Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer
Articles
DOI: 10.14254/1795-6889.2025.21-3.5
Submitted: 2025-12-30
Published: 2025-12-30

Student satisfaction as a mediator between administrative e-system quality and university reputation: An empirical analysis from Poland

Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Poznaniu
Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Katowicach
Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Katowicach
Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos – UNISINOS
e-system satisfaction reputation universities digitalization higher education

Abstract

This study examines how administrative e-system quality influences student satisfaction and university reputation, addressing a research gap: most studies analyse the reverse relationship, where reputation drives satisfaction, and rarely consider administrative e-systems. Drawing on survey data from nearly 7,500 students at Polish universities collected in 2019 and 2020, eight features were evaluated - functionality, implementation, intuitiveness, interface layout, responsiveness/speed, reliability and availability, security and data protection, and mobile accessibility - using regression and Structural Equation Modelling. In 2019, satisfaction mediated the relationship between e-system quality and reputation. In 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, this mediation weakened, while direct effects of functionality and reliability on reputation strengthened, reflecting a shift from satisfaction-based to performance-based evaluations. Security also influenced reputation more strongly than satisfaction. Factor analysis grouped the eight indicators into three latent dimensions. Findings demonstrate that administrative e-systems, often overlooked, play a strategic role in shaping both satisfaction and reputation.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

