Assessment of Customer Service Delivery on

Customer Satisfaction: A Case Study in Ethiopian

Electric Utility (EEU) Company Western Region,
Customer Service Centers

A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of

Jimma University in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Award of the Degree of Master of
Business Administration (MBA)

BY:

HAMID ABABOR

JIMMA UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS

MBA PROGRAM

OCTOBER 13, 2015

JIMMA, ETHIOPIA
 Assessment of Customer Service Delivery on
Customer Satisfaction: A Case Study in Ethiopian
Electric Utility (EEU) Company Western Region,
Customer Service Centres
BY:

HAMID ABABOR

Under the Guidance of

Mr. Ashenafi Haile (PhD Candidate)

And

Mr. Mohammed Yasin (MBA)

A Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of

Jimma University in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Award of the Degree of Master of
Business Administration (MBA)

JIMMA UNIVERSITY

MBA PROGRAM
OCTOBER 13, 2015

JIMMA, ETHIOPIA
 JIMMA UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS & ECONOMICS

MBA PROGRAM

Board of Examination Thesis

Approval Sheet

Members of the Board of Examiners

External Examiners Signature Date

_______________ _____________ ________________

Internal Examiners Signature Date

________________ _____________ ________________

Advisor Signature Date

________________ _____________ ________________

Co-advisor Signature Date

_________________ _____________ ________________

Chairperson Signature Date

_________________ _______________ ________________

OCTOBER, 2015

JIMMA
 DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this thesis entitled “Assessment of Customer

Service Delivery on Customer Satisfaction: A Case Study in
Ethiopian Electric Utility (EEU) Company Western Region,
Customer Service Centres”, has been carried out by me under the
guidance and supervision of Mr. Ashenafi Haile (PhD Candidate) and
Mr. Mohammed Yasin (MBA).

The thesis is original and has not been submitted for the award of any
degree or diploma to any university or institutions.

Researcher’s Name Signature Date

___________________ ______________ _____________

 CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the thesis entitled “The Role of
Transformational Restructuring on Customer Satisfaction: A Case
Study in Ethiopian Electric Utility (EEU) Company Western Region,
Customer Service Centres”, submitted to Jimma University for the
award of the Degree of Master of Business Administration (MBA)
and is a record of bonafide research work carried out by Mr. Hamid
A/Bor A/Qoyas, under our guidance and supervision.

Therefore, we hereby declare that no part of this thesis has been

submitted to any other university or institutions for the award of any
degree or diploma.

Main Adviser’s Name Date Signature

____________________ ____________ _____________

Co-Advisor’s Name Date Signature

______________________ ____________ ______________

 Abstract
Studies show that outstanding customer service organizations focus on a clear
goal—satisfying the customer—and design everything else with that aim in
mind. The complaints on lack of the services and the quality of services from
the customers were indicative of poor service delivery performance in the
EEU Company. Therefore, the main objective of this study was assessment of
customer service delivery on customers’ satisfaction. It also addresses the
major problem areas of service delivery and service quality in terms of
stretched objective achievement through the survey done in EEU Company,
western region retail business; customer service centres’ (CSC).The sampling
technique adopted in this study was multi stage random sampling. And by using
stratified sampling technique the population was stratified in to three tariff
categories such as Domestic, Commercial, and Industrial. Finally, the total
samples of 376 customers were selected from the stratum by Convenience
sampling technique. Primary data from customers by the use of a
questionnaire and interviews for officials of the company, secondary data from
different sources, were used as the sources and methods of the collected data.
The collected data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistical
tools by using SPSS version 16.0. The result from testing of the hypothesized
relationships between the variables, using multiple linear regression analysis
reveals that customers satisfaction(dependent variables) and the five
independent variables of SERVQUAL dimensions is positively related, which is
also significant at p<0.001. And, about 56% of total variability in customers’
satisfaction is explained by these predictors jointly. Further investigations
results in; the effective predictors in the model were tangibles and
responsiveness thus should jointly explained 51% of total variability in
customers’ satisfaction. Majority of the customers were satisfied with the
overall service deliveries of the company.

Key words: Customers Service Delivery, Customers Service Quality

(SERVQUAL), Customer Satisfaction.

I
 Acknowledgements
To begin with, I would like to thank Allah, the Almighty for making me alive and
finish this thesis. Then my deepest and heartfelt gratitude goes to my advisors Mr.
Ashenafi Haile (PhD Candidate) and Mr. Mohammed Yasin (MBA) for their patient
guidance, fruitful discussions, encouragement, critical review of this thesis, and
exposing me to an exciting experience especially in a new paradigm of looking for
knowledge.

Last but not the least, I really would like to acknowledge my wife Mrs. Yasmin
Mohammed as my backbone, and for being there whenever I needed her support
and my incredible girls Hania and Huda Hamid for their patience with everything
going on.

Finally, I would like to acknowledge and appreciate all of my family members,

friends, and my colleagues of EEU for their kindhearted efforts to my success.

II
 Table of Contents

Contents
Abstract ............................................................................................................................................ I
Acknowledgements.........................................................................................................................II
Table of Contents.......................................................................................................................... III
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. V
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... VI
ACRONYMS...............................................................................................................................VII
CHAPTER ONE ............................................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1
1.1Background of the Study ........................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Organizational Background ...................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Statement of the Problem.......................................................................................................... 4
1.4 General and Specific Objectives of the Study .......................................................................... 6
1.5 Significance of the Study .......................................................................................................... 6
1.6 Scope of the Study .................................................................................................................... 7
1.7 Limitations of the Study............................................................................................................ 7
1.8 Organization of the Study ......................................................................................................... 8
CHAPTER TWO ............................................................................................................................ 9
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ...................................................................................... 9
2.1Theoretical Framework.............................................................................................................. 9
2.1.1 Customer Service and Service Quality .................................................................................. 9
2.1.2 Customer Experience ........................................................................................................... 11
2.1.3 Customer Satisfaction .......................................................................................................... 11
2.1.4 Rationale for Organizational Change Assessment............................................................... 13
2.1.5 Change Effect on Organizations .......................................................................................... 14
2.1.6.1 Definitions of Customer Satisfaction................................................................................ 15
2.1.7 Customer Satisfaction Index ................................................................................................ 19
2.1.8 Backgrounds of customer satisfaction ................................................................................. 19
2.1.9 Consequences of consumer satisfaction............................................................................... 21
2.1.10 Introducing Customer Choice and Competition ................................................................ 21
2.1.11Applying customer satisfaction research to the public ....................................................... 22
2.2 Empirical Reviews .................................................................................................................. 23
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................. 27

III
3.1 Research Design...................................................................................................................... 27
3.2 Study Area and Target Population.......................................................................................... 27
3.3 Source and Type of Data......................................................................................................... 27
3.4 Sampling Techniques and Sample Size Determination .......................................................... 27
3.5 Data Analysis and Presentation Techniques ........................................................................... 28
CHAPTER FOUR ......................................................................................................................... 30
DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION ......................................... 30
4.1Introduction.............................................................................................................................. 30
4. Test of Reliability and Normality of Residuals – normal p-p plot ........................................... 30
4.2 Descriptive Analysis ............................................................................................................... 32
4.3.1 Pearson Correlations Analysis ............................................................................................. 54
4.3.2 Multiple Liner Regression Analysis .................................................................................... 55
CHAPTER FIVE ........................................................................................................................... 63
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, & RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................... 63
5.1 Summary of Major Findings ................................................................................................... 63
5.2 Conclusions............................................................................................................................. 66
5.3 Recommendations................................................................................................................... 67
5.4 Future Research Direction ...................................................................................................... 68
Appendix A...................................................................................................................................... I
Appendix C ................................................................................................................................ VIII
Appendix D................................................................................................................................ XIII
Appendix E ................................................................................................................................ XIV

IV
 List of Tables

Table 4.2.1 Distributions of Biographic Data ............................................................................... 31

Table 4.2.2 Electric Energy Bill Payment .................................................................................... 32

Table 4.2.3 Customer response to Technical Work Problems...................................................... 35

Table 4.2.4 Customer response towards Meter Reading .............................................................. 37

Table 4.5 Overall customers’ satisfaction towards service delivery of CSC................................ 38

Table 4.5.1 Customers’ Responses on Tangibility Dimension of Service Quality ...................... 42

Table 4.5.2 Customers’ Responses on Reliability Dimension of Service Quality ....................... 44

Table 4.5.3 Customers’ Responses on Responsiveness Dimension of Service Quality............... 46

Table 4.5.4 Customers’ Responses on Assurance Dimension of Service Quality........................ 50

Table 4.5.5 Customers’ Responses on Empathy Dimension of Service Quality......................... 52

Table 4.3.1 Pearson Correlation between Variables .................................................................... 53

Table 4.3.2 Summary of Model 1 with 5 predictions variables.................................................... 55

Table 4.3.3 Significance test of the Model 1 using ANOVA ....................................................... 56

Table 4.3.4 Standardized Coefficients, Significance, and VIF of Model 1 .................................. 57

Table 4.3.5 Multi Collinearity of Model 1 ................................................................................... 59

Table 4.3.6 Correlations of Model 2 ............................................................................................ 60

Table4.3.7 Summary of Model 2 with 2 prediction variables ..................................................... 61

Table 4.3.8 Significance test of model 2 using ANOVA ............................................................. 61

Table 4.3.9 Standardized Coefficients, Significance, and VIF of Model 2 .................................. 62

V
 List of Figures

Figure1 Conceptual Framework .................................................................................................. 27

Figure 2 Normal P-P plot of Regression Standardized Residual .............................................. XIII

VI
 ACRONYMS
APQC - American Productivity & Quality Center

CSC - Customer Service Center

CSI - Customer Satisfaction Index

EEU – Ethiopian Electric Utility

EELPA – Ethiopian Electric Light and Power Authority

EEPCO – Ethiopian Electric Power Corporation

PCF - process classification framework

SERVQUAL – Service Quality

SPSS - Statistical Package for Social Science

VII
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1Background of the Study

Now a days, a primary concern of business organizations: private or public is building

companies that excel at gaining and keeping customers. Studies show that outstanding
customer service organizations focus on a clear goal—satisfying the customer—and
design everything else with that aim in mind. From the top-down, these organizations
act to provide positive customer experiences. The focus on complete customer
satisfaction demands the organization to continuously change in its business process so
as to achieve its fundamental objective of existence. Hammer & Champy (1993).

According to Ivancevich and Matteson (1990) changes and fluctuation in an

organization are caused by two major forces; external and internal. Some of the external
forces include change in market, customer demand and services given, change in
technology, new machines, and new processes have revolutionized the way in which
many products or services are manufactured and distributed, and new regulations etc.
Concerning the internal factors, the changes in an organization may be due to factors
that relate to process and behavioural problems. The process problem includes
inadequacy in decision making and communication. Low levels of employee’s morale
and high level of absenteeism and turn over are symptoms of behavioural problems that
might necessitate change. If the above two broadly explained causes why organizations
undertake changes, how is it implemented?

The nature, scope and intensity of changes in an organization vary considerably. In this
regard, Nadler & Tusham cited in Yasmin (2010) have tried to identify two kinds of
changes; incremental and strategic changes.

a. Incremental changes are changes that only affect selected organizational

structures, introducing a new production, technology, or developing
employees to reduce interdepartmental conflict.

1
 b. Strategic changes impact the entire organization and fundamentally
redefine what the organization is or change its basic frame work,
including strategy, structure, people, processes and in some cases core
values. Accordingly organizational restructuring is one of the current
strategies which are used by many organizations in order to cope up
with the changing environment.

The question of whether an organization achieves the desired objective that necessitated
organizational Change requires the evaluation of results that are achieved in the light of
objectives. Studies have shown that between 50% and 85% of organizational change
efforts fail (Beer and Nohria, 2000). Similarly Paterson, Green and Cary (2002) argue
that the rapid pace and massive scope of organizational change in recent years have
increasingly taken a psychological toll, not least on those employees who emerge as
survivors of the turmoil of change, irrespective of whether it is caused by mergers,
acquisitions, corporate rationalizations, delayering, Total Quality Management,
Business Process Reengineering or downsizing. So how could the effects of
organizational change be measured?

As stated in the introductory paragraph one of the driving forces for recent
organizational change is the achievement of customer satisfaction. The concept of
customer satisfaction has been widely debated as organizations increasingly attempt to
measure it. 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 (the “moment of truth” as it is called
in business literature) 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.

Accordingly, Ethiopian Electric Utility Company (EEU) at its former name Ethiopian
Electric Power Corporation (EEPCO) is one of the organizations which went through
organizational restructuring in order to achieve its main objective of achieving
international standards of customer care through sustained capacity building,
operational and financial excellence, and state-of-the-art technologies.

2
Two years have been passed since it undergone this major change. But, the questions of
whether the change achieves intended objectives or not have not yet been investigated.

1.2 Organizational Background

Initially the EEU was established as the Ethiopian Electric Light and Power Authority
/EELPA/on 11th September 1955 Ec. After having 1st round restructuring, it has been
reorganized as the Ethiopian Electric Power Corporation on 7thJuly, 1997. EEPCO was
responsible for generating, transmitting, distributing and selling of electricity
nationwide. (50th Golden jubilee)
On December 9, 2013 EEPCO had divided in to two distinct companies namely
Ethiopian Electric Utility (EEU) which shall value innovative, timely, efficient,
solution-oriented, and cost effective services and systems, aiming to achieve the highest
levels of customer satisfaction. And the other is the Ethiopian Electric Power (EEP)
Company which is used for generation of electricity and transmission of generated
power up to substation.
The Ethiopian Electric Utility is a public utility company which is undergoing a
transformation of its business processes through the management contract. At the initial
stage of this organizational transformation program, the former Ethiopian electric power
corporation business processes were comprehensively defined without redundancies by
using the American Productivity & Quality Center (APQC) process classification
framework (PCF). After the restructuring of the company and placement; on the job
training and general awareness creation programs for those posted employees has been
started in right earnest. In addition to all of those efforts, the main target of this
transformation process is about establishing, implementing and sustaining a world class
utility management system which is transparent, seamless, accountable, and customer
focused service.
Currently EEU has 15 regional departments and under these, Western Region Retail
Business has 26 district customer service centers, which, is undergoing a transformation
of its business processes through the management contract.
Accordingly, Assessment of customers’ service delivery on customers’ satisfaction a
case of EEU Company, western region retail business customer service centres’ (CSC)
an overview of its business processes out comes in terms of goals achievement.

3
1.3 Statement of the Problem

Customer service and delivering quality service is the major issue determining the competitive
edge of organizations. The survival of any business organization depends on the
satisfaction of its stakeholders. Customers being the major and critical ones among
those stakeholders, they are the sources of profits for the primary a profit making
organizations and reason for being in operation for any non-profit making organizations.
Thus, customers are considered as the backbone of any organization. (Robert - Phelps,
2003). Lack of or failure to meet quality will lead an organization to lose all or some of its
customers. A great emphasis is needed for a service to retain all its qualities that
customers need(Oakland,2009).

Burke et al (2005) claim that there are two ways service organizations can improve upon
service quality. First, a good human resources management policy must be adopted to
ensure employees’ satisfaction. It is believed that the necessary support from
management, employees strive hard to provide high quality services to customers. Also,
the organization has to implement its organizational values, policies and procedures to
leverage the delivery of high quality to customers.

Quality in a service business has become a measure of the extent to which the service
provided meets the customer’s expectations Oakland (2009). Customers’ expectations
are not static, but keep changing. Therefore, organizations need to monitor customers’
expectations on a continuous basis and to be innovative in order to respond
meaningfully to changes about the customers’ expectation (Kotler, 1989:203).
Accordingly Customers’ satisfaction depends on the extent to which customer’s
expectations about the product or services are fulfilled and the perception about the
service being delivered.

Swan and Combs (1976) sought to identify some of the determinants of satisfaction or
dissatisfaction. Their hypothesis was that there are two types of determinants –
instrumental (the performance of the physical product) and expressive (the
psychological performance of the product) – and that both have to be achieved to satisfy
the consumer. They postulated that satisfaction will tend to be associated with
expressive outcomes above or equal to expectations and dissatisfaction will tend to be
related to performance below expectations for instrumental outcomes.

4
Another study was undertaken by Smith et al. (1992) using critical incident technique
(CIT) and cluster analysis. They suggested that the determinants of satisfaction and
dissatisfaction indeed may be different. They did not use the existing service quality
characteristics but found that satisfaction is usually generated by service going beyond
expectations and dissatisfaction resulted from failure, slowness, disinterest, and
rudeness of staff.

Similarly customer satisfaction has been studied by Cronin & Taylor, (1992) using a
single item scale in which customer’s overall feeling towards a service is asked to
measure satisfaction. While others l i k e Parasuraman et al., (1985, 1988) use a
multiple item scale satisfaction by using various dimensions.

In our country different studies at different organizations concerning customer

satisfaction have been conducted using multiple item scale satisfaction by considering
various dimensions. Specifically in EEU, even if these studies have been conducted by
different researchers, they failed to consider all of the different services such as bill
related, technical work, meter reading, and new connection that are given by EEU
organization which are important for maintaining customer satisfaction. For instance,
Seyoum (2012) focused only on prepaid meter customer service while Temam &
Mesfin (2013) focused only on industrial customer satisfactions. Furthermore there is
no any study which was conducted in western region to assess the customer satisfaction.

Accordingly, this study emphasizes on studying customers’ satisfaction by assessing the

determinants of service quality into typically conceptualize service quality in five
dimensions: tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy (Cronin and
Taylor, 1992; Parasuraman et al. 1988; Raajpoot, 2004) across all the services given by
the organization. It is hoped that the study will overcome some of the limitations of the
earlier studies by trying to answer the following research questions.
 Is there any standard of customers’ service quality that guides the
effective service delivery process of EEU Company?
 What are the perceptions of customers towards current service delivery
of the company looks like?
 Is there any relationship between service quality dimensions and customer
satisfaction?

5
  What are the dominant service quality dimensions that affect customer
satisfaction of the Company?
 What are the major problems faced in achieving customer satisfaction in
the selected study area?

1.4 General and Specific Objectives of the Study

General Objectives

Assessment of customers’ service delivery on customers’ satisfaction a case of EEU

Company, western region retail business customer service centres’ (CSC) is the major
research objective in this study.

