Mobile Service Quality


The concept of service quality has been widely studied in traditional services but much less is known about it in a wired or wireless context. However, the basic tenets of service quality are assumed to hold also for m-services . This means that service quality is only as good as perceived by the consumers and that their service expectations affect the overall perceived quality of the service. Findings by Khalifa and Liu (2002) show that desired expectations are an important determinant of Internet-based service satisfaction.

Zeithaml et al. (2000, p. 11) define e-service quality (e-SQ) as 'the extent to which a Web site facilitates efficient and effective shopping, purchasing, and delivery.' This definition covers commercial transactions but not the retrieval of service content. At present, m-services offer mainly information content and opportunities for service payment (e.g., buying a metro ticket), whereas shopping for goods is rare. We therefore define m-service quality as the extent to which a mobile service facilitates efficient and effective retrieval of content, and shopping, purchasing and delivery of goods and services.

Service Expectations

The conceptualization of service quality has been a much-debated topic in marketing (Brady & Cronin, 2001). Two of the strongest debates have been on the difference between service quality and satisfaction, and the importance of consumer expectations in determining service quality.

Service quality has its roots in satisfaction research and both concepts have been defined as the disconfirmation of consumer expectations. It is, however, now widely accepted that quality represents the consumers' cognitive evaluation of the service, whereas satisfaction is an affective state and captures how well the service fulfills the consumer's needs. The consumer's monetary and non- monetary sacrifices related to the service benefits also affect satisfaction. A mobile service may be of high quality but too expensive compared to alternatives.

Our study focuses on consumers' overall cognitive evaluations of mobile service quality. Based on our data, we cannot draw conclusions on the specific relationship between quality, satisfaction or value and their individual effects on future behavior. More studies are needed on the nature of these relationships in a mobile environment. For example, exploratory studies of mobile service value indicate that the concept is multidimensional for mobile services (Heinonen, 2004; Pura, Viitanen & Liljander, 2003).

Researchers have also debated the nature of comparison standards, i.e., the reference point that consumers use to evaluate a service (Gr nroos, 2000; Liljander, 1995; Zeithaml, Berry & Parasuraman, 1993). Numerous studies have reported service performance alone as being the best predictor of overall service quality (Liljander, 1995). Since these results can be attributed to method bias in performance-expectations studies, most researchers continue to hold that customers form implicit and explicit expectations of services, and that these expectations affect their overall service evaluation (Bitner, 1995; Gr nroos, 2000; Ojasalo, 2001; Zeithaml et al., 1993). We believe this to be true also for mobile services.

The extent to which consumers recognize and are willing to accept a variation in service performance is called the zone of tolerance (Zeithaml et al., 1993). Regarding mobile services it has been widely claimed that user expectations have been too high, almost impossible for service providers to meet (Yoon, 2001; Darling, 2001). For example, consumer expectations of new mobile devices are currently set by ads, which indicate that new phones contain a telephone, camera, radio, and laptop with Internet connection, and more, all in one.

Bad experiences of early m-services might also make consumers skeptical towards future offerings. For example, the reportedly high percentage of non-delivered SMS messages in the United States (Junkkari, 2003) may have a negative effect on consumer expectations and adoption of other m-services. According to the report, Americans already estimate that half of their messages never reach their target, although the real percentage is only 7.5, albeit also high. This might help to explain why, according to the same report, telecommunication companies in the US get close to zero income from mobile data services, whereas the corresponding number in Europe is 10-15%. For example, in Finland, with a population of 5 million people, on the average 4 million SMS messages are sent every day, and they form 80% of the total value of the internal mobile service market (Ministry of Traffic and Communication, 2003).

Service Quality Dimensions

We have found no previous research on the dimensions of mobile service quality but similarities between m- and e-services can be expected since both are Internet-based. However, technical limitations of mobile phones, such as the size of the display, will affect quality perceptions.

A number of service quality dimensions have been proposed in the literature. For traditional services, Brady and Cronin (2001) proposed a summary model consisting of three dimensions: service interaction, the physical environment and service outcome. However, e-service quality is still in its infancy, and there is currently no consensus on the nature or number of quality dimensions (Kaynama & Black, 2000; Lemon, Newell & Lemon, 2001; Srinivasan et al., 2002; Wolfinbarger & Gilly, 2003; Yang, Peterson & Cai, 2003; Zeithaml et al., 2000). Some studies indicate that here as well the number of dimensions could be reduced (Wolfinbarger & Gilly, 2003, van Riel et al., 2001).

Zeithaml et al.'s (2000) e-SQ model, which divides e-service quality into 11 dimensions, covers a broad range of quality aspects. The dimensions were derived from four focus group interviews and have not been tested on a larger sample, but they appear to cover aspects found in other studies. Therefore, at this early stage of conceptual development we decided to use Zeithaml et al.'s dimensions for a pre-understanding of how consumers might evaluate m-services. The 11 dimensions and their relevance for mobile services are briefly presented.

  • Access is the ability to get on the site quickly and to reach the company when needed. Consumers of mobile services will desire fast downloads of content. The first generation of WAP phones were too slow in this regard, and accessing services with GPRS phones have been slow or impossible when there are many simultaneous users in the vicinity (Pietil inen, 2001).

  • Ease of Navigation is important for moving quickly back and forth through the pages. Although m-services are less comprehensive than e-services, ease of navigation is equally important, and a good search engine is essential (c.f., I-Mode services in Krishnamurthy, 2002).

