Reviewing Waiting Time and Customer Satisfaction in a Service Process

Reviewing Waiting Time and node Satisfaction in a Service ProcessPurpose The purpose of this paper is to present a literature review that highlights major findings from empirical research examining the impact of era lag judgment of conviction on node delight within various proceeds settings.Design/Methodology/Approach The paper examines the results of past studies that have manipulated specific serve up settings (layout, fillers, surroundings, resources) and attempts to observe variables that cause less dis merriment in a religious returns function.Findings A large make sense of studies reveal veto influence of time lag condemnation on node happiness. Future research proposals seek to identify the class of gaiety in a swear out delivery process.Originality/Value The review highlights a range of implications careworn from the studies that will be of pass judgment to serving organization managers who face high node dis joy and low repeat customers.Keywords Service delivery process, guest service quality, client mirth, Waiting termPaper type Literature reviewIntroductionThe performance of a service delivery system is inversely proportional to the degree of customers contact (Chase, 1982). The to a greater extent the customer close to the service system, the longer the customer waiting meters in the service delivery system. This cost of longer waiting cadences in the system can be attri entirelyed to (i) the customer walking away from the system and join somewhere else(ii) the customers decision non to come prat again in the future and(iii) the customer passing negative experiences to near and dear ones like family and friends. Many studies emphasize the relationship between customer satisfaction in a service process and their loyalty (Anderson, 1994 Dick and Basu, 1994 Fornell et al., 1996 Selness, 2001 Mittal and Kamakura, 2001 Olsen, 2002). The cost of these behaviors by the customer is very difficult to calculate but definite ly the sales will go down with each unhappy customer as the cost of retaining a satisfied customer is less than a newly acquired customer (Reichheld, 1996).According to Lovelock and Gummesson (2004) time plays the central economic consumption in most of the services processes and they recommend giving more attention to improving the customers understanding of how they perceive, budget, consume and value time. Many studies focus on the relationship between waiting time and customer satisfaction in a service process (Hui and Tse, 1996 Pruyn and Smidts, 1998).Thus the customers satisfaction can be regarded as the bridge between operational performance of the service firm and attendant impact on the behavior of the customer towards the service firm. In this study we are trying to understand the factors responsible for dissatisfy customer in a service environment and how it can be minimize through proper and timely allocation of resources in the service process system.Literature Revi ewWaiting TimeTime has commonly been regarded as a significant component of the total cost of a transaction, making customers aware that their time is most valuable (Anderson and Shugan, 1991 Jacoby et al., 1976 Kellaris and Kent, 1992). Past research has suggested various dimensions of time that hold pace, urgency, sequencing, separation, scheduling, duration, punctuality, flexibility, linearity, synchronization and present and future time perspectives (Ballard and Seibold, 2004 Owen, 1991 Moore, 1963, Lauer, 1981).The waiting time problem has become an important part of service providers priorities as todays customers are becoming intolerance to waiting time in a service process. Further, consumers do not rate service quality solely on the outcome of service, but they evaluate it on the basis of service delivery process and time is the most important factor for evaluating customer satisfaction in a service process (Davis and Vollmann, 1990 Friedman and Friedman, 1997). Addition ally waiting tine is the deciding factor for service evaluations for many consumers as they value time more than ever. It is also important to notice in which peg the customer is feeling dissatisfaction in a service encounter. According to Dube-Rioux et al. (1989), the service encounter has three phases pre- process, in- process and post- process. Research has shown that there is causal effect of service horizontal surface, as mentioned by Dube-Rioux (1989), and service delays on consumers reaction to waiting (Hui et al., 1998 Dube et al., 1991 Dube-Rioux et al., 1989). Dube-Rioux et al. (1989) argue that service delays were less unpleasant than service entry or service passing game waits as Hansen and Danaher (1999) showed that service exit exerts a significant effect on consumers perception of service quality and post purchase behavior.Waiting is considered a negative experience from both the economic as well as psychological perspective. Further waiting time is often used as a transform for cost. The waiting time is an important component of customers overall evaluation of the service (Peritz, 1993). in any cheek the