TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY AND SERVICE DELIVERY IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR: NATIONAL TRANSPORT AND SAFETY AUTHORITY IN KENYA

BRENDA SAWE, DR. JOHN CHELUGET (Ph.D)

Abstract


Technology operational efficiency practice as a business process is adopted by organizations to make the processes uniform and free of errors. It also helps increase speed of processing and in turn improves customer satisfaction since the product or service quality is predictable. Despite the efforts by the National Government to improve service delivery, adoption of technology operational efficiency has not been wholly effected. It was against this background that the study sought to find out the influence of technology operational efficiency on service delivery in the public sector, a case of National Transport and Safety Authority. The study employed descriptive research design and the population of this study was the 450 Staff member working at NTSA head offices in Nairobi County. Since the study population was large, the study adopted 20% of the population. Questionnaires were used to obtain important information about the population. Data collected was both quantitative and qualitative in nature. Descriptive statistical tools helped the researcher to describe the data and determine the extent used. Analysis was done quantitatively and qualitatively by use of descriptive statistics. This included percentages, mean and standard deviation which were presented using tables, bar charts to give a clear picture of the research findings. A simple regression model was used in determining the level of influence the independent variables had on dependent variable. The study concluded that operational efficiency has a significant effect on service delivery at National Transport and Safety Authority. Moving forward the NTSA management must ensure that all in house procured systems are user-friendly, programmers in this case programming ensure the systems they develop is subjected to tests in order to ascertain its operational efficiency and predict its ability to accommodate the ever growing demand with quality service delivery at NTSA.

Key Words: Technology Operational Efficiency, Service Delivery

CITATION:  Sawe, B., & Cheluget, J. (2020). Technology operational efficiency and service delivery in the public sector: National Transport and Safety Authority in Kenya. The Strategic Journal of Business & Change Management, 7 (4), 753 – 764.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Al-Hawari, M. & Ward, T. (2016). The effect of automated service quality on Australian banks financial performance and the mediating role of customer satisfaction. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 24(2), 127 – 147

Aliata, V. (2016). Relationship between Service Quality and Customer Satisfaction of Commercial Bank Customers, Nairobi Kenya. International Journal of Management and Corporate Affairs. 25(5), 563-583.

Anderson, W. & Claes, F. (2014), Customer satisfaction and loyalty in E-Markets: A PLS path modeling approach. The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 221–234.

Bettencourt, L. (2016), “Customization of the Service Experience: The Role of the Front line Employee,” International Journal in Services Industry Management, 7 (2), 2–20

Boyle, L. (2017). Extending the Technology Acceptance Model to assess automation. Cognition, Technology & Work, 14(1), 39-49.

Flint, D. (2016). Exploring customers’ perceptions in creating and delivering value: Technology-based self-service as an illustration. Services Marketing Quarterly, 27(1), 57–72.

Gakuu, C. (2017). The link between sales force automation system and sales performance in the consumer goods industry in Nairobi, Kenya. International Academic Journal of Information Systems and Technology, 2(1), 36-48.

Karin, A. (2014) "Service quality and customer retention: building long‐ term relationships", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 38 Issue: 11/12, pp.1577-1598

Kelly, D. (2000). A lifecycle model of continuous clinical process innovation. Journal of Healthcare Management, 45(5): 308

Kim, D. (2018). Information technology and organizational performance within international business-to-business relationships: a review and an integrated conceptual framework. International Marketing Review, 25(5), 563-583.

Lim, C. (2019). Criteria of project success: An exploratory re-examination. International Journal of Project Management. 17. 243-248.

Mays, N. (2018). The impact of the UK NHS purchaser-provider split on the ‘rational’ introduction of new medical technologies. Health Policy, 43: 103-123

Mbuvi, L. (2016). Factors Affecting Automation of Inventory Management in Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises: A Case Study of Kitui County. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 6(1), 15-27.

Mise, W. (2016). The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations. Organization science, 3(3), 398-427.

National Transport and Safety Authority (2015). Citizens’ Service Delivery Charter. National Transport and Safety Authority (2016). Online Services. Accessed on 28/03/19 from http://www.ntsa.go.ke/index.php

Rye, C. & Kimberly, J. (2017). The adoption of innovations by provider organisations in healthcare. Medical Care Research and Review, 64 (3): 235- 278

Tavassoli, S., & Karlsson, C. (2015). Persistence of various types of innovation analyzed and explained. Research Policy, 44(10), 1887-1901.

Van Aken, J. (2015). Management research as a Design Science: articulating the research products of Mode 2 knowledge production. British Journal of Management 16: 19-36

Wainwright, D. (2017). The application and adaptation of a diffusion of innovation framework for information systems research in NHS general medical practice. Journal of Information Technology, 22: 44-58

Zuboff, S. (2015). Big other: Surveillance capitalism and the prospects of an information civilization. Journal of Information Technology.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.61426/sjbcm.v7i4.1819

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

PAST ISSUES:
20242023202220212020201920182017201620152014
Vol 11, No 2 [2024]Vol 10, No 4 [2023]Vol 9, No 4 [2022]Vol 8, No 4 [2021]Vol 7, No 4 [2020]Vol 6, No 4 [2019]Vol 5, No 4 [2018]Vol 4, No 4 [2017]Vol 3, No 4 [2016]Vol 2, No 2 [2015]Vol 1, No 2 [2014]
 Vol 11, No 1 [2024] Vol 10, No 3 [2023] Vol 9, No 3 [2022]Vol 8, No 3 [2021]Vol 7, No 3 [2020]Vol 6, No 3 [2019]Vol 5, No 3 [2019]Vol 4, No 3 [2017]Vol 3, No 3 [2016]Vol 2, No 1 [2015]Vol 1, No 1 [2014]
  Vol 10, No 2 [2023] Vol 9, No 2 [2022]Vol 8, No 2 [2021]Vol 7, No 2 [2020]Vol 6, No 2 [2019]Vol 5, No 2 [2018]Vol 4, No 2 [2017]Vol 3, No 2 [2016]  
  Vol 10, No 1 [2023] Vol 9, No 1 [2022]  Vol 8, No 1 [2021]Vol 7, No 1 [2020]Vol 6, No 1 [2019]Vol 5, No 1 [2018]Vol 4, No 1 [2017]Vol 3, No 1 [2016]   


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.