Service Quality in Education at Addis Ababa University: The Case of The Faculty of Business and Economics Extension Program

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 24

Service Quality in Education at Addis Ababa University: The

case of the Faculty of Business and Economics Extension


Program
Tewodros Wuhib1

Abstract
Despite the fact that tertiary level education has been immensely operational,
maintaining quality education has become a challenge in Ethiopia. This paper is
trying to find out the problem related to service quality in education at Faculty
of Business and Economics of Addis Ababa University (Accounting,
Economics, Management, Public Administration and Informatics), specific to
the extension program. The servqual model is used as an instrument
methodology to measure the service quality vis-à-vis Tangibles, Reliability,
Responsiveness, Assurance, and Empathy. Primary data pertaining to the
research was collected from randomly selected students’ drawn from the five
departments’ under Faculty of Business and Economics. The findings of the
study show that except for responsiveness, all the remaining parameters
exhibited positive responses from the students. The responsiveness of the
Faculty of Business and Economics for evening students is low. But, the
students’ replied that the faculty is reliable, shows good empathy, good service
assurance and tangible. However, some of these items in construct show
negative responses. The faculty has to use its resources to improve the problems
identified in certain items in the constructs of this research. The study is limited
to measure the service quality of the Faculty of Business and Economics
extension program. The finding of the study however, may not represent the
entire performance of the University. The recommendations and suggestions of
this research would serve as a foundation to reinforce the relevance and crucial
role that the service quality plays towards the performance of the University.

Keywords: Responsiveness, Reliability, Empathy, Assurance and Tangibles


DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4314/ejbe.v6i1.3

1
Lecturer, Department of Management, Addis Ababa University, Email:
[email protected]
Service Quality in Education
1. Introduction
A service can be defined as: “any act or performance that one party can offer to
another that is essentially intangible and does not result in the ownership of
anything (Kotler, 1999). The main purpose of service rendering organization is
to make the intangible offer tangible through an attempt to meet the customer
expectation.

Customers are the sole owners of today’s business. That is, the company shall
tailor all their activities towards meeting and satisfying their needs. How the
company’s satisfied and outperforms competition is a critical issue where every
service rendering organization must focus on. Only customer focused
organizations are striving in developing a long-lasting business relationship with
their customers for sustainable growth and development.

In the management context, the word quality can be used to refer to different
things: accordance with the requirements, adequacy of use, prevention of losses,
or how to answer to or to exceed consumer expectations (Parasuraman, Zeithaml
and Berry, 1985, 1988).

The main reason to focus on quality is to meet customer needs while remaining
economically competitive at the same time. This means satisfying customer
needs is very important for the enterprises to survive. The outcome of using
quality practices is: Understanding and improving operational processes;
identifying problems quickly and systematically; establishing valid and reliable
service performance measures; and measuring customer satisfaction and other
performance outcomes

Customers do not perceive quality in a uni-dimensional way but rather judge


quality based on multiple factors relevant to the context. Similarly, the service
qualities have been identified five specific dimensions as criteria by which
interaction, physical environment, and outcome quality may be judged. These
five dimensions include: Tangibles; Reliability; Responsiveness; Assurance;
and, Empathy; (Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry, 1988).

These five dimensions represent how customers’ organize information about


service quality in their minds. Thus, in measuring the service quality and the
level of satisfaction, the gap between the perceived value of service by the
customers and the actual service rendered by the organization must tally.

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 49


Service Quality in Education
The research is trying to investigate the service quality performance level of the
FBE to its students. That is, it attempts to address the service quality from the
review of the related literature; the perception of customers towards receiving
quality service, etc. Thus, it incorporates the views of FBE students who have a
direct contact with the service, the FBE renders.

The main motivation behind undertaking this research is due to the fact that
students interact with departments for certain services, like: advising, add/drop;
complaints, etc. Observing their complaints triggers the need to undertake the
research in order to substantiate with valid and scientific findings for the
betterment of the service, FBE renders to its students.

The main objective of the study is to measure the service quality of FBE through
the use of the five constructs (Reliability; Responsiveness; Assurance; Empathy;
and Tangibles) designed by (Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry, 1988) to
measure the satisfaction and dissatisfaction of the students.

The research is discussed into five different sections including the introduction.
Next to introduction, service quality from the point of the literature review is
discussed to give an insight. Then, it is followed by the research design and
methodology used for the study at hand. In the end, it encompasses the results
and discussions accompanied by conclusion and recommendation for further
research.

2. Literature Review
2.1 Theoretical Review (Service Quality)

Service quality is “the delivery of excellent or superior service relative to


customer expectations” (Zeithaml and Bitner, 1996, p. 117). Service quality is
recognized as a multi-dimensional construct. While the number of dimensions
often varies from researcher to researcher, there is some consensus that service
quality consists of three primary aspects: outcome quality, interaction quality,
and physical service environment quality (Rust and Oliver, 1994; Brady and
Cronin, 2001).

