Professional Documents
Culture Documents
One Way To Increase The Public Services Quality Is by Measuring People Satisfaction Index
One Way To Increase The Public Services Quality Is by Measuring People Satisfaction Index
One Way To Increase The Public Services Quality Is by Measuring People Satisfaction Index
For acquiring CS Index value we used weighted average score approaches with
the formula:
For ease the interpretation of CS Index which is 25-100 so the result above is
converted with base score 25, with the formula:
Considering public service unit has different characteristics, so every unit is
allowed to:
1. Add relevant elements
2. Give different weight for 14 dominant elements in public services unit, with note
that total of elements weight is 1.
CS Index Interval, Converted CS Index, Services Quality and Performance
PERCEPTION
VALUE
CS INDEX
INTERVAL
VALUE
CONVERTED
CS INDEX
INTERVAL
VALUE
SERVICE
QUALITY
SERVICE
PERFORMANCE
1 1,00 1,75 25 43,75 D BAD
2 1,76 2,50 43,76 62,50 C NOT GOOD
3 2,51 3,25 62,51 81,25 B GOOD
4 3,26 4,00 81,26 100,00 A VERY GOOD
H. DATA ANALYSIS INSTRUMENT
Using data entry processes data and index counting is done by using computer
programme or by database system to ensure accountably data process and good
responsibilities so service given to community has good quality and tested value.
I. COMMUNITYSATISFACTION INDEX ANALYSIS
CommunitySatisfaction Index is measured by using weighted average score for
every element (there are 14 elements) which results are:
Servi ce Qual i ty Tabl e year 2010
N
O
SERVICE ELEMENTS VALUE
SERVICE
QUALITY
PERFOR
MANCE
1 SERVICE PROCEDURES 2.88 B GOOD
2 SERVICE REQUIREMENTS 2.95 B GOOD
3 CLARITY OF SERVICE OFFICER 2.87 B GOOD
4 DISCIPLINE OF SERVICE OFFICER 2.86 B GOOD
5
RESPONSIBILITIES OF SERVICE
OFFICER
2.98 B GOOD
6 ABILITY OF SERVICE OFFICER 2.97 B GOOD
7 SERVICES SPEED 2.62 B GOOD
8 JUSTICE IN SERVICES 2.93 B GOOD
9
BEHAVIOUR AND FRIENDLINESS
OF OFFICER
3.01 B GOOD
10 APPROPRIATE SERVICE CHARGE 2.84 B GOOD
11 CERTAINTY SERVICE CHARGE 2.70 B GOOD
12
CERTAINTY OF SERVICE
SCHEDULE
2.72 B GOOD
13 ENVIRONMENTAL COMFORTNESS 2.84 B GOOD
14 SECURITY OF SERVICE 3.18 B GOOD
Based on CS Index calculation, total score obtain from every public services unit
acquired from total average score every element, while Composite Index Value for every
element is total average score and every services element times with the same weighted.
Therefore The CS index for year 2010 is:
(2.88 x 0,071) + (2.95 x 0,071) + (2.87 x 0,071) + (2.86 x 0,071) + (2.98 x 0,071)
+ (2.97 x 0,071) + (2.62 x 0, 071) + (2.93 x 0, 071) + (3.01 x 0, 071) + ( 2.84 x
0, 071) + (2.70 x 0,071) + (2.72 x 0,071) + (2.84 x 0,071) + (3.18 x 0, 071) = 2. 86
Index Val ue = 2. 86
Therefore the index value of service unit of year 2010 results concluded as:
1. CS index 2010 after converted = Index Value x Element Value = 2.86 x 25 =
71.62
2. Service Quality: B
3. Service Performance: Good
While for the year 2011, CS Index calculation is stated below:
Servi ce Qual i ty Tabl e year 2011
N
O
SERVICE ELEMENTS VALUE
SERVICE
QUALITY
PERFOR
MANCE
1 SERVICE PROCEDURES 3,03 B GOOD
2 SERVICE REQUIREMENTS 3,19 B GOOD
3 CLARITY OF SERVICE OFFICER 3,18 B GOOD
4 DISCIPLINE OF SERVICE OFFICER 3,11 B GOOD
5
RESPONSIBILITIES OF SERVICE
OFFICER
3,10 B GOOD
6 ABILITY OF SERVICE OFFICER 3,05 B GOOD
7 SERVICES SPEED 3,01 B GOOD
8 JUSTICE IN SERVICES 3,01 B GOOD
9
BEHAVIOUR AND FRIENDLINESS
OF OFFICER
3,06 B GOOD
10 APPROPRIATE SERVICE CHARGE 3,05 B GOOD
11 CERTAINTY SERVICE CHARGE 2,97 B GOOD
12
CERTAINTY OF SERVICE
SCHEDULE
3,03 B GOOD
13 ENVIRONMENTAL COMFORTNESS 3,08 B GOOD
14 SECURITY OF SERVICE 3,12 B GOOD
Based on CS Index calculation, total score obtain form every public services unit
acquired from total average score every element, while Composite Index Value for every
element is total average score and every services element times with the same weighted.
