EFFECTS OF EMPLOYEES’

COMMITMENT ON ORGANIZATIONAL
PERFORMANCE.
(A CASE STUDY OF AMBROSE ALLI UNIVERSITY, EKPOMA)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title page…………………………..………………………………….ii

Certification…………………………….…………….……………..iii

Dedication………………………………….………………….……..iv

Acknowledgement…………………………………………….…….v

Table of content………………………………………………….…vii

Abstract…………………………………………….…………….……x

CHAPTER ONE (Introduction)

1.1 Introduction………………………….………………………….1

1
1.2 Statement of Problem…………………………………………3

1.3 Research question……………………………………...…..…4

1.4 Objectives of Study……………………………………..…….4

1.5 Statement of Hypothesis ………………………………….…5

1.6 Significance of the Study………………….…………..…….5

1.7 Scope of the study…………………………………………….6

1.8 Limitation of study……………………………………………6

1.9 Organization of study ………………………………………..7

1.10 definition of terms…………………………………………….7
REFERENCES…………………………………………….……8

CHAPTER TWO (Literature Review)

2.1 Concept of Commitment and its Effect on

Performance………………………………………………..

….....9

2.2 Forms of measurement………………...….…...

……….....16

2.3 Importance of employee Commitment…….

……………..17

2
2.4 Concept of Performance…………………………………………

18

2.4.1 Main causes of low Performance………………….

………….21

2.5 Linkage between Commitment and

Performance………...22

2.6 Techniques of Raising Employees Commitment…………

28

2.7 Summary of the Literature…………………….…………

35

REFERENCES…………………………………………………………..3

CHAPTER THREE (Research Methodology)

3.1 Introduction…………………………………………………….…

43

3.2 Socioeconomic characteristics of

respondent…………….43
3
3.3 Analysis of Research Questions/Hypotheses Testing……

46

3.4 Interpretation of findings…………………………….53

CHAPTER FOUR (Summary, Conclusion AND

Recommendation)

4.1 Summary of Findings……………………………………….55

4.2 Conclusion…………………………………………………….56

4.3 Suggestion and Recommendation………………………..57

Bibliography ………………………………………………..….60

Appendix………………………………………………………….66

4
 ABSTRACT
This research on effect of employees’ commitment on

organizational Performance was carried out in Ambrose Alli

University (AAU), Ekpoma, Edo state, Nigeria. The aim of the

study was to examine the factors that determine employee’s

commitment to their job, the study also aims at finding out

the relationship between motivation and employee’s

commitment and the impact it has on job performance and

organizational Performance. In order to achieve the objectives,

three hypotheses were formulated and were tested using the

chi square. The sample population was drawn from a cross

section of the university’s (AAU) staffs, comprising both junior

and senior academic staffs. The questionnaire was used to

elicit information, and these relevant data were collated and

analyzed in later part of the work. The findings from the study

show that there is a significant relationship between job

satisfaction and employees commitment. The second

hypothesis was tested using the chi square, and the result

showed that there is a significant relationship between

5
motivation of employees and their level of commitment to

work. Finally, the last hypothesis which sought to find

relationship between commitment and overall employee and

organizational Performance was confirmed. However,

suggestions were made as to improving employee’s

commitment especially in tertiary institutions amongst which

are: the need to improve on workers salary, disciplining the

staffs as way of ensuring sanity and effective learning among

the students and many others. These suggestions if strictly

adhered to will not only enhance learning, but as well raise the

commitment of staffs and consequently increasing

Performance in the university.

6
 CHAPTER ONE
1.1 INTRODUCTION
In an era of limited resources, governments at all levels are

pressured to produce maximum output with the least input. A great

deal of attention has been given to a variety of Performance

improvement strategies, including public-private partnership, and

Balanced Score Card (BSC), in the hope that such strategies are a

starting point for Performance improvement. It should be noted,

however, that no Performance improvement strategy alone is perfect.

As such, various strategies should be used at the same time. Since

Performance improvement is a function of too many factors, ranging

from top management support to feedback on budget based decisions,

it is essential to be aware that all factors are equally important

(Holzer & Callhan, 1998; Lee, 2000a).

Among others, the backdrop of Performance improvement is an

employee’s desire to be maximally productive. As Guy (2002) points

out, “it is the people who, in the long term, control the Performance

of any organization” (p.307). Even if there might be a number of

reinvention efforts and top management support, unless employees at

all levels are willing to improve Performance, all efforts toward

Performance enhancement will come to nothing.

7
 Modern day Organization is concerned with the analysis and

diagnosis of the factor that determine organizational

effectiveness, and the planning and delivery of programmes to

increase that effectiveness. Organizations want to obtain the

commitment of their employees. Management would like its

employees to identify with the values, norms and artefacts of the

organization, hence the need for organizational culture. Management

needs to explain and imbibe its culture in its employees; this will

enable the employee to get familiar with the organizational system.

During this process of explanation, the employee learns about

the organizational culture and decides whether he can cope with

it or not. This means that each organization is a learning

environment. It is the proper understanding of the organizational

culture that the performance of the employee in the organization.

Performance is the extent to which an individual is carrying out

assignment or task. It refers to the degree of accomplishment of the

task that makes up an employee’s job (Cascio, 2006).

Commitment has a rational element: Most people consciously

decide to make commitments, then they thoughtfully plan and carry

out the actions required to fulfill them (Meyer, et al, 2004). Because

commitments require an investment of time as well as mental and

8
emotional energy, most people make them with the expectation of

reciprocation. That is, people assume that in exchange for their

commitment, they will get something of value in return—such as

favors, affection, gifts, attention, goods, money and property. From

this perspective, this paper sheds light on the importance of a

multidimensional view of employee commitment. This paper starts

with an assumption that the previous concept of organizational

commitment may not tell the whole story about individual

performance and Performance. Identifying multiple foci of employee

commitment beyond the organization helps explain various

motivational bases among employees toward Performance

improvement efforts.
1.2 Statement of Problem
The problem of this study bore from the fact that there is a

wide discrepancy between employees’ efforts towards work and what

he or she receives or get in return for that effort. In the world of work,

as particularly in a university setting, employees and employers have

traditionally made a tacit agreement: In exchange for workers’

commitment, university’s governing bodies would provide forms of

value for employees, such as secure jobs and fair compensation. But

rather unfortunate, the employees irrespective of their level or

9
ranking in the university. As a result, workers in the organization

have embarked on series of protest in order protect their work

conditions and improve welfare package. Reciprocity affects the

intensity of a commitment. When an entity or individual to whom

someone has made a commitment fails to come through with the

expected exchange, the commitment erodes. This study therefore,

looked into the effect of employee’s commitment on organizational

Performance, a case study of staffs of the Ambrose Alli University, Ekpoma.

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
It is in view of the above problems that the following questions arise:
1. What is the level of employee commitment in relation to job

satisfaction in Ambrose Alli University?

2. Does motivation improve employees’ commitment to

work?
3. Does the level of employee’s commitment determine

organizational Performance?
1.4 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The main objective of this study is to examine the effect of

employee’s commitment on organizational Performance. The study also

aims at:
i. Determining the effect of employee commitment in relation

to job satisfaction.
10
 ii. Ascertaining whether motivation improve employees’

commitment to work, and

iii. Ascertaining whether employee’s commitment determines

organizational Performance.
1.5 STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESES
The following null hypotheses will be tested in this study:
1. There is no significant relationship between job satisfaction and

employees’ commitment
2. There is no significant relationship between motivation of employees

and employees’ commitment to work

3. There is no significant relationship between employee’s commitment

and increased performance/Performance

1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
The findings from this study will help to highlight those areas

where there are problems among staff and thus will be of great

benefit to the authorities of higher institutions and the policy makers.

The results of this study would hopefully be significant in the sense

that it would enable both the Management of universities to better

understand how the various motivational factors could be harnessed

to inspire staff to increase and sustain Performance.

The findings from this study would help to further highlight the

likely problems of frustrations and how motivation can be used to

11
either reduce or eliminate these problems amongst staff of the

organization (Ambrose Alli University).

1.7 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
This study is on effect of employee’s commitment on organizational

Performance. The study will also covers the various techniques of

employees commitment and theories of motivation as they impact on

employees Performance in an a organization. The study covers between

2010 and 2011.

1.8 LIMITATION OF STUDY
The study is limited to the employees’ commitment, and its effect of

organizational Performance. The study does not consider other variables and

as such is limited to only those areas specified above. Also, the study only

covers the academic environment which is further confined to the Ambrose

Alli University, Ekpoma. It does not cover all sectors of the Nigerian

educational system; and as such the study does not look into how

commitment strategies work or influence Performance across other sectors

of the Nigerian economy.

