The impact of service quality on grabs customer satisfaction in ho chi minh city an empirical study in the covid 19 epidemic

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING THE STATE BANK OF VIETNAM BANKING UNIVERSITY OF HO CHI MINH CITY TRAN DINH THUY LINH THE IMPACT OF SERVICE QUALITY ON GRAB’S CUSTOMER SATISFACTION: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY IN THE COVID 19 EPIDEMIC BACHELOR THESIS FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION SUBJECT CODE: 7340101 HO CHI MINH CITY, 2021 MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING THE STATE BANK OF VIETNAM BANKING UNIVERSITY OF HO CHI MINH CITY TRAN DINH THUY LINH THE IMPACT OF SERVICE QUALITY ON GRAB’S CUSTOMER SATISFACTION: AN EMPIRICAL STUDY IN THE COVID 19 EPIDEMIC BACHELOR THESIS FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION SUBJECT CODE: 7340101 SUPERVISOR: Ph.D NGUYEN VAN THUY HO CHI MINH CITY, 2021 DECLARATION I declare that this final study is entirely my composition All references made to works of other persons have been duly acknowledged The figures in this thesis are taken from sources that are published I am responsible for my thesis Signature Tran Dinh Thuy Linh ACKNOWLEDGE I am willing to take this opportunity to acknowledge several individuals who have helped me to complete my thesis First of all, I would like to give my endless thanks and gratefulness to my supervisor, Ph.D Nguyen Van Thuy His kindly and continuous advice went through the process of completion of my thesis His encouragement and comments had significantly enriched and improved my work Without his motivation and instruction, the thesis would have been impossible effectively Secondly, I want to thank my family for their endless love, care and have most assistance and motivation for me for my whole life Next, my deepest thanks come to all of my friends who always support me when I study at university I am thankful for the times, and they have listened to me, advised me, and even comforted me They are kindly helped, cared for, and motivated gave me strength, and lifted me all the trouble for the rest of my life TABLE OF CONTENT CHAPTER INTRODUCTION 1.1 Problem thesis 1.2 Aims and objective of the research 1.3 Subject and scope of the research 1.4 Research method .4 1.5 Structure of thesis 1.6 Summary CHAPTER LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 The basic concepts 2.1.1 Customer satisfaction 2.1.2 Service quality 2.1.3 The relationship between service quality and customer satisfaction .10 2.2 Theoretical research 12 2.3 Conceptual model and hypothesis 17 2.3.1 Hypothesis 17 2.3.2 Research model 20 2.4 Summary 21 CHAPTER METHODOLOGY 22 3.1 Design of research 22 3.1.1 Research process 22 3.1.2 Modify the questionnaires 24 3.2 Building the scale 24 3.2.1 The scale of reliability (RE) .25 3.2.2 The scale of responsiveness (RS) .25 3.2.3 The scale of empathy (EM) 26 3.2.4 The scale of tangibles (TA) 26 3.2.5 The scale of assurance (AS) .27 3.2.6 The scale of price policy (PR) 27 3.2.7 The scale of customer satisfaction (CS) 28 3.3 Sample and data 28 3.3.1 Sample size .28 3.3.2 Survey questionnaire 29 3.3.3 Collecting data 29 3.4 Data analysis 30 3.4.1 Test reliability by Cronbach's Alpha .30 3.4.2 Test Validity by Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) .31 3.4.3 Regression Analysis 32 3.4.4 ANOVA test 34 3.5 Summary 34 CHAPTER RESULT AND FINDING 35 4.1 Company overview 35 4.1.1 History of Grab Holding Inc .35 4.1.2 About Grab Vietnam 36 4.2 Sample description 38 4.3 Reliability test by Cronbach’s Alpha 40 4.3.1 Evaluating reliability scale 40 4.3.2 Evaluating responsiveness scale 41 4.3.3 Evaluating tangibles scale .41 4.3.4 Evaluating empathy scale 42 4.3.5 Evaluating assurance scale 42 4.3.6 Evaluating price policy scale 43 4.3.7 Evaluating customer satisfaction