Table of Contents

Table of Figure...........................................................................................................................2
1.

Introduction.........................................................................................................................3

2.

Literature Review...............................................................................................................3
2.1 Boston Consultant Group matrix.....................................................................................3

3.

Critical Analysis..................................................................................................................7
3.1 Portfolio Management......................................................................................................7
3.2 Suggestion......................................................................................................................10

4.

Conclusion........................................................................................................................11

5.

Reference..........................................................................................................................12

1.

Introduction.......................................................................................................................16

2.

Literature Review.............................................................................................................16

3.

2.1

Service Quality..........................................................................................................16

2.2

Diagnosing Service Quality Disappointment............................................................17

Critical Analysis................................................................................................................20
3.1

4.

Earlier Researcher.....................................................................................................20

Discussion.........................................................................................................................24
4.1

Suggestion.................................................................................................................25

4.1.1

Interviewing approach........................................................................................25

4.1.2

Benchmarking....................................................................................................25

5.

Conclusion........................................................................................................................26

6.

Reference list....................................................................................................................27

Table of Figure
Figure 1. BCG Matrix................................................................................................................4
Figure 2. Question Mark Quadrant............................................................................................5
Figure 3. Cash cow.....................................................................................................................5
Figure 4. A star...........................................................................................................................6
Figure 5. Dog Quadrant.............................................................................................................6
Figure 6. Implementation...........................................................................................................8
Figure 7. Bcg Movement...........................................................................................................9
Figure 8. Balanced Portfolio......................................................................................................9
Figure 9. Origin Gaps Model...................................................................................................17
Figure 10. Fedex Courier.........................................................................................................19
Figure 11. Purposed Gaps method...........................................................................................21
Figure 12. LISREL VII Hierarchy...........................................................................................22
Figure 13. Benchmarking Strategy by ITC..............................................................................23
Figure 14. Wok & Go Restaurant.............................................................................................24

1. Introduction
Every company wants their product accepted in market, therefore a variation of strategy
in business activity such as human research development, innovation, design product,
marketing and also business plan have been optimized to reach market as a target (Fajar, n.d),
also introduce a new product and line extensions has become exist in develop strategy,
moreover in FMCG market where the company have a plenty of variation product with
different segment. (Amber & Styles, 1997). Additionally, in this case BCG matrix will use for
analyze portfolio of the company and FMCG company as the example of application. Risk
and return can be used to assess an asset (investment) portfolio, a product portfolio or a
customer portfolio that managers must concerned, therefore, it has an impact either a passable
financial contribution or also a viable competitive advantage for shareholder that part of
company (Nutton, 2005). It is also important for investor where they have invest the money
(Brassington and Pettitt, 2006).
Furthermore, Unilever one of worldwide FMCG company (Fast Movement Consumer Good)
is absorbing to be an object for this analysis, where the application of the method classifying
a product remaining a variable of product in retail business have to maintain, perhaps this
analysis help reader for understanding the effectiveness of BCG matrix with use 2 axes which
is market share and market growth. Thus, the outcome of this study is analyzing strategic
tools Boston Box and gives critical improvement by looking the evidences and
implementation.

2. Literature Review
2.1 Boston Consultant Group matrix
In 1970 Bruce has described this theory as portfolio analysis. D Henderson (Smith,
2002), but basically this method invented by Boston Consulting Group (corporation) for
categorized according to shared qualities and evaluate a tangible product and service in
industry. This creates prediction in making decision orderly to balance the activities of a firm
amid which earning money, the individuals who guarantee development, those which
constitute the fate of the firm or the legacy of the people (Nutton, 2005). Since 1970 the
matrix designed to organize cash flow that impart prolusion for Boston Consulting Group, at
that time has become the most popular used portfolio analysis tools. In almost invariably
BCG use for analysis in brand imaging, portfolio, managing product and it believed for
3

strategic operation supporting them to develop the variation outcome and commerce. Their
market share and market growth have a significant implication increase rating products
devising both of them on the axes as shown figure below for the illustration, the weight of

Figure 1. BCG Matrix

evidence indicate that share business have significantly higher earning than do low share
business (Hambrick, Macmillan & Day, 1982). In 2014, Evans has argued this tools set out
the relative strategic positioning of each major segment (or business, in corporate strategy).
(Source: crackmba.com)

In 2015, Guerrero stated that with use visual people more easily to understand with real
visualization. At figure 1 may the most people know about BCG matrix curve, 4 parts each
has different situation caused by sell and market growth.

