Most service marketing academics agree that service quality is a multidimensional, higher order construct (Brady & Cronin, 2001; Clemes et al., 2013). Several scholars have consistently identified and empirically validated three primary dimensions that influence overall service quality in several cultural settings and for various industries: interaction quality, physical environment quality, and outcome quality (Brady & Cronin, 2001; Caro & Garcia, 2008; Clemes, Brush, et al., 2011; Clemes et al., 2013; Clemes, Gan, et al., 2011; Clemes et al., 2009; Pollack, 2009; Wu & Ko, 2013). Therefore these three primary dimensions are used in this study as key drivers of service quality.
However the sub-dimensional structures of service quality tend to be culturally sensitive and may vary across industries (Brady & Cronin, 2001; Clemes et al., 2007). Therefore, the service quality sub- dimensions need to be determined for each cultural and industry setting (Aigbedo & Parameswaran, 2004; Clemes et al., 2009; Cronin Jr & Taylor, 1994; Dabholkar et al., 1996; Wu & Ko, 2013).
In line with this recommendation, the potential sub-dimensions pertaining to each primary dimension were identified through an extensive literature review and three focus group discussions for resort hotels in Thailand.
3.3.1
Interaction Quality
Interaction quality is described as the quality of personal interactions between customers and service providers (Clemes, Gan, et al., 2011; Clemes et al., 2009; Surprenant & Solomon, 1987; Wu & Cheng, 2013). Interaction quality is a vital factor affecting customers’ assessment of service quality (Brady & Cronin, 2001; Caro & Garcia, 2008; Clemes et al., 2013; Clemes, Gan, et al., 2011; Clemes et al., 2009; Wu & Ko, 2013). Based on the existing literature, the information obtained from the focus group discussions and the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA); three sub- dimensions are proposed to have a positive impact on the interaction quality primary dimension: attitude (Brady & Cronin, 2001; Caro & Garcia, 2008; Clemes et al., 2009; Lam, Cho, & Qu, 2007), behaviour (Brady & Cronin, 2001; Clemes et al., 2009; Ko & Pastore, 2005) and professionalism (Brady & Cronin, 2001; Caro & Garcia, 2008; Clemes et al., 2009; Dabholkar et al., 1996).Therefore, the following hypothesis is formulated:
H1: There is a significant positive relationship between the sub-dimensions of interaction quality (H1a, H1b, H1c) and the interaction quality primary dimension.
3.3.2
Physical Environment Quality
Bitner (1992) and Hilliard and Baloglu (2008) demonstrates that the surrounding physical environment has a significant impact on the overall service quality perceptions of service encounters as customers evaluate services through tangible physical surrounding such as décor, ambience and location in the hospitality industry. Several studies note that the physical environment is an essential aspect of service quality assessments (Brady & Cronin, 2001; Clemes et al., 2007; Dagger et al., 2007). Based on the existing literature, the information obtained from the focus group discussions and the EFA; five sub- dimensions are proposed to have a positive impact on the physical environment quality: a. décor and ambience (Kim & Moon, 2009; Wu & Weber, 2005), b. room quality (Choi & Chu, 2001; Chu & Choi, 2000), c. design (Bonn et al., 2007; Clemes et al., 2009; Ko & Pastore, 2005; Wu & Ko, 2013), d. location (Chou et al., 2008; Chu & Choi, 2000; Urtasun & Gutiérrez, 2006), e. facility and activity (Clemes et al., 2009; Wu, Lin, & Hsu, 2011; Xiang-xiang, 2005). Therefore, the following hypothesis is formulated: H2: There is a significant positive relationship between the sub-dimensions of physical environment quality (H2a, H2b, H2c, H2d, H2e) and the physical environment quality primary dimension.
3.3.3
Outcome Quality
Outcome quality, or technical quality, is what customers receive after the service delivery or buyer- seller interactions (Brady & Cronin, 2001; Clemes et al., 2009; Wu & Ko, 2013).
There is consensus in the literature that outcome quality has a positive influence on customers’ overall perceptions of service quality. Based on the existing literature, the information obtained from the focus group discussions and the EFA; three sub-dimensions are proposed to have a positive impact on the outcome quality: a. valence (Brady & Cronin, 2001; Brady et al., 2006; Caro & Garcia, 2008; Clemes et al., 2009; Wu & Ko, 2013), b. waiting time (Caro & Garcia, 2008; Clemes et al., 2009; Dagger et al., 2007; Wu & Ko, 2013), c. sociability (Brady & Cronin, 2001; Clemes et al., 2009; Wu & Ko, 2013).
Therefore, the following hypothesis is formulated:
H3: There is a significant positive relationship between the sub-dimensions of outcome quality (H3a, H3b, H3c) and the outcome quality primary dimension.
3.3.4
Overall Perceived Service Quality
Several scholars have consistently identified that perceived service quality consists of at least three primary dimensions: interaction quality, physical environment quality, and outcome quality (Brady & Cronin, 2001; Clemes, Gan, et al., 2011; Clemes et al., 2009; Kyle et al., 2010). It is proposed that resort hotel customers aggregate the perceptions of the interaction, physical environment and outcome quality primary dimensions to form the overall service quality perceptions (Brady & Cronin, 2001; Chen et al., 2011; Clemes et al., 2013; Clemes et al., 2007; Clemes, Gan, et al., 2011; Clemes et al., 2009; Dagger et al., 2007; Ko & Pastore, 2005; Kyle et al., 2010; Pollack, 2009; Wu & Cheng, 2013; Wu & Ko, 2013). Therefore the following hypotheses are formulated to test the positive impact of the interaction, physical environment, and outcome quality on the overall service quality perceptions of guests in a resort hotel stay context.
H4: There is a significant positive relationship between the interaction quality primary dimension and customers’ overall perceptions of service quality.
H5: There is a significant positive relationship between the physical environment quality primary dimension and customers’ overall perceptions of service quality.
H6: There is a significant positive relationship between the outcome quality primary dimension and customers’ overall perceptions of service quality.