kra customer satisfaction survey

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION

SURVEY 2017/2018 REPORT

Prepared By: SBO Research Ltd

Kindaruma Road off Ring Road

P.O Box 10567-00400

Nairobi

Tel: 020-2145668/2101916/7

Email: [email protected]

For:

ISO 9001:2015 Certified

DECEMBER,2017

____________________________________________________________________________________ ii Customer Satisfaction Survey For: Kenya Revenue Authority 2017-2018

Contents 1. CHAPTER ONE: BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 The Organizational Governance and Management ................................................................... 1

1.3 Current Situation at KRA .............................................................................................................. 1

1.4 Research objectives ....................................................................................................................... 3

1.5 Scope of Work ................................................................................................................................. 3

2. CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................ 4

2.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 Overview of the literature .............................................................................................................. 4

2.2 Customer Satisfaction Theory ...................................................................................................... 4

2.3 Customer Satisfaction Models ...................................................................................................... 5

2.4 Comparative Analysis with Competition .................................................................................... 9

3. CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................................................... 11

3.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 11

3.1 Research Approach ...................................................................................................................... 11

3.2 Target Population ......................................................................................................................... 12

3.3 Sampling Design ........................................................................................................................... 12

3.5 Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 14

4. CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH FINDINGS ............................................... 15

4.0 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 15

4.1. Response Rate ............................................................................................................................... 15

4.2 KRA Customer Service Charter .................................................................................................. 20

4.3 KRA Reforms on Service Delivery ............................................................................................. 26

4.4. Complaint Handling & Resolution ............................................................................................. 31

____________________________________________________________________________________ iii Customer Satisfaction Survey For: Kenya Revenue Authority 2017-2018

4.5 KRA Contact Centre ..................................................................................................................... 38

4.6 KRA Website ................................................................................................................................. 39

4.7 KRA services at Huduma Centres .............................................................................................. 41

4.8 Customer Satisfaction on Key Touch Points ............................................................................ 43

4.9 Likes and Dislikes of KRA ........................................................................................................... 48

4.10 Evaluating KRA Systems ............................................................................................................. 49

4.11 Quality of Communication .......................................................................................................... 51

4.12 Supplier Satisfaction with Procurement of Goods and Services ............................................ 52

4.13 Overall Customer Satisfaction Index ......................................................................................... 54

4.14 Summary of Regional Ratings on Customer Satisfaction ....................................................... 56

4.15 Net Promoter Score (NPS) .......................................................................................................... 57

4.16 Brand Personality ......................................................................................................................... 58

5. CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................ 59

REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................. 65

QUESTIONNAIRE ........................................................................................................................................... 67

____________________________________________________________________________________ iv Customer Satisfaction Survey For: Kenya Revenue Authority 2017-2018

List of Tables

Table 2. 1 Kenya Power- (2016-2021) ...................................................................................................... 9

Table 2.2: National Hospital Insurance Fund (2014-2018) ............................................................... 10

Table 3. 3 Selection of customer sample size ......................................................................................... 12

Table3. 4: Adjusted sample breakdown .................................................................................................. 13

Table 3. 5: Distribution of individual taxpayers .................................................................................... 13

Table 4.6: Achieved sample ....................................................................................................................... 15

Table 4.7: Interaction with KRA ............................................................................................................. 17

Table 4.8: Reasons for interaction ........................................................................................................... 19

Table 4. 9: Comparative Analysis - awareness of customer service charter ................................... 21

Table 4. 10: Customer service charter awareness sources ................................................................. 21

Table 4. 11: Comparative Analysis – Customer service charter awareness sources ..................... 22

Table 4. 12: Customer service charter awareness sources -individual taxpayers ......................... 22

Table 4. 13: Comparative Analysis - effectiveness of the customer service charter ....................... 23

Table 4. 14: Living the core values ......................................................................................................... 25

Table 4. 15: Specific reforms - Levels of awareness ............................................................................ 27

Table 4. 16: Impact of iTax systems ...................................................................................................... 28

Table 4.17: Impact of Huduma centres ................................................................................................. 28

Table 4.18: Impact of processing of VAT ............................................................................................. 29

Table 4.19: Impact of mobile payment systems .................................................................................. 29

Table 4. 20: Impact of established call centre ....................................................................................... 30

Table 4. 21: Impact of website upgrade ................................................................................................ 30

Table 4. 22: Comparative Analysis - complaints incidence ................................................................ 31

Table 4. 23: Nature of complaints ........................................................................................................... 32

Table 4.24: Comparative Analysis - complaints reporting ............................................................... 33

Table 4. 25: Taxpayer Complaints channels ......................................................................................... 34

Table 4. 26: Comparative Analysis - speed of complaint resolution ................................................. 35

Table4. 27: Comparative Analysis - satisfaction with complaint resolution ................................. 36

Table 4. 28: Effectiveness and satisfaction of the contact centre ....................................................... 38

Table 4.29: Frequency of visit ................................................................................................................. 40

Table 4.30: Reasons for website visit .................................................................................................... 40

Table 4.31: Frequency of visit .................................................................................................................... 41

____________________________________________________________________________________ v Customer Satisfaction Survey For: Kenya Revenue Authority 2017-2018

Table 4.32: Reasons for visit to Huduma centre ................................................................................ 42

Table 4.33: Satisfaction with KRA staff ................................................................................................ 43

Table 4.34: Satisfaction with support services ................................................................................... 44

Table 4.35: Employees Integrity and fairness ..................................................................................... 44

Table4. 36: Comparative Analysis - employee’s integrity and fairness .......................................... 45

Table 4.37: Taxpayer education and information .............................................................................. 46

Table 4. 38: Comparative Analysis - Taxpayer Education ................................................................. 46

Table 4.39: KRA Performance on functional and operational attributes ....................................... 47

Table 4.40: Likes/Dislikes about KRA ................................................................................................... 48

Table 4.41: Customer satisfaction with tax processes ........................................................................ 49

Table 4.42: Customer satisfaction with KRA systems ....................................................................... 50

Table 4.43: Quality of communication .................................................................................................. 51

Table 4.44: Supplier satisfaction with procurement of goods and services ................................... 52

Table 4. 45: Comparative Analysis - satisfaction with procurement of goods and services ........ 53

Table 4.46: Overall Customer satisfaction Index ............................................................................... 54

Table 4.47: Comparative satisfaction scores – 2013/201 – 2016/2017 ........................................... 55

Table 4.48: Regional ratings .................................................................................................................. 56

Table 4.49: NPS summary of the various stakeholders is presented as follows ............................ 57

Table 4.50: KRA Brand personification ................................................................................................ 58

Table 5.51: Comparative satisfaction scores – 2013/201 – 2016/2017 .............................................. 59

List of figures

Figure 4.1: Individual Taxpayers by age and gender ......................................................................... 16

Figure 4.2: Individual Taxpayers by regions ....................................................................................... 16

Figure 4.3: Customers across different segments ................................................................................ 17

Figure 4.4: Mode of contact used ........................................................................................................... 18

Figure 4.5: Provision of feedback ............................................................................................................ 19

Figure 4.6: Customer service charter awareness ............................................................................... 20

Figure 4. 7: Individual taxpayers’ customer service charter awareness- by regions ................... 20

Figure 4. 8: Effectiveness of the customer service charter ................................................................ 23

Figure 4. 9: Awareness of KRA reforms ................................................................................................ 26

Figure 4. 10: Awareness of KRA reforms -Individual Taxpayers ...................................................... 27

____________________________________________________________________________________ vi Customer Satisfaction Survey For: Kenya Revenue Authority 2017-2018

Figure 4 11: Complaints Incidence .......................................................................................................... 31

Figure 4. 12: Reporting of complaints ..................................................................................................... 32

Figure 4.13: Deterrents for complaints registration ............................................................................ 33

Figure 4.14: Speed of complaint resolution ........................................................................................... 35

Figure 4. 15: Satisfaction with complaint resolution ............................................................................ 36

Figure 4. 16: Awareness of KRAs contact centre number .................................................................... 38

Figure 4. 17: Awareness of KRAs website ............................................................................................... 39

Figure 4.18: Awareness of Huduma centre ........................................................................................... 41

____________________________________________________________________________________ vii Customer Satisfaction Survey For: Kenya Revenue Authority 2017-2018

ABRREVIATIONS

BOD – Board of Directors DPC – Document Processing Centre ECTS - Electronic Cargo Tracking System FGD – Focus Group Discussion GDP – Gross Domestic Product IDI – In Depth Interviews ITMS - Integrated Tax Management System KRA – Kenya Revenue Authority LTO – Large Taxpayer Office MST – Medium Small Taxpayer MTO – Medium Taxpayer Office NPS- Net Promoter Score SPSS - Statistical Package for Social Sciences TOR – Terms of Reference VMS - Vehicle Management System SMEs- Small & Medium Sized Enterprises

SMS –Short Message Services

____________________________________________________________________________________ viii Customer Satisfaction Survey For: Kenya Revenue Authority 2017-2018

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction

Best practice and the Tax administration Diagnostic Assessment Tool (TADAT) requires customer

satisfaction survey to be carried out at least once in every two years by an independent consultant and

the findings implemented in the subsequent years. In this regard The Authority commissioned SBO

Research Ltd to conduct customer satisfaction survey for the year 2017/2018. The main objective of

the survey was to assess taxpayers’ perception of the level and quality of service delivery and whether

their service expectations were being met by KRA.

The survey used both qualitative and quantitative data obtained from secondary and primary data

sources through literature review and questionnaires respectively. The primary data was collected

from Individual Taxpayers, Large Taxpayers, Medium Taxpayers, SMEs, Supplies, Associations and

Clearing Agents/Importers & Importers. The proposed sample was 2401. However, the survey

achieved a sample of 2470 as follows: Individual taxpayers (1800), LTOs (180), MTOs (100), SMEs

(200), Suppliers (100), Associations (30) and finally Clearing Agents/Importers & Importers (60). The

achieved sample for individual taxpayers was as follows: Nairobi (586), Central (287), Northern (292),

South Rift (146), North Rift (163), Southern (99) and Western (286).

The information and data were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS). Indices

were used to measure customer satisfaction level on a scale of 1-5 (1 to 5) with one being dissatisfied

and 5 being very satisfied.

Summary of results

Based on the findings, the overall satisfaction index for KRA for the financial year ending June 2017

stood at 71.9% against a target of 80%. This was however an improvement compared to 2014 where

the index was 65%.The improvement was realized from shift in satisfaction on adherence to core

values, Customer perception on staff, Support given by staff to taxpayers and complaint handling.

However, there was a decline on customers’ satisfaction with the level of integrity and fairness

exhibited by staff. On customer service charter awareness, there was a drop across all customer

segments from 64% in 2013 to 49% in 2017.

____________________________________________________________________________________ ix Customer Satisfaction Survey For: Kenya Revenue Authority 2017-2018

LTOs: The overall score for Large Taxpayers was 69.7% which was similar to the score achieved in

2013. On service charter awareness, LTOs recorded some improvements from 65% in 2013 to 73% in

2017. Similarly, on reform awareness, 80% of LTOs indicated they are aware compared to 2013 where

the awareness level was 60%. On level of professionalism, there was slightly improvement on KRA

ratings from 70% in 2013 to72% in 2017. On integrity and fairness, KRA rating dropped from 64% in

2013 to 55% in 2017.

MTOS: The overall satisfaction score for MTOs was 70.8%. In regard to reforms awareness, there was

some improvements in terms of customer’s awareness on reforms from 54% in 2013 to 60% in 2017.

On the same note, there was also improvement on levels of perception in regard to staff

professionalism from 69% in 2013 to 73% in 2017. In regard to complaint handling, KRA recorded

significant improvement from 36% in 2013 to 48% in 2017. However, MTOs scored KRA at 53% on

integrity and fairness in 2017 which was a significant drop from a rating of 62% in 2013.

SMES: The overall satisfaction score for SMEs stood at 73.9% which was an improvement from 68%

in 2013. A number of SMEs (76.8%) were happy with KRA systems especially the Simba System/ iCMS

(86.7%) Other areas that were rated highly by SMEs included complaints handling (80.4%) and KRA

core values (77.2%).However the report indicated a need to improve on integrity and fairness which

was ranked lowest at 63.3%.

Clearing and Forwarding Agents: The overall score for clearing and forwarding agents stood at 75.8%

which is an improvement of 9.8 %( from 66% in 2013). On complaint handling, KRA was rated at 100%

in 2017 on satisfaction which is a significant shift from 42% in 2013. On reforms awareness, there was

however substantial drop from 82% in 2013 to 68% in 2017.

Suppliers: Overall satisfaction index for suppliers stands at 76.4% a decline of 7.6% (from 84% in 2013

to 76.4% in 2017). Dissatisfaction areas include integrity and fairness, lack of adequate time for

submission of responses to bid and bidders not being informed as to why their bids were not

successful. However, KRA was perceived to follow guidelines set by Public Procurement and Oversight

Authority (PPOA). Further, the prequalification process was said to be fair and transparent.

Associations: The overall satisfaction score with KRA by Associations was 71.9%. KRA was rated highly

on effectiveness of the service charter (81%) and complaint handling (81.8%). However, customers’

were dissatisfied with communication at KRA.

____________________________________________________________________________________ x Customer Satisfaction Survey For: Kenya Revenue Authority 2017-2018

Conclusions

The KRA brand is considered to be mature (systems and structures are in place) and stringent in

sticking to its structures. The brand is largely perceived to embrace modernity. On likes, KRA was

perceived to have faster services especially with the online system (41%), however, some customers

complained about the long queues and penalties charged in case of default or delays in filling returns.

The overall NPS was positive (29%), an indicator that customers are satisfied with KRA services. More

importantly, a positive NPS signifies that the number of taxpayers likely to pass a positive word of

mouth to other taxpayers/citizens is bigger than those who would pass a negative message.

On reforms awareness, 60% indicated to be aware of some reforms, which is low given that the reforms

are meant to improve services.

Recommendations

First, Successful customer service revolves around product and service knowledge. KRA should

therefore invest in building knowledge about their products with customers. It is also important for

KRA to keep customers updated on initiatives that it is undertaking in a bid to improve customer

experience as it is only through understanding the efforts being put, customers can reciprocate and

appreciate. Further, KRA should ensure all customers are aware of its customer service charter as the

helps in managing their expectations with KRA.

With technology revolution among customers where physical interaction is increasingly becoming

minimal, KRA can take advantage of the new communications channels in the market for example use

of social media, web chat and emails to reach out to their customers in a bid to increase customer

satisfaction. Also through use of modern technology, KRA can frequently monitor customers’

satisfaction real time after through SMS after visiting various touch point. In order to minimize

dissatisfaction with complaints handling KRA should continue strengthening the mechanisms existing

in order to provide complaints resolutions on top of empowering staff to provide solutions at the

appropriate level/touch points.

There is need to recognize and reward values-centric behaviors. This will give employees an

opportunity to nominate co-workers who successfully live the KRA values. KRA should also re-enforce

core values in all communications, including all meetings and in brochures and newsletters and during

____________________________________________________________________________________ xi Customer Satisfaction Survey For: Kenya Revenue Authority 2017-2018

trainings and orientations. In order to generate positive word of mouth that would influence change

in any negative perceptions about KRA, the authority should engage in frequent feedback mechanism

with the customers.

A customer oriented organization benefits greatly from a positive word of mouth as consumers are

always optimistic about its innovations and quality. This makes it easy to reach out to customers with

minimal efforts. KRA should therefore continue building on the NPS for impactful and less costly

campaigns.

____________________________________________________________________________________ 1 Customer Satisfaction Survey For: Kenya Revenue Authority 2017-2018

1. CHAPTER ONE: BACKGROUND

1.1 Introduction

The Kenya Revenue Authority was established by an Act of Parliament (Cap 469) on 1st July 1995 as

a central body for the assessment and collection of revenue, for the administration and enforcement

of the laws relating to revenue and to provide for connected purposes.

In particular, the functions of the Authority are: -

To assess, collect and account for all revenues in accordance with specific laws set out in

the first part of the First Schedule and the revenue provisions of the second part of the First

Schedule,

To advise on matters relating to the administration of, and collection of revenue under the

written laws or the specified provisions of the written laws.

To perform such other functions in relation to revenue as the Minister (for Finance) may

direct.

1.2 The Organizational Governance and Management

The Board of Directors (BoD) is the governing Body of KRA as set out in the KRA Act. It has two ex-

officio members from the Government (representative of the Cabinet Secretary to the National

Treasury and the Attorney General), the Commissioner General and six other members from private

sector. The BoD is responsible for the review and approval of policies and monitoring the functions of

KRA.

The day to day management of the Authority is the responsibility of the Commissioner General,

assisted by Commissioners in charge of Customs and Border Control, Domestic Taxes, Investigations

and Enforcement, Corporate Support Services, and Strategy, Innovation and Risk Management

department and Internal Audit Department.

1.3 Current Situation at KRA

Over the period of 1995/1996 to 2016/17, tax revenue collection rose from Kshs. 122 billion in 1995/96

to 1.365 Trillion. This strong revenue performance has been matched by improvements in customer

service, primarily driven by initiatives in automation, integrity and enhancing professionalism in

service delivery. During the sixth corporate plan period, KRA seeks to achieve revenue mobilization

targets through automation and modernization in a way that enhances customer services.


From the past survey (2013/2014) the following were some of service delivery challenges which

included Existence of bureaucratic processes that prolongs service delivery turn-around times, Lack

of integration of customer information from disparate business systems and processes hindering first

contact resolution, recurrent system downtimes leading to discontinuity of service and existence of

disjointed and disparate service touch points, leading to inconsistency of service delivery.

Further, the study also highlighted communication and complaints handling challenges. These were

said to lead to limited awareness on existing legislative-driven processes and role of the Exchequer on

disbursement of tax refunds. Other challenge included lack of a forward looking strategy for

stakeholder engagement when rolling out tax administration and trade reforms and a proactive go-to-

market approach to enhance uptake of services across existing and new service touch points.

