MinorThesis Presentation

8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation

1/25

LOGO

The Effect of Service Quality, Customer

Value and Corporate Image on Customer

Satisfaction(Study case at PT. Pos Indonesia (Persero) Branch Malang City)

Faizal Muhammad Alhaq

0810227001

Minor Thesis Presentation Entitled:


2/25

LOGOContents

Background1

Theoretical Framework2

Research Methodology3

Findings and Discussion4

5 Conclusion and Recommendation

1


3/25

LOGOBackground

Service industry development inIndonesia and intense competition.

Delivery service provided by PT. PosIndonesia (Persero).

The Quality of the service provided, how

customer value on the service, overallcustomer image perception on the firm.

Customer satisfaction on PT. Pos

Indonesia (Persero) as service provider.

1


4/25

LOGOResearch Problem

Are service quality, customer value and corporateimage simultaneously affecting the customer

satisfaction in using the services provided by PT. Pos

Indonesia (Persero)?

Are service quality, customer value and corporate

image partially affecting the customer satisfaction in

using the services provided by PT. Pos Indonesia

(Persero)?

Among service quality, customer value and corporate

image, which attribute is dominantly affecting the

customer satisfaction in using the services provided by

PT. Pos Indonesia (Persero)?

1


5/25

LOGOResearch Purpose

To know whether service quality, customer value and

corporate image are simultaneously affects the customer

satisfaction in using the service provided by PT. Pos

Indonesia (Persero).

To know whether service quality, customer value and

corporate image are partially affect the customer satisfaction

in using the services provided by PT. Pos Indonesia (Persero).

To know among service quality, customer value and corporate

image, which attributes is dominantly affecting the customer

satisfaction in using PT. Pos Indonesia (Persero) services.

1


6/25

LOGOThe Advantages of the Research

Giving an overview and better understanding about theeffect of service quality, customer value and corporate

image over customer satisfaction for the students.

Contribute in the academic world, especially forManagement science at Economic and Business Faculty,

University of Brawijaya.

As an evaluation for company to measure customer

satisfaction over service offered.

1


7/25

LOGOTheoretical Framework

1

3

4

2

Service Marketing

Service Quality

Customer Value

Corporate Image

5 Customer Satisfaction

2


8/25

LOGOResearch Hypothesis

Service Quality (X.1)

- Reliability(X.1.1)

- Responsiveness (X.1.2)

- Assurance (X.1.3)

- Empathy (X.1.4)

- Tangibility (X.1.5)

Customer Value (X.2)- Low Price (X.2.1)

- Whatever I want in a product (X.2.2)

- Quality I get for price I pay (X.2.3)

- what I get for what I give(X.2.4)

Corporate Image (X.3)

- High Integrity (X.3.1)

- Innovative (X.3.2)

- Friendly (X.3.3)

- Knowledgeable (X.3.4)

- Large (X.3.5)

Customer Satisfaction (Y)

- Product or service features

(Y.1)

- Customer emotions (Y.2)- Attribute for service success

or failure (Y.3)

- Perception on equity and

fairness (Y.4)

- Other family member,

coworker, etc (Y.5)

Simultaneously affecting

Partially affecting

Dominantly affecting

2


9/25

LOGOResearch Methodology

Research method- Quantitative method

- Explanatory research

Research location - PT. Pos Indonesia, Jalan Merdeka Selatan No. 5, Malang

Data source and data

collection method- Primary data: Questionnaire, Interview

Population and sample - Customer of PT. Pos Indonesia (Persero)

Sampling technique-Non – Probability Sampling

- Purposive sampling

Measurement scale - Likert scale

Data analysis method

- Instrument Test (Validity, Reliability)

- Classsical assumption (Normality, Heteroscedacticity, Multicollenearity)

- Multiple Regression Analysis, F test and t test

3


10/25

LOGOVariable Operational Definition

Service Quality (X.1)

- Reliability(X.1.1)

- Responsiveness (X.1.2)

- Assurance (X.1.3)

- Empathy (X.1.4)

-Tangibility (X.1.5)

Customer Value (X.2)-Low Price (X.2.1)

- Whatever I want in a product (X.2.2)

- Quality I get for price I pay (X.2.3)

- what I get for what I give(X.2.4)

Corporate Image (X.3)

-High Integrity (X.3.1)

- Innovative (X.3.2)

- Friendly (X.3.3)

- Knowledgeable (X.3.4)

- Large (X.3.5)

Customer Satisfaction (Y)