1) Question Mark (High market growth, low market share)

Figure 2. Question Mark
Quadrant

(Source: Brooks, 2013)

This condition is the product was high in market growth but they require more cash or
someone to invest in the business. It has big opportunity to reach the market (Henderson,
1973). In addition, this is a dilemma position because Question Mark their money needs are
extraordinary on account of their development, and due to market share is low it has an
impact for the cash. (Henderson, 1973). As an investor of the company if in this situation is
still needed inject cost for market share to be acquired. Furthermore when the money is
donated, and then keeping only the share, perhaps may be pets will they get when the growth

Figure 3. Cash cow

finish (Steinman, Deshphande & Farley, 2000). The demand of huge cash input is still the
main requires (Henderson, 1973).
2) Cash Cow (High market share, low market growth)
(Source: Brooks, 2013)
High Cash cow condition, in this area a couple of organizations produce much more money
than they can gainfully reinvest. (Henderson, 1973). The growth of Cash cows are not too
fast, therefore the company in this part are often low in cash uses. Otherwise, the amount of
market share was lofty (Henderson, 1973)

Figure 4. A star

3) A Stars (High market share, high market growth)

(Source: Brooks, 2013)
According to Brooks (2013) exposed that either adequate of cash flow and high market
growth the company star, which indicated this part is a good position that firm have gained
market. Over time they will become much larger and also large net generators of cash
(Henderson, 1973). Consequently, The star ultimately into Cash cow, providing high number,

Figure 5. Dog Quadrant

high edge, stable of strength, security, and cash for reinvestment somewhere else (Henderson,
1973).
4) Dog (Low market growth, low market share)
(Source: Brooks, 2013)
In contrast with Stars it could be says Cash Trap(Myers, 2007) for Dogs with low
share and slow growth of market, due to the business commonly in low both of growth
market and sell profit (Wahyono, 2012). The outcome of the business firm is gradually
inadequate qualified for customer, excluding in liquidation. According to the figure above it
easy to see that Dogs are in the right corner under the Question Mark.
The advantages of the tools will examine first, one of the advantages the company has a
speculation by gaze matrix graph, and dispute forecast step based on their position of matrix,
also declared by Kiechel (2010) that it can be as guideline for formulating business strategy.
Additionally, according to Octviamen (2013) that cash flow, the character of investment and
the different entail of organization in each division. As mentioned before, it has open
potential movement for a firm or product change either incline market or decline the sell,
such as Dog to Question Mark, or Question Mark become Star, Star to Cash cow and so on.
6

However, despite it has opportunity both of product change in matrix area it infrequently
changing clock wisely (Octviamen, 2013).
There are disadvantages of this matrix as listed below:
1. According to Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman (1981) claimed that perhaps it may have
difficulties to find qualified data that matrix required.
2. High market not guarantee for success of the business (Stern, C, 2006)
3. Over underestimate many business because of all business as Star, Cash cow, Dog or
Question mark (Armstrong & Brodie, 1994), in a few sector (not very specific).
4. In this method, assumed that in competition any business is independent with the other
business. On the other hand for Dog area can help to earn profit among in business
competition or can be profitable. (Octviamen, 2013)
5. There is no specific time period for this analysis, so it supposes adding another variable
such as the size of the market and competitive advantage (Armstrong & Brodie, 1994).

