A Study of Service Quality in Leisure Clubs

Emma Woodhouse
MPhil Student

And

Noel Y. M. Siu
Associate Professor

Department of Marketing
Hong Kong Baptist University
Kowloon Tong
Hong Kong

Tel: (+852) 34117529.

Fax: (+852) 34115586.
Email: nsiu@hkbu.edu.hk
 ABSTRACT

Studies on service quality of leisure clubs in the global market are scarce. This paper
aims to develop a service quality measure for the leisure club industry. The study
investigates the service quality of two residential clubs in Hong Kong and examines the
impact of service quality on customer satisfaction and loyalty. In the study, five service
quality dimensions are identified. They are namely, Responsiveness, Empathy,
Reliability, Access and Tangibles. Responsiveness, Empathy and Reliability are salient in
determining customer satisfaction while Access is salient in determining loyalty. Finally,
implications and recommendations for leisure clubs management are discussed.

KEYWORDS. Service quality, Leisure club s, Hong Kong, Customer satisfaction,

Loyalty.

INTRODUCTION

Torkildsen (1999) suggested that leisure clubs comprise three elements, they are leisure,
recreation and play. ‘Pleisure’ is regarded as the heart of the three components. This
shows that customers expect to experience pleasure in the clubs and this shed light on to
the importance of service quality and customer satisfaction.

Leisure club is a fast growing service industry in Hong Kong. More and more prominent
property developers provide resid ential clubs in their properties since last decade. The
perception of the residents towards the living quality is based on the aggregate
experiences of both property and the club quality. Their perception on the service quality
of the clubs will influence how they perceive the service quality of the property and the
developers. Therefore, this will affect the developers’ competitiveness and long-term
success.

Previous studies on service quality of leisure club industry in the global market are scarce.
Therefore, this research attempts to fill the gap by examining the service quality
dimensions. In addition, it also aims to study the relationship among service quality,
customer satisfaction and loyalty.

LITERATURE REVIEW

According to Parasuraman, Zeitha ml and Berry (1985), service quality has three
underlying themes: it is more difficult for consumers to evaluate than goods quality, the
result of the comparison between customers’ expectation and perception of the services
performed and its evaluations are made on both the outcome of service and process of
service delivery. Service quality is a principal competitive weapon in the services
industry (Khatibi, Ismail and Thyagarajan, 2002) and has been increasingly used as a
strategy for effectively positioning the company (Parasuraman et al, 1988; Cronin and
Taylor, 1992). Therefore, the services providers differentiate themselves by providing
excellent services quality epecially when the core service is similar such as banking,
restaurants, airlines and hotels. In addition, service quality is believed to have positive

2
impact on company’s bottom- line performance (Caruana, 2002).

SERVQUAL, first introduced by Parasuraman, Ziethaml and Berry (1985), is known as

the most comprehensive and frequently cited tool for measuring and managing service
quality (Khatibi et al., 2002). The five dimensions of the scale include assurance,
empathy, reliability, responsiveness and tangibility. SERVQUAL has been applied in
many service firms (Dabholkar, 1996) but a number of theoretical and psychometric
concerns have been highlighted. The scale is criticized as industry specific and country
specific. Cronin and Taylor (1992, 1994) showed empirically that SERVQUAL
perception items have a stronger correlation with service quality than the SERVQUAL
difference score computations. Therefore, they introduced SERVPERF which consists
solely of the 22 performance items of SERVQUAL. Findings from this study (1992)
indicated that SERVPERF outperforms SERVQUAL in predicting behavior intentions.
Therefore, SERVPERF will be used to measure service quality in this research.

In terms of customer satisfaction, it is argued that it consists of both cognitive and

emotional elements (Yu and Dean, 2001). The cognitive element refers to evaluation of
comparison of expectation and perceived performance (Liljander and Strandvik, 1997;
Oliver, 1980; Wirtz, 1993). The emotional element refers to various emotions, such as
happiness, surprise and disappointment (Cronin et al., 2000; Liljander and Strandvik ,
1997; Oliver, 1993; Stauss and Neuhaus, 1997).

Gremler and Brown (1996) defined service loyalty as ‘the degree to which a customer
exhibits repeat purchasing behavior from a service provider, possess a positive attitudinal
disposition toward the provider, and considers using only this provider when a need for
this service exists.’ The loyal customers will buy more, pay premium prices and provide
new referrals via positive word-of- mouth (Keaveney, 1995; O’Brien and Jones, 1995).

