xxxff

1. Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2332721
A model for assessing consumer
perceptions of quality
George Kenyon and Kabir Sen
Lamar University, Beaumont, Texas, USA
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to propose a model for linking the dimensions of quality and
how customers create their perceptions of quality in the products and services that they purchase. This
provides a holistic framework for a better understanding of the various dimensions of product and
service quality and their impact on consumer perceptions.
Design/methodology/approach – A holistic framework for the understanding of the various
dimensions of product and service quality and their impact on the creation of consumer perceptions is
presented. In addition research questions for future investigations are proposed.
Findings – Consumer satisfaction is directly related to how well their expectations for a product or
service are met. These expectations are developed from the customers perceptions about the product or
service. If the firm wishes to develop new products and services that can create competitive advantage,
they must understand how the various product characteristics, or service attributes, effect the creation
of consumer perceptions.
Originality/value – This research contributes to the understanding of how consumers create their
perceptions and how the various dimensions of product and service quality relate to these properties of
perception.
Keywords Customer perceptions, Dimensions of quality, Product quality, Service quality,
Customer services quality, Quality
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Quality is a broad and pervasive philosophy that can significantly affect a firm’s
competitiveness (Powell, 1995; Sousa and Voss, 2002). Many organizations have
adopted practices that aim to bring about a change in their overall attitude towards
quality. These include: total quality management (TQM), Six Sigma, just-in-time (JIT),
and other systems which have the goal of reducing costs and/or increasing revenues.
However, as reported in The Economist magazine, in a survey conducted by
Arthur D. Little, only 36 percent of respondents believed that their TQM efforts
improved their competitive profile (Hendricks and Singhal, 2000).
In the quality literature there has been an extensive discussion of various quality
management systems and philosophies (Crosby, 1979, 1984; Deming, 1986; Garvin, 1987;
Juran, 1988), together with the factors and practices driving these systems (Krafcik, 1988;
Saraph et al., 1989; Dean and Bowen, 1994; Flynn et al., 1994; Hackman and Wageman,
1995; Powell, 1995; Ahire et al., 1996). Garvin (1984) was one of the first to assert that the
only way for a firm to achieve competitive advantage through quality is to match the
importancethatmarkets assigntotheindividual quality dimensionstotheorganization’s
performance along those dimensions. Shasharudin et al. (2010, p. 166) state that:
[. . .] from a marketing point of view, competitive advantage can be achieved through a series
of intermediate objectives such as perceived quality, achieving satisfaction, greater
commitment and confidence on the part of customers, as well as a final objective which is to
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1756-669X.htm
Consumer
perceptions
of quality
175
International Journal of Quality and
Service Sciences
Vol. 4 No. 2, 2012
pp. 175-188
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1756-669X
DOI 10.1108/17566691211232909

2. Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2332721
enhance loyalty. Furthermore, in order to increase the brand loyal customer base, they
suggest that an organization needs to create the awareness, reputation, image, brand
extension, innovation and perceived quality of its products.
Fynes and De Burca (2005) further note that given the consensus that exists on the
quality management paradigm, it is time to explore the nature of the causal relationships
between the various dimensions of quality and performance. Similarly, Smith and Bush
(2000) also identify the need for a framework for how consumers evaluate products and
service.
Notwithstanding the considerable literature on quality, there has been negligible
work on how consumers evaluate items that possess both product and service qualities.
This is surprising as many consumer goods are a combination of tangible products
along with associated intangible services. Also, there has been little research on the
various dimensions of product and service quality. Thus, the focus of this paper is on
developing a holistic model of how consumers judge the quality of products along with
its associated services. Section 2 briefly reviews the existing literature on product and
service quality. In Section 3, we examine how customers form opinions about product
and service quality. Section 4 discusses the various dimensions of product and service
quality. In Section 5 we propose a model linking the various properties of customer
perceptions to the dimensions of product and service quality. The final section of the
paper discusses some of the implications for this model and concludes with suggestions
for future lines of research.
2. Literature review
Kardes et al. (2004, p. 230) state that “consumers frequently make judgments and
decisions based on limited information and knowledge”. In studying the phenomenon
of making inferences with missing information, they propose a theoretical framework
for judgments and decisions regarding limited or missing information. Mower and
Minor (2001) believe that the information-processing model explains how consumers
perceive product characteristics. Horn and Salvendy (2006, p. 165) explain that
information-processing relates to consumer behavior as:
[. . .] the consumer captures information about the product from visual, auditory, haptic, and
other senses. This sensed information then goes through a manipulation stage, which is
controlled by the consumer’s allocation of attention, memory, and level of involvement with
the product. The information is organized and the consumer forms meaning of the product.
