Application of Gap Model in the Researches of Hotel Services Quality

Ivana Blešić*

Anđelja Ivkov-Džigurski* Aleksandra Dragin* Ljubica Ivanović*

Milana Pantelić*

Received: ???? 2010 | Accepted: ???? 2010

Abstract

his work presents the research results of the hoel services qualiy by applying Gap model and SERV-QUAL quesionnaire. he research was conduced in ive health spa ceners in the West Morava river valley region during August and Sepember 2008. he reach is aimed at esing of Gap model, i.e. ideniicaion of excepions when the hoel services qualiy in the observed sample is concerned.

Key words: Gap model, SERVQUAL, hoel services qualiy

Introduction

he concept of the qualiy is topic which holds the cenral place in the services markeing. However, the atempt to deine qualiy in scieniic circles causes a number of dilemmas. he main reason for that lies in the fact that qualiy does not represent a purely “clear” scieniic concept. Although the term “qualiy” is widely used in everyday speech, it is not oten clear what that qualiy actually stands for, i.e. deining a qualiy can be a rather subjecive con-cept. he base for a scieniic deiniion is connected with the approaches to the concept of qualiy rom two main standpoints - of a producer – qualiy represents harmonizaion with procedural rules in the process of producion and service ofer, and of a costumer - qualiy stands for the enire characterisics of products and services which have the capabiliy of sat-isfying the needs of costumers. Everything menioned only emphasizes the fact that qualiy should be observed as a market category (Kosar, Rašeta, 2005).

Hotel which chose the applicaion of qualiy concept as a key factor of success should expe-rience the growth in the saisfacion of costumers (guests), i.e. successfully posiion on the

TURIZAM

Volume 15, Issue 1 40-52 (2011)

Application of Gap Model in the

Researches of Hotel Services Quality

* Department of Geography, Tourism and Hotel Management, Faculty of Science, University of Novi Sad, Trg Dositeja Obradovića 3, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia;

TURIZAM | Volume 15, Issue 1, 40-52 (2011) 41 market ad thus gain larger proit. However, rying to reach the high level of the qualiy of hotel services, hotel managers very oten meet with problems of an adequate measuring of the ser-vice qualiy. Firstly, hotel managers do not know what their guests consider as important when evaluaing the qualiy of hotel products and very oten do not have reliable methods for deter-mining the expectaions and percepion of hotel guests when the service qualiy is concerned. he problem of measuring the qualiy appeared already at the beginning of the development of a scieniic thought about the qualiy itself. As a soluion to this problem, many authors suggest diferent methods for measurement of service qualiy and customer saisfacion.

Literature, that covers the problems of the concept of service qualiy, describes a number of models which emphasize various dimensions of the qualiy. Niin et al. (2005) describe in their work a detailed descripion and evaluaion of the qualiies which appeared in the peri-od between 1984 and 2003. 19 diferent mperi-odels of the qualiy are analyzed based on the fol-lowing elements:

• Ideniicaion of factors which inluence the service qualiy • Adaptabiliy to diferent forms and ypes of services

• Flexibiliy concerning permanent changes in the percepion of costumers • Suggesions for the improvement of the service qualiy

• Enabling the development of methods for measuring the customer saisfacion • Diagnosing the needs for raining and educaion of the employees

• Flexibiliy concerning modiicaions depending on the changes in the surrounding condiions

• Emphasis paced upon the improvement of qualiy aimed at all levels of organisaion (verically up and verically down)

• Ideniicaion of future needs (inrasructure, resources) and assistance to the man-agement in planning process

• Adaptabiliy to a growing use of informaion technology in the hospitaliy sector

‒ Possibiliy to be used as a tool for benchmarking.

Authors analysed in details the model of qualiy and compared the aitudes and opin-ions of a number of experts in this ield. Although the research results did not cause one uni-versally accepted model to disinguish itself, the GAP model of qualiy and qualiy dimen-sion presented in SERVQUAL model received the greatest support and the best criics. he main advantage of the model is the fact that it actually enables the management to idenify the gaps in service qualiy on various levels, as well as in its external orientaion, i.e. orien-taion directed towards the costumer.

