ASB Summer University 2006: Assessment of student satisfaction with a threefold approach

Mühlich, Oliver

Blick ins Buch

ASB Summer University 2006: Assessment of student satisfaction with a threefold approach

Masterarbeit, 2006, 184 Seiten

BWL - Customer-Relationship-Management, CRM

Leseprobe

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.

http://www.diplom.de, Hamburg 2007

Printed in Germany

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

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

INTRODUCTION ...1

1.1

Background... 2

1.2

Objectives... 2

1.3

Limitations ... 3

1.4

Overview ... 4

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

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

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

4.3

Miscellaneous research on student satisfaction... 46

4.4

Summary... 49

RESEARCH QUESTIONS...50

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

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

IGURE

TRUCTURE OF THE DISSERTATION

... 5

IGURE

ALDRIGE CRITERIA FOR PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE FRAMEWORK

(NIST,

2002) ... 18

IGURE

EFQM

XCELLENCE

ODEL

(EFQM,

2006) ... 19

IGURE

ATISFACTION

UNCTION BY

NDERSON AND

ULLIVAN

(1993)... 27

IGURE

WEDISH

USTOMER

ATISFACTION

AROMETER

(SCSB)

MODEL

... 29

IGURE

MERICAN

USTOMER

ATISFACTION

NDEX

(ACSI)

MODEL

... 30

IGURE

NITIAL

ECSI

MODEL

(ECSI,

1998)... 32

IGURE

EPSI

MODEL

ASTER

ODEL

TRUCTURE

(EPSI,

2005) ... 33

IGURE

VERALL

ECSI

RESULTS FROM

ARTENSEN ET AL

(1999) ... 38

IGURE

10-

UMAN QUALITY MAP

ARTENSEN ET AL

1999)... 40

IGURE

11-

HUMAN QUALITY MAP

ARTENSEN ET AL

1999) ... 41

IGURE

12-

VERALL

EPSI

RESULTS FROM

STERGAARD AND

RISTENSEN

(2005)... 44

IGURE

13-

EAN EXPECTATION RATINGS ON DIMENSION

MAGE

' ... 65

IGURE

14-

EAN RATINGS ON THE DIMENSION

XPECTED QUALITY

' ... 66

IGURE

15-

TUDENTS

REASONS FOR PARTICIPATING AT THE

UMMER

NIVERSITY

... 68

IGURE

16-

EAN EXPERIENCE RATINGS ON DIMENSION

ERCEIVED

ALUE

AND

ATISFACTION

' ... 69

IGURE

17-

EAN EXPERIENCE RATINGS ON DIMENSION

OYALTY

' ... 71

IGURE

18-

ATH DIAGRAM OF THE

EPSI

MODEL WITH DIRECT EFFECTS AND SIGNIFICANT

R² ... 78

IGURE

19-

EAN EXPECTATIONS AND EXPERIENCE RATINGS ON QUALITY DIMENSION

... 80

IGURE

20-

ATH DIAGRAM WITH SIGNIFICANT AND INSIGNIFICANT EFFECTS

... 94

IGURE

21-

MPORTANCE

ERFORMANCE

AP ON

IMENSION

ATISFACTION

' ... 111

IGURE

22-

MPORTANCE

ERFORMANCE

AP ON DIMENSION

OYALTY

' ... 113

List of Tables

ABLE

ECTURES AND LECTURERS AT THE

UMMER

NIVERSITY

... 11

ABLE

VERALL EFFECTS ON SATISFACTION AND LOYALTY IN

ARTENSEN ET AL

(1999) ... 39

ABLE

TEMS TO DETERMINE LATENT VARIABLES AND THEIR UNSTANDARDISED OUTER WEIGHTS

... 43

ABLE

OMPARISON OF OVERALL EFFECTS

2005

AND

1999 ... 45

ABLE

XPECTED

UALITY

EMOGRAPHICS

... 57

ABLE

XPERIENCED

UALITY

EMOGRAPHICS

... 57

ABLE

EMOGRAPHICS FOR

UALITY

OMPARISON

... 58

ABLE

ARIABLES AND QUESTIONS FOR

UMMER

NIVERSITY

2006 ... 61

ABLE

OW DID YOU HEAR ABOUT

UMMER

NIVERSITY

... 68

ABLE

10-

XPERIENCED OVERALL BENEFIT

... 70

ABLE

11-

UTER

OADINGS FOR THE LATENT VARIABLES OF THE

EPSI

ODEL

... 74

ABLE

12-

ELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF

EPSI

MODEL

... 75

ABLE

13-

ATH COEFFICIENTS AND DIRECT EFFECTS OF

EPSI

ODEL

... 77

ABLE

14-

ESTS OF WITHIN

SUBJECTS EFFECTS

XPECTED VS

XPERIENCED

UALITY

... 79

ABLE

15-

TANDARD

EVIATIONS OF THE ITEMS

-E

XPECTED VS

XPERIENCED QUALITY

... 80

ABLE

16-

UALITY OF THE ACADEMIC LEVEL

-E

XPECTED VS

XPERIENCED QUALITY

... 81

ABLE

17-

UALITY OF THE CLASS CONTENT

XPECTED VS

XPERIENCED QUALITY

... 83

ABLE

18-

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

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 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

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:

EPSI model of student satisfaction

Comparison of expectations and experience

Interviews with the relevant lecturers

INTRODUCTION

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

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

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.

Theoretical

Framework

Previous

Research

Summer

University

Evaluation

Research

Question

Conclusions

STRATEGIC CONTEXT

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

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

In order to cope with new challenges and opportunities, ASB has set the focus on

eight goals:

Increasing market focus

Increasing business focus

Focus on integrated internationalisation

Clearer profiling of research, education and dialogue

Focus on high quality and efficiency in all activities

Closer collaboration with other institutions

Increasing focus on impact on employment rates and business sector

developments

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

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

(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

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

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

of July until 4

of August and the second term from 7

August until 25

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Customer

Satisfaction

(SCSB)

Customer

Complaint

Customer

Loyalty

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

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

Perceived

Quality

Perceived

Value

Customer

Satisfaction

(ACSI)

Complaint

Behavior

Customer

Loyalty

Ende der Leseprobe aus 184 Seiten - nach oben

Details

Titel

ASB Summer University 2006: Assessment of student satisfaction with a threefold approach

Autor

Oliver Mühlich (Autor:in)

Erscheinungsjahr

2006

Seiten

184

Katalognummer

V225302

ISBN (eBook)

9783956362415

ISBN (Buch)

9783836603546

Dateigröße

1210 KB

Sprache

Englisch

Schlagworte

hochschule kundenzufriedenheit ecsi qualitätsmanagement hochschulmarketing

Produktsicherheit

Diplom.de

Arbeit zitieren

Oliver Mühlich (Autor:in)

, 2006, ASB Summer University 2006: Assessment of student satisfaction with a threefold approach, Hamburg, Bedey Media GmbH, https://www.diplom.de/document/225302

Kommentare

Noch keine Kommentare.

Melden Sie sich an, um einen Kommentar zu schreiben

ASB Summer University 2006: Assessment of student satisfaction with a threefold approach

Kategorie

Institution / Hochschule

Note

Leseprobe

Details

Kommentare

Ihre Vorteile als Autor