Volume 3, Number 2 (2016) pp 82-93 doi 10.20448/802.3.2.82.93 | Research Articles
The issue of motivation has continued to draw the attention of many individuals and corporate bodies alike in their quest to improve organizational performance. Most workers in various work places are faced with some challenges such as: poor condition of service; inadequate remuneration; poor working environment; inadequate working materials; authoritarian leadership style in some cases; poor inter-personal relationship, poor morale among workers, inadequate motivation and a host of others. This work therefore is on the role of motivation in organisational development. Research objectives and research questions were developed. Research hypotheses were also formulated in line with the objectives of the study. The research adopted a survey approach. While Test of Model significance – ANOVA was used in testing the hypothesis. Three of the explanatory variables namely leadership style, training and high welfare package proved to be significant contributors to organizational development (i.e. 6.060, 5842, 1.970) > t – tabulated (2.576, 1.960), at least, at 5% level of significance while only monetary reward and the use of consultancy services were not significant (i.e., 1.953, 1.662) < t - tabulated (2.576, 1.960), respectively for both 1% and 5% levels of significance. The researcher therefore conclude that only three of the explanatory variables namely leadership style, training and high welfare package make a significant contribution to the level of organizational development in the National Assembly. The study recommended the use of training programmes needs to be stepped up in the National Assembly Abuja, especially as the study has revealed that workers find it more appealing than monetary gift, good welfare package should be put in place for the staff of the National Assembly, Abuja, among others.
Keywords: Motivation, Organisation, Development, Performance, Worker
Citation | Chima Allios Nwaobilor; Lazarus Okoroji; Julius O. Anyanwu (2016). Assessing the Role of Motivation in Organisational Development. A Study of National Assembly, Abuja. International Journal of Economics, Business and Management Studies, 3(2): 82-93.
Copyright: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License
Funding : The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
History : Received: 2 June 2016/ Revised: 18 June 2016/ Accepted: 28 June 2016/ Published: 30 July 2016
Publisher: Online Science Publishing
Employee motivation has always been a central problem for leaders and managers. Unmotivated employees are likely to spend little or no effort in their jobs, avoid the workplace as much as possible, exit the organization if given the opportunity and produce low quality work. On the other hand, employees who feel motivated to work are likely to be persistent, creative and productive, turning out high quality work that they willingly undertake (Ezeani & Oladele, 2013). There has been a lot of research done on motivation by many researchers, but the behavior of groups of people to try to find out why it is that every employee of a company does not perform at their best has been comparatively not researched. Many things can be said to answer this question; the truth is that every employee has diverse ways to become motivated. Employers require to get to know their employees very well and use different tactics to motivate each of them based on their personal wants and needs.
The dictionary Webster's defines motivation as something inside people that drives them to action. This motivation varies in different people. We can also say that motivation is the enthusiasm to work at a influenced level of effort
Employee performance refers to the efficiency and effectiveness of employees in achieving organizational objectives (kootz et al., 1978). Employee performance can be evaluated by considering the level of absenteeism, quality of reports, and time of reporting for and leaving for duty.
It is in this light therefore, that a study of this nature is being carried out to draw the attention of the management to the need to do more than it is currently doing for its workforce. This study therefore, directly focused on the use of motivational tools to increase productivity among the staff of the National Assembly, Abuja.
Primary investigation into the activities of workers in House of Assembly in Nigeria revealed that they were faced with some challenges such as: poor condition of service; inadequate remuneration; poor working environment; inadequate working materials; inadequate training cum capacity building; authoritarian leadership style in some cases; poor inter-personal relationship, poor morale among workers, inadequate motivation and a host of others.
A cursory look at individual organizations often points to the fact that differences exist and as such, differences do also exist over motivational factors among staff of different corporate entities such that motivational measures that appear to be effective in organization A, may not work for organisation B. Given this scenario, some of the pertinent questions at this juncture are:
What are the motivational factors among the staff of the National Assembly, Abuja? To what extent have these factors helped to drive up organizational performance? How these motivational factors should be applied to achieve organizational objectives
As a central objective, this study intends to investigate the role of motivation in organizational performance, as measured by level of the staff. Specifically, it intends to achieve the following:
Having made clear the purpose and problems of the study in the course of this research, the following research questions are used as a guide to this research.
1. What are the likely things that motivate workers?
2. Does money (salary, bonuses and Allowances) constitute a significant aspect of motivational strategies in this organization?