Gap model

Since then, SERVQUAL model became the model with the most widespread applicaion in the process of the measurement of service qualiy. However, the model as well meets crii-cism when observed form conceptual and methodological aspect (Butle, 1996; Asubonteng et al., 1996). Despite this criicism, the model served as a base for a number of researches of the qualiy on the service aciviies.

he basic characterisic of the Gap model is that it actually puts an accent upon the over-sights in the qualiy between the guest and service provider and are directly connected with the aitudes towards the percepion and expectaions. his model demonsrates the process of the development of the service qualiy (Ljubojević, 2004).

he model was presented for the irst ime in 1985, when the service qualiy was deined as a diference between the way how a costumer experienced a service (percepion) and expectaions which a costumer created before using the service. Oversights, i.e. variaions in the process of service ofer according to this model are s follows (Parasuraman et al., 1985):

• Gap 1 – Variaion between actual expectaions of customers and the way how the management understands their expectaions (management does not understand what customers expect rom a service).

• Gap 2 – Represents variaion between percepions of the management about the

expectaions of customers and speciicaions of service qualiy, i.e. management of a company realized the actual customers’ expectaions but has not developed a system of measures which will enable the delivery of a desired qualiy.

• Gap 3 – Represent diference between speciicaion of service qualiy and aributes

of the process of service producion and delivery, i.e. diference between what man-agers have deined as standard of service qualiy and the way how a service was actu-ally delivered.

• Gap 4 – Represents variaion between delivered service and what customer was

actu-ally told about the service itself.

• Gap 5 – Represents diference between customers’ expectaions regarding the service and their percepion about the speciic service. he last gap is the result of all the pre-vious gaps.

According to the described model (Figure 1), the service qualiy is the funcion of expec-taions and percepion and can be presented as (Niin et al., 2005):

SQ (service qualiy) – overall service qualiy,

k – number of aributes,

Pij (percepion) – percepion of performances of simulus i under the inluence of aribute j,

Eij (expectaion) – expected service qualiy for aribute j compared to standards for simulus i.

Gap model was later improved by creaion of SERVQUAL scale for measurement of expectaions and percepion of service qualiy that Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berrydevel-oped through a number of researched in the period between 1985 and 1994 (Parasuraman et al., 1985, 1988, 1991, 1991a, 1994). Model consists of ive dimensions of qualiy:

• Percepibiliy – presence of physical elements;

• Reliabiliy – capabiliy of a promised service to be delivered in a speciic manner; SQ =

∑

k

TURIZAM | Volume 15, Issue 1, 40-52 (2011) 43 • Responsibiliy – carefulness, willingness to help and ofer a fast service;

• Safey – knowledge and politeness of the employees and their capabiliy to be rusted at; • Empathy – ofer of a personalised service, observing a customer as an individual.

he menioned categories serve as a base for the creaion of SERVQUAL quesionnaire that consists of 22 quesions. Interviewees are asked one series of 22 quesions before actually using the service, which actually measures expectaions while later, ater the actual usage of the ser-vice, they are asked the second serial of 22 quesions, which measures experience, i.e. percep-ion of customers about the delivered service. When measuring perceppercep-ion, most widely used

Likert scale with seven levels, where on the one end of the scale there is an answer such as „I

srongly disagree “ (1), while on the other end there is „I totally agree“ (7). Data rom all ques-ionnaires are examined and analysed by using adequate staisical techniques ater which the quaniied results which deine the level of service qualiy are gained. his result, as well as

word of mouth personal needs

expected service

perceived service

services delivery

customer-driven service designs and standards

external communications

to customers

company perceptions of customer expectations

previous experience

CUSTOMER

COMP

C omer GAP(5)

GAP 3

GAP 2 GAP 1

GAP 4

Figure 1 Gap model of service quality

parial results by categories and groups of qualiy components, can usefully be used for def-iniion of suitable correcive acions which would improve the eiciency of service company.