Specific Research Objectives Include:-

 To assess the existence of customers’ service quality standard that guides

the effective service delivery process of EEU Company.
 To examine the perceptions of customers towards current service
delivery of the company.
 To determine the relationship between service quality dimensions and
customer satisfaction.
 To identify the dominant service quality dimensions that affect customer
satisfaction.
 To identify the major problems faced in achieving customer satisfaction
in the selected study area

1.5 Significance of the Study

The major significance of this study is its contribution to the overall body of knowledge
concerning public sector enterprises goal setting of customer satisfaction and the
manner they strive to achieve it with specific reference of delivery of quality service.
Specifically these studies had the following significances:-

6
  It will provide a recommendation regarding ways of improving customer
satisfaction for electric service provider and for other service rendering
organization.
 It will have a significant implication on the understanding on ways of
customers’ service delivery of quality service and its effect on customer
satisfaction for those interested for future studies in the area.
 The study should also develop the necessary skills to complete a research project
besides earning of MBA.

1.6 Scope of the Study

Even if the concept of customer service delivery are very wide concept and its
application vary from one organization to the other nationwide, this study was delimited
to assessment of customers service delivery on customers service implementation
outcomes in terms of stretched objectives (goals) achievement and customers
satisfaction in EEU, Western region customer service centres.

1.7 Limitations of the Study

Lack of well written document which states the standard of service delivery for the
specific activity on stretched objectives makes difficulty of securing the adequate
and relevant information at the required level from EEU western region CSC as the
target sources to analyze customer service delivery in more detail manner.
Besides, other limitations of the current thesis come from its limited sample size of
376 respondents, which prevented the researcher from examining the detail
differences between customers on different tariff categories. So that; the findings may
not be representative of the wider population, as customers service delivery.

7
1.8 Organization of the Study

The study consists of five chapters. The first chapter deals with introductory part which
consists of background of the study, background of the organization, statement of the
problem, objectives of the study, significance of the study, scope of the study. The
second chapter deals with review of related literature, empirical findings, and
conceptual model; the third chapter deals with research design and methodology. The
fourth chapter presents the analysis and interpretation of assessment of customers’
service delivery on customers’ satisfaction. Finally, summary of major findings,
conclusions, recommendation, and future research direction were forwarded.

8
 CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1Theoretical Framework

2.1.1 Customer Service and Service Quality

Service: is a process (Grönroos, 2007, Cited in Seyoum, 2012.) involving a series of
intangible activities which, most of the cases, take place in interactions between the
customer and service employees and/or physical resources or goods and/or systems
of the service provider which are provided as solutions to the customer’s problems.
It is also generally characterized by, as commonly understood in marketing, such as its
intangibility, variability (heterogeneity), inseparability and perishability. Service is
intangible in the sense that it couldn’t be touched, smelled, etc. using the senses of our
body except experiencing it in the process of value creation; inseparability refers to the
fact that it can’t be separated from the service provider, as opposed to product
offerings; variability on the other hand is to mean that it is highly
variable(heterogeneous) throughout its production and delivery process, under the
influence that both the customer and the service provider exert (Grönroos,1990) ;
and perishability denotes that it is specifically designed to satisfy the needs and wants of
a customer at a certain point in time after which it can no longer be stored or
reclaimed to be reused by the customer.
Service Quality: refers to (Patrick P. et. al 1996, pp. 62), the ‘‘difference between
customers’ expectations for service performance prior to the service encounter and their
perceptions of the service received. Service quality theory (Oliver, 1980) predicts that
clients will judge that quality is low if performance does not meet their expectations and
quality increases as performance exceeds expectations. Accordingly, customers’
expectations serve as the foundation on which service quality will be evaluated by
customer. In addition, as service quality increases, satisfaction with the service and
intentions to reuse the service increases.’’

9
 Generally, the different literatures define service quality in the
following ways:
 An outcome of evaluation process (Grönroos, 1984), and differences
(Asubonteng et al. 1996) in that customers make comparison (Parasuraman et.al,
1988) of their expectation with their perception of the service received;
 The overall impression of consumers towards the superiority or inferiority of an
organization and its services (Bitner, 1990).
Service quality can be both (Grönroos, 1982) technical quality- involves what the
customer is actually receiving from the service, and functional quality- involves the
manner in which the service is delivered. Marketing research studies resulted in a general
agreement that firms providing high service quality have a competitive advantage, and
often are more profitable (Bhat, 2005). Moreover, a high level of service quality enhances
customer satisfaction, decreases customer defection, and enhances customer loyalty (Jun
and Cai, 2001). Studies conducted in Western cultures typically conceptualize service
quality in five dimensions: tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy
(Cronin and Taylor, 1992; Parasuraman et al. 1988; Raajpoot, 2004). (R. Ladhari et al.
2011, 952-53)
Tangibles - refer to the appearances or access to personnel, equipment, suppliers, physical
facilities, etc.
Reliability- refers to the ability of the service provider to perform the promised
service accurately and dependably.
Responsiveness- means providing prompt service and displaying a willingness to
help customers.
Assurance- means employee knowledge and ability to inspire confidence and trust.
Empathy- refers to the level of individualized attention the firm gives to its customers. It
is vital to making a valid and reliable service quality measure as a corner stone of
marketing strategy. This may be done by using the most popular service quality measure
for different service industries called SERVQUAL (Patrick A.et al. 1996). SERVQUAL
helps to measure the quality of the service provided as perceived by the end-users, i.e. the
customers. Especially it would be important to measure customer perceptions of quality
before and after the quality action is taken (e.g. before and after the introduction of

10
organizational restructuring, in this case), by developing the service dimensions from the
customer’s perspective. This way the company will have an opportunity to see if the goal
of say improving customer service has been achieved as a result or not.

2.1.2 Customer Experience

One of the main routes to reach in the creation of long lasting competitive advantages is
through a stronger focus on the customer. Nowadays, the customer experience factor
plays an increasingly significant role in determining the success of any offering. In the
previous years, the growing attention on the customer resulted in an increased focus on
Customer Relationship Management (CRM). More recently, as the number of contact
points between a company and its customers increased, such attention revealed the
fundamental importance of monitoring the many experiences that originate from those
contact points. (Chiara G., 2007, pp. 395)
Marketers, therefore, underline the critical role service quality plays in the customer's
service experience. For instance, researchers demonstrate that better service quality
increases perceived service value and satisfaction; improves the service provider's
customer retention and financial performance; and also enhances a firm's corporate
image (Nguyen and Leblanc, 1998). In addition, researchers also investigated the drivers
of perceived service quality such as demographic factors (the effect of culture and
personal values). (R. Ladhari et al. 2011, 951–957)
Customer experience generally ‘‘originates from a set of interactions between a customer
and a product, a company, or part of its organization, which provoke a reaction. This
experience is strictly personal and implies the customer’s involvement at different levels
(rational, emotional, physical and spiritual). Its evaluation depends on the comparison
between a customer’s expectations and the stimuli coming from the interaction with the
company and its offering.’’
(P. Asubonteng,et. Al 2007, pp. 397. Cited in Seyoum, 2012)

2.1.3 Customer Satisfaction

Customer satisfaction is a compelling issue because in the service industry customer
retention is more important than attracting new customers. Retaining customers has a

11
stronger impact on company profit than does attracting new customers. Therefore,
companies, so as to maximize profits in the long term, should strive for zero defection
through customer satisfaction.
There is an increasing tendency to view satisfying customer as going beyond providing
just a technically superior product or service, i.e., defect reduction and continuous
improvement programs. Quality is also as such defined by the customer’s perception,
not by the service provider. However, it should also be born in mind that even if the first
person who is considered as a customer is the buyer (end user), there are several other
people who need to be considered as customer for the reason that their involvement in
the production and distribution of the service or product, or project (LR Ireland, 1992,
123-124) affects the quality of the service. Generally, customers may be of: (Cited in
Seyoum, 2012)
 Product/service end users- users expectations such as ease of use, safe
operation, reliable products, durable goods, and easily maintained products, etc.
which all together enhances better functional performance and or greater ease
of use compared to other competing products/services.
 Boss (senior management) - the project director expects the project manager to
effectively and efficiently undertake the work, including keeping informed every
stakeholder as to its progress and potentials that could affect its success and
relationship with customers, etc.
 Project team members- the team expects professional leadership of the project
manager, safe work environment, clear directions pertaining to work, training for
new works, and appropriate rewards for superior performance. Of course, the team
members also expect loyalty from the project manager to shield them from outside
interference with their work.
 Functional organization-involves an expectation of efficient use of assigned
resources (human, material, financial, information, etc.)

 Vendors/suppliers- Vendors and suppliers have a vested interest in providing parts,

components, and materials to the project meeting the quality requirements. .These
customers have expectations of proper specification practices by project personnel
and prompt payment upon delivery.

12
  Society- a special interest groups and is the guardian of such general areas as the
environment and public safety. The issues addressed by society include
environmental pollution of rivers and streams, maintenance of a natural habitat, etc.
How well a company addresses each and every requirement of these groups of
customers determines the new product/service’s success in the market. Therefore,
companies should consider customers as their important part of gaining improved
quality of customers’ satisfaction service.

2.1.4 Rationale for Organizational Change Assessment

The past few years have taught that during a period of high change there are five core
management processes: mobilizing, enabling, defining, measuring, and communicating.
Mobilizing is the process by which a company and its people are at least brought to the
point where they accept the changes that reengineering entails – and at best to where they
are ready and willing to make them happen. It’s not enough to get your people mobilized,
energized, ready and willing every day for a “new day’s”. You have got to give them the
wherewithal. That require enabling (empowering); redesigning work so that people can
exercise their skills and capabilities to the fullest extent possible- then steeping back and
letting it happen. Defining a company’s ambition is a process that has been on the
managerial agenda ever since there has been a profession of management.
Reengineering’s great contribution to the management process of measurement has been
to help keep the accountancy focused on what really matters for the business.
Communicating; About what? About the case for change, about the purpose around
which we are mobilizing, about the culture and behavior we want and don’t want, about
the standards and objectives of our performance, about how we are doing against those
standards and objectives, about why we are taking certain actions and how those actions
serve our purpose. Hammer and Champy, (1993).

Although the change management literature generally recognizes the need for change
initiatives, the potential for failure is great.
Practitioners are primarily focus on how to successfully implement change and create
more effective organizations. The other perspective is that of the scholars. They tend to
focus their efforts on discovering the predictive nature of organizational change and on

13
building a theory that better describes the phenomenon (Cady and Hardalupas, 1999).
There may be differences in perspectives, the fact remains but, that organizations are
living in a global economy that is always changing with the advancement of technology.
This necessitates the need for organizations to acquire and maintain the ability to adapt to
the ever-changing environment.
Change efforts may evoke undesirable responses such as denial and resistance, which
will lead to increased stress and decreased organizational commitment. Research suggests
that criteria for tracking the likelihood of employees enacting behaviors necessary in a
transformational situation (Armenakis & Bedeian, (1999). Cited in Mntungwa, (2007).

2.1.5 Change Effect on Organizations

The reality that organizations have to confront is the old ways of doing business i.e. the
division of labor around which companies have been organized no longer work, because
the pace of change has accelerated. With globalization of the economy, companies face
greater number of competitors, each one of which may introduce product and service
innovations to the market. The rapidity of technological change also promotes
innovation. Eventually product life cycles have gone from years to months (Hammer &
Champy, 1993).

EEU restructuring process decisions are made transparently so the company spends
enough time and energy in communicating the objectives of the restructuring to
customers and media and also has explained the broad view of the government in trying
to address the transformation of the electricity distribution services in order to keep
abreast with international trends whilst making electricity an affordable commodity (EEU
monthly newspaper, November, 2013).
Critical agendas for change are both idealistic and revolutionary (Tushman and O’Reilly,
1996). The results for organization members might include a growing respect for people
as thinking and feeling individuals, the broader sharing of power, control and
responsibility and greater responsiveness of all stakeholders including managers,
employees, customers, and community.
It is true that many organizational change initiatives fail badly, with unintended and
damaging consequences. Although it is recognized that organizations have to change and

14
restructure in order to maintain or enhance competitiveness in the face of aggressive
competition, changing markets or technological breakthroughs. Paterson, Green and Cary
(2002) argue that the rapid pace and massive scope of organizational change in recent
years have increasingly taken a psychological roll, not least on those employees who
emerge as survivors of the turmoil of change, irrespective of whether it is caused by
mergers, acquisitions, corporate rationalizations, delaying, Total Quality Management,
Business Process Reengineering or downsizing.
During organizational change efforts, it is typical for management to explain the
proposed changes to employees and provide assurances regarding possible negative
consequences of the change. If explanations and promises made by management are
found to be untrue over time, some employees may become cynical about the
organization, the leaders of change, and the organizational change effort. Likewise,
people who have experienced organizational changes that have not met their expectations
or have led to frustration may become cynical the process. (Thompson, Joseph et al.,
2000 Cited in Mntungwa, 2007)
2.1.6 Why Organizations Focus on Customer Satisfaction
Businesses monitor customer satisfaction in order to determine how to increase their
customer base, customer loyalty, revenue, profits, market share and survival. Although
greater profit is the primary driver, exemplary businesses focus on the customer and
his/her experience with the organization. They work to make their customers happy and
see customer satisfaction as the key to survival and profit. Customer satisfaction in turn
centers on the quality and effects of their experiences and the goods or services they
receive. (Center for the Study of Social Policy, 2007).

2.1.6.1 Definitions of Customer Satisfaction

The definition of customer satisfaction has been widely debated as organizations
increasingly attempt to measure it. So that; customer satisfaction has been defined in
different context by different authors. Some definitions are given below :( Cited on
Wandaogou & Jalulah, 2011)

15
  Customer satisfaction is a “psychological concept that involves the feeling of
well- being and pleasure that results from obtaining what one hopes for and
expects from an appealing product and/or service” (WTO, 1985);
 CS “as an attitude-like judgment following a purchase act or a series of consumer
product interactions.” Youjae Yi, (1990 cited in Lovelock &Wirtz, 2007);
 CS is “a consumer’s post-purchase evaluation and affective response to the
overall product or service experience.” (Oliver, 1992);
 “Satisfaction is merely the result of things not going wrong; satisfying the needs
and desires of consumers.” (Besterfield, 1994);
 Satisfaction as pleasure; satisfaction as delight (Kanji and Sa Moura, 2002);
 CS is “an experience-based assessment made by the customer of how far his own
expectations about the individual characteristics or the overall functionality of the
services obtained from the provider have been fulfilled.” (Bruhn, 2003);
 “Satisfaction is a person’s feeling of pleasure or disappointment resulting
from comparing a product’s performance (outcome) in relation to his or her
expectation.” (Kotler& Keller, 2006 p. 144).
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 (the “moment of truth” as it is called in business literature) 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. (Center for the study of Social Policy, 2007)
Customer satisfaction differs depending on the situation and the product or service. A
customer may be satisfied with a product or service, an experience, a purchase decision, a
salesperson, store, service provider, or an attribute or any of these. Some researchers
completely avoid “satisfaction” as a measurement objective because it is “too fuzzy an
idea to serve as a meaningful benchmark.” Instead, they focus on the customer’s entire
experience with an organization or service contact and the detailed assessment of that
experience. For example, reporting methods developed for health care patient surveys
often ask customers to rate their providers and experiences in response to detailed

16
questions such as, “How well did your physicians keep you informed?” These types of
surveys provide “actionable” data that reveal obvious steps for improvement.
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. To avoid difficulties stemming
from the kaleidoscope of customer expectations and differences, some experts urge
companies to “concentrate on a goal that’s more closely linked to customer equity.”
Instead of asking whether customers are satisfied, they encourage companies to determine
how customers hold them accountable.
In the public sector, the definition of customer satisfaction is often linked to both the
personal interaction with the service provider and the outcomes experienced by service
users. (Center for the study of Social Policy, 2007)
As the result four customer networks were developed as part of the initiative:
The process of obtaining a service and the way it is delivered can have a major impact on
the users’ experience. The qualities of relationships and staff have central to positive
outcomes.
Because customer satisfaction is a highly variable assessment that every individual makes
based on his/her own information, expectations, direct contact and interaction, and impact,
it makes sense to involve and consult consumers when designing customer satisfaction
approaches.
2.1.6.2 Customer-Oriented Mission and Culture
Not surprisingly, a primary concern of business research and literature is building
companies that excel at gaining and keeping customers. Studies show that outstanding
customer service organizations focus on a clear goal—satisfying the customer—and
design everything else with that aim in mind. From the top-down, these organizations act
to provide positive customer experiences. The focus on complete customer satisfaction
permeates the organization:
(Center for the study of Social Policy, 2007)

17
A. Customer-Focused Mission Statements
The management and customer service literature hammer home the importance of a
guiding vision that is clearly communicated through an organizational mission statement
and set of principles. An effective mission statement accomplishes three purposes:
1. It focuses and guides employee actions
By providing a constant touch-stone for employees, the mission statement has a powerful
role in reinforcing customer service. According to marketing expert Barry Feig, a strong
mission statement both inspires and challenges employees. It can also help employees
feel that they are part of something important, another operating principle of high-
performing companies.
2. It helps set and manage customer expectations
The Customer service Plan then goes on to provide service goals, guarantees, and
promises for customers and employees. It is continually updated based on information
from customer research, including focus groups discussions and surveys.
3. It contributes to instilling a culture of customer orientation
Frequently cited as a company that exemplifies superior customer service. By looking on
leadership of the company a comprehensive program of quality management that grew to
permeate the organization that defined the new direction begins with a clear statement.
B. Customer-Oriented Culture
Creating and instilling a “culture” of customer service in which employees are
encouraged and expected to go to great lengths to satisfy customers is another hallmark
of a successful organization. High performing organizations work to create an
environment where employees focus on customer satisfaction in each encounter, every
day. For many organizations, including public sector social services, this requires “a
massive culture shift away from what is convenient for the organization to what is needed
by the service users.”
C. Total Customer Experience
Business experts recommend focusing on the entire customer experience with each
service contact. “It is the totality of the buying experience that will keep customers
coming back for more.” More than just the basics of customer service create a favorable
experience for the customer; everything, conscious and unconscious, can affect it.

