Analyzing Service Gaps and Improvement Priorities in Academic Administrative Services: A Gap and Importance-Performance Analysis Approach

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS ISSN(print): 2643-9840, ISSN(online): 2643-9875 Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 DOI: 10.47191/ijmra/v8-i10-05, Impact Factor: 8.266 Page No. 5524-5538 IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijmra.in Page 5524 Analyzing Service Gaps and Improvement Priorities in Academic Administrative Services: A Gap and Importance-Performance Analysis Approach Sya’ban Nur Utomo1, Wawan Sundawan Suherman2, Oktaviarini Yahya Rahmadhanty3 1,2Faculty of Sport Science and Health, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta 3Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Singaperbangsa Karawang ABSTRACT: This study aims to analyze the quality of academic administrative services in the Department of Primary School Physical Education, Faculty of Sports and Health Sciences, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, using the Gap Analysis and Importance Performance Analysis (IPA) approaches. The research focuses on examining the gap between students’ expectations of academic administrative services and their perceptions of the services received, and identifying priority areas for improvement based on levels of importance and performance. A quantitative survey design was employed. The research sample consisted of students from various faculties selected through purposive sampling. The research instrument was a questionnaire with a five-point Likert scale covering service quality dimensions, namely tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, and empathy. Data analysis was conducted by calculating the gap between perception and expectation scores and mapping service indicators into the IPA Cartesian diagram to determine improvement priorities. The results show that all service quality dimensions had negative gap values, indicating that service performance has not fully met students’ expectations. The tangibles and reliability dimensions had the most significant gaps, highlighting the need to improve facilities and service consistency. Based on the IPA, several service indicators fell into the quadrant of top-priority improvements, particularly regarding service timeliness, facility availability, and the competence of administrative staff. Accordingly, this study recommends continuously improving academic administrative service quality by upgrading facilities, enhancing human resource capacity, and strengthening technology-based service systems. KEYWORDS: Academic service quality; Gap analysis; Importance-Performance Analysis I. INTRODUCTION The development of the education sector has positioned higher education institutions not only as providers of academic services but also as crucial service industries. Universities are expected to go beyond delivering educational services by striving to meet the expectations of students who pursue higher education, intending to develop their potential and enhance their competitiveness in the job market. Education stakeholders recognize the importance of broadening their perspectives to achieve universal access to quality basic education (Garira et al., 2019). The main output of higher education is human resources who contribute to national development and industry, while its service users include multiple stakeholders such as students, parents, and employers who hire graduates from these institutions. In the current era, service quality is considered one of the key factors in achieving competitive advantage. This is particularly relevant as the quality of academic services significantly influences students’ choice of higher education institutions. Student satisfaction is achieved when the services provided align with their needs and expectations. Service quality can be understood as the degree of excellence expected, along with efforts to maintain such excellence in order to meet student expectations. Considerable attention has been given to measuring service quality, with SERVQUAL (Service Quality) being one of the most widely recognized instruments introduced by Parasuraman (2001:26). This framework identifies a comprehensive set of service attributes that customers use to evaluate performance, encompassing five dimensions: reliability, responsiveness, assurance, empathy, and tangibles. To deliver high-quality educational services, universities with established reputations are expected to maintain their credibility through continuous efforts to enhance service quality. Strong service performance is critical in meeting students’ expectations as primary consumers of higher education. When expectations are fulfilled, student satisfaction is achieved. In this regard, student satisfaction is closely linked to the degree of alignment between their expectations and the actual quality of services received. Analyzing Service Gaps and Improvement Priorities in Academic Administrative Services: A Gap and ImportancePerformance Analysis Approach IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijmra.in Page 5525 One strategy to ensure this alignment is by conducting service