scale 43 4.4 Results of exploratory factor analysis (EFA) 44 4.4.1 Factors analysis for independent variables .44 4.4.2 Factors analysis for the dependent variable .46 4.4.3 Conclusion about exploratory factors analysis 47 4.5 Correlation analysis .51 4.6 Test of regression analysis 52 4.7 Testing of the sample .55 4.7.1 The difference in gender 56 4.7.2 The difference in age 56 4.7.3 The difference in occupations 57 4.7.4 The difference between the frequency 58 4.7.5 The difference between essential service during COVID-19 59 4.8 Summary 59 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 60 5.1 Conclusions 60 5.2 Implications managements improve customer satisfaction on Grab’s users 61 5.2.1 Grab should highly focus on price policy to enhance customer satisfaction with its services .61 5.2.2 Grab should concentrate on assurance for users to enhance customer satisfaction 62 5.2.3 Grab should focus on service competence to enhance its customer satisfaction 63 5.2.4 Grab should consider reliability to enhance customer satisfaction 63 5.2.1 Grab should consider responsiveness to enhance customer satisfaction 64 5.3 Contribution of the study 64 5.4 Limitations and future research 65 5.5 Summary 65 REFERENCES 66 APPENDIX 1: QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY .71 APPENDIX 2: DATA ANALYSIS RESULT .77 LIST OF ACRONYMS Acronyms Meaning EFA Exploratory Factor Analysis ANOVA Analysis of Variance Sig Significance level VIF Variance Inflation factor KMO Kaiser-Mayer-Olkin RE Reliability RS Responsiveness TA Tangibles EM Empathy PR Price Policy AS Assurance CS Customer satisfaction LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1: Research model .20 Figure 3.1: Research process 23 Figure 4.1: Research model after EFA 51 78 AVERCOST * GEN Crosstabulation Count GEN Male AVERCOST Total Female Less than 500.000VND 39 114 153 From 500.000 to 1.000.000VND 26 51 77 Above 1.000.000VND 10 19 29 75 184 259 Total TIMES * GEN Crosstabulation Count GEN Male TIMES Total Female Once per month 18 35 53 From to times per month 29 93 122 times and more per month 28 56 84 75 184 259 Total ESSSERV * GEN Crosstabulation Count GEN Male Total Female Yes 74 173 247 No 11 12 75 184 259 ESSSERV Total $service Frequencies Responses N $servicea 66 8,8% 25,5% GrabBike 131 17,4% 50,6% GrabFood 184 24,5% 71,0% GrabExpress 153 20,4% 59,1% GrabMart 112 14,9% 43,2% 55 7,3% 21,2% 0,4% 1,2% 47 6,3% 18,1% 751 100,0% 290,0% Booking attractions and hotels Electricity and water billing payments a Group Percent GrabCar Mobile and data top-up Total Percent of Cases 79 B Cronbach’s Alpha Case Processing Summary N Valid Cases Excludeda Total % 259 100,0 ,0 259 100,0 a Listwise deletion based on all variables in the procedure Reliability Statistics Cronbach's N of Items Alpha ,754 Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Variance Corrected Item- Cronbach's Item Deleted if Item Deleted Total Alpha if Item Correlation Deleted RE1 15,86 6,503 ,427 ,741 RE2 16,28 5,940 ,496 ,719 RE3 16,40 5,140 ,561 ,698 RE4 16,00 5,864 ,564 ,695 RE5 15,91 5,911 ,570 ,694 Reliability Statistics Cronbach's N of Items Alpha ,828 Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Variance Corrected Item- Cronbach's Item Deleted if Item Deleted Total Alpha if Item Correlation Deleted RS1 11,81 4,748 ,629 ,795 RS2 11,94 4,450 ,697 ,765 RS3 12,06 4,497 ,668 ,777 RS4 12,28 4,008 ,643 ,795 80 Reliability Statistics Cronbach's N of Items Alpha ,779 Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Variance Corrected Item- Cronbach's Item Deleted if Item Deleted Total Alpha if Item Correlation Deleted TA1 12,73 3,561 ,578 ,729 TA2 12,75 3,419 ,571 ,732 TA3 13,08 3,366 ,526 ,760 TA4 12,77 3,378 ,673 ,682 Reliability Statistics Cronbach's N of Items Alpha ,825 Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Variance