Based on Caruana’s work (2002), the concepts of service quality, customer satisfaction
and service loyalty are interrelated. Service quality is known to relate to customer
satisfaction (Spreng et al., 1996) and behavioral intentions (Boulding et al., 1993; Cronin
and Taylor, 1992). This idea is supported by Chiou et al. (2002) who stated that perceived
service quality precedes satisfaction and trust and these lead to customer loyalty
responses such as word-of- mouth. On the one hand, significant relationship between
customer satisfaction and service quality implementation was confirmed (Khatibi et al.,
2002). On the other hand, loyalty is believed to be built through a positive differentiation
which is achieved by superior service (Heskett et al., 1994). Therefore, service quality is
important as the evaluations of service quality will result in satisfaction level which
determines the likelihood of repurchase and business bottom- line success (Iacobucci,
Grayson and Ostrom, 1994).

In terms of consumers characteristics, participation in leisure activities is affected by

personal and social factors (Torkildsen, 1999). For the personal factors, participation is
strongly linked with elements of life such as age and family life-cycle like marriage,
parenthood and retirement. Moreover, gender, marital status and interest also have a
profound effect on the participation. On the other hand, participation is closely and

3
positively related to social factors such as occupation, income, social class and time
available. As these factors affect customers’ choice of how to spend the time and
participation for leisure activities, these factors are used in this research.

METHODOLOGY

In this research, two residential clubs were chosen because they are similar in terms of
facilities, length of year and target customers. In addition, these two were developed by
the largest property developers in Hong Kong. They use residential clubs as a selling
point for attracting buyers.

The SERVPERF introduced by Cronin and Taylor (1992, 1994) was employed. A focus
group of 12 members of the two residential clubs was held to develop a new service
quality dimension for residential clubs. After analysis, one dimension of SERVPERF,
Assurance, was deleted since respondents expressed that it was irrelevant to the
residential clubs. On the other hand, Access was added and this refers to the
approachability and ease of contact. A pre-test with a sample of 12 members of the two
residential clubs was carried out for checking the appropriateness of the wordings and
meanings of the items.

The satisfaction construct consists of confidence, happiness, respect and disappointment

developed by Cronin et al. (2000), Liljander and Strandvik (1997), Oliver (1993) and
Stauss and Neuhaus (1997). For loyalty, the items including buying more, paying
premium prices and providing new referrals via positive word-of- mouth developed by
Keaveney (1995) and O’Brien and Jones (1995) were applied. The 7-point Likert Scale,
an agree-disagree scale was employed. The data was collected via face-to-face
person-administrated survey format in order to obtain complete and accurate information
as it enables a better control of respondents selection and explanation of questions. A
total of 216 samples were obtained in which 108 for each club. Of the sample, 117 were
male and 99 were female. They were interviewed right after the clubs’ service was
consumed. This ensured that they would have fresh memories of the experiences and
reflect satisfaction instead of service quality (Dabholkar et al. 1996).

To analyze the collected data, the statistical analysis of SPSS was applied. A principal
component factor analysis with Varimax rotation was employed for data reduction.
Besides, T-tests and ANOVA tests were employed to examine the difference between the
means of the research results among the 2 clubs. A Chi-square test was carried out to
examine the relationship between two categorical variables. In addition, a correlation test
was applied to examine the strength of relationship between overall service quality and
satisfaction as well as satisfaction and loyalty. Finally, the multiple regressions were
applied to demonstrate the relationship of the service quality dimensions with overall
service quality, satisfaction and loyalty.

FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

Table 1 shows that 54.2% respondents were male while 45.8% were female. Most of

4
them aged from 26 to 45 (81.1%). The majority of the respondents (78.2%) had monthly
household income ranged from $41,000 to $70,000 and this fits the residents’ monthly
household income of the two properties according to the Hong Kong Census and
Statistics Department. Of all the respondents, 34.3% used with their spouse while 29.2%
with children or parents. On the one hand, almost half of the respondents (47.7%) used
the club for four to five times in a month while 38% used two to three times. On the other
hand, the majority (69.9%) used two to three hours each time while 25.5% used one hour
or less.