  1. Aras, G., Ercis, E., & Çiftçi, A. Ö. (2017). How are university reputation practices and reputation perceptions related? Kafkas University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences Journal, 8(15), 19–34.
  2. Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). Virtual classroom characteristics and student satisfaction with Internet-based MBA courses. Journal of Management Education, 24(1), 32–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/105256290002400104 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/105256290002400104
  3. Bánhidi, M. & Lacza, Gy. (2020). Lifestyle changes during Covid-19 period in Hungary –feedback of university students. World Leisure Journal, 62(4), 325–330 https://doi.org/10.1080/16078055.2020.1825251 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/16078055.2020.1825251
  4. Bouranta, N., Psomas, E., & Kafetzopoulos, D. (2025). Integrating online learning into service quality assessment in higher education: Its influence on student satisfaction. TQM Journal, 37(5), 1418–1445. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-05-2024-0123 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-06-2023-0180
  5. Brown, R. M., & Mazzarol, T. W. (2009). The importance of institutional image to student satisfaction and loyalty within higher education. Higher Education, 58(1), 81–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-008-9183-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-008-9183-8
  6. Chandra, T., Hafni, L., Chandra, S., Purwati, A. A., & Chandra, J. (2019). The influence of service quality, university image, on student satisfaction and student loyalty. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 26(5), 1533–1549. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-07-2018-0212 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-07-2018-0212
  7. Chiappetta, A. (2017). Hybrid ports: The role of IoT and cyber security in the next decade. Journal of Sustainable Development of Transport and Logistics, 2(2), 47–56. https://doi.org/10.14254/jsdtl.2017.2-2.4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/jsdtl.2017.2-2.4
  8. Coulter, K. S., & Coulter, R. A. (2003). The effects of industry knowledge on the development of trust in service relationships. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 20(1), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8116(02)00120-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8116(02)00120-9
  9. Crispell, D. (1993, May 12). People patterns: Students picking college bank on reputation. Wall Street Journal.
  10. Davidavičienė, V., Rymaniak, J., & Lis, K. (2023). Remote workplaces as a determinant of working conditions in education during COVID-19. Economics and Sociology, 16(2), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789X.2023/16-2/8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789X.2023/16-2/8
  11. Dennis, C., Papagiannidis, S., Alamanos, E., & Bourlakis, M. (2016). The role of brand attachment strength in higher education. Journal of Business Research, 69(8), 3049–3057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.01.020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.01.020
  12. Fares, D., & Kachkar, O. (2013). The impact of service quality, student satisfaction, and university reputation on student loyalty: A case study of international students in IIUM, Malaysia. Information Management and Business Review, 5(12), 584–590. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22610/imbr.v5i12.1091
  13. Farid, S., Ahmad, R., Alam, M., Akbar, A., & Chang, V. (2018). A sustainable quality assessment model for the information delivery in e-learning systems. Information Discovery and Delivery, 46(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1108/IDD-09-2017-0062 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IDD-11-2016-0047
  14. Harfoushi, O., & Obiedat, R. (2011). E-training acceptance factors in business organizations. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 6(2), 15–18. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v6i2.1602 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v6i2.1443
  15. Helgesen, Ø., & Nesset, E. (2007). Images, satisfaction and antecedents: Drivers of student loyalty? A case study of a Norwegian university college. Corporate Reputation Review, 10(1), 38–59. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550037 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.crr.1550037
  16. Hofer, A. P., & Halman, J. I. (2005). The potential of layout platforms for modular complex products and systems. Journal of Engineering Design, 16(2), 237–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544820500031816 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09544820500031518
  17. Huang, R., & Ma, J. (2020). Mobile app design and development for educational institutions. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2974-0
  18. Hudrea, A., Spoaller, D., & Urs, N. (2023). Digital tools in Romanian higher education: The influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the digitalization of universities. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 19(69), 44–63. https://doi.org/10.24193/tras.69E.3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24193/tras.69E.3
  19. Jackson, K., & Konczos Szombathelyi, M. (2022). The influence of COVID-19 on sentiments of higher education students - prospects for the spread of distance learning. Economics and Sociology, 15(3), 216-247. doi:10.14254/2071-789X.2022/15-3/13 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-789X.2022/15-3/13
  20. Garrett, J. J. (2010). The elements of user experience: User-centered design for the Web and beyond. New Riders Publishing.
  21. Gruber, T., Fuß, S., Voss, R., & Gläser-Zikuda, M. (2010). Examining student satisfaction with higher education services: Using a new measurement tool. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 23(2), 105–123. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513551011022474 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/09513551011022474
  22. Ibarrientos, J. R. (2015). Implementation and effectiveness of student affairs services program in one polytechnic college. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 3(5), 144–156.
  23. Immonen, A., & Niemelä, E. (2008). Survey of reliability and availability prediction methods from the viewpoint of software architecture. Software and Systems Modeling, 7(1), 49–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-006-0040-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-006-0040-x
  24. Kadry, S., & El Hami, A. (Eds.). (2019). E-systems for the 21st century: Concept, developments, and applications (Two-volume set). CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429466530 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315366593
  25. Kichurchak, M., Paslavska, I., Hrynkevych, O., Mishchuk, H., & Bilan, Y. (2024). Examining tertiary education amid the war in Ukraine: A synthetic control approach. European Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 16(2), 42–56. https://doi.org/10.24818/ejis.2024.13 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24818/ejis.2024.13
  26. Kireyeva, A., Kenzhegulova, G., Kozhirova, S., Vasa, L. & Sabdenaliyev, B. (2024). Assessing Emotional Intelligence in Higher Education: Policy Recommendations for Kazakhstan’s Education System. Public Policy and Administration, 23(4), pp. 490–507, https://doi.org/10.13165/VPA-24-23-4-05 DOI: https://doi.org/10.13165/VPA-24-23-4-05
