alexa
Reach Us +441414719275
Assessment of Customer Satisfaction in Menelik II Health Science College, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2018
ISSN: 2380-5439

Journal of Health Education Research & Development
Open Access

Our Group organises 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events every year across USA, Europe & Asia with support from 1000 more scientific Societies and Publishes 700+ Open Access Journals which contains over 50000 eminent personalities, reputed scientists as editorial board members.

Open Access Journals gaining more Readers and Citations
700 Journals and 15,000,000 Readers Each Journal is getting 25,000+ Readers

This Readership is 10 times more when compared to other Subscription Journals (Source: Google Analytics)

Assessment of Customer Satisfaction in Menelik II Health Science College, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2018

Girum Sebsibie Teshome1*, Fikirte Woldesilassie Woldeyohans2, Elias Sebsebe Haile2 and Ergataw Kidane Alene2
1Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
2Minilek II Health Science College, Ethiopia
*Corresponding Author: Girum Sebsibie Teshome, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, Tel: +9251111510511, Email: [email protected]

Received Date: Mar 06, 2018 / Accepted Date: Mar 27, 2018 / Published Date: Apr 05, 2018

Abstract

Background: Every organization must define customer satisfaction regarding their market. So customer satisfaction could not be defined only standard or quality of product. Customer satisfaction is about relationships between the customer and product or service and the provider of a product or service.

Objective: The objective of this study was to assess overall satisfaction levels Customers with the administration of Menelik II health Science College.

Methodology: A cross sectional study design was conducted from Dec, 2015 to Jan, 2016 in Menelik II Health Science College. The sample size includes Students (n=233), teachers (n=20), and administrative staffs (n=29) who were available at the college during the study period and randomly selected and included in study. Structured questioner was prepared to collect the data and data entry and analysis was done using SPSS version 23.

Results: The satisfaction of student was found to be 55.8%, 48.1%, 51.1%, and, 42.1% in teaching learning process, library service, and registrar and student services respectively. The satisfaction of teachers was similar (45%) with college management, Library and Registrar services; whereas 60% of teachers were satisfied on procurement, finance, and general service of the college. The satisfaction of administrative staff was 44.8% and 55.2% with college management and procurement, finance, and general service of the college respectively.

Conclusion: The overall level of students, teachers and administrative staff satisfaction was moderate. The college should consider mechanisms to improve the satisfaction of its customers.

Keywords: Satisfaction; Menelik II; Customer; Addia Ababa

Introduction

Customer satisfaction is defined as “the number of customers, or percentage of total customers, whose reported experience with a firm, its products, or its services (ratings) exceeds specified satisfaction goal [1]. Customer satisfaction can be experienced in a variety of situations and connected to both goods and services. It is a highly personal assessment that is greatly affected by customer expectations. Satisfaction also is based on the customer’s experience of both contacts with the organization and personal outcomes. Some researchers define a satisfied customer within the private sector as “one who receives significant added value” to his/her bottom line a definition that may apply just as well to public services [2].

To reinforce customer orientation on a day-to-day basis, a growing number of companies choose customer satisfaction as their main performance indicator [3]. In an increasingly competitive environment, companies must be customer oriented [4]. Customer satisfaction is about relationships between the customer and product or service and the provider of a product or service. Customer satisfaction is a highly personal assessment that is greatly influenced by individual expectations. Some definitions are based on the observation that customer satisfaction or dissatisfaction results from either the confirmation or disconfirmation of individual expectations regarding a service or product [5].

Measuring customer satisfactions provide a comprehensive insight to the customer pre and post purchase behavior. Without this approach understanding, improving and developing better customer services could not be possible.

Increased competition, dynamic educational environment, challenges such as budget cut, higher costs in obtaining college education, changing demographics in the population, declining enrollments, and a general public call for accountability have educational institutions realize the importance of student satisfaction [6,7]. Studies have shown student satisfaction to have a positive impact on student motivation, student retention, recruiting efforts and fundraising [8,9].

The students’ positive feeling and satisfaction is contingent to the students’ academic and social experiences obtained at the particular institution [10-13]. However, most student studies in higher education focus more on intrinsic factors of student motivation. As a result, student satisfaction among graduate students is assumed and only usually considered when competition affects enrolment.

There is need for more research in higher education that focuses more on student needs and concerns for the purposes of improving academic programs. In addition, extrinsic factors need to be considered as well. Being able to identify and address students’ needs and expectations allows educational institutions to attract and retain quality students as well as improve the quality of their programs [14].

Satisfied and motivated teachers are important for any educational system. The success or failure of the education system depends mainly on satisfied teachers, but also on satisfied managers and administrators. Teachers, specifically, spend a great amount of time with their students in class, and hence they have a significant impact on student achievement [15,16].

Customer satisfaction is a term frequently used in marketing. It is a measure of how products and services supplied by a company meet or surpass customer expectation [17].

Quality service is defined as the situation in which the consumer’s perception of service performance meets or exceeds their expectation of what the service firm should do. The key to service quality, then, is to meet or exceed consumer expectations. One problem with measuring customers’ satisfaction is that there may often be discrepancies between the consumer’s viewpoints and the provider’s understandings of what constitutes quality service [18].

Any differences between consumer viewpoints and the organization’s perception of consumer viewpoints on quality are important to identify and determine the level and quality of the service provided [19].

Satisfaction with the teaching component has important consequences. It means that the teachers are happy, dedicated and committed, and it also helps them to bring their best qualities to their schools, so that students, parents, and the society may benefit from their services [20].

