Oliver Mühlich
ASB Summer University 2006: Assessment of student satisfaction with a threefold
approach
ISBN: 978-3-8366-0354-6
Druck Diplomica® Verlag GmbH, Hamburg, 2007
Zugl. University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Dänemark, MA-Thesis / Master, 2006
Dieses Werk ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Die dadurch begründeten Rechte,
insbesondere die der Übersetzung, des Nachdrucks, des Vortrags, der Entnahme von
Abbildungen und Tabellen, der Funksendung, der Mikroverfilmung oder der
Vervielfältigung auf anderen Wegen und der Speicherung in Datenverarbeitungsanlagen,
bleiben, auch bei nur auszugsweiser Verwertung, vorbehalten. Eine Vervielfältigung
dieses Werkes oder von Teilen dieses Werkes ist auch im Einzelfall nur in den Grenzen
der gesetzlichen Bestimmungen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes der Bundesrepublik
Deutschland in der jeweils geltenden Fassung zulässig. Sie ist grundsätzlich
vergütungspflichtig. Zuwiderhandlungen unterliegen den Strafbestimmungen des
Urheberrechtes.
Die Wiedergabe von Gebrauchsnamen, Handelsnamen, Warenbezeichnungen usw. in
diesem Werk berechtigt auch ohne besondere Kennzeichnung nicht zu der Annahme,
dass solche Namen im Sinne der Warenzeichen- und Markenschutz-Gesetzgebung als frei
zu betrachten wären und daher von jedermann benutzt werden dürften.
Die Informationen in diesem Werk wurden mit Sorgfalt erarbeitet. Dennoch können
Fehler nicht vollständig ausgeschlossen werden, und die Diplomarbeiten Agentur, die
Autoren oder Übersetzer übernehmen keine juristische Verantwortung oder irgendeine
Haftung für evtl. verbliebene fehlerhafte Angaben und deren Folgen.
© Diplomica Verlag GmbH
http://www.diplom.de, Hamburg 2007
Printed in Germany
Executive Summary
I
Executive Summary
The aim of the research presented here is to assess student satisfaction at the Aarhus
School of Business (ASB) for the Summer University that was first introduced in July
2006. The European Performance Satisfaction Index (EPSI) was adapted to
incorporate student satisfaction in order to reach this aim, and was used as the main
approach in our thesis. The necessary data was gathered from online surveys we
derived from the students.
Two studies complemented this model. On the one hand, structured interviews were
conducted with all relevant lecturers and on the other hand, a survey was conducted in
two waves with Summer University participants. In the first wave, the students' initial
expectations were measured and in the second wave it was the degree of fulfilment for
these expectations that were measured. Results from the EPSI model indicated that
participants of the Summer University were satisfied overall with the program and
will remain loyal. Surprisingly however, the variable image showed no direct impact
on perceived value, satisfaction, and loyalty. The results from the interviews showed
that lecturers were well chosen, but not adequately prepared for the program. In
addition, the survey results indicated that expectations were to some degree fulfilled,
but certain attributes of lecture quality experienced a negative disconfirmation of
expectations. Furthermore, the direct comparison of data from the lecturers and the
students suggested problems with the information flow between ASB, the lecturers,
and the students. From these findings it can be concluded that overall, the Summer
University was a success in the introduction of a new study program; however, there
are some areas that need to be improved. Thus, our suggestions include new
positioning and better marketing for next year, concrete improvement of quality
attributes and information flow, and a strategy for sustainability and expansion of the
Summer University.
Our work successfully presents student satisfaction with a threefold approach, not
used hitherto. Combining all three approaches in one dissertation and establishing
linkages and interrelations between them, provides an extensive insight towards
student satisfaction. Considering ASB Summer University took place for the first time
in 2006, the insights we provide and the recommendations we are able to give, will
influence the further organisational and managerial development of the program.
Preface
II
Preface
When deciding on the topic of our thesis, we concentrated on two issues. Firstly, it
had to be both practically oriented and supported by important theories learned in our
study program. Secondly, it needed to be beneficial and meaningful to a third party.
Thus, we were very delighted, when we received the opportunity to evaluate the
performance of the Summer University for the Aarhus School of Business. We would
like to thank both the ASB management and all people involved, who helped us with
this project. This includes Peder Østergaard and Frank Pedersen for giving us the
opportunity to investigate, and Steen Weisner and Dorte Føns Sørensen for their
personal support. Our special gratitude and acknowledgement goes to our supervisor
Joachim Scholderer, for his untiring support and encouragement. His professional
guidance and patience, combined with the high demands he sets on a master thesis
helped us to produce a master thesis we can be proud of.
Ella would like to thank:
My family. Especially my parents for supporting and motivating me throughout my
studies. Thank you for believing in me! I would also like to thank my thesis partner,
Oliver Mühlich, for his great cooperation and commitment. Without him, I would
have never completed such complex work. I wish him all the best in the future.
Oliver would like to thank:
First of all, my parents. It was a long way. Without your support, love, and belief, I
could have never accomplished this. Thus, this work is dedicated to you. I also would
like to thank my beloved girlfriend, Juliane. Thank you for being there for me and
supporting me in this sometimes very stressful period. Last but not least, I would like
to thank Ella for the good work we have done together, and Hannah, Rebecca, Rene,
and Simon for proof-reading this master thesis.
Aarhus, October 2006
______________________
______________________
Ella Schneider
Oliver Mühlich
Table of Contents
III
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ... I
PREFACE... II
TABLE OF CONTENTS ... III
LIST OF FIGURES ... V
LIST OF TABLES...VI
ABBREVIATIONS ...VII
1
INTRODUCTION ...1
1.1
Background... 2
1.2
Objectives... 2
1.3
Limitations ... 3
1.4
Overview ... 4
2
STRATEGIC CONTEXT ...6
2.1
Historical background ... 6
2.2
Strategy 2006 2009 ... 6
2.3
TQM experiences ... 8
2.4
Summer University 2006 ... 11
3
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ...14
3.1
Total Quality Management... 14
3.1.1
Introduction to TQM ... 15
3.1.2
TQM frameworks... 17
3.1.3
TQM in higher education... 20
3.2
Student satisfaction... 23
3.3
Customer satisfaction models ... 25
3.3.1
Expectancy disconfirmation paradigm... 25
3.3.2
Customer satisfaction measurement ... 27
3.3.3
ECSI (EPSI) model ... 31
3.4
Summary... 34
4
PREVIOUS RESEARCH ...35
4.1
Measuring student oriented quality in higher education... 36
4.2
Drivers of student satisfaction and loyalty ... 42
Table of Contents
IV
4.3
Miscellaneous research on student satisfaction... 46
4.4
Summary... 49
5
RESEARCH QUESTIONS...50
6
SUMMER UNIVERSITY EVALUATION ...52
6.1
Objectives... 53
6.2
Methods... 54
6.2.1
Participants ... 55
6.2.2
Procedure ... 58
6.2.3
Measures... 60
6.2.4
Analysis ... 63
6.3
Results ... 64
6.3.1
EPSI model and item analysis ... 64
6.3.2
Comparison of Expected and Experienced quality... 78
6.3.3
Lecturer Interviews... 84
6.4
Discussion... 93
6.4.1
EPSI model and specific level... 93
6.4.2
Expectancy disconfirmation... 99
6.4.3
Interviews ... 102
7
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...104
7.1
Key results... 105
7.2
Conclusions ... 106
7.3
Strategic recommendations ... 108
7.4
Tactical recommendations... 114
7.5
Research implications ... 118
7.6
Managerial implications ... 119
REFERENCES
List of Figures
V
List of Figures
F
IGURE
1-
S
TRUCTURE OF THE DISSERTATION
... 5
F
IGURE
2-
B
ALDRIGE CRITERIA FOR PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE FRAMEWORK
(NIST,
2002) ... 18
F
IGURE
3-
EFQM
E
XCELLENCE
M
ODEL
(EFQM,
2006) ... 19
F
IGURE
4-
S
ATISFACTION
F
UNCTION BY
A
NDERSON AND
S
ULLIVAN
(1993)... 27
F
IGURE
5-
S
WEDISH
C
USTOMER
S
ATISFACTION
B
AROMETER
(SCSB)
MODEL
... 29
F
IGURE
6-
A
MERICAN
C
USTOMER
S
ATISFACTION
I
NDEX
(ACSI)
MODEL
... 30
F
IGURE
7-
I
NITIAL
ECSI
MODEL
(ECSI,
1998)... 32
F
IGURE
8-
EPSI
MODEL
-
M
ASTER
M
ODEL
S
TRUCTURE
(EPSI,
2005) ... 33
F
IGURE
9-
O
VERALL
ECSI
RESULTS FROM
M
ARTENSEN ET AL
.