Apart rom SERVQUAL quesionnaire which is used for researches in the expectaions and percepion of qualiy by the guests, Zeithaml, Parasuraman and Berry developed a sructured and semi sructured quesionnaire intended to be used for researches in the over-sights when ofer of service qualiy is concerned (Zeithaml et al., 1990).

Reasons for the development of oversights in the ofer of service quality

Each of the speciic gaps inluences the enire percepion of service qualiy and customer sat-isfacion. he text which follows will present the basic reasons which in service companies (hotels) cause the variaions and damaging of service qualiy and service process.

Gap 1 represents the general incompaibiliy between company management and

cus-tomers. he basic reason of its appearance is not understanding the real customers’ expecta-ions. he irst gap is actually the result of wrongly interpreted informaion concerning cus-tomers’ expectaions, non-existence of demand analysis and inadequate percepion of the relaionship between the company and its customers. he important reason for the emer-gence of this Gap is the existence of too many levels of organisaion which resrain and alter certain levels of informaion about the expectaions and demands of (Kotler, Keller, 2006; Ljubojević, 2004). Moreover, not understanding the customers’ expectaions can be as well the result of a bad management of customers’ complaints (Veljković, 2009).

When problems concerning the menioned variaions are overcome, i.e. when managers understood the market demands, problems may arise in the very process of realisaion. he company knows the wishes of its customers but can not saisfy them. For example, manage-ment can adequately evaluate the ime that guests are willing to spend when checking in at the recepion of a hotel, but do not have enough staf to fulil those expectaions. Reasons that cause Gap 2, i.e variaion between percepions of the management about the

expecta-ions of customers and speciicaexpecta-ions of service qualiy are the following:

Badly designed services:

• Unclear, undeined service design; • Badly designed service design;

• Unsystemaically process of new service development.

Lack of sandards deined rom the aspect of customers: • Standards are not deined respecing customers’ demands;

• here is no procedural management focusing upon customers’ demands;

• Lack of formalised processes needed for installaion of adequate goals of service qualiy.

Inadequae service ambience and physical elements:

• Failure to develop percepible values in accordance with customers’ expectaions; • Service ambience is not created to suit the needs of customers and employees; • Inadequacy when innovaing the ambience and undertaking necessary reparaions.

TURIZAM l u m 5, s s u ,0-52 2011) 45

In case when managers have deined the standards of service qualiy in accordance with customers’ demands, the oversight in the ofer of a qualiy service can appear in the process of service ofer. he reasons for the emergence of Gap 3 are the following:

Oversights in the human resources management: • Bad reputaion;

• Unclear roles and conlict of interests; • Poor system of evaluaion and praising; • Lack of team work, inadequate jurisdicion.

Poor cooperaion of customers:

• Customers do not understand or do not know what their role and responsibiliy in the service process are;

• Customers make a negaive inluence among themselves.

Problems with servicing agents:

• Conlicts concerning aims and performances; • Problems with the conrol of qualiy and consistency; • Conlicts concerning jurisdicion and conrols.

Badly harmonised ofer and demand:

• Failure to soten the demanding exremes; • Poor choice of customers/segments;

• Excessive reliance upon the price when balancing the demand.

Managers are able to deine speciicaions of services based upon the customers’ demands. However, what can happen is that the employees are not able to deliver the service in an ade-quate way. For example, management of a restaurant orders that a speciic dish needs to be delivered within 20 minutes while the waiter delivers the same dish ater the period demanded. Possible reasons for that are: conlicts between the staf, poor intersectoral coop-eraion between the kitchen and the restaurant, conlict with management and customers, unskilled staf, inadequate system of moivaion, old-fashioned kitchen equipment, too may crowd in the restaurant etc.

A promise that a service company gives about the service qualiy using diferent forms of market communicaions are crucial for the creaion of customers’ expectaions. he main reasons for not fulil these promises, which leads to the emergence of Gap 4, are the

follow-ing:

Lack of inegraed service markeing communicaions:

• Custom that each external communicaion is observed independently; • Interacive markeing is not part of communicaion plan;

• Lack of a developed programme of internal markeing.