According to The KRA 6th corporate plan (2015/2016- 2017/2018, Revenue authorities are expected

to be responsive to taxpayers while simultaneously being consistent in the application of tax laws.

Responsiveness requires accessibility, provision of accurate and timely information, accurate and

timely treatment of requests and appeals. This requires the creation of customer oriented systems as

opposed to systems targeted at the needs of tax administrations. It also requires emphasizing single

point of contact, self-service and electronic services especially focused on filing, payment and

electronic access to account balances.

Despite its considerable achievements in minimizing customer compliance costs over the time, there

is need for KRA to continue enhancing its service levels. Over the past years, various surveys and

reports have exposed the weaknesses in service delivery. KRA is cognizant of the fact that the first step

to improving customer compliance is by building trust through facilitation. In the Sixth Corporate Plan

KRA aims to raise customer satisfaction level to 80% from 65% in 2013/14. This requires a significant

improvement in employee satisfaction.


1.4 Research objectives

The main objective of the survey was to assess the taxpayers’ perception of the level and quality of

service delivery and whether their service expectations were being met by KRA.

Specific Objectives

i. Evaluate the customers’ perception towards KRA services

ii. Find out the extent to which KRA is adhering to Customer Service Standards and Taxpayer’s

Charter

iii. Ascertain KRA key areas of strength and weaknesses in a bid to identify gaps and

opportunities in service delivery

iv. Identify the sources and frequency of taxpayer complaints in regard to service delivery

v. Determine taxpayers’ awareness of KRA services and sources of awareness

vi. Establish the effectiveness of taxpayer education programs and other reforms on service

delivery

vii. Determine overall KRA performance on key customer satisfaction measures - Customer

Satisfaction Index, Net Promoter Score, and Loyalty Score

viii. Provide comparative analysis of the Authority’s service delivery

ix. Identify and propose service improvement measures

1.5 Scope of Work

To achieve the objectives of this survey, the scope of work encompassed the following tasks:

Design of appropriate tools to gather data

Developing sampling frame and the sample size base on the stakeholder list provided

Collect the desired data as agreed with KRA

Analyze the data and provide the reports as indicated in the deliverables

Establish the customer satisfaction level and compute the change in the levels of satisfaction


2. CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 Introduction

Customer satisfaction provides a leading indicator of consumer perceptions towards institutions and

products as well as loyalty. Customer satisfaction also provides a platform for customers to share their

opinion and suggestions on areas that require change or improvement thus enhancing positive

experience at every customer touch point.

2.1 Overview of the literature

This section highlights some literature on customer satisfaction in Kenya, policies and strategies

employed by the government in addressing the same. It also seeks to uncover some insights from

models and theories in empirical data and their relevance to the survey. The Key indices and

measurements are also defined in this section.

2.2 Customer Satisfaction Theory

Expectancy-Disconfirmation Paradigm Theory

Drawing on the shortcomings of the early theories of consumer satisfaction,

Oliver (1977, 1980) proposed the Expectancy-Disconfirmation Paradigm (EDP) as the most promising

theoretical framework for the assessment of customer satisfaction. The theory implies that consumers

buy goods/ services with pre-purchase expectations about the anticipated performance. The

expectation level hence becomes a standard against which the product/service is evaluated. That is,

once the product or service has been used, outcomes are compared against expectations. Where the

outcome matches the expectation confirmation occurs.

Disconfirmation occurs where there is a difference between expectations and outcomes. A customer is

either satisfied or dissatisfied as a result of positive or negative difference between expectations and

perceptions. Thus, when service performance is better than what the customer had initially expected,

there is a positive disconfirmation between expectations and performance which results in

satisfaction, while when service performance is as expected, there is a confirmation between

expectations and perceptions which results in satisfaction. On the contrary, when service performance

is not as good as what the customer expected, there is a negative disconfirmation between expectations

and perceptions which causes dissatisfaction.


Howards & Sheth (1967) concur with the theory, that satisfaction is a function of the degree of

congruency between aspirations and perceived reality of experiences. This model has found great

degree of support from researchers in various disciplines, and has been widely used to evaluate

satisfaction with different products and services. This theory therefore, anchored the survey on

customer satisfaction at KRA.

The KRA commitment to the provision of effective, efficient and ethical tax services for social economic

development continues to be the driving force behind many customer satisfaction initiatives.

Significant improvement in customer satisfaction since 2013, KRA is yet to achieve the target of 80%

satisfaction level. This survey has highlighted the various taxpayers’ category levels of satisfaction that

may a mix initiative to meet the need by the different categories.

2.3 Customer Satisfaction Models

The performance model

The Performance Model depict that, the theory that a customer’s perception of a product or service

performance, and their expectations of that performance have a positive effect on customer

satisfaction, Spreng and Mackey (1996). Performance is defined as the level of quality of the product,

or service, as perceived by the customer, relative to the price paid. This perceived performance is

described as value. The perceived performance may have a stronger effect on customer satisfaction

than expectations, Tse and Wilton (1988).The assessment of satisfaction is closely related to

expectations. The Performance Model depict expectations having a direct and positive impact on

satisfaction as a result of the part they play as a foundation in the satisfaction evaluation process. The

stronger a customer’s expectation, relative to performance information, the greater the impact of

expectations as an anchor on satisfaction. The stronger the performance information of the construct,

the greater the relative positive effect will be on customer satisfaction.

The Performance Model also shows a positive effect of expectations on perceived performance that is

the ability of customer expectations to predict performance. This is felt to be greatest when customers

have a lot of experience with a performer who is either predictable or has low variance. The extent of

the effect will vary from products to services. Given that KRA service is routine and repetitive, the

model of performance therefore, may partially apply in efforts to meet customer expectations.


The expectations-artefact model

Johnson et al. (1996) argue that expectations should not have either a positive or a negative effect on

satisfaction, in a unique service like KRA’s. This is because in this context expectations do not act as

an anchor, as in the Performance Model. Performance will give rise to the expectations reported by

customers. The Expectations-Artefact Model shows the direct positive effect of perceived performance

on satisfaction, and a positive relationship between performance and expectations. Expectations are

not linked to satisfaction; this illustrates the fact that this construct does not have an effect upon

satisfaction. The implications of this Model are simply that to focus on the expectations construct,

would be counterproductive to the improvement of customer satisfaction. The argument that

expectations are only a by-product of the service production process, and have no effect on customer

service, would make any efforts to meet or exceed customer expectations pointless. Instead this Model

posits that to improve customer service, service personnel should focus on the improvement of

performance. This model resonate with KRA’s service delivery anchors.

In order to measure the levels of satisfaction, a quantitative approach using likert scale is used to

measure level of satisfaction across various touch points. Further, in trying to explain the impact of

customer loyalty to a business, Reichheld in his 2003 Harvard Business Review article "One Number

You Need to Grow" introduced Net Promoter Score. This number is computed by netting off those

customers who are highly unlikely (detractors) from those likely to strongly recommend an institution

(Promoters). If the net value is positive, the measure indicate more customers are likely to positively

endorse a business leading to growth.

Customer satisfaction is generally described in terms of “an evaluative, affective or emotional

response”. The literature on satisfaction focuses on the idea that the customer will make a comparison

between the performance of the product or service and a certain standard (Ganning, 2000).

Parasuraman et al. (1988, 1993) also argue this point; they claim that the standard of comparison is

that of predictive expectations; i.e. what the customer believes will happen. Oliver (1981) defines

satisfaction as “a summary psychological state resulting when the emotion surrounding disconfirmed

expectations is coupled with the consumer’s prior feeling about the consumption experience”.

Churchill and Serprenant (1982) explain customer satisfaction as a function of pre-purchase

expectations and post purchase product/service performance. The pre-purchase expectation held

might be conscious, active or sub-conscious, passive expectations.


Customer satisfaction or dissatisfaction is a recognized function of the disconfirmation which arises

from discrepancies between prior expectations and actual performance. The presumption that a

customer’s pre-purchase expectations determine customer satisfaction is based on the assumption

that the expectations are formed on the basis of past experience. In cases where customers have no

experience, customer expectations are believed to be more an artefact of the service production

process and to have no effect on satisfaction Gable, (1996). There are two general conceptualizations

of customer satisfaction; these are transaction-specific and cumulative satisfaction.

Fornell (1992) proposes that critical gains of customer satisfaction include loyalty, as loyal customers

can create a steady stream of future cash flow for a firm. Lower costs can be achieved in future

transactions because a firm that provides high customer satisfaction will devote fewer resources to

handling returns, managing complaints and reworking defective items. It promotes insulation of

current customers from competition, reduced failure costs, lower costs in attracting new customers

and the enhancement of the firm’s reputation. Satisfied customers are more likely to recommend the

firm thus promoting its image and reputation. A long term perspective is required. The above gains

resonate with KRA service delivery outcomes.

Empirical Review

Customer satisfaction is the key factor for successful and depends highly on the behaviors of frontline

service providers. Customers should be managed as assets, and that customers vary in their needs,

preferences, and buying behavior. A study applied the Taiwan Customer Satisfaction Index model to

a tourism factory to analyze customer satisfaction and loyalty. The results showed that perceived

quality had the greatest influence on the customer satisfaction for satisfied and dissatisfied customers.

In terms of customer loyalty, the customer satisfaction is more important than image for satisfied and

dissatisfied customers. CSI was found appropriate for making decisions about allocating resources and

for assisting managers in establishing appropriate priorities in customer satisfaction management

Anderson and Sullivan (1993).

Service quality is frequently used by both researchers and practitioners to evaluate customer

satisfaction. It is generally accepted that customer satisfaction depends on the quality of the product

or service offered Anderson and Sullivan, (1993). Numerous researchers have emphasized the

importance of service quality perceptions and their relationship with customer satisfaction by applying

the NCSI model (e.g., Ryzin et al. (20040; Hsu (2008); Yazdanpanah et al. (2013); Chiu et al. (2011);

Temizer and Turkyilmaz (2012); Mutua et al. (2012); Dutta and Singh (2014). Ryzin et al. (2004)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5025411/#CR1











applied the ACSI to U.S. local government services and indicated that the perceived quality of public

schools, police, road conditions, and subway service were the most salient drivers of satisfaction, but

that the significance of each service varied among income, race, and geography. Hsu (2008) proposed

an index for online customer satisfaction based on the ACSI and found that e-service quality was more

determinative than other factors (e.g., trust and perceived value) for customer satisfaction. To deliver

superior service quality, an online business must first understand how customers perceive and

evaluate its service quality. This study borrowed from e-service quality measures based on the

theoretical model comprised constructs to include image, customer expectations, perceived quality,

perceived value, customer satisfaction, and loyalty.

A crop insurance study proposed an index for measuring farmer's satisfaction levels with crop

insurance. The index was based on the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI), having been

adapted to the specific needs of this research. Perceived quality, perceived value and farmer's attitude

toward crop insurance was found to have strongest effects on farmer's satisfaction levels. The study

further confirmed that customer satisfaction is the leading factor that determines farmers' loyalty. The

results suggest that the proposed model can also be used on past insured clients and can give insights

on which dimensions to focus most, eventually bringing them back into insurance arrangements. This

can as well apply to tax evaders to onboard them again.

Another national wide research, investigated the antecedents and consequences of customer

satisfaction. The study found that satisfaction is best specified as a function of perceived quality and

“disconfirmation”—the extent to which perceived quality fails to match pre-purchase expectations.

Surprisingly, expectations did not directly affect satisfaction, as is often suggested in the satisfaction

literature. In addition, the study found quality which falls short of expectations has a greater impact

on satisfaction and repurchase intentions than quality which exceeds expectations. Moreover, the

researchers found that disconfirmation is more likely to occur when quality is easy to evaluate. Finally,

in terms of systematic variation across firms, it was found that elasticity of repurchase intentions with

respect to satisfaction to be lower for firms that provide high satisfaction. This implies a long-run

reputation effect insulating firms which consistently provide high satisfaction.



2.4 Comparative Analysis with Competition

KRA being a monopoly in the market, SBO Research Ltd choose to do a comparative analysis with

other public sector in the energy and health sector. The selection of these two institutions was based

on the closeness of their strategic plans with that of KRA. Below is a list of objectives, strategic

initiatives and key performance indicators each institution had.

a) Kenya Power Customer Satisfaction Initiatives

Table 2. 1 Kenya Power- (2016-2021)

Objective Strategic Initiatives Key performance

Indicators target

Enhanced customer

satisfaction by

improving customer

service delivery

Enhanced customer relationship

management structures

Customer segmentation to guide the

development of an effective engagement

strategy

Creation/remodeling of customer service

centres

Implementation of rapid response teams

Improved Customer

Satisfaction Survey

(CSS) index to 75%

Outsourcing Outsourced meter reading, revenue

collection and customer service functions.

Complaint handling Upgraded Complaints management

module and installed and a web based

application to be used by customers.

Customer service

Delight

Implemented in-depth customer service

training for all members of staff •

Enforced of a uniform dress code for all

customer facing-members of staff.

Communication Integrated modern customer care

applications that interacted with

customers including Twitter and Facebook

Kenya Power Corporate Plan 2016/17 - 2020/21


b) National Hospital Insurance Fund Customer Satisfaction Initiatives

Table 2.2: National Hospital Insurance Fund (2014-2018)

Objective Strategic Initiatives Key performance Indicators target

Improved customer

retention

Developed and

Implemented

incentives

SMS for reminders

Automated Birthday &

Holiday wishes

Introduce Self-care

80% retention rate

Improved quality of

service

Customer satisfaction

index

Patient satisfaction

index

Implemented contract management

solution

E-Procurement – vendor rating & cost

center

Revamped call center

Enhance customer care center

capabilities

Establish turnaround times in

customer enquiries

Improve the Fund’s

image

Improved brand index Scheduled press forums

Enhanced & Operationalize the

branding manual

Corporate Social responsibility

Access to information Improved awareness

Index

Public Information & education

Enhance the Fund’s presence

County engagement

Leadership and

management

evolvement

Customer satisfaction

index

Employee satisfaction

index

Mentoring & customer centric training

Institute reward strategies according

to customer satisfaction levels

Dissemination of strategy to all front &

back office staff

Enhance internal communication

system

NHIF Strategic plan 2014-2018


3. CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction

This chapter describes the research design used to meet the objectives of the study. The thematic areas

include the research approach, target population, data collection method, sampling and sampling

design, data analysis techniques and quality control measures.

3.1 Research Approach

The study used both primary and secondary data. Primary data was collected through qualitative and

quantitative techniques.

3.1.1 Qualitative

Five (5) focus group discussions were conducted with individual tax payers who were based in Nairobi,

Kisumu, Nyeri and Eldoret. The focus group discussion consisted of eight (8) participants each. A

further eight (8) in-depth interviews were carried out with various stakeholders.

In Depth Interviews: Interviews were conducted with key stakeholders on a one on one basis to

obtain deeper insights and explore key attributes considered important by the stakeholders. A discussion

guide was used to guide both the focus group discussion and the in depth interviews.

3.1.2 Quantitative Approach

Quantitative data was gathered through face-to-face interviews using structured questionnaires from

all the stakeholders. The objective here was to quantify the responses and confirm the extent to which

respondents held various opinions and perceptions. The data was analyzed to answer the research

objectives.

3.1.3 Secondary data sources

It involved identifying and analyzing secondary information on KRA and revenue agencies. The

documents which were reviewed include:

Previous KRA survey reports.

Documents related to changes in taxation in the recent past.

KRA strategic document e.g. sixth corporate plan 2015-2018.

KRA service/taxpayers charter.


3.2 Target Population

The study targeted all external stakeholders of KRA. The customers comprised of Individual taxpayers,

Large Taxpayers Organizations (LTOs) Medium Taxpayers Organizations (MTOs, Small & Medium

Enterprises, Associations (SMEs), Clearing & Forwarding agents and Suppliers.

3.3 Sampling Design

In order to determine the sample for various target customers, Fisher’s Model for computing sample

size where the target population is more than 10,000 was used. This is an international best practice

for use in surveys where the population is huge and sample elements are heterogeneous and diverse.

The sample size was determined by employing the equation below:

Equation

2

**2

qpzn

Equation

Where; n= refer to the desired sample size

Z=the standard normal deviate usually set at 1.96 which corresponds to the 95% confidence level.

P= Population of the target population estimated to have a particular characteristic, 50% is

normally used because it is the recommended measure if there is lack of reasonable estimate.

q=1.0 – p

e=degree of accuracy desired in this context set at 0.02.

n=z2*p*q = (1.96)2(0.5) (0.5) =2401 ℰ2 (0.02)2

Table 3. 3 Selection of customer sample size

Error Margin (P-values)

Customer Sample(pop

>10,000) Comments

5% 384 Lower Accuracy

4.50% 474

4% 600

3.50% 784

3% 1067

2.50% 1537

2% 2401 Recommended for this survey

1.70% 3323

1.50% 4268

1% 9604


The sample size obtained was proportionately distributed across Individual taxpayers, LTO’s, MTO’s,

SME's, Associations, Clearing & Forwarding agents and suppliers across all KRA regions. However, in

a bid to ensure all segments had a statistically stable base (minimum n=30, for any analysis

parameter), sample adjustments were done. All in all, the survey ensured sample distribution for each

segment was proportionate to the segment size. The adjusted sample distribution is as presented in

Table 3.2.

Table3. 4: Adjusted sample breakdown

KRA Customers Sample

Individual taxpayers 1800 LTOS 180

MTOS 100

SMEs 200

Suppliers 100

Associations 30

Importers Exporters/Clearing & Forwarding Agents 60

Total 2470

Sample Size for Individual taxpayers

A normal distribution was used to pick at random 1800 individual taxpayers distributed shown on

table 3.3 below. The distribution was based on population spread across KRA regions.

