Optimizing service quality management of the bus rapid transport system in lagos using the multi-criteria decision analysis

• Autorzy: AdebiyI Sulaimon Olanrewaju , Akinrinmade Oluwagbenga John , Amole Bilqis Bolanle

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.20858/sjsutst.2022.116.1

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Evaluation of Bus Rapid Transportation (BRT) based on service quality criteria and customer satisfaction can never be overemphasized due to its derivative, such as optimizing the performance of the transportation industry. Thus, this study employs the multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method for the evaluation of service quality and customer satisfaction of the BRT system in Nigeria using the fuzzy analytical hierarchy process (FAHP) and visekriterijumska optimizacija i kompromisno resenje (VIKOR), which are components of multi-criteria optimization and compromise solution to evaluate notable factors responsible for the user’s perspective. Research design is quantitative and analytical in nature through a survey of experts who are users of BRT services. Samples were drawn through a multi-stage sampling procedure and a total of 402 copies of questionnaires were administered to BRT users based on their experience with the system. Hence, VIKOR and FAHP methods are applied to analyse data retrieved from the field on services quality and performance level. The service quality (SERVQUAL) model (a multi-dimensional research instrument designed to capture consumer expectations and perceptions of service) was modified thereby generating six dimensions and thirty-six service criteria for this research. The FAHP method was employed to determine the weights of the decision criteria because there is a need to measure commuters’ perceptions and expectations based on numerical linguistic variables due to the vague, imprecise and complexity related to the nature of services. The criteria weights and responses of the survey analysis (data) related with the BRT are input for the VIKOR method for ranking. As measuring the perception of service quality based on crispy value can often be misleading, hence, the use of the fuzzy MCDM method can give a more realistic measurement. The result of the multi-criteria decision analysis revealed that pricing quality is the most relevant service quality dimension to users’ satisfaction, followed by the empathy quality dimension. The summary of strength and weakness areas of service quality discovered through the research and its managerial implications with recommendations were related to the appropriate authority in charge of the BRT system for improved performance.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

MCDM; FAHP; VIKOR; SERVQUAL; BRT

PL

MCDM; FAHP; VIKOR; SERVQUAL; BRT

• Wydawca: Wydawnictwo Politechniki Śląskiej
• Czasopismo: Zeszyty Naukowe. Transport / Politechnika Śląska
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: z. 116
• Strony: 5--23
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 23 poz.

Twórcy

autor

AdebiyI Sulaimon Olanrewaju

• Department of Business Administration, University of Lagos, Akoka. Lagos. Nigeria

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7657-1182

autor

Akinrinmade Oluwagbenga John

• Department of Business Administration, University of Lagos, Akoka. Lagos. Nigeria

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1371-2520

autor

Amole Bilqis Bolanle

• Department of Management Sciences, Distance Learning Institute (DLI), UNILAG. Nigeria

• https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7143-893X

Bibliografia

• 1. Abosede A.J., Amole B.B., Adebiyi S.O. 2017. „Determinants of customer loyalty to Nigerian banks using the analytic hierarchy process approach”. UNILAG Journal of Business 3(1): 116-136. Publication of Department of Business Administration, University of Lagos, Nigeria.
• 2. Adeola M.M., Adebiyi S.O. 2014. “Service quality, perceived value and customer satisfaction as the determinant of choice of airline by air travelers in Nigeria”. International Letters of Social and Humanities Sciences 20: 66-80.
• 3. Amiegbebhor D., Boluwatife P. 2018. “The Lagos bus rapid transit: review of users, Nigeria”. America Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Research 02(11): 88-108.
• 4. Anvari A., Zulkifli N., Arghish O. 2013. “Application of a modified VIKOR method for decision-making problems in lean tool selection”. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 71: 829-841. London: Springer-Verlag.
• 5. Buckley J.J. 1985. “Fuzzy hierarchical analysis”. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 17(3): 233-247. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(85)90090-9.
• 6. Buttle F. 1996. “SERVQUAL: review, critique, research agenda”. European Journal of Marketing 30(1): 8-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/03090569610105762.
• 7. Chatterjeea P., Chakrabortyb S. 2016. “A comparative analysis of VIKOR method and its variants”. Decision Science Letters 5: 469-486. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5267/j.dsl.2016.5.004.
• 8. Covic F., S. Voß. 2019. “Interoperable smart card data management in public mass transit”. Public Transport 11: 523-548.
• 9. Haell Carl H., Jan T. Lundgren, Stefan Voss. 2015. „Evaluating the performance of a dial-a-ride service using simulation”. Public Transport 7(2): 139-157.
• 10. Iftikhar M., Musheer A., Siddiqui, A.S. 2017. “Review of a study on fuzzy AHP method and its applications in a “tie-breaking procedure”“. Global Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics 13(6): 1619-1630.
• 11. Kang G., Jame J., Alexandris K. 2002. “Measurement of internal service quality: application of the SERVQUAL battery to internal service quality”. Managing Service Quality: An International Journal 12(5): 278-291. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/09604520210442065.
• 12. Mugenda O., Mugenda A. 2003. “Research methods: quantitative and qualitative approaches”. Act press.
• 13. Opricovic S., Tzeng G.-H. 2004. “Compromise solution by MCDM methods: A comparative analysis of VIKOR and TOPSIS”. European Journal of Operational Research 156(2): 445-455.
• 14. Oyatoye E.O., Adebiyi S.O, Amole, B.B. 2015. “Evaluating Subscribers` preference for service attributes of mobile telecommunication in Nigeria using analytical hierarchy process”. International Journal of Analytical Hierarchy Process (IJAHP) 7(2): 171-187. Publication of the Creative Decisions Foundation. United Kingdom.
• 15. Oyatoye E.O., Amole B.B., Adebiyi S.O. 2016. “Patients` perception of quality service delivery of public hospitals in Nigeria using analytical hierarchy process” Journal of Health Management and Informatics (JHMI) 3(3): 66-73. Publication of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (SUMS), Iran.
• 16. Özdağoğlu A., Özdağoğlu G. 2017. “Comparison of AHP and Fuzzy AHP for the multi-criteria decision-making processes with linguistic evaluations”. Istanbul Commerce University Journal of Science 11(1): 65-85.
• 17. Parasuraman A., Zeithaml V.A., Berry L.L. 1985. “A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research”. Journal of Marketing 49(4): 41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1251430.
• 18. Saaty T.L. 1980. The analytical hierarchy process. New York: Mc Graw Hill.
• 19. Surajit Bag. 2016. “Fuzzy VIKOR approach for selection of big data analyst in procurement management”. Journal of Transport and Supply Chain Management 10(1): a230.
• 20. Ugo D.P. 2014. “The bus rapid transit system: a service quality dimension of commuter uptake in Cape Town, South Africa”. Journal of Transport and Supply Chain Management 8(1): 1-10.
• 21. Valenzo M.A., Lazaro D.A., Arroyo J.A. 2019. “Application of SERVQUAL model to evaluate the quality in the transportation service in Morelia, Mexico”. DYNA 86(211): 64-74.
• 22. Yazdani M., Graeml F.R. 2014. “VIKOR and its applications: A state-of-the-art survey”. International Journal of Strategic Decision Sciences 5(2): 56-83.
• 23. Zeleny M. 1982. Multiple criteria decision making. USA, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Uwagi

PL

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa nr SONP/SP/546092/2022 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2024).