1.9 ORGANIZATION OF STUDY

For an orderly presentation of this study, this research essay has been

divided into four chapter. The first gives an introduction of the study, chapter

two focuses on literature review, chapter three is the presentation and

12
analysis of data generated for this study, and chapter four the summarizes the

study and gives useful recommendations.

1.10 DEFINITION OF TERMS
Employees’ commitment can be defined as both a willingness to

persist in a course of action and reluctance to change plans, often

owing to a sense of obligation to stay the course.

Morale: Moral refers to staff emotional and mental level of zeal.
Employees: Are the workers in an organization, working for the

accomplishment of the organizational goals. In this study, the employees are

those staffs of the organization, the Ambrose Alli University, Ekpoma

including academic and non academic staffs.

Performance: It is the relationship between the amount of one or more

inputs and the amount of outputs from a clearly identified process. That is

the outcome performance of an organization or individual.

Motivation: These are factors (familiarity, concern and driving force), which

exist or are provided in a work situation either physically or psychologically

which determine the input and Performance level of the worker.

REFERENCES
Cascio, J.S. (2006) The public-private distinction in organization

theory: A critique and research strategy. Academy of

Management Review, 13, 182-201.

13
Guy, M.E. (2002). Managing people. In M. Holzer (Ed.), Public

Performance handbook (pp.307-320). New York: Marcel

Dekker.
Cohen, A. (2003). Multiple commitments in the workplace: An

integrative approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (2001). A three-component

conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human

Resource Management Review, 1, 61-89

Meyer, J. P., Becker, T. E., & Vandenberghe, C. (2004). Employee

commitment and motivation: A conceptual analysis and

integrative model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 991-100.

14
 CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Concept of Commitment and its Effect on Performance
In general, commitment is defined as the psychological

attachment of workers to their workplaces (Becker, Billings, Eveleth,

and Gilbert 1996, Allen and Meyer, 1990, O’ Reilly and Chatman,

1986). In fact, few empirical studies have examined a public sector

employee’s commitment and its relationship to Performance

variables, such as extra-role behavior, desire to remain, absenteeism,

and willingness to support Performance improvement strategies.

Much of the literature regarding organizational performance and

Performance places the emphasis on securing the commitment of

employees to organizational goals and purposes (Balfour and

Wechsler, 1991, 1996, Bass 1985).

Employee commitment literature is huge and most studies have

centered on organizational commitment and its relationship to job

performance, turnover intent, and other motivational outcomes. The

common findings and implications of those studies are that employee

commitment is the key to achieving Performance and performance in

any organization (Mowday, Porter, and Steers, 1982, Reichers, 1985,

Becker, Billings Eveleth and Gilbert, 1996, Becker, 1992; Meyer,

15
Allen and Smith, 1993; Reichers, 1986, Lion, 1995, Balfour and

Weschler, 1991, 1996).

There have been numerous efforts to identify and divide the

concept of organizational commitment among organizational

behavior scholars in both public and private sectors, Mathieu and

Zajac (1990) categorize the definition of organizational commitment

into three types: Attitudinal Commitment, Calculative Commitment,

and Normative Commitment. The most commonly studied type of

OC has been attitudinal commitment (Mowday, Steers, and Porter,

1979; Steers, Mowday, & Boulian, 1974).

In the public sector, following O’Reilly and Chatman’s

definition, Balfour and Wechsler (1991, 1996) have tried to see

organizational commitment as multiple constructs: affiliation

commitment (belongingness), compliance commitment (exchange

commitment), and identification commitment (value congruence).

Robertson and Tang (1995) also divide the concept of commitment

into two types.

(1) Identification or involvement commitment from an

organizational behavior perspective, and

(2) Exchange commitment from a rational choice perspective.
By using multiple dimensions of organizational commitment,

they tried to find out some meaningful relationships between multiple

16
commitments and key dependent variables. Those relationships,

however, have varied with regard to researchers, samples, and

subjects. Studies have differed regarding whether or not

organizational commitment was positively associated with job

satisfaction, job performance, tenure, and educational attainment.

For example, Balfour and Wechsler (2001) found that

organizational commitment was significantly related to in-role

behavior, while no connection was found between organizational

commitment and extra-role behavior. Six years later, however, they

revisited organizational commitment and found that identification

commitment was connected to extra-role behavior. In fact, there have

been some inconsistencies in the findings. In this regard, Lion (1995)

maintains that “researchers argued that the inconsistent findings are

due to the different definition and operationalizations of commitment

used, and the organizations and variables analyzed”.

A conventional view of commitment has exclusively focused on

commitment to organization. It should be noted, however, that, in

contrast to this conventional view, a number of researchers have

begun to view employee commitment as having multiple foci and

bases (Becker, Randall, & Riegel, 1995; Reichers, 1985, 1986,

Becker, 1992; Gorden, Philipot, Burt Thomposn, and Spiller, 1980,

17
Meyer, Allen, and Smith 1993).
Foci of commitment are the individuals and groups to whom an

employee is attached (Reichers, 1985). It has been found that

employees could be committed to such foci as professions (Morrow,

1983, Gouldon, 1958) and unions (Gouldon, Beauvais, & Ladd,

1984), as well as commitment to organizations (Mowday et al.,

1982). In addition, recent research has pointed out that workers could

also be differentially committed to occupations, top management,

supervisors, co-workers, and customers (Becker, 1992, Meyer, Allen,

and Smith, 1993, Reichersi, 1986). Especially, Becker et al. (1996)

pointed out that in previous research, employee commitment and job

performance are largely unrelated as prior work has failed to

distinguish among individual foci of commitment. Based on their

empirical findings, they argued that commitment to supervisors was

positively related to performance and was more strongly associated

with performance than was commitment to organization (Becker,

Billings, Eveleth, & Gilbert, 1996).

Becker (1992) also discovered that “commitment to top

management, supervisor, and work group were important

determinants of top satisfaction, intent to quit, and prosocial

organizational behaviors over and above commitment to an

18
organization. In other words, it was found that commitment to foci

other than an employing organization, specifically to top

management, supervisors, and work groups, were negatively related

to intent to quit and positively related to satisfaction and prosocial

organizational behaviors and explained variance in these dependent

variables over and above that explained by commitment to

organization” (p. 232).

It should be noted, therefore, that viewing employee

commitment as having multidimensional constructs helps explain

more variance in key dependent variables than does commitment to

organization.
In relation to goal clarity, it has so often been hypothesized that

compared to private sector employees, public employees perceive

their organizations’ goals as less clear and less easy to measure (Dahl

and Lindblom, 2003, Gortner, Nahler, and Nicholson, 1987, Lan and

Rainey 1992). In other words, private sector employees are higher on

goal clarity than do public sector employees. This is, in part, due to

the absence of clear performance measures, such as profits and sales,

in the public sector (Boyatzis, 1982). However, this hypothesis is

very controversial. Unlike conventional wisdom, recent studies

indicate that public managers perceive greater clarity of

19
organizational goals and greater effectiveness in achieving those

goals (Lan & Rainey, 1992; Rainey, 1983 Rainey, Pandey, and

Bozeman, 1975). With regard to multiplicity of objectives, public

organizations also have greater diversity and multiplicity of

objectives, as well as criteria and conflict among objectives and

products, compared to private ones (Banfield, 1975; Rainey, Backoff,

and Levine, 1976).

In the meantime, compared to private agencies, public agencies

are believed to have less decision-making autonomy and flexibility,

more constraints on procedures and spheres of operations, and a

greater tendency to proliferation of formal specifications and controls

(Rainey, Backoff, and Levine, 1976). Downs (1967) also argues that,

due to the absence of an economic market, public bureaucracies are

inclined to be more elaborate hierarchies, and become rigid as time

goes on. Public employees are higher on concentration of authority at

the top, with personal procedures highly centralized or externally

controlled (Pugh, Hickson, & Hinings, 1969).

It has also been pointed out that public managers are different

from private managers in terms of certain motivational incentives. In

general, it has been argued that public sector employees have a lower

pecuniary incentive than do private sector employees (Rainey,

20
Backoff, and Levine, 1976; Banfield, 1975, Cacioppe and Mock,

1984). Furthermore, in a study comparing reward preferences across

the public, private, and hybrid sectors, Wittmer (1991) found that

monetary rewards and incentives were the major motivator for private

sector managers, while performing work that serves others was the

primary factor for public sector managers. Therefore, Wittmer (1991)

concluded that the public service ethic was still alive and could

provide an explanation of why public sector employees are motivated

to work hard. These findings are consistent with those by Cacioppe

and Mock (1984). They found that public sector employees were

motivated more by a willingness to provide a service that helps other

people than private sector employees, while private sector employees

were motivated more by monetary rewards for their personal life.