(1999) ... 38
F
IGURE
10-
H
UMAN QUALITY MAP
(M
ARTENSEN ET AL
.,
1999)... 40
F
IGURE
11-
N
ON
-
HUMAN QUALITY MAP
(M
ARTENSEN ET AL
.,
1999) ... 41
F
IGURE
12-
O
VERALL
EPSI
RESULTS FROM
Ø
STERGAARD AND
K
RISTENSEN
(2005)... 44
F
IGURE
13-
M
EAN EXPECTATION RATINGS ON DIMENSION
`I
MAGE
' ... 65
F
IGURE
14-
M
EAN RATINGS ON THE DIMENSION
`E
XPECTED QUALITY
' ... 66
F
IGURE
15-
S
TUDENTS
'
REASONS FOR PARTICIPATING AT THE
S
UMMER
U
NIVERSITY
... 68
F
IGURE
16-
M
EAN EXPERIENCE RATINGS ON DIMENSION
`P
ERCEIVED
V
ALUE
'
AND
`S
ATISFACTION
' ... 69
F
IGURE
17-
M
EAN EXPERIENCE RATINGS ON DIMENSION
`L
OYALTY
' ... 71
F
IGURE
18-
P
ATH DIAGRAM OF THE
EPSI
MODEL WITH DIRECT EFFECTS AND SIGNIFICANT
R² ... 78
F
IGURE
19-
M
EAN EXPECTATIONS AND EXPERIENCE RATINGS ON QUALITY DIMENSION
... 80
F
IGURE
20-
P
ATH DIAGRAM WITH SIGNIFICANT AND INSIGNIFICANT EFFECTS
... 94
F
IGURE
21-
I
MPORTANCE
P
ERFORMANCE
M
AP ON
D
IMENSION
`S
ATISFACTION
' ... 111
F
IGURE
22-
I
MPORTANCE
P
ERFORMANCE
M
AP ON DIMENSION
`L
OYALTY
' ... 113
List of Tables
VI
List of Tables
T
ABLE
1-
L
ECTURES AND LECTURERS AT THE
S
UMMER
U
NIVERSITY
... 11
T
ABLE
2-
O
VERALL EFFECTS ON SATISFACTION AND LOYALTY IN
M
ARTENSEN ET AL
.
(1999) ... 39
T
ABLE
3-
I
TEMS TO DETERMINE LATENT VARIABLES AND THEIR UNSTANDARDISED OUTER WEIGHTS
... 43
T
ABLE
4-
C
OMPARISON OF OVERALL EFFECTS
2005
AND
1999 ... 45
T
ABLE
5-
E
XPECTED
Q
UALITY
D
EMOGRAPHICS
... 57
T
ABLE
6-
E
XPERIENCED
Q
UALITY
D
EMOGRAPHICS
... 57
T
ABLE
7-
D
EMOGRAPHICS FOR
Q
UALITY
C
OMPARISON
... 58
T
ABLE
8-
V
ARIABLES AND QUESTIONS FOR
S
UMMER
U
NIVERSITY
2006 ... 61
T
ABLE
9-
H
OW DID YOU HEAR ABOUT
S
UMMER
U
NIVERSITY
... 68
T
ABLE
10-
E
XPERIENCED OVERALL BENEFIT
... 70
T
ABLE
11-
O
UTER
L
OADINGS FOR THE LATENT VARIABLES OF THE
EPSI
M
ODEL
... 74
T
ABLE
12-
R
ELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF
EPSI
MODEL
... 75
T
ABLE
13-
P
ATH COEFFICIENTS AND DIRECT EFFECTS OF
EPSI
M
ODEL
... 77
T
ABLE
14-
T
ESTS OF WITHIN
-
SUBJECTS EFFECTS
,
E
XPECTED VS
.
E
XPERIENCED
Q
UALITY
... 79
T
ABLE
15-
S
TANDARD
D
EVIATIONS OF THE ITEMS
-E
XPECTED VS
.
E
XPERIENCED QUALITY
... 80
T
ABLE
16-
Q
UALITY OF THE ACADEMIC LEVEL
-E
XPECTED VS
.
E
XPERIENCED QUALITY
... 81
T
ABLE
17-
Q
UALITY OF THE CLASS CONTENT
-
E
XPECTED VS
.
E
XPERIENCED QUALITY
... 83
T
ABLE
18-
O
VERVIEW LECTURERS AND CLASSES
... 84
Abbreviations
VII
Abbreviations
AACSB
-
Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business
ACSI
-
American Customer Satisfaction Index
ANOVA
-
Analysis of variance
ASB
-
Aarhus School of Business
AVE
-
Average Variance Expected
DJH
-
Den Jyske Handelshøjskole
ECSI
-
European Customer Satisfaction Index
ECTS
-
European Credit Transfer System
EFMD
-
European Foundation for Management Development
EFQM
-
European Foundation for Quality Management
e.g.
-
Exempli gratia (for example)
EPSI
-
European Performance Satisfaction Index
EQUIS
-
European Quality Improvement System
ESSAM
-
European Summer School of Advanced Management
et al.
-
Et alii (and others)
etc.
-
Et cetera (and so forth)
HEC
-
École des Hautes Études Commerciales
i.e.
-
Id est (that is ...)
IED
-
International Entrepreneurship Development
INSEAD
-
Institut Européen d'Administration des Affaires
IPA
-
Importance Performance Analysis
Lisrel
-
Linear Structural Relationships
MBA
-
Master of Business Administration
MP3
-
MPEG-1 Audio Layer 3
M.Sc.
-
Master of Science
MBNQA
-
Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award
No.
-
Number
p.
-
Page
pp.
-
Pages
PCA
-
Principal Component Analysis
PLS
-
Partial Least Squares
SCSB
-
Swedish Customer Satisfaction Barometer
SEM
-
Structural Equation Modelling
SPSS
-
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
TQM
-
Total Quality Management
Vol.
-
Volume
INTRODUCTION
1
1 INTRODUCTION
Every nation's prosperity and well-being relies on the quality of their human capital.
Therefore, it is vital to continuously improve and adjust the quality of higher
education to the fast-changing environment. Just like businesses regularly assess
customer satisfaction, universities, for quite some time have also been conducting
student satisfaction surveys. In order to guarantee high quality in education, it is
imperative to identify what is important to customers, who are in this case the
students. In relation to this, it also has to be acknowledged that higher education is a
service industry just like any other. Although some traditional institutions are still
struggling to accept this fact, it is the only way to survive in an increasingly
competitive global environment, in which every university wants to attract the best
students.
In the last decade the Aarhus School of Business (ASB) has aimed to position itself
amongst the most recognised Business Schools in Europe. The implementation of
quality management tools, continuous improvement, an international orientation, and
long-term strategy plans have paved the way. Such adjustments are crucial for any
higher education institution in order to remain competitive. Additional pressure was
built up by the Bologna Declaration in 1999, when new standards for teaching and
learning were set throughout Europe. The ASB has faced this challenge and since then
has become an accredited school of the European Quality Improvement System
(EQUIS). The quality standards at EQUIS are very high and only the best Business
Schools are accredited under this quality assurance scheme.
