Bank Service Quality in Enhancing Client Satisfaction - Research Proposal Example

The Role of Service Quality in Enhancing Client Satisfaction and Loyalty; Perspective from Saudi Retail Banks Table of Contents 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Research Area of Interest, Aims, and Objectives 2 2. Literature Review 3 2.1 The Role of Customer Service in Banking 3 2.2 The SERVQUAL Model 4 3. Methodology 5 3.1 Research Approach 5 3.2 Research Sample 7 3.3 Ethical Considerations 8 References 9 Form EC1 – Ethics Form Research Proposal: The Role of Service Quality in Enhancing Client Satisfaction and Loyalty; Perspective from Saudi Retail Banks 1. Introduction 1.1 Background Driven by oil revenues, the economy and population of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) has reached “first-world” status in a relatively short period of time, from a dusty and largely undeveloped nation in the 1930s to a member of the important Group of 20 (G-20) nations in 2009 (The Group of 20, 2009). One of the consequences of KSA’s prosperity is a relatively financially-secure, young, internationalised population; as of 2009, expatriates and youths under the age of 15 accounted for approximately eight million and 8.6 million respectively of KSA’s estimated 28.7 million people (Population Reference Bureau, 2011). With respect to the Saudi banking industry, there appear to be three main challenges. First, the industry must be prepared to serve the younger generation, a generation with a more global outlook and greater access to new technology – such as electronic banking – than their predecessors. Second, because of KSA’s position as an important global trading partner, Saudi banks must be prepared to meet international standards for service and governance. And finally, as the historic home of Islam, Saudi Arabia strictly follows Islamic law, which provides extensive guidance for commercial and financial transactions (Abdul Rahman, 2007, p. 142; Abraham, 2009, p. 42). In terms of the current state of the Saudi banking industry, its prospects appear very favourable; in October 2012 Moody’s Investor Services published its quarterly world banking outlook and assigned KSA a risk rating of 2, the lowest risk level in the entire Middle East region and one of the lowest in the world. In addition, the banking sector as a whole – which includes 12 major banks – posted slightly more 11% year-on-year income growth and a more than 15% growth in deposits in 2012 (Ahmed, 2013). Yet despite the success of the Saudi banking sector, complaints about customer service are, anecdotally at least, rather common. For example, in a July 2011 article in the Saudi Gazette, customers listed a number of grievances, including the slow adoption of electronic banking services, long queues, understaffing in bank offices, and slow processing of transactions (Khan, 2011). 1.2 Research Area of Interest, Aims, and Objectives The main research area of interest for the proposed study is the response of customers to perceptions of customer service quality in Saudi retail banks. The primary research aim is to determine and measure the degree to which customer service quality impacts the customer’s choice to start or maintain a relationship with a bank, as opposed to other factors such as fees and interest rates, bank locations, or banking product offerings. The study has three main objectives: 1. To identify a method of measuring service quality. A likely candidate is the SERVQUAL model, developed for use in marketing research by Parasuraman, et al. (1985, 1988). This is discussed in greater detail in the literature review below. 2. To conduct a survey of banking customers from each of the 12 major Saudi banks to gather information on their perceptions of service quality, and the relative importance they attach to service quality in making loyalty decisions. 3. To develop a description of the impact of service quality on customer loyalty towards Saudi banks through the analysis of the survey data according to the measurement model. 2. Literature Review 2.1 The Role of Customer Service in Banking The management of quality in banking services is a critical area of attention for banks, which because of strict regulations governing their business are not able to differentiate themselves to a very great degree in terms of the products they offer their customers. In order to remain competitive, banks must focus on containing costs, accountability based on outcomes, and customer-oriented quality delivery. An initial review of the literature related to the proposed study did not reveal many published studies devoted to assessing service quality in Saudi service industries, but one significant study that was completed focused on customers of the Saudi Electric Company (Jannadi & Al-Saqqaf, 2000). That study has a bearing on the proposed study because of the similarity between the electric company and the banking industry – the product offering in each case is relatively static, so that customer perceptions of the overall quality of the company