Course overview
Service quality problems are often visible in complaint volumes, repeat contacts, abandoned applications, low satisfaction scores or inconsistent frontline behaviour. The underlying causes can be harder to isolate. Customer expectations may exceed stated standards; policies may conflict with service promises; hand-offs may create delays; or managers may receive reports that describe symptoms without showing where to act. A disciplined audit and gap analysis process turns scattered feedback, operational data and direct observation into evidence for targeted service improvement.
This course teaches participants to plan and conduct service quality audits, gather customer and operational evidence, measure performance gaps and identify root causes. Participants work with RATER dimensions, SERVQUAL gap analysis, service blueprints, customer journey maps, audit checklists, complaint data and mystery shopping evidence. They learn how to distinguish a weak score from a material service failure, test whether findings are representative, prioritise corrective actions and report recommendations in a form senior decision-makers can use.
Teaching combines short instructor briefings with cases drawn from banking, public services, retail, telecommunications and business-to-business support. Group work covers audit scoping, evidence review, scoring calibration, journey diagnosis, complaint case analysis and improvement planning. Participants leave with a reusable service quality audit pack: an audit charter, evidence matrix, scoring approach, gap analysis, corrective-action register and reporting structure. The course is delivered over five days in the classroom or live online, with approximately 6.5 contact hours each day, and includes a certificate of completion.
The course is suited to managers and specialists responsible for customer experience, service operations, quality assurance, complaints, contact centres, branches, field service and process improvement. It is particularly useful where service standards exist but assurance, measurement and follow-through are inconsistent.
