INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS
ISSN(p in ): 2643-9840, ISSN(online): 2643-9875
Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025
DOI: 10.47191/ijm a/ 8-i10-05, Impac Fac o : 8.266
Page No. 5524-5538
IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025 www.ijm a.in Page 5524
Analyzing Se ice Gaps and Imp o emen P io i ies in Academic Adminis a i e
Se ices: A Gap and Impo ance-Pe o mance Analysis App oach
Sya’ban Nu U omo1, Wawan Sundawan Suhe man2, Ok a ia ini Yahya Rahmadhan y3
1,2Facul y o Spo Science and Heal h, Uni e si as Nege i Yogyaka a
3Facul y o Teache T aining and Educa ion, Uni e si as Singape bangsa Ka awang
ABSTRACT: This s udy aims o analyze he quali y o academic adminis a i e se ices in he Depa men o P ima y School Physical
Educa ion, Facul y o Spo s and Heal h Sciences, Uni e si as Nege i Yogyaka a, using he Gap Analysis and Impo ance
Pe o mance Analysis (IPA) app oaches. The esea ch ocuses on examining he gap be ween s uden s’ expec a ions o academic
adminis a i e se ices and hei pe cep ions o he se ices ecei ed, and iden i ying p io i y a eas o imp o emen based on
le els o impo ance and pe o mance. A quan i a i e su ey design was employed. The esea ch sample consis ed o s uden s
om a ious acul ies selec ed h ough pu posi e sampling. The esea ch ins umen was a ques ionnai e wi h a i e-poin Like
scale co e ing se ice quali y dimensions, namely angibles, eliabili y, esponsi eness, assu ance, and empa hy. Da a analysis was
conduc ed by calcula ing he gap be ween pe cep ion and expec a ion sco es and mapping se ice indica o s in o he IPA
Ca esian diag am o de e mine imp o emen p io i ies. The esul s show ha all se ice quali y dimensions had nega i e gap
alues, indica ing ha se ice pe o mance has no ully me s uden s’ expec a ions. The angibles and eliabili y dimensions had
he mos signi ican gaps, highligh ing he need o imp o e acili ies and se ice consis ency. Based on he IPA, se e al se ice
indica o s ell in o he quad an o op-p io i y imp o emen s, pa icula ly ega ding se ice imeliness, acili y a ailabili y, and
he compe ence o adminis a i e s a . Acco dingly, his s udy ecommends con inuously imp o ing academic adminis a i e
se ice quali y by upg ading acili ies, enhancing human esou ce capaci y, and s eng hening echnology-based se ice sys ems.
KEYWORDS: Academic se ice quali y; Gap analysis; Impo ance-Pe o mance Analysis
I. INTRODUCTION
The de elopmen o he educa ion sec o has posi ioned highe educa ion ins i u ions no only as p o ide s o academic
se ices bu also as c ucial se ice indus ies. Uni e si ies a e expec ed o go beyond deli e ing educa ional se ices by s i ing o
mee he expec a ions o s uden s who pu sue highe educa ion, in ending o de elop hei po en ial and enhance hei
compe i i eness in he job ma ke . Educa ion s akeholde s ecognize he impo ance o b oadening hei pe spec i es o achie e
uni e sal access o quali y basic educa ion (Ga i a e al., 2019). The main ou pu o highe educa ion is human esou ces who
con ibu e o na ional de elopmen and indus y, while i s se ice use s include mul iple s akeholde s such as s uden s, pa en s,
and employe s who hi e g adua es om hese ins i u ions.
In he cu en e a, se ice quali y is conside ed one o he key ac o s in achie ing compe i i e ad an age. This is pa icula ly
ele an as he quali y o academic se ices signi ican ly in luences s uden s’ choice o highe educa ion ins i u ions. S uden
sa is ac ion is achie ed when he se ices p o ided align wi h hei needs and expec a ions. Se ice quali y can be unde s ood as
he deg ee o excellence expec ed, along wi h e o s o main ain such excellence in o de o mee s uden expec a ions.