3. Does application of motivation factors affect productivity?
4. To what extent does unsatisfied motivation lead to job dissatisfaction and reduce organizational commitment?
5. Does productivity have a direct relationship with leadership style, expertise, quality and commitment to labour?
This research work shall investigate the following hypotheses in null form
Ho1: There is no significant relationship between motivational factors and organizational development.
Ho2: The type of leadership style has no significant effect on organizational development.
Ho3: The use of consultancy services has no significant effect on organizational development. Organizational development.
Ho4: The use of high welfare package has no significant effect on organizational development.
Ho5: The use of monetary reward has no significant effect on organizational development.
The National Assembly, Abuja is one of the three arms of government with the constitutional responsibility to make laws for the good governance of Nigeria.
Located in the Three Arms Zone Abuja, the National Assembly has two Chambers (bi-cameral legislature), the Senate and the House of Representatives. The Senate has 109 Senators while the
House of Representatives has 360 Members. The National Assembly, Abuja has both political and administrative leadership. The President of the Senate and the Chairman of the National Assembly is the political head, while the Clerk to the National Assembly is the administrative head and the accounting officer. The National Assembly administration is made up of twelve (12) departments. The Senate and House of Representatives are headed by Clerks (Permanent Secretaries), while the other ten (10) departments are headed by directors! The departments are:
The Senate, House of Representatives, Office of the Clerk to the National Assembly, Planning and Legislative Budget, Finance and Accounts, Information and Publications, Personnel Management, Research, Library, Statistics and Computer, Estate and Works, Legal Services, Medical Services, Procurement and Supplies
The idea of motivation derived its impetus from attempts by organization to be productive. Classical management theorist of the early 20” century placed a great _deal of emphasis on the structure of organizations, the work itself, efficiency in productivity, but gave little time on how to motivate those who undertake the business of production.
1. To attract capable employees to the organization.
2. To motivate them towards superior performance.
3. To retain their services over an extended period of time.
The physical surrounding in which people are employed has obvious effects on the 'amount of work that can be produced. It also has a psychological impact on workers considerably, influencing their attitude towards their work. Success in improving conditions of work would contribute to improve workers attitude to the whole social structure of industry and harmony Appiah et al, (2013).
Chen and Silverthorne (2008) identify three types of performance. One is the measure of output rates, amount of sales over a given period of time, the production of a group of employees reporting to manager, and so on. The second type of measure of performance involves ratings of individuals by someone other than the person whose performance is being considered. The third type of performance measures is self -appraisal and self-ratings. As a result, the adoption of self-appraisal and self-rating techniques are useful in encouraging employees to take an active role in setting his or her own goals. Thus, job performance measures the level of achievement of business and social objectives and responsibilities from the perspective of the judging party (Hersey and Blanchard, 1993).
2.6. Performance Appraisal
Employees want to know how well they perform on their jobs. A simple statement, almost axiomatic in any organization, yet it has probably caused more controversy, applied research and practical advice than any other assertion in the history of management writing and thinking (Kavanagh, 1997).
Taylor and Wherry (1951) proposed that ratings collected for administrative purposes would be more lenient than ratings collected for research or developmental purposes.
The majority of the research on performance appraisal purpose has focused on the rater, some work has also been conducted on rater effects (Boswell and Boudreau, 2001). There are numerous methods to measure employee’s performance appraisal but some of these methods are not suitable in some cases. Effective appraisal systems should address clarity, openness, and fairness; recognize productivity through rewards; and be cognizant of appraiser leadership qualities (Winston & Creamer, 1997); (Devi & Shaik, 2012Irene, 2013).
DeCenzo and Robbins (2002) denominate that there are three existent approaches for measuring employee’s performance appraisal. These are (1) absolute standards (2) relative standards and (3) objectives.
It refers to a situation that employees are compared to a standard, and their evaluation is independent of any other employee in a work group (Dessler, 1999). This absolute standard is also known as the old method of performance appraisal of employees. Included in this group are the following methods: the essay appraisal, the critical incident appraisal, the checklist, the graphic rating scale, forced choice and behaviorally anchored rating scales.
It focuses on key factors which make difference in performing a job efficiently. This method is more credible because it is more related to job and based on individual’s performance than characteristic. The necessity of this system is to try to measure individual’s performance in term of incidents and special episodes which take place in job performance. These incidents are known as critical incident. In this method, the manager writes down the positive and negative individuals‟ performance behavior in evaluation term (Mondy, 2008).