are based on perceptions of service delivery. The main difference between the electric company and the banking industry is, of course, that customers of banks have many more alternatives in selecting banks, and this realisation is at the heart of customer service strategy for banks. The primary goal of banks with respect to customer service is to achieve “zero defections”, that is, retaining every customer while gaining new customers up to the number of customers who can be serviced profitably (Reicheld & Sasser, 1990, p. 106). The implication of the goal of customer service is that service quality must be continuously improved to achieve zero defections and attract new customers, and in order to be improved, service quality must be measured. Before service quality can be measured, however, it must be clearly defined, and it is in this area that the literature provides sometimes confusing information. Bergman and Klefsjo (1994) define service quality as the ability to satisfactorily meet the needs and expectations of customers, while Evans and Lindsay (1996) take this a step further and define it as the combination of features of a product or service that positively contribute to meeting the needs and expectations of customers. A large part of the difficulty in defining service quality for service organizations lies in the fact that it must be done from a customer perspective, whereas most other strategic concerns of the business are approached from an internal perspective (Brannen & Streeter, 1995, pp. 61-63; Selber, 1998). Walsh (1991, p. 506) points out a characteristic of banks and some other types of service businesses where it is typical for the business to refer to its “clients” rather than “customers”; he suggests this is more than a semantic difference, as “client” suggests a more passive relationship with the service provider, whereas “customer” suggests a relationship in which the client/customer has more power. The implication of this small difference in what the bank calls the people who use its services may be that it can serve as an indicator of the degree to which the bank takes a customer-oriented perspective towards managing service quality. 2.2 The SERVQUAL Model In terms of the measurement of service quality, the biggest challenge is that it is almost unavoidably subjective. In banking, the services are largely intangible, and are produced and consumed at the same time; for customers, the only measure of “good” service quality is if it meets their expectations when they receive it – and their expectations may change from time to time, depending on their particular needs in different interactions with the bank (Lewis & Booms, 1983; Gronroos, 1984). In order to translate subjective assessments of service quality into some consistently measureable form, Parasuraman, et al. (1985) developed the SERVQUAL model, which compare the expectations of service quality with the perceptions of the service delivered. In its first version, the SERVQUAL model provided 10 dimensions of service quality: reliability, responsiveness, competence, access, courtesy, communication, credibility, security, understanding the consumer, and tangibles (Parasuraman, et al., 1985). A second, refined version developed a few years later reduced the number of dimensions to five: reliability, responsiveness, empathy, assurances and tangibles (Parasuraman, et al., 1988). The SERVQUAL model has received some criticism from scholars, who question whether the dimensions are applicable to all types of service industries (the model was originally developed in a marketing context), and whether it is complete enough. For example, Cronin and Taylor (1992, pp. 56-58) argue that a large body of research supports empirical outcomes as measures of service quality, such as repeat purchases or customer endorsements to new customers. The problem as they see it is that the SERVQUAL model focuses on the service delivery process rather than technical attributes of service, which can be measured by the results it produces; in other words, the SERVQUAL model can define whether service quality is “good” or “bad” in a broad sense, but cannot define why it is so. In terms of alternative models, Rust and Oliver (1994) developed a three-dimensional model measuring service quality in terms of service product, service delivery, and service environment. A similar but somewhat more refined model was developed by Brady and Cronin (2001), which described service quality in terms of service outcome, customer-employee interaction, and service environment. Despite the criticisms of the SERVQUAL model, using it as the fundamental analysis tool for the proposed study has two advantages. First, it has been applied in other studies and is thus a tested methodology. Second, even though the model is built around five dimensions, it can be extended by adding additional dimensions; provided, of course, these can be clearly defined and differentiated from the existing five dimensions. Thus the SERVQUAL model, despite possible limitations, will be the most appropriate model for this study. 