[Please Insert Table 1 About Here]

A principle component factor analysis with varimax was employed on 26 service quality
items. The result of Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy (0.776),
Bartlett’s test of Sphericity (1863.626) and Significance (0.000) indicated that the factor
analysis method was appropriate. Nine items were deleted as the Cronbach alpha showed
they were inconsistent with other items in the same dimension. After deletion, the alpha
raised to .8186. The remaining 17 items were reduced into five factors with eigenvalue
greater than 1.0 so thus would be used for subsequent analysis. The resultant factor
structure explained 71.589% of the item variance. The five factors and their loadings are
listed in Table 2.

[Please Insert Table 2 About Here]

Factor 1, labeled as Responsiveness, consisted of five items (alpha = .8754) and

explained 31.204% of the variance. It is the third lowest mean score with a mean of 2.65.
This indicates that it is the third satisfied factor. The five items in ascending order of the
mean score are: the club ensures safety of transactions in response to customer’s safety
concern, employees are willing to serve, show consistent courtesy, willing to solve
problem and give prompt and efficient service.

Factor 2, referred to Empathy, consisted of four items (alpha = .8629) and explained
12.369% of the variance. It ranked fourth with a mean of 3.58. The four items are related
to the treatment of customers’ opinions and complaints, namely, easy procedure, willing
to accept, make improvement according to opinions and complaints and handles seriously
and promptly.

Factor 3, corresponded to Reliability, consisted of three items (alpha = .6347) and

explained 11.123% of the variance. This factor ranked fifth with a mean of 3.79. This
indicates that it is the least satisfied factor. The three items are: providing right service at
the first time, perform service at promised time and ensure the club is exclusively open
for the members only as stated in the mission.

Factor 4, interpreted as Access, consisted of three items (alpha = .5620) and explained
9.616% of the variance. It ranked first with a mean of 2.37. It is therefore the most
satisfied factor. The three items are: convenient and user-friendly booking service,
error- free booking service and convenient enquiry service.

5
Factor 5, related to Tangibles, consisted of two items (alpha = .5547) and explained
7.276% of the variance. It ranked second with a mean of 2.60. It is the second satisfied
factor. The two items are: clean, tidy and visually appealing environment and convenient
layout.

A principle component factor analysis with varimax was employed on 11 loyalty items.
The result of Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy (0.780) and Bartlett’s
test of Sphericity (2332.589) and Significance (0.000) indicated that the factor analysis
method was appropriate. No cross loading was resulted on the 11 items and the alpha
was .8741. The items were reduced into four factors with eigenvalue greater than 1.0 so
thus would be used for subsequent analysis. The resultant factor structure explained
88.56% of the item variance. The four factors and their loadings are listed in Table 3.

[Please Insert Table 3 About Here]

Factor 1, known as Increase of Usage Rate, consisted of three items (alpha = .9635) and
explained 45.826% of the variance. It ranked the second with a mean of 3.33 in terms of
loyalty intention. The three items are: will use more services of the club, will use the club
for longer time and will use more frequently.

Factor 2, known as Referral, consisted of three items (alpha = .9602) and explained
17.584% of the variance. It ranked fourth with a mean of 4.34. The three items are: will
encourage others, will introduce the club and will bring others to use the club.

Factor 3, known as Premium Price, consisted of three items (alpha = .8248) and
explained 15.776% of the variance. It ranked third with a mean of 4.33. The three items
are: will not use less upon price increment, time of usage will not change even a less
expensive alternative is available and willing to pay more for the services.

Factor 4, known as Continuation of Use, consisted of two items (alpha = .9388) and
explained 9.375% of the variance. It ranked first with a mean of 2.07. The two items are:
will continue to use the club and will see the club as prior choice.

The multiple regression was employed with five service quality dimensions used as
independent variable and overall service quality, satisfaction and loyalty as dependent
variables.

[Please Insert Table 4 About Here]

Table 4 indicates that the relationship between the five service quality dimensions and
overall service quality, the adjusted R square = 0.492 was statistically significant. This
indicated that 49.2% of the variance was explained in the overall service quality. All
dimensions were significant (Sig. T < 0.05). Among the five service quality dimensions,
Reliability had the strongest association with overall service quality while Tangibles had
the weakest association.