Product comprehension is a result of both perceptual organization and interpretation of
information. This perceptual processing then leads the consumer to respond and make
decisions about the product [. . .] Expectations influence the consumer’s overall product
evaluation and assessment [. . .] Product expectations are influenced by the nature of the
product, promotional factors, effects of other products, and an individual characteristic of the
consumer [. . .] The consumer decision process begins with problem recognition, then search,
alternative evaluation, choice, and finally post-acquisition evaluation.
Two classes of expectations have been identified in the literature: predictive
expectations and normative expectations (Parkash, 1984).
The expectations paradigm holds that customers measure product or service
performance against the predictions they made in advance of their consumption of those
products or services. Thus, the higher the expectations relative to actual performance,
the greater the resultant degree of dissatisfaction (Bearden and Teel, 1993). In their study
IJQSS
4,2
176

3. Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2332721
of service quality and expectations, Boulding et al. (1993, p. 20) find strong evidence that
“a person’s prior will and should expectations, and the delivered service, influence a
person’s perceptions of quality”.
Stigler (1916, 1962) formulates his theory of search which states that, to maximize
the expected utility of a search, a person will search until the marginal expected cost of
the search becomes greater than the expected marginal return. In this theory, the
consumer must decide on the number of searches to be made. Frequently the consumer
will do better to search until a product that he considers better than his minimum
utility criteria. Extending this theory, Nelson (1970, p. 327) states that in his:
[. . .] quest for information about the quality of goods, the consumer has a simple alternative
to search; he can use experience, that is, he can determine the quality of brands by purchasing
brands and then using them.
Extending these theories on information-processing, Darby and Karni (1973) state that
products have a combination of properties: search, experience and credence. Zeithaml
(1981) find that products (e.g. goods) typically have more search qualities than services,
which typically have more experience and credence qualities.
Search properties are defined as those product characteristics, or service attributes,
that can be easily evaluated and compared by a consumer prior to the purchase of said
product or service. This assessment is often an objective measure of the product’s
performance (e.g. speed, capacity, robustness, etc.) or the service’s benefits. Zeithaml
(1981) states that search properties include such attributes as color, style, price, fit, and
smell. Ford et al. (1990) assert that product rating services transform credence and
experience attributes into search attributes.
Experience properties are described as those product characteristics, or service
attributes, that can only be evaluated after purchase and use of the product, or the
actual consumption the service. Though searchable information describing the product
or service may be available, ultimately customers will realize that evaluating them will
require experiencing the product or service. Zeithaml (1981) states that experience
properties include such qualities as taste, wearability, and purchase satisfaction.
Credence properties are those product characteristics, or service attributes, that
cannot be discerned even after the product, or service, has been purchased and
consumed. Customers ultimately must rely on the evaluations given by a credible source,
or make inferences from past experiences with similar items. One reason that customers
have difficult in evaluating credence properties with previously unexperienced products
or services is that the typical customer does not have enough knowledge or expertise to
make an accurate evaluation. These types of products or services are typical items such
as insurance, surgical procedures, automobile maintenance work, etc. Professional
services typically possess higher levels of credence qualities (Emons, 1997). Darby and
Karni (1973) conclude in their study that the longer a consumer takes in evaluating
experience qualities the more they act like credence characteristics. This conclusion is
also supported by Ford et al. (1990).
For a firm to survive and prosper in today’s business environment, customer
retention is a critical factor. The key issue being how do you create customer loyalty? In
their study on service quality and customer satisfaction, Hernan et al. (1999) note that in
the long term, service quality is related to customer expectations, whereas, in the short
term, customer satisfaction is transaction specific, and focused upon a personal,
Consumer
perceptions
of quality
177

4. emotional reaction. Hernan et al. (1999, p. 9) observe that “customers remain loyal only as
long as they are completely satisfied with the quality of the service or product provided”.
In markets where competitors offer similar levels of quality in their products or services,
maintaining a competitive advantage becomes increasingly dependent upon their
ability to focus on complementary quality dimensions (Gwinner et al., 1998).
