Job satisfaction and employee performance in Nasarawa State Water Board, Lafia, Nigeria.
Job satisfaction is an important factor that determines how the overall performance of the organization will be. It is concerned with how contented an individual is with his or her job. As an attitudinal measurement technique, job satisfaction (employee satisfaction) requires to increase the scope and complexity of workers' job in order to make it more appealing, attractive, and productive. This is done through intrinsic and extrinsic reward programmes provided by management to: attract qualified personnel to join the organization, keep them coming to work, and motivate same (employees) to achieve high level of performance.
The intrinsic determinants of job satisfaction (e.g added responsibility, achievement, advancement, recognition, attraction of the job itself (Sapru, 2011) are psychological rewards experienced directly by individuals; and they stem from man's desire for perfection. Gibson, Ivancevih and Donnely (1991) defines these as rewards that are part of the job itself. The presence of these motivating factors, Sapru (2011) opines will cause satisfaction in the work place; their absence will not cause dissatisfaction but will lead to absence of positive satisfaction.
Extrinsic rewards or determinants of job satisfaction (e.g pay, promotion, interpersonal relationship, status, fringe benefits etc) are provided by an outside agent such as superior or work group. Gibson et al (1991) defines these as rewards external to the job. Herzberg, (1966) refers these as hygiene or maintenance factors and states that when they are provided up to an acceptable level or beyond that level, they do not lead to increase in satisfaction. But when these factors are provided, they maintain satisfaction of employees. When a staff feels satisfied about the job, he or she is motivated to put in greater efforts, or creates a pleasant atmosphere within the organization to perform well. Conversely, a dissatisfied staff is relaxed and thus exhibits non--challant attitudes to organizational activities. This negatively impacts on performance of the organization. Thus, every organization places considerable reliance on individual employee performance to gain high productivity.
The performance of employees at the Nasarawa State Water Board (NSWB) in Lafia has dwindled greatly in the past decade (2008-2017) as a result of unhygienic and epileptic water supply to inhabitants in the State capital (Shehu, 2018). Bounded by Kaduna State in the North, Federal Capital Territory (Abuja) in the West, Kogi and Benue States in the South, Taraba and Plateau States in the East; Lafia, the State capital lacks decent water for consumption by its citizens. As a result, residents in the town have resorted to use of packaged water (pure water), most of which are not safe for drinking; and the consumption of same have resulted to associated health challenges and environmental degradation in the area (Moses, 2007). The study is therefore, set to verify if intrinsic and extrinsic rewards availed employees of the agency have satisfied same for job performance at the NSWB, Lafia.
In line with the specific objectives, two null hypotheses were formulated to guide the study viz: (i) Intrinsic rewards do not significantly influence employee performance at the NSWB.
(ii) Extrinsic rewards do not significantly influence employee performance at the NSWB.
Primary and secondary sources of data were used to gauge if job satisfaction enhanced staff performance at the NSWB in Lafia. The primary sources of data included interview and the use of questionnaire. The staff of the agency were asked to say whether or not, measures of the intrinsic (achievement, advancement) and extrinsic (promotion, pay) rewards availed them by the agency enhanced the performance of their jobs. The population of the study was 79 staff of the agency. This consists of 51 junior employees and 28 senior employees of the organization in Lafia.
The entire population constituted the sample for the study, hence there was no sampling because the population is small and was effectively managed by the researchers. The 59 copies of questionnaire returned from field survey formed the base of analyses of the study via tables and simple percentages. Secondary sources of information were however obtained from textbooks, journals, and official documents at the NSWB in Lafia. Through these, the researchers were able to define and determine the measures of job satisfaction as was the case at the NSWB; and the accordingly ascertain how the motivants led to performance of workers of the organization.
The stated hypotheses for the study were tested using chi-squire at 0.05 level of significance.
Decision Rule: The decision rule for rejection of hypotheses was based on the Chi-square calculated value (c2[alpha]) and the critical value. A hypothesis of no significant effect was rejected for any cluster of items whose c2[alpha] was greater than the critical value at 0.05 and with the specified degree of freedom, while it was not rejected for any cluster of items whose c2[alpha] is less than the critical value at 0.05 and with the specified degree of freedom.
CONCEPTUAL CLARIFICATIONS/THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Major concepts of the study are hereunder defined and explained.
Job satisfaction is an affective or emotional response towards various facets of ones' job. Locke (1976:1304) definses the concept (job satisfaction) as a 'pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one's job or job experiences'. A person with high job satisfaction holds positive attitudes towards his or her job, while a person who is dissatisfied with his or her job holds negative attitude or behaviour about the job. Job satisfaction has two major managerial implications. If it is high, the employee will perform better. On the other hand, if job satisfaction is low, there will be performance problems.