Ineicient management of customers’ expecaions:

• Lack of the management of customers’ expectaions through all forms of communi-caion;

Unreasonable promises:

• Unreasonable promises in markeing aciviies, personal sale etc.

Inadequae horizonal communicaion:

• Poor communicaion between people responsible for promoional campaign and peo-ple responsible for operaional aciviies;

• Insuicient communicaion between people responsible for retail and people respon-sible for operaional aciviies;

• Diferences in poliics and procedures between certain branches of the same compa-ny.

Unreasonable promises and inadequate management of customers’ expectaions lead to the appearance of too demanding expectaions. he result is ofering services below the expected level and negaive percepion of the qualiy by customers (Veljković, 2009; Ljubojević, 2004; Ćosić, 2007)

If any of the menioned gaps or the combinaion of the same occurs, then the last Gap 5 or

the “gap of customers” will inevitably occur. It appears as the diference between the expec-taions of customers concerning the services and their percepion of the service received in the company itself.

Results of quality research

Hotel managers and guests in health spa cenres in West Morava river valley region (Vrnjačka Banja, Mataruška Banja, Bogutovačka Banja, Ovčar Banja and Banja Gornja Trepča) were interviewed by using sructured and semi sructured SERVQUAL quesionnaire (Zeithaml et al., 1990). he main objecive of the research is to determine the present condiion in the hotel service of spa cenres in the researched area and tesing of Gap model on the observed sample. 618 guests and 10 managers (one manager rom each hotel that was included in the research) were interviewed (Table 1).

Analysis of a structured SERVQUAL questionnaire

Sructured quesionnaire consists of ive items, i.e. determinants of qualiy which relect the experience of hotel service (Table 2). Quesionnaire was conducted with an aim to idenify dimensions of services that hotel managers and guests consider the most important ones and to determine how they evaluate the characterisics of hotel product.

he results of the quesionnaire presented in Table 3 suggest that hotel managers consid-er the following detconsid-erminants as the most signiicant: percepibiliy, reliabiliy and responsibili-y. On the other hand, guests claim that safey is deinitely the most crucial determinant,

TURIZAM | Volume 15, Issue 1, 40-52 (2011) 47 Table 1 Proile of managers interviewed

Sociodemographic characteristics Absolute frequencies Percent (%) Gender

male 7 70

female 3 30

total 10 100

Work place

hotel manager 5 50

marketing and retail manager 1 10

assistant to catering manager 1 10

reception manger 3 30

total 10 100

Education

University education 3 30

College education 4 40

Secondary school 3 30

total 10 100

Source: Blešić, I. (2010). Quality of hotel servicies as a factor of market position in spas of the West Morava Region. PhD dissertation, Monographic documentation, Author’s reprint.

Table 2 Structured SERVQUAL questionnaire for managers

Characteristics of hotel service experience Points

1. The appearance of hotel object, equipment, staf and propaganda material 2. Ability of a hotel to reliably and precisely ofer the promised service 3. Willingness of a hotel to help a guest and ofer a prompt service 4. Knowledge and politness of hotel staf and their ability to be show trust 5. Individual attention that hotel has for its guests

TOTAL 100

Source: Zeithaml, V.A., Parasuraman, A., Berry, L.L. (1990). Delivering Quality Service: Balancing Customer Perceptions and Expectations, The Free Press, New York.

The interviewees had to distribute 100 points into the following items, so that the most signiicant characteristics receive the greatest number of points.