Outcome quality refers to the end result of the service received by the service
seeker (Grönroos, 1984).Outcome quality reflects the customer’s perception of
the superiority of service experience (Brady and Cronin, 2001; Gro¨nroos, 1982,
1984; Kang and James, 2004).

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 50


Service Quality in Education
The interaction quality refers to the customers’ evaluation of the service delivery
process rendered by any tangible means (Grönroos, 1984). Interactive quality
refers to the interaction between the service provider and the service seeker. It is
a key element in evaluating the service quality as it will help the service seeker
to observe and analyze the service provider’ performance in lieu of the service
delivered (Lehtinen and Lehtinen, 1991; Grönroos, 1984, Rust and Oliver 1994).

Interaction quality (Grönroos, 1982, 1984) refers to the customers’ perception


of the manner in which the service is delivered during service encounters.
Interaction quality is also related to customers’ perception of the interactions
with service providers (e.g. employees, staff, etc.) during service delivery (Brady
and Cronin, 2001; Grönroos, 1982, 1984).

The physical environment quality measures the tangible aspect associated with
the equipment and facilities pertaining to how the service is provided. That is,
attitude of the service providing staffs, the communication equipment,
computers, and photocopiers used to deliver the service (Grönroos, 1984)

A service firm may win its customer by meeting or exceeding their expectation
through delivering consistently superior quality service than competitors do.
These expectations of customers emanate through their past experience, friends
or through promotional means. After receiving the services, customers evaluate
the perceived service against their expectation; if the perceived service falls short
of their expectation, the customers will be disappointed. However, if it meets or
exceeds their expectation, they will be satisfied and keep on coming to the
service provider.

The customer needs are fundamental for the enterprise to determine its internal
capabilities to satisfy and retain its customer for the long- term sustainable
business. In the interaction process, the customers are the sole players in the
service delivery. They work hand in hand with the provider. The company has
to work towards satisfying and work together with clients to create value for
sustainable long term relationship (Brady and Cronin, 2001; Grönroos, 1982,
1984).

Customer satisfaction is a key ingredient on the service organization


representing a customer evaluation of the trade- off between the service they
received and the money paid for the service. Rust and Oliver (1994) were the
first to define satisfaction as “the customer’s fulfillment response” which is both
an evaluation and an emotion-based response to a service.

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 51


Service Quality in Education

Table 1: Literature review related to service quality


Year Author(s) No of Details Comments Title
Dimensions
2013 Beom Joon Choi 6 Peer-to-peer quality, Except for changing of words, all the The impact of outcome quality,
Hyun Sik Kim Customer experience item discussed are included in the five interaction quality, and peer-to-
quality, Outcome dimensions introduced by the peer quality on customer
quality, Interaction Parasuraman et al (1988) satisfaction with a hospital service
quality, (Managing Service Quality Vol. 23
Customer satisfaction, No. 3, 2013 pp. 188-204
Customer loyalty
2011 Mik Wisniewski 5 Tangibles, Reliability, Discussed the five dimensions Using SERVQUAL to assess
Responsiveness, introduced by the Parasuraman et al customer satisfaction with public
Empathy and Assurance (1988) sector services, (Managing service
quality volume 11, number 6,2011
pp 380-388)
2010 Prabha 5 Tangibles, Reliability, Discussed the five dimensions Service Quality In The Public
Ramseook- Responsiveness, introduced by the Parasuraman et al Service (International Journal of
Munhurrun, Empathy and Assurance (1988) Management and Marketing
Soolakshna D. Research ♦ Volume 3 ♦ Number 1
Lukea-Bhiwajee, ♦ 2010)
Perunjodi Naidoo
2010 Lo Liang Kheng, 4 Tangibles, Reliability, Discussed the five dimensions The Impact of Service Quality on
Osman Mahamad, Responsiveness, introduced by the Parasuraman et al Customer Loyalty: A Study of
T. Ramayah, Empathy, Assurance, (1988) Banks in Penang, Malaysia
Rahim Mosahab, (International Journal of Marketing
Studies Vol. 2, No. 2; November
2010)
2010 C.N Krishna Naik, 5 Reliability, Assurance, Discussed the five dimensions introduced Service Quality (Servqual) and its
Swapna Nhargavi Tangibles, Empathy and by the Parasuraman et al (1988) Effect on Customer Satisfaction in
Gantasala, Responsiveness Retailing (European Journal of
Gantasala Social Sciences – Volume 16,
V.Prabhakar Number 2 (2010))

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 52


Service Quality in Education

2009 Rakshit Negi 5 Tangibles, Reliability, Discussed the five dimensions User’s perceived service quality of
Responsiveness, introduced by the Parasuraman et al mobile communications:
Empathy, Assurance (1988) experience from Ethiopia
Network aspect, and (International Journal of Quality &
Convenience Reliability Management, Vol. 26
No. 7, 2009 pp. 699-711)