It should also be noted that another difference between the two

sectors is group cohesion. Blumental (1983) argues that public

agencies are more conglomerated and diverse compared to private

ones. Buchanan (1974a) also found that public sector managers were

lower on group cohesion relative to private sector managers. This is a

function of the heterogeneity of the “typical” government work

group. Buchanan (1974a) goes on to assert that “representativeness

in the form of equal protection still shapes government hiring

21
practices to a far greater degree than is true of business” (p.343). For

this reason, it may be hypothesized that employees in private

organizations will express higher levels of commitment to the group

than employees in public organizations.

2.2 Forms of Measurement
Employers typically assess their employees’ engagement levels with

company-wide attitude or opinion surveys. A sampling of the criteria

featured in such instruments reveals 10 common themes related to

engagement:
 Pride in employer

 Satisfaction with employer

 Job satisfaction

 Opportunity to perform well at challenging work

 Recognition and positive feedback for one’s contributions

 Personal support from one’s supervisor

 Effort above and beyond the minimum

 Understanding the link between one’s job and the organization’s

mission
 Prospects for future growth with one’s employer
 Intention to stay with one’s employer
This broad array of concepts has come to be labeled employee

commitment by virtue of linkage research, which relates survey results to

22
bottom-line financial outcomes.
2.3 Importance of Employee Commitment
An empirical study by Lee (2000b) supports that, unlike

conventional wisdom, employee commitment may not be

automatically related to Performance variables, such as a willingness

to support Performance improvement strategies, extra-role behavior,

and the desire to remain.[??desire to remain what? Where? How?]

Only when an employee believes that his/her supervisor, managerial-

level group, or organization is committed to Performance

improvement, was a connection found between three dimensions of

employee commitment and willingness for Performance

improvement. The implication of this study is to emphasize why top

management support and committed people at all levels are the most

important prerequisites for Performance improvement. In order to

increase employees’ willingness to support Performance strategies,

top management support and committed people at all levels are

critical because employee commitment will not work unless

employees believe that each focus of employee commitment is

committed to Performance improvement. This fact also implies that

research on employee commitment needs to focus more on control

variables between employee commitment and key dependent

23
variables. For instance, according to the theory of reasoned action

(Fishben, 2000), there are two types of beliefs that lead to a person’s

behavior. One is the belief that the behavior leads to certain

outcomes. The other is the belief that specific referents think I should

or should not perform the behavior. In particular, the latter belief will

be likely to work as a control variable in connecting employee

commitment to key dependent variables.

Further research is needed to examine and identify other control

variables that may elicit possible connections between employee

commitment and its key dependent variables.

2.4 Concept of Performance
Performance has been defined as the efficient use of resources labour,

capital, land and materials in the production of various goods and services. It

can also be defined as the relationship between result and the time it takes to

accomplish them. It is often seen as total output divided by total input. Thus

Performance of an employees is seen as the relationship between unit of

labour and unit of output. Performance also refers to the effectiveness of the

use of the factors of production to product goods and services.

An effective integration resource, both physical and human will yield

high output.
Performance is the output per person under a given condition. It is

usually an indicator of motivation. The higher the moral of the worker, the
24
more productive he is. It is therefore true to say that a happy worker is a

productive worker.
How to improve the Performance of Nigerian employees has been the

topic of many seminar, symposia and workshops. It is a recognized fact

Performance is a critical factor in economic and serial development, for it

determined the standard of living of the citizens. Nigeria employees are said

to have a poor attitude to work resulting in low Performance.

Low Performance gives rise to high prices when employees earning

are very low. When Performance is high, organization earn higher income

and profit and thus are better positive to pay higher wages. Commenting on

the low Performance of Nigerian employee, N. Eze observed that, many

achievement oriented, shined observer of Nigeria people at work have

always come with a common impression that generally, Nigerian workers

are lazy, slow, sleepy, reluctant to act, unconcerned, and deceitful in their

approach. These workers and said to lack zeal, the briskness and the

momentum of hard working people and generally, they dislike to hear

anybody talk about efficiency, dedication, honesty, competence

determination and Performance all of which characterize the achievement of

people in a production oriented society.

Although the description above may be considered as too strong the

situation which the author is trying to portray is real. To deal with this

25
problem, one of the first things to attempt is to identify the causes.
Sociological Factors
Employees treasure a sense of belonging in an organization and

resent any effort the part of the management of treat them only as cost of

production. Many Nigeria workers lack a sense of belonging in the

organization and as a result act as strangers in the organization. As long as

employees feel that they do not belong there is likely tendency for them not

to put in their best or have a full sense of commitment or dedication.

Managerial Factors:
The success or failure of an organization more or less depends on

management. A productive or undisciplined supervisor can hardly motivate

employees. Many Nigeria managers are lacking in the elementary principle

of organizational behaviour. They do not known how to identify employee’s

goals and link them with organizational rewards in order to motivate

employees. Many do not appreciate the importance of performance

evaluation and feed backs.

Nwa Chukwu has observed that that manager’s attitude to work is

guest for excellence and his continued expectation

2.4.1 Main Causes of low Performance
A national workshop on Performance divide the major cause of low

Performance in Nigeria into four major sectors v 12 which are:

a. Economic factors
26
 b. Sociological factors
c. Management factors and
d. Technology factors
In the research in depth look into the above problem shall be

observed.
Economic Factors
This deals with the reward system of employees in Nigeria. There are

no correlation between effect expanded by an employee and the reward that

he will receive in the organization. It is widely acclaimed that the Nigeria

workers in the world where an employee believes that e.g. unity does not

prevail he is bound to withhold a measure of his Performance in order to

restore equity. Closing allied to this is the inability of employees who as a

result put in their barest minimum effort in the attachment of organizational

goals. These appears to be no commitment and no goal congruity. To

encourage higher Performance it is essential that a system of reward must be

designed that attempts to equate work with reward. For higher standard of

excellence influence the performance of his subordinate.

Technological Factor
In Nigeria the lack of proper information to help entrepreneurs select

appropriate technology is one of the major causes of low Performance. The

dumping of obsolete in recent time in this country and the adverse effect of

constant change in power also contribute to low Performance.

27
 In summary the Performance of employees in this country is affected

by many factors as discussed above. If we must improve the performance of

employees we must improve the economic, social technological and

managerial factors constitute the major bottleneck to high Performance in

Nigeria.
2.5 Linkage between Commitment and Performance
Various theories have been used to establish the existing relationship

between commitment and Performance.

These have been propounded by different scholars, interested in

studying motivation as a factor for raising commitment. Some of these

theories are discussed below:

DOUGLAS MCGREGOR THEORY ‘X’ AND THEORY ‘Y’
Theory ‘x’
This theory was developed by Douglas McGregor. The theory is

based on the manger’s assumption or conception of people in the work

place. The assumptions of theory x are discussed below:

Theory ‘x’
a. The average human beings have an inherent dislike for work and

will attempt to avoid it whenever possible.

b. Most workers placed security above all other factors associated

with work and will display little ambition.

28
 c. As a result of these human characteristics of dislike for work,

most people must be coerced, controlled or threatened with punishment to

achieve goals. People will shrink responsibility and seek formal direction

whenever possible.
Theory ‘y’
Below are some of the assumptions of theory ‘y’
Managers views about their employees under theory ‘y’ are:
a. Average human beings under proper condition not only accept but

also seek responsibility.

b. The capacity to exercise a relatively high degree of intelligence

and creativity in the solution of organizational problems is widely and not

narrowly distributed in the population.

c. In the conditions of modern industrial life, the intellectual

potentialities of the average human beings are only partially utilized.

d. External control and the threat of punishment are not the only

means for bringing about effort towards the organizational objectives.

e. People will exercise self-control and self-direction in the services

of objectives to which they are committed.

f. The expenditure of physical and mental in work is as natural as

play or rest.
McGregor’s theory ‘x’ and theory ‘y’ represents manager’s view

about people in the working place. In other words, the theory ‘x’ and theory
29
‘y’ are formulated by Douglas McGregor to show the conceptions or view

held by the practicing managers about people in the work place. The

assumption of theory ‘y’ can play positive role in the raising the

commitment of workers because they can tap the innate potentialities of man

in the work place, and positively impacting on Performance.

The Hierarchy of Need Theory by Abraham Maslow (1954)
One of the widely mentioned theories of motivation is the hierarchy

of need theory propounded by psychologist known as Abraham Maslow.

Maslow saw human needs in the form of hierarchy ascending from the

lowest level of need to the highest level of needs in order of importance.