3. Methodology 3.1 Research Approach The proposed study takes a research approach that can be described as the application of theoretical knowledge – in this case, the presumed validity of the SERVQUAL model in the measurement of service quality – to a specific industry or business sector. Therefore, a mixed approach combining both qualitative and quantitative methods would be the best approach (Bryman & Bell, 2003, pp. 632-633). The qualitative aspects of the research approach help to explain behaviours, while the quantitative part of the methodology defines to what extent those behaviours occur (Bernard, 1995, pp. 356, 419). In the context of the proposed study, the qualitative aspect of the research comes from the two parts of the SERVQUAL model, expectations and perceptions. These are entirely subjective, defined by the customers; one customer’s expectations or perceptions are most likely to be different from another’s, based on his or her specific needs. The model itself represents the quantitative aspect of the research, as it is essentially a mathematical expression, , where SQ is service quality, P is the customer’s perception, and E is the customer’s expectation. This can be subjected to statistical operations, using assigned values (such as the scores from Likert scales) for the variables; those values, however, are subjectively determined by the customers responding to the survey in which the information is gathered. The primary research will be conducted by means of a survey based on the SERVQUAL model, and the survey will have three main parts: Basic demographic data, such as which bank the customer is using, and general descriptive information of the customer such as age group, gender, and occupation; customer expectations, based on the dimensions of the SERVQUAL model; and customer perceptions, based on those same dimensions. Although the specific design of the survey – including the possible addition of other dimensions – will be subject to further review of the literature and pilot-testing of the survey, the proposed research will study the five dimensions of service quality as they are described by Parasuraman, et al. (1988): Reliability: The providing of the service in a reliable and accurate way. Responsiveness: The ability and willingness of the staff to assist customers and provide prompt service. Empathy: The ability of the staff to understand the customer’s needs. Assurances: The ability of the staff to project knowledge and competence, and to provide courteous service, i.e., to communicate the acknowledgement of the customer’s value. Tangibles: The appearance, accessibility, and ease of use of facilities, equipment, materials, and personnel. The main parts of the survey will consist of two sets of questions, one measuring expectations and a corresponding set of questions measuring perceptions; there will be several questions for each of the service quality dimensions. Each question will be scored by the survey respondents according to a five-point Likert scale, with 1 representing the lowest score (such as “least important” or “strongly disagree”) and 5 representing the highest score (“most important” or “strongly agree”). These scores will then be applied as the values for the variables P and E in the data analysis. 3.2 Research Sample The proposed research sample is 150 respondents to the survey, approximately 12-13 respondents from amongst the customers of each of the 12 major banks in Saudi Arabia, with the additional objective to obtain a research sample approximately evenly divided between men and women. The rationale for this basic make-up of the research sample is to develop a broadly-applicable set of conclusions about customer service quality in the Saudi banking sector. Because of the relatively small sample size for each bank, the research is not intended to be indicative of service quality in any specific bank, as there would be considerable uncertainty whether that number (approximately 12 per bank) is normally distributed. Alternately, a research sample with the number of respondents per bank being in approximately the same proportion as each bank’s share of the Saudi retail banking market would also produce an accurate overall picture of the perceived state of service quality in the industry. It is understood that the anticipated number of respondents may need to be adjusted pending further research, and that the specifications of the research sample will pose some challenges to the researcher. This is unavoidable, however, as the overall goal of this proposed study is provide robust, credible results, which will of course not be possible without dedicated effort. 