1996 Francis Buttle 5 Reliability, Assurance, Discussed the five dimensions introduced SERVQUAL: review, critique,
Tangibles, Empathy and by the Parasuraman et al (1988) research agenda, European
Responsiveness Journal of Marketing
1996 Geoffrey Soutar 5 Reliability, Assurance, Discussed the five dimensions introduced Measuring service quality in a
and Tangibles, Empathy and by the Parasuraman et al (1988) tertiary institution.
Margaret McNeil Responsiveness Journal of Educational
Administration, Vol. 34 No. 1,
1996, pp. 72-82. © MCB
University Press
1994 Rust and Oliver 3 The customer- This is somehow similar to what Gronoos Books on Service Quality: New
employee (functional or and Lehitinen discussed with the Directions in Theory and Practice,
process quality) approach differs (service environment) year={1994},
interaction, The service Sage Publications
environment, and the
outcome quality
(technical quality)
1994 Clifford, Young, 5 Reliability, Assurance, Discussed the five dimensions introduced Assessing Service Quality as an
Lawrence Tangibles, Empathy and by the Parasuraman et al (1988) Effective Management Tool: The
Cunningham and Responsiveness Case of the Airline Industry
Moonkyu Lee (Journal of Marketing Theory and
Practice, Vol. 2, No. 2 (Spring,
1994), pp. 76-96)

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 53


Service Quality in Education

1991 Lehtinen and 3 Physical quality, These qualities are similar to Gronroos Two Approaches to Service
Lehtinen Interactive Quality and model Quality Dimensions, The Service
Corporate (image) Industries Journal, Vol 11 pp 287-
quality 303, Routledge
1988, Parasuraman, 5 Reliability, Assurance, The ten determinants of service quality SERVQUAL: A multiple – item
1991, Zeithaml, and Tangibles, Empathy and has been condensed to five by the authors scale for measuring customer
1993 Berry Responsiveness perception of service quality,
Journal of Marketing, 1988
1988 Parasuraman and 5 Reliability, Assurance, The above same concepts discussed. "Communication and Control
Zeithaml Tangibles, Empathy and Processes in the Delivery of
Responsiveness Service Quality," Journal of
Marketing, April 1988, pp. 35-48.
1985 Parasuraman, 10 Reliability, The ten determinants of the service A Conceptual Model of Service
Zeithaml, and Responsiveness, quality as identified by Parasuraman, Quality and Its Implications for
Berry Competence, Access, Zeithaml, and Berry Future Research (Journal of
Communication, Marketing, Vol. 49, No. 4
courtesy, Credibility, (Autumn, 1985), pp. 41-50)
Security,
understanding/knowing
the customer, Tangibles
1984 Gronroos 3 Technical quality, These dimensions are discussed by A service quality model and its
Functional Quality, and Lehitinen and Lehitinen in a similar marketing implications (European
Corporate image fashion and emphasised on the image Journal of marketing 18 (4), 36-44
propsed by Lehitnen

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 54


Service Quality in Education
Consumer satisfaction has been considered the primary intervening constructs
in the area of service marketing because ultimately they lead to the development
of consumer loyalty or re-patronization of a product or service (e.g. Parasuraman
et al, 1985, 1988; Rust & Oliver, 1994; Zeithaml et al,1993, 1996).

Satisfaction or dissatisfaction has been called on the episodic measure in that it


relates to the last service experience. Service quality is a global evaluation of all
past service experiences. Research has found that customers' perceived
evaluations of service quality have an impact on their level of satisfaction.
Therefore, service quality evaluation is an antecedent to customer satisfaction.

Thus, the service rendering organization must prove it to its customer that its
service is superior compared to its competitors through revolving around
identifying and meeting its customer’s needs. To do so, they shall focus or
pursue a strategy in service marketing. That is, people (they shall hire a very
knowledgeable working staff to deliver the service), process (they shall deliver
prompt service within a short period of time), and physical evidence (they shall
acquire modern equipment to show to customers that they are providing an
excellent service).

2.2. Empirical Literature: Service Quality


Service quality can be measured by identifying the gaps between customers’
expectations and their perceptions of the actual performance of service rendered
by the service provider. Thus, service rendering organization should strive to
narrow the gap between customer expectation and perception for the betterment
and sustainability of their business.

The empirical literature of service quality is mainly dominated by the works of


Parasuraman, Zeithamal and Berry (1988) who have built a 22-item instrument
called SERVQUAL for measuring consumer perception of service quality.
Servqual is an extensively acknowledged vital measurement tool used by many
businesses (Airlines, shipping lines, Parcel service, health services, hotel,
tourism, education, banks, logistics, etc.).
The tenet of servqual is originated on the dimensions of tangibility,
responsiveness, reliability, empathy and assurance. The model accentuates to
measure the gap between customers ‘expectation of the services to be provided
and their perception of the actual performance of services.
The five dimensions of service quality as identified by Parasuraman, Zeithaml,
and Berry (1985) are of the following: Tangibles: the appearance of physical
facilities, equipment, personnel and written materials. Reliability: The ability of

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 55


Service Quality in Education
an employee to perform the promised service dependably and accurately.
Responsiveness: The willingness of an employee to help customers and provide
prompt service. Assurance: The knowledge and courtesy of an employee’s and
their ability to inspire trust and confidence. Empathy: Caring and individualized
attention given to customers.

