IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijdsrm/v8y2018i1-2p106-118.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative analysis of the contemporary public sector quality determinants in relation to the satisfaction level of the Greek judicial officials and citizens in civil, criminal and administrative courts

Author

Listed:
  • Charitomeni Kalogeropoulou
  • George Petrakos

Abstract

The main purpose of this paper is to provide a quality assessment of the four key factors of the existing Greek judicial system namely, the environment, the professional competence, the prejudice and the burn-out, and investigate their structural relationship to the citizens' and officials' satisfaction within different demographic segments. The results were mainly based on the statistical analysis of relative data gathered from an empirical survey conducted in civil, criminal and administrative courts of Thessaloniki, among citizens and judicial officials. Serious differentiations have been reported in different segments and also in different courts and respondents type. Interesting findings and figures also came out of the data gathered from administrative records regarding human recourses and the adoption and usage of information and communication technologies. The main results of this research point out the need for a reform in the Greek judicial system in accordance with the key dimensions of the new public management.

Suggested Citation

  • Charitomeni Kalogeropoulou & George Petrakos, 2018. "Comparative analysis of the contemporary public sector quality determinants in relation to the satisfaction level of the Greek judicial officials and citizens in civil, criminal and administrative cou," International Journal of Decision Sciences, Risk and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 8(1/2), pages 106-118.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijdsrm:v:8:y:2018:i:1/2:p:106-118
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=95188
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijdsrm:v:8:y:2018:i:1/2:p:106-118. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=254 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.