Halin and Judge (2003), on the other hand defines job satisfaction as multidimensional psychological responses to an individual's job and that these personal responses have cognitive (evaluative), affective (emotional) and behavioural components. Job satisfaction scales vary in the extent to which they assess the affective feelings about the job or the cognitive assessment of the job.
Affective job satisfaction is a subjective construct representing an emotional feeling individuals have about their jobs (Thompson and Phua, 2012). Hence affective job satisfaction for individuals reflects the degree of pleasure or happiness their jobs in general induces. Cognitive job satisfaction is a more objective and logical evaluation of various facets of a job. They can be unidimensional if it comprises evaluation of just one facet of a job, such as pay or maternity leave, or multidimensional if two or more facets of a job are simultaneously evaluated.
Cognitive job satisfaction do not assess the degree of pleasure or happiness that arise from specific job facet, but rather gauges the extent to which those job facets are judged by the job holder to be satisfactorily in comparison with objectives they themselves set or with other jobs. While cognitive job satisfaction might help to bring about affective satisfaction, the two constructs are distinct, not necessarily directly related, and have antecedents and consequences (Moorman, 1993). It (job satisfaction) can be understood in terms of its relationship with other key factors such as general well-being, stress at work, control at work, home-work interface and working conditions (Tomazric, Seljak, Aristounic, 2014).
Herzberg (1966) in Sapru (2011) opines that today's motivators are tomorrow's hygiene because they stop influencing the behaviour of persons when they get them. When a person gets one thing, then something else will motivate him and the need which has been fulfilled will have only negative significance in defining his behaviour. He also noted that one's hygiene may be the motivator of another. He cited example in developing countries where workers consider maintenance factors as motivators because they have not been able to attain these primary needs, and as such continues to be motivated by them (factors).
MEASURES OF JOB SATISFACTION
Scholars and practitioners in administration/ management have not agreed as to whether or not job satisfaction consists of a single or a number of separate dimensions. This is because some workers may be satisfied with certain aspects of their jobs and dissatisfied with other aspects. Job satisfaction is complex and difficult to measure as it is affected by a wide range of variables viz: individual, social, cultural, organizational and environmental factors.
Individual factors that affect job satisfaction include personality, educational qualifications, intelligence, abilities, age, marital status, and orientation to work.
Social factors include relationships with co-workers, group working and norms, opportunities for interaction, informal organization.
Cultural factors, on the other hand encompasses underlying attitude, beliefs and values.
Organizational factors revolve on nature and size, formal structure, Human resource policies and procedures, employee relations, nature of the work, technology and work organization, supervision and styles of leadership, management systems, working conditions.
Environmental factors include economic, social, technical and governmental influences. These different factors all affect the job satisfaction of certain individuals in a given set of circumstances but not necessarily in others. For example, in times of economic depression and fears of high unemployment, job security is to be the prominent concern for many members of staff of organizations.
Employee performance refers to accomplishment of task or mere working effectiveness of employees (Thomas, 2014). It is a means by which organizations, either private or public, achieve their goals through its recurring activities. Good performance thus means how well employees have performed on assigned tasks. The emphasis on employee performance in organizations results from the fact that every organization is established with set objectives and human resources are the basic tools for attaining these goals (Apase, 2013; Oravee, 2014).
Employee performance in organizations is a function of the reward system. When employees are able to meet their intrinsic and extrinsic needs, they put in more efforts for the achievement of organizational goals and vice versa, if these needs are not met by the organization.
The paper employed the Two-factor Theory by Herzberg (1966) to explain how job satisfaction influence employee performance at the NSWB, Lafia. The theory posits that satisfaction and dissatisfaction are driven by either motivation or hygiene factors. An employee's motivation to work is continually related to job satisfaction at the point in time.
Motivating factors earlier mentioned in the paper are those aspects of the job that make people want to perform, and provide people with satisfaction; and their presence will cause satisfaction (Sapru, 2011). Their absence will not cause dissatisfaction but will lead to an absence of positive satisfaction.