6
 [Please Insert Table 5 About Here]

Table 5 demonstrates the relationship between the five service quality dimensions and
satisfaction. Results show that the relationship between the five dimensions and
Confidence was most emphatic while relationship with Respect was least emphatic. The
Responsiveness had strongest association with Confidence, Empathy for Happiness and
Disappointment and Reliability for Respect.

[Please Insert Table 6 About Here]

Table 6 shows the relationship between the five service quality dimensions and loyalty.
The relationship between the five dimensions and Referral was most emphatic while the
relationship with Continuation of Use was least emphatic. Among the dimensions,
Reliability had strongest association with Increase of Usage Rate, Access for Referral and
Continuation of Use and Tangibles for Premium Price.

Table 7 showed that there was a significant positive relationship between the overall
service quality and each of the satisfaction items. Among the four items, overall service
quality had greatest correlation with Confidence, followed by Happiness, Disappointment
and Respect.

[Please Insert Table 7 About Here]

Table 8 shows a positive relationship between the overall satisfaction and each factor of
loyalty construct. Among the four items, overall satisfaction had greatest correlation with
Premium Price while the correlation with Increase of Usage Rate, Referral and
Continuation of Use were weaker.

[Please Insert Table 8 About Here]

The below figure summarizes the results of multiple regressions and correlation and
demonstrates the relations hip between service quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty.

[Please Insert Figure 1 About Here]

Findings indicate that age demonstrated significant difference in Reliability (t = 2.899),

Increase of Usage Rate (t = 2.311) and Premium Price (t = 2.081). The age group of 36 to
55 or above exhibited a lower mean score meaning that they were more satisfied than
those aged 16 to 35.

In addition, gender showed significant difference in Access (t = 2.430), Increase of Usage

Rate (t = 2.789) and Premium Price (t = 2.605). Female respondents had a lower mean
score and this indicated that they were more satisfied in these areas than male
respondents.

Furthermore, the Chi-square test revealed that there was a significant association between

7
companion and frequency (p = 0.042). According to the result, the customers used the
clubs alone were more likely (58.8%) to use the club less frequently while customers
used the clubs with their spouse (63.5%) were tended to use the club more frequently.

DISCUSSIONS

Among the five service quality dimensions, Access is the most satisfied factor, followed
by Tangibles, Responsiveness, Empathy and Reliability. This indicates that the customers
are satisfied most in the booking and enquiry service. It is because these services require
less skills and is easier to perform properly.

Empathy ranked as the fourth satisfied dimension. It can be explained that the passive
role of the duty staff in receiving opinions and complaints makes customers think that the
clubs are not willing to accept and handle their complaints. As complaint handling and
service recovery are crucial in enhancing customers’ satisfaction and loyalty, the clubs
should pay attention on this dimension.

Furthermore, Reliability is the least satisfied dimension. The clubs performed worst in
ensuring the clubs to exclusively open for members. This frustrated the customers who
pay for the service when someone who does not live in the estate shares the service and
facilities without paying any money.

Continuation of Use is found to be the most dominant factors, followed by Increase of

Usage Rate, Premium Price and Referral. This indicates that the customers are very likely
to continue to use the clubs. However, the multiple regression and correlation results
indicated that the relationship is weak between Continuation of Use and service quality.
This contradiction can be explained by the spurious loyalty theory. It suggested that
customers are not likely to switch because of the convenient location and lack of
alternative (Javalgi and Moberg, 1997). As there is no other leisure club nearby and the
switching cost is very high for going to private clubs, this keeps customers from
switching.

The five service quality dimensions are shown to be moderate predictors of overall
service quality. Among the five service quality dimensions, Reliability had the strongest
association with overall service quality. This suggested that Reliability is crucial factor in
assessing the overall service quality.

The five service quality dimensions have moderate predictive power to satisfaction.
Responsiveness has strongest association with Confidence, Empathy for Happiness and
Disappointment and Reliability for Respect. These are crucial factors in assessing
customer satisfaction.

The five service quality dimensions are weak in explaining loyalty. This can be explained
by the spurious loyalty theory mentioned above. Among the dimensions, Reliability had
strongest association with Increase of Usage Rate, Access for Referral and Continuation
of Use and Tangibles for Premium Price.

8
The overall service quality has moderate positive correlation to satisfaction especially in
Confidence and Happiness. This indicated that once the overall service quality level
increases, the satisfaction will increase. In addition, the overall satisfaction has moderate
positive correlation to loyalty especially in Premium Price and Increase of Usage Rate.
Therefore, once satisfaction level increases, the loyalty will increase as well.