2.3 Conceptual Framework


Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry developed a popular scale called
SERVQUAL to measure service quality across various service industries
(Parasuraman et al., 1988).

The SERVQUAL model has been the most valuable instrument used to measure
consumers’ perceptions of service quality. The SERVQUAL scale consists of
five dimensions, namely: tangibility, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and
empathy and 22 items, (Parasuraman et al., 1988). The framework of
SERVQAUL has been successfully adopted in many businesses (Airline,
Shipping Line, Hotel, Hospital, Banking, Parcel, Education, etc.). SERVQUAL
when applied to the tertiary level education can be interpreted in to the
following:-

 Tangibles: The appearance of physical facilities (lecture rooms, library, staff


rooms), tools and equipment’s (computers, internet, etc.) used to provide the
service, appearance of personnel and communication materials.
 Reliability: The ability of the academic staffs to perform the promised service
dependably and accurately. And their ability to discharge their duties
consistently and dependably.
 Responsiveness: The willingness and/ or readiness of the academic staffs to
help students in counseling, assessing and submitting their grades promptly.
 Assurance: The knowledge and courtesy of the academic staffs and their
ability to convey trust and confidence: competence (possession of the required
skills and knowledge to perform the service)
 Empathy: The provision of caring, individualized attention to students:
informing the students about the expectation of their performance,
Understanding student's specific needs, and providing individualized attention.

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 56


Service Quality in Education
Figure 1: Conceptual framework of the study (Servqual Model)

Adapted from: (Parasuraman, Zeithaml, and Berry, 1988)

T
Tangiblity
s T

R
Reliability
R

Service Responsiveness RE
Quality S
RE

Assurance A

A
Empathy E
E
The other scholar who has dealt with the importance of service quality
measurements include the works of Gronroos (1984) who suggested that service
quality comprises of three dimensions, namely, the technical quality of the
outcome of the service encounter, the functional quality of the process itself and
the corporate image. In addition, Lehtinen and Lehtinen (1991) defined service
quality as a three dimensional construct consisting of interactive, physical and
corporate quality dimensions which are quite similar to Gronroos’s view.

3. Statement of the Problem


Identifying and meeting customer needs is the sole objective of every
organization. Satisfying and retaining customers require an eloquent approach
and sustained commitment. Customer satisfaction occurs when organizations
meticulously accomplish their duty to meet their customer needs and wants.
Customer satisfaction is defined as "the number of customers, or percentage of
total customers, whose reported experience with a firms products and services
EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 57
Service Quality in Education
exceeds specified satisfaction goals (Faris et al 2010). Customer satisfaction is
crucial to sustainability, growth and profit for organization’s supplying goods or
services. Thus, better understanding of customers’ perception helps companies
to strategize the actions necessary to convene the customers’ needs and wants.
Customer satisfaction measures the overall performance of an organization in
meeting the customers’ expectation.

Thus, it is an eminent threat for business to fail to meet the customer perception
of the service they are offering. Customer satisfaction is the sole and prominent
asset for business to survive and maintain worthwhile growth.

The research has attempted to address the service quality of the Faculty of
Business and Economics, Addis Ababa University. The research problem of the
study has investigated the performances of the Faculty to its students’ vis-a-viz
Tangibility, Reliability, Responsiveness, Assurance, and Empathy.

3.1 Research Questions

The study has endeavored to find answers for the following research questions.

1. Do the physical facilities and equipment of the faculty are appealing to


provide good service?
2. Do the faculty staffs perform the promised service dependably and
accurately?
3. Do the faculty staffs provide timely and prompt service to customers?
4. Does the faculty have competent staffs to deliver the service to customers?
5. Do the staff of the faculty provide individualized attention to customers?

4. Objectives of the Study


The main objective of the study at hand is to measure the service quality
provided by the Faculty of Business and Economics to its students. It strived to
meet the following:
1. Identify the real causes that affect the service quality, and
2. Assess the customers’ perception of the service quality of the faculty

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 58


Service Quality in Education
5. Research Methodology

5.1 Research Approach


The research adopts a Servqual model as a conceptual framework to elucidate
the service quality of the Faculty of Business and Economics of the Addis Ababa
University’s extension students’ of the academic year 2012 and 2013. The year
2012 and 2013 students have been selected due to the fact that they are in the
system for more than two years and are expected to have exhibited gaps in the
service delivery (add/drop, readmission, consultation, withdrawal, etc.).

5.2 Sampling Technique


A simple random sampling method has been used to ensure that all parts of the
population are represented in the sample in order to increase the efficiency and
decrease the error in the estimation. Thus, 20% (100 students) out of the total
500 students’ drawn from various disciplines (24% Accounting, 24%
Management, 20% Public Administration, 16% Economics and 16%
Informatics) are evenly apportioned and randomly has been selected. Out of the
selected students, 86% of the questionnaire are duly filled and returned.

