A weakness of disconfirmation approaches to service quality is their failure to explicitly recognise which items are particularly important to consumers. So, although an individual item of the SERVQUAL scale may show a high level of dissatisfaction, a maneger does not have a clear idea whether this failing represents a particularly important aspect of the service offer. Should the manager concentrate on rectifying an item that
is showing a high level of dissatisfaction, but which may be quite unimportant to the consumer, or on rectifying an item that
shows only marginal levels of dissatisfaction, but may be absolutely crucial to consumers?
Czy możecie mnie proszę naprowadzić na wyjaśnienie dlaczego autor nie użył tych samych aspektów?