Article can be accessed online at http://www.publishingindia.

com

SERVICE QUALITY IN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE

SECTOR BANKS OF INDIA
Shruti Agrawal*, Manish Mittal**, Ratish Gupta***

Abstract: Banking sector and its performance play an important role in an economy. The current scenario of Indian banking sector is
very dynamic and competitive. To maintain market share it is necessary for banking institutions to acquire large customer base. Customers
today are very much aware about various financial services and institutions, moreover they are spoilt for choice. Therefore they can only be
retained by providing quality services. The present study focuses on the service quality and customer satisfaction among private and public
sector banks in India. It also attempts to compare service quality gaps between customer expectation and satisfaction regarding banking
service. The outcome of the study shows that service gap is lower in private sector banks than public sector banks. Reliability and assurance
are the dimensions where no significant difference has been observed between public and private sector banks.

Keywords: Customer Satisfaction, Service Quality, Private Banks, Public Banks, Servqual

INTRODUCTION from that of competitors (Tang & Zairi, 1998). Further to

maintain and improve their profit position and market share,
Effective functioning of banking system is very crucial banks have to design marketing strategies aiming customer
for the development of an economy. Banking institutions satisfaction and loyalty through improved service quality.
play a key role in the process of mobilisation of savings
to the productive sector of the economy. Before 1991, the As explained by Zeithaml (1987) “Service quality is the
level of competition in banking industry was very low. customer’s judgment about an entity’s overall excellence
After nationalisation of commercial banks, banking sector or superiority. It is a form of attitude, and results from
was majorly dominated by public sector banks in terms of comparison of expectation to perceptions of performance
asset size. But in 1991, when India undertook a series of received”. With reference to banking industry service quality
liberalisation, privatisation, and globalisation measures the is vital as products and services offered by different banks
banking industry has completely transformed with new are similar to each other, as they function in same regulatory
private sector banks opening up, expansion of existing environment. So to survive and succeed banks have to
private sector banks, and entry of foreign banks. understand service quality and satisfaction parameter. Banks
must make frequent efforts to identify customers’ perception
Since then Indian banking sector has witnessed a phenomenal regarding the services they provide. Jha (2000) pointed
growth. Presently, the scenario of this industry is very dynamic out that government today emphasizes on profits with a
and challenging. It has a large number of banks operating clear indication to ‘perform or perish’. So banks must start
with mixed ownership. Regulators and policy makers are realising their dependency over customer, try to improve
making banking norms in line with international standards their services and build good relationships with the clients.
with the aim that Indian banking system progresses with
strong fundamentals. However even after many initiatives
and policy measures introduced to strengthen banking sector
LITERATURE REVIEW
there seems a lot of difference at the operational level of
Service sector of an economy faces a continuous
banks. Banks are required to understand these difference,
challenge of managing the quality of service they provide.
discover their weaknesses, and work in pace with rapidly
With the expanding consumer base as well as growing
changing financial market.
competition, even banking sector is becoming customer
In such a competitive set up banks are required to attract driven. Therefore, nowadays banking institutions focus on
potential customers as well as retain the existing ones (Best, analyzing satisfaction levels of customers and try to adopt
2005). Banks are now required to capitalise on their core differentiation in their services. Some researches done in this
competencies and focus on differentiating their offerings area are described below.

*
Daly College Business School, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India. Email: shrutidcbs@gmail.com
**
Daly College Business School, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India. Email: manmittal_1969@rediffmail.com
***
Daly College Business School, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India. Email: ratish.dcbs@gmail.com
 Service Quality in Public and Private Sector Banks of India 35

