Assessing Quality of Police Services in Hyderabad
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Assessing Quality of Police Services in Hyderabad PROJECT REPORT ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF COLLEGE OF INDIA (ASCI) HYDERABAD Study Sponsored By Sardar Vallabhai Patel National Police Academy (NPA) Shivaramapalli, Hyderabad - 500 052, Telangana , India. CONTENTS PAGE NO. List of Tables List of Figures Chapter I Introduction 1-4 Chapter II Literature Review 2-12 Chapter III Research Methodology 13-15 Chapter IV Analysis and Interpretation 16-58 Chapter V Findings, Recommendations and Conclusion 59-63 Appendices Questionnaire for Police Officials of Hyderabad Questionnaire for Citizens of Hyderabad LIST OF TABLES Table No Title of the Table Page No 4.1 Gender and Age of Police Officials 26 4.2 Qualification and Experience 27 4.3 Designation of Police Officials 28 4.4 Gender and age of citizens 29 4.5 Qualification and employment status of Citizens 30 4.6 Marital Status of Citizens 31 4.7 Family Income of Citizens 32 4.8 Type of Citizen: Basis of Opinion 33 4.9 Means of expectations and perceptions 34 4.10 Paired Statistics for SERVQUAL scale 35-36 4.11 Paired Statistics for SERVQUAL Dimensions 37 4.12 T‘ Test for SERVQUAL DIMENSIONS 41 4.13 Summary of Gap 5 SERVQUAL Scores 42 4.14 Root Causes of Gaps 43 4.15 Means of Root Causes of Gaps 44 4.16 Paired statistics: Citizens 46-47 4.17 Paired Statistics for SERVQUAL scale: Citizens 48-49 4.18 Paired Statistics for SERVQUAL DIMENSIONS: Citizens 52 4.19 T‘ Test for SERVQUAL DIMENSIONS: Citizens 52 4.20 52 Citizens‘ Expectations: Wilks' Lambda 4.21 53 Citizens‘ Expectations : Standardized Canonical Discriminant Function Coefficients 4.22 54 Citizens‘ Expectations : Functions at Group Centroids 4.23 Citizens‘ Perceptions : Wilks' Lambda 56 4.24 Citizens‘ Perceptions : Standardized Canonical 56 Discriminant Function Coefficients 4.25 Citizens‘ Perceptions : Functions at Group 57 Centroids LIST OF FIGURES Description Title of the Figure Page No Figure 1 Gaps Model 3 Graph 2 Citizens Expectations: Canonical discriminant functions 55 Graph 2 Citizens Expectations: Canonical discriminant functions 57 Acknowledgements At the outset, We would like to express our deepest appreciation to Sardar Vallabhai Patel National Police Academy (NPA) for giving Administrative Staff College of India (ASCI), the opportunity to take up this project. we express our deepest gratitude and Special Thanks to Dr. A. K. Saxena, National Police Academy (NPA), Dr. Malkondaiah, IPS, Director, Andhra Pradesh Police Academy (APPA), who shared their valuable views and experiences on service quality. Without their guidance and constant support this project would not have been able to come to its logical conclusion. We place on record our Special Thanks to all the Constables, Head Constable, INS, Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) and Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), Members of Andhra Pradesh Police Academy (APPA), who participated in the Focus Group Discussions (FGD) on Assessing Service Quality of Police at APPA and shared their opinions and gave suggestions which provided greater insights on measuring service quality. Our Special Thanks to Our College for always being a constant motivator and guide in taking up new projects by the faculty and contributing to the knowledge bank. Last but not the least, We would like to thank my Colleagues at Administrative Staff College of India (ASCI) Mr. Sujeet Kumar, Research Associate, for his support. Thanking You, Yours Sincerely, Dr. Shahaida P Dr. Prabhati Pati Area Chair: Marketing Director: Centre for Management Studies [email protected] [email protected] Administrative Staff College of India Bella Vista, Khairatabad Hyderabad - 500 082 Chapter I 1.1 Introduction The police force constitutes an integral part of the law enforcement machinery in India. The police perform multiple roles in society by reducing incidence of crime, protection of society, upholding law and order etc. According to Zeithmal et al (19901) honesty, excellence and the principle of giving full value for what we receive would become the rule of conduct in both business and personal relationships in a ―Quality Society‖. The citizens of the country pay taxes to the government and expect certain services to be provided to them. The Citizens become the consumers of the service and the police are the service providers. The term ―Service Quality‖ can be defined as the extent of discrepancy (difference) between customer‘s expectation (ideal service) from the service and their perception (actual service). Service delivery happens during interactions between contact employees (government officials) and citizens, attitudes and behaviors of the contact employees can influence citizens‘ perceptions of service quality (Schneider and Bowen, 19852). Beatson et al (2008)3 found that percvepved employee satisfaction, perceived employee loyalty, and perceived employee commitment has a significant impact on perceived product and service quality (in commercial setting). Zeithmal et al (1990) proposed five dimensions by which customers evaluate service quality: Tangibles-the appearance of the physical facilities, equipment, personnel and communication materials. 