International Journal of Business

Management & Research (IJBMR)

ISSN(P): 2249-6920; ISSN(E): 2249-8036
Vol. 4, Issue 4, Aug 2014, 47-56
TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

A STUDY OF SERVICE SATISFACTION, CUSTOMER SATISFACTION, AND

FREQUENCY OF SHOPPING IN DEPARTMENT STORE IN INDIA
RAJEEV SIROHI1 & NAVEEN KUMAR2
1

Doctoral Research Candidate, School of Management, Gautam Buddha University,

Assistant Professor, Noida Institute of Engineering & Technology, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India
2

Assistant Professor, School of Management, Gautam Buddha University, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India

ABSTRACT
Retail industry in India is one of the sunrise sector with a growth rate of about 20 percent. The main reasons
behind high growth are concerned with rising disposable incomes, good demographics with young customer base,
varying lifestyles, expansion of the middle class people and a high potential for penetration into urban and rural markets.
In order to ensure success in retailing, customer overall satisfaction is mandatory which lead to customer loyalty.
The purpose of this paper is to investigate crucial factors that lead to customer loyalty in the department store in India,
namely service quality and customer satisfaction. Besides, the intermediate effect of customer satisfaction on the service
quality and customer loyalty relationship was analyzed.
In addition to this, consistency of quality of service across four retail locations were also examined as
heterogeneity of services offered a challenge to ensure consistency in service quality. Field research was conducted with a
sample of 200 customers. The questionnaire was used for the purpose of data collection. The findings concluded that
customer service was an important factor of customers overall satisfaction and had a significant positive impact on it.
The mediation role of customer satisfaction on the service quality and customer loyalty relationship had been confirmed.
The analysis confirmed that there was a measurable difference in the service quality between stores, and that was due to the
poor service of a single store rather than a more serious company-wide variation in store image.

KEYWORDS: Customer Services Quality, Customer Satisfaction, Customer Loyalty, Department Store
INTRODUCTION
Retailing in India is growing at the rate of about 18-20 per cent per annum. India is ranked second in the global
retail development index out of 30 by AT Kearney. The retail environment is dynamic and volatile due to great
competition either within domestic retailers or between domestic and foreign retailers, a rise in mergers and acquisitions,
and more aware customers who have high expectations related to their consumption experiences (Sellers 1990,
Smith 1989). The purchasing power and lifestyle of urban consumers are improving and hence they are looking for better
shopping experience. Under such circumstances, the success of organized retailing in India depends on delivery of quality
services.
Rapidly changing retail environment along with sophisticated and demanding customers have made it mandatory
for the retailers to differentiate themselves in meeting the needs of customers which will help them in improving their
competitive positioning in the market (Mehta et al. 2000). For competitive survival and growth, retailers are focusing on
areas under their control that might give them an edge in the market. Hence delivering high levels of service quality as an
www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

48

Rajeev Sirohi & Naveen Kumar

area is receiving major attention in this regard. Research has shown that good service quality leads to customer satisfaction
(Sivadas and Baker-Prewitt 2000; Bolton and Drew 1991; Boulding et al. 1993), retention and patronage (Yavas et al.
1997), customer loyalty (Wong and Sohal 2003), positive relationship to costs (Crosby 1979), profitability (Buzzell and
Gale 1987; Rust and Zahorik 1993), and positive word of mouth. Hence retailers are keen to adopt service quality as a
means for improving their performance in the market.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Sivadas Eugene and Baker-Prewitt Jamie (2000) examined the relationship between service quality, customer
satisfaction, and store loyalty in department store in USA. The results confirmed that service quality had a great influence
on customer satisfaction in department stores. Customer satisfaction had influence on relative attitude, repurchase, and
recommendation and hence store loyalty.
Wong Amy and Sohal Amrik (2003) tested the impact of service quality dimensions on customer loyalty on two
levels: person-to-person (sales person level) and person-to-firm (store level). The study was organized on department store
in Australia. The results identified that service quality was positively related with customer loyalty, and the relationship
between the two was stronger at the company level, rather than the interpersonal level. The tangibles were the most
significant predictor of customer loyalty at a company level, while the empathy was the most significant predictor of
customer loyalty at an interpersonal level.
Babakus Emin, Bienstock Carolc C., and Van Scotter James R. (2004) explored the effects of perceived
merchandise and service quality on retail store performance in USA. They have used store traffic and revenue growth as
outcome variables. The research outcomes indicated that both service and merchandise quality made significant influence
on store performance, measured by sales growth and customer growth.
Chen Yung Kun and Chen Chia-you (2007) explored the relationship between hot springs hotels customer
perceived service quality, customer satisfaction, and customer loyalty. The research results identified that hot spring hotel
required to improve customers satisfaction to develop customer loyalty directly or increase service quality to develop
customer loyalty indirectly so that profitability could be increased in long term.
Lu Yan and Seock Yoo-Kyoung (2008) examined the relationship between perceived service quality, satisfaction
and loyalty for the customers of department store in USA. The outcome of research concluded that service quality
dimensions were significantly and positively related to customer satisfaction at their preferable department stores and
overall loyalty behavior of the customers to those stores.
Saha Gour C and Theingi (2009) investigated the relationship among the service quality, satisfaction, and
behavioural intentions in passengers of three low-cost carriers (LCCs) offering airline services in Thailand. The results
indicated that the order of importance of the dimensions of service quality was flight schedules, flight attendants, tangibles,
and ground staff. Passenger satisfaction related to service-quality dimensions was found to be very significant in describing
behavioural intentions. Satisfied customers involved in positive word-of-mouth communication and had shown great
interest in repurchase.