3. Critical Analysis
3.1 Portfolio Management
Earlier researcher has determined a plenty of project management, in 1991 Roussel
purposed Bubble Diagram of Portfolio Map; Wind and Claycamp (1976) a matrix approach
for planning product line strategy. Of course it is impossible the firm without the future,
because normally, portfolio show by cash flow of the organization that ideally situated to take
lead of its recent and forecast sell (Roth, 2002). In 2002 Roth claimed that Dogs quadrant in
this section was not count as balanced portfolio such as Cif, Slim Fast and Persil illustrated at
figure, but this is inequitable, due to the product has equal occasion as people know the
product still can survive in supermarket. However, a previous performed was not a guarantee
for further performance and sometimes the company in biwildered both detach a product and
modify to keep in a market (Dog quadrant) (vu, 2012).

On the other hand, the other 3 quadrants are balanced portfolio, assuming that Unilever have
a plenty of product in different segmentation, for an instance Dove is in Question Mark
quadrant (figure. 6) the market has growing but slow in cash, this product can be fall into
Dog if has not
Figure 6. Implementation

(Source: Oakley, 2014)

inadequate investor or money to support the product. Nevertheless, it should be the anxious
of Dove product was not a concern, because the product has high market growth if selling
little volume market will accept sufficiently. By contrast, according PLC theory a Stars where
both axes are aggressive high have a threat because of new competitive, the picture below
show the movement each quadrant in BCG matrix.
Figure 7. Bcg Movement

(Source: vu, 2012)

The illustration above showing the dynamic of possibility quadrant between each other, so
the company required to manage it. Walls for an instance at is in high market position, if the
brand going into Cash cow quadrant it has huge margin, solidity enough and investor put
their money confidently due to the market change aggressively. But, consequently Unilever
need proper strategy to handle the weaknesses of the product remaining variable product in
different segment.
Figure 8. Balanced Portfolio

(Source: bcgperspective.com)
Such as Lipton tea brand need create innovation and keep satisfaction of the customer to
avoid decline of market growth. Additionally, cash investing into product is mainly company
needs, for each item ought to inevitably be a money generator (Henderson, 1973), and it
called balanced portfolio. The idea behind the framework is that money produced from
9

distinctive items can help each other and assets are given need for items in a quickly
developing business (vu, 2012). In the other word balanced portfolio as shown below.
In 2013, Vilet stated that if the company have elucidate balanced portfolio choose four
strategy which proper for a next step where hold, build, harvest and divest.

Hold: Perhaps, company choose holding similar ways is the best to preserve the status

Build: Assume that in the real business for implementing BCG matrix people need to
invest in future from Question Mark become a Star.

Harvest: Utilizing money flow from either Cash Cow or a Star diminish the weight of
investment and earn more profit.

Divest: Redeem and sell off Dogs that economic capital can invest in a Star and
Question Mark business.

Despite the fact that the theory have been shown, real life has changed the organization
and perhaps a firm have wrong decision, to recognize this inefficiency, in 2004 there was a
downturn and Unilever make it lower portfolio (brand) to balance their project (Ariyawansa,
2009), because it has an impact to shareholders and investor. Especially for Dogs project,
around 1000 have reduced, moreover money bovines devour some extra cost (Cash cow) and
decreasing net revenues because of not-growing, whole sales of Unilever will has an effect of
reduction, especially cost and buyer behavior. Of course this is contras between company
expected and growth of market, Unilever is boxed itself with too many targets
(Ariyawansa, 2009). However, Unilever decided to divest some of the product to get payback
position in 2004 and for sustainability business.

3.2 Suggestion
According to balanced portfolio perspective, rebalancing is the activity of purchasing and
selling percentages of portfolio in order setting to arrange the heaviness of asset class back to
original state (Jaconetti, Kinniry & Zilbering, 2010). Moreover, it will help a firm maintain
original asset- allocation strategy and allow to implement any changes that business made to
investing style (Charter, 2015). It is like tune up for machines so can keep the performance
and prevent for further risk. Thus, perhaps this suggestion bring the benefit to recover
imbalanced portfolio, especially readjust assets because that was an important point effecting
a new formulation asset allocation and minimize further risk.

