Purpose

The purpose of this study is to build a retail‐banking specific quality scale and, through its examination and comparison with the SERVQUAL and BSQ metrics that are currently used in banking, to deepen understanding of quality determinants in the industry. Furthermore, the study is set to provide additional input to the debate over generic against setting/industry/time‐specific quality metrics.

Design/methodology/approach

The study is implemented through a two‐stage process of literature review and empirical survey. Evidence drawn from Greek retail banking, through a specially designed research tool, is analyzed through reliability, factorial and regression analysis to determine the scale’s item and factorial structure and assess its reliability and validity.

Findings

The BANQUAL‐R metric is introduced, with key elements assurance/empathy, effectiveness, reliability and confidence, a combination of SERVQUAL and BSQ dimensions. Findings back the setting‐specific approach of service quality and the notion that SERVQUAL provides the skeleton on which setting‐specific scales should be built.

Practical implications

Bank managers are provided with a reliable and valid metric of service quality in retail banking. Its dimensionality implies that under credit‐crunch conditions service delivery should be directed towards reinstating customers’ trust and confidence that are put in danger. Banks should redirect resources from tangibles to the human contact‐related service elements.

Originality/value

Although the subject of “service quality measurement” is extensively researched, the continuously changing marketing environment calls for an ongoing assessment of quality factors. With respect to its academic value, the study accumulates knowledge that will eventually outgrow the boundaries of academia and pervade management

1. 1. This material content is developed to serve as a GUIDE for students to conduct academic research work
2. 2. As a source for additional understanding of the subject.
3. 3. As a source for ideas for your own research work (if properly referenced).
4. 4. For PROPER paraphrasing (see your university definition of plagiarism and acceptable paraphrase)
5. 5. Direct citing (if referenced properly)
Thank you so much for your respect to the authors copyright.