As a part of this, the ASB can also look back on a decade of listening very closely to
students' opinions. In 1999, ASB researchers made a first attempt at assessing student
satisfaction, using an approach usually used for customer satisfaction measurement.
Results obtained by means of the European Performance Satisfaction Index approach
turned out to be reliable and useful. Similar assessments of student satisfaction at
ASB were conducted in the years after. More successful improvements showed the
approach's potential for real-life application.
In 2006, the ASB decided to expand its study programs with the introduction of the
first Summer University. Classes were offered in two terms, each lasting three weeks.
INTRODUCTION
2
The schedule was tight as students were expected to study from nine a.m. to four p.m.
at school everyday. The amount of enrolled students was satisfying and therefore, the
first obstacles for the program were overcome.
1.1 Background
ASB's reasons for introducing a Summer University program are manifold. First of
all, other Business Schools had already introduced similar programs some years
earlier. Although ASB has already had a summer program on Executive MBA level
for quite some time, an equivalent program for Master students was still missing.
By offering this extra service to ASB students, and of course also to external students,
this gap would be filled. Additional reasons for introducing the Summer University
are to allow students to finish their studies faster, therefore giving them more time for
internships.
As the Summer University took place for the first time in 2006, it seems logical that
the assessment of this program is an important issue. Principally, the whole program
is similar to other well-known summer programs. However, the threat of wrong
organisation, scheduling, and management of the program seems to still be a problem,
due to a lack of experience. The research presented in the following aims to assess
student satisfaction, the lecturers' point-of-view, and connecting all this with other
additional material, to offer vital decision support for the successful future of the
Summer University. Finding more information about the particular needs of the
students, how curriculum and their design can be improved, and the perception of the
administrative staffs' work, will help ASB's management to make the right decisions.
1.2 Objectives
The success at the Summer University will empirically be assessed by means of three
approaches:
1.
EPSI model of student satisfaction
2.
Comparison of expectations and experience
3.
Interviews with the relevant lecturers
INTRODUCTION
3
The EPSI approach will help us get a better understanding of issues that the students
think are important. The model contains various variables that predict student
satisfaction and student loyalty as outcomes. With the information we will receive, it
will be possible to give an exact idea to some important issues. Firstly, the EPSI
results will indicate how satisfied the students are and why. Secondly, it will show
how loyal students remain to the Summer University and the ASB, and if they will
recommend them to others. Furthermore, analysis of each item will give us an exact
insight of the importance and performance of specific areas of improvement.
The comparison of expectations before the Summer University, and the degree of
their confirmation or disconfirmation after the Summer University will provide a
different angle. Disappointment is often rooted in wrong or too high expectations.
Thus, understanding the students' expectations is a very important aspect in our work.
By surveying students in two waves, it will be possible to draw fruitful conclusions.
Possible scenarios vary between meeting the students' expectations fully and not at
all. Dissatisfaction, due to disconfirmed expectations, would have a huge impact on
overall student satisfaction. Finding out more about expectations will therefore be an
important angle and will ultimately help solve managerial problems.
We believe that past research has often underestimated the great influence lecturers
have on student satisfaction. Therefore, we will add the lecturers' point-of-view by
interviewing all relevant lecturers. This will cover the educational background and
experience of the lecturers, their own expectations towards the program and the
students, and their way of teaching at the Summer University. These aspects are also
linked to some of the items used in our EPSI model approach. The results from this
model will complement our knowledge and the role of the lecturers' performance.
Information gained from these interviews will make it possible to establish direct
connections to students' attitudes and perceptions. Additionally, recommendations in
terms of areas of improvement will receive a stronger basis.
1.3 Limitations
The Summer University is divided into two terms, which take place, right after each
INTRODUCTION
4
other. Every student is permitted to enrol in one class per term. Due to the information
gathered from the Summer University administration, the majority of students were
expected to participate in the first term. The first term also offered more classes than
the second term. Some of the second term applicants dropped out of the second term
after having finished the first term. This, among other reasons led to the decision, only
to evaluate the first term of the Summer University. Our results still reflect the
majority of the participants, as we had high response rates in our surveys. It has to be
kept in mind however, that whenever the students or lecturers at the Summer
University are mentioned, it only refers to the first term participants.
Moreover, the amount of participants at the Summer University is not as
representative as when assessing overall student satisfaction for an entire university.
Hence, we shall not forget that the results are only representative to a certain degree.
This may also limit its comparability to previous research, which is mostly surveying
entire faculties or universities.
When designing the first questionnaire, which was distributed before the Summer
University had started, we included items related to grade expectations. Once the
program had begun, it became clear that the relevant follow-up data would be difficult
to obtain. Students' grades from the Summer University were expected to be delivered
no earlier than six to eight weeks after the final exams were written. This meant
double the waiting time compared to usual exams, which made it impossible for us to
keep the question about the fulfilment of students' grade expectations. Not only was it
problematic in relation to our own schedule, but even more for the questionnaire that
was supposed to be sent out one week after the final exam, when impressions were
still fresh, in order to receive meaningful results. This was very unfortunate as we had
expected important insights into the students' self-conceptions.
1.4 Overview
The structure of the report is outlined in Figure 1.
INTRODUCTION
5
Figure 1- Structure of the dissertation
The introduction in Chapter 1 gives a first idea of what this dissertation is about and
what we want to achieve. In Chapter 2, we proceed with the strategic context of our
work. Here, we will present the ASB and the Summer University, which builds the
basis of our topic. Chapter 3 continues with the theoretical framework we adopt. In
this chapter, we will describe the constructs of the chosen theories, the economic
processes relating to them, and finally, we will state more explicitly what the theories
predict and why this may be helpful for solving our research problem. The most
important previous research will be focused on in Chapter 4. This will include
research which has successfully applied our theories and is of great relevance to our
work in particular aspects. The research questions in Chapter 5 will specify what
exactly is to be investigated in the empirical studies. Following, in Chapter 6 the
Summer University evaluation will be presented. After presenting the methods, we
will continue with the results and discuss them in relation to the objectives. This leads
to Chapter 7, where we will focus on the conclusions and recommendations that can
be made, based on the results we received. This section will summarize the key results
and indicate how our results will help improve the Summer University in terms of the
"real-world" problem.
1
I
N
T
R
O
D
U
C
T
I
O
N
2
S
T
R
A
T
E
G
I
C
C
O
N
T
E
X
T
3
Theoretical
Framework
4
Previous
Research
6
Summer
University
Evaluation
5
Research
Question
7
Conclusions
STRATEGIC CONTEXT
6
2 STRATEGIC CONTEXT
In order to understand the background of the Summer University, more detailed
information about the Aarhus School of Business will be presented in the following
chapter. Beginning with the historical background of the ASB, we will then proceed
with the school's strategy and past experiences with Total Quality Management
(TQM) in higher education. The chapter will conclude with the ASB Summer
University in regard to its characteristics, goals, and benefits.
2.1 Historical background
The ASB is situated in Aarhus, Denmark. The predecessor of the ASB can be dated
back to the 19
th
century, known then as The Jutland Business School (Den Jyske
Handelshøjskole, DJH). At that time, it already provided young students with an
education in business, economics, and trade. The ASB, as we know it today, was
founded in the year 1939 and has constantly grown in size, staff, and students (ASB,
2006a). ASB has an annual budget of approximately DKK 320 million.
Today, ASB is one of Denmark's 12 universities. Approximately 485 full-time and
700 part-time faculty and academic staff are employed at the Business School. The
total amount of students is around 7000, of which are 2000 part-time students and 800
foreign students (ASB, 2004). This makes ASB the fifth largest EQUIS accredited
business school in Europe.