Therefore The CS index for year 2011 is:
(3.03 x 0,071) + (3.19 x 0,071) + (3.18 x 0,071) + (3.11 x 0,071) + (3.10 x 0,071)
+ (3.05 x 0,071) + (3.01 x 0, 071) + (3.01 x 0, 071) + (3.06 x 0, 071) + ( 3.05 x
0, 071) + (2.97 x 0,071) + (3.03 x 0,071) + (3.08 x 0,071) + (3.12 x 0, 071) = 2. 98
Index Val ue =2. 98
Therefore the index value of service unit of year 2011 results concluded as:
1. CS index 2011 after converted = Index Value x Element Value = 2.98 x 25 =
74.53
2. Service Quality: B
3. Service Performance: Good
While for the year 2012, CS Index Calculation is stated below:
Servi ce Qual i ty Tabl e year 2012
NO SERVICE ELEMENTS VALUE
SERVICE
QUALITY
PERFORMANCE
1 SERVICE PROCEDURES 2.73 B GOOD
2 SERVICE REQUIREMENTS 2.91 B GOOD
3
CLARITY OF SERVICE
OFFICER
2.81 B GOOD
4
DISCIPLINE OF SERVICE
OFFICER
2.82 B GOOD
5
RESPONSIBILITIES OF
SERVICE OFFICER
2.94 B GOOD
6
ABILITY OF SERVICE
OFFICER
2.88 B GOOD
7 SERVICES SPEED 2.63 B GOOD
8 JUSTICE IN SERVICES 2.72 B GOOD
9
BEHAVIOUR AND
FRIENDLINESS OF
OFFICER
2.93 B GOOD
10
APPROPRIATE SERVICE
CHARGE
2.72 B GOOD
11
CERTAINTY SERVICE
CHARGE
2.57 B GOOD
12
CERTAINTY OF SERVICE
SCHEDULE
2.63 B GOOD
13
ENVIRONMENTAL
COMFORTNESS
2.87 B GOOD
14 SECURITY OF SERVICE 3.11 B GOOD
Based on CS Index calculation, total score obtain form every public services unit
acquired from total average score every element, while Composite Index Value for every
element is total average score and every services element times with the same weighted.
Therefore The CS index for year 2012 is:
(2.73x 0,071) + (2.91x 0,071) + (2.81x 0,071) + (2.82x 0,071) + (2.94x 0,071) +
(2.98x 0,071) + (2.63x 0, 071) + (2.72x 0, 071) + (2,93x 0, 071) + ( 2.72x 0, 071)
+ (2.57x 0,071) + (2.63x 0,071) + (2.87x 0,071) + (3.11x 0, 071) = 2. 81
Index Val ue = 2. 79
Therefore the index value of service unit of year 2012 results concluded as:
1. CS index 2012 after converted = Index Value x Element Value = 2.79 x 25 =
69.70
2. Service Quality: B
3. Service Performance: Good
The conclusion are generally CS Index from 2010 2012 for the Civil
Registration Certificate service, Identification Card and Family Card publish at
Population and Civil Registration Agency, Subdistrict Offices, Permit handling and
Retribution at Integrated Permit Services and Capital Investment Office, and also health
service at local government clinic at Sei Rampah is GOOD.
Stated below is Comparison CS Index Table from 2010 2012.