18
Successful service companies attend to every detail to ensure that the customer’s
physical, social, and psychological experience is pleasant.
D. Customer Service Standards and Accountability
Standards of customer service identify and communicate what constitutes satisfactory
performance for all employees and customers. “Behavioral change requires standards, not
suggestions.” Once those are in place, an organization can develop consistency by
“clearly communicating what is expected and, based upon those expectations, reinforce
positive behaviors and hold employees accountable for sub-standard service delivery.”
Organizations take different approaches to identifying customer service standards and
they vary in detail. Customer service standards provide a framework for performance
management and accountability. In many areas, customer satisfaction ultimately boils
down to the customer’s contact with frontline staff. Capable, empowered frontline staff
put customer-focused mission statements, standards and culture into practice.

2.1.7 Customer Satisfaction Index

Customer satisfaction has become a vital concern for companies and organizations in
their efforts to improve product and service quality, and maintain customer loyalty
within a highly competitive market place.
At the national level, the customer satisfaction index (CSI) is a nationwide gauge of how
adequately companies and industries in general satisfy their customers. In addition,
CSI’s can be used at the lower industry or even company level facilitating comparison
of companies within an industry. These indicators complement traditional measures of
economic performance (e.g., return on investment, profits and market shares)
providing useful diagnostics about organizations, and their customers evaluations of
the quality of products and services. (Cited in Girona, 2002).

2.1.8 Backgrounds of customer satisfaction

1) Perceived Quality

In 1996, the American Customer satisfaction index (ACSI) model was expanded to
delineate two general types of perceived quality, product quality (hardware) and service
quality (software/human ware) (Fornell et al., 1996). Perceived product quality is the

19
 evaluation of recent consumption experience of products. Perceived service quality is
the evaluation of recent consumption experience of associated services like customer
service, conditions of product display, range of services and products etc.

2) Value

The literature in this area has recognized that customer satisfaction is dependent on value
(Howard & Sheth, 1969). Value is the perceived level of product quality relative to the
price paid or the “value for money” aspect of the customer experience. Value is defined
as the ratio of perceived quality relative to price (Anderson et al., 1994). Value is
expected to have a direct impact on satisfaction (Anderson & Sullivan, 1993; Fornell,
1992) and to be positively affected by perceived quality. To ensure that the effects of a
price-quality relationship are not confounded, quality and value are measured relative to
each other (Anderson et al., 1994).

3) Image

Image refers to the brand name and the kind of associations customers get from
the product/brand/company. This construct was first introduced in the Norwegian
Customer Satisfaction Barometer (NCSB) model (Andreassen & Lindestad, 1998a;
Andreassen & Lindestad, 1998b). New research indicates that it is an important
component of the customer satisfaction model (e.g., Martensen et al 2000). The impact
of quality on image (or vice versa) is not usually estimated. According to Johnson et al.,
(2001), image has been modelled to affect perceptions of quality (Andreassen &
Lindestad, 1998a). However, in most research papers this affect is not modelled, thus
we consider image and product and service quality to be all exogenous factors.

4) Expectations

Expectations refer to the level of quality that customers expect to receive and are the
result of prior consumption experience with a firm’s products or services. Johnson et
al., (2001) noted that the effect of expectations is non-significant in a number of
industry sectors. Similarly, Martensen et al., (2000) showed that customer expectations
of post office products and services in Denmark have a negligible impact on consumer
satisfaction.

20
2.1.9 Consequences of consumer satisfaction
1. Complaints
This factor refers to the intensity of complaints and the manner in which the company
manages these complaints. It is expected that an increase in customer satisfaction
should decrease the incidence of complaints (American Society for Quality, 1998;
Fornell et al. 1996).
2. Loyalty
Customer loyalty is the ultimate dependent variable in the model and is seen to be a
proxy measure for profitability (Reichheld & Sasser, 1990). Increasing customer
loyalty secures future revenues and minimizes the possibility of defection if quality
decreases. In addition, word-of-mouth from satisfied loyal customers exaggerates the
firm’s overall reputation and reduces the cost of attracting new customers
(Anderson & Fornell, 2000). Loyalty is measured by repurchase intention, price
tolerance and intention to recommend products or services to others. It is expected
that better image and higher customer satisfaction should increase customer loyalty. In
addition it is expected that there is a reciprocal relationship between complaints and
loyalty. When the relationship between customer complaints and customer loyalty is
positive it implies that the firm is successful in turning customers who complain into
loyal customers. Conversely, it is expected that when the relationship is negative the
firm has not handled complaints adequately.

2.1.10 Introducing Customer Choice and Competition

Advocates of “reinventing government” recommend injecting some of the market
dynamics that businesses experience into the public arena. One strategy suggested for
motivating government agencies to improve performance is the introduction of customer
choice in public services.
A rationale for service privatization is stimulation of competition among service
providers. However, customer satisfaction is rarely included in the performance
requirements of government contracts with private organizations. (Cited on Yasmin,
2010)

21
2.1.11Applying customer satisfaction research to the public
Few public agencies systematically monitor customer satisfaction or even focus on it as
a policy, management or practice goal. High turnover rates and poor morale in the
human services workforce signal that the public sector has far to go in treating
employees well or in equipping them to provide exemplary customer service. The other
fundamental challenges are:
Who are the customers? According to leading experts on the movement to “reinvent
government,” thinking in terms of public service customers is a recent development, and
there is much confusion about who the customer is. (Osborne and Plastrik, 2007 cited in
Center for the study of social policy, 2007) maintain that the “primary customer is the
individual or group” the organization’s work is “primarily designed to help” often the
public at large. Public agencies also may have secondary customers—groups that benefit
from the work, but less directly than primary customers, these may be the community at
large, employers who will someday hire graduates, and others. In addition, public
organizations and systems have many stakeholders who have an interest in the agency’s
performance but are not customers.
Lack of market economy; for the most part, public agencies do not compete for
customers and market share. Their survival and growth depend on the appropriation of
tax revenues determined by elected officials at the federal, state and local levels, not the
satisfaction of the individuals they serve.
Monopoly on services; government agencies are generally monopolies. They are not
subject to the performance challenges that competitors provide. Public sector customers
are captive. With some exceptions, they cannot go elsewhere if they are dissatisfied with
the services they receive.

Mission defined by legal rights and mandates; rather than shaped by customer- driven
demands; the mission and priorities of public organizations are determined by law.
Unless customers have legal rights to services and government agencies have legal
mandates to provide them, public organizations may have little motivation to please
customers and limited flexibility to respond to customer complaints.

Accountability to elected officials; private sector businesses are accountable to both the
customers and their owners—usually through a board of directors that represents

22
shareholders. In the public sector, elected officials represent the interests of citizens.
Even in the business world, “accountability to owners trumps accountability to
customers.” For public organizations, accountability to elected officials (the funders) is
likely to take priority over customer satisfaction.

Public customers’ lack of political power; according to Osborne and Plastrik, “some
conflict between what customers want and what elected officials want is inevitable.” For
customers to influence public agencies’ performance, they need the capacity to influence
elected officials. To motivate public agencies to change, service consumers (who usually
are experiencing personal crises) often must work with public officials and through the
political process. For those in need, this may be an unrealistic expectation, especially
when service users are provided no assistance in making their voices heard. Potential
Strategies for Improving Customer Satisfaction in Public Organizations and Vulnerable
Neighborhoods
The characteristics and strategies of successful customer service organizations apply to
public as well as entities:
 Customer-focused mission statements’,
 Customer-oriented organizational culture,
 Attention to the total customer experience,
 The key role of frontline staff and strategies for promoting complete customer
satisfaction by staff, and
 Strategies for monitoring and improving customer satisfaction.
In addition to directly applying these business-derived strategies to the public sector,
emerging strategies are being developed to counteract some of the challenges that public
service customers experience.

2.2 Empirical Reviews

Findings are clearly applicable to public sector service organizations, and examples of
governmental or nonprofit organizations are provided throughout this report. In addition,
the public sector is under increasing pressure to apply business practices to improve their
performance. As many governments worldwide increasingly contract out services to
private providers, they are working to assure service quality. Elected officials are eager

23
to respond to constituent demands for more efficient, effective and user-friendly public
services, and government agencies are under increasing pressure to improve their own
public service performance.
The workgroup suggested a set of principles to be considered for an eventual Charter of
User Involvement. The cornerstone principle is user involvement as a right and a
responsibility that should be enforceable and accessible. To put these principles into
practice will require fundamental changes in public services, including: (Center for the
study of social policy, 2007)
 More fully informed citizens. “Public agencies must find much more innovative
ways of informing people about their rights, listening to their ideas and
proposals and helping them to navigate through bureaucratic labyrinths.”
 Putting user involvement at the core of agencies’ missions and tasks.
 Public policies that create national cultures of user involvement and consistent
commitment from different sectors of society.
 Users as recipients and actors who, in addition to having the right to be involved,
are responsible for playing a full and active part in services.
 User involvement in evaluation of service outcomes, including selection of
criteria for evaluation.
(Yonatan, 2010) concluded that:" Respondents have ranked the overall importance
level of the five dimensions in determining a quality banking service. Thus, according
to the point score by each dimensions Reliability s rated the most important dimension
at the three banks in determining a quality banking service Also Assurance and
Responsiveness will take the second and third position. Tangibles and Empathy are
assumed to be least important in determining quality banking service.
It is interesting to note that customers rated empathy dimension as the least important.
At the
same time, empathy has received the highest negative gap score. This could to due to
the fact that management do not pay much attention to this dimension realizing that
this is not very important to customers. "
Temam A.,M.l. (2013) study has the objective of assessing industrial customers’
satisfaction on service quality using SERVQUAL model. It also addresses the problems
of quality gaps through the survey done at EEPCO, South Addis Ababa Region

24
Industrial customers. They did present as: the study was conducted using a descriptive
survey method where the respondents were industrial customers and frontline
managers. The sample size was 333 industrial customers and these were selected using
simple random sampling technique. Front line managers were selected through
purposive sampling. Moreover, structured questionnaires and interviews are tools used
to gather relevant information and statistical tools like percentage, tables and charts are
used to analyze the data. The study shows performance of EEPCO in providing quality
service to its industrial customers is not in a situation to meet their expectations. In all
dimensions of the SERVQUAL; tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, empathy, and
assurance, it’s found that there is a negative gap between service expectations and
service perceptions. Therefore, the Corporation should come up with an appropriate
service delivery standards, proper complaint handling mechanisms, relevant training for
its employees, and strengthening decision making power of employees. Decision
makers also have to exert maximum effort in quality improvement programs so
that the corporation ensures industrial customers satisfaction. "
Zeritu F.(2010) concluded that; "the corporation has a service quality gap with every
dimension of the service quality. However, the empathy dimension is relatively better
than others, the satisfaction level of customers in the area is highly affected by
poor performance of the Corporation in its new customer handling practice,
service failure recovery procedure and complaint handling process in the Corporation.
Therefore, the Corporation service delivery process to satisfy the needs of its customers
is below the average expectation of the customers. Also The Corporation does not give
adequate training to its employees on how to serve their customers properly and it does
not try to empower them, a substantial number of customers do not trust employees in
the transaction they know that, some employees of the corporation have unwanted
behavior which may open a door for corruption of individuals and public wealth."
Seyoum (2012) concluded for service quality of EEPCO that: "For the prevalent gap of
expectation against perception of prepaid customers’ service, different contributing
factors (challenges) of prepayment service were identified. Some of these are: sub-
standardized tangible offerings of the prepayment service itself (technical and non-
technical aspects), including, but not limited to, defective and less user friendly meter
and card, high employee turnover and job rotation without any prior arrangement, lack

25
 of adequate training and supply of necessary material, information and other
supportive resources (of reliable service), lack of quick and efficient response to
customers’ complaints, inflexible working hours, senior management’s inaction,
especially in putting pressure on the technology (prepayment) supplier, lack of
visibility (awareness) and simplicity of the service to potential customers, due to the
absence of an adequate promotion, and lack of persistent and reliable network."
2.3 Conceptual Model
In this study, based on a thorough review of literature, the models and concepts employed
are presented in Figure 1. It is based on the two main concepts of this study:
restructuring of EEU customer service delivery performance and customer satisfaction.
According to existing literature review, customer satisfaction is conceptualized as
cumulative service delivery performance encounter experiences at least for the past
twelve months (Fornell, 1992; Anderson et al., 1994a, b; cited in Wang & Lo, 2002).
Customer services are also conceptualized as a process of customer evaluation as they
use the services, and this evaluation is based on customer expectation and perceived
performance. Based on the empirically validated expectation disconfirmation model
(Danaher and Haddrell, 1996), a disconfirmation scale was deemed appropriate to
measure customer satisfaction.
Independent Variables
EEU
EEU Services
Services Delivery
Delivery
Performance/Service
Performance/Service quality
quality
Intervening Variables Dependent Variables
Human Aspects
Customers
 Reliability Satisfaction
 Responsiveness
 Assurance
 Empathy Figure1Conceptual Framework
EEU Transformational
Tangibles of Services
Restructuring
 Equipment
 Machinery
 Employee
appearance

26
 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research Design

The typical design in these cases is a survey. Because these designs are appropriate in the
case of social and behavioural sciences (Thorne, 2004).

3.2 Study Area and Target Population

The Population of this study were customers of EEU in western region. According to the
report from western region collection office as of December, 2014; there were a total of
18,405 customers available in the four selected customer service centres (CSC) which
were categorized in to Domestic, Commercial, and Industrial customers.

3.3 Source and Type of Data

Primary data was collected from sampled EEU customers by the use of a questionnaire
administered by the researcher which include; demographic inquiries of the customers,
their opinion on EEU customers services, the level of customers satisfaction on EEU
services, and customers opinion concerning how the service delivery of the organization
might be improved and semi structured interviews to employees and officials of the
organizations based on their reliability to the issue under investigation. Also, Secondary
data were collected from magazines, organizational reports, and other records were
conducted.

3.4 Sampling Techniques and Sample Size Determination

Due to the large population size and vastness of the geographical area, the sampling
technique adopted in this study was multi stage random sampling. This method is
appropriate in such cases because it is easier to administer and a large number of units

27
can be sampled for a given cost (Kothari, 1990). Accordingly, Western region have 26
customer service centres (CSC) which were categorized based on different criteria in to
four levels; such as level A, level B, level C, and level D. Because of similarity of service
delivery and type of customers within the CSC only one from each level was selected
randomly. After the selection of CSC the population grouped on the basis of common
characteristics in order to do so the study was used stratified sampling technique, and
then the population were stratified in to three tariff categories such as Domestic,
Commercial, and Industrial. Finally, representative samples of respondents were selected
from each stratum by stratum by Convenience sampling technique. In order to do so the
sample size determined statistically, at 95% confidence level with a 5% margin of error is
assumed (CR Kothari, 2004). Given this level of confidence and the assumed margin of
error, the sample size has been determined using the following formulae:

Where,

n= Z2. p. q. N Z=degree of confidence 95% = 1.96

(e) 2. (N-1) +z2.p.q

n= (1.96)2(0.5) (0.5) (18405) e = Standard error 5%

(0.05)2(18405-1) + (1.96)2(0.5)(0.5) n = Sample size

n= 376 p = Population proportion

q = 1 –P

The total number of customers under each strata as of December, 2014 for Domestic,
Commercial, and Industrial tariff categories for selected CSC is 15543, 2494, and 268.
And the proportional allocation sample size under each stratum was 317 Domestic, 51
Commercial, and 8 Industrial customers respectively.

3.5 Data Analysis and Presentation Techniques

Data collected was analysed using descriptive and inferential statistical tools. The
analysis was conducted by the help of Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS)
application software. Descriptive statistical tools such as mean, percentage, and
frequency were applied in order to assess perception of customers on service delivery
of the company. And to examine the relationship between the variables in this study;

28
inferential statistical tools such as: correlation and multiple liner regression were
applied. Finally, the analysis results were presented using tables.

3.5 Ethical Consideration

 First consent was earned from the officials of the organization and the
respondents.

 After getting their consent, the objective of the research was explained to them
and they were assured that the information they give will be kept confidential
and not disclosed to anyone and will be used only for the purpose of this
research.

29
 CHAPTER FOUR

DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND

INTERPRETATION

4.1Introduction
The primary focus of this study is assessment of customer service delivery on
customers’ satisfaction in EEU western region at selected four customer service centers.
Accordingly, in this chapter the researcher attempts to present the practically observed
facts about the service delivery, customer satisfaction with the data collected from
customers and management by using tools mentioned in chapter three. To do so, 376
questionnaires were distributed to customers and 346(92%) complete responses were
returned from the branches and interview was conducted for eight officials of the
company. The results obtained in the study are presented, analyzed, and interpreted for
the regions in the study area. The study starts by presenting background information of
the respondents’ on demographic profile. And finally a summarized analysis is done to
see the overall experiences of service delivery quality of the company. In this analyses
SPSS v.16.0 and excel spreadsheets are used to make the necessary calculations.

4. Test of Reliability and Normality of Residuals – normal p-p plot

Before applying statistical tools; testing of the reliability of the scale is very much
important as it shows the extent to which a scale produces consistent result if
measurements were made repeatedly. This is done by determining the association
between scores obtained from different administrations of the scales. Its value varies
from 0 to 1 but the satisfactory value is required to be more than 0.6 for the scale to be
reliable (Cronbach, 1951). In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha scale is used as a measure
of reliability of the scales that measures all the variables. For service quality yield and
customer satisfaction, the Cronbach’s alpha values are as follows:
Service quality yield Cronbach’s alpha =0.858 and for customers satisfaction Cronbach’s
alpha was = 0.706. Since; the Cronbach’s alpha values for all the variables considered are

30
greater than 0.6 this indicates the items have measured what they were supposed to
measure and also the items in each of the domains are well understood by the
respondents.
Normality of residuals assumes that for any value of the independent variable, the
residuals around the regression line should be normally distributed (Cohen et al, 2003,
p.120). Accordingly; as shown in figure 2, the residuals appear to be close to the
straight line, which means that the residuals are normally distributed and the
assumption for normality of the data distribution is met.

