EMPLOYEES PERCEPTION ON IMPROVING SERVICE DELIVERY IN THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

Download This Article

Gugu Precious Mathaba, Ian Nzimakwe, Pfano Mashau ORCID logo, Elias Munapo ORCID logo

https://doi.org/10.22495/jgr_v4_i4_c4_p8

Abstract

The study aimed at establishing the critical factors underlying the improvement of service delivery within the Department of Public Works in South Africa by ensuring that key elements of service delivery (cost effectiveness of services, high quality services and timeous delivery of services) are adhered to. Durban Regional Area was selected as the location of study. A total of 100 participants were randomly sampled from a population of 400 employees in the targeted area of study. A questionnaire was used as a research instrument and was administered to all the selected 100 respondents. What emerged from the study is that the Department of Public Works is marred by a number of problems, the biggest problem being the non-existence of an integrated management system, making it difficult to track the stages of services to be delivered and this resulted in huge delays in delivering the services to the clients. The quantitative results showed that the Department has staff members who are suitably skilled for the work rendered, but these skills alone are not sufficient if the Department is lacking in the critical resources required to deliver services. Since Department of Public Works is a technical department, it is recommended that skilled employees such as quantity surveyors, engineers as well as information technology experts be at the forefront of priorities. It is also very important that guidelines, policies and business processes for all sections in the department are well communicated to all staff.

Key Words: Public Service Delivery, Employee Perception, Procurement Challenges

How to cite this paper: Mathaba, G. P., Nzimakwe, I., Mashau, P., & Munapo, E. (2015). Employees perception on improving service delivery in the department of public works. Journal of Governance and Regulation, 4(4-4), 507-514. https://doi.org/10.22495/jgr_v4_i4_c4_p8