In their evaluation of service quality and customer satisfaction, Tian-Cole and
Crompton (2003) note that there are two principle approaches to defining satisfaction. The
firstisaneed-basedapproach,calledappraisalsatisfaction. Inthisapproachtheindividual
assesses the extent to which his perceived reality matches his current expectations. The
second approach is called the expectancy-disconfirmation paradigm (Oliver, 1980). In this
second approach there are two separate but connected processes: the development of
expectations for an outcome, and the disconfirmation judgment that results from
comparing the outcome against the expectations. LeBlanc (1992, p. 15) state that:
[. . .] even though both quality and satisfaction are in theory concerned with the difference
between expectations and perception, at present no theoretical distinction seems to be made
between the two concepts in the literature.
In their research, Tian-Cole and Crompton (2003) find that at the transactional level,
service quality is cognitive while satisfaction is affective. At the global level, service
quality and satisfaction are attitudes that possess both cognitive and affective
components.
Korda and Snoj (2010) note that the concepts of service quality are ambiguously and
vaguely defined in the marketing literature. They also find evidence of the important
role of perceived quality and perceived value in high customer contact industries. This
increases the importance of identifying the dimensions of these constructs correctly and
discovering how the constructs are perceived by customers. Their study shows that:
.
perceived service quality is strongly linked to customer satisfaction, both
directly and indirectly;
.
perceived value acts as a mediator between perceived quality and customer
satisfaction; and
.
that there are three significant factors relevant to perceived service quality:
safety, confidence, and physical evidence.
Sachdev and Verma (2004) find that in the formulation of marketing strategies,
knowledge of the dimensions of quality is essential, but not sufficient. It is equally
important to understand how to optimally deploy resources among those dimensions
so the best value can be provided to the customer; thus creating satisfaction and
retention.
Odekerken-Schroder et al. (2001) investigate the impact of quality on customer
loyalty. The authors note that:
[. . .] customers take several dimensions into consideration when evaluating total quality.
If retailers are aware of the dimensions that are crucial in the eyes of the customer, this will
enable them to optimize the allocation of their resources (p. 309).
Theresultsoftheirstudyarebaseduponthreedimensionsofquality:technical,functional,
and relational. McDaniel and Burnet (1990) define technical quality as the breath, depth,
mix, and composition of products offered. Functional quality focuses on the courteous
IJQSS
4,2
178

5. and friendly of service personnel and their ability to communicate effectively with the
customer. Relational quality involves the customer’s ability to affiliate with others during
the service encounter. The results of Odekerken-Schroder et al.’s, study show that
relational quality is a critical factor in the retail industries.
Horn and Salvendy (2006, p. 155) observe that:
[. . .] customer relationship management and TQM focus on capturing consumer
requirements to produce products that provide consumer satisfaction, engagement, and
acceptance [. . .] Productivity methods and product decisions focus on consumer expectations
and perceptions of value [. . .] Several types of opportunities contribute value to the
consumer’s overall product experience, such as product ergonomics, quality, aesthetics,
emotion, identity, impact, and core technology.
The main objective of the product development process is to create an affordable item,
of sufficiently high quality, that will contribute to both customer satisfaction and
profits. In order to do this effectively, customer information must be collected that
includes their experiences, expectations, and environment.
The characteristics designed into the product contribute significantly to the success
or failure of the product. In addition to the characteristics defined by Garvin (1987) and
Han et al. (2000) link two new dimensions to product usability: form and function.
Product form is defined as the customer’s image and impression of the product, while
product function pertains to the product’s performance. Both of these dimensions have
been found to create value and satisfaction in customers (Roozenburg and Eckels, 1995).
Shasharudin et al. (2010) in their study of a product’s quality and its extrinsic
attributes find that with respect to customer retention, the image of the product itself is
more important than the physical quality of the product itself. They note that in
addition to a good customer relationship, product awareness as critical in shaping the
customer perceptions.
3. The properties of customers perceptions
From the customer’s point of view, the perception of quality is related to their
experiences with a product’s performance, or services benefits, as compared to their
expectations about a hypothetical ideal. Based upon the economics of information
theory postulated by Stigler (1962), Nelson (1970) and Darby and Karni (1973), we
propose that the strength of a product’s credence property develops over time. Figure 1
shows this proposed perception development process.
Figure 1.
Basic perceptions
of quality model
Indirect Information Received
Credence Properties
No
Yes
Need to be
Satisfied?