For the demographic characteristics, findings exhibited that the older age groups were
more satisfied in Reliability and more likely to increase their usage rate and pay premium
price than the younger age group. Therefore, the older age group is the potential loyal
customers. In addition, female were reported to be more satisfied in Access, more likely
to increase their usage rate and to pay premium price than male. Moreover, the customers
used the clubs less frequently when they use the club alone but more frequently when
they use with their spouse.

IMPLICATIONS ANF RECOMMENDATIONS

Though the research study had been conscientiously done, there were some unexpected
and uncontrollable factors that had impacted the study. The sample was obtained by
convenience and judgmental methods, which might affect the representativeness of the
result. Moreover, the data was collected near Christmas and New Year holidays, which
may not truly represent the service quality of the clubs during normal seasons. Present
study did not distinguis h if respondents were tenants or owners of their properties. As
the two groups might exhibit different aspirations and demands on the service of the club,
further research investigating their expectations is warranted.

Access is the most satisfied service quality factor but not the most important factor to
increase customer satisfaction and loyalty. However, it is suggested that the clubs should
set up intranets or websites for the customers to access the clubs information and to make
online booking. It is cost effective and time-saving for both customers and the clubs. This
can further enhance customer satisfaction.

Results demonstrate that Reliability and Empathy had strongest association with many
items of overall service quality, satisfaction and loyalty. These suggest that they are the
strongest determinants to overall service quality, satisfaction and loyalty. However, they
are the least satisfied service quality factors. Therefore, the clubs should improve these
two dimensions in priority.

To improve Empathy, the clubs can assign the managers to take an active role for asking
and receiving opinions from the customers. It helps to make the customers believe their
opinions will be heard by the clubs.

To improve Reliability, the clubs can set up a membership sim-card system; it is similar
to a hotel key card which enables the customers to access to the clubs and facilities. This
can prevent the non- member to access to the club’s facilities. In addition, the sim-card
can store customers’ usage patter ns and preference. Therefore, the clubs and employees

9
can better understand customers’ needs and improve their service quality based on the
sim-card data.

For loyalty, results showed that the customers will not increase their usage rate much;
therefore, the clubs can initiate new programs and functions to encourage customers to
increase their usage. Moreover, the clubs can sell day-ticket at promotional price that the
customers can use as many services and facilities as they can in a day with the ticket.
This can encourage them to try more services and use the clubs for longer duration. Next,
the older group is the potentially loyal customers. More functions that appeal to their
needs could be conducted, such as wine tasting, food fair and social dance class.
Moreover, in order to encourage the younger group to increase their usage rate, the clubs
can introduce different new functions weekly or monthly such as sports competition, fun
fair, workplace or psychological workshops and relationship talks. In addition, to
encourage the couples and female to use the service more frequently, the clubs can
launch some special functions and events, such as make- up class, marriage, family
workshops.

CONCLUSION

Service quality has long been recognized as the basic strategy for effective positioning
and competitive advantage. This study identified five service quality dimensions for
residential leisure clubs and its impact on customer satisfaction and loyalty. The five
service quality dimensions had moderate predictive power for satisfaction but weak for
loyalty. These indicated that service quality is crucial in affecting the satisfaction.
However, the clubs are unable to build loyalty via service quality and satisfaction since
the loyalty situation of these clubs is classified as spurious loyalty. Among the five
service quality dimensions, Reliability has greater influence on overall service quality.
Responsiveness, Empathy and Reliability shows strongest predictive power to
satisfaction where Access has strongest association with Referral. Furthermore, the
service quality of the clubs not only affects customers’ perception of the clubs, but also
affects how they perceive the quality of the property and the developers. Therefore, the
developers should maintain and improve service quality of the clubs as it will affect their
profitability, competitiveness and long-term success.