  • Efficiency means that a site is easy to use, structured clearly, and requires a minimum of information to be inserted by the consumer. Users of mobile services will most likely want to find what they need by just a few clicks on the telephone. Efficiency is essential to all self-service technologies and, in our opinion, the result of a well-designed service that offers high quality on all the other dimensions.

  • Flexibility in e-commerce refers to the availability of choices for paying for an order (various credit cards, check, debit card), choice of ways to ship an order (land, air, express, delivery to retailer), choice of ways to order (online, by phone), and a choice of different ways in which to search and return items. This dimension is specific for commercial transactions and might, therefore, become more relevant for m-services when, or if, mobile retailing takes off. An alternative interpretation of this dimension might fit current m-services better. That is, being able to use the mobile phone to pay for goods and services makes the phone itself a flexible option compared to credit cards or cash. Exploiting these possibilities, Microsoft and Vodafone recently announced that they are developing a new gadget called the 'dongle.' It is a phone that can be attached to a PC or laptop and used to pay for purchases that are too small for credit cards, such as buying songs and games (Halper, 2003). The purchases are added to the phone bill. Whether it will be successful, remains to be seen. A new service was also introduced in Finland in 2004 where it is possible to load cash into the mobile phone [3] .

  • Responsiveness includes beside a quick response to requests , the possibility to get help if a problem occurs. When consumers order, e.g., flight tickets or make a transaction between bank accounts, they will want an order confirmation. Cheap or free (telephone) help-lines are also essential. This dimension corresponds to customer care in Wolfinbarger and Gilly's (2003) study.

  • Customization/Personalization means how well the site is tailored to individual consumers' preferences, their history and ways of shopping. When Subscriber Identity Module (SIM) cards will include data such as name , address, date of birth, and credit card information, mobile phones can be used as personal identity cards (Ericsson Radio Systems, 2001; Cross, 2001). The identification of users makes it possible to tailor-make the services, and customized content is believed to be a high revenue-generating service in the future (Nortel, 2001). However, all users do not want their phone to work as an identity card. They are afraid that the information can be used for the wrong reasons, such as unwanted target marketing, criminal usage of information, and control of traffic (Schultz, 2001; Schwartz, 2001).

  • Security/Privacy involves the degree to which the customer believes that the site is safe from intrusion and that personal information is protected. This is believed to be one of the main issues for mobile services, especially m-commerce (Teerikorpi, 2001; Gair, 2001). According to some experts, mobile viruses are expected to become a problem in 2005.

  • Reliability is the correct technical functioning of the site, keeping the service promises, and providing correct billing and product information. All of these are essential, particularly if m-commerce is to be successful.

  • Assurance/Trust involves the confidence that the customer feels in dealing with the site. It is affected by the reputation of the site, the products and services that it sells, and by the truthfulness of information. The provider's assurances of a high reputation through policy statements, quality awards and consumer testimonials are important, as is the consumers' trust in those assurances, especially when making transactions. Trust is essential for using the service in the first place but is also as a consequence of perceived service quality and satisfaction (Gummerus, Liljander, Pura & van Riel, 2004).

  • Site Aesthetics relates to the appearance of the site, an aspect that is still underdeveloped in m-services. Displays vary between phone brands and models, thereby impacting on how the service is perceived (Pietil inen, 2001). Visual appeal or aesthetic value, as found for e-services (Mathwick, Malhotra & Rigdon, 2001) is not a strength of m-services.

  • Price knowledge was added by Zeithaml et al. (2000), with some reluctance, since price has not been considered a quality dimension for traditional services. The authors found that customers of online retailers were dissatisfied with the transparency of pricing, and that not knowing the total cost had a negative effect on the overall perceived quality of the site. In other words, price knowledge is related to how clearly the provider informs customers about prices (shipping price, total price, comparative price, etc.) during shopping, or when using a service. It is not the customer's evaluation of the price level, but of price transparency. For example, m-services customers should know up-front what the charges are (price/minute). Price knowledge may be even more important for mobile services than for the wired Internet. One study showed that due to the complicated pricing, 70% of polled American mobile phone users did not know who paid for their SMS message, the sender or the receiver (Junkkari, 2003).

High quality self-service technologies create consumer benefits, such as convenience benefits (Meuter, Ostrom, Roundtree & Bitner, 2000; Zeithaml et al., 2000). Of particular importance to m-services is the convenience of being able to use the mobile phone, anywhere , anytime , as well as being able to access new location-based services (Balasubramanian et al., 2002).

[3] In countries where the telecom operator's billing equipment allows for it, the mobile phones can already be used as a wallet for, for example, car park payment or tram tickets. In Finland a new service was launched in 2004. As the result of a cooperation between two banks and a telephone operator, it is now possible for consumers to load money from their bank account into their own, or into other consumers' (e.g., children) mobile phone, and to use the phone as a wallet for purchases. It requires special equipment at the place of purchase when used in a normal retail store. It is marketed as useful for business people, whose phones have been blocked against billing certain service numbers on the normal phone bill. By using the money that has been loaded into their phone, they can buy the services directly with 'mobile cash.'




Contemporary Research in E-marketing (Vol. 1)
Agility and Discipline Made Easy: Practices from OpenUP and RUP
ISBN: B004V9MS42
EAN: 2147483647
Year: 2003
Pages: 164

flylib.com © 2008-2017.
If you may any questions please contact us: flylib@qtcs.net