Characteristics of the Respondent

The study population was composed of the Company ABC: Project Officer, Collection Officer, Admin and the Department of Teachers.

Table 4.0 Frequency of Respondents

Respondents                            Frequency

Project Officer                           1

Collection Officer                      1

Amin                                           1

Teachers                                     2

Customers                                 25

Total                                          30

This table shows the frequency of respondents who have answered the User – Acceptability Survey. The proponents got a total of 5 respondents.

Table 5.0 Reliability Test Result

  Cronbach’s Alpha
Acceptable 0.700
Data Gathered 0.986

 

This table shows the result of reliability testing undergone by the data gathered from the User-Acceptance Survey. A Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.986 shows that the data gathered is reliable.

Interpretation of Data

The instrument required to access the perception of the users in terms of five (5) categories namely: Effectiveness, Efficiency, Quality, Timeliness and Productivity. The first category was composed of four (4) items, the second category was composed of three (3) items, and third, fourth were composed of four (4) items and the last categories was composed of three (3) items. The rating scale was 1 to 5: 1 as very dissatisfied; 2 as dissatisfied; 3 as neutral; 4 as satisfied; and 5 as very satisfied.

Table 6.0 Rating Scale

Range of Mean Verbal Interpretation
4.21 – 5.00 Very Satisfied
3.41 – 4.20 Satisfied
2.61 – 3.40 Neutral
1.81 – 2.60 Dissatisfied
1.00 – 1.80 Very Dissatisfied

This table shows the range of mean and its verbal interpretation.

Table 7.0 Survey Result for Effectiveness

                                             Effectiveness

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 TOTAL
Mean 5 4 5 5 4.53

The table above shows that the user’s survey result for the effectiveness of the system has a total mean of 4.53 which interprets that the users were Very Satisfied with the system’s effectiveness. The subcategories of which like Completeness and Accuracy of the System, the ability to provide correct and complete document, (5) interpreted as Very Satisfied; Report Generation, the ability to provide correct and complete document required by the user with minimum idle time, (4) interpreted as Satisfied; Search, Retrieval and Dissemination of Required Information, the ability to access, create and disseminate required information, (5) interpreted as Very Satisfied; and Report Generation Flexibility, the ability to provide printable reports in a format required by the user, (5) interpreted as Very Satisfied.

Table 7.1 Survey Result for Efficiency

Efficiency

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 TOTAL
Mean        5        5       4   4.52

 

The table above shows that the user’s survey result for the system’s efficiency has a total mean of 4.52 which interprets that the users were very satisfied with the efficiency of the system. The subcategories of which like Ease of Use, the ability of the user to easily perform required tasks, (5) interpreted as Very Satisfied; Complexity of the Task, the learnability to perform tasks, (5) interpreted as Very Satisfied; and Task Accuracy, the ability to perform tasks without errors, (4) interpreted as Satisfied.

Table 7.2 Survey Result for Quality

Quality

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 TOTAL
Mean        5        5       5        4 4.6

The table above shows that the user’s survey result for the system’s quality has a total mean of 4.6 which interprets that the users were satisfied with the system’s quality. The subcategories of which like Report Content, the ability to produce accurate documents to users, (5)

interpreted as Very Satisfied; Report Flexibility, the ability to produce documents in a format useful to users, (5) interpreted as Very Satisfied; Report Turnaround Time, the ability to produce reports in time to users, 5 interpreted as Very Satisfied; and Report Consistency, the ability to produce documents that are consistent with other reports, (4) interpreted as Satisfied.

Table 7.3 Survey Result for Timeliness

Timeliness

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 TOTAL
Mean       4        4        4        5 4.41

 

The table above shows that the user’s survey result for the system’s timeliness has a total mean of 4.41 which interprets that the users were very satisfied with the system’s timeliness. The subcategories of which like System Accessibility, the system is accessible to users whenever they need it, (4) interpreted as Satisfied; System Adaptability, the system can easily adapt to new demands, (4) interpreted as Satisfied; Data Security, the system allows access to authorized personnel, (4) interpreted as Satisfied; and Achievement of Goals, the system provides the necessary functionality to achieve its purpose in line with the organizational goals, (5) interpreted as Very Satisfied.

Table 7.4 Survey Result for Productivity

Productivity

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question4 4 TOTAL
Mean       5      4.6     4.67     4.61 4.767

The table above shows that the user’s survey result for the system’s productivity has a total mean of 4.767 which interprets that the users were Very Satisfied with the system’s productivity. The subcategories of which like User Assistance, provides the user with procedural documentation to minimize operational errors, (5) interpreted as Very Satisfied; Throughput, the ability to provide required documents in the shortest time possible, (4.6) interpreted as Satisfied; Decision Support, the ability to provide the required information needed for decision making, (4.63) interpreted as Very Satisfied; and Overall, (4.61) interpreted as Very Satisfied.

Questions