Until spring 2005, ASB had two faculties: the faculty of Business Administration and
the faculty of Modern Languages. The University Board then decided to merge these
two faculties into one, in order to become more effective in future competition for
both students and research funds. In doing so, they wanted to achieve increasing
cross-functional thinking in research and education, as well as harmonize procedures
and processes (Østergaard Kristensen, 2005).
2.2 Strategy 2006 2009
ASB has formulated a strategy for the next three years. The strategy document
outlines what the ASB aims to look like in 2009, which direction it will go, and how
its priorities are set (ASB, 2005).
STRATEGIC CONTEXT
7
In order to cope with new challenges and opportunities, ASB has set the focus on
eight goals:
1.
Increasing market focus
2.
Increasing business focus
3.
Focus on integrated internationalisation
4.
Clearer profiling of research, education and dialogue
5.
Focus on high quality and efficiency in all activities
6.
Closer collaboration with other institutions
7.
Increasing focus on impact on employment rates and business sector
developments
8.
Focus on its regional role in relation to the change from industrial
society to knowledge society
Point five (in italics), plays an important role in the context of our underlying work as
it shows a clear focus on quality management.
Key aspects of quality management in ASB's strategy are their mission and vision
statements. The mission and vision can also be found in the Deming Prize
Framework, which will be explained in 2.2,
as well as in the EQUIS accreditation
standards.
Mission
Aarhus School of Business is a business university which contributes
added value to society through research, education, and dialogue on
the creation and development of companies and organisations.
Vision
Aarhus School of Business will strive to be internationally
recognised as a university that develops and realises ideas,
promoting growth for companies, organisations, and society.
STRATEGIC CONTEXT
8
Aarhus School of Business is committed to achieving this through
outstanding business research, internationally recognised graduates,
and prosperous cooperation with the Danish business community.
The basis for this is an attractive, creative and learning workplace
for employees and students and a high international level in
everything we do. (ASB, 2005)
The last sentence of the formulated vision statement is of special relevance to our
work. The aim of being an attractive, creative, and learning workplace is not easy to
achieve. Parts of this will be discussed later.
2.3 TQM experiences
First approaches
The first TQM initiative implemented at the ASB was in 1991, when the chair of
quality management was created. In the beginning, only three persons were associated
with the chair: the professor, a research associate, a Ph.D. student, and a secretary.
The way of cooperating with the students on this two year long M.Sc. (Master of
Science) programme was unique. In order to solve the problem of having only limited
staff, the students were involved in research and development. Involving the students
in the development of the new research area showed a clear commitment to quality
management. With the increasing number of students, enlisting in the courses of
quality management, the research and knowledge in this field also increased.
In 1992, the Department of Modern Languages decided to evaluate the education.
Similar attempts before this evaluation had not been very successful, due to a lack of
knowledge in planning and processing, and the students' lack of interest in
participating (Dahlgaard, 1998). In cooperation with the new chair, questionnaires
were developed and tested, but the final results were not completed until 1995.
Another key event for ASB's commitment to quality management was an
international seminar, held in Aarhus in 1993. One of the most important conclusions
of this seminar was that the model from the European Foundation of Quality
Management (EFQM) had great potential to be applied to higher education
STRATEGIC CONTEXT
9
(Dahlgaard, 1998). In connection with this, several questionnaires have been
developed over the years, based on the Business Excellence of the EFQM model, in
order to improve education at ASB.
Student satisfaction measurements
From 1999 until the present, the ASB has been very active in evaluating classes on a
yearly basis. Specific classes were picked each year and were evaluated under
different aspects by the students who attended the class.
Furthermore, extensive research was done, where the overall student satisfaction was
measured, based on ECSI (European Customer Satisfaction Index) methodology.
Research by Martensen, Grønholdt, Eskildsen, and Kristensen (1999) based on data
collected in 1999 from all students of the ASB, assessed students' perceived quality
and satisfaction within higher-education institutions, in order to develop continuous
improvement strategies for study programmes, instruction methods, staff, and
equipment. The latest large scale study was carried out at ASB in the year 2005
(Østergaard Kristensen, 2005). It also involved a survey addressing all students of
the school. The main objective was to find out whether there were any differences
between the students' perceptions of the two former faculties of the ASB, or at the
different levels of education. The reason behind this was to support the arguments for
a new strategy and improve effectiveness of the business school's operating.
Especially the student satisfaction research by Martensen et al. (1999) and Østergaard
Kristensen (2005) are of great relevance to our work. In fact, they are the only
available work, where the ECSI methodology was used to measure student
satisfaction and they will thus be discussed in detail in chapter four.
From information we received from Anne Martensen (A. Martensen, personal
communication, September 13, 2006), who administrated two earlier ASB studies,
another study is about to be published. Unfortunately, publication will not take place
before December 2006 and can therefore not be included.
EQUIS accreditation
EQUIS is a quality assurance scheme administered by the European Foundation for
Management Development (EFMD). EQUIS is the leading international accreditation
STRATEGIC CONTEXT
10
system for quality assessment, improvement, and accreditation of higher education
institutions in management and business administration (EFMD, 2006).
To achieve the EQUIS accreditation, schools must demonstrate that they are able to
satisfy specific quality criteria in three equally important areas:
·
High international standards of quality in all of the areas defined
in the EQUIS model.
·
A significant level of internationalisation as defined within the
EQUIS model.
·
The needs of the corporate world, well integrated into
programmes, activities, and processes. (EFMD, 2006)
The ASB has been an accredited EQUIS member since 2001. In the year 2004, the
membership was renewed and the next renewal will be in 2009. If a member does not
satisfy the high quality standards, the membership can be withdrawn after two years.
Among the 92 members (status quo 06/2006) are some of the best business schools in
the world. These include: London Business School, Institut Européen
d'Administration des Affaires (INSEAD), the École des Hautes Études Commerciales
(HEC), and Università Commerciale Luigi Bocconi, just to name a few. EQUIS can
be seen as the European counterpart to the American oriented AACSB (Association to
Advance Collegiate Schools of Business). The latest development in this respect is
that during 2006, ASB will start with the process of obtaining the AACSB
accreditation. Børge Obel, rector of the ASB, explained to the ASB's Focus Magazine
why this development is of such great importance to the ASB.
"We seek to be accredited according to the American AACSB
accreditation so that we can ensure that we live up to international
standards" (Fredenslund, 2006).
The EQUIS membership turned out to be a good investment for the ASB. The ASB
improved their internal quality standards and also sent an external signal to authorities
and potential students.
STRATEGIC CONTEXT
11
2.4 Summer University 2006
Characteristics
The ASB Summer University was introduced for the first time in 2006. Addressing
Master Students, it offered classes in the field of Business Administration. Both ASB
Master Students and students from business schools from outside can apply. As
mentioned previously, the Summer University 2006 was held in two terms. The first
term took place from 17
th
of July until 4
th
of August and the second term from 7
th
of
August until 25
th
of August. In the first term, an amount of five classes were offered
with four classes being offered in the second term. Information from the Summer
University website promised classes that were aimed at the highest academic level.
While some classes were inter-disciplinary, others focussed on a specific topic. Most
of the classes had a strong international perspective and were all based on the latest
research in the field (Summer University ASB, 2006).
Table 1- Lectures and lecturers at the Summer University
1st term lectures
2nd term lectures
Corporate Failure and Transformation
Global Business
Douglas Briggs, University of Glasgow
Fred Robins, University of Adelaide
Corporate Governance and Financial Markets
Securities and their Markets
Morten Balling Thomas Poulsen, ASB
Carsten Tanggaard, ASB
Cases in Corporate Finance
Global Marketing
Luc Soenen, California Polytechnic University
Roberto Sanchez, Oregon State University
International Human Resource Management
Technology Management and Strategy
Julia Brandl, University of Vienna
Stephen Lawrence, University of Colorado
Project Management
Tim Carroll, Georgia Tech College
The international perspective was supposed to be supported by the participation of
students from foreign universities and lecturers from outside Denmark. Only two out
of the nine lecturers were resident lecturers from the ASB. The other lecturers were
guest lecturers from the US, Scotland, Australia and Austria (see Table 1).