Conside able a en ion has been gi en o measu ing se ice quali y, wi h SERVQUAL (Se ice Quali y) being one o he mos widely
ecognized ins umen s in oduced by Pa asu aman (2001:26). This amewo k iden i ies a comp ehensi e se o se ice a ibu es
ha cus ome s use o e alua e pe o mance, encompassing i e dimensions: eliabili y, esponsi eness, assu ance, empa hy, and
angibles.
To deli e high-quali y educa ional se ices, uni e si ies wi h es ablished epu a ions a e expec ed o main ain hei c edibili y
h ough con inuous e o s o enhance se ice quali y. S ong se ice pe o mance is c i ical in mee ing s uden s’ expec a ions as
p ima y consume s o highe educa ion. When expec a ions a e ul illed, s uden sa is ac ion is achie ed. In his ega d, s uden
sa is ac ion is closely linked o he deg ee o alignmen be ween hei expec a ions and he ac ual quali y o se ices ecei ed.
Analyzing Se ice Gaps and Imp o emen P io i ies in Academic Adminis a i e Se ices: A Gap and Impo ance-
Pe o mance Analysis App oach
IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025 www.ijm a.in Page 5525
One s a egy o ensu e his alignmen is by conduc ing se ice quali y e alua ions o de e mine whe he disc epancies exis
be ween s uden s’ expec a ions and hei pe cep ions o ecei ed se ices (Rosi, 2015). High-quali y academic se ices a e c ucial
in suppo ing he success o he educa ional p ocess a uni e si ies. As he main se ice use s, s uden s o m expec a ions and
pe cep ions o he quali y o academic adminis a ion ins i u ions p o ide. To assess and be e unde s and he a ibu es o
se ice ha s uden s alue, he SERVQUAL model is equen ly applied. This model ou lines i e key dimensions ha shape se ice
quali y: (1) Tangibles: physical acili ies, equipmen , pe sonnel appea ance, and communica ion ma e ials; (2) Reliabili y: he
abili y o pe o m p omised se ices dependably and accu a ely; (3) Responsi eness: he willingness and abili y o assis s uden s
and p o ide p omp se ice; (4) Assu ance: knowledge, cou esy, and us wo hiness o s a ; and (5) Empa hy: indi idualized
a en ion and genuine conce n o s uden s. Unde s anding hese a ibu es is essen ial o ensu e ha se ices mee s uden
needs and expec a ions, he eby enhancing bo h sa is ac ion and academic pe o mance. Academic adminis a i e se ices, in
pa icula , play a i al ole in suppo ing he eaching and lea ning p ocess. High-quali y adminis a i e se ices posi i ely in luence
s uden sa is ac ion and depa men al ope a ional e ec i eness. Howe e , deli e ing op imal adminis a i e se ices o en poses
challenges. To add ess his issue, se ice quali y is ypically assessed using SERVQUAL and u he analyzed wi h Gap Analysis (GA)
and Impo ance-Pe o mance Analysis (IPA). Gap Analysis is used o examine di e ences be ween expec a ions and pe cep ions
ac oss he i e SERVQUAL dimensions. A he same ime, IPA p o ides a compa ison o expec ed and ac ual se ice pe o mance
om he pe spec i e o s uden s.
Add essing hese gaps equi es p oposing p io i y ac ions g ounded in an in-dep h analysis o cu en academic se ice quali y.
Iden i ying c i ical a eas o imp o emen and implemen ing a ge ed s a egies can signi ican ly enhance he quali y o academic
adminis a i e se ices. This s udy, he e o e, aims o iden i y he mos c i ical se ice a ibu es o s uden s and p o ide p io i y
ecommenda ions o imp o e he quali y o academic adminis a i e se ices in highe educa ion ins i u ions.