10

4. Conclusion
As a result, to conclude this paper is start from analyze the term of BCG matrix, the
benefit that a firm will get assessment with matrix approach that product plotting in 4
different quadrant in 2 axes and decide any strategy for future, as said before that this method
is for internal evaluation, even for prediction it has not specific time which sufficient for
more critical analyses, and imbalanced portfolio have inadequate factor if only gaze from
BCG matrix, it supposed to be use another method such as SWOT, Balanced scorecard, GE
matrix and Benchmarking to support this method to get more result accurately . Cash cow,
Question mark and a Stars are balanced portfolio, it depends on what strategy the company
use after defining matrix for each product. Moreover, high market not promised the success
of the brand. This case Unilever Company as example have decided to reduce the product
instead of improve innovation or play in cash sector due to handle some products in Dogs
quadrant. However, remaining the evidence for manipulate imbalanced portfolio with
rebalancing, generally the aim of rebalanced is for recapture a project risk and return,
quarterly or annually, it depend on company consideration.

11

5. Reference
Ariyawnsa, D. (2009). Management report on Unilever and Procter & Gambler case study.
Retrieved from website http://aridhanu.synthasite.com
Armstrong, J., & Brodie, R. (1994). Effects of portfolio planning methods on decision
making: Experimental results. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 11 (1),
73-84.
Brassington, F., & Pettitt, S. (2003). Principles of marketing (3rd Ed.). Harlow, England:
FT/Prentice Hall
Brooks, C. (2013). Business news daily. What is the BCG matrix? Retrieved from
businessnewsdaily.com.
Charter, S. (2015). Rebalance your portfolio to stay on track. Retrieved from Investopedia
website: http://www.investopedia.com/articles/pf/05/051105.asp
Evans, V. (2013). Key strategy tools: The 80 tools for every manager to build a winning
strategy. Harlow, England: Pearson.
Evans, V. (2014). Strategy tools: 25 need to know. Harlow, United Kingdom: Pearson.
Fajar, M, F. (n.d). Analisa Matrik BCG pada Pemasaran Produk pada CV. Turangga Mas
Motor.

Retrieved

from:

http://www.gunadarma.ac.id/library/articles/graduate/eco

omy/2009/Artikel_10205462.pdf
Guerrero, A. (2015). Social Media Examiner: How to Use Visuals to Engage Your Audience.
Retrieved

from

Social

Media

Examiner

website:

http://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/use-visuals-to-engage-your-audience/
Hambrick, D. C., MacMillan, I. C., & Day, D. L. (1982). Strategic Attributes and
Performance in the BCG MatrixA PIMS-Based Analysis of Industrial Product
Businesses. Academy of Management Journal, 25(3), 510-531.
Jaconetti, C. M., Kinniry, F. M., & Zilberg, Y. (2010). Best practices for portfolio rebalancing.
Retrieved from Vanguard website: http://www.vanguard.com/pdf/icrpr.pdf
Henderson, B. D. (1973). The experience curvereviewed. IV. The growth share matrix of the
product portfolio. Retrieved from: http://www.bcg.com/documents/file13904.pdf
Kiechel, W. (2010). The lords of strategy: The secret intellectual history of the new corporate
world. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business Press
Myers, R. (2007). The Cash Trap. Retrieved from CFO website: http://ww2.cfo.com/bankingcapital-markets/2007/11/the-cash-trap/
12

