Krb Customer Satisfaction Fy 2011 2012 2

7/28/2019 Krb Customer Satisfaction Fy 2011 2012 2

1/74

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY REPORT

JULY 2012


2/74

KRB Customer Satisfaction Survey Report Prepared by VAS Consultants Ltd i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................ vi

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................... vii

CHAPTER ONE:INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 1

1.1 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 KRB MANDATE ................................................................................................................... 1

1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE ASSIGNMENT ............................................................................. 2

1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY ..................................................................................................... 3

CHAPTER TWO:DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY ........................................... 4

2.1 SURVEY DESIGN ................................................................................................................ 4

2.2 POPULATION AND SAMPLING ...................................................................................... 4

2.3 DEVELOPMENT OF DATA COLLECTION TOOLS ..................................................... 6

2.4 DATA COLLECTION .......................................................................................................... 7

2.5 DATA ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................. 7

CHAPTER THREE:SURVEY FINDINGS ............................................................................ 8

3.1 RESPONSE RATE ................................................................................................................ 8

3.2 OVERALL CUSTOMER SATISFACTION INDEX (CSI) ................................................ 8

3.3 ROAD AGENCIES ............................................................................................................. 10

3.4 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ................................................................................................... 13

3.5 MINISTRIES AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIES .......................................................... 18

3.6 TRANSPORTERS ............................................................................................................... 20

3.7 MASS MEDIA ..................................................................................................................... 22

3.8 KRB FUND COLLECTING AGENTS AND OIL MARKETERS .................................. 25

3.9 SUPPLIERS SATISFACTION SURVEY ........................................................................... 29

3.10 PROFESSIONAL BODIES ................................................................................................. 34

3.11 MOTORISTS AND NON- MOTORISTS ......................................................................... 36

3.12 SECURITY SECTOR ......................................................................................................... 42

3.13 EDUCATION SECTOR .................................................................................................... 44

3.14 MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT .......................................................................................... 46

CHAPTER FOUR:DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............. 51


3/74

KRB Customer Satisfaction Survey Report Prepared by VAS Consultants Ltd ii

4.1 COMMUNICATION ......................................................................................................... 51

4.2 KRB SERVICE DELIVERY/MANDATE ........................................................................ 51

4.3 COMPLAINTS HANDLING ............................................................................................. 52

4.4 IMAGE PERCEPTION ....................................................................................................... 53

4.5 FUND ALLOCATION ....................................................................................................... 53

4.6 ROAD SYSTEM .................................................................................................................. 53

4.7 PAYMENT PROCESS ..... Error! Bookmark not defined.Error! Bookmark not defined.

APPENDICES ..................................................................................................................... 55

Appendix 1: List of Various Categories of Respondents ............................................................... 55

Appendix 2: Respondents Most Satisfying Factors on Various Aspects ....................................... 59

Appendix 3: Respondents Most Dissatisfying Factors on Various Aspects .................................. 60

Appendix 4:Respondents Comments on Various Aspects ............................................................ 62


4/74

KRB Customer Satisfaction Survey Report Prepared by VAS Consultants Ltd iii

List of Tables

Table 1: Comparison of satisfaction indices for the year 2010/2011 and 2011/2012 ............................. viii

Table 2: Response rate .............................................................................................................................. 8

Table 3: Customer Satisfaction indices for various customer categories ......................................................... 9

Table 4: Road agencies satisfaction factor weights .................................................................................... 10

Table 5: Road agencies satisfaction index values per factor ....................................................................... 11

Table 6: Road agencies satisfaction level by agency ................................................................................... 12

Table 7: Road agencies satisfaction aspects .............................................................................................. 13

Table 8: Local government factor satisfaction Weights .............................................................................. 15

Table 9: Local government satisfaction index values per factor ................................................................. 15

Table 10: Local government satisfaction index by category ........................................................................ 16

Table 11: Local government satisfaction index by provinces ....................................................................... 17

Table 12: Local government satisfaction aspects ....................................................................................... 18

Table 13: Ministries and government agencies satisfaction factor weights ................................................... 18

Table 14: Ministries and government agencies satisfaction index values per factor ...................................... 19

Table 15: Ministries satisfaction aspects .................................................................................................. 20

Table 15: Transporters satisfaction factor weights .................................................................................... 21

Table 16: Transporters satisfaction index values per factor ........................................................................ 21

Table 17: Transporters satisfaction aspects .............................................................................................. 22

Table 18: Mass media satisfaction factor weights ..................................................................................... 23

Table 19: Mass media satisfaction index value per factor ......................................................................... 23

Table 20: Mass media satisfaction aspects ............................................................................................... 25

Table 21: KRB fund collecting agents satisfaction factor weights .............................................................. 26

Table 22: KRB fund collecting agents satisfaction index value per factor .................................................. 26

Table 23: KRB fund collecting agents satisfaction level by category .......................................................... 27

Table 24: KRB Fund collecting agents and oil marketers satisfaction aspects ............................................ 29Table 25: Suppliers satisfaction factor weights .......................................................................................... 30

Table 26: Suppliers satisfaction index values per factor ............................................................................ 31

Table 27: Suppliers satisfaction values by duration of supply ..................................................................... 32

Table 28: Suppliers satisfaction aspects .................................................................................................... 33

Table 29: Professional bodies satisfaction factor weights ........................................................................... 34

Table 30: Professional bodies satisfaction index value per factor ................................................................ 34

Table 31: Professional bodies satisfying aspects ......................................................................................... 36

Table 32: Motorists and non-motorists satisfaction factor weights .............................................................. 37

Table 33: Motorists and non-motorists satisfaction index value per factor .................................................. 38

Table 34: Motorists and non-motorists satisfaction levels by gender ............................................................ 38Table 35: Motorists and non-motorists satisfaction levels by age ................................................................ 39

Table 36: Motorists and non-motorists satisfaction levels by category ......................................................... 40

Table 37: Motorists and non -motorists satisfaction aspects ....................................................................... 41

Table 38: Security sector satisfaction factor weights .................................................................................. 42


5/74

KRB Customer Satisfaction Survey Report Prepared by VAS Consultants Ltd iv

Table 39: Security sector satisfaction factor indices ................................................................................... 42

Table 40: Security sector satisfaction aspects ............................................................................................ 43

Table 41: Education sector satisfaction factor weights .............................................................................. 44

Table 42: Education sector satisfaction factor indices ............................................................................... 44

Table 43: Security sector satisfaction aspects ............................................................................................ 45

Table 44: Members of Parliament satisfaction factor weights .................................................................... 46Table 45: Members of Parliament factor satisfaction indices ..................................................................... 46

Table 46: Members of Parliament Satisfaction aspects .............................................................................. 48

Table 47: Development partners satisfaction factor weights ....................................................................... 48

Table 48: Development partners satisfaction index values per factor .......................................................... 49

Table 49: Development partners satisfaction aspects ................................................................................. 50