Table 3 The importance of determinants of quality for hotel guests and managers Characteristics of hotel service experience

(determinants of quality) Points

Rank (managers)

Rank (guests)

1. The appearance of hotel object, equipment, staf and

propaganda material (perceptibility). 24,0 1 4

2. Ability of a hotel to reliably and precisely ofer the promised

service (reliability). 20,5 2 3

3. Willingness of a hotel to help a guest and ofer a prompt

service (responsibility). 20,0 3 2

4. Knowledge and politness of hotel staf and their ability to be

show trust (safety). 19,0 4 1

5. Individual attention that hotel has for its guests (empathy). 15,5 5 5

Analysis of a semi structuredERVQUAL questionnaire

By analysing the answers managers gave we will determine what kind of a gap exists in a paricular hotel: gap 1 („gap of knowledge“), gap 2 („gap of standard“), gap 3 („gap of service ofer and gap 4 („communicaion gap“).

Gap 1 is the result of not understanding the real customers’ expectaions (company man-agement does not understand what customers expect rom the service). In order to prove or confute the existence of this gap in the observed sample, managers were asked the follow-ing quesions:

• Do you use methods for determining the saisfacion of clients? If yes, which? • Have you so far based the decisions concerning the improvement of service qualiy

upon guests’ suggesions?

• What is the majoriy of management sructure in hotel? Do you consider that kind of sructure to e eicient? Are there too many managers according to your opinion? • What syle of management do you use? Does that syle have good results?

• Are decisions in your hotel made on the highest levels of organisaion? Do employees have a role in that?

All managers answered posiively when asked if they use methods for determining the saisfacion of their clients. hree managers, out of 10, said that they mostly oten interview their guests; two managers said that they use the method of personal contact with a guest while ive managers said that they learn about guests’ opinions about service qualiy rom Guestbook (Figure 2).

All managers said that they base decisions regarding improvement of service qualiy upon feedback informaion they receive rom hotel guests.

In the observed sample of 10 hotels, according to the answers provided by interviewees, management levels are not adequately developed – seven out of ten managers said that the

Questionnaire

Personal contact with a guest

Guestbook

30%

20% 50%

Inefficient management structure (management levels are not adequately developed)

Efficient management structure

30%

70%

Employees take part in decision making

Employees have a certain role in decision making

Employees have have no influence at all on the decision making

40% 40%

20%

Figure 2 Methods used for determining guest satisfaction

Figure 3 Management structure in hotels

TURIZA 5I 0-52011) 49

hotel is run by a small number of people and that kind of management sructure is not ei-cient enough (Figure 3).

According to the managers of hotels, the democraic syle is present in half of hoels and they consider it to be rather eicient. Another half of interviewed managers said that auto-craic syle of management is present in the hotel and they think that it has a bad inluence

on hotel business.

Decisions are made on the highest levels of organisaion in all hotels. Four interviewees said that employees „take part in decision making“, two said that „employees have a certain role in decision making “ while four said that „employees have no inluence at all on the deci-sion making“ (Figure 4).

When analysing quesions form the irst part of the interview, it can be concluded that Gap 1 exists in the observed sample. Occasional interviewing of guests is conducted in a small number of hotels. Other hotels do not have reliable methods for systemaic following of guests’ saisfacion which badly relects upon the recogniion of their expectaions and con-sequently upon the process of customers’ saisfacion. Although all managers said that they take into consideraion guests’ suggesions, data gathered in this way are not reliable.

In order to determine if Gap 2 or “Gap of standard” exists in a hotel, managers were asked the following quesions:

• What do you consider your greatest obstacle when ofering qualiy services? Why? • How much atenion do you pay to the improvement of the qualiy of hotel products

and services?

• Are tasks in hotel sectors standardised? Can you provide several examples?

Gap 2 is the result of variaion between the way how a company understands custom-ers’ expectaions and the way how it answers those wishes through creaing services and their qualiy standards. When analysing answers managers gave, the existence of this gap was also conirmed. When ofering qualiy services, the greaest obsacle according to them are the following: insuicient inancial means for invesing, spaial limiaion, and inadequaely rained and educaed hoel saf. Management sructure does not also have necessary professional

knowl-edge. Moreover, their educaional sructure is not on a saisfying level.