3.3 Ethical Considerations There are some ethical issues in the proposed study that must be addressed. Banking matters are highly personal, and potential research participants may not be inclined to take part out of concern for confidentiality. In order to protect confidentiality of the respondents, the purpose and nature of the survey will be clearly communicated to all prospective participants, who will be informed that they may decline to participate, or stop at any time once the survey is begun. In addition, no personally identifying information will be collected from any participant other than very basic demographic information as described above; no details as to the nature of their business with the banks will be required for the survey, and will not be collected. To prevent possible ethical issues from arising with the banks themselves, the banks will not be identified in the dissertation (although they will be known to the researcher), and will only be identified in any data analysis worksheets or appendices in generic terms, such as “Bank 1,” “Bank 2,” etc. All guidelines and requirements of the University will be strictly followed. The mandatory Ethics Form (Form EC1) is attached to this proposal as an Appendix. References Abdul Rahman, A.R. (2007), “Islamic Banking and Finance: Between Ideals and Reality”, IIUM Journal of Economics and Management, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 123-141. Abraham, I. (2009), “Riba and Recognition: Religion, Finance and Multiculturalism”. In J. Johnston & K. McPhillips (eds), Essays from the AASR Conference, University Of Auckland, New Zealand July 6-11, 2008. University of Sydney, pp. 39-54. Ahmed, M. (2013), “Saudi banks continue to maintain growth momentum”, Arab News [online], 25 January 2013. Available from: http://www.arabnews.com/economy/saudi-banks-continue-maintain-growth-momentum. Bergman, B. and Klefsjo, B. (1994), Quality: From Customer Needs to Customer Satisfaction, New York: McGraw-Hill. Bernard, H.R. (1995), Research Methods in Anthropology. Lanham, Maryland: AltaMira Press. Brady, M.K. and Cronin, J.J. (2001), “Customer Orientation: Effects on Customer Service Perceptions and Outcome Behaviors”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 241-251. Brannen, S.J. and Streeter, C.L. (1995) “Doing It with Data: Total Quality Management and the Evaluation of Social Services”. In: B. Gummer and P. McCallion (Eds.), Total Quality Management in the Social Services: Theory and Practice, Albany, NY: Rockefeller College Press, pp. 59-88. Bryman, A., and Bell, E. (2003), Business Research Methods, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cronin, J.J., & Taylor, S.A. (1992), “Measuring service quality: a reexamination and extension”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 56 July, pp. 55-68. Evans, J.R. and Lindsay, W.M. (1996), The Management and Control of Quality, New York: West Publishing. Gronroos, C. (1984), “A Service Quality Model and Its Implications”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 8, pp. 36-44. The Group of Twenty (2009), available from: http://www.g20.org/. Jannadi, O.A. and Al-Saqqaf, H. (2000), “Measurement of Quality in Saudi Arabian Service Industry”, International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Vol.17, No. 9, pp. 949-965. Khan, S.A. (2011), “Retail banking services unsatisfying: Customers”, Saudi Gazette [online], 8 July 2011. Available from: http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/ index.cfm?method=home.regcon&contentid=20110708104745. Lewis, R.C. and Booms, B.H. (1983), “The Marketing Aspects of Quality”. In: L. Berry, L. Shostack and G. Upah (Eds.), Emerging Perspectives on Service Marketing. Chicago: American Marketing Association, pp. 99-107. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A., & Berry, L.L. (1985), “A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49, pp. 41-50. Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A., & Berry, L.L. (1988), “SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 64, pp. 12-40. Population Reference Bureau (2011), Saudi Arabia summary data. Available from: http://www.prb.org/DataFinder/Geography/Data.aspx?loc=370. Reichheld, F.F. and Sasser, W.E. (1990), “Zero Defections: Quality Comes to Services”, Harvard Business Review, September-October, pp. 105-111. Rust, R.T. and Oliver, R.L. (1994), Service Quality; New Directions in Theory and Practice, Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications. Selber, K. (1998), “Challenges in Measuring and Managing Quality in Health and Human Services Organizations”, Family and Community Health, Vol. 21, No. 2, pp. 50-69. Walsh, K. (1991), “Quality and Public Services”, Public Administration, Vol. 69, No. 4, pp. 503-514. UNIVERSITY OF HERTFORDSHIRE Form EC1: Application for ETHICAL approval of a study involving human participants (See Guidance Notes) Office Use only Date Received by Clerk: Expedited Review Approved by Reviewer 1 (sign & date) Approved by Reviewer 2 (sign & date) Further Action: (tick appropriate box and provide details) Request Further Information Details: Refer for Substantive Review Refer for Full review Reject Substantive Review Approved by Reviewer 1 (sign & date) Approved by Reviewer 2 (sign & date) Approved by Reviewer 3 (sign & date) Approved by Reviewer 4 (sign & date) Further Action: (tick appropriate box and provide details) Request Further