Search
Properties
Experience
Properties
Customer
Satisfaction
Service
Product
Time Lapse
Time Lapse
Consumer
perceptions
of quality
179

6. Consumers are always receiving and processing information received about products
and services. The sources of this indirect reception can include any or all of the
following: word-of-mouth testimonies for family members or friends, general
conversations with associates or strangers, advertisements, and numerous other
sources. From these bits and pieces of information, consumer perceptions about a given
product or service, or the company or brand behind it, develops. This initial belief,
synonymous with the product’s credence property, is often nebulous and likely to
change with additional information. The strength of the credence property explains the
sense of security that consumers feel after purchasing a product and/or service from a
company that they believe in. In other words, credence properties are the root of
expectations, if the customer experiences for that product or service. More information
builds stronger credence; stronger cues lead to higher confidence levels on the nature of
the product or service. The higher the confidence about an item, the greater the
customer’s sense of security about the decision to either experience, or not to
experience, the item. If in the future, the customer does experience the product or
service, and the results of the experience closely match the expectation created from
credence, the greater the security level about future credence.
Before a person acts on this credence property, by deciding to purchase a product or
service, he/she must first recognize the need for that product or service. This need can
arise from either an actual requirement or from a simple whim or a sense of
self-gratification. This will typically drive the prospective consumer to search for a
product or service that will satisfy the specifics of his/her need. The time frame for this
can range in duration from an instantaneous impulse buy, to a lengthy and arduous
vetting of both the vendor and the product or service. This process is associated with
the search property of the product.
Once the search process is completed and the choice of product and its associated
vendor is completed, a purchase is made. The act of either using the product, or
consuming the service, creates information that translates into an experience property.
The perceptions that the person stores during the experiential process will modify the
perceptions stored under credence properties: either strengthening the existing
credence or changing it to more closely fit the most recent experience. This process is
repeated an innumerable number of times by all of us over the course of our lives. Often
a brand’s experiential properties can affect the credence properties of other products
manufactured under the same brand name, but not bought by the consumer.
Many of the products we use are supported both before and after their purchase by
associated services. Most services have a mix of both tangible and intangible
attributes. For example, while a fast food chain serves hamburger, fries and drinks
(a tangible product), our evaluation of the chain is also affected by intangible factors
such as the outlet’s cleanliness, the salesperson’s friendliness, the speed of service, etc.
While the quality of many tangible products is possible to judge before purchase
(a search property), the quality of most intangible products, typical of the service
sector, can only be judged after purchase (an experience property) or over a span of
time (a credence property). Given these differences, it is important that the various
dimensions of quality from the perspective of product-consumer interactions be
analyzed in the proper context for their impact on the customer’s final perceptions of
quality to be understood. Table I presents products and the services associated with
them in various industrial sectors.
IJQSS
4,2
180

7. 4. The dimensions of quality
Quality dimensions can be defined as those attributes, or characteristics, that when
viewed together form the basis on which opinions and perceptions of the item are
established, and expectations for similar items are shaped over time. Furthermore,
there is a degree of interdependence between these dimensions; any opinions,
perceptions, or expectations that are formed without considering all the applicable
dimensions of an item will be incomplete. It should be noted that in creating an item
that the consumer considers “fit for use”, various dimensions beyond those associated
with the usual product attributes must also be addressed. These dimensions are
associated with the organization’s culture as well as the characteristics of the
transformation processes that are behind the creation of the product or service.
4.1 The dimensions of product quality
Garvin (1987) states that quality is first and foremost a strategic question as it governs
the development of product design and the choice of features or options. In addition, it
also sets the criteria for the selection of suppliers and materials. Adam (1992) asserts
that many firms put forth the strategic objectives of improving product, process, and
service quality as a method for achieving world-class performance. Hill (1994) notes
that product quality is an important factor in the development of a firm’s sustainable
competitive advantage. Garvin suggests that customer impressions about a firm’s
products are formed from past experiences with the firm and its products. He also
observes that management needs a conceptual bridge to the consumer’s vantage point
in order to achieve true quality: in other words, “high quality means pleasing
consumers, not just protecting them from annoyances” (p. 104).
In order to help management better understand how to achieve quality, Garvin
defines eight dimensions for the development of products: performance, features,
reliability, conformance, durability, serviceability, aesthetics, and perceived quality.
He suggests that with respect to quality management and the related design of products
or services, management needs to think strategically about quality, and focus on those
Business Products Services
Retailer The merchandise sold Custom ordering
Warranty returns and handling
Automotive services The parts used in the repair Testing and diagnostics of vehicle
Removal and replacement of defective parts
Adjustment and calibration of components
Restaurants Food and beverages Taking of orders and requests
Preparation of food and drink orders
Service during the meal
Clean up after the meal
Manufacturing Parts and components Custom design services
Production by specification
Inspections
Repairs and installations
Education Educating students Curriculum development
Instructions and lectures
Tutoring and study support
Table I.