Satisfied and motivated teachers are important for any educational system. The success or failure of the education system depends mainly on satisfied teachers, but also on satisfied school managers and administrators. Teachers, specifically, spend a great amount of time with their students in class, and hence they have a significant impact on student achievement [21].

Job satisfaction is also defined as the general emotional evaluations of service providers for their job situation and job experiences [22]. Job satisfaction has a positive effect on the customer (student) orientation of service providers [23]. It can be the foundation to enhance a positive interaction between service providers (teachers) and customers (students) [24].

It is important to note that maintaining the provision of effective education at school requires a coordinated effort from all the bodies concerned. Among others, it demands the devotion of policy makers, administrators, teachers’ associations, the parents, the students themselves, as well as members of the wider community. It requires the provision of effective facilities and spaces, and the training and assignment of qualified administrative and other support staff. However, while each of the mentioned groups has important contributions to make, providing effective learning environments in schools depends in particular on the skills, morale, knowledge and commitment of the teachers [25]. Student satisfaction refers to the attraction, pride, or positive feeling that the students develop toward the program or institution [26].

The level of students’ positive feeling or satisfaction is associated with students’ being able to find adequate resources to meet their academic and social interests. The students’ ability to project and implement their self-concepts as a students or viewing themselves as part of the institution is also related to their positive feeling of satisfaction [27,28]. The students’ positive feeling and satisfaction is also contingent to the students’ academic and social experiences obtained at the particular institution [29]. The academic and social experiences of students are the vehicles that drive students into the life of the institution [30]. Previous studies have shown that students who report positive academic and social experiences expressed greater satisfaction with their overall college experience. Other key determinants of student satisfaction include academic performance, quality of curriculum, quality of instruction, quality of academic advising, student satisfaction with major, and the level of interaction between faculty members and students is also a factor affecting student satisfaction in their academic experiences [31].

The findings of the study used to improve the quality of service to customers, and implement strategies through necessary modification that would lead to improve teaching and learning process, and to meet the needs and concerns of the current students who are already enrolled. Moreover, the results of this study will assess teachers, administrative staff satisfaction on activities of their job and identifying the gaps affecting their satisfaction and it adds to the importance of how student satisfaction assessment can be utilized as a tool to ensure the program’s quality and effectiveness. Therefore Menelik II Health Science College has to determine the satisfaction level of existing students in different departments, their instructors, administrative staff indifferent aspects of the college services in order to improve and develop better customer service in line with the mission of the College, that is, by duly responding to conducive teaching and learning process and the undertaking of quality and efficient health professional education in different programs, commits to produce honest and loyal health professionals who can solve the health problem of the Addis Ababa city Administration and above all the country, which in turn enable the society to be capable of becoming healthy and productive it is vital for educational institutions to determine and deliver what is important to students.

Materials and Methods

Study design, area and period

Institution-based cross-sectional study design was conducted at Menelik II Health Science College from December 2015- January, 2016. Menelik II Health Science College was established in 1956 and located at Yeka sub city in the compound of Menelik II Hospital. It is one of the first Health Training sectors which provide unreserved services to the community beginning from its establishment. The College is serving as a prime partner of the Addis Ababa city administration health Bureau in delivering convenient trainings and services to substantial number of health professionals.

Source population

Source population for the study were all Menelik II Health Science College Customers.

Study population

Menelik II Health Science College Students, Instructors, administrative staffs were the study population.

Ethical consideration

Research clearance and Approval was obtained from Menelik II Health Science College Ethical review and Approval committee of Research and Publication office. The study subjects were requested to give their consent after receiving adequate explanation about the purpose, significance, anonymity and how they could give their responses. They were also told about their rights to withdraw from the study, and not to answer questions whenever they felt uncomfortable. Oral informed verbal consent was obtained from every respondent.

Sample size determination

The sample size of the study for the students was determined by using single population proportion. The prevalence rate of customer satisfaction obtained from other similar study is 70.8%. Based on this assumption, the actual sample size for this study was computed:

no=Z (α/2)2 × P(1-P)

d2

Since the source population is less than 10,000 correction formula is used. n1=no/1+(no/N)

no=is the minimum sample size, z=95% confidence level (1.96), d2=the margin of sampling error (5%), P=is the prevalence rate of satisfaction (0.708%), Correction Formula n1=Final sample size using correction formula, N=total size of study population. Then the final sample size will be 240 participants.

Data collection instrument

The instrument was a standardized tool that was formerly used in a related study conducted in Debere Marko’s University and modified for use in the current study depending on the various customers’ satisfactions within the college and its validity and reliability was tested using Cranach’s Alpha (0.871). All the items were scored on a five-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied).

Sampling procedures

Students, Teachers and Administrative staff who work in the college for a minimum of six months and volunteers were invited to the study. Systematic random sampling technique was conducted. The first student in the list was randomly selected through a lottery method and then every 3rd interval was chosen to take the sample. All Teachers and administrative staff, who were volunteers, are included in the study.

Data collection procedures

Data collection was done from December 12-16, 2016. Five MSc individuals were recruited and trained to obtain consent and administer the questionnaire privately and maintain confidentiality throughout the process. Before the data collection the items on the instrument were checked for its completeness and pre-test wed. The questionnaire was prepared in English and translated into Amharic language and then back to English to keep its consistency. Data collectors were trained for two days. Close supervision was undertaken during data collection and every questionnaire was cross checked daily by the supervisors and the principal investigators.

Operational definition

Customer: Menelik II Health Science College students, Instructors, and administrative staff.

Customer satisfaction: performance matches with the expectations of individual.

Customer dissatisfaction: performance falls short with the expectation of individuals.