List of Figures

Figure 1: Customer Satisfaction indices for various customer categories ........................................... 9

Figure 2: Distribution of respondents by road agency ....................................................................... 10Figure 3: Road agencies satisfaction index values per factor ............................................................. 11

Figure 4: Road agencies satisfaction level by agency .......................................................................... 12

Figure 5: Distribution of local government respondents by category ................................................ 14

Figure 6: Distribution of local government respondents by provinces ............................................. 14

Figure 7: Local government satisfaction index values per factor ....................................................... 15

Figure 8: Local government satisfaction index by category ................................................................ 16

Figure 9: Local government satisfaction index by provinces ............................................................. 17

Figure 10: Ministries and government agencies satisfaction index values per factor ........................ 19

Figure 11: Transporters satisfaction index values per factor .............................................................. 21

Figure 12: Distribution of mass media respondents by media category ............................................ 23

Figure 13: Mass media satisfaction index values per factor ............................................................... 24Figure 14: Distribution of KRB fund collecting agents by category .................................................. 26

Figure 15: KRB fund collecting agents satisfaction level per factor ................................................. 27

Figure 16: KRB fund collecting agents satisfaction level by category ............................................... 28

Figure 17: Suppliers distribution by duration of supply .................................................................... 29

Figure 18: Suppliers distribution by category of supplier .................................................................. 30

Figure 19: Suppliers satisfaction index values per factor ................................................................... 31

Figure 20: Suppliers satisfaction by duration of supply ..................................................................... 32

Figure 21: Professional bodies satisfaction per factor ....................................................................... 35

Figure 22: Distribution of motorists and non-motorists by gender ................................................... 36

Figure 23: Distribution of motorists and non-motorists by age ........................................................ 37

Figure 24: Motorists and non-motorists satisfaction index value per factor ..................................... 38

Figure 25: Motorists and non-motorists satisfaction levels by gender ............................................... 39

Figure 26: Motorists and non-motorists satisfaction levels by age ..................................................... 40

Figure 28: Security sector satisfaction factor indices .......................................................................... 43

Figure 29: Education sector satisfaction factor indices ...................................................................... 45


6/74

KRB Customer Satisfaction Survey Report Prepared by VAS Consultants Ltd v

Figure 30: Members of Parliament factor satisfaction indices ........................................................... 47

Figure 31: Development partners satisfaction index values per factor .............................................. 49


7/74

KRB Customer Satisfaction Survey Report Prepared by VAS Consultants Ltd vi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CSI Customer Satisfaction Index

KeNHA Kenya National Highway Authority

KeRRA Kenya Rural Roads Authority

KRA Kenya Revenue Authority

KRB Kenya Roads Board

KURA Kenya Urban Roads Authorities

SI Satisfaction Index

SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences

KWS Kenya Wildlife Service


8/74

KRB Customer Satisfaction Survey Report Prepared by VAS Consultants Ltd vii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Kenya Roads Board (KRB) is a statutory body established by the Kenya Roads Board Act No.

7 of 1999. The purpose for which the Board was established is to oversee the road network in

Kenya and coordinate the maintenance, rehabilitation and development funded by the collected

Fund and to advise the Minister on all matters related thereto. KRB is committed to nurturing and

sustaining customer, satisfaction as well as identifying ways in which it can improve their

satisfaction. Towards this, KRB embarked on undertaking customer satisfaction survey to

determine customers concerns and inform its quality service improvement strategies. The survey

targeted all customers of KRB.

In carrying out customer satisfaction survey, qualitative and quantitative approach was adopted.

The Consultants held various meetings with the client as part of execution of assignment and

reviewed various documents to inform the survey process. The Consultants developed and

administered questionnaires to various categories of customer. The completed questionnaires were

inspected for completeness, coded and data input into Statistical Package for Social Sciences

(SPSS). Descriptive statistics were used in the analysis of the data and customer satisfaction index

was computed based on how the various attributes under study were rated by various categories of

customer.

The overall response rate for the survey was 77%. The findings of the survey resulted in an overall

customer satisfaction index (CSI) of 85% which was an improvement by 6% from last year

satisfaction index of79%. Table 1 shows a comparison of different customers satisfaction level for

the year 2010/2011 and 2011/2012.


9/74

KRB Customer Satisfaction Survey Report Prepared by VAS Consultants Ltd viii

Stakeholders Category

2010/2011 2011/2012

Satisfaction Indices Satisfaction Indices

Agencies 78% 81%

Fund Collecting Agents 76% 81%

Local Government 75% 89%Suppliers 82% 90%

Mass media 86% 79%

Government Ministries 74% 86%

Security Sector 80% 89%

Education Sector - 93%

Transporters 73% 77%

Professional Bodies 80% 83%

Motorized and Non-Motorized 70% 84%

Development Partners 84% 87%

Members of Parliament 75% 87%

Overall SI 79% 85%

Table 1: Comparison of satisfaction indices for the year 2010/2011 and 2011/2012

The survey findings also revealed areas that might need improvement for enhanced customer

satisfaction. Recommendations on how to deal with the identified areas are as follows:

a) Communication with stakeholdersi. Mechanisms are put in place to ensure prompt response to emails to various customer

categories.

ii. Measures are put in place to ensure that lodged complaints and queries are addressed

adequately and in a timely manner.

b) KRB Service Delivery/Mandatei. The Board should enhance its awareness campaign on its role and what is being done to

improve road status in the country.

ii. Mechanisms should be put in place to avail more information on the allocation and

disbursement of funds to the implementing agencies.


10/74

KRB Customer Satisfaction Survey Report Prepared by VAS Consultants Ltd ix

iii.The Board to put measures in place that will ensure that all allocated funds are used for the

intended purpose.

c) Complaints handlingi. Modalities of lodging complaints should be enhanced.

d) Image perceptioni. Measures be undertaken to enhance awareness and understanding of the activities of the

Board.

e) Fund allocationi. The Board should ensure timely disbursements of funds to the road agencies.

ii. The Board should review the fund allocation criteria.

f) Road systemi. Modalities should be put in place to enhance road safety in the country.

ii. Axle-road regime should be reviewed.


11/74

KRB Customer Satisfaction Survey Report Prepared by VAS Consultants Ltd 1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

The Kenya Roads Board is a statutory body established by the Kenya Roads Board Act No. 7 of 1999.

The objective and purpose for which the Board was established is to oversee the road network in

Kenya and coordinate the maintenance, rehabilitation and development funded by the Fund and to

advise the Minister on all matters related thereto.

Vision

To have an efficient road network through the best managed Fund

Mission

To Fund and oversee road maintenance, rehabilitation and development through prudent sourcing

and utilization of resources.