He concluded that when sets of needs are satisfied the need ceased to

be a motivator. The basic need identified by Maslow is an ascending order of

importance is as follows:

Psychological Needs
These one are the primary needs to sustain human life. Psychological

needs are the lowest need in Maslow’s classification of needs. These

includes the organizational provision of such things cafeteria, good working

environment is an attempt to satisfy these needs in the working place.

Safety Needs

30
 When the psychological needs are satisfied, the next level of needs in

ascending order of importance is the safety and security needs. These needs

include the need for safe working condition, fringe benefits, general salary

increase and job security.

Social Needs
If the psychological and safety needs are adequately met, the social

needs of an individual will emerge in dominance. The needs to be accepted

by others take on to tremendous importance to some individuals or

employees in the organization. Organizational provision of such things like

club and association were workers need and interact can be regarded as the

attempt to raise employee’s commitment and satisfy their needs in the work

place.
Self Esteem Needs
These are the needs for self-respect and recognition in the work place.

Self-respect and dignity are essential to the psychological well being of the

individual who has reached some degree of satisfaction in the realization of

the organization’s objectives. The need for self-esteem also includes men’s

desire for prestige and status in the organization.

Self Actualization Need
This is the highest of Maslow’s classification of needs, self-

actualization is the culmination of the lower and intermediate level needs.

31
These include the need for self-fulfillment and doing a challenging job in the

organization.
As each of these needs becomes substantially satisfied, the person

moves up the hierarchy. According to Maslow a substantially satisfied needs

no longer motivate. Maslow categorized his five hierarchies of needs into

higher and lower levels of needs. Starting from the lower needs to the higher

level; needs.
The differentiation between the two groups of needs, that is lower
level needs and higher level needs are satisfied internally to the person,
while the lower level needs are predominantly not satisfied.
Need for self-actualization

Esteem needs

Affiliation or acceptance

Security or Safety need

Psychological needs
The Expectancy Theory by Victor Vroom

32
 Another theory of motivation that can be used in explaining employee’s

commitment in the workplace is the expectancy theory by Victor Vroom

(1964). The thrust of this theory is that people will be motivated to do

things, to achieve some goals to the extent. It is expected that certain actions

will spur people to be committed to their job and help them to achieve their

goal. Vroom’s (1964) he presented a motivational model, which enlarges

Maslow’s and Hezberg’s theories of motivation. Expectancy theory is based

on the assumption that motivation is a process governing choice behaviour

in the organization. The theory is a rational view of man as an economic

being. It is of the view that human beings in the working place have some

goals to achieve and the path to take in achieving these goals. In other

words, people have alternatives or strategies in achieving their goals and a

person will take the alternative or strategy that will enable him to achieve his

goal.

Vroom offered an expectancy approach to the understanding of

motivation. He suggested that a person’s motivation towards an action

would be determined by his or her anticipated values of all outcomes (both

negative and positive) of the action, multiplied by the strength of that

person’s expectancy that the outcome would yield the desired goal. This can

be stated as follows:

33
Force (motivation) = valence X expectancy, where force = the strength of an

individual’s performance for an outcome.

Expectancy, Valence, Outcome, Instrumentality and Ability.
Expectancy: This refers to the likelihood that a particular behaviour act will

be followed by a particular outcome.

Valence: This refers to the strength of an employee’s performance for a

particular outcome. An outcome has a valence because it is related to the

need of a worker.
Outcome: This refers to the end product of a particular behaviour and is

classified as the first and second level outcome. The first level outcomes are

the result of individual effort while the second level outcome is the

consequence to which the first level outcomes are expected to lead to.
Instrumentality: This is the relationship between the first and second level

outcome. Instrumentality can vary between +1.0 and –1.0. When first level

outcome leads to second level outcome, instrumentality is 1.0 but when first

level does not lead to second level it is –1.0.

2.6 Techniques of Raising Employees Commitment
Leadership Style: Leadership style plays an important role in driving of

workers commitment to performance. The style of leading adopted by a

manager can affect the performance of the subordinates. The success of a

leadership in influencing subordinates to performance can be affected by

certain situational variables like confidence of the subordinates, experience,

34
the need and the perception of the subordinates. It is important that before

any leader adopts any style of leading, he should first of all understand the

nature and characteristics of the subordinates since this can affect his

Performance, the subordinate of all understand the nature and characteristics

of the subordinates since this can affect his performance and overall job

Performance, the subordinate perception of the boss. Leadership style can be

a source of motivation. Management by Objective (MBO): this is one of the

most motivational techniques used by management in raising employees

commitment. Its used in the organization has increased since its inception in

1950s. The programme is designed to encompass specific goals,

participative set for an explicit time period with feedback on goals progress.

This was advocated in different forms and one of the advocates is Peter

Drucker, who first introduced the concept.

Drucker states that the objective of the MBO should be concise

statement of expected accomplishment, that is the superior and the

subordinates should jointly choose the goals and decide on how they will be

measured. Drucker believes that the greatest advantage of the MBO is that it

allows the worker to control his performance. This self-control will result in

stronger commitment to do the best rather than just get by it. Another

philosopher of the MBO were Koontz et al. They defined it as a process

whereby the superior and the subordinates jointly identifies the common

35
goal, define individual major areas of responsibility in terms of the result

expected of him and use these measures as guards for operating the units and

accessing the contribution of each of his members.

An important factor in Koontz et al view point is for the subordinates

and superiors to have an understanding regarding the subordinate’s major

areas of responsibility. A common feature in Drucker and Koontz et al

conceptions of MBO is that MBO can lead to improved motivation of the

participants. This is because the superior and subordinates meets to discuss

the goals of their department, which must be in line with overall goals of the

organization.
The superior and subordinate meet again after the initial goals are

established and evaluate the subordinate performance in terms of goals.

With the participation of the subordinates in discussion, establishment

and emulation of the organizational goals as specified by MBO, the

subordinate will be motivated to contribute his best to the attainment of the

goal. MBO gives the subordinates a sense belonging can motivate them to

act.
Job Enrichment: Researchers and analysts of motivation points to the

importance of making job challenging and meaningful to the person doing

the job. Herzberg et al popularized Job enrichment as technique of raising

employee’s commitment in their two-factor theory of motivation. Job

36
enrichment is referred to as the vertical expansion of the job which entails

giving the individual full control and autonomy over the job he his doing.
Basically, increasing the responsibility of a job in order to increase

the satisfaction associated with the job. A job may be enriched in the

following ways:
1. Giving room for selection of jobs where better reward is more

likely to improve commitment and Performance. The job must be designed

to provide opportunities for achievement, recognition, responsibility,

advancement and growth. The technique entails enriching the job so that

these factors are included.

2. Encouraging participation of subordinates and interaction between

workers.
3. By giving workers a feeling of personal responsibility of their task.
4. By taking steps to make sure that people can see how their task

contributes to a finished products and the welfare of the enterprise.

5. Giving people a feedback on their job performance.
Involving workers in analysis and change of physical aspect of the

work environment such as layout of the office or plant, temperature lighting,

and cleanliness. With job enrichment, workers interest in their job may be

generated and their level of commitment will be increased.

Job Enlargement

37
 Job enlargement is another technique of motivation. It is referred to as

the horizontal expansion of the job. Job enlargement simply makes a job

varied by removing dullness associated with performing the job. It means

enlarging the scope of the job by adding task without enhancing

responsibility. The essence of job enlargement is to prevent monotony,

which kills, interest and job interesting to the workers. Job enlargement can

help to steer employee commitment and motivate people to higher

Performance.
Positive Re-Enforcement
Re-enforcement is used to motivate workers to performance by

encouraging a desired behaviour and discouraging an undesired baehaviour.

Re-enforcement approach to the employee’s commitment was first

developed by a Harvard psychologist known as B.F. Skinner. This theory

was first developed in learning, which entails encouraging desired behaviour

and discouraging undesired behaviour. It can be used to encourage the

workers to greater Performance by rewarding a desired behaviour. For

example, a lecture in the university is given the task of conducting a research

(stimulus) the lecturer exerts a high level of efforts and complete the project

in time (response), the supervisor reviews the work and recommend an

increase pay for an excellent work (positive re-enforcement).

38
 Rewarding a desired behaviour entails monetary reward, promotion,

recognition and praise. With positive re-enforcement, a behaviour desired by

the management can be repeated in subsequent times.

MONEY
Money cannot be overlooked as a means of increasing employees’

commitment and greater Performance, whether in the form of wages,

piecework, bonuses, or any other incentive pay that may be given to

employees for performance.

The influence of money as a technique for raising commitment to job is

a function of the need level of the worker. A worker who is striving to satisfy

his psychological needs will value money more than a worker striving to

satisfy a self-actualization need. Management should understand the desire

of workers before using money as a means of motivating them to greater

Performance.
PARTICIPATION
Participation is another technique for raising employee commitment,

which requires that management of any organization should also consult

employees on decision affecting them and that they should be given the

opportunity to air their own views with regards to such decisions.