According to the majoriy of interviewed managers, hotel management pays a lot of aten-ion to the improvement of the qualiy of hotel product. However, there sill exists inadequae and insuicient sandardisaion of asks in majoriy of hoels.

Apart for previous two, Gap 3 also exists in the observed sample. It is the result of the variaion between how managers deined a service (qualiy, standards, and way of delivery) and how service was actually delivered to customer. he existence of this gap is proved ater the analysis of the answers to the following quesions:

• What forms of professional raining of staf do you apply? • Do you talk to your employees about success in work?

• Do you think that service qualiy is endangered with role conlicts? How do you deal with such problems?

• What qualiies do you seek when selecing new employees? What qualiies do you consider to be the mot important?

• Describe the procedure of an interview with a possible candidate.

• To what extent are employees allowed to make their own decisions when saisfacion of guests’ demands is concerned?

Half of the hotels in the observed sample pracice neither one form of professional rain-ing while the employees in the other half of the hotels atend computer courses, English lan-guage courses and diferent ypes of seminars (Figure 5).

All managers said that they regularly alk to their employees about the results of business acivi-ies in the hoel.

Conlict of roles doe not exist in the observed hoels. If these kinds of problems occur, they are solved with alks, ransfer to another work posiion or salary reducion.

According to the opinion of interviewed managers, the most imporant characerisics when choosing employees for the execuive posiions are: professionalism, polieness, lexibiliy, physical appearance and age. Managers irstly meet with candidate’s curriculum vitae and references while they bring their inal decision ater the interview they have with a candidate.

Half of the managers said that employees are allowed to make their own decisions when saisfying guests’ demands but that those decision must not exceed their responsibiliies and possibiliies, while the answer of the other half of the interviewed managers was that employees must consult their supervisors before making those kinds of decisions (Figure 6). Hotels do not have a determined criterion for awarding employees. Despite the fact that professional, experienced and moivated staf has the greatest conribuion to successful business aciviies of one hotel, most of the hoels in the observed sample do not apply adequae measures for the moivaion of their employees.

he fourth gap appears as the result of the diference between delivered service and what was promised to a guest by using diferent forms of communicaion. To examine the exist-ence of this gap, managers were asked the following quesion:

c Do you think that intersectoral cooperaion is on adequate level?

Six out of ten interviewees said that the communicaion between sectors is usually not on an adequate level. Other managers answered posiively to this quesion (Figure 7). hese results, as well as the existence of the previous gaps, inevitably suggest that Gap 4 is also pre-sent in the majoriy of hotels.

Figure 5 Professional training of the employees

Figure 6 The role of employees in decision making regarding satisfaction of guests’ demands

Figure 7 Level of intersectoral cooperation in hotels Professional training of the

employees is not applied

English language and computer courses, attendance in seminars

50% 50%

Employees are allowed to make their own decisions according to their responsibilities

Employees can not make their own decisions

50% 50%

Intersctoral cooperation is satisfying

Intersctoral cooperation is not satisfying

TURZA ! "um#$5%& &u#$%'0-5()2011) 51

C*nclusion

he presented Gap model of service qualiy represents the right way of idenifying incon-sistency between percepion a company has and percepion customers have when the quali-y of service process is concerned. his model can help management idenifquali-y reasons of poor service qualiy in its company and take suitable measures for the improvement of the same.

More oten quesioning of hotel guests by applying various models (SERVQUAL model and other similar models) would cause irst gap to cease. Development of srong relaions with customers, coninuous following of changes in the demands of customers and develop-ment of diferent revival srategies when mistakes in the delivery of services occur are the best way how to overcome problems which are caused by the existence of Gap 1. Studies show that customers whose complaints were successfully dealt with become more loyal to a specif-ic company than those who have never complained so far.

In order to overcome the second gap, the basic task of the management in this case is designing of standards and speciicaions of services that are in accordance with ideniied customers’ demands, including providing physical evidences of services though a well devel-oped service ambience.