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.9926

Index Copernicus Value (ICV): 3.0

49

A Study of Service Satisfaction, Customer Satisfaction, and Frequency of Shopping in Department Store in India

Nadiri Hali and Tumer Mustafa (2009) examined the relationship between service quality and behavioral
intentions for retail customers in Northern Cyprus. The results indicated the strong relationship among service quality
dimensions, overall service quality, and future consumption behavior.

OBJECTIVE
Based on above discussion, the study has three objectives:

To investigate the impact of service quality on customers overall satisfaction

To evaluate consistency of service quality across four department store

To investigate the association between customers overall satisfaction and shopping frequency

HYPOTHESIS
Based on above objectives, three hypothesis were formulated.
Hypothesis 1: Quality of customer service (service satisfaction) is an important factor to a customers overall
satisfaction.
Hypothesis 2: Levels of service satisfaction are constant across department stores.
Hypothesis 3: There is a significant relationship between customers overall satisfaction and shopping frequency.

METHODOLOGY
A total of four department stores named Shoppers Stop in national capital region of India were involved in the
study. In order to cover the national capital region, Shoppers Stop situated at Noida, Ghaziabad, Delhi, and Gurgaon
considered as store 1, store 2, store 3, and store 4 respectively were taken in this study. Population was defined as active
retail shoppers. A sample of 200 respondents was obtained. 50 respondents were selected from each department store.
Judgemental sampling was used to select the respondents from the target population. Personal interviews were conducted
immediately after the completion of shopping experience for the purpose of data collection. Questionnaire was used as a
data collection instrument which employed a 5- point Likert scale (1-strongly negative to 5- strongly positive).
Linear regression and crosstabs measures were used for hypothesis testing and data analysis.

THE RESULTS
Service Satisfaction and Overall Customer Satisfaction
Table 1: Coefficientsa
Un Standardized
Coefficients
B
Std. Error
(Constant)
1.317
0.177
1
Service satisfaction 0.595
0.053
a. Dependent Variable: Overall satisfaction
Model

Standardized
Coefficients
Beta

Sig.

0.624

7.423
11.244

.000
.000

This Table 1 shows the coefficients of the regression line. It states that the expected overall satisfaction is equal to
0.595 * Service satisfaction + 1.317.

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

50

Rajeev Sirohi & Naveen Kumar

Table 2: ANOVAb
Model
1

Sum of Squares
Df
Regression
130.97
1
Residual
205.11
198
Total
336.08
199
a. Predictors: (Constant), Service satisfaction
b. Dependent Variable: Overall satisfaction

Mean Square
130.97
1.036

F
126.43

Sig.
.000a

The acceptability of the model from a statistical point of view is examined in ANOVA Table 2. The Regression
row shows information about the variation accounted for by the model. The Residual row shows information about the
variation that is not accounted for by the model. The significance value of the F statistic (.000) is less than 0.05,
which means that the variation explained by the model is not due to chance. Although ANOVA is a valuable test to explain
any variation in the dependent variable of the model, it does not confirm the power of that relationship. For this purpose,
model summary table is used.
Table 3: Model Summaryb
Adjusted Std. Error of
R Square the Estimate
1
.624a
0.39
0.387
1.018
a. Predictors: (Constant), Service satisfaction
b. Dependent Variable: Overall satisfaction
Model