Researchers have shown that when workers are allowed to have a say in

things that affect them in the work place, they tend to be satisfied. This

increases Performance and discourages absenteeism. Participation is also a

39
means of recognition. It appeals to the need for affiliation and acceptance.

Above all, it gives people sense of accomplishment.

WELFARE SCHEMES
These are facilities provided by the organization, which are in addition

to workers wages or salaries.

Problems of Motivation
A motivational problem exists with an organization when there is a

discrepancy between expected and achieved results and when the

discrepancy is due to lack of opportunity. For instance, the motivational

problem may be expressed in terms of the failure of employees to obey a

specific safety rule e.g. smoking should be restricted in certain supervisory

practices (handing disciplinary problem can arise from any of the following.
1 Problem of Ability: The person concerned lacks the physical or

mental ability to perform according to exceptions and is therefore

unattainable.
2 Problem of Training: In this case, performance would be

inadequate regardless of motivational level until training courses is

accomplished.
3 Problem of Communication: Failure to perform is caused by the

employees misconception of what is expected

4 Leadership Style: Motivation as I have either said has to do with

behavior of individual in the organization. Also, the attitude of supervisors

40
should maintain that spirit of co –operation with their employees as it has

been identified that poor supervision can be a source of motivational

problem. There should be that cordial relationship exiting between the

supervisor and employee and hardworking employs should as a: matter of

fact be recommended for promotion.

5 Situational Factor: The employees know what to do and how to

do it but is held back by certain situational factors, such as inadequate tools

obsolete methods, being paced by the performance of other of or by market

conditions.

41
2.7 Summary of the Literature
The problem of this study bore from the fact that there is a wide

discrepancy between employees’ efforts towards work and what he or

she receives or get in return for that effort. In this literature, so far, we

have looked at the various ways through which organizations can

improve on employees’ commitment. Accordingly, Berlison and Staines

(2003) argued that motivation is the basis for commitment in any

organizational settings. The reward level perhaps is what determines the

level of commitment to the work. Other technique of raising commitment

includes leadership style, job enrichment and job enlargement. Drucker

states that the objective of the MBO should be concise statement of expected

accomplishment, that is the superior and the subordinates should jointly

choose the goals and decide on how they will be measured. Drucker believes

that the greatest advantage of the MBO is that it allows the worker to control

his performance. In this study, subsequent chapters shall dwell on the

methods of the study and, whether the variables of the commitment

mentioned in this literature have positive impact on organizational

Performance will be ascertained by testing the various hypotheses

formulated earlier in the study.

42
 REFERENCES
Banfield, E. (2005). Corruption as a feature of governmental

organization. Journal of Law and Economics, 20, 587-605.

Bass, M.D. (2005). Leadership, performance beyond expectations.

NY: Free Press

Blumental, J.M. (1983). Candid reflections of a businessman in

Washington. In J.L. Perry & K.L. Kraemer (Eds.), Public

management: Public and private perspectives (pp.22-33). Palo

Alto, CA: Mayfield.

Boyatzis, R.E. (2002). The competence manager. New York: Wiley.
Buchanan, B. (1974a). Government managers, business executives,

and organizational commitment. Public Administration Review,

34, 339-347.
Buchanan, B. (2004b). Building organizational commitment: The

socialization of managers in work organizations.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 19, 533-546.

Cacioppe, R., & Mock, P. (2004). A comparison of the quality of

work experience in government and private organizations.

Human Relations, 37, 923-940.

Dahl R.A., & Lindblom, C.E. (1953). Politics, economics and

welfare. New York: Harper & Brothers.

Downs, A. (2007). Inside bureaucracy. Boston, MA: Little Brown &
43
 Company.
Dula, D.J. (1987). Nonprofit boards: A practical guide to roles,

responsibilities, and performance phoenix, AZ: Oryx

Gordon M.E., Beauvais, L.L, and Ladd, R.T. (1984). The job

satisfaction and union commitment of unionized engineers.

Industrial and labor Relation Review. 37, 359-370.

Gordon, M.E., Philpot, J.W., Burt, R.E., Thompson, C.A., and Spiller,

W.E. (1980). Commitment to union: development of a measure

and an examination of its correlates. Journal of Applied

Psychology
Gortner, H.F., Mahler, J., and Nicholson, J.B. (1987). Organization

theory: A public perspective. Chicago, IL: Dorsey.

Gouldner, A.W. (1958) cosmopolitans and locals: toward and analysis

of latent social roles. Administrative science quarterly, 2,444-

480.
Hammock, D.C. (1998). Managing the nonprofit sector in the United

States. Bloomington, W. Indiana University Press

Hayes, T. (1996). Management, control and accountability in

nonprofit/voluntary organizations. Brookfield, VT. Avebury

Lan, Z., & Rainey, H.G. (2002). Goals, rules, and effectiveness in

public, private, and hybrid organizations: More evidence on

frequent assertions about differences. Journal of Public

44
 Administration Research and Theory, 2, 5-28.
Lee, S-H., & Olshfski, D. (2001). An examination of variations in the

nature of employee commitment between paid employees and

volunteers: Understanding different motivational bases among

employees. Unpublished paper, The 62nd ASPA National

Conference, March 10-13, 2001, Newark, New Jersey.

Lipsky (1980). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual

in public semius. New York: Russell sage foundation.

Macduff, N. (1998). Principles of training for volunteers and

employees. In R.D. Herman (Ed.) the Jossey-Bass handbook of

nonprofit leadership and management (pp.303-324). San

francisco C.A: Jossey-Bass

Meyer, J.P., Allen, N.J., and Smith, C.A. (1993) commitment to

organizations and occupations: extension and test of a three-

component conceptualization. Journal of applied psychology,

78,538-551
Morrow, P.C. (1983). Concept redundancy in organizational research:

the case of work commitment. Academy of management

review, 8,486-500
Murray, V., and Tassie, B.(1994). Evaluating the effectiveness of

nonprofit organizations. In R.D. Herman (Ed.), the Jossey-bass

handbook of nonprofit leadership and management (pp.303-

45
 324). San franisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
O’Reilly, C.A., & Chatman, J. (2006). Organizational commitment

and psychological attachment: The effects of compliance,

identification, and internalization on prosocial behavior.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 492-499.

Pappas, A.T.(1996). Reengineering your nonprofit organization: A

guide to strategic transformation. New York John Wiley and

Sons
Perry, J.L., and Wise, L.R. (1990). The motivational based of public

semice. Public Administration Review, 50,367-373.

Porter, L.W., Steers, R.M., Mowday, R.T., & Boulian, P.V. (2004).

Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover

among psychiatric technicians. Journal of Applied Psychology,

59, 603-609.
Pugh, D.S., Hickson, D.J., & Hinings, C.R. (2009). An empirical

taxonomy of work organizations. Administrative Science

Quarterly, 14, 115-126.

Rainey, H.G. (1979). Perceptions of incentives in business and

government: implications for civil service reform. Public

administration review, 39,440-448

Rainey, H.G. (2003). Public Agencies and private firms: Incentive

structures, goals, and individual roles. Administration &

46
 Society, 15, 207-242.
Wittmer, D. (2001). Serving the people or serving for pay: Reward

preferences among government, hybrid sector, and business

managers. Public Performance & Management Review, 14,

369-383.
Wolf, T. (2009). Managing a nonprofit organization in the twenty-

first century. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Welch, E., and Wong, W. (1998). Public administration in a global

context: Bridging the gaps of theory and practice between

western and non-western nations, public administration review,

58,33-40
Tummala, K.K. (1998). Compurations study and SICA. Public

administration review, 58,21.

Wallach, E.J. (1983). Individuals and organizations: the cultural

match. Training and development journal 37,29-36

Odom, R.Y., Boxx, W.R., and Dunn, M.G (1990). Organizational

cultures, management review, 14,157-169.

Fishbein, M. (1980). A theory of reasoned action: some applications

of implications. In H. Howe and M. Page (Eds), Nebraska

symposium on motivation (Vol. 27). Lincoln: university of

Nebraska press

47
 CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
METHODOLOGY
3.0 INTRODUCTION

This chapter covers the description and discussion on the various

techniques and procedures used in the study to collect and analyze the

data as it is deemed appropriate.

It is organized under the following sub-headings:

 Research Design
 Area of the Study
 Population of the study
 Sample and sampling procedure
 Instrument of Data Collection
 Validation of the Instrument
 Reliability of the Instrument
 Method of Data Collection
 Method of Data Analysis

3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN

48
According to Asika (2009), research designs are often referred to as the

structuring of investigation aimed at identifying variables and their

relationships to one another. In this study, questionnaire serves as

useful guide to the effort of generating data for this study. The

questionnaire is a survey method and it is an exploratory research.