quality evaluations to determine whether discrepancies exist between students’ expectations and their perceptions of received services (Rosi, 2015). High-quality academic services are crucial in supporting the success of the educational process at universities. As the main service users, students form expectations and perceptions of the quality of academic administration institutions provide. To assess and better understand the attributes of service that students value, the SERVQUAL model is frequently applied. This model outlines five key dimensions that shape service quality: (1) Tangibles: physical facilities, equipment, personnel appearance, and communication materials; (2) Reliability: the ability to perform promised services dependably and accurately; (3) Responsiveness: the willingness and ability to assist students and provide prompt service; (4) Assurance: knowledge, courtesy, and trustworthiness of staff; and (5) Empathy: individualized attention and genuine concern for students. Understanding these attributes is essential to ensure that services meet student needs and expectations, thereby enhancing both satisfaction and academic performance. Academic administrative services, in particular, play a vital role in supporting the teaching and learning process. High-quality administrative services positively influence student satisfaction and departmental operational effectiveness. However, delivering optimal administrative services often poses challenges. To address this issue, service quality is typically assessed using SERVQUAL and further analyzed with Gap Analysis (GA) and Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA). Gap Analysis is used to examine differences between expectations and perceptions across the five SERVQUAL dimensions. At the same time, IPA provides a comparison of expected and actual service performance from the perspective of students. Addressing these gaps requires proposing priority actions grounded in an in-depth analysis of current academic service quality. Identifying critical areas for improvement and implementing targeted strategies can significantly enhance the quality of academic administrative services. This study, therefore, aims to identify the most critical service attributes for students and provide priority recommendations to improve the quality of academic administrative services in higher education institutions. II. METHOD This study employed an evaluation research approach. The focus of the study was to examine and analyze policies related to academic administrative services implemented by the Department of Primary School Physical Education, Faculty of Sports Science and Health, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta. The policy analysis model applied in this research was content analysis, combined with Gap Analysis and Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA). According to Bungin (2012, p. 231), content analysis is a research technique used to generate replicable and valid inferences from data within its context. Similarly, Widodo (2006, p. 23) emphasized that content analysis centers on the interpretation of textual or service-related content. In this study, the object of analysis was the academic administrative services provided by the Department of Primary School Physical Education, Faculty of Sports Science and Health, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta. The analysis was conducted by assessing service attributes based on the SERVQUAL dimensions, tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, empathy, and assurance (Parasuraman et al., 1985), as well as an additional dimension of relevance, which reflects the extent to which the services align with student needs and expectations. III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION A. RESULTS 1. Analysis of the Conformity Level of Importance and Performance Variables The conformity level analysis was conducted to determine the achievement of service quality performance in education as assessed by students. This measurement was carried out by comparing the actual services received with the expected services. The conformity value, expressed as a percentage, reflects the quality of service performance based on the ratio between students’ perceptions of actual services and their expectations. a. Conformity Level of Academic Administrative Services in the Department of Primary School Physical Education Table 1. Calculation of the Conformity Level of Academic Administrative Service Quality in the Tangibles Dimension No Description Mean Importance Mean Performance Suitability Level % Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension 1 The available physical facilities which adequately support academic administrative services. 