R Square

The model summary Table 3 reports the strength of the relationship between the model and the dependent
variable. R, the multiple correlation coefficient, is the linear correlation between the observed and model-predicted values
of the dependent variable. The high value of R confirms a powerful relationship. R Square, the coefficient of
determination, is the squared value of the multiple correlation coefficients. It shows that 38.7 percent variation in overall
satisfaction is explained by the service satisfaction.

Figure 1
A histogram of the residuals is used to check the assumption of normality of the error term. The shape of the
histogram should approximately follow the shape of the normal curve. This histogram is acceptably close to the normal
curve.
From the above discussion we can say that service satisfaction or quality of customer service is the important
factor to a customers overall satisfaction.
Impact Factor (JCC): 4.9926

Index Copernicus Value (ICV): 3.0

51

A Study of Service Satisfaction, Customer Satisfaction, and Frequency of Shopping in Department Store in India

In the next objective, we want to test the hypothesis that levels of service satisfaction are constant across stores.
It means that each of the store locations provide a similar and adequate level of customer service.
Store and Service Satisfaction
Table 4: Store * Service Satisfaction Cross Tabulation

Store

Total

Store 1
Store 2
Store 3
Store 4

Strongly
Negative
8
15
4
6
33

Count
Service Satisfaction
Somewhat
Somewhat
Neutral
Negative
Positive
9
14
9
12
12
8
5
17
12
12
11
4
38
54
33

Strongly
Positive
10
3
12
17
42

Total
50
50
50
50
200

The frequency of every response at every store location has been described in cross tabulation Table 4. If every
store location delivers a same quality of service, the pattern of responses should be same across stores. At each store, the
maximum responses take place in the center. Store 2 has smaller number of satisfied customers. Store 3 has smaller
number of dissatisfied customers. From the cross tabulation only, it is not possible to confirm whether these differences are
actual or by coincidence. It can be done with the help on chi-square test as shown below in Table 5.
Table 5: Chi-Square Tests
Pearson Chi-Square
Likelihood Ratio
Linear-by-Linear Association
N of Valid Cases
a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected
count is 8.25.

Value
Df
Asymp. Sig. (2-Sided)
26.951a
12
0.008
28.546
12
0.005
3.527
1
0.06
200
count less than 5. The minimum expected

The chi-square test measures the discrepancy between the observed cell counts and what you would expect if the
rows and columns were unrelated. The significance value of the test is 0.008. Since this value is less than 0.05, it can be
confirmed that the relationship observed in the cross tabulation is true and not due to coincidence. It means that levels of
service satisfaction are not constant across department stores. While the chi-square test is valuable for deciding the
relationship, it doesn't tell the power of the relationship. Symmetric measures attempt to quantify this. '
Table 6: Symmetric Measures
Nominal by Nominal

Phi
Cramer's V
Contingency Coefficient

N of Valid Cases

Value
0.367
0.212
0.345
200

Approx. Sig.
0.008
0.008
0.008

Symmetric Measures are Based on the Chi-Square Statistic

Phi is the ratio of the chi-square statistic to the weighted total number of observations. It is the most "optimistic"
of the symmetric measures, and unlike most association measures, does not have a theoretical upper bound when either of
the variables has more than two categories.
www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

52

Rajeev Sirohi & Naveen Kumar

Cramer's V is a rescaling of phi so that its maximum possible value is always 1. As the number of rows and
columns increases, Cramer's V becomes more conservative with respect to phi.
The contingency coefficient takes values between 0 and SQRT [(k-1)/k], where k = the number of rows or
columns, whichever is smaller. It becomes more conservative with respect to phi as the associations between the variables
become stronger. The significance values of all three measures are 0.008, indicating a statistically significant relationship.
However, the values of all three measures are close to 0.3, so although the relationship is not due to chance, it is
also not very strong.
While these measures give some sense of the strength of the association, they do not, in general, have an intuitive
interpretation. The directional measures have been shown below in Table 7 in order to develop understanding about this.
Table 7: Directional Measures

