ABSTRACT
The study investigated the association between Work Characteristics and Employees’ Performance of Public Organizations in Port Harcourt, Nigeria. Autonomy, Feedback and Job Significance were conceptualized and used as the dimension of work characteristic and work quality, efficiency and effectives were also engaged as measures of employee performance. The research answered Ten (10) research questions and Ten (10) hypotheses so as to verify the degree of positive correlation between work characteristics and employee performance. Fredrick Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory and Job Characteristic Theory was adopted as a theoretical framework for this study. Cross-sectional survey research design was used for the study. One thousand, three hundred and sixteen (1,316) senior management employees were derived from the population and the sample size of 307 was applied using Taro Yamane’s formula. The researcher collected data on a macro level unite using a five-point likert scale. Cronbach Alpha was used to test for the reliability of the research instrument. The data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), version 20.0. Spearman Correlation Analysis was used to test for the relationships between the independent variable (Work Characteristics) and dependent variable (Employee Performance). The findings of the study revealed that the dimensions of work-characteristic have a positive and significant relationship with the measures of employee performance. Based on the findings of this study, it is worth noting that work characteristics plays an important role to an employee performance and it is very important for organization policy makers to take this into consideration in order to meet organizational goals.INTRODUCTION
Work characteristic is an antecedent of organizational behaviour. It is tightly woven into the structure and function of organizations, Torraco, (2005), representing the central pillar of performance. Decisions made about work characteristic can have an enormous, either positive or negative impact on organizational success and individual well-being (Morgeson & Campion, 2003). They can reduce stress, enhance motivation, improve productivity and even represent a potential source of competitive advantage Pfeffer, (2004); Garg & Rastogi, (2005); (Grant, Fried, & Juillerat, 2010).Due to the importance and significant impact of work characteristic on various work outcomes, not surprisingly it has been one of the most researched topics in the field of organizational psychology and behaviour (Griffin & McMahan, 2013); Oldham, (2009). Traditionally work characteristic was defined as the set of opportunities and constraints structured into assigned tasks and responsibilities that affect how employees accomplishes and experiences work (Hackman & Oldham, 1980), cited in Baridam (2009).
It determine the effort an employee would put in work,( good motivational factor good performance ,bad motivational factors poor performance). People tend to work harder, faster and better when they are happy and positively motivated. The other side of the coin is also true Love, (2013). A stressful, unhappy workplace is rarely productive, and it takes just a few employees with bad performance to create enough interpersonal dissonance to negatively affect workplace productivity. Fortunately, employers can take steps to prevent poor performance from developing and also have mechanisms in place to get things back on track when difficulties arise Langford and Whit fleld, (2011). Attitudinal behaviour of employee could pose a lot of positive and negative influences in an organization. This can affect the efficiency of the firms prior to its productivity, turnover intentions, growth and commitment.
Don Pepper (2013) in his recent publication averred that attitudinal behaviour in an organization could tell on employee values, trust belief, stereotype, perception, expectancies, cognition, loyalty, commitment, citizenship behavior etc which outcomes could be traced to employee productivity, employee job satisfaction and employee commitment. It is in this perspective that Allen and Meyer (2010) introduces employee commitment as measures for performance in the work place.
According to them, employee performance is an employee’s ability to economically, efficiently and effectively utilize the organization resources in a way that enhances the achievement of result. According to Nwachukwu (2009), one of the important questions in business has been why some organizations succeed while others fail. Employees performance has according to him been the most important issue for every organization be it profit or nonprofit one, it has been very important for managers to know which factor influences an employee’s performance in order for them to take appropriate steps to initiate them.
However, defining, conceptualizing and measuring employee performance has according to Nwachukwu not been an easy task. According to him, researchers among themselves have different opinions and definitions of employee performance which remains to be a contemptuous issue among organizational researchers for example, according to Javier (2012), employee performance is the ability of an employee to effectively utilize the time and resources provided him by his organization toward organizational goal and objectives.