In this method, the evaluator has a list of situations and statements and compares it with employees. The checklist is a presentation of employee’s characteristics and performance. The results can be quantitative and give weight to characteristics. Answers of checklist are often “Yes” or “No” (DeCenzo, & Robbins, 2002).
This is the most commonly used method of performance appraisal because they are less time-consuming to develop and administer and allow for quantitative analysis and comparison. It is a scale that lists some characteristics and rang of performance of each individual. Therefore, employees are ranked by determining a score which shows their performance level. The utility of this technique can be enhanced by using it in conjunction with the essay appraisal technique (Mondy, 2008).
This method replaces traditional numerical anchors tools with behavioral prototypes of real work behaviors. BARS let evaluator to rank employee based on observable behavioral dimension. The elements of this method are result of combination of major elements of critical incident and adjective rating scale appraisal methods (Wise, 1998). BARS Have five stages (DeCenzo & Robbins 2002): 1) Generate Critical Incidents, 2) Develop performance dimensions, 3) Relocate incidents, 4) Rating of level of performance for each incident and 5)Development of the final instrument.
In the second general category of appraisal methods, individuals are compared against other individuals. These methods are relative standards rather than absolute measuring device. The most popular of the relative method are group order ranking, individual ranking and paired comparison.
In this method, employees are placed into a particular classification, such as “top one-fifth”. For example, if a rater has 20 employees, only 4 can be in the top fifth and 4 must be relegated to the bottom fifth (DeCenzo & Robbins 2002)
In this type of appraisal, individuals are ranked from highest to lowest. It is assumed that the difference between the first and second employee is equal to difference between 21st and 22nd employee. In this method, the manager compares each person with others than work standards (Mondy, 2008).
In this method, employees are compared with all others in pairs. The number of comparison is followed as (1) 2N⋅N in which N shows the number of employees. After doing all comparisons, the best person is determined for each characteristic (Mondy, 2008).
The third approach to appraisal makes use of objectives. Employees are evaluated on how Well they accomplished a specific set of objectives that have been determined to be critical in the successful completion of their job. This approach is frequently referred to as Management by Objectives (MBO). Management by objectives is a process that converts organizational objectives in to individual objectives. It consists of four steps (Ingham, 1995): goal setting, action planning, self-control and periodic reviews.
360 degree evaluations are the latest approach to evaluating performance. It is a popular performance appraisal method that involves evaluation input from multiple levels within the firm as well as external sources.
Labour turnover is the shifting of workers into and out of organization, to minimize overall employee turnover requires good retention planning and risk analysis,
(Kavanagh, 1997) defined risk analysis as the process of identifying risk areas and their chances of occurrence in the organization, the effect on the organization, case of replacement and cost. Risk analysis is an essential part of retention planning and labour turnover.
Research design adopted in this work is descriptive survey research design.
The population of this study mainly consists of the lower cadre and some selected management staff of the National Assembly, Abuja on whom motivational factors are applied and who understand the concept of motivation as a means to increasing productivity. This population, from the nominal roll came to a total of 155 staff strength.
Out of this population the sample size was then selected using this formula thus;
n = N
1 + N(e)2
N = Population size, 155
n = Sample size,
e = error margin, 10%
Therefore, n= 54.95 but we took a sample size of 55 employees. The sample comprises of a selected cross-section of both senior and junior staff.
The study is concerned with the analysis of the role of motivation in organizational, development of the National Assembly, Abuja. Hence, the study requires the specification of the dependent and independent variables in order to encourage effective analysis.
Mathematically, therefore we have;
ORGDEVT = f(LESHIPST'YL, SONSUL, TRAINING, HIWELFARE, MONIEREVVARD) ....3.1
i.e, OIRGDEVT = β0 + β1 LESHIPSTYL + β2 CONSUL + β3 TRAINING + p4 HIWEFARE + β5 MONEREWARD + e ..... 3.2
Where: β = estimated parameter or coefficient of regression
e= the error term
For the hypotheses to be properly tested, it is pertinent, if not imperative for a test of the model as a whole to be conducted. Carrying out such a test has the advantage of confirming the appropriateness of the model specification. This was achieved through the analysis of variance approach.
The analysis of variance approach seeks. to split the variations of the independent variable (industrial development) among its components parts.
Variations in the Dependent (organizational development) that are accounted for by the explanatory variables are called the EXPLAINED VARIATIONS. Other sources not thus explained are due to random or chance factors. These are estimates of the population distribution variable ‘u’ and are represented by ‘e’ otherwise called the RESIDUAL or error term.