Corrected Item- Cronbach's Item Deleted if Item Deleted Total Alpha if Item Correlation Deleted EM1 12,38 4,012 ,630 ,792 EM2 12,45 3,868 ,649 ,782 EM3 12,66 3,319 ,725 ,743 EM4 12,82 3,327 ,627 ,798 Reliability Statistics Cronbach's N of Items Alpha ,861 Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Variance Corrected Item- Cronbach's Item Deleted if Item Deleted Total Alpha if Item Correlation Deleted AS1 11,63 4,668 ,709 ,822 AS2 11,79 4,406 ,713 ,820 AS3 11,95 4,032 ,737 ,813 AS4 11,64 4,827 ,684 ,833 81 Reliability Statistics Cronbach's N of Items Alpha ,832 Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Variance Corrected Item- Cronbach's Item Deleted if Item Deleted Total Alpha if Item Correlation Deleted PR1 7,08 3,256 ,689 ,773 PR2 7,24 3,286 ,709 ,751 PR3 6,90 3,897 ,692 ,777 Reliability Statistics Cronbach's N of Items Alpha ,818 Item-Total Statistics Scale Mean if Scale Variance Corrected Item- Cronbach's Item Deleted if Item Deleted Total Alpha if Item Correlation Deleted CS1 12,18 4,824 ,602 ,792 CS2 12,25 4,051 ,681 ,752 CS3 12,41 3,947 ,616 ,791 CS4 12,10 4,359 ,689 ,751 C Exploratory factors analysis a Independent variables • The first time KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy ,925 Approx Chi-Square 3335,745 Bartlett's Test of Sphericity df 276 Sig ,000 82 Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings Loadings Component Total % of Cumulative Variance % Total % of Cumulative Variance % Total % of Cumulative Variance % 10,045 41,852 41,852 10,045 41,852 41,852 3,882 16,174 16,174 1,718 7,158 49,010 1,718 7,158 49,010 3,525 14,686 30,860 1,422 5,924 54,934 1,422 5,924 54,934 3,376 14,068 44,928 1,263 5,264 60,198 1,263 5,264 60,198 2,385 9,937 54,865 1,103 4,595 64,793 1,103 4,595 64,793 2,383 9,928 64,793 ,853 3,553 68,346 ,743 3,095 71,441 ,657 2,738 74,179 ,585 2,439 76,618 10 ,570 2,374 78,992 11 ,544 2,267 81,259 12 ,503 2,096 83,355 13 ,479 1,997 85,352 14 ,439 1,830 87,181 15 ,417 1,737 88,919 16 ,392 1,634 90,552 17 ,380 1,581 92,134 18 ,342 1,426 93,560 19 ,312 1,298 94,858 20 ,307 1,280 96,138 21 ,267 1,111 97,249 22 ,249 1,036 98,286 23 ,232 ,966 99,252 24 ,180 ,748 100,000 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis Rotated Component Matrixa Component EM1 ,763 EM2 ,750 TA1 ,706 83 TA4 ,677 TA2 ,649 EM3 ,573 AS1 ,789 AS3 ,747 AS2 ,719 AS4 ,594 TA3 ,564 EM4 RE1 ,775 RS2 ,673 RS4 ,652 RS3 ,650 RS1 ,645 RE2 ,577 RE3 ,751 RE4 ,683 RE5 ,666 PR2 ,859 PR1 ,805 PR3 ,697 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization a Rotation converged in iterations • The second time after eliminate EM4 KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy Approx Chi-Square Bartlett's Test of Sphericity ,920 3117,306 df 253 Sig ,000 84 Total Variance Explained Component Initial Eigenvalues Total % of Variance Extraction Sums of Squared Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings Loadings Cumulative Total % % of Cumulative Total Variance % % of Cumulative Variance % 9,503 41,319 41,319 9,503 41,319 41,319 3,730 16,216 16,216 1,718 7,468 48,787 1,718 7,468 48,787 3,370 14,651 30,867 1,414 6,149 54,936 1,414 6,149 54,936 3,263 14,188 45,055 1,251 5,440 60,376 1,251 5,440 60,376 2,340 10,173 55,228 1,102 4,790 65,166 1,102 4,790 65,166 2,286 9,937 65,166 ,815 3,543 68,709 ,737 3,203 71,912 ,657 2,856 74,768 ,585 2,545 77,312 10 ,554 2,410 79,722 11 ,520 2,260 81,982 12 ,500 2,173 84,155 13 ,479 2,083 86,239 14 ,439 1,909 88,148 15 ,411 1,785 89,933 16 ,391 1,698 91,631 17 ,343 1,490 93,121 18 ,325 1,413 94,534 19 ,309 1,344 95,878 20 ,268 1,165 97,043 21 ,251 1,092 98,136 22 ,240 1,043 99,179 23 ,189 ,821 100,000 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis Rotated Component Matrixa Component EM1 ,763 EM2 ,749 TA1 ,709 TA4 ,679 TA2 ,654 EM3 ,567 85 RE1 ,771 RS2 ,672 RS4 ,663 RS3 ,653 RS1 ,644 RE2 ,579 AS1 ,790 AS3 ,743 AS2 ,712 AS4 ,594 TA3 ,568 PR2 ,859 PR1 ,807 PR3 ,698 RE3 ,752 RE4 ,689 RE5 ,671 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization a Rotation converged in iterations b Dependent variable KMO and Bartlett's Test Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy ,792 Approx Chi-Square Bartlett's Test of Sphericity 361,256 df Sig ,000 Total Variance Explained Component Initial Eigenvalues Total % of Variance Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Cumulative % 2,619 65,473 65,473 ,577 14,417 79,889 ,423 10,587 90,477 ,381 9,523 100,000 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis Total 2,619 % of Variance 65,473 Cumulative % 65,473 86 Component Matrixa Component CS4 ,839 CS2 ,834 CS3 ,783 CS1 ,780 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis a components extracted D Correlation Pearson Analysis Correlations M_SC Pearson Correlation M_SC Pearson Correlation M_CS ,469** ,574** ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 259 259 259 259 259 ,652** ,482** ,554** ,616** ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 259 259 259 259 ,518** ,571** ,654** ,000 ,000 ,000 259 259 259 ,471** ,618** ,000 ,000 259 259 ,577** ,652** Sig (2-tailed) ,000 ,000 N 259 259 259 ,422** ,482** ,518** Sig (2-tailed) ,000 ,000 ,000 N 259 259 259 259 259 259 ,469** ,554** ,571** ,471** ,579** Sig (2-tailed) ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 N 259 259 259 259 259 259 ,574** ,616** ,654** ,618** ,579** Sig (2-tailed) ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 N 259 259 259 259 259 Pearson Correlation M_CS M_RE ,422** N Pearson Correlation M_RE ,570** M_PR ,577** ,000 Pearson Correlation M_PR 259 M_AS ,570** Sig (2-tailed) Pearson Correlation M_AS Sig (2-tailed) N M_RS M_RS ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) E Regression Analysis ,000 259 87 Model Summary Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std Error of the Durbin-Watson Estimate ,776a ,601 ,594 ,42767 1,915 a Predictors: (Constant), M_RE, M_SC, M_PR, M_RS, M_AS b Dependent Variable: M_CS ANOVAa Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Regression 69,831 13,966 Residual 46,273 253 ,183 116,104 258 Total Sig 76,360 ,000b a Dependent Variable: M_CS b Predictors: (Constant), M_RE, M_SC, M_PR, M_RS, M_AS Coefficientsa Model Unstandardized Standardized Coefficients Coefficients B Std Error t Sig Beta (Constant) ,301 ,224 M_SC ,197 ,062 M_RS ,165 M_AS Collinearity Statistics Tolerance VIF 1,345 ,180 ,164 3,167 ,002 ,587 1,704 ,061 ,154 2,688 ,008 ,479 2,087 ,226 ,060 ,222 3,758 ,000 ,452 2,213 M_PR ,215 ,037 ,287 5,882 ,000 ,663 1,509 M_RE ,151 ,050 ,155 2,987 ,003 ,585 1,710 a Dependent Variable: M_CS F One-way ANOVA Analysis • Gender Descriptives M_CS N Mean Std Std 95% Confidence Interval for Deviation Error Mean Minimum Maximum Lower Bound Upper Bound Male 75 3,9633 ,67495 ,07794 3,8080 4,1186 2,50 5,00 Female 184 4,1250 ,66530 ,04905 4,0282 4,2218 1,75 5,00 Total 259 4,0782 ,67083 ,04168 3,9961 4,1603 1,75 5,00 88 Test of Homogeneity of Variances M_CS Levene Statistic df1 df2 ,009 Sig 257 ,926 ANOVA M_CS Sum of Squares Between Groups df Mean Square F 1,393 1,393 Within Groups 114,712 257 ,446 Total 116,104 258 • Sig 3,120 ,079 Age Descriptives M_CS N Mean Std Std 95% Confidence Interval Deviation Error for Mean Lower Upper Bound Bound Minimum Maximum From 18 to 24 172 4,1424 ,66616 ,05079 4,0422 4,2427 2,25 5,00 From 25 to 34 66 3,9242 ,67932 ,08362 3,7572 4,0912 1,75 5,00 From 35 to 44 11 4,0000 ,75829 ,22863 3,4906 4,5094 2,50 5,00 From 45 to 55 4,0833 ,40825 ,16667 3,6549 4,5118 3,50 4,50 Above 55 4,0625 ,65749 ,32874 3,0163 5,1087 3,50 5,00 259 4,0782 ,67083 ,04168 3,9961 4,1603 1,75 5,00 Total Test of Homogeneity of Variances M_CS Levene Statistic ,573 df1 df2 Sig 