Influence of Service Responsiveness on Student Satisfaction in Schools of Business of Chartered Universities in Kenya

Influence of Service Responsiveness on Student Satisfaction in Schools of Business of Chartered Universities in Kenya

Jane Naitore Kimaita^1*, Hellen Kabue¹, Phares Ochola², Stephen Ntuara Kiriinya¹

¹Department of Business Administration and Management, The Technical University of Kenya, Kenya

²Department of Management Science, The Technical University of Kenya, Kenya

^*Corresponding author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.90400337

Received: 02 April 2025; Accepted: 08 April 2025; Published: 14 May 2025

ABSTRACT

The purpose of the study was to determine the influence of service responsiveness on student satisfaction in Schools of Business of Chartered Universities in Kenya.  A cross-sectional descriptive research design was used. Second, third- and fourth-year students from schools of business of chartered universities in Kenya were chosen.  The study used stratified sampling, a pilot test was carried out on 2 universities with 10 respondents from each university to assess the instrument’s validity and reliability. This was tested using Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha with a threshold of 0.7.  Primary data was collected from 400 respondents where questionnaires were self-administered to students during the common unit classes.  Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) (2020) version 27 was used for data analysis. The study used Multinomial Logistic Regression Model. The results revealed that service responsiveness was statistically significant for each of the three rating categories.

Keywords: Responsiveness, Satisfaction

BACKGROUND

Service responsiveness is the enthusiasm to encourage clients and to give them needed services. This includes; giving customers right information, keeping customers informed as to when services will be performed, prompt service to customers, willingness to help customers, readiness to respond to customers’ request and giving them undivided attention (Huang et al., 2018).  Uyoga and Lagat (2019) opined that responsiveness comprises speed, prompt customer service, less waiting time, short queuing time and timeliness of service delivery.  According to Yarimoglu (2014) responsiveness dimension is the readiness or willingness of staff members to be of assistance in the course of rendering services and focusing on giving the best service.

Education sector and more specifically universities, have increasingly recognizing the importance of service quality which has led to heightened efforts to meet the expectations of students (Weerasinghe et al., 2017). In the past, the quality of services that were provided in the universities was never a key priority however in the recent years; there has been increased interest in measuring service quality in this sector (Shaikhly, 2019). Students’ expectations have placed pressure on universities to be more competitive as those that offer quality services gain an added advantage in terms of attracting and retaining students (Dunja, 2017).   As such, service quality is measured using various constructs which include tangibility, responsiveness, reliability, assurance and empathy.  It is therefore important for universities to observe service quality and devote their efforts towards continued improvement to meet students’ needs (Lien, 2017). It is a conventional practice for universities to identify dimensions which enhance quality service to avert cases of dissatisfaction among as these are the key issues facing the institution (Mashenene, 2019).

H₀₁ Service responsiveness has no effect on student satisfaction in Schools of Business of chartered universities in Kenya

LITERATURE REVIEW

Responsiveness

Studies indicate that the responsiveness dimension guarantees service seekers that their concerns and needs are catered for at any given time. With reference to this, it is crucial that service providers in higher education sectors do not only focus on output but rather on the need to make their services attractive and thus achieve students’ satisfaction (Raphael, 2014).  Students’ perception of service quality is influence by the personnel’s willingness to assist students, ability to communicate when service would be delivered and the speed with which the service is provided. Based on empirical research by Kundi et al., (2014); Alabboodi (2019) established that responsiveness has an impact on students’ satisfaction. In this regard, students who perceive university as responsive will be more satisfied than those that do not.  In their study, Jaza et al., (2020) found out that responsiveness dimension of service quality has affected the achievement of satisfaction in the universities. This means that if students received a high level of responsiveness from the staff then their satisfaction would be enhanced.  An increase in the degree of responsiveness leads to an increase in service quality lifetime, which creates positive effect on an institution’s credibility hence the expected satisfaction by the concerned parties is achieved (Pakurar et al., 2019).