5.3 Data Collection


To gather information from randomly selected students, the study used both
primary and secondary data sources. Primary data has been collected by using a
standard close-end questionnaire using a five- point Likert scale where scores
range from “strongly agree (5) and strongly disagree (1). And, secondary data
has been collected from various journals published on the area.

5.4 Data Analysis


Descriptive statistics is used in analyzing the responses of the respondents. To
this effect, statistical tool i.e. IBM SPSS version 20 is employed.

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 59


Service Quality in Education
6. Results and Discussion
6.1 Distribution of Questionnaire

Table: 2 Distribution of Questionnaire


Departments Distributed Duly filled and Percentage of
returned response
Economics 20 15 75
PADM 20 19 95
ACFN 20 19 95
Mangement 20 17 85
IT 20 16 80
Total 100 86 86

As depicted in the above table, a total of 100 questionnaires evenly were


distributed to the departments. Out of which, 86% of the questionnaire are dully
filled and returned. The sample size is considered using purposive random
sampling. That is, the study believed that the students’ responses are much more
alike.

6.2 Respondents according to Gender

Table 3: Respondents according to gender


Gender Departments Total

ECON PADM ACFN MGMT IT Num %


Male 9 11 12 9 7 48 56
Female 6 8 7 8 9 38 44
Total 15 19 19 17 16 86 100

As illustrated in the above table, 56% of the respondents are male while the
remaining 44% are female. However, this percentage of response has no
significance in the analysis. It has been incorporated simply to show the
representation of the respondents among the sample.

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 60


Service Quality in Education
6.3 Respondents according to their academic year of enrollment

Table 4: Respondents according to year of enrollment


Year of Departments Total
Enrollment
ECON PADM ACFN MGMT IT Num %
2012 15 19 34 40
2013 19 17 16 52 60
Total 15 19 19 17 16 86 100

As seen in the above table, 40% of the respondents are enrolled in the year 2012
while the remaining 60% are enrolled in the year 2013. The rationale behind
choosing these batches is due to the fact that they are in the system for more than
a year. Thus, these batches can provide a valuable and constructive feedback on
the service (Add/Drop, Readmission, Course Waiver, Advising, Complaints,
etc.) the university provides. Comparatively, more students enrolled in the year
2013 have been chosen considering their exposure and anticipating a more sound
response on the service the university renders.

6.4 Discussions
The constructs which are used in this research are reported in Table5. The table
includes the variables, the number of items considered under each construct,
mean, standard deviation, the reliability test-alpha. In order to have a valid
construct in the model, each of the items comprising the construct was checked
to see if it was uni-dimensional. To this effect, each construct was then evaluated
using a separate reliability test and the Cronbach’s alpha is reported in the same
table. The Cronbach's alpha measures how well a set of items (variables) in the
measures of a single uni-dimensional latent construct was also tested. When
data have a multidimensional structure, Cronbach's alpha is usually low. The
higher the alpha value is the better the data reliability (Field, 2009). Most of the
constructs are good for students; with few exceptions, such as empathy (alpha is
equal to 0.598) and assurance (alpha is equal to 0.672).

Though the commonly accepted level of Alpha is 0.60 (Joseph et.al, 2010), the
finding showed that, apart from one construct (that is empathy- less than or equal
to 0.60), all have a Cronbach’s Alpha value greater than or equal to 0.6.
Moreover, all of the items under each construct have a factor loading greater
than or equal to 0.50 and inter-item-total correlation greater than or equal to 0.30

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 61


Service Quality in Education
(Evans et.al, 1996). The descriptive statistics of each item under each
construct/variable are reported in table4.

Table5 : Over all mean and standard deviation of the construct


Students
SN # of Cronb. Std.
Construct Items Alpha N Sum Mean Dev.
1 Tangibility 7 0.678 87 241.43 2.80 .681
2 Reliability 4 0.761 87 237.00 2.72 .895
3 Responsiveness 5 0.723 87 210.70 2.42 .773
4 Assurance 3 0.672 87 249.00 2.86 .851
5 Empathy 3 0.598 86 224.00 2.60 .786

As shown in Table5, the overall mean and standard deviation of the construct
tangibility is found to be 2.80 and 0.681. That is, the higher mean and relatively
low standard deviation show that the tangibility of the service rendered by the
FBE with respect to students’ need is relatively good. A close investigation of
each item as under the construct responsiveness, shown in Table6 supports this
finding. All the items, except “you have an access to a computer to aid your
learning at FBE? “have got a low mean (less than 2.50) and high standard
deviation (greater than 1.00). From Table 6, one item out of the total seven items
that measure the construct tangibility are rated by more than 40% of the students
either strongly disagree or disagree. From the findings, relatively very few
numbers of students have strongly agreed for these items.