1.2 KRB MANDATE

The mandate of KRB is detailed in the Kenya Roads Board act, 1999 as to:

a) Co-ordinate the optimal utilization of the Fund in implementation of programmes relating to

the maintenance, rehabilitation and development of the road network;

b) Seek to achieve optimal efficiency and cost effectiveness in road works Funded by the Fund;

c) Manage the Fund;

d) Based on five year road investment programme approved by the Minister for Roads and the

Minister for Finance, determine the allocation of financial resources from any other source

available to the Board required by Road Agencies for the maintenance, rehabilitation and

development of the road network to ensure that the allocation of Funds is pegged to specific

categories of roads and not less than:

i. Twenty percent of monies from the Fund is allocated equally to all

constituencies in the country to be administered by the Rural Roads Authority;


12/74


ii. Twelve percent of the monies from the Fund is allocated equitably to districts

in respect of Rural Roads administered by the Rural Roads Authority;

iii. Forty percent of the monies from the Fund is allocated in respect of the

national roads to be administered by the National Highways Authority;

iv. Fifteen percent of the monies from the Fund is allocated in respect of the

Urban Roads Authority;

v. One percent of the monies from the Fund is allocated in respect of recurrent

expenditure of the Board under section 311 (5);

e) Ensure the remainder of the monies of the Fund (10%) described in paragraph (d) shall be

allocated annual by the Board with the approval of the Minister to road investment

programme derived from the five-year road investment programme approved by the minister

responsible for roads and Minister for Finance;f) Ensure the maximum of ten percent of all monies allocate to each road agency is utilized for

development purposes by the said road agency;

g) Monitor and evaluate by means of technical, financial and performance audits, the delivery of

goods, works and services funded by the Fund;

h) In implementing paragraph (g), pay due regard to public procurement and disposal

regulations and additional guidelines issued or approved by the Minister;

i)

Recommend to the Minister appropriate levels of road user charges, fines, penalties, levies orany sum required to be collected under the Road Maintenance Levy Fund Act, 1993 and paid

into the Fund;

j) Recommend to the Minister such periodic reviews of the Fuel Levy as are necessary for the

purposes of the Fund; and

k) Identify, quantify and recommend to the Minister such other potential sources of revenue as

may be available to the Fund for the development, rehabilitation and maintenance of roads.

1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE ASSIGNMENT

The overall objective of the survey was to measure the level of satisfaction of the Boards customers

with the services and products provided. The survey was to:

i. Determine the overall customer satisfaction with KRB service;


13/74


ii. Identify areas of strengths and weakness in service provision;

iii. Identify and prioritize areas where improvement will most affect customer satisfaction;

and

iv. Determine the level of customer awareness on role and mandate of Kenya Roads Board.

1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

In order to achieve the objectives of the survey, the assignment entailed:

i. Identification of critical KRB customers and ranking them on basis of impact on KRB;

ii. Identification of satisfaction parameters to be measured and agreeing with the KRB;

iii. Development of appropriate survey instrument for carrying out the survey;

iv. Sampling of respondents for each customer category;

v. Administration of questionnaires to sampled customers;

vi. Computation of overall customer satisfaction index and indices for various customer

categories;

vii. Identification of causes of satisfaction and dissatisfaction; and

viii. Preparation of the customer satisfaction report.


14/74


CHAPTER TWO

DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY

2.1 SURVEY DESIGN

In carrying out KRB customer satisfaction survey, qualitative and quantitative approach was adopted.

The methodology entailed identification of the Boards customers, identification of the various

satisfaction variables, development and review of data collection tools, administration of

questionnaires to the various categories of stakeholders, analysis of responses and report writing.

2.2 POPULATION AND SAMPLING

To carry out the surveys the following customer categories were identified and agreed upon:

a) Key customers

Road agencies; Local Government;

Development partners;

Mass Media;

KRB Fund collecting agents and oil marketers;

Suppliers of goods /services and utility providers;

Professional bodies;

Members of Parliament;

Government Ministries; and

Transporters.

b) Non-key customers Motorists and non -motorists; and

Security Sector.

Education Sector

A representative sample was selected from each group of respondents for purposes of conducting the

survey. Sampling for each group of respondents was carried out proportionately to ensure adequate

representation of the entire population. The sampling method for each customer category is described

hereunder:


15/74


a) Road AgenciesThe survey targeted the four road agencies namely Kenya Urban Roads Authority (KURA), Kenya

National Highway Authority (KeNHA), Kenya Rural Roads Authority (KeRRA) and Kenya Wildlife

Service (KWS). For each of these institutions, the sample comprised of:-

i. Kenya Rural Roads Authority-13;

ii. Kenya Urban Roads Authority-15;

iii. Kenya National Highway Authority-15; and

iv. Kenya Wildlife Service- 2.

b) Local GovernmentThis survey targeted the local governments in the country. The sample comprised of forty (40)

councils (city/municipal/county/town).The sample was distributed among the various councils based

on the total number in each of the eight (8) provinces in the country.

c) Government Ministries and AgenciesEighteen Government Ministries and agencies that have had interaction with KRB were sampled for

the survey.

d) Development PartnersA total of ten (10) development partners that have had interaction with KRB were sampled.

e) TransportersThe survey targeted heavy commercial transporters in the country. Thirty (30) transporters were

sampled.

f) Mass MediaThe survey targeted the media houses in the country. A sample of ten (10) media houses were selected

for the survey.

g) KRB Fund Collecting Agents and Oil MarketersIn this category, a sample of four (4) levy collecting agents and thirteen (13) oil marketers were

selected.


16/74


h) Suppliers of Goods/Services and Utility ProvidersThe survey targeted the suppliers of goods and services to the KRB for the last one year. A sample of

thirty (30) suppliers and utility providers were selected.

i) Professional BodiesThe survey targeted professional bodies that had interacted with KRB for the last one year. A sample

of fourteen (14) professional bodies were selected.

j) Motorists and Non-MotoristsA sample of three hundred (300) motorists and three hundred (300) non-motorists were sampled.

k) Security SectorThe security sector satisfaction survey targeted all the security firms in the country. A sample of ten

(10) security firms was selected.

l) Education sectorThe Consultants targeted eight (8) education institutions the Board has interacted with in the last

one year.

m)Members of ParliamentThe survey targeted all Members of Parliament. A sample of two hundred and twenty Members of

Parliament was selected for the survey.

Note: List of sampled customers is shown in appendix 1

2.3 DEVELOPMENT OF DATA COLLECTION TOOLS

Development of questionnaires involved review of various documents, discussions with the KRB

management, design of draft questionnaires, review of questionnaires by the management and

updating of questionnaires. The questionnaires consisted of both closed-ended and open-ended

questions. A five point Likert scale was used for the closed-ended questions. Different questionnaires

were developed for the various categories of customers.


17/74


2.4 DATA COLLECTION

The approved questionnaires were administered to the different categories of stakeholders at their

respective regions/offices. The purpose of the survey and the content of the questionnaires were

clarified to the respondents after which they completed the questionnaires.