Nutton, S, E. (2005). Management Accounting - Business Strategy. Retrieved from:

http://www.cimaglobal.com/Documents/ImportedDocuments/P6_pilot_paper.pdf
Octviamen, E. (2013). Pengertian Boston Consulting Group matrix. Retrieved from:
http://evanmanajemen.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/pengertian-boston-consulting-groupbcg.html
Roth, M. (2002). Sector investing: Stock selection strategies for achieving a balanced
portfolio. Brighton, Victoria, Australia. Wrightbooks.
Smith, M. (2002). Derricks IceCream Company: applying the BCG matrix in customer
profitability analysis. Accounting Education, 11(4), 365-375
Steinman, C., Deshpande, R., & Farley, J. U. (2000). Beyond market orientation: When
customer and suppliers disagree. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 28 (1),
109-119.
Stern, C. W & Demiler, M, S. (2006). The Boston Consulting Group on strategy (2nd Ed.).
Hoboken, New Jersey, United States: John Wiley & Sons.
Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of
choice. Science, 211, 453-458
Vilet, V, V. (2013). Toolshero: BCG Matrix. Retrieved from http://www.toolshero.com/bcgmatrix/
Wahyono, B. (2012). Pendidikan Ekonomi: Matriks Boston Consultan Group (BCG).
Retrieved from http://pendidikanekonomi.com.
Weiler, M & Arbetman, Y. (2010). Organisational Risk Management the Balanced and
Unbalanced Portfolio. Retrieved from http://www.gordon-se.technion.ac
Wind, Y. and Claycamp, H.J. (1976), Planning product line strategy: a matrix approach.
Journal of Marketing, 40 (1), pp. 2-9

13

14

1. Introduction
In this globalization era, the competition of product and service in market has been
increased and also variety of products due to open market. Because of high competitive
among business, the owner realized that they have a good strategy to give the best for
customer. As a result in some journal in 2010 by Hardiyati said that basically, satisfaction is
the biggest important needs that entrepreneur has to be concern. In addition, service is an
important determinant of quality, because it brings together all element of the services
marketing and is the point at which the product itself is created and delivered (Frances
Brassington & Stephen pettitt, 2006). Frances and Stephen (2006) commented that services
quality can be measured objectively, where tangible segment are involved such as physical
proof and processes, quality can be defined and assessed more easily.
This study will not make a new theory to gauge service quality and change the system of
marketing in business, but will prove how effective Gaps model to measure SERVQUAL
(service quality), by analyzing earlier researcher it perhaps this analysis bring criticize
evaluation to give improvement in the level of customer loyalty strategy. In this case, Wok
and Go as study case for implementation.

2. Literature Review
2.1

Service Quality
Describing about service quality is the finest way before scrutinize Gaps method for

gauging the level of loyalty of customer. In 1999 Bateson and Hoffman described that a
plenty of professionals come to an understanding that just the satisfaction of customer is just
a sort period, precise dealing measurement, while for a long-term service quality assessment
of services provider performance for viewpoint formed. In addition, many issues of service
among in business implementation has been deliberated, because buyers recognized the
quality of provider can be seen by worker in action rather than tangible product. According to
Bateson and Hoffman explanation in 1999, to bring a reliable strategy answering satisfying
capabilities is make evaluation of excellence quality of target, in this case is customer, by
organization which have to be focused on task.

15

2.2

Diagnosing Service Quality Disappointment

In service, obviously many difficulties essentials in calculating service quality. By