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 62


Service Quality in Education

Table 6: Tangibility
SN Tangibility Mean Stdv. N SDA DA N A SA Total
N (%) N (%) N (%) N(%) N(%) N(%)
1 An orientation is given to
you the first time you 3.01
enroll at FBE? 1.38 87 21(23.6) 11(12.4) 13(14.6) 32(36) 10(11.2) 87(97.8)
2 The commitment of FBE in
improving the quality of 2.73
education is high? 1.19 86 16(18) 20(22.5) 28(31.5) 15(16.9) 7(7.9) 86(96.6)
3 Are you provided with
quality and recent books in 2.78
FBE libraries? 1.25 86 19(21.3) 16(18) 21(23.6) 25(28.1) 5(5.6) 86(96.6)
4 You have an access to a
computer to aid your 2.28
learning at FBE? 1.09 86 26(29.2) 26(29.2) 18(20.2) 16(18) 86(96.6)
5 The administration of final
exams at FBE is well
2.99
organized and strictly
controlled? 1.19 86 15(16.9) 10(11.2) 28(31.5) 27(30.3) 6(6.7) 86(96.6)
6 The class size of students
to sections at FBE is more
3.17
appropriate and
manageable? 1.06 86 7(7.9) 16(18) 23(25.8) 35(39.3) 5(5.6) 86(96.6)
7 The normal curve grading
system of FBE is more 2.67
evaluative and effective? 1.02 86 15(16.9) 18(20.2) 33(37.1) 20(22.5) 86(96.6)

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 63


Service Quality in Education
As shown in Table 5, the overall mean and standard deviation of the construct
reliability is found to be 2.72 and 0.895. From this, one can infer that the
reliability of the service rendered by FBE is relatively good. However, close
investigations of each item as under the construct reliability, shown in Table7
indicates that. Almost all the items, except item “the students hand book is very
informative and applicable and the instructor at FBE encourages students to be
active participants?” have got high mean (greater than 2.75) and high standard
deviation (greater than1.20). From Table 6, all the four items that measure the
construct reliability are rated by more than 20% of the students as neutral. From
the findings, relatively very few numbers of students have strongly agreed and
agreed for all the items.

Table 7: Reliability
SN Reliability
Mean Stdv N SDA DA N A SA Total
N
N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%) (%) N (%)
1 The student
hand book is
very
2.85 1.22 87
informative
and
applicable? 17(19) 14(16) 27(30) 23(26) 6(7) 87(98)
2 The
instructors
at FBE
encourage 2.90 1.22 86
students to
be active
participants? 13(14.6) 21.0(23.6) 22(24.7) 22(24.7) 8(9) 86(96.6)
3 The
teaching -
learning
2.62 1.14
quality at
FBE is very
good? 86 16(18) 24(27) 29(32.6) 11(12.4) 6(6.7) 86(96.6)
4 The
evaluation
modality at 2.59 1.06
FBE is very
good? 86 12(13.5) 33(33.71) 22(24.7) 16(18) 3(3.4) 86(96.6)

As shown in Table5, the overall mean and standard deviation of the construct
responsiveness is found to be 2.42 and 0.773. That is, the low mean and
relatively high standard deviation show that the responsiveness of FBE with
respect to students’ need is relatively low. A close investigation of each item as
under the construct responsiveness, shown in Table 8 supports this finding.

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 64


Service Quality in Education
Almost all the items, except item “You have a good access to advisors when
facing academic problems?” have got high mean (greater than 2.50) and low
standard deviation (less than 1.00). From Table 8, four out of the five items that
measure the construct responsiveness are rated by more than 50% of the students
either strongly disagree or disagree. From the findings relatively very few
numbers of students have strongly agreed for all items.

Table8. Responsiveness
No
Responsiveness Mean Stdv SDA DA N A SA Total

1 FBE provides you


with the student
hand books which
2.33 1.19 27(30.33)* 27(30.30) 11(12.40) 21(23.60) 1(1.10)
give you all the
information that
you require? 87(97.87)
2 The
Administration is
2.30 1.19
so responsive to
students' quest 33(37.08) 13(14.61) 24(27.00) 16(17.98) 1(1.10) 87(97.87)
3 You have a good
access to advisors
when facing 2.78 0.98
academic
problems? 3(3.37) 39(43.82) 22(24.70) 18(20.22) 4(4.49) 86(96.63)
4 The decision
making process at
2.45 1.13
FBE is highly
transparent? 20(22.47) 28(31.46) 20(22.50) 15(16.85) 3(3.37) 86(96.63)
5 Your
involvement/active
participation in the
2.28 1.09
decision making
process of FBE is
very high? 26(29.21) 23(25.84) 27(30.30) 7(7.87) 3(3.34) 86(96.63)
*27(30.33), 27 observation, and 30.33 percentage out of the total (once you put
this on the first table you do not need to repeat it)

As shown in Table 5, the overall mean and standard deviation of the construct
assurance is found to be 2.86 and 0.851. From this finding one can infer that the
assurance of FBE with respect to students’ need is relatively good. A close
investigation of each item as under the construct assurance, shown in Table 9,
supports this finding. Almost all the items, except item “You are encouraged to
become an active learner at FBE?” have got relatively high mean (greater than
2.5) and low standard deviation (less than 1.00). From Table 9, all of the three
items that measure the construct assurance are rated moderately higher by the
EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 65
Service Quality in Education
students either strongly agree or agree. From the findings relatively very few
numbers of students have strongly disagreed or disagree for all the items and
many have rated neutral.

