Next Article in Journal
Enhancing City Logistics for Sustainable Development in Jordan: A Survey-Based Study
Previous Article in Journal
Optimizing Utilization of Transport Capacities in the Cold Chain by Introducing Dynamic Allocation of Semi-Trailers
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Logistics
Volume 7
Issue 4
10.3390/logistics7040102
logistics-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Impact of Service Orientation and Airport Service Quality on Passenger Satisfaction and Image: Evidence from Indonesia

by
Agus Usman
1,*,
Yudi Azis
1,
Budi Harsanto
1 and
Anton Mulyono Azis
2
1
Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung 40132, Indonesia
2
Faculty of Economics and Business, Telkom University, Bandung 40257, Indonesia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Logistics 2023, 7(4), 102; https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics7040102
Submission received: 22 September 2023 / Revised: 27 November 2023 / Accepted: 7 December 2023 / Published: 15 December 2023
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background: Airport service quality and service orientation are important aspects of managing passenger satisfaction and airport image. The aim of this paper is to analyze the influence of service orientation and airport service quality on airport image through passenger satisfaction as an intervention variable. Methods: The survey was conducted on 356 passengers at the departure area and lounge. Samples were taken at five major airports in Indonesia, including Soekarno Hatta International Airport. To test the influence of exogenous variables on endogenous variables through intervening variables, a quantitative testing analysis test was carried out using the structural equation model partial least square (SEM-PLS). Result: The research results show that service orientation has a significant and positive effect on airport service quality, passenger satisfaction, and airport image. Moreover, service quality also has a positive effect on passenger satisfaction and the airport’s image. Empirically, passenger satisfaction has been proven to mediate the influence of service quality and service orientation on airport image. It has been proven that airport operators who focus on passengers through service orientation can increase passenger satisfaction and the airport’s image. Conclusions: Focusing on passengers’ needs while at the airport is an important aspect for airport operators who aim to manage their emotions, which encourages passengers to use paid services while in the waiting room. The use of this paid service will directly increase the airport’s aeronautical revenue. Future research needs to consider the influence of image on purchase intention and return to the airport.

1. Introduction

Air transport is one of the most dominant service sectors in the world, with airports becoming important facilities for supporting the natural aeronautical sector, as well as preparing domestic and international aviation infrastructures. Based on the importance of airports in supporting the aviation industry, the analysis of service quality related to passenger satisfaction has become a source of concern [1]. International airports that are included in the ASEAN Open Sky agreement are Soekarno-Hatta International Airport (CGK) and Kualanamu International Airport (KNO) [2]. As a predictor in building user perceptions, service quality is often emphasized differently by study experts, such as its impact on satisfaction, trust, perceived value, as well as corporate and airport image [3,4,5]. An airport, as a public service facility, is also expected to operate independently toward providing efficient and high-quality assistance to different customers [6]. This is because passengers’ perception of quality is traditionally associated with process efficiency, short waiting times, and the positive attitude of the service team in the processing area [1].
Based on these descriptions, service quality, satisfaction, and the image of the airport are very critical. This is because service quality is considered one of the factors contributing to the attractiveness and competitiveness of an airport [7]. More advanced aviation hub infrastructures are also appealing to passengers, whose feedback on service helps improve service quality [8]. Since pleasure is the key to demonstrating airport operational effectiveness [9], overall service quality management needs to include passenger satisfaction [10]. This is due to the correlation of satisfaction to service quality, which can impact the overall experience of a location or airport. In tourism, the perception of a tourist destination or country is commonly formed at airports [11], with passengers who are satisfied with the aviation hub service deciding to visit its location. Moreover, other sectors have extensively analyzed the relationships between these concepts, including the lodging [12] and recreation [13] industries in the United States, as well as forest visitors [14].
A literature study from Usman et al. [15], specifically, a research report on the topic of airport service quality, focused on the influence of service quality on passenger satisfaction and was shown to have implications for the airport’s image. No empirical studies have reported the influence of service orientation on airport service management and passenger satisfaction. In fact, airport operators who focus on passengers’ expectations and needs while at the airport reduce the gap between expectations and realization so that passengers are satisfied with the quality of airport services. This indicated the necessity for airport managers to consider the expectations and needs of passengers as service users. Besides the need to measure their level of satisfaction with the available service, the patterns by which airport operators better understand passenger expectations and needs are also necessary to explore through the implementation of a service-oriented method. In cases such as the banking sector, companies that had a customer-oriented determination were subsequently capable of strengthening the level of customer service and satisfaction [16]. This was also true for the revenue of retail organizations [17]. Based on literature studies, several gaps were observed in the analysis of service-based orientation and its possible impact on the quality of airport service, customer satisfaction, and airport image.
This study aimed to fill the research gap on how to impact service orientation on airport service quality, satisfaction, and airport image using a partial least squares structural equation model (SEM-PLS) approach. The first research question relates to how service orientation influences airport service quality, satisfaction, and airport image. Second, how does airport service quality influence airport satisfaction and image? Third, what is the influence of service orientation and service quality on an airport’s image through passenger satisfaction?
Theoretically, this investigation helps deepen the current understanding of the relationship between service orientation and airport service to improve passenger satisfaction and airport image in general. In practical terms, it is expected that this research can provide assistance in the form of valuable guidance for airport managers in formulating strategies to improve service quality and enhance the overall image and experience at the airport for passengers and all stakeholders involved.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Service Orientation

The definition of service orientation varies among published works; however, most describe service orientation as the attitude of employees adopted to satisfy customer needs [18]. Service orientation is a process carried out by organizations to provide services to create service excellence [19]. Another definition of service orientation is the stage of a company’s marketing strategy that is customer-oriented [20].
According to various studies, service orientation is a part of the total organizational culture [21]. In this context, a long-term organizational climate is developed when an organization implements policies, practices, and procedures with a specific scope of purpose. This includes the development of a suitable atmosphere or the involvement of frontline employees in the service process [22]. Long-term consumer expectations have also been commonly met by businesses developing, maintaining, and applying service-oriented processes [19,23]. Furthermore, service orientation is an ongoing organizational activity that supports and provides assistance to foster excellence [19] and customer-focused marketing tactics [24]. By emphasizing the value development and excellence in service delivery, customer satisfaction has also been prioritized [25]. This demonstrated that organizations with a service-oriented culture strongly and positively affected the mindset of the employees serving as service personnel and were highly helpful in achieving a competitive advantage [26]. Long-term relationships between employees and customers were also formed in companies with a service-oriented culture [27].
Based on various reports, the concept of service orientation was recognized and operationalized in different patterns. This concept contains two categories, namely, the individual and organizational levels [20]. Firstly, the individual level of service orientation emphasizes the personal characteristics of assistance providers [28]. The concept of service orientation is also useful for various companies in solving customer problems [29]. As observed in the telecommunication and health industries, service and customer orientation influenced satisfaction [16,23]. This was in line with [30], where customer orientation was a strategic decision that utilized all company resources to support and satisfy profit-generating customers.
In this study, the implemented service orientation dimensions emphasized the recent analyses from [16,31] and early reports conducted in [21]. From these dimensions, the customer treatment prioritizing employee interactions with customers during the service process was initially emphasized. This interaction included the interpersonal delivery of high-quality service and the prevention of customer problems. Service technology was the second dimension, which focused on the design of service delivery systems. This involved the use of technology in supporting the service process starting from passengers arriving at the airport during check-in as well as boarding and baggage handling. The third dimension was also service leadership, which encompassed the commitment of airport managers to service. Meanwhile, service training was considered the fourth dimension, involving the extent to which airport managers invested in employees for the tutoring of the skills needed to meet customer assistance demands [31].