Independent and outcome variables: Outcome variable of this study was customer satisfaction. Independents variable for this study were:- Management of the college, Teaching and Learning process, Library service, ICT service, General Service of the college, Registrar service, student service, Finance service, administration service and, Human resource service.

Data processing and analysis: Five points likert scale has been used to distribute the respondents’ options. The levels of the scale were given the following rating (1) very dissatisfied, (2) dissatisfied, (3) neutral (4) satisfied, (5) very satisfied. The standard mean of all statements equals to their grand mean. The study considered the value below the grand mean is dissatisfied and above and equal that is satisfied, this scale mean management has been (Factors Affect Mobile Phone Brand Choices– Studying the Case of Jordan Universities Students in 2011 [32]. Simple descriptive statistics in the form of frequency counts and percentage distributions were utilized for analyzing quantitative data.

Results

Socio-demographic characteristics of the student

A total of 233 students from different department took part in the study with a response rate of 233 (97.1%). According to the finding of this study, 147 (63.1%) and 86 (36.9%) were females and males respectively. From this most of the respondents were in the age group of 37.3% (20-24) and 36.1% (25-29). Majority of the respondents 91 (39.1%) and 60 (25.8%) were from Midwifery and Nursing departments respectively. 187 (80.3%) of the respondents were BSC students from this 120 (48.5%) and 176 (75.5%) day and second year students respectively.

Level of satisfaction of students with teaching and learning process

The study shows that satisfaction of students in teaching learning process on instructors methods of delivering courses and method of assessment and fairness in correcting exams satisfaction was rated highest 121 (51.9%) satisfied, 29 (12.4%) very satisfied, and 120 (51.5%) satisfied, 28 (12.0) very satisfied respectively. And satisfaction was rated very dissatisfied and dissatisfied in highest score with the speed and timeliness of the department to respond promptly to students request was 71 (30.5%) very dissatisfied and 69 (29.9%) dissatisfied. In general the overall satisfaction of students on teaching and learning process articulated in mean (greater than and equal 2.4 indicates satisfaction) from this 55. 8% of the students were satisfied in teaching and learning process.

Level of satisfaction of students with the library service of the college

The finding shows that the satisfaction of students with Library books in kind and number and their relevancy to the education given in the college was 24 (10.3%) very dissatisfied, 70 (30.0%) dissatisfied, 111 (47.6%) satisfied, 23 (9.9%) very satisfied, and 5 (2.1%) neutral. Regarding library service satisfaction in terms of time days/hours was rated highest 131 (56.2%) satisfied 40 (12.4%) very satisfied. And satisfaction was rated very dissatisfied and dissatisfied in highest score on the question of accessibility of service facilities and being free from disturbance of noise was 54 (23.2%) very dissatisfied and 63 (27.0%) dissatisfied. In general the overall satisfaction of students on the Library service articulated in mean (greater than and equal 2.5 indicates satisfaction) from this 48.1% of the students were satisfied on the Library services.

Level of satisfaction of students with the registrar service of the college

The satisfaction of students on the accessibility of the service was 28 (12.0%) very dissatisfied, 75 (32.2%) dissatisfied, 104 (44.6%) satisfied, 26 (11.2%) very satisfied. Knowledge and skills exhibited by the staff (friendliness, politeness) response was rated highest 108 (46.4%) satisfied, 22 (9.4%) very satisfied and 109 (46.8%) satisfied, 24 (10.3%) very satisfied respectively. In general, 51.5% of the students were satisfied on Registrar services.

Satisfaction of students with procurement, finance, and general service of the college

The study shows that the satisfaction of students on the speed and time lines of maintenance service was 32/ (13.7%) very dissatisfied, 86 (36.9%) dissatisfied, 90 (38.6%) satisfied, 21 (9.0%) very satisfied and 4 (1.7%) neutral. Regarding Cleanness of the facilities or the service environment comfort for customers response was rated highest 99 (42.5%) satisfied, 29 (12.4%) very satisfied and satisfaction was rated very dissatisfied and dissatisfied in highest scores on the quality of teaching and learning materials procurement, the fulfillment of equipment and being comfortable in the teaching learning process (LCD, Chair), and support letter to get medical service was 49 (21.0%) very dissatisfied, 101 (43.3%) dissatisfied and 65 (27.9)% satisfied, 13 (5.6)% very satisfied, 38 (16.3%) very dissatisfied, 90 (38.6)% dissatisfied and 81 (34.8%) satisfied, 22 (9.4%) very satisfied and 47 (20.2)% very dissatisfied, 70 (30.0%) dissatisfied and 87 (37.3%) satisfied, 23 (9.9%) very satisfied and 6 (2.6%) neutral respectively. In general, 42.1% of the students were satisfied on student services.

Socio-demographic characteristics of teacher

There were 44 teachers in the College from this a total of 20 teachers from different department took part in the study, of which a response rate of 100%. The rest of participants were department heads and those served the college less than six months were excluded from the study. According to the finding of this study, 13 (65%) males and 7 (35%) were Females. Most of the respondents were in the age group of 57.6% [30-33]. Majority of the respondents 9 (45%) and 6 (30%) were from Midwifery and Nursing departments respectively. Half of the respondents served the college 5 and above years.

The study suggested that the satisfaction of teachers on leadership skills of the top management was very dissatisfied 0%, 25% dissatisfied, 70% satisfied and 5% very satisfied. Among teachers, accessibility of top management was rated highest 13 (65%) satisfied, 6 (30%) very satisfied.