amount of time they spend while checkout from a salt away influences the overall satisfaction level of the customer (Katz, Larsen, Blaire and Larsen, 1991). Further, research has shown that long waits have a negative effect on customer satisfaction (Chebat and Filiatrault, 1993).Waiting time is often regarded as a waste of time (Leclerc, Schmitt and Dube, 1995 Schwartz, 1975 Rafaeli, 1989 Hui and Tse, 1996 Sheu et al., 2003) and has been described as frustrating boring and irritating (Hui and Tse, 1996 Katz et al., 1991). According to McDonnell (2007), anger and frustration are more likely to happen at bank branches and financial institutions than many other service contact points. Further, research has shown that many consumers dislike waiting in a queue which results in a negative service quality evaluation (Krentler, 1988 Kumar et al ., 1997 Houston et al., 1998 Ho and Zheng, 2004).The consumers waiting experience has the direct influence on the perception of service quality (Soloman, Bamossy and Askeggard, 1999). For, wait is considered as a wait prior to being served. Apart from income and price, time is considered as a constraint in consumer purchasing option (Becker, 1965 Umesh et al., 1989).Many researchers have tried to solve waiting time by providing various strategies like waiting time fillers such as increase of prior line employees, video display, news updates or waiting time guarantees (Kumar, Kalwani and Dada, 1997), but failed to eliminate the waiting time dissatisfaction completely. Music can play an important role in reducing dissatisfaction levels for consumers waiting in line (Steve and Oakes, 2008).A waiting time has four dimensions Objective, subjective, cognitive and effectiveDavis and Vollman, 1990Katz et al., 1991 Taylor, 1994) advocate that objective waiting time is the elapsed time as m easured by a stop watch by the customer before being served.The subjective waiting time is the perceived waiting time by the customer (Hui and Tse, 1996 Pruyn and Smidts, 1998).The cognitive waiting time is the customers evaluation of the wait as short versus long (Pruyn and Smidts, 1998), being (or not being) acceptable, springable and tolerable (Durrande- Mpreau, 1999).The affective aspect of the waiting time is the emotional response to waiting like irritation, boredom, frustration, pleasure, stress, happiness etc (Taylor, 1994 Hui and Tse, 1996 Pruyn and Smidts, 1998).However the perceived waiting time is different from objective waiting time (Barnett and Saponaro, 1985 Hirsch, Bilger and Heatherage, 1950 Hornik, 1984).The effect of waiting time on customers perceptions of customer satisfaction relates positively to the wait to the customer and moderated by the reason for the wait (Nicole and Tony, 2006). Also the perception of waiting time is affected by anxiety level and queu e length (Hornik, 1984 Maister, 1984).The wait dissatisfaction in a service process can be lowered if the overall service meets the customers expectations. Customers are willing to wait if they anticipate benefits through the consumption of a service (Zeithaml et al., 1993).Customer SatisfactionCustomer satisfaction is of utmost importance to the service providers and scholars (Babin and Griffin, 1998 Oliver, 1999) in todays highly competitive business environment.Customer satisfaction is conceived to be part of an overall model of customer behavior (Bearden and Teele, 1983). One such model presented by Oliver (1980) is shown in the figure below (Figure 1).The Role of Satisfaction in a Customer Behavior ModelExpectationsPerformanceDisconfirmationsSATISFACTIONAttitudesIntentionsFuture BehaviorFigure 1Sasser et al. (1978) identify three different models by which customers evaluate overall satisfaction with a service. These areOne overpowering attributeA single attribute with threshold minimums for other attributesA weighted average of attributesAccording to the foreboding disconfirmation model, satisfaction/ dissatisfaction is a function of expectations and disconfirmations of the consumer (Oliver, 1980 Oliver and DeSabro, 1988). According to Davis and Heineke (1998), customers reaction to waiting in line can color his/her perception of the service delivery process. Further, customer satisfaction is affected not just by waiting time but also by the customers expectations or attribution or determination of the causes for the waiting(Bitner, 1990 Churchill and Suprenant, 1982 Folkes , 1984 Folkes, Koletsky and Graham, 1987 Maister, 1985 Oliver, 1980 Shostack, 1985 Taylor, 1994 Tom and Lucey, 1995 Tse and Wilton, 1988). Also in a service delays, the be in which a delay occurs within a service encounter affects customer evaluations of the service quality (Dube et al., 1989, Hui et al., 1998).The overestimating of waiting time by the consumers (Hornik, 1984 Katz, L arson and Larson, 1991) leads to more dissatisfaction as customers perception of waiting time increases, the satisfaction tends to decrease (Katz et al., 1991).Customer satisfaction is inversely related to waiting time (Davis and Maggard, 1990) that is the longer a customer waits, the less satisfied or more dissatisfied he/she