10
 TABLE 1. The Demographic Characteristics of the Sample

Items Data % Data %

Gender Male 54.2 Female 45.8
Age 16 - 25 7.9 26 – 35 21.8
36 – 45 59.3 46 - 55 9.7
55 or above 1.4
Family Single 33.8 Married (no children)
15.3
Members
Married (children Married (children
33.8 8.8
aged under 12) aged under 18)
Married (children
8.3
aged > 18)
Occupation Management/Admini White Collar
51.4 7.9
strative
Self-employed 6.0 Professionals 17.6
Salesperson 1.4 Service Staff 0.9
Housewives 8.3 Student 5.1
Retired 1.4
Monthly 11K - 20K 0.5 21K - 30K 1.4
Household 31K - 40K 6.9 41K - 50K 27.3
Income 51K - 60K 21.3 61K - 70K 29.6
71K - 80K 5.6 81K or more 7.4
Usage Weekdays 11.6 Saturday 50.5
(Day of Week) Sunday 38
Usage Morning 10.2 Noon 5.1
(Time of Day) Afternoon 34.3 Evening 30.1
Night 20.4
Companions Alone 23.6 Spouse 34.3
Children or Parents 29.2 Relatives or Friends 13
Main User Himself/ Herself 72.3 Spouse 5.1
Children 20.9 Parents 1.7
Frequency 1 or less 9.3 2-3 38.0
of Usage 4-5 47.7 6-7 4.2
in a Month 8-9 0.9
Years of 1 year or less 5.1 2-3 16.2
Living 4-5 35.2 6-7 32.4
8 or more 11.1
Duration of 1 or less 2-3
25.5 69.9
Usage
4-5 4.6

11
 TABLE 2. Service Quality Dimensions

Factor 1 Responsiveness Loading Mean Factor

Score Mean
14. Employees are willing to solve problems 0.894 2.75
15. Employees show consistent courtesy 0.803 2.66
13. Employees are willing to serve 0.787 2.59
16. Employees give prompt and efficient service 0.680 3.02 2.65 (3rd)
05. The club ensure safety in the club 0.601 2.22
Reliability Coefficient Alpha = .8754
Eigenvalue = 5.305, Variance explained =
31.204%
Factor 2 Empathy Loading Mean Factor
Score Mean
22. Easy procedure to give opinions or 0.880 3.53
complaints
23. Handles the opinions or complaints 0.864 3.63 3.58 (4th)
seriously and promptly
24. Makes improvement according to opinions 0.724 3.60
or complaints
21. Willing to accept opinions or complaints 0.646 3.56
Reliability Coefficient Alpha = .8629
Eigenvalue = 2.103, Variance explained =
12.369%
Factor 3 Reliability Loading Mean Factor
Score Mean
19. Provide right service at the first time 0.826 3.21
18. Understand customer's needs 0.744 3.55 3.79 (5th)
07. Ensure to open the club exclusively for 0.639 4.60
members
Reliability Coefficient Alpha = .6347
Eigenvalue = 1.891, Variance explained =
11.123%
Factor 4 Access Loading Mean Factor
Score Mean
11. Convenient and user-friendly booking 0.815 2.31
service
12. Error-free booking service 0.688 2.33 2.37 (1st)
10. Convenient enquiry services 0.522 2.47
Reliability Coefficient Alpha = .5620
Eigenvalue = 1.635, Variance explained =
9.616%
Factor 5 Tangibles Loading Mean Factor
Score Mean
01. Clean, tidy and visually appealing 0.857 2.51
environment
02. Convenient layout 0.742 2.69 2.60 (2nd)
Reliability Coefficient Alpha = .5547
Eigenvalue = 1.237, Variance explained =
7.276%

12
 TABLE 3. Loyalty Dimensions

Factor 1 Increase of Usage Rate Loading Mean Factor

Score Mean
03. will use the club more frequently .937 3.37
05. will use the club for longer time .925 3.32 3.33
04. will use more service of the club .914 3.31 (2nd)
Reliability Coefficient Alpha = .9635
Eigenvalue =5.041, Variance explained
=45.826 %
Factor 2 Referral Loading Mean Factor
Score Mean
10. will encourage others to use the clubs .941 4.29
09. will introduce the clubs to others .913 4.35 4.34
11. will invite others to use the clubs .911 4.37 (4th)
Reliability Coefficient Alpha = .9602
Eigenvalue =1.934, Variance explained
=17.584 %
Factor 3 Premium Price Loading Mean Factor
Score Mean
06. willing to pay more for the service .850 4.49
07. will not use less upon price increment .799 4.19 4.33
08. time of usage will not change even 4.32 (3rd)
.765
alternatives are available
Reliability Coefficient Alpha = .8248
Eigenvalue =1.735, Variance exp lained
=15.776 %
Factor 4 Continuation of Use Loading Mean Factor
Score Mean
02. will see the club as prior choice .971 2.1 2.07
01. will continue to use the service .965 2.05 (1st)
Reliability Coefficient Alpha = .9388
Eigenvalue =1.031, Variance explained =
9.375%