The study period was divided into two time slots - morning and afternoon. The
morning hours were similar to lectures during a regular semester. The afternoon hours
were reserved for group work and applied case studies. The students had to deal with
STRATEGIC CONTEXT
12
a high workload. Classes began at nine o'clock in the morning and lasted until four
o'clock in the afternoon. After finishing classes, students were expected to prepare for
the next days' classes and read the relevant literature, which took approximately two
hours or more.
With the introduction of the Summer University, the ASB continued following its
path of new and innovative study programmes. Another successful example is
ESSAM (European Summer School of Advanced Management). Running since 1999,
it focuses on Executive MBA (Master of Business Administration) students and is
organised in cooperation with seven other business schools.
Furthermore, a project in cooperation with the Aarhus University has been launched,
also providing a summer course. The program offers three-day and five-day courses
available to students studying at the Master level.
Another Summer School project was the International Entrepreneurship Development
(IED). It sought to bring together entrepreneurs, students, venture capital, and
professors in a strategy lab to facilitate success for companies. Unfortunately it had to
be cancelled due to lack of interest.
Goals and benefits
The ASB has several goals connected to initialising the Summer University. One of
them is to offer ASB students the possibility of closing the gap of lecture-free time in
the summer. Thereby, students can use the summer to get ECTS (European Credit
Transfer System) credits and finish their studies sooner. Dorte Sørensen, Project
Coordinator of the Summer University, added another aspect to this:
"The idea was mainly to allow the M.Sc. students to have time
enough during the year for internships. So when taking the Summer
University they could take an internship from September on and
write
their
thesis
afterwards"
(D.
Sørensen,
personal
communication, July 17, 2006).
Another goal for the ASB is to attract new students and to make the working
atmosphere at the Summer University as international as possible.
"Of course, we also want our students to meet other and new,
international students. It is always better to have international
students from our partner universities to attend. Also, only coming
here first for the summer is probably easier than already enrolling
STRATEGIC CONTEXT
13
for a whole program. Then they can see if the ASB is good for them"
(D. Sørensen, personal communication, July 17, 2006).
Benefits for the students include for example international competences and
experience, a global network, and credits for the study program.
"The learning experience of working together with people from
other cultures and nationalities is quite often a long-life experience
and some of the networks you create during the Summer University
will last for the rest of your life" (ASB, 2006b).
Furthermore, the ASB seeks to deliver visiting students an insight into new lecture
styles with e.g. group work and case studies:
"The study method comprises a number of team-based learning
activities which means that you will get hands-on experience about
intercultural dynamics and differences. We believe this will add to
your experience and make it challenging, beneficial and enriching"
(ASB, 2006b).
ASB Summer University promised to be of great benefit to the students and to the
institution itself. Credits, international experience, saved time, and new skills, are
some of the most positive outcomes for the students. The ASB seeks to follow its
current path as an international business school of high quality. By providing students
with this opportunity the ASB attempted to create also space for doing an internship.
This circumstance is even more important as the summer break at universities in
Denmark is shorter (two months) compared to neighbouring countries such as
Germany (three months). This makes it generally hard for Danish students to enrol in
internships, which normally have a three-month minimum duration.
Of course, it is the goal of every higher institution to have a low rate of drop-outs and
a high rate of completed educations. However, it is not completely altruistic of the
ASB to help its students to finish their studies and to pass their exams successfully in
due time. Higher institutions like the ASB receive a financial bonus from the state of
Denmark for every student who completes their education. With programs like the
Summer University, the drop-out rates will decline as students are finishing sooner
with their studies.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
14
3 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
In the following chapter, the most relevant theories linked to our empirical study are
presented. These theories and frameworks build the basis of our research and will help
to facilitate understanding.
The chapter starts in section 3.1 with an introduction of the basic concept of Total
Quality Management, which contains fundamental ideas such as customer orientation
and continuous improvement. Following on from this introduction, the most common
TQM concepts will be presented. Customer orientation, which is part of the TQM
concept will then be further discussed and lead into TQM approaches in higher
education. In relation to this, we will explain why higher education can be understood
as a service with customers, just like any other business. Furthermore, some critical
thoughts towards this topic will conclude. This will lead us to student satisfaction in
section 3.2. In 3.3, the social judgement theory and the application of the expectancy
disconfirmation paradigm will give the psychological background and theoretical
foundation into our customer satisfaction measurement. Different customer
satisfaction measurements will be analysed and lead to the central model used in our
research, namely the EPSI model.
3.1 Total Quality Management
Before discussing TQM in education and more specific subgroups, we must start by
defining the term itself. TQM can be seen as a management process, which any
organisation can implement through long-term planning. By using continuous quality
improvement plans, this will gradually lead the organisation towards the fulfilment of
its vision:
"An organizational culture characterized by increased customer
satisfaction through continuous improvement, in which all
employees actively participate." (Dahlgaard, Kristensen, Kanji,
1994)
We will start with an introduction to the basic ideas of TQM and will continue with
the three most important TQM frameworks. With this knowledge in mind it will be
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
15
easier to dig deeper into the concept of TQM in higher education, and also criticise it
in some respects.
3.1.1 Introduction to TQM
The management philosophy of TQM has helped many companies and institutions to
produce quality products and services that meet and exceed customers' demands. For
a better understanding of the elements characterising TQM, the research by
Dahlgaard, Kristensen, and Kanji (1995) provides a general idea.
The five elements of TQM can be summarized as management's commitment
(leadership), focus on the customer and the employee, focus on facts, continuous
improvement, and everybody's participation. These elements cover the basic
characteristics of TQM and are presented as follows.
Management commitment (leadership)
Leadership constitutes the basis of TQM and consequently represents the foundation
of the TQM pyramid. With the implementation of TQM in a company or any other
institution, it is vital for the success that the management outlines quality goals,
quality policies and quality plans in accordance with the four sides of the TQM
pyramid (Dahlgaard et al., 1995). These goals and plans have to be communicated to
employees and other involved groups in a clear and meaningful way in order to be
successful. Often, the concept of quality improvement follows some basic concept
like the Deming cycle, which will be discussed later in this chapter.
Focus on the customer and the employee
First of all, it is essential to identify the different customers and their expectations.
The customer can be both internal and external. This focus may seem very obvious,
but indeed a lot of TQM attempts fail, because the focus only lies on processes, rather
than the people producing and buying them. In order to produce and deliver quality,
employees must know what both internal and external customers expect from them.
Focus on facts
The facts that are being dealt with include two types of measurements, namely
internal measurements and external measurements. Internal measurements consist of
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
16
measurements of key processes and measurements of internal customer satisfaction
(Dahlgaard et al., 1995). Before processes for creating customer satisfaction can be
improved, knowledge of the customers' experiences with products and services has to
be assessed. Customer satisfaction measurements play a key role here and are vital
quality goals for any company or institution.
Continuous improvement
The continuous improvement of all operations and activities builds another key to
TQM. Customer satisfaction can only be obtained by providing a high-quality product
and a continuous improvement of the quality of the product. Along with the pioneers
like Deming, Juran, and Shewhart and their TQM work in Japan, the expression
`Kaizen' defined a new quality of continuous improvement. It describes a way of
productivity improvement and set new standards, practised by companies like Toyota
and their successful lean management approach.
Quality learning has to be seen as a continuous process. Improvement cycles are
encouraged for all the company's activities. The Deming cycle with its Plan-Do-
Check-Act philosophy offers just that (Deming, 1994) and appeared at the same
period as `Kaizen'. `Plan' defines the goal-setting process, ensuring documentation
and setting measurable objectives against it. `Do' executes the process and collects the
information and knowledge that is required. `Check' analyses the information in a
suitable format in order to learn from the results. Eventually, `Act' obtains corrective
action and implements future plans. At the end of each cycle, processes are
standardised or adjustments are executed and the cycle continues.
