4外文翻译.doc

毕业设计（论文）
译文及原稿

译文题目：
酒店行业中的服务质量管理：餐饮部门的管理体系

原稿题目
Service Quality Management in Hotel Industry: A Conceptual Framework for Food and Beverage Departments

原稿出处：
International Journal of Business and Manegement; Vol. 7, No. 14; 2012

酒店行业中的服务质量管理：餐饮部门的管理体系

摘要
服务质量一直是一个重要的课题，涉及酒店餐饮部门的研究。尽管有大量的服务质量的研究，为什么客人再次访问酒店的原因需要有一个高质量的服务，从餐饮部是需要的，仍然没有答案。本文旨在回顾饭店餐饮服务质量管理中的现有文献及有效性服务质量管理框架。本文讨论了著名的模型，并解释了所提出的餐饮服务质量管理的空间框架及在酒店中的应用。本文提出的应用程序的三维模型旨在帮助和鼓励酒店改善其管理，以更好地满足客人。

关键词：服务质量，饭店业，三维模型，餐饮部门

简介
1994；张林和，1998；Parasuraman。舒莱克等人，1988；& 亨斯利，2010；Zeithaml和比特纳，2003）。研究人员已经确定了服务质量的概念，基于客户的角度，消费者感知质量。这样一种看法是建立在一个组织供应货物的地方并且服务于客户，以满足他们在他们所研究的服务质量（babajide，2011，48页；卡曼，1990；菜与楚1998；克里斯蒂2002；克罗宁等人，2000；古纳里斯et al.，2003；梅等人，1999；轧机，2002；奥尼尔2001；Oberoi和Hales，1990；presbury et al.2005；曲与曾荫权，1998；锈和Zahorik，1993；萨利赫和赖安，1991；Zeithaml et al，1996）。在酒店业，满足客户的服务并提高质量是鼓励他们重新回归酒店并赢得他们的忠诚的重要手段（carev，2008；卡曼，普天同庆，1990；2001；Parasuraman。等人，1988；Zeithaml和Bitner，2003）和满意度（babajide，2011，p. 48；克里斯蒂2002；赫什，2010，p. 209；ladhari，2009，页311；奥利弗，1999）。
Parasuraman等人。（1985；1988b），他与曾荫权（1998）和 Zeithaml等。（1996）在全球质量评价中，客户在优秀学校或处于优势的服务里定义“感知的服务”。定义是类似的概念的意思，根据定义，服务质量具有的感知性，你的客户，带着期望的顾客通过服务感知期望和他的实际服务所带来的差距。最近大部分研究服务质量的Parasuraman等人正在进行服务质量模型开发的广泛研究。（1990年，1985年），他曾与 Zeithaml等人一起，在1996年，服务质量已经通过各种文学讨论，其中一个最主要用于检测服务质量的就是SERVQUAL量表模型。
根据Parasuraman等人的研究。（1995，1998），这项研究表明，服务质量和它的尺寸是影响客人满意度的重要因素。考虑到服务质量的维度，因此，这个维度是集中在酒店管理员收到支持实施服务质量提升计划（alrousan，2011；该，2011；Parasuraman et al.，1985）几个研究中的很有必要的。一个良好的服务质量，提供酒店业的好处，包括更大的客户满意度和员工绩效的提高（克罗宁等人，2000；邓肯和埃利奥特，2002；约翰逊等人，1995；康和杰姆斯，2004；盖，2003；妮科尔，2006；Soutar et al.，2001；苏，2004）。Zeithaml和Bitner（2003）提到，感知服务质量成为根据服务的主要根据点，服务质量是一个多维概念的思想得到大家的普遍接受。
根据安东尼和Ghosh（2004）和Harvey（1998），服务质量包括满足和超越顾客期望。这种描述在70年代末开始就开始流行起来了。服务质量源于市场营销，这对一个业务及客户的关系至关重要。服务质量是无形的，要是对其计量是不可能的。评价服务质量很大程度上取决于外观和知觉的管理（第380页）。
本文回顾了现有的文献，并提出了一个理论框架为餐饮部，用以说明饭店业服务质量评价。它使用的五个维度开发的Parasuraman等人。（1985）和Zeithaml等人的成果。（1996）。这五个维度分别是：（1）有形资产–是指体育设施、设备、个人、等现象；（2）可靠性–能力，踏实准确履行承诺的服务；（3）响应能力，愿意帮助客户，并提供及时服务；（4）保证-知识和礼貌的员工，和他们传递信任和信心的能力；（5）同理心-照顾和个性化的关注客人。
2. 服务质量理论与模型
