TITLE PAGE COMPANY PERFORMANCE - University Of Nigeria Nsukka ADAOBI VIVIAN.pdf · workforce. Most obvious is that the labour force is becoming increasingly qualified, as older non

1

2

TITLE PAGE

THE IMPACT OF EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION ON COMPANY PERFORMANCE (A STUDY OF ACCESS BANK NIGERIA PLC, ENUGU) ODO ADAOBI VIVIAN PG/MBA/06/45751 A PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION (MBA) IN MANAGEMENT.

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA ENUGU CAMPUS

SEPTEMBER, 2011

3

CERTIFICATION I, ODO ADAOBI VIVIAN, a Postgraduate student in the

Department of Management with Registration Number –

PG/MBA/06/45751 have satisfactorily completed the requirements

for the award of Master of Business Administration (MBA) degree in

Management.

I certify that the work contained herein is original and has not been

submitted either in part or in full for any Diploma or Degree of this

or any other University.

____________________________ Odo Adaobi Vivian PG/MBA/06/45751

4

APPROVAL

This project titled The Impact of Employee Participation on

Company Performance: (A study of Access Bank Nigeria

Plc, Enugu) written by Odo Adaobi Vivian, with Registration

Number PG/MBA/06/45751 has been certified and approved as

meeting the standard required in partial fulfillment for the award of

Master of Business Administration (MBA) in Management of the

University of Nigeria.

__________________ _________________ Dr .C.O. Chukwu Date Project Supervisor _________________ __________________ Dr .U.J.F. Ewurum Date Head of Department

5

DEDICATION

This Project is dedicated to God Almighty; our Creator. My

dedication also goes to my dear husband; Barr. Eugene Odo, and

my lovely children; Chidimma, Chisom, and Chimdalu.

6

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The Researcher has made efforts to put together a report finding

that is authentic, valid, and accurate. Wide consultations both by

way of literature review and personal interview were carried out. In

other words, this project is an outcome of extensive sourcing of

information.

I thank Almighty God for Life, His Love, Mercy, Guidance, and

Protection.

I am particularly indebted and grateful to my husband; Barr.

Eugene Odo, for his encouragement and financial support. I also

appreciate my children; for their understanding.

I am also grateful to the Staff of Access Bank Nigeria Plc, Ogui

Road, Enugu for their co-operation and information.

My sincere appreciation goes to my Supervisor; Dr Chukwu .C.O,

who patiently advised and supervised me throughout the period of

the research.

7

ABSTRACT

The research was carried out to ascertain the Impact of Employee

Participation on Company Performance; A study of Access Bank

Nigeria Plc, Enugu. Four departments in the Bank were used for

the study, while a sample size of 36 respondents participated in the

research study. The reason for growing interest in Employee

Participation and its effects were discussed. Also the different

categories of Employee Participation were examined to find out

their peculiarities and what can be done to improve their

participation and their outcome. Furthermore, the issue of

Employee Participation and welfare were put into consideration,

with emphasis on the right policies to be implemented in order to

get the best out of the employees. However, the analysis of the

data was based on the research questions answered by the

respondents. The questionnaire was analysed using simple

percentage distribution formula. The given level of significance was

at 95%. The hypothesis was analysed using chi-square and

correlation. Finally, the researcher discovered that the combination

of participation and welfare measures (such as equal opportunities

and family – friendly policies) help to enhance both Organisational

performance and the quality of working life. Policy support should

focus on union recognition and activity within a human rights

framework, since this can positively influence employees‟ behavior

towards Organisational goals and employer behavior towards their

employees.

8

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page - - - - - - - - - - - - i

Certification - - - - - - - - - - - - ii

Dedication - - - - - - - - - - - -

iii

Acknowledgement - - - - - - - - - -

iv

Abstract - - - - - - - - - - - - -

v

Table of contents - - - - - - - -

vi

CHAPTER ONE :– INTRODUCTION - - - - - - 1

1.1 Background of the Study- - - - - - - -

1

1.2 Statement of the Problem - - - - - - - -

3

1.3 Objectives of the Study - - - - - - - -

4

1.4 Research Hypotheses - - - - - - - -

5

9

1.5 Significance of Study - - - - -- - - -

6

1.6 Scope of the Study - - - - - - - - -

8

1.7 Limitations of the Study - - - - - - -

8

1.8 Definition of Terms - - - - - - - - -

9

Chapter References - - - - - - - - - -

12

CHAPATER TWO: – LITERATURE REVIEW - - - - -

13

2.1 Background to growing interest in participation

and its effects - - - - - - 13

2.2 Categories of Employee Participation - - - - - 14

2.3 Impact of Employee Participation - - - - - - - 19

10

2.4 Employee Participation and Family Friendly Working - -

24

2.5 Policy Implication - - - - - - - - - - -

26

2.6 Outcomes of Participation - - - - - - - -

28

Chapter References - - - - - - - - - -

40

CHAPATER THREE:– RESEARCH METHODOLOGY - -

41

3.1 Research Methods and Designs - - - - - - - 41

3.2 Area of the Study - - - - -

42

3.3 Population of the Study - - - -

42

3.4 Sampling Distribution - - - - -

42

3.5 Sources of Data - - - - - -

43

3.6 Methods of Data Collection - - - -

44

11

3.7 Validity of the Research Instrument -

45

3.8 Methods of Data Analysis - - - -

45

CHAPTER FOUR: – DATA PRESENTTION, INTERPRETATION

AND ANALYSIS - - - - - - - - 48

4.1 Questionnaire Distributed and Returned - - - 48

4.2 Data Presentation - - - - - - 49

4.3 Analysis of Hypothesis - - - -- - - 63

CHAPTER FIVE: – SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, IMPLICATIONS

OF RESEARCH FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND

CONCLUSION

5.1 Summary of Findings - - - - 75

5.2 Implications of Research Findings - - - 77

5.3 Recommendation s - - - - - 82

5.4 Conclusion - - - - - - - 83

5.5 Suggestion for Further Study - - - - 83

BIBLIOGRAPHY. - - - - - 84

Questionnaire - - - - - - 85

12

13

THE IMPACT OF EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION ON COMPANY PERFORMANCE

(A STUDY OF ACCESS BANK NIGERIA PLC, ENUGU)

BY ODO ADAOBI VIVIAN PG/MBA/06/45751

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT

FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA

ENUGU CAMPUS

SEPTEMBER, 2011

14

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

The economy has witnessed a lot of changes in the recent

years. We have the emergency of Information Technology,

Privatization, and growing global competition for the provision of

goods and services. Continuous change in product and service

markets, combined with tightening quality demands, require

employers to seek more efficient and flexible means of production.

They seek the often contradictory elements of employee

commitment and disposability, often disguised by terms such as

employability and „new employment contract‟.

Partly in response to these economic demands and partly as a

consequence of other societal shifts, there have been

corresponding changes in the composition and activities of the

workforce. Most obvious is that the labour force is becoming

increasingly qualified, as older non – qualified staff, give way to

growing ranks of university and college – educated newcomers in

the labour market. Also apparent, is the rise in the proportion of

women in the paid labour market, and associated with this,

15

growing emphasis on part – time and flexible forms of labour. A

more diverse, potentially less secure workforce, also raises

questions of equality of treatment and rights at work, with the

danger that minority or vulnerable groups will lack the resources to

participate effectively in work place affairs, thereby reinforcing

their peripheral states.

For employers of scarce and highly – qualified labour, commitment

rather than control has ostensibly become the key objective of people

management. Under these changing conditions, it is not surprising

that concern by employers, policymakers, and employees themselves,

in safeguarding and promoting interests has been reflected in

different approaches to employee participation. Governments must

balance the needs of a competitive economy with welfare of their

citizens. Employers seek production efficiency, and recognize that the

means to this is increasingly locked in the heads of the people

they employ. Well – qualified employees, seek elusive objectives

of job satisfaction, stability, and life – enhancing employment,

while a more pressing priority for less advantaged and more

vulnerable employees may simply be to gain secure employment

and reasonable treatment from their employers. The rise of

global institutions presents other problems for workers, as

16

corporate decisions become more distant from the staff that they

employ: a decision made to close a plant in one country may have

been made many thousands of miles away, with little opportunity

for indigenous employees to combat, or even question decisions

which dramatically affect their lives.