Information Details: Refer for Full review Reject Full Review Request Further Information Details: Reject CONFIRMATION OF APPROVAL [To be completed by the Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the relevant ECDA, or by the Chairman of the University Ethics Committee – (see GN 2.1.4)] I confirm that this application has been approved by or on behalf of the committee named below. Name/Sign…………………………………………………………Date…………………….. Name of committee ……………………... DECLARATIONS DECLARATION BY APPLICANT (See GN 2.1.3) (i) I undertake, to the best of my ability, to abide by accepted ethical principles in carrying out the study. (ii) I undertake to explain the nature of the study and all possible risks to potential participants, to the extent required to comply with both the letter and the spirit of my replies to the foregoing questions (including information contained in Appendices 1 & 2). (iii) Data relating to participants will be handled with great care. No data relating to named or identifiable participants will be passed on to others without the written consent of the participants concerned, unless they have already consented to such sharing of data when they agreed to take part in the study. (iv) All participants will be informed (a) that they are not obliged to take part in the study, and (b) that they may withdraw at any time without disadvantage or having to give a reason. Where the participant is a minor or is otherwise unable, for any reason, to give full consent on their own, references here to participants being given an explanation or information, or being asked to give their consent, are to be understood as referring to the person giving consent on their behalf. (See Q 19 above; also GN Pt. 3, and especially 3.6 & 3.7) Enter your name here………………………………………………………..Date………………. If you are a member of staff, please obtain the signature of your line manager to indicate their agreement to this application: …………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………… (Signature) (Name in BLOCK CAPITALS and position within the School) DECLARATION BY SUPERVISOR (see GN 2.1.3) I confirm that the proposed study has been appropriately vetted within the School in respect of its aims and methods as a piece of research; that I have discussed this application for Ethics Committee approval with the applicant and approve its submission; and that I accept responsibility for guiding the applicant so as to ensure compliance with the terms of the protocol and with any applicable ethical code(s). Enter your name here………………………………………………………...Date……………… Instructions for Applicants Applicants are advised to read the Guidance Notes before completing this form. Use of this form is mandatory [see UPR RE01, SS 7.1 to 7.3]. Your School may choose to add additional School specific questions in a separate appendix to the Form EC1. Please clarify with your Supervisor whether your School has chosen to append any extra questions. Approval must be sought and granted before any investigation involving human participants begins [UPR RE01, S 4.4(iii)]. Abbreviations GN=Guidance Notes UPR=University Policies & Regulations Q=Question S=Section SS=Sections Pt =Part PLEASE NOTE: Where alternative answers are offered, put a cross in the appropriate box. For example: YES Where a “write in” answer is requested, begin in the space provided below the question and continue as necessary. All questions must be answered. Please answer in BLACK. 1. THE STUDY Q1. Please give the title (or provisional title) of the proposed study. (NB – you will be asked for further details later) The Role of Service Quality in Enhancing Client Satisfaction and Loyalty; Perspective from Saudi Retail Banks 2. THE APPLICANT Q2. Please answer either Q2.1 or Q2.2 by providing the information requested. Q2.1 should be answered by individual applicants, both staff and students, who require protocol approval for work which they themselves intend to carry out. Q2.2 should be answered by academic staff requiring approval for standard protocols governing classroom practical work (or equivalent work) to be carried out by a specified group of students. (See GN 2.2.1 & 2.2.19) Q2.1. Name of applicant/(principal) investigator Status: (a) undergraduate (b) postgraduate (taught/research) (c) academic staff (d) other - please give details here School/Department Programme of study or award (e.g. BA/MSc/PhD/Staff research) E-mail address Name of supervisor Supervisor’s contact details (email, extension number) Q2.2. Class Protocol Applications Only. Name of applicant/(principal) investigator (member of staff) School/Department Programme of study or award (e.g. BSc/MA) Module Title Year/group to be governed by the protocol Number of students conducting the study Programme Tutor (if different from the applicant) E-mail address Please note: Risk Assessment Form EC5 is mandatory for all Class Protocol Applications and must accompany this application. 