服务质量的五个维度，即有形性（克罗宁和泰勒，1992年；康和杰姆斯，2004；萨利赫和Ryan，1991；Zeithaml和Bitner，2003）、可靠性（alrousan，2011；科特勒&绽放，1984；ladhari，2009，311页；Parasuraman，1988）、反应性（安东尼戈什，2004；张与法，1998；knuston，1991年upal）；2008年，保证性（Al khattab，2011年；克罗宁和泰勒，1992年；皮特和jeantrout，powapaka，1994年；1996年），和执着力Harvey，1998；2011年；Parasuraman，1988年；曲和尼尔森，1998年；曼尔，1993）。根据已经确定了SERVQUAL量表的一些研究得出。Parasuraman等人（1985）是第一个指出的营销服务的方向是客户管理的一个考虑因素。服务质量，如在酒店业，是很难理解的，因为前者是无形的，与产品质量相比。一些研究报道，SERVQUAL量表不是万能的，因为服务质量维度显然取决于服务的类型检查（ladhari，2009， 311）。
有了SERVQUAL模型，对于酒店服务业的有效变量是有帮助的（ladhari，2009，311页；威尔金斯等，2007）。在探讨SERVQUAL模型的适用性中，对于土耳其的酒店业，并确定了七个方面的模型：（1）礼貌和能力，（2）通信和交易，（3）有形资产，（4）知识和对客户的了解，（5）服务的准确性和速度，对酒店业的研究，（6）解决问题的能力；（7）酒店的准确性保留等。对于这个模型，（1999）确定了澳洲酒店业服务质量的尺寸及在酒店业发展的一个新的服务质量量表，称为“holserv，”这个量表有三个方面：（1）员工，（2）有形资产，（3）有形性、可靠性。萨利赫和瑞安（1991）报告的五个维度的服务质量不同于那些在SERVQUAL模型：它包括（1）亲和力；（2）有形资产；（3）保证；（4）避免讽刺挖苦；（5）移情。Oberoi和黑尔（1990）提出建议，认为服务质量起着重要的作用，根据英国的会议酒店和服务质量感知的报告，提出有两个维度：（1）无形资产；（2）有形资产。
盖蒂图片社（1994年）和汤普森描述的在服务质量方面的有效性饭店业和报告中指出（唯一的二维和可靠性有形）是通用的。结果导致(大力强调证券下面酒店的质量规模在美国农业里发展的很愉快，我们称之为规模质量指标和服务质量五）有形尺寸：（1）准确性，（2）反应性、可靠性，（3）同情心，（4）信心（5）沟通。（2011年）Parasuraman等人以附近的酒店服务质量模型与顾客忠诚度作为检查，以约旦酒店using the酒店连锁为例。研究讨论在服务质量五个模型的背景下，服务质量体验的差距并适用于酒店这一模型链测试。这一要素的好处是不同模型的框架应用对于一个酒店及旅游业管理是有作用的。
“产品和服务的质量已成为一个关键问题，在1980年，对有形商品的质量描述和衡量的营销人员，对于服务质量在很大程度上是不确定的研究。作者试图通过报告通过一个广泛的洞察来纠正这种情况，在服务业务质量的探索与服务质量模型的建的基础上。
3. 服务质量维度
第一个定义，可靠性被定义为一个服务供应商的能力，及时提供良好的服务质量。观察服务的交付合同，定价和投诉处理方式都非常重要的一个业务。（alrousan，2011；Parasuraman et al.，1985；TAT和raymound，1999）。二是概念，反应是当收到请求帮助客人的通过提供即时服务的一种反射。提供客人快速的服务，及时注意他们所有的客人所提出来的要求、问题和建议（Al rousan，2011；Knutson et al.，1990；Parasuraman et al，1985）。第三个概念，保证是对服务质量的考虑的能力，能够激活信任和信心的产品或服务。第四维度的移情是以顾客为本，接触的客人对其服务质量方式的个性化。这一步结束，有形的是服务维度，使产品或服务的实践可用于客户（alrousan，2011；Parasuraman et al.，1985）。
1、顾客满意度
客人的满意程度是一个客人的评价是否符合服务质量的要求。业绩低于预期，使客人满意度下降（科特勒，2006）。在酒店行业，客人的满意度是在他们与餐饮部的服务和酒店员工发展客户关系的满意度（Al rousan，2011；Parasuraman et al.，1985）在市场化的公司中，顾客满意认为是市场营销活动中最重要的结果之一。显而易见满足客户的目标是扩大业务，获得更高的市场份额，并获得重复和转介业务，所有这一切都能导致改善盈利能力。然而，客人在这个模型中的满意度概念是指判断，其取决于良好的服务质量和对客人的需求服务（TSE和威尔顿，1988）。根据Parasuraman的理论，客人满意度水平是一个客人的期望是或超过期望。carev（2008）定义了一个服务的优势基于服务质量的满意度，考虑到客户的看法，考虑到什么是服务的整体考虑保留什么（Parasuraman等。1988）。服务供应商应该能够理解客人的行为和需求并能够知道如何满足他们。翔与法（1998）开发了新酒店员工在平方米的酒店员工绩效的测量模型。这个新的平方的顾客满意度模型，反过来，可以直接集成到酒店TQ，因为平方是TQ的一个基本组成部分。这种新模式在传统的平方模型中普遍存在若干领域，同时新模式更全面。此外，新的模型更好地反映实际的平方情况适合TQ ，TQ和员工绩效的概念是针对性的持续改进性。前者是对每个过程的持续改进的指导，后者是针对连续的性能改进。