Kangis and Vassilis (1997) studied customer’s expectation Literature on Banks in India
and perception of public and private banks of Greece. They
studied five dimensions of service quality and concluded that Aurora and Malhotra (1997) made efforts to study level
consumers of private sector banks have favorable impact of customer satisfaction and marketing strategies adopted
of quality received as compared to banks in public sector. in public and private sector banks in India. Their study
Vasilis, Constantine and Katerina (2005) made a similar explored various factors of satisfaction in these banks and
attempt to study Greece customers’ satisfaction level. Their concluded that customers are more satisfied with private
study concluded that in terms of marketing efficiency public banks mainly because of the staff factor. They suggest
sector banks have high perceived value while in terms of public sector banks to be well equipped, have trained staff,
professional services and communications private sector personalise the services provided, avoid long queues, and
banks shows more satisfactory performance. keep their environment attractive.
Al-Tamimi and Al-Amiri (2003) compared service quality Varghese (2000) conducted a study to compare public and
between the Dubai Islamic Bank and the Abu Dhabi Islamic private sector banks of Kerela. He considered two banks
Bank. The result of their study indicated no major difference from each category and analyzed their performance. The
between service quality provided by these banks. study revealed that there exist no major differences between
Islam and Ahmed (2005) used SERVQUAL model to services of public and private sector banks. Also, banks in
compare private, public and foreign banks in Dhaka. The both the sectors adopt similar internal marketing strategies.
study concluded that personal attention to clients, error Bodla (2004) examined four private sector banks and four
free records, safety of transactions and tangible physical public sector banks of Chandigarh, Delhi and Haryana
facilities are most important attributes to measure service in order to assess their service quality. He concluded that
quality. Another finding of the study demonstrates significant expectations and perceptions of customers differ significantly
difference between expected and perceived service quality in the banks of these two sectors. Israel, Clement, and
of public and private banks. Selvam (2004) made similar attempt to analyse service
Ahmad, Rehman, Saif and Safwan (2010) examined how quality of banks. Their study identified that marketing efforts
customers perceive the services provided by Islamic and and performance of banks in public sector are less efficient
conventional banks in Pakistan. The study revealed that than in private sector, but when it comes to reliability and
customers of Islamic banks expect a high quality of service security public sector banks are trusted more over private
from their bank while customers of conventional banks have sector banks.
low expectation in this regards. Sudesh (2007) analysed service quality of banks in India
Haq and Muhammad (2012) compared public and private and reported that services of public sector banks are of
sector banks of Pakistan. Customers were found to be more poor quality. These banks are rated low for tangibility,
satisfied with the private sector banking services. As these responsiveness and empathy when compared to private
banks were technologically well equipped and had multiple sector banks. The study also suggested that management
branches at convenient locations. should keep a close watch on potential failure points and
should make efforts to solve customer problems promptly.
Akhter (2012) analysed public and private sector banks of
Bangladesh. The study demonstrated a large gap between Singh and Arora (2011) studied the factors effecting
public and private banks. Commercial banks in public sector customer satisfaction with the quality of services. The
needan overall change and improvement in its system so as study was conducted in some selected branches of public
to meet the demand of their clients. The study also reveals and private sector banks of Delhi. The respondents reported
that there exist a gap between customer expectations and that they were not satisfied with the employee behavior and
employee perception in private sector banks. Therefore infrastructure of public sector banks. While private sector
private sector should focus on internal as well as interactive services were perceived to be cost with lack of accessibility
marketing. and communication.

Yapa and Hasara (2013) researched customer satisfaction Lohani and Shukla (2011) focused on banks in Lucknow city
between customers of public and private sector banks in Sri and concluded that customers perceive services of private
Lanka. Their study revealed that there exist a lot of difference sector banks to be of superior quality than banks in public
between performance and expectation of public and private sector.
sector banks. The major areas where the performance gap Virk and Mahal (2012) presented a comparative analysis
persists are tangibility and reliability. of level of customer satisfaction towards services provided
by public and private sector banks in Chandigarh city. They
36 International Journal on Customer Relations Volume 4 Issue 1 March 2016

