CHAPTER 4 DATA ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION OF RESULTS
4.6 Cost Cutting in Relation to Service Quality
In this section the respondents were required to express their perceptions on the effects of cost cutting to the quality of service they provide to clients (which is either provincial departments, municipalities, public entities or municipal entities). The results reflected in Table 4.6 were taken from a 5 point Likert scale used wherein 1 indicated
‘Strongly Disagree’ and 5 indicated ‘Strongly Agree’.
Table 4.6: Frequency Distribution of Cost Cutting Effects to Service Quality
Item
Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
1 2 3 4 5
2.1. Cost cutting measures reduce quality of services provided to clients
11% 24% 6% 38% 21%
2.2. Cost cutting measures have promoted creativity in a manner in which service is delivered
2% 28% 27% 34% 9%
2.3. Cost cutting measures have minor or no effect on the
18% 42% 9% 25% 6%
55 Item
Strongly
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
1 2 3 4 5
quality of work delivered to clients
2.4. I am able to achieve my yearly targets regardless of the cost cutting measures
7% 34% 11% 40% 8%
2.7. My colleagues and I have resorted to pooling resources to achieve our yearly targets
2% 24% 22% 45% 8%
2.8. I do the bare minimum since the implementation of the cost cutting measures towards my duties
15% 44% 12% 27% 2%
2.9. My clients are still happy with the quality of work that I
provide since the
implementation of cost cutting measures
5% 25% 26% 32% 12%
Table 4.7: Mean, Standard Deviation, Mode, Skewness and Kurtosis Item N Mean Standard
Deviation Mode Skewness Kurtosis 2.1. Cost cutting measures
reduce quality of services provided to clients
95 3.362 1.328 4 -0.3846 -1.1876
2.2. Cost cutting measures
have promoted creativity in 93 3.185 1.010 4 -0.0163 -0.9257
56
Item N Mean Standard
Deviation Mode Skewness Kurtosis a manner in which service
is delivered
2.3. Cost cutting measures have minor to no effect on the quality of work delivered to clients
93 2.576 1.218 2 0.4266 -1.0185
2.4. I am able to achieve my yearly targets regardless of the cost cutting measures
95 3.074 1.169 4 -0.1241 -1.2363
2.7. My colleagues and I have resorted to pooling resources to achieve our yearly targets
92 3.330 0.984 4 -0.3249 -0.8274
2.8. I do the bare minimum since the implementation of the cost cutting measures towards my duties
93 2.576 1.106 2 0.3296 -1.0623
2.9. My clients are still happy with the quality of work that I provide since the implementation of cost cutting measures
95 3.181 1.101 4 -0.0936 -0.8538
The data presented in Table 4.6 which contain frequency distributions is discussed together with the data from Table 4.7 which descriptive statistics for similar data. Table 4.7 presents sample mean which indicates average scores, standard deviation which describes how spread out the responses were, mode which shows responses with the
57
highest frequency and kurtosis which describes trends as the mean would not be able to show outliers.
Based on the information reflected in Table 4.6, most of the respondents (59%) agreed that cost cutting measures reduce the quality of services provided to clients. This is further supported by the mean (3.362) and the mode (4) as displayed in Table 4.7.
The views of the respondents were further subdivided into management and junior staff as per Table 4.8 to find out whether management and junior staff have differing perceptions about the service quality. The results show that most management and junior staff members agree that cost cutting measures reduce the quality of service rendered to the clients.
Table 4.8: Mean, Standard Deviation and Mode - Management and Junior Staff Comparisons on Cost Cutting Effects to the Service Quality
Item N Mean Variance Standard Deviation Mode
Management 50 3.440 1.686 1.299 4
Junior Staff 45 3.244 1.829 1.352 4
Whilst the results relating to creativity and cost cutting were evenly distributed shown by the skewness of (-0.0163), most respondents (60%) disagreed with a view that cost cutting measures have minor to no effect on the quality of work delivered to clients. A moderate mean score of 3.074 relating to the achievement of yearly targets in the midst of cost cutting measures was recorded for all staff members which meant that there is generally no significant impact on the annual performance plans of the department. This is effected by the mean score of 3.330 relating to the pooling of organisational resources by staff when planning and executing their yearly targets.
In assessing the degree of effort put in by staff in performing their duties under cost cutting measures, most staff members (59%) disagreed with the concept of doing the bare minimum due to cost cutting. This is also reflected in Table 4.7 with a kurtosis of -1.0623 which indicates a ‘light tailed’ distribution in support this disagreement. Light tailed distribution means that there is more data in distribution tails and less data in distribution peak (around the mean which is represented by neutral) which in this case is more responses either strongly disagreeing or agreeing (DeCarlo, 1997).
58
The study further sought to establish the extent of clients’ satisfaction regarding the quality of work that the KwaZulu-Natal Treasury staff members provide since the implementation of cost cutting measures. The study revealed that most (44%) staff members perceive that they provide a satisfactory quality of work to clients. A moderate mean per Table 4.9 below of 3.160 and 3.222 (both neutral and agreeing with satisfactory service quality) for management and junior staff members respectively, with a mode of 4 (which is assigned to agree per Likert Scale) indicated that most staff members feel that their clients are still satisfied with the service delivered.
Table 4.9: Mean, Standard Deviation and Mode - Management and Junior Staff Comparisons on Extent of Clients’ Satisfaction
Item N Mean Variance Standard
Deviation Mode
Management 50 3.160 1.334 1.155 4
Junior Staff 45 3.222 1.062 1.030 4