Detachment from the company may also represent a problem for

growing number of home workers, and for those whose jobs

demand high levels of mobility.

Access Bank Nigeria Plc, where the researcher is focusing this

study on, places a high premium on the development of its

manpower, and consults with employees, on matters affecting the

performance of the group. The group draws extensively on training

programs around the world. Training courses are offered to

employees both locally and overseas. This is in order to get the

best out of the employees.

The rationale for introducing, „The Impact of Employee

Participation on Company Performance‟ is based upon different

economic, social and political assumptions.

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM:

17

Employee participation can be seen as a “contested terrain”. Not all

literature agrees on the universal positive effects of participation.

Some suggests that participation may have no effect or even

negative effects on performance. However, it is difficult to discern

a definitive pattern. In Access Bank, the management holds the

interest of the team above those of the individual, while showing

mutual respect for all employees and sharing information

throughout their organization. They develop further, their leading

role in talent acquisition and talent development. They also

eliminate the negative performance contributions of their banking

subsidiaries through their “One Bank strategy‟‟. Access Bank

encourages participation of employees in arriving at decisions in

respect of matters affecting the group and employee interests, with

a view to making inputs to decisions thereon.

The Bank places a high premium on the development of its

manpower. The problem is to find out the impact of these on

Company (Access Bank) performance.

1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY:

The specific objectives of this research include:-

18

(i) To ascertain if the effects of participation schemes vary

with the environment into which they are introduced.

(ii) To determine the degree of influence granted to

employees under participation measures.

(iii) To find out if the combination of financial and work –

related participatory measures can have a positive impact

on company performance.

(iv) To assess the assumptions, that participation measures

affect all employees identically, regardless of gender, race,

age, and contractual status.

(v) To investigate in what circumstance, employees‟ voices

remain muted in terms of work – life balance and family -

friendly working.

(vi) To present that policy support, should focus on union

recognition and activity within a human rights frame

work, since this can positively influence employee‟s

behaviour towards Organizational goals.

1.4. FORMULATION OF HYPOTHESIS

(i) A combination of financial and work – related

participatory measures can have a positive impact on

Company performance.

19

(ii) A combination of financial and work – related

participatory measures does not have a positive impact

on Company performance.

(iii) Links between participation and attitude change appear

to depend on the degree of influence granted to


(iv) Links between participation and attitude change does not

depend on the degree of influence granted to employees

under participation measures.

(v) A combination of participation and welfare measures

(such as equal opportunities and family friendly policies)

appears to enhance Organizational performance and the

quality of working life.

(vi) A combination of participation and welfare measures

(such as equal opportunities and family friendly policies)

does not enhance Organizational performance and the


1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

There are numerous different rationales for introducing employee

participation, often competing. Poutsma (2001) identified four

20

dominant approaches embracing; humanistic, power - sharing,

organizational efficiency and redistribution of results rationales.

These can be subsumed under three main operational rationales,

namely; economic, social and governmental. Each rationale derives

from different conceptual bases, such that predicted outcomes of

participative initiatives can vary accordingly. Each position will be

considered in turn.

(i) Economic Rationale:- Changes in employees‟ attitudes

and behavior are achieved through financial participation,

by offering employees a stake in the firm. Employees‟

association with management values and goals is thereby

increased, and they are more motivated and committed to

achieving those goals.

(ii) Social Rationale:- By catering for employees‟ social

needs, through improved job security and satisfaction and

quality of working life, higher performance is achieved.

Alternatively, satisfying social needs can be treated as an

end in itself.

(iii) Governmental Rationale:- Current Nigeria policy is to

improve national economic efficiency, while also improving

the experience of work for employees.

21

This study which is limited to Access Bank Nigeria Plc exposes the

impact which the employees makes on company performance

based on the above rationales. Application of these rationales will

go a long way in improving the performance of companies in

private and public sectors of the economy.

1.6. SCOPE OF THE STUDY

This study covers the Impact of Employee participation on

Company performance with reference to Access Bank Nigeria Plc.

1.7. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

The limitations encountered in this study include respondents‟ bias

experienced when they were requested to fill the questionnaire.

Most were unwilling to co-operate with the researcher because

they felt they had limited time, compared to their volume of work.

There were also financial and time imposed constraints in

gathering the necessary data to study.

22

1.8 DEFINITION OF TERMS

(i) Surveys: A survey involves the collection of information,

usually by interviews or questionnaires from a sample of

the target population.

(ii) Collective Bargaining: Collective bargaining takes

place between management and trade unions at both

national and local (plant) level. However, the issues

covered by collective bargaining tend to be narrow,

concerning wages and other basic issues such as hours of

work and holidays.

(iii) Employee Empowerment: Empowerment is seen as

providing an extension to employee authority by allowing

workers to take decisions that were previously the

preserve of their line managers and to assume

responsibility for the consequences. This occurs within

an organizational culture of initiative, team work and

flexibility (Hyman and Cunningham, 1998).

(iv) Employee Involvement:- Employee involvement is a

term associated with schemes that involve low – level,

individualized participation, with little or no input into

corporate or high – level decision making.

23

(v) Employee Share Ownership Plans (ESOPS):- An

ESOP is a scheme designed to allow all employees to

become shareholders in their company. ESOPs can offer

majority shareholdings to employees. Examination from

income tax is available if shares are retained for a

minimum of five years in trust.

(vi) Joint Consultation Committees (JCCs):- A process

whereby management seeks the view of employees

before making a firm decision. In practice, it is rare for a

JCC to have veto power over managerial decisions. Two

specific types of JCCs are works councils and joint

working parties.

(vii) Suggestion Schemes: - Suggestion schemes are a

procedure for submitting and evaluating ideas.

Suggestion boxes, suggestion committees, or individual

management can all be used as the transmission agency

for ideas.

(viii) Worker Co-operatives:- Co-operatives are businesses

owned and controlled by the people working in them. Co-

operatives are democratic organizations, administered by

people elected or appointed in a manner agreed by the

24

members and accountable to them. Members enjoy equal

voting rights (one member, one vote) and participation in

decisions affecting their enterprises.

(ix) Work Councils: - Works councils potentially involve

employee representatives in strategic decision making.

They may also serve as a channel for information

disclosure and consultation.

25

REFERENCES

Joseph Rowntree Foundation (2005) - Employee Participation and Company Performance. http://www.jrf.org. UK/sites/files/jrf/1859352995.pdf.

Juliette Summers (University of Stirling) and Jeff Hyman (University of Aberdeen) (2007) – Employee Participation And Company Performance: A Literature Review. Joseph Rowntree Foundation. http: //www.jrf.org.uk/node/2322

Access Bank Nigeria Plc – Annual Report & Accounts 2008. March 2008,(P 35).

http://www.jrf.org/

26

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. BACKGROUND TO GROWING INTEREST IN

PARTICIPATION AND ITS EFFECTS.

Economic changes in recent decades have required employers, to

seek more efficient and flexible means of production. Deregulation

and privatization have also significantly altered the nation‟s

industrial relations climate, with a decline in trade unions‟ influence

and membership in the private companies. Mirroring this, has been

the growth in “new” forms of work – related participation by

employees. This is under the banner of human resource

management, associated programmes, and strategies for

partnership and high commitment.

Governments must balance the needs of a competitive economy

with the welfare of their citizens. A change in political climate has

seen social partnership currently being promoted by all interested

parties. Reflecting this change, the inclusion of trade unions in

government consultation exercises is significant.

The growing emphasis on all forms of flexibility in industry is in

response to competitive pressures. Subsequent changes in work

organization and the current political climate is reflected in the

27

emerging models of participation. These models tend to reflect

(and promote) both the individualization of the employment

relationship and the new partnership being encouraged, amongst

employees, unions, and employers.