Service Quality Management in Hotel Industry: A Conceptual Framework for Food and Beverage Departments

Abstract
Service quality has been an important subject of research involving food and beverage (F&B) departments of hotels. Despite a substantial number of studies on service quality, the reasons why guests revisit a hotel and why a high-quality service from the F&B department is needed have remained unanswered. This paper aims to review existing literature on service quality management in the F&B departments of hotels, its process, and the effective service quality management framework. This paper discusses famous models, and explains Parasuraman’s dimensional framework of service quality management in the area of F&B and its application to the hotel industry. The conceptual paper suggests application of the dimensional model in the F&B department and encourages hotels to improve its management to better satisfy their guests.
Keywords: service quality, hotel industry, parasuraman dimensional model, food and beverage department
1. Introduction
Hotel management scholars consider service quality a precedent to guest satisfaction. Some experiential studies show that getting a good quality of service from the food and beverage (F&B) department of a hotel is important for many guests (Armstrong et al., 1997; Crick & Spencer, 2011; Cronin & Taylor, 1992a; Getty & Thompson, 1994; Lam & Zhang, 1998; Parasuraman. et al., 1988a; Sulek & Hensley, 2010; Zeithaml & Bitner, 2003). Researchers have defined service quality in relation to the concept of consumer-perceived quality, which is based solely on the perspective of customers. Such a perception is built in a place where an organization supplies goods and services to customers in a manner that satisfies them and where they examine service quality (Babajide, 2011, p. 48; Carman, 1990; Choi & Chu 1998; Christie 2002; Cronin et al., 2000; Gounaris et al., 2003; Mei et al., 1999; Mill, 2002; O’Neill, 2001; Oberoi & Hales, 1990; Presbury et al., 2005; Qu & Tsang, 1998; Rust & Zahorik, 1993;
Saleh & Ryan, 1991; Zeithaml et al., 1996). In the hotel industry, service quality that satisfies customers is important to encourage them to revisit and to earn their loyalty (Carev, 2008; Carman, 1990; Jabulani, 2001;
Parasuraman. et al., 1988a; Zeithaml & Bitner, 2003) and satisfaction (Babajide, 2011, p. 48; Christie 2002; Hersh, 2010, p. 209; Ladhari, 2009, p. 311; Oliver, 1999).
Parasuraman et al. (1985; 1988b) Qu and Tsang (1998), and Zeithaml et al. (1996) define “perceived service quality” as the global evaluation by customers of the overall excellence or superiority of a service. The definition is similar to the concept of attitude. Based on the exploratory definition of service quality as perceived by customers, it is the gap (discrepancy) between a customer’s expectation of a service and his perceptions of the actual service received (p. 254 – 255). Much of the recent research on service quality has been carried out within the framework of the SQ (service quality) model developed from the extensive research of Parasuraman et al. (1990, 1985, and 1988b), Qu & Tsang (1998), and Zeithaml et al. (1996). Service quality has been discussed in various literatures, and one of the most largely used models measuring service quality is the SERVQUAL. Taking on views from the study by Parasuraman et al. (1995, 1998), this study suggests that service quality and its
dimensions are among the important factors influencing guest satisfaction. Considering the dimensions of service quality is, therefore, necessary as well. This dimension was focused on several studies on which hotel administrators received the support to implement the plan for improving service quality (AlRousan, 2011; Mohsin, 2011; Parasuraman et al., 1985). The benefits of a good service quality as far as the hotel industry is concerned include greater guest satisfaction and enhancement of employee performance (Cronin et al., 2000; Duncan & Elliott, 2002; Johnson et al., 1995; Kang & James, 2004; Lidén, 2003; Peter & Nicole, 2006; Rust et al., 1995 Soutar et al., 2001; Su, 2004). Zeithaml and Bitner (2003) mentioned that perception of service quality becomes global depending on the prevalence of the service. The idea that service quality is a multidimensional concept is commonly accepted.
According to Antony and Ghosh (2004) and Harvey (1998), service quality covers meeting and exceeding customer expectations. This description has become popular since its inception in the late 1970s. The concept of service quality stemmed from the area of marketing, which puts importance to the relationship between a
business and its customers. Service quality is intangible, making its measurement impossible. Evaluation of service quality largely depends on management of appearances and perceptions (p. 380).
This paper reviews existing literature and suggests a theoretical framework for F&B department that illustrates the evaluation of service quality in the hotel industry in Jordan. It uses the five dimensions developed by Parasuraman et al. (1985) and Zeithaml et al. (1996). These five dimensions are the followings: (1) tangibles –
