Evaluation of the Gap Model of Service Quality in Building and Sustaining Customer Relationships

Assignment Brief

Assessment task details and instructions

Critically evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the gap model of service quality as an approach to build and sustain customer relationships. Illustrate your answer by drawing upon your own consumption and/ or job role experiences (100 marks)

As a guide you should:

1. Critically review the gap model of service  quality , and its strengths and weaknesses (30 marks)

2. Review customer relationships academic literature (30 marks)

3. Evaluate the linkages between the gaps model of service quality and customer relationships using academic literature (15 marks).

4. Illustrate throughout your answer relevant theory by drawing upon your own consumption and/ or job role experiences (25 marks).

Your work should be in a creative, critical and evaluative manner. Ensure that your arguments are clear and logical and where appropriate include academic sources, i.e. academic journal papers, which add weight to your points raised. Please show in your list of references an appropriate breadth and depth of references relevant to the topic.

Your work must be correctly referenced throughout in the Harvard format.

Your assignment should be word processed and produced in an appropriate academic style. The font should be 12, and be double spaced. The work should be completed on an individual basis.

We have set up a draft submission area so that you can check whether your work is adequately referenced. You are strongly advised to make use of this system. You can submit a draft to turnitin as many times as you wish but you can only submit one final version. Therefore please ensure you submit to the correct area of blackboard turnitin systems. 

Knowledge and Understanding

On successful completion of this assessment, you will be able to:

1. Critically and effectively assess the value of theories, concepts and models to the practices of  the service sector and how they manage service quality;

2. Critically assess the relationship marketing (RM) approach in marketing theory and practice and evaluate critically the importance of ‘interactions’, ‘networks’ and service processes in modern marketing;

3. Demonstrate critical awareness of ‘experiential marketing’, and how this can be complemented through Social Media Marketing in a way with which organisations and consumers can ‘co-create value’.

Word count/ duration (if applicable)

Your assessment should be 3000 Words (+/- 10%) excluding references.

Sample Answer

A Critical Evaluation of the Gap Model of Service Quality in Building and Sustaining Customer Relationships

Introduction

Service quality has long been recognised as a key determinant of customer satisfaction, loyalty, and retention. In highly competitive service industries, the ability to manage and deliver consistent quality directly influences customer relationships and long-term profitability (Parasuraman, Zeithaml & Berry, 1985). The Gap Model of Service Quality, developed by Parasuraman et al. (1988), provides a structured framework for understanding discrepancies between customer expectations and their perceptions of actual service delivery. While the model has been widely used across industries such as hospitality, banking, and retail, it has also faced criticism for its rigid assumptions and limited adaptability to dynamic, technology-driven service contexts.

This essay critically evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of the Gap Model of Service Quality as a tool for building and sustaining customer relationships. It reviews the model’s theoretical foundation, explores its relationship with customer relationship management (CRM) and relationship marketing literature, and integrates personal experience to demonstrate its practical implications in service delivery and customer engagement.

Critical Review of the Gap Model of Service Quality

The Gap Model of Service Quality identifies five key gaps that influence customer satisfaction:

1. Gap 1: The difference between customer expectations and management perceptions.

2. Gap 2: The gap between management perceptions and service quality specifications.

3. Gap 3: The gap between service quality specifications and service delivery.

4. Gap 4: The gap between service delivery and external communications.

5. Gap 5: The gap between customer expectations and their perceptions of actual service performance (Parasuraman et al., 1985).

The model’s strengths lie in its structured, diagnostic nature. It provides managers with a practical tool to pinpoint where service failures occur. For example, in my experience working part-time at a retail bank, the model helped management identify that customer dissatisfaction stemmed mainly from Gap 3, service delivery failures due to understaffing during peak hours, rather than product quality or pricing. This led to better staffing strategies and customer satisfaction improvements.

Another strength is its focus on customer-centric thinking. The model places customer expectations at the heart of service evaluation, aligning with the modern relationship marketing emphasis on long-term value creation rather than one-off transactions (Grönroos, 1994). Furthermore, it provides a universal framework applicable across diverse service sectors, making it a versatile diagnostic model for managers seeking to improve customer experience consistency (Zeithaml et al., 1990).

However, the weaknesses of the Gap Model become apparent in contemporary service environments. First, it assumes that customer expectations are stable and easily measurable, which is unrealistic in digital and globalised markets where expectations shift rapidly (Buttle, 1996). For instance, customers today expect seamless digital interactions, quick responses, and personalised engagement, all elements the original model overlooks.

Secondly, the model’s reliance on managerial perception to assess service gaps can lead to bias. Managers may misinterpret customer expectations or overestimate their organisation’s service delivery. In the airline industry, for example, while management might focus on punctuality as a key quality measure, passengers may value empathy and communication during delays even more (Wirtz & Lovelock, 2021).

Continued...