making questioner form it help focusing the whether employee or customer (Pride & Ferrell,
2008). The Gaps method is very widely used in business management and the most wellknown by Parasuraman as the first originator, of course this modus operandi has been
founded for approximately 30 years and adopted as basis for measuring service fulfilment
instrument (Gronoos, 1982). The aim of this model is identifying and correcting service
quality problem (Lovelock, Wirtz and Yee Peng, 2009). In service organization that has an
impact for the perception of quality. In addition, based on Shanin, A and Shamea, M (2010)
the model shows the mutual corresponding between principal activities of the service
organization which are relevant delivering the satisfaction level of service quality.
Agreeing an author (essential of service marketing) There are six gaps that created by
Zeithaml, Berry and Parasuraman is shows below:
Gap 1: the knowledge gap is the dissimilar mindset of management to customer and
buyers literally need and expect. So, there is a gap between reality and perception.
Gap 2: the policy gap (The Gap between Management Perception and Service Quality
Specification) the different between management understanding of costumer expectation and
the service grade they made for service delivery. The reason why policy for this gap is senior
management made a policy decision not to bring what they think costumer want. Cost and
practicably consideration are the reason for setting grade beneath customer.
Gap 3: the delivery gap (gap between service quality specifications and actual service
delivery) will have an impact on the quality of service from the customer's perspective.
Perhaps consumer try to find a similar product with better service.
Gap 4: the communication gap, in some issues of this gap, company made promises in
via media and interaction raise on what customer thought. But when promising in advertising
is not same in reality of service delivery, it makes a communication gap. Consequently people
may seek another product which can complete their need.
Gap 5: the perception gap (the customer gap) this gaps address the difference between
customer expectations and perceptions. Customer expectation is what their expectation
remaining adequate source and the information of experience with same products, it could be
by online access. The perspective of customer is pure subjective and is based on the

16

customers interaction with the product or service. This gap is the most vital and in a perfect
world the client's desire would be just about indistinguishable to the client's recognition.
Zeithaml et al. (1993) have suggested related gaps model there are three levels of
desires can be characterized against which quality is evaluated:

The desire level of service, shows the buyers need;

The adequate service level, the grade of customer based their expectation;
The predicted service level that which they believe is most likely to literally happen.

Figure 9. Origin Gaps Model

(Source: ausweb.scu.edu.au)

Theoretically Parasuraman identified 10 main dimension of service quality model with 22

variable points related with services to analyses it use analysis factor (Astuti, 2007), but it
can be modified as needed. The dimensions are tangible, reliability, responsiveness,
communication, credibility, security, competence, courtesy, understanding and access.
According Palmer A in principle of service marketing, those dimensions has reduced to 5
with some depiction of each and separate quantities shows their weight, is as follows:

Tangibles (appearance of physical elements)

1 to 4
17

reliability (dependability, accurate performance)

5 to 9

responsiveness (promptness and helpfulness)

10 to 13

Table 1. Questioner Scale

assurance (competence, courtesy, credibility, security)

14 to 17

empathy (easy access, good communication, customer understanding)

18 to 22

Additionally, for elucidate the typical form of the service quality survey by table as listed
below:
(Source: Principles of service marketing, 2010)

18

3. Critical Analysis
To recognized effectiveness the level of performance measurement among in business, for
the first step this study provide a plenty of previous research that evaluated Gaps method, to
obtain critical analyses the discussion below also investigated purposes and give suggestion,
perhaps this way can improve the method in service quality.

3.1

Earlier Researcher
1. As result by Lovelock, Wirtz & Chew (2009) was about improvement service quality in

one of the biggest courier company in the world (FedEx). The commitment of the company
believe that service quality can be measured with numeric (mathematically) says Frederick
W. Smith the Chairman of FedEx Corp. And this firm make a list of common problem
catalogued by their customer remonstrance called Hierarchy of Horror CEO says. 1). Miss
delivery day, 2). Right day but not on time, 3). Pick-up mode not made, 4). Lost package,
5). Mislead by FedEx, 6). Wrong billing paper 7). employee act failures and 8) disturbance
packages. This things was for CFS (Container Freight Station). With using SQI FedEx

Figure 10. Fedex Courier

identified the failure. Moreover, more than 11-items instrument of fulfilment from customer
perspective. In addition, SQI which was altered in some point such as procedures, services
and customer priorities; FedEx use a plenty of ways to solve the problem, due to customer is
the biggest critical point, without customer they may collapse.
(Source: pacificnorthwestcoastbias.com)