Table 3. 5: Distribution of individual taxpayers

Region Population Sample size

Rift valley 1,013,616 343

Southern 462,169 156

Central 751,136 254

Nairobi 1,564,687 529

Western 902,016 305

Northern 625,590 212

Total 5,319,214 1800


3.5 Data Analysis

Qualitative data was processed through content analysis. The audios were transcribed in order to

identify themes and patterns. The themes were organized into coherent categories and used to bring

meaning to the text. The quantitative data was analyzed through percentages, mean scores and

frequencies using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) .In this report, the findings are

presented in forms of tables, charts and narratives. The quantitative data was collected using a 5 Point

Likert Scale designed on a continuum ranging e.g. from strongly agree to strongly disagree among

other scales. This helped in computing percentage scores that eventually generated the ultimate

measures of customer satisfaction.

Customer satisfaction Computation

Customer Satisfaction Index on computing %Average for various touch points-Customer service

charter effectiveness, KRA core values, Satisfaction with KRA Staff, Satisfaction with support services,

Employees integrity and fairness, complaint handling, quality of service at the contact center,

satisfaction with tax processes, KRA performance on functional and operational attributes,

performance of KRA systems, effectiveness of tax payer education, quality of communication and

quality procurement services

Net Promoter Score Computation

This was computed based on a recommendation likelihood scale of 0-10. Promoters score was

calculated from those who gave a likelihood score of 9 and 10 while detractors are those who gave a

score of 0-6.

Net Promoter Score (Loyalty score) = % Promoters - % Detractors


4. CHAPTER FOUR: DATA ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH FINDINGS

4.0 Introduction

This chapter highlights results on evaluation of customers’ perception towards KRA services, extent

to which KRA is adhering to Customer Service Standards and Taxpayer’s Charter, ascertaining

KRA key areas of strength and weaknesses in a bid to identify gaps and opportunities in service

delivery, identifying the source and frequency of taxpayer complaints in regard to service delivery,

determining taxpayers’ awareness of KRA services and source of awareness, establishing the

effectiveness of taxpayer education programs and other reforms on service delivery, determining

overall KRA performance on key customer satisfaction measures - Customer Satisfaction Index, Net

Promoter Score, and Loyalty Score, providing comparative analysis of the Authority’s service delivery

and identifying and proposing service improvement measures.

4.1. Response Rate In this survey, 2,470 customers were targeted with a total of 2,510 customers participating translating

into a response rate of 101%. However, for MTO’s and LTO’s, the response rate was slightly below the

target owing to their busy schedules and reluctance to participate in the survey by some of the would

be respondents as depicted in table 4.6 below.

Table 4.6: Achieved sample

Target Group Target Achieved Sample

Response Rate

Individual Taxpayers 1800 1859 103%

LTOS 180 172 95%

MTOS 100 84 84%

SMEs 200 206 103%

Suppliers 100 100 100%

Associations 30 32 107%

Importers Exporters/Clearing & Forwarding Agents 60 60 100%

Total Sample 2470 2,513 101%


4.1.1 Profile by Age and Gender of Individual Taxpayers

From the survey, 58% of the individual taxpayers were males while 42% were females. In terms of age

category, majority were between 25-44 years, while only 7% were above 45 years. Figure 4.1 below

shows the individual taxpayers profile by age and gender.

Figure 4.1: Individual Taxpayers by age and gender

4.1.2 Individual Taxpayers Profile by Regions

On regional splits, the taxpayers sample was distributed as illustrated in figure 4.2 with Nairobi

having the highest sample (32%) , followed by Northern (16%) , Central and Western with each having

15% .

Figure 4.2: Individual Taxpayers by regions

22%

50%

21%

6%1%

58%

42%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

18-24 yrs 25-34 Yrs 35-44 Yrs 45-55 Yrs 55+ Yrs Male Female

%

Age Gender

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Nairobi(n=586)

Central(n=287)

Northern(n=292)

South Rift(n=146)

North Rift(n=163)

Southern(n=99)

Western(n=287)

32%

15% 16%

8% 9%5%

15%


4.1.3 LTOs/MTOS/Suppliers/Associations/Importers/Exporters profile by Regions

Customers dealing with KRA were targeted for the survey. They were spread across different regions

as shown on figure 4.3. Most LTOs were mainly found in Nairobi (46%), Western (16%), Central (6%)

and a few 4% from southern. MTOs were spread across all regions. 54% the suppliers were from

Nairobi and 32% from Southern. Only a few 8% and 5% were from North Rift and Central respectively.

Importers and Exporters were mainly concentrated in Southern (82%) while a few 12% from Western.

Figure 4.3: Customers across different segments

4.1.4 Interaction with KRA

To find out the frequency of interaction, respondents were asked to state the last time they had contact

with KRA. Average scores and correlation percentages were computed based on the ordinal question

where respondents were required to choose one response from the choices given. From the findings,

59% of the customers interviewed indicated to have interacted with KRA within the last 6 months as

illustrated in table 4.7 below.

Table 4.7: Interaction with KRA

Individual taxpayers

LTOs MTOs SMEs Associations Avg

Base 1859 172 84 206 32

Within the last 2 weeks 6% 6%

Within the last month 23% 31% 36% 42% 22% 31%

Between 2 and 6 months 22% 31% 26% 24% 9% 22%

Between 7 months and 1 year 7% 22% 19% 10% 38% 19%

Over 1 year ago 42% 16% 20% 24% 31% 26%

46%

6% 3% 4%

16%

45%

94% 100% 97% 100% 96%

84%

9%

54%

5%1%

8%

32%

6%

82%

12%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Nairobi (n=356) Central(n=17) Northern(n=24) South Rift(n=31) North Rift(n=9) Southern(n=26) Western(n=31)

Large Orgs Medium Orgs Associations Suppliers Importers/Exporters


4.1.5 Mode of contact used

To find out the mode of contact, questions on ways in which KRA was contacted was asked. Average

scores and correlation percentages were computed based on as multiple based question where

respondents were at liberty to choose more than one response from the choices given. The study

sought to establish the mode of contact used by the taxpayers. On average, 49% of the customers

visited KRA offices while only 10% indicated to have used telephone to contact KRA as illustrated in

figure 4.4 below.

Figure 4.4: Mode of contact used

IndividualTaxpayers(n=1295)

LTOs (n=172) MTOs (n=84) SMEs (n=206)Associations

(n=32)Avg

Visited their offices 51% 48% 43% 51% 50% 49%

Website 26% 48% 27% 35% 66% 40%

Email 14% 9% 19% 13% 6% 12%

Telephone 6% 10% 15% 16% 3% 10%

Others 1% 1%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%


To find out the reasons for interaction, questions on the reasons for the contact was asked. On table

4.8, average scores and correlation percentages were computed based on as multiple based question

where respondents were at liberty to give as many responses as they could. From the findings, the

main reasons for interacting with KRA were to file returns and seek information as illustrated below.

Table 4.8: Reasons for interaction Individual

Taxpayers (n=1859)

LTOs (n=172)

MTOs (n=84)

SMEs (n=206)

Associations (n=32)

Avg

Seeking information or check details 19% 21% 26% 38% 28% 26%

File returns 40% 33% 29% 25% 34% 32%

Tax compliance certificate/tax clearance certificate

6% 20% 18% 16% 16% 15%

KRA PIN registration/email Login/pin retrieval

18% 13% 19% 11% 16% 15%

HELB loan issue 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

License renewal 2% 2% 1% 2% 0% 2%

Tax obligations issues 1% 1% 0% 1% 0% 1%

Car registration/change number plates/log book search

1% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0%

Payments/cheque deposit 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2%

Others 2% 0% 0% 1% 0% 1%

4.1.6 Provision of feedback

In order to establish provision of feedback, respondents were asked whether they received any

feedback for their query. Average scores and correlation percentages were computed based 0n a

dichotomous question, where the respondents were to either agree or disagree with a given statement.

From the findings, 92% of the customers received feedback as indicated in figure 4.5 below.

Figure 4.5: Provision of feedback


LTOs (n=172) MTOs (n=84) SMEs (n=206)Associations

(n=32)Avg

Yes 95% 89% 89% 89% 97% 92%

No 5% 11% 11% 11% 3% 8%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Yes No


4.2 KRA Customer Service Charter

To find out the extent to which KRA is adhering to Customer Service Standards and Taxpayers Charter,

questions on the awareness of existence of customer service charter, effectiveness and the sources of

awareness were asked. A customer service charter is a written policy that communicates/defines what

an organization commits in terms of service to internal and external customers. Average scores and

correlation percentages were computed based 0n a dichotomous question, where the respondent were

to either agree or disagree with a given statement.

4.2.1 Awareness of customer service charter

The figure 4.6 below details the response of all the categories sampled and interviewed in this study.

Figure 4.6: Customer service charter awareness

About 60% of those interviewed were aware of the existence of the customer service charter. Among

them, out of 206 SMEs category, 94% were aware of the existence of the service charter. In the category

of LTOs, 73% of 172 taxpayers interviewed were also aware.

Figure 4. 7: Individual taxpayers’ customer service charter awareness- by regions

IndividualTaxpayers(1859)

LTOs(n=172) MTOs(n=84) SMEs(n=206)Suppliers(n=100)

Associations(n=32)

Average

Yes 35% 73% 63% 94% 21% 72% 60%

No 65% 27% 37% 6% 79% 28% 40%

35%

73%63%

94%

21%

72%

60%65%

27%37%

6%

79%

28%

40%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Nairobi(n=586)

Central(n=287)

Northern(n=292)

SouthRift(n=146)

North Rift(n=163)

Southern(n=99)

Western(n=286)

Average

Yes 34% 26% 58% 21% 8% 11% 53% 35%

No 66% 74% 42% 79% 92% 89% 47% 65%

34%26%

58%

21%8% 11%

53%

35%

66%74%

42%

79%92% 89%

47%

65%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


Going by regions, there was higher individual awareness of customer service charter existence with

Northern and Western region leading with 58% and 53%, respectively. Southern and North Rift

regions trailed with 11% and 8% respectively.

Table 4. 9: Comparative Analysis - awareness of customer service charter

We can observe from the table above that there has been a significant drop of awareness on the

existence of customer service charter compared to 2013/2014.

4.2.2 Source of Awareness of Customer Service Charter

Customers learn about products, services and brands from various sources. It is therefore critical for

an organization to evaluate which sources are effective for their customers. In line with the above, the

study sought to establish the sources of awareness for KRA service charter to its customers.

Respondent were at liberty to choose more than one response from the choices given. Based on the

findings, posters within KRA’s building and their website were the main sources of awareness as

shown in table 4.10 below.

Table 4. 10: Customer service charter awareness sources

Individual

Taxpayers

(n=654)

LTOs

(n=126)

MTOs

(n=53)

SMEs

(n=193)

Suppliers

(n=21)

Asso.

(n=23)

Avg

(In %)

Newspaper 24% 17% 21% 12% 10% 13% 16%

Radio 15% 7% 13% 7% 0% 0% 8%

TV 31% 11% 25% 26% 10% 4% 18%

KRA’s website 40% 41% 45% 31% 43% 9% 35%

Posters within KRA’s buildings

32% 39% 26% 15% 19% 87% 36%

Exhibitions and promotions e.g. shows

12% 11% 6% 4% 5% 4% 7%

Events held by KRA e.g. launch events, taxpayers week

6% 8% 11% 3% 0% 4% 6%

Employees of KRA 9% 2% 6% 3% 5% 0% 4%

Friends/family 2% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 1%

2013/2014 2017 /2018 Variance

LTOs (n=100) - 7 3% (n=17 2) - 7 3% 0%

MTOs (n=31) - 7 6% (n=84) - 63% 13%

Individual Taxpayers (n=97 8) - 63% (n=1859) - 35% 28%

Suppliers (n=60) - 50% (n=100) - 21% 29%


The output was compared with that of 2013/2014 and the variances were recorded as tabulated below.

Table 4. 11: Comparative Analysis – Customer service charter awareness sources

Further analysis with individual taxpayers revealed KRA website as the main source of awareness

across all regions followed by posters and TV. Other notable sources of awareness for the service

charter are Radio and KRA employees as shown in table 4.12 below.

Table 4. 12: Customer service charter awareness sources -individual taxpayers

To

tal

(n=

65

4)

Na

iro

bi(

n=

20

2)

Cen

tra

l(n

=7

5)

No

rth

ern

(n=

170

)

So

uth

Rif

t(n

=3

1)

No

rth

Rif

t(n

=13

)

So

uth

ern

(n=

11)

Wes

tern

(n=

152

)

Newspaper 24% 15% 19% 29% 16% 23% 18% 33%

Radio 15% 7% 9% 17% 10% 15% 27% 24%

TV 31% 12% 28% 60% 29% 31% 36% 27%

KRA’s website 40% 50% 44% 22% 65% 23% 27% 43%

Posters within KRA’s buildings 32% 54% 35% 6% 55% 15% 27% 25%

Exhibitions and promotions e.g. shows 12% 8% 17% 11% 0% 8% 27% 19%

Events held by KRA e.g. launch events, taxpayers week 6% 1% 9% 5% 3% 0% 9% 12%

Employees of KRA 9% 7% 8% 9% 3% 0% 9% 12%

Friends/family 2% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7%

2013/2014 2017/2018 V ariance

New spa per 2 0% 1 6 % -4 %

Ra dio 1 3 % 8 % -5 %

TV 1 4 % 1 8 % 4 %

KRA ’s websit e 5 3 % 3 5 % -1 8 %

Post ers wit h in KRA ’s bu ildings 4 0% 3 6 % -4 %Ex h ibit ion s a n d pr om otion s e.g .

sh ow s 1 0% 7% -3 %

Ev en ts h eld by KRA e.g . la u n ch

ev en ts, ta x pa y er s w eek 6 %6%

0%

Em ploy ees of KRA 7 % 4% -3 %

Fr ien ds/fa m ily 1 % 1% 0%


4.2.3 Effectiveness of the Customer Service Charter

Based on a scale of 1-5, where 1 is very ineffective and 5 is very effective, respondents were asked to

rate the effectiveness of the customer service charter. The final score was gotten as the average of the

ratings for each statement and further computed into percentage as presented in figure 4.8 below.

Figure 4. 8: Effectiveness of the customer service charter

From the figure above, it can be observed that on average, 75% of the customers perceived the service

charter to be effective.

Table 4. 13: Comparative Analysis - effectiveness of the customer service charter

We also observed that individual and supplier categories registered the highest drop. These we suspect

and could have culminated from KRA service automation, resulting to less frequent visits to KRA

offices where customer service charter is physically domiciled. Most LTOs and MTOs prefer Huduma

centres and even wish they could have their own designated counter due to fast delivery of services

and lack of queues which would be the ultimate objective of the service charter. From the individual

taxpayers’ point of view, Cyber cafes are preferred especially by the millennia generation than physical

visits to KRA offices where customer service charter is found. Staff serving in cyber café were perceived

to offer good customer services compared to KRA staff. This resulted in minimal or no interaction with

KRA offices promoting a drop in awareness of the charter. From the focus group, it was mentioned

that clarity on pin registration to clarify whether the service is free or customer is required to pay Ksh

50/= as is ordinarily charged by cyber cafes for registration of pin numbers and filing returns.

73% 76% 72% 76% 71%81%

75%

0

20

40

60

80

100

IndividualTaxpayers(N=654)

Large Org(n=73) MediumOrg(n=53)

SMES (n=193) Suppliers (n=21) Associations(n=23)

Average

2013/2014 2017 /2018 Variance

LTOs (n=100) - 58% (n=7 3) - 7 6% 18%

MTOs (n=31) - 7 1% (n=53) - 7 2% 1%

Individual Taxpayers (n=97 8) - 49% (n=654) - 7 3% 24%

Suppliers (n=60) - 80% (n=21) - 7 1% -9%


Automation could have encouraged suppliers to seek services outside KRAs physical offices which is

commendable given that it has increased service accessibility. However, it’s imperative that KRA

enhance the level of awareness of the customer service charter through regular website updates and

increase content in order to generate more traffic. KRA may need t0 consider a designated counter at

Huduma centre to serve LTOs and MTOs. They should make the website more interactive to increase

heat of the service charter features.

From this we could deduce that KRAs website (53%, 35%) and Posters within KRAs building (40%,

36%) continues to be the most effective source of awareness of customer service charter. This denotes

that KRA could continue updating the website and printing posters for the customers as they seem to

boost awareness about the charter. Although website and posters are the most effective source of

awareness of customer service charter, a significant drop was observed majorly on KRA website which

could be as a result of customer complaints in accessibility in some towns and frequent downtime.

This implies that KRA needs to consider other sources of awareness like mobile phones services and

retain usage of television.

Individual taxpayers perceived the service charter to have been very effective (24%) due to faster

service delivery and automation. Other said the service charter was effective due to lack of queues,

adequate and competent staffs who are friendly and professional. We noticed that the suppliers

perception of the service charter effectiveness dropped by 9%. This could have been as a result of

complaint handling where they felt that KRA rarely give feedback especially on the tendering process.

KRA needs to formulate strategies that will make the service charter more effective to suppliers and

MTOs given that they are key stakeholders. This specifically touch on giving feedback on the status of

the tendering process.


4.2.5 KRA Core values

To find out the extent to which KRA core values are being observed by KRA employees, respondents

were asked to rate the extent to which KRA employees observed the core values using a scale of 1 to 5

where 1 was strongly disagree while 5 was strongly agree. According to KRA sixth Corporate Plan

(2015-2018), the core values have since reduced from six to four to include Trustworthy, Ethical,

Competent and Helpful to ease recall and internalization by staff. Further, the core values were

aligned with the new directions where emphasizing trustworthy and facilitative relationships. The

score were obtained as the average of the ratings for each statement and were converted into

percentage as are presented in Table 4.14 below. From the findings, an average of 74% of the

customers interviewed perceived the employees as living the KRA core values.