Products and
related services
Consumer
perceptions
of quality
181

8. dimensions that support their strategic objectives. In addition, he believes that these
dimensions are interrelated, such that improvements in one dimension might be at the
expense of another.
From the customer’s perspective, the choice of purchasing a product starts with the
desire to satisfy a given need. Thus, the product must possess specific performance
characteristics, or capabilities. Coupled with the product’s performance are the features
by which this performance is achieved. Usually, more features are perceived as leading
to greater performance. However, there are exceptions to this rule, such as the example of
fighter aircrafts which are designed to performance multiple missions (e.g. dog fighting,
bombing, and close air support of ground troops). The incorporation of designs to
achieve these multiple tasks frequently result in the plane achieving a lower than highest
possible ranking at each of the individual missions. Next, customers are interested in the
reliability of the product’s performance each time they use the product. In addition, they
expect the product to be durable, i.e. to last over its expected lifetime. The final choice to
buy the product often involves its aesthetics. If the product is unwieldy, ugly, or
otherwise hard to handle or use, the customer may well forgo the purchase altogether.
Consumers are likely to form a set of expectations about the above dimensions from
information received directly and indirectly from external sources. Thus, the degree of
conformance between the product’s actual performance, reliability, and durability to
consumer expectations, or ideal standards, results in perceptions about the product’s
quality. The greater the gap between expectations and the actual performance, the
stronger the perceptions of quality. Thus, when performance is lower than
expectations – the lower the perceived quality, and conversely when performance
exceeds expectations – the higher the perceived quality.
Over time the maintenance and serviceability of the product moderates the
customer’s perceptions of the quality of the product. The perceptions of quality will be
downgraded for those products that are difficult or expensive to maintain or service. In
contrast, consumer perceptions of quality of products that are simple and inexpensive
to maintain are likely to improve over time.
Several studies find empirical support for Garvin’s dimension. Stone-Romero et al.
(1997) show empirical evidence that support the multi-dimensional nature of product
quality. Similarly, Paulson-Gjerde and Slotnick (1997) use a multidimensional
approach to study the antecedents of manufacturing quality. Ahire and Dreyfus (2000)
find that the management of product design is equally important as the management of
process quality. Sousa and Voss (2002) point out that future research should focus
upon the fundamental nature of an organization’s products and use measures that
capture the relevant dimensions for those products. It is also suggested that it may be
necessary to aggregate or disaggregate some of Garvin’s original dimensions of quality
as we acquire more knowledge about the underpinnings of product quality.
4.2 The dimensions of service quality
Parasuraman et al. (1985) identify three aspects of services that distinguish it from
physical goods: intangibility, heterogeneity, and inseparability. Because of intangibility,
services cannot be touched or measured in any way before their purchase by the
consumer. In addition to intangibility, the quality of services is difficult to judge because
of the inconsistency of behavior of service personnel (heterogeneity) and the consumer’s
active role in the consumption of the service (inseparability). The latter implies that the
IJQSS
4,2
182

9. production and consumption of services cannot be separated from each other, as with the
case of physical goods.
From the customer’s perspective there are several generic attributes to the service
delivery experience. The first attribute is convenience, or accessibility. As services are
easily duplicated, they are often provided by a host of providers. If all other factors are
equal, consumers are likely to choose the service provider that is easiest to access. In
order to remain competitive, the service provider must denote both competency and
reliability. In other words, the provider should have the skills and knowledge
necessary to perform the service requested at the level of quality expected by the
consumer (i.e. competence). In addition, the provider must provide the same level of
consumer satisfaction every time the service is provided to the consumer on every
occasion (i.e. reliability). Thus, both service competence and reliability are essential for
achieving service quality. Arguably, if the service provider is both competent and
reliable, he/she is also likely to be credible and secure. Credibility and security are
extremely important in the creation and maintenance of the customer’s perceptions and
expectations about the service and the associated service provider.
Because there is a tremendous difference among individual customers and even for
the same customer at different contact points, it is important that service providers be
responsive to the needs of each customer on every occasion. These needs include, but are
not restricted to an understanding of the specific requirements, courtesy, and respect
expected by a majority of consumers. Furthermore, a service provider with the
necessary business acumen should recognize variations in customer expectations.
He/she should strive to understand that these expectations can be moderated by
transient events that lead to changes in customer perceptions. In order to influence
consumer perceptions, the company should provide customers with timely and useful
information about its product and related services. The final determinant of service
quality is associated with the tangibles that are part of the service delivery. Even though
they are a product and not a service, the quality of the tangibles provided during delivery
can greatly influence the customer’s overall perception of the actual service. The
dimensions that determine the quality of these tangibles are discussed in Section 4.1.