1 Zeithmal, V.A, Parasuraman, A and Berry, L. L. (1990), Delivering Service quality, The Free Press, New York, NY 2 Schneider, B and Bowen, D. (1985). Employee and Customer Perceptions of Services in banks: Replication and Extension. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.70. p 423-433 3 Beatson, A, Lings, I and Gudergan, S. (2008), Employee Behaviour and Relationship Quality: Impact on customers, The Service Industries Journal. Vol. 28 (2), p. 211-223. 1 Reliability- the ability to perform the promised service dependaly and accurtely Responsiveness- The willingness to help customers and provide prompt service. Assurance: The knowledge and courtesy of employees and their ability to convey trust and confidence and Empathy- The caring, individualised attention the organization provides its customers. When adapted to Public service quality, the SERVQUAL Gap Model can be described as follows: Gap 1 is the positioning gap: The managements‘ (top administration) perceptions of citizens‘ expectations and the relative importance citizens‘ attach to quality dimensions. Gap 2 is the specification gap: The difference between what management (top administration) believes the citizen wants and what the citizens expect the government to provide. Gap 3 is the delivery gap: The difference between the service provided by the employee of the government and the specifications set by the management (administration). Gap 4 is the communication gap: The promises communicated by the government to the citizen do not match the citizens‘ expectations of those external promises. Gap 5 is the perception gap: The difference between the citizens‘ internal perception and expectation of the services. Public Services are responsible and accountable to citizens and communities. Several researchers have dealt with service quality in public services (Wisniewski and Donnelly, 19964; Rowley, 19985; Brysland and Curry, 20016). According to Gowen et al (2001)7 service provision is more complicated 4 Wisniewski, M and Donnelly, M (1996), Measuring Service Quality in the Public Sector: the Potential for SERVQUAL. Total Quality Management, Vol. 7 (4). P. 357-365. 5 Rowley, Jennifer (1998). Quality Measurement in the Public Sector: Some Perspectives from the Service Quality Literature. Total Quality Management, Vol. 92(3). P. 321-333 6 Brysland, A and Curry, A (2001), Service Improvements in public Services Using SERVQUAL, Managing Service Quality, Vol.11(6).p. 389-401 7 Gowan, M. Seymour, J., I Barreche. S and Lackey. C. (2001). Service Quality in a Public Agency: Same Expectations but Different Perceptions by Employees, managers and Customers. Journal of Quality Management. Vol.6.p. 275-291. 2 in the delivery of public services as it involves finding out unexpressed citizen needs, prioritizing citizen needs, allocating resources based on priorities and justifying the same. 1.2 Problem Statement According to the Conceptual Model of Service Quality proposed by Zeithmal et al (1990) as shown in diagram 1. Figure 1 Zeithmal et al (19888 and 1990) identified four gaps which would lead to the fifth and most important gap that is the difference between what the customer (here citizen) expects and what the provider (police) delivers. 8 Parasuraman, A. Zeithmal, V.A. and Berry, l.L (1988), SERVQUAL: A Multiple-item Scale for Measuring Customer perceptions of Service Quality, Journal of Retailing, Vol.62, p. 12-40. 3 1. Gap1: the gap between customer‘s (citizen‘s) expectations and management (police) perceptions of these expectations 2. Gap 2: the gap between management (police) perceptions of customer (citizen) expectations and service quality specifications 3. Gap 3: the gap between the service quality specifications and the actual delivery of these 4. Gap 4: the gap between the perceptions/expectations of customers (citizens) of the service and what is communicated by the organization (police) 5. Gap 5: the gap between perceived service and expected service 4 Chapter II 2.1 Literature Review Quality has come to be recognized as a strategic tool for attaining operational efficiency and improved performance in public and private services. This is true for both the goods and services sectors. However, the problem with management of service quality in Government departments is that quality is not easily identifiable and measurable due to inherent characteristics of services which make them different from goods. Various