The motivating factors are considered to be intrinsic to the job; and they stem from man's perpetual need to realize his human potential for perfection so that he can transcend his environmental limitations or the work carried out (Hackman and Oldham, 1976). Hygiene factors, on the other hand include those aspects of the working environment such as pay (salary), company policies, supervision, and interpersonal relationships (op cit)
Job satisfaction and employee performance at the NSWB was influenced by motivation and hygiene factors. As was gathered during field survey, the intrinsic determinants of job satisfaction analyzed in the paper had impacted positively on the performance of employees of the agency. However, since employees of the NSWB desire primary needs more than secondary needs, salary increase (a hygiene factor) enhanced their job satisfaction and consequently higher performance more than the motivation factors.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The data obtained during the field survey at the Nasarawa State Water Board is presented and analysed in this part of the paper using Tables and simple percentages. The distribution and return of questionnaire to staff of the organization was as presented on Table 1.
The data on Table 1 shows that 79 copies of questionnaires were distributed to staff at the NSWB in Lafia during the field survey for the paper. Out of the total questionnaires distributed to the respondents, 59 were returned and 20 were not returned. The analyses in the paper was therefore, based on the 59 questionnaires that were properly completed and returned from staff of the organization in Lafia.
DOES INTRINSIC REWARDS (ACHIEVEMENT, ADVANCEMENT) ENHANCE EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE AT THE NSWB?
The staff of NSWB were asked to say if the opportunity giving to them for achievement and advancement by the organization enhanced performance of their jobs, and their responses were as contained on Table 2.
As seen on Table 2 of the study, 27 respondents represented by 45.75% agreed/strongly agreed that the opportunity for achievement and advancement accorded to staff of NSWB made them to be satisfied with their jobs. This encouraged them to put in more efforts and hence leading to better performance on their jobs.
However, 21 (35.58%) of the respondents disagreed/strongly disagreed that the opportunity for achievement and advancement did not enhance performance of their jobs and 11 (18.64%) of the respondents were undecided. In comparing the number of respondents who agreed/strongly agreed with those who disagreed/strongly disagreed, it can be seen that the drift was more towards the assertion that the opportunity given to the employees of NSWB for achievement and advancement enhanced their performance during the period of the study.
Does extrinsic rewards (promotion, pay) enhance your performance at the NSWB?
Staff at NSWB were asked to state if promotion and pay positively influenced their performance, and their responses were as contained on Table 3.
Most of the employees which the researcher interacted with had spent a number years in the services of NSWB in Lafia and as such were asked to say if promotion and pay enhanced their performance. Responding, 38 (64.39%) of the respondents on Table 3 agreed/strongly agreed; while 17 (28.08%) of the respondents disagreed/strongly disagreed, and 4 (06.77%) of the respondents were undecided. This portends that promotion and pay enhanced the performance of the employees during the period of the study.
Test of Hypotheses
The hypotheses earlier stated were tested in this part of the study using chi-squire as seen below.
Hypotheses one: Intrinsic rewards do not significantly influence employee performance at the NSWB.
The hypothesis was tested using responses on how intrinsic rewards (achievement and advancement) influenced employee performance at the NSWB as seen on Table 4.
The Table 4 shows a chi-square calculated value of 102.763 which is greater than the critical value of 3.84 at .05 level of significance and with 1 degree of freedom (i.e. c2[alpha] = 102.763 > 3.84). This indicates that intrinsic rewards significantly influence employee performance at the Nasarawa state water board, Lafia during the period of the study. Therefore, the hypothesis which states that intrinsic rewards do not significantly influence employee performance at the Nasarawa state water board was rejected.
performance. The implication here is that the intrinsic rewards led to job satisfaction and employee performance at the NSWB during the period of the study. The result of hypothesis one of the study collaborates this position.
The above finding is an indication that motivation of employees cannot be done through job hygiene factors earlier mentioned alone. This is because hygiene factors reduce job dissatisfaction but cannot provide adequate satisfaction of the job to employees. Related to this, professionals derive Hypotheses two: Extrinsic rewards do not significantly influence employee performance at the NSWB.
The hypothesis was tested using responses on how extrinsic rewards (promotion and pay) influenced employee performance at the NSWB as seen on Table 5.
Table 5 shows a chi-square calculated value of 203.813 which is greater than the critical value of 3.84 at .05 level of significance and with 1 degree of freedom (i.e. c2[alpha] = 203.813 > 3.84). This indicates that extrinsic rewards significantly influence employee performance at the Nasarawa state water board, Lafia during the period of the study. Therefore, the hypothesis which states that extrinsic rewards do not significantly influence employee performance at the Nasarawa state water board was rejected.
DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
The paper assessed the impact of job satisfaction on the performance of employees at the Nasarawa State Water Board, in Lafia and statistically analysed the views of 59 staff of the organization. The results of the analyses showed that both intrinsic and extrinsic factors enhanced performance of the employees of the agency.