Based upon a series of extensive interviews, Parasuraman et al. (1985) identify over
200 elements of service quality. Many of these elements were previously identified as
components in the ten determinants of service quality. Of these determinants, they
postulate that only tangibility and credibility can be known in advance of the purchase.
On the other hand, competence and security can be classified as credence properties.
Using factor analysis, Parasuraman et al. (1985) condensed the original ten
determinants of services into five dimensions: tangibles, reliability, responsiveness,
assurance and empathy.
5. Linking customers perceptions and the dimensions of quality
The ability of a product, or service, to render the expected value sought by the
costumer, contributes significantly towards the customer’s perceptions of quality.
Quality is measured across multiple dimensions. Each of the characteristics or
attributes, within a given dimension have credence, search, and experience properties.
We contend that these characteristics, or attributes, align with these perceptions
properties at different levels. Ziethaml (1981) in her evaluation of the differences
between goods and services said that, “inseparability, nonstandardization, and
Consumer
perceptions
of quality
183

10. tangibility” of services lead them to possess few search qualities and many experience
qualities. Credence qualities also dominate in many services, especially those provided
by professionals and specialists. Figure 2 shows our proposed theorized alignment of
product characteristics and service attributes with the properties of perceptions. In this
figure, the basic model for the development of perceptions shown in Figure 1, has been
modified to incorporate into each perception property the characteristics or attributes
that most closely align with it.
Information received by the customer about the performance of competitive
substitute products/service also influences the formation of both perceptions and
expectations. As such, environmental conditions not only affect the way customers
perceive the benefits received from their purchases, but are also likely to influence their
expectations about the benefits possible from future purchases. By monitoring the
customer’s reactions to various products and services, coupled with an understanding
of how these reactions relate to the design of a product or services characteristics, the
firm should be able to continuously produce superior products and services.
In the quality management literature there are strong endorsements for companies
to seek out the customer’s requirements for a product or service as the starting point
for their product/service design, but there has been little research on the development
of consumer perceptions and expectations for products and services as well as how
these perceptions and expectations relate to the characteristics that that define product
or service. Figure 2 shows a proposed linkage between the customer’s perceptions
model and the dimensions of both service and product quality. The figure illustrates
how consumer perceptions of service and product quality arise from the search and
experience properties and over time embed themselves in beliefs about the quality
Figure 2.
Proposed relationship
between the perceptions of
quality and the
dimensions of product and
service quality
Services Related Credence Properties:
• Competence
• Reputation
• Convenience
Product Search Properties:
• Durability
• Features
• Reliability
• Ergonomics
Product Related Credence Properties:
• Aesthetics
• Creativity
• Conformance
Service Experience
Properties:
Product Experience
Properties:
Customer
Satisfaction
• Access
• Convenience
• Performance
• Security
• Serviceability
Service
Product
Time Lapse
Time
Lapse
Need to be
Satisfied?
Yes
No
Need to be
Satisfied?
Yes
No
Time Lapse
Time
Lapse
• Consistency
• Convenience
• Courtesy
• Flexibility
• Reliability
• Responsiveness
• Security
• Tangibles
• Ambiance
Services Search Properties:
Indirect
Information
Received
• Access
• Responsiveness
• Communication
IJQSS
4,2
184

11. of the total bundle offered by the firm. This is related to the credence properties that
develop over time.
6. Conclusions
Understanding how customer perceive quality, and how the various dimensions of
quality relate to the creation of those perceptions, can greatly enhance the firm’s ability
to develop products and services that create competitive advantage. A good example of
this can be seen in Deman et al. (2002) study of patients’ and personnel perceptions of
service quality in nuclear medicine. In their study, the author find that “personal
characteristics are not as important as tangibles-assurance and reliability” (p. 1116).
They further suggest that with respect to customer satisfaction in the nuclear medicine
field, the main focus should be on the physical components – technical skills.
The present paper presents an integrative model that presents a theoretical model of
how consumers gauge the quality of items that have both tangible and intangible
dimensions. Although separately, both Garvin (1987) and Parasuraman et al. (1985)
have evaluated the salient dimensions of service and product quality, in this paper we
present a model where consumers judge both simultaneously. The paper uses the work
of Nelson (1974) and Darby and Karni (1973) to build a model that consumers are likely
to use in judging the quality of products and services they are likely to purchase and
continue to use in the future.
