This study aims to challenge universal service quality frameworks by introducing the concept of cue diagnostic – the idea that the dimensions customers use to evaluate service experiences vary systematically across service configurations. The purpose is to develop and empirically test the Service Configuration–Experience Fit (SCEF) framework, which explains why and how different service typologies require different quality configurations to achieve high customer satisfaction.
The study analyzes 50,293 customer reviews from 11,198 businesses across three service typologies (Service Shops, Professional Services, Mass Services). SERVQUAL based text mining extracts reliability, responsiveness, assurance, empathy and tangible indicators from review text. Fuzzy set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) identifies configurations of these dimensions that are sufficient for high satisfaction, complemented by ANOVA and Random Forest feature importance analysis.
Cue diagnostic differs by typology: responsiveness and assurance dominate Service Shops, empathy drives Professional Services and reliability/tangibles characterize Mass Services. High customer satisfaction requires configurations of dimensions, not individual attributes. Mass Services score highest on tangibles yet receive the lowest ratings, and tangibles are diagnostic only when combined with relational dimensions such as responsiveness and empathy. The cross-sectional design does not permit causal claims.
The SCEF framework advances service theory from universal quality models to a contingency based understanding by introducing cue diagnostic as the mechanism linking operational configuration to customer experience. The findings resolve the Service Quality Paradox and provide managers with typology specific heuristics for resource allocation and service design.