Level of satisfaction of teachers with the library service of the college

From the variables of Library service the study shows that the satisfaction of teachers on Library books in kind and number and their relevancy to the education given in the college was 2 (10%) very dissatisfied, 6 (30%) dissatisfied, 11 (55%) satisfied, 1 (5%) very satisfied.

The arrangement of book and catalogue service easiness to find books in the library was rated highest 13 (65%) satisfied 5 (15%) very satisfied. And satisfaction was rated very dissatisfied and dissatisfied in highest score on the question of Library service for students in terms sufficient time and internet service in the library was 4 (20%), 8 (40%) very dissatisfied and 9 (45%) 5 (25%) dissatisfied respectively. In general the overall satisfaction of teachers on the library service articulated in mean (greater than and equal 2.7 indicates satisfaction) from this 45% of the teachers were satisfied on library services.

Level of satisfaction of teachers with the registrar service of the college

From the questions of the registrar service the survey shows that the satisfaction of teachers on the quality of student’s attendance and mark list preparation was 1 (5%) very dissatisfied, 4 (20%) dissatisfied, 11 (55%) satisfied, 4 (20%) very satisfied. Regarding Degrees of service knowledge and skills exhibited by the staff and staffs’ professional behavior (friendliness, politeness) response was rated highest 12 (60%) satisfied, 6 (30%) very satisfied. And satisfaction was rated very dissatisfied and dissatisfied in highest score on the question of students grade report and academic calendar preparation and utilization was 1 (5%), 7 (35%) very dissatisfied, 2 (10%), 6 (30) dissatisfied respectively. In general the overall satisfaction of teachers on the registrar service articulated in mean (greater than and equal 3.0 indicates satisfaction) from this 45% of the teachers were satisfied on registrar services.

Satisfaction of teachers with procurement, finance, and general service of the college

From the questions of Procurement, Finance, and General Service the finding shows that the satisfaction of teachers on the quality of teaching and learning materials was 3 (15%) very dissatisfied, 7 (35%) dissatisfied, 9 (45%) satisfied, 1 (5%) very satisfied.

Speed and timeliness of finance and cleaning service was rated highest 13 (65%), 14 (70) satisfied, 2 (10%), 29 (10%) very satisfied respectively. Satisfaction was rated very dissatisfied and dissatisfied in highest scores on the question of teaching learning materials speed and timeliness of procurement and the fulfillment of equipment and being comfortable in the teaching learning process was 5 (25%), 3 (15%) very dissatisfied, 9 (45%), 9 (45%) dissatisfied respectively. In general the overall satisfaction of teachers with Procurement, Finance, and General activities articulated in mean (greater than and equal 3.0 indicates satisfaction) from this 60% of the teachers were satisfied on Procurement, Finance, and General Services of the College).

Administrative staff socio-demographic characteristics

A total of 29 administrative staff from different department took part in the study from 50 staffs, the rest of the staff were department head and whose service was less than six months, of which a response rate of 29 (100%). According to the finding of this study, 9 (31%) males and 20 (69%) were Females. From this most of the respondents were in the age group of 28.3% (25-29). Majority of the respondents were from procurement and Finance office 7 (24.1%) and 5 (17.2%) respectively.

Satisfaction of administrative staff with different components top management activities

The study suggested that the satisfaction of accessibility of top management was very dissatisfied (13.8%), (13.8%) dissatisfied, (37.9%) satisfied and (24.1%) very satisfied. Among administrative staff, Leadership skills of the top management was rated highest 19 (65.5%) satisfied, 4 (13.8%) very satisfied. And satisfaction was rated very dissatisfied and dissatisfied in highest score on the question promoting college strong employees was 7 (24.1%) very dissatisfied and 11 (37.9%) dissatisfied. In general 44.8% of the administrative staff was satisfied on top management activities.

Satisfaction of administrative staff with the service of the college

The satisfaction of administrative staff on fairness, speed and timeliness and transparency of human resource office was 7 (24.1%) very dissatisfied, 8 (27.6%) dissatisfied, 8 (27.6%) satisfied, 6 (20.7%) very satisfied. Speed and timeliness of procurement service finance and cleaning service was rated highest 17 (58.6%) satisfied, 3 (10.3%) very satisfied. Satisfaction was rated very dissatisfied and dissatisfied in highest scores on the question of quality procured materials and fulfillment of equipment and its comfort was 5 (17.2%), 13 (44.8%) very dissatisfied, 13 (44.8%), 12 (41.4%) dissatisfied respectively (Tables 1-11). In general 55.2% of the administrative staffs were satisfied on Procurement, Finance, and General Service of the College.

Respondents characteristics No Percent
 Sex
 Male 86 36.9
Female 147 63.1
 Total 233 100
 Age    
 15-19 9 3.9
 20-24 87 37.3
 25-29 84 36.1
30-34 25 10.7
35-39 13 5.6
40-44 5 2.1
45-49 7 3
50-54 3 1.3
Total 233 100
Department
Midwifery 91 39.1
Anesthesia 5 2.1
Emergency 7 3
HIT 15 6.4
Medical Lab 30 12.9
Mental health 13 5.6
 Neonatal 7 3
Nursing 60 25.8
 OR 5 2.1
Total 233 100
Educational status
 Level IV 46 19.7
BSC/Degree 187 80.3
 Total 233 100
 Program    
 Day 113 48.5
 Extension 120 51.5
 Year of students
 First Year 14 6
Second year 176 75.5
 Third year 43 18.5
 Total 233 100

Table 1: Socio-demographic Characteristics of Student Respondents in Menelik II Health Science College, January 12-16, 2016 (n=233).