Firms should evaluate the appropriate dimensions within its bundled offering of
products and services that relate to credence, search and experience properties. They
should particularly monitor changes in beliefs that occur over time. These are related
to credence properties and are likely to play an important part in deciding the
competitive positioning of the firm’s offerings. Thus, each firm’s view of the areas of
the points of parity and points of differences compared to other competitive offerings
should result from its analysis of customer perceptions of product and service quality
and their shifts over time.
Future research on both the properties of perception and the dimensions of quality
should strive to validate the mechanisms that consumers use to incorporate the
information they obtain under the search, experience and credence properties. A better
understanding of the network of these dimensions should make firms better positioned
to use quality as a competitive tool in the market place.
References
Adam, E.E. (1992), “Quality improvement as an operations strategy”, Industrial Management
and Data Systems, Vol. 92 No. 4, pp. 3-12.
Ahire, S.L. and Dreyfus, P. (2000), “The impact of design management and process management
on quality: an empirical investigation”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 18 No. 5,
pp. 549-75.
Ahire, S.L., Golhar, D.Y. and Walter, M.A. (1996), “Development and validation of TQM
implementation constructs”, Decision Sciences, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 23-56.
Bearden, W.D. and Teel, J.E. (1993), “Selected determinants of customer satisfaction and
compliant reports”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 21-8.
Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Staelin, R. and Zeithaml, V.A. (1993), “A dynamic process model of
service quality: from expectations to behavioral intentions”, Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 7-27.
Consumer
perceptions
of quality
185

12. Crosby, P.B. (1979), Quality is Free, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Crosby, P.B. (1996), Quality is Still Free, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Darby, M. and Karni, E. (1973), “Free competition and the optimal amount of fraud”, Journal of
Law and Economics, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 67-86.
Dean, J. and Bowen, D. (1994), “Management theory and total quality: improving research and
practice through theory development”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 19 No. 3,
pp. 392-418.
Deman, S., Gemmel, P., Vlerick, P., Van Riki, P. and Dierckx, R. (2002), “Patient’s and personnel’s
perceptions of service quality and patient satisfaction in nuclear medicine”, European
Journal of Nuclear Medicine, Vol. 29 No. 9, pp. 1109-17.
Deming, W.E. (1986), Out of the Crisis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for
Advanced Engineering Studies, Cambridge, MA.
Emons, W. (1997), “Credence goods and fraudulent experts”, RAND Journal of Economics, Vol. 28
No. 1, pp. 107-19.
Flynn, B.B., Schroeder, R.G. and Sakakibara, S. (1994), “A framework for quality management
research and an associated measurement instrument”, Journal of Operations Management,
Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 339-66.
Ford, G., Smith, D. and Swasy, J. (1990), “Consumer skepticism of advertising claims: testing
hypothesis from economics of information”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 16 No. 4,
pp. 433-41.
Fynes, B. and De Burca, S. (2005), “The effects of design quality on quality performance”,
International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 96 No. 1, pp. 1-14.
Garvin, D.A. (1984), “Product quality: an important strategic weapon”, Business Horizons, Vol. 27
No. 3, pp. 40-3.
Garvin, D.A. (1987), “Competing on the eight dimensions of quality”, Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 65 No. 6, pp. 101-9.
Gwinner, K.P., Gremler, D.D. and Bitner, M.J. (1998), “Relational benefits in services industries:
the customer’s perspective”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 26 No. 2,
pp. 101-14.
Hackman, J. and Wageman, R. (1995), “Total quality management: empirical, conceptual, and
practical issues’”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 309-42.
Han, S.H., Yun, M.H., Kim, K. and Kwahk, J. (2000), “Evaluation of product usability:
development and validation of usability dimensions and design elements based upon
empirical models”, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, Vol. 26, pp. 477-88.
Hendricks, K.B. and Singhal, V.R. (2000), “Implementing effective total quality management
(TQM) programs and financial performance: a synthesis of evidence from quality award
winners”, What Works at Work – The Bottom Line Implications of Workplace Practices,
edited by Casey Ichniowski, Thomas Kochan, David Levine, Craif Olson, and George
Strauss, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 234-72.
Hernan, P., Nitecki, D.A. and Altman, E. (1999), “Service quality and customer satisfaction:
an assessment and future directions”, Journal of Academic Librarianship, Vol. 25 No. 1,
pp. 9-17.
Hill, T. (1994), Manufacturing Strategy: Text and Cases, 2nd ed., Irwin, Burr-Ridge, IL.
Horn, D. and Salvendy, G. (2006), “Consumer-based assessment of product creativity: a review
and reappraisal”, Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, Vol. 16 No. 2,
pp. 155-75.