Table 4.2.1 Distributions of Biographic Data

Questions Frequency Percent

(%)
Male 232 67.1
Sex Female 114 32.9
Total 346 100.0
20-30 Years 19 5.5
31 -40 Years 60 11.8
41 -50 Years 153 44.2
Age 51--65 Years 120 34.7
> 65 Years 6 1.7
Total 339 98.0
Missing System 7 2.0
Total 346 100.0
Grade 10 & Below 65 18.8
Certificate 55 15.9
College Diploma 83 24.0
1st Degree 94 27.2
Educational Above 1st Degree 10 2.9
Level Others 17 4.9
Total 324 93.6
Missing System 22 6.4
Total 346 100.0

Source: Author, Computed from survey data, 2014

31
 4.2 Descriptive Analysis

As indicated in table 4.2.1 from the total number of (346) respondents (customers),
232(67.1%) of them were males and 114(32.9%) of respondents were female.
Most of the respondents, 153(44.2%) age were 41-50 years, the next dominant age group
were 120(34.7%) 51– 65 years which indicate that most customers of the company age
group has been categorized in these range. Thus, the larger numbers of these
respondents are expected to have a lot of experience about the service delivery practice
of the company and they can easily measure their satisfaction level.
As observed from table 4.2.1 also show that; the educational level of customers of the
company indicated that 94(27.2%) were first degree holder, 83(24%) were college
diploma holder. Whereas; 65(18.8%) were grade 10 and below, 55(15.9%)
respondents were certificate, and 17(4.9%) were others. This indicates that most of the
company customers are educated and should be expected to have a good understanding
of quality service delivery.

Table 4.2.2 Electric Energy Bill Payment

Questions Frequency Percent

(%)
Domestic 290 83.8
On which of the following tariff Commercial 48 13.9
categories you are registered Industry 8 2.3
for? Total 346 100.0
Yes 293 84.7
Do you pay your electric energy No 50 14.5
bills on time? Total 343 99.1
Missing System 3 .9
Total 346 100.0
Between 1 – 10 Minute 109 31.5
Between 11 – 20 Minute 73 21.1
How long did it take you to pay Between 21 – 30 Minute 55 15.9
your electric energy bills before Between 30 – 60 Minute 44 12.7
restructuring? Above 60 Minute 53 15.3

32
 Total 334 96.5
Missing System 12 3.5
Total 346 100.0
Between 1 –10 Minute 131 37.9
How long does it take you to Between 11 –20 Minute 82 23.7
pay your electric energy bills Between 21 – 30 Minute 40 11.6
after restructuring? Between 30 – 60 Minute 27 7.8
Above 60 Minute 48 13.9
Total 328 94.8
Missing System 18 5.2
Total 346 100.0
If your answer for Q.5 is ‘No’, Yes 143 41.3
have you ever had your electric No 46 13.3
lines disconnected because of Total 189 54.6
not paying on time before Missing System 157 45.4
restructuring? Total 346 100.0
Between 1 – 6 hours 71 20.5
Between 7 – 12 hours 64 18.5
If your answer for Q. 8 is ‘yes’, 1-2 days 9 2.6
how long it take for 3-5 days 18 5.2
reconnection? Above 5 days 14 4.0
Total 176 50.9
Missing System 170 49.1
Total 346 100.0
If your answer for Q.5 is ‘No’, Yes 147 42.5
have you ever had your electric No 49 14.2
lines disconnected because of Total 196 56.6
not paying on time after Missing System 150 43.4
restructuring? Total 346 100.0
Between 1 – 6 hours 93 26.9
Between 7 – 12 hours 46 13.3
If your answer for Q. 10 is ‘yes’, 1-2 days 8 2.3
how long it take for 3-5 days 17 4.9
reconnection? Above 5 days 9 2.6
Total 173 50.0
Missing System 173 50.0
Total 346 100.0
Source: Author, Computed from survey data, 2014

33
As depicted on table 4.2.2, Tariff categories of the respondents appears to be a
reasonable consideration of EEU company because the company is due attention of
strategy formulation basically revenue maximization and types of electric line
extensions based on the expected tariff size of its customers. Accordingly;
290(83.8%) of the respondents are domestic customers that implies majority of the
customers are domestic and they have lower but progressive bill tariff categories which
are allocated to energy bill payment according to their electric energy consumptions.,
while 48(13.9%) of the respondents are commercial ,based on EEU bill tariff these
customers are relatively paying the energy bill in the higher tariff categories, and
8(2.3%) of the respondents are industrial customers; the company profile indicates that
these customers are nominated to be 20/80 (twenty, eighty) which means, they are
expected to be twenty percent of the total customers however, the company collects
eighty percent of its revenue from these customers due to their high electric energy
consumption.
Also; as shown on the above table 293(84.7%) of the respondents were pay electric
energy bill on time which implies most of the bill generated or available for sale should
expected to be error free, and customers have been to take responsibility on time
payment. Whereas; 50(14.5%) of the respondents were not pay the electric energy bill on
time. So that; most of the respondents pay their bills on the standard time that is one
month time line set by the company that maintain customers’ satisfaction.
Table 4.2.2 also shows that questions related with the time took to pay electric bills,
accordingly; 109(31.5%) of the respondents replied that it took 1 -10 minutes, 73(21.1%)
replied 11 -20 minutes, and 53(15.3) of them took more than an hour before restructuring.
Whereas; after restructuring 131(37.9%) of the response shows that it took 1 -10 minutes,
82(23.7%) respond it took 11 -20 minutes, and 48(13.9%) respond they are waiting more
than an hour.
But; the organization set the standard time on its stretched objectives for waiting time to
keep its customers satisfaction is within 10 minutes. On the other hand, even if the
respondents result shows there are a progress on waiting time after restructuring but it
was only 37.9% which is less than an average of the customers were served within the
standard time line.

34
Likewise, the above table shows that finding of questions related to the action of the
company on customers who were not paying on time for their electric usage. As a result;
147(42.5%) of the respondents replied; electric lines disconnected because of not paying
on time before restructuring and 49(14.2%) replied the lines were not disconnected.
Those customers whose lines disconnected also asked for reconnections response time.
Accordingly; 71(20.5%), and 64(18.5%) respond their lines were reconnected after
fulfilling of their bill payment obligations between 1- 6 hours, and between 7 – 12 hours
respectively before restructuring. Similarly; among those respondents who did not pay
their bills on time, 143(41.3%) of them have had their lines disconnected and 46(13.3%)
did not disconnected. Of them of line disconnected 93(26.9%), and 46(13.3%) responded
that their lines were reconnected after fulfilling of their bill obligations between 1- 6
hours, and between 7 – 12 hours after restructuring respectively.
These result shows that the company actions on disconnection and reconnections of lines
before restructuring were 41.3% and 20.5% of the disconnected lines were reconnected
within 1-6 hour. On the other hand; after restructuring the result revealed on
disconnection and reconnections of lines were 42.5% and 26.9% of the disconnected lines
were reconnected within 1-6 hour. It concluded that there are progresses after
restructuring on corrective action that should result in compliant resulted from not on
time payment and on time response for reconnection. But still there are gaps to meet the
standard time set by the company for line disconnection and reconnection that is within a
month and within one to six hour.
Table 4.2.3 Customer response to Technical Work Problems

Questions Frequency Percent

(%)
Yes 320 92.5
Have you ever come across any
No 24 6.9
EEU technical work problem that
Total 344 99.4
needed to be fixed by the
Missing System 2 .6
company technicians?
Total 346 100.0
Between1-12 hours 124 35.8
If ‘Yes’ for Q 12. How fast was
Within 24 hours 96 27.7
their response before
Within 48 hours 50 14.5
restructuring?
Within 72 hours 15 4.3

35
 Above 72 hours 49 14.2
Total 334 96.5
Missing System 12 3.5
Total 346 100.0
Between 1 – 12
169 48.8
hours
Within 24 hours 44 12.7
Within 48 hours 39 11.3
If ‘Yes’ for Q 12. How fast was Within 72 hours 9 2.6
their response after restructuring? Above 72 hours 58 16.8
Total 319 92.2
Missing System 27 7.8
Total 346 100.0

Very Satisfying 40 11.6

In your opinion how was the
Satisfying 143 41.3
performance of the technicians in
Not Satisfying 154 44.5
terms of giving quality service
Total 337 97.4
before restructuring?
Missing System 9 2.6
Total 346 100.0
Very Satisfying

27 7.8
In your opinion how was the
performance of the technicians in
terms of giving quality service
Satisfying 189 54.6
after restructuring?
Not Satisfying 110 31.8
Total 326 94.2
Missing System 20 5.8
Total 346 100.0

Source: Author, Computed from survey data, 2014

As shown in table 4.2.3 320(92.5%); majority of the respondents have had faced
technical work problem that needed to be fixed by the company technicians.
Accordingly; 124(35.8%), and 96(27.7%) were respond that the technicians’ speed when
they were called before restructuring was within 12 hours and within a day respectively.

36
Whereas; after restructuring 169(48.8%), and 44(12.7%) of the respondents respond the
technicians’ speed when they were called were within 12 hours and within a day
respectively. It is determined that there are an improvement after restructuring on
technicians’ speed when they were called; even better than the standard time set by the
company that is within a day. So that; more than an average result shows that the
organizations are keeping customers satisfactions on technical works.
The above table also shows that the performances of the technicians in terms of giving
quality service before restructuring were 154(44.5%) which were not satisfying,
143(41.3%), and 40(11.6%) were satisfying, and very satisfying. From the result it
observed that the sum of satisfaction percentage was 52.9% which is more than an
average of customers are satisfying on performances of the technicians.
Table 4.2.3 also shows that the performances of the technicians in terms of giving quality
service after restructuring were 189(54.6%) of the respondents were satisfied, and
27(7.8%) of the respondents were very satisfied. On contrary; 110(31.8%) of the
respondents claimed that the performances of the technicians in terms of giving quality
service after restructuring were not satisfying. From the result it observed that even if
after restructuring the percentage of respondents increased but the organization should be
asses the root problems of customers who have been not satisfied on the performances of
the technicians in terms of giving quality service and ensure customers satisfaction on
this dimension.
Table 4.2.4 Customer response towards Meter Reading

Questions Frequency Percent (%)

Yes 194 56.1

Did the meter readers of No 148 42.8
the company read your Total 342 98.8
meter correctly and Missing System 4 1.2
properly? Total 346 100.0
If your answer for Q.17 Energy bill payment
86 24.9
is ‘No’, what kind of overstated
problem does you face Energy bill payment
52 15.0
because of your meter understated
had not read properly? Make difficulty for 25 7.2

37
 follow up of the
integrity of meter
Both 1,2,and 3 11 3.2
Both 1 and 2 30 8.7
Both 1 and 3 23 6.6
Both 2 and 3 14 4.0
Total 241 69.7
Missing System 105 30.3
Total 346 100.0
Source: Author, Computed from survey data, 2014

As illustrated in table 4.2.4, majority of the respondents 194(56.1%) believed; meter

readers of the company read their meter correctly and properly. But; 148(42.8%) of the
respondents claimed that their meters were not being read correctly and properly.
Customers were also asked to list down the main problems that they faced due to
not read their meters properly include; 86(24.9%) respond due to energy bill payment
overstated, 52(15%) respond due to energy bill payment understated, and 25(7.2%) of the
respondent replied that they faced difficulty for follow up of the integrity of their meter,
and the other respondents faced different combinations of the above mentioned problems
causes the customers to complaints like wastage of time for appealing on the described
problems, unable to set their electric consumption budget plan etc.
Table 4.5 Overall customers’ satisfaction towards service delivery of CSC

Questions Frequency Percent Mean

(%)
Strongly disagree 21 6.1
Disagree 83 24.0
Generally, the CSC services on energy Neutral 21 6.1
bill payment system are satisfying. Agree 197 56.9
Strongly agree 24 6.9
Total 346 100.0 3.3468
Strongly disagree 44 12.7
The overall technical performances of Disagree 63 18.2
technicians of the CSC in terms of Neutral 32 9.2
giving quality services are satisfying. Agree 177 51.2

38
 Strongly agree 30 8.7
Total 346 100.0 3.2486
Strongly disagree 23 6.6
Disagree 77 22.3
Generally, the CSC services on meter Neutral 23 6.6
reading are satisfying. Agree 191 55.2
Strongly agree 32 9.2
Total 346 100.0 3.3815

Strongly disagree 34 9.8

Disagree 71 20.5
Neutral 75 21.7
Agree 135 39.0
The time required to become a
Strongly agree 31 9.0
customer of EEU facility as per the
company’s schedule are satisfying i.e.
Total
within maximum of 21 days.
346 100.0
3.1676

27 7.8
Strongly disagree
Disagree 61 17.6
The overall experience of the
Neutral 69 19.9
customer service currently given by
Agree 157 45.4
the company is satisfying.
Strongly agree 32 9.2
Total 346 100.0 3.3064
Source: Author, Computed from survey data, 2014
According to Ivancevich and Matteson (1990) changes and fluctuation in an organization
are caused by two major forces; external and internal. Some of the external forces include
change in market, customer demand and services given, concerning the internal factors,
the changes in an organization may be due to factors that relate to process and
behavioural problems that might necessitate change. If the above two broadly explained
causes why organizations undertake changes, how is it implemented?
EEU had been started implementation of different programs in order to ensure on
service provision standards of the company. As secondary documents and different officials
on interview session confirmed; EEU has been undertake different strategies to improve its
service standards and it implements various reform programs at different time to
improve service standards of each activity under investigation. In order to do so the

39
company have been implemented changes like employee reshuffling, civil service
reform, quick wins, BPR for BPR implementation the company service standard set on
its stretched objectives for different activities, BSC, and currently transformational
restructuring. In order to achieve its main objective of achieving international standards
of customer service delivery and to ensure customers satisfaction through sustained
capacity building, operational and financial excellence, and state-of-the-art technologies.
Two years have been passed since it undergone this major change. But; the question of
whether the change achieve intended objectives or not, should have been investigated as
an intervening variables in this research.
Table 4.5 shows overview of the overall customers’ satisfaction of the region on different
variables. Accordingly; 197(56.9%) of the respondents were agree, and 24(6.9%) were
strongly agree on the statement the CSC services on energy bill payment system are
satisfying. Whereas; 83(24%) of the respondents disagree, 21(6.1%) were strongly agree,
and 21(6.1%) of the respondents were neither agree nor disagree that the CSC services on
energy bill payment system are satisfying. Even if, overall assessment of bill payment
system infer that majority of the respondents were satisfied but the company should be
due attention for those respondents who have been dissatisfied by assessing the root
problems and give possible solution in order to ensure their satisfaction.
On the other hand; 177(51.2%) of the respondents were agree and 30(8.7%) of the
respondents were strongly agree on the statement that the overall technical performance
of technicians of the CSC in terms of giving quality services are satisfying. These result
shows that more than average of the respondents were satisfied with the overall technical
performance of technicians of the CSC. On contrary; 63(18.2%) of the respondents were
disagree, 44(12.7%) of the respondents were strongly agree, and 32(9.2%) of the
respondents claimed on the statement the overall technical performance of technicians of
the CSC in terms of giving quality services are satisfying. From these results the
researcher infers; about 40% of the respondents were dissatisfied in overall technical
performance of technicians of the CSC in terms of giving quality services so that in order
to ensure the achievement of organizational objectives; the company should be undertake
further investigation.
The respondents also respond on the statement; the CSC services on meter reading are
satisfying. Thus; 191(55.2%) and 32(9.2%) of the respondents were agree and strongly

40
agree respectively. However; 77(22.3%) of the respondents were disagree, 23(6.6%) of
the respondents were strongly disagree, and 23(6.6%) of the respondents’ were neither
agree nor disagree on the statement the CSC services on meter reading are satisfying.
Even if; significant percentage of the respondents were satisfied on the overall services of
meter reading of the company; but dissatisfactions of other respondents who claimed on
this variable should be investigated for further improvements and achieve customers’
satisfaction.
Table 4.5 also depicted that the level of agreement and disagreement on the overall
customers perception on the time required to become a customer of EEU facility as per
the company’s schedule are satisfying that is the time required for new connections of
kilowatt hour meters of EEU is within a maximum of 21 days.
For that reason; 135(39%) of respondents agreed and 31(9%) of respondents were
strongly agree. On contrary; others claimed on the statement such as 75(21.7%) of the
respondents were neither agree nor disagree, 71(20.5%) of the respondents were disagree,
and 34(9.8%) of the respondents were strongly disagree on the time required to become a
customer of EEU facility as per the company’s schedule are satisfying. Therefore; the
percentage of agreement that is 48% which is approximately only half of the respondents
are satisfied; which implies there are almost half of the customers are dissatisfied on the
time required to become customers of the company so that the organization should be
further investigate the time required for new connection of customers in order to ensures
customers satisfaction.
Finally; respondents respond on the statement; the overall experience of the customer
service currently given by the company is satisfying. Consequently; 157(45.4%) agreed
and 32(9.2%) of the respondents were strongly agree. On contrary; 69(19.9%) of the
respondents were neither agree nor disagree, 61(17.6%) of the respondents were
disagreed, and 27(7.8%) of the respondents claimed that they were strongly disagree
respectively. From the result the researcher infers that; even if; majority of the
respondents were satisfied with the overall experience of the customer service currently
given by the company; whereas; other respondents whose satisfaction were not meet.
From these, the organization should undertake the problems and settle; in order to
improve its services standard to ensure customers satisfaction.

41
 Table 4.5.1 Customers’ Responses on Tangibility Dimension of Service Quality

Frequency Percent
Questions Mean
(%)

Strongly disagree 9 2.6

Disagree 73 21.1
Neutral 64 18.5
Generally, the physical facilities Agree 180 52.0
and employees are neat and clean. Strongly agree 20 5.8

Total 346
100.0 3.3728
Strongly disagree 38 11.0
Disagree 78 22.5
Neutral 60 17.3
Generally, EEU company facility Agree 146 42.2
provides an environment that is Strongly agree 24 6.9
free from danger, risk, or doubt.
Total 346 100.0
3.1156

The effort that I must make is

minimum to receive the services Strongly disagree 36 10.4
offered. Disagree 93 26.9
Neutral 58 16.8
Agree 133 38.4
Strongly agree 26 7.5

Total 346 100.0

3.0578
Source: Author, Computed from survey data, 2014

As indicated in table 4.5.1, 1 8 0 ( 5 2 %) an d 36 (5 .8 %) of the respondents agree and

strongly agree with the statement that; in EEU the physical facilities and employees
are neat and clean. Whereas; 73(21.1%), 64(18.5%), and 9(2.6%) of the respondents were
disagree, neutral, and strongly disagree with the statement. From these figure it is
possible to say that more than an average (57.8%) of the respondents ensure that in the
company the physical facilities and employees are neat and clean.