  27. Lacmanović, S., & Škare, M. (2024). The comparative analysis of B Corp Impact Report results in higher education organizations. Journal of International Studies, 17(4), 255–277. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-8330.2024/17-4/15 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-8330.2024/17-4/15
  28. Maama, H. (2024). A critical review of leadership styles in higher education institutions: Implications for employee commitment in South Africa. Economics, Management and Sustainability, 9(2), 84–93. https://doi.org/10.14254/jems.2024.9-2.7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/jems.2024.9-2.7
  29. Maniu, I., & Maniu, G. C. (2014). Educational marketing: Factors influencing the selection of a university. SEA: Practical Application of Science, 2(3), 23–30.
  30. Maarouf, H. (2019). Pragmatism as a supportive paradigm for the mixed research approach: Conceptualizing the ontological, epistemological, and axiological stances of pragmatism. International Business Research, 12(9), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v12n9p1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v12n9p1
  31. Malkawi, M. I. (2013). The art of software systems development: Reliability, availability, maintainability, performance (RAMP). Human-Centric Computing and Information Sciences, 3(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/2192-1962-3-3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/2192-1962-3-22
  32. Pampaloni, A. M. (2010). The influence of organizational image on college selection: What students seek in institutions of higher education. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 20(1), 19–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241003788037 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241003788037
  33. Peltekova, E., Miteva, D., & Stefanova, E. (2015). Creative control over educational systems. In EDULEARN15 Proceedings (pp. 4906–4915). IATED.
  34. Pokhrel, S., & Chhetri, R. (2021). A literature review on impact of COVID-19 pandemic on teaching and learning. Higher Education for the Future, 8(1), 133–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/2347631120983481 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2347631120983481
  35. Potjanajaruwit, P. (2023). The influence of technology leadership on university lecturers integrating technology in Thailand. Human Technology, 19(3), 435–452. https://doi.org/10.14254/1795-6889.2023.19-3.7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/1795-6889.2023.19-3.7
  36. Priporas, C. V., & Kamenidou, I. (2011). Perceptions of potential postgraduate Greek business students towards UK universities, brand and brand reputation. Journal of Brand Management, 18(4–5), 264–273. https://doi.org/10.1057/bm.2010.34 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/bm.2010.40
  37. Ramirez, R. B. (2025). The service quality of the registrar’s office and the stakeholders’ satisfaction in Olivarez College Tagaytay. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 8(14), 455–465. https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.814MG0038 DOI: https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.814MG0038
  38. Qazi, Z., Qazi, W., & Raza, S. A. (2022). The antecedents affecting university reputation and student satisfaction: A study in higher education context. Corporate Reputation Review, 25(4), 253–271. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41299-021-00126-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41299-021-00126-4
  39. Samoliuk, N., Hrynkevych, O., Mishchuk, H., & Bilan, Y. (2024). Ukrainian students on the global map of academic migration. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 22(4), 558–575. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.22(4).2024.42 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.22(4).2024.42
  40. Schuh, J. H., Biddix, J. P., Dean, L. A., & Kinzie, J. (2016). Assessment in student affairs. John Wiley & Sons.
  41. Sharma, K., Karlin, I., Keasler, J., McGraw, J. R., & Sarkar, V. (2015). Data layout optimization for portable performance. In Euro-Par 2015: Parallel Processing. 21st International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Computing, Vienna, Austria, August 24–28, 2015. Proceedings 21 (pp. 250–262). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48096-0_20 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48096-0_20
  42. Sofroniou, A., Premnath, B., & Poutos, K. (2020). Capturing student satisfaction: A case study on the National Student Survey results to identify the needs of students in STEM-related courses for a better learning experience. Education Sciences, 10(12), 378. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10120378 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10120378
  43. Staniec, I., Kaczorowska-Spychalska, D., Kalinska-Kula, M., & Szczygiel, N. (2023). The need to work from home in higher education during the first phase of COVID-19: Employee productivity, autonomy, work relationships, job satisfaction and well-being. Journal of International Studies, 16(4), 257–280. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-8330.2023/16-4/17 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-8330.2023/16-4/17
  44. Steiner, L., Sundström, A. C., & Sammalisto, K. (2013). An analytical model for university identity and reputation strategy work. Higher Education, 65(4), 401–415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9552-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9552-1
  45. Strielkowski, W. (2020). COVID-19 pandemic and the digital revolution in academia and higher education. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202004.0290.v1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202004.0290.v1
  46. Sułkowski, Ł., Kolasińska-Morawska, K., Brzozowska, M., Morawski, P., & Seliga, R. (2024). Application of e-learning platforms by higher education institutions during the COVID-19 pandemic: The Polish perspective. Human Technology, 20(3), 446–467. https://doi.org/10.14254/1795-6889.2024.20-3.2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14254/1795-6889.2024.20-3.2
  47. Sung, M., & Yang, S. (2009). Student–university relationships and reputation: A study of the links between key factors fostering students' supportive behavioral intentions towards their university. Higher Education, 57(6), 787–811. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-008-9176-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-008-9176-7
  48. European Union. (2016). General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) – Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
  49. Webb, A., McQuaid, R. W., & Webster, C. W. R. (2021). Moving learning online and the COVID-19 pandemic: A university response. World Journal of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, 18(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1108/WJSTSD-11-2020-0090 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/WJSTSD-11-2020-0090
  50. Zhezhnych, P., Berezko, O., Zub, K., & Demydov, I. (2020). Analysis of features and abilities of online systems and tools meeting information needs of HEIs' entrants. In COAPSN Proceedings (pp. 76–85).

How to Cite

Rydzak, W., Adamus-Matuszyńska, A., Zacny, B., & Sellitto, M. A. (2025). Student satisfaction as a mediator between administrative e-system quality and university reputation: An empirical analysis from Poland. Human Technology, 21(3), 576–595. https://doi.org/10.14254/1795-6889.2025.21-3.5