Everybody's participation
An organisation's success is highly dependent on knowledge, skills, creativity, and
motivation of its people. This `people potential' is best harnessed through shared
values, supported by a culture of trust and empowerment (Porter Tanner, 2004).
As stated earlier, knowledge about the customers' needs and expectations is a
requirement for continuous improvement. For this to be effective, everybody in the
company or institution has to participate fully in quality improvement activities. In
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
17
this process, employees are encouraged to take more responsibility, communicate
more effectively, act creatively, and innovate.
Of course, this introduction to TQM is only dealing with the most general
foundations. Frameworks based on TQM vary widely and differ in a lot of aspects.
Some of the most fundamental and widespread frameworks will be presented in the
following section.
3.1.2 TQM frameworks
A lot of different TQM frameworks exist. Discussing every single one would go
beyond the scope of this chapter. Therefore, the three most important and common
ones will be presented in order to give a general idea about the topic. These
frameworks also provided a basis for further development, which is of great
importance to the underlying work.
The Deming Prize
The earliest foundations of TQM were established by W. Edwards Deming in the
early 1950's in Japan. There, from 1950 onwards he taught top management members
how to improve design and services, product quality, testing, and sales.
Deming made a significant contribution to Japan, becoming renowned for producing
innovative high-quality products. Deming (1986) created 14 points to help
management. These points covered constancy, improvement, leadership, management
etc.
At the same time, the Deming Prize was introduced, based on a highly demanding and
intrusive process and given to outstanding performance in the Japanese industry. The
aim of the Deming Prize is to find out how effectively the applicant is implementing
TQM, by focusing on the quality of its products and services (Oakland, 2003).
Throughout the 1950's and 1960's, Joseph M. Juran and Phil Crosby came up with
similar steps to ensure quality improvement. However, their importance to the
industries has been smaller than the Deming concept.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
18
Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award
The early concepts of Deming in Japan led to a more recent American counterpart. It
is the probably best-known excellence award model; the Malcolm Baldrige National
Quality Award (MBNQA). The introduction of the MBNQA in the late 1980's
attracted a lot of attention among organisations. This attention is not solely ascribed to
the fact that it is presented by the President of the USA; it is also an excellent
framework for TQM and organisational self-assessments (Oakland, 2003).
Figure 2 shows how the framework connects and integrates the different categories.
The criteria in the framework are designed to help organisations, by focusing on two
goals: continually delivering improved value to customers, and improving overall
organisational performance.
Figure 2- Baldrige criteria for performance excellence framework (NIST, 2002)
The framework has three basic elements: organizational profile, system, and
information and analysis. The senior executive leadership constitutes the main driver
and creates the values, goals and systems, and also guides the sustained pursuit of
quality and performance objectives. The delivery of customer satisfaction and market
success leading to excellent business results is the overall goal of the Baldrige criteria.
Customer and market focused
strategy and action plans
2. Strategic
planning
6. Process
management
5. Human
resource focus
3. Customer and
market focus
1. Leadership
7. Business
results
4. Information and analysis
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
19
As an answer to the MBNQA, the EFQM launched the EFQM Excellence model in
conjunction with the European Quality Award in the early 1990's. This same
European Foundation for Quality Management introduced the EPSI model.
EFQM Excellence model
The Excellence model is based on the TQM principles which are: leadership,
customer focus, continuous improvement, focus on facts, and everybody's
participation (Dahlgaard et al., 1998). Furthermore, the EFQM model forms the basis
for the European Quality Awards. This award aims to recognise outstanding
performance of European companies each year. Participating companies have to
verify how they fulfilled the catalogue of the nine given main- and sub-criteria of the
model. Therefore, the companies have to evaluate themselves, mention their strengths
and weaknesses, and estimate their self-assessment. This self-assessment is an
important factor but can also be considered as a guide to the introduction of a TQM
initiative, since the model synthesises the principles, or fundamental concepts of
TQM, in a clear and accessible language (Eskildsen Kanji, 1998).
Figure 3- EFQM Excellence Model (EFQM, 2006)
Figure 3 shows how the EFQM Excellence Model is designed.
Here, the `Enabler'
criteria cover what an organisation does and the `Results' criteria cover what a
company achieves. `Results' are caused by `Enablers' and `Enablers' are improved
using feedback from `Results' through `Innovation and Learning'.
Enablers
Results
Leadership
Key
Performance
Results
Processes
People
Policy
Strategy
Partnerships
Resources
People
Results
Customer
Results
Society
Results
Innovation Learning
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
20
Each box in the EFQM Excellence model implies a certain percentage of weight
relative to the whole. Here, `Customer Results' occupies the main emphasis. This
shows the growing interest in customer feedback and its closeness to the topic of
customer satisfaction measurements.
3.1.3 TQM in higher education
Higher education is an important service industry. It is the quality of education that
shapes the long-term prosperity and well-being of both nations and their people
(Babbar, 1995). Governments all over the world invest billions in order to remain, or
become competitive, within the global markets through a highly educated workforce.
As a result, the notion of providing a high-quality education is becoming a vital
prerequisite.
In the 1970's a number of federal programs to improve education on different levels
were launched in America. Some of the best-known concepts and improvements are
Head-Start, Upward Bound and the Higher Education Act from 1965. Head-Start
seeks to help children up to the age of five by providing comprehensive education,
health, nutrition, and parent involvement services to children and their families with a
low income. Upward Bound programs follow the goal of giving high school students,
who are less likely to attend college, the tools they need to attend and succeed in
American colleges. The Higher Education Act of 1965 supports the position of such
programs and initiatives and follows the strategy "to strengthen the educational
resources of [our] colleges and universities" (United States Congress House, 1965).
These programs reformed the education sector in many ways and similar initiatives in
other countries followed.
Total Quality Management discovered higher education in the 1980's. This was
supported by successful implementation of quality strategies in manufacturing and
service organisations. It soon became a wide spread concept and some authors even
pointed out, that institutions of higher education have only few alternatives but to
adopt TQM in some form. Given the increasing pressure to improve quality and
efficiency simultaneously, more and more universities consequently followed
(Motwani Kumar, 1997; Owlia Aspinwall, 1997).
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
21
By 1996, more than 160 universities in the US were involved in applying quality
improvement principles (Burkhalter, 1996). Surveys indicated that approximately
70% of the American universities were in some way involved in TQM (Kanji, Tambi,
and Wallace, 1999). Attracting the best students and satisfying them with a proper
education throughout their studies guarantees a prospering future for universities in
many ways and is therefore highly desirable. Deming (1994) suggested that
improvement and management of education requires application of the same
principles, which must be used for the improvement of any process, manufacturing or
service. The `customer first' approach was rather new to education. Educators tended
to refuse to accept the fact, that students, among others, are their customers.
Accepting that students are one of the groups of customers to serve is crucial to the
successful implementation of TQM in higher education. To make this point clearer,
the different groups of customers in higher education and students in particular have
to be analysed further.
Students as customers in higher education
While there is a general agreement that businesses, legislators, community members
and alumni are customers of an educational institution, students have been
traditionally viewed as a product of a university, due to their intimate involvement
with the education process for an extended period of time (Gold, 2001). Professors
felt that they -and only they- know what is best for their students, who do not know
their own self-interest and sometimes, "[...] for their own good, have to be given lots
of medicine that they don't want to take" (Bateman Roberts, 1992).