2.5 DATA ANALYSIS

Completed questionnaires were inspected for completeness, edited, coded and the data inputted into

Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) package. Descriptive statistics including the means,

frequencies and proportions were used in the analysis. Further, cross tabulation of some of the factors

was undertaken to identify trends across different groups. Customer satisfaction indices were

computed by taking into account the number of respondents in each question, their responses to

each question (ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree) and the importance weights for the

various satisfaction factors. The survey findings are discussed in the chapters that follow.


18/74


CHAPTER THREE

SURVEY FINDINGS

3.1 RESPONSE RATE

Out of one thousand and fifty five (1055) questionnaires administered, eight hundred and four (804)

questionnaires were returned resulting in an overall response rate of 76%. The response rates for the

various categories of customers were as depicted in Table 2.

Stakeholder Sample

Size

Number of

Respondents

Response

Rate

Road Agencies 45 32 71%

Local Government 43 37 86%

Ministries and Government Agencies 18 16 89%

Transporters 30 25 83%

Mass Media 10 7 70%KRB Fund Collecting Agencies and Oil

Marketers

17 13 76%

Suppliers 30 28 93%

Professional Bodies 14 7 50%

Motorists and Non-Motorists 600 600 100%

Security Sector 10 6 60%

Education Sector 8 4 50%

Members of Parliament 220 27 12%

Development Partners 10 2 20%Total 1055 804 76%

Table 2: Response rate

Note: Several questionnaires were administered to the representatives of the road agencies in the

different regions.

The lowest response rate was registered among members of parliament at 12% whereas motorists and

non- motorists registered the highest response rate of 100%.

3.2 OVERALL CUSTOMER SATISFACTION INDEX (CSI)

The overall customer satisfaction index was 85%. Satisfaction index for the various categories of

customers were as presented in Table 3 and Figure 1.


19/74


Stakeholder Satisfaction Index

Education sector 93%

Suppliers 90%

Security Sector 89%

Local Government 89%

Members of parliament 87%Ministries and Government agencies 86%

Professional Bodies 83%

Motorists and Non-Motorists 84%

Road Agencies 81%

Mass Media 79%

KRB Fund Collecting Agencies and Oil Marketers 81%

Transporters 77%

Development Partners 87%

Overall Customer Satisfaction Index 85%

Table 3: Customer Satisfaction indices for various customer categories

Figure 1: Customer Satisfaction indices for various customer categories

The highest satisfaction index was recorded by customers in the education sector at 93% while the

lowest satisfaction index was registered by transporters at 77%. The most satisfying and dissatisfying

factors on various aspects are captured in appendix 2 and 3 while respondents comments on various

aspects are captured in appendix 4. Detailed analysis per customer category is presented in the

sections that follow.


20/74


3.3 ROAD AGENCIESThree out of the four road agencies participated in the survey. Out of 45 questionnaires administered,

32 were returned representing a response rate of 71%.

3.3.1 Distribution of respondents by Road Agency

Out of those who responded, majority (52%) were from Kenya Rural Roads Authority (KeRRA), 31%

from Kenya Urban Roads Authority (KURA) while Kenya National Highways Authority (KeNHA)

had the least at 17% as shown n Figure 2.

Figure 2: Distribution of respondents by road agency

3.3.2 Factor Weights

The rating of the various factors in influencing road agencies satisfaction was analysed and the results

are presented in Table 4.

Factor Weight

Communication 21%

Mandate 20%

Fund Allocation 21%

Image Perception 19%

Complaints Handling 18%

Total 100%

Table 4: Road agencies satisfaction factor weights


21/74


The result shows that communication and fund allocation are more important with each scoring 21%

as compared to mandate, image perception and complaints handling which scored 20%, 19% and

18% respectively.

3.3.3 Satisfaction Index Values

The road agencies recorded an overall satisfaction index of 81%. Communication was the most

satisfying factor at 75% while fund allocation was the least satisfying factor at 61%. Table 5 and

Figure 3 depict the satisfaction values for each of the satisfaction aspects.

Factor Satisfaction Index

Communication 86%


Mandate 84%


Fund Allocation 72%

Overall Satisfaction Index 81%

Table 5: Road agencies satisfaction index values per factor

Figure 3: Road agencies satisfaction index values per factor


22/74


3.3.4 Satisfaction Level by Agency

Satisfaction levels were analysed by agency, the results were as detailed in Table 6 and Figure 4.

Factor KURA KeRRA KeNHA

Communication 87% 88% 81%

Mandate 85% 83% 82%

Fund Allocation 72% 69% 80%

Image Perception 90% 84% 84%

Complaints Handling 74% 79% 76%

Overall SI 81% 80% 80%

Table 6: Road agencies satisfaction level by agency

KURA recorded the highest overall satisfaction index at 81% while KeRRA and KeNHA had

satisfaction indices of 80% each. Across the factors, the highest satisfaction index was recorded under

image perception at 90% by KURA while the lowest satisfaction index was 69% on fund allocation

recorded by KeRRA.

Figure 4: Road agencies satisfaction level by agency

The road agencies were most satisfied and least satisfied with various aspects as shown in Table 7.

Most satisfied with: Least satisfied with:

Communication

Courtesy of staff at enquiries desk Provision of adequate information whenever

needed

Provision of sufficient information/direction by

staff at enquiry desk

Well structured KRB website

Telephones are answered promptly

Parking arrangement at KRB


23/74


Mandate

Road works improvement programme in Kenya

KRB process of monitoring funded goods, works

and services

Progress made by KRB in developing road

maintenance management system

Adequate measures put by KRB to ensure goods,works and services delivered under the allocated

funds are of higher quality

Status of the roads in Kenya

Axle-load regime in the country

Fund Allocation

Transparency in funds allocation to all agencies Delay in disbursing funds to the agencies

Delay in addressing funds enquiries

Funds allocation criteria

Image Perception

Participation of KRB in corporate social

responsibility activities

Good leadership at KRB

Professionalism of KRB staff

Transparency level at KRB

Complaints Handling

Process of lodging complaints Delay in dealing with complaints

Table 7: Road agencies satisfaction aspects

3.4 LOCAL GOVERNMENTIn this category, the survey registered a response rate of 93%. Detailed analysis is as follows.

3.4.1 Respondents Demographic Data

i. Distribution of respondents by Category of local governmentOut of those who responded, majority (54%) were Municipal councils, 41% were County Councils,

while 5% was City Council as shown in Figure 5.


24/74


Figure 5: Distribution of local government respondents by category

ii. Distribution of respondents by provincesEastern province recorded the highest number of respondents at 22% followed by Rift Valley at 19%.

North Eastern and Nairobi provinces had the least number of respondents at 5%. The analysis is as

shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6: Distribution of local government respondents by provinces


The local government rated various factors influencing customer satisfaction levels in order of

importance as shown in Table 8.