II. METHOD
This s udy employed an e alua ion esea ch app oach. The ocus o he s udy was o examine and analyze policies ela ed o
academic adminis a i e se ices implemen ed by he Depa men o P ima y School Physical Educa ion, Facul y o Spo s Science
and Heal h, Uni e si as Nege i Yogyaka a. The policy analysis model applied in his esea ch was con en analysis, combined wi h
Gap Analysis and Impo ance-Pe o mance Analysis (IPA). Acco ding o Bungin (2012, p. 231), con en analysis is a esea ch
echnique used o gene a e eplicable and alid in e ences om da a wi hin i s con ex . Simila ly, Widodo (2006, p. 23)
emphasized ha con en analysis cen e s on he in e p e a ion o ex ual o se ice- ela ed con en . In his s udy, he objec o
analysis was he academic adminis a i e se ices p o ided by he Depa men o P ima y School Physical Educa ion, Facul y o
Spo s Science and Heal h, Uni e si as Nege i Yogyaka a. The analysis was conduc ed by assessing se ice a ibu es based on
he SERVQUAL dimensions, angibles, eliabili y, esponsi eness, empa hy, and assu ance (Pa asu aman e al., 1985), as well as
an addi ional dimension o ele ance, which e lec s he ex en o which he se ices align wi h s uden needs and expec a ions.
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A. RESULTS
1. Analysis o he Con o mi y Le el o Impo ance and Pe o mance Va iables
The con o mi y le el analysis was conduc ed o de e mine he achie emen o se ice quali y pe o mance in educa ion as
assessed by s uden s. This measu emen was ca ied ou by compa ing he ac ual se ices ecei ed wi h he expec ed se ices.
The con o mi y alue, exp essed as a pe cen age, e lec s he quali y o se ice pe o mance based on he a io be ween s uden s’
pe cep ions o ac ual se ices and hei expec a ions.
a. Con o mi y Le el o Academic Adminis a i e Se ices in he Depa men o P ima y School Physical Educa ion
Table 1. Calcula ion o he Con o mi y Le el o Academic Adminis a i e Se ice Quali y in he Tangibles Dimension
No
Desc ip ion
Mean Impo ance
Mean Pe o mance
Sui abili y Le el %
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
1
The a ailable physical acili ies
which adequa ely suppo
academic adminis a i e se ices.
5.49
5.44
5.18
5.26
94%
97%
Analyzing Se ice Gaps and Imp o emen P io i ies in Academic Adminis a i e Se ices: A Gap and Impo ance-
Pe o mance Analysis App oach
IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025 www.ijm a.in Page 5526
2
The adminis a i e se ice oom is
equipped wi h adequa e acili ies
5.37
5.17
96%
3
Equipmen used in adminis a ion
is always in good condi ion
5.39
5.12
96%
4
The a ailabili y o compu e s and
o he echnologies g ea ly
suppo s adminis a i e p ocesses
5.52
5.33
97%
5
Technology used in adminis a i e
se ices is always up- o-da e
5.33
5.25
96%
6
Adminis a i e s a always
p o ide equi ed documen s
p omp ly
5.44
5.27
98%
7
Adminis a i e documen s
p o ided a e always nea and
comple e
5.39
5.33
98%
8
Adminis a i e s a a e always
nea ly and poli ely d essed while
on du y
5.43
5.33
98%
9
The appea ance o adminis a i e
s a e lec s p o essionalism in
hei wo k
5.42
5.32
98%
The o e all mean con o mi y pe cen age o he angibles dimension was 97%, which alls in o he “good” ca ego y
since i exceeds 90%. Howe e , one a ibu e, he a ailabili y o physical acili ies (94%), was below he a e age, making i he
lowes con o mi y pe cen age wi hin his dimension.
Table 2. Calcula ion o Se ice Quali y Con o mi y in Academic Adminis a ion
No
Desc ip ion
Mean Impo ance
Mean Pe o mance
Sui abili y Le el %
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimensi
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
1
Adminis a i e s a p o ide
consis en se ices o e ime.
5.37
5.19
5.25
5.04
98%
97%
2
Adminis a i e se ices a e deli e ed
wi h a high le el o consis ency
5.4
5.22
97%
3
I always ecei e accu a e in o ma ion
om he adminis a i e s a .
5.43
5.33
98%
4
Adminis a i e s a always deli e
se ices on ime.
5.45
5.25
96%
5
I o en expe ience slow se ice.
3.39
3.34
99%
6
Adminis a i e s a ha e good
capabili ies in handling a ious ypes
o eques s.
5.41
5.21
96%
7
The se ices p o ided by he
adminis a i e s a mee my
expec a ions as a s uden .
