Student Satisfaction with Business Processes in Higher Education

Authors

Sanja Zambelli University for Applied Science in Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7011-2778
Marko Babić University of Libertas, Zagreb, Croatia
Miroslav Drljača University North, Koprivnica, Croatia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8936-5190
Zvonimir Peranić University for Applied Science in Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0033-111X

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22598/pi-be/2026.1.42344

Keywords:

student satisfaction, higher education, service quality, quality management, business processes, institutional support, student experience

Abstract

Purpose: This study examines student satisfaction with the perceived performance of key business processes in a higher education institution and identifies process-specific parameters that significantly influence satisfaction. Service quality is conceptualized as a process-based construct embedded in institutional performance and quality management systems.
Design/Methodology: A quantitative research design was applied using a structured survey instrument with Likert items. Data were collected from 160 students at one Croatian higher education institution. Multiple linear regression analysis examined the effects of process-specific parameters on satisfaction across six institutional business processes: Teaching, Library, Student Administration, IT Support, Publishing Activity, and Scientific Research.
Findings: The results reveal clear process-specific determinants of student satisfaction. Teaching satisfaction is significantly predicted by lecturer preparedness, clarity of teaching content, and study program quality. Library satisfaction is associated with library staff competence and responsiveness to users’ needs, while Student Administration satisfaction is driven by communication quality and procedural knowledge. IT Support satisfaction is influenced by IT staff competence and classroom equipment. Publishing Activity satisfaction is primarily related to the availability of textbooks authored by academic staff. Satisfaction with Scientific Research is mainly associated with perceived institutional reputation, whereas academic staff research competence is not statistically significant.
Practical Implications: Higher education institutions should prioritize process-oriented quality management strategies focused on staff competence, communication effectiveness, infrastructure optimization, and alignment of support services with student needs.
Originality/Value: This study extends service quality research by operationalizing student satisfaction at the level of institutional business processes rather than isolated service dimensions.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abdullah, F. (2005). The development of HEdPERF: A new measuring instrument of service quality for the higher education sector. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 30(6), 569–581. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2005.00480.x

Abdullah, F. (2006). Measuring service quality in higher education: HEdPERF versus SERVPERF. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 24(1), 31–47. https://doi.org/10.1108/02634500610641543

Amoako, G. K., Ampong, G. O., Gabrah, A. Y. B., de Heer, F., & Antwi-Adjei, A. (2023). Service quality affecting student satisfaction in higher education institutions in Ghana. Cogent Education, 10(2), Article 2238468. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2238468

Bonett, D. G., & Wright, T. A. (2015). Cronbach’s alpha reliability: Interval estimation, hypothesis testing, and sample size planning. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1960

Bwachele, V. W., Chong, Y.-L., & Krishnapillai, G. (2023). Perceived service quality and student satisfaction in higher learning institutions in Tanzania. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10, Article 444. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01913-6

Clemons, R., & Jance, M. (2024). Defining quality in higher education and identifying opportunities for improvement. SAGE Open, 14(3), Article 21582440241271155. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241271155

Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cronin, J. J., Jr., & Taylor, S. A. (1992). Measuring service quality: A reexamination and extension. Journal of Marketing, 56(3), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299205600304

DeVellis, R. F., & Thorpe, C. T. (2022). Scale development: Theory and applications (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Douglas, J., McClelland, R., & Davies, J. (2008). The development of a conceptual model of student satisfaction with their experience in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education, 16(1), 19–35. https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880810848396

Dužević, I. (2020). Student satisfaction vs student achievements: Should quality management system in higher education aim at student satisfaction or student achievements? Poslovna izvrsnost – Business Excellence, 14(2), 51–67. https://doi.org/10.22598/pi-be/2020.14.2.51

Dužević, I., Baković, T., & Delić, M. (2019). Stimulating teaching and learning innovations to enhance higher education quality. Poslovna izvrsnost – Business Excellence, 13(1), 13–31. https://doi.org/10.22598/pi-be/2019.13.1.13

European Association for Quality Assurance in Higher Education, European Students’ Union, European University Association, & European Association of Institutions in Higher Education. (2015). Standards and guidelines for quality assurance in the European Higher Education Area (ESG). https://www.enqa.eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/ESG_2015.pdf

Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Gruber, T., Fuß, S., Voss, R., & Gläser-Zikuda, M. (2010). Examining student satisfaction with higher education services: Using a new measurement tool. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 23(2), 105–123. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513551011022474

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.