identified that customers prefer private sector banks mainly was 250. However, researcher received 206 fully answered
because of two reasons, firstly these banks focus on building questionnaire, all of them were included in the study. Thus
and maintaining good relationship with their clients and the response rate was 82%. Geographically the study was
secondly as they are well equipped with the use of modern restricted to Indore city.
technology as compared to banks in public sector.
Simon (2012) studied customers’ perception with respect to Data Analysis
service quality of public sector and private sector banks in
Coimbatore. She concluded that private sector banks give Various statistical analysis techniques such as descriptive
tough competition to public sector banks by providing better statistics, factor analysis, gap analysis, and ANOVA were
quality and range of services to customers. used, which were processed by statistical software.The
Franklin and Arul (2014) surveyed banks of Chennai city analysis of data was carried out using Statistical Package for
and compared satisfaction and expectation of consumers of the Social Sciences (SPSS) 16.0 for Windows. The following
public and private sector banks. They reported that service hypotheses were tested:
gap of private sector is better than public sector across all 1) H0: There is no significant difference in satisfaction
service dimensions except assurance. Public sector banks level of public and private bank’s customers with
must concentrate on improving their performance in order to respect to tangibility.
maintain their market share in Chennai. H1: There is a significant difference in satisfaction
level of public and private bank’s customers with
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY respect to tangibility.
2) H0: There is no significant difference in satisfaction
Research Objectives level of public and private bank’s customers with
respect to responsiveness.
a) To examine the service quality expectations of the
H1: There is a significant difference in satisfaction
bank customers
level of public and private bank’s customers with
b) To examine the level of satisfaction of the customers respect to responsiveness.
towards services rendered by banking institutions
3) H0: There is no significant difference in satisfaction
c) To compare the difference between customer level of public and private bank’s customers with
expectation and satisfaction of the banking services of respect to reliability.
public and private sector banks.
H1: There is a significant difference in satisfaction
level of public and private bank’s customers with
Tools for Data Collection respect to reliability.
4) H0: There is no significant difference in satisfaction
A self-administered questionnaire was used for data level of public and private bank’s customers with
collection. It consisted of close-ended questions. The respect to empathy.
questionnaire was divided in two parts – the first part H1: There is a significant difference in satisfaction
was intended to know the respondent’s expectation of the level of public and private bank’s customers with
SERVQUAL service quality variables. Therefore, the respect to empathy.
respondents were asked to rate service quality variables on
a five-point Likert Importance Scale where 1=Extremely 5) H0: There is no significant difference in satisfaction
Important, 2= Very Important, 3= Moderately Important, 4= level of public and private bank’s customers with
Slightly Important and 5= Not at all Important. The second respect to assurance.
part of questionnaire included various statement describing H1: There is a significant difference in satisfaction
service quality parameters, where the respondents rated level of public and private bank’s customers with
their agreement on a five-point Likert Scale. The responses respect to assurance.
were labeled as 1= Strongly Agree, 2= Agree, 3= Neutral,
4= Disagree and 5= Strongly Disagree. High level of
Descriptive Statistics
validity was ensured through pilot test of the questionnaire
with 40 respondents. Their views were incorporated in the
Some information about the respondent’s background was
final questionnaire. Convenient sampling method was used
collected using demographic variable like gender, age,
to select the respondents. They were contacted directly or
education, occupation and annual income. Distribution
through internet. The data were collected during January and
of respondents on the basis of their demographic profile
February 2016. Total number of questionnaire distributed
is illustrated in Table 1. The collected information shows
 Service Quality in Public and Private Sector Banks of India 37

that research sample consist of 138 males and 68 females Reliability Analysis
belonging to Indore. A large proportion of respondents of
public and private sector belong to 26-45 age groups. The In this study reliability was examined on all items. As a test
respondent’s distribution regarding the education level of reliability Cronbach’s Alpha was adopted to represent
displays that 10.7% currently have higher secondary as internal consistency. Table 3 shows reliability test of all the
their highest qualification, 23.3% have a graduate degree, items. Most of the values are greater than the threshold level
28.2% have a post graduate degree and 37.9% were qualified of 0.70 except the reliability value of assurance (Walsh,
professionals. The above data indicate that majority of the 1995). Hence it can be concluded that the items reliably
sample represents highly educated class. Statistics related to measure the defined constructs.
occupation reveals that a significant number of the sample
belongs to service class (48.1%) followed by professionals
(26.7%). On the income level, sample information shows Factor Analysis
that 67% of the respondents have annual income less than
or equal to Rs. 10 lakhs, higher income group with annual Principal component factor analysis with Varimax Rotation
income above Rs. 15 lakhs is16.5% of the total number. It was used to analyse service quality factors. Retaining only
is interesting to note that with regard to public and private such factors which have Eigen values greater than 1, we
sector banks, the sample number of respondents are equal to infer that totally six factors have emerged. The total variance
50% who use services of public sector banks and remaining accounted for five factors which explain 71.62% variances.
50% uses services of private sector banks. One factor is dropped in this process, as it was able to
explain only 4% of the variance. Factors identified and their
factor loadings are discussed in Table 2. Factor loadings

Table 1: Demographic Profile of Respondents

Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent

Male 138 67 67
Gender Female 68 33 100.0
Total 206 100.0 100.0
18-25 38 18.4 18.4
26-35 64 31.1 49.5
Age (in years) 36-45 66 32.0 81.6
Above 45 38 18.4 100.0
Total 206 100.0 100.0
H.SC 22 10.7 10.7
Graduate 48 23.3 34
Education Post Graduate 58 28.2 62.1
Professional 78 37.9 100.0
Total 206 100.0 100.0
Service 99 48.1 48.1
Business 35 17.0 65
Occupation Housewife 17 8.3 73.3
Professional 55 26.7 100
Total 206 100 100
Less than 5 lakhs 52 25.2 25.2
5 lakhs to 10 lakhs 86 41.7 67.0
Yearly Income 10 lakhs to 15 lakhs 34 16.5 83.5
Above 15 lakhs 34 16.5 100
Total 206 100 100
Public Sector 103 50 50
Type of Bank Private Sector 103 50 100
Total 206 100 100
38 International Journal on Customer Relations Volume 4 Issue 1 March 2016

are the weights and correlations between each variable and Responsiveness: The second factor that emerged is
the factor. High load signify that the factor is more relevant responsiveness. This factor is loaded by four variables –
(Cooper & Schindler, 2006). equipped ATMs (.630), services meet your requirement
(.696), full range of services provided (.615), services are
Empathy: This factor was perceived by the respondents as
provided on time (.616)
the most important factor with total variance of 43.218%.
Empathy as a service quality dimension includes bank Tangibility: This factor explains 5.812% of variance. The
staff knowledge (0.613), right service in first time (.722), items included in this factor are physical facilities (.788),
prompt services (.782), interest in solving customer problem environment of bank is clean (.752), arrangement of products
(.727), employees understand individual needs (.560), polite and facilities (.695), and modern-looking equipments (.728)
employees (.689), bank keeps your interest in mind (.533),
Reliability: This factor is loaded by two variables safety of
and bank understand your problem (.724)
transaction with banks employees (.783) and trustworthy
employees (.816).
Table 2: Factors Identified and Their Factor Loadings

Factor Name Eigen Cronbach Variable and Questionnaire items Factor Loading
Value Alpha
1 2 3 4 5 6
Your bank’s physical facilities are visually .788
appealing
The environment in your bank is clean .752
Tangibility 2.797 0.818 Products and facilities in your bank are neat- .695
ly arranged
Your bank have modern-looking equipments .728
The ATM’s of your bank are technologically .630
well equipped
Services provided by bank meets your re- .696
Responsiveness 2.900 0.798 quirement
Your bank provides full range of services .615
Your bank provide services on time .616
You feel safe in your transactions with the .783
Reliability 2.502 0.810 bank employees
You can trust employees of your bank .816
Your bank staff have sufficient knowledge to .613
answer your queries
Your bank’s employees gives you right ser- .722
vices in first time
Your bank employees serves you promptly .787
When customers have a trouble, your bank .727
Empathy 5.025 0.927 show a sincere interest in solving it
Bank employees understand your individual
.560
needs
Employees are polite
.689
Your bank keeps your interest in mind
.533
Bank understands your problem
.724
Products and services of the bank are cor- .750
rectly priced
Your bank provides sufficient parking space .678
Assurance 2.068 0.633 Statements and documents provided by your .769
bank are error free
Your bank employees tell you exactly when .464
the services will be delivered
 Service Quality in Public and Private Sector Banks of India 39

Assurance: This factor explains 4.428% of variance. The Dimension-wise Analysis

items included in this factor are price of product and services
(.750), sufficient parking space (.678), error free statements Tangibility: Table 4 compares expectation, perception and
and documents (.769), and service delivery time known service gap among customers of public sector and private
(.464). sector. A negative gap score indicates that services are not
provided as per customer’s expectations. As it can be seen, in
all tangibility service quality dimensions gap score is higher
Gap Analysis in case of public sector banks. It can thus be concluded that
physical facilities and availability of modern equipment is
According to Brown and Bond (1995) “The Gap model is
more in private sector banks.
one of the best received and most heuristically valuable
contributions to the service literature”. This method Responsiveness: Table 5 shows expectation and satisfaction
is popularly used to find shortfalls in service quality of customer in respect of responsiveness. When an element-
dimensions. Customer develops an expectation based on the wise analysis is made it is found that private sector banks are
service and company information they collect from various superior in two dimensions that is equipped ATMs and range
sources. Once they experience the service they are able to of product and services offered while public sector banks are
rate their satisfaction level. The Gap model helps to analyze better in providing services as per customer’s requirement
difference or gap in the expectation and satisfaction scores. and also in providing timely services.
Reliability: Table 6 shows gap regarding reliability
Overall Service Quality Analysis dimension. There are two elements in this dimension.
One is safety of transactions with bank employees, the
The analysis of Table 3 shows difference between expectation gap score depicts that it’s almost equal among public and
and perception concerning service quality of public and private sector banks of Indore. But the second element that
private sector banks. On comparing the gap score, it is study trustworthiness of bank employees, customer trust
found that perceptual gap of private sector bank customers employees of private sector banks over public sector banks.
is narrow on all the dimensions. Therefore, it can be said
that private bank customers are more satisfied with the bank Empathy: Table 7 shows comparison of public and private
services when compared with public sector bank customers. sector banks in regards to empathy. The results reveal

Table 3: Difference between Expectation and Perception of Banks

Service Quality Public Sector Banks Private Sector Banks

Dimensions Expectation Perception Gap Expectation Perception Gap
Tangibility 7.7864 32.1068 -24.3204 7.6863 28.2941 -20.6078
Responsiveness 7.3301 14.4854 -7.1553 6.7157 12.6961 -5.9804
Reliability 2.4466 4.0583 -1.6117 2.549 4.0882 -1.5392
Empathy 12.7961 21.0874 -8.2913 11.8333 18.2157 -6.3824
Assurance 6.9029 11.9417 -5.0388 6.5098 11.098 -4.5882

Higher the mean, lower the expectation

Negative gap represents services are not delivered as per expectations

Table 4: Comparison between Expectation, Perception and Service Gap

Tangibility
Public Sector Banks Private Sector Banks
Service Quality Dimensions
Expectation Perception Gap Expectation Perception Gap
Bank’s physical facility 1.9029 2.2524 -0.3495 1.902 1.9412 -0.0392
Bank’s environment 1.8835 2.2718 -0.3883 1.7059 1.9216 -0.2157
Arrangement of Product and Fa-
1.835 2.4854 -0.6504 1.7745 2.098 -0.3235
cilities
Modern Looking Equipment 2.165 2.4854 -0.3204 2.3039 2.2353 0.0686
40 International Journal on Customer Relations Volume 4 Issue 1 March 2016

Table 5: Expectation and Satisfaction of Customer in Respect of Responsiveness

Responsiveness
Public Sector Banks Private Sector Banks
Service Quality Dimensions
Expectation Perception Gap Expectation Perception Gap
Well Equipped ATM 1.4175 2.3301 -0.9126 1.3235 1.9706 -0.6471
Bank Service as per requirement 1.3495 2.1584 -0.8089 1.2353 2.1275 -0.8922
Range of Product and services of-
1.9208 2.4466 -0.5258 1.6176 2.1863 -0.5687
fered
Timely Services 1.2136 2.5825 -1.3689 1.1961 1.951 -0.7549

Table 6: Gap Regarding Reliability Dimension

Reliability
Public Sector Banks Private Sector Banks
Service Quality Dimensions
Expectation Perception Gap Expectation Perception Gap
Safety of transactions 1.0971 1.8835 -0.7864 1.1078 1.8922 -0.7844
Trustworthy bank employees 1.3495 2.1748 -0.8253 1.4412 2.1961 -0.7549

Table 7: Comparison of Public and Private Sector Banks in Regards to Empathy

Empathy
Service Quality Public Sector Banks Private Sector Banks
Dimensions Expectation Perception Gap Expectation Perception Gap
Knowledge of bank Staff 1.6408 2.5825 -0.9417 1.2941 2.4118 -1.1176
Right services in first time 1.4466 2.5631 -1.1165 1.3235 2.2941 -0.9706
Promptness of services 1.5631 2.5049 -0.9417 1.3235 2.0980 -0.7745
Interest in solving customer
1.3960 2.7723 -1.3762 1.3431 2.1176 -0.7745
problem
Employees understand in-
1.7864 2.6214 -0.8350 1.6373 2.5490 -0.9118
dividual needs
Polite employees 1.8020 2.8155 -1.0136 1.6373 2.0196 -0.3824
Consideration of your inter-
1.7426 2.7767 -1.0341 1.7745 2.5000 -0.7255
est by bank
Understanding customer’s
1.5146 2.5049 -0.9903 1.5000 2.2255 -0.7255
Problem

that majority of the elements explaining empathy suggest Assurance: Table 8 illustrates differences on the assurance
that services of private sector banks are better than public dimension of service quality. The data shows that gap is more
sector banks. Right service in first time, promptness of in private sector with respect to product and service quality.
service delivery, interest in solving customer problem, The data show that gap is more in private sector with respect
polite employees, consideration of customer interest and to product and service pricing and parking facility provided
understanding customer problem are the variables that to customers. While customers are satisfied with private
shows high gap score in public sector banks in comparison to sector bank’s services in respect of error free statements
private sector banks. Respondents were more satisfied with and documents and also informing customers about service
public sector banks only on two elements that is knowledge delivery time.
of bank staff and employees understand individual needs of
customers.
 Service Quality in Public and Private Sector Banks of India 41

Table 8: Differences on the Assurance Dimension of Service Quality

Assurance
Service Quality Public Sector Banks Private Sector Banks
Dimensions Expectation Perception Gap Expectation Perception Gap
Right Pricing of Prod-
1.5347 2.3107 -0.7760 1.4706 2.6078 -1.1373
uct and Services
Parking Facility 2.2524 2.8155 -0.5631 2.1176 3.0392 -0.9216
Error Free Statements
1.4660 2.1359 -0.6699 1.3431 1.8529 -0.5098
and documents
Service delivery time 1.6796 2.8932 -1.2136 1.5784 2.4412 -0.8627