Variables  Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Very satisfied Mean
Instructors Knowledge and skills of the subject they teach 17 (7.3) 72 (30.9) 1 (0.4) 110 (47.2) 33 (14.2) 2.6
Instructors skills in demonstration class  34 (14.6)  74 (31.8) 1 (0.4) 94 (40.3) 30 (12.9) 2.5
Instructors supportive supervision in clinical attachment 37 (15.9) 80 (34.3) 0 (0) 85 (36.5) 31 (13.3) 2.5
Instructors methods of delivering courses  (23 (9.9) 60 (25.8) 0 (0) 121 (51.9) 29 (12.4) 2.7
 Accuracy, correctness and fairness of course instructors 22 (9.4) 63 (27.0) 0 (0) 120 (51.5) 28 (12.0) 2.6
Instructors method assessment and fairness in correcting exams 35 (15.0) 64 (27.5) 0 (0) 101 (43.3) 33 (14.2) 2.5
Instructors personal and professional manner of communication 15 (6.4) 50 (21.5) 0 (0) 118 (50.6) 50 (21.5) 2.9
The instructor professional behavior (friendliness, politeness with their students 15 (6.4) 50 (21.5)  0 (0) 118 (50.6) 50 (21.5) 2.8
Instructors punctuality for the schedule 30 (12.9) 77 (33) 1 (0.4) 93 (39.9) 32 (13.7) 2.5
The speed and timeliness of the department to respond promptly to your request 71 (30.5) 69 (29.9) 0 (0) 67 (28.8) 26 (11.2) 2.2
The reliability of department to keep agreement made together with students 56 (24) 75 (32.2) 1 (0.4) 80 (34.3) 21 (9.0) 2.3
The clarity, completeness and accuracy of both verbal and written information communicate 32 (13.7) 80 (34.3) 2 (0.9) 97 (41.6) 22 (9.4) 2.5
Accessibility of the college Management bodies (deans, program coordinator 58 (24.9) 76 (32.6) 3 (1.3) 74 (31.8) 22 (9.4) 2.3
 Identify problems in teaching learning process and corrective measures took by college management 49 (21) 87 (37.3) 3 (1.3) 76 (32.6) 18 (7.7) 2.3
The degree of students participation in college decision making process 54 (23.2) 91 (39.1) 4 (1.7) 72 (30.9) 12 (5.2) 2.2
The fulfillment of equipment and quality of it in the demonstration room 26 (11.2) 81 (34.8) 0 (0) 76 (32.6) 26 (11.2) 2.3
Technical assistant knowledge and skill and their effort to help students 37 (15.9) 69 (29.6) 1 (0.4) 87 (37.3) 39 (16.7) 2.5
 fulfillment of expectation in the college 33 (14.2) 67 (28.8) 0 (0) 98 (42.1) 35 (15.0) 2.5
The physical comfort of demonstration room 54 (23.2) 85 (36.5) 0 (0) 67 (28.8) 27 (11.6) 2.2

Table 2: Level of satisfaction of students with different components of teaching and learning process, 2016 (n=233).

Questions Very dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral satisfied  very satisfied Mean
The accessibility of service facilities and being free from disturbance of noise 54 (23.2) 63 (27.0) 3 (1.3) 88 (37.8) 25 (10.7) 2.4
Neatness (Cleanness) of the library 28 (12.0) 56 (24.0) 3 (1.3) 116 (49.8) 30 (12.9) 2.7
Library books in kind and number and their relevancy to the education given in the college 24 (10.3) 70 (30.0) 5 (2.2) 111 (47.6) 23 (9.9) 2.6
Degree of knowledge exhibited by the library staff to offer books on time to students 19 (8.2) 54 (23.2) 5 (2.2) 129 (55.4) 26 (11.2) 2.7
Readiness of library staff to help students 17 (7.1) 67 (28.8) 5 (2.2) 111 (47.7) 33 (14.2) 3
The arrangement of book and catalogue service easiness to find books in the library 17 (7.3) 67 (28.8) 7 (2.9) 109 (46.8) 33 (14.2) 2.7
The staffs’ professional behavior (friendliness, politeness, 22 (9.4) 55 (23.6) 5 (2.2) 122 (52.4) 29 (12.4) 2.7
Fairness and trust with which you are treated 29 (12.4) 63 (27.0) 3 (1.3) 110 (47.2) 28 (12.1) 2.6
 The personal safety and comfort you feel in the library office 29 (12.4) 63 (27.0) 3 (1.3) 110 (47.2) 28 (12.1) 2.6
 Degree of library service quality 33 (14.2) 78 (33.5) 3 (1.3) 94 (40.3) 25 (10.7) 2.5
 Library service for students in terms time days/hours 21 (9.0) 38 (16.3) 3 (1.3) 131 (56.2) 40 (17.2) 3
Library service technology utilization 43 (18.5) 77 (33.0) 3 (1.3) 87 (37.3) 23 (9.9) 2.4
Presence computer of service in the library 42 (18.0) 73 (31.3) 3 (1.3) 88 (37.8) 27 (11.6) 2.5

Table 3: Level of satisfaction of students with Library service in the college, 2016 (n=233).

Questions Very dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral satisfied very satisfied  Mean
The accessibility of the service 28 (12.0) 75 (32.2) 0 (0) 104 (44.6) 26 (11.2) 2.5
Clarity, completeness and accuracy of information 26 (11.2) 78 (33.5) 2 (0.8) 106 (45.5) 21 (9.0) 2.5
 Quality of documentation 32 (13.7) 97 (41.6) 4 (1.8) 82 (35.2) 18 (7.7) 2.4
 Students result announcement and posting 80 (34.3) 73 (31.2) 2 (0.8) 64 (27.5) 14 (6.0) 2
The speed and timeliness of the registrar services 81 (34.8) 76 (32.6) 2 (0.8) 57 (24.5) 17 (7.3) 2
The speed and timelines of the service 54 (23.2) 90 (38.6) 2 (0.8) 68 (29.2) 19 (8.2) 2.2
The commitment of the staff to correct mistakes based on customers suggestion 42 (18.0) 82 (35.2) 2 (0.8) 86 (6.9) 21 (9.0) 2.3
Degrees of service knowledge and skills exhibited by the staff 33 (14.2) 69 (29.6) 1 (0.4) 108 (46.4) 22 (9.4) 2.5
The staffs’ professional behavior (friendliness, politeness) response 28 (12.0) 70 (30.0) 2 (0.8) 109 (46.8) 24 (10.3) 2.5
 Competency of providing quality registrar service 28 (12.0) 88 (37.8) 2 (0.8) 96 (41.2) 19 (8.2) 2.5
The physical comfort to the service environment and facilities in the office 32 (13.7) 74 (31.8) 4 (1.7) 99 (42.5) 24 (10.3) 2.5
 Transparency of registrar service activities 26 (11.2) 83 (35.6) 3 (1.3) 100 (42.9) 21 (9.0) 2.5
Academic calendar preparation and utilization 36 (15.5) 84 (36.1) 3 (1.3) 91 (39.1) 19 (8.2) 2.4
Speed and timeliness of semester based registration 51 (21.9) 68 (29.2) 3 (1.3) 86 (36.9) 25 (10.7) 2.4

Table 4: Level of satisfaction of students with registrar service in the college (n=233), 2016.

Variables Very dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral satisfied very satisfied Mean
 Quality of teaching and learning materials procurement 49 (21.0) 101 (43.3) 5 (2.2) 65 (27.9) 13 (5.6) 2.4
The fulfillment of equipment and being comfortable in the teaching learning process 38 (16.3) 90 (38.6) 2 (0.9) 81 (34.8) 22 (9.4) 2.2
 (LCD, Chair)
Cleanness of the facilities or the service environment comfort for customers 30 (12.9) 73 (31.3) 2 (0.9) 99 (42.5) 29 (12.4) 2.6
 The speed and time lines of maintenance service 32 (13.7) 86 (36.9) 4 (1.7) 90 (38.6) 21 (9.1) 2.5
Regarding access for support letter to get medical service 47 (20.2) 70 (30.0) 6 (2.6) 87 (37.3) 23 (9.9) 2.4

Table 5: Level of satisfaction of students with, Procurement, Finance, General Service (n=233), 2016.

Respondents characteristics No Percent
Sex    
Male 13 65
Female 7 35
Total 20 100
Age    
20-24 2 10.5
25-29 3 15.8
30-34 11 57.6
35-39 2 10.5
45-49 2 10.5
50-54 0 0
Total 20 100
Department    
Midwifery 9 45
HIT 1  
Medical Lab 3 15
Mental health 1 5
Nursing 6 30
Total 20 100
Year of service    
6 months 1 5
1 year 4 20
1 and half year 1 5
2 years 2 10
3 years 2 10
5 years 5 25
8 years 2 10
9 years 1 5
10 years 1 5
20 years 1 5
Total 20 100
Educational status    
Diploma 4 20
BSC 5 25
MSC 11 55
Total 20 100

Table 6: Socio-demographic Characteristics of Teachers Respondents, Menelik II Health Science College, 2016 (n=20).

Questions Very dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral satisfied  very satisfied Mean
Accessibility of top management 0 (0) 1 (5) 0 (0) 13 (65) 6 (30) 3.2
Leadership skills of the management 0 (0) 5 (25) 0 (0) 14 (70) 1 (5) 2.8
The degree of promoting college strong teachers in their work by college’s management 6 (30) 9 (45) 2 (10) 3 (15) 0 (0) 2.2
The clarity, completeness, and accuracy of both verbal and written information communicated 2 (10) 5 (25) 2 (10) 7 (35) 2 (20) 2.9
The reliability of the College’s management to keep to agreements made 1 (5) 6 (30) 2 (10) 9 (45) 2 (10) 2.9
Fairness and trust of the offices in staff treatment 1 (5) 7 (35) 1 (5) 8 (40) 3 (15) 2.8
Management of continuous supportive supervision 3 (15) 5 (25) 2 (10) 8 (40) 2 (10) 2.8
Professional behavior (Friendliness, helpfulness and concern) of the management 1 (5) 5 (25) 1 (5) 10 (50) 3 (15) 2.9
The speed and timeliness of the top level management to respond promptly to your request 2 (10) 6 (30) 2 (10) 9 (45) 1 (5) 2.8
 The degree of teachers participation in college decision making process 2 (10) 10 (50) 0 (0) 7 (35) 1 (5) 2.4
 Identify teachers gap and measures took to make them competent 2 (10) 9 (45) 1 (5) 8 (40) 0 (0) 2.5
Fairness and intelligibility of instructor placement for professional training outside the college 3 (15) 8 (40) 1 (5) 7 (35) 1 (5) 2.5
 Lesson learned from college disciplinary measures 3 (15) 2 (10) 3 (15) 11 (55) 1 (5) 2.9

Table 7: Level of satisfaction of Teachers with College top management, Menelik II Health Science College, 2016 (n=20).

Variables Very dissatisfied Dissatisfied  Neutral satisfied Very satisfied  Mean
Neatness (Cleanness) of the library 3 (15) 7 (35) 0 (0) 10 (50) 0 (0) 2.4
Library books in kind and number and their relevancy to the education given in the college 2 (10) 6 (30) 0 (0) 11 (55) 1 (5) 2.6
Degree of service knowledge exhibited by the library staff 1 (5) 4 (20) 1 (5) 12 (60) 2 (10) 2.9
Readiness of library staff to help teachers and students 0 (0) 4 (20) 1 (5) 12 (60) 3 (15) 3
The arrangement of book and catalogue service easiness to find books in the library 1 (5) 2 (10) 1 (5) 13 (65) 3 (15) 3
The staffs’ professional behavior (friendliness, politeness, 2 (10) 2 (10) 0 (0) 11 (55) 5 (25) 2.9
Fairness and trust with which you are treated 1 (5) 4 (20) 2 (10) 7 (35) 6 (30) 3.2
 The degree of safety of the library 0 (0) 6 (30) 0 (0) 13 (65) 1 (5) 2.7
 Safety of the library service 3 (15) 7 (35) 0 (0) 10 (50) 0 (0) 2.3
 Library service quality 3 (15) 4 (20) 3 (15) 10 (50) 0 (0) 2.8
Library service for students in terms sufficient time 4 (20) 9 (45) 2 (10) 5 (25) 0 (0) 2.8
 Internet service in the library 8 (40) 5 (25) 1 (5) 6 (30) 0 (0) 2.3

Table 8: Level of satisfaction of Teachers with different components of College Library service, Menelik II Health Science College, 2016 (n=20).

Variable Very dissatisfied Dissatisfied  Neutral satisfied very satisfied Mean
Teaching learning materials speed and timeliness of procurement 5 (25) 9 (45) 0 (0) 6 (30) 0 (0) 2
Quality of teaching and learning materials 3 (15) 7 (35) 0 (0) 9 (45) 1 (5) 2.4
The fulfillment of equipment and being comfortable in the teaching learning process 3 (15) 9 (45) 0 (0) 8 (40) 0 (0) 2.2
The physical cleanness of teaching class room and surroundings its 3 (15) 3 (15) 0 (0) 12 (60) 2 (10) 2.7
The physical comfort of class rooms 2 (10) 6 (30) 0 (0) 12 (60) 0 (0) 2.5
 Human resource administration office- keeping benefits/promotion of employees 5 (25) 6 (30) 0 (0) 8 (40) 1 (5) 2.3
Speed and timeliness of human resource office service 1 (5) 3 (15) 2 (10) 13 (65) 1 (5) 3
Speed and timeliness of finance office service 0 (0) 3 (15) 2 (10) 13 (65) 2 (10) 3.2
Speed and timeliness of procurement service 2 (10) 2 (10) 2 (10) 11 (55) 3 (15) 3
Speed and timeliness of the maintenance service such as electric, water 2 (10) 5 (25) 2 (10) 9 (45) 2 (10) 4.3
Speed and timeliness of cleaning service 2 (10) 2 (10) 0 (0) 14 (70) 2 (10) 2.8
Regarding college’s vehicle service 1 (5%) 7 (35%) 0 (0) 12 (60%) 0 (0) 2.6

Table 9: Level of satisfaction of Teachers with different components of Menelik II Health science College management, 2016 (n=20).

Variable Very dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral satisfied very satisfied Mean
Accessibility of top management 4 (13.8) 4 (13.8) 3 (10.3) 11 (37.9) 7 (24.1) 3
Leadership skills of the management 0 (0) 5 (17.2) 1 (3.4) 19 (65.5) 4 (13.8) 3
The degree of promoting college strong employees in their work by college’s management 7 (24.1) 11 (37.9) 1 (3.4) 9 (31.0) 1 (3.4) 2.2
The clarity, completeness, and accuracy of both verbal and written information communicated 2 (6.9) 14 (48.3) 2 (6.9) 8 (27.6) 3 (10.3) 2.6
The reliability of the College’s management to keep to agreements made 3 (10.3) 6 (20.7) 2 (6.9) 12 (41.4) 6 (20.7) 2.9
Fairness and trust of the offices in staff treatment 2 (6.9) 7 (24.1) 2 (6.9) 13 (44.8) 5 (17.2) 2.9
 Regarding management continuous supportive supervision 3 (10.3) 10 (34.5) 1 (3.4) 10 (34.5) 5 (17.2) 2.6
Inter communication between management and administrative staff 4 (13.8) 9 (31.0) 0 (0) 6 (20.7) 10 (34.5) 3.1
The speed and timeliness of the top level management to respond promptly to your request 6 (20.7) 6 (20.7) 3 (10.3) 10 (34.5) 4 (13.8) 2.7
 The degree of administrative staff participation in college decision making process 8 (27.6) 9 (31.0) 0 (0) 8 (27.6) 4 (13.8) 2.3

Table 10: Level of satisfaction of Administrative staff with different components of College top management, Menelik II Health Science College, 2016 (n=29).