2.2. Airport Service Quality

Service quality has been extensively analyzed for a variety of businesses, including the airport sector. In this case, several studies have focused on the perception of service quality for a specific firm and the patterns by which the ensuing behavior was critical for the business [32]. The concept of service quality also encompassed a comparison of expectations with impressions of assistance delivery patterns [9]. In the work of Parasuraman et al. [33], the SERVQUAL model was established, using 22 measurement items to assess service quality across five dimensions, namely, reliability, assurance, tangibles, empathy, and responsiveness. For reliability, the physical facilities and the appearance of the staff were considered major contributors, with assurance emphasizing precise and consistent service performance. The tangible aspects also included the patterns by which the personnel assisted customers and provided prompt service, with empathy focusing on the staff members’ understanding and capacity to provide service capable of inspiring clients’ trust and confidence. According to [34,35], three dimensions of service quality were observed, namely, technical (perceived by consumers), functional (perceived by customers regarding the technical outcome), and image quality. From this context, most of the service quality characteristics identified by Parasuraman et al. were concerned with functional value [36]. In the airport industry, some reports have also addressed several related issues to investigate and develop service quality assessments known as ASQUAL [1,37].
To measure airport service quality, a variety of metrics have been proposed in the relevant literature. In the airport service quality expectation model, [1] identified three dimensions. These dimensions included the following: (1) a function relating to the effective and convenient movement of passengers, as well as the ability of airport personnel to solve problems; (2) interactions relating to quality emanating from the communication between passenger and airport service providers; (3) a discussion about the patterns by which airport servicescape transformed into activities capable of developing a pleasant passenger experience [37]. Based on Yeh and Kuo, the quality of passenger service in an Asia–Pacific airport was assessed regarding six key criteria, namely, comfort, processing time, convenience, staff courtesy, information visibility, and security [38]. Airport service quality was also measured in [9] based on ground transportation, check-in service, departure security inspection, signs and information, and assistance and facilities. In [39], airport services were classified into passenger core and support, as well as visitor management assistance, for appropriate measurements. Furthermore, [40,41] measured airport service quality through various aspects, such as facilities, check-in, servicescape, security, atmosphere, convenience, mobility, and price. In this context, the term servicescape contained airport signs, layout, and transfer amenities, with the ambiance including acceptable noise, comfortable temperature, and fragrance. Since different experts used distinct words and measures to assess airport service quality, several overlapping interpretations were observed. Based on Yeh and Kuo [38], a common understanding of service performance at airports was observed, with quality and dimensions being context-specific applications. Since the major goal of the service supply was to satisfy customers, a passenger survey was considered the most effective technique to measure their contentment and reflect service quality. Therefore, this present study assessed airport service quality using passenger perceptions regarding the five dimensions proposed in [40,41].

2.3. Passenger Satisfaction

Passenger satisfaction, as evidenced in other businesses, is critical for airport service quality performance. According to [42], total satisfaction was a function of all transaction-specific satisfaction and a sum of general experiences with the firm. In this case, overall contentment was a greater predictor of repurchase intention than transaction-specific happiness. Another previous study also stated that satisfaction influenced loyalty and post-purchase behaviors, enabling its vitality for many service providers [43,44]. In this case, passenger satisfaction was a key performance metric for airport operations [7] and was linked to customers’ perceptions of service quality and servicescape [40]. Airports and airlines have also recognized the need to analyze air traveler happiness and define service quality indicators to improve travel experience [45]. Therefore, this present study assessed passenger satisfaction based on passenger perceptions of the implemented airport service.
The investigated passenger perspectives of service quality and their impact on value, contentment, airport image, and post-purchase behavior [46] also examined the effects of various relevant factors on customer satisfaction using a cause-and-effect model [47]. This analysis investigated the factors of airport passenger satisfaction, the nature of the link between contentment and service value, as well as the moderating effect of innovation on quality enhancement [48]. According to Moon et al., the links between an airport’s physical environment, consumer emotions (pleasure and arousal), and satisfaction were explored, accompanied by an analysis of the role of emotions in mediating the relationship between the physical environment and satisfaction [49].

2.4. Airport Image

Customers were commonly responsible for defining a corporate organization in their minds through its image [3,7]. This was formed from the elements of various goods and attributes through beliefs, ideas, and feelings about specific products [50,51]. When a person obtains information about an object, the information is processed in the brain to build the shape of the commodity’s description. In the context of MSMEs, brand equity is influenced by social media [52]. Passengers were also capable of favorably describing or recalling the specific acquisition of high-quality service when positive attitudes were emphasized about a specific airport. According to [53], three visual components were proposed, namely, the cognitive, effective, and conative image. In this context, the cognitive image emphasizes the evaluation of recognized products and attributes, with the effective component being linked to the motivations of users. For example, users were often motivated toward using the products or services of an organization due to being aware of the available quality. Meanwhile, conative image emphasized decisions or behavioral activities, as customers commonly selected the information processed by the previous components through a cognitive visual aid.
Since the image was frequently perceived from various angles, cognitive and emotional appraisal influenced the recognition of a tourism destination picture [51]. This literature emphasized the corporate image [54], brand image [55], and company image [56]. Meanwhile, the airport was considered the first impression for tourists about a destination [57]. This indicated that passenger evaluations of airport service quality [58] or overall opinion [41] shaped the image of the aviation hub. Some investigations [3,58] also primarily encompassed physical features, emphasizing the high impressionability of passengers, such as ambient circumstances, signs, symbols, and spatial function. These features were then classified as physical and psychological, comprising the cognitive part of an airport’s image [58]. Based on Suter et al., the emotive image emerging from passenger sentiments of interest, relaxation, or stress toward the airport was analyzed. In this case, the evaluated characteristics were examined in an airport-based context [58]. Therefore, this present study examined the airport image in relation to passengers’ perceptions of service and airport facilities.