Table 9: Assurance
SN
Assurance Mean Stdv. N SDA DA N A SA Total
N
N(%) N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%) (%) N (%)
1 Are you
encouraged to
2.88 0.90
become an active
learner at FBE? 86 5(5.6) 20(22.5) 16(51.7) 10(11.2) 5(5.6) 86(96.6)
2 The instructors at
FBE are competent
enough in 2.98 1.15
delivering the
lecture? 86 13(14.6) 14(15.7) 25(28.1) 30(33.7) 4(4.5) 86(96.6)
3 The methodology
engaged in
2.75 1.20
teaching at FBE is
very good? 86 17(19.1) 20(22.5) 23(25.8) 22(24.7) 5(5.6) 87(97.8)

As shown in Table 4, the overall mean and standard deviation of the construct
empathy is found to be 2.60 and 0.786. From this finding one can infer that, the
empathy, the concern that the FBE has in regard to resolving the students’
problem is high. A close investigation of each item as under the construct
empathy, shown in Table 7 shows that almost all the items, except item “FBE
provides instant solutions to students’ problems?” have got low mean (less than
2.50) and low standard deviation (less than 1.00). From Table 9, all the three
items that measure the construct empathy are rated by more than 30% of the
students either strongly disagree or disagree. From the findings, relatively very
few numbers of students have strongly agreed and many of the students are
neutral for all the items.

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 66


Service Quality in Education
Table 10: Empathy
SN
Empathy Mean Stdv N SDA DA N A SA Total
N
N (%) N (%) N (%) N (%) (%) N (%)
1 FBE provides
instant solutions
2.34
to students’
problems? 0.95 86 20(22.5) 26(29.2) 31(34.8) 9(10.1) 86(96.6)
2 The admission
procedure at
2.64
FBE is very
good? 1.12 86 15(16.9) 26(29.2) 23(25.8) 19(21.3) 3(3.4) 86(96.6)
3 The add/drop
procedure of
FBE is more 2.84
efficient and
effective? 1.08 86 12(13.5) 18(20.2) 32(36) 20(22.5) 4(4.5) 86(96.6)

7. Conclusion
Based on the data and findings, the following conclusions are drawn. Poor
teaching modality designed is contributory to poor service and inferior quality
outcome. Thus, quality of service is determined by maintaining timeliness of
services and responds to customers’ quest immediately through providing
prompt service. In addition, the participation of students’ in the teaching-
learning process is an indispensable factor in elevating them with profound
knowledge. Also, provision of caring and giving individual attention in the
service delivery is of a paramount importance for service rendering institutions.
Furthermore, the overall quality of the teaching- learning is determined by the
physical infrastructure available for delivering the same.

To this effect, the overall performance of FBE in maintaining educational


service quality is good. However, the responsiveness of FBE in providing
prompt service to students is very low. To this end, transparent approach to
provide instant solution to student’s problem by developing a new one or
modifying an existing policy through a coordinated effort with students’,
instructors’ registrar, supporting service units, etc., is indispensable. Further
more, management of FBE has to set a system to closely follow up the students’
problem to provide prompt service.

Further improvement in certain constructs under empathy, assurance, tangibility


and reliability must be revisited.

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 67


Service Quality in Education
References
Ana Brochado Comparing alternative instruments to measure service quality in
higher education, Quality Assurance in Education Vol 17 No 2, 2009 pp,
174-190, Emerald.

Berry, LL., A. Parasuraman, Valarie A. Zeithaml, Dennis Adsit, John Hater,


Eric J. Vanetti, David J. Veale (1994) “Improving Service Quality in
America: Lessons Learned [and Executive Commentary]”, The Academy
of Management Executive Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 32- 52.

Birgit Leisen Pollack, (2008) "The nature of the service quality and satisfaction
relationship: Empirical evidence for the existence of satisfiers and
dissatisfiers", Managing Service Quality, Vol. 18 Iss: 6, pp.537 – 558.

Brady, M.K, & J. Cronin,(2001),” Some New Thoughts on Conceptualizing


Perceived Service Quality: A Hierarchical Approach “, The Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 65 No.3 , pp.34-49.
Christian Grönroos: A Service Quality Model and its Marketing Implications
1984, European Journal of Marketing.
DEBBIE CLEWES, A Student-centred Conceptual Model of Service Quality
in Higher Education, Quality in Higher education, 9:1, 69-85, DOI

Evans, M., Moutinho, L, & Van Raaij, W. F. 1996. Applied Consumer


Behavior, Addison-Wesley Publishing Ltd.
Field, A. 2009. Discovering Statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.), SAGE Publications,
London.
Filipa Fonseca, Sofia Pinto, Carlos Brito, “Service Quality and Customer
Satisfaction in Public Transports”, International Journal for Quality
research, Vol.4, No. 2, 2010.