3.2 AREA OF THE STUDY

The study will be conducted in Sabon Gari, Kaduna state. Kaduna is

the state capital of Kaduna State in north-western Nigeria, on the

Kaduna River, is a trade center and a major transportation hub for the

surrounding agricultural areas with its rail and road junction. The

population of Kaduna was at 760,084 as of the 2006 Nigerian census.

The symbol of Kaduna is the crocodile, called kada in the native Hausa

language.

3.3 POPULATION OF THE STUDY

49
The population of study consists of academic and non-academic staff

of Ambrose Ali university. According to the staff payroll, the number

amounts to 753.

3.4 SAMPLE OF THE STUDY

Random sampling technique was used in selecting 130 lecturers and

non-teaching staff from the entire population. This was chosen due to

the financial strength of the researcher coupled with time constraints.

3.5 INSTRUMENT FOR DATA COLLECTION

These are the tools or methods used in getting data from respondents.

In this study, questionnaires and interview are research instruments

used. Questionnaire is the main research instrument used for the study

to gather necessary data from the sample respondents. The

50
questionnaire is structured type and provides answers to the research

questions and hypotheses therein.

This instrument is divided and limited into two sections; Section A and

B. Section A deals with the personal data of the respondents while

Section B contains research statement postulated in line with the

research question and hypothesis in chapter one. Options or

alternatives are provided for each respondent to pick or tick one of the

options.

3.6 RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF INSTRUMENT

Reliability means the accuracy of precision of a measuring instrument

while validity means the extent to which the research instrument

measures what it is supposed to measure. In order to determine the

reliability and validity of the study, the test-retest method was used. To

have a valid instrument, the questions in the questionnaire will be free

51
from ambiguity (i.e the questions will not be too complex). To have

reliable instrument, the questionnaire will be followed with interview

of sample of respondents to know whether their view on the subject.

3.7 TECHNIQUES OF DATA ANALYSIS

Having gathered the data through the administration of questionnaire,

the collected data will be coded, tabulated, and analyzed according to

the research question and hypothesis.

In order to analyze the data collected effectively and efficiently for

easy management and accuracy, the simple percentage method was the

analytical tools used for this research project and a sample size of two

hundred (200) will be represented by 100% for easy analysis of the

responses.

Also, Chi-square statistical analytical method will be used in the

research work chi-square as a statistical technique is used in testing of

52
hypothesis so as to predict what the relationship between two variables

should be. It is used in drawing and reaching conclusion by collecting

the observed values from the questionnaire administered to

respondents, testing the degree of freedom and carrying out a decision

in determining the critical value of the hypothesis.

The formular being

X2 = (F0-FE)2

FE

Where O = Observed Frequency

E = Expected Frequency

The X2 value obtained from the formular is compared with the value of

tabulated X2 for a given significance level and degree of freedom.

53
REFERENCES

Asika, L.K., (2009). Essentials of Research Methodology. Owerri:

Spring Publishers. Pp.21

CHAPTER FOUR
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
3.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter deals with the analysis of data gathered from the field.

This section is divided into two. The first section analyses the

socioeconomic characteristics of respondents, while the second section

analyses the relevant research questions using the chi- square statistical tool.
Questionnaire Administered and Returned
In this research work, 130 questionnaires were administered, but 128

54
were returned and correctly filled, hence, 128 samples or subjects were

considered for this analysis. The table below shows the breakdown of the

administered questionnaire.
Table 4.0 Return rate of questionnaire administered in Esan Central
No of Frequency Percentage (%)
questionnaire
Administered 130 100%
Returned 128 98.46%
From the table 4.0 above, it is obvious that out of 130 questionnaires

administered, total of 128 were returned, thus, indicating a 98.46 percent

return rate.
3.2 Socioeconomic Characteristics of Respondents
Table 4.1.1 percentage of distribution of respondents by age
Age Frequency Percentage (%)
Below 30 33 25.78
31 – 34 37 28.91
35 – 44 28 21.88
45 – 54 10 07.81
55 – 64 20 15.63
Total 128 100.00%
Source: field survey 2012
From the table 4.1.1 above, it is shown that out of 128 respondents

sampled, a total of 33 representing 25.78% are below 30 years old, 37

(28.91%) are between 31 – 34 years, 28 (21.88%) are between 45 – 54 years

an d 20 (15.63%) are between 55 – 64 years. Thus, it could be seen that age

55
category 31 – 34 years dominated the sample for this study. This age group

are the most dominant in the staffs category (including ASUU and NASU).
Table 3.1.2: Percentage distribution of respondents by sex
Sex Frequency Percentage (%)
Male 68 53.13
Female 60 46.88
Total 128 100%
Source: field survey, 2011
From the table 4.1.2 above, it is shown that male respondents are

more dominant in this study than their female counterparts. The males

constitute 68 or 53.13% of the total sample while female respondents

constitute 60 or 46.88% of the total sample. This indicates that males are the

dominant population of this study.

Table 3.1.3 Percentage o distribution of respondents by marital status

Marital status Frequency Percentage (%)
Single 77 60.16
Married 49 38.28
Divorced - -
Widowed 02 1.56
Total 128 100%
Source: field survey, 2011
From the table 4.1.3 above, it is seen that 77 or 60.16% of

respondents are single, while 49 or 38.28 are married, and the least

respondents are the widowed with frequency of 2 or 1.56%. It is evidenced

56
that majority of the respondents are singles and this favorably describe the

nature of the study’s subject, especially as these category of people who are

still young can aptly describe the variables affecting their commitment and

overall work Performance.

Table 3.1.4 percentage of distribution of respondents by educational

qualification
Educational Frequency Percentage (%)
qualification
No formal education - -
Pry. Sch. Leaving Cert. - -
O’ level 18 14.01
OND/Diploma/ NCE 27 21.01
B.Sc./ HND 49 38.21
PhD 11 8.59
Others 23 17.97
Total 128 100%
Source: field survey, 2011
From the table 3.1.4 above, 18 or 14.01% are secondary school

certificate holders, while 59 or 33.33% are O’level holders, 27 (21.01%)

have OND and equivalent diplomas, 49 or 38.21% are B.Sc. or HND

holders, PhD holders are 11 (8.59%), while others (23 or 17.79%) possessed

other higher qualifications or degrees. Thus, majority respondents are B.Sc. /

HND holders having a total 38.21% of total population sampled. This further

indicates that majority respondents are literates. Hence, making the

questionnaire administration easier for the researcher.

57
Table 3.1.5 Percentage distribution of respondents by occupational
category
Category staff Frequency Percentage (%)
ASUU 46 35.94
NASU 82 64.01
Total 128 100.00%
Source: field survey, 2011
The tables above 3.1.5 above shows that 46 respondents representing

35.94% are members of the Academic Staff Union of Universities, while 82

or 64.01% are Non academic staff Union. This indicates that non academic

staff union has the highest representation in this study.

3.3 Analysis of Research Questions/Hypotheses Testing
Hypothesis I
H0: There is no significant relationship between job satisfaction and

employees’ commitment
H1: There is a significant relationship between job satisfaction and

employees’ commitment
Reference to questionnaire item (3), aimed at ascertaining satisfactory level

in the area of supervision as it affect employee commitment to their job

Table 3.2.1 Relationship between job satisfaction and employee commitment
Variable Response Row
total
ASUU NASU
Supervision has increased your 38 50 88
commitment to work

58
Supervision has not increased your 08 32 40
commitment to work
Column Total 46 82 128
Source: field survey, 2011.
X2 formula = ∑ (o – e)22
Where ∑ = Summation
O = Observed frequency
E = Expected frequency
Expected frequency = Row total X column total
N
Where N = Total sample
Degree of freedom (df) = (c – 1) (r– 1)
=1 X 1=1
Alpha level = 0.05
X2 tabulated = 3.81
X2 calculated = 3.9322
Decision rule: Reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative

hypothesis if X2 calculated is greater than X2 tabulated, but if X2 calculated

is lesser than X2 tabulated, accept the null hypothesis and reject the

alternative hypothesis.
Conclusion: At 0.05 level of significance and 1 df, X 2 calculated is 3.93.

Since X2 calculated is lower than X 2 tabulated (3.93 > 3.81) then we reject

the H0 that says there is no significant relationship between job satisfaction

59
and employees’ commitment.
Hypothesis I
O E o- e (o – e )2 (o-e)2/e
A 38 31.62 6.37 40.60 1.2842
B 50 56.37 -6.37 40.60 0.7202
C 08 14.37 -6.37 40.60 2.8253
D 32 37.15 -5.15 26.52 5.5435
Total X2 = 5.5435

a = 88 X 46 = 31.62
128
b = 88 X 82 = 56.37
128
c = 40 X 46 = 14.37
128
d = 40 X 82 = 37.15
128
Hypothesis II
H0: There is no significant relationship between motivation of employees

and employees’ commitment to work.