5.42
5.21
96%
Analyzing Se ice Gaps and Imp o emen P io i ies in Academic Adminis a i e Se ices: A Gap and Impo ance-
Pe o mance Analysis App oach
IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025 www.ijm a.in Page 5527
8
Adminis a i e s a a e able o
e ec i ely esol e he p oblems I
encoun e .
5.42
5.22
96%
9
I us he compe ence o he
adminis a i e s a in handling
adminis a i e issues.
5.41
5.27
97%
Reliabili y e e s o employees’ abili y o deli e se ices accu a ely and consis en ly. The mean con o mi y pe cen age
in his dimension was 97%. The lowes con o mi y alues (96%) we e ound in a ibu es ela ed o p oblem-sol ing and he abili y
o handle issues e ec i ely.
Table 3. Calcula ion o Se ice Quali y Con o mi y in Academic Adminis a ion
No
Desc ip ion
Mean Impo ance
Mean Pe o mance
Sui abili y Le el %
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
1
Adminis a i e s a always espond
quickly o s uden complain s.
5.46
5.18
5.22
4.94
96%
95%
2
My complain s a e always handled
p omp ly.
5.38
5.12
95%
3
I can easily access assis ance om
he adminis a i e s a when
needed.
5.41
5.21
96%
4
Adminis a i e s a a e always eady
o help when I encoun e di icul ies.
5.37
5.21
97%
5
The in o ma ion p o ided by he
adminis a i e s a is always clea
and easy o unde s and.
5.39
5.21
97%
6
No ice boa ds o o he media a e
always upda ed wi h he la es
in o ma ion.
5.36
5.05
94%
7
Adminis a i e s a p o ide
addi ional use ul in o ma ion
wi hou being asked.
5.35
5.12
96%
8
Adminis a i e s a handle my
complain s se iously and ho oughly.
5.38
5.19
97%
9
Adminis a i e s a a e no always
a ailable a hei desk.
3.53
3.16
89%
Responsi eness, o he abili y o adminis a i e s a o p omp ly add ess s uden conce ns, is c ucial and e lec s
p oac i e ac ions aken be o e complain s a ise. Based on Table 3, he mean con o mi y pe cen age o esponsi eness was
95%. The lowes pe cen age (89%) was eco ded o he a ibu e “Adminis a i e s a a e no always a ailable a hei desk.”
Analyzing Se ice Gaps and Imp o emen P io i ies in Academic Adminis a i e Se ices: A Gap and Impo ance-
Pe o mance Analysis App oach
IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025 www.ijm a.in Page 5528
Table 4. Calcula ion o Se ice Quali y Con o mi y in Academic Adminis a ion
No
Desc ip ion
Mean Impo ance
Mean Pe o mance
Sui abili y Le el %
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
1
Adminis a i e s a ha e su icien
knowledge o he in o ma ion I need.
5.36
5.15
5.16
4.98
96%
97%
2
The in o ma ion p o ided by
adminis a i e s a always mee s
my needs.
5.38
5.17
96%
3
Adminis a i e se ice policies a e
well socialized o s uden s.
5.38
5.17
96%
4
Adminis a i e se ice p ocedu es
a e easy o unde s and and ollow.
5.33
5.17
97%
5
My pe sonal da a and in o ma ion
a e kep con iden ial by
adminis a i e s a .
5.41
5.33
99%
6
I can easily ob ain he pe sonal da a
o o he s uden s.
3.4
3.36
99%
7
Adminis a i e s a a e always
iendly when se ing me.
5.46
5.26
96%
8
I eel com o able in e ac ing wi h
adminis a i e s a .
5.44
5.21
96%
As shown in Table 4, he mean con o mi y pe cen age o he assu ance dimension was 97%. The lowes con o mi y
alues, a 96%, we e ound in i e a ibu es. Howe e , since all alues emain abo e 90%, hese do no equi e immedia e
imp o emen .
Table 5. Calcula ion o Se ice Quali y Con o mi y in Academic Adminis a ion
No
Desc ip ion
Mean Impo ance
Mean Pe o mance
Sui abili y Le el %
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
1
Adminis a i e s a lis en ca e ully
when I exp ess my needs o p oblems.