2.5. Model and Hypothesis

2.5.1. The Relationship between Service Orientation and Airport Service Quality

Passengers, as users of an airport service, are expected to be served wholeheartedly while at the airport. To meet these expectations, airport operators need to prioritize the delivery of quality service. When these operators closely consider passengers, airport service can be described as customer-centered. Besides presently providing physical facilities that cater to passenger needs, the operators are also capable of producing customer-focused assistance through service orientation. This is because service orientation involves comprehending the needs of passengers during their time at the airport through the management of airport assistance quality and exceeding expectations. These pursuits of excellence in customer service often cause the development of a sustainable competitive advantage [59]. According to Khan et al., an improvement in the sustainable profitability of a service company was achieved through customer orientation, due to being able to meet appropriate needs via adequate products and service [60]. In this case, service organizations should fully focus on customers through a service-based orientation to deliver quality service, satisfaction, and sustainability. Latyshova et al. also stated that customer acclimatization was a strong variable in the delivery of quality service using an appropriate service-based orientation [61]. In Gonu et al. [16], customer-oriented companies provided quality service to satisfy their customers, indicating that service orientation was very important in building airport assistance values [16,61]. Based on these descriptions, the following hypothesis is stated:
Hypothesis 1 (H1). 
Service orientation positively influences airport service quality.

2.5.2. The Relationship between Service Orientation and Passenger Satisfaction

Passengers traveling by air transport are expected to pass through the airport and, therefore, experience its service. Besides being landing areas for journey continuation, airports also presently provide passengers with higher expectations regarding their service. To meet these expectations, airport operators need to focus on providing quality services to passengers. This is because a customer-oriented service is crucial in generating value and satisfaction [16,62,63]. In the banking sector, satisfaction is also the most significant customer attitude towards a product or service [64]. Considering the context of service at airports, passengers, as service users, are often more focused and alert than operators. Therefore, service orientation is likely to positively impact passenger satisfaction, leading to the provision of the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 2 (H2). 
Service orientation positively affects passenger satisfaction.

2.5.3. The Relationship between Service Orientation and Airport Image

In this study, the direct impact of service orientation on airport image quality is also examined. This indicates that a financially successful organization is expected to have a better understanding of customers through orientation to their needs [65]. For service companies, the information obtained from customers about their needs and preferences often leads to service advantages [66]. According to [65], customer service orientation positively impacted a restaurant’s image. This proved that the orientation variable improved quality assessment, leading to the enhancement of the restaurant’s image and customer satisfaction. The direct effect of customer orientation was also supported, certifying its position as the fundamental driver of all important positive behavioral outcomes, evaluations, and attitudes. These results are consistent with several previous reports [65], leading to the provision of the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 3 (H3). 
Service orientation positively impacts airport image.

2.5.4. The Relationship between Airport Service Quality and Passenger Satisfaction

According to the service sector, the quality of service is closely linked to customer satisfaction. Based on relevant literature, the quality of airport service directly affects the satisfaction of passengers [3,5,66,67]. Therefore, airport service quality positively impacts user satisfaction in the Indonesian aviation sector, leading to the provision of the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 4 (H4). 
Airport service quality positively influences passenger satisfaction.

2.5.5. The Relationship between Airport Service Quality and Airport Image

Quality of service is divided by service sector to ensure the formation of an image through the contributor. In this case, the company is expected to obtain several benefits when a positive image is constructed [68]. Quality is also an important aspect of building the brand image of a company, which is closely related to service delivery [68,69]. This is because the image of the company is formed through the evaluation of the service process [58]. Based on airport assistance, service quality is often responsible for contributing to the formation of an airport’s image. These conditions suggest that the positive or negative perception of an airport depends on the quality of service provided by the operator to passengers. Based on previous reports, a positive relationship was observed between airport service quality and image [3,5,70,71] owever, the work of Saut and Song emphasized that there was no significant influence [3]. From these descriptions, the airport image emphasized by passengers is closely related to service attributes, leading to the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 5 (H5). 
Airport service quality positively affects airport image.

2.5.6. The Relationship between Passenger Satisfaction and Airport Image

Corporate image is one aspect considered important in the overall evaluation process of services provided by a company [72]. According to Saut and Song, the image directly influences customer behavior and intentions in the purchase transaction. Satisfaction is also an important antecedent of the company image, becoming an interesting topic for service department experts. Furthermore, [73] stated that an organizational image was affected by the provision of a high-quality service, leading to greater value and satisfaction in the customer’s experience. In this case, the satisfaction of service users is expected to directly affect an airport’s image, leading to the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 6 (H6). 
Passenger satisfaction positively impacts airport image.
Hypothesis 7 (H7). 
Service orientation positively impacts the airport image-mediated effect on passenger satisfaction.
Hypothesis 8 (H8). 
Airport service quality positively impacts the airport image-mediated effect on passenger satisfaction.
The research model in (Figure 1) can be seen that there are 6 hypotheses to test the direct effect and 2 hypotheses to test the mediating effect of passenger satisfaction on airport image.

3. Methodology

3.1. Partial Least Square Structural Equation Model

In this study, a quantitative method was used through confirmatory analysis based on the study objectives. The partial least squares structural equation model (PLS-SEM) was also appropriately implemented for quantitative statistical analysis to examine the link between exogenous and endogenous variables through intervening determinants. Since the theoretical findings and study model provided were very sophisticated, this statistical method was adopted [74]. Based on the analysis, a questionnaire was used to obtain data from departing passengers in Soekarno Hatta, Juanda, Kualanamu, Yogyakarta, and Sepinggan International Airport. A multi-item measurement scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 10 (strongly agree) was also implemented [75]. Moreover, to assess the instrument’s suitability as a data collection tool, validity and reliability tests were performed. The second stage was also conducted to obtain data on a sample of participants when all statement items were valid and reliable. In the third stage, structural relationship analysis using SmartPLS version 3 was then carried out. To assess the study model and hypothesis, Smart PLS version 3 software was also used to perform partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Furthermore, PLS-SEM provided the advantage of employing a construct model with a single item size and non-normally distributed data [72,74,75].

3.2. Data Collection

Base on Table 1, a total of 356 participants were sampled proportionally in each of the five major Indonesian airports. The sampling technique used was systematic probability. The sample of passengers comprised those waiting in the airport departure seats and lounges. The fifth passenger who was sitting was asked to participate in the questionnaire. If the passenger moved or refused, the surveyor chose the passenger sitting next to him. This was accompanied by the selection of a minimum sample size of 100 for five construct elements [76]. To ensure that the samples obtained were representative, selections were also randomly conducted from people waiting to depart in the airport and lounge area. In this study, the number of samples was 356, all of which were taken proportionally from respondents at the five main airports in Indonesia. To ensure that the samples taken were representative, samples were taken randomly from passengers waiting to depart in the terminal and lounge area. According to sex, the respondents were 53% male and 47% female. Non-business travel destinations accounted for 18%, business 28%, education 6%, and tourism travel 47%. By type of flight, 72% were domestic flights and 28% were international flights. Meanwhile, based on the frequency of trips, 0–2 times accounted for 55%, 3–5 times 25%, and more than 5 times 19%.

