APPLICATION OF THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS METHOD IN EVALUATING PUBLIC COMPLAINT HANDLING SERVICE SATISFACTIONTHROUGH THE RAPID RESPONSE COMMUNITY (CRM) SYSTEM OF THE DKI JAKARTA PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT
DOI:
10.54443/morfai.v6i2.4932Published:
2026-01-17Downloads
Abstract
Objectives: The study aims to analyze the factors that shape public satisfaction with the Cepat Respon Masyarakat (CRM) System. Methodology: Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) analysis with a mixed methods approach was used to compare paired cluster indicators identified by three CRM system experts. Finding: The results indicate that the level of public satisfaction with the CRM system, in the second-level cluster, is the most important factor determining public satisfaction, perceived quality. In the third-level cluster, the most important factors determining public satisfaction are Service Process Efficiency and Transparency. In the fourth-level cluster, the most important factors determining public satisfaction are the report and complaint development process, ease of procedures, and security of reporter data protection. Conclusion: The implementation of the CRM system must consider public opinion as users. Therefore, the DKI Jakarta Provincial Government needs to focus on improving transparency, accessibility, and operational management of public services to increase public trust.
Keywords:
Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) Cepat Respon Masyarakat (CRM) System Perceived Value Perceived Quality Public ExpectationsReferences
Ansell, C., Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2023). Public administration and politics meet turbulence: The search for robust governance responses. Public Administration, 101, 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12874
Aritonang, D. M. (2017). The impact of e-government system on public service quality in Indonesia. European Scientific Journal, 13, 99–111. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2017.v13n35p99
Bateson, J. E. G., & Hoffman, K. D. (1999). Managing services marketing: Text and Rreadings. Dryden Press.
Cahyadi, A. (2003). E-government: Suatu tinjauan konsep dan permasalahan. Journal The WINNERS, 4(1), 1–12.
Canco, I., Kruja, D., & Iancu, T. (2021). AHP, a reliable method for quality decision making: A Case study in business. Sustainability, 13(24), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132413932
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. New York: Sage Publications Ltd.
Deyalage, P. A., & Kulathunga, D. (2019). Factors Affecting Online Customer Satisfaction: The Sri Lankan Perspective. International Journal of Business and Management, 14(2), 99. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v14n2p99
Du, X., & Wang, Z. (2024). Researching public satisfaction in social governance through the application of the fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method. Journal of Social Sciences, VII(2), 105–117. https://doi.org/10.52326/jss.utm.2024.7(2).09
Haggart, B., & Keller, C. I. (2021). Democratic legitimacy in global platform governance. Telecommunications Policy, 45(6), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2021.102152
Idzi, F. M., & Gomes, R. C. (2022). Digital governance: government strategies that impact public services. Global Public Policy and Governance, 2, 427–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43508-022-00055-w
Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2009). Marketing management. Pearson Prentice Hall.
Lin, J., Carter, L., & Liu, D. (2021). Privacy concerns and digital government: exploring citizen willingness to adopt the COVIDSafe app. European Journal of Information Systems, 30(4), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2021.1920857
Mahmud, D. (2023). Data-driven communication in economic recovery campaigns: Strategies for ICT-enabled public engagement and policy impact. International Journal of Business and Economics Insights, 3(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.63125/qdrdve50
Nardi, P. M. (2018). Doing Survey Research: A Guide to Quantitative Methods. New York: Routledge.
Nugroho, A. P., Zed, E. Z., & Syakila, F. (2023). Intention to use digital bank: Role of perceived ease of use, customer knowledge, service quality, and system security. Jurnal Ekonomi, 12(01), 891–899.
Omar, S. S., Nayef, J. M., Qasim, N. H., Raad Tomaa Kawad, & Kalenychenko, R. (2024). The role of digitalization in improving accountability and efficiency in public services. Revista Investigación Operacional, 45(2), 203–224.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1988). SERVQUAL: A multi-item scale for measuring customer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 12–40.
Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1).
Sari, N. M., & Bahfiarti, Muh. I. S. T. (2021). Public satisfaction with information services in public services. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Law, Social Science, Economics, and Education, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.6-3-2021.2305964
Setyowati, K., Adi, P. S., Suryawati, R., Parwiyanto, H., & Prakoso, S. G. (2024). Effect of E-GOVQUAL service quality on customer satisfaction of public service mall website in Surakarta. Pakistan Journal of Life and Social Sciences, 22(2), 38–52. https://doi.org/10.57239/PJLSS-2024-22.2.004
Suhendar, A., Asmala, T., & Johan, A. (2022). The effect of digital service quality on public satisfaction through perception of ease of use. JAMBA: Journal of Applied Management and Business Administration, 1(1), 11–20.
Widanti, N. P. T. (2022). Good governance for efficient public services responsive and transparent. International Journal of Demos, 4(2), 872–879.
Wirtz, B. W., Müller, W. M., & Schmidt, F. W. (2021). Digital public services in smart cities - An empirical analysis of lead user preferences. Public Organization Review, 21, 299–315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-020-00492-3
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Andika Wisnuadji Putra Soebroto, Utomo Sarjono Putro
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Downloads
How to Cite