42
Table 4.5.1 also depicted that; 146(42.2%) and 24(6.9%) of the respondents were agree
and strongly agree on the statement that EEU company facility provides an environment
that is free from danger, risk, or doubt. On the other hand, 78(22.5%), 60(17.3%), and
38(11%) of the respondent were disagree, neither agree nor disagree, and strongly
disagree on the statement. Since; from these responses it concluded that less than an
average (49.1%) of the respondents ensures that EEU company facility provides an
environment that is free from danger, risk, or doubt.
The above table also shows that 133(38.4%) of the respondents agree and 26(7.5%) of the
respondents strongly agree on the statement that the effort that they must make is
minimum to receive the services offered. But; 93(26.9), 58(16.8%), and 36(10.4%) of the
respondents were disagree, neutral, and strongly disagree on the statement respectively.
The result reviled that only (45.9%) of the respondents which is less than an average were
approved on the effort that they must make is minimum to receive the services offered by
EEU.
Generally; statements rise on tangibility service quality dimension in relation with
service quality of the company which incorporate; the appearance of the company
representatives, facilities, materials, and equipment from the result; it observed that most
of the respondents were agreed on each of the statements on tangibility dimensions of
EEU; which implies most of them are satisfied in this dimension. These can be supported
by the theory of a high level service quality helps the Corporation to enhancing (Jun
and Cai,2001cited in Temam A. & Mesfin L.) the overall customer experience in the
form of boosting customer satisfaction, decreasing customer defection and enhancing
customer loyalty, which are more important in the long term.

43
 Table 4.5.2 Customers’ Responses on Reliability Dimension of Service Quality

Questions Percent Mean

Frequency
(%)

Strongly disagree 21 6.1

Generally, the employees provide Disagree 97 28.0

service reliably, consistently, and Neutral 47 13.6

Agree 150 43.4
dependably.
Strongly agree 31 9.0

Total
346 100.0 3.2110
Strongly disagree 17 4.9
Disagree 81 23.4
Neutral 56 16.2
Generally, the employees are Agree 156 45.1
trustworthy, believable, and honest
Strongly agree 36 10.4

Total 346 100.0

3.3266

Strongly disagree
12
3.5
The company has a convenient/ flexible Disagree 59 17.1

operating hour. Neutral 104 30.1

Agree 138 39.9
Strongly agree 33 9.5

Total 346 100.0

3.3497
Strongly disagree 43 12.4
Disagree 25 7.2
The price charge to use EEU Facility is Neutral 211 61.0
fair. Agree 43 12.4
Strongly agree 43 12.4

Total 346
100.0 3.5954

The company has a convenient/easy to

26 7.5
reach vending outlets. Strongly disagree
Disagree 69 19.9 3.3121

44
 Neutral 46 13.3
Agree 181 52.3
Strongly agree 24 6.9

Total 346
100.0
Source: Author, Computed from survey data, 2014

Table 4.5.2 indicates the reliability dimension of service quality of the company.
Accordingly 150(43.4%) and 31(9%) of the respondents agreed and strongly agreed on
the statement that the employees provide service reliably, consistently, and dependably.
Whereas; 97(28%), 47(13.6%), and 21(6.1%) of the respondents claimed on the
statement that they were disagree, neither agree nor disagree, and strongly disagree for
the employees provide service reliably, consistently, and dependably in EEU company.
On the above table respondents respond on the statement about the organizations
employees; trustworthy, believable, and honest. Accordingly; 156(45.1%) and 36(10.4%)
of the respondents agreed and strongly agreed for the statement organizations employees
are trustworthy, believable, and honest. However; 81(23.4%), 56(16.2%), and 17(4.9%)
of customers respondents of EEU were disagree, neutral, and strongly disagree about
employees of EEU trustworthy, believable, and honest.
Concerning the statement that company has a convenient/ flexible operating hour;
138(39.9%) and 33(9.5%) of the respondents were agree and strongly agreed. Whereas;
104(30.1%) of the respondents were neither agree nor disagree on these statement. This
implies that almost half of the customers’ (49.4%) of the respondents confirm that EEU
Company has a convenient/ flexible operating hour for those customers who are unable to
go on the normal eight working hour for the services rendered by the company like;
working on weekends, twenty four hour emergency service, etc.
Respondents were also asked on the statement; the price charge to use EEU company
facility is fair. Thus, 211(61%) of customers respondents agreed and 43(12.4%) strongly
agree; but; 43(12.4%) of the respondents disagreed. Consequently; significant number of
the respondents, (73.4%) convinced on the fairness of the price paid for EEU facility.
On the other hand; 181(52.3%) of the respondents were agree but; 69(19.9%) of the
respondents were disagree on the statement that the company has a convenient/easy to

45
 reach vending outlets. The result shows that more than average of the respondents was
agreed on the statement.
To conclude from customers respondents about statements under investigation on
reliability dimension; it was observed that most of the respondents were agreed on each
of the statements. This implies most of them were satisfied on reliable electric power
currently delivered from EEU Company but dissatisfactions of other respondents who
claimed on those variables should be investigated in order to improve perceptions of
quality electric supply to ensure customers satisfaction.

Table 4.5.3 Customers’ Responses on Responsiveness Dimension of Service Quality

Questions Frequency Percent Mean

(%)
Strongly disagree 21 6.1
Disagree 102 29.5
Generally, the employees are willing Neutral 42 12.1
and able to provide service in a timely Agree 146 42.2
manner. Strongly agree 35 10.1

Total
346 100.0 3.2081
Strongly disagree 13 3.8
Disagree 77 22.3
Neutral 40 11.6

The company tries to respond to Agree 192 55.5

customers complaints properly. Strongly agree 24 6.9

Total 346
100.0 3.3960

Strongly disagree 12 3.5

Disagree 67 19.4

The customer contact personnel have Neutral 48 13.9

good reception ability and politeness. Agree 166 48.0

Strongly agree 53 15.3

Total 346 100.0

3.5231

46
 Strongly disagree 5 1.4
Disagree 59 17.1

Generally, the employees listen to me Neutral 38 11.0

and speak in a language that I can Agree 203 58.7

understand. Strongly agree 41 11.8

Total 346
100.0 3.6243

Strongly disagree
6 1.7

Disagree 65 18.8
Neutral 63 18.2
Generally, the employees make the
Agree 171 49.4
effort to understand my needs.
Strongly agree 41 11.8

Total 346
100.0 3.5087

Strongly disagree 4 .2

Disagree 123 35.5

The customer service center’s staff
Neutral 35 10.1
overall efficiency and effectiveness is
Agree 160 46.2
satisfying.
Strongly agree 24 6.9

Total 346
100.0 3.2225
Source: Author, Computed from survey data, 2014

Table 4.5.3 asses the respondents’ response on the indicator of responsiveness of staffs
for different customers request such as willingness of firm’s staff to provide services;
timeliness, setting up appointments, punctually, and others. As a result; 146(42.2%) of
the respondents were agree and 35(10.1%) of the respondents were strongly disagree with
the statement that EEU employees are willing and able to provide service in a timely
manner. On the contrary, 102(29.5%), 42(12.1%), and 21(6.1%) of the respondents
were disagree, nether agree nor disagree, and strongly disagree on the statement
respectively. From this description, it is possible to infer that even if the percentage of
agreement of respondents are more than half; the level of disagreement and neutral
should also have been given possible consideration.

47
On the other hand; 192(55.5%) and 24(6.9%) of the respondents were agree and
strongly agree with the statement that EEU company tries to respond to customers
complaints properly. Whereas; 77(22.3%), 40(11.6%), and 13(3.8%) of the respondents
were disagree, neutral, and strongly disagree on the statement respectively. From the
result the researcher supposed that even if the percentage of agreement were 62.4%
which indicate the majority of the respondents were satisfied in this aspect of employees’
responsiveness the rest should also be supposed to considered for the reason why
company felt to satisfy them by trying to respond to their complaints properly by taking
all the possible remedial actions.
Table 4.5.3 also contains perception of customers responsiveness on the statement the
customer contact personnel of EEU has good reception ability and politeness.
Accordingly; 166(48%) were agree, similarly 53(15.3%) were strongly agree on the
statement. While; 67(19.4%), 48(13.9%), and 12(3.5%) of the respondents claimed they
came across dissatisfied, nether satisfied nor dissatisfied, and strongly dissatisfied with
reception ability and politeness of the company’s employees’.
From the data of table 4.5.3, it can be considered that the percentage of agreement and
disagreement of customers of EEU on the statement that employees of EEU listen to and
speak in a language that customers can understand. Consequently; 203(58.7%) and
41(11.8%) of the respondents agree and strongly agree on the statement. However;
59(17.1%), 38(11%)), and 5(5.1%) of the respondents claimed on the statement and their
response were disagree, neutral, and strongly disagree on the statement respectively. The
result reveal that majority (70.5%) of the respondents ensured that employees of EEU
listen to and speak in a language that the customers can understand.
Table 4.5.3 also depicted that the percentage of agreement and disagreement on the
customers perception on EEU employees towards the statement on the effort of staffs to
understand customers’ needs. For that reason; 171(49.4%) of the respondents were
agree and 41(11.8%) of the respondents were strongly agree with the statement.
Conversely; 65(18.8%), 63(18.2%), and 6(1.7%) of the respondents were disagree,
neutral, and strongly disagree on the statement the employees make the effort to
understand their needs. From the result it is possible to reveal that 61.2% of the
respondents were satisfied. But; the other respondents claimed for the service quality
dimensions of EEU employees’ responsiveness to make the effort to understand

48
customers’ needs. So that; the company should due attention for the reason why they felt
to be understand customers’ needs for future corrective action.
Statement on customer service center’s staff overall efficiency and effectiveness as a
variable of responsiveness also shown on the above table. Thus; 160(46.2%) agreed and
24(6.9%) of the customers respondents were strongly agree. while; 123(35.5%) of the
respondents were disagree, 35(10.1%) of the respondents were neither agree nor disagree,
and 4(1.2%) of the respondents were strongly disagree on the statement that customer
service center’s staff overall efficiency and effectiveness is satisfying. Therefore; even if
the percentage of agreement that is 53.1% which is approximately only half of the
respondents are satisfied; which implies there are almost half of the customers who have
been dissatisfied with this service quality dimension that the organization should be asses
CSC staff’s overall efficiency and effectiveness in order to deliver quality customer
services which ensures customers satisfaction.
Generally; the respondents’ perceptions on different variables that measure the
responsiveness of staffs of EEU on different variables of service delivery quality on
responsiveness such as information accessibility, the prompt service being delivered, and
willingness of employees to support customers and others. Even though; human
responsiveness sometime can be affected by emotion; which causes low productivity.
The result obtained from variables on responsiveness’ dimension from the respondents
reveal that majority of the respondents were agreed on each of the statements. These
indicate that most of the customers are satisfied with responsiveness of the staffs on
quality service delivery process of EEU. Whereas; the company should also due
attention for those claimed for staff service delivery which is not responsive to kept
customers satisfaction.

49
 Table 4.5.4 Customers’ Responses on Assurance Dimension of Service Quality

Questions Frequency Percent Mean

(%)
Strongly disagree 11 3.2
Disagree 54 15.6
Neutral 95 27.5
Generally, the employees are competent
Agree 158 45.7
(i.e. knowledgeable and skillful).
Strongly agree 28 8.1

Total 346
100.0 3.3988
Strongly disagree 23 6.6
Disagree 86 24.9
Neutral 48 13.9

Generally, the employees are Agree 146 42.2

approachable and easy to contact. Strongly agree 43 12.4

Total 346
100.0 3.2890

Strongly disagree 15 4.3

Disagree 78 22.5
Neutral 36 10.4
Agree 183 52.9
Generally, the employees are courteous, Strongly agree 34 9.8
polite, and respectful.
Total 346
100.0 3.4133
Strongly disagree 22 6.4
Disagree 51 14.7
Neutral 65 18.8
Generally, the employees are patient in Agree 169 48.8
handling customers.
Strongly agree 39 11.3

Total 346 100.0

3.4393
Source: Author, Computed from survey data, 2014

50
Table 4.5.4 shows respondents perception on assurance dimension on different service
quality variables. Accordingly; 158(45.7%) agreed and 28(8.1%) of the respondents
were strongly agree on the statement that the employees are competent (i.e.
knowledgeable and skillful). On the contrary; 95(27.5%) neither agree nor disagree,
54(15.6%) of the respondent disagree, and 3.2(3.2%) of them were strongly disagree.
Furthermore, 146(42.2%) and 43(12.4%) of the respondents were agree, and strongly
agree on the statement that states the employees are approachable and easy to contact.
However; 86(24.9%), 48(13.9%), and 23(6.6%) of the respondents were disagree,
neutral, and strongly disagree on the statement; EEU employees are approachable and
easy to contact.
Respondents were also asked on the statement; employees of EEU Company are
courteous, polite, and respectful. Thus; 183(52.9%) of customers respondents agreed and
34(9.8%) strongly agree; but 86(24.9%), 48(13.9%), and 23(6.6%) of the respondents
claimed that they were disagreed, neither agree nor disagree, and strongly disagree that
employees of EEU Company are courteous, polite, and respectful.
Finally; respondents respond on assurance variable that state the employees of EEU
Company are patient in handling customers. Consequently; 169(48.8%) agreed and
39(11.3%) strongly agreed on the statement. On contrary; 65(18.8%), 51(14.7%), and
22(6.4%) of the respondents claimed that they were neither agreed nor disagreed,
disagreed, and strongly disagreed on the statement which states that employees of EEU
Company are patient in handling customers.
In general; based on all indicators (competence and courtesy of employees; trust and
confidence; required skills and knowledge; etc.) that measure assurance dimension of
service quality which were identified for EEU company for assessments of customers
satisfaction; accordingly majority of the respondents were agreed on each of the
statements raised for investigation on assurance of staffs. Whereas; other respondents
who were not satisfied on skills and knowledge, trustworthiness, believability, honesty,
etc. of EEU employees on quality service delivery. So the organization should asses the
problems and work hard on how to settle it and ensure customers satisfaction.

51
Table 4.5.5 Customers’ Responses on Empathy Dimension of Service Quality

Questions Frequency Percent Mean

(%)

Strongly disagree 18 5.2

Disagree 88 25.4

Generally, the customer service center give Neutral 58 16.8

services by giving individual attention/being
treated individually for key customers. Agree 149 43.1

Strongly agree 33 9.5

Total 346 100.0

3.2630
Source: Author, Computed from survey data, 2014

Table 4.5.5 shows that, 149(43.1%) of the respondents agree and 33(9.5%) of the
respondents were strongly agree on the statement about the customer service center give
services by giving individual attention/being treated key customers individually. On
contrary; 88(25.4%) of the respondents were disagree, similarly 58(16.8%) of the
respondents were neither agree nor disagree, and 18(5.2%) of the respondents were
strongly disagree that they claimed on the statement EEU customer service centers are
caring and give services by giving individual attention/being treated individually for key
customers. Even if; more than an average of the respondents’ are satisfied with the
current service delivery of EEU Company by giving individual attention to key customers
but other respondents were dissatisfied and claimed on this variables. So that; they should
be investigated in order to improve perceptions of them by assessing their individual
demand on quality electric supply to ensure customers satisfaction.

52
 4.3 Correlation and Multiple Liner Regression Analysis
Table 4.3.1 Pearson Correlation between Variables
Customer Responsive-
Satisfaction Tangibles Reliability ness Assurance Empathy
Customers Pearson ** ** ** ** **
1 .534 .581 .705 .549 .547
satisfaction Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 346 342 342 342 342 316

Tangibles Pearson ** ** ** ** **
.534 1 .664 .614 .438 .565
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 342 342 342 342 342 316

Reliability Pearson ** ** ** ** **
.581 .664 1 .726 .554 .709
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 342 342 342 342 342 316

Responsive Pearson ** ** ** ** **
.705 .614 .726 1 .784 .644
ness Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 342 342 342 342 342 316

Assurance Pearson ** ** ** ** **
.549 .438 .554 .784 1 .547
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 342 342 342 342 342 316

Empathy Pearson ** ** ** ** **
.547 .565 .709 .644 .547 1
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000

N 316 316 316 316 316 316

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

53
4.3.1 Pearson Correlations Analysis

The correlations of the variables are shown in table 4.3.1 above. As it can be seen from
the correlation results, all correlations are statistically significant. The positive correlation
(+) shows an increase in values for one variable is associated with an increase in values
for other variables. On the contrary, the negative correlation (-ve) shows an increase in
values for one variable is associated with a decrease in values on another variable.
This table consists of six variables in which customers satisfaction is the dependent variable,
and the following five variables are independent variables: 1) Tangibles, 2) Reliability, 3)
Responsiveness, 4) Assurance, and 5) Empathy, almost all of the service quality dimensions
have positive or significant relationship or correlation with customers’ satisfaction.
Accordingly; the highest Pearson coefficient was 0.705 and the lowest was 0.534. The
highest correlation between independent and dependent variable was between customers’
satisfaction and responsiveness, with the Pearson coefficient 0.705. On the other hand, the
lowest correlation between independent variable and the dependent variable was customers’
satisfaction with reliability, which was 0.534.

The correlation of dependent variable and each independent variable shows; the correlation
coefficient between customers’ satisfaction and tangibles is 0.534. This shows that
customers’ satisfaction increased while the tangible dimension of the service quality
increased. Likewise; the correlation coefficient between customers’ satisfaction and.
empathy is 0.547 which shows that there is a positive correlation between customers’
satisfaction and empathy. On the other hand; the correlation coefficient between
customers’ satisfaction and assurance is 0.549. This tells the existence of a positive
correlation between these variables. There is also a positive significant correlation between
customers’ satisfaction and reliability of service delivery of EEU which is a significant
coefficient 0.581. In addition to this, there is positive relationship between customers’
satisfaction and responsiveness of the company service delivery with a correlation
coefficient of 0.705. This shows that, customers’ satisfaction increased when responsiveness
of EEU for service delivery increased.