- Product or service features

(Y.1)

- Customer emotions (Y.2)

- Attribute for service

success or failure (Y.3)

- Perception on equity and

fairness (Y.4)

- Other family member,coworker, etc (Y.5)

3


11/25

LOGO

Finding and Discussion4

Validity Test

Variable Indicato

rs

Coefficient

Correlation (r)

Significance Explanation

X X.1

X.1.1 0.645 0.000 Valid

X.1.2 0.820 0.000 Valid

X.1.3 0.771 0.000 Valid

X.1.4 0.828 0.000 Valid

X.1.5

0.754

0.000

Valid

X.2

X.2.1 0.745 0.000 Valid

X.2.2 0.775 0.000 Valid

X.2.3 0.748 0.000 Valid

X.2.4 0.824 0.000 Valid

X.3

X.3.1 0.534 0.000 Valid

X.3.2 0.742 0.000 Valid

X.3.3 0.731 0.000 Valid

X.3.4 0.755 0.000 Valid

X.3.5 0.766 0.000 Valid

Y Y

Y.1 0.552 0.000 Valid

Y.2 0.610 0.000 Valid

Y.3 0.634 0.000 Valid

Y.4 0.707 0.000 Valid

Y.5 0.591 0.000 Valid

Reliability Test Variables Cronbanch’s

Alpha (α)

Explanation

X.1 0.825 Reliable

X.2 0.770 Reliable

X.3

0.752 Reliable

Y 0.609 Reliable

Valid If:

-Significance level is less than 5% (< 5%)

- r values ( Coefficient Correlation greater

than 0.3 ( > 0.3)

Reliable If:

- Cronbach Alpha (α) greater than 0.6

(> 0.6)


12/25

LOGOClassical Assumption Test4

Normality Test

One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

Unstandardized

Residual

N 100

Normal Parametersa,b Mean .0000000

Std. Deviation 1.01726536

Most Extreme Differences Absolute .134

Positive .134

Negative -.070

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z 1.341

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .055

a. Test distribution is Normal.

b. Calculated from data.

Data is Considered Normal If:

Data spreads near diagonal line

and follow the diagonal line

Significant value at Kolmogorov – Smirnov

Test is bigger than 5% ( > 0.05)


13/25

LOGO

Classical Assumption Test

Multicollenearity Test

Variable

Collinearity Statistics

Explanation

Tollerance VIF

X.1 0.488 2.051 No. Multicollenearity



Heteroscedacticity Test

A good data is free from Multicollenearity

which shown by:

-The Tollerance value is smaller than 1

(


14/25

LOGO

Multiple Regression Analysis Formula is:

Y = a + β1 Χ1 + β2 Χ2 + β3 Χ3 + е

So

Y = 9.722 + 0.144X1 + 0.170X2 +0.236X3 + e

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

Collinearity

Statistics

B Std. Error Beta

Toleran

ce VIF

1 (Constant) 9.722 .775 12.544 .000

x.1 .144 .046 .275 3.103 .003 .488 2.051

x.2 .170 .052 .251 3.266 .002 .649 1.540

x.3 .236 .055 .396 4.308 .000 .452 2.211

a. Dependent Variable: y.1

4

States that:

β1

= Every Service Quality (X1

) variable increase by 1 point, Customer satisfaction (Y)variable will increase by 0.144 point.

β2 = Every Customer Value (X2) variable increase by 1 point, Customer satisfaction

(Y) variable will increase by 0.170 point.

β3 = Every Corporate Image (X3) variable increase by 1 point, Customer satisfaction

(Y) variable will increase by 0.236 point.

Data Analysis MethodsMultiple RegressionAnalysis


15/25

LOGO

Data Analysis Methods

Model Summaryb

Model

R R Square

Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate Durbin-Watson

n

0

1 .795a .632 .621 1.03304 1.793

a. Predictors: (Constant), x.3, x.2, x.1

b. Dependent Variable: y.1

Coefficient of Determinant

Means:

62.1% of customer satisfaction (Y) is affected by the Service Quality (X1),

Customer value (X2), and Corporate Image (X3), whereas the remaining

37.9% of customer satisfaction (Y) is influenced by other variables that hadnot been examined in this research.

4

Adjusted R square = 0.621


16/25

LOGO

Proven Simultaneously Affecting if:

- if Fcalculated > Ftable means that significant of correlation tight

- if Fsig. < 0.05 means that there is a significant correlation

ANOVAb

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square Fcalculated Sig.