However, regarding students as the primary customers does not mean that the primary
goal has to be meeting all their wishes. It is just the same in the marketplace, where
the customer does not always know what is best for him either. Focus on the customer
does not only mean recognising the student as the primary customer, but also
identifying all different customers and their expectations. Harris (1992) even goes one
step further by identifying the students in the process: "While students are prime
customers of colleges and universities, they are also their raw material, suppliers, co-
processors, and products". It is indeed very important for the students to realise that
they are not only customers, but also suppliers of the educational system (Dahlgaard,
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
22
1995). They cannot leave all the responsibility for their education, and thus their
future, solely to the lecturers. They must take equal responsibility.
Critics on TQM in higher education
Despite the success of TQM in higher education, there are also some negative voices
in literature. In connection to reports on TQM experiences in universities, it is often
mentioned that most work has actually been done at the administrative tasks (Aly
Akpovi, 2001; Clayton 1993; Coate, 1993; Horine, Hau-Ey, Rubach 1993). This
section is less complex than improving on the academic side. There are also numerous
examples of failure in the implementation process. Surveys taken by Aly and Akpovi
(2001) and Vazzana, Elfrink and Bachmann (2000
)
showed that from the universities
implementing TQM in some way, less than 10% implemented it in their academic
programmes or the teaching/learning process. Similar failures of TQM occurred in the
industry. Typical problems in TQM companies are excessive paperwork, time-
consuming meetings, lack of accountability, missing management commitment,
neglecting the human resource aspect, etc.
Product and service quality is relatively easy to standardise in manufacturing
industries. Finding a common ground for product and service quality in higher
education seems to be disproportionately harder and can be another reason for TQM
failure in higher education.
It is estimated that 80% of the Fortune Magazine's largest 500 industrial firms in the
US implemented some form of TQM. However, it has been evidently shown that there
is no direct correlation between TQM implementation and the firm's financial
performance (Graves, 1994). TQM needs a lot of time and commitment, which some
decision makers in industry and education seem to lack. Without a long-term
implementation process no institution can gain continuous improvement.
As mentioned earlier, not accepting students as customers and teaching as being a
service process, is another reason why TQM has not been successfully established in
higher education. Talking of students as a customer is often seen as offensive and not
making any sense by professors. They make it clear that they will have nothing to do
with this scheme and will view any attempt to compel them to participate, as a
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
23
violation of their freedom (Felder Brent, 1999). As `team problem solving' and
`everybody's participation' are imperative to a successful TQM implementation, the
attempt to improve through TQM is often doomed to fail. Related to this, the
principal-agent problem delivers a theoretical basis. One party (the principal) hires
another (the agent) to undertake a particular task, but the former party suffers from an
information asymmetry that introduces a problem in terms of motivating the agent.
This means in case of a TQM implementation, that all members of the institution must
align with the strategy and may also have to receive a benefit or incentive in order to
follow this common strategy.
3.2 Student satisfaction
Student satisfaction refers to the favourability of a student's subjective evaluation of
the various outcomes and experiences associated with education (Oliver DeSarbo,
1989). Evaluating student satisfaction has become a vital necessity for universities.
Thus, most higher education institutions around the world collect some kind of
feedback from their students about their experiences and expectations.
According to Harvey (2001), this may include perceptions about learning and
teaching, the learning support facilities (such as libraries, computing facilities), the
learning environment (lecture rooms, laboratories, social space and university
buildings), support facilities (refectories, student accommodation, health facilities and
student services), and external aspects of being a student (such as finance, transport,
and infrastructure). Focusing on their students' satisfaction enables universities to
adapt better to the students' needs and to develop a system of continuously monitoring
how effectively they meet or exceed students' needs.
But student satisfaction can not only be viewed as an isolated product of what
happens in the classroom. Browne, Kaldenberg, Browne and Brown (1998) found that
global satisfaction with a university was not only driven by a student's assessment of
the quality of the class but also other curriculum-related factors, associated with the
university. Kotler and Fox (1995) suggested in their research that the majority of
students were actually satisfied with their academic programs, but were less satisfied
with support services, such as academic advising and career counselling.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
24
Another key role in connection to this lies in the lecturers. They are in direct contact
with the students and spend a lot of time with them. Thus, they have a lot of
possibilities shaping their satisfaction.
Role of lecturers
Lecturers bear the responsibility of shaping the students' learning and, through them,
also the potential of the human resource as it contributes to competitiveness in today's
globally competitive environment (Babbar, 1995). They are consistently in
relationship with all students. Their students are aware of the class expectations and
know that they will be evaluated with a grade at the end of the term. The lecturers can
play a great role in maximising student satisfaction. A very good lecturer can have
such a positive influence on the whole picture of student satisfaction that other
negative variables might only have little influence in the end.
Respectively, the important role of the lecturers' performance will influence student
satisfaction in two ways in our investigation. Firstly, it is an included item in the
questionnaire and secondly, interviews with all first term lecturers will be
qualitatively analysed in chapter six.
Loyalty and post-lecture intentions
Generally, consumers continue to be loyal if switching service providers is difficult,
or they are satisfied (Banwet Datta, 2002). In this case, we consider the latter as the
desirable. Thus, students will always want to attend a lecture or entire study program
under satisfying circumstances and will therefore maybe recommend it to others.
Very strong empirical links between customer satisfaction and loyalty have been
presented (Patterson, Johnson, Spreng, 1997), making it necessary for universities
not to disregard student satisfaction. Babin and Griffin (1998) also found customer
satisfaction to be highly correlated with consumers' future patronage intentions.
Not only can it be concluded that dissatisfied students might thus not return to their
studies, but also that it might mean a defeat for the university in competition with
other universities. Last but not least, the spreading of a negative word-of-mouth
amongst dissatisfied and potential students could be another possible outcome.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
25
3.3 Customer satisfaction models
Customer orientation and accordingly customer satisfaction play a vital role in any
TQM approach. The term `customer satisfaction' can be generally described as either
an outcome of a construct of various attributes, or as a process (Yi, 1991).
The expectancy disconfirmation paradigm originates from the social judgement theory
from 1935 and builds the theoretical foundation to our satisfaction measurement.
Following, the first customer satisfaction indices will be presented as they built the
basis for later models. Continuing with the ECSI and EPSI model, we provide an
insight to the model applied in our own research, and to the measurement of student
satisfaction, concluding with student loyalty.
Defined as an outcome, customer satisfaction is characterized as an end-state,
resulting from the consumption experience:
"The buyer's cognitive state of being adequately or inadequately
rewarded for the sacrifices undergone" (Howard Seth, 1969).
Considering satisfaction from the process point-of-view emphasises the perceptual,
evaluative, and psychological processes that contribute to satisfaction:
"The consumer's response to the evaluation of the perceived
discrepancy between prior expectations and the actual performance
of the product is as perceived after its consumption" (Tse Wilton,
1988).
In the following section, the expectancy disconfirmation paradigm will be presented
in order to provide the theoretical foundation to the satisfaction measurement, which
will follow, thereafter.
3.3.1 Expectancy disconfirmation paradigm
The paradigm has its origin in social psychology (Sherif, 1935). Hovland and Sherif
(1952) developed from these findings the social judgement theory, which attempts to
explain how attitude change is influenced by judgemental processes. The theory
explains, that after hearing a message, a person judges right away where it ranks
something on an attitude scale. They state that this judgment happens immediately
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
26
after hearing the message. The theory describes how we instantly weigh a new idea
with attitudes, which are already present in our heads.
Oliver (1977, 1980, 1981) addressed the process of disconfirmed expectations and
applied Hovland and Sherif's (1952) social judgement theory, more specifically to
consumer satisfaction.
Oliver (1980) furthermore stated that consumers are also believed to form
expectations of product performance characteristics prior to purchase. If the perceived
performance exceeds the consumer's expectations (positive disconfirmation),
satisfaction will occur. But if the perceived performance falls short of the consumer's
expectations (negative disconfirmation), then the consumer will of course be
dissatisfied. Empirical evidence from the past has proven that the impact of
disconfirmation of expectations is considerable.