54
 4.3.2 Multiple Liner Regression Analysis

Table 4.3.2 Summary of Model 1 with 5 predictions variables

Model Summery b
Change Statistics
Adjusted Std. Error of R Square
Model R R Square R Square the Estimate Change F Change df1 df2 Sig. F Change

1 .754a .568 .561 2.64213 .568 81.516 5 310 0.000

a. Predictors: (Constant), Empathy, Assurance, Tangibles, Reliability, Responsiveness
b. Dependent Variable: Customers Satisfaction

Overall fit of the model are shown in table 4.3.2 above provides an overview of the results. This
summary table provides the value of R and adjusted R square for the model that has been derived. For
these data R square and adjusted R square has a value of .568 and .561 respectively. It can be seen
from these that the weighted combination of the predictor variables; Tangibles, Reliability,
Responsiveness, Assurance, and Empathy explained approximately 56% of the variance of customers
satisfaction. Or about 56% of total variability in customers’ satisfaction is explained by the previous
mentioned predictors jointly. Using the standard regression procedure where all of the predictors were
entered simultaneously into the model, R Square Change went from zero before the model was fitted
to the data to .568 when the variable was entered.

55
Table 4.3.3 Significance test of the Model 1 using ANOVA

ANOVA b
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
a
1 Regression 2845.271 5 569.054 81.516 .000

Residual 2164.071 310 6.981

Total 5009.342 315

a. Predictors: (Constant), Empathy, Assurance, Tangibles, Reliability, Responsiveness

b. Dependent Variable: Customers Satisfaction

Table 4.3.3 shows the test of significance of the model using an ANOVA (analysis of
variance); accordingly; the F statistic for the model, which indicating a significant model.
Through 5 predictors, the regression effect has 5 degrees of freedom. The regression
effect is statistically significant, where F (5, 310) = 81.516, p < .001, indicating that
prediction of the dependent variable is proficient better than can be done by
chance. This result indicates very strong evidence that the model has a strong illustrative
power of prediction. It could be also said that since the F value is significant, and then all
the five variables jointly influence the dependent variable that is customers’ satisfaction
in the population.

56
 Table 4.3.4 Standardized Coefficients, Significance, and VIF of Model 1
Coefficients b
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients Collinearity Statistics
Std.
Model B Error Beta t Sig. Tolerance VIF
1(Constant) 3.087 .669 4.613 .000

Tangibles .148 .069 .110 2.140 .033 .524 1.909

Reliability .126 .068 .123 1.845 .066 .314 3.189

Responsiveness .367 .054 .529 6.757 .000 .228 4.392

Assurance .018 .063 .017 .282 .778 .377 2.653

Empathy .167 .195 .047 .858 .391 .459 2.179

Table 4.3.4 shows the details of the results and describes the relations between the
dependent and independent variables. All the coefficients are positive and they show that
there is a positive relation between the dependent variables and the independent variable.
In other words, the model predicts that by increasing the independent variables by one
unit, the dependent variable will also increase by values indicated in the beta column of
the coefficients table. But, if looking at the significance of the five independent variables
distinctly, the results seem to be different.

These results should be seen initially at the t statistics, when coefficient of t > 1.96 with a
significance less than 0.05 (p<0.05), that indicates the independent variable is a
significant predictor of the dependent within the sample. As it can be seen from table 9,
two of the t values of independent variables responsiveness and tangibles have t > 1.96
(t= 6.757 and t= 2.14). This means that they are both effective predictors in the model.
But, when looking at the t value of the other independent variables such as reliability,
assurance, and empathy, they can be seen that t= 1.845, t=0.282, and t=0.047
respectively. So that; these results suggest that reliability, assurance, and empathy are not
effective predictors in the model.

Similarly; responsiveness and tangibles variables results show that their p values are less
than 0.05, which also confirms that they are significant and have predictive ability for the

57
dependent variable, or they are both significant predictors for customers’ satisfaction. In
contrary to this, the other independent variables: reliability, assurance, and empathy their
p value p=0.066, p=0.778, and p=0.391 which are greater than 0.05. So that the outcomes
suggest that they are not significant predictors in the multiple regression models. The
rationale of this is that their predictive efforts are being accomplished by the other
variables in the analysis. Although; there are no hard and fast rules about what values of
the VIF should be cause for concern, Myers (1990) suggest that a value of 10 is a good
value at which to worry. What’s more, Bowerman & O’Connell (1990) suggest that if the
average VIF is greater than 1, then multi collinearity may be biasing the regression
model. Related to the VIF is the tolerance static which is its reciprocal (1/VIF). As such,
values below .1 indicates serious problems, although Menerd (1995) suggest that values
below.2 are worthy of concern (Andy Field 2005, p175). Accordingly; it can be seen that
all the independent variables’ tolerance level is more than 0.1 and the VIF is less than 10,
therefore, there is no significant relationship among the independent variable.

58
 Table 4.3.5 Multi Collinearity of Model 1

Collinearity Diagnostics a

Condition Variance Proportions

Model Dimension Eigenvalue Index (Constant) Tangibles Reliability Responsiveness Assurance Empathy
1 1 5.831 1.000 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00

2 .057 10.109 .40 .07 .00 .00 .02 .36

3 .045 11.368 .01 .74 .00 .00 .11 .17

4 .040 12.101 .34 .05 .01 .02 .30 .24

5 .017 18.268 .23 .12 .54 .10 .20 .21

6 .010 24.632 .01 .01 .45 .87 .37 .02

a. Dependent Variable: Customers Satisfaction

However, while it comes to the condition index, Cohen et al. (2003, p. 424) claims
condition index values that exceed 30 (κ ≥ 30), indicate high problems of multi
collinearity. Garson (2012) agrees that when condition index is greater than 30, there is
an indication for serious problems regarding multi collinearity, however he argues that
even condition indexes greater than κ ≥ 15 indicate possible collinearity issues.

According to Garson’s (2012) guidelines, condition index of tangibles, reliability, and

responsiveness have the value of k= 10.109, k=11.109, and k= 12.101 which is < 15. But,
even if the condition index value for reliability is less than 15 it cannot fulfill the others
criteria for fitness of the model for instance it could be assumed that there might be a
high correlation between responsiveness and reliability (r = 0.772) and that multi
collinearity may cause a problem when interpreting the results.

After removing of the three independent variables from the first hypothesized model and
the independent variable or customers satisfaction measured by the remaining two
predicators the result have been shown as follows:

59
Table 4.3.6 Correlations of Model 2
Correlations
Customers
satisfaction Tangibles Responsiveness

Pearson Correlation Customers

1.000 .534 .705
satisfaction

Tangibles .534 1.000 .614

Responsiveness .705 .614 1.000

Sig. (1-tailed) Customers

. .000 .000
satisfaction

Tangibles .000 . .000

Responsiveness .000 .000 .

N Customers
342 342 342
satisfaction

Tangibles 342 342 342

Responsiveness 342 342 342

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 4.3.6 shows the correlation between customers’ satisfaction and the two
independent variables such as tangibles and responsiveness. As it can be seen from the
above results, all correlations between the variables are statistically significant.
Accordingly; the output shows that customers satisfaction is positively related for both
tangibles and responsiveness with a coefficient of r =.534 and r=.705, which is also
significant at p<0.001.

60
Table4.3.7 Summary of Model 2 with 2 prediction variables

Model Summary

Change Statistics

Adjusted R Std. Error of R Square

Model R R Square Square the Estimate Change F Change df1 df2 Sig. F Change
a
2 .716 .513 .510 2.75550 .513 178.617 2 339 .000

a. Predictors: (Constant), Responsiveness,

Tangibles
b. Dependent Variable: Customers Satisfaction

Table 4.3.7 shows the results for the multiple linear regression of hypothesized model 2.
It seems that the R Square and Adjusted R Square values are R Square= .513 and
adjusted R Square= .510 respectively. So that the weighted combination of the predictor
variables that is tangibles and responsiveness should jointly explained 51% of total
variability in customers’ satisfaction.

Table 4.3.8 Significance test of model 2 using ANOVA

b
ANOVA

Model 2 Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

a
Regression 2712.393 2 1356.196 178.617 .000

Residual 2573.949 339 7.593

Total 5286.342 341

a. Predictors: (Constant), Responsiveness, Tangibles

b. Dependent Variable: Customers Satisfaction

The overall significance of model 2 is measured by the analysis of variance (ANOVA).

Accordingly ; the results indicate that the regression effect has 2 degrees of
freedom. The Regression effect is statistically significant, where F (2,339) =
178.617, p < .001, showing that prediction of the dependent variable which is very
unlikely to have happened by chance.

61
 Table 4.3.9 Standardized Coefficients, Significance, and VIF of Model 2

Descriptive Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation N

Customer sat. 15.7105 3.93732 342

Tangibles 8.9854 3.01167 342

Responsiveness 22.5000 5.65361 342

Coefficients b
Unstandardized Standardized Collinearity
Coefficients Coefficients Statistics

Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig. Tolerance VIF

2 (Constant)
4.322 .621 6.963 .000

Tangibles .213 .063 .163 3.401 .001 .623 1.605

Responsiveness .421 .033 .604 12.588 .000 .623 1.605

a. Dependent Variable: Customers

Satisfaction
Table 4.3.9 shows weight of the standardized coefficient or beta and the significance
level of each predictor. Accordingly; responsiveness increase by one standard deviation,
customers’ satisfaction increase by .604 standard deviations. Similarly, tangibles increase
by one standard deviation, customer satisfaction increase by .163 standard deviations.
And the predictor variables p values are less than 0.05.

62
 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, & RECOMMENDATIONS

As many literatures on service delivery shows, the success of any service delivery
organizations is measured and judged by customers. In this study; indicators for the
availability of quality service delivery that bring about customer satisfaction were
identified. Finally, in order to answer the basic research questions rose in chapter one of
this study, analysis of primary and secondary data have been done and interviews with
western region EEU officials conducted. Finally; the following summary of major
findings, conclusions, and recommendations were drawn as follows:

5.1 Summary of Major Findings

 Biographic data result shows: from the total number of (346) customers
respondents, 232(67.1%) of them were males and 114(32.9%) of respondents
were female, Most of the respondents, 153(44.2%) age were 26-40 years, which
indicated that most customers of the company were above adolescent age, and the
educational level of customers indicated that 94(27.2%) were first degree holder,
83(24%) were college diploma holder respectively.
 Tariff categories of the respondents appears to be a reasonable consideration of
EEU company because the company is due attention of strategy formulation
basically revenue maximization and types of electric line extensions based
on the expected tariff size of its customers. Accordingly; 290(83.8%) of the
respondents are domestic customers and 293(84.7%) of the respondents were pay
electric energy bill on time which implies most of the bill generated or available
for sale should expected to be error free. and customers have been done their
electric consumption payment on time. On the other hand EEU set the standard
time on its stretched objectives for waiting time for bill payment to keep its
customers satisfaction is within 10 minutes; even if there were a progress after
organizational restructuring: but only 37.9% of the customers were served within
the given standard time line. The same is true for disconnection and reconnection

63
 of line that standard time have been set were within a month for disconnection up
on nonpayment of bill and 1 to 6 hours for reconnection but; even if the result
reveals progresses after restructuring but only 42.5% and 26.9% of the
respondents were served within standard time.
 From the result the investigater observed that even if after restructuring the
performances of the technicians in terms of giving quality service increased but
the organization should be asses the root problems for customers who have been
not satisfied on these dimensions and ensure their satisfaction.
 194(56.1%) of the respondents confirmed that meter readers of the company read
their meter correctly and properly. Among those claimed that their meters were
not read correctly and properly majority of them faced the problem of their energy
bill payment overstated.
 The researcher infers that; majority of the respondents were satisfied with the
overall experience of the customers service currently given by the company; with
the average mean of approximately 3.29 which is above expected average mean
(3.00) which have been used in these thesis for the rest of SERVQUAL
dimension measurement.
 Statements raised on tangibility service quality dimension in relation with service
quality of the company which incorporate; the appearance of the company
representatives, facilities, materials, and equipment. From the result; the
researcher observed that most of the respondents were agreed on each of the
statements; which implies most of them are satisfied in this dimension with the
average mean of approximately 3.18.
 It was observed that most of the respondents were agreed on each of the
statements on reliability dimension of SERVQUAL so that the reliability of
electric power currently delivered from EEU Company is reliable and the average
mean was approximately 3.36.
 Willingness of firm’s staff to provide services; timeliness, setting up
appointments, punctually, and others to express responsiveness dimension of
SERVQUAL statements raised; as a result majority of the respondents were
satisfied with an average mean of approximately 3.41.

64
 Results from respondents also show that an average mean of approximately 3.38
for assurance and 3.26 for empathy dimensions of SERVQUAL statements were
also obtained for EEU.
 From the above the researcher should concluded that even if the results of average
mean obtained on all dimensions of SERVQUAL shows above expected average
mean; but it does not mean that all the customers are satisfied so EEU should be
investigate all the problems of other respondents who claimed on perceptions of
service delivery and take corrective action to ensure their satisfaction.
 The correlation output shows customers’ satisfaction i.e. dependent variables and
the five independent variables of SERVQUAL dimensions is positively related,
which is also significant at p<0.001.
 Overall fit of the model are shown; R square and adjusted R square have a value
of .568 and .561 respectively. Which means the weighted combination of the five
predictor variables, about 56% of total variability in customers’ satisfaction is
explained by these predictors jointly.
 The regression effect is statistically significant, where F (5, 310) = 81.516, p <
.001. Showing that prediction of the dependent variable which is very unlikely to
have happened by chance.
 Further investigations for the beta coefficients and other tests of fitness of the
model shows the effective predictors in the model were tangibles and
responsiveness respectively. As a result R square and adjusted R square value
were .513 and .510 respectively for the new hypothesized model that means
tangibles and responsiveness should jointly explained 51% of total variability in
customers’ satisfaction.

65
5.2 Conclusions
 EEU has set stretched objectives and taken as the base line for organizational
restructuring and performance of employees based on which service delivery
standards were developed. But, only some of the respondents replied that they
were served within the developed service standard.

 Interview result reveals that lack of adequate human and material resources
including physical facility as a result customers become dissatisfied.

 Majority of the customers were satisfied with the overall service of bill
payment but only few were served within the standard service time set.

 Almost half of the respondents claimed dissatisfied on overall technical work and
performance of technicians of the CSC.

 Meter reading problems subject the customers to complaints.

 Customer satisfaction has been studied by using a multiple item scale service
dimensions, tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy. As a
result:

 The dependent and independent variables have:

o Strongly positive relationship.

o Significant at p<0.001.

o About 56% of total variability explained by these predictors jointly.

 The average mean for the quality of the services delivery and customer
satisfaction reveals above expected result.

o But it does not mean that all the customers are completely satisfied.

 The effective predictors in the model were tangibles and responsiveness.

66
5.3 Recommendations
 It has been found that EEU has developed customer service quality standards.

o However, efforts should be put forward to meet those standards in the

actual process of service delivery.

o In addition the company should set service quality standard taking

experiences from other country electric service provider companies
and customize accordingly.

 Coming to customers' perception on the current service delivery the

company;

o Should put an effort on effective resources management

especially on the provision of sufficient materials and human resources
in order to make conducive working environment for employees and to
improve customers’ satisfaction.

 Revenue from bill payment is the major source of income for EEU Company, so
efforts should be made to improve the bill payment process to a maximum level.

 EEU should also solve meter reading problems by:

o Increasing number and efficiency of meter reading employees.

 The company should design how customers exert minimum efforts to receive the
service offered.

 In addition, during delivery of all the services mentioned in the study the
company customer contact personnel should have;

o Good reception ability, politeness, and effectiveness to satisfy

the customers.

o Effort to listen carefully and understand customers’ problems and

render services in timely and effective manner.

67
  EEU should assess service quality (SERVQUAL) dimensions which were used in
this investigation to varying degrees to enhance service delivery performance.

 Last but not the least; important consideration should be given to tangibles and
responsiveness as important predicators of SERVQUAL dimensions. Because,
about 51% of total variability in customers’ satisfaction is explained by these
predictors jointly.

5.4 Future Research Direction

The current study results demonstrated positive correlation between the five
predicators of SERVQUAL dimensions and customers’ satisfaction. Furthermore
multicollinearity issues were existed, which forced the researcher to remove
reliability, assurance, and empathy from the predictive model, in order to gain more
accurate regression coefficients. Therefore; future research should be considered for
such collinearity issues when designing a prediction model especially on tangibles and
responsiveness as important predicators of SERVQUAL dimensions in order to ensure
high quality service for customers’ satisfaction.

68
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anderson, E. (1994 ). “Customer Sa sfaction and Prince Tolerance”. Marke ng Le ers, 7

(3).

Armenakis, A. a. (1999). Organisa onal change: A review of theory and research in the
1990s. Journal of Management, 25:293-315. .

Beer, M. a. (2000). Cracking the code of change. New Delhi, India : Harvard Business
University.

Cady, S. a. (1999). A lexicon for organisa onal change: examining the use of language in
popular, practitioner, and scholar periodicals. The Journal of Applied Business
Research, 15: 81-94. (4).

Cha erijee, S. (2003). An Introduction to management: Its principle and practice.

Kolkata: world press limited.

Coakes, S. S. (2007). SPSS Version 16.0 for Windows: Analysis Without Anguish. ,
Australia : John Wiley & Sons Australia Ltd .

Cohen, J. C. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioural

science (3 ed.). Mahwan, New Jersey: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates.

Corpora on, E. E. (1999 E.C). 50th Golden Jubilee: Special Issue. Ethiopian Electric Power
Corporation Public Relations. Addis Ababa.

Corporation, E. E. (2010, september 21). Electric power for all. Facts in brief.

Cronbach, L. J. (1951, September ). Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests.
Psychometric. Journal of Marke ng, 18 (4), 36-44. .

Cronin, J. J. (1992, July ). “Measuring Service Quality: A Reexamination and Extension,” .

Journal of Marke ng, 56 .

Cronin, J. J. (2000). Assessing the Effects of Quality, Value, and Customer Sa sfac on on
Consumer Behavioral Intentions in Service Environments. Journal of Retailing, 76
(2 ).

Field, A. (2005). Discovery of statistics using SPSS (2 ed.). Oliver Yard 55 city road,
London ECIY ISP: SAGE publications Ltd.

Fornell, C. (1992). “Na onal Sa sfac on Barometer: the Swedish Experience”. Journal
Marke ng, 56 (January) .