3.3. Measurement

Service orientation was measured using passenger focus (three items) and service-based failure prevention and recovery (three items) based on [21]. Airport service quality was also measured using four dimensions, namely, servicescape (four items), interactional quality (three items), functional quality (three items), and outcome quality (three items), based on [76,77]. Moreover, passenger satisfaction was measured using two dimensions, namely, the cognitive aspect (two items) and the affective aspect (two items), as emphasized in [3]. The dimension of airport image was also analyzed according to airport brand (three items), airport credibility (three items), and airport reputation (three items), based on [3]. All of item measurement can be seen in Appendix A Table A1.

4. Result

4.1. Construct Validity and Reliability Test

In this study, the methods used to assure the dependability of the employed constructs were implemented to examine their validity and reliability. This indicated that the measurement construct items virtually produced all components with a loading factor value greater than 0.70, emphasizing the threshold criteria proposed by Hair et al. [78]. The item construct airport service quality ASQ7 (0.681) was also among the items with values less than 0.70. According to [78] external loading test, ASQ7 was eliminated from the model since the values less than 0.70 did not meet the threshold standard. For each construct, Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability (CR) values were also less than 0.60, indicating that the reliability analysis met the requirements (Table 2).
According to Hair et al., Cronbach’s alpha (0.7) was used to measure dependability with upper and lower bounds. In Table 2, the Cronbach’s alpha values of all constructs were between 0.800 and 0.948, which was greater than the 0.6 indicated by Hair et al. (2017). A composite reliability rating from 0.6 to 0.7 was also suitable for exploratory analysis, with the CR coefficients of all constructs being between 0.871 and 0.959 and considered acceptable (Table 2). Table 3 presents the heterotrait–monotrait (HTMT) correlation ratio for discriminant validity. This demonstrated that all HTMT values were less than 0.90, with discriminant validity of the conceptions being considered acceptable [79].

4.2. Structure Model (Inner Model)

The coefficient of determination (R2) was used to represent the predictive accuracy of the model. This showed that the square correlation between a specific endogenous construct and the expected value was implemented for appropriate calculation [78]. For example, Chin (1998) claimed that endogenous LV values of 0.670, 0.333, and 0.190 were characterized as high, average, and weak, respectively [80]. Table 4 shows that the R2 value for the airport image is 0.759; this means it is in a high position. The airport image is influenced by a satisfaction score of 75.9%. The R2 value for passenger satisfaction is 0.278, which means it is in a weak position. Passenger satisfaction is influenced by service quality and service orientation by 27.8%, and the remainder is influenced by variables not examined in this model. Meanwhile, the R2 value for airport service quality is 0.579, in a moderate position. This shows that airport service quality is influenced by service orientation by 57.9%, while the rest is influenced by variables not examined in this model.
The Q2 was also related to the predictive significance analysis of the inner model and the patterns by which eliminated data were projected. Table 4 presents the Q2 values of all endogenous components obtained using blindfolding techniques. These values were greater than zero, proving that airport image (0.498), airport service quality (0.359), and passenger satisfaction (0.172) provided explicit support for the hypothesis about the endogenous construct.

4.3. Hypothesis Test

Based on the analysis of H1, service-based orientation positively affects airport service quality. This indicated that the hypothesis was supported by a t-sat of 23.659 (>1.96), coef of 0.761, and p-value of 0000 under <0.05. The analysis of H2 also encompassed the positive influence of service orientation on passenger satisfaction, emphasizing acceptance through a t-sat of 3.589 (>1.96), coef of 0.257, and p-value of 0.000 under <0.05. For H3 measurement, service orientation positively impacted airport image, confirming support through a t-sat of 8.699 (>1.96), coef of 0.429, and p-value of 0.000 under <0.05. According to the analysis of H4, airport service quality positively affected passenger satisfaction, and the hypothesis was supported by a t-sat of 4.353 (>1.96), coef of 0.302, and p-value of 0.000 under <0.05. The analysis of H5 also encompassed the positive influence of airport service quality on airport image, prioritizing acceptance through a t-sat of 8.528 (>1.96), coef of 0.432, and p-value of 0.000 under <0.05. Meanwhile, for H6, passenger satisfaction positively impacts airport image, and the hypothesis was supported by a t-sat of 3.038 (>1.96), coef of 0.001, and p-value of 0.001 under <0.05. Overall, the direct influence of exogenous variables on endogenous variables is accepted. This shows that both service orientation and airport service quality are proven to directly influence passenger satisfaction and airport image.
Hypothesis H7 is proven, namely, that passenger satisfaction mediates the influence of service orientation on an airport’s image with a path coefficient value of 0.028, t-statistic of 2.253 (>1.96), and p-value of 0.012 under <0.05. For Hypothesis H8, it is also proven that passenger satisfaction mediates the influence of airport service quality on an airport’s image with a path coefficient value of 0.033, a t-statistic of 2.398, and a p-value of 0.006 under <0.05. Overall, it is proven that passenger satisfaction has a mediating effect on the influence of service orientation and service quality on an airport’s image. Table 5 presents all the outputs of the hypothetical analysis. Meanwhile, the structural model resulting from path analysis using SEM-PLS can be seen in Figure 2.