254 ,683 ANOVA M_CS Sum of Squares Between Groups df Mean Square 2,343 ,586 Within Groups 113,762 254 ,448 Total 116,104 258 F Sig 1,308 ,268 89 • Occupation Descriptives M_CS N Student Mean Std Std 95% Confidence Interval Deviation Error for Mean Lower Upper Bound Bound Minimum Maximum 162 4,1296 ,64282 ,05050 4,0299 4,2294 2,25 5,00 4,3000 ,83666 ,37417 3,2611 5,3389 3,00 5,00 Freelancer 15 4,2333 ,64411 ,16631 3,8766 4,5900 3,00 5,00 Officer 77 3,9253 ,70834 ,08072 3,7646 4,0861 1,75 5,00 259 4,0782 ,67083 ,04168 3,9961 4,1603 1,75 5,00 Unskilled Labor Total Test of Homogeneity of Variances M_CS Levene Statistic df1 ,164 df2 Sig 255 ,920 ANOVA M_CS Sum of Squares Between Groups df Mean Square 2,835 ,945 Within Groups 113,269 255 ,444 Total 116,104 258 • F Sig 2,127 ,097 Average cost per month Descriptives M_CS N Less than 500.000VND From 500.000 to 1.000.000VND Above 1.000.000VND Mean Std Std 95% Confidence Deviation Error Interval for Mean Lower Upper Bound Bound Minimum Maximum 153 4,0735 ,65887 ,05327 3,9683 4,1788 2,25 5,00 77 4,0714 ,69284 ,07896 3,9142 4,2287 1,75 5,00 29 4,1207 ,69636 ,12931 3,8558 4,3856 3,00 5,00 90 Total 259 4,0782 ,67083 ,04168 3,9961 4,1603 1,75 5,00 Test of Homogeneity of Variances M_CS Levene Statistic df1 ,462 df2 Sig 256 ,630 ANOVA M_CS Sum of Squares Between Groups df Mean Square ,059 ,030 Within Groups 116,045 256 ,453 Total 116,104 258 • F Sig ,065 ,937 Frequency Descriptives M_CS N Once per month From to times per month Std Std 95% Confidence Deviation Error Interval for Mean Lower Upper Bound Bound Minimum Maximum 53 3,8396 ,70215 ,09645 3,6461 4,0332 2,25 5,00 122 4,1270 ,63737 ,05771 4,0128 4,2413 1,75 5,00 84 4,1577 ,67192 ,07331 4,0119 4,3036 2,50 5,00 259 4,0782 ,67083 ,04168 3,9961 4,1603 1,75 5,00 times and more per month Total Mean Test of Homogeneity of Variances M_CS Levene Statistic ,824 df1 df2 Sig 256 ,440 ANOVA M_CS Sum of Squares Between Groups df Mean Square 3,839 1,920 Within Groups 112,265 256 ,439 Total 116,104 258 F 4,377 Sig ,014 91 Multiple Comparisons Dependent Variable: M_CS LSD (I) TIMES (J) TIMES Mean Std Difference Error Sig 95% Confidence Interval (I-J) From to times per month Lower Upper Bound Bound -,28743* ,10894 ,009 -,5020 -,0729 -,31812* ,11617 ,007 -,5469 -,0893 ,28743* ,10894 ,009 ,0729 ,5020 -,03069 ,09389 ,744 -,2156 ,1542 ,31812* ,11617 ,007 ,0893 ,5469 ,03069 ,09389 ,744 -,1542 ,2156 Once per month times and more per month From to times per month Once per month times and more per month Once per month times and more per From to times per month month * The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level • Grab services are essential during COVID 19 Descriptives M_CS N Mean Std Std 95% Confidence Interval for Deviation Error Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound Minimum Maximum Yes 247 4,1296 ,60772 ,03867 4,0534 4,2057 2,50 5,00 No 12 3,0208 1,00825 ,29106 2,3802 3,6614 1,75 5,00 259 4,0782 ,67083 ,04168 3,9961 4,1603 1,75 5,00 Total Test of Homogeneity of Variances M_CS Levene Statistic 7,090 df1 df2 Sig 257 ,008 ANOVA M_CS Sum of Squares Between Groups df Mean Square 14,068 14,068 Within Groups 102,037 257 ,397 Total 116,104 258 F 35,432 Sig ,000 92 ...MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING THE STATE BANK OF VIETNAM BANKING UNIVERSITY OF HO CHI MINH CITY TRAN DINH THUY LINH THE IMPACT OF SERVICE QUALITY ON GRAB’S CUSTOMER SATISFACTION: AN EMPIRICAL. .. respondents using Grab services during the fourth outbreak of COVID 19 in Ho Chi Minh city Based on the study result, the determinant factors that impact Grab’s customer satisfaction in Ho Chi Minh. .. infections in the community recorded 97.370 cases as of July 2021, including Ho Chi Minh city, the epicenter, witnessed 62.139 instances of the impact of the Delta variant Ho Chi Minh City authorities