5.49 5.44 5.18 5.26 94% 97% Analyzing Service Gaps and Improvement Priorities in Academic Administrative Services: A Gap and ImportancePerformance Analysis Approach IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijmra.in Page 5526 2 The administrative service room is equipped with adequate facilities 5.37 5.17 96% 3 Equipment used in administration is always in good condition 5.39 5.12 96% 4 The availability of computers and other technologies greatly supports administrative processes 5.52 5.33 97% 5 Technology used in administrative services is always up-to-date 5.33 5.25 96% 6 Administrative staff always provide required documents promptly 5.44 5.27 98% 7 Administrative documents provided are always neat and complete 5.39 5.33 98% 8 Administrative staff are always neatly and politely dressed while on duty 5.43 5.33 98% 9 The appearance of administrative staff reflects professionalism in their work 5.42 5.32 98% The overall mean conformity percentage for the tangibles dimension was 97%, which falls into the “good” category since it exceeds 90%. However, one attribute, the availability of physical facilities (94%), was below the average, making it the lowest conformity percentage within this dimension. Table 2. Calculation of Service Quality Conformity in Academic Administration No Description Mean Importance Mean Performance Suitability Level % Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimensi Perattribute Dimension 1 Administrative staff provide consistent services over time. 5.37 5.19 5.25 5.04 98% 97% 2 Administrative services are delivered with a high level of consistency 5.4 5.22 97% 3 I always receive accurate information from the administrative staff. 5.43 5.33 98% 4 Administrative staff always deliver services on time. 5.45 5.25 96% 5 I often experience slow service. 3.39 3.34 99% 6 Administrative staff have good capabilities in handling various types of requests. 5.41 5.21 96% 7 The services provided by the administrative staff meet my expectations as a student. 5.42 5.21 96% Analyzing Service Gaps and Improvement Priorities in Academic Administrative Services: A Gap and ImportancePerformance Analysis Approach IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijmra.in Page 5527 8 Administrative staff are able to effectively resolve the problems I encounter. 5.42 5.22 96% 9 I trust the competence of the administrative staff in handling administrative issues. 5.41 5.27 97% Reliability refers to employees’ ability to deliver services accurately and consistently. The mean conformity percentage in this dimension was 97%. The lowest conformity values (96%) were found in attributes related to problem-solving and the ability to handle issues effectively. Table 3. Calculation of Service Quality Conformity in Academic Administration No Description Mean Importance Mean Performance Suitability Level % Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension 1 Administrative staff always respond quickly to student complaints. 5.46 5.18 5.22 4.94 96% 95% 2 My complaints are always handled promptly. 5.38 5.12 95% 3 I can easily access assistance from the administrative staff when needed. 5.41 5.21 96% 4 Administrative staff are always ready to help when I encounter difficulties. 5.37 5.21 97% 5 The information provided by the administrative staff is always clear and easy to understand. 5.39 5.21 97% 6 Notice boards or other media are always updated with the latest information. 5.36 5.05 94% 7 Administrative staff provide additional useful information without being asked. 5.35 5.12 96% 8 Administrative staff handle my complaints seriously and thoroughly. 5.38 5.19 97% 9 Administrative staff are not always available at their desk. 3.53 3.16 89% Responsiveness, or the ability of administrative staff to promptly address student concerns, is crucial and reflects proactive actions taken before complaints arise. Based on Table 3, the mean conformity percentage for responsiveness was 95%. The lowest percentage (89%) was recorded for the attribute “Administrative staff are not always available at their desk.” Analyzing Service Gaps and Improvement Priorities in Academic Administrative Services: A Gap and ImportancePerformance Analysis Approach IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijmra.in Page 5528 Table 4. Calculation of Service Quality Conformity in Academic Administration No Description Mean Importance Mean Performance Suitability Level % Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension 1 Administrative staff have sufficient knowledge of the information I need. 5.36 5.15 5.16 4.98 96% 97% 2 The information provided by administrative staff always meets my needs. 5.38 5.17 96% 3 Administrative service policies are well socialized to students. 5.38 5.17 96% 4 Administrative service procedures are easy to understand and follow. 5.33 5.17 97% 5 My personal data and information are kept confidential by administrative staff. 5.41 5.33 99% 6 I can easily obtain the personal data of other students. 3.4 3.36 99% 7 Administrative staff are always friendly when serving me. 5.46 5.26 96% 8 I feel comfortable interacting with administrative staff. 5.44 5.21 96% As shown in Table 4, the mean conformity percentage for the assurance dimension was 97%. The lowest conformity values, at 96%, were found in five attributes. However, since all values remain above 90%, these do not require immediate improvement. Table 5. Calculation of Service Quality Conformity in Academic Administration No Description Mean Importance Mean Performance Suitability Level % Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension 1 Administrative staff listen carefully when I express my needs or problems. 