2.2. CATEGORIES OF EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION

Operationally the term; “Employee Participation” can be divided

into two primary categories: Financial and Work – Related

Participation.

Financial Participation:- Financial participation schemes take

two main dimensions, and both are important from a policy

perspective. The first approach involves distribution of shares to

employees, based on the assumption that share ownership induces

positive attitudinal and behaviourial responses. Share – based

schemes can be classified into two principal approaches, one where

employees are offered shareholdings as part of remuneration, and

a second where employees have an option to buy shares in their

own company. The first of the distributive schemes was introduced

in 1978 in UK as the so – called approved deferred share trust

(AOST) programme, in which companies distribute share according

to a stipulated formula to all full – time employees, who satisfy

eligibility criteria. The option approach, first introduced in 1980 in

28

UK, allows employees to buy shares in their companies, at

favourable rates through an Inland Revenue approved savings

institution, such as a building society. Both approaches have

subsequently been improved financially, and participation has been

extended to part – time employees. A derivative option approach

was the much derided (though heavily patronized) and now

terminated “discretionary” (or “executive”) share option scheme,

which was available only to specified (usually senior) personnel by

invitation.

For example, this scheme was introduced in UK in 1984 and

replaced in 1996 with the more broadly based company share

option plans. In 1989, the first employee share ownership plans

(ESOPs) were given statutory approval to go alongside ESOPs

founded on a combination of earlier legislation and common law

precedents. (See Pendleton 1995a, 1998, Pendleton 2001). These

schemes can offer much higher share proportions to employees

than the original Inland revenue approved all – employee schemes.

A second dimension of financial participation concerns flexibility of

pay, where an element of remuneration varies with profitability or

other appropriate performance measures. A recent example was

cash-based profit-related pay (PRP), in which income tax relief was

29

offered to schemes that met Inland Revenue requirements. Some

14,500 schemes were active at their peak in 1997, with tax relief

calculated at E1.5 billion (IDS1998). The escalation in the loss of

income tax prompted the Government to phase out tax relief on

PRP, concluding in January 2000 with no further relief.

Work – Related Participation: - Work – related participation

comes in a number of forms: individual or collective, and direct

(i.e. face to face) or indirect (i.e. via a representative) participation.

These can be grouped into two main types of work-related

participation:

Traditional Collective Participation: This aims for a more

equitable distribution of power throughout the organization.

“New” Forms of Participation: These are more direct and

individualized and have tended to grow out of management

strategies, such as HRM, aimed to secure employee commitment to

organizational objectives through sophisticated communication

procedures, individualized reward, and developmental initiatives

such as performance appraisal linked to performance – related pay.

Possibly the clearest – cut example of traditional collective

participation is the co-operative, where participation includes both

ownership and control elements (Pencavel 2001). However,

30

relatively few employees work in cooperatives, and the bulk of the

literature on employee participation deals with the more

conventionally organized and owned firms that introduced

participation measures. Of these firms, the ones that provide for

employee share ownership (ESOP) most closely, approximates the

co-operative, with its emphasis on employee ownership. However,

unlike the co-operative, the ESOP form does not guarantee

equitable collective participation, such as one – person – one –

vote or majority employee ownership (Pendleton, 2001) Recently,

ESOPs have veined from 100 percent employee ownership to

insignificant levels of worker ownership or involvement. Unlike

most other forms of collective participation, co-operatives because

of the small size of majority of the co-operatives (an average of

fewer than ten workers), tend to use direct forms of collective

participation. In addition, for reasons of economies of scale in

terms of numbers of workers, and also from a policy perspective,

indirect collective participation is the principal collective

participation. Collective bargaining, for instance still covers 45

percent enterprise in European countries, (Cully et al, 1999)

though the proportion of employees covered by negotiated

agreements has been in continuous decline since the early 1980s.

31

(Henry et al, 2003). Collective bargaining permits employee

participation in negotiations via elected representatives or full-time

officials, usually as part of a trade union network. Other forms of

indirect collective participation can include social partnership

agreements with trade unions, works councils, co – determination

agreements, and joint consultation committees.

Second, there are the “new” forms of participation, which are

predominantly direct, such as briefings groups, and individual in

nature, e.g. attitude surveys or suggestions schemes. Most of

these forms are conflated into the term; “employee involvement”

or “employee empowerment‟‟ and, most of them can be included

under HRM strategies or approaches. These forms of direct

participation have become more important to managers seeking to

gain voluntary commitment from employees to organizational goals

(Walton, 1985). This is especially at times of heightened

competitive pressures and work insecurity. An associated impulse,

propelling managers towards a commitment – based regime,

derives from the growth of so – called knowledge sectors of the

economy, in which the means of production are locked in the head

of valued employees (Castells 2000). Hence, considerable academic

and managerial attention, has been drawn in recent years to the

32

identification and value of „high- commitment work practices‟ (see

for example, Huselid 1995), especially in new knowledge – based

sectors of the economy (Frenkel et al, 1999). In addition to the

forms of work – related participation outlined above, employee

participation in conventionally owned and organized firms can be

task – related (i.e. at the work station) or strategic (i.e at board or

corporate level), and participation at either of these level can be

communicative, consultative or negotiable.

2.3 IMPACT OF EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION

The impact of employee participation on company performance can

be studied under the following perspectives:-

(a) Attitude Change: Participatory measures such as team

working and high – involvement work practices demonstrate

improvements in performance, but can also have less positive

outcomes for employee and their social well – being. Performance

changes may occur because participation leads to changed

attitudes which lead to higher performance. Alternately, changes to

behaviour and performance may be achieved not through attitude

changes, but through fear, and an insecure or intensified work

environment.

33

One explanation for these contradictory results is that participation

schemes are sometimes introduced as part of restructuring

packages. When employees are faced with an insecure

environment, participation may induce compliance, and not the

attitude changes necessary for employees‟ commitment to the

enterprise. If this is so, behavioral changes may not be of the order

anticipated.

The degree of influence accorded to employees is also important.

Low levels of participation with little employee autonomy have

been identified as a reason for disappointing results. Where

employees expectations have been raised by introducing

participation, but there is little real improvement in employee

influence, workers may express resentment and dissatisfaction.

Where participation is only from the top down, workers may feel

that they are being lectured and not listened to. Even where

participation is from the bottom up, workers may feel that

management is using their ideas, with no return seen by

employees.

High levels of participation also have their own problems. Some

authors claim that employees do not make hard decisions, opting

for outcomes that maximize income, not profit. Others claim that

employees are not able to discipline co - workers, and that decision

34

– making takes too long. From the management‟s perspective, high

degrees of employee influence may mean that managers‟ input in

decision – making is reduced. Whether from the concern that their

authority is being compromised, or through dilution of the decision

– making process, this may result in reduced competitiveness.

Participation can also be categorized as individual versus collective.

Individualized forms of participation may clash with existing

collective arrangements and fail to induce a harmonious climate.

Concerns have also been expressed over individualized financial

participation. A fall in share prices could make it harder to attract

high – quality staff. Collective participation, on the other hand, can

work with existing labour – relations channels and attitudes in a

productive way. The role of trade unions therefore continues to be

significant.

However, collective participation is no guarantee of positive

attitude change. Management also has to accept the ethos of

participation. However middle and supervisory management is a

particularly difficult group to influence.

(b) Combining Participation Measures: The potential for

positive impact on performance seems to arise when participation

measures are used in combination, either as financial and work –

35

related participation, or as representative and direct participation.

Either combination may act upon employee perceptions,

encouraging high – trust relations within the workplace and

allowing employees with different motivations to enjoy the benefits

of participation.

Employees are not a homogenous group responding identically to

participation initiatives. Different employees have different

motivations: Some respond to financial incentives and others, more

to social or work – related ones. This is why a combination of

financial and work – related participation appears to have a

positive effect on performance.

(c) Transferability: A further issue is the transferability of

participation schemes, particularly between large and small firms.