5. Discussion and Implications

According to the statistical analysis results, all hypothetical analyses were significant for all implemented variables. This proved that service orientation, including passenger focus and service-based failure prevention and recovery, majorly and positively affected airport service quality (H1). In the context of airport management, the service policies implemented by airport operators influence the operational activities of airport service quality management. This finding is in line with that of [16] and [62], who found that service orientation with a focus on passengers is the key to developing service quality in every organization, including airport services. These research results illustrate that the service activities offered by airport operators in Indonesia can increase if an emphasis is placed on passenger needs. Because service quality is subjective and can be perceived differently by the recipient (passenger), passengers provide a positive and high-quality response if their needs exceed their expectations. Therefore, airport operators who are passenger-oriented and who directly focus on their needs, and operators who are able to handle their complaints quickly, will have a positive impact on service quality. Service orientation requires direct customer involvement to provide important information for companies to meet needs with the correct service products; moreover, in the long term, service orientation is useful in achieving profits and understanding customer needs. Therefore, it is clear that, when airport operators are oriented toward passengers’ needs, it is likely that the quality of the services offered will be of high quality.
The analysis of H2 also showed that service orientation (SO) significantly and positively influenced passenger satisfaction. This indicated that passenger-oriented aviation hub operators play a significant role in shaping a positive response to satisfaction. In this case, an operator’s increasing understanding of the passengers’ needs led to a higher satisfaction score. Although studies emphasizing this variable were not found in the airport sector, some banking reports have shown that customers whose needs were financially met were most likely to be satisfied and always exhibit positive attitudes [65]. The findings of this research are in line with the results of research from [16,81], in the banking sector context, proving that, if bank customers’ needs are met, then they will most likely feel satisfied and give a positive response. This applies to the airport industry: if airport operators specifically carry out needs analysis and customer value analysis and then focus on service actions, they can optimize customer attitudes and performance results.
For H3, service orientation significantly, directly, and positively impacted the airport’s image. These results were consistent with [65], where customer-oriented managers directly enhanced the restaurant’s image. It also strengthened the role of service orientation in the airport sector, which was an important aspect for managers to prioritize the needs of passengers in building a positive image. In this case, managers should understand the characteristics and needs of passengers at airports to publicly improve their reputations. If the service from the airport operator meets the needs of passengers then passengers will have a positive response to the airport they have visited; therefore, positive reviews can directly improve the image of the airport itself.
Furthermore, the analysis of H4 emphasized the direct effect of airport service quality (ASQ) on passenger satisfaction (PS). This demonstrated that airport operators emphasizing service quality obtained a positive response in the form of satisfaction. Passengers departing from an airport also expected valuable assistance in the form of physical and personnel aspects. From these results, the existence of a significant positive relationship between service quality and satisfaction showed that poor service quality was caused by poor assistance value. Therefore, the provision of services that meet customer expectations was one of the steps enabling the calmness of passengers through satisfaction. This was in line with the results of [3,5,70], where airport terminal users considered service quality when obtaining a significant and positive impact on passenger satisfaction.
Based on the analysis of H5, airport service quality (ASQ) positively impacted the airport image (AIM). These results were in line with those of [47], where passengers stated that the good experience obtained from airport operators was a favorable factor for the formation of a positive image. In this case, the quality of the service provided was highly considered, including the facilities, the interaction of the assistance, the friendly service, as well as the clean and pleasant airport environment. These elements were often emphasized by the users of air transport services in the context of building a positive airport image. From the results, service quality aspects included special concerns and continuous improvements for airport operators. These were not in line with the results of [3], who found that service quality did not positively affect airport image.
The analysis of H6 also proved that the satisfaction of passengers influenced an airport’s image. From this context, satisfaction significantly and positively affected the airport’s image. These results were in line with those of [3,5,58,70], where a positive image was most likely formed when passengers were satisfied with the airport’s service. In this case, the airport was considered to be the location where passengers received a service that significantly influenced satisfaction and increased the airport’s image. These results were considered for operators to ensure passenger satisfaction through various services, ranging from the periods of departure to the arrival at the airport.
Hypotheses 7 and 8 are proven, namely, that passenger satisfaction has a mediating effect on the influence of service orientation and that airport service quality affects an airport’s image. This shows that managing passengers’ emotions at the airport will have a positive effect on passengers, who then positively review the airport on social media and direct reviews. In the short term, these positive reviews have a positive impact on overall airport service performance. This finding is in line with the stimulus organism theory (SOR) by [82], in which service orientation and airport service quality are stimuli that are responded to by organisms (passengers) as users of airport services in the form of passenger satisfaction, which then has positive implications for improving the airport’s image. Managing passengers’ emotions while in the airport terminal area is an important aspect to positively improve the airport’s image and develop a superior service performance.

6. Conclusions

Firstly, service orientation significantly and positively affected the quality of airport service in Indonesia. From this context, airport operators understanding the expectations and needs of passengers formulated appropriate service standards. Secondly, service orientation influenced passenger satisfaction, indicating that airport operators highly focused on passengers successfully ensured maximum contentment through the service provided. Thirdly, service orientation impacted the formation of the airport’s image. This demonstrated that the operators who seriously understood the needs of passengers, in the long run, formed a positive image of the aviation hub. Fourthly, service quality directly affected satisfaction and the airport’s image. When the quality of the airport service was managed according to passenger expectations, standard responses were formed, emphasizing the positive effects of satisfaction on the aviation hub’s image. From these results, the management of airport service quality involves the physical aspects of the service; moreover, it is important for operators to understand passenger needs through service orientation so that passengers respond positively to the service, thus improving the airport’s image.
There are several limitations to this research. First, the respondents only consisted of passengers who were waiting at the departure gate and lounge. Future research needs to increase the number of samples with other airport service users besides passengers, such as immigration officers, airline officers, and immigration and customs. The addition of a comprehensive sample will provide a complete picture of future research results. Second, the unit of analysis is the sampling location at the five main airports in Indonesia. Future research needs to compare with airport service users in developed countries so that a complete picture of the different characteristics of passengers in developing and developed countries can be obtained, which is useful for airport operators in formulating service strategies to achieve a competitive advantage.
These results provided a practical contribution for airport operators to better understand the needs and expectations of passengers. Besides emphasizing the physical aspect of the services offered, the operators should also understand and realize the needs of the users. By using service orientation, the level of airport assistance should also be more consistent to manage passenger satisfaction and the positive image of the aviation hub. This model needs to be practically implemented by managers to accommodate the changing characteristic expectations and requirements of passengers as airport users.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.U., Y.A., B.H. and A.M.A.; methodology, A.U. and Y.A.; software, A.U.; validation, Y.A., B.H. and A.M.A.; formal analysis, A.U.; investigation, A.U.; resources, A.U.; data curation, A.U.; writing—original draft preparation, A.U.; writing—review and editing, A.U.; visualization, A.U.; supervision, Y.A., B.H. and A.M.A.; project administration, A.U. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Institutional Review Board of UNIVERSITAS PADJADJARAN Nomor: 731/UN6.KEP/EC/2022.

Informed Consent Statement

We protect all respondents involved in this study in accordance with research ethics and respondents who are willing to fill out further questionnaires.

Data Availability Statement

We will provide supporting data requests personally when all authors involved approve the request.

Conflicts of Interest

We certify that this research is free from conflicts of interest. We thank the institutions and individuals who have been involved in this research.

Appendix A

Table A1. Structure of the questionnaire.
Table A1. Structure of the questionnaire.
ItemsMeasurementSources
ASQ1 Public facilities at this airport are adequate[3,10,83]
ASQ2 The airport terminal area is free from waste
ASQ3 This airport toilet is clean and dry
ASQ4 The airport terminal area has adequate lighting
ASQ5 The airport staff had a friendly and polite attitude in serving me
ASQ6 The airport staff were knowledgeable enough to answer my questions
ASQ7 The airport staff are not willing to accept any gifts from me
ASQ8 I feel comfortable when waiting in the departure area of this airport
ASQ9 I feel comfortable with the room temperature settings at this airport
ASQ10 The flight information provided at this airport is clear, accurate, and precise
ASQ11 The signs at the airport have helped me get to my destination quickly
ASQ12 This airport provides clear information before and after the flight
ASQ13 I have plenty of time to do other work at this airport
SEO1 I feel that my hopes and needs have been met by the airport management[23,60,84]
SEO2 The officers at this airport were more willing to help than I needed
SEO3 The officers at the airport quickly helped me without having to ask
SEO4 This airport management has a high commitment to passenger rights
SEO5 My ideas and suggestions were responded to quickly by the airport operators
SEO6 When I experienced problems at this airport, my complaints were quickly responded to and handled
SAT1 This airport overall provided a very satisfactory service for me[85]
SAT2 This airport has provided a memorable experience for me
SAT3 It was a wise decision for me to choose this airport for traveling[86]
SAT4 It is the right thing for me to travel using this airport
AIM1 The name of this airport has shown local attributes that are in harmony with historical heritage[3,5,58]
AIM2 This airport displays local arts and culture, bringing me closer to the local cultural heritage
AIM3 This airport makes more of an impression than any other airport I have visited
AIM4 I do not feel afraid of the threat of terrorism because at this airport there has been good prevention
AIM5 I give a positive review about this airport
AIM6 This airport has implemented health protocols to protect passengers
AIM7 This airport has a good reputation
AIM8 I always find positive reviews about this airport
AIM9 I have never heard any negative news about this airport in the media