25/74


Factor Factor Weight

Communication 26%

Attainment of the Mandate 24%



Total 100%

Table 8: Local government factor satisfaction Weights

Communication was rated as the most satisfying factor at 26% whereas attainment of mandate and

image perception were rated lowest at 24%.


The overall local government satisfaction index was 89% .The satisfaction levels across the factors are

presented inTable 9 and Figure 7.

Factor Factor Satisfaction Index

Communication 93%





Table 9: Local government satisfaction index values per factor

Figure 7: Local government satisfaction index values per factor


26/74


The respondents registered high satisfaction with communication (93%) followed by image

perception at 89% while the least satisfaction was on both attainment of the mandate and complaint

handling at 88%.

3.4.4 Satisfaction Values by Category of Local Government

The satisfaction indices for the different categories of local government are presented in Table 10 and

Figure 8.

Factor County council Municipal Council City Council


Attainment of the

Mandate 80% 90% 80%


Complaints

Handling 83% 84% 91%


Table 10: Local government satisfaction index by category

Note: City council had two respondents

Figure 8: Local government satisfaction index by category

City council registered the highest satisfaction level at 91% while county councils had the least at

86%. Attainment of mandate had the lowest satisfaction level among the city council and county

council at 80%.

3.4.5 Satisfaction Values by Provinces

Satisfaction levels of local government were further analysed by provinces. Respondents from North

Eastern province registered the highest satisfaction index at 87% while those from Nyanza province


27/74


had the least satisfaction level at 69%. Across the provinces, the lowest satisfaction index was

registered in respect to complaint handling and communication in Nyanza at 62%. The results are as

shown in Table 11 and Figure 9.

Factor North

eastern

Central Coast Nairobi Eastern Rift

Valley

Western Nyanza

Communication 84% 83% 85% 90% 84% 85% 84% 62%

Mandate 88% 79% 76% 69% 82% 76% 76% 77%

Image

Perception 96% 70% 85% 86% 79% 84% 77% 62%

Complaints

Handling 80% 93% 78% 80% 80% 74% 64% 76%

Overall

Satisfaction 87% 81% 81% 81% 74% 80% 75% 69%

Table 11: Local government satisfaction index by provinces

Figure 9: Local government satisfaction index by provinces

Local Government respondents were most satisfied and least satisfied with various aspects as shown

in Table 12.


Communication

Easy accessibility of KRB offices

Well structured website

Website has relevant information

Prompt response to telephone calls

Delay in responding to emails


28/74


Mandate

Road maintenance programme in Kenya


and services


maintenance management system Measures undertaken by KRB to ensure that all

monies allocated to agencies are used for intended

purpose

Fund allocation criteria used by KRB


Levy funds management

Awareness campaign by KRB

Image Perception






Complaints Handling Process of lodging complaints Delays in dealing with complaints lodged

Table 12: Local government satisfaction aspects

3.5 MINISTRIES AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIESOut of eighteen (18) questionnaires administered, sixteen (16) were returned registering a response

rate of 89%. Detailed analysis is as follows.


Ministries and government agencies rated the various factors influencing customer satisfaction levels

in order of importance. The results are tabulated in Table 13.

Factor Factor Weight

Communication 26%




Total 100%

Table 13: Ministries and government agencies satisfaction factor weights

The respondents rated communication as the most important factor at 26% while image perception

and attainment of mandate were the least important factors at 24% each.


29/74



The overall satisfaction index for ministries and government agencies was 86%. Complaint handling

was the most satisfying aspect at 78% while image perception was the least satisfying factor at 72%.

The results are shown in Table 14 and Figure 10.

Factor Satisfaction IndexCommunication 85%

Mandate 88%


Complaint Handling 89%

Overall SI 86%

Table 14: Ministries and government agencies satisfaction index values per factor

Figure 10: Ministries and government agencies satisfaction index values per factor

Ministries and government agencies respondents were most satisfied and least satisfied with various

aspects as shown in Table 15.


30/74



Communication


Well structured website

Website has relevant information



Mandate

Road maintenance programme in Kenya


and services


maintenance management system

Measures undertaken by KRB to ensure that all

monies allocated to agencies are used for intended

purpose

Fund allocation criteria used by KRB


Levy funds management


Image Perception






Complaints Handling

Process of lodging complaints Delay in dealing with complaints lodged

Table 15: Ministries satisfaction aspects

3.6 TRANSPORTERSOut of thirty (30) questionnaires administered, twenty five (25) transporters responded representing

83% response rate.


The transporters rated the various factors influencing customer satisfaction levels in order of

importance. The results are tabulated in Table 15.


31/74


Factor Weight

Road Status 35%

Customer Relations 33%


Total 100%

Table 15: Transporters satisfaction factor weights

Transporters rated the status of the roads to be the most important factor influencing their

satisfaction at 35% followed by customer relations at 33% while image perception was the least

important factor at 32%.


The overall transporters satisfaction index stood at 77%. Satisfaction level for each of the factors isshown in Table 16 and Figure 11.


Customer Relations 79%

Road Status 77%


Overall SI 77%

Table 16: Transporters satisfaction index values per factor

Figure 11: Transporters satisfaction index values per factor

Transporters were most satisfied with customer relations (79%) and least satisfied with image

perception at 76%.


32/74


Transporters respondents were most satisfied and least satisfied with various aspects as shown in

Table 17.


Customer Relation

Relevant information in KRB website The way KRB appreciate the role of transporters

in generating road maintenance levy

Inadequate address to transporters complaints Delay in addressing transporters complaints

Mandate

Good understanding of KRB mandate

Maintenance works going on in our roads

Safety of our roads in the country



Image Perception



Staff professionalism at KRB

Inadequate KRB good reputation

Leadership at KRB


Table 17: Transporters satisfaction aspects

3.7 MASS MEDIAIn this category, the survey registered a response rate of 70%. Detailed analysis is as follows.


Majority of the respondents (50%) were from radio category while 38% and 13% were from television

and newspaper categories respectively as shown in Figure 12.


33/74


Figure 12: Distribution of mass media respondents by media category


The mass media rated the various factors influencing customer satisfaction levels in order of

importance. The results are as shown in Table 18.

Factor Weight

Communication 34%

Service Delivery 33%


Total 100%

Table 18: Mass media satisfaction factor weights

Communication was rated as the most important factor at 34% while both service delivery and image

perception were rated equally important to at 33% each.


The overall mass media satisfaction index stood at 79%. Satisfaction level for each of the factors is

shown inTable 19 and Figure 13.


Communication 86%




Table 19: Mass media satisfaction index value per factor


34/74


Figure 13: Mass media satisfaction index values per factor

The mass media respondents were most satisfied with communication at 86% followed by KRBs

image perception at 80%. The service delivery had the least satisfaction level at 72%.


35/74


Mass media respondents were most satisfied and least satisfied with various aspects as shown in Table

20.


