Bank service quality: empirical evidence from Greek and Bulgarian retail customers

Abstract

Purpose

Despite the rapid growth and internationalisation of the services sector, particularly financial services, managers today realize that to successfully leverage service quality as a global competitive tool, they first need to correctly identify the antecedents of what the international consumer perceives as service quality. This paper aims to assess and compare the level of bank service quality provided in Greece and Bulgaria and to identify the dimensions of quality service in the two countries.

Design/methodology/approach

In 2000 Bahia and Nantel proposed a specific scale, the BSQ, (Bank Service Quality) for measuring perceived service quality in retail banking consisting of six dimensions: effectiveness and assurance; access; price; tangibles; service portfolio; and reliability. This tool was used for the collection of data related to the banking services provided in the two countries (Greece and Bulgaria). Statistical methods, such as the t‐test, chi‐square, Cronbach's‐alpha and factor analysis, were then employed to answer the research questions.

Findings

The results suggest that the Greek customers' perception was that they received higher quality services compared to the perception of the Bulgarian clients. Differences between the countries were also reported regarding the dimensionality of quality service.

Practical implications

The results have significant implications for banks in developing operational, marketing and human resource strategies in the two countries.

Originality/value

Greece and Bulgaria – two countries with different economic, political and socio‐cultural backgrounds – give the opportunity for cross‐country research in the area of service quality, an area where research is not very mature.

Citation

Petridou, E., Spathis, C., Glaveli, N. and Liassides, C. (2007), "Bank service quality: empirical evidence from Greek and Bulgarian retail customers", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 568-585. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656710710757772