Using a Recognition and Reward Initiative to Improve Service Quality: A Quasi-Experimental Field Study in a Public Higher Education Institution

• DOI: 10.1177/009102601104000204
• Published date: 01 June 2011
• Author: Richard E. Kopelman,Ann Cohen Brandwein,Naomi A. Gardberg
• Date: 01 June 2011
• Subject Matter: Article

Using a Recognition and

Reward Initiative to

Improve Service Quality:

A Quasi-Experimental

Field Study in a Public

Higher Education

Institution

By Richard E. Kopelman, DBA, SHPR, Naomi A. Gardberg, PhD, and Ann

Cohen Brandwein, PhD

Acknowledgements: We gratefully acknowledge the research assistance of

Katrina Motch and Elif Selcuk.

We descri be an intervent ion undertake n to improve serv ice quality in a public

sector i nstitution. M ore specifica lly, our service qua lity initiati ve focused on

improv ing the work beha vior and job att itudes of emplo yees in a job cate gory that

is often overlooked, ye t which is integr al to the succes s of most public ( and

privat e) sector organ izations—ad ministrative assistants. In colleges and

univer sities it has lon g been customar y at the end of each academic year t o

recogn ize the outstan ding achievem ents of faculty and students; ho wever,

admini strative assi stants have tra ditionally ne ver received an y accolades. A

recogn ition and rewar d initiative fo r administrat ive assistant s was implement ed

during t he three academ ic years (2003/ 2004 through 20 05/2006) as pa rt of a

servic e excellence in itiative. Dat a on service qual ity were collec ted on an ongoin g

basis by an independent entity, Educatio nal Benchmarks , Inc. After the third year

of the rec ognition and re ward initiati ve, survey data were also obtai ned from

admini strative assi stants and indi viduals in rela ted job titles. In general, att itudes

were hig hly favorable (e.g., 89 percen t of respondent s wanted the pro gram to

contin ue), and numero us positive com ments were prov ided such as “it i s a good

feelin g to be recognize d by your peers an d commended for your work.” The

presen t action resear ch suggests tha t a recognition and reward inte rvention can

improv e service excel lence in a public sector higher e ducation orga nization.

Further, we bel ieve that the pr esent interve ntion is transp ortable to vari ous public

sector e ntities.

Public Personnel Management Volume 40 No. 2 Summer 2011 133

Agrowing body of evidence suggests that excel lence in service quality is an

important driver of customer satisfaction leading to additional benef‌its to

organizations, such as superior customer satisfaction and customer loyalty.1

One approach to enhancing service quality is via employee recognition and reward

programs. Such programs hav e also been found to improve employee attitudes2and

to facilitate org anizational change.3As DeM ers noted: “City, state, and county govern-

ments would do quite well to institute a blend of best practices from around the coun-

try that embrace new private-sector strategies while at the same time accentuate

existing governm ent benef‌its.”4Similarly, Lachance commented that “[t]here is grow-

ing realization that the tools and techniques we have availa ble to engage and sustain

the commitment we ne ed from public servants go beyond the annual salari es or even

basic forms of pay-for-performan ce.”5Yet, surprisingly little research has examined

such tools in nonprof‌it or public sector contexts. In the present invest igation, we

examine t he effects of a ser vice excellence recognition and reward program on per-

ceptions of service quality in a public higher ed ucation institution.

Our research add resses four gaps in the current empirical literature. First, Dean

describes a service prof‌it chain in which a positive environment for employees leads to

value for customers, which in tur n leads to improved organizational results.6Yet, her

literature review examined only one article from the nonprof‌it or public sector (a

police depar tment in the UK). We believe it is important for both academicians and

managers to understand whether these f‌indings are generalizable to other contexts.

For example, do relationships between organizational features, such as management

culture and employee attitudes generalize to the nonprof‌it and public sectors? More

specif‌ically, although an extensive body of research has examined associations between

service climate initiatives and the behaviors of employees and customers in the private

sector, to our knowledge no research has examined the effects of a service excellence

initiative in a public higher education institution. Faculty and administrative assistants

share some characteristics with private sector employees but vary in other impor tant

ways. As Ruben noted in connection with the longstanding (12-year) service quality

enhanc ement initia tive at Rutgers Univ ersity, public sector high er edu cation

institutions are characterized by: (1) “ultrastability ” of the workforce; (2) limited

availability of incentives and disincentives; and (3) complex bureaucratic structures.7

Second, in addition to examining relationships in a new context, we think that

these relationships require study using a longitudinal approach. The body of research

on the relationship between service excellence initiatives and organizational outcomes

has primarily been cross-sectional. Dean calls for longitudinal research in order to have

more conf‌idence in the internal validity of cause and effect inferences.8

Third, little empirical research has examined the effects of a recognition program

(coupled with rewards) to facilitate service quality improvement. The present research

employs a quasi-experimental multiple measure design in this quest.

Finally, the present investigation is contri butory in focusin g on an often

overlooked job category, administrative assistants. Although usually located at lower

levels of organ ization char ts, administr ative assistants can be integr al to a n

organization’s performance. They frequently serve in a boundar y-spanning capacity—

Public Personnel Management Volume 40 No. 2 Summer 2011134