It is uncertain whether participation schemes suitable for large

firms will have positive effects in smaller companies, or whether

participation measures can be transferred between industrial

sectors and even between different national conditions. For

example, the success of Japanese profit – sharing and other

involvement techniques has been accounted for by Japan‟s unique

culture, which emphasizes mutual obligations by employee and

employer.

36

(d) Workplace Equality:- Questions arise concerning the benefits

of participation measures to workplace equality. Work – related

participation can place a premium on social factors such as ability

to communicate and the time available to commit to participation.

Participation can therefore amplify social advantage, and by the

same token social disadvantage. For example, caring

responsibilities may mean that some employees have relatively less

time to attend meetings. In addition, some schemes may be based

upon questionable assumptions about employees – for example,

that women are sometimes less committed to work, and perhaps

less willing to participate. However, a number of studies have

refuted this assumption. Other potentially excluded groups also

suffer from amplified disadvantage. They include ethnic minorities,

single parents, agency workers, and temporary workers, with

possibly limiting effects on their capacity and opportunity for

participation.

(e) Discrimination: - Less advantaged groups and individuals,

such as older workers, ethnic minorities and disabled people may

have a restricted “voice” within the workplace. Coupled with

greater employment insecurity, this can permeate workers‟

performance through frustration and impotence, with a negative

37

impact on both organizational performance and quality of working

life.

This evidence indicate that participation schemes in tandem with

welfare measures – such as equal opportunities and family-friendly

policies improve organizational performance and the quality of

working life. By contrast, perceptions of unfairness have a negative

impact.

2.4 EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION AND FAMILY FRIENDLY

WORKING

Some studies, which have examined the business consequences of

implementing family – friendly employment policies have found

benefits in doing so. Others have tried to determine whether

employees have a voice over work – life issues, and how

instrumental it might be in establishing family friendly employment

policies.

Employees appear to have a voice of some kind in larger

organizations. It tends to be collective, and expressed through

trade unions or staff associations.

Smaller enterprises typically lack collective means of expression,

though there can be direct communication between individual

employees and their employers over flexible working. Some studies

38

have reported individuals negotiating informal arrangements with

their managers in small and medium sized enterprises to suit their

individual circumstances, but not all employees have a powerful

enough voice to achieve this.

Family – friendly policies appear to be more widespread and deeply

embedded in enterprises which recognize unions, though this

association does not imply that unions have a more effective voice.

Various studies have confirmed the low-key role of trade unions

consultation; even with and among line managers also appears to

be rather restricted. The possible exception is the health services,

where there is an organizational cultural tradition of consultation.

However, the major factor influencing employers to implement or

extend family – friendly policies appears not to be collective or

individual employee pressures, but labour – market conditions

backed by minimal statutory requirements.

The management of time is an essential workplace process over

which employees – especially those with domestic responsibilities –

need a measure of control in order to combat tensions between the

demands of work and home. Despite some softening of the political

climate towards trade unions and scarcity of labour in some

sectors, there is little evidence that employees, collectively or

39

individually, have been able to make any significant impression on

the work – life agendas of companies, even when there can be a

business case for such policies. It also seems that some managers

continue to adopt a gender and possibly marginalized perspective

of work life issues.

Research have also shown that long working hours; another major

dimension of work – life conflict, have scarcely been touched by

the Working Time Regulations, or high – profile concerns

expressed in the media and elsewhere. In terms of the work – life

balance and family – friendly working, the evidence suggests that

employees voice out with precision and care.

2.5 POLICY IMPLICATIONS

The extent of current political support for employee participation is

mixed at times. It appears uncoordinated or even contradictory, as

evidenced by the Government‟s ambiguous stance towards greater

Nigerian influence over participation practice and work reforms

such as the Working Time Directive. In addition, work-related

participation policies focus on efforts to promote collective (though

not necessarily trade union – based) participation through

measures such as social partnership, while financial participation

40

legislation leans towards individualized programmes. Current policy

appears to be trying to appease both employers‟ and to a lesser

extent trade union aspirations, though initiatives to date seem to

point to the former direction.

This apparent lack of co-ordination of policy will have a

disproportionate impact on small firms. Small firms are less likely to

introduce work-related participation measures than larger

companies, therefore providing few opportunities to access the

positive effects of combining participations schemes.

On top of this, the Employment Relations Act works against the

development of collective participation in small firms through the

exclusion of enterprises with 20 employees and under from union

recognition rights. Since the quality and quantity of welfare policies

are associated with trade union presence, small firms and their

employees could be missing out on the positive effects of

combining participation and welfare schemes.

There are also some areas where the reach of policy is limited.

Participation measures are not isolated from the effects of the

external environment.

Economic fluctuations have an impact on share prices for instance,

and the voluntary nature of many participation schemes means that

41

they are vulnerable to cost – saving exercises. In addition, there

are discrepancies between how a policy is conceived at national or

organizational level, and how it is interpreted at company or

workplace level.

2.6 OUTCOMES OF PARTICIPATION

The outcomes of participation consider the effects of participation

schemes, not all of which achieve the outcomes desired by their

originators. The evidence for contradictory effects is examined. The

impact that different types of participation have on the processes

of participation into improved company performance is then

investigated, focusing on participation schemes, with different

degrees of employee influence.

Also studied is the empirical evidence as well as generalization of

participation effects.

(a) Contradictory Evidence:- The question remains, why should

the type of participation introduced affect performance differently?

This body of contradictory evidence is not surprising given the

often considerable lack of attention paid to the mechanisms by

which employee participation influences performance and the

assumptions made about causality, linking participation to attitude

42

change, then to changes in behaviour and finally, to improved

performance. These processes are all too frequently shrouded in

questionable assumptions about the nature of the workplace and

the casual effects of participation programmes. Of particular

concern are assumption made about change in employee attitudes,

especially that participation induces greater employee association

with management values, and that this will also improve

employment relations within the workplace. If this assumption

proves fragile, it sheds doubt on the assumed positive links

between participation and performance. A further assumption

which is rarely contested is the generalization of participation

schemes between different work places, industrial sectors and sizes

of enterprise. Finally of concern for the social outcomes of

participation is the assumption that participation affects all

employees identically, regardless of gender, age, race and contract

states.

(b) Degree of Employee Influence:-

(i) Low – Degree Influence: The literature clearly indicates

that the introduction of some forms of participation can have little

positive effect on company performance. Part of the explanation

for this is the level of participation offered to employees whether is

43

consultation or decision – making rights – and the level this is

operated at, board or work station. Low degrees of participation

with little employee autonomy have been identified as reasons for

disappointing participation results. This has been observed in some

firms where, after an initial “honeymoon” period, the workforce has

expressed more dissatisfaction with the firm than before the

introduction of participation, because of the raised and unmet

expectations of employee influence (Kruse and Blasi, 1995). The

scope of participation schemes may be so limited as to simply

irritate the workforce, thus failing to meet their expectations. A

workforce may also feel resentful about the amount of time, effort

and increased responsibility involved in a participation scheme

(Bryson and Millward, 1997; McMabband Whitfield, 1998),

especially if they see little return from management. One possible

explanation for these discrepancies can be gleaned from views

from the shop floor, which suggest that participation schemes have

had little effect on communications between employees and

management. Patterson et al‟s (1997) study found that employees

felt that, while management placed emphasis on quality goods and

services, little emphasis was placed on participation and

communication. This may go some way towards explaining Adam‟s

44

(1991) findings on the limited impact of quality circles. Ackroyd and

Procter (1998), support this alternative view of the UK situation

with their contention that in fact very little has actually changed in

employee relations.

They found out that employee relations have not moved towards

„softer‟ measures, such as communications and employee

motivation, but in fact have moved towards, “harder” measures.

This hypothesis is supported by the WERS 98 findings; employees

were less likely to report improvements in communications with

management than their managers were.

These shortcomings suggest that the role of the trade unions

remains significant, although this contention has to be measured

against a (possible) shift in worker identification away from unions.