IJQSS
4,2
186

13. Juran, J.M. (1988), Juran on Planning for Quality, McMillan, New York, NY.
Kardes, F.R., Posavac, S.S. and Cronley, M.L. (2004), “Consumer inference: a review of processes,
bases, and judgment contexts”, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 230-56.
Korda, A.P. and Snoj, B. (2010), “Development, validity and reliability of perceived service
quality in retail banking and its relationship with perceived value and customer
satisfaction”, Managing Global Transactions, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 187-205.
Krafcik, J.F. (1988), “Triumph of the lean production system”, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 30
No. 1, pp. 41-52.
LeBlanc, G. (1992), “Factors affecting customer evaluation of service quality in travel agencies:
an investigation of customer perceptions”, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 30 No. 4,
pp. 10-16.
McDaniel, S.W. and Burnett, J.J. (1990), “Consumer religiosity and retail store evaluative criteria”,
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 101-12.
Mower, J.C. and Minor, M.S. (2001), Consumer Behavior: A Framework, Prentice-Hall, Upper
Saddle River, NY.
Nelson, P. (1970), “Information and consumer behavior”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 78
No. 2, pp. 311-29.
Nelson, P. (1974), “Advertising as information”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 81 No. 2,
pp. 729-54.
Odekerken-Schroder, G., De Wulf, K., Kasper, H., Kleinen, M., Hoekstra, J. and Commandeur, H.
(2001), “The impact of quality on store loyalty: a contingency approach”, Total Quality
Management, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 307-22.
Oliver, R.L. (1980), “A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction
decisions”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 460-9.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1985), “A conceptual model of service quality
and its implications for future research”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49 No. 4, pp. 41-50.
Parkash, V. (1984), “Validity and reliability of the confirmation of expectations paradigm as a
determinant of consumer satisfaction”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 63-76.
Paulson-Gjerde, K.A. and Slotnick, S.A. (1997), “A multidimensional approach to manufacturing
quality”, Computers Industrial Engineering, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 879-89.
Powell, T. (1995), “Total quality management as competitive advantage: a review and empirical
study”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 15-37.
Roozenburg, N.F.M. and Eckels, J. (1995), Product Design: Fundamentals and Methods, Wiley,
New York, NY.
Sachdev, S.B. and Verma, H.V. (2004), “Relative importance of service quality”, Journal of
Services Research, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 93-116.
Saraph, G.V.P., Benson, G. and Schroeder, R.G. (1989), “An instrument for measuring the critical
factors of quality management”, Decision Sciences, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 810-29.
Shasharudin, M.R., Hassan, A.A., Mansor, S.W., Elias, S.J., Harun, E.H. and Aziz, N.A. (2010),
“The relationship between extrinsic attributes of product quality with brand loyalty on
Malaysia national brand motorcycle/scooter”, Canadian Social Science, Vol. 6 No. 3,
pp. 165-75.
Smith, R. and Bush, A.J. (2000), “Toward developing a measure of search, experience, and
credence qualities for products and services”, Conference Proceedings, Southwest
Management Association, San Antonio, TX.
Consumer
perceptions
of quality
187

14. Sousa, R. and Voss, C.A. (2002), “Quality management re-visited: a reflective review and agenda
for future research”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 91-109.
Stigler, G. (1961), “The economics of information”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 69 No. 3,
pp. 213-25.
Stigler, G. (1962), “Information in the labor market”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 70 No. 5,
pp. 213-25.
Stone-Remero, E., Stone, D.L. and Grewal, D. (1997), “Development of a multi-dimensional
measure of perceived product quality”, Journal of Quality Management, Vol. 2 No. 1,
pp. 87-111.
Tian-Cole, S. and Crompton, J.L. (2003), “A conceptualization of the relationship between service
quality and visitor satisfaction, and their links to destination selection”, Leisure Studies,
Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 65-80.
Zeithaml, V.A. (1981), “How consumer evaluation processes differ between goods and services”,
in Donnelly, J.H. and George, W.R. (Eds), Marketing of Services, American Marketing
Association Proceedings Series, Chicago, IL.
Further reading
Berry, L.L., Zeithaml, V.A. and Parasuraman, A. (1985), “Quality counts in service, too”, Business
Horizons, May/June, pp. 44-52.
Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L. and Parasuraman, A. (1993), “The nature and determinants of
customer expectations of service”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 21
No. 1, pp. 1-12.
IJQSS
4,2
188
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com
Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints