Quality service process, a generic semantic model proposition

1. IntroductionThe service sector has been in development. The companies are relatively unable to developcompetitiveness just based on the advantages of products. Service sector has a primordialimportance. Economics tends to develop in the service sector. It can be associate to anothertendency: the creative economy. The increase of new services has improved marketingcomplexity, in advance, management of knowledge capabilities has an influential effect onquality service, according, Tseng (2016). Is possible that these changes can developentrepreneurship and relate to economic increment, and the quality service has a substantialimportance to it. Probably this cycle of development will be continued, without a perspectiveof finish.The importance of the study of quality service is related to increasing the competitiveness oforganizations, societies, and cities. Digital economy has become a new factor to consider.Relatively quality service Tseng (2016) considers that information and the internet areimproving access to information for customers, and this context can improve competitivenessbecause the customer can compare, in real time, different supplies of services and products bythe internet. This can suggest a new competitive environment in the informational era.Because it, quality service can represent a constant item for attention, and management of thisenvironment, and context in advance.

2 Service, concepts, and contextsService is the activity or benefit that an organization can offer to another, or acustomer,service is essentially intangible. Additionally, services can be integrated withtangibles products. The intangibility of the service is comparable to an abstraction. Thus,implicate the evaluation of service is perceived in terms of results. The customer and yourperception about the performance service will result in an evaluation about quality and inperceptions about satisfaction related to service, service operators, and organizations. Incomplex markets the competitive, and participative environment result in a need forintegrations between sectors and organizations, to improve performances. In this case, themain objective is to provide excellent service attendance and maintain the level of satisfactionand quality of service in the excellence stage. But it is not a simple activity because theservice has a sui generis particularities. Knowing these characteristics are essential forplanning operation, managing to excellence. According to Kotler (1991, p.541-543), the mainfeatures are: a) Intangibility; b) Inseparability/ simultaneously; c) Variability/ heterogeneity,and d) Perishability.Perishability according to Cooper et al (2001) is characterized by an impossibility tomaintenance or stocking.According to Oakland (1994), heterogeneity in service occurs as a result of visible andinvisible elements, and elements that are derived from perceptions, and individualpreferences, resulting in different perceptions by the customer.Intangibility is a natural characteristic of service, because service is intangible. Inseparabilityis the need of customer and service operator to stay, simultaneously, in a determined place.Other tips of attributes are described by Oakland, considering various attributes of theservices, important for project operations:

a. The intensity of workb. Contactc. Interactiond. Customizatione. Service Receiver

These different attributes represent the differences between services. Knowing the attributes isimportant to think about service operation, and provide adequate services to the consumer'sneeds.

2.2 Service productionAccording to Levitt (1990), tangible production has an intense spectrum of control incomparison to intangible production. Intangibles involve people in the process, thuscontrolling the quality of tangible production is simple. Production of intangible needscaution and attention to adequate level of quality.Heizer & Render (1999 p. 16) indicates singularity of services, and expose these features andexamples: 1) Typically intensive human labor, (education); 2) Often processed individually(investment advice); 3) Often a single task performed by professionals (medical diagnostics);4) Often difficult to mechanize and automate (haircut); 5) Often relative difficult to beevaluated quality ( law consulting).According to these authors, productivity in the service sector is difficult to measure. It isbecause of the characteristics of service. But it is not impossible; Measurement is possible interms of: productivity, man/ time/ feature; measurable too is possible by problem solving,multi-factor analysis, considering the labor, capital, energy, and consum of material support,the convergent factor can be the money. Then, productivity in services includes adapting tospecific situations in business units, in different controls requireds.

3 Quality, classical theories"Quality is the maximization of customer success" (Shiozawa, 1993, p.59). Quality referability to provide products with characteristics that customers need, and wand, in terms ofcost, service, and other factors and specifications. Leibfried (1994, p.147) considers thequality of a process and performance to deliver the product and service correctly, since thefirst time. Deming considers quality, defined in terms of who evaluates. And, products can bedesigned and modified to improve satisfaction, and price considered acceptable (Deming1990). Then, consider the customer's needs, substantially.Feigenbaum (1961) considers the quality, the customers requirement, product specifications,conditions, the appropriate sales price, to attend to the customer. Juran (1990) considers theproduct performance resulting from the features of the product, resulting satisfaction in termsof quality. Crosby (1992) defines quality as conformance to customer requirements. Alsoreport the importance of management for quality, and the way to improve process efficiency.These elements probably are relevant for the management quality of the process.Ishikawa, (1993, p 44) considers the amplitude term quality as "work quality, service quality,quality of information, quality process, personnel quality, and others concepts, includingagents, for example: workers, engineers, managers, and executives, in different contexts:system quality, business quality, quality objectives etc. Across these agents, interactions canbe represented as essential factors to improving quality performance. Ishikawa approachconsiders not only the role of the individual for quality, but also, the importance of companycontexts identify the desire of the client to provide quality of product, and service.

3.1 Importance of qualityQuality has importance for companies, because it represents part of marketing performance.The perception of the consumer can improve the quality process by identification of productrequirements if the companies are able to interpret customer’s needs and to provide outputtingproducts and services, with consistent quality service.Quality can improve productivity, minimizing rework, and reducing costs. Qualityfurthermore, can be associated with positive financial results in the company.Heizer & Render (1999) explain three reasons that evidencing importance of quality: i)Reputation of companies, quality of new product and service; ii) Product Reliability, referringgoods and services consumer, without risk, and damage to health; iii) Global reference anduniversal standard acceptance of products, and organizational operations.Nevertheless, the adequate management of service can help organizations to improvereputation, profitability, quality, reduce costs, productivity, reduce rework, and to implementwarranties.

3.2 Characteristics of service qualityAccording Juran (1993) quality characteristics and particularities of service are identifiableand directing for applications:

a. Psychological perceptions;b. Time of waiting for service;c. Contractual aspects of service and warranty;d. Ethics: honestly, courtesy, right advertising relate to service;e. Truthful promotion;f. Technology.

These characteristics and particularities of service are important for companies and for thesatisfaction of customers, complementary, these requisites involving time and ethics" (Juran,1993). This proposition may be relevant for improving quality. The characteristics and factorsare considered relevant for the quality service process, and for management quality service.

3.3 Quality serviceIn accordance with the process of management quality service, relative to quality service,Oakland (1994), relates quality of projects for service recognizing three distinct elements, thephysical elements, the visible service or benefits perceived in terms of psychological benefits.Reporting characteristics of service: a) Intangibility; b) Perishability; c) Simultaneously; d)Heterogeneity. The author considers the difficulty of designing the intangible aspects of aservice. Consumers frequently must use their experience, perceptions and reputation related toservice to evaluate quality service. Because of this, these elements are relevant to servicequality management, because these factors are present in personal customer evaluation.Overall quality design services must have a development that respect the customer's thinkingand needs. Consequently, a suitable quality design service includes engagement of marketingfunctions, design, and operations.

3.4 Quality service determinantsRelatively to quality service determinants and your importance to the project and design ofquality service environment, Zeithaml & Berry, apud HEIZER (1999, p 70) consider a roll ofthe determinants of quality in services Table 3. Parasuraman, Zeithaml e Berry (1994) showthat quality service can be measured by customer expectations, and the model SERVQUAL

can provide, based to expectative to the customer, a roll of indicators that can identify areas ofweakness in service quality, about the company. The comparative between expectations andperceptions can provide insights to know gaps in related qualities in the company.Determinants of quality service are a reflection of this way, those items represent elements ofSERVQUAL models, and the model proposed for this article and correspondent studieconsider these models also. Zeithaml & Berry consider “tangibles, knowledge, safety,credibility, communications, courtesy, access, competence, responsiveness, and truth”,determinants factors of quality.

3.5 Quality service managementHeizer & Render (1999) note the difficulty of measuring the quality of services, but considerthat the customer's selection process considers alternatives and features of the service, on abasis of comparison itself. So, in the purchase decision process the client will make acomparison between what the enterprise offers and what Company B offers. Is possible tocompare the attributes and identify superior service of a company in relation to another, andtends to decide for high quality. Having concluded that measuring systems is an importantrecourse to identify quality, and this system can be integrated with others, specifically can bethinking about customer satisfaction.Additionally, to it, conclusions of Zeithaml and Berry, apud HEIZER (. 1999, p 70) considerthat important aspect of total quality management in services:

a. The perception of service quality by consumers results in a comparison betweenprevious expectations of service with experience of real service. In other words, thequality of service is judged in terms of care and real service performance, and notsubstantially for expectations of customers.

b. The perceived quality comes from both, the service process as the result of the service.From a consumer point of view, the service can be run itself and there is an ownevaluation of service.

c. The service quality has types: normal and exceptional. First, there is the quality levelthat indicates regular service planning: a) there is the quality level where theexceptions and problems are processed. This implies that a system quality shouldrecognize, and have prepared alternatives for no optimal operating conditions.

Considering these factors, "Managing for quality is in use of the processes:. managerialPlanning, control, and improvement (...) It is the Juran Trilogy" (JURAN 1993).

3.6 Quality planningQuality planning corresponds to the development of the product/service and processesnecessary to meet customer needs. It is essential to outline a guide to quality, preparing thecompany to achieve goals; a planned process from design, it is always able to achieve thequality goals under operating conditions. It involves universal steps, but they are basicelements of needs; b) Identifying customers and their goals; f)quality; e) Development of theproduct/service with features as requirements; c) Customer identification of processes thatimpact on expectations/needs. This establishes quality about model Process capabilityassurance to achieve goals.

3.7 Quality controlQuality of control has represented in the past an important element of managing qualityservice, today quality control has importance minimized in a process of managing quality.Moreover, control of procedures, the definition of measurement systems, fixation of aperformance index, and comparing to the expectations of customers, represent relevantelements of quality service.In this way, determining the needs of customers, identifying deficiencies of service, adoptingremedial actions to correct wrong things, measuring performance, and monitoring processesare importants conditionals factors to managing quality service.Is possible to conclude, managing quality service is necessary to give attention to differencesin attributes, and factors including a technical dimension and social dimension. This argumentwill be explored in the next section.

3.9 Sociotechnic Tavistock model perspectiveThis study considers the Tavistock model as a reference to the analysis of paradigms andconsequent reflections. For the model proposition of this research, the dimensions of thesocio-technical model are considered relevant and suitable to formulate propositions. Themodel Tavistock considers two subsystems. The first, subsystem technical; this dimensioninvolves installations, machines, equipment, and other technical and technological requisites.The second dimension cited is a social subsystem, involving people, relationships,capabilities, and abilities.

3.10 Initial model propositionThe initial framework of the model involves the mains approach cited in a section of theliterature review; And, objective to output a model that is representative to the quality serviceprocess environment. This model is intended to explain and represent a model for subsidinganalyses of managers and scientists when analyzing the environment of the managerialprocess of quality service.

Framework model proposedSource: based in theoretical developments

3.11 Hypotheses and propositionsConsidering the model proposed is necessary considering these propositions, to test validityof arguments and propositions, and established conclusions about model validation:

P1 There are social demands requisites associate to environment qualityservice process

P2 There are technical requisites associate to environment qualityservice process

P3 There are subjective and objective demands related to environmentquality service process

P4 Conditional factors of organizational services are related demandsof environment to promote quality service process

P5 The customer recognize managerial factor on environment topromote quality service process

P5 There are evaluating of customer needs related to quality serviceprocess environment

3.11.1 Possible results about model proposition

P7 The model confirmed according quality service process managementis considering plausibleP8 model is totally acceptable according to empirical evidencesP9 The model is partially performed; based empirical evidencesP10 = ㄱ P7

4. Methodological research designThis research utilized the semantic approach to compose a model related to quality servicemanagement process. The principal resource composing data collection is google platformwith Twitter social networking. Theoretical background was considered, and the thematicinvolving articles about quality service process management subjects was considered forselection of data. The second data source was provided from a focus group withundergraduate students. The data was analyzed by propositional logic and classic qualitativeoutput to support data interpretations. Reflections and discussions were provided in advance.The techniques and precedents are described below.Sample and data collectionThere are two samples considered for this research. The first was collected from twitter socialnetworking, and the second, was provided from a focus group with undergraduate students.Big data on social networkingA requisite for big data collection is: an original and big volume of data with ample access tothe data; then the first sample of this research was considered a big data. The criteria selectionof this data collection was refined by subject “quality”, “service”, and “tourism”. Thisselection was intentional to capture an environment of quality service, and contextual factors.The third analytic category for data selection was defined to capture touristic contextualelements of service. Logically, the proposition of this study is to provide a model formanagement service, but the tourism context was considered for this research to delimit anextension of this research.Focus group students, and mental images ideasThe second sample of research was composed of “conditional factors and memories of qualityservice about destinations” referring here to the touristic destinations. Those destinations wereselected for a group of students. The undergraduate students that responded to the subjectindicated to identify these factors, and memories ideas about destinations. The dynamic ofdata collection was implemented in a classroom of Brazilian faculty of Administrationgraduation course.Semantic analysis approach, an analysis of data collectionThe data were interpreted searching relevance categories of semantics. Was possible toobserve cloud words in the first stage of this selection and interpretation. After this, was usedhistograms and statistics, to identify groups of semantic categories. This method to test amodel proposition by empirical evidence. Then, a table was provided to demonstrate and testthe correspondence between a theoretical proposition and empirical evidence. Sequentially arepresented any reflections and discussions. In advance, analysis of the results provide areinterpretation of the quality service process model, and a model was suggested.Analysis of data consistencySocial Networking database considered for composing the data of this research, in this case,was considered requisites of big data classification, that include a big volume of data, andaccess to these data. Them twitter was the elect platform for composing this data set. The

characteristic of data can be considered partially non structured, because the data in the initialstage, considered the needed filtering. But, was considered valid because in the proceeding ofthe composition of data, the semantic dimension “quality service” was considered base tocollect data. The other type of reflection about consistency and validation of data wasrunning. In the initial attention of the researcher the question: Those data are valid, and is thedatabase consistent? After discussions, and reflections, the answer considered is, yes. This isbecause of the technique of association psychic thematic consider the phrasal composition anaccess to conscience of respondents. Then, the validity of the data is similar to another type ofdata collection. considering in this methodology of data collection, the data considered for thisresearch.

5. ReflectionsRelatively to priori reflections, this section advances consider the model proposed, to analyzethe context of quality service based on different evidence, perspectives and studies.Referring to the tourism product, a possible environment for empirical evidence, an approachthat considers the tangible, intangible, goods, and services; evidence the process ofmanagement quality in tourist services.Regarding the quality of services provided relative to the characteristic of heterogeneity, itindicates enormous variability to perception of quality service, indicating any difficulty tomanage quality service.The design of the services business operations, involves significant and important attributesfor the service activity, evidence of heterogeneity.Levitt (1990) presents an alternative to producing intangible quality, replacing the processeswhere there is a large number of technologies, people, hard, soft, or hybrid as means toincrease quality. However, the importance of processes to support quality is important toconsider. Analyzing the productivity in the service sector, observe some singularities ofservice production, that difficulty an automatization.Possibility and model propositions to futureExpanding the use of classic models, a new perspective from this model was proposed, forother areas in the service sector, and generic uses to test and provide reflections for managers,and students. Possible examples, the medic turistic, spirituality studies, thematic tourism,hospitality sector, restaurants, food and drink commerce, and every other possible areas thatmodel can be considered suitable for reflection about actions, plans and strategies. In thiscase, the final results of this study proposed a model to consider in management of servicequality process, and contexts associates.The next section provides reflections about the new model proposition considering thebackground proposition, but the output refers to analysis to validate the new model andenvironmental and contextual reflections about it.

6 Results, empirical evidence, and discussionsEmpirical results and analysis are subsidized from: a semantic analysis with a cloud of wordsanalysis, histograms, mind image ideas. The presentation of results is distributed in two stagesthat correspond to two samples used. Results from dialogic and reflections, presenteddiscussions and conclusions, the subsequent section.Empirical evidences demonstrates a strong relationship between service quality dimensions,service performance, and satisfaction of customers. Agus, Barker, and Kandampully (2007)has related that any determinants of quality has obtained a relationship to satisfaction andquality service, evaluated to customer; responsiveness, courtesy, access are factors related.Credibility was another factor that these authors identified, improving customer satisfaction,

and service performance. Empirical evidences has demonstrated that Servqual, and yourdeterminants of quality are completely compatible with service quality and satisfaction ofcustomers. In this sequence, it is interesting to respond to explore others factors that areassociated with the contextual environment of quality service, and managerial environment.This study provides evidence of emergence to semantic categories.Semantic AnalysisSemantic analysis of this study considers the empirical evidence to compose the analysis.Semantic categories were established by emerging qualitative data evidence. More frequentialwords were utilized to compose a roll of graphics and tables that permit a quantitativeanalysis. There are two databases in this study, the first, providing social networking big dataand the second, provided by a classroom of business students. The first involves moreintensity quantitative data, the second more intensity involves qualitative dimension, novolume, but the quality of data, diversity, and mental images ideas.Database complete and Database selection of criteriaThe first database needed a selection by criteria, because the data was extracted in a rustystage, then, the criteria “quality service” was utilized for selecting a part of data that isconfluent with research interest. In this case, the psique semantic associative was consideredfor this analysis. The analysis of the consistency of this data gets a special section in thisarticle. See below the more relevant analytic categories, criteria data selection.

Resource: data collection.

This graphic represents the “analytic categories” with a selection of just part of data from thesemantic categories, more representatives for quality service, the dispensed part data, andcomments not relevant for a quality service environment. The next sequence of graphicsrepresents any categories of quality service process model. In this sequence will bedemonstrated a correspondence between empirical evidence and proposal model. The nextsequence of graph evidencing, separate in dimensions about model proposition; morerelevance and frequents empirical evidence, related the environment of the quality serviceprocess. The distribution of these graphs considering, how shown: “technical customerrequisites”, “customer expectations”, “conditional factors of service quality” and“measurement evidence dimension”.

Resource: data collection.

Resource: data collection.

Resource: data collection.

The next section will provide a systematic classification of empirical evidences that shows adistribution of empirical evidences, analytic categories and respective dimensions, in thecontext of the quality service process management environment model.

Figure: Histogram summarization, and the categorization of information

ClassificationsAccord model

proposition

Technicalrequisites

Expectations ofcustomer

dimension

Conditionalfactors of

quality service

Measuringdimension

Number ofempiricalevidencesFirst sample

230 70 50 160

Percentualrelative

45% 13% 10% 31%

Data normalized 1 0,304 0,217 0,695

Resource: data collection.Observation: quantify of empirical evidences ー3 more frequents semantic categories,counting in approximately

The second sample, and evidences from students mental images ideasThe second sample of this study considers three destinations, three countries indicated fromstudents to data collection, with tourist potentiality. Implemented a focus group in thebusiness class, it was solicited that students answer this question: “ What do you think whenconsidering relevant memory or mind ideas relative to this tourist destination?”Considering: Mental images, no literal meaning, but represent ideas, a metaphoricsignification from mental ideas.The histogram analysis permits identifying a compendium of relevant, and frequentsattributes, it permits to conclude that different attributes are related to quality processmanagement, in the service environment. Forward these attributes cited, are categorized,Figure A. The analyze proposed considers these categories to consolidate the environmentmodel proposition of quality service process management. Supported by the validationprocess showed, and propositional logic.

Figure A: Summarization of qualitative evidences, and the categorization of informationsaccording model proposed - quantify of semantic categories

ClassificationsEmpiricalevidences -semanticcategories

Technical andsocial requisites

demands

Expectations ofcustomer

Conditionalfactors of

quality service

Measuringdimension

Evidences ofsemanticcategoriesciteded

References tosocial

interaction,brands, andthings, forexample:

Food, equipesports,

personalities

Socialinteractions,dance and

sports,For example:futbol, tango

Reference toquality of socialinteractions andspirituality, for

exemplo:religion and

sports

Implicity andsubjective

evidences ofsatisfaction, and

quality, forexample: sky,

language,knowledge

Resource: data collection.

This framework corresponds to the theoretical model and empirical evidences.

Service quality process management, a environment model, validating process

ClassificationsTrue or false

Technicalrequisites

Expectations ofcustomer

dimension

Conditionalfactors of quality

service

Measuringdimension

Theoreticalpropositionsdimensions

t t t t

empirical evidencesSample 1

t t t t

Empirical evidencessample 2

t t t Notevaluating inthis sample

Resource: data collection.

5.8 Logical analysis results

Proposition

Description Conclusion

P1 There are social demands requisites associate toenvironment quality service service process

acetable

P2 There are social and technical requisites associate toenvironment quality service service process

acetable

P3 There are subjective and objective demands related toenvironment quality service process

acetable

P4 Conditional factors of organizational services are relateddemands to environment quality service process

acetable

P5 The customer recognize managerial factor on environmentquality service processP5a sample 1

P5b sample 2

Acetable insample 1Not evaluatingin sample 2

P6 There are evaluating of customer in related to qualityservice processP6a Sample 1

P6b Sample 2

Acetable insample 1Not evaluatingin sample 2

Propositional calculating

Considering Pn = true

(P1+Pn + P6 )⇢ P7

Considering any P false ⇢ P8

Considering any P false ⇢ P9

Considering every P false ⇢ P10

Proposition Description Conclusion ofsyllogism

P7 The model confirmed according quality service processmanagement is considering plausible

T

P8 The model is totally confirmed according empiricalevidences

Sample 1 TSample 2 F

P9 The model is partially confirmed according empiricalevidences

T

P10 ㄱ P7 F

Service quality management process, discussions of results from organistic characteristics ofmodel propositionRelated to the model propositions, it is perceptible that a categories are corresponding to theevidence, for example, conditional factors of organizational service are confluent in any casewith technical and social requisites of customer, and demands. It showed that 6 dimensionsdistributed for semantic categories are not closed, on the contrary, the model should becompatible with an environmental organic, not static. Nevertheless, the analysis imposed totest this model has rigorosity of method. The propositional logic considered a binary codingestablishing “true” and “false”, for each proposition. It can be a requisite to consistency ofanalysis, and reliability of propositions and results. This model is not a deterministic model toanalyze the environment of quality service but is a model that permits a reflection about themanagement of the quality service process environment.

7. ConclusionsFirstly, a model proposition for service quality process management considers: theenvironment of quality service process management, contexts of quality service processmanagement, theoretical classical bases, empirical evidence, and consequent conclusions;suggesting future studies and implications.The classical background theory recognizes the difficulty of designing services, and issupposed that design models to management is difficult, because there are several aspects ofthe environment, indicating complexity; quality service process management is recognized, acomplex environment.The process of quality management in services using the managerial process of planning wasshown in literature, and your importance was demonstrated. Customers are the central part ofthe process. These perspectives are compatible with a model that can be able to interpretquality service process management environments, but not in terms deterministic, inconsidering the complexity of environment and contexts.Tseng (2016) observed that customer relationship management and knowledge managementcapability are related to quality service. In this case this study provides two dimensions thatare similar to those constructs, that are interactions, and relationships in social dimensions andthe dimension related to management process of quality; it is possible to conclude that thesedimensions cited by Tseng( 2016) are present in the model shown. Other dimensions are

substantially evidentes, and are identified by this study and model. Because of those empiricalevidences, it is possible to conclude that the model presents empirical results compatible withgood adaptation.Despite this, the logical test of analysis of propositions, was evaluated and four propositionsare aceptables, and the others two propositions tested had adjusted to sample 1; According tothe test demonstrated. Empirical evidences demonstrated that the model proposed is plausiblein the sample analyzed.The implications of this study to managers is that the environment of management qualityservice is more complex than supposed, and this model can provide a possibility to increaseknowledge about this context. The analytical categories related in the model showed canprovide a group of insights, and elements to attention in managerial practices. This model wasable to improve knowledge related to the environment of quality service management. Thismodel is generic and your amplitud can be tested.Behara, Fischer and Lemmink (2002) has tested a model of quality service by neural networkanalysis, results relate the importance of expectative relate a quality service models, in factthe expects are important determinant of quality, according studies of Parasuraman, Zeithamle Berry, (1994). Similar to this finding, Yoo and Park (2007) relate that customer satisfactionis mediator to expectations and financial performance.The value of the model shown in this article and study is reflecting about quality serviceprocess, considering an amplitude of variables, and reflecting about environmental contextfactors, to improve managerial capacity.Future research can test this model using structural equation models, because these models areable to test hypotheses of relationship between many variables, by mathematical models,complementary to this study, that was substantially anchored in qualitative, and quantitativedata; and propositional logic.

References

Agus, A., Barker, S. Kandampully, J.(2007). An exploratory study of quality service in theMalaysian public service sector. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management,V. 24. N. 2.Behara, R., Fisher, W. Lemmink, J.(2002). Modeling and evaluating service qualitymeasurement using neural networks. International Journal of Operation and ProductionManagement. V.22. N. 10, p. 1162-1185.Carlzon, J.(1992). Hora da verdade. Rio de Janeiro.Cooper , C.(2001). Turismo: princípios e prática. 2. ed. Porto Alegre: Bookman.Deming, E. W.(1990). Qualidade: a revolução na produtividade. Rio de Janeiro, MarquesSaraiva.Crosby, P. (1993). Qualidade é investimento. Rio de Janeiro: José Olympio, 1992. Paris:Éditions Dalloz.Feigenbaum, A. Total quality control. New York: McGraw-Hill.Heizer, J e Render, B.(2001). Administração de operações: bens e serviços. Rio de Janeiro,LCT.Ishikawa, K.(1993). Controle de qualidade total à maneira japonesa. Rio de Janeiro:Campus.Juran, J. (1990). Juran planejando para a qualidade. São Paulo: Pioneira.Juran,J. (1992).A qualidade desde o projeto. Novos passos para o planejamento da qualidadede produtos e serviços. São Paulo: Pioneira.Kotler, P .(2001). Administração de marketing. 10. ed. São Paulo: Prentice Hall.

Kotler, P.(1991). Administração de marketing. Análise, planejamento, implementação econtrole. São Paulo: Atlas.Leibfried, K., Mcnair, C. (1994). Benchmarking-uma ferramenta para a melhoria contínua.Rio de Janeiro: Campus.Levitt, T.(1990). The marketing imagination. New York: The Free Press.Manenti, D. Z. (2018). Efeitos a priori e a posteriori da criatividade organizacional. EuropeanJournal of Applied Business and Management. V. 4, n.2.Oakland, J. (1994). Gerenciamento da qualidade total – TQC. Editora Nobre, São Paulo.Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., and Berry, L. L.,(1994). Reassessment of expectations, as acomparison standard, in measuring service quality: implications for future research, Journal ofmarketing. V. 58, pp. 111-124.Porter, M. (1980). Competitive strategy-techniques for analyzing industries and competitors.New York: Free Press, 1980.Shiozawa, R.(1993) Qualidade no atendimento e tecnologia de informação. São Paulo: Atlas,1993.Tseng, Shu-Mei. (2016). Knowledge management capability , customer relationshipmanagement, and service quality. Journal of Enterprise information management, v. 29, n. 2,.Yoo, D.,Park, J. (2007). Perceived Service Quality. Analyzing relationship employees,customers, and financial performance. International Journal of Quality & ReliabilityManagement. V.24. n. 9. P.908-926.