5.42 5.41 5.25 5.25 97% 97% 2 Communication carried out by administrative staff is clear and effective. 5.47 5.28 96% 3 Administrative staff understand my needs and expectations as a student. 5.43 5.29 97% 4 Administrative staff are proactive in offering solutions to the problems I face. 5.4 5.24 97% 5 Special services are provided for students with specific needs. 5.42 5.26 97% 6 Administrative staff are flexible in adjusting services according to the situation. 5.41 5.3 98% Analyzing Service Gaps and Improvement Priorities in Academic Administrative Services: A Gap and ImportancePerformance Analysis Approach IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijmra.in Page 5529 7 Administrative staff give their full attention when serving me. 5.37 5.21 97% 8 I feel valued as an individual when dealing with administrative staff. 5.38 5.21 97% Within the empathy dimension, the attribute “Communication carried out by administrative staff is clear and effective” had the lowest conformity value (96%). Overall, the mean conformity percentage for empathy was 97%. Table 6. Overall Average of Service Quality Conformity in Academic Administration Based on the Five SERVQUAL Dimensions Dimension Mean importance Mean performance Conformity Level (%) Tangibles 5.44 5.26 97% Reliability 5.19 5.04 97% Responsiveness 5.18 4.94 95% Assurance 5.15 4.98 97% Empathy 5.41 5.25 97% Overall Average 5.27 5.09 97% The average conformity across all dimensions for academic administrative services in the Department of Primary School Physical Education, Faculty of Sport Sciences, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta (Fakultas Ilmu Keolahragaan dan Kesehatan, FIKK UNY), was 97%. This value was used as a cut-off point: services with a conformity level above 97% were categorized as “good,” while those below 97% were “less satisfactory.” The lowest conformity value was in the responsiveness dimension (95%), followed by the other four dimensions at 97%. Of the total items, 19 attributes (44%) scored below the cut-off, indicating areas requiring improvement. Thus, while overall service quality met student expectations, specific aspects of responsiveness and other attributes below 97% should be prioritized. These priorities were further mapped through Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA). 2. Performance-Importance Gap Analysis (Gap P-I) Gap analysis refers to the difference between students’ expectations of the service quality they should receive from the Economics Education Study Program and their assessment of the actual service quality they have experienced. This analysis was carried out with the aid of Microsoft Excel. The gap analysis was conducted on lecturer services in the learning process as well as on academic administrative staff services in the Economics Education Study Program, using the SERVQUAL model as the analytical framework. Specifically, the gap analysis was performed at three levels: service item, service dimension, and overall mean. The results of the P-I (Performance-Importance) gap calculation for each item, each dimension, and the overall mean are presented in the following table. a. Calculation of Academic Administration Service Gap Table 7. Calculation of the Performance-Importance Gap (P-I Gap) for Academic Administration Services, Physical Evidence Dimension No Description Mean Importance Mean Performance GAP P-I Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension 1 The available physical facilities support academic administrative services well. 5.49 5.44 5.18 5.26 -0.3 -0.17 2 The administrative service area is equipped with adequate facilities. 5.37 5.17 -0.2 Analyzing Service Gaps and Improvement Priorities in Academic Administrative Services: A Gap and ImportancePerformance Analysis Approach IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijmra.in Page 5530 3 The equipment used in administration is always in good condition. 5.39 5.12 -0.24 4 The availability of computers and other technologies greatly supports the administrative process. 5.52 5.33 -0.19 5 The technology used in administrative services is always up-to-date. 5.33 5.25 -0.2 6 Administrative staff always provide the required documents promptly. 5.44 5.27 -0.12 7 Administrative documents provided are always neat and complete. 5.39 5.33 -0.1 8 Administrative staff are always neatly and politely dressed while on duty. 5.43 5.33 -0.09 9 The appearance of administrative staff reflects professionalism at work. 5.42 5.32 -0.12 In the tangible dimension of academic administrative services, a negative gap value of -0.17 was identified, indicating that students’ expectations have not been fully met by the actual services they experienced. In other words, the physical facilities and administrative support resources are still perceived as less optimal compared to students’ expectations. Table 8. Calculation of Gap Performance-Importance (Gap P-I) in Academic Administrative Services - Reliability Dimension No Description Mean Importance Mean Performance Conformity level % Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension 1 Administrative staff provide consistent services over time. 5.37 5.19 5.25 5.04 -0.13 -0.16 2 Administrative services are delivered with a high level of consistency. 