13
TABLE 4. Relationship among Five Service Quality Dimensions and Overall Service
Quality

Relationship among Five Dimensions and Overall Service Quality

Dimensions B Beta Sig.T
Responsiveness .230 .252 .000*
Empathy .225 .263 .000*
Reliability .232 .304 .000*
Access .311 .213 .000*
Tangibles - .112 - .108 .032*
Adjusted R Square = .492 *p<0.05

14
 TABLE 5. Relationship among Five Service Quality Dimensions and Satisfaction

Relationship among Five Dimensions and Satisfaction (Confidence)

Dimensions B Beta Sig.T
Responsiveness .414 .413 .000*
Empathy .196 .208 .000*
Reliability .100 .119 .031*
Access .202 .126 .022*
Tangibles .243 .212 .000*
Adjusted R Square = .445 *p<0.05
Relationship among Five Dimensions and Satisfaction (Happiness)
Dimensions B Beta Sig.T
Responsiveness .175 .176 .007*
Empathy .304 .325 .000*
Reliability .236 .283 .000*
Access .307 .192 .001*
Tangibles / .015 .774
Adjusted R Square =.425 *p<0.05
Relationship among Five Dimensions and Satisfaction (Respect)
Dimensions B Beta Sig.T
Responsiveness / .071 .332
Empathy .238 .261 .000*
Reliability .241 .297 .000*
Access .368 .237 .000*
Tangibles / .007 .907
Adjusted R Square =.266 *p<0.05
Relationship among Five Dimensions and Satisfaction (Disappointment)
Dimensions B Beta Sig.T
Responsiveness / .096 .166
Empathy .364 .337 .000*
Reliability .268 .312 .000*
Access .299 .182 .001*
Tangibles / - .10 .861
Adjusted R Square =.345 *p<0.05

15
 TABLE 6. Relationship among Five Service Quality Dimensions and Loyalty

Relationship among Five Dimensions and Loyalty (Increase of Usage Rate)

Dimensions B Beta Sig.T
Responsiveness .295 .258 .002*
Empathy - .176 - .164 .018*
Reliability .356 .371 .000*
Access / .100 .115
Tangibles / - .110 .069
Adjusted R Square =.233 *p<0.05
Relationship among Five Dimensions and Loyalty (Referral)
Dimensions B Beta Sig.T
Responsiveness / .018 .802
Empathy .197 .146 .015*
Reliability .342 .284 .000*
Access .713 .309 .000*
Tangibles - .391 - .238 .000*
Adjusted R Square =.302 *p<0.05
Relationship among Five Dimensions and Loyalty (Premium Price)
Dimensions B Beta Sig.T
Responsiveness .302 .213 .002*
Empathy / .088 .201
Reliability .278 .234 .000*
Access .293 .129 .045*
Tangibles - .449 - .277 .000*
Adjusted R Square =.233 *p<0.05
Relationship among Five Dimensions and Loyalty (Continuation of Use)
Dimensions B Beta Sig.T
Responsiveness / .041 .568
Empathy / .007 .918
Reliability / .090 .181
Access .214 .184 .007*
Tangibles / .086 .209
Adjusted R Square =.029 *p<0.05

16
TABLE 7. Correlation: Relationship between Overall Service Quality and Satisfaction

Pearson Correlation Sig.

Overall Service Quality and Confidence .652 .000*
Overall Service Quality and Happiness .614 .000*
Overall Service Quality and Respect .484 .000*
Overall Service Quality and Disappointment .550 .000*
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level

17
 TABLE 8. Correlation: Relationship between Overall Satisfaction and Loyalty

Pearson Correlation Sig.