3. DETAILS OF THE PROPOSED STUDY Q3. (a) Is it likely that your application will require NHS approval? (See GN 2.2.2) YES NO (If YES, please answer (b) & (c)) (If NO, please continue on to Q4) (b) Please confirm whether your research involves any of the following: NHS Patients Clinical trial of an investigational product Clinical trial of a medical device Exposure to any ionising radiation Adults who lack the capacity to consent Human Tissue (c) Please confirm whether this study is considered to be a Clinical Trial of Investigational Medical Products (CTIMP) or Clinical Trial of Investigational Medical Devices. (See GN 2.2.2) YES NO If YES, please indicate if the study involves any of the following categories: Children under 5 Pregnant women A group of more than 5,000 people Study would be undertaken overseas If your study is likely to require NHS approval or is a Clinical Trial of Investigational Medical Products or Devices, DO NOT complete this form any further and submit it to your relevant ECDA at this stage. All NHS applications must be made on an IRAS form. If your study is a Clinical Trial of Investigational Medical Products or Devices involving one of the above specified categories, you will be contacted by the relevant ECDA with information on the next steps. Please note, you will be issues with a UH Protocol Number but this will not be valid until you have sent your relevant ECDA a copy of your NHS approval. Q4. Please give a short synopsis of your proposed study; stating its aims and highlighting, if appropriate, where these aims relate to the use of human participants. (See GN 2.2.3) Please enter details here. The proposed study aims to investigate the relationship of perceptions of service quality to customer loyalty amongst customers of banks in Saudi Arabia, using the SERVQUAL model to develop a descriptive measure of service quality. Human participants will be required for the primary research, which is a survey that will gather basic demographic information and ask participants about the expectations and perceptions of customer service at their respective banks. Q5. Please give a brief explanation of the design of the study and the methods and procedures used, highlighting in particular where these involve the use of human participants. You should clearly state the nature of the involvement the human participants will have in your proposed study and the extent of their commitment. Thus you must complete and attach the Form EC6 (Participant Information Sheet) (see Appendix 2). Be sure to provide sufficient detail for the Committee to be clear what is involved in the proposed study, particularly in relation to the human participants. (See GN 2.2.4) The survey will consist of a number of paired Likert-scale questions (approx. 30-40) concerning customer expectations and perceptions of various dimensions of customer service, and may be administered in person, online using a web-based survey utility, or both. Q6. Please give the starting date and finishing date. (For meaning of “starting date” and “finishing date”, see GN 2.2.5) Q7. Where will the study take place? (If this is on UH Campus, who will permission be obtained from e.g. your Module Leader, Programme Tutor, Pro-Vice Chancellor (Student Experience) or the Dean of Students. If this is NOT on UH Campus, please attach a copy of the written permission, given by the proprietor, manager or other person with such authority over the premises, to use the premises for the purposes of carrying out this research (see Appendix 2)) (See GN 2.2.6) Please enter details here. The study will be conducted via the Internet or in one or more convenient public locations in Saudi Arabia. Q8. If the location is off campus, have you considered whether a risk assessment is necessary for the proposed location? (in respect of hazards/risks affecting both the participants and researchers) Please see Form EC5 (see Appendix 2, which is an example of a risk assessment form.) Please use this example if a risk assessment is necessary, and you have not been provided with a subject specific risk assessment form by your School or Supervisor. (See GN 2.2.7) A risk assessment will not be needed for any location where the study will be conducted, as these will be public facilities (such as shopping malls, or cafes). Q9. (a) Will anyone other than yourself and the participants be present with you when conducting this study? (See GN 2.2.8) YES NO If YES, please state the relationship between anyone else who is present other than the applicant and/or participants? (e.g. health professional, parent/guardian) N/A (b) Will the proposed study be conducted in confidence? If NOT, what steps will be taken to ensure confidentiality of the participants’ information. (See GN 2.2.8) Yes. No personally-identifying information will be collected from participants. 