Communication

Well structured KRB website Up and running website

Appreciation of KRB on the role of the media in

creating awareness on their services to the public

Relevant information in KRB website

Adequate investment in media publicity by KRB

Adequate interaction between KRB and the media

Delay in responding to administrativequeries.


Service Delivery/ Mandate

Awareness campaigns being undertaken by KRB

Prompt payment for the services rendered to KRB



How complaints are handled at KRB

Road construction and maintenance goingon in the country

Image Perception






Table 20: Mass media satisfaction aspects

3.8KRB FUND COLLECTING AGENTS AND OIL MARKETERSOut of seventeen (17) questionnaires administered, thirteen (13) fund collecting agents and oil

marketers responded representing 76% response rate.


Majority of the respondents (69%) were oil companies, 23% Agricultural collecting agents while 8%

represented KRA as shown in Figure 14.


36/74


Figure 14: Distribution of KRB fund collecting agents by category


The fund collecting agents and oil marketers rated the various factors influencing customer

satisfaction levels in order of importance. The results are as shown in Table 21.

Factor Weight


Communication 26%



Total 100%

Table 21: KRB fund collecting agents satisfaction factor weights

The most important aspect to fund collecting agents and oil marketers was service delivery which was

rated at 28% while complaints handling was rated the least important factor at 22%.


The Fund collecting agents and oil marketers had an overall satisfaction index of81%. Satisfaction

level for each of the factors is shown inTable 22 and Figure 15.

Factor Satisfaction IndexCommunication 92%





Table 22: KRB fund collecting agents satisfaction index value per factor


37/74


Figure 15: KRB fund collecting agents satisfaction level per factor

Communication was the most satisfying factor at 92% followed by service delivery at 89% while

complaints handling was the least satisfying factor at 69%.

3.8.4 Satisfaction Level by Fund Collecting Agents

As shown in Table 23 and Figure 16, agricultural collecting agents and KRA were equally satisfied at

81% each while the oil marketers had the least satisfaction level of 79%.

Factor KRA

Agricultural

collecting agent Oil company


Service Delivery 90% 74% 92%

Complaints Handling 100% 75% 66%



Table 23: KRB fund collecting agents satisfaction level by category


38/74


Figure 16: KRB fund collecting agents satisfaction level by category

The KRB Fund collecting agents and oil marketers respondents were most satisfied and least satisfied

with various aspects as captured in Table 24.


Communication

Courtesy with staff at enquiry desk




Up and running KRB website


Delay in responding to telephone calls

Service Delivery/ Mandate


Awareness campaigns undertaken by KRB


Efficient system of levy collection

Road construction and maintenance going on in

the country

Road status in the country

Relationship between levy collecting agents

and KRB

Use of fuel levy/agricultural cess in

rehabilitation and maintenance of the

roads

Delay in providing levy informationComplaints Handling

The process of lodging complaints at KRB Delay in dealing with complaints lodged at

KRB


39/74


Image Perception





Transparency in service delivery at KRB

Table 24: KRB Fund collecting agents and oil marketers satisfaction aspects

3.9 SUPPLIERS SATISFACTION SURVEYOut of the thirty (30) questionnaires administered, twenty eight (28) suppliers of goods and services

responded representing a response rate of 93%. Detailed analysis is as follows.


i. Distribution of Suppliers by Duration of Supplying KRBSixty five (65%) of the respondents had supplied the Board for a period of 3-5 years, 23% for a period

of 6-10 years while 12% had supplied the Board for a period of 1-2 years as shown in Figure 17.

Figure 17: Suppliers distribution by duration of supply

ii. Distribution by Category of SuppliersOf the suppliers who responded in the survey, 70% were in the company category, 22% were

partnerships while 7% were individual suppliers as presented in Figure 18.


40/74


Figure 18: Suppliers distribution by category of supplier


The suppliers rated the various factors influencing their satisfaction levels in order of importance.

Table 25 presents the factor weight by the suppliers.

Factor Weight


Mandate 14%

Communication 14%

Contract Management 14%

Payment Process 14%

Procurement process 14%


Total 100%

Table 25: Suppliers satisfaction factor weights

The results show that all the factors were equally important in influencing suppliers satisfaction at

14% each.


The overall supplier satisfaction index (SI) was 90%. Table 26 and Figure 19 depict the satisfaction

values for each of the satisfaction factors.


41/74




Mandate 93%

Communication 93%

Contract Management 92%

Payment Process 89%

Procurement process 88%



Table 26: Suppliers satisfaction index values per factor

Figure 19: Suppliers satisfaction index values per factor

The suppliers were most satisfied with image perception at 94% followed by mandate (93%) while

complaints handling had the least satisfaction index at 81%.

3.9.4 Satisfaction by Duration of Supply

Suppliers satisfaction was analysed according to the number of years they had supplied to KRB and

the results are shown in Table 27 and Figure 20


42/74


Table 27: Suppliers satisfaction values by duration of supply

Figure 20: Suppliers satisfaction by duration of supply

The respondents who had supplied for a period of 6-10 years had the highest satisfaction level at

93% followed by those who had supplied KRB for a period of 3-5 years at 89%. The least satisfaction

level was recorded among suppliers who had supplied KRB for a period of 1-2 years at 88%.

Suppliers were most satisfied and least satisfied with various aspects as captured in Table 28.

Factor Duration of Supply

1-2 Years 3-5 Years 6-10 Years


Procurement process 91% 86% 94%

Contract management 91% 91% 94%

Complaints handling 81% 79% 88%Mandate 93% 93% 95%


Payment process 89% 87% 92%

Overall satisfaction index 88% 89% 93%


43/74



Communication


Adequate response to administrative queries


Courtesy of staff at enquiry desk Provision of sufficient information/direction by staff at

enquiry desk

Procurement Process

Courtesy of procurement section staff

Clarification of issues raised during procurement process

by procurement staff

Transparency with procurement process at KRB

Tender evaluation process at KRB

Contract Management

Adherence with terms of contract

Instructions given during contract execution

Supportive user departments

Complaints Handling The straight forward process of lodging complains at KRB Delay in dealing with lodged

complaints

Mandate



The status of the roads in Kenya

The way KRB manages levy funds

Image Perception

KRB good leadership


Transparency at KRB

Payment process Payment of suppliers on time

Suppliers payment process

Table 28: Suppliers satisfaction aspects


44/74


3.10 PROFESSIONAL BODIESOut of fourteen (14) questionnaires administered, seven (7) professional bodies responded

representing 50% response rate.


The professional bodies rated the various factors influencing customer satisfaction levels in order of


Table 29: Professional bodies satisfaction factor weights

Communication was rated at 26% while image perception and complaint handling were least

important factors at 24% each.


The overall professional bodies satisfaction index was 83%. Satisfaction level for each of the factors is

shown in Table 30 and Figure 21.