H1: there is a significant relationship between motivation of employees and

employees’ commitment to work.

Reference to questionnaire item (13) was based on whether the kind of

motivation (especially pay) when compared to other employee in similar

institutions have positive impact t on commitment and Performance.

Table 3.2.2 Relationship between motivation and commitment

60
Variable Response Row total

ASUU NASU
Motivation in the university 39 49 88
affect your level of
Performance
Motivation in the university 7 33 40
does not affect your level of
Performance
Column Total 46 82 128
Source: field survey, 2011.
X2 formula = ∑ (o – e)2
e
Where ∑ = Summation
O = Observed frequency
E = Expected frequency
Expected frequency = Row total X column total
N
Where N = Total sample
Degree of freedom (df) = (c – 1) (r– 1)
=1 X 1=1
Alpha level = 0.05
X2 tabulated = 3.81
X2 calculated = 6.93
Decision rule: Reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative

hypothesis if X2 calculated is greater than X2 tabulated, but if X2 calculated

61
is lesser than X2 tabulated, accept the null hypothesis and reject the

alternative hypothesis.
Conclusion: At 0.05 level of significance and 1 df, X 2 tabulated is 3.814.

Since X2 calculated is greater than X2 tabulated (6.93 > 3.81) then we reject

the H0 that says there is no significant relationship between motivation of

employees and employees’ commitment to work and we accept the H1 that

says there is a significant relationship between motivation of employees and

employees’ commitment to work.

Hypothesis II
O E o- e (o – e )2 (o-e)2/e
A 39 31.62 7.38 54.46 1.7225
B 49 56.37 -7.37 54.31 0.9636
C 07 14.37 -7.37 54.31 3.7799
D 33 37.15 -4.15 17.22 0.4635
Total X2 = 6.9295

a = 88 X 46 = 31.62
128

b = 88 X 82 = 56.37
128
c = 40 X 46 = 14.37
128
d = 40 X 82 = 37.15
128
Hypothesis III
H0: There is no significant relationship between employee’s commitment

62
and increased performance/Performance
H1: There is a significant relationship between employees’ commitment and

increased performance/Performance
Reference to questionnaire item (12) says does high level of commitment

among workers impact positively on students’ performance?

Table 3.2.2 Relationship between workers commitment and
performance/ Performance
Variable Response Row total

ASUU NASU
commitment among workers 41 50 91
impact positively on students
performance
commitment among workers 5 32 37
does not impact positively on
students performance
Column Total 46 82 128
Source: field survey, 2011.
X2 formula = ∑ (o – e)2
e
Where ∑ = Summation
O = Observed frequency
E = Expected frequency
Expected frequency = Row total X column total
N
Where N = Total sample
Degree of freedom (df) = (c – 1) (r– 1)

63
 =1 X 1=1
Alpha level = 0.05
X2 tabulated = 3.81
X2 calculated = 12.00
Decision rule: Reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative

hypothesis if X2 calculated is greater than X2 tabulated, but if X2 calculated

is lesser than X2 tabulated, accept the null hypothesis and reject the

alternative hypothesis.
Conclusion: At 0.05 level of significance and 1 df, X 2 calculated is 3.81.

Since X2 calculated is greater than X2 tabulated (12.00 > 3.81) then we reject

the H0 that says there is no significant relationship between employees’

commitment and increased performance/Performance and we accept the

alternative hypothesis that says there is a significant relationship between

employees’ commitment and increased performance/Performance.

Appendix
Hypothesis III

O E o- e (o – e )2 (o-e)2/e
A 41 32.70 8.30 68.86 2.1059
B 50 58.30 -8.30 68.86 1.8113
C 05 13.30 -8.30 68.86 5.1774
D 32 23.70 8.30 68.86 2.9055
Total X2 = 12.00

64
a = 91 X 46 = 32.70
128
b = 91 X 82 = 58.30
128
c = 37 X 46 = 13.30
128
d = 37 X 82 = 23.70
128
3.3 Interpretation of findings
This section has been divided into two parts, the first part is

centered on the demographic of respondents, the males have a higher

representation than the females. The non academic staff union also

has a higher representation in the study than their counterparts in the

academic staff category.

Three hypotheses were formulated in order to achieve the

objectives of the study. These hypotheses are tested at 0.05 level of

significance and analyzed using the chi square statistical tool. The chi

square test showed that a relationship exist between job satisfaction and

employees’ commitment. The X2- calculated value was given at 3.9322, and

this value is relatively higher than the X 2- tabulated value which was given at

3.841. Thus, the alternative hypothesis that says relationships exist was

accepted. Similarly, the second hypothesis that says a relationship exists

between motivation of employees and employees’ commitment to work was

accepted. The result gotten from the table 4.2.2 showed that majority

65
respondents attest to the fact that high level of commitment to work is

achievable through motivation especially increased pay had great influence

of employees commitment. The subsequent test of hypothesis showed that

these high levels of commitment have positive impact on performance. The

performance in this sense is associated with students’ academic achievement

and general work Performance. Thus, a calculated 12.00 X2 indicates that a

relationship exist between commitment and overall performance and

Performance.

66
 CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
4.1 Summary of the Findings
This study focus on the effect of employees’ commitment on

organizational Performance. In order to the test the various hypotheses

formulated in line with the research objectives; three hypotheses were

formulated and were all tested using the chi square method. Hypothesis one,

which says that there is a significant relationship between job satisfaction

and employees commitment was accepted or confirmed to be true. The

research finding was in consonance with that of Herzberg et al. (1989).

Herzberg et al popularized Job enrichment as technique of raising

employee’s commitment in their two-factor theory of motivation. According

to the scholars, the enrichment of a job which entails giving the individual

full control and autonomy over the job he his doing, basically increases the

responsibility of a job in order to increase the satisfaction associated with the

job. They further argued that job may be enriched in the giving room for

selection of jobs where better reward is more likely to improve commitment

and Performance. The job must be designed to provide opportunities for

achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement and growth.

The hypothesis was tested using the chi square, and the result showed

that there is a significant relationship between motivation of employees and

67
their level of commitment to work. The findings are in line with those of

notable scholars. For example, Davies (1995) while defining the concept

motivation as what goes on inside a person, which brings about her

behaviour. Davies emphasizes that lack of motivation could make an

individual not to be committed to duties and thus, lessening satisfaction from

the work. Accordingly, Berlison and Staines (2003) argued that motivation is

the basis for commitment in any organizational settings. The reward level

perhaps is what determines the level of commitment to the work.

Finally, the last hypothesis which sought to find relationship between

commitment and overall employee and organizational Performance was

confirmed. The research carried out by Wolf (1999) was in line with the

findings of this present study, Wolf found that the essence of job

enlargement is to prevent monotony, which kills, interest and job interesting

to the workers. Job enlargement can help to steer employee commitment and

motivate people to higher Performance.

4.2 Conclusion
This study placed the emphasis on the need for considering a

multidimensional view of employee commitment for Performance

improvement, arguing that the previous concept of organizational

commitment does not provide the whole story about Performance and

individual performance. Productive organizations require extra-role

68
behavior from employees. Employee commitment is the primary

factor affecting willingness to make an extra effort on behalf of the

organization.
Conventional wisdom has indicated that, in general, public

sector employees are lower on organizational commitment than their

counterparts in the private sector, thereby resulting in a lower level of

performance and Performance in the state owned institutions such as

the Ambrose Alli University. However, when viewing employee

commitment as having multiple dimensions, one can argue that the

conventional view may not be true. Despite the constant barrage of

negative images, superficial criticism, and minimal public support,

public sector employees may have a strong willingness to improve

Performance and a proactive attitude toward their organization’s well

being. In line with the findings of this study, the following conclusions were

made: enriching the work environment with motivational factors help to

increase workers or employees commitment to their duties; motivation of

employees increases their level of job Performance and motivational factors

in the organization increases employees commitment and overall satisfaction

for the job.

4.3 Suggestions and Recommendations
The university is an institution of learning which inculcate

69
morale and good instructions in the students, it as well prepare them

for the challenges ahead in their respective chosen career. This study

has extensively looked into the various ways in which employees

(university’s staffs) commitment can raised so as to make them work

towards the achievement of the goals off higher learning stated

above. In line with the study’s findings, the researcher therefore

recommends that:
1. A conducive environment for learning should be created

by the school management which emphasize discipline among the

staffs whether junior or senior academic staffs.