69
Fornell, C. J. (1996). The American Customer ( 4 ed.). New York, NY. : Macmillan.

G, C. (2007). Customer Experience: An Overview of Experience Components that Co-

create Value With the Customer. European Management Journal, 25(5).

Gebre, Y. (2010). Customers Percep on of Service Quality in Ethiopia banking sector.

unpublished Master's thesis.

Gronroos, C. (1982a). “European Journal of service Quality in its Implica ons for Future
Research,”. Journal of Marketing.

Gronroos, C. (1982b). “An Applied Service Marke ng Theory,” European Journal of

service Quality in its Implications for Future Research,” . Journal of Marke ng, 49
.

Grönroos, C. (1984). “European Journal of service Quality in its Implica ons for Future
Research,” . Journal of Marketing.

Gronroos, C. (1990). Service Management and Marketing . Lexington : MA: Lexington

Books .

Hair, J. F. (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis (4 ed.). New York, NY.: Macmillan.

Hammer, M. &. (1993). Reengineering the corporation; A manifesto for business

revolution. New York: Harper business.

Holt, D. T. (2006). Accepted for publica on Toward a comprehensive defini on of

readiness for change. A review of research and instrumentation.

Ireland, L. (1992). Customer sa sfac on: the project manager’s role. California
Management Review, 10(2), 123-127 .

Ivancevich, J. M. (1990). Organizational behavior and management (2 ed.). Boston:

IRWIN.

Johnson, G. S. (2001). Exploring Corporate Strategy (6 ed.). London: Pren ce Hall.

London. .

Kothari. (2004). Research Methodology Methods and Techniques (4 ed.). New Delhi :
New Age international publishers .

Kotler P, K. L. (2009). Marketing Management (13 ed.). India : Dorling Kindersley pvt.ltd .

70
Kotler, & parker. (1989). Marke ng Management: 8th ed North Western University, New
Delhi, India marke ng,56(January) (8 ed.). New Delhi, India marke ng: North
Western University.

Kotler, P. (2000). Marketing Management: (Millennium Edition). (10, Ed.) New Delhi,
India : North Western University.

Ladhari, R. (2011). Culture and personal values: How they influence perceived service
quality. Journal of Business Research, 64 (2) 951–957.

Mano, H. a. (1993 ). “Assessing the Dimensionality and Structure of the Consump on

Experience: Evaluation, Feeling, and Satisfaction”. Journal of Consumer Research,
20 (December) .

Min ngwa, M. (2007). The readiness of eThekwini Electricity employees for change to a
Regional Electricity Distributor. Durban University of Technology in The Faculty
Of Commerce unpublished Master thesis.

Nguyen, N. &. (1998). The Media ng Role of Corporate Image on Customers Satisfaction
Index: Nature, Purpose, and Findings. Journal of Marke nng, 60(4), .

Oliver, R. (1980). A cogni ve model of the antecedents and consequences of sa sfac on

decisions. Journal of Marke ng, 17(10), 460-69.

Parasuraman A., Z. A. (1988). ``SERVQUAL: a mul ple-item scale for measuring

consumer perceptions of service quality'' . Journal of Retailing, 64 .

Parasuraman, A. V. (1985). “A Conceptual Model of Truth in Service Competition,

Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Lexington: MA: Lexington Books. .

Paterson, J. G. (2002). The measurement of organisa onal jus ce in organisa onal

change programmes: a reliability, validity, and context-sensitivity assessment.
Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 75: 393- 408(4).

Patrick Asubonteng, K. J. (1996). SERVQUAL revisited: a cri cal review of service quality.
THE JOURNAL OF SERVICES MARKETING, 10 (6), 62-81 .

Policy, C. f. (2007). Customer Sa sfac one. Improving Quality and Access to Service.

Robert-Phelps, G. (2003). Customer Relation Ship Management: How to Turn a Good

Business in to a Great One. Boston: Harvard Business School Press .

S., C. (2003). An Introduction to management: Its principle and practice. Kolkata: world
press limited.

71
Seyoum, A. (2012). Customer Service Quality at Ethiopian Electric Power Corpora on:
Prepayment Customer Service. Uppsala University, department of business
studies .

Temam Afdel (MBA), M. L. (2013, December). An Assessment of Industrial Customers’

Satisfaction at Ethiopian Electric Power Corporation: A Case of South Addis
Ababa Region. 5(2).

Tushman, M. a. (1996). Ambidextrous organisa ons: managing evolu onary and

revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38, 8-30.

Yasmin, M. (2010). BPR Implementa on Outcome: A Case of EEPCO, Jimma District.

Unpublished Master’s Thesis.

Zeritu, F. (2010). Service Delivery and Customer sa sfac on: A case of EEPCO , East
Addis Ababa Region. unpublished Master’s thesis.

72
Appendix A
JIMMA UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS & ECONOMICS

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT

QUESTIONNAIRE FOR CUSTOMERS

Dear Customer, My name is Hamid A/bor from Jimma University; this questionnaire
is designed to collect information regarding impact of transformational restructuring
implementation; outcomes in terms of its stretched objectives (goals) achievement and
customer’s satisfaction service in Ethiopian Electric Utility (EEU) company western
region Customer Service Center. Your genuine response to the following questions is
extremely important for the successful completion of intended graduation research
purpose. All information you give will be kept confidential and not disclosed to
anyone. No need to write your name so; please be sincere with your responses.

Part I:-Biographic data (Circle Your Choice)

1. Sex
A. Male B. Female
2. Age
A. 20 – 30 years B. 31 – 40 years C. 41 – 50 years D. 51 – 65 years E.
>65years
3. Educational level:
A. Grade 10 & below B. Between grade 11- 12 C. Certificate
D. Diploma E. 1st Degree F. above 1st Degree

Part II: Questions Related to Electric Energy Bill Payment (Circle Your Choice)

4. On which of the following tariff categories you are registered for:

A. Domestic B. Commercial C. Industry
5. Do you pay your electric energy bills on time?
A. Yes B. No

I
6. How long did it take you to pay your electric energy bills before
restructuring?
A. Between 1 – 10 Minute B. 11 – 20 Minute C. 21 – 30 Minute

D. 30 – 40 Minute E. Above 40 Minute

7. How long does it take you to pay your electric energy bills after restructuring?
A. Between 1 – 10 Minute B. 11 – 20 Minute C. 21 – 30 Minute

D. 30 – 40 Minute E. Above 40 Minute

8. If your answer for Q.5 is ‘No’, have you ever had your electric lines
disconnected because of not paying on time before restructuring?
A. Yes B. No
9. If your answer for Q. 8 is ‘yes’, how long it take for reconnection?
A. Between 1 – 6 hours B. 7 – 12 hours C. 1 – 2 days
D. 3 – 4 days E. above 4 days
10. If your answer for Q.5 is ‘No’, have you ever had your electric lines
disconnected because of not paying on time after restructuring?
A. Yes B. No
11. If your answer for Q. 10 is ‘yes’, how long it take for reconnection?
B. Between 1 – 6 hours B. 7 – 12 hours C. 1 – 2 days
D. 3 – 4 days E. above 4 days
Part III: - Question’s related to Technical Problems (Circle Your Choice)

12. Have you ever come across any EEU technical work problem that needed to
be fixed by the company technicians?
A. Yes B. No
13. If ‘Yes’ for Q 12. How fast was their response before restructuring?
A. Between 1 – 12 hours B. within 24 hours C. within 48 hours

D. 72 hours days E. above 72 hours

14. If ‘Yes’ for Q 12. How fast was their response after restructuring?
A. within 12 hours B. within 24 hours C. within48 hours

D. within 72 hours E. above 72 hours

II
 15. In your opinion how was the performance of the technicians in terms of giving
quality service before restructuring?
A. Very Satisfying B. Satisfying C. Not Satisfying

16. In your opinion how was the performance of the technicians in terms of
giving quality service after restructuring?
A. Very Satisfying B. Satisfying C. Not Satisfying

Part IV: - Questions Related to Meter Reading (Circle Your Choice)

17. Did the meter readers of the company read your meter correctly and properly?

A. Yes B. No

18. If your answer for Q.17is ‘No’, what kind of problem does you face because of
your meter had not read properly: - (Choosing more than one option is
permitted)

A. Energy bill payment overstated B. Energy bill payment understated

C. Make difficulty for follow up of the integrity of meter

III
Part V: - The following questions intended to measure customer satisfaction level
regarding the services they subscribe from EEU. Please indicate your perception on each
item as indicated below according to the service quality dimension Scaling from
“strongly disagree”=1 disagree=2 neutral=3 agree=4 to strongly agree=5 Point scale)
Part V: A; Questions related with service provision process of EEU company.

S.No. Descriptions 1 2 3 4 5

Generally, the CSC services on energy

1 bill payment system are satisfying.
The overall technical performance of

2 technicians of the CSC in terms of

giving quality services are satisfying
Generally, the CSC services on meter
3
reading are satisfying.
The overall performance of the CSC in

4 timely provision of KWHM or new

connection is satisfying.
The overall process of service delivery
5 experience and customer service given
by the company is satisfying.

Part V: B; Questions related with service quality of the company in relation to the
following service quality dimension.

S.No. Descriptions 1 2 3 4 5

1 Tangibles
Generally, the physical facilities and
1.1
employees are neat and clean.
Generally, EEU company facility
1.2
provides an environment that is free

IV
 from danger, risk, or doubt.
The efforts that I must make are

1.3 minimum to receive the services

offered.

2 Reliability

Generally, the employees provide

2.1 service reliably, consistently, and

dependably.
Generally, the employees are
2.2
trustworthy, believable, and honest.
The company has a convenient /
2.3
flexible operating hour.
The price charge to use EEU facility
2.4
is fair.
The company has a convenient/easy to
2.5
reach vending outlets.

3 Responsiveness

Generally, the employees are willing

3.1 and able to provide service in a timely

manner.
The company tries to respond to
3.2
customers complaints properly.
The customer contact personnel have
3.3
good reception ability and politeness.
Generally, the employees listen to me

3.4 and speak in a language that I can

understand.

3.5 Generally, the employees make the

V
 effort to understand my needs.
The customer service center’s staff

3.6 overall efficiency and effectiveness is

satisfying.

4 Assurance

Generally, the employees are

4.1 competent (i.e. knowledgeable and

skillful).
Generally, the employees are
4.2
approachable and easy to contact.
Generally, the employees are
4.3
courteous, polite, and respectful.
Generally, the employees are patient
4.4
in handling customers.

Empathy
5
Generally, the customer service center

5.1 give services individual

attention/being treated individually.

VI
 Appendix B

Semi Structured Interviews for Managers and Employees of the CSC.

2. Do you think organizational restructuring implementation in your company brought

significant change in customer satisfaction? If so, how? And why?
3. What strategy was used before restructuring in order to achieve the stretched
objectives of the organization to meet service standard of the company?
4. What makes restructuring different from the previous strategy used in order to achieve
the stretched objective of the organization?
5. Do you believe restructuring brings the expected level of change in customers
satisfaction?
6. Is there the stretched objective of the organization before and after restructuring
implementation have a change?
7. What factors do you think EEU customers satisfaction most of the time affected by?
8. Do you evaluate your customers’ satisfaction from time to time? If so, how?
9. Do you think your customers are satisfied with the services that the company currently
provides if not; what are the main problems to satisfy the customers?
10. What problems do you come across while implementing organizational
restructuring in EEU in relation with achieving the stretched objective of the company,
if any?
11. What problems and opportunity have been there for achieving the customers’
overall service delivery of the company, if there are any?
12. What solutions do you suggest to minimize and alleviate the problems in line with
customers’ dissatisfactions?

VII
Appendix C
ÏT ¿’>y`c=+

¾w´’e“ °¢•T>¡e óŸ<M+

¾T’@ÏS”ƒ ¾ƒUI`ƒ ¡õM

¾Å”u™‹ SÖÃp

ytkb„ dNb®C

ÃI SÖÃp ¾}²Ò˨< u }T] HT>É ›/x` uw´’e ›ÉU”eƒ_i”

¾G<K}— ÉÓ] KTETELƒ uÏT ¿’>y]c=+ ¾T>c^ Ø“ƒ KT"H@É ’¨<::
uSJ’<U u›=ƒÄåÁ ›?K?¡ƒ]¡ ›ÑMÓKAƒ ¾Tªp` K¨<Ø ŸS}Óu\“ Ÿ}ገu[
u|L uÅu<w U°^w ]Ï” Là vK< ¾Å”u™‹ ¾›ÑMÓKAƒ SeÝ T°ŸLƒ LÃ
ÁK¨<” ¨<Ö?ƒ }Å^i Ów” ŸTd‹ƒ [ÑÉ“ ¾Å”u™‹” °`‹q ŸSÚS`
›”í` ÁK¨<” M¿’ƒ SSMŸƒ ’¨<:: eKJ’U °`f ¾UcÖ<ƒ ULi KØ“~
eŸ?}T’ƒ ›K<q© ›e}ªï °”ÇK¨< ›¨<k¨<“ UcØ^©’~U ¾}Öuk SJ’<”
}Ñ”´u¨<፣ eU­ƒ” Síõ dÁeðMÓ u}‰M­ SÖ” °¨<’}—“ ¾}TEL ULi
wcÖ< Ø“~” ›ካH>Ũ< KSÚ[e ƒMp °Ñ³ ÁÅ`ÒM::

Kƒww`­ ›ScÓ“KG<::

¡õM ›”É:- ¾ÓM S[Í (U`Ý­ƒ” Á¡u<)

1. ïq G. ¨”É K. c?ƒ
2. °ÉT@ G. Ÿ 20 -30 ›Sƒ K. Ÿ31-40 ¯Sƒ N. Ÿ 41-50 ¯Sƒ
S. Ÿ 51-65 ¯Sƒ W. Ÿ65¯SƒuLÃ
3. ¾ƒUI`ƒ Å[Í :-G. Ÿ 10— ¡õM uq‹ K. Ÿ11-12— ¡õM N. ÉýKAT
S. ¾SËS]Á ÉÓ] W. ŸSËS]Á ÉÓ] uLÃ g. K?L ‹K ÃØkc<--
¡õM G<Kƒ:-uSe]Á u?~ Ÿ›?K?¡ƒ]¡ ¡õÁ Ò` }Áõ ¾k[u< ØÁo­‹

4. ¾›?K?¡ƒ]¡ ¡õÁ­ u¾ƒ—¨< ¾q`õ SÅw ÃSÅvM;

G. uS•]Á K. u”ÓÉ N. u°”Æeƒ]
5. ¾›?K?¡ƒ]¡ ›ÑMÓKAƒ H>dx­” u¨p~ ßõLK<;

G. ›­ K. ›ÃÅKU

VIII
6. ¾›ÑMÓKAƒ ¡õÁ­” KS¡ðM ŸSªp` K¨<Ø uòƒ U” ÁIM Ñ>²?
ÃðÏxqM;

G. Ÿ 1 - 10 Åmn­‹ K. Ÿ 11 - 20 Åmn­‹ N. Ÿ 21 - 30
Åmn­‹

S. Ÿ 31 - 60 Åmn­‹ W. Ÿ 60 Åmn­‹ uLÃ

7. ¾Sªp` K¨<Ø Ÿ}}Ñu[ u|L ¾›?K?¡ƒ]¡ ¾›ÑMÓKAƒ ¡õÁ KS¡ðM U”

ÁIM Ñ>²? ÃðÏx}M;

G. Ÿ 1 - 10 Åmn K. Ÿ 11 - 20 Åmn N. Ÿ 21 - 30 Åmn

S. Ÿ 31 - 60 Åmn W. Ÿ 60 Åmn uLÃ

8. KØÁo lØ` 5 ¾cÖ<ƒ ULi «›ÃÅKU» ŸJ’ Qdx­” u¨p~ vKS¡ðM­

ŸSªp` K¨<Ø ƒÓu^ uòƒ ¾›?K?¡ƒ]¡ ›ÑMÓKAƒ }s`Ùxƒ Á¨<nM;

G. ›­ K. ›ÃÅKU

9. ŸLà K}Ökc¨< ØÁo SMe­ «›­» ŸJ’ ›ÑMÓKA~” KTekÖM U” ÁIM

Ñ>²? ÃðÏxqM;

G. Ÿ 1 - 6 c¯ƒ K. Ÿ 7- 12 c¯ƒ N. Ÿ 1-2 k“ƒ

S. Ÿ 3 - 5 k“ƒ W. Ÿ 5 k“ƒ uLÃ

10. KØÁo lØ` 5 ¾cÖ<ƒ ULi «›ÃÅKU» ŸJ’ Qdx­” u¨p~ vKS¡ðM­
ŸSªp` K¨<Ø ƒÓu^ u|L ¾›?K?¡ƒ]¡ ›ÑMÓKAƒ }s`Ùxƒ Á¨<nM;

G. ›­ K. ›ÃÅKU

11. ŸLà K}Ökc¨< ØÁo SMe­ «›­» ŸJ’ ›ÑMÓKA~” KTekÖM U”

ÁIM Ñ>²? ÃðÏxqM ;

G. Ÿ 1 - 6 c¯ƒ K. Ÿ 7 - 12 c¯ƒ N. Ÿ 1 - 2 k“ƒ

S. Ÿ 3 - 5 k“ƒ W. Ÿ 5 k“ƒuLÃ

¡õM Zeƒ:- ¾ቴ¡’>¡ wMiƒ“ ¾ØÑ“ ›ÑMÓKAƒ” ¾T>SKŸ~ ØÁo­‹

12. ¾É`Ï~” ¾ØÑ“ vKS<Á ¾T>ÖÃp ¾ቴ¡’>¡ ›ÑMÓKAƒ wMiƒ uu?ƒ­ ¨ÃU
u›Ÿvu=­ ¨<eØ ŸY^ H>Ń K¨<Ø ƒÓu^ uòƒ ›ÒØV­ Á¨<nM;