becomes with the service process. In their study on two stage service process, they found that customer satisfaction is more affected by the initial wait of the customer prior to entering the service process, than it is by subsequent waits in the process. Their study was supported by Sasser, Olsen and Wyckoff (1978) and Maister (1985).Davis and Maggard (1990) suggest management to devote extra time and resources toward initial stage of the wait. This priority is necessary because a dissatisfied restaurant customer tells fifty other people about his/her dissatisfaction (Lyth and Johnson, 1998).Parasuraman et als (1985) study on relationship between waiting time and perceived service quality has been widely accepted by the research and industry communities. The gap between the perception and expectation for waiting experience determines the customer satisfaction with waiting (Maister, 1985).Davis and Vollman(1990) argue that in most of the service operations, customer expectations and satisfaction with respect to waiting time are dependent on many factors including The customers prior experience, the number of customers in the service facility, criticality of time to the customer and other distractions, intended or otherwise.According to Hornik (1984) consumers often inclined to overestimate time spent on waiting and the delay can influence affective reactions (Dube-Rioux et al., 1989 Hui and Tse, 1996 Taylor, 1994). Prior research suggests that crowding at the service process also affects the customers satisfaction (Eroglu et al., 2005 Michon et al., 2005). That means a perception of extremely un -crowded and extremely crowded environment s at the service area lead to lower customer satisfaction. This means the service managers should allocate human resources sagely when the crowd is low. Conversely, more number of service personals should be devoted when the crowd is very high.Taylor (1994) argues that customers anger and their evaluation of punctuality affect the overall performance of a service process. The customers satisfaction with wait is also influenced by customers perception of service providers social justice(Larson, 1987) that is whether the provider is adhering to first come first serve basis or not. Piyush et al. (1997) argue that the customer satisfaction in wait is also influenced by the waiting time guarantee provided by the service providers.Customer satisfaction in a retail setting has been linked to a number of important outcomes, including sales performance, customer retention and loyalty (Darian et al., 2001 Wong and Sohal, 2003 Gomez et al., 2004 Anselsson, 2006 Martenson, 2007). Apart from re tail, the customer satisfaction is a prerequisite for other customer service outcomes including customer retention and customer loyalty, sales/profitability and market share for many organizations (Hackl and Westlund, 2000 Reichheld, 1996) as losing a customer result in the cost associated with replacement of that customer (Reichheld and Sasser, 1990). According to Anderson et al. (1994) the customer satisfaction is positively related to the profit of the service provider. Additionally, the role of service satisfaction is believed to directly shape a customers long term relation with the service provider (Gronroos, 1984).The waiting time can be distracted with the help of tv sets, newspapers, magazines, wall posters etc as filled time appears to pass more quickly than empty time (McGrath and Kelly, 1986). This can be applied to sicken the waiting dissatisfaction but not to enhance the customer satisfaction as superior waiting experiences will, in turn, enhance customers overall sa tisfaction with the service provider.Information provided in slip-up of delay (Hui and Tse, 1996 Antonides et al., 2002) and the characteristics of waiting environment (Pruyn and Smidts, 1998) determine the customers waiting time satisfaction. According to Maister (1985) any information regarding delay can reduce the uncertainty of wait and reduce the overall stress level of the customer. As mentioned by Baker and Cameron (1996) the service environment influences the affective aspect of the waiting times. Also Pruyn and Smidts (1998) show that perceived attractiveness of the environment positively influences the affective response to the wait and service satisfaction in addition to the appraisal of the wait. But satisfaction with the information provided in case of delays influence waiting time satisfaction more than waiting environment satisfaction (Frederic and Nathalie, 2007). The customers waiting time can be influenced by making the service environment comfortable as possible (Baker and Cameron, 1996).Future directions for researchSince the current study focuses on the influence of waiting time on customer satisfaction at various stages of the service transformation process, the exact degree of satisfaction is unclear from the study. Davis and Maggard (1990) argue that in a two stage service process, stage one requires priority where customer waits before being served. Future research is required to assess the degree of priority in the various stages of service process.