Table 4. 14: Living the core values

CATEGORY (in %) (N) Trustworthy Ethical Competent Helpful Average

Individual Taxpayers (1859) 75.8% 75.6% 77.4% 79.2% 77%

Suppliers (100) 76.8% 77% 77.2% 79.6% 77.7%

Clearing Agents (60) 75.6% 77% 73.6% 79.4% 76.4%

LTOs (172) 67.2% 66.8% 76.1% 71.1% 70.3%

MTOs (84) 67.6% 69.1% 76.8% 72.2% 71.4%

SMEs (206) 76% 76.4% 78.3% 77.9% 77.2%

Associations (32) 63.2% 65.2% 72.9% 69.7% 67.7%

Average 71.7% 72.4% 76.0% 75.6% 74.0%

From the table above, KRA employees were perceived to observe the core values (rated above 70%).

Employees were found to observe competency and helpfulness (76% and 75.6% respectively).

However, trustworthiness and ethical as core values registered the lowest score (71.7% and 72.4%

respectively). Among the categories, suppliers and MTOs registered scores of 77.7% and 77.2%

respectively while LTOs and Associations registered a score of 70.3% and 67.7% respectively.

This implies that although the core values are integrated at KRA, it is important to translate them into

behaviours that are easy to be understood by both employees and customers. This calls for KRA

management to live the values and enhance trust, teach the values, and recognize the values and

incorporating core values as part of performance management process.


4.3 KRA Reforms on Service Delivery

To establish the impact of KRA reforms on service delivery, questions on the awareness of existence

of reforms currently being undertaken or have been undertaken were asked. In a bid to improve

customer satisfaction, KRA implemented a number of reforms. According to KRA sixth Corporate Plan

(2015-2018), some of the reform programs undertaken by KRA included: iTax systems and support

centres, iCMS (Customs), Mobile payments systems which has already been implemented and SMS

gateway solution. Their average scores and correlating percentages were computed based 0n

dichotomous questions, where the respondent were to either agree or disagree with a given statement.

4.3.1 Taxpayers awareness of KRA Reforms

In order to establish whether taxpayers have seen any impact of these reforms on service delivery, it

was important to determine whether they were aware of any reforms that are currently being

undertaken or have been undertaken by KRA. Across the various customer segments, about 60% of

the taxpayers indicated to be aware of some reforms. Associations and individuals recorded below

40% as shown in figure 4.9 below.

Figure 4. 9: Awareness of KRA reforms

Individualtaxpayers(n=1859)

LTOs(n=172)

MTOs(n=84)

SMEs(n=206)

Associations(n=32)

Clearing &Forwarding

(n=60)

Suppliers(n=100)

Avg

Yes 36% 80% 60% 60% 88% 68% 31% 60%

No 64% 20% 40% 40% 12% 32% 69% 40%

36%

80%

60% 60%

88%

68%

31%

60%64%

20%

40% 40%

12%

32%

69%

40%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


Based on individual taxpayers, apart from Nairobi, South Rift and Western, all the other regions

recorded awareness of below 40% with North Rift recording the lowest awareness levels of 5% as

illustrated in figure 4.10.

Figure 4. 10: Awareness of KRA reforms -Individual Taxpayers

4.3.2 Specific Reforms Undertaken

In order to establish specific reforms undertaken by KRA, questions on awareness of specific reforms

was asked. Average scores and correlation percentages were computed based on as multiple based

question where respondents were at liberty to choose more than one response from the choices given.

From the findings, 64% of the taxpayers were aware of iTax systems, 38% mentioned Huduma centres

while 36% mentioned mobile payment systems. However, there was low awareness of SMS gateway

solution and call centres facilities especially from suppliers and associations as shown in table 4.15

below.

Table 4. 15: Specific reforms - Levels of awareness

Individual taxpayers (n=658)

LTOs (n=138)

MTOs (n=77)

SMEs (n=124)

Associations (n=28)

Clearing & Forwarding

(n=41)

Suppliers (n=31)

Avg

Processing of VAT

5% 22% 21% 27% 14% 29% 20% 20%

iTax systems 68% 74% 61% 60% 86% 46% 55% 64%

Mobile payment systems

23% 43% 36% 42% 46% 44% 20% 36%

SMS gateway solution

2% 8% 8% 15% 4% 12% 0% 7%

Establishment of Huduma centres

36% 52% 53% 57% 21% 39% 10% 38%

Website upgrade

10% 22% 31% 34% 7% 41% 20% 24%

Established call centers

5% 14% 13% 15% 0% 10% 0% 8%

Total(n=1859)

Nairobi(n=586)

Central(n=287)

Northern(n=292)

South Rift(n=146)

North Rift(n=163)

Southern(n=9)

Western(n=286)

Yes 36% 44% 30% 36% 42% 5% 24% 40%

No 64% 56% 70% 64% 58% 95% 76% 60%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


Other reforms mentioned by individual taxpayers include outsourcing of experts to carry KRA

services, website upgrade and personalization of email services (one email per user unlike previously

where more than two people would share one email and periodic online updates via personal email

4.3.3 Impact of Reforms

In order to assess the impact of reforms at KRA, questions on impact of I Tax systems, Huduma centre,

processing of VAT, Mobile payment systems, established call centres and website upgrade were asked.

Average scores and correlating percentages were computed based on multiple based question where

respondents were at liberty to give as many responses as they could as the tables below depict.

Impact of iTax systems on service delivery

On assessing the impact of iTax systems, ease of payment using the phone (45%) and fast services

(31%) were the top benefits associated with the system. However very few believed it has reduced

bribery, it’s accessible and easy to remit tax as shown in table 4.16 below.

Table 4. 16: Impact of iTax systems

Impact %

Easy to pay using the phone 45%

Fast services/very fast/saves time 31%

It is convenient to everyone/One is no longer supposed to go to their offices 10%

Reduced bribery cases and increased revenue 7%

Accessible/Payment can be done from anywhere 5%

Cheapest form of payment/Easy to remit tax payments 2%

I don’t know much about it 1%

Impact of Huduma Centre on service delivery

In order to establish the impact of Huduma center on service delivery, availability and accessibility

were mentioned as the main benefits emanating from this service as shown in table 4.17 below.

Table 4.17: Impact of Huduma centres

Impact %

It is always available/accessible/services bought nearer to the people 13%

Fast services 11%

Efficient customer service/Offer quality services 8%

Time saving 3%

Has done away with long queues 3%

Reduces corruption 3%


Impact of processing of VAT on service delivery

In order to establish the impact of processing of VAT on service delivery, customers mentioned they

experienced faster services (45%), easy VAT filing (34%) as key improvements as shown below in table

4.18 below.

Table 4.18: Impact of processing of VAT Impact %

Fast services/Prompt services 45%

The process of VAT filling has become easy 34%

It’s very convenient 7%

Promotes accountability 7%

Improved revenue collection 7%

It has become difficult to evade tax 3%

Processing of VAT currently promotes a Friendly environment 3%

Impact of Mobile Payment System on service delivery

In order to establish the impact of mobile payment system on service delivery at KRA, customers

highlighted convenience (26%) as the main benefit as shown in table 4.19 below.

Table 4.19: Impact of mobile payment systems

Impact %

Convenience 26%

Very cheap 13%

Sends notifications to the customers 13%

Providing solutions to problems 13%

Reaches more customers 13%

Easy access to services 13%

Has improved on the loyalty of the members 13%


Impact of established call centers on service delivery

In order to establish the impact of established call centres on service delivery, solving of issues via

the phone (26%), ease of contacting KRA (21%) as well as time saving (12%) were mentioned as key

benefits associated with call centres as shown in table 4.20 below.

Table 4. 20: Impact of established call centre

They can solve queries via phone 26%

Easy to contact KRA 21%

It saves customers time 12%

Quick service delivery 12%

Enhances enquiries of customer 9%

Easily accessible 6%

One can easily reach them via their call centres 3%

Reduces long queue in the office 3%

Customers are handled effectively 3%

Easy communication 3%

It’s more convenient to both customers and staff 3%

Impact of Website Upgrade on service delivery

When asked to highlight the impact of website upgrade on service delivery, quick access, ease of

interaction and provision of updates emerged as the key benefit for the upgrade as shown in table 4.21

below.

Table 4. 21: Impact of website upgrade

Impact %

The websites have become fast enough/ There has been improvement on system breakdown

31%

Increased KRA accessibility/More interaction sessions with KRA 27%

Provision of updates/active website/new graphics 21%

Provision of more information content/ a lot of options included 10%

Helps in avoiding congestion/Improvement in system breakdown 7%

Convenient to customers 2%

The website highlights KRA services 4%

Increase in security 2%


4.4. Complaint Handling & Resolution

To establish whether any problems had been experienced with KRA or whether any form of complaint

had been reported to KRA in the last two years, questions on awareness and usage of channels of

reporting issues and the effectiveness of the Authority in resolving the complaints were asked. An

average score and a correlating percentage was computed based 0n a dichotomous based question,

where the respondent were to either agree or disagree with a given statement.

4.4.1 Complaints Incidence

When asked whether they have experienced problems with KRA in the past, 20% of the customers

claimed to have experienced problems with KRA in the last 2 years. Across customer categories, LTOs

and MTOs indicated a higher incidence of complaints compared to other categories as illustrated on

figure 4.11 below.

Figure 4. 11: Complaints Incidence

Table 4. 22: Comparative Analysis - complaints incidence

From the graph above, there has been a decrease on need t0 complain compared to 2013/2014.


LTOs(n=172)

MTOs(n=84)SMEs(n=206

)Associations

(n=32)

Clearing &forwarding

(n=60)Avg

Yes 4% 27% 33% 17% 28% 12% 20%

No 96% 73% 67% 83% 72% 88% 80%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2013/2014 2017 /2018 Variance

LTOs (n=100) - 34% (n=7 3) - 27 % -7 %

MTOs (n=31) - 44% (n=53) - 33% -11%

Individual Taxpayers (n=97 8) - 26% (n=654) - 4% -22%

Clearing & Forwarding (n=17 0) - 50% (n=60) - 12% -38%


4.4.2 Nature of complaints

To assess the reasons for complaints, a multiple response questions were used where respondents

were at liberty to choose more than one response from the choices given. Based on the findings,

website downtime (46%) followed by delay in service provision (30%) are some of the issues

mentioned. Table 4.23 below shows the nature of complaints experienced.

Table 4. 23: Nature of complaints

Individual Taxpayers

LTOs MTOs SMEs Associations Clearing & Forwarding

Avg

Base 70 46 28 36 9 7

The website was down

21% 41% 50% 44% 78% 43% 46%

Delayed service 10% 33% 18% 36% 11% 71% 30%

Renewal/registration of Pin

17% 22% 11% 19% 11% 43% 21%

Wrong computation of income tax

3% 28% 29% 19% 0% 29% 18%

Problem with my returns

27% 0% 0% 6% 0% 0% 5%

4.4.3 Reporting of complaints

In order to establish whether they reported the problem to KRA, an average score and a correlating

percentage was computed based 0n a dichotomous based question, where the respondent were to

either agree or disagree with a given statement. Findings indicate that only 58% had reported their

complaints to KRA as shown in figure 4.12 below.

Figure 4. 12: Reporting of complaints

IndividualTaxpayers

(n=70)LTOs (n=46) MTOs(n=28) SMEs(n=36)

Associations(n=9)

Clearing &forwarding

(n=7)Avg

Yes 66% 48% 61% 72% 0% 100% 58%

No 34% 52% 39% 28% 100% 0% 42%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


Table 4.24: Comparative Analysis - complaints reporting

We can observe from the graph that there has been a significant drop on need to complain from LTOs,

MTOs and Individual taxpayers’ category. Clearing and Forwarding agents reported an increase of 7%.

In order to ascertain the deterrents for complaints registration, a question was asked as to why the

complaint was not reported to KRA. A correlating percentage was computed based 0n a multiple based

question, where the respondent were at liberty to choose more than one response from the choices

given. From the findings, lack of knowledge on the procedures to be followed was indicated as the

main hindrance (39%). Lack of time to report the problem (25%) and poor response rate were also

cited as deterrent to registration of complaints as shown in figure 4.13 below.

Figure 4.13: Deterrents for complaints registration

2013/2014 2017 /2018 Variance

LTOs (n=100) - 95% (n=46) - 48% -47 %

MTOs (n=31) - 90% (n=28) - 61% -29%

Individual Taxpayers (n=97 8) - 88% (n=7 0) - 66% -22%

Clearing & Forwarding (n=17 0) - 93% (n=7 ) - 100% 7 %

39%

25%

17%14% 13%

4% 4% 5%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

I didnt knowwho to report

to

Lack of time Gotassistance

somewhereelse

They takelong to

answer thequery

No action istaken even ifwe report the

issue

I didnt seethe need

I will visit theoffice

personally

Others


4.4.4 Taxpayer Complaints channels

In order to establish the complaints channels used, a question on the mechanism used to report the

problem to KRA was asked. An average score and a correlating percentage was computed based 0n a

multiple based question, where the respondent were at liberty to choose more than one response from

the choices given. Customers have become increasingly demanding in terms of services they expect

from organizations. In view of this, organizations have responded by making themselves accessible to

customers. From the findings, physical visit (68%) was the most commonly used channel of

complaints followed by telephone (36%) as shown in table 4.25 below.

Table 4. 25: Taxpayer Complaints channels


(n=70)

LTOs (n=46)

MTOs (n=28)

SMEs (n=36

)

Clearing & forwarding

(n=7)

Avg

Visited their offices 78% 68% 71% 54% 71% 68%

Telephone 8% 55% 41% 38% - 36%

Website 30% 36% 18% 27% 14% 25%

Email 10% 32% 12% 19% 14% 17%

Customer care desk 20% 0% 0% 0% 14% 17%

Postal mail 2% 0% 0% 0% 14% 8%

Suggestion box 6% 9% 6% 4% 0% 6% Social media 10% 0% 12% 4% 0% 6%

4.4.5 Speed of Complaint resolution

In order to determine the speed of complaint resolution, a question on how fast the complaint was

resolved was asked. A correlating percentage was computed based 0n an ordinal scale question, where

the respondent was mandated to choose one response from the choices given. The speed at which

business responds to customer complaints affects satisfaction levels. Organizations have different time

frames for solving customer complaints depending on the nature of their business as ascribed in their

service charter. For KRA, about two thirds of the customers’ complaints are resolved within a week as

shown in figure 4.14 below. This is could be a long wait for customers who need immediate complain

resolution or within 24hours.


Figure 4.14: Speed of complaint resolution

Table 4. 26: Comparative Analysis - speed of complaint resolution

We can observe from the graph that there has been some increase on speed of complaint resolution

especially on issues solved within a week, within 3 weeks and over 3 weeks while response to

complaints in less than 24 hours and within 2 weeks reduced by 12% and 5% respectively which against

the expected level of efficiency.

4.4.6 Level of customer Satisfaction with complaints handling

Effective complaint handling is fundamental to the provision of a quality service in an organization.

An effective complaint handling system provides key benefits to an organization by resolving issues

raised by a person who is dissatisfied in a timely and cost-effective way. On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1

was not satisfied at all and 5 extremely satisfied, customers were asked to rate their satisfaction with

complaints handling.. The average score was obtained after the ratings for each statement and were

converted into percentages as presented in figure 4.15 below.

In less than 24 hours, 26%

Within a week, 40%

Within 2 weeks, 7%

Within 3 weeks, 17%

Over 3 weeks, 10%

2013/2014 2017 /2018 Variance

Less than 24 hrs 38% 26% -12%

Within a week 32% 40% 8%

Within 2 weeks 12% 7 % -5%

within 3 weeks 11% 17 % 6%

Over 3 weeks 2% 10% 8%


Figure 4. 15: Satisfaction with complaint resolution

As indicated in figure 4.15 above, 53% of the customers indicated they were satisfied with the services

while 25% indicated they were dissatisfied. Overall, the satisfaction score on complaint handling was

78%.A comparative analysis was done and tabulated in the table below.

Table4. 27: Comparative Analysis - satisfaction with complaint resolution

4% 10% 11% 4% 5%

21%

37%15%

50%

20%

19%

13%

26%

23%

50%

22%

51%40%

37%

23%

50%

100%

50%

4% 11%3%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Not satisfied at all Dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Satisfied Extremely satisfied

2013 2017 Variance

Not satisfied at all 12% 4% -8%

Dissatisfied 27 % 21% -6%

Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 20% 19%

Satisfied 38% 51% 13%

Extremely satisfied 3% 4% 1%

2013 2017 Variance

Not satisfied at all 0% 10% 10%

Dissatisfied 15% 37 % 22%

Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 27 % 13%

Satisfied 48% 40% -8%

Extremely satisfied 10% 0% -10%

2013 2017 Variance

Not satisfied at all 0% 11% 11%

Dissatisfied 7 % 15% 8%


Satisfied 64% 37 % -27 %

Extremely satisfied 0% 11% 11%

2013 2017 Variance

Not satisfied at all 15% 0% -15%

Dissatisfied 27 % 0% -27 %


Satisfied 35% 100% 65%

Extremely satisfied 1% 0% -1%

Indiv idual taxpay ers

LTOs

MTOs

Clearing & Forwading


We note that there has been a decrease on need to complain in the year 2017/2018. This may be

attributed to KRA implementing a harmonized complaint handling systems where complaints issues

are dealt systematically by having intervention mechanism in place.

Although KRA website was perceived to be interactive with feedback being received within 24 hours,

customers were concerned with the slow network which they claimed contributed to delayed services.

There were calls however from focus group participants to streamline services across all KRA regional

branches.

Majority of the customers’ preferred physical visits to KRA offices. Although the inquiries were varied,

and the staff courteous, there exist some challenges in regard to the waiting periods. Some customers

complained of being told to wait for longer time without any solution or feedback. It is important for

KRA to give feedback to any complaint within 24 hours.

