The Study on the Model and Evaluation of the Public Perceived Administrative Services Quality:A Comparative Study of Different Regions and Different Public
Lü Weixia,Chen Ye,Huang Jing
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1008-3448.2009.04.019
2009-01-01
Abstract:With the development of government reform movements and the deepening of government performance evaluations across the world, government administrative service quality appraisal has received considerable attention at home and abroad. By reviewing the researches on the customer perceived quality in services industry, and public service quality standards taken by governments of western countries in their quality reform movements and quality dimensions proposed by the administrative experts, this paper explores the characteristics of the public perceived quality of government administrative services such as administrative examination and approval, administrative grant, etc. We develop evaluation dimensions and evaluation scales to measure the perceived quality of administrative services. This paper combines qualitative and quantitative research.The results of data analysis show that government agencies have their own evaluation dimensions and scales of service quality, which are different from those of enterprises and other suppliers of public services. Our model contains six dimensions: convenience, responsiveness, transparency, legitimacy, effectiveness, and competence. The newly-established evaluation dimensions and scales are to be used as criteria to measure public perception of administrative services provided by local governments. Moreover, comparing the data of public perception from different regions, departments, academic qualifications, and survey locations, we analyze the differences among the public and try to explore the possible reasons why different kinds of people have different perceptions of administrative service quality. Reasons for these differences include a lack of public service spirit among civil servants, deficiencies in the administrative system, differences in financial inputs for the improvement of service quality in different regions, differences between the interests of different types of people, and differences between service designs in different places. Furthermore, this study puts forward some suggestions for addressing these differences.