Barney (2007), sees employee performance as equivalent to the famous 3 ES (economy, efficiency and effectiveness) of a certain programme or activity, according to Barney, employee performance relates to the efficiency, effectiveness, economy equality, consistent behaviour, productivity and quality service discharged by employees. The next issue that was always asked about employee performance was what factor enhances or determine employee performance. According to Hausen et al (2009) in the business policy literature there were two major stream of research on the determinant of employee performance of which the most accepted is employee job satisfaction, job efficiency, job effectiveness, productivity of employee, flexible working arrangement as well as quality service etc, which in turn enhances employee performance on the job.
TABLE OF CONTENT
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION1.1 Background to the Study 1
1.2 Statement of Research Problem 3
1.3 Purpose of the Study 5
1.4 Research Questions 6
1.5 Research Hypotheses 7
1.6 Significance of the Study 8
1.7 Scope of the Study 8
1.8 Definition of Terms 9
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Theoretical Framework 10
2.2 Concept of Work Characteristics 13
2.3 Job Characteristics Theory 14
2.4 The Job Characteristics Model 15
2.5 Relationship between Work Characteristics and Work Outcomes 16
2.6 Dimensions of Work Characteristics 17
2.6.1 Autonomy as a Dimension of Work Characteristics 18
2.6.2 Feedback as a Dimensions of Work Characteristics 19
2.6.3 Job Significance as a Dimension of Work Characteristics 20
2.7 Concept of Employee Performance 21
2.8 Effects of Supervisor-Employee Relationship on
Job Performance 23
2.8.1 Perceived Organizational Support 24
2.8.2 Trust in the Supervisor 25
2.8.3 Leader-Member Exchange 27
2.8.4 Rewards Systems 29
2.9 Performance Characteristics 31
2.10 Work Quality as a Measure of Employee Performance 33
2.11 Efficiency as a Measure of Employee Performance 35
2.12 Effectiveness as a Measure of Employee Performance 36
2.13 Skill Variety and Employee Performance 36
2.14 Job Significance and Employee Performance 37
2.15 Task Identity and Employee Performance 38
2.16 Relationship between Work Characteristics and Employee Performance 39
2.17 The Moderating Role of Employee Satisfaction 40
CHAPTERS 3: RESEARCH METHODOIOGY
3.1 Research Design 46
3.2 Population of the Study 46
3.3 Sample Size 47
3.4 Data Collection Method 48
3.5 Validity of Research Instrument 48
3.6 Reliability of Instrument 49
3.7 Method of Data Analyses 50
CHAPTER 4: DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSES AND DISCUSSION
OF FINDINGS
4.1 Presentation of Questionnaire Distribution 51
4.2 Demographic Analysis 51
4.3 Univariate Data Analyses 56
4.3.1 Analysis on Work Characteristics 56
4.3.2 Analysis on Employee Performance 58
4.3.3 Analysis on Employee Satisfaction 60
4.4 Bivariate Data Analyses 60
4.4.1 Scatter Plot of the Relationship between Study Variables 61
4.4.2 Presentation of Results on the Analysis of Data on Research Questions and
Testing of Hypotheses 62
4.4.2.1 Relationship between Autonomy and Employee Performance 63
4.4.2.2 Relationship between Feedback and Employee Performance 65
4.4.2.3 Relationship between Job Significance and Employee Performance 66
4.5 Multivariate Analysis 68
4.5.1 Testing the Significance of the Moderating Influence of Employee Satisfaction
on the Relationship between the predictor and the Criterion Variable 68
4.6 Discussion of Findings 69
4.6.1 Relationship between Autonomy and Employee Performance 71
4.6.2 Relationship between Job Significance and Employee Performance 73
4.6.3 Relationship between Feedback and Employee Performance 77
CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Summary of Findings 78
5.2 Conclusion 79
5.3 Recommendations 80
5.4 Contribution to Knowledge 81
5.5 Suggestions for Further Studies 82
References 84
Appendix A
Appendix B
Reference code: MG013
_____________________________________
Reference code: MG013
Does the work meet your requirements?
Then Click the Order Now Button Below
No comments:
Post a Comment