The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Return on Quality (ROQ): Making Service Quality Financially Accountable
Abstract
Many companies have been disappointed by a lack of results from their quality efforts. The financial benefits of quality, which had been assumed as a matter of faith in the “religion of quality,” are now being seriously questioned by cost-cutting executives, who cite the highly publicized financial failures of some companies prominent in the quality movement. In this increasingly results-oriented environment, managers must now justify their quality improvement efforts financially. The authors present the “return on quality” approach, which is based on the assumptions that (1) quality is an investment, (2) quality efforts must be financially accountable, (3) it is possible to spend too much on quality, and (4) not all quality expenditures are equally valid. The authors then provide a managerial framework that can be used to guide quality improvement efforts. This framework has several attractive features, including ensured managerial relevance and financial accountability.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
SERVQUAL: A multiple-Item Scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality
Parasuraman, A., Berry, L. L., & Zeithaml, V. A. (1988) · Zenodo · doi:10.5281/zenodo.14579729 · Cited by 21,118
A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions
Oliver, R. L. (1980) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378001700405 · Cited by 14,494
A national customer satisfaction barometer: the Swedish experience
Fornell, C. (1992) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1252129 · Cited by 5,641
The antecedents and consequences of customer satisfaction for firms
Anderson, E. W., & Sullivan, M. W. (1993) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.12.2.125 · Cited by 4,610
An Investigation into the Determinants of Customer Satisfaction
Churchill, G. A., & Surprenant, C. (1982) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3151722 · Cited by 2,914
Defensive Marketing Strategy by Customer Complaint Management: A Theoretical Analysis
Fornell, C., & Wernerfelt, B. (1987) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224378702400401 · Cited by 1,395
A Catastrophe Model for Developing Service Satisfaction Strategies
Oliva, T. A., Oliver, R. L., & MacMillan, I. C. (1992) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1252298 · Cited by 812
The Financial Information Content of Perceived Quality
Aaker, D. A., & Jacobson, R. (1994) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3152193 · Cited by 789
Cited by
The Behavioral Consequences of Service Quality
Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1251929 · Cited by 12,003
The Different Roles of Satisfaction, Trust, and Commitment in Customer Relationships
Garbarino, E., & Johnson, M. S. (1999) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299906300205 · Cited by 4,899
Mittal, V., & Kamakura, W. A. (2001) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.38.1.131.18832 · Cited by 2,256
Return on Marketing: Using Customer Equity to Focus Marketing Strategy
Rust, R. T., Lemon, K. N., & Zeithaml, V. A. (2004) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.68.1.109.24030 · Cited by 2,151
Self-citationBolton, R. N. (1998) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.17.1.45 · Cited by 1,948
Metadata
- Authors
- Rust, R. T., Zahorik, A. J., & Keiningham, T. L.
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1995-04
- Volume
- 59
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 58-70
- ISSN
- 0022-2429 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-7185
- OpenAlex
- W2099358844
- Cited by
- 1,635
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 136.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.