Dawes, Singer and Lemons (1972) showed how large the influence of expectations on
satisfaction can be in combination with attitudes, in form of the "contrast effect", also
applied from the social judgement theory. This effect can be described as a "[...]
tendency to exaggerate the discrepancy between one's own attitudes and other's
attitudes". This theory, furthermore predicts that product performance falling below
expectations, will be rated more poorly than it actually is in reality. Performance
above expectations, on the other hand, will be rated very highly. Thus, it can be
concluded, that consumers often tend to magnify ratings in the direction of
disconfirmation. This relationship has even led some researchers to argue that
companies should lower consumer expectations to produce positive disconfirmation
and thus higher satisfaction (Davidow Uttal, 1989; Peters, 1987).
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
27
Figure 4- Satisfaction Function by Anderson and Sullivan (1993)
Figure 4 shows this relation with an asymmetric loss function and also that
satisfaction will be more responsive to disconfirmation than to affirmation. The nature
of word-of-mouth supports this thought. Dissatisfaction always produces far more
negative word-of-mouth activity, than satisfaction produces positive word-of-mouth
activity. Furthermore, the shape of the curve gives companies and other institutions a
clear idea into how great the value is of preventing dissatisfaction for their customers.
In section four, we will present the research of Martensen et al. (1999) and Østergaard
and Kristensen (2005). One interesting finding from their research is the constancy of
expectations at surveying ASB students. It also showed that a state of unfulfilled
expectations led to relatively low student satisfaction. Expectations play an important
role in explaining student satisfaction at the ASB. Thus, the paradigm of expectancy
disconfirmation will also play an important role in our work. We will continue
discussing their research in more detail in section four, and will also include it in
chapter six, with the results from our own research.
3.3.2 Customer satisfaction measurement
The first steps towards a customer orientation were taken with the earlier mentioned
Deming Price in the 1950's. However, Deming's theories were more oriented towards
product and process, rather than the customer itself. Cardozo (1965), and Howard and
Expectations
Failed
(Difference between
Performance and
Expectations)
Satisfied
Dissatisfied
Disconfirmation Confirmation
Affirmation
Expectations
Exceeded
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
28
Seth (1969) were some of the first academics to investigate customer satisfaction.
This investigation was often based on social psychology theories like the social
judgement theory, mentioned before and helped better understand the impact of
satisfaction on future buying behaviour. These findings inspired the discussion of
separate measurability of expectations and experience, especially post-hoc. This
approach of post-hoc measurement is also practised by the SERVQUAL model.
However this model is mainly used for service organisations and retailing quality
(Parasuraman, Zeithaml, Berry, 1988) and plays no further role in our context.
In the 1980's, the TQM approach became more and more apparent and with it the
popularity of customer orientation. In the late 1980's, the Baldrige Award was
launched and America from there on had its own Quality Award. The concept of `zero
defects' and `Kaizen' emerged at the same time in Japan. It soon became a strong and
competitive strategic tool. Strategic-level models like the Balanced Scorecard
appeared in the 1990's. Several models, more essential for our research, are making
use of strategic benchmarking. By comparing performance against standards or
reference points over a period of time, this strategy became very popular, in order to
track customer satisfaction and customer loyalty. The Malcolm Baldrige Quality
Award and the Deming Prize also belong to this group.
Also belonging to this group, the Swedish and the American version of a customer
satisfaction index became the milestones in the development of national customer
satisfaction indices. From these, various other indices developed, such as the
European Customer Satisfaction Index. Because of this fundamental importance, they
will be explained thoroughly in the following part.
Swedish Customer Satisfaction Barometer (SCSB)
The Swedish Customer Satisfaction Barometer (SCSB) can be seen as the first real
national customer satisfaction index (Fornell, 1992). The SCSB model contains two
main antecedents of satisfaction: perceptions of a customer's performance and
experience with a product or service, and customer expectations regarding this
performance, as shown in
Figure 5.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
29
Figure 5- Swedish Customer Satisfaction Barometer (SCSB) model
The basic prediction is that as perceived value increases, satisfaction will also increase
(Johnson, Gustafsson, Andreassen, Lervik, Cha, 2001). Customer expectations are
what the customer predicts and therefore, also positively affect the customer's
satisfaction. Satisfaction is furthermore linked to the customer's complaint behaviour.
This connection and its consequences are related to Hirschman's (1970) exit-voice
theory, which describes the situation of a customer becoming dissatisfied in two ways.
The organisation may either discover its failure over the complaint, voiced by the
customer, or the customer exits and stops buying from that firm. In case of a satisfied
customer, customer complaints decrease and loyalty increases.
Loyalty can be seen as the ultimate dependent variable in the SCSB model because of
its value as a proxy for actual customer retention and subsequent profitability
(Johnson et al., 2001). As satisfaction increases, loyalty increases subsequently.
Finally, there is the relationship between complaint behaviour and customer loyalty.
Here, it is harder to make predictions regarding this relationship. However, when the
relationship is positive, the complaining customer may have been successfully turned
into a loyal customer; with a negative relationship he will be disloyal. This means,
that the complaining customer will be loyal, if the company took good care of his
complaint and that he will exit for good, if not. This relationship provides mostly
diagnostic information about the efficacy of a company's customer service and
complaint handling systems (Fornell, 1992).
Perceived
Performance
(Value)
Customer
Expectation
s
Customer
Satisfaction
(SCSB)
Customer
Complaint
s
Customer
Loyalty
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
30
American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI)
The ACSI model was developed in 1994 by Claes Fornell, who is also responsible for
the architecture of the SCSB model. The model uses a tested, multiequation system to
construct indices for customer expectations, perceived quality, perceived value,
customer satisfaction (ACSI), customer complaints, and customer loyalty (Johnson,
1998).
The ACSI model relationships can be seen in Figure 6. The main difference between
the ACSI model and the SCSB model is the addition of a perceived quality
component. Fornell,
Johnson, Anderson, Cha and Bryant (1996) argued that the
inclusion of both perceived quality and perceived value into the ACSI model provides
important diagnostic information.
Figure 6- American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) model
Customer Satisfaction (ACSI) has three antecedents in the ACSI model, namely
perceived quality, customer expectations, and perceived value. The customers'
expectations have a direct, positive effect on satisfaction and also capture the
institution's quality image. By asking respondents think back in time and remember
the level of quality they expected, imperfect post hoc measures are obtained. This
cause and effect relationship between the antecedents and consequences, practised in
the same way in the SCSB model, can be seen as inferior as the respondents answer
Customer
Expectation
s
Perceived
Quality
Perceived
Value
Customer
Satisfaction
(ACSI)
Complaint
Behavior
Customer
Loyalty
Ende der Leseprobe aus 184 Seiten
- nach oben
Details
- Arbeit zitieren
- , 2006, ASB Summer University 2006: Assessment of student satisfaction with a threefold approach, Hamburg, Bedey Media GmbH, https://www.diplom.de/document/225302
Ähnliche Arbeiten
Deutschlands größter Sharing Community
Jetzt Zusammenfassungen, Skripte und Klausuren kostenlos downloaden!
Uniturm.de
Ihre Vorteile als Autor
Geld verdienen Für jedes verkaufte Exemplar erhalten Sie Autorenhonorar - bis zu 40%.Kostenlose Buchveröffentlichung
Als eBook-Studie im Original und / oder auf Wunsch zusätzlich als hochwertiges Fachbuch in unserem renommierten Buchverlag.
Renommee als Fachbuchautor
Präsentieren Sie sich als Fachfrau oder Fachmann in Ihrem Fachgebiet und machen Sie sich bekannt.
Persönliche Betreuung
Unser Lektorat wird Sie persönlich betreuen und ist auch telefonisch unter 040-655992-14 erreichbar.
Weltweit im Buchhandel
Ihr Buch ist weltweit im Buchhandel und Online-Buchhandel wie z.B. amazon erhältlich.
Jetzt Autor werden!
Kommentare