5.4 5.22 -0.18 3 I always receive accurate information from the administrative staff. 5.43 5.33 -0.11 4 Administrative staff always deliver services on time. 5.45 5.25 -0.2 5 I often experience slow service. 3.39 3.34 -0.04 6 Administrative staff have good capabilities in handling various types of requests. 5.41 5.21 -0.2 7 The services provided by the administrative staff meet my expectations as a student. 5.42 5.21 -0.21 8 Administrative staff are able to effectively resolve the problems I encounter. 5.42 5.22 -0.21 Analyzing Service Gaps and Improvement Priorities in Academic Administrative Services: A Gap and ImportancePerformance Analysis Approach IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijmra.in Page 5531 9 I trust the competence of the administrative staff in handling administrative issues. 5.41 5.27 -0.14 All attributes in this dimension showed negative gaps. The largest gaps were found in the attributes “The services provided by administrative staff meet my expectations as a student” and “Administrative staff are able to effectively resolve the problems I encounter” (-0.21), suggesting that students felt services were not yet satisfactory. Table 9. Calculation of Gap Performance-Importance (Gap P-I) in Academic Administrative Services-Responsiveness Dimension No Description Mean Importance Mean Performance Conformity level % Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension 1 Administrative staff always respond quickly to student complaints. 5.46 5.18 5.22 4.94 -0.23 -0.24 2 My complaints are always handled promptly. 5.38 5.12 -0.26 3 I can easily access assistance from the administrative staff when needed. 5.41 5.21 -0.2 4 Administrative staff are always ready to help when I encounter difficulties. 5.37 5.21 -0.15 5 The information provided by the administrative staff is always clear and easy to understand. 5.39 5.21 -0.19 6 Notice boards or other media are always updated with the latest information. 5.36 5.05 -0.3 7 Administrative staff provide additional useful information without being asked. 5.35 5.12 -0.23 8 Administrative staff handle my complaints seriously and thoroughly. 5.38 5.19 -0.19 9 Administrative staff are not always available at their desk. 3.53 3.16 -0.37 Responsiveness is the ability to help students and provide services quickly, as shown in the table above. The overall mean gap in responsiveness was -0.24, with the largest gap observed in “Administrative staff are not always available at their desk” (-0.37). This condition indicates that responsiveness remains a key area for improvement. Table 10. Calculation of Gap Performance-Importance (Gap P-I) in Academic Administrative Services - Assurance Dimension No Description Mean Importance Mean Performance Conformity level % Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension 1 Administrative staff have sufficient knowledge of the information I need. 5.36 5.15 5.16 4.98 -0.2 -0.17 Analyzing Service Gaps and Improvement Priorities in Academic Administrative Services: A Gap and ImportancePerformance Analysis Approach IJMRA, Volume 08 Issue 10 October 2025 www.ijmra.in Page 5532 2 The information provided by administrative staff always meets my needs, 5.38 5.17 -0.21 3 Administrative service policies are well socialized to students. 5.38 5.17 -0.21 4 Administrative service procedures are easy to understand and follow. 5.33 5.17 -0.16 5 My personal data and information are kept confidential by administrative staff. 5.41 5.33 -0.08 6 I can easily obtain the personal data of other students. 3.4 3.36 -0.03 7 Administrative staff are always friendly when serving me. 5.46 5.26 -0.2 8 I feel comfortable interacting with administrative staff. 5.44 5.21 -0.22 The assurance dimension recorded a mean gap of -0.17. The largest negative gap (-0.22) was in “I feel comfortable interacting with administrative staff.” This highlights the importance of trust and confidence in service quality. Table 11. Calculation of Gap Performance-Importance (Gap P-I) in Academic Administrative Services - Empathy Dimension No Description Mean Importance Mean Performance Conformity Level % Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension Per attribute Dimension 1 Administrative staff listen carefully when I express my needs or problems. 5.42 5.41 5.25 5.25 -0.17 -0.16 2 Communication carried out by administrative staff is clear and effective. 5.47 5.28 -0.2 3 Administrative staff understand my needs and expectations as a student. 5.43 5.29 -0.14 4 Administrative staff are proactive in offering solutions to the problems I face. 5.4 5.24 -0.16 5 Special services are provided for students with specific needs. 5.42 5.26 -0.16 6 Administrative staff are flexible in adjusting services according to the situation. 5.41 5.3 -0.11 7 Administrative staff give their full attention when serving me. 5.37 5.21 -0.16 8 I feel valued as an individual when dealing with administrative staff. 5.38 5.21 -0.17 The attribute “Communication carried out by administrative staff is clear and effective” recorded the largest negative gap (-0.20). The overall mean gap for empathy was -0.16, indicating a need to improve interpersonal interactions.