Main Article Content


Higher Education Institute (HEI) has a vital role in developing human capital of a country. Measuring the quality of teaching and learning system in HEI and also industry’s satisfaction level is important to ensure the marketability of HEI graduates. This study examined Universiti  Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) Mathematical Sciences students’ marketability by determining industry’s satisfaction level on students’ skills and abilities during industrial training and identifies factors that affect students’ marketability. There were 22 student attributes that were categorized into four factors. Mean scores and Relative Importance Analysis determined the satisfaction and importance level of each attribute studied respectively. Besides, Penalty-Reward Contrast Analysis (PRCA) showed that affective factor was categorized as a basic factor where its existence did not increase but its absence decreased the industry’s satisfaction level. For Importance Performance Analysis (IPA), cognitive, affective, and cognitive & psychomotor factors were observed in the first quadrant which had high importance level but low performance level. Lastly, all four factors were found in the loyal customer zone and at an excellent level through Customer Satisfaction Index (CSI) analysis. In conclusion, UKM Mathematical Sciences students have high marketability in general, but preservation and improvement should be implemented on important attributes to enhance their marketability.


Higher Education Institute (HEI) Marketability Satisfaction level Importance level Performance

Article Details

How to Cite
Lim Chui Ting, Ong Wen Xuan, Muhammad Aris Fadzilah, N. N. B., & Nora Binti Muda. (2023). Marketability Study of Mathematical Sciences Students in Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM). Enthusiastic : International Journal of Applied Statistics and Data Science, 3(1), 97–110.


  1. M. Ishak and A.R. Zumrah, “Pendidikan Asas Pembangunan Modal Insan,” Proceedings Perkem III, 2008, pp. 327-331.
  2. A. Ahmad, “Kepentingan Pendidikan dalam Pembentukan Kualiti Hidup Sejahtera,” Malaysian Education Dean’s Council Journal, vol. 2, pp. 1–8, 2008.
  3. M.I.M. Zain, “Pengajian Tinggi Perlu ‘Rumah Sendiri’,” (accessed 12 June, 2021).
  4. Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi, “Pengenalan,” (accessed Jun. 12, 2021).
  5. M. Peak, “University World News: The Global Window on Higher Education: Why Tertiary Education Is Crucial for Building Back Better,” (accessed Jun. 12, 2021).
  6. “7 Simple Reasons Why Malaysian Fresh Graduates Are Unemployed,” (accessed Jun. 12, 2021).
  7. “Unemployment Among Malaysian Graduates, the Employability Myth,” (accessed Jun. 12, 2021).
  8. “Dasar Latihan Industri Institusi Pengajian Tinggi,” Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi, 2010.
  9. L.W. Anderson et al., A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. London, UK: Pearson, 2001.
  10. D.A. Sousa, How the Brain Learns, 5th ed. CA, USA: Corwin, 2017.
  11. U. Groemping, “Relative Importance for Linear Regression in R: The Package Relaimpo,” Journal of Statistical Software, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 1–27, 2006, doi: 10.18637/jss.v017.i01.
  12. R.D. Brandt, “A Procedure for Identifying Value-Enhancing Service Components Using Customer Satisfaction Survey Data,” in Add Value to Your Service: The Key to Success, C. Surprenant, Eds. IL, USA: American Marketing Association, 1987, pp. 61–65.
  13. T. Albayrak and M. Caber, “Penalty–Reward-Contrast Analysis: A Review of Its Application in Customer Satisfaction Research,” Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, vol. 24, no. 11–12, pp. 1288–1300, 2013, doi: 10.1080/14783363.2013.776757.
  14. J.A. Martilla and J.C. James, “Importance-Performance Analysis,” Journal of Marketing, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 77–79, 1977.
  15. F. Go and W. Zhang, “Applying Importance-Performance Analysis to Beijing as an International Meeting Destination,” Journal of Travel Research, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 42–49, 1997, doi: 10.1177/004728759703500407.
  16. J.L. Heskett, W.E. Sasser Jr., and L.A. Schlesinger, L.A., The Service Profit Chain: How Leading Companies Link Profit and Growth to Loyalty, Satisfaction, and Value. NY, USA: Free Press, 1997.
  17. N. Yanova, “Assessment of Satisfaction with the Quality of Education: Customer Satisfaction Index,” Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 182, pp. 566–573, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.782.