5.42
5.41
5.25
5.25
97%
97%
2
Communica ion ca ied ou by
adminis a i e s a is clea and
e ec i e.
5.47
5.28
96%
3
Adminis a i e s a unde s and my
needs and expec a ions as a s uden .
5.43
5.29
97%
4
Adminis a i e s a a e p oac i e in
o e ing solu ions o he p oblems I
ace.
5.4
5.24
97%
5
Special se ices a e p o ided o
s uden s wi h speci ic needs.
5.42
5.26
97%
6
Adminis a i e s a a e lexible in
adjus ing se ices acco ding o he
si ua ion.
5.41
5.3
98%
Analyzing Se ice Gaps and Imp o emen P io i ies in Academic Adminis a i e Se ices: A Gap and Impo ance-
Pe o mance Analysis App oach
IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025 www.ijm a.in Page 5529
7
Adminis a i e s a gi e hei ull
a en ion when se ing me.
5.37
5.21
97%
8
I eel alued as an indi idual when
dealing wi h adminis a i e s a .
5.38
5.21
97%
Wi hin he empa hy dimension, he a ibu e “Communica ion ca ied ou by adminis a i e s a is clea and e ec i e”
had he lowes con o mi y alue (96%). O e all, he mean con o mi y pe cen age o empa hy was 97%.
Table 6. O e all A e age o Se ice Quali y Con o mi y in Academic Adminis a ion Based on he Fi e SERVQUAL Dimensions
Dimension
Mean impo ance
Mean pe o mance
Con o mi y Le el (%)
Tangibles
5.44
5.26
97%
Reliabili y
5.19
5.04
97%
Responsi eness
5.18
4.94
95%
Assu ance
5.15
4.98
97%
Empa hy
5.41
5.25
97%
O e all A e age
5.27
5.09
97%
The a e age con o mi y ac oss all dimensions o academic adminis a i e se ices in he Depa men o P ima y School
Physical Educa ion, Facul y o Spo Sciences, Uni e si as Nege i Yogyaka a (Fakul as Ilmu Keolah agaan dan Keseha an, FIKK
UNY), was 97%. This alue was used as a cu -o poin : se ices wi h a con o mi y le el abo e 97% we e ca ego ized as “good,”
while hose below 97% we e “less sa is ac o y.”
The lowes con o mi y alue was in he esponsi eness dimension (95%), ollowed by he o he ou dimensions a 97%.
O he o al i ems, 19 a ibu es (44%) sco ed below he cu -o , indica ing a eas equi ing imp o emen . Thus, while o e all se ice
quali y me s uden expec a ions, speci ic aspec s o esponsi eness and o he a ibu es below 97% should be p io i ized. These
p io i ies we e u he mapped h ough Impo ance-Pe o mance Analysis (IPA).
2. Pe o mance-Impo ance Gap Analysis (Gap P-I)
Gap analysis e e s o he di e ence be ween s uden s’ expec a ions o he se ice quali y hey should ecei e om he
Economics Educa ion S udy P og am and hei assessmen o he ac ual se ice quali y hey ha e expe ienced. This analysis was
ca ied ou wi h he aid o Mic oso Excel. The gap analysis was conduc ed on lec u e se ices in he lea ning p ocess as well as
on academic adminis a i e s a se ices in he Economics Educa ion S udy P og am, using he SERVQUAL model as he analy ical
amewo k. Speci ically, he gap analysis was pe o med a h ee le els: se ice i em, se ice dimension, and o e all mean. The
esul s o he P-I (Pe o mance-Impo ance) gap calcula ion o each i em, each dimension, and he o e all mean a e p esen ed in
he ollowing able.
a. Calcula ion o Academic Adminis a ion Se ice Gap
Table 7. Calcula ion o he Pe o mance-Impo ance Gap (P-I Gap) o Academic Adminis a ion Se ices, Physical E idence
Dimension
No
Desc ip ion
Mean Impo ance
Mean Pe o mance
GAP P-I
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
1
The a ailable physical acili ies suppo
academic adminis a i e se ices well.