There were also challenges in regard to hours of operation where customers felt KRA need to broaden

their operating hours for ease of accessibility. Some claimed rotational shifts to be introduced to cater

for the large number of customers especially during lunch hours when most of the desks were left

unmanned.


4.5 KRA Contact Centre

A contact center (also referred to as a customer interaction center or e-contact center) is a central place

in an organization from which all customer contacts are managed. This section sought to determine

whether customers had contacted KRA, the issue to KRA, whether received any feedback and channels

used, time taken to resolve issues and awareness of the contact number.

4.5.1 Awareness of KRAs contact Centre Number

In order to establish awareness of KRA contact centre number, average scores and correlation

percentages were computed based 0n a dichotomous question, where the respondents were to either

agree or disagree with a given statement. From the findings, only a third (35%) claimed to be aware of

the contact center number. Out of this, only 45% of the MTOs and 43% of the LTOs were aware of the

contact number as shown in figure 4.16 below.

Figure 4. 16: Awareness of KRAs contact centre number

4.5.2 Quality of service at the Contact Centre

In order to understand customers’ satisfaction based on the quality of service at the contact center,

customers were asked to rate its effectiveness. The contact center was rated 72% on effectiveness and

while on quality of service offered customers rated it 78% as shown on table 4.28 below.

Table 4. 28: Effectiveness and satisfaction of the contact centre Individual

Taxpayers LTOs MTOs SMEs Associations Avg

Effectiveness of KRA's contact center 76% 69% 70% 72% 75% 72%

Satisfaction with services at contact center 77% 73% 77% 81% 82% 78%

Average satisfaction score 76% 71% 73% 76% 78% 74%


LTOs (n=172) MTOs(n=84) SMEs(n=206)Associations

(n=32)Avg

Yes 23% 43% 45% 36% 25% 35%

No. 77% 57% 55% 64% 75% 65%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%


4.6 KRA Website

The study also sought to ascertain customer awareness levels of KRA website, its usage and quality of

information offered.

4.6.1 Awareness of KRA’s website

In order to establish awareness of KRA website, average scores and correlation percentages were

computed based 0n a dichotomous question, where the respondents were to either agree or disagree

with a given statement. From the findings, awareness of KRA website was quite high (85%) across all

customers segments apart from individual taxpayers where 35% of them claimed not to be aware of

its existence as shown by figure 4.17 below.

Figure 4. 17: Awareness of KRAs website

We can observe from figure 4.1.7 that individual taxpayers had the lowest awareness level at 65%

compared to other customers. This may be attributed to frequent visits by taxpayers to cyber café

especially to file returns and registration of pin numbers. Cyber cafes are a preference due to

convenience and accessibility hence minimizing interaction with the website.

4.6.2 Frequency of visit

In order to ascertain the frequency of visit to the website, an average score and a correlating percentage

was computed based 0n a multiple based question, where the respondent were at liberty to choose

more than one response from the choices given. From the findings, on average, (78%) of the customers

stated they frequent the website on a need basis. as illustrated by table 4.29.



(n=32)


(n=60)Avg

Yes 65% 92% 88% 85% 97% 80% 85%

No 35% 8% 12% 15% 3% 20% 15%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


Table 4.29: Frequency of visit

Individual Taxpayers (n=1206)

LTOs (n=158)

MTOs (n=74)

SMEs (n=176)

Associations (n=31)


(n=48)

Avg

Daily 1% 1% 0% 2% 3% 29% 6%

Weekly 3% 4% 7% 4% 3% 8% 5%

Monthly 11% 13% 18% 19% 3%

13%

On a need basis 85% 82% 76% 76% 90% 63% 78%

Others 1%

1%

We found that mostly customers visit the website to seek information and to pay taxes. Other mentions

included form downloads as illustrated on table 4.30 below.

Table 4.30: Reasons for website visit

Ind

ivid

ua

l T

ax

pa

yer

s (n

=12

06

)

LT

Os

(n=

158

)

MT

Os

(n=

74

)

SM

Es(

n=

176

)

Ass

oci

ati

on

s (n

=3

1)

Cle

ari

ng

&

Fo

rwa

rdin

g

(n=

48

)

Av

g

Tax payments 34% 47% 41% 52% 32% 42% 41%

Seek information 61% 70% 53% 71% 55% 83% 66%

Download forms 22% 37% 32% 37% 68% 42% 40%

Checking updates 26% 32% 30% 20% 23% 33% 27%

Others 2% 0% 0% 1% 0% 2% 1%

Majority of customers visit the website on a need basis and to seek information. However, how often

a customer visits the website may be dependent on the width and depth of the range of services offered

by the site. This may have an impact on visitors’ frequency. It is therefore important for KRA to add

content that could add to the customer experience.

KRA can improve their website by use of strong servers and systems that will help maintain and

increase speed. The website should be updated regularly to make it active and keep up the traffic.

There were also calls for use of animations video clips that will guide the customer through the learning

process. However, customers were of the opinion that KRA should regulate the cyber café by

standardizing the registration cost.


4.7 KRA services at Huduma Centres

In order to establish awareness of Huduma centre, average scores and correlation percentages were

computed based 0n a dichotomous question, where the respondents were to either agree or disagree

with a given statement. From the findings, 63% stated they were aware while (81%) of members of

association interviewed stated that they have visited Huduma center compared to 40% from clearing

and forwarding agencies. Figure 4.18 below shows visits to the Huduma centres by different customer

segments

Figure 4.18: Awareness of Huduma centre

4.7.2 Frequency of customer website visit

In order to ascertain the frequency of visit to Huduma Centre, an average score and a correlating

percentage was computed based 0n a multiple based question, where the respondent were at liberty

to choose more than one response from the choices given. Findings indicate that on average, (93%) of

the customers frequent Huduma centres on a need basis as illustrated by table 4.31 below.

Table 4.31: Frequency of visit


LTOs (n=119)

MTOs (n=60)

SMEs (n=126)

Associations (n=26)


(n=24)

Avg

On a need basis 89% 92% 97% 87% 100% 92% 93%

Monthly 8% 3% 2% 11% 0% 8% 5%

Weekly 1% 4% 2% 2% 0% 2%



(n=32)


(n=60)Avg

Yes 54% 69% 71% 61% 81% 40% 63%

No. 46% 31% 29% 39% 19% 60% 37%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%


4.7.3 Reasons for Website Visit by customers.

One of the main reasons mentioned for visiting Huduma center was to seek information (60%).while

24% visit Huduma center to pay taxes as illustrated in table 4.32 below.

Table 4.32: Reasons for visit to Huduma centre


LTOs (n=119)

MTOs (n=60)

SMEs (n=126)

Associations (n=26)


(n=24)

Avg

Tax payments 12% 23% 30% 27% 27% 25% 24%

Seek information 57% 60% 55% 63% 50% 75% 60%

Registration 23% 34% 25% 38% 54% 38% 35%

Others 7% 10 10% 9% 19% 0% 11%

Good efficient services is one of the reasons why customers frequent Huduma centre. According to

focus group participants, there is need to increase number of attendants at the service desks in order

increase the speed of service. There were suggestions that services offered by Huduma should be

specified and any payment displayed for all customers to see. There were calls for KRA to diversify to

all the counties.


4.8 Customer Satisfaction on Key Touch Points

4.8.1 Satisfaction with KRA Staff

Satisfaction with KRA staff on service delivery was rated 74.9%.Key satisfaction elements evaluated

across all taxpayers included staff level of knowledgeable, helpfulness and competence as illustrated

below in table 4.33.

Table 4.33: Satisfaction with KRA staff

Individual

taxpayers

LTOs. MTOs SMEs Associations Suppliers Avg

Base 1859 172 84 206 32 100

KRA staff are knowledgeable 77.5 77.3 79.5 79.7 78.8 78.6 78.6

It is easy for customers to get

through to relevant person at

KRA

73.2 69.0 70.0 74.0 67.5 78.4 72.0

KRA staff are courteous 77.5 71.0 74.8 79.6 70.0 81.8 75.8

KRA staff are trust worthy 75.4 69.2 69.8 77.1 66.3 80.6 73.1

KRA customers have clear

understanding of what

customers want

73.8 69.2 74.3 73.1 68.8 80.6 73.3

KRA staff are helpful 79.9 76.5 77.6 77.7 76.9 80.6 78.2

KRA staff are competent 77.1 76.1 76.1 77.9 75.6 81.8 77.4

KRA staff are professional 77.8 69.5 69.5 79.1 66.9 81.6 74.1

KRA staff strive to exceed

customers' expectations 73.5 69.8 69.9 72.7 70.6 79.2 72.6

KRA staff respond to

customers' queries and

problems promptly

75.5 70.4 75.1 74.6 70.6 78.8 74.2

Average satisfaction score 76.1 71.8 73.7 76.5 71.2 80.2 74.9

4.8.2 Customer Satisfaction with support services

In order to establish satisfaction with support services, customers were asked to rate the extent to

which they agree with the statements in table 4.34 on a scale of 1 for strongly disagree to 5 strongly

agree. From the findings, 0verall satisfaction with customer support was rated 68.3% with 69% of the

customers indicating that KRA is committed to supporting their businesses/individual long term

growth.


Table 4.34: Satisfaction with support services

Individual

Taxpayers

LTOs

.

MTO

s

SME

s

Association

s

Avg

Base 1859 172 84 206 32

KRA is committed to supporting my company's/individual long term growth

75.2 65.2

66.0 77.8 69.4 69.0

KRA audits do not cause inconveniences and disruptions to taxpayers and their business programs

65.1 66.5

63.5 66.3 68.8 67.1

KRA ensures prompt payments of money owed to taxpayers

73.2 68.6

69.8 75.2 69.0 68.7

Average satisfaction score 71.2 66.8 66.4 73.1 69.1 68.3

4.8.3 Employees Integrity and Fairness

In order to determine integrity and fairness for KRA staff, customers were asked to rate the extent to

which they agree with the statements in table 4.35 on a scale of 1 for Strongly Disagree to 5 for Strongly

Agree. The final score was obtained as the average of the ratings for each statement and were converted

into percentage. From the findings, customers rated employees’ integrity and fairness at 57.9%.

However, on institutional integrity and accountability KRA was rated at 71.9% as shown below.

Table 4.35: Employees Integrity and fairness

Ind

ivid

ua

l Ta

xp

ay

er

s LT

Os.

MT

Os

SM

Es

Ass

oci

ati

on

s

Su

pp

lie

rs

Av

g

Base 1859 172 84 206 32 100

KRA employees/officials are of high integrity

74.2 69.1 65.8 74.1 70.6 80.6 71.6

KRA officials or employees discharge their duties in a fair and impartial manner

71.8 61.3 61.7 72.5 68.8 80.8 67.4

KRA officials or employees DO NOT expect to receive bribes or entertainment in order to serve customers efficiently

38.9

40.8 36.1 39.2 46.2 36.8 39.6

Do you DISAGREE that they actually take bribes (cash, gifts, favors etc.)?

38.9 33.5 31.7 39.3 30 35.8 34.8

KRA upholds integrity and accountability in all its undertakings

74.3 70.5 67 76.2 68.1 78.2 71.9

Average satisfaction score 59.6 55.0 52.5 60.3 56.7 62.4 57.1


Table4. 36: Comparative Analysis - employee’s integrity and fairness

Employees’ integrity and fairness was constant at 57% in 2013/14 and 2017/18 respectively. We

observed a 5% marginal decrease on customers’ perceptions in regard KRA employees not receiving

bribes or entertainment in order to serve customers efficiently (44% in 2013/14 compared to 39% in

2017/18) and a further 7% decline on KRA employees not taking bribes (43% in 2013/14 compared to

36% in 2017/18). Most taxpayers who claimed to have given bribes to KRA officers indicated they

wanted their services or processes facilitated or fast tracked (59%). Other reasons for giving the bribes

included; demand from employers (40%), facilitation of future service delivery (18%), expressing

gratitude for the service received (12%) (Corruption Perception Survey, 2017).

We suspect that KRA intervention mechanism to corruption especially on mainstreaming ethics and

integrity through education and stakeholder engagement may have stimulated a decline which is

encouraging. Further, KRA reforms especially automation of services for example iTax and website

upgrade may have contributed to faster delivery of services hence zero or no contact with KRA

employees. However, there were concerns in regard to KRA transparency and lack of accountability

on tax collected from the public. Focus group participants felt that the Authority should update the

public during and after revenue collection.

In order to enhance integrity and fairness, KRA should continue integrating integrity components in

all ongoing automation initiatives, demanding transparency and accountability from employees, faster

service delivery and introducing a framework for reporting suspicious acts of corruption and

corruption related payments to appropriate authorities.


4.8.4 Taxpayer Education and Information

In order to establish status on taxpayer education and information, customers were asked to rate the

extent to which they agree with the statements in Table 4.37 on a scale of 1 for Strongly Disagree to 5

strongly Agree. The final score was obtained as the average of the ratings for each statement and were

further converted into percentages. Taxpayer education is the bridge that connects tax administration

and the public; and a key tool that is widely used to transform the tax culture. Findings indicated that

customer satisfaction with taxpayer education and information stood at 70.90% as shown below.

Table 4.37: Taxpayer education and information


Large Orgs.

MTOs SMEs Associations Avg

Base 1859 172 84 206 32

KRA conducts tax payer education programs for businesses that covers basic information in respect to all taxes

67.6 70.7 70.2 70.5 70.7 70.3

KRA issues simplified publications that contain information on all taxes administered by KRA

70.6 68.3 73.9 70.9

Average satisfaction score 69.0 70.6 70.3 72.2 70.6 70.9

Table 4. 38: Comparative Analysis - Taxpayer Education

From the table above, it can be observed that there has been an increase on taxpayer education and

information compared to 2013/2014.

We observe improvements on taxpayers’ education and information which may be attributed to the

growth of information technology. Increased ownership and usage of mobile technology has also

paved way for accessibility of information. Use of smart phones has accelerated information sharing

and increased internet usage. However, the study found that some of the taxpayers were unaware of

the requirements in regard to taxation. Those who took part in focus group discussions complained of

penalties imposed by KRA of which they were uninformed. Lack of information on the type of taxes

requirements and payment criteria either monthly or annually was a challenge to most taxpayers. It is

therefore important for KRA to come up with strategies for tax payer education aimed at enhancing

compliance of those who do not comply either through ignorance of requirements or penalties.

2013/2014 2017/2018 Variance

Tax payer Education 64% 7 1% 7 %


4.8.5 KRA Performance on functional and operational attributes

In order to establish KRA performance on functional and operational attributes, customers were asked

to rate the extent to which they agree with the statements in Table 4.39 on a scale of 1 for Strongly

Disagree to 5 strongly Agree. The final score (70%) was obtained as the average of the ratings for each

statement and were converted into percentage. From the findings, KRA performance on functional

and operational attributes was at 70%. This was mainly attributed to satisfaction with registration

process (75%), decentralization of operations (74%) and process of filing returns (73%). However,

there is need to enhance staff accessibility through emails and phones (67%) and faster response to

complaints and enquiries (65%) as illustrated below.

Table 4.39: KRA Performance on functional and operational attributes

CATEGORY



Base 1859 172 84 206 30

Process of registration 74% 72% 78% 76% 77% 75%

Decentralization of operations to the county level

71% 73% 76% 77% 76% 74%

Process of filing returns 72% 67% 76% 73% 76% 73%

Modes and channels of communication used 66% 70% 78% 72% 73% 72%

Timeliness in delivery of services 73% 67% 74% 69% 74% 72%

KRA keeping their brand promise – what KRA promises its customers

71% 68% 73% 76% 67% 71%

Efficient and speedy service delivery 73% 67% 70% 69% 75% 71%

Accurate collection of taxes 70% 72% 70% 70% 69% 70%

Staff ability to answer customer queries and questions

67% 67% 73% 74% 66% 69%

The confidentiality given to customers while handling sensitive matters

67% 65% 70% 76% 63% 68%

Frequency of communication 68% 64% 71% 67% 72% 68%

Taxpayer education programs 65% 67% 63% 66% 79% 68%

Staff being accessible through emails and phones

63% 66% 69% 72% 65% 67%

Fast response to enquiries and complaints 66% 63% 65% 69% 64% 65%

Average Satisfaction Score 69% 62% 72% 72% 71% 70%

One of the key components of customer satisfaction is communication. KRA should strengthen

communication channels to enable customers communicate with the staff. It’s also important for the

staff to do follow ups. Giving feedback to the customers is also important. KRA needs promoting

sharing of knowledge and experiences within the Authority through a robust internal communication

strategy.


4.9 Likes and Dislikes of KRA

In order to understand what appeals to the customers and the challenges experienced with the

Authority, a question on the likes and dislikes about KRA was asked. An average score and a

correlating percentage was computed based 0n a multiple based question, where the respondent were

at liberty to choose more than one response from the choices given. Understanding what customers

like and dislike about an organization helps in unearthing critical factors that makes customers behave

in a particular way or react when interacting with the organization. Today’s customer want warm and

friendly service, they want to feel valued and cared for; they want emotional connections.

When asked what they like about KRA, 41% of the customers mentioned faster services especially with

the online system and good customer service (20%). However, there were complaints in regard to slow

online system (29%), long queues during end month (16%) and issues of penalties (13%) as shown in

table 4.40 below.

Table 4.40: Likes/Dislikes about KRA

Likes % Dislikes %

It is faster while using online/modern systems

41% Some are very slow/slow system 29%

Good customer service 20% Long queues during the end months 16%

It's more easier to access their services 14% Issue a lot of penalties 13%

The work with high professionalism 10% Bribes/Extortions 12%

Efficiency in collection of revenue/They have efficiency and speedy service deliveries

12% The custom officers are arrogant/harsh 8%

Simba system 6% They do not educate customers about the issues relating to Revenues and the fees

5%

It is legal 2% Delays when sending queries 3%

It is source of employment in the company

2% They are corrupt 3%

A lot of procedures in order for you to get served

3%

Most of the business processes at KRA which previously has been manual has already been digitalized.