For cessaion or minimisaion of Gap 3, it is necessary to support determined standards and speciicaions of services with suitable resources (people, technology) so that their appli-caion would be consistent and complete. Taking into consideraion the importance of func-ional dimension of service qualiy, management of a hotel should place accent upon recruit-ing, educaion, rainrecruit-ing, and moivaion of the employees. Moreover, it is very important to inroduce adequate systems of the conrol and awarding of the employees. Considering the seasonal luctuaion of demand in tourism and hotel indusry, an important moment for overcoming Gap 3 is synchronisaion of ofer and demand through raining of employees to deal with the work in the peak of the season, price changes, propaganda and promoion of alternaive services in of season period.

Realisic promises given to buyers through suitable channels of external communica-ion represent basic precondicommunica-ion for cessacommunica-ion of the fourth or “communicacommunica-ion” gap. When ofering ruthful informaion concerning the service and process of its delivery, it is of uter importance to manage internal markeing communicaions through establishing success-ful horizontal and verical communicaion within the organisaion. Too demanding expec-taions caused by promises given in superlaive forms can cause to the disappointment of guests even when the qualiy of the ofered service is on a high level.

Considering the fact that in the phase of qualiy research, only hotel managers were inter-viewed (one manager rom each object) it is suggested that other managers, i.e. all employees are interviewed in further researches. his would provide a thorough insight into aitudes of both external (guests) and internal clients (employees). Such a research would ind its place in the pracice and would enable companies race their way towards well integrated organi-saional system which is capable of accomplishing long-term plans.

+cknowledgement

his work is part of the project “Elaboraion of programmes for revialisaion of borderline regions in Banat” realised by the Faculy of Natural Sciences, Novi Sad (Department of Geography, Tourism and Hoel Management) and the Execuive Council of the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina (Provincial Secreariat for Science and Technological Development) (114-451-01084).

References

Asubonteng, P., McCleary, K.J. and Swan, J.E. (1996). SERVQUAL revisited: a criical review of service qualiy. he Journal of Services Markeing 10 (6), 62-81.

Blešić, I. (2010). Qualiy of hotel servicies as a factor of market posiion in spas of the West Morava Region. PhD dissertaion, Monographic documentaion, Author’s reprint. Butle, F. (1996). SERVQUAL: review, criique, research agenda. European Journal of

Market-ing 30 (1), 8-32.

Ćosić, M. (2007). Qualiy management of tourist services, College of Tourism, Belgrade. Kosar, LJ. and Rašeta, S. (2005). Challenges to qualiy - Qualiy management in hospitaliy

indusry, College of Hotel Management, Belgrade.

Kotler, Ph. and Keller, L.K. (2006). Markeing management, Data status, Beograd. Ljubojević, Č. (2004). Markeing of services, Faculy of Service Business, Novi Sad. Niin, S., Deshmukh, S.G. and Perm, V. (2005). Service qualiy models: a review.

Inerna-ional Journal of Qualiy and Reliabiliy Management 22 (9), 913-949.

Parasuraman, A., Berry, L.L. and Zeithaml, V.A. (1991). Perceived service qualiy as a cus-tomer-based performance measure: an empirical examinaion of organizaional barriers using an extendend service qualiy model. Human Resource Management 30 (3), 335-364. Parasuraman, A., Berry, L.L. and Zeithaml, V.A. (1991a). Reinement and reassessment of

the SERVQUAL scale. Journal of Reailing 67 (4), 420-450.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1985). A Conceptual Model of Service Qualiy and its Implicaions for Future Research. Journal of Markeing 49, 41-50.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A muliple-item scale for measuring consumer percepions of service qualiy. Journal of Reailing 64(1), 12-40.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1994). Reassessment of expectaions as a comparison standard in measuring service qualiy: implicaions for further research.

Journal of Markeing 58 (1), 111-124.

Ramasaran-Fowdar R.R. (2007). Developing a service qualiy quesionnaire for the hotel indusry in Mauriius. Journal of Vacaion Markeing 13 (1), 19-27.

Veljković S. (2009). Markeing of services, Faculy of Economics, Belgrade.