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 68


Service Quality in Education
Francis Buttle, (1996) "SERVQUAL: review, critique, research agenda",
European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 30 Iss: 1, pp.8 – 32.
Francis Buttle, SERVQUAL: review, critique Research Agenda, European
Journal of marketing, December 1995 , Vol.30 No1, 1996, pp. 8-32.

Geoffrey Soutar and Margaret McNeil:Measuring service quality in a tertiary


institution.Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 34 No. 1, 1996,
pp. 72-82.
GI-Du Kang and Jeffrey James: Service quality dimensions: and examination
of Gro nroos’s service quality model Managing Service Quality Volume
14 · Number 4 · 2004 · pp. 266–277.
Halil Nadiri, Jay Kandampully and Kashif Hussain, Students’ perceptions of
service quality in higher education, Total Quality Management, Vol. 20
No. 5 May 2009, 525-535,

Joseph, F.H. William, C.B. & Barry, J. B. 2010. Multivariate Data Analysis
(7th ed.), Pearson Education/Prentice Hall.

Lo Liang Kheng, Osman Mohamad, T.Ramayah, Rahim Mosahab : The impact


of Service Quality on Customer Loyalty: A study of Banks in Penang,
Malaysia, International Journal of Marketing Studies Vol. 2 No2. ,
November 2010.
Mohammad Mahdi Tavakoli and Hadi Shirouyehzad* , Reza
Dabestani:Efficiency evaluation of a private bank’s branches with service
quality approach by data envelopment analysis nt. J. Services and
Operations Management, Vol. 16, No. 4, 2013.

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 69


Service Quality in Education
Ms U.Dhanalakshmi, Dr. R. Rajini, Ms S.Kanimozhi: Developing Service
quality Using Gap Model- A critical study Journal of Business and
Management PP 46-51.
Naik, C.N Krishna, Swapna Bhargavi Gantasala, Gantasala V. Prabhakar:
Service Quality: (Servqual) and its Effect on Customer Satisfaction in
Retailing, European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 16, Number 2
(2010).
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V., Berry, L.L. (1988), "SERVQUAL: a multiple-
item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality",
Journal of Retailing, Vol. 64 pp.12-40.
Parasuraman, Valarie A. Zeithaml, Leonard L. Berry “Reassessment of
Expectations as a Comparison Standard in Measuring Service Quality”:
The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58, No. 1 (Jan., 1994), pp. 111-124.
Parasurman A, A. Zeithmal, V.A. and Berry, L.L (1985), “A conceptual Model
of Service Quality and Its Implication for Future Research”, Journal of
Marketing, pp 41-50.
Paul G. Patterson, Richard A. Spreng: Modeling the relationship between
perceived value, satisfaction and repurchase intentions in a business‐to‐
business, services context, International Journal of Service Industry
Management, 1997.
Paul W. Farris, Neil T. Bendle, Phillip E. Pfeifer, David J. Reibstein, (2010),
marketing metrics: The Definitive Guide to Measuring Marketing
Performance/ Paul W. Farris ... [et al.], .2nd Edition, 2010 by Pearson
Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458
Philip Kotler, Veronica Wong, John Saunders, and Gary Armstrong, Principles
of Marketing, Fourth European Edition, Prentice Hall, Page 625.

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 70


Service Quality in Education
Roland T. Rust, Richard L. Oliver Service Quality: New Directions in Theory
and Practice, 1994.
Roland T. Rust, Richard L. Oliver, Service Quality: Insights and Managerial
Implications from the Frontier. 1994.

S.M. Zabed Ahmed, Md. Zahid Hossain Shoeb, (2009) "Measuring service
quality of a public university library in Bangladesh using SERVQUAL",
Performance Measurement and Metrics, Vol. 10 Iss: 1, pp.17 – 32.
Tewodros Wuhib, (1999): Service Marketing text, first edition, Alpha
University College.

Valarie A. Zeithaml, Amy R. Hubbert, William T. Faranda, Mary Jo Bitner:


Customer contributions and roles in service delivery, International
Journal of Service Industry Management, 1997.
Zeithaml, V.A., Berry, L.L., Parasuraman, A. (1991), "The nature and
determinants of customer expectations of service", Marketing Science
Institute, Cambridge, MA., working paper 91-113.
Zelthmal A., & Bitner M. (2006), Service Marketing -Integrating Customer
Focus Across the firm), 3rd ed. Tata MacGraw-Hill. Publishing Company
Limited, New Delhi.

EJBE Vol. 6 No. 1/2016 Page 71

You might also like