Table 9: ANOVA Table - 1

Sum of Mean
Df F Sig.
Squares Square
Between Groups (Combined) 744.979 1 744.979 10.041 .002
Tangibility * Type of Bank Within Groups 15061.002 203 74.192
Total 15805.980 204

Table 10: ANOVA Table - 2

Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups (Combined) 164.089 1 164.089 12.072 .001
Responsiveness * Type of Bank Within Groups 2759.307 203 13.593
Total 2923.395 204

Hypothesis Testing Reliability and Type of Bank

The result of ANOVA test shows a value 0.889 (Table 11)

Tangibility and Type of Bank which means that there is no significant difference in the
service quality dimension of reliability and type of bank at
The result of ANOVA test shows a value 0.002 (Table 9) 5% level of significance. Both the sectors are considered to
which means that there is a significant difference in the be equally reliable by customers.
service quality dimension of tangibility and type of bank at
5% level of significance.
Empathy and Type of Bank
Responsiveness and Type of Bank The result of ANOVA test shows a value 0.002 (Table 12)
which means that there is a significant difference in the
The result of ANOVA test reflects a value 0.001 (Table 10) service quality dimension of empathy and type of bank at
which means that there is a significant difference in the 5% level of significance.
service quality dimension of responsiveness and type of
bank at 5% level of significance

Table 11: ANOVA Table - 3

Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups (Combined) .046 1 .046 .020 .889
Reliability * Type of Bank Within Groups 475.856 203 2.344
Total 475.902 204
42 International Journal on Customer Relations Volume 4 Issue 1 March 2016

Table 12: ANOVA Table - 4

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups (Combined) 422.629 1 422.629 9.984 .002
Empathy * Type of Bank Within Groups 8593.468 203 42.332
Total 9016.098 204

Table 13: ANOVA Table - 5

Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups (Combined) 36.481 1 36.481 3.654 .057
Assurance * Type of Bank Within Groups 2026.670 203 9.984
Total 2063.151 204

Assurance and Type of Bank and attempt to assess and monitor their service quality
periodically. Such practice will enable them to identify
The result of ANOVA test shows a value 0.057 (Table 13) improvement areas and incorporate customer’s views while
which means that there is no significant difference in the taking control measures.
service quality dimension of assurance and type of bank at
5% level of significance. REFERENCES
CONCLUSIONS Ahmad, A., Rehman, K.-u., Saif, I., & Safwan, N. (2010).
An empirical investigation of Islamic banking in Pakistan
The present study attempted to examine service quality based on perception of service quality. African Journal of
dimensions of banking institutions and also to understand Business Management, 4(6), 1185-1193.
difference between expectation and satisfaction of customers Akhter, M. (2012). Service gap of selected public and pri-
of two main banking sectors that is public and private. The vate commercial banks in Bangladesh.Global Disclosure
study reveals that most important service quality practice on of Economics and Business, 1(2), 18-30.
customer satisfaction is empathy followed by responsiveness, Al-Tamimi, H. A., & Al-Amiri, A. (2003). Analysing service
tangibility, reliability, and assurance. quality in the UAE Islamic banks.Journal of Financial
Private banks seems to have provided better services and Services Marketing, 8, 119-132.
give better facilities than public sector banks in most of the Aurora, S., & Malhotra, M. (1997). Customer satisfaction: A
areas and thereby they are successful in maintaining long comparative analysis of public and private sector banks.
association with their customers. Public sector banks on Decision, 24(1), 109-130.
the other hand enjoy customer trust, which they have been Best, R. (2005). Market based management. UK: McGraw
using for their survival. Private sector banks need to be Hill.
innovative and adaptive to maintain their market place while
Bodla, B. S. (2004). Service quality perception in banks: An
public sector banks must improve their physical facilities,
Indian perspective. Prajnan, 23(4), 321-333.
technology usage and also impart soft skill training to their
employees. Brown, S.W., & Bond, E. U. (1995). The internal/external
framework and service quality: Toward theory in services
Customer satisfaction is a pre-requisite to compete marketing. Journal of Marketing Management, 25-39.
successfully in market. It acts as a leading indicator of the
Cooper, D., & Schindler, P. (2006).Business research meth-
customer purchase intention and loyalty. Satisfied customer
ods. UK: McGraw Hill.
tends to repeatedly avail same bank’s services and also
buy their products. They also create new customers by Franklin, L. L., & Arul, H. (2014). A comparative study
communicating positive message about it to others. on customer’s satisfaction in service quality dimen-
sions among public sectors banks and private sector
As there is a stiff competition between banks, they are banks in Chennai city. International Journal of Business
forced to be customer- centric in order to retain the existing Quantitative Economics and Applied Management
customers and to acquire new ones. It is necessary for Research, 1(6), 41-55.
all banking institutions to deliver high quality services
 Service Quality in Public and Private Sector Banks of India 43

Haq, W., & Muhammad, B. (2012). Customer satisfaction: Sudesh (2007). Service quality in banks-A study in Haryana
A comparison of public and private banks of Pakistan. and Chandigarh. NICE Journal of Business, 2(1), 55-65.
Ali Bhutto Institute of Science and Technology, Journal of Tang, K. H., & Zairi, M. (1998). Benchmarking qual-
Business and Management (IOSRJBM) 1(5), 1-5. ity implementation in a service context: A comparative
Islam, N., & Ahmed, E. (2005). A measurement of custom- analysis of financial services and institutions of higher
er service quality of banks in dhaka city of Bangladesh. education, Part I: Financial services sector. Total Quality
South Asian Journal of Management, 12(1), 37-57. Management, 9(6), 407-420.
Israel, D., Clement Sudhahar, J., & Selvam, M. (2004). The Varghese, E. M. (2000).Marketing of banking services, Ph.D
measurement of service quality preparation in banking thesis, Thiruvananthpuram. University of Kerela.
sector. SCMS Journal of Indian Management, 1(4), 37-51. Vasilis, A., Constantine, L., & Katerina, D. (2005). Customers
Jha, S. M. (2000). Bank marketing. Millennium Edition. ‘ perceived value for private and state controlled Hellenic
Mumbai, India: Himalaya publication. banks. Journal of Financial Services Marketing, 9 (4),
Kangis, P., &Vassilis, V. (1997). Private and public banks: 360-374.
A comparison of customer expectations and perceptions. Virk, N., & Mahal, P. (2012).Customer satisfaction: A com-
International Journal of Bank Marketing, 15(7), 279-287. parative analysis of public and private sector banks in
Lohani, M. B., & Shukla, K. K. (2011). Comparative study India. Information and Knowledge Management, 2(3),
of customer perception towards services provided by 1-6.
public sector bank and private sector bank. International Walsh, W. B. (1995). Tests and Assessment (3rd ed.). New
Journal of Engineering and Management Science, 2(3), Jursey: Prentice Hall.
143-147. Yapa, W. S., & Hasara, K. M. (2013). Bank service qual-
Simon, L. M. (2012). A study on customer perception to- ity in Sri Lanka: A comparative study between public and
wards services provided by public sector bank and pri- private sectors, Proceedings of 3rd Asia-Pacific Business
vate sector bank in Coimbatore region. Indian Journal of Research Conference 25 - 26 February 2013, Kuala
Research, 1(12), 113-115. Lumpur, Malaysia, ISBN: 978-1-922069-19-1.
Singh, S., & Arora, R. (2011). A comparative study of bank- Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1993).
ing services and customer satisfaction in public, private The nature and determinants of customer satisfaction of
and foreign banks. J Economics, 2(1), 45-56. services. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
21(1), 1-12.