References

  1. Fodness, D.; Murray, B. Passengers’ expectations of airport service quality. J. Serv. Mark. 2007, 21, 492–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Harsanto, B.; Permana, C.T. Understanding Sustainability-oriented Innovation (SOI) Using Network Perspective in Asia Pacific and ASEAN: A Systematic Review. J. ASEAN Stud. 2019, 7, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Saut, M.; Song, V. Influences of airport service quality, satisfaction, and image on behavioral intention towards destination visit. Urban Plan. Transp. Res. 2022, 10, 82–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Hang, N.P.T.; Linh, N.H.K.; Nghi, L.D. Examining the Effect of Airportscape on Airport Image, Tourist Revisit Intention, Considering Roles of Sense of Place and Destination Image. J. Logist. Inform. Serv. Sci. 2023, 10, 164–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Mainardes, E.W.; de Melo, R.F.S.; Moreira, N.C. Effects of airport service quality on the corporate image of airports. Res. Transp. Bus. Manag. 2021, 41, 100668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Bezerra, G.C.L.; Gomes, C.F. Measuring airport service quality: A multidimensional approach. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2016, 53, 85–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Pantouvakis, A.; Renzi, M.F. Exploring different nationality perceptions of airport service quality. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2016, 52, 90–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Bellizzi, M.G.; Eboli, L.; Mazzulla, G. Air Transport Service Quality Factors: A Systematic Literature Review. Transp. Res. Procedia 2020, 45, 218–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Chao, C.C.; Lin, H.C.; Chen, C.Y. Enhancing Airport Service Quality: A Case Study of Kaohsiung International Airport. J. East. Asia Soc. Transp. Stud. 2013, 10, 2235–2254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Bezerra, G.C.L.; Gomes, C.F. Antecedents and consequences of passenger satisfaction with the airport. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2020, 83, 101766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Rendeiro Martín-Cejas, R. Tourism service quality begins at the airport. Tour. Manag. 2006, 27, 874–877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Olorunniwo, F.; Hsu, M.K.; Udo, G.J. Service quality, customer satisfaction, and behavioral intentions in the service factory. J. Serv. Mark. 2006, 20, 59–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Cole, S.T.; Illum, S.F. Examining the mediating role of festival visitors’ satisfaction in the relationship between service quality and behavioral intentions. J. Vacat. Mark. 2006, 12, 160–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Lee, J.; Graefe, A.R.; Burns, R.C. Service Quality, Satisfaction, and Behavioral Intention Among Forest Visitors. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 2004, 17, 73–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Usman, A.; Azis, Y.; Harsanto, B.; Azis, A.M. Airport service quality dimension and measurement: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 2022, 39, 2302–2322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Gonu, E.; Agyei, P.M.; Richard, O.K.; Asare-Larbi, M. Customer orientation, service quality and customer satisfaction interplay in the banking sector: An emerging market perspective. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2023, 10, 2163797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Black, S.; Briggs, S.; Keogh, W. Service quality performance measurement in public/private sectors. Manag. Audit. J. 2001, 16, 400–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. George, B.P.; Hegde, P.G. Employee attitude towards customers and customer care challenges in banks. Int. J. Bank Mark. 2004, 22, 390–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Teng, C.C.; Barrows, C.W. Service orientation: Antecedents, outcomes, and implications for hospitality research and practice. Serv. Ind. J. 2009, 29, 1413–1435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Homburg, C.; Hoyer, W.D.; Fassnacht, M. Service orientation of a retailer’s business strategy: Dimensions, antecedents, and performance outcomes. J. Mark. 2002, 66, 86–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Robinson, L.; Williamson, K. Organizational Service Orientation: A Short-Form Version of the SERV*OR Scale. Serv. Mark. Q. 2014, 35, 155–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ivanov, S.; Webster, C. Conceptual Framework of the Use of Robots, Artifiial Intelligence and Service Automation in Travel, Tourism, and Hospitality Companies; Emerald Publishing Limited: Leeds, UK, 2019; ISBN 9781787566873. [Google Scholar]
  23. Solimun; Fernandes, A.A.R. The mediation effect of customer satisfaction in the relationship between service quality, service orientation, and marketing mix strategy to customer loyalty. J. Manag. Dev. 2018, 37, 76–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Homburg, C.; Müller, M.; Klarmann, M. When Should the Customer Really be King? On the Optimum Level of Salesperson Customer Orientation in Sales Encounters. J. Mark. 2011, 75, 55–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Popli, S.; Rizvi, I.A. Leadership style and service orientation: The catalytic role of employee engagement. J. Serv. Theory Pract. 2017, 27, 292–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Fellesson, M.; Salomonson, N. It takes two to interact—Service orientation, negative emotions and customer phubbing in retail service work. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2020, 54, 102050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Beitelspacher, L.S.; Richey, R.G.; Reynolds, K.E. Exploring a new perspective on service efficiency: Service culture in retail organizations. J. Serv. Mark. 2011, 25, 215–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Yoon, S.J.; Choi, D.C.; Park, J.W. Service orientation: Its impact on business performance in the medical service industry. Serv. Ind. J. 2007, 27, 371–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Ngo, L.V.; O’Cass, A. Innovation and business success: The mediating role of customer participation. J. Bus. Res. 2013, 66, 1134–1142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Anabila, P.; Ameyibor, L.E.K.; Allan, M.M.; Alomenu, C. Service Quality and Customer Loyalty in Ghana’s Hotel Industry: The Mediation Effects of Satisfaction and Delight. J. Qual. Assur. Hosp. Tour. 2022, 23, 748–770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Briggs, E.; Deretti, S.; Kato, H.T. Linking organizational service orientation to retailer profitability: Insights from the service-profit chain. J. Bus. Res. 2020, 107, 271–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Liu, C.H.S.; Lee, T. Service quality and price perception of service: Influence on word-of-mouth and revisit intention. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2016, 52, 42–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Parasuraman, A.; Zeithaml, V.A.; Berry, L.L. SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. J. Retail. 1988, 64, 12–40. [Google Scholar]
  34. Gronroos, C. Service Quality: The six criteria of good perceived service. Rev. Bus. 1988, 9, 10–13. [Google Scholar]
