 Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR)
Vol-2, Issue-3 , 2016
ISSN : 2454-1362 , http://www.onlinejournal.in

Occupation(1) -.316 .425 .553 1 .457 .729 a. In predicting the factors that contribute to
Occupation(2) -1.378 .515 7.170 1 .007 .252 the prediction of the intention to wait, from
Occupation(3) -.955 .369 6.696 1 .010 .385
Occupation(4) -.480 .449 1.144 1 .285 .619
the table4 the researcher found that Gender,
Occupation(5) -1.192 .451 6.992 1 .008 .304 Education, Occupation and SERVQUAL
spending on .141 .110 1.621 1 .203 1.151 score are the factor that contributes to the
grocery decision on the intention to wait is correct in
Home savings .065 .132 .245 1 .621 1.067 reality too.
SERVQUAL .245 .094 6.758 1 .009 1.278
Constant -1.905 .608 9.827 1 .002 .149
b. Predicted that among 105 respondents, 88
a.Variable(s) entered on step 1: City in which you have GROCERY respondents are male and 17 respondents
shopping xperience, Gender, Education, Occupation, spending in rocery, are female. So males have the chance to
Home savings, SERVQUALic.
wait more than female. (Appendix A)
c. Predicted that among 105 respondents, 88
Among the 7 predictors in table 4, the variable respondents are graduates and below. This
Gender, Education, Occupation and SERVQUAL shows that the higher educated mostly do
score in table4 alone has significance below 0.05 not wait. So when our customers are of
hence these variables alone contributes to the model. higher education, we should understand that
Place, monthly savings and monthly spending on they do not have time or patience to wait to
Grocery do not contribute to this model at large. shop and look for alternatives. (Appendix
B)
8. Discussion and Conclusion d. Predicted that among 105 respondents, 82
The servqual score of the majority of 32.66% of respondents are Businessman and
the respondent is between -0.25 to 0 shows that the professional, this shows that these
majority of the respondents expects an incremental professions have flexibility in time and have
care to improve the service quality. The negative patience. None of the student waits shows
SERVQUAL score is about 84.87% of respondents. that they have to be timid. (Appendix C)
It clearly shows that the expectation of the e. Predicted that among 105 respondents, 75
respondents during buying grocery is higher and respondents have SERVQUAL score
hence the retailer should put effort. Respondents between -0.25 to +0.25 and none from the
forgot that the increment in service quality is going SERVQUAL score between -0.75 and -1.
to cost more in the products they buy.
The cutoff value is 0.5 to predict whether a The conclusion is that the males, businessman,
respondent will wait or not. The respondent with a Professionals, Graduates & below and those who
probability greater than 0.5 is predicted to have the have SERVQUAL score between -0.25 to 0.25 has
intention to wait to shop grocery. the chance to wait to shop grocery. Hence need to
train the employees to focus on them better [11]. The
Table 5: Binary Logistic Regression Classification emotions of the buyer are to be valued [12] Since
Tablea these people have the patience to wait it should be
Predicted encouraged. The researcher suggests offering a token
at the entry when these people enter immediately
Will you
after opening. This token bears a discount of 4% or
wait to purchase
free grocery of their brand. This might also attract
when they are
the buyers to wait. A healthier approach is to focus
opening the
on consistently providing the dimensions and levels
store/yet to
of quality that customers expect [13].
open in the
Morning? Percentage
Observed No Yes Correct
9. References
Step Will you No 308 47 86.8 [1] F. Buttle, “SERVQUAL: review, critique,
1 wait to purchase Yes 125 62 33.2 research agenda,” European Journal on
when they are Marketing, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 8–32, 1996.
opening the [2] A. Parasuraman, “Consumer Perceptions of
store/yet to Service Quality,” Spring, vol. 64, no. 1,
open in the 1988.
Morning? [3] J. H. Gitomer, Customer Satisfaction is
Overall Percentage 68.3 worthless, Customer loyalty is priceless:
a. The cut value is .500 How to make customers love you, keep them
coming back and tell everyone they know.
Based on the results obtained by the researcher, Austin: Bard Press, 1998.
the following are the conclusions: [4] D. W. Finn and C. W. Lamb, “An Evaluation

Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR) Page 461

 Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR)
Vol-2, Issue-3 , 2016
ISSN : 2454-1362 , http://www.onlinejournal.in

ofthe SERVQUAL Scales in a Retailing Total 20

126 327
Setting,” Advances in Consumer Research, 1
vol. 18, no. 1986, pp. 483–490, 1991. Female Predicted group No 14
[5] D. Grace and D. Griffin, “Conspicuous 53 198
5
donation behaviour: scale development and Yes 9 8 17
validation,” Journal of Consumer Behaviour, Total 15
vol. 25, pp. 14–25, 2009. 61 215
4
[6] T. L. Keiningham and T. G. Vavra, The Total Predicted group No 31
customer delight principle: Exceeding 127 437
0
customers’ expectations for bottom-line Yes 45 60 105
success. Chicago: McGraw-Hill, 2001. Total 35
[7] G. S. Sureshchandar, C. Rajendran, and T. J. 187 542
5
Kamalanabhan, “Customer perceptions of
service quality: A critique,” Total Quality Appendix B
Management, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 111–124, Predicted group * Will you wait to purchase when
2001. they are opening the store/yet to open in the
[8] R. Ayyamperumal, “Research methodology Morning? * Education – Cross tabulation
– Research types,” Google Drive, 2015. Will you
[PowerPoint]. Available: wait to
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1sKhveHr purchase
EvqCMcYI_BRbZAhtTHI190X7z1o- during
0Y61KK7w. opening
[9] L. L. Berry, “SERVQUAL : A Multiple- hours?
Item Scale for Measuring Consumer
Education No Yes Total
Perceptions of Service Quality,” Spring, vol.
12th grade or Predicted No 22 15 37
64, no. 1, 1988.
less group Yes 21 31 52
[10] F. C. Pampel, Logistic Regression: A Primer,
Illustrate. NEWDelhi: SAGE Publications, Total 43 46 89
2000. Predicted No 76 39 115
[11] T. A. Clottey, D. A. Collier, and M. Graduate group Yes 14 22 36
Stodnick, “Drivers Of Customer Loyalty In Total 90 61 151
A Retail Store Environment,” Journal of Post-Graduate Predicted No 67 32 99
Service Science, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 35–48, Degree and group Yes 8 7 15
2008. Higher Total 75 39 114
[12] D. Spanjaard and L. Freeman, “The hidden Professional Predicted No 145 41 186
agenda: emotions in grocery shopping,” Degree group Yes 2 0 2
Internationa Review of Retai,. Distribution Total 147 41 188
Consumer Research, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 439– Total Predicte No 12
310 437
457, Dec. 2012. d group 7
[13] J. M. Getty and R. L. Getty, “Lodging Yes 45 60 105
quality index (LQI): assessing customers’ Total 18
perceptions of quality delivery,” 355 542
7
International Journal of Contemporary Appendix C
Hospitality Management, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. Predicted group * Will you wait to purchase when
94–104, 2003. they are opening the store/yet to open in the
Morning? * Occupation – Cross tabulation
Appendices Will you
wait
Appendix A
During
Predicted group * Will you wait to purchase when opening
they are opening the store/yet to open in the hours
Morning? * Gender – Cross tabulation Ye Tota
Will you wait Occupation No s l
to purchase Business - Predicte No 10 9 19
during opening Trading, Own d group Ye
hours? Tot 25 36 61
Manufacturing s
Gender No Yes al Total 35 45 80
Male Predicted group No 16 Government Predicte No 51 10 61
74 239 Sector d group Ye
5 0 1 1
Yes 36 52 88 s

Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR) Page 462

 Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR)
Vol-2, Issue-3 , 2016
ISSN : 2454-1362 , http://www.onlinejournal.in

Total 51 11 62
Private Sector Predicte No 14
56 196
d group 0
Ye
5 8 13
s
Total 14
64 209
5
Homemaker/Hous Predicte No 48 25 73
e Wife d group Ye
4 5 9
s
Total 52 30 82
Student Predicte No
51 16 67
d group
Total 51 16 67
Professionals Predicte No 10 11 21
d group Ye
11 10 21
s
Total 21 21 42
Total Predicte No 31 12
437
d group 0 7
Ye
45 60 105
s
Total 35 18
542
5 7

Appendix D
Predicted group * Will you wait to purchase when
they are opening the store/yet to open in the
Morning? * SERVQUAL – Cross tabulation
Will you wait
to purchase
during
opening
SERVQUAL hours
Score No Yes Total
-1 to Predicted No
29 3 32
- 0.75 group
Total 29 3 32
-0.75 to Predicted No 71 21 92
-0.5 group Yes 4 13 17
Total 75 34 109
-0.5 to Predicted No 92 39 131
-0.25 group Yes 1 10 11
Total 93 49 142
-0.25 to Predicted No 96 42 138
0 group Yes 28 21 49
Total 124 63 187
0 to Predicted No 20 19 39
0.25 group Yes 12 14 26
Total 32 33 65
0.25 to Predicted No 2 3 5
0.5 group Yes 0 2 2
Total 2 5 7
Total Predicted No 310 127 437
group Yes 45 60 105
Total 355 187 542

Imperial Journal of Interdisciplinary Research (IJIR) Page 463