Questions Very dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral satisfied very satisfied Mean
 The speed and timeliness of procurement of materials 10 (34.5) 11 (37.9) 0 (0) 7 (24.1) 1 (3.4) 1.9
 Quality of procured materials 5 (17.2) 13 (44.8) 0 (0) 8 (27.6) 3 (10.3) 2.3
The fulfillment of equipment and being comfortable in the process of work 13 (44.8) 12 (41.4) 1 (3.4) 3 (10.3) 0 (0) 1.7
The Physical Cleanness of working place and its surrounding 3 (10.3) 10 (34.5) 1 (3.4) 12 (41.4) 3 (10.3) 2.6
The physical comfort of office 8 (27.6) 12 (41.4) 1 (3.4) 7 (24.1) 1 (3.4) 2.1
Speed and timeliness of the maintenance service such as electric, water 9 (31.0) 6 (20.7) 3 (10.3) 8 (27.6) 3 (10.3) 2.4
 Human resource administration office- keeping benefits/promotion of employees 7 (24.1) 8 (27.6) 0 (0) 8 (27.6) 6 (20.7) 2.4
Regarding fairness, speed and timeliness and transparency of human resource office 7 (24.1) 8 (27.6) 0 (0) 8 (27.6) 6 (20.7) 2.4
Speed and timeliness of finance office service 4 (13.8) 8 (27.6) 0 (0) 12 (41.4) 5 (17.2) 2.6
Speed and timeliness of procurement service 3 (10.3) 5 (17.2) 1 (3.4) 17 (58.6) 3 (10.3) 2.7

Table 11: Level of satisfaction of Administrative staff with procurement, Finance, General Service and Human Resources Administration, Menelik II Health Science College, 2016 (n=29).

Discussion

Students have different degree of satisfaction in different components of the colleges’ services, this opinion is similar to the study conducted in Norway at oslow university Higher education places a big emphasis on meeting student expectation, but since all people are different, it is impossible to meet each person’s expectations. So it is natural that some students would be unsatisfied with one or more aspects of their educational experience.

All the respondents had some aspects that they would like to improve and some aspects with which they were completely satisfied. Also, all the students have their own interest and goals in their studies. That is why it is obvious that the respondents paid attention to the aspects they were interested in and wrote their suggestions on improvements. Some students actively use the library and pay more attention to what it has to offer. Some students use the internet resources more, making the library collection less important to them [33].

The overall satisfaction of students on teaching and learning process, Library service, Registrar, Procurement, Finance, and General Service of the College articulated in grand mean range from 42.1 to 55.8% of student services to teaching learning process, indicates many customers have had dissatisfaction on teaching learning process, Library, registrar and students services. This result is similar to the qualitative study that shows teachers are dependent on LCD, the problem with this method are teachers cannot effectively utilize the time allocated for the session, in addition they cannot further elaborate, simply they read the information stated on the power. Some of teachers are not good in teaching and even who are not able to answer, when students ask them things which are not clear.

The demonstration room is narrow and the equipment is insufficient and old. Students from specialty trainings informed shortage of books in their fields, librarians do not know all types of available books and when students asked them a book they may take 20 to 30 minutes to search the name and the location of the books, there is no service at night time after 6:00 or 6:30 PM o’clock, students cannot use their laptops because of lack of sockets, students have library pocket card but they are not able to borrow books. Registrar staff don’t respond timely their questions, even grades may be changed by the registrar, and unable to see their result when wrong result is posted and also there are no programmed schedules of the registrar as students compared the college with other universities.

Moreover, there is no coordination among program coordinators and deans of the colleges and also the quality of teaching and learning materials procurement also had poor quality. All the above problems made students not satisfied on teaching and learning process

The satisfaction of teachers on top management activities was a mean of 2.7 (45%) that indicate 55% of teachers were dissatisfied with similar study conducted by Gedefaw Kassie in high school teacher’s satisfaction in Addis Ababa indicates mean of 2.10 also confirms the teachers’ negative views regarding the support provided by their school [33]. When we come to registrar and library service the result of the study indicates teachers were better satisfied where as the result shows many students of the college were dissatisfied on registrar and library services.

The satisfaction of administrative staff on top management activities was a mean of 2.8 (44.8%) satisfied whereas majority of administrative staff 55.2% were dissatisfied and this result triangulated by qualitative study with administrative staff showed administrative staffs were dissatisfied about college’s cafeteria service, transportation problem, unfair payment of extension program among staffs, and inconvenient and insufficient office and its equipment and, lack of training made them dissatisfied.

Conclusion and Recommendation

The overall level of students, teachers and administrative staff satisfaction was moderate. The college should consider mechanisms to improve the satisfaction of its customers. In addition the college management and teachers and administrative staff make every effort to give solution to the problem of students at the grass root level and also the college management has to improve the satisfaction of teachers and administrative staff. The college should Strengthening Teaching and Learning process through: Provide regular meeting with students, Teachers and administrative staff, Implement Continuous supportive supervision, Procure adequate and quality teaching learning materials as much as possible, equipped library and demonstration room, Measure customer’s satisfaction periodically and Provide prompt response for student’s questions.

Conflict of Interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare for this study.

Acknowledgements

First of all we would like to thank Menelik II Health Science College for giving us this chance to do this research. Our great gratitude goes to Mr. Kuma Getahun (Dean of the college), Mr Ergataw Kidane (Academic and research deputy dean), and Mr. Menilik Legesse (Research and publication coordinator) for their continuous encouragement for research works and those Research and Technical review committee and college academic staffs who provide their valuable comment on the proposal.

References

Citation: Teshome GS, Woldeyohans FW, Haile ES, Alene EK (2018) Assessment of Customer Satisfaction in Menelik II Health Science College, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2018. J Health Educ Res Dev 6: 252. DOI: 10.4172/2380-5439.1000252

Copyright: © 2018 Teshome GS, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Select your language of interest to view the total content in your interested language

Post Your Comment Citation
Share This Article
Recommended Conferences
Article Usage
  • Total views: 2852
  • [From(publication date): 0-2018 - Dec 05, 2019]
  • Breakdown by view type
  • HTML page views: 2741
  • PDF downloads: 111
Top