Automation of services might be the cause of slow network and systems. It is imperative that KRA

ensure strong network systems that will increase customer satisfaction.


4.10 Evaluating KRA Systems

4.10.1 Customer Satisfaction with Tax Processes

In order to evaluate KRA systems a question on satisfaction with tax processes was asked. Customers

were required to rate the extent to which they agree with the statements in table 4.41 on a scale of 1

for Strongly Disagree to 5 strongly Agree. The score was obtained as the average of the ratings for each

statement and were converted into percentage. From the findings, satisfaction with the process of

obtaining tax compliance certificates was rated 73.8% followed by payment of taxes at 72.9%. However

the process of tax refunds was lowest at 64.3%.as illustrated below.

Table 4.41: Customer satisfaction with tax processes

CATEGORY


Base 172 82 206 30

Process of Obtaining Tax Compliance Certificates

71.6 73.4 71.6 78.5 73.8

Payment of taxes 70.8 74.1 71.3 75.4 72.9

KRA Audit and Compliance process 66.6 69.5 71.9 67.4 68.9

Adding and Removing of tax obligations 65.1 65.9 71.3 65.7 67

Process of Obtaining Tax Exemption Certificates

64.8 65.5 70.6 65.7 66.7

KRA handling of VAT Claims 66.2 62.4 67.1 63.6 64.8

Process of Tax Refunds 64.8 62.1 68.7 61.4 64.3

Average Satisfaction Score 67.1 67.6 70.4 68.2 68.3

Although process of obtaining tax compliance certificates and payment of taxes was perceived to be

satisfactory, there were concerns in regard to lack of clear channels of escalating issues arising from

interest and penalties since most of the staff referred to either lacked authority or the knowledge to

sort out the issues on hand. KRA should put more effort in building capacity in order to improve

customer service delivery. Knowledge management is also paramount for information sharing.


4.10.2 Satisfaction with KRA’s systems

In order to evaluate KRA systems, a question on satisfaction with KRAs systems was asked. Customers

were required to rate the extent to which they agree with the statements in table 4.42 on a scale of 1

for strongly disagree to 5 strongly agree. The final score was obtained as the average of the ratings for

each statement and were converted into percentage. The overall score for customer satisfaction with

KRA systems stood at 76.7%. Customers were satisfied with pin checker (81.9%), tax compliance

certificate checker (81.2%), common cash receipting system (80.3% and iTax (80.1%) However, there

were concerns in regard to flow meters for exercise registered firms rated at 64% as illustrated below.

Table 4.42: Customer satisfaction with KRA systems


LTOS MTOs SMES Associations Clearing & Forwarding

Avg

Base (n) 1859 172 84 206 32 60

PIN Checker 81.6 78.2 85.1 82.9 81.5 82.2 81.9

Tax Compliance Certificate Checker 74.2 76.7 82.9 81.6 86.7 85 81.2

Common Cash Receipting System 73.9 74.5 78.3 85.2 80 90 80.3

iTax 77.1 72.4 82.4 84 84.3 80.6 80.1

Simba System/ iCMS 77.8 76.9 72.7 86.7 82.2 79.3

Electronic Cargo Tracking System/regional electronic cargo tracking system

81.5 81.9 62.7 75 76 81.3 76.4

Manifest management system 74.3 56.7 71.4 80 80 72.5

Customs Oil stock Information System

60 72.2 68.6 70 90 72.2

Flow meters for Excise registered firms

60 73.3 66.7 40 80 64

Average Satisfaction score 73.4 73.6 74.5 80.7 74.8 83.5 76.7

In order to enhance satisfaction score with KRA systems, the authority needs to provide technical

support for issues arising from these systems. This is especially on communication interface on iTax,

pin checker and tax compliance certificate checker. Customers were of the opinion challenges arising

from the system need to be sorted out with no delay or need to visit KRA offices.

There were also concerns in regard to cyber cafes where customers felt that majority of the operators

lacked training and knowledge on tax matters. Individual taxpayers especially students filing returns

were the most affected with some citing they were registered for obligations not applicable to them.

There were suggestions that KRA should provide educational programs targeting the public that will

encourage self-service especially on iTax profile management.


4.11 Quality of Communication

In order to determine the quality of communication, customers were asked to describe their

impression of communication within KRA. A correlating percentage was computed based 0n an

ordinal scale question, where the respondent was required to choose one response from the choices

given. Communication is a critical factor as it promotes good relationship and helps create clarity on

issues that may affect customers’ satisfaction. From the findings, about 66% of the customers indicated

KRA at least keeps them adequately informed as illustrated in table 4.43 below.

Table 4.43: Quality of communication


LTOS MTOs SMES Associations Suppliers Clearing &

Forwarding Avg

Base (n) 1859 172 84 206 32 100 60 KRA keeps customers fully informed

18% 8% 4% 7% 0% 46%

13% 14%

KRA keeps customers fairly well informed

32% 39% 20% 15% 28% 21%

33% 27%

KRA keeps customers adequately informed

20% 25% 24% 33% 34% 21%

20% 25%

KRA gives customers only a limited amount of information

18% 26% 43% 35% 28% 7%

23% 26%

KRA doesn’t tell customers much at all about what is happening

13% 2% 10% 11% 9%

5%

10%

9%


4.12 Supplier Satisfaction with Procurement of Goods and Services

In order to evaluate suppliers satisfaction with procurement of goods and services, suppliers were

asked to rate the extent to which they agree with the statements in Table 4.44 on a scale of 1 for strongly

disagree to 5 strongly agree. The final score was obtained as the average of the ratings for each

statement and were converted into percentage. The overall satisfaction with KRA Procurement of

goods and services was rated at 76.7%. Suppliers rated procurement process at 81.2% signifying a

significant satisfaction level while communication on outcome of a tender was rated lowest (71.4%) as

illustrated below.

Table 4.44: Supplier satisfaction with procurement of goods and services

Attributes (n=100) %

KRA’s procurement process follows the guidelines set by Public Procurement and Oversight Authority (PPOA)

81.2

The specifications in the tender documents are clear and not ambiguous 80.8

Prequalification process is fair and transparent 80.8

The advertising process of tenders in the print media and at KRA’s website is clear 79.2

The evaluation of tenders is clearly explained to all bidders 79

Execution period given for us to complete the work/assignment is realistic 78.8

The procurement of goods and services at KRA is done in a fair and transparent manner

77.4

Payments are done in accordance with contract payment terms 77.4

Overall Satisfaction with KRA as a supplier 74.7

KRA gives adequate time for submission of responses to bids 72.8

The payment process is clear to suppliers 72.2

Bidders are informed the reason why their bids were not successful upon inquiry 72

There is adequate communication about the outcome of tenders 71.4

Average Satisfaction Score 76.7


Table 4. 45: Comparative Analysis - satisfaction with procurement of goods and services

From the table 4.45 above, it can be noticed that there has been a decline on suppliers’ satisfaction

with procurement of goods and services compared to 2013/2014. We can also observe that payment

processes and communication on the outcome of the tenders registered the highest drop in 2017/2018.

In order to increase supplier satisfaction score, it is imperative that KRA enhance communication

through email and sms platforms especially the outcome of the tendering process. KRA needs to create

more relationship with suppliers by engaging them in forums and sharing useful market information

with them. There were calls from focus group participants for KRA to partner with suppliers in meeting

corporate social responsibility. This may include a mixture of social and environmental

responsibilities.

Attributes 2013/14 2017 /18 Variance

The pay ment process is clear to suppliers 88% 7 2% -16%

There is adequate communication about the outcome of tenders 83% 7 1% -12%

Prequalification process is fair and transparent 90% 81% -9%

KRA gives adequate time for submission of responses to bids 81% 7 3% -8%

The procurement of goods and serv ices at KRA is done in a fair and

transparent manner85% 7 7 %

-8%

The advertising process of tenders in the print media and at KRA’s

website is clear84% 7 9%

-5%

Pay ments are done in accordance with contract pay ment terms 82% 7 7 % -5%

The specifications in the tender documents are clear and not ambiguous 85% 81%-4%

The evaluation of tenders is clearly explained to all bidders 83% 7 9% -4%

KRA’s procurement process follows the guidelines set by Public

Procurement and Oversight Authority (PPOA)83% 81%

-2%

Execution period given for us to complete the work/assignment is

realistic80% 7 9%

-1%

Bidders are informed the reason why their bids were not successful upon

inquiry7 2% 7 2%

0%

Overall Satisfaction with KRA as a supplier 80% 7 5% -5%

Average Satisfaction Score 83% 7 7 %


4.13 Overall Customer Satisfaction Index

The overall satisfaction index for KRA in the financial year ending June 2017 stands at 71.9%. Although

this is a good performance, KRA needs to improve service delivery so that it can attain a customer

satisfaction index of 80% which is the point of delight. Table 4.46 below shows that suppliers had the

highest satisfaction rating followed by Clearing & forwarding Agents. These are the only two customer

segments that scored above 75%. The least satisfied customer segment is LTOs (69.7%) followed by

MTOs (70.8%).

Table 4.46: Overall Customer satisfaction Index

Ind

ivid

ua

l T

ax

pa

ye

rs

LT

Os

MT

Os

SM

Es

As

so

cia

tio

ns

Cle

ar

ing

&

fo

rw

ard

ing

Su

pp

lie

rs

Sc

or

e

Effectiveness of customer service charter

73.0 76.0 72.0 76.0 81.0

71.0 74.8

KRA core values 77.0 70.3 71.4 77.2 67.7 76.4 77.7 74.0

Satisfaction with KRA staff 76.1 71.8 73.7 76.5 71.2

80.2 74.9

Satisfaction with Support services

71.2 66.8 66.4 73.1 69.1

69.3

Employees Integrity and fairness 59.62 55.04 52.46 60.26 56.74 62.44 57.09 59.9 Complaint Handlings 77.2 73.5 76.8 80.4 81.8 80.0

78.3

Quality of service at the contact center

76.4 71.1 73.2 76.0 78.3

75.0

Satisfaction with Tax processes

67.1 67.6 70.4 68.2

68.3

KRA Performance on functional and operational attributes

68.8 67.9 71.7 71.8 71.2

70.3

Satisfaction with KRA systems

73.4 73.3 74.5 80.7 74.8 83.5

76.7

Tax payer education 69.1 70.6 70.3 72.2 70.6

70.9

Quality of Communication 64.6 64.1 67.0 65.8 63.8 63.2 79.2 66.8

Supplier satisfaction with procurement of goods and services

76.7 76.7

Satisfaction Score Index 72.2 69.7 70.8 73.9 71.9 75.8 76.4 71.9


Table 4.47: Comparative satisfaction scores – 2013/201 – 2016/2017 2013/14 2016/2017

Customer service charter

74.8%

KRA core values 68.2% 74% Staff perception 68% 74.9%

Support from KRA 65% 69.3%

Integrity and fairness 69% 59.9%

Complaint Handlings 63% 78.3%

Quality of service at the contact center 69% 75%

Tax processes 71% 68.3%

KRA Image 69% 70.3%

KRA systems 73% 76.7%

Tax payer education 63% 70.6%

Communication

66.8%

Procurement of goods 60% 76.7%

Customer Satisfaction Score Index 65% 71.9%


4.14 Summary of Regional Ratings on Customer Satisfaction

Across the regions, KRA core values had the highest rating in Central and Northern region (79.8% and

79.2 respectively). Quality of service at the contact center generated the highest score (80.5% and

79.8% ) among North Rift and South Rift customers while Nairobi region was rated highly on KRA

systems (82.5%). Customers from the Southern region were satisfied with complaint handling

mechanisms (80%). as illustrated below by table 4.48 below.

Table 4.48: Regional ratings

Nairobi Central Northern South Rift

North Rift

Southern

Western

Avg

Effectiveness of Customer service charter 70.8% 76.8% 72.5% 72.9% 69.2% 70.9% 76.1% 72.7% Satisfaction with services received from KRA 75.6% 77.0% 70.1% 75.9% 69.6% 71.1% 74.3% 73.4% KRA core values

76.2% 79.8% 78.2% 77.3% 77.7% 76.4% 74.6% 77.2% Satisfaction with Support services 75.9% 78.7% 75.3% 76.7% 76.3% 76.8% 74.0% 76.3% Employees Integrity and fairness 69.0% 72.6% 71.3% 72.4% 76.7% 73.4% 69.3% 72.1% Complaint Handlings

66.4% 69.4% 70.0% 68.0% 71.8% 73.1% 67.1% 69.4% Quality of service at the contact center 70.0% 74.0% 55.0% 73.3% 70.0% 80.0% 61.1% 69.1% Quality of service at the contact center 79.0% 79.2% 74.1% 79.8% 80.5% 79.4% 73.4% 77.9% Perception towards services

69.8% 71.8% 65.2% 65.6% 68.5% 60.0% 68.7% 67.1% Satisfaction with Tax processes 68.3% 69.7% 64.1% 65.6% 68.6% 58.0% 67.8% 66.0% Satisfaction with KRA systems 82.5% 72.0% 71.3% 80.5% 72.5% 78.1% 73.0% 75.7% Tax payer Education

64.5% 70.3% 73.2% 73.8% 73.7% 71.2% 67.3% 70.6% Quality of Communication

64.5% 58.2% 70.4% 69.3% 68.0% 60.8% 62.5% 64.8% Satisfaction Score Index

71.7% 73.0% 70.0% 73.2% 72.5% 71.5% 70.0% 71.7%


4.15 Net Promoter Score (NPS)

Net Promoter Score, or NPS, is a form of measurement that is used to gauge customer experience. The

measurement starts from 0 to 10

The results are grouped as follows

Promoters (score 9-10) are loyal enthusiasts’ customers who will keep buying and referring others, hence promoting growth.

Passives (score 7-8) are satisfied but unenthusiastic customers who are vulnerable to competitive offerings.

Detractors (score 0-6) are unsatisfied customers who can damage your brand and impede growth through negative word-of-mouth. A positive NPS (>0) is considered as an indication of a good satisfaction while a negative NPS (<0) is considered as an indication of dissatisfaction. What is the likelihood of you recommending KRA to a friend or colleague?

Table 4.49: NPS summary of the various stakeholders is presented as follows

Promoter Neutrals Detractors NPS

Individual Taxpayers 71% 5% 24% 47%

LTOs 67% 13% 14% 53%

MTOs 36% 54% 10% 26%

SMEs 35% 44% 21% 14%

Associations 43% 43% 14% 29%

Clearing & Forwarding 27% 60% 13% 14%

Suppliers 42% 36% 22% 20%

Average 46% 36% 17% 29%

Overall, the NPS was positive (29%) an indicator customers are satisfied with KRA services. More

importantly, a significant number of customers are likely to pass positive word of mouth to other

taxpayers/citizens. From the findings, a higher proportion of LTOs (53% are more positive with KRA

services compared to other customer segments.


4.16 Brand Personality

In order to bring out the current KRA brand alive, a qualitative approach through focus group, bran

personification of KRA was conducted. KRA was described as shown in table 4.50 below.

Table 4.50: KRA Brand personification

Description

Age 45-50 years married with children

Character- Merciless. Dictatorial, hard facial expression, serious and a loner. He doesn’t talk

much but only when he needs something from you

Profession Shylock and an accountant – “because they are trading with your money and

they love it when you don’t pay”.

Hang outs Westland and high end places

Transport He uses tinted Range rover or Lamborghini

Hobby He plays Golf but very bossy in the field

Whether he can

be visited

He is the kind of person that you can visit and would leave you at the sitting room

and go on with his business. He doesn’t talk much but he’s very intelligent.

Relationship Would want him to be a friend as the friendship will be beneficial

Brand Personality Analysis & Implications

The brand is considered to be mature (systems and structures are in place). It is also perceived to be

stringent in its structures with no possibility of bending. It’s also perceived to be healthy and

financially stable. The brand is largely perceive to embrace modernity. The implications for the above

analysis is that the brand is viewed as strong with good structures which helps in building confidence

in regard to how it operates. On technology front, KRA is viewed to be agile which allows it to adopt

new technology and new ways of doing things. However, there is some negative associations in regard

to its friendliness to its customers.


5. CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Summary of findings

Based on the findings, the overall satisfaction index for KRA for the financial year ending June 2017

stood at 71.9% against a target of 80%. This was however an improvement compared to 2014 where

the index was 65%.The improvement was realized from shift in satisfaction on adherence to core

values, Customer perception on staff, Support given by staff to taxpayers and complaint handling.

However, there was a decline on customer satisfaction with the level of integrity and fairness exhibited

by staff.

Table 5.51: Comparative satisfaction scores – 2013/201 – 2016/2017

2013/14 2016/2017

Customer service charter

74.8%

KRA core values 68.2% 74% Staff perception 68% 74.9%

Support from KRA 65% 69.3%

Integrity and fairness 69% 59.9%

Complaint Handlings 63% 78.3%

Quality of service at the contact center 69% 75%

Tax processes 71% 68.3%

KRA Image 69% 70.3%

KRA systems 73% 76.7%

Tax payer education 63% 70.6%

Communication

66.8%

Procurement of goods 60% 76.7%

Customer Satisfaction Score Index 65% 71.9%

a) Individual Taxpayers

Among individual taxpayers, the satisfaction index improved by 4.1% from 68.0% in 2013 to 72.1%.

On complaint handling, 54% indicated they were satisfied which is an improvement from 2013 where

only 39% were satisfied. There was also notable improvement on customers who indicated KRA staffs

act professionally from 70% in 2013 to 76% in 2017. However, on integrity and fairness, there was a

slight decline from 64% in 2013 to 60% in 2017. A similar trend is also observed with service charter

awareness which declined from 63% in 2013 to 35% in 2017.

b) LTOs The overall score for Large Taxpayers was 69.7% which was similar to the score achieved in 2013. On

service charter awareness, LTOs recorded some improvements from 65% in 2013 to 73% in 2017.