refer to physical facilities, equipment, appearance of personal, etc.; (2) reliability – ability to dependably and accurately perform the promised service; (3) responsiveness – willingness to help customers and provide prompt service; (4) assurance – knowledge and courtesy of employees, and their ability to convey trust and confidence; and (5) empathy – care for and individualized attention to guests.
2. Theories and Models in Service Quality
There are five dimensions of service quality, namely, tangibility (Cronin & Taylor, 1992b; Kang & James, 2004; Saleh & Ryan, 1991; Zeithaml & Bitner, 2003), reliability (AlRousan, 2011; Kotler & Bloom, 1984; Ladhari, 2009, p. 311; Parasuraman. et al., 1988a), responsiveness (Antony & Ghosh, 2004; Cheung & Law, 1998; Knuston et al., 1991; Upal, 2008), assurance (Al Khattab, 2011; Cronin & Taylor, 1992a; Pitt & Jeantrout 1994; Powapaka, 1996), and empathy (Harvey, 1998; Mohsin, 2011; Parasuraman. et al., 1988a; Qu & Nelson, 1998; Zeithaml et al., 1993). Several studies have identified SERVQUAL, but Parasuraman et al. (1985) were the first to point out that the direction of marketing services is one of the considerations in guest administration. Service quality, such as in the hotel industry, is difficult to understand compared with product quality because the former is intangible. Several studies reported that the SERVQUAL scale is not universal because the dimensionality of service quality apparently depends on the type of service examined (Ladhari, 2009, p. 311).
There has been variable help for the validity of the SERVQUAL model in the hotel service industry (Ladhari, 2009, p. 311; Wilkins et al., 2007). Akan (1995) explores the applicability of the SERVQUAL model in the
Turkish hospitality industry and identifies seven dimensions in the model: (1) courtesy and competence of the person, (2) communication and transactions, (3) tangibles, (4) knowledge and understanding of the customer, (5)
accuracy and speed of service, study of the hotel industry, (6) solutions to problems; and (7) accuracy of hotel reservations. Mei et al. (1999) determine the dimensions of service quality in the Australian hotel industry and develop a new scale of service quality in the hospitality industry, called “HOLSERV,” with three dimensions: (1) employees, (2) tangibles, and (3) reliability. Saleh and Ryan (1991) report five dimensions of service quality that differ from those in the SERVQUAL model: (1) conviviality; (2) tangibles; (3) reassurance; (4) avoidance of sarcasm; and (5) empathy. Oberoi and Hales (1990) suggest that service quality plays an important role in conference hotels in the United Kingdom and report that service-quality perception has two dimensions: (1) tangibles; and (2) intangibles
Getty and Thompson (1994) describe the validity of the SERVQUAL dimensions in the hotel sector and report that only two of the dimensions (tangibles and reliability) are generic. Getty and Getty (2003) test the dimensions of service quality in the hotel industry in the United States and develop a new scale (called “lodging quality index”) with five service-quality dimensions: (1) tangibility, (2) reliability, (3) responsiveness, (4) confidence, and (5) communication. Al Roussan (2011) examines Parasuraman model for hotel service quality and customer loyalty in Jordanian hotels using the Marriott hotel chain as a case study. The study discusses the
five gaps in service quality in the context of Jordan and applies this model to the Marriott hotel chain to test its quality of service. The benefit of this framework is applying the elements of “various models” into a clarified hotel and tourism industry management as Parasuraman (1995, p. 1) says:
“Attainment of quality in products and services has become a pivotal concern in 1980 while the quality in tangible goods has been described and measured by marketers, quality of service is largely undefined and unresearched. The authors attempt to rectify this situation by reporting the insight obtained in an extensive exploration of quality in four service businesses and developing a model of service quality”
3. Service Quality Dimensions
The first definition, reliability is defined as the ability of a service supplier to promptly deliver a good quality of. service. Observing service delivery contracts, pricing, and complaints handling are all important for a business. (AlRousan, 2011; Parasuraman et al., 1985; Tat & Raymound, 1999). The second concept, responsiveness is the agreeableness to help guest by providing immediate service as soon as a request is received. The service guests will provide soon and prompt attention to all their guest requests, question and suggestion (Al Rousan, 2011; Knutson et al., 1990; Parasuraman et al., 1985). The third concept, assurance is with consideration to the service quality detention which considerates on the capability to activate trust and confidence of the product or service provided. The fourth dimension empathy is the service quality manner that stresses on t