Table 30: Professional bodies satisfaction index value per factor

Factor Weight

Communication 26%

Service delivery 25%



Total 100%



Communication 86%

Service delivery 82%




45/74


Figure 21: Professional bodies satisfaction per factor

The respondents registered high satisfaction level with Image perception at 87% followed by

communication at 86%. Complaint handling had the least satisfaction level at 75%.

The professional bodies were most satisfied and least satisfied with various aspects as captured in

Table 31.


Communication

Courtesy of staff at enquiry desk


Adequate response to administrative queries




Response to telephone calls

Service Delivery




Measures being undertaken by KRB to ensure thatall monies allocated to agencies are used for the

intended purpose

The way Board recommends to the minister on

issues related to the mandate


KRB process of monitoring goods, works

and services they fund

The way KRB coordinates optimalutilization of funds by agencies

Status of the roads in the country

Image Perception

KRB good leadership Transparency in service delivery at KRB


46/74




KRB has good reputation KRB staff upholds high standards of

professionalism

Complaints Handling

Delay in dealing with lodged complaints

The way complaints lodged are being

handled at KRB

The process of lodging complaints at KRB

Mechanisms put in place to facilitate

complaint lodging

Table 31: Professional bodies satisfying aspects

3.11 MOTORISTS AND NON- MOTORISTSOut of the targeted 600 respondents, the survey registered a response rate of 100%. Detailed analysis

is as follows.


i. Distribution of Motorists and Non-Motorists by GenderMajority (59%) of the respondents in the motorists and non-motorists category were male while 41%

were female as shown in Figure 22.

Figure 22: Distribution of motorists and non-motorists by gender


47/74


ii. Distribution of Motorists and Non-Motorists by AgeOut of those who responded, 46% were in 21-30 years age group followed by respondents in 31-40

years age group at 32% while respondents in age group 51 years and above were the least at 4%. The

results are as shown in Figure 23.

Figure 23: Distribution of motorists and non-motorists by age


The motorists and non-motorists across the country rated the various factors influencing customer

satisfaction levels in order of importance. The results are as shown in Table 32.

Factor Weight

Communication 34%

Road System 35%


Total 100%

Table 32: Motorists and non-motorists satisfaction factor weights

The road system (network) is the most important factor to the motorists and non-motorists at 35%

while image perception was the least important factor to the respondents at 31%.

3.11.3 Motorist and Non-Motorists Satisfaction Index Values

The motorists and the non-motorists recorded a satisfaction index of84%. Satisfaction levels for each

of the factors are shown inTable 33 and Figure 24.


48/74


49/74


Figure 25: Motorists and non-motorists satisfaction levels by gender

Communication was rated as the highest satisfying aspect by male and female respondents. Image

perception recorded the least satisfaction for both at 81%.

3.11.5 Motorists and Non-motorists Satisfaction Levels by Age

Satisfaction levels of motorists and non-motorists respondents were further analysed by age groups.

Age group 41-50 years had the highest satisfaction level at 86%. Respondents in age groups 21-30

years and 31-40 years recorded equal satisfaction at 84% also those in age groups below 20 years and

51 years and above had equal satisfaction at 83%. The results are as shown in Table 35 and Figure 26.

Factor Below 20

Years

21-30 Years 31-40 Years 41-50 Years 51 Years and

above

Communication 87% 86% 88% 91% 83%

Road System 82% 83% 83% 83% 86%

Image Perception 79% 82% 81% 85% 81%

Overall SI 83% 84% 84% 86% 83%

Table 35: Motorists and non-motorists satisfaction levels by age


50/74


Figure 26: Motorists and non-motorists satisfaction levels by age

Communication was rated highest satisfying factor among all the respondents with 41-50 years age

group leading at 91% while image perception was the least satisfying factor among all age groups

except for 41-50 years age group which rated road system the least at 83%.

3.11.6 Motorists and Non-motorists Satisfaction Levels by Category

Satisfaction levels of motorists and non-motorists respondents were further analysed by category. Non-

motorists registered the highest satisfaction level at 73% closely followed by Motorists at 72%.

Communication had equal rating by both categories while image perception was the least satisfying

factor at 69% and 71% for motorists and non-motorists respectively. The analysis is shown in Table

36 and Figure 27.

Factor Motorist Non-motorist

Communication 87% 87%

Road System 83% 83%

Image Perception 80% 82%

Overall SI 83% 84%

Table 36: Motorists and non-motorists satisfaction levels by category


51/74


Figure 27: Motorists and non-motorists satisfaction levels by category

The motorists and non-motorists respondents were most satisfied and least satisfied with various

aspects as captured in Table 37.


Communication

Availability of relevant information in KRB

website


Courteous staff

Delay in responding to lodged complaints

Delay in responding to telephone calls

Road System

Status of the roads in the country

Maintenance going on in our roads

Safety measures in our roads

Pedestrian walkways


Image Perception



KRB good reputation

KRB good reputation

Table 37: Motorists and non -motorists satisfaction aspects


52/74


3.12 SECURITY SECTOROut of ten (10) questionnaires administered, six (6) security sectors responded representing 60%

response rate.


The security sector rated the various factors influencing customer satisfaction levels in order of


Factor Weight



Communication 33%

Total 100%

Table 38: Security sector satisfaction factor weights

There was no significant difference with all factors in terms of importance. Image perception and

service delivery were rated at 34% each while communication was rated at 33%.


The security sector satisfaction overall index was 89%. Service delivery was the most satisfying factor

at 90% while communication was the least satisfying at 87%. Satisfaction level for each of the factors

is shown inTable 39 and Figure 28.




Communication 87%


Table 39: Security sector satisfaction factor indices


53/74


Figure 28: Security sector satisfaction factor indices

The security sectors respondents were most satisfied and least satisfied with various aspects as

captured in Table 40.


Communication




Relevant information in KRB website Always up and running website

Delay in responding to security sector

lodged complaints


Image Perception

KRB good leadership



KRB good reputation


Transparency level in service delivery at

KRB

Service Delivery



our roads


Relationship between KRB and security sector

Road safety measures on our roads

Management of the levy funds by KRB

Table 40: Security sector satisfaction aspects


54/74


3.13 EDUCATION SECTOROut of eight (8) questionnaires administered, four (4) education institutions that deal with issues

related to the roads sector responded representing 50% response rate.


The education sector rated the various factors influencing customer satisfaction levels in order of


Factor Weight

Communication 33%



Total 100%

Table 41: Education sector satisfaction factor weights

All factors were rated equally at 33%.


The education sector satisfaction overall index was 93%. Communication was the most satisfying

factor at 94% while service delivery was the least satisfying at 92%. Satisfaction level for each of the

factors is shown inTable 42 and Figure 29.