  35. Lehtinen, U.; Lehtinen, J.R. Two approaches to service quality dimensions. Serv. Ind. J. 1991, 11, 287–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. De Oña, J.; De Oña, R. Quality of service in public transport based on customer satisfaction surveys: A review and assessment of methodological approaches. Transp. Sci. 2015, 49, 605–622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Lubbe, B.; Douglas, A.; Zambellis, J. An application of the airport service quality model in South Africa. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2011, 17, 224–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Yeh, C.-H.; Kuo, Y.-L. Evaluating passenger services of Asia-Pacific international airports. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2003, 39, 35–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Seetanah, B.; Nunkoo, R. Destination Satisfaction and Revisit Intention of Tourists: Does the Quality of Airport Services Matter? J. Hosp. Tour. Res. 2020, 44, 134–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Bezerra, G.C.L.; Gomes, C.F. The effects of service quality dimensions and passenger characteristics on passenger’s overall satisfaction with an airport. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2015, 44–45, 77–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Park, K.; Park, J.W. The effects of the servicescape of airport transfer amenities on the behavioral intentions of transfer passengers: A case study on Incheon International Airport. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2018, 72, 68–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Jones, M.A.; Suh, J. Transaction-specific satisfaction and overall satisfaction: An empirical analysis. J. Serv. Mark. 2000, 14, 147–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Oliver, R.L. A Cognitive Model of the Antecedents and Consequences of Satisfaction Decisions. J. Mark. Res. 1980, 17, 460–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Cronin, J.J.; Taylor, S.A. Measuring Service Quality: A Reexamination and Extension. J. Mark. 1992, 56, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Bogicevic, V.; Yang, W.; Cobanoglu, C.; Bilgihan, A.; Bujisic, M. Traveler anxiety and enjoyment: The effect of airport environment on traveler’s emotions. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2016, 57, 122–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Park, J.W.; Jung, S.Y. Transfer Passengers’ Perceptions of Airport Service Quality: A Case Study of Incheon International Airport. Int. Bus. Res. 2011, 4, 75–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Nesset, E.; Helgesen, Ø. Effects of switching costs on customer attitude loyalty to an airport in a multi-airport region. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2014, 67, 240–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Chen, J.K.C.; Batchuluun, A.; Batnasan, J. Services innovation impact to customer satisfaction and customer value enhancement in airport. Technol. Soc. 2015, 43, 219–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Moon, H.; Yoon, H.J.; Han, H. Role of Airport Physical Environments in the Satisfaction Generation Process: Mediating the Impact of Traveller Emotion. Asia Pac. J. Tour. Res. 2016, 21, 193–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Baker, D.A.; Crompton, J.L. Quality, satisfaction and behavioral intentions. Ann. Tour. Res. 2000, 27, 785–804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Baloglu, S.; Pekcan, A.; Santos, J. The Relationship Between Destination Performance, Overall Satisfaction, and Behavioral Intention for Distinct Segments. J. Qual. Assur. Hosp. Tour. 2004, 4, 149–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Shandy, V.M.; Mulyana, A.; Harsanto, B. Social media richness, brand equity, and business performance: An empirical analysis of food and beverage SMEs. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2023, 10, 2244211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Gartner, W.C. Journal of Travel & Image Formation Process. J. Travel Tour. Mark. 1994, 2, 191–216. [Google Scholar]
  54. Gray, E.R.; Balmer, J.M.T. Managing Corporate Image and Corporate Reputation. Long Range Plan. 1998, 31, 695–702. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Azoury, N.; Daou, L.; Khoury, C. EL University image and its relationship to student satisfaction—Case of the Middle Eastern private business schools. Int. Strateg. Manag. Rev. 2014, 2, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Madleňáková, L.; Turská, S.; Madleňák, R. The image of the postal company as a key attribute of the customer’s purchasing behaviour. Transp. Res. Procedia 2019, 40, 1088–1095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Ariffin, A.A.M.; Yahaya, M.F. The relationship between airport image, national identity and passengers delight: A case study of the Malaysian low cost carrier terminal (LCCT). J. Air Transp. Manag. 2013, 31, 33–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Nghiêm-Phú, B.; Suter, J.R. Airport image: An exploratory study of McCarran International Airport. J. Air Transp. Manag. 2018, 67, 72–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Steinman, C.; Deshpandé, R.; Farley, J.U. Beyond market orientation: When customers and suppliers disagree. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2000, 28, 109–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Khan, M.J.; Ahmad, S.; Abdul Halim, H.; Ahmad, N.H. The Effect of Service Innovation Orientation and Open Innovation on Innovation Performance of Medium and Small Private Hospitals in India. SAGE Open 2022, 12, 21582440221116110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Latyshova, L.; Oyner, O.; Syaglova, Y. The Customer—Oriented Approach: The Concept and Key Indicators of the Customer Driven Company. DIEM Dubrov. Int. Econ. Meet. 2015, 2, 637–645. [Google Scholar]
  62. Li, W.; Pomegbe, W.W.K.; Dogbe, C.S.K.; Novixoxo, J. Dela Employees’ customer orientation and customer satisfaction in the public utility sector: The mediating role of service quality. Afr. J. Econ. Manag. Stud. 2019, 10, 408–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Chow, Y.T.H.; Li, C.H.; Mak, S.L.; Li, S.P.; Tong, P.S.; Fan, C.K.; Keung, K.L. How Do Full-Service Carriers and Low-Cost Carriers Passengers Perceived Service Dimensions, Passengers’ Satisfaction, and Loyalty Differently? An Empirical Study. J. Ind. Eng. Manag. 2022, 15, 587–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Tafadzwa, M.; Olawale, F. An empirical investigation into the extent of customer satisfaction and customer loyalty at big retail stores in King Williams Town, South Africa. Afr. J. Bus. Manag. 2011, 5, 7665–7673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Xia, Y.; Ha, H.Y. Does customer orientation matter? Direct and indirect effects in a service quality-sustainable restaurant satisfaction framework in China. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Chang, T.Z.; Chen, S.J. Market orientation, service quality and business profitability: A conceptual model and empirical evidence. J. Serv. Mark. 1998, 12, 246–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Antwi, C.O.; Ren, J.; Owusu-Ansah, W.; Mensah, H.K.; Aboagye, M.O. Airport self-service technologies, passenger self-concept, and behavior: An attributional view. Sustainability 2021, 13, 3134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Keller, K.L. Conceptualizing, measuring, managing Customer-Basesd Brand Equity. J. Mark. 1993, 57, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Nguyen, N.; Leblanc, G.; Leblanc, G. The mediating role of corporate image on customers’ retention decisions: An investigation in financial services. Int. J. Bank Mark. 1998, 16, 52–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Usman, A.; Azis, Y.; Harsanto, B.; Azis, A.M. The Role of Innovation and Airport Service Quality on Airport Image: Mediated Effect of Passenger Satisfaction. Afr. J. Hosp. Tour. Leis. 2023, 12, 1111–1126. [Google Scholar]