5.49
5.44
5.18
5.26
-0.3
-0.17
2
The adminis a i e se ice a ea is
equipped wi h adequa e acili ies.
5.37
5.17
-0.2
Analyzing Se ice Gaps and Imp o emen P io i ies in Academic Adminis a i e Se ices: A Gap and Impo ance-
Pe o mance Analysis App oach
IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025 www.ijm a.in Page 5530
3
The equipmen used in adminis a ion is
always in good condi ion.
5.39
5.12
-0.24
4
The a ailabili y o compu e s and o he
echnologies g ea ly suppo s he
adminis a i e p ocess.
5.52
5.33
-0.19
5
The echnology used in adminis a i e
se ices is always up- o-da e.
5.33
5.25
-0.2
6
Adminis a i e s a always p o ide he
equi ed documen s p omp ly.
5.44
5.27
-0.12
7
Adminis a i e documen s p o ided a e
always nea and comple e.
5.39
5.33
-0.1
8
Adminis a i e s a a e always nea ly
and poli ely d essed while on du y.
5.43
5.33
-0.09
9
The appea ance o adminis a i e s a
e lec s p o essionalism a wo k.
5.42
5.32
-0.12
In he angible dimension o academic adminis a i e se ices, a nega i e gap alue o -0.17 was iden i ied, indica ing
ha s uden s’ expec a ions ha e no been ully me by he ac ual se ices hey expe ienced. In o he wo ds, he physical acili ies
and adminis a i e suppo esou ces a e s ill pe cei ed as less op imal compa ed o s uden s’ expec a ions.
Table 8. Calcula ion o Gap Pe o mance-Impo ance (Gap P-I) in Academic Adminis a i e Se ices - Reliabili y Dimension
No
Desc ip ion
Mean Impo ance
Mean Pe o mance
Con o mi y le el %
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
1
Adminis a i e s a p o ide
consis en se ices o e ime.
5.37
5.19
5.25
5.04
-0.13
-0.16
2
Adminis a i e se ices a e deli e ed
wi h a high le el o consis ency.
5.4
5.22
-0.18
3
I always ecei e accu a e in o ma ion
om he adminis a i e s a .
5.43
5.33
-0.11
4
Adminis a i e s a always deli e
se ices on ime.
5.45
5.25
-0.2
5
I o en expe ience slow se ice.
3.39
3.34
-0.04
6
Adminis a i e s a ha e good
capabili ies in handling a ious ypes
o eques s.
5.41
5.21
-0.2
7
The se ices p o ided by he
adminis a i e s a mee my
expec a ions as a s uden .
5.42
5.21
-0.21
8
Adminis a i e s a a e able o
e ec i ely esol e he p oblems I
encoun e .
5.42
5.22
-0.21
Analyzing Se ice Gaps and Imp o emen P io i ies in Academic Adminis a i e Se ices: A Gap and Impo ance-
Pe o mance Analysis App oach
IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025 www.ijm a.in Page 5531
9
I us he compe ence o he
adminis a i e s a in handling
adminis a i e issues.
5.41
5.27
-0.14
All a ibu es in his dimension showed nega i e gaps. The la ges gaps we e ound in he a ibu es “The se ices
p o ided by adminis a i e s a mee my expec a ions as a s uden ” and “Adminis a i e s a a e able o e ec i ely esol e he
p oblems I encoun e ” (-0.21), sugges ing ha s uden s el se ices we e no ye sa is ac o y.
Table 9. Calcula ion o Gap Pe o mance-Impo ance (Gap P-I) in Academic Adminis a i e Se ices-Responsi eness
Dimension
No
Desc ip ion
Mean Impo ance
Mean Pe o mance
Con o mi y le el %
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
1
Adminis a i e s a always espond
quickly o s uden complain s.
5.46
5.18
5.22
4.94
-0.23
-0.24
2
My complain s a e always handled
p omp ly.
5.38
5.12
-0.26
3
I can easily access assis ance om he
adminis a i e s a when needed.
5.41
5.21
-0.2
4
Adminis a i e s a a e always eady
o help when I encoun e di icul ies.