Krieger and O‟ Kelly (1998) also found that the presence of a trade

union was important. It meant that higher degrees of employee

influence were associated with individualized, direct participation,

and that this situation produced significant cost – cutting results.

Where participation is only in one direction, from top down (e.g.

through briefing meetings), workers may feel that their views are

not being considered or given any weight, therefore, while they

feel indifferent about the increased communication from the top, this

45

may be accompanied by increased hostility towards management.

Marchington et al (1989) found a number of instances where team

briefing often heralded as a cornerstone to workplace

communication, was ineffective. Where one – way communication

is from the bottom up, for example through suggestion schemes,

workers may then feel that management is using their suggestions,

with no rewards seen by employees. Overall disillusionment within

the workforce could therefore rebound on management plans. In

other circumstances, where schemes have been introduced without

prior worker consideration, resentment may be the overriding

attitudinal change, not contentment.

Sisson and Frohlich‟s (1998) results support the thesis that low –

degree influence is unlikely to produce glowing results. In their

recent analysis of the Employee Direct Participation in Organization

Change (EPOC) survey, they found that where employees were

expected to act more autonomously, and take on responsibility

without any increase in employee influence, then participation had

no significant impact. They also found that the effects of

participation on increase in output were strongest where employee

participation involved a high degree of influence. Of particular

interest is their conclusion that team work has a significant effect

46

only when associated with high degrees of employee influence. On

the other hand, to reduce absenteeism, low levels of influence

were found to be the most effective means. This has implications

for Company choice of participation scheme – depending on

whether the primary motive is to reduce costs or to improve

output. However, Sisson and Frohlich (1998), concluded that

consultative forms of participation, “are more likely to be

associated with positive employment trends” more than delegate

forms of participation.

(ii) High – Degree Influence: - Where participation in

conventionally owned and organized firms occurs at strategic

decision – making levels, and is more than merely consultative,

many of the problems of associated with low – degree influence

forms of participation are bypassed. However other problems may

occur in this circumstance.

Hartley (1992, p. 302) maintains that employee owners (i.e. high –

degree influence participation) will be unwilling to, “make hard

decisions” or to discipline colleagues, and furthermore that

factionalism will develop. Hartley (1992) continues that employees

may be unwilling to take orders from managers, because employee

views formally hold equivalent weight in the decision – making

47

process. Further, where there is a significant element of employee

ownership, a manager may feel constrained from exercising

authority or from requesting an employee – owner to perform

certain tasks.

Ben – Ner and Jones (1995) suggest that decision making rights

without financial rewards for workers could mean that employees

do not take care when taking decisions, which could therefore

adversely affect company performance. Jones (1987) and

Defourney et al (1985) agree that worker involvement in decision

making could result in poorer decisions, because workers are

assumed to be less skilled or competent in this task (or they face

potential conflict of interest, for example as board members on

pension fund trusts). There is also the contention that, where

employees have decision – making rights, their decisions will be

income – maximizing and not profit –oriented (Bartlett, 1994),

though Bonin et al (1993) consider this view over – simplistic. Ber-

Ner and Jones (1995) also contend that, where workers have

control rights but no financial return rights, they will seek to

improve working conditions. This, Ben – Ner and Jones assume will

adversely affect Company Efficiency. However, this could also be

seen as a means to increase worker loyalty to the company,

48

thereby improving worker performance and reducing labour

turnover. Furthermore, employee involvement in decision making

may increase the amount of time, decision making takes, thus

disadvantaging firms in highly competitive markets. Jones (1987)

takes a different tack. He warns that with enforced strategic level

participation; for example legislation for co-determination

managers, may reduce their input and effort in decision making,

resulting in poorer company performance. However, Jones goes on

to add that worker involvement in, and acceptance of decisions can

reduce implementation problems, therefore lowering costs and

improving adaptability.

(c) Empirical Evidence: Empirical Evidence from Roche and

Geary‟s (2002) study of partnership at the Irish Airports Authority

(Aer Rianta), also suggests a positive outcome for both parties,

supporting the mutual gain thesis. The principles of Constructive

Participation by which the agreement operated at Aer Rianta

contained explicit directions that unions and management would do

all possible to improve company performance and living standards

for employees‟ (cited in Roche and Geary, 2002, P. 668). The main

benefit for the organization from this new agreement was that

workers were believed to have become more willing to contribute

49

voluntarily to the success of the company in ways that had been

absent in the past‟ (Roche and Geary, 2002, P.673), indicating at

least at a causal link between the advent of partnership and

employee attitude changes. This partially supports the claims for

improvements to the psychological contract, but Roche and Geary‟s

work contains no explicit reference to Organizational Performance

Improvements (this may have been assumed through employee

attitude changes). However, there was also significant opposition

to the new ways of decision making, from both worker directors

and middle management. Yet for the employees, a better quality of

working life was seen as a principal outcome. A key element of the

partnership agreement within this organization was the protection

of established collective bargaining procedures, and sphere of

influence overlaid by the new partnership structure and

procedures. These newer partnership arrangements consisted of

both established and new forms of collective representation in

decision making and individualized participation - including

employee share ownership.

In this respect, it was a combination of Collective and

Individualized participation (both a pluralist and unitary approach)

that achieved the outcomes of partnership for the organization and

50

its employees. Nevertheless, the partnership arrangement were put

in place as a direct response to an increasingly competitive

environment, the threat of privatization and a near full –

employment labour market. Thus, Streeck (1992, 1994, 1995, cited

in Roche and Geary, 2002) and Ramsay‟s (1977) doubts concerning

the durability and longevity of these participation arrangements

may well be relevant in these cases.

Guest and Peccei‟s (2001) work is also somewhat qualified, in its

support for partnership. This research also found support for the

combination of direct and representative forms of participation

(alongside forms of flexible working) in achieving attitude and

behaviour changes in favour of the organization. This attitude

change was also associated with improved labour retention and

absence levels, and with improvements to Organizational

performance, sales and profits. In principle, the authors conclude

that, while they found evidence of mutual benefits, these were

however skewed in favour of management in most of their sample.

This was particularly sharp in those organizations that „reported

only low progress towards partnership.‟ In this respect,

Organizational performance outcomes, held precedence over

employee welfare outcomes. So while performance was enhanced,

51

at what cost to employees, and for how long? Yet, where „high –

trust‟ relations existed within organizations, both employee welfare

and organization performance outcomes were observed. This led

Guest and Peccei to conclude that:

„It is only when employees are engaged in terms of attitudes and

behaviour, that performance gains are apparent. This implies that

too great a distortion in the balance of advantage, would fail to

lead to positive performance outcomes‟.

(d) Generalisability of Participation Effects.

A further mediating factor in the application and effects of

participation is the size of the workplace. Relatively little is known

about participation in the SME sector beyond what has been

published on co-operatives. Many of the more recent surveys and

studies, fail to differentiate between large and small organizations,

However, Bryson and Millward (1997, P.8) discovered that

participation is „less prevalent in small firms … than in larger firms.‟

A major survey that has looked into the state of participation in

small and large firms is the Workplace Employee Relations Survey

(WERS). The results for WERS 98 show that, while only 8 percent

of small firms had not introduced any new management or

employee involvement measures, less than 30 percent are using

52

five or more of these schemes, compared with well over half of the

larger firms. These findings have particular resonance given the

government„s continuing emphasis on expanding and encouraging

the small firms sector (DFEE, 1998) and on promoting share

ownership in small enterprises through programmes such as the

Enterprise Management Initiative.

Beyond arguments about enterprise size are concerns about the

Industrial sector within which participatory firms are located.

Questions remain concerning whether successful participation

schemes are transferable between industry types. Lucas (1996)

found that, in the hotel and catering sectors, participation was

extremely low and much poorer than in other sectors. In addition,

participatory measures in this sector were unlikely to induce better

performance (Lucas, 1995). The hotel and catering sector, like

other low – skill sectors, e.g. clothing, has a relatively high staff

turnover. Management rationales for introducing participation

schemes in such a sector can be questioned because participation

cannot be used as a panacea for an industry‟s problems. In the

absence of a sustained policy to alter the underlying structural

conditions and clearer understanding of the high labour turnover in

these sectors, participation schemes are unlikely to have significant

positive impacts.

53

REFERENCES

Joseph Rowntree Foundation (2005) - Employee Participation And Company Performance. http://www.jrf. org.uk/sites/files/jrf/1859352995.pdf

Juliette Summers (University of Stirling) and Jeff Hyman (University

of Aberdeen) (2007) –Employee Participation and Company Performance: A Literature Review, Joseph Rowntree Foundation. http://www.jrf.org.uk/node/2322.

54

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter concentrates on the various methods used in colleting

the data and the techniques used in analyzing the data collected.

The Research methodology will be carried out under the following

headings:-

(1) Research Method and Designs

(2) Area of the Study

(3) Population of the study

(4) Sampling Distribution

(5) Sources of Data

(6) Methods of Data Collection

(7) Validity of the Research Instrument

(8) Methods of Data collection

REFERENCES.

3.1 RESEARCH METHODS AND DESIGNS

Survey method of research was employed for the study, and the

questionnaire was extensively used as the basic tool. Furthermore,

multiple choice questions were used in designing the questionnaire,

in order to exhaust all the possible responses that are relevant to

the research.

55

3.2. AREA OF THE STUDY

The area that will be covered under this study is Access Bank

Nigeria Plc, Ogui Road Enugu.

3.3 POPULATION OF THE STUDY

The population of the study is forty (40). It is got from the

Customer services unit of Access Bank PLC, Enugu. It is illustrated

thus:-

S/N DEPARTMENTS NO OF STAFF PERCENTAGE

1 Marketing 15 37.5

2 Operations 12 30.0

3 Security & Drivers 8 20.0

4 Cleaners 5 12.5

TOTAL 40 100.00

3.4 SAMPLING DISTRIBUTION

The sample size is thirty six (36). It is got from the population

units using Yaro Yamen‟s Statistical Distribution formula.

n = ___N_____ 1 + N (e) 2 Where n = Sample size

N = Population unit /size (40)

56

E = Sampling error taken at 5%

Hence, n = 40

1 + 40 (0.05)2

n = 40

1 + 0.1

n = 40

1.1

n = 36.4 Ω 36

n = 36

3.5 SOURCES OF DATA

The data used for the research project were collected through

primary and secondary sources.

(a) Primary Data: The questionnaire served as the main

primary data used. It was administered to the staff of Access Bank

Nigeria Plc Enugu. This is supplemented with oral interview and

personal observation.

(b) Secondary Data: These were mainly used in chapter two of

the research project, where related literatures were reviewed. I

visited the internet, went to the sites that has to do with Employee

57

Participation and Company performance, where I collected most of

the data.

3.6 METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION

The methods/instruments used for data collections were as follows:

(a) Questionnaire: A total of 36 questionnaires were distributed

to the staff of Access Bank Nigeria Plc Enugu. It is made up of

multiple choice questions comprising a total of twenty questions.

(b) Interview: The Interview gives the Researcher on the spot

response from the respondents. This provides a complementary

data to the questionnaire.

(c) Observations: Observations were made on the activities

taking place in the Organization. (a), (b), and (c) form the primary

method of data collection.

Secondary method of data collection involves collecting data, which

had been gathered by a different entity (agency) for their own

specific use, but which are of relevance to the researcher in

carrying out her work. They consist mainly of work of others in the

past, as contained in the textbooks, internet, company reports,

journals, information offices, etc.

58

3.7 VALIDITY OF THE RESEARCH INSTRUMENT:

The Researcher prepared the questionnaire herself, before giving

to a specialist, whose advice informed the researcher to make sure

it measured, what it intended. The supervisor finally approved it,

before they were distributed, as there was no interesting aspect of

the study that was omitted when designing the survey questions.

Furthermore, the copies of the questionnaire were completed at

the convenience of the respondents, and in an atmosphere free

from intimidation.

3.8 METHODS OF DATA ANALYSIS:

The responses from the questionnaires were carefully collected and

classified, according to the number of items on the questionnaire

most relevant to the research questions.

The methods used for the analysis included:-

(a) The questionnaire was analyzed using simple percentage

distribution formula:-

Where r = Number of responses to each questionnaire

n = Observable sample size, which is the total respondents.

(b) The hypothesis: The Chi - Square (X2) will be used in

analyzing the data, and testing the hypothesis.

59

The formula is given thus:-

X2α(R-1) (C-1) = X

20.05(R-1) (C-1) = X20.05df

R = Row Number; C = Column Number

The level of significance is taken at 95%

The calculated value is from the formula,

X2df = ∑(o

i - e

i)

ei

Where oi Observed Frequencies

ei Theoretical Expected Frequencies

X2 Chi - Square

df = Degree of Freedom = (R - 1) (C - 1)

Σ = Summation sign; 0.05 means “95% chance”.

Decision Rule

The decision rule for the hypothesis is:

Accept Ho if and only if the table/critical value is greater than the

calculated value. Reject if otherwise. The Rejection and Acceptance

region are shown below:

60

(c) The Correlation Analysis:- This is used to show if there is

a positive or negative relationship between two variables. The co-

efficient of correlation (r) is calculated as follows:-

R = nΣxy - (Σx) (Σy)

(nΣx2 - (Σx) 2) (nΣy2 - (Σy) 2)

Where x = Independent variable

y = Dependent variable

Decision Rule: If the co-efficient of correlation (R) is positive

(+), then the null hypothesis will be accepted, otherwise it should

be rejected.

Reject Ho

95%

Accept Ho

61

CHAPTER FOUR

DATA PRESENTATION, INTERPRETATION, AND ANALYSIS.

The purpose of this chapter is to present, interpret, and analyses

data collected in the course of this research study: The Impact of

Employee Participation on Company Performance – A study of

Access Bank Nigeria Plc Enugu. The analysis of data collected was

treated in accordance with the methodology stated in the previous

chapter. The questionnaire was designed to test the validity of

each research question posed in this study.

4.1 QUESTIONNAIRE DISTRIBUTED AND RETURNED

TABLE 4.1

S/N DEPARTIMENT NO

GIVEN

%

GIVEN

NO

RETURNED

%

RETURNED

1 Marketing 14 38.9 14 38.9

2 Operations 11 30.6 11 30.6

3 Security &

drivers

7 19.4 7 19.4

4 Cleaners 4 11.1 4 11.1

TOTAL 36 100 36 100

This means that all the questionnaires distributed, were returned

62

4.2 DATA PRESENTATION

4.2.1. RESEARCH QUESTION 7:

The effects of participation schemes vary with the environment into

which they are introduced.

TABLE 4.2.0: RESPONSES

DEPT. YES % NO % TOTAL %

Marketing 12 33.33 2 5.56 14 38.89

Operations 9 25.00 2 5.56 11 30.56

Security & Drivers 4 11.11 3 8.33 7 19.44

Cleaners 2 5.56 2 5.56 4 11.12

TOTAL 27 75.00 9 25.01 36 100.01

SOURCE: Questionnaire Responses

From table 4.20, 27 respondents representing 75% said, „yes‟,

while 9 respondents representing 25% of the total sample said

„No‟. Therefore, we conclude that the effects of participation

schemes vary with the environment into which they are introduced.

63

4.2.2. RESEARCH QUESTION 8

Does an insecure workplace environment induce employees‟

compliance with participation measures?


DEPT.

YES

%

NO

%

I DO NOT

KNOW

%

TOTA

L

%

Marketing 7 19.44 4 11.11 3 8.33 14 38.88

Operations 8 22.22 2 5.56 1 2.78 11 30.56

Security &

Drivers

4

11.11

1

2. 78

2

5.56

7

19.45

Cleaners 2 5.56 1 2.78 1 2.78 4 11.12

TOTAL 21 58.33 8 22.2

3

7 19.4

5

36 100.0

1


From Table 4.2.1, 21 respondents representing 58.33% said, „yes‟,

8 respondents representing 22.23% said, „No‟, while 7

respondents representing 19.45% said, „I do not know‟. Therefore

we conclude that an insecure workplace is likely to induce

employees‟ compliance with participation measures.

