Administrative Service In Higher Education: Minimizing Gaps And Maximizing Satisfaction

Abstract

On the grounds of global changes worldwide, the education system, and schools in particular, are becoming more of an autonomic commercial organization. As a result of the marketization of higher education, and of the accompanied perception of students as a customers, the need for higher education institutions to ensure delivery of quality services have become crucial, and management methodologies have been adopted pursuantly. As the customer is central to the assessment of quality, there is a shift in control in the determination of quality, and a new role acquired by the university’s staff, both academic and administrative, as facilitators rather than providers of the educational service. In attempt to facilitate service, and hence to attain high degrees of students' satisfaction, a special emphasis should be placed on minimizing the gap between customer's expectations and the actual service delivered. Careful attention should be paid to the different perspectives from which service is being perceived and interpreted. The paper will present initial findings from a research on PhD level, regarding students' satisfaction from administrative service in college, highlighting perceptual gaps between service providers and service recipients and underlining gaps between students from different studying programs. Sample included approximately 500 students studying towards bachelor degree, master degree and teaching certificate, and 22 academic secretaries. SERVQUAL questionnaire was handed to both students and secretaries in order to collect and analye the different perspectives.

Keywords: Administrative servicehigher educationsatisfaction

Introduction

In a world of rapid global changes, intense commercial competition and a growing consciousness of consumers, the capability of an organization to deliver high quality services is of great importance.

The education system, experiencing parallel organizational modifications, is becoming more of an autonomic commercial organization, and is therefore beginning to draw operative conclusions regarding its organizational and managerial procedures.

In the turn of higher education into a commercial organization, their institutional boards have started to adopt corporate management methodologies in the provision of education. As a result of the marketization of higher education and of the emerging perception of students as customers ( Eagle & Brennan, 2007), characteristics of the delivery of service quality became a matter of concern and discussion ( Lagrosen, Seyyed-Hashemi, & Leitner, 2004).

Consequent of these progressions, many universities are now applying marketing theories and concepts that have been effective in the business world to the higher education setting ( Hemsley-Brown & Oplatka, 2006).

The attentiveness of higher education institutional management, both academic and administrative, to the new scenery of the academic world, is followed by a fresh, groundbreaking thinking, appearing in an attempt to attract the relevant crowds to its institution. The original thinking is conveyed by a pioneering, creative and authentic curriculum, and a deepening in administrative essentials, specifically in relation to service quality and in the cultivation of trust and assurance among students.

The gap model of satisfaction

According to De Jager and Gbadamosi ( 2010), it is imperative for higher education institutions to monitor the quality of services they provide in order to commit themselves to ongoing enhancements.

The service quality model ( Parasuraman, Zeithaml, & Berry, 1988) specifies that customers' quality perceptions are influenced mainly by 4 gaps between: 1. customer expectations and management's perceptions of customer expectations. 2. Management perception of customers' expectations and service quality standards, 3. Service quality standards and the actual service delivered, 4. Delivery and communication regarding the service to customers, and 5. Difference between customers' expectations and perceptions (in association with gaps 1-4). In order to diminish these gaps there is a necessity to involve assessment procedures, as well as communication and control processes implemented in managing employees.

Figure 1 illustrates five gaps detected within the process of service delivery.

See Full Size >

Problem Statement

The projected perceptual gap between service providers (academic secretaries) and service recipients (students from different programs), will affect students' perceptions in relation to the quality of administrative service in the Kibbutzim College of education.

Research Questions

• What differences in perception exist between students and administrative staff concerning the quality of administrative service?

• What differences in perception exist between students from different programs (B.Ed, M.Ed, Teaching certificate) concerning the quality of administrative service?

Research Hypotheses: Perceptual gaps will be found between students and administrative staff and between students from different studying programs.

Purpose of the Study

The proposed study will strive to shed light on the significant dimensions of administrative service in higher education, and on the weight and influence it has on students' overall satisfaction from their studies. It will further attempt to expose the perceptual gaps between students and administrative staff, and will high lightened the main areas to be treated. Initiation of an intervention program towards service quality improvement, and the carrying out of a service contract, are two means by which future enhancement of students' satisfaction and reduction of perceptual gaps might take place. The results of present research are expected to assist and direct decision makers and employees in the formation of an agreed service policy headed for minimizing perceptual gaps and maximizing students' satisfaction.

Research Methods

The features of quantitative research, which emphasize measuring distinct aspects of organizations and conducting procedures of comparing individuals or groups ( Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011), along with its objective nature, which facilitates validity and reliability ( Nasser, 2001), are key considerations in selecting the appropriate methodologic paradigm and method.

The SERVQUAL questionnaire was used to measure service quality of administrative staff. The instrument includes 22 statements, point to five dimensions of service quality: tangible, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy ( Parasuraman et al., 1988).

Research Variables according to the SERVQUAL questionnaire, include the following features:

Tangibles: physical facilities, equipment, and appearance of personnel.

Reliability: ability to perform the promised service dependably and accurately.

Responsiveness: willingness to help customers and provide prompt service.

Assurance: knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to inspire trust and confidence.

Empathy: caring, individualized attention the firm provides its customers.

Cluster sampling will be used such that students will be sampled according to the purpose of study: bachelor’s degree, master's degree, and teaching certificate. Additionally, 22 academic secretaries will be asked to answer the same questionnaire.

Descriptive findings of pre-test examination, regarding the different perceptions of students from different programs, and regarding students in general and academic secretaries will be presented and discussed following.

Findings

The total score of students' perceptions regarding the quality of administrative service they receive was 5.33 on a scale of 1-7. The total score of secretaries' perceptions of the service they deliver was 5.99 on a scale of 1-7.

Findings comparing students' group and secretaries' group demonstrate significant differences in four of the five categories: reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy. Secretaries rate the service they deliver to students considerably higher than students, while the largest gap is concerning empathy, and then, in descending order, responsiveness, reliability and assurance. No significance was found in tangibles category (table 1 ).

The total score of the perceptions of students regarding the quality of administrative service studying towards B.Ed degree was 5.20 on a scale of 1-7, the total score of students studying towards master degree was 5.60, and the total score of students studying towards teaching certificate was 5.27. Findings indicate significant difference between students studying towards master degree and students studying towards B.Ed and towards teaching certificate in four variables in descending order: reliability, empathy, assurance and responsiveness. No significance was found in tangibles category. No significant difference was found between B.Ed students and teaching certificate students (table 2 ).

Conclusion

The service quality model specifies that customers' quality perceptions are influenced fundamentally by five gaps. The first gap according to the model, between students' expectations and management's perceptions of students' expectations, was empirically examined in this study. Findings of the study confirmed the theoretical assumption that there are conceptual gaps in relation to administrative service quality, between service providers, the academic secretaries in present study, and students. The significant differences between secretaries and students, which came up in four out of the five dimensions: reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy, illustrates the reality within which services are the result of management perceptions and choices rather than of a genuine examination of students' perceptions and needs.

Students' rated reliability and assurance higher than responsiveness, empathy and tangibles. this finding corresponds with the study of Nell and Cant ( 2014) who suggested that the ability of the Student Administrative departments to perform the service dependably, accurately and on time was the most important feature relating to service for the students.

The significant differences which were observed between M.Ed and M.Teach students and B.Ed and teaching certificate students, placing master degree students' perceptions higher than the other two groups, could be explained on the grounds of students' mature age and due to the fact that master degree students are more familiar with academic demands and stresses, and are therefore more realistic as far as their expectations. Further, the design of masters' programs is typically much shorter and structured, which summons less conflictual occurrences and more positive perceptions consequently.

The unambiguous and consistent results of the study intensify the need of higher education institutions to be alert to students' expectations. The obligation to match expectations in order to minimize perceptual gaps between secretaries and students, lies on the institutional management. A future service contract is offered as a mean through which a match of expectations can take place, and an enhancement in students' satisfaction may consequently occur.

References

• Albulescu, I., & Albulescu, M. (2014). The University in the community. The university’s contribution to local and regional development by providing educational services for adults. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 142, 5-11.
• Ben‐Peretz, M., & Dror, Y. (1992). “Israel”. In H. Leavitt (Ed.), Issues and Problems in Teacher Education: an international handbook. New York: Greenwood Press.
• Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
• De Jager, J., & Gbadamosi, G. (2010). Specific remedy for specific problem: measuring service quality in South African higher education. The International Journal of Higher Education Research, 60(3), 251–267.
• Dibb, S., & Simkin, L. (2010). Judging the quality of customer segments: segmentation effectiveness. Journal of strategic Marketing, 18(2).
• Eagle, L., & Brennan, R. (2007). Are students customers? TQM and marketing perspectives. Quality assurance in education, 15(1), 44-60.
• Harvey, L. (2014). Analytic quality glossary. Retrieved from http://www.qualityresearchinternational.com/glossary/
• Hemsley-Brown, J., & Oplatka, I. (2006). Universities in a competitive global marketplace: a systematic review of the literature on higher education marketing. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 19(4), 316-338.
• Lagrosen, S., Seyyed-Hashemi, R., & Leitner, M. (2004). Examination of the dimensions of quality in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education, 12(2), 61–69.
• Nasser, F. (2001). Selecting an appropriate research design. In E. Farmer & J. Rojowski (Eds.), Research pathways: writing professional papers, theses, and dissertations in workforce education (91-106). Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
• Nell, C. E., & Cant, M. C. (2014). Determining student perceptions regarding the most important service features and overall satisfaction with the service quality of a higher education institution. Management, 19(2), 63-87.
• Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V., & Berry, L. (1988). Communication and Control Processes in the Delivery of Service quality. Journal of Marketing, 52(2), 35-48.
• Pitman, T. (2000). Perceptions of academics and students as customers: A survey of administrative staff in higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 22(2), 165–175.
• Robson, I. (2000). "Them and us – General and non-general staff in higher education". Journal of higher education policy and management, 22(2), 203-210.
• Rowley, J. (1997). Beyond service quality dimensions in higher education and towards a service contract. Quality Assurance in Education, 5(1), 7–14.
• Schindler, L., Puls-Elvidge, S., Welzant, H., & Crawford, L. (2015). Definition of quality in higher education: A synthesis of literature. Higher learning research communications, 5(3).
• Volanski, A. (2005). Academy in a Changing Environment. Hakibbutz Hameuchad Publishing House Ltd.