Studies by Jaza et al., (2020); Peprah (2018) recommends that with a view to enhance the effect of responsiveness dimension on service quality satisfaction, it is necessity for staff to have willingness to help students by responding to their requests promptly, providing individual attention and to be truthful by letting students know when services would be offered. Further, a study revealed that there is need to understand students’ expectations, being in possession of problem-solving skills, showing courtesy and willingness to assist and giving individual attention is a priority to institutions in order to enhance satisfaction and loyalty  (Gong & Yi, 2018).  On the contrary, by Lodesso et al., (2018) on Student Satisfaction Regarding Service Quality at Ethiopian Public Higher Education Institutions, revealed that students’ satisfaction in relation to service quality was insignificant.  Most aspects of the service quality dimensions for example reliability and tangibles were considered weak by the students. Among the dimensions that were somewhat of lesser importance was responsiveness

Student Satisfaction

Measuring customer satisfaction can offer a pointer for organizations’ regarding how efficient they are in providing services to the market, where customer satisfaction is a significant differentiator of marketing strategy.  This is mainly contingent on the extent to which a service supplied by an organization fulfils or exceeds customer expectations (Salo, 2017).  According to Razali, et al. (2017) service quality has a direct positive impact on customer satisfaction hence organizations must strive to enhance quality and encourage customer feedback on the level of satisfaction from the service provided.

In the university scenario, students are the prime customers and their satisfaction is a sign of the performance of quality of service by the staff (Cubillo et al., 2016).  According to Pedro et al., (2018) students’ satisfaction leads to loyalty, enhances retention as well as support an organization to increase its customer base through referrals and word of mouth.  In addition, specific dimensions of students’ satisfaction such as referral, retention and word of mouth need to be given attention as they are widely recognized as critical student outcomes (Asma, 2018) ;(Yeo et al., 2015).  A study by Azzam (2018) on Service Quality Dimensions and Students’ Satisfaction: A study of Saudi Arabian Private Higher Education Institutions, revealed that academic service (except responsiveness) showed statistically significant relationship between students’ satisfaction and retention.  On the other hand, findings of a study by Mwiya, et al., (2017), indicated there was existence of statistically significant associations between dimensions of service quality and student satisfaction. Results indicated that service quality performance dimensions (tangibility, reliability, responsiveness, empathy and assurance) are each significantly positively related to overall student satisfaction.

Research Design

Research design is the plan or structure within which research is conducted hence constituting the blueprint for the collection, measurement and analysis of data (Cooper & Schindler, 2014). Saunders et al., (2016), outlined that research design is the general framework of how the researcher is going to answer the research questions.  In addition, the design is concerned with the descriptions of phenomena or characteristics such as who, what, when, where of a subject population.  Research design gives a clear direction on how to select the various sources and types of information required and defines the relationship among the variables of a study.  This study adopted a cross-sectional descriptive design in which data was collected from many different individuals at a single point in time. This design supported the study’s desired objectivity and allowed logistical flexibility required for data collection and data analysis (Blumberg et al., 2014).

Study Population, Sampling and Sampling procedure

Population comprises of all events or objects that have common characteristics and from which the researcher wants to generalize results (Cooper & Schindler, 2014). The population under the study was students of business schools of chartered public and private universities in Kenya.  The target population was second, third and fourth-years students from Schools of Business of the chartered universities in Kenya.  The choice of the schools is that business courses cut across all universities and also control the majority of student population.

Sampling frame is the complete list of individuals or entities in the population, from which a probability sample is drawn and to which study findings are to be generalized (Saunders et al., 2016).  Sampling was done in two stages: stage one was sampling of the universities while stage two was sampling of students from the sampled universities. Yamane (1974) formula was used to arrive at 10 universities out 52 chartered universities as the unit of analysis of the study. The universities were further be clustered into public and private where proportions will be used to determine the number of universities in each cluster.  Selection of specific universities was scientifically done using the random number tables.  Using the Yamane’s formula target student population that was derived from the sampled universities was 13,062 and distribution of sample size across the sampled universities was 400 Second, third and fourth-year students were chosen to form the sample unit for the study.

Research Instruments and Data Collection and Analysis

Primary data was collected using semi structured questionnaire which was self-administered to students during the common units’ classes.  According to Christesen et al., (2014) questionnaires are commonly used in data collection because they enable a researcher to save time, since it is possible to collect a large amount of information in case of a large population

Before the actual collection of data, a pilot test was conducted in 2 universities with sample of 20 respondents.  This was aimed to assess the question’s validity and the likely reliability.  Prior to data analysis process, gathered data were cleaned, edited and then coded.  Subsequently, analysis of the data was executed using the proposed models in Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) 2020 version 27. This study used multinomial logistic regression model to explore the relationship between service responsiveness and student satisfaction.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

According to the table below, 10% and 86% of respondents respectively strongly agreed and agreed that staff in their university responded to students’ enquiries in a courteous manner.    Additionally, the study established that 9% of respondents strongly agreed while 88% agreed that staff in their university went out of their way to help.  The study findings also established that 12% of respondents strongly agreed and 86% of respondents agreed that lecturers in their university were encouraging at all times.  This was an indication that students were pleased and motivated to work hard in their studies as lecturers instilled confidence by encouraging them.  Results also revealed that 8% respondents strongly agreed while 77% agree that non-teaching staff communicated when there was service delay. Further, 8% of respondents strongly agreed whereas 77% agreed that staff offered quick services all the time.  It was found that 10% of respondents strongly agreed and 87% agreed that staff in their universities communicated to students when services were to be offered.  Results therefore confirmed that a majority of respondents agreed that the university was keen to communicate to students when services were to be offered.  This being a reflection of how universities are keen to dispense information to keep students well informed.  This is in line with a study by Peprah (2018) on the study on service quality and students’ satisfaction that recommended that, in order to enhance the effect of responsiveness dimension of service quality, it was necessity for staff to have willingness to help students by responding to their requests promptly, providing individual attention and to be truthful by letting students know when services would be offered. This also agrees with studies by Kundi et al., (2014); Alabboodi (2019) that with regard to universities, students’ perception of service will be affected by the personnel’s willingness to assist students, ability to communicate when services will be delivered and also the speed with which the service is provided.

The study revealed that 9% of respondents strongly agreed and 87% agreed that staff in their university attended to students needs with commitment. Further, results of the study show that 8% of respondents strongly agreed that staff pay attention to details on services sought by students while 88% agreed.   8% of respondents strongly agreed and 86% agreed that staff were able to identify students’ issues with ease.

Table 1 Descriptive Results for Service Responsiveness

Source: Researcher (2023)

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SERVICE RESPONSIVENESS AND STUDENT SATISFACTION

According to table 2, findings showed that service responsiveness was a significant dimension on all the three evaluation categories; at strongly agree p-value = 0.018, agree p-value = 0.24 and at disagree level p-value = 0.000. The Exp (B) results revealed that for one unit increase in service responsiveness, it is anticipated that there will be .056 decrease in the probability of an event occurring holding the other independent variables constant on the ‘Strongly agree’ category while at the ‘agree’ category a unit increase in service responsiveness rating will also be 0.177 decrease in the probability of an event occurring and at the ‘disagree’ category, a unit decrease in service responsiveness rating will lead to 0.174 decrease in the log-odds of the response variable. From the results, it was clear that there is statistically significant relationship between service responsiveness and student satisfaction, therefore rejecting the null hypothesis and accepting the alternative hypothesis. This was an indicator that university staff attended to students’ inquiries in a courteous manner and also went out of their way to help.  Additionally, staff offered quick services at all times and there was clear and sufficient communication from relevant authorities.  It is important to note that universities are keen to transmit information in order to keep students well informed on all matters that are of importance to them.

Table 2 Parameter Estimates Results

Areas of further research

The study focused on schools of business students who expressed their opinions and views on the degree to which service responsiveness influence student satisfaction in chartered universities in Kenya.  A similar study can be carried out in future research but target population could be other schools, for example, School of computing, so as to establish whether the two findings would yield the same results.

REFERENCE

1. Alabboodi, A. S. (2019). The effect of customer satisfaction on service quality:The case of Iraqi banks. International journal of applied research, 5(1), 146-152.
2. Asma, S., Dine, M. B., Wafaa, B., & Redouan, A. (2018). The Effect of Perception Quality/Price of Service on Satsfaction and Loyalty Algerians Customers Evicence Study Turkish Arilines. International Journal of Economics and Management Sciences, 7(1).
3. Azzam, A. (2018). Service Quality Dimensions and Students Satisfaction: A study of Saudi Arabia Education Institutions. European Journal of National Social Sciences, 7, 275-284.
4. Blumberg, B. F., Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2014). Business Research Methods. McGraw-Hill education.
5. Christesen, L. B., Johnson, R. B., & Turner, L. A. (2014). Research Methods, Design and Analysis (11th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
6. Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2014). Business Research Methods (7th ed.). USA: McGraw-Hill International.
7. Cubillo, M. J., Sanchez, J., & Cervino, J. (2016). International students’ decision-making process. international Journal of Educational Management, 20(2), 101-115.
8. Dunja, M. (2017). Service Quality, Students’ Satisfaction and Behavioural Interntions in Stem and Ic Higher Education Institutions. Interdiscilinary Description of Complex Systems, 15(1), 66-77.
9. Gong, T., & Yi, Y. (2018). The effect of service quality on customer satisfaction, loyalty, and happiness in five Asian countries. Psychology & Marketing, 35(6), 427-442.
10. Huang, Z., Luo, Y., & Wang, D. (2018). Online customer service quality of online shopping: evidence from Dangdang.com, Cluster Computing. 1-9.
11. Jaza, H. T., Mustafa, S., & Ahmet, E. (2020). The Impact of Service Quality on Student and Academic Staff Satisfaction within Higher Education Institutions: A Case Study of Sulaimani City in Northern Iraq. Revisita Argentina de Clinica Psicologica, Vol. XXIX, No. 5, 440-450.
12. Kundi, G. M., Khan, S. M., Qureshi, Q. A., Khan, Y., & Akhar, R. (2014). Impact of Service Quality on Customer Satisfaction in Higher Education (A Case Study of Gomal University, DI Khan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Pakistan). Higher Education, 4. 23-28.
13. Lien, P. T. (2017). Training service quality and its effects on student satisfaction: Case of a Vietnam University. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 7(4), 99-110.
14. Lodesso, S. L., Niekerk, E. J., & Jansen, C. A. (2018). Student satisfaction regarding service quality at Ethiopian public higher education institutions: A case study. Journal of Student Affairs in Africa: 6(2), 51-64.
15. Mashenene, R.G. (2019), Effect of service quality on student’s satisfaction in Tanzania higher education. Business Education Journal, 2(2), 1-8.
16. Mwiya, B., Bwalya, J., Siachinji, B., Sikombe, S., Chanda, H., & Chwala, M. (2017). Higher education quality and student satisfaction nexus: Evidence from Zambia Creat. Educ. Vol. 8, 1044-1068.
17. Pakurar, M., Haddad, H., Nagy, J., Popp, J., & Olah, J. (2019). The service quality dimensions that affect customer satisfaction in the Jordanian banking sector. Sustainability, 11(4). 1113.
18. Pedro, E., Mendes, L., & Lourenco, L. (2018). Perceived Service Quality and Student’s Satisfaction in Higher Education: The Influence of Teaching Methods. International Journal for Quality Research, 12(1).
19. Peprah, W. K. (2018). Internationalstudents’ satisfaction of ISO 9001 certified education: A basis for a preventive and corrective program. Abstract Proceedings International Scholars COnference 6(1), (pp. 195-195).
20. Razali, M., Nor, K., Talib, N., Ahmad, N., Baharan, R., Sakarji, S., & Saferdin, W. (2017). The study of the relationship between service quality and customer satsfaction among staffat Mahmamah Persekutuan Malaysia. Journal of Humanities, Language, Culture and Business, 1(2), 152-167.
21. Salo, K. (2017). Using different methds of measuring customer satisfaction.
22. Shaikhly, S. (2019, December 21). Education in Iraq. Retrieved from https://wenr.wes.org/2017/10/education-iniraq
23. Uyoga, D., & Lagat, C. (2019). Relationship Between Customer Responsives,Service Performance and Satisfaction Among Airline Passangers in Kenya. Journal of Emerging Trends in Economics and Management Sciences, 10(2), 1-69.
24. Weerasinghe, S., Lalitha, R., & Fernando, S. (2017). Students’ satisfaction in higher education literature review. Am. J. Educ. Res. 5. 533-539.
25. Yarimoglu, E. K. (2014). A review on dimensions of service quality models. J. Mark Manag, 2, 79-93.
26. Yeo, G. T., Thai, V. V., & Roh, S. Y. (2015). An Analysis of Port Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction: The Case of Korean Container Ports. Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 31(4), 437-447. doi:doi:10.1016/j.ajsl.2016.01.002
27. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2016). Research Methods for Business Students (7th ed.). Harlow: Pearson.