19

Finally, FedEx achieved Malcolm Baldridge National Quality Award by a plenty of programs
which is helped this company obtaining a leadership part among service industry and played
a key role authorization to get this reputable grant. The programs are Customer satisfaction,
targeted customer satisfaction survey, FedEx center comment cards, and online customer
feedback surveys.
2. In addition, to see another evidence to make this analysis more critical, in 2010 Shanin
investigated Developing the models of service quality Gaps, the finding of the analysis was
comparing 3 different type of SERVQUAL by Parasuraman A, Frost and Kumar, Luk and
Layton. In that report exposed that the investigation is the traditional models were not
comprehensive (Shanin, 2010). So, he has purposed model adding new components into
previous Gaps model as can see at Figure 2. Because of not very specific in traditional model;
the proposed model added more gaps perhaps in implementation find some problems (Gupta,
Mcdaniel, & Herath, 2005). The 5 new elements as discovered by Shanin (2010) included in
the developed model were ideal standards; translation of strategy and policy into service
quality specification; service quality strategy and policy; employee perceptions of customer
perceptions; and management perceptions of customer perceptions as shows in Figure 3. He
believe this finding can prevent problem by added gaps in service problem-solving.

20

Figure 11. Purposed Gaps method

(Source: Shanin, 2010)

In 1992, SERVQUAL method has been investigated by Taylor, S, A and Jr, Joseph
Cronin, J. The researcher analyze about the concept of service quality between service
quality, consumer satisfaction and purchase intension and measurement of service quality
method. The journal overview indicated that satisfaction and ethic can affected by service
quality performance. First, the authors obtaining evaluate an alternative method of
SERVQUAL, in this step the authors use LISREL VII to determine the 22 items for defining
SERVQUAL as can see at (Figure 3) by Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry (1988), to
calculate the significance of correlation both service quality with opposing 4 different ways to
gauge service quality: 1) evaluated the traditional model of SERVQUAL model, 2)
importance weight SERVQUAL scale, 3) calculating performance based that near to
appraisal of service quality (SERVPERF) and the important scale of SERVPERF. For the
outcome shows that perhaps a performance based measure of service quality is an enhanced
21

method for measuring the service quality build, secondly a precursor of customer satisfaction

Figure 12. LISREL VII Hierarchy

considering it can be affected by hospitality management of firm, the satisfaction of

consumer has remarkable implication on purchase target and the last result service
performance is not sufficient on purchase intension than consumer satisfaction (Taylor and
Jr, Joseph, 1992).

(Source: rphrm.curtin.edu.au)

22

4. Discussion
The implementation of those study shows that to calculate service quality among in
business using Gaps method was adequate, moreover, that instrument can modified to
develop the function in each gaps identifying what exactly costumer need. Despite there is
still gaps between consumer and staff performance (Astuti, 2007), gaps model help defining
the critical point that marketer have to responsible. In the other word as the guideline from
empirical theory that implemented. Basically, costumer have to be satisfied because buyer is
a target of entrepreneur, so marketing staff have to concern of it. However, to give another
analysis in measuring the level of service is by Benchmarking strategy, it is tend to decide
further life of business by comparing performance in company, it also show the effectiveness
in operational and managerial. ITC (International Trade Centre) calculated performance to
evaluate and improve efficiency of their employee due to this strategy brings perception to
build advantage plan more specific.
Figure 13. Benchmarking Strategy by ITC

(Source: intrecen.org)
ITC (International Trade Centre) calculated performance to evaluate and improve efficiency
of their employee due to this strategy brings perception to build advantage plan more
specific.

23

4.1

Suggestion

4.1.1

Interviewing approach

To determine the reality, author did observation by interviewing to a few of customer in

fast food restaurant located in Chester named Wok and Go. Additionally, a video in 2010 by
School of Business and Economics shows Parasuraman argued that buyers have to be listened
and understanding, by follow the necessity of customer. Furthermore, that model (gaps) is for
a frame to solve some barriers in service. This idea come from Bateson and Hoffman in 1999
one of key components that need to build into service system, so the observation planned
on Tuesday because there was a promo buy 1 get 1 free, due to that promo makes the number
of customer increase dramatically, waitress, chef and many staff are busy which is peak
season of the week.
Figure 14. Wok & Go Restaurant

Listening the customer is must be the best way to evaluate and improve service, so directly
know the customer needs and their perspective.
4.1.2

Benchmarking

Furthermore, despite gauging service quality by Gaps model was sufficient,

Benchmarking method is well strategy too in doing competition among in and also make an
improve in advance. Because as a leader have pay attention whether product and service,
specially evaluate working performance. The result of this method set of baseline and
improve efficiency more detail remaining it is using spider matrix. Thus, although company
predict how effective marketing contribution in making profit.