As seen on Tables 2 of the study, 14 and 13 respondents respectively agreed/strongly agreed that opportunity for achievement and advancement on the job as intrinsic factors led to job satisfaction and staff performance at the NSWB. However, 10 and 11 respondents on the table (2) disagreed/strongly disagreed that the factors did not lead to job satisfaction--employee more satisfaction with intrinsic rewards than extrinsic rewards as they derive achievement even from their work environment. As gathered, they are positively disposed to opportunities for growth to continue as leaders of their organizations. When a job is thus enriched with motivating factors which provides opportunity for the employees personal and psychological growth, Sapru (2011) opines, the workers puts in more efforts to the realization of its objectives. He (Sapru, 2011) further states that adding undemanding job to another or switching from one undemanding job to another does not enrich an employee's job. Therefore, jobs should be appealing/attractive to pave way for personal and psychological growth of its employees. These will motivate the workers to work harder for higher performance of the organization.
Environmental factors (salary, promotion) analysed in the study also led to job satisfaction-employee performance at the NSWB as was empirically found in the test of hypothesis two. Thus, while 38 out of the 59 respondents of the organization agreed/strongly agreed that salary and promotion are their major attractions of working with NSWB, 17 of them held opposite view, and 4 staff of the organization were neutral.
Although Herzberg (Sapru, 2011) calls money (pay) and fringe benefits as 'negative motivators' since people feel sad if they have no money and that money does not necessarily make people happier and more productive, it was gathered that needs of employees at the NSWB are/were physiological in nature. Therefore, they need money to meet their primary needs rather than intrinsic needs (esteem, ego) which are often secondary in nature, most especially in developing nations.
Promotion in the work place also led to job-satisfaction-employee performance at the NSWB. As gathered, it made employees of the organization to feel happy whenever they are elevated to high positions. This injects a sense of belonging, pride and success in life, and hence higher performance.
Job satisfaction is germane to employee performance at the NSWB as satisfied workers tend to be more concerned about given tasks, work speedily, work free of errors and omissions, and are always willing to accept more responsibility. It is an effective response of employees which is as a result of their experiences on the job. Thus, if job conditions are favourable to an employees' expectation, such employee would put in his best, thereby merging the goals of the organization with his.
Job satisfaction motivates workers to perform optimally. Management of NSWB should therefore provide intrinsic and extrinsic rewards to their employees to boost their satisfaction and consequently higher performance. The agency should provide both intrinsic and extrinsic needs, depending on the cadre/position of the employees for job satisfaction-employee performance to be experienced.
Intrinsic rewards are crucial to job satisfaction and employee performance in every organization. However, because employees of NSWB are more concerned with primary needs, management of the Board should give adequate attention to extrinsic needs (salary and promotion) to improve the degree of job satisfaction- employee performance in the organization. The organization should revise the existing monetary rewards to retain and attract the employees.
The surveyed data on Table 2 shows that 13 out of the 79 respondents for the study were undecided as whether or not, opportunity for advancement and achievement led to job satisfaction--employee performance. As was gathered, most of the employees (especially Tanker Drivers and the Clerical staff) did not understand/appreciate the intrinsic needs as relevant to job satisfaction. Therefore, management should create counselling department/unit in the organization to conscientize their workers on rewards provided by the organization to boost their morale towards job satisfaction--performance.
The information on Table 2 of the study indicates that 11, out of the 59 respondents were undecided that opportunity for advancement and achievement as motivation at NSWB enhanced their job satisfaction--performance. Comparing the magnitude of these number of employees with those who agreed/strongly agreed, it is recommended that management of NSWB should also give priority to other intrinsic needs (e.g. autonomy, recognition, feedback etc) so as to attract overwhelming attention of the workers for job satisfaction-performance. Above all, employees derive job satisfaction if there is feedback on their performance. Therefore, management of NSWB should establish proper appraisal system to provide this opportunity
Apase M. (2013). Motivation and Labour Turnover in Benue and Nasarawa States. Unpublished seminar paper, Department of Public Administration, Nasarawa State University, Keffi.
Gibson, J.L.J., Ivancevih, M.H. and Donnely Jr. (1991). Organizational Behaviour, Structure, Process. ILLions: Irwin.
Hackman, I.R. and Oldham, G. (1976). 'Motivation through the Design of Work: Test of a Theory'. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance. Vol. 16(2): 250-277.
Hulin, C.L., and Judge, T.A. (2003). Job Attitudes. In W.C. Boreman, Ligen, D.R. and Klimoski (Eds), Handbook of Psychology: Industrial and Organizational Psychology. NJ: Wiley.