SSR = Sum of squares of the regression
SSE = Sum of squares of the error term
SST = f Sum of squares of total variation
K = Number of independent variables
N = Number of observations
Note R2 = b1 ΣX1Y + ΣX2Y/ Σy2
Test of Significance OF THE EXPLANATORY VARIABLES - THE STUDENT T-TEST
The Influence of Motivational Factors in Organizational Development in the National Assembly, Abuja
In order to determine the role of motivation in organizational development, a multiple regression analysis was carried out using the model specified. The hypotheses are stated thus:
Ho1: There is no significant relationship between motivational factors and organizational development.
H02: The type of leadership style has no" significant effect on organizational development.
Ho3: The use of consultancy services has no significant effect on organizational development.
H04: The use of training services has no significant effect on organizational development.
Ho5: The use of high welfare package has no significant organizational development.
Ho6: The use monetary reward has no significant effect of organizational development.
Here, three of the explanatory variables namely leadership style, training and high welfare package proved to be significant contributors to organizational development (i.e. 6.060, 5842, 1.970) > t – tabulated (2.576, 1.960), at least, at 5% level of significance while only monetary reward and the use of consultancy services were not significant (i.e., 1.953, 1.662) < t - tabulated (2.576, 1.960), respectively for both 1% and 5% levels of significance. We therefore, reject Ho and accept Ha to conclude that only three of the explanatory variables namely leadership style, training and high welfare package make a significant contribution to the level of organizational development in the National Assembly, Abuja. Stated differently, both the monetary reward and the use of consultancy services as motivational factors, none exerts a significant effect on the organizational development in the National Assembly, Abuja.
The results of hypothesis one reveal that the motivational factors collectively bear a significant relationship with the level of organizational development in the National Assembly, Abuja.
Similarly, the resulting model shows about 88% level of relationship between the explanatory variables or motivational factors and organizational, development in the National Assembly Abuja. Similarly, with an R2 of about 87%, it therefore, suffices to say that the explanatory variables have been able to explain at least, 87% of the variations in the level of organizational development. Another striking revelation from these results is the signs of the coefficients of the model as a whole. Interestingly, all the explanatory variables bear positive coefficients. Thus, the inference here is that all the motivational factors, though may not be significant, yet they are all important factors in the analysis of the influence of motivational factors on organizational development in the National Assembly.
On the strength of our findings, the following conclusions are therefore reached:
Appiah et al, (2013): Human Resource Management, London: M & E Handbook, McDonald and Evans Limited.
Boswell, W. R. and Boudreau, J. W. (2001), "How leading companies create, measure, and achieve strategic results through “line of sight”", Management Decision, 39: 851–59.
Chen C. J, Silverthorne C, (2008) "The impact of locus of control on job stress, job performance and job satisfaction in Taiwan", Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 29(7): 572 – 582.
Ezeani & Oladele, 2013) Unified Local Government Service Staff. Daily Times of Nigeria Ltd. 4(28).
DeCenzo, D. A. & Robbins, S. P. (2002). Human resource management. (7th Ed.). USA: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Dessler, G (1999), Human Resources Management: 10th Edition. International Edition Kennedy, Marilyn Moat, February, the case for Performance Appraisal”. Across the board.
Devi & Shaik, 2012Irene, 2013: Planning for Human Resources, London: Longman Group Limited.
Flippo, E. B. (1980). Personnel Management. Kogakusha: McGraw-Hill.
Hersey, P` & Blanchard, K.B. (l993). Management of organization behavior utilizing human resources (8th. ed.). Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Ingham T (1995): Management by Objective. A lesson in Commitment cooperation. Managing Service Quality. 5(6)
Kavanagh, M. (1997), I simply want to know how well I am doing! Group Organ
Kootz H etal (1978) Principles of management Tokyo, Mc Graw Hill
Mondy, R. W. (2008). Human resource management. (9th Ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education. ISBN 8131725685
Taylor E.K and Wherry R. J. (1951): A study of Leniency in two Rating Systems. Personal Psychology, 4(1): 39-40. Manage 22 (2): 147
Winston, R.B & Creamer, D.G. (1997): Improving Staffing Practices in students affairs. San Franscisco. Jossy Bass.
Wise P.G (1998) Rating Differences in Multi Rater Feedback. Chicago IL: International Personnel Management. Association Assessment Council Conference on Professional Personnel Management.