Similarly, on reform awareness, 80% of LTOs indicated they are aware compared to 2013 where the

awareness level was 60%. On level of professionalism, there was slightly improvement on KRA ratings

from 70% in 2013 to72% in 2017. On integrity and fairness, KRA rating dropped from 64% in 2013 to

55% in 2017.

c) MTOS The overall satisfaction score for MTOs was 70.8%. In regard to reforms awareness, there was some

improvements in terms of customer’s awareness on reforms from 54% in 2013 to 60% in 2017. On the

same note, there was also improvement on levels of perception in regard to staff professionalism from

69% in 2013 to 73% in 2017. In regard to complaint handling, KRA recorded significant improvement

from 36% in 2013 to 48% in 2017. However, MTOs scored KRA at 53% on integrity and fairness in

2017 which was a significant drop from a rating of 62% in 2013.

d) SMES

The overall satisfaction score for SMEs stood at 73.9% which was an improvement from 68% in 2013.

A number of SMEs (76.8%) were happy with KRA systems especially the Simba System/ iCMS (86.7%)

Other areas that were rated highly by SMEs included complaints handling (80.4%) and KRA core

values (77.2%).However the report indicated a need to improve on integrity and fairness which was

ranked lowest at 63.3%.

e) Clearing and Forwarding Agents The overall score for clearing and forwarding agents stood at 75.8% which is an improvement of 9.8

%( from 66% in 2013). On complaint handling, KRA was rated at 100% in 2017 on satisfaction which

is a significant shift from 42% in 2013. On reforms awareness, there was however substantial drop

from 82% in 2013 to 68% in 2017.

f) Suppliers Overall satisfaction index for suppliers stands at 76.4% a decline of 7.6% (from 84% in 2013 to 76.4%

in 2017). Dissatisfaction areas include integrity and fairness, lack of adequate time for submission of

responses to bid and bidders not being informed as to why there bids were not successful. However,

KRA was perceived to follow guidelines set by Public Procurement and Oversight Authority (PPOA).

Further, the prequalification process was said to be fair and transparent.


g) Associations The overall satisfaction score with KRA by Associations was 71.9%. KRA was rated highly on

effectiveness of the service charter (81%) and complaint handling (81.8%). However, customers’ were

dissatisfied with communication at KRA.

5.2 Conclusions

Although a significant customer satisfaction improvement (6.9%) has been realised in 2017 compared

to 2013, this is significantly below the 2017 target of 80%. If integrity and fairness (59.9%),

communication (66.8%) and tax process (68.3) is improved, the gap between target and actual

customer satisfaction can be reduced. This calls for a continuous reforms implementation at KRA to

realise the set customer delight target.

5.3 Recommendations

Objective Research Findings Recommendations (a) Customer satisfaction score

The overall satisfaction score stood at 71.9%, an improvement of 1.9% (from 65% in 2013 to 71.9% in 2017). Key satisfaction drivers include quality of services at the contact center, procurement of goods and services , professional and helpful staff, complaint handling mechanism and easier process of registration

1. Successful customer service revolves around product and service knowledge. KRA should therefore invest in building knowledge about their products with customers.

2. It is also important for KRA to keep customers updated on initiatives that it is undertaking in a bid to improve customer experience as it only through understanding the efforts being put, customers can reciprocate with appreciate.

3. With technology revolution among customers, KRA can take advantage of the new communications channels in the market for example use of social media, web chat and emails to reach out to their customers.

(b) Net Promoter score

Although the average NPS score is noted at 29%, LTOs registered the highest NPS score.

1. Increase customer satisfaction through frequent feedback from your customers.

2. Regular training of customer service agents.


Objective Research Findings Recommendations (d)Interaction with KRA

Most taxpayers only interact with KRA while making returns only. For others, they file these returns online making website the main point of contact.

1. Website in a greater way is the key touch point between KRA and customers.

2. This could be the reason why 50% of the complaints customers had were limited to website.

3. It is therefore important for KRA to ensure the website is active all the time and it is easy for customers to navigate. The authority should also ensure the website is up to date and all communication a customer may be looking for is accessible.

(e)Reforms at KRA

According to the survey, only 60% indicated they are aware of reforms at KRA. Further, when asked about specific reforms, iTax and Huduma center services came out strongly

1. Reforms cost money and are meant to solve challenges. When the targeted groups does not understand or know the reforms undertaken, the investment is not value for money.

2. KRA should therefore invest in making their reforms known to all their customers to ensure their uptake. KRA should make it know to customers about the SMS gateway solution and call center facility to help ease pains customers may be undergoing.

3. A key action would be to share the information through various platforms e.g. SMS to any customers who would otherwise have utilized the above services.

(f) Effectiveness of customer service charter

Effectiveness of customer service charter seem to be increasing, from 60% in 2013 to 75% in 2017

1. KRA should ensure that the customer service charter documents are easy to read and understand.

2. Introduce mystery shopping surveys to monitor customer service standards

3. In order to make the service charter more effective, Departments should be encouraged to be as detailed as possible in setting out their standards and targets for service delivery and interaction with customers. This will assist in assessing and monitoring performance.

(g) Core values Employees were perceived to observe the core values. The average satisfaction score was rated at 74%

1. There is need to recognize and reward values-centric behaviors. This will give employees an opportunity to nominate co-workers for successfully living the values.

2. KRA should re-inforce core values in all communications, including all meetings and in brochures and newsletters.

3. It’s imperative to teach values during trainings and orientations.


Objective Research Findings Recommendations (h) Satisfaction with complaint handling

Satisfaction with complaint resolution increased by 27% (from 51% in 2013 to 78% in 2017).This is mainly attributed to prompt service at Huduma centres and an upgraded website which has encouraged online registration.

1. KRA should continue strengthening the mechanisms existing in order to provide complaints resolutions.

2. Staff should be empowered to provide

solutions at the appropriate level, especially at the reception

(i) Complaint lodging channels

Personal visitation to the KRA offices is the most effective mechanism of complain handling. However, most of the customers don’t know where to complain or present their grievances

1. KRA should have a friendly system to receive and respond to complaints

2. KRA should have clear systems & procedures

for staff to deal with complaints and provide solutions.

3. KRA should have a recording system to capture complaint data, and use it to identify problems and trends

4. KRA should come up with mechanism to

improve service delivery in identified areas of complains

(j)Time taken to resolve issues

36% of customers’ issues were resolved within 24hrs in 2013 compared to 26% in 2017 while 32% of customers issues were resolved within a week in 2013 compared to 40% in 2017

Most customers want their complaints to be addressed as soon as possible after communication therefore KRA should strive to attend to complaints issues within 24 hours.

(k) Awareness of KRA website

The overall score for website awareness declined by 4% (85% in 2017 compared to 89% in 2013).This was mainly attributed to Individual taxpayers and clearing and forwarding agents whose awareness was below average (35% and 20% respectively). Lack of interaction between staff and customers as most individual taxpayers prefer using cyber cafes

1. Create more awareness and educate people on how to use the website.

2. simplify the language on their website so

that it’s easy to understand 3. Include Kiswahili for ease of understanding


Objective Research Findings Recommendations (l)Awareness of Huduma center

Awareness with Huduma center was rated at 63%. This was mainly attributed to Individual taxpayers and clearing and forwarding agents whose awareness was the lowest (54% and 40% respectively).

1. Increase more awareness through advertisement and brochures

2. Open more centres in designated places

within the city. Expand in the rural areas especially the interior.

3. Increase space to accommodate more

people (m)Reforms undertaken by KRA

Call centres and SMS gateway solutions scored the lowest on reform awareness. This is mainly attributed to lack of usage of the two facilities from customers and KRA.

1. KRA should make use of all the mobile contacts in their database to send promotional messages to the customers regularly

2. KRA needs to unveil a unique call center number for its customers to access customer care services more efficiently. Apart from maintaining high quality standard of customer service, it will also ensure customer complaints are resolved in good time and through various media channels.

(n)Frequency and reasons for visit

On average, 93% of the customers visit Huduma center on need basis to seek information

1. Have more personnel allocated to serve customers in order to ease congestion.

2. Have different counters serving different categories of customers for example, large taxpayers should be served separately. This will fasten service delivery

3. Increase working hours in order to serve more people.

(o)Support from KRA

Satisfaction score was rated at 68.3%

KRA should support customers company long term growth through 1. Prompt payment of services and products

i.e. pay on time 2. Personalize the relationship. Set a day to

interact with customers for example organize some sports day. They can also be included in some strategy meeting

3. Support Customers Company by sharing information. This can be done through newsletter and keep them informed on any new changes in the organizations.

(p)Taxpayer education and information

Satisfaction with education and information rated at 70.9%. However training and education was rated low by individual taxpayers

KRA should continue offering free product training and support


REFERENCES

Anderson, R.E. (1973) - Consumer Dissatisfaction.: The Effect of Disconfirmed Expectancy on

Product Performance, Journal of Marketing, Research, 10, p.38-44

Carlsmith, J., Aronson, E. (1963) - Some Hedonic Consequences of the Confirmation and

Disconfirmation of Expectations”, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66(2),

p.151-156

Cardozo, R. (1965) -An experimental Study of Customer Effort, Expectation, and Satisfaction,

Journal of Marketing Research, 2(8), 244-249

Consumer Satisfaction Theories: from:https://www.researchgate.net/

publication/258224400_Consumer_Satisfaction_Theories_A_Critical_Review

Dawes, R., D. Singer, Lemons, P. (1972), An experimental Analysis of the Contrast Effect and

its Implications for Intergroup Communication and Indirect Assessment of Attitude,

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 21(3), p. 281-295

Fornell, C. (1992). A National Customer Satisfaction Barometer: The Swedish Experience.

Journal of Marketing, 56, 6-21

Festinger, L. (1957) - A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University

Press.

Gable, G.G. (1996) A Multidimensional Model of Client Success when Engaging External

Consultants Management Science 42 (August): 1175-1197

Halstead, D., Page, V. (1992) - The effects of satisfaction and complaining behavior on

consumer repurchase intentions. Journal of Consumer Satisfaction, Dissatisfaction

and Complaining Behavior, 5, 1-11.

Hovland, C., Harvey, O., Sherif, M. (1957). Assimilation and contrast effects in reaction to

communication and attitude change. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,

55(7), p. 244-252.

KRA 6th corporate plan (2015/2016- 2017/2018

Nicolaou, D. (2007) - A Holistic Customer Satisfaction Model, PHD Thesis, the University of

Warwick, Warwick Business School

Oliver, R. - A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions,

Journal of Marketing Research, 17, November 1980, p. 460 - 469

Olson, J., Dover, P. (1979), Disconfirmation of consumer expectations through product trial.

Journal of Applied Psychology: Vol.64, pp.179-189.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1985), “A conceptual model of service quality

and implications for future research”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 49, Fall, pp. 41-50.

https://www.researchgate.net/%20publication/258224400_Consumer_Satisfaction_Theories_A_Critical_Review

https://www.researchgate.net/%20publication/258224400_Consumer_Satisfaction_Theories_A_Critical_Review


Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1988), “SERVQUAL: a multiple-item scale

for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality”, Journal of Retailing, Spring,

pp. 12-40.

Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V.A. and Berry, L.L. (1994), “Reassessment of expectations as a

comparison standard on measuring service quality: implications for further research”,

Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 1, January, pp. 111-24

Peyton, R., Pitts, S., Kamery, R.H., (2003) - „Consumer Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction: a review

of the literature prior to the 1990’s”, Proceedings of the Academy of Organizational

Culture, Communication and Conflict. Vol. 7(2)

Spreng, R.A., Page, T.J. Jr. (2003) - A Test of Alternative Measures of Disconfirmation,

Decision Sciences, 34 (1), p. 31 - 62.

Vavra, Terry G. (1997) - Improving Your Measurement of Customer Satisfaction: A Guide to

Creating, Conducting, Analyzing, and Reporting Customer Satisfaction Measurement

Programs. American Society for Quality

Westbrook, R.A., Reilly,M.D.- “Value-percept disparity- an alternative to the

disconfirmation of expectations theory of consumer satisfaction”, în Bagozzi, R.P. and

Tybout,A.M. (eds.)- Advances in Consumer Research, vol.10, 1983, p.256-261.

Yi, Y., (1990) - A Critical Review of Customer Satisfaction, in Review of Marketing, AMA,

p.68-123.


QUESTIONNAIRE

Appendix 4. Individuals/ General Public Questionnaire INTRODUCTION Good morning/afternoon. My name is……………………………………from a research company called SBO Research Ltd. We are conducting a customer satisfaction and corruption perception survey on behalf of the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA). KRA would like to know what their customers think about their services in order to ensure high levels of customer satisfaction. The information you provide will remain confidential and the results will be analyzed and reported collectively. May I ask you a few questions?

SECTION I: MAIN INTERVIEW

PART A: CUSTOMER SATISFACTION ASSESSMENT

Q1) When I mention the name Kenya Revenue Authority, what is the first thing that comes to mind? Write in Verbatim - One mention only. PROBE for meanings and associations.

Q2a) Do you have a PIN (Personal Registration Number)?

Yes 01 If yes, please continue to 3 No 02 If no, skip to Q2b and close

Q2b) Why not?

Q3) In your opinion, what is the role of KRA? Write in verbatim?

Collection of revenue 01

To assess and account for all revenues in accordance with specific laws

02

To advise on matters relating to the administration of revenue

03

Others (specify)

Q4a) Are you aware that KRA has a taxpayer service charter?

Yes 01 If yes, please continue to Q4b No 03 If no, skip to Q5

Q4b) How did you get to know about KRA’s taxpayer service charter?

Newspaper 01

Radio 02

TV 03

KRA’s website 04

Posters within KRA’s buildings 05

Exhibitions and promotions e.g. shows 06

Events held by KRA e.g. launch events, taxpayers week 07

Employees of KRA 08

Others – please specify;


Q4c) On a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 = very ineffective; 2 = somewhat ineffective; 3= neither effective nor Ineffective; 4 = somewhat effective and 5 = very effective, how would you rate the effectiveness of KRA’s customer service charter?

Very ineffective Somewhat ineffective

Neither effective nor

ineffective

Somewhat effective

Very effective

01 02 03 04 05 Q4d)Why do you say so?

Q4a) Are you aware that KRA

Vision Yes No Mission Yes No Core values Yes No

Q5a) Are you aware of any reforms that are currently being undertaken or have been undertaken by KRA?

Yes 01 If yes, please continue to Q6b No 04 If no, skip to Q7a

Q5b) What are these reforms that you are aware of? Any other?

Processing of VAT 01 I Tax systems 02 Mobile payment systems 03 SMS gateway solution 04 Establishment of Huduma centres 05 Website upgrade 06 Established call centers 07 Others (specify)

Q5c) how have these reforms impacted on KRA’s service delivery?

Q6(c) Reforms they are aware of Q6c) Impact of the reforms on KRA’s service

delivery Processing of VAT I Tax systems Mobile payment systems SMS gateway solution Establishment of Huduma center Website upgrade Established call centers Others (specify


Q6a) Using a scale of 1 to 10 where 10 = VERY SATISFIED and 1 = NOT SATISFIED AT ALL,I want you to tell me how satisfied you are with KRA on each of the following attributes that I am going to read out to you.

Statements Satisfaction – [10 Point Scale]

a) Keeping their brand promise – what KRA promises its customers

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK

b) Accurate collection of taxes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK

c) Process of registration 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK

d) Process of filing returns 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK

e) Staff ability to answer customer queries and questions

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK

f) The confidentiality given to customers while handling sensitive matters

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK

g) Timeliness in service delivery 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK

h) Frequency of communication 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK

i) Staff being accessible through emails and phones 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK

j) Decentralization of operations to the county level 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK

k) Taxpayer education programs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK

l) Fast response to enquiries and complaints 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK

m) Modes and channels of communication used 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK

n) Participation in corporate social responsibility activities

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK

Q6b) Taking everything into consideration, how satisfied would you say you are with the services that you have received from KRA? Please use a scale of 1 – 5 where 5 = Very Satisfied; 4 = Satisfied; 3 = Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied; 2 = Dissatisfied and 1 = Very Dissatisfied.

Very Satisfied Satisfied Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied

05 04 03 02 01 Q7a) When did you last contact KRA?

Within the last 2 weeks 01 Within the last month 02

Between 2 and 6 months 03 Between 7 months and 1 year 04

Over 1 year ago 05 Have never made contact 06 If no contact, go to Q9a

Q7b) What was the reason for the contact?

Q7c) Did you receive any feedback on your query?

Yes 01

No 02


Q7d) How did you contact them? Telephone 01

Email 02 Website 03

Visited their offices 04 Letter 05

Fax 06 Other – please specify:

Q7e) How long did it take for you to receive feedback from KRA?

In less than 24 hours 01 Within a week 02

Within 2 weeks 03 Within 3 weeks 04

Over 3 weeks: please specify how long it took for you to receive feedback from KRA

Q7f) Thinking about this last time that you made a contact with KRA; how satisfied would you say you were with the contact made?

Not satisfied at all 01 Dissatisfied 02

Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 03 Satisfied 04

Extremely satisfied 05 Q8a) CONTACT CENTRE: Do you know which number to use when you want to contact KRA’s Contact Centre?

Yes 01 If yes, continue to Q9b

No 02 If no, please go to Q10a

Q8b) Please rate the effectiveness of KRA’s Contact Centre using a scale of 1 – 5 where 1 = very ineffective; 2 = somewhat ineffective; 3= neither effective nor ineffective; 4 = somewhat effective and 5 = very effective.


Neither effective nor ineffective

Somewhat effective

Very effective

01 02 03 04 05 Q9a) WEBSITE: Are you aware that KRA has a website?


Q9b) How often do you visit KRA’s website?

Daily 01 Weekly 02

Monthly 03 On a need basis 04

Other – please specify Q9c) what do you do when you visit KRA’s website?