Communication 94%Image Perception 93%



Table 42: Education sector satisfaction factor indices


55/74


Figure 29: Education sector satisfaction factor indices

The education sectors respondents were most satisfied and least satisfied with various aspects as



Communication





Always up and running website

Delay in responding to education sector

lodged complaints

Image Perception

KRB good leadership



KRB good reputation


Transparency level in service delivery at KRB

Service Delivery



our roads


Relationship between KRB and education sector

Road safety measures on our roads

Roads status in Kenya

Table 43: Security sector satisfaction aspects


56/74


3.14 MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENTIn this category, out of 220 members of parliament, 27 returned the questionnaires registering a

response rate of 12%. Detailed analysis is as follows.


The Members of Parliament rated the various factors influencing customer satisfaction levels in order

of importance. The results are as shown in Table 44.

Factor Weight

Communication 24%

Image/Perception 26%

Fund Allocation Process 24%

Attainment of Mandate 26%

Total 100%

Table 44: Members of Parliament satisfaction factor weights

Mandate and image /perception were rated the most important factors at 26% each while fund

allocation and communication were the least important factors at 24% each.


The Members of Parliament satisfaction overall index was 87%. Communication and image

perception were the most satisfying factors at 89% each while attainment of mandate and fund

allocation were the least satisfying factor at 84% each. Satisfaction level for each of the factors is

shown inTable 45 and Figure 28.


Mandate 84%

Fund Allocation Process 84%


Communication 89%

Overall SI 87%

Table 45: Members of Parliament factor satisfaction indices


57/74


Figure 30: Members of Parliament factor satisfaction indices

The Members of Parliament respondents were most satisfied and least satisfied with various aspects as



Communication

KRB staff provide sufficient information/direction

KRB staff respond to administrative queries within 14 days

Staff at KRB are courteous

Adequate information made available by KRB

Telephone calls at KRB are answered promptly

KRBs response to emails

KRBs website relevant information

KRB website structure

KRB website is always up and running

Delay in responding to

queries

Fund Allocation Process

Utilization of funds for the intended purpose

Transparency of fund allocation formula

Mechanism for managing funds released

Delay in addressing

funds enquiries

Mandate


Road works improvement programme in Kenya The way Board recommends to the Minister on issues related to the

mandate

Measures being undertaken by KRB to ensure that all monies

allocated to agencies are used for intended purpose

The way KRB coordinates optimal utilization of funds

Use of agricultural cess

in constituencies Status of the roads in

Kenya


58/74


Image Perception


KRB reputation Interaction between KRB and MPs

Transparency level in

service delivery Inadequate participation

of KRB in corporate

social responsibilities

Table 46: Members of Parliament Satisfaction aspects

3.15 DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSIn this category, the survey registered a response rate of 20%. Detailed analysis is as follows.


The development partners rated the various factors influencing customer satisfaction levels in order

of importance. The results are tabulated in Table 47.

Factor Weight

Communication 27%

Attainment of the Mandate 27%Image Perception 22%


Total 100%

Table 47: Development partners satisfaction factor weights

The development partners rated communication and attainment of mandate as the most important

factors at 27% each while image perception had the least satisfying factor at 22%, while complaints

handling had 24%.


The overall satisfaction index for development partners was 87%. Communication was the most

satisfying aspect at 90% while complaints handling was the least satisfying factor at 82%. The results

are shown in Table 48 and Figure 31.


59/74


60/74




Process of monitoring goods, works and services

funded by KRB

Awareness campaigns being undertaken by

KRB

Road works improvement programmes in

Kenya


Image Perception



Transparency in service delivery at KRB



Complaints Handling

Delay in dealing with complaints

Table 49: Development partners satisfaction aspects


61/74


CHAPTER FOUR

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The recommendations were informed by the findings on the satisfaction level of the various factors in

the study, the results of the analysis of the specific customer aspects as well as comments provided by

the customers during the survey. The recommendations are presented by factors of satisfaction.

4.1 COMMUNICATION

Communication registered satisfaction index of 94% among the education sector, 93% by suppliers

and local government, 92% by the fund collecting agencies and oil marketers, 89% by members of

parliament,87% by the security sector and motorists and non motorists traffic, 86% by mass media,

professional bodies and road agencies, 85% by government ministries. A large number of respondents

rated communication aspects as satisfying. However, 38% of fund collecting agents and oil marketers,

20% of mass media, 10% of road agencies, 19% of local government and 10% of members of

parliament indicated that KRB does not respond to emails on time.

As regards lodged complaints and queries, 50% of mass media, 39% of motorized and non-motorized

traffic, 19% of transporters and 22% of Members of Parliament indicated that KRB does not address

complaints and queries on time.

Recommendations:

i. Mechanisms be put in place to ensure prompt response to emails to various customer

categories.

ii. Measures be put in place to ensure that lodged complaints and queries are addressed

adequately and in a timely manner.

4.2 KRB SERVICE DELIVERY/MANDATE

Service delivery recorded 92% for education sector,90% for security sector, 89% for fund collecting

agencies and oil marketers, 82% for professional bodies and associations and 72% for mass media.

Mandate registered a satisfaction level of 93% for the suppliers, 88% for local government and

ministries; and 84% for road agencies and members of parliament. However 100% of mass media,


62/74


33% of education and security sector, 42% of fund collecting agencies and oil marketers and 50% of

professional bodies are not satisfied with the status of roads in the country. Regarding road

construction and maintenance,50% of mass media and 58% of professional bodies and associations

are dissatisfied.45% of fund collecting agencies and oil marketers,40% of mass media and 14% of

professional bodies were dissatisfied with KRBs awareness campaigns.36% of fund collecting agencies

and oil marketers disagreed with the efficiency of fund collection system while 67% of the same group

were not aware of the amount of levy fund collected. In response to the satisfaction with the measures

undertaken by the Board to ensure that all monies allocated to agencies are used for the intended

purpose, 35% of the local government,16% of Members of Parliament and 10% of road agencies

were dissatisfied

Recommendations:

iii.The Board should enhance its awareness campaign on its role and what is being done to

improve road status in the country.

iv. Mechanisms be put in place to avail more information to the public on the allocation and

disbursement of funds to the implementing agencies.

v. The Board to put measures in place that will ensure that all allocated funds are used for the

intended purpose.

4.3 COMPLAINTS HANDLING

Complaints handling registered a satisfaction index of 89% among government ministries,88% by

local government, 81% by suppliers 78% by road agencies,75% by professional bodies and 69% by

fund collecting agencies and oil marketers.

However 50% of fund collecting agencies and oil marketers and 28% of local government indicated

that the complaint lodging mechanisms are not straight forward while 71% of fund collecting

agencies and oil marketers were dissatisfied with the effectiveness of complaint lodging mechanisms.

36% of local government, 40% of fund collecting agencies and oil marketers, 16% of road agencies

and 17% of professional bodies indicated that there is delay in dealing with complaints whereas 29%

of fund collecting agencies and oil marketers and 36% of local government were not satisfied the way

complaints are handled at KR

Krb Customer Satisfaction Fy 2011 2012 2

Documents

Transcript of Krb Customer Satisfaction Fy 2011 2012 2