Haverila, M., Haverila, K., McLaughlin, C., & Arora, M. (2021). Towards a comprehensive student satisfaction model. The International Journal of Management Education, 19(3), Article 100558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2021.100558

International Organization for Standardization. (2015a). ISO 9000:2015 Quality management systems — Fundamentals and vocabulary. https://www.iso.org/standard/45481.html

International Organization for Standardization. (2015b). ISO 9001:2015 Quality management systems — Requirements. https://www.iso.org/standard/62085.html

International Organization for Standardization. (2018). ISO 21001:2018 Educational organizations — Management systems for educational organizations — Requirements with guidance for use. ISO.

Kustiawan, M., Suryadi, K., & Sukmayadi, V. (2024). Essential attributes of service quality in higher education institutions: A systematic literature review. Croatian Journal of Education, 26(2), 651–683. https://doi.org/10.15516/cje.v26i2.5267

Leskaj, E., Leskaj, A., & Lipi, R. (2024). Striving for excellence: Assessing the impact of university strategies on enhancing student services in Albanian public higher education. Frontiers in Education, 9, Article 1486199. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1486199

Norman, G. (2010). Likert scales, levels of measurement and the “laws” of statistics. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15(5), 625–632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-010-9222-y

O’Brien, R. M. (2007). A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality & Quantity, 41(5), 673–690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-006-9018-6

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12–40.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879

Santini, F. de O., Ladeira, W. J., Sampaio, C. H., & da Silva Costa, G. (2017). Student satisfaction in higher education: A meta-analytic study. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 27(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2017.1311980

Seitova, M. S., Temirbekova, Z., Kazykhankyzy, L., Khalmatova, Z. K., & Çelik, H. E. (2024). Perceived service quality and student satisfaction: A case study at Khoja Akhmet Yassawi University, Kazakhstan. Frontiers in Education, 9, Article 1492432. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1492432

Supriyanto, A., Burhanuddin, Sunarni, Rochmawati, Ratri, D. K., & Bhayangkara, A. N. (2025). Academic service quality, student satisfaction and loyalty: A study at higher education legal entities in Indonesia. The TQM Journal, 37(5), 1364–1384. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-10-2023-0334

Surya Bahadur, G. C., Gurung, S. K., Poudel, R. L., Yadav, U. S., Bhattacharjee, A., & Dhungana, B. R. (2024). The effect of higher education service quality on satisfaction among business students in India and Nepal. Cogent Education, 11(1), Article 2393521. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2393521

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics (7th ed.). Pearson.

Toscano-Hernández, A. E., Álvarez-González, L. I., Sanzo-Pérez, M. J., & Esparza-Rodríguez, S. A. (2024). Service quality in higher education: A systematic literature review, 2007–2023. Estudios Gerenciales, 40(170), 13–30. https://doi.org/10.18046/j.estger.2024.170.6244

Wong, W. H., & Chapman, E. (2023). Student satisfaction and interaction in higher education. Higher Education, 85(5), 957–978. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00874-0

Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L., & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The behavioral consequences of service quality. Journal of Marketing, 60(2), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299606000203

Published

15.06.2026

Issue

Vol. 20 No. 1 (2026): Poslovna izvrsnost - Business Excellence

Section

Preliminary Communications

License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

All articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0). This license permits: Non-commercial use, sharing, and reproduction in any medium, proper attribution to the original authors and source.

Authors retain full copyright of their work while granting the journal the right of first publication.

The journal is published by the University of Zagreb Faculty of Economics & Business.