64


Does an insecure workplace help to achieve from the employees

the commitment needed for attitude change?


DEPT.

YES

%

NO

%

I DO NOT

KNOW

%

TOTAL

%

Marketing 5 13.89 7 19.44 2 5.56 14 38.89

Operations 3 8.33 5 13.89 3 8.33 11 30.55

Security &

Drivers

2

5.56

4

11.11

1

2.78

7

19.45

Cleaners 1 2.78 2 5.56 1 2.78 4 11.12

TOTAL 11 30.56 18 50.00 7 19.45 36 100.01


From Table 4.2.2., 11 respondents representing 30.56% said, „Yes‟,

18 respondents representing 50% said, „No‟, while 7 respondents

representing 19.45% said, „I do not know”. Therefore we conclude

that an insecure workplace may not achieve from the employees,

the commitment needed for attitude change.

65


Links between participation and attitude change appear to depend

on the degree of influence granted to employees under

participation measures.


DEPT.

STRONGL

Y AGREE

%

AGRE

E

%

NOT

AGREE

%

TOTAL

%

Marketing 4 11.11 7 19.44 3 8.33 14 38.88

Operations 3 8.33 6 16.67 2 5.56 11 30.56

Security &

Drivers

3

8.33

3

8.33

1

2.78

7

19.44

Cleaners 1 2.78 2 5.56 1 2.78 4 11.12

TOTAL 11 30.55 18 50.00 7 19.45 36 100.00


From Table 4.2.3, 11 respondents representing 30.55% indicated,

„„Strongly Agree”, 18 respondents representing 50% said, “Agreed”,

while 7 respondents representing 19.45% said, “Not Agree”. We

therefore conclude that links between participation and attitude

change appear to depend on the degree of influence granted to


66

4.2.5 RESEARCH QUESTION 11

Is it true that low degrees of perceived influence granted to

employees are unlikely to produce positive results?


DEPT.

YES

%

NO

%

I DO NOT

KNOW

%

TOTAL

%

Marketing 8 22.22 3 8.33 3 8.33 14 38.88

Operations 7 19.44 2 5.56 2 5.56 11 30.56

Security &

Drivers

5 13.89 1 2.78 1 2.78 7 19.45

Cleaners 2 5.56 1 2.78 1 2.78 4 11.12

TOTAL 22 61.11 7 19.45 7 19.45 36 100.00


Table 4.2.4 showed that 22 respondents representing 61.11% said,

“Yes”. 7 respondents representing 19.45% said, “No". Also, 7

respondents representing 19.45% said, “I do not know.” We

therefore conclude that low degrees of perceived influence granted

to employees are unlikely to produce positive results.

67

4.2.6 RESEARCH QUESTION 12

Middle Management appears to resist participation initiatives, which

are perceived as reducing their influence or authority, thus posing

an obstacle to the success of participation programmes.

TABLE 4. 2. 5. RESPONSES

DEPT AGREE % DISAGREE % TOTAL %

Marketing 10 27.78 4 11.11 14 38.89

Operations 8 22.22 3 8.33 11 30.55

Security &

Drivers

4 11.11 3 8.33 7 19.44

Cleaners 2 5.56 2 5.56 4 11.12

TOTAL 24 66.67 12 33.33 36 100


From Table 4.2.5, 24 respondents representing 66.67% indicated,

“Agree”, while 12 respondents representing 33.33% indicated,

“Disagree”. We therefore conclude that Middle Management

appears to resist participation initiatives, which are perceived, as

reducing their influence or authority, thus posing an obstacle to the

success of participation programmes.

68

4. 2. RESEARCH QUESTION 13

Do you agree that a combination of financial and work – related

participatory measures can have a positive impact on company

performance as employees do not all react to participation

initiatives in the same manner?


DEPT.

STRONGLY

AGREE

%

AGREE

%

NOT

AGREE

%

TOTAL

%

Marketing 7 19.44 5 13.89 2 5.56 14 38.89

Operations 7 19.44 2 5.56 2 5.56 11 30.56

Security & Driver

4 11.11 3 8.33 - - 7 19.44

Cleaners 2 5.56 2 5.56 - - 4 11.12

TOTAL 20 55.55 12 33.34 4 11.12 36 100.01


Table 4.2.6 showed that 20 respondents representing 55.55%

indicated; “Strongly Agree‟‟, 12 respondents representing 33.34%

said; “Agree”, while 4 respondents representing 11.12% said;

„„Not Agree”. We therefore conclude that a combination of financial

and work – related participatory measures can have a positive

impact on company performance as employees, do not all react to

participation initiatives in the same manner.

69

4.2.8: RESEARCH QUESTION 14

Some Employees respond well to financial initiatives and others

more to work – related elements


DEPT.

YES

%

NO

%

I DO NOT KNOW

%

TOTAL

%

Marketing 8 22.22 4 11.11 2 5.56 14 38.89

Operations 7 19.44 3 8.33 1 2.78 11 30.55

Security &

Driver

3

8.33

2

5.56

2

5.56

7

19.45

Cleaners 2 5.56 1 2.78 1 2.78 4 11.12

TOTAL 20 55.55 10 27.78 6 16.68 36 100.01


From Table 4.2.7, the data showed that 20 respondents

representing 55.55% said; “yes‟‟, 10 respondents representing

27.78% said; “No”, while 6 respondents representing 16.68% said;

“I do not know”. From this we conclude that, some employees

respond well to financial initiatives, and others more to work –

related elements.

70

4. 2. 9: RESEARCH QUESTION 15

Do you agree to the assumptions that participation measures

should affect all employees identically, regardless of gender, race,

age, and contractual status?


DEPT. AGREE % DISAGREE % TOTAL %

Marketing 5 13.89 9 25.00 14 38.89

Operations 3 8.33 8 22.22 11 30.55

Security &

Drivers

2 5.56 5 13.89 7 19.45

Cleaners 1 2.78 3 8.33 4 11.11

TOTAL 11 30.56 25 69.44 36 100.00


From Table 4.2.8, 11 respondents representing 30.56 said,

“Agree”, while 25 respondents representing 69.44% said, “Not

Agree”. This shows that the assumptions that participation

measures should affect all employees identically, regardless of

gender, race, age, and contractual status is not agreed to.

71


Can the assumptions above, amplify social disadvantage?


DEPT.

Y ES

%

NO

%

I DO NOT

KNOW

%

TOTAL

%

Marketing 8 22.22 3 8.33 3 8.33 14 38.88

Operations 8 22.22 2 5.56 1 2.78 11 30.56

Security &

Drivers

4

11.11

2

5.56

1

2.78

7

19.45

Cleaners 3 8.33 1 2.78 - - 4 11.11

TOTAL 23 63.88 8 22.23 5 13.89 36 100

SOURCES: Questionnaire Responses

From Table 4.2.9, 23 respondents representing 63.88% said;

“Yes”, 8 respondents representing 22.23% said; “No‟‟, while 5

respondents representing 13.89% said; “I do not know”.

Therefore, we conclude that the assumptions above, can amplify

social disadvantage.

72


Disadvantaged groups, such as older workers, disabled people, and

those with caring commitments, may have only a restricted voice

at work.


DEPT.

YES

%

NO

%

SOME TIMES

%

TOTAL

%

Marketing 8 22.22 2 5.56 4 11.11 14 38.89

Operations 6 16.67 2 5.56 3 8.33 11 30.56

Security &

Drivers

4 11.11 1 2.78 2 5.56 7 19.45

Cleaners 2 5.56 1 2.78 1 2.78 74 11.12

TOTAL 20 55.56 6 16.68 10 27.78 36 100.02


From Table 4.2.10, 20 respondents representing 55.56% indicated;

“Yes”, 6 respondents representing 16.68% indicated; “No”, while

10 respondents representing 27.78% said; „„Sometimes”. We

therefore conclude that; disadvantaged groups, such as older

workers, disabled people, and those with caring commitments, may

have only a restricted voice at work.