Symmetric
Store Dependent
Service satisfaction Dependent
Store Dependent

0.108
0.153
0.062
0.045

Asymp.
Std. Errora
0.05
0.068
0.049
0.016

Service satisfaction Dependent

0.032

0.011

Value
Lambda
Nominal
by
Nominal

Goodman
and
Kruskal tau

Symmetric
0.048
Store Dependent
0.051
Service satisfaction Dependent 0.045
a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.
b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.
c. Based on chi-square approximation
d. Likelihood ratio chi-square probability.
Uncertainty
Coefficient

Approx.
Tb
2.079
2.097
1.218

0.017
0.018
0.016

Approx.
Sig.
0.038
0.036
0.223
.008c
.012c

2.869
2.869
2.869

0.005
0.005
0.005

Directional measures quantify the reduction in the error of predicting the row variable value when you know the
column variable value, or vice versa. Each measure simply has a different definition of "error."
Lambda defines error as the misclassification of cases, and cases are classified according to the modal
(most frequent) category.
Tau defines error as the misclassification of a case, and cases are classified into category j with probability equal
to the observed frequency of category j.
The uncertainty coefficient defines error as the entropy, or P (category j) * ln (P (category j)) summed over the
categories of the variable. The uncertainty coefficient is also known as Theil's U.
For customers, the Goodman and Kruskal's tau value of 0.045 with Store dependent means that there is a 4.5%
reduction in misclassification.
The other measures report equally small values, indicating that the association between Store and Service
satisfaction is almost solely due to the poor service at store 2 (Shoppers Stop at Ghaziabad).
In the last objective, we are interested to know how shopping frequency is related to overall customer satisfaction
levels. It means we want to check the association between shopping frequency and overall satisfaction.

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.9926

Index Copernicus Value (ICV): 3.0

53

A Study of Service Satisfaction, Customer Satisfaction, and Frequency of Shopping in Department Store in India

Shopping Frequency and Overall Satisfaction

Table 8: Shopping Frequency * Overall Satisfaction Cross Tabulation

Shopping
Frequency

< 1/month
1/month
1/week
> 1/week

Total

Strongly
Negative
18
2
3
2
25

Count
Overall Satisfaction
Somewhat
Somewhat
Neutral
Negative
Positive
36
3
3
2
35
3
4
1
39
3
4
6
45
43
51

Strongly
Positive
2
2
2
30
36

Total
62
44
49
200

The cross tabulation shows no clear pattern. If any exists, it may be that people who shop more often are more
satisfied.
Symmetric and Directional Measures
Table 9: Symmetric Measures
Value
Ordinal by
Ordinal

Kendall's tau-b
Kendall's tau-c
Gamma

0.655
0.67
0.75
200

Asymp.
Std. Errora
0.05
0.051
0.051

Approx.
Tb
13.113
13.113
13.113

Approx.
Sig.
.000
.000
.000

N of Valid Cases
a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.
b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.
Table 10: Directional Measures
Value

Asymp.
Std. Errora
0.05

Approx.
Tb
13.113

Symmetric 0.655
Shopping
frequency
0.636
0.049
13.113
Ordinal
by
Somers' d
Dependent
Ordinal
Overall
satisfaction 0.675
0.052
13.113
Dependent
a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.
b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Approx.
Sig.
.000
.000

.000

Gamma is P (concordant) P (discordant), ignoring comparisons that are tied. Unfortunately, this often excludes a
number of pairwise comparisons.
Somer's d is a modification of gamma that accounts for comparisons that are tied on one variable. Somer's d
decreases with respect to gamma as the number of comparisons tied on one variable increases.
Tau-b also accounts for comparisons tied on one variable but does not have a simple interpretation. It decreases
with respect to gamma as the number of comparisons tied on one variable increases.
Tau-c also accounts for comparisons tied on one variable and does not have a simple interpretation. Tau-c may be
preferable to tau-b when the numbers of categories in the row and column variables are not equal.

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

54

Rajeev Sirohi & Naveen Kumar

The approximate significance value of each measure is equal to 0.000. Since this is less than 0.05, we can
conclude there is a statistically significant relationship between Shopping frequency and Overall satisfaction.
However, the value of each measure is more than 0.500, so the relationship is above average.