4. HARMS, HAZARDS & RISKS Q10. Will this study involve invasive procedures on the human participants? (See GN 2.2.9) Yes No (If YES, please fill out Appendix 1 – (If NO, answer Q11, Q12, Q13 Increased Hazards and Risks. & Q14) Once this is complete, move on to Q15) Q11, Q12, Q13 & Q14 - NON INVASIVE STUDIES ONLY Note: You are advised to read GN 2.2.10, 2.2.11, 2.2.12 & 2.2.13 carefully before you answer the following questions. Q11. Are there potential hazards to participant(s) and/or investigator(s) from the proposed study? (See 2.2.10) YES NO If YES, (a) Indicate their nature here. (b) Indicate here what precautions will be taken to avoid or minimise any adverse effects. Q12. Will or could the study cause discomfort or distress of a mental or emotional character to participants and/or investigator(s)? (See NG 2.2.11) YES NO If YES, (a) Indicate its nature here. (b) Indicate here what precautions will be taken to avoid or minimise such adverse effects. Q13. Will or could medical or other aftercare and/or support be needed by participants and/or investigator(s) as a result of the study? (See GN 2.2.12) YES NO Q14. (a) If you have answered ‘YES’ to Q11, Q12 & Q13, please state here the previous experience (and/or any relevant training) of the supervisor (or academic member of staff applying for a standard protocol) of investigations involving the hazards, risks, discomfort or distress detailed in those answers. (See GN 2.2.13) (b) Please describe in appropriate detail what you would do should the adverse effects or events which you believe could arise from your study, and which you have mentioned in your replies to the previous questions, occur. (See UPR RE01, S 2.3 (ii) and GN 2.2.13) 5. ABOUT YOUR PARTICIPANTS Q15. Please give a brief description of the kind of people you hope/intend to have as participants, for instance, a sample of the general population, University students, people affected by a particular medical condition, children aged 5 to 7, employees of a particular firm, people who support a particular political party. Participants will be adult customers of banks in Saudi Arabia. Q16. Please state here approximately how many participants you hope will participate in your study. The anticipated number of participants is 150. Q17. By completing this form, you are indicating that you are reasonably sure that you will be successful in obtaining the number of participants which you hope/intend to recruit. Please outline here how you intend to recruit them. (See GN 2.2.14) Participants will be recruited by word-of-mouth, social media, and in-person approach. 6. CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONSENT [For guidance on issues relating to consent, see GN 2.2.15 & Pt. 3.] Q18. Is it intended to seek informed consent from the participants? YES NO (See UPR RE01, S 2.3 & 2.4 and GN 3.1) If NO, please explain why it is considered unnecessary or impossible or otherwise inappropriate to seek informed consent. If YES, please attach a copy of the Consent Form to be used (See Form EC3 & EC4 for reference and GN 3.2), or describe here how consent is to be obtained and recorded. The information you give must be sufficient to enable the Committee to understand exactly what it is that prospective participants are being asked to agree to. Q19. If the participant is a minor (under 18 years of age), or is otherwise unable for any reason to give full consent on their own, state here whose consent will be obtained and how? (See especially GN 3.6 & 3.7) Q20. Are personal data of any sort (such as name, age, gender, occupation, contact details or images) to be obtained from or in respect of any participant? (See GN 2.2.16) YES NO If YES, (a) Give details here of personal data to be gathered, and indicate how it will be stored. For the purposes of minimal differentiation of participants as part of the data analysis, and for comparative purposes (such as comparing responses amongst different age groups or genders), age, gender, occupation, and the bank which the customer patronises will be collected. This data will be stored as part of the data analysis worksheet in electronic form accessible only to the researcher, except where it is recorded on paper surveys (if any), which will be secured or destroyed at the completion of the project according to University guidelines. (b) State here what steps will be taken to prevent or regulate access to personal data beyond the immediate investigative team? Any data on hard copies will be kept in a secure location as directed; electronic copies will be password-protected and accessible only to the researcher. (c) Indicate here what assurances will be given to participants about the security of, and access to, personal data. The manner of data security will be described as part of the participant data sheet. (d) State here, as far as you are able to do so, how long personal data collected during the study will be retained, and what arrangements have been made for its secure storage. Data will be kept secured until the completion of the project, or as long as required by University guidelines, and then safely destroyed. Q21. Is it intended (or possible) that data might be used beyond the present study? (See GN 2.2.16) YES NO If YES, please give here an indication of the kind of further use that is intended (or which may be possible). If NO, will the data be kept for a set period and then destroyed under secure conditions? YES NO If NO, please explain here why not. Q22. If your study involves work with children and/or vulnerable adults you will require a satisfactory Enhanced Criminal Records Bureau Disclosure. (See GN 2.2.17) Please indicate as appropriate: (a) CRB Disclosure not required (b) CRB Disclosure required and obtained If a satisfactory CRB Disclosure is required, a copy of this must be attached to Appendix 2 in order for reviewers to be able to consider your application. 