Overall Satisfaction and Increase of Usage Rate .362 .000*
Overall Satisfaction and Referral .270 .000*
Overall Satisfaction and Premium Price .436 .000*
Overall Satisfaction and Continuation of Use .215 .001*
Correlation is significant at the 0.01 leve l

18
 FIGURE 1. Summary of the Research Results

SATISFACTION

Overall Satisfaction

Confidence .652
.413
Happiness OVERALL
.614
.325 .484 SERVICE
Respect
.550 QUALITY
.297
Disappointment

.337 .252
SERVICE QUALITY
.263
Responsiveness
LOYALTY .304
.362 Empathy .213
Increase of Usage Rate -.108
.371
.270 Reliability
Referral .309

.436 -.277 Access

Premium Price
.215
.184 Tangibles
Continuation of Use

19
 REFERENCES

Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Staelin, R. and Zeithaml, V. (1993). A dynamic process
model of service quality: from expectation to behavior intentions, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol.30, February, pp.7-27.
Caruana, A. (2002), Service loyalty: The effect of service quality and the mediating
role of customer satisfaction, European Journal of Marketing, Bradford, Vol. 36,
Issue 7/8.
Chiou, J.S., Droge.C, Hanvanich, S. (2002). Does customer knowledge affect how
loyalty is formed? Journal of Service Research:JSR, Thousand Oaks, Vol.5, Issue
2, pp.113-124.
Cronin, J.J.Jr, Brady, M.K. and Hult, G.T.M. (2000). Assessing the effects of quality,
value and customer satisfaction on consumer behavior intentions in service
environments, Journal of Retailing, Vol.76, no.2, pp.195-224.
Cronin, J.J.Jr, Taylor, S.A. (1992). Measuring service quality: A reexamination and
extension, Journal of Marketing, 56 (July), pp.55-68.
Cronin, J.J. and Taylor, S.A. (1994). SERVPERF versus SERVQUAL: reconciling
performance based and perception based – minus – expectation measurements of
service quality, Journal of Marketing, Vol.58, January, pp.125-131.
Dabholkar, P.A, Thorpe, D.I. and Rentz, J.O. (1996), A measure of service quality for
retail stores: scale development and validation, Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, Vol.24, No. 1, Winter, pp.3-16.
Gremler, D.D. and Brown, S.W. (1996). Service loyalty: its nature, importance and
implications, in Edvardsson, B., Brown, S.W., Johnston, R. and Scheuing, E.E.
(Eds), Proceedings American Marketing Association, pp.171-180.
Heskett, J.L., Jones, T.O., Loveman, G.W., Sasser, W.E., Jr. and Schlesinger, L.A.
(1994). Putting the service-profit chain to work, Harvard Business Review, Vol.72,
No.2, March – April, pp.164-174.
Iacobucci, D., Grayson, K. and Ostrom, A. (1994). Customer satisfaction fables,
Slogan Management Review, Vol.35, No.4, pp.93-96.
Keaveney, S. (1995). Customer switching behavior in service industries: an
exploratory study, Journal of Marketing, 59 (April), pp.71-82.
Khatibi, A.A., Ismail, H. and Thyagarajan, V. (2002), What drives customer loyalty:
An analysis from the telecommunications industry, Journal of Targeting,
Measurement and analysis for Marketing, London, Vol.11, Issue 1, pp.34-44.
Liljander, V. and Strandvik, T. (1997). Emotions in service satisfaction, International
Journal of Service Industry Management, vol.8, no.2, pp.148-169.
O’Brein, L. and Jones, C. (1995). Do Rewards really careate loyalty?, Harvard
Business Review, 73 (May/June), pp.75-83.
Oliver, R.L. (1993). A conceptual model of service quality and service satisfaction:
compatible goals, different concepts, Swartz, T.A., Bowen, D.E., Brown, S.W.
(Eds), Advances in Services Marketing and Management: Research and Practice,
Vol.2, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp.65-85.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1985). A conceptual model of
service quality and its implication for future research, Journal of Marketing,
Vol.49, April, pp.41-50.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1988). SERVQUAL: a
multiple- item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality,
Journal of Retailing, Vol.64, No.1, Spring, pp.12-40.

20
Stauss, B. and Neuhaus, P. (1997). The qualitative satisfaction model, International
Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol.8, no.3, pp. 236-249.
Torkildsen, G. (1999). Leisure and Recreation Management, 4th ed. New York: Spon
Press.
Yu, Y.T. and Dean, A. (2001). The contribution of emotional satisfaction to consumer
loyalty, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Bradford, Vol.12,
Issue 3/4, pp.234-250.

21