  71. Nguyen, N.; Leblanc, G. Corporate image and corporate reputation in customers’ retention decisions in services. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2001, 8, 227–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Andreassen, T.W.; Lindestad, B. Customer loyalty and complex services. The impact of corporate image on quality, customer satisfaction and loyalty for customers with varying degrees of service expertise. Int. J. Serv. Ind. Manag. 1998, 9, 7–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Hu, H.H.; Kandampully, J.; Juwaheer, D.D. Relationships and impacts of service quality, perceived value, customer satisfaction, and image: An empirical study. Serv. Ind. J. 2009, 29, 111–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Usakli, A.; Kucukergin, K.G. Using partial least squares structural equation modeling in hospitality and tourism: Do researchers follow practical guidelines? Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag. 2018, 30, 3462–3512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Taherdoost, H. What Is the Best Response Scale for Survey and Questionnaire Design; Review of Different Lengths of Rating Scale/Attitude Scale/Likert Scale. Int. J. Acad. Res. Manag. 2019, 8, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  76. Hair, J.F.; Risher, J.J.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. Eur. Bus. Rev. 2019, 31, 2–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Ramayah, T.; Cheah, J.; Chuah, F.; Ting, H.; Memon, M.A. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; ISBN 9783319574134. [Google Scholar]
  78. Hair, J.; Hollingsworth, C.L.; Randolph, A.B.; Chong, A.Y.L. An updated and expanded assessment of PLS-SEM in information systems research. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2017, 117, 442–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Henseler, J.; Hubona, G.; Ray, P.A. Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: Updated guidelines. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 2016, 116, 2–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Chin, W.W. The partial least squares approach for structural equation modeling. In Modern Methods for Business Research; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 1998; pp. 295–336. [Google Scholar]
  81. Witell, L.; Snyder, H.; Gustafsson, A.; Fombelle, P.; Kristensson, P. Defining service innovation: A review and synthesis. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 2863–2872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Mehrabian, A.; Russell, J. An Approach to Environmental Psychology; The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1974. [Google Scholar]
  83. Hong, S.J.; Choi, D.; Chae, J. Exploring different airport users’ service quality satisfaction between service providers and air travelers. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2020, 52, 101917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Yi, H.-T.; Lee, M.; Park, K. Service Orientation and Customer Performance: Triad Perspectives of Sales Managers, Sales Employees, and Customers. Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Chen, A.H.; Wu, R.Y. Mediating Effect of Brand Image and Satisfaction on Loyalty through Experiential Marketing: A Case Study of a Sugar Heritage Destination. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Bogicevic, V.; Bujisic, M.; Bilgihan, A.; Yang, W.; Cobanoglu, C. The impact of traveler-focused airport technology on traveler satisfaction. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2017, 123, 351–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Logistics 07 00102 g001
Figure 1. Study model and hypothesis.
Figure 1. Study model and hypothesis.
Logistics 07 00102 g001
Logistics 07 00102 g002
Figure 2. A nexus between service orientation and airport service quality, passenger s atisfaction, and airport image.
Figure 2. A nexus between service orientation and airport service quality, passenger s atisfaction, and airport image.
Logistics 07 00102 g002
Table 1. Sample characteristic (N: 356).
Table 1. Sample characteristic (N: 356).
CriteriaFreq%
Gender
Male18853%
Female16847%
Total 356100
Trip purpose
Tourism travel16947
Business9928
Non-business6518
Education 236
Total 356100
Type of flight
Domestic 25872
International 9828
Total 356100
Travel frequency
1–2 trips 19755
3–5 trips9025
>5 trips6919
Total 356100
Table 2. Construct validity.
Table 2. Construct validity.
Latent VariableDimensionItemLoadingCronbach’s αCRAVE
Airport service quality ServicescapesASQ10.8010.9400.948 0.626
ASQ20.841
ASQ30.857
ASQ40.833
Interaction QualityASQ50.885
ASQ60.900
ASQ70.681 *
Outcome QualityASQ80.897
ASQ90.895
ASQ100.869
Functional QualityASQ110.903
ASQ120.915
ASQ130.794
Service orientation Passenger FocusSEO10.8970.9480.9590.795
SEO20.929
SEO30.918
Services Failure and RecoverySEO40.924
SEO50.940
SEO60.930
Passenger satisfaction Cognitive SAT10.7940.8000.8710.629
SAT20.871
AffectiveSAT30.904
SAT40.897
Airport image Airport BrandAIM10.7450.9360.9470.664
AIM20.814
AIM30.767
Airport CredibilityAIM40.830
AIM50.878
AIM60.842
Airport ReputationAIM70.759
AIM80.892
AIM90.792
* loading factor under 0.70 eliminated from model.
Table 3. Discriminant validity HTMT ratio.
Table 3. Discriminant validity HTMT ratio.
AIM ASQ SAT
Airport image (AIM)
Airport service quality (ASQ) 0.791
Passenger satisfaction (SAT) 0.534 0.497
Service Orientation (SEO) 0.812 0.761 0.487
Table 4. Result of R2 and Q2.
Table 4. Result of R2 and Q2.
R2Q2
Airport image 0.7590.498
Airport service quality 0.5790.359
Passenger satisfaction 0.2780.172
Table 5. Summary hypothesis test result.
Table 5. Summary hypothesis test result.
RelationsSET-Statistic Coef.p-ValueResult
Direct Hypothesis
H1SEO → ASQ0.03223.6590.7610.000Accepted
H2SEO → SAT0.0723.5890.2570.000Accepted
H3SEO → AIM0.0498.6990.4290.000Accepted
H4ASQ → SAT0.0694.3530.3020.000Accepted
H5ASQ → AIM0.0528.2580.4320.000Accepted
H6SAT → AIM0.0363.0380.1100.001Accepted
Indirect Hypothesis
H7SO → SAT → AIM0.0132.2530.0280.012Accepted
H8ASQ → SAT → AIM0.0132.4980.0330.006Accepted
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Usman, A.; Azis, Y.; Harsanto, B.; Azis, A.M. The Impact of Service Orientation and Airport Service Quality on Passenger Satisfaction and Image: Evidence from Indonesia. Logistics 2023, 7, 102. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics7040102

AMA Style

Usman A, Azis Y, Harsanto B, Azis AM. The Impact of Service Orientation and Airport Service Quality on Passenger Satisfaction and Image: Evidence from Indonesia. Logistics. 2023; 7(4):102. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics7040102

Chicago/Turabian Style

Usman, Agus, Yudi Azis, Budi Harsanto, and Anton Mulyono Azis. 2023. "The Impact of Service Orientation and Airport Service Quality on Passenger Satisfaction and Image: Evidence from Indonesia" Logistics 7, no. 4: 102. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics7040102

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop