CUSTOMER (STUDENTS) SATISFACTION SURVEY SATISFACTION SU… · S mart F rontiers Prepared and ... v...

CUSTOMER (STUDENTS) SATISFACTION SURVEY

October 2012

Report

SF Smart Frontiers

Prepared and submitted by Smart Frontiers P.O. Box 6169 – 00100, Nairobi, Kenya

KFS Employee Satisfaction Survey

Smart Frontiers ii

Acknowledgements

This study was undertaken by Smart Frontiers. We would like to thank everyone who contributed the

various aspects towards the realization of this survey. We wish to convey thanks to the staff of KFS for

their enthusiastic help in conducting this assessment: Abraham Wafula and Eric Wainaina greatly

appreciative to the persons of the invaluable advice in relation to the consultative discussion that provided

critical support and direction during the course of data collection. Special thanks are also extended to the

data collection and data entry teams for their due dedication and commitment throughout the data

collection and data entry process.

Finally, and most important, appreciation is extended to the KFC students who willingly participated in

the survey and for providing the valuable information that is the outcome of this report. Smart Frontiers

however solely remain responsible for any of the errors that may remain.

Consultancy team

June 2012


Smart Frontiers iii

Abbreviations and Acronyms

DK Don‟t Know

GoK Government of Kenya

CSI Customer Satisfaction Index

CSS Customer Satisfaction Survey

FGD Focus Group Discussion

KMO Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin

KFC Kenya Forest College

KFC Kenya Forest Service

NR No Response

PC Performance Contracts

RBM Result Based Management

SPSS Statistical Products and Services Solutions


Smart Frontiers iv

Table of Contents

List of Figures ......................................................................................................................... v List of Tables ......................................................................................................................... vi

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. 1

Section 1: Introduction......................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Background ......................................................................................................... 3 1.2 Customer (Student) Satisfaction Survey .................................................................. 3 1.2.1 Sampling and Sample Distribution ......................................................................... 4 1.2.2 Data Collection .................................................................................................... 5 1.2.3 Data Analysis ...................................................................................................... 6

Section 2: The Forest Sector in Kenya ................................................................................... 7 2.1 The Kenya Forest Service ..................................................................................... 7 2.2.1 Economic importance and role towards Vision 2030 ................................................. 9 2.2.2 Contribution to employment and income ............................................................... 10 2.2 Situation analysis of the forest sector .................................................................... 10 2.2.1 Challenges ......................................................................................................... 11

Section 3: Results and Discussion ....................................................................................... 12 3.1 Overall Performance ........................................................................................... 12 3.1.1 Satisfaction Index ............................................................................................... 12 3.1.2 Satisfaction gaps ................................................................................................ 13 3.2 Perceptions of KFC and Service Delivery Dimensions ............................................ 14 3.2.1 Communication and delivery of Organizational Mandate ........................................ 14 3.2.2 KFC Commitment to its Core Values .................................................................... 15 3.2.3 Service Delivery Standards .................................................................................. 16 3.2.4 Communication ................................................................................................. 17 3.2.5 Adequacy of Facilities and Utilities ...................................................................... 18 3.2.6 Quality of Teaching ............................................................................................ 19 3.2.7 Quality and Delivery of Exams and Results ........................................................... 20 3.2.8 Amount and Process of Paying Fees ..................................................................... 21 3.2.9 Extra-curricular Activities and Psycho-Social Support ............................................ 22 3.2.10 Customer focus and continued improvement .......................................................... 23 3.2.11 Student Perceptions of Improvements over Time .................................................... 24 3.3 Factors Underlying Customer Satisfaction ............................................................. 25 3.3.1 Factor Analysis .................................................................................................. 25

Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 29

References ........................................................................................................................ 31


Smart Frontiers v

List of Figures

Fig 3.1: Satisfaction with KFC on delivery of its organizational mandate 15

Fig 3.2: Satisfaction with KFC on commitment to its core values 16

Fig 3.3: Satisfaction with KFC on services delivery standards 17

Fig 3.4: Satisfaction with communication and engagement 18

Fig 3.5: Satisfaction with adequacy of facilities and utilities 19

Fig 3.6: Satisfaction with quality of teaching 20

Fig 3.7: Satisfaction with KFC on quality and delivery of exams and results 21

Fig 3.8: Satisfaction with KFC on amount and process of paying fees 22

Fig 3.9: Satisfaction with KFC on psycho-social support 23

Fig 3.10: Satisfaction with KFC on customer focus and continued improvement 24

Fig. 3.11: Perceptions about improvements over time 25

Fig. 3.12: Contribution of factors to satisfaction 28


Smart Frontiers vi

List of Tables

Table 1.1: Sample distribution for customer survey by stakeholder segment 5

Table 2.1: Level of forest coverage between 1990 and 2010 11

Table 3.1: Customer (student) Satisfaction Index 12

Table 3.2: Satisfaction gaps across the service delivery dimensions 14

Table 3.3: Factors underlying student satisfaction 27


Smart Frontiers 1

Executive Summary

During the month of June, Smart Frontiers, on behalf of The Kenya Forest Service and Kenya Forest

College, conducted a Customer Satisfaction Survey, with students as the target reference group. The

purpose of this survey was to identify the elements that affect the level of customer satisfaction or

dissatisfaction. The findings presented in this report ultimately highlight the actions required to enhance

directorial processes with student expectations in order to facilitate greater performance

The outcomes of this survey suggest relatively high customer satisfaction levels. This is evidenced by

overall satisfaction index of 63.32. Satisfaction indices of 48 and 80 points are observed across the ten

service delivery dimensions, with the dimension of „Quality and delivery of teaching‟ (80.27) ranked the

highest, and conversely, the lowest figures emerging in two aspects: „Communication and engagement‟

(48.91) and „Adequacy of facilities and utilities‟ (43.78).

Relative to the expectations, the results show that, on average, satisfaction gaps are -0.32. Analysis by

the specific service attributes show that satisfaction gaps are highest in respect to the following three

dimensions: Communication (-0.88), Service delivery standards (-0.61) and Customer focus (-0.55). It is

noteworthy that „positive gaps‟ emerged in respect to „Quality and delivery of teaching‟ (0.47),

suggesting the KFC‟s performance surpasses students‟ expectations in this area.

On the basis of the factor analysis, results revealed that the satisfaction is based on the platform of

Accountability and integrity, which constitutes three items that are essentially related to credibility

issues, Facilitation & support to students, which comprised four items that are primarily related to

quality of services, and opportunities for engagement & participation, which was defined by the quality

of relationship between the College and students

Ultimately, looking at student perceptions of improvements over time, it is observed that, overall, about

one-third (34%) of participants had a positive view, with another one-third (34%) rating the change as

„fair‟. Fairly less than one-tenth (6%) were unequivocally negative. Analysis of the results by years of


Smart Frontiers 2

interaction with KFC, show a rather wide range, although without any distinct pattern, is observed,

depicting 100%, 43% and 60% for those who have interacted with KFC for 1 year, 2 years and 3 years

and above respectively.

In conclusion, the survey makes the following recommendations, as a way of enhancing the College‟s

level and quality of output.

1. Timeliness of service delivery: Results show that, in terms of service delivery standards, expediency

in service delivery capacity remains an area of relative concern. Although the survey did not establish

the exact points where these gaps are apparent, he concern expressed here seems to focus on use of

modern technology. It is expected that enhancing administrative functions in these terms is useful.

2. Information: The issue of quality of information on products and services is similarly underlined in

terms of service delivery standards. An area of apparent areas of concern is the quality and adequacy of

information provided in the KFC/KFS websites.

3. Communication: The issue of communication should be addressed in order to anticipate and prevent

potential breakdowns in communication between the College administration and student population.

Areas of concern include: effectiveness of both telephone and email communication, top-down

communication on a range of issues, and in a broad sense, the flexibility and adequacy of

communication between administration and students.

4. Complaint procedures: The College should design good grievance procedure. This was more

negative in terms of openness of KFC to complaints, suggestions and compliments, and the process and

efficiency of complaints handling.


Smart Frontiers 3

Section 1: Introduction

1.1 Background

The Government of Kenya (GoK) has embraced the Result Based Management (RBM) as a tool to

improving public service delivery. The essence of RBM is to ensure efficiency and effectiveness in the

delivery of public services, and that citizens can hold public servants accountable for the levels of

service they receive from public institutions. This is in line with Kenya‟s public service accountability

initiative known as Performance Contracts (PC), which was introduced in 2003, and which is expected

to support the goals and objectives outlined in Kenya‟s Vision 2030 strategy.1 The PC initiative forms

the basis of improvement in the public service delivery, which seeks to progressively work towards

increasing quality of output within public institutions.

Under these broader public sector reforms, the Kenya Forest Service (KFS) aims to ensure that services

are enhanced to the satisfaction of its customers and excellence is attained in its operations. In

complement to this Reform Agenda, one pillar in this move is to monitor the level of satisfaction of both

the internal and external stakeholders.

Thus, in pursuit of ensuring that services are enhanced to the satisfaction of its customers, KFS

commissioned a survey with a view to gain insights into the satisfaction with and perceptions of the

services provided by the Kenya Forest College (KFC). The outcomes are intended to assist the KFC to

align management and directorial processes with student expectations in order to facilitate greater

performance.

1.2 Customer (Student) Satisfaction Survey

The broader motivation underpinning the proposed survey is to enable the assessment of satisfaction

among the KFC students with the services provided by the college. In this way, the survey sought to

1 Muthaura, F., (2003), Head of Public Service


Smart Frontiers 4

establish whether the college is meeting its service expectations. The specific objectives of this

customer satisfaction survey (CSS) comprised the following:

Develop a composite measure of Customer/student satisfaction index (CSI) and use it to

determine the overall rating of the current level of student satisfaction;

Find out student perception of the service delivery dimensions;

Identify gaps in service delivery;

Identify specific areas that require improvement.

1.2.1 Sampling and Sample Distribution

The study population of this survey consists of all Kenya Forest College (KFC) students. A census-

based approach was employed for selection of the participants. On this account, the survey provided

opportunity to all students in the respective stations to respond to the questionnaire. A sample size of 50

was achieved with the target group.

The sample for the student survey is displayed in Table 1.1. The sample was spread to have different

departments represented, although as noted, relatively high proportion did not indicate their department

(denoted NR). For the one that indicated, it is seen that 34% were drawn from Forest Management,

while Basic Science and Siviculture had proportions of 18% and 10% respectively. In terms of period of

interaction with KFC, the bulk (58%) had done so for 1 year or less

Across gender, it is seen that the highest proportion were male (68%) against 28% proportion for

females. On the other hand, by age, it is again seen that relatively high proportion disinclined to do so,

although it is expected that the bulk would be between 18 to 24 years of age.


Smart Frontiers 5

Table 1.1: Sample distribution for customer survey by stakeholder segment

Number Percent

Forest Management 17 34

Basic Science 9 18

Silviculture 5 10

NR 19 38

Period of interaction with KFC

1 yr 29 58

2 yrs 8 16

2+ yrs 3 6

Gender

Male 34 68

Female 14 28

NR 2 4

Age

18-24 12 24

25-34 4 8

Over 35 2 4

NR 32 64

1.2.2 Data Collection

Data collection was undertaken using self filled approach. The questionnaire was framed along ten core

themes, namely: Quality and delivery of teaching, Commitment to core values, Communication and

delivery of organizational mandate (Vision, Mission, Service Charter), Quality and delivery of

examinations, Customer focus and continued improvement, Extra-curricular activities and psycho-social

support, Service delivery standards, Amount and process of paying fees, Communication and Adequacy

of facilities and utilities. One additional line of enquiry was included to assess perceptions of

improvements over time.


Smart Frontiers 6

1.2.3 Data Analysis

The analysis was undertaken using SPSS. For measurement of performance and opinion, the survey

adopted the Likert 5-point scales, intended to measure each item by possible two opposing positive and

negative scales, and a middle or neutral scale. The analysis approach used here focuses on „Top Box‟

rating (i.e. combined “strong agree/agree”). The analysis entirely focuses on the total column; whereas it

would be useful to disaggregate the results by various sub-groups, such as department, the low sample

base for the sub-groups, notably due to high proportion of NR on a number of demographics questions

could not permit this.

Keeping in view the broad objectives of the survey, the data has been triangulated among two core

categories of analyses, namely:

Satisfaction Index

In this survey, the CSI is the tool used to map and track the overall levels of satisfaction, and is therefore

useful to determine whether the conditions are getting better or worse, and also to provide a measure by

which these findings can be trended in the future. Within each dimension, the items are calculated to

produce composite score on a 0-100 scale, such that the higher the CSI, the greater degree of

satisfaction.

Gap analysis

The focus of gap analysis lies on measurement of customer/student level of expectations against

perceptions of performance by the College. The expectancy-disconfirmation framework2 provided the

context for measuring perceived performance deficit to that regard. On this basis, a difference of 0.0

would indicate that expectations perfectly match the delivered experience; a difference above 0.0 would

indicate that the delivered experience exceeds customer/student expectations, while a difference below

0.0 would indicate that the delivered experience are below customer expectations.

2 The framework is used to measure the extent to which expectations have not been met.


Smart Frontiers 7

Section 2: The Forest Sector in Kenya

2.1 The Kenya Forest Service

The oversight institution responsible for management of the forest sector in Kenya is the KFS. The KFS

was established by an act of Parliament as a body corporate under the Forest Act, 2005, to provide for

the establishment, development and sustainable management, including conservation and rational

utilization of forest resources for the socio-economic development of the country. Under the existing

legislation, the broader mandate of KFS extends to all forests.

Mandate

To provide for the establishment, development and sustainable management, including conservation and

rational utilization of forest resources for environmental protection and socio-economic development of

the country

Core Functions

On this account, the specific functions of KFS include the following:

1. To sustainably manage natural forests for social, economic and environmental benefits

2. Increase productivity of industrial forest plantations and enhance efficiency in wood utilization

3. Promote farm forestry and commercial tree farming

4. Promote efficient utilization and marketing of forest products

5. To promote sustainable management of forests in the drylands

6. To protect forestry resources and KFS property

7. To develop and maintain essential infrastructure for effective forest management and protection

Vision

“To be the leading organization of excellence in sustainable forest management and conservation”


Smart Frontiers 8

Mission

“To enhance conservation and sustainable management of forests and allied resources for environmental

stability and socio-economic development”

2.1.1 The Kenya Forest College

The KFC was established in 1956, and is a training institution of the Kenya Forest Service. The college

is responsible for training technical personnel in forestry and allied natural resources, to build capacity

for development of the forest sector. The mandate of the KFC is to train highly qualified technical

manpower for sustainable management and efficient utilization of forestry and allied natural

resources for environmental stability and socio- economic development. The mission of the

KFC is to promote best practices in forestry and allied Natural Resource Management through

excellence in teaching, knowledge creation, and outreach.

2.1.2 Stakeholders

In undertaking it functions, KFS works with a broad range of stakeholders (customers). The key

customers include but not limited to:

1. Communities and land owners e.g. community forest associations, organized community

groups, farmers, pastoralists and commercial tree growers.

2. Private Sector e.g. licensees, concessionaires, saw miller, ecotourism based enterprises, Small

and Medium Enterprises and Suppliers

3. Non Government Organizations (local and international)

4. Development partners (governmental and non-governmental)

5. Government agencies: these include local authorities and parastatals

6. The General public

7. Service providers

2.1.3 Participatory Forest Management

The need to increase forest cover and reduce forest destruction and degradation has been recognized in

Kenya. The Government has recognized the critical role to be played by forest-adjacent communities in

ensuring that tree cover in the country increases from the current 2% to the recommended 10%. In view


Smart Frontiers 9

of this, the 2005 Forests Act (2005) offered opportunities for the local communities to participate in the

management of forest resources adjacent to them in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

According to the Forests Act (2005), section 46 (1), a member of a forest community may together with

other members or persons resident in the same area register a community forest association under the

Society‟s Act.

2.2.1 Economic importance and role towards Vision 2030

Kenya‟s Vision 2030 notes that, globally, deforestation and forest degradation accounts for 20% of

green house gases (GHG) emissions and that forest conservation can provide 20% of the solution to

global warming. It therefore calls for the urgent need to conserve, protect and rejuvenate Kenya‟s

forests. The Vision 2030 recognizes the importance of forest industries to the national economy -

accounting for more than 2% of the GDP.

Forestry business in many African countries is mainly transacted in the informal sector. This is a sector

that operates at the interface of the monetized and traditional economies. The types of activities that

characterize the sector include subsistence collection of forest products, processing and trade in

firewood, charcoal, forest foods and handicrafts. It is assumed that in some countries, business

conducted in the informal forestry sector may contribute more to rural livelihoods than that in the formal

forestry sector. They provide employment opportunities in various industries, thereby contributing to

improved income and livelihoods of many Kenyans. These include: sawmills, pulp and paper industry,

woodfuel industry, basketry, charcoal production, marketing and transportation industry, wood curving

industry, and non-timber forest products industries.

The Forest Act 2005 and the KFS strategic plan (2006 to 2011) stipulate that Kenya‟s forests will be

broadly managed for the following purposes:

1) Biodiversity, soil and water conservation and provision of other environmental services;

2) Wood production (timber, pulp, woodfuel and poles) and employment – current and potential;

3) Conservation of wildlife habitats; and,

4) Production of non-wood forest products and ecotourism development. More specifically, the

Act clearly states that plantation forests will be managed primarily for the production of wood

and other forest products and services for commercial purposes.


Smart Frontiers 10

The ban on forest timber harvesting which has now been reviewed was for a long time a major

constraint to forest management and in particular, it affects the level of royalty collection, the quality of

timber products (including exposing plantations to risk of fires and disease/insect infestation),

insufficient or lack of raw materials supply, and increased cost of forest commodities.

2.2.2 Contribution to employment and income

There is therefore increasing recognition of the central role of forests in the rural economy in Africa. In

Kenya, the sector has been a strong contributor to the economy in terms of wage employment and cash

income. For the most recent years, the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS) data about sectoral

wage employment estimated that in 2010, private agriculture and forestry accounted for approximately

14% of the country‟s total 2,060,400 wage employment. On the other hand, it is estimated that 530 000

forest-adjacent households (which amount to 2.9 million people living within five kilometres from

forests) derive direct benefits from indigenous closed-canopy forests. This amounts to about eight per

cent of Kenya‟s population.

2.2 Situation analysis of the forest sector

Forests are among the Kenya‟s important natural resources as they supply goods and services for socio

economic and cultural development. The gazetted forestland is estimated to be 1.7 million hectares. This

is just about 2.5 % per cent of the country‟s land area. Recent estimates, based on remote sensing,

indicate that Kenya has a critical 1.7 per cent of closed canopy forest cover (UNEP, 2001).

The gazetted forests constitute 0.12 million hectares of plantation forest, 1.21 million hectares of

indigenous forest, and 0.5 million hectares of protective bush and grassland. A total of 36.7 million

hectares of other forest associations exist under other legal frame works that include National Parks,

Ranches, Trustlands and forests private ownership. As Water Catchment, forests in Kenya play a vital

role as home to the nation‟s “Water towers”, i.e. the five main water catchments (Mt Kenya,

Cherangani, Aberdare‟s, Mau and Mt Elgon) constituting the bulk of Kenya‟s high forests.


Smart Frontiers 11

2.2.1 Challenges One of the main challenges currently facing the sector is deforestation and degradation. Loss of forest

resources, general land degradation and desertification are serious environmental as well as socio-

economic problems globally and in Kenya.3 Three key drivers have been identified as having immensely

contributed to this problem in Kenya. These include: Clearing for agriculture, unsustainable utilization

and poor governance and institutional failures. Thus, the past two decade has seen decline in the

coverage of the sub-total forest land by about 12,050 ha annually.

Table 2.1: Level of forest coverage between 1990 and 2010

Category of forest resource

(using FAO definitions) Area (‘000 Ha)

Annual Change

(‘000 Ha)

1990 2000 2005 2010 1990 - 2010

1. Indigenous closed Canopy Forest 1,240 1,190 1,165 1,140 -5

2. Indigenous Mangroves 80 80 80 80 0

3. Open woodlands 2,150 2,100 2,075 2,050 -5

4. Public Plantation Forests 170 134 119 107 -3.15

5. Private Plantation forests 68 78 83 90 +1.1

Sub - total Forest land

(total of above categories) 3,708 3,582 2,357 3,467 -12.05

6. Bush-land 24,800 24,635 24,570 24,510 -14.5

7. Farms with Trees 9,420 10,020 10,320 10,385 +48.25

Total Area of Kenya 58,037 58,037 58,037 58,037 0

3 Mr Aeneas Chuma, Resident Representative, UNDP, Kenya


Smart Frontiers 12

Section 3: Results and Discussion

3.1 Overall Performance

3.1.1 Satisfaction Index

For the overall measurement of Satisfaction Index, a composite score based on 3 dimensions of service

delivery was computed. Table 3.1 reports the CSI by aggregate and specific service dimensions. The

overall CSI was calculated to be 63.32.

Across the ten service delivery dimensions, the index scores are in the range between 48 and 80 points.

With the index points around 80.27 points, the dimension of „Quality and delivery of teaching‟ ranked

the highest, and conversely, the lowest CSI figures apparent in respect to „Adequacy of facilities‟

(43.78) and „Communication and engagement‟ (48.91)

Table 3.1: Customer (student) Satisfaction Index

Satisfaction Index

Overall 63.32

Quality and delivery of teaching 80.27

Commitment to core values 79.36

Communication and delivery of organizational mandate (Vision, Mission, Service Charter) 78.70

Quality and delivery of examinations 73.64

Customer focus and continued improvement 69.98

Extra-curricular activities and psycho-social support 61.28

Service delivery standards 54.21

Amount and process of paying fees 53.06

Communication 48.91

Adequacy of facilities and utilities 43.78


Smart Frontiers 13

3.1.2 Satisfaction gaps

The expectancy-disconfirmation paradigm provided the context for measuring perceived deficit with

regard to the performance of the KFC, participants were asked to rate various service delivery attributes,

first for expectations and then for satisfaction. This analysis focused on the difference between

expectations and how they perceived KFC‟s performance.

Table 3.2 shows the descriptive mean scores for performance, expectations and satisfaction gaps. As

noted, the dimensions in which students expectations for service delivery are highest, in order of

importance, comprise the following:

Commitment to Core Values (4.25)

Customer focus (4.17)

Service delivery standards (4.13)

Quality and delivery of exams (4.02)

Communication and delivery of organizational mandate (4.02)

Communication (3.96)

Relative to the expectations, the results show that, on average, satisfaction gaps are -0.32. Analysis by

the specific service attributes show that satisfaction gaps are highest in respect to the following three

dimensions:

Communication (-0.88)

Service delivery standards (-0.61)

Customer focus (-0.55)

It is noteworthy that „positive gaps‟ emerged in respect to „Quality and delivery of teaching‟ (0.47),

suggesting the KFC‟s performance surpasses students‟ expectations in this area.


Smart Frontiers 14

Table 3.2: Satisfaction gaps across the service delivery dimensions

Performance

Expectation

Gaps

Communication 3.07 3.96 -0.88

Service delivery standards 3.51 4.13 -0.61

Customer focus 3.63 4.17 -0.55

Amount and process of paying fees 3.19 3.64 -0.45

Quality and delivery of exams 3.61 4.02 -0.41

Facilities (library, accommodation, lecture halls, ICT) 3.27 3.55 -0.28

Communication and delivery of organizational mandate (Mission,

Vision, Service Charter) 3.81 4.02 -0.21

Commitment to Core Values 4.09 4.25 -0.16

Extra-curricular activities and psycho-social support 3.45 3.57 -0.13

Quality and delivery of teaching 4.31 3.83 0.47

Average 3.60 3.91 -0.32

3.2 Perceptions of KFC and Service Delivery Dimensions

3.2.1 Communication and delivery of Organizational Mandate

This dimension was measured using four attributes focusing on the way KFC is communicating and

addressing of its corporate strategies. As observed in Figure 3.1, the results indicate reasonable

attachment, evidenced by an overall positive score of 66%, although this figure masks significant

differences across the specific attributes, ranging from 85% to 52%.

It is observant that on the customers (students) perceptions on this dimension are somewhat less positive

on with regard to the twin areas related to “communication”: i.e. the way KFC is communicating its

„Vision and Mission‟ on the one hand, and its „Service Delivery Charter‟ on the other. This may suggest

that the College is perceived to be fairly less steadfast in terms of communicating its corporate

strategies.


Smart Frontiers 15

Fig 3.1: Satisfaction with KFC on delivery of its organizational mandate

3.2.2 KFC Commitment to its Core Values

In terms of KFC commitment to its core values, participants‟ views were evaluated using eight

attributes. As observed in Figure 3.2, the results overall indicate relatively high satisfaction, depicting

72%, although looking across the specific attributes, the positive scores cover a wide range, from 88%

to 58%.

From the results, it is apparent that the most notable concerns relate to perceptions of integrity, notable

by the comparatively lower positive scores in respect to: „the level of honesty and truthfulness among

staff‟, „the extent of zero tolerance to corruption‟ and „the extent the staffs are transparent in its dealings

with customers‟, all the three aspects depicting satisfaction ratings below 70%.

52

56

68

86

66

16

20

10

6

16

24

16

8

8

14

8

8

14

0

4

0% 100%

The way KFS College is communicating its vision and mission

The way KFS College is communicating its Service

Delivery Charter

The core value of the KFS College

The way KFS College addressing its mandate to improve the tree cover in the country

Overall satisfaction

Satisfied Average Dissatisfied DK/NR


Smart Frontiers 16

Fig 3.2: Satisfaction with KFC on commitment to its core values

3.2.3 Service Delivery Standards

Seven attributes were used to evaluate students‟ views about the service delivery standards. As

displayed in Figure 3.3, results show fairly lower overall satisfaction, depicting 46%, although looking

across the service attributes, the positive scores on satisfaction cover a wide range, from a high of 80%

to fairly lower score of 54%.

Looking at each item separately, it is notable that the results are somewhat more positive in respect to

„General standard of cleanliness‟ and „Organization of KFS College offices and stores‟. On the other

hand, satisfaction with performance is lower in respect to: „Timeliness of delivery of services‟, „Use of

modern technology for service delivery at the College‟ and „Quality of information on products and

services‟, all depicting less than 60%.

58

60

62

64

72

74

76

88

72

22

16

12

12

18

6

14

4

8

16

14

18

16

10

10

10

2

10

4

10

8

8

0

10

0

6

10

0% 100%

Level of honesty and truthfulness among staff

The extent of zero tolerance to corruption

Level of transparency in its dealings with customers

The extent the the scientific findings are applied

Professional competence demonstrated by staff

The extent KFC adheres to best scientific practices

Committment to excellence in service delivery

Dissemination of knowledge on forestry information




Smart Frontiers 17

Fig 3.3: Satisfaction with KFC on services delivery standards

3.2.4 Communication

Views about communication were evaluated using eight attributes, and registered fairly low overall

satisfaction rating of 42%. In Figure 3.4, the results show relatively wide difference between across the

attributes, with positive scores ranged from a high of 52% to a low of just 26%. Specifically, in terms of

performance, the results seem to place confidence on two aspects of communication practice; i.e. „the

way complaints are addressed‟ and adequacy of communication flow between administration and

students.‟ On the contrary, lower satisfaction levels are observed on three aspects:

Quality of information on the College website

Effectiveness of email communication

Effectiveness of telephone communication

44

54

56

56

66

66

76

80

46

32

18

24

26

18

16

10

10

30

10

20

12

12

14

12

6

8

10

14

8

8

6

2

6

8

2

14

0% 100%

Improvement in service delivery over time

Timeliness of delivery of services by KFS College

Use of modern technology for service delivery at the College

The quality of information on products and services

The quality of services provided by KFS College to customers/students

Environmental friendliness of technologies used at KFS College

Organization of KFS College offices and stores

General standard of cleanliness




Smart Frontiers 18

Regarding these three aspects, a key observation was the relatively high percentage “DK/NR” response

(these ranged from 24% to 28%. Participants‟ inability to provide a rating, in this case, may indicate that

most might not have directly interacted with these communication modes recently.

Fig 3.4: Satisfaction with communication and engagement

3.2.5 Adequacy of Facilities and Utilities

The dimension in facilities and utilities was evaluated using nine attributes. As displayed in Figure 3.5,

the results show overall satisfaction rating of 48%. Looking more specifically across the attributes,

relatively wide contrasts in satisfaction emerged, depicting the positive scores ranging from 66% to

14%.

Isolating the issue of „lecture halls‟, the remaining eight attributes depict positive scores below 60%,

with conspicuously lower scores being observed on five aspects, namely:

Library facilities and services

26

28

38

42

46

48

50

52

42

18

8

14

10

24

18

22

16

10

30

36

24

44

26

28

22

30

30

26

28

24

4

4

6

6

2

18

0% 100%

Quality of information on the College website

Effectiveness of the email communication

Effectiveness of the telephone communication

Timeliness of communication or feedback on issues affecting students

Flexibility to discuss the administration issues that affect me

Use of formal channels of communication

Adequacy of communication between administration and students

The way complaints are addressed




Smart Frontiers 19

Health care

Utilities (power, water)

Recreational facilities

Access to internet

Fig 3.5: Satisfaction with adequacy of facilities and utilities

3.2.6 Quality of Teaching

The dimension on quality of teaching was evaluated using three attributes focusing on coverage of

syllabus, amount of time allocated to practical lessons and amount of classroom time. Consistent with

the satisfaction indices across the ten dimensions examined in this survey, this dimension elicited the

highest overall positive score, recording 84%. Across three attributes examined, performance was

equally ranked highly, depicting from 78%, 70% and 72% respectively. Figure 3.6 displays the results.

14

22

22

26

34

46

50

54

66

48

24

8

24

6

12

14

16

18

10

14

56

64

50

60

44

32

30

24

20

34

6

6

4

8

10

8

4

4

4

4

0% 100%

Library facilities and services

Health care

Utilities (power, water)

Recreational facilities

Access to internet

ICT facilities (computers)

Sanitation facilities

Accommodation and residential services

Lecture halls




Smart Frontiers 20

It will nonetheless, again be observed that, with regard to two of the aspects: „amount of time allocated

to practical lessons‟ and „amount of classroom time‟, fairly higher percentages of the participants could

not or would not provide any substantive rating, depicted by DK/NR proportions of 18% and 16%

respectively.

Fig 3.6: Satisfaction with quality of teaching

3.2.7 Quality and Delivery of Exams and Results

The dimension of quality and delivery of exams and results was evaluated using five attributes. Overall,

modest satisfaction is observed, with positive scores spanning a wide range, from 80% to 40% across

the five attributes. The results are presented in Figure 3.7.

Notwithstanding the relatively high percentage of DK/NR (the proportions range from 12% to 26%), it

is apparent that, whereas the students appear to have relative confidence in the quality of exams and

adherence to the rules and regulations, the aspects relating to the „transparency in handling of

examination results‟ and the „process of remaking of examination‟ remain a salient concern.

72

70

78

84

10

10

14

6

16

18

6

8

2

2

2

2

0% 100%

The amount of classroom time

Amount of time allocated to practicals

Coverage of syllabus




Smart Frontiers 21

Fig 3.7: Satisfaction with KFC on quality and delivery of exams and results

3.2.8 Amount and Process of Paying Fees

Three attributes were used to evaluate satisfaction with regard to the amount and process of paying fees.

Of all of the ten survey dimensions examined, this one elicited the lowest overall positive rating,

recording 40%. Across three attributes, satisfaction scores ranged from 42% to 34%. The results are

displayed in Figure 3.8.

Taking all the three attributes into consideration, it is seen that all the areas emerge as areas of relatively

important concern, recording below 50% across the board, with „the amount of tuition fees charged by

the College remaining the aspect of greatest concern.

40

44

56

64

80

58

12

8

10

14

6

16

26

24

20

12

12

14

22

24

14

10

2

12

0% 100%

The process of remarking of examination

The transparency in handling of examination results

Timeliness and processing and issuing of transcripts/ certificates

Adherence to examination rules and regulations

Quality of examination




Smart Frontiers 22

Fig 3.8: Satisfaction with KFC on amount and process of paying fees

3.2.9 Extra-curricular Activities and Psycho-Social Support

The last set of questions related to extra-curricular activities and psycho-social support. Five attributes

relating to clubs, sport, games, students‟ council, guidance and counseling were used to evaluate this

dimension.

As shown in Figure 3.9, modest satisfaction level is of 52% is overall observed, with positive scores

across the five aspects varying from 58% to 44%. On account of these results, all the five aspects

examined depict satisfaction levels below the 60% threshold. More specifically, it is apparent that the

areas of notable concern on this dimension are: „guidance and counseling‟ and „sports/games‟, both of

which recorded satisfaction levels below 50%.

34

40

42

40

30

26

18

24

32

30

36

32

4

4

4

4

0% 100%

The amount of tuition fee charged by the College

The amount of exam fee charged by the College

The process of paying fees




Smart Frontiers 23

Fig 3.9: Satisfaction with KFC on psycho-social support

3.2.10 Customer focus and continued improvement

The dimension of „customer focus and continued improvement‟ was evaluated using twelve survey

attributes. Results (see Figure 3.10) indicate overall satisfaction score of 58%, although relatively high

percentage “DK/NR” response can be observed on a number of aspects.

More specifically, the results seem to give leverage on only three aspects of the service: „The extent

KFS College is a customer focused organization‟, „the level of cooperation between KFC and its

students‟ and „the effort put by KFC to make its students aware of its services‟, all depicting positive

scores of 60% and above. In scrutiny of the remaining items it is apparent that what cannot be ignored

are the issue of complaints management, noted by the fairly low positive scores in respect to; „The

extent KFC is open to complaints, suggestions, compliments‟ and „The extent KFC resolves complaints

promptly and satisfactorily‟.

44

44

50

54

58

52

26

20

12

18

20

26

28

30

34

26

20

20

2

6

4

2

2

2

0% 100%

Sports/games

Guidance and Counseling

Students council

Clubs and Societies - YCS, CU, SDA, Muslims

The level of student representation




Smart Frontiers 24

Fig 3.10: Satisfaction with KFC on customer focus and continued improvement

3.2.11 Student Perceptions of Improvements over Time

To examine perceptions of improvement over time, participants were asked to rate their satisfaction

with change, on a 5-point scale ranging from “very dissatisfied” to “very satisfied”. To evaluate student

perceptions to that regard, responses are grouped into three categories as illustrated:

Scale 4 & 5: Better

Scale 3: Fair

Scale 1 & 2: Worse

38

42

46

52

54

54

56

56

58

60

60

62

58

18

22

20

12

14

14

20

20

24

14

14

14

12

36

26

16

28

24

20

20

18

12

24

22

20

16

8

10

18

8

8

12

4

6

6

2

4

4

14

0% 100%

The extent KFC is open to complaints, suggestions, compliments

The extent KFC resolves complaints promptly and satisfactorily

The General efficiency of operations at KFC

The extent KFC adjusts its operations in response to feedbacks from customers/students

The extent KFC seeks opinion of its customers in its decisions

The extent KFC is a team player

The extent KFC demonstrates a clear understanding of students needs

The extent KFC customer care impacts positively

its image

Promptness of service delivery at KFC

The effort put by KFC to make its students aware of its services

The level of cooperation between KFC and its

students

The extent KFS College is a customer focused organization




Smart Frontiers 25

As displayed in Figure 3.11, it is observed that, overall, about one-third (34%) of participants had a

positive view, with another one-third (34%) rating the change as „fair‟. Fairly less than one-tenth (6%)

were unequivocally negative.

Looking at the results by years of interaction with KFC, a rather wide range, although without any

distinct pattern, is observed, depicting 100%, 43% and 60% for those who have interacted with KFC for

1 year, 2 years and 3 years and above respectively.

Fig. 3.11: Perceptions about improvements over time

3.3 Factors Underlying Customer Satisfaction

3.3.1 Factor Analysis

Exploratory Factor Analysis using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was used to identify service

constituents at which satisfaction levels are highest. The purpose of PCA is to reduce the data by

identifying the patterns of correlation between different attributes.

34% 34%

6%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Better Fair WorseYears interacted with KFC

1 yr 60% 36% 4%

2 yrs 43% 43% 14%

3 yr+ 100% 0% 0%


Smart Frontiers 26

Given the large number of attributes that were available for analysis relative to the sample size (62

attributes against a sample of 50), the attributes that related most strongly to overall satisfaction were

first identified using Pearson Correlation. Following, factor analysis was applied on those attributes that

depicted coefficient values of 0.4 and above. From the analysis, three components were extracted. The

measure of sampling adequacy (KMO) against all attributes was found at 0.59, with significance level

(BC) found at p = 0.00,

The three factors extracted collectively covered 9 attributes, which cumulatively explained 60.38% of

the variance in the data. The estimates of the variance in each item were < 0.60. Accordingly, the pattern

of correlation shows that the three factors, in order of importance, can be interpreted as follows:

Factor 1: The leading factor, interpreted as Accountability and integrity, accounted for 21.15% of

the variance. This factor constitutes three items that are essentially related to credibility issues;

(i.e. the level of honesty and truthfulness of the College staff, the extent of zero tolerance to

corruption at the College and the extent KFS College is a team player)

Factor 2: The second factor, Facilitation & support to students accounted for 20.84% of the

variance. This comprised four items that are primarily related to quality of services; (i.e.

adequacy of utilities (power, water, timeliness and processing and issuing of transcripts/

certificates, clubs and Societies and students council)

Factor 3: This can be interpreted as opportunities for engagement & participation, and

accounted for 18.38% of the variance. As seen, this factor was defined by the quality of

relationship between the College and students; (i.e. the extent KFS College demonstrates a clear

understanding of students needs and the extent KFS College adjusts its operations in response to

feedbacks from customers/students)


Smart Frontiers 27

Table 3.3: Factors underlying student satisfaction

Factor (% of variance)

The level of honesty and truthfulness of the

College staff 0.71

Accountability & integrity

(21.15%)

The extent of zero tolerance to corruption at the

College 0.86

The extent KFS College is a team player 0.71

Adequacy of utilities (power, water)

0.73

Facilitation & support to students

(20.84%)

Timeliness and processing and issuing of transcripts/

certificates 0.71

Clubs and Societies

0.73

Students council

0.84

The extent KFS College demonstrates a clear understanding

of students needs 0.62

Opportunities for engagement &

participation

(18.38%)

The extent KFS College adjusts its operations in response to

feedbacks from customers/students 0.74

Fig. 3.12 shows the relative contribution of each component to overall satisfaction. The variance

explained indicate that aspects related to „Accountability and integrity‟ and „Facilitation and support‟

account for relatively the same level in share of satisfaction – 35%. On the other hand, the aspects

related to „engagement and participation‟ account for 30% of satisfaction levels.


Smart Frontiers 28

Fig. 3.12: Contribution of factors to satisfaction

Accountability &

integrity, 35%

Facilitation & support, 35%

Engagement & facilitation,

30%


Smart Frontiers 29

Conclusion

The CSS results in this report provide a broad overview of the students‟ perceptions and satisfaction

with the services provided by KFC. Based on the level of satisfaction index, results overall show

relatively modest satisfaction levels. On the basis of PCA, the analysis revealed that satisfaction is based

on three platforms: accountability & integrity, facilitation & support to students, and engagement and

participation.

Looking at priorities, the descriptive mean scores for expectations show that the highest levels of

expectations cluster around six dimensions; namely: Commitment to Core Values (4.25), Customer

focus (4.17), Service delivery standards (4.13), Quality and delivery of exams (4.02), Communication

& delivery of organizational mandate (4.02) and Communication (3.96). Given the potential role in the

overall customer satisfaction matrix, making improvements or maintaining existing performance

standards (in the aspects where satisfaction scores are already high), is prerequisite for achieving or

maintaining higher levels of satisfaction.

Turning to performance gaps, it emerged that the dimensions of „Communication,‟ „Service delivery

standards‟ and „Customer focus‟ are the three areas where the students show greatest concerns. It can be

noted that the three dimensions also ranked higher in the overall in the priorities rating. Thus, although

pockets of satisfaction are observed across the aspects under these dimensions, the results of this survey

also point to a number of the areas in need of priority actions, which are central when it comes to

developing strategies to improve customer satisfaction.

Recommendations for improvement:

On the basis of the key satisfaction gaps observed, the following are suggestions given to improve

customer satisfaction levels:

i. Timeliness of service delivery: Results show that, in terms of service delivery standards,

expediency in service delivery capacity remains an area of relative concern. Although the survey

did not establish the exact points where these gaps are apparent, he concern expressed here

seems to focus on use of modern technology. It is expected that enhancing administrative

functions in these terms is useful.


Smart Frontiers 30

ii. Information: The issue of quality of information on products and services is similarly underlined

in terms of service delivery standards. An area of apparent areas of concern is the quality and

adequacy of information provided in the KFC/KFS websites.

iii. Communication: The issue of communication should be addressed in order to anticipate and

prevent potential breakdowns in communication between the College administration and student

population. Areas of concern include: effectiveness of both telephone and email communication,

top-down communication on a range of issues, and in a broad sense, the flexibility and adequacy

of communication between administration and students.

iv. Complaint procedures: The College should design good grievance procedure. This was more

negative in terms of openness of KFC to complaints, suggestions and compliments, and the

process and efficiency of complaints handling.


Smart Frontiers 31

References

Kariuki, P (u.d.) Drivers of Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Kenya & Candidate REDD

Strategies (PPT)

Koech, C.K. et al (2009). Community Forest Associations in Kenya: challenges and opportunities,

Kenya Forestry Research Institute

Mathu, W (2011). Forest Plantations and Woodlots in Kenya. African Forest Forum Working Paper,

Vol. 1, Issue 13, 2011

Mars group Kenya (2010). Address by The Rt. Hon. Raila Amolo Odinga, E.G.H., Prime Minister Of

The Republic Of Kenya, At The Official Release Of Performance Evaluation Results For Public

Agencies For 2008/09, At The Kenyatta International Conference Centre, Nairobi On 26th April, 2010

http://www.marsgroupkenya.org/pdfs/2010/04/govt_perfomance_results_speech_by_the_pm.pdf.

Muthaura F. 2003. Kenya Vision 2030: The Role of the Public Service.

www.nesc.go.ke/.../2006oct30_SPEECH-Muthaura_Vision%202030.pdf

Ogweno, D, Opanga, P and Obara, A. (2009). Forest Landscape And Kenya‟s Vision 2030

UNEP (ud). Chapter 1: Environment and Vision 2030

http://na.unep.net/atlas/kenya/downloads/chapters//Kenya_Screen_Chapter1.pdf

CUSTOMER (STUDENTS) SATISFACTION SURVEY SATISFACTION SU… · S mart F rontiers Prepared and ... v...

Documents

Transcript of CUSTOMER (STUDENTS) SATISFACTION SURVEY SATISFACTION SU… · S mart F rontiers Prepared and ... v...