24

5. Conclusion
To conclude this study, basically a plenty of researchers and also the implementation have
been discussed in measuring service quality among in business firm, using Gaps model was
effective tools and accurately defined failure in the level of customer satisfaction, but the
original method made by Parasuraman need to re-construct due to improve while rising a
number of competitor in market as discussed at previous researchers, in spite of the result
(numeric) of service quality have still gaps between customer and employee, the contain of
the method should have questioner and interview to find details that cannot calculated only
by numeric. However, using Benchmarking methodology it support measuring, evaluate and
decide next step ahead, of course improving customer work is main consideration, because
service bring product more prestigious for customer satisfaction and have a play role in
business, because company have been built for customer.

25

6. Reference list
Astuti, H. J. (2007). Analisa kepuasan konsumen: SERVQUAL Model dan Important
Performance

Analysis

Model).

Media

Ekonomi,

7(1).

Retrieved

from

http://jurnal.ump.ac.id/index.php/EKONOMI/article/view/259/244
Bateson., John. E. G., & Hoffman K. D. (1999). Managing Service Marketing. (4th Ed.).
Orlando, USA:
Brassington, F., & Pettitt, S. (2006).Principles of marketing (4th Ed.). Harlow, England:
FT/Prentice Hall.
Cronin, J., & Taylor, S. (1992). Measuring Service Quality: A Re-examination and
Extension. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 55-68.
Dastigir, M and Mortezane, A, S (2012).

Factor affecting the end-user computing

satisfaction, Business Intelligence Jounal. 5(2) 293 -294. Retrieved from

http://www.saycocorporativo.com/saycoUK/BIJ/journal/Vol5No2/Article_11.pdf
Gronoos, C. (1982). Strategic Management and Marketing in the service sector.
Gupta, A., Mcdaniel, J., & Herath, S. (2005). Quality management in service firms:
Sustaining structures of total quality service. Managing Service Quality, 389-402
Hardiyati, R. (2010). Service quality analysis in private hotel Puncak, West Java, Indonesia.
Retrieved from: http://eprints.undip.ac.id/23450/1/Skripsi.pdf
Helsingfors, Finland: Swedish of Economic and Business Administration.
Lovelock, C, H., Wirtz, J., & Patricia Chew Yee Peng. Jurong, Singapore, 2009
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V., & Berry, L. (1985). A Conceptual Model of Service Quality
and Its Implications for Future Research. Journal of Marketing, 49, 41-50.
Pride, W., & Ferrell, O. (2008). Marketing. (14th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
School of Business and Economic. (2011, January 25). Interview with Parasuraman.
Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com
Shanin, A and Shamea, M. (2010). Developing the models of service quality gaps: critical
discussion.

Macrothink

Institute,

1(1).

Retrieved

from

http://macrothink.org/journal/index.php/bms/article/viewFile/395/342
Zeithaml, V., Berry, L., & Parasuraman, A. (1993). The Nature and Determinants of Customer
Expectations of Service. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 1-12.
Retrieved

from:

file:///C:/Users/1427130/Downloads/02e7e53cd16b60a538000000.pdf
26

Shamma, H., & Hassan, S. (2013). Customerdriven benchmarking: A strategic approach

toward a sustainable marketing performance. Benchmarking: An International
Journal. 20 (3), 377 395
Miller, J. A. (1992). Benchmarking performance. CMA, 66(5), 23. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/197833684?accountid=14620

27