Locke, E.A. (1976). The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction. In M.D. Dun-nette (Ed), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Moorman, R.H. (1993). 'The Influence of Cognitive and Affective Based Job Satisfaction and Organizational Citizenship Behaviour'. Human Relations, Vol. 6(3): 759-776.
Moses, M. (2018). Factors inhibiting workers performance in Nasarawa State Public Service.
Unpublished B.Sc Project Submitted to the Department of Sociology, Benue State University, Makurdi.
Oravee A. (2014). Human Resource Development and Employee Performance: A study of University of Agriculture, Makurdi, Lapai Journal of Management Sciences, Special Edition, 2015.
Sapru, R.K. (2011). Administrative Theories and Management Thought, New Delhi: PHL Learning Private Limited.
Shehu W (2018). The role of Nassarawa State Water Board in enhances socio-economic development in the State. Unpublished project submitted at the Department of Public Administration, ABU Zaria, Nigeria
Thomas R. (2014). Effect of Job Satisfaction on Staff Performance in the Benue State Civil Service. Unpublished seminar paper, Department of Political Science, Benue State University, Makurdi.
Thompson, E.R. and Phua, F.T.T. (2012). 'A Brief Index of Affective Job Satisfaction'. Group and Organizational Management, Vol. 37(3): 275-307
Tomazric, N., Seljak, J and Aristovnik, A. (2014). 'Factors Influencing Employee Satisfaction in the Public Service: The Case of Slovenia'. Personnel Review, Vol. 43(2): 209-227.
Aule Oravee (1)
Solomon Zayum (2)
Bulus Kokona (3)
(1) Department of Business Administration, University of Agriculture Makurdi, Benue State, Nigeria. Correo electronico: firstname.lastname@example.org
(2) University of Agriculture, Makurdi, Benue State, Nigeria. Correo electronico: email@example.com
(3) Department of Public Administration, Federal Polytechnic Nassarawa
Recibido: 17 de agosto de 2018 Aceptado: 2 de diciembre de 2018
Table 1 Distribution and return of questionnaire. Respondents Number Number Number % of % of Distributed Returned Not Total Total not Returned returned returned Admin Staff 25 16 9 27.11 45 Tanker 24 20 4 33.89 20 Drivers Clerical 30 23 07 38.98 35 Staff Total 79 59 20 100 100 Source: Field Survey, 2018. Table 2 Opportunity for achievement and advancement enhanced performance of staff at the NSWB. Respondents Adm. Staff Tanker Clerical Total % of Drivers Staff respondents Agree 04 05 05 14 23.72 S/agree 04 05 04 13 22.03 Undecided 03 02 06 11 18.64 Disagree 02 04 04 10 16.94 S/disagree 03 04 04 11 18.64 Total 16 20 23 59 100 Source: Field Survey, 2018. Table 3 Promotion and Pay enhanced performance of employees at the NSWB. Respondents Adm. Staff Tanker Clerical Total % of Drivers Staff Responses Agree 04 06 08 18 30.50 S/agree 06 08 06 20 33.89 Undecided 01 01 02 04 06.77 Disagree 02 02 04 08 13.55 S/disagree 03 03 03 09 15.25 Total 16 20 23 59 100 Source: Field Survey, 2018. Table 4 Chi-Square Test on Influence of Intri nsic Rewards on Employee Performance at the Nasarawa State Water Board Df [chi]2 [chi]2[alpha] Sig. Alpha Level Remark Pearson Chi-square 1 3.84 102.763 .000 .05 S, R Number of Valid 79 Cases Df = degree of freedom, [chi]2 = critical value, [chi]2[alpha] = chi-square calculated, Sig. = P-value; P <.05, S = Significant, R = rejected. Table 5 Chi-Square Test on Influence of Extrinsic Rewards on Employee Performance at the Nasarawa State Water Board Df [chi]2 [chi]2[alpha] Sig. Alpha Level Remark Pearson Chi-square 1 3.84 203.813 .000 .05 S, R Number of Valid 79 Cases Df = degree of freedom, [chi]2 = critical value, [chi]2[alpha] = chi-square calculated, Sig. = P-value; P <.05, S= Significant, R= rejected.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Author:||Oravee, Aule; Zayum, Solomon; Kokona, Bulus|
|Date:||Jul 1, 2018|
|Previous Article:||El Catastro e Inmuebles informales en municipios de Sinaloa, Mexico/Informal properties in municipalities of Sinaloa, Mexico.|
|Next Article:||Impacto de las redes sociales y el marketing en la alimentacion y la actividad fisica de los jovenes en el estado de Guanajuato/Impact of social...|