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:
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
2/25
LOGOContents
Background1
Theoretical Framework2
Research Methodology3
Findings and Discussion4
5 Conclusion and Recommendation
1
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
7/25
LOGOTheoretical Framework
1
3
4
2
Service Marketing
Service Quality
Customer Value
Corporate Image
5 Customer Satisfaction
2
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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)
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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)
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
13/25
LOGO
Classical Assumption Test
Multicollenearity Test
Variable
Collinearity Statistics
Explanation
Tollerance VIF
X.1 0.488 2.051 No. Multicollenearity
X.2 0.649 1.540 No. Multicollenearity
X.3 0.452 2.211 No. Multicollenearity
Heteroscedacticity Test
A good data is free from Multicollenearity
which shown by:
-The Tollerance value is smaller than 1
(
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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
X.2 3.266 0.002 1.984 Reject H0 Accept H1
X.3 4.308 0.000 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
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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.
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
19/25
LOGO
Thank You so Much for the ValuableTime spend on My Minor Thesis
Presentation
6 The End
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
20/25
LOGO
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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
8/13/2019 MinorThesis Presentation
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