7. REWARDS Q23. (a) Are you receiving any financial or other reward connected with this study? (See UPR RE01, 2.3) YES NO If YES, give details here. (b) Are participants going to receive any financial or other reward connected with the study? YES NO If YES, give details here. (c) Will anybody else (including any other members of the investigative team) receive any financial or other reward connected with this study? YES NO If YES, give details here. 8. OTHER RELEVANT MATTERS Q24. Enter here anything else you want to say in support of your application, or which you believe may assist the Committee in reaching its decision. APPENDIX 1 – INCREASED HAZARDS AND RISKS This section is to be completed if your answer to Q10 affirms the USE OF INVASIVE PROCEDURES in your study. Note: You are advised to read GN 2.2.10, 2.2.11, 2.2.12, 2.2.13 & 2.2.18 carefully before you answer the following questions. QA1. Please give details of the procedures to be used (e.g. injection of a substance, insertion of a catheter, taking of a blood or saliva sample), and any harm, discomfort or distress that their use may cause to participants and/or investigator(s). (See GN 2.2.10) (a) Indicate here what precautions will be taken to avoid or minimise any adverse effects. QA2. Will the study involve the administration of any substance(s)? (See GN 2.2.10) YES NO If YES, (a) Give details here of the substance(s), the dose or amount to be given, likely effects (including duration) and any potential hazards to participant(s) and/or investigator(s). (b) Indicate here what precautions will be taken to avoid or minimise any adverse effects. QA3. Are there any potential hazards to participant(s) and/or investigator(s) arising from the use of the proposed invasive procedures? (See GN 2.2.10) YES NO If YES, (a) Indicate their nature here. (b) Indicate here what precautions will be taken to avoid or minimise any adverse effects. QA4. Will or could the study cause discomfort or distress of a mental or emotional character to participants and/or investigator(s)? (See GN 2.2.11) YES NO If YES, (a) Indicate its nature here (b) Indicate here what precautions will be taken to avoid or minimise such adverse effects. QA5. Medical or other aftercare and/or support must be made available for participants and/or investigator(s) who require it where invasive procedures have been used in the study. Please detail what aftercare and/or support will be available and in what circumstances it is intended to be used. (See UPR RE01, S 2.3 (ii) and GN 2.2.12) QA6. (a) Please state here previous experience (and/or any relevant training) of the supervisor (or academic member of staff applying for a standard protocol) of investigations involving hazards, risks, discomfort or distress as specified. (See GN 2.2.13) (b) Please describe in appropriate detail what you would do should the adverse effects or events which you believe could arise from your study, and which you have mentioned in your replies to the previous questions, occur. QA7. In the event that the study reveals that a participant has a pre-existing medical condition (of which they may or may not be aware), and which could affect their present or future health or that of others, they should be informed of this in an appropriate manner and advised of follow-up action that they should take. (See GN 2.2.18) Advice should be sought as to whether information should be passed to their GP and a decision taken whether they should be allowed to continue to take part in the study. If a potential participant is not willing to agree to such action being taken in these circumstances, they should not be allowed to take part in the study. Please indicate here what arrangements have been made for complying with these requirements. Please revert to Q15. APPENDIX 2 – DOCUMENTS TO BE ATTACHED Please attach the following documents if you have affirmed possession of them in the relevant questions: (a) Permission from the location to be used to carry out this study (Q7) (This includes permission to use a location on UH Campus and any location off of UH Campus which requires permission to use.) (b) Risk assessment for off campus location (See Form EC5) (Q8) (c) Copy of Consent Form (See Form EC3 & Form EC4) (Q18) (d) Copy of Form EC6 (Participant Information Sheet) (Q5) (e) CRB Disclosure (Q22) (f) A copy of the proposed questionnaire and/or interview schedule (if appropriate for this study). For unstructured methods, please provide details of the subject areas that will be covered and any boundaries that have been agreed with your Supervisor. Read More