G. ›­ K. ›ÃÅKU

13. KØÁo lØ` 12 ¾cÖ<ƒ ULi «›­» ŸJ’ uØÑ“ vKS<Á­‡ ŸSªp`
K¨<Ø uòƒ uU” ÁIM Ñ>²? ¨<eØ ULi }cÖ­ƒ;

G. Ÿ 1 - 12 c¯ƒ K. u 24 c¯ƒ ¨<eØ N. u 48 W¯ƒ ¨<eØ

IX
 S. u 78 c¯ƒ ¨<eØ W. Ÿ 78 c¯ƒ uLÃ

14. KlØ` 12 ¾cÖ<ƒ ULi «›­» ŸJ’ ¾ØÑ“ vKS<Á­‡ ŸSªp` K¨Ø u|L
uU” ÁIM Ñ>²? ¨<eØ ULi Ãc×K<;

G. Ÿ 1 - 12 c¯ƒ K. u 24 c¯ƒ ¨<eØ N. u 48 W¯ƒ ¨<eØ

S. u 78 c¯ƒ ¨<eØ W. Ÿ 78 c¯ƒ uLÃ

15. u°`f­ ÓUƒ ¾ØÑ“ vKS<Á­‡ ¾T>WÖ<ƒ ¾›ÑMÓKAƒ Ø^ƒ ŸSªp`

K¨<Ø uòƒ&

G. u×U ¾UÁ[‹ ’u` K. ¾T>Á[‹ ’u` N. ›Á[‹U ’u`

16. u°`e­ ÓUƒ ¾ØÑ“ vKS<Á­‡ ¾T>cÖ<ƒ ¾›ÑMÓKAƒ Ø^ƒŸSªp`

K¨<Ø u|L&

G. u×U ¾UÁ[‹ ’u` K. ¾T>Á[‹ ’u` N. ›Á[‹U ’u`

¡õM›^ƒ:-¾q×] ”vw” ¾USKŸ~ ØÁo­‹

17. ¾É`Ï~ ¾q×] ›”vw­‹ q×]¨<” u¨p~“ uƒ¡¡M Á’vK<;

G. ›­ K. ›ÃÅKU

18. KØÁo lØ` 17 ¾cÖ<ƒ ULi «›ÃÅKU» ŸJ’ U” ›Ã’ƒ ‹Ó`

›eŸ}Kx­ƒ;

(Ÿ›”É uLà SU[Ø Ã‰LM)

G. ¾›ÑMÓKAƒ ¡õÁ u³w˜ K. ¾›ÑMÓKAƒ ¡õÁ›’cw˜

N. ¾q×]¨<” ÅI”’ƒ“ ›q×Ö` KSŸq}M ›M‰MŸ<U

X
KFL xMST:- yMktl#T _Ãq&ãC bDRJt$ yMs-WN ydNb®C xgLGlÖT
yXR‹q m-NÂ yxgLGlÖT xsÈ_ _‰TN yMlk# Sçn# lÃNÄNÇ _Ãq& ÃlÖãTN
xmlµkT kqrb#T MRÅãC m‹kL xNÇN bmMr_ MLKT ÃDRg#ÝÝ

xLS¥¥M
xLS¥¥M

xYdlh#M
XS¥¥lh#
XRG-¾
bÈM

bÈM
}.l. _Ãq&ãC

lx@l@KT¶K xgLGlÖT yMkfL KFÃ ymKfL

1 xQMN ÃgÂzb nWÝÝ
yx@l@KT¶K xgLGlÖTÃgßh#T DRJt$ ÆSqm-W
2
yg!z@ gdB ¥lTM b 21qÂT WS_ nWÝÝ
bDRJt$ yMs-#TN xgLGlÖèC l¥GßT
3
y¥wÈW g#LbTxÂú nWÝÝ
bDRJt$ \‰t®C yMs-# xgLGlÖèC l¬mN
4
yMCLÂ qÈYnTÃlW nWÝÝ
5 \‰t®c$ bF”d„nTÂ bwQt$ xgLGlÖTYsÈl#ÝÝ

6 \‰t®c$ bXWqTÂ KHlÖT y¬ni# ÂcWÝÝ

7 \‰t®c$N$ qRbW lmStÂgD yMUb!z# ÂcWÝÝ

\‰t®c$ mL‹M Sn MGÆR¿ THTÂ XÂ

8
xKBéT x§cWÝÝ

9 \‰t®c$ bdNb¾ ¥StÂgD §Y T:GST x§cWÝÝ

DRJt$ bxGÆB ydNb®CN Qʬ lmF¬T

10
YäK‰LÝÝ
ydNb®C xgLGlÖT \‰t®C mLካM yxqÆbL
11
Cl֬ THT x§cWÝÝ
\‰t®Cc$ ÃÄMጡ¾L XNÄ!h#MbMrÄW ÌNÌ
12
YÂg‰l#ÝÝ

XI
 xLS¥¥M
xLS¥¥M

xYdlh#M
XS¥¥lh#
XRG-¾
bÈM

bÈM
}.l. _Ãq&ãC

13 \‰t®c$ ¬¥˜Â yM¬mn# Âcý ÝÝ

14 \‰t®c$ F§¯t&N lmrÄT _rT ÃdRUl#ÝÝ
bxgLGlÖT mSÅ ¥:kl# yMs-# xgLGlÖèC §Y
15
bTKKL mStNGì ¥GßT YÒ§LÝÝ
bDRJt$ ydNb®C xgLGlÖT \‰t®C QL_FÂÂ
16
td¥+nT xRK nWÝÝ
DRJt$ Mc$Â XNdh#n@¬W Llw_ y¸CL y|‰
17
sxT xlWÝÝ
DRJt$ Mc$Â bq§l# mdrS y¸uLbT y>Ã+
18
xgLGlÖT mSÅ Èb!Ã xlWÝÝ
DRJt$ y¸-qMÆcW q$úq$îC yxkÆb!WN
19
dHNnT kxdU SUT XÂ _RÈÊ nÉ ÃdRUl#ÝÝ
yDRJt$ \‰t®C X ymS¶Ãb@t$ q$úq$îC
20
Ni#HÂ yiÇ ÂcWÝÝ
bx-”§Y bDRJt$ ydNb®C xgLGlÖT xsÈ_
21
LMD xRk! nWÝÝ

XII
Appendix D

Figure 2 Normal P-P plot of Regression Standardized Residual

XIII
 Appendix E
¾›=ƒÄåÁ ›?K?¡ƒ]¡ ›ÑMÓKAƒ
uT`Ÿ?ƒ”Ó“ iÁß ¾Y^ H>Ń ¾}kSÖ< }Å^i Óx‹

Stretched Objectives and Performance

}.l ¾Y^ SÓKÝ }ðLÑ> ¬Ö?ƒ ŸY^ H>Ń K¨<Ø uòƒ ¾Ø^ƒ SKŸ=Á Quality Measure/
Task Description/need Desired out comes Before BPR

1 Kp_ ULi ð×” ULi SeÖƒ /Promt u›Ueƒ k” Ñ>²? ¨<eØ ULi ¾p_q ö`U uƒ¡¡M SVL~ /¾Å”u—¬
SeÖƒ/Complaint response/ SeÖƒ respond customers within 5 S<K< YU ›É^i ò`T /¾p_}¬ ¯Ã’ƒ
handling/ working days k”“ c¯ƒ p_}¬” ¾}kuK¬ S<K< eU“
ò`T/ ›“ ƒ¡¡M— SõƒH@ KÅ”u—¬
SeÖ~
2 ¾ÓUƒ N=dw Td¨p u›ß` Ñ>²? KÅ”u™‹ u›”É k” ¨<eØ KÅ”u—¨< ƒ¡¡K— ¾Å”u™‹ S[Í S<K< ¾Á²“ u°n ÓU~ LÃ
/providing an estimation ƒ¡¡K—¨<” ÓUƒ Td¨p ÓUƒ” Td¨p /Provide ucð[¬ ´`´` Sc[ƒ TŸ“¨” ¾H>dw
of charges /Customer will be served appropriate estimation charges ÓU~” ÁKU”U e`´ ÉM´ TŸ“¨”
with appropriate estimation within three hours/ ÓU~” Á¨×¬ c^}— eU“ ò`T
in minimal time/ TekSØ Å”u—¬ ukÖa¬ k” ¡õÁ
KSðìU SØ„ SSKe ¾KuƒU
3 ¾°pÉ ÃM ¾T>q[Øuƒ KÅ”u—¨< um ¾´Óσ Ñ>²? KÅ”u—¨< Ÿ10 k” uòƒ ÃM Ÿfeƒ k” kÅU wKA u›?K?¡ƒ]¡ Tk[Ý
Ñ>²? Td¨p /Giving SeÖƒ/ Giving customers ¾T>q^[Øuƒ” Ñ>²? Td¨p ö`U Là ¾›Ÿvu=¬” G<’@} ¾T>Ádà eŸ?ƒ
notice of supply sufficint notification time/ /Customer are notified before ¾T>k[Ö¬” SeS` /Feeder No./ Y^¬
interruption/ 10dayes ¾T>ðˬ” Ñ>²?“ Y^¬” uGLò’ƒ
¾T>Ÿ“¬’¬ c^}— eU“ ò`T
¾SdcK<ƒ” S[Í­‹ uSS<Lƒ
KT>SKŸ}¬ ¡õM TÉ[e
4 eK q×] ƒ¡¡K—’ƒ KÅ”u—¬ ØÁo ¨p~” eK q×] ƒ¡¡K—¨<” ØÁo SMe Ÿq×]¬ ƒ¡¡M— S[Í Scwcw /¾q×]¬
ØÁo SMe /Responding ¾Öuk “ }Ñu=¬” ULi u›e` k” ¨<eØ SeÖƒ /respond G<’@} Ø\ SJ’<” SSMŸƒ ¾Ç=c=¡ ²<[ƒ
to meter accuracy SeÖƒ /Customers will to metere accuracy requests within c¯ƒ ›³D³D` SJ’<” ÁKß’ƒ Sµ\”
queries/ gete appropriate response ten working days/ IÑ¨Ø É`Ñ>ƒ uq×]¬“ }³TÏ °n‹ LÃ
time to the queries/ ›KSðìS<” Ÿ?wM ix TeÑu=Á¬ c¡[¬
SÖul“ Ø\ G<’@} LÃ SJ’<” ¾q×]¬

XIV
 ¾ß’ƒ SÖ” ›¬„T+¡ ò¬´ uß’~
M¡ SJ’< q`õ” T[ÒÑØ uƒ¡¡M
S}gÑ<” q×]¬ ›K S”ÒÅÆ”
q×]¬” K”vw U‡ SJ’<” ¾q×] Ç=̓
ƒ¡¡K— SJ’<” ¾}¨cŬ ¾Te}ŸŸÁ
°`UÍ u}cucu¬ S[Í Sc[ƒ /›G<”
¾}’uu¬” uòƒ Ÿ}¨cŬ ”vw Ò`
ƒ¡¡K—’~” TSdŸ` óÃK<” c=e}U
¬cà ÁK¬” S[Í ƒ¡¡K—’ƒ ŸT@ƒ\
}]¡ Ò` T’íì` ö`T~ Ut>ðKѬ
Sc[ƒ SVLƒ ¾pÉS ¡õÁ q×]¬
TdÁ Se}¨ƒ uƒ¡¡M Se]´^~”
T[ÒÑØ/
5 ¾q×] ThhÁ KÅ”u—¨< ØÁo ¨p~” ¾’ÖL ô´ q×]­‹” ucvƒ k” Å”u—¬ uƒ¡¡M ö`U Là SS<L~ uGPS
/Responding to metere ¾Öuk “ }Ñu=¨<” ULi ¨<eØ SK¨Ø /Respond within 7 ¾Å”u—¬ Çz ÁK eI}ƒ `k~” SKŸƒ
improvement SeÖƒ /Customers will get days for single phase/ service drop e`´ ÉM´ uK?K¬ ¾°n ´`´` ›“ ªÒ
appropriate response timely only ¾feƒ ô´ q×]­‹” u›e^ ƒU“ q×]¬ uƒ¡¡M uMŸ?ƒ Se^~
to the queries/ ›^ƒ k” SK¨Ø/Respond within /ió” ix ŸÓMê ix Ò` u¡LU– SÑ“–~
14 days for three phase/ service ¾ix¬ ›¨×Ö` Ÿu¾ƒ ×]Á¬ TÑ“—¬
drop only Ò` u¢ú ›Øwq TÁÁ´ Ÿ?wK< u90 Ç=Ó]
}Øö Se^~ ¾Ÿ?wK< Ýõ Ÿq×]¬
e¡`¬ Öwq SÑ“–ƒ q×]¬ k” wKA
›”Ç=ÑÖU
6 KÅ”u™‹ ØÁo ULi KÅ”u—¨< ØÁo ¨p~” KÅ”u—¨< ØÁo ufeƒ ¾e^ k” ƒ¡¡K— ULi SeÖ~“ Å”u—¬ ö`S<
SeÖƒ /Responding to ¾Öuk “ }Ñu=¨<” ULi ¨<eØ }Ñu=¨<” ULi SeÖƒ Là uƒ¡¡M SS<L~
queries from customers/ SeÖƒ /Customers will get /Respond to customers queries
appropriate response time to within 3 working days/
the queries/
7 /kÖa SeÖƒ /Making Respect and respond to Ÿ›”É Ñ>²? vMuKÖ }Kªß ¾kÖa u}vK¬ kÖa c¯ƒ Te}“ÑÉ ›“
and keeping customer appointment timely k” Ÿcvƒ k” ¨<eØ Td¨p/keeps ƒ¡¡K— S[Í KÅ”u—¬ SeÖ~“ S[Ÿ~
appointments as per the schedule an appointment and notifies the
/KÅ”u™‹ ›¡waƒ change at least in 7 workeng days in
uSeÖƒ ukÖa Ñ>²? SMe advance
SeÖƒ/
8 ›Ç=e N?ÃM TÑ“–ƒ ¾’ÖL /feƒ/ ô´ ¾’ÖL ô´ q×]­‹” ufeƒ k” Å”u—¬ uƒ¡¡M ö`U Là SS<L~

XV
 /Providing new supply/ q×]­‹” KÅ”u—¨< ¬eØ SK¨Ø/Respond within 7 ¾Å”u—¬ Ç} ÁK eI}ƒ `k~” SKŸƒ
SeÖƒ/ Deliver power days for single phase/service drop e`´ ÉM´ uK?L¬ ¾°n ´`´` ›“ ªÒ
supply timely for customer only ¾feƒ ô´ q×]­‹ u›e^ ƒS“ q×]¬ uƒ¡¡M uMŸ?ƒ Se^~
request/ ›^ƒ k” SK¨Ø/Respond within /ió” ix ŸÓMî ix Ò` u¡LUý SÑ“˜~
14 days for three phase /service ¾ix¬ ›¨×Ø` Ÿu?ƒ ×]Á¬ TÑ“—¬
Ò` u¢– ›Øwq TÁÁ´ Ÿ?wM u90 Ç=Ó]
drop only }Øö Sc[~ ¾Ÿ?wK< ÝõŸ q×]¬
e¡`¬ Öwq SÑ“–ƒ q×]¬ k”
9 ¾q×] T³¨]Á Y^ KÅ”u—¨< ØÁo ¨p~” ¾’ÖL ô´ q×]­‹” ucvƒ k” Å”u—¬ uƒ¡¡M ö`U Là SS<L~
/Relocating the existing ¾Öuk “ }Ñu=¨<” ULi T³¨` /Relocating the exting supply uGNS ¾Å”u—¬ Ç} ÁK eI}ƒ [k~”
supply /meter/ SeÖƒ/Customer be served meter within 7 working days for 1 SKŸƒ e`´ ÉM´ uK?L¬ ¾°n ´`´` ›“
with appropriate minimal phase /ô´ q×]­‹ u14 k” ªÒ ƒS“ q×]¬ uƒ¡¡M uMŸ?ƒ Sc^~
time TeÑvƒ /Respond within 14 days for /ió” ix ŸÓMî ix Ò` u¡LUý SÑ“–~
three phase /service drop only/ ¾ix¬ ›¨×Ö` Ÿu?ƒ ×]Á¬ TÑ“—¬
Ò` u¢ú ›Øwq TÁÁ´ Ÿ?wK< u90 Ç=Ó]
}Øö Se^~ ¾Ÿ?wK< Ýõ Ÿq×]¬
e¡`¬ Öwq SÑ“–ƒ q×]¬ k” wKA
›”Ç=ÑÖU
10 ›?K?ƒ]¡ TÑ“–ƒ ¨p~” ¾Öuk ¾NÃM u›”É k” ¨<eØ ÃM TÑ“– ¾T>VK<ƒ S[Í }ŸõLDM ¾T>M TI}U
/Reconnecting supply SÑ“–ƒ/Reconnect supply ƒ/Reconnct supply within 1 day/ SS}~” ö`T„‹ uƒ¡¡M SVL}†¬
following payment/ timely/ GLò’ƒ ÁK¬ c^}— eU“ ò`T e^¬
SÖ”kl /ix‹” ŸeŸ`¬ Ò` ›×wq
TÑ“–ƒ ¨ÃU Ÿ?u?K< Ÿix¬ Ò` u¡LUý
SÑ“–~ eU ò`T“ k” e^¬” ¾c^¬
c¬ SS<L~ ƒ¡¡K— ›?K?¡ƒ]¡ KÅ”u—¬
SÉ[c<
11 q×] T”uw/meter ƒ¡¡K— ”vw/Correct u=Á”e u3¨` ›”É Ñ>²? ¾}’uu ¾}S²Ñu¬ Ç} ƒ¡¡M ›e}TT˜ SJ’<
reading/ reading/ q×] /At Least once in 3 month/ G<K<U Ç}­‹ S<K<“ ”vw ¾}S²Ñu
¡õÁ¬ ¾}ÑKì Síõ ÁKuƒ /EeU ¾›”vu=¬
eU ò`T ŸeðKÑ Te}¨h u=Á´ ƒ¡¡K—
S[Í ƒ¡¡K— ¾”vw S[Í u¨p~ KÅ”u—
¬ Td¨p /¾”vw Åw}`/
12 Ñu= Scwcw /Revenue Ñu= }cwdu=” ¨p © }cwdu= u=M” “ ¨<´õ ¾T[ÒÑÝ ]þ`ƒ“ u›Ì“ ÁK¬ Ñ”²w
collection/ TdÅÓ/Increase revenue }cwdu=” Ÿ30 k” Scwcw /Billing ›Ÿ<M SJ” ¾u=K< l^ß“LCA ´`´`
collection/ lag & Account receivable lag below ]þ`ƒ 100% S³Sdž¬
30 days/

XVI
XVII