1 Regression 176.302 3 58.767 55.069 .000a

Residual 102.448 96 1.067

Total 278.750 99

a. Predictors: (Constant), x.3, x.2, x.1

b. Dependent Variable: y.1

F – test (Simultaneously)

Hypothesis Testing

From table above:

- Fcalculated (55.069) is bigger that Ftable (2.699)

- Fsig. Smaller than α (0.000 < 0.05)

Hypothesis:

H0 : βi = 0, there is no influence of X.1, X.2, X.3 on Y

H1 : βi ≠ 0, there are influence of X.1, X.2, X.3 over Y

4


17/25

LOGO

t – Test ( Partially)

Hypothesis Testing

Variable Value Decision

tcalculated Sig F ttable

X.1 3.103 0.003 1.984 Reject H0 Accept H1



Hypothesis:

H0 : βi = 0, there is no influence of X.1, X.2, X.3 on Y

H1 : βi ≠ 0, there are influence of X.1, X.2, X.3 over Y

Partially significant affect

if:

-tcalculated > ttable- sig. F < 0.05

Model

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 9.722 .775

x.1 .144 .046 .275

x.2 .170 .052 .251

x.3 .236 .055 .396

Dominant TestTo determine the variables that best define

(dominant) in influencing value of dependantvariable in a linear model uses the Beta

Coefficient Standardized with the largest

number among other .

- In this research the largest is Corporate

Image (X.3) with 0.396

4


18/25

LOGO5 Conclusion

The independent variables of Service Quality (X.2), Customer value

(X.2) and Corporate Image (X.3) are simultaneously affecting PT. Pos

Indonesia (Persero) Branch Malang Customer Satisfaction (Y).

All independent variables of Service Quality (X.1), Customer value

(X.2) and Corporate Image (X.3) are partially significant affecting

the Customer Satisfaction (Y).

Variable of Corporate Image (X.3) is the dominant variable that

affects the customer satisfaction.


19/25

LOGO

Thank You so Much for the ValuableTime spend on My Minor Thesis

Presentation

6 The End


20/25

LOGO


21/25

LOGOService Defined

“Service defined as any activity or benefit that one party can offer to another that essentially

intangibles and does not result in any ownership of anything” (Kotler and Armstrong, 2009: 231)

Service include “all economic activity whose output is not a physical product or construction, is

generally consumed at the time it is produced and provides added value in forms (such as

convenient, amusement, timelines, comfort, or health)” (Zeithaml , 2006:4)

Service Characteristic

1. Intangibility – service cannot been seen, tasted, felt, heard or smelled before purchase

2. Inseparability – service cannot be separated from their providers

3. Variability – quality of service depends on who provides them and when , where and how

4. Perishability – service cannot be stored for late scale or use

Back


22/25

LOGOService Quality

- Because service is intangibility, perception play a greater role in assessing quality than they

do with manufactured product. Because its variability, its hard to predict consistency of a

quality and there is a little or no opportunity for comparison shopping.

- Quality is defined in tern of customer perception (Winner, 2007:425),

- Customer often judge the quality of the service on the basis of a variety of information cues

that they associate with the product or service. Some of these cues are intrinsic to the product

or service, other are extrinsic.

Back


23/25

LOGOCustomer value

“ customer value is the differences between the prospective customer’s evaluation of all

the benefits and all the cost of an offering and perceived alternatives. While total

customer value is the perceived monetary value of a bundle of economic, functional,

and psychological benefit customer expect from a given market offering” (Kotler,

2003: 60)

Customer perceived value is thus based on the difference between what the customer

get and what he or she gives for different possible choices.

Back


24/25

LOGOCorporate Image

The image customers hold of an organization is a result of a particular combination of a

number of different elements, but it’s essentially a distillation of a value, beliefs and

attitudes that an individual or organization has of the focus organization.

The image held by customers may vary according to the individual experiences, and

will almost certainly be different from those that management thinks. This means that

an organization does not have a single image but may have multiple images (Fill,

20009: 399).

Back


25/25

LOGOCustomer satisfaction

Customer satisfaction is the extent to which a product’s perceived performances

matches buyers’ expectations (Kotler and Armstrong, 2009:46)

Customer satisfaction depends on the product’s perceived performance relative to a

buyer’s expectations. “If the product’s performance falls short of expectations, the

customer is dissatisfied. If performance matches expectations, the customer is satisfied.

If performance exceeds expectations, the customer is highly satisfied or delighted” (Kotler, 2003:61).

Back

Documents

MinorThesis Presentation