Tax payments 01 Seek information 02 Download forms 03

Checking updates 04 Others


Q9d) please tell me how KRA can improve on their website

Q10a) HUDUMA CENTRE: Have you ever visited any Huduma Centre?


Q10b) How often do you visit Huduma center?

Daily 01 Weekly 02


Other – please specify Q10c) what do you do when you visit Huduma center?

Tax payments 01 Seek information 02

Registration 03 Others 04

Q10) please tell me how KRA can improve services at Huduma Centre

KRA’s SYSTEMS Q11a) Which of the following KRA systems are you aware of? Read list (Circle all that apply) Q11b) Of these systems that you are aware of, which ones does your organization use? (Circle all that apply) Q11c) Using a scale of 1 to 5 where 5 = Very Satisfied; 4 = Satisfied; 3 = Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied; 2 = Dissatisfied and 1 = Very Dissatisfied, please tell me how satisfied you are with the system/s that your organization uses.

Q11a Awarenes

s

Q11b Usage

Q11c Satisfaction

SYSTEMS Very

Satisfied Satisfied Neither

Dissatisfied

Very Dissatisfi

ed

Simba System 01 02 05 04 03 02 01

Integrated Tax Management System (ITMS) / i-tax

01 02

05 04 03 02 01

Electronic Cargo System 01 02 05 04 03 02 01

Common Cash Receipting System

01 02

05 04 03 02 01

PIN Checker 01 02 05 04 03 02 01

Tax Compliance Certificate Checker

01 02

05 04 03 02 01


01 02

05 04 03 02 01

Manifest management system 01 02 05 04 03 02 01


01 02

05 04 03 02 01

Others – specify: 05 04 03 02 01


Q11(d) Why do you say so

Q12) I am now going to read out some statements about KRA. Please tell me to what extent you agree with them. Use a 5 point scale, whereby 1 means you “Strongly Disagree”, 2 means you “disagree”, 3 means you “Neither Agree nor Disagree”, 4 means you “agree” and 5 means you ‘Strongly Agree” with the statement. Please ensure you rate each statement.

Reasons for satisfaction rating in Q11c above

Simba System

Integrated Tax Management System (ITMS) / i-tax

Electronic Cargo System


PIN Checker



Manifest management system


Other – please specify

Strongly Disagree

Disagree Neither Agree Nor

Disagree

Agree Strongly Agree

CUSTOMER CARE / STAFF RELATIONS

KRA staff are knowledgeable 01 02 03 04 05

KRA staff are professional 01 02 03 04 05

KRA staff strive to exceed customers’ expectations

01 02 03 04 05

KRA staff respond to customers’ queries and problems promptly

SUPPORT

KRA is committed to supporting my company’s long term growth

01 02 03 04 05

KRA audits causes inconveniences and disruptions to taxpayers and their business programs

01 02 03 04 05

KRA ensures prompt payments of money owed to taxpayers

01 02 03 04 05


Q13) Which of the following statements best describes your impression of communications within KRA?

KRA keeps customers fully informed 05

KRA keeps customers fairly well informed 04

KRA keeps customers adequately informed 03

KRA gives customers only a limited amount of information 02

KRA doesn’t tell customers much at all about what is happening 01

Q14a) PROBLEM RESOLUTION / COMPLAINT HANDLING: Have you experienced any problems with KRA or have you made any form of complaint on behalf of your organization to KRA in the last 1 year?


Q14b) What was the problem / complaint about?

Q14c) Did you report the problem or complaint to KRA?

Yes 01 If yes, please continue to Q14e No 02 If no, skip to Q14d

Q14d) If no, why did you not report it to KRA?

INTEGRITY AND FAIRNESS

KRA employees/officials are of high integrity 01 02 03 04 05


01 02 03 04 05

KRA officials or employees expect to receive bribes or entertainment in order to serve customers efficiently

01 02 03 04 05

Given your experiences with KRA officials or employees over the past two years, do you agree that they actually take bribes (cash, gifts, favors etc)?

01 02 03 04 05

KRA upholds integrity and accountability in all its undertakings

01 02 03 04 05

TAXPAYER EDUCATION

KRA conducts tax payer education programs for individuals that covers basic information in respect to all taxes

01 02 03 04 05


01 02 03 04 05


Q14e) Through which mechanism / channel did you make the complaint / report the problem?

Telephone 01 Email 02

Website 03 Visited their offices 04

Postal mail 05 Fax 06

Suggestion box 07 Other – please specify:

Q14f) How fast was your complaint / problem solved?



Over 3 weeks: please specify how long it took Q14g) Thinking about this last time that you made a complaint to KRA; how satisfied were you with the way your complaint/ problem was resolved?



Extremely satisfied 05 Q14h) Why do you say so? PROBE

Q14i). On a scale of 0-10, where Zero means would not recommend at all and 10 means, very likely, what is the likelihood of you recommending KRA to a friend?

Detractors Neutral Promoters 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


Appendix 1. TAXPAYERS –Organization INTRODUCTION Good morning/afternoon. My name is……………………………………from a research company called SBO Research Ltd, an independent market research agency We are conducting a customer satisfaction survey on behalf of the Kenya Revenue Authority (KRA). KRA would Like to know what their customers think about their services in order to ensure high levels of customer satisfaction. The information you provide will remain confidential and the results will be analyzed and reported collectively.May I ask you a few questions?

SECTION I: MAIN INTERVIEW

PART A: CUSTOMER SATISFACTION ASSESSMENT

Q1a) Have you noticed any changes at KRA in the last 3 years? Please tick /circle


Q1c) If so, what changes have you noticed?

(Q1b) Which of the following tax obligations relates to you?

Process of payments 01 Processing of refunds 02

VAT 03 Excise duty 04

Corporation income 05 PAYE 06 Withholding tax 07 Others (specify)

Q2a) Are you aware that KRA has a customer service charter?


Q2b) How did you get to know about KRA’s customer service charter?

Newspaper 01

Radio 02

TV 03

KRA’s website 04

Posters within KRA’s buildings 05

Exhibitions and promotions e.g. shows 06

Events held by KRA e.g. launch events, taxpayers’ week 07

Employees of KRA 08

Others – please specify;


Q2c) On a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 = very ineffective; 2 = somewhat ineffective; 3= neither effective nor ineffective; 4 = somewhat effective and 5 = very effective, how would you rate the effectiveness of KRA’s customer service charter?


Neutral Somewhat effective

Very effective

01 02 03 04 05 Q3a) Are you aware of any reforms that are currently being undertaken or have been undertaken by KRA?


Q3b) What are these reforms that you are aware of? Any other? Don’t prompt

Processing of VAT 01 I Tax systems 02 Mobile payment systems 03 SMS gateway solution 04 Establishment of Huduma centres 05 Website upgrade 06 Established call centers 07 Others (specify)

Q4) SATISFACTION: For this section, I want you to tell me the extent to which you are satisfied with KRA on each of the following attributes that I am going to read out to you. Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where 5 = Very Satisfied; 4 = Satisfied; 3 = Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied; 2 = Dissatisfied and 1 = Very Dissatisfied.

Very Satisfied

Satisfied Neither

Satisfied nor Dissatisfied

Dissatisfied Very

Dissatisfied

a) KRA keeping their brand promise – what KRA

promises its customers

05 04 03 02 01

b) Accurate collection of taxes

05 04 03 02 01

c) Process of registration 05 04 03 02 01

d) Payment of taxes

e) Process of filing returns 05 04 03 02 01

f) The confidentiality given to customers while

handling sensitive matters

05 04 03 02 01

g) Efficient and speedy service delivery

05 04 03 02 01

h) Frequency of communication

05 04 03 02 01

i) Staff being accessible through emails and

phones

05 04 03 02 01

j) Decentralization of operations to the county

level

05 04 03 02 01


Q5a) When did you last contact KRA on behalf of your organization?

Within the last 2 weeks 01 Within the last month 02

Between 2 and 6 months 03 Between 7 months and 1 year 04

Over 1 year ago 05 Q5b) How did you contact them? One mention only



Letter 05 Fax 06

Other – please specify: Q5c) What was the reason for the contact?

Q5d) Did you receive any feedback on your query?

Yes 01 If yes, continue to Q7e

No 02 If no, please go to Q7f

Q5e) How long did it take for you to receive feedback from KRA?



Over 3 weeks: please specify how long it took for you to receive feedback from KRA Q5f) Thinking about this last time that you made a contact with KRA; how satisfied would you say you were with the contact made?



Extremely satisfied 05

k) Taxpayer education programs

05 04 03 02 01

l) Fast response to enquiries and complaints

05 04 03 02 01

m) Modes and channels of communication used

05 04 03 02 01

n) Timeliness in delivery of services

05 04 03 02 01

o) Staff ability to answer customer queries and

questions

05 04 03 02 01


Q6a) CONTACT CENTRE: Do you know which number to use when you want to contact KRA’s Contact Centre?

Yes 01 If yes, continue to Q8b

No 02 If no, please go to Q9a

Q6b) Please rate the effectiveness of KRA’s Contact Centre using a scale of 1 – 5 where 1 = very ineffective; 2 = somewhat ineffective; 3= neither effective nor ineffective; 4 = somewhat effective and 5 = very effective.


Neither effective nor ineffective

Somewhat effective

Very effective

01 02 03 04 05 Q7a) WEBSITE: Are you aware that KRA has a website?


Q7b) How often do you visit KRA’s website?

Daily 01 Weekly 02


Other – please specify Q7c) what do you do when you visit KRA’s website?

Tax payments 01 Seek information 02 Download forms 03

Checking updates 04 Others

Q7d) please tell me how KRA can improve on their website

Q8a) HUDUMA CENTRE: Have you ever visited any Huduma Centre?


Q8b) How often do you visit Huduma center?

Daily 01 Weekly 02


Other – please specify Q8c) what do you do when you visit Huduma center?

Tax payments 01 Seek information 02

Registration 03 Others 04

Q9) please tell me how KRA can improve services at Huduma Centre


Tax payment – through mpesa KRA’s SYSTEMS Q10a) Which of the following KRA systems are you aware of? Read list (Circle all that apply) Q10b) Of these systems that you are aware of, which ones does your organization use? (Circle all that apply) Q10c) Using a scale of 1 to 5 where 5 = Very Satisfied; 4 = Satisfied; 3 = Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied; 2 = Dissatisfied and 1 = Very Dissatisfied, please tell me how satisfied you are with the system/s that your organization uses

Q11) I am now going to read out some statements about KRA. Please tell me to what extent you agree with them. Use a 5 point scale, whereby 1 means you “Strongly Disagree”, 2 means you “disagree”, 3 means you “Neither Agree nor Disagree”, 4 means you “agree” and 5 means you ‘Strongly Agree” with the statement. Please ensure you rate each statement.

Q10a Awareness

Q10b Usage

Q10c Satisfaction

SYSTEMS Very

Satisfied Satisfied

Not sure

Dissatisfied Very

Dissatisfied

Simba System/ iCMS

01 01 05 04 03 02 01

iTax 02 02 05 04 03 02 01

Electronic Cargo Tracking System/regional electronic cargo tracking system

03 03 05 04 03 02 01


04 04 05 04 03 02 01

PIN Checker 05 05 05 04 03 02 01


06 06 05 04 03 02 01


07 07 05 04 03 02 01

Manifest management system

08 08 05 04 03 02 01


09 09 05 04 03 02 01

Others – specify: 05 04 03 02 01

Strongly Disagree

Disagree Neither Agree Nor

Disagree

Agree Strongly Agree

CUSTOMER CARE / STAFF RELATIONS

KRA staff are knowledgeable 01 02 03 04 05

KRA staff are professional 01 02 03 04 05

KRA staff strive to exceed customers’ expectations

01 02 03 04 05

KRA staff respond to customers’ queries and problems promptly

01 02 03 04 05


Q12 Which of the following statements best describes your impression of communications within KRA?

KRA keeps customers fully informed 05

KRA keeps customers fairly well informed 04

KRA keeps customers adequately informed 03

KRA gives customers only a limited amount of information 02

KRA doesn’t tell customers much at all about what is happening 01

Q13a) PROBLEM RESOLUTION / COMPLAINT HANDLING: Have you experienced any problems with KRA or have you made any form of complaint on behalf of your organization to KRA in the last 2 year?


Q13b) What was the problem / complaint about?

Took too long to serve 01

The website was down 02 Wrong computation of income tax 03 Renewal/registration of Pin 04 Others (specify)

Q13c) Did you report the problem or complaint to KRA?

Yes 01 If yes, please continue to Q13e No 02 If no, skip to Q13d

Q13d) If no, why did you not report it to KRA?

I didn’t know who to to report to/I don’t know the procedure 01 They take too long to answer your query 02

Lack of time 03

Others (specify)

INTEGRITY AND FAIRNESS

KRA employees/officials are of high integrity 01 02 03 04 05


01 02 03 04 05

KRA officials or employees expect to receive bribes or entertainment in order to serve customers efficiently

01 02 03 04 05

Given your experiences with KRA officials or employees over the past two years, do you agree that they actually take bribes (cash, gifts, favors etc.)?

01 02 03 04 05

KRA officials upholds accountability in all their undertakings

01 02 03 04 05

TAXPAYER EDUCATION

KRA conducts tax payer education programs for businesses that covers basic information in respect to all taxes

01 02 03 04 05


01 02 03 04 05


Q13e) Through which mechanism / channel did you make the complaint / report the problem?



Postal mail 05 Suggestion box 06

Social media 07 Other – please specify:

Q13f) How fast was your complaint / problem solved?



Over 3 weeks: please specify how long it took Q13g) Thinking about this last time that you made a complaint to KRA; how satisfied were you with the way your complaint/ problem was resolved?



Extremely satisfied 05 Q13h) Why do you say so? PROBE

Q13i). On a scale of 0-10, where Zero means would not recommend at all and 10 means, very likely, what is the likelihood of you recommending KRA to a friend?

Detractors Neutral Promoters 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


SECTION II: PROFILE

P1. Name of respondent

Optional

P2. Contact details of respondent

Optional

P3. Name of organization

P4. Category – FOR LARGE TAX PAYERS ONLY

Top 25 sector 01

Agriculture and Wholesalers 02

Banks and Insurance 03

Domestic Excise 04

Food and other Manufacturers 05

Government and Construction 06

Oil, Transport Motor Vehicle, Services and

Hospitality

07

P5. Category – FOR MEDIUM, SMALL AND MICRO TAX PAYERS ONLY

LTO’s 01

Medium (Employs 50 – 99 employees) 02

Small (Employs 10 – 49 employees) 03

Micro (Employs 1 -9 employees) 04

SECTOR

Service 01

Agriculture and Manufacturing 02


Retail and Wholesalers 03

Insurance 04

Financial 05

Government and Construction 06

P6.Region / Location

Nairobi 01

Central 02

Northern 03

South Rift 04

North Rift 05

Southern 06

Western 07

P7) COUNTY


INDIVIDUAL CUSTOMERS DG

LENGTH OF DICUSSION: 25 – 30 MINUTES

INTRODUCTION AND WARM UP (2 mins)

The interviewer introduces him/herself and explains the purpose of the exercise.

The interviewer explains that the discussion is open, not an exam and there is no wrong or right answer.

Explain that the information given by respondents is confidential.

Encourage the respondents to give honest opinions.

Explain the use of the recorder.

Ask the respondent to introduce him/herself.

MAIN INTERVIEW

GENERAL AWARENESS (3 mins)

What is the first thing that comes to mind when I mention KRA? PROBE for meanings and associations

What if anything do you like about KRA? What else?

What if anything do you dislikes about KRA? What else?

In your opinion, what is the role of KRA?

CUSTOMER SERVICE CHARTER/ SERVICE DELIVERY (7 mins)

Are you aware that KRA has a customer service delivery charter? If so, how did you get to learn about it?

PROBE for sources

Do you know the various timelines set out in the service charter? If yes, please give me examples of some

timelines.

Has KRA lived up to the promises that they have set out in the charter? Why or Why not?

In which areas has KRA fallen short of your expectations in their service delivery? (Weaknesses) PROBE

In which areas has KRA exceeded your expectations in terms of service delivery? (Strengths) PROBE

PERCEPTION OF KRA ACROSS VARIUOS SERVICE ELEMENTS (7 mins)

How do you perceive KRA in terms of; Speed of their services Responsiveness to customer needs and queries Hours of operation Staff efficiency Embracing technology Process of registration Process of applying for PIN number, (process of paying fees etc – this apply for those who

have done the services)

CUSTOMER EDUCATION PROGRAMMES (2 mins)

Which customer education programs from KRA have you ever heard of?

What is your opinion about these education programs?

CURRENT COMMUNICATION TO EXTERNAL CUSTOMERS (7 mins)

Have you ever seen/ heard about KRA in the media? If yes which media?

In which media did you hear/ see about KRA?

In which media do you get to hear/see about KRA most often? if Radio or TV Probe for specific stations

What was it about?


What message was being passed about KRA?

How often do you get to see/hear about KRA in the media?

Do you feel that KRA is using the right media to communicate to the market? If no ask, which media should KRA use in order to get more exposure?

REFORMS (7 mins)

Are you aware of any reforms that are currently being undertaken or have been undertaken by KRA?

What are these reforms that you are aware of? (probe for huduma centres, website upgrade etc

BRAND PERSONIFICATION (3 mins)

Supposing KRA was a person? What kind of a person would it be?

PROBE FOR:

Age, sex would that person be? What would be the physical appearance of that person?

What would be their profession?

Where would that person live?

Where would they hang out?

What would be their form of transport i.e. car, bicycle, Matatu or walk? If that person would own a car,

what type of car would they drive?

What would be their hobby?

If you knew that person, would he/she be your friend? How close would your relationship be?

Would KRA be the kind of person you would like to visit without notice or would you prefer notice?

Why?

Do you have any other comment that you would like to make about KRA?

End of discussion. Thank the participants for their time and feedback.