Microsoft Word Volume 2 Service and Service Quality Final docx

Electronic and Multi-Channel Services Quality Model 
The internet boom has seen the convergence of electronic services (or ‘technology-based self-
services’) and prompted research and discussion into their implications for service quality (Dabhokar, 
Bobbitt, & Lee, 2003, p.59). Whilst research and discussions on the impact of technology on service 
commenced prior to the year 2000, significant development and effort has been directed to the concept 
only in the past decade. Cox and Dale (2001, p.121) argue that the components of electronic service 
quality differ to those of traditional models and called for further research into the impact of this 
medium. Rowley (2006, p.342) too suggests there are distinct differences between the qualities of an 
electronic service provided as an information service or as a self-service. She suggests that e-service is 
part of a broader service delivery experience, stating that organisations are strategically utilising the 
concept of ‘multi-channelling’, for example through the use of the Internet, to enhance and support 
traditional marketing and sales channels (2006, p.346). 
Many early models for evaluating electronic service tended to be based on traditional service quality 
models such as SERVQUAL, and the Nordic model (e.g. Lee & Lin, 2005; Zeithaml, 2002). This is 
not surprising as there are many parallels between a traditional and electronic service encounter. 
However, several more grounded attempts have also been made to determine a new e-service quality 
model. An example is the E-S-QUAL model developed by Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Malhotra 
(2005) (two of whom are co-authors of the original SERVQUAL model).
In addition to dimensions that are similar to the traditional service quality model (such as environment 
quality, albeit in the context of electronic services this pertains to the design and layout of the site, 
ease of navigation etc; and outcome quality) several “new” dimensions that appear to be important and 
unique to electronic services settings were proposed in the electronic service models (for details see 
Appendix B – Electronic Services Quality Models). The most salient of these are security and service 
recovery (the latter of which is later used in traditional services literature as well). Security covers 
such aspects as perceived freedom from danger, risk, or doubt during the service process (Madu & 
Madu, 2002; Santos, 2003). Service recovery is defined as the ability to restore consumer confidence 
after a failure or adverse service experience. Parasuraman et al. (2005) justified the importance of this 
aspect in electronic services based on the observation that consumers often did not experience any 
recovery, and hence were often unable to answer recovery related questions in the electronic service 
environment (p. 213). Collier and Bienstock (2006, p.264) further justified the importance of this 
aspect based on the principle that a prospective consumer can find an alternative online provider with 
minimal effort and hence the quality of recovery must be measured and managed to ensure consumer 
satisfaction and hence competitiveness. We believe that this is an important aspect of service quality, 
not just in the electronic service domain, but also particularly in an increasingly multi-channel service 
environment and hence should be included in a general service model (indeed this has been included 
in some traditional service model, such as Bai, et al. (2008)). However, we argue that from the 
perspective of the Brady and Cronin model, they fall under the interaction quality dimension, and in 
pure electronic services scenarios, could replace dimensions that pertain to behaviour and attitudes of 
employees.
As a consequence of increasing competitiveness in the service industry, coupled with the current 
generation’s demand for convenience and hence multiple alternative means to obtain services, services 
are increasingly being delivered via multiple channels (traditional face-to-face, web-based, terminals, 

---

Business Service Management White Paper - Volume 2 
Page 25 of 46 
mobile devices, etc), either completely via a single channel or in combination. Sousa and Voss (2006) 
define multichannel services as, ‘a service composed of components - physical and/or virtual - that 
are delivered through two or more channels’ and argue that these two components must be clearly 
separated (2006, p.358).
Sousa and Voss (2006, p.359) suggest a multichannel service quality model must be comprised of 
three components; virtual (e.g. website), physical (people delivered-including logistics), and 
integration quality (seamless service experience across channels). The dimensions in the physical 
component are based mainly on the SERVQUAL and other traditional service quality models, while 
those in the virtual environment are based on the electronic services model (for details see 
APPENDIX C – Multichannel Service Quality Models). The dimensions under integration quality, 
such as breadth of channel choice, transparency of channel service configuration, content consistency 
across channels and process consistency across channels, are new and appear to well capture the 
cross/multiple channels aspect of service delivery.