Communi ty Sati sfacti on Index Compari son Tabl e
NO SERVICE ELEMENT
NUP
NUP
NUP
2010 2011
2012
(NUP
2010)
(NUP2011)
(NUP2012)
1 SERVICE PROCEDURE 2.88 0.20 3.03 0.22 2.73 0.19
2 SERVICE REQUIREMENTS 2.95 0.21 3.19 0.23 2.91 0.21
3
CLARITY OF SERVICE
OFFICER
2.87 0.20 3.18 0.23 2.81 0.20
4
DISCIPLINE OF SERVICE
OFFICER
2.86 0.20 3.11 0.22 2.82 0.20
5
RESPONSIBILITIES OF
SERVICE OFFICER
2.98 0.21 3.1 0.22 2.94 0.21
6
ABILITY OF SERVICE
OFFICER
2.97 0.21 3.05 0.22 2.88 0.20
7 SERVICES SPEED 2.62 0.19 3.01 0.21 2.63 0.19
8 JUSTICE IN SERVICES 2.93 0.21 3.01 0.21 2.72 0.19
9
BEHAVIOUR AND
FRIENDLINESS OF OFFICER
3.01 0.21 3.06 0.22 2.93 0.21
10
APPROPRIATE SERVICE
CHARGE
2.84 0.20 3.05 0.22 2.72 0.19
11
CERTAINTY SERVICE
CHARGE
2.7 0.19 2.97 0.21 2.57 0.18
12
CERTAINTY OF SERVICE
SCHEDULE
2.72 0.19 2.03 0.14 2.63 0.19
13
ENVIRONMENTAL
COMFORTNESS
2.84 0.20 3.08 0.22 2.87 0.20
14 SECURITY OF SERVICE 3.18 0.23 3.12 0.22 3.11 0.22
CS INDEX
2.86
2.98
2.79
SERVICE QUALITY GOOD GOOD GOOD
SERVICE PERFORMANCE GOOD GOOD GOOD
Based on table above we can see the differentiation between CS Index from
Public Services from 2010 2012. At 2010 the CS Index Value is 2.86, and increased
0.12 point to 2.98 in 2011. This increasement are influenced by increasement of value
from 14 elements, which can we see from the table above. However in 2012, the CS
Index Value is decreasing 0.19 from 2.98 in 2011 to 2.79 in 2012. This decreasement are
also influenced by decreasement of value from 14 elements in 2012.
We can also comparing that CS Index after converted from 2010 2012 there are
quality fluctuations, which is between 2010 2011 there was an increasement but there
was decreasement between 2011 2012. Eventhough there is value fluctuation but
service quality level still in good category and service performance is also good, but we
can see that there are fluctuations of increasement and decreasment that should be noticed
and analyzed furthermore and take actions to anticipate decreasement for every services
from Civil Registration Certificate, Identification card and Family card publish in
Population and Civil Registration Agency, Subdistrict Offices, Permit handling and
Retribution in Integrated Pemit Services and Capital Investment Offices and also health
services in Sei Rampah local government clinic.
J. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
1. CS Index in 2010 2012 for Civil Registration Certificate, Identification card and
Family card publish in Population and Civil Registration Agency, Subdistrict
Offices, Permit handling and Retribution in Integrated Pemit Services and Capital
Investment Offices and also health services in Sei Rampah local government
clinic which are measured from 14 elements that are service procedure, service
requirements, clarity of service officer, discipline of service officer,
responsibilities of service officer, ability of service officer, service speed, justice
in service, behaviour and friendliness of officer, appropriate sevice charge,
certainty of service charge, certainty of service schedule, environmental comfort,
and security of services based on characteristic that has been stated is GOOD.
2. Based on CS Index of Service Analysis in Civil Registration Certificate,
Identification card and Family card publish in Population and Civil Registration
Agency, Subdistrict Offices, Permit handling and Retribution in Integrated Pemit
Services and Capital Investment Offices and also health services in Sei Rampah
local government clinic in 2010 is 71.62, 2011 is 74.53, and 2012 is 69.70.
3. After comparing the CS Index 2010 to 2012 there are increasement in CS Index is
2.91 and from 2010 to 2011 the CS Index in 2011 is better from 2010 or 74.53
while CS Index of 2010 is 71.62, this means that service quality is increased.
However in 2011 2012 there are decreasement of 4.83 point which is caused by
CS Index of 2012 is 69.70, this means service quality is descreased. In the future,
this situation should be noticed more seriously so service quality to community
could be increased more.
Based on the conclusion, there are few things that need to be recommended,
which are stated below:
1. CS Index measurements primarily in basic services should be understanded as an
important thing in accountability valuing and Regency Governmental Success to
acquiring purpose autonomy policies that is increasing the service quality,
primarily in basic services such as population administration and civil registration,
permit and retribution handling and also health services.
2. Political Will is needed from Executives and Legislatives to realize commitment
of stocking enough the estimation of resources for increasing service quality in
Civil Registration Certificate, Identification card and Family card publish in
Population and Civil Registration Agency, Subdistrict Offices, Permit handling
and Retribution in Integrated Pemit Services and Capital Investment Offices and
also health services in Sei Rampah local government clinic.
3. Reward and Punishment should be established, for the staff that worked well will
be given rewards, such as incentives; in the other hand for the undisciplined staff
should be given punishment, and also to SKPD which has the best service quality
and performance which its purpose to repairement and increasement of services.
4. For the next CS Index measurement, good preparation and supports are needed
especially in amount of SKPD that measured, number of respondents, and also
measurement methods that are used so the result is better and can be used as a
reference for giving evaluating value to SKPD which has the best service quality
and performance in Serdang Bedagai Regency.
5. The need of improving questions and answers in the Community Satisfaction
Index questionnaires so that the questionnaires is more accurate and appropriate
with Serdang Bedagai condition and demography, such as answer options for
occupation and job should be added farmers, fishermen, and planters which are
main occupation for people of Serdang Bedagai.