5.37
5.21
-0.15
5
The in o ma ion p o ided by he
adminis a i e s a is always clea and
easy o unde s and.
5.39
5.21
-0.19
6
No ice boa ds o o he media a e
always upda ed wi h he la es
in o ma ion.
5.36
5.05
-0.3
7
Adminis a i e s a p o ide
addi ional use ul in o ma ion wi hou
being asked.
5.35
5.12
-0.23
8
Adminis a i e s a handle my
complain s se iously and ho oughly.
5.38
5.19
-0.19
9
Adminis a i e s a a e no always
a ailable a hei desk.
3.53
3.16
-0.37
Responsi eness is he abili y o help s uden s and p o ide se ices quickly, as shown in he able abo e. The o e all
mean gap in esponsi eness was -0.24, wi h he la ges gap obse ed in “Adminis a i e s a a e no always a ailable a hei
desk” (-0.37). This condi ion indica es ha esponsi eness emains a key a ea o imp o emen .
Table 10. Calcula ion o Gap Pe o mance-Impo ance (Gap P-I) in Academic Adminis a i e Se ices - Assu ance Dimension
No
Desc ip ion
Mean Impo ance
Mean Pe o mance
Con o mi y le el %
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
1
Adminis a i e s a ha e su icien
knowledge o he in o ma ion I
need.
5.36
5.15
5.16
4.98
-0.2
-0.17
Analyzing Se ice Gaps and Imp o emen P io i ies in Academic Adminis a i e Se ices: A Gap and Impo ance-
Pe o mance Analysis App oach
IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 Oc obe 2025 www.ijm a.in Page 5532
2
The in o ma ion p o ided by
adminis a i e s a always mee s
my needs,
5.38
5.17
-0.21
3
Adminis a i e se ice policies a e
well socialized o s uden s.
5.38
5.17
-0.21
4
Adminis a i e se ice p ocedu es
a e easy o unde s and and ollow.
5.33
5.17
-0.16
5
My pe sonal da a and in o ma ion
a e kep con iden ial by
adminis a i e s a .
5.41
5.33
-0.08
6
I can easily ob ain he pe sonal da a
o o he s uden s.
3.4
3.36
-0.03
7
Adminis a i e s a a e always
iendly when se ing me.
5.46
5.26
-0.2
8
I eel com o able in e ac ing wi h
adminis a i e s a .
5.44
5.21
-0.22
The assu ance dimension eco ded a mean gap o -0.17. The la ges nega i e gap (-0.22) was in “I eel com o able
in e ac ing wi h adminis a i e s a .” This highligh s he impo ance o us and con idence in se ice quali y.
Table 11. Calcula ion o Gap Pe o mance-Impo ance (Gap P-I) in Academic Adminis a i e Se ices - Empa hy Dimension
No
Desc ip ion
Mean Impo ance
Mean Pe o mance
Con o mi y Le el %
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
Pe a ibu e
Dimension
1
Adminis a i e s a lis en ca e ully
when I exp ess my needs o p oblems.
5.42
5.41
5.25
5.25
-0.17
-0.16
2
Communica ion ca ied ou by
adminis a i e s a is clea and
e ec i e.
5.47
5.28
-0.2
3
Adminis a i e s a unde s and my
needs and expec a ions as a s uden .
5.43
5.29
-0.14
4
Adminis a i e s a a e p oac i e in
o e ing solu ions o he p oblems I
ace.
5.4
5.24
-0.16
5
Special se ices a e p o ided o
s uden s wi h speci ic needs.
5.42
5.26
-0.16
6
Adminis a i e s a a e lexible in
adjus ing se ices acco ding o he
si ua ion.
5.41
5.3
-0.11
7
Adminis a i e s a gi e hei ull
a en ion when se ing me.
5.37
5.21
-0.16
8
I eel alued as an indi idual when
dealing wi h adminis a i e s a .
5.38
5.21
-0.17
The a ibu e “Communica ion ca ied ou by adminis a i e s a is clea and e ec i e” eco ded he la ges nega i e
gap (-0.20). The o e all mean gap o empa hy was -0.16, indica ing a need o imp o e in e pe sonal in e ac ions.