2. As a result of the intertwined relationships between

employee commitment and productive behaviors, researchers should

pay attention to various foci of employee commitment. As Becker et

al. (1996) pointed out; distinguishing among individual dimensions of

employee commitment does explain more about the variances in key

dependent variables than does commitment to organization.

Identifying various motivational bases of employees will enhance our

understanding for the behavior of interest and provide solutions as to

how we can motivate people to achieve a high level of Performance,

especially in the university system.

3. It should be noted, however, that not all these commitments

70
are always good for an organization’s well being. For instance, a high

level of commitment to a particular university union might be another

barrier to a harmonious labor-management cooperation that is a

bottom line for Performance improvement. Further research is needed

to identify the relationship between these foci of commitment and

key dependent variables such as the “desire to remain,” the “turnover

intent,” and the “extra-role behavior.”

71
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Allen, N.J., & Meyer, J.P. (2000). The measurement and antecedents

of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the

organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18.

Balfour, D.L., & Wechsler, B. (2001). Commitment, performance,

and Performance in public organizations. Public Performance

& Management Review, 14, 355-368.

Balfour, D.L., & Wechsler, B. (2006). Organizational commitment:

Antecedents and outcomes in public organizations. Public

Performance & Management Review, 19, 256-277.

Banfield, E. (2005). Corruption as a feature of governmental

organization. Journal of Law and Economics, 20, 587-605.

Bass, M.D. (2005). Leadership, performance beyond expectations.

NY: Free Press

Becker, T.E. (2002). Foci and bases of commitment: Are they

distinctions worth making? Academy of Management Journal,

35:232-244.
Becker, T.E., Billings, R.S., Eveleth, D.M., & Gilbert, N.L. (2006).

Foci and bases of employee commitment: Implications for job

performance. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 464-482.

Becker, T.E., Randall, D.M., & Riegel C.D. (2005). The

multidimensional view of commitment and the theory of

72
 reasoned action: A comparative evaluation. Journal of

Management, 21, 617-638.

Blumental, J.M. (1983). Candid reflections of a businessman in

Washington. In J.L. Perry & K.L. Kraemer (Eds.), Public

management: Public and private perspectives (pp.22-33). Palo

Alto, CA: Mayfield.

Boyatzis, R.E. (2002). The competence manager. New York: Wiley.
Buchanan, B. (1974a). Government managers, business executives,

and organizational commitment. Public Administration Review,

34, 339-347.
Buchanan, B. (2004b). Building organizational commitment: The

socialization of managers in work organizations.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 19, 533-546.

Cascio, J.S. (2006) The public-private distinction in organization

theory: A critique and research strategy. Academy of

Management Review, 13, 182-201.

Cacioppe, R., & Mock, P. (2004). A comparison of the quality of

work experience in government and private organizations.

Human Relations, 37, 923-940.

Cohen, A. (2003). Multiple commitments in the workplace: An

integrative approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates.
73
Dahl R.A., & Lindblom, C.E. (1953). Politics, economics and

welfare. New York: Harper & Brothers.

Downs, A. (2007). Inside bureaucracy. Boston, MA: Little Brown &

Company.
Federal Republic of Nigeria, Official gazette, No. 24, vol. 94, 2007
Guy, M.E. (2002). Managing people. In M. Holzer (Ed.), Public

Performance handbook (pp.307-320). New York: Marcel

Dekker.
Ikharehon J.I Small and Medium Scale Business Management First Edition

2009.
Lan, Z., & Rainey, H.G. (2002). Goals, rules, and effectiveness in

public, private, and hybrid organizations: More evidence on

frequent assertions about differences. Journal of Public

Administration Research and Theory, 2, 5-28.

Lee, S-H., & Olshfski, D. (2001). An examination of variations in the

nature of employee commitment between paid employees and

volunteers: Understanding different motivational bases among

employees. Unpublished paper, The 62nd ASPA National

Conference, March 10-13, 2001, Newark, New Jersey.

Lee, S-H. (2000a). Understanding Performance improvement in a

turbulent environment: A symposium introduction. Public

Performance & Management Review, 23, 423-427.

74
Lee, S-H (2000b), A multidimensional view of public sector employee

commitment and willingness to support Performance

improvement strategies: A comparative study of public

employees at managerial level between the United States and

South Korea. Unpublished dissertation, Rutgers University,

Newark, New Jersey.

Liou, K.T. (1995). Understanding employee commitment in the

public organization: A study of the Juvenile detention center.

International Journal of Public Administration, 18, 1269-1296.

Mathieu, J.E., & Zajac, D.M. (2000). A review and meta-analysis of

the antecedents, correlates, and consequences of organizational

commitment. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 171-194.

Martins, E.O. (2011) Research Methods and fundamentals in social and

behavioral sciences. Cite at hhtp://moneyteachermatrix.blogspot.com.

retrieved: April, 11 2012.

Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (2001). A three-component

conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human

Resource Management Review, 1, 61-89.

Meyer, J. P., Becker, T. E., & Vandenberghe, C. (2004). Employee

commitment and motivation: A conceptual analysis and

integrative model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 991-100.

O’Reilly, C.A., & Chatman, J. (2006). Organizational commitment
75
 and psychological attachment: The effects of compliance,

identification, and internalization on prosocial behavior.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 492-499.

Porter, L.W., Steers, R.M., Mowday, R.T., & Boulian, P.V. (2004).

Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover

among psychiatric technicians. Journal of Applied Psychology,

59, 603-609.
Pugh, D.S., Hickson, D.J., & Hinings, C.R. (2009). An empirical

taxonomy of work organizations. Administrative Science

Quarterly, 14, 115-126.

Rainey, H.G. (2003). Public Agencies and private firms: Incentive

structures, goals, and individual roles. Administration &

Society, 15, 207-242.

Wittmer, D. (2001). Serving the people or serving for pay: Reward

preferences among government, hybrid sector, and business

managers. Public Performance & Management Review, 14,

369-383.
Wolf, T. (2009). Managing a nonprofit organization in the twenty-

first century. New York: Simon & Schuster.

76
 APPENDIX
Department of Public Administration
Faculty of Management Sciences
Dear Sir/ Ma.
I am a student at the named department carrying out a research on the

effect of employee commitment on organizational Performance using

Ambrose Alli University, Ekpoma as a case study. Every information

provided by you shall be used for purely academic research and such

77
information shall be treated as strictly confidential. So please, feel free and

answer the questions as honest as possible.

Thanks for your anticipated co-operation
Yours Faithfully,
Full name
(Researcher)

Section A
Please mark ( ) in the box provided as appropriate.
1. Age: Below 30 years ( ) 31 – 34 years ( ) 35 – 44 years ( )
2. Sex: Male ( ) Female ( )
3. A. Marital Status: Single ( ) Married ( ) Divorced ( ) Widowed

( )
b. Please if Married, Divorced or Widowed, state number of

children………………………………………………………….
4. Present academic qualification: None ( ) O’level ( ) NCE/Diploma

( ) HND/B.Sc ( ) Phd ( ) Others ( )

5. Date of appointment in this university………………………………
78
 6. Present position……………………………………………………..
Section B
1. Have you had any in-service training since you joined this university?

Yes ( ) No ( )
2. How would you see the way your immediate boss supervises its own

subordinates? Yes ( ) No ( )
3. Do you think the way your boss supervise you has increased your

commitment to your job? Yes ( ) No ( )

4. Are you satisfied with the remuneration pattern at workers in the

university? Yes ( ) No ( )
5. Does the institution’s fringe benefit spur your to greater performance?

Yes ( ) No ( )
6. Does the Performance level of workers in the institution positively

reflect the management’s objective? Yes ( ) No ( )

7. Is there room for workers’ participation in the decision making

process? Yes ( ) No ( )
8. Does giving room for expansion and autonomy boost further the

Performance of the university staffs? Yes ( ) No ( )

9. How did you see the way you are rewarded in the university in

relation to other colleagues of the same status with you in the

organization? Very Good ( ) Good ( ) Fairly Good ( ) Bad ( )

Very Bad ( )
10. Are you satisfied the way employees performance is been evaluated?

Yes ( ) No ( )
11. Do you think the reward system is commensurate with the nature of
79
 job task assigned to you? Yes ( ) No ( )
12. Does high level of commitment among workers impact positively on

students performance in their chosen discipline? Yes ( ) No ( )

13. Has your view of what is obtainable in your institution in relation to

what is obtainable in other universities affected your level of

Performance? Yes ( ) No ( )
14. Which of the following re-enforcement will most likely raise spur

you to commit more efforts to your job? Yes ( ) No ( )

15. Do any of the rewards above have any positive impact on workers’

Performance? Yes ( ) No ( )

80