CONCLUSIONS
By applying linear regression we found out that service satisfaction or quality of customer service is the important
factor to a customers overall satisfaction. As 38.7 percent variation in overall satisfaction is explained by the service
satisfaction.
Using Crosstabs' nominal-by-nominal measures, a relationship between Stores and Service satisfaction emerged.
Fortunately, that relationship is rather weak, indicating that while there is a measurable difference in the service quality
between stores, it is likely due to the poor service of a single store rather than a more serious company-wide variation in
store image. As a result, employees at store 2 (Shoppers Stop at Ghaziabad) should get customer service training to bring
their quality of service in line with the other stores.
Using Crosstabs' ordinal-by-ordinal measures, we found a statistically significant, above average positive
association between Shopping frequency and Overall satisfaction.

REFERENCES
1.

Babakus, E; Bienstock, Carolc, C and Van Scotter James R. (2004). Linking Perceived Quality and Customer
Satisfaction to Store Traffic and Revenue Growth, Decision Science, 35(4), 713-737.

2.

Bolton, R and Drew, J (1991). A Longitudinal Analysis of the Impact of Service Changes on Customer
Attitudes, Journal of Marketing, 55(1), 1-9.

3.

Boulding, W; Kalra, A; Staelin, R and Zeithaml, V (1993). A Dynamic Process Model of Service Quality:
From Expectations to Behavioral Intentions, Journal of Marketing Research, 30(2), 7-27.

4.

Chen Yungkun and Chen Chia-You (2007). Correlation of Service Quality, Customer Satisfaction,
Customer Loyalty and Life Style at Hot Springs Hotels, Journal of International Management Studies, 51-59.

5.

Crosby, L A and Stephens, N (1987). Effect of Relationship Marketing on Satisfaction, Retention, and Prices in
the Life Insurance Industry, Journal of Marketing Research, 24(11), 404-411.

6.

Lu Yan and Seack Yoo-Kyoung (2008). The Influence of Grey Consumers Service Quality Perception on
Satisfaction and Store Loyalty Behavior, International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 6(11),
901-918.

7.

Mehta, Subhash C; Lalwani, Ashok K and Han Soon Li (2000). Service Quality in Retailing: Relative Efficiency
of Alternative Measurement Scales for Different Product-Service Environments, International Journal of Retail
& Distribution Management, 28(2), 62-72.

8.

Nadiri, Hali and Tumer, Mustafa (2009). Retail Service Quality and Behavioral Intentions: An Empirical
Application of the Retail Service Quality Scale in Northern Cyprus, Ekonomie a Management, 127-138.

Impact Factor (JCC): 4.9926

Index Copernicus Value (ICV): 3.0

55

A Study of Service Satisfaction, Customer Satisfaction, and Frequency of Shopping in Department Store in India

9.

Rust, R T; Zahorik, A J and Keiningham, T L (1993). Return on Quality: Measuring the Financial Impact of
Your Companys Quest for Quality, Chicago: Probus Publishing Company.

10. Rust, R T; Zahorik, A J and Keiningham, T L (1995). Return on quality (ROQ): Making Service Quality
Financially Accountable, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 59, 5870.
11. Saha, Gour C and Theingi (2009). Service Quality, Satisfaction, and Behavioral Intentions: A Study of
Low-Cost Airline Carriers in Thailand, Managing Service Quality, 19(6), 350-372.
12. Sellers, P (1990). What customer really want? Fortune, Vol. 121, pp.58-68.
13. Sivadas, E and Baker-Prewitt, J (2000). An Examination of the Relationship between Service Quality,
Customer Satisfaction, and Store Loyalty, International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 28(2),
73-82.
14. Wong, A and Sohal, A (2003). Service Quality and Customer Loyalty Perspectives on Two Levels of Retail
Relationship, Journal of Services Marketing, 17(5), 495-513.

AUTHOR'S DETAILS
Mr. Rajeev Sirohi is a Doctoral Research Candidate at School of Management, Gautam Buddha University,
Grearter Noida, Utter Pradesh, India. He is an assistant professor of marketing at the Noida Institute of Engineering &
Technology, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India. He has presented and published various research papers in National and
International conferences and proceedings of the same. His areas of interest include Service Marketing, and Retailing.
Dr. Naveen Kumar is an Assistant Professor of Marketing at School of Management, Gautam Buddha
University, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India. He received his Ph. D. from Dayalbagh University, Agra. His research
interests include service marketing, international marketing. He has presented and published various research papers in
National and International conferences and reputed journals.

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org