Prioritizing improvement of service attributes using impact range‐performance analysis and impact‐asymmetry analysis

Abstract

Purpose The aim of this paper is to describe and apply a new three‐step approach to prioritizing service attributes in formulating quality‐improvement strategies. In particular, the paper seels to demonstrate the value of impact range‐performance analysis (IRPA) and impact‐asymmetry analysis (IAA) in prioritizing quality attributes for improvement. Design/methodology/approach The proposed new analytical framework is developed and presented. Data from a survey on satisfaction with airport passenger services are then used to demonstrate the proposed approach. Improvement priorities are derived using a three‐step analytical framework. Findings This paper raises several conceptual issues concerning importance‐performance analysis (IPA). In particular, the study contends that direct and indirect measures of the “importance” of an attribute are not measuring the same construct. Practical implications Managers who use IPA to prioritize the improvement of service attributes might obtain misleading recommendations. In particular, managers should be aware that the impact of an attribute on overall customer satisfaction can vary significantly with different levels of performance of that attribute. Originality/value The study proposes a revised approach to IPA in which the traditional measure of “attribute‐importance” is replaced by a measure of the range of attribute‐impact on overall customer satisfaction (RIOCS). Moreover, a new analysis provides detailed information on asymmetric relationships between attribute‐level performance and overall customer satisfaction (OCS).