73


Do you agree that a combination of participation and welfare

measures (such as equal opportunities and family- friendly policies)

appears to enhance Organizational performance and the quality of

working life?


DEPT. STRONGLY AGREE

% AGREE % NOT AGREE

% TOTAL %

Marketing 9 25.00 4 11.11 1 2.78 14 38.89

Operations 8 22.22 3 8.33 - - 11 30.55

Security &

Drivers

4

11.11

3

8.83

-

-

7

19.44

Cleaners 2 5.56 2 5.56 - - 4 11.12

TOTAL 23 63.89 12 33.33 1 2.78 36 100



“Strongly Agree”, 12 respondents representing 33.33% indicated;

“Agree” while only 1 respondent representing 2.78% indicated;

“Not Agree”. We therefore conclude that, a combination of

participation and welfare measures (such as equal opportunities

74

and family – friendly policies) appears to enhance Organizational

performance and the quality of working life.

4. 2.13: RESEARCH QUESTION 19

Policy support should focus on union recognition and activity within

a human rights frame work.


DEPT YES % NO % I DO NOT

KNOW

% TOTAL %

Marketing 10 27.78 2 5.56 2 5.56 14 38.90

Operations 8 22.22 1 2.78 2 5.56 11 30.56

Security &

Drivers

6

16.67

-

-

1

2.78

7

19.45

Cleaners 4 11.11 - - - - 4 11.11

TOTAL 28 77.78 3 8.34 5 13.90 36 100.02


The above table 4.2.12 depicts that 28 respondents representing

77.78% indicated; “Yes”, 3 respondents representing 8.34%

indicated; “No”, while 5 respondents representing 13.90% said; “I

do not know”. Therefore, we conclude that, policy support should

focus on union recognition and activity within a human rights

framework.

75


The statement above; (No 19), can positively influence employees‟

behaviour towards Organizational goals.




“Yes”,1 respondent representing 2.78% indicated; „„No‟‟, while 4

respondents representing 11.12% indicated; “I do not know”. We

therefore conclude that the statement, „Policy Support should focus

on union recognition and activity within a human rights

framework‟, can positively influence employees‟ behaviour towards

Organizational goals.

DEPT

YES

%

NO

%

I DO NOT

KNOW

%

TOTAL

%

Marketing 13 36.11 - - 1 2.78 14 38.89

Operations 9 25.00 1 2.78 1 2.78 11 30.56

Security &

Drivers

6 16.67 - - 1 2.78 7 19.45

Cleaners 3 8.33 - - 1 2.78 4 11.11

TOTAL 31 86.11 1 2.78 4 11.12 36 100.01

76

4. 3. ANALYSIS OF HYPOTHESIS

(1) Table (4.3.1) –

Ho – A combination of financial and work – related

participatory measures can have a positive impact on

company performance.

H1 - A combination of financial and work related participatory

measure does not have a positive impact on company

performance.

The above hypothesis 1 is analysed using research question 13.

Do you agree that a combination of financial and work-related

participatory measures can have a positive impact on company


initiatives in the same manner?


DEPT. STRONGLY

AGREE

% AGREE % NOT

AGREE

% TOTAL %

Marketing 7 19.44 5 13.89 2 5.56 14 38.89

Operations 7 19.44 2 5.56 2 5.56 11 30.56

Security &

Drivers

4

11.11

3

8.33

-

-

7

19.44

Cleaners 2 5.56 2 5.56 - - 4 11.12

TOTAL 20 55.55 12 33.34 4 11.12 36 100.01


77

TABLE 4.3.1

From Table 4.3.1., ẋ = = 12.00

ẏ= =33.33

The standard deviation Sx of the values of x could be calculated

with the following formular.

Sx = x-ẋ; From the table, x = 20, 12, and 4. ẋ = 12

Δ Sx = 20 – 12 = 8, 12 – 12 = 0, and 4 – 12 =- 8

Sy = y – ẏ. from the table; y= 56, 33 and 11. ẏ = 33.33.

ΔSy = 56 - 33.33 = 22.67; 33-33.33 = -0.33, and 11- 33 – 33

= - 22.33

OPTIONS

FREQU

ENCY

X

%

Y

dx=x-ẋ

dy=y-ẏ

dx2=(x-ẋ)2

dy2=(y-ẏ)2

dxdy= (x-ẋ)(y-ẏ)

Strongly Agree

20

56

8

22.67

64

513.93

181.36

Agree

12

33

0

-0.33

0

0.11

0

Not Agree

4

11

-8

-

22.33

64

498.63

178.64

TOTAL 36 100 0 0 128 1012.67 360

78

ẋ = Mean value of x

Ý = Mean value of Y

r = Co – efficient of Correlation

Δr = n xy - ( x) ( y)

[n X2 - x 2] [n y2 - y 2]

X = Independent variable

Y = Dependent variable

r = 3 1560 - 3600

[ 3 560) - 1296] [ 3 4346 - 10,000 ]

r = 1080 = 1080

(384) (3038) 1,166,592

r = 1080

1080 = + 1

r = + 1

DECISION:

There is a perfect correlation (i.e. + 1), which indicates that, the

null hypothesis which states that a combination of financial and

work – related participatory measures can have a positive impact

on company performance is accepted.

79

(2) Table (4.3.2.)

Ho - Link between participation and attitude change appear to


under participation measures

H1 - Links between participation and attitude change does not

depend on the degree of influence of granted to employees


The above hypothesis 2 is analysed using research question 10:

Links between participation and attitude change appear to depend

on the degree of influence granted to employees under

participation measures.



DEPT.

STRONGLY

AGREE

%

AGREE

%

NOT

AGREE

%

TOTAL

%

Marketing 4 11.11 7 19.44 3 8.33 14 38.88

Operations 3 8.33 6 16.67 2 5.56 11 30.56

Security &

Drivers

3

8.33

3

8.33

1

2.78

7

19.44

Cleaners 1 2.78 2 5.56 1 2.78 4 11.12

TOTAL 11 30.55 18 50.00 7 19.45 36 100.00

80

To calculate the expected frequencies, “E” or Eij

we use the formular, Eii = R x C n Where;

Eij = Expected Frequency

R = Row Total

C = Column Total

n = Total observation

So, for the following observed frequencies, we calculate the

expected frequencies thus;

“O” „„E‟‟

4 = 14 X 11 = 4. 3 36 7 = 14 x 18 = 7. 0 36 3 = 14 x 7 = 2. 7 36 3 = 11 x 11 = 3. 4 36

6 = 11 x 18 = 5. 5 36 2 = 11 x 7 = 2. 1 36 3 = 7 x 11 = 2. 1 36

81

3 = 7 x 18 = 3. 5 36 1 = 7 x 7 = 1. 4 36 1 = 4 x 11 = 1. 2 36 2 = 4 x 18 = 2. 0 36 1 = 4 x 7 = 0. 8 36

To calculate the Chi – Square (X2); the following calculation

follows:-

Oi Ei Oi - Ei (Oi - Ei) 2 (Oi-Ei)

2 EI

4 4. 3 - 0.3 0. 09 0.021

7 7. 0 0.0 0.00 0.000

3 2. 7 0.3 0 .09 0.033

3 3. 4 - 0.4 0. 16 0. 047

6 5. 5 0.5 0. 25 0. 046

2 2. 1 - 0.1 0. 01 0.005

3 2.1 0.9 0. 81 0.386

3 3. 5 -0.5 0. 25 0.071

82

1 1.4 -0.4 0. 16 0.114

1 1.2 -0.2 0. 04 0 .033

2 2.0 0.0 0 .00 0.000

1 0.8 0.2 0. 04 0. 050

36 36 0 0. 806

For the Table or Critical value, the table has 4 rows and 3 column

X2α(R-1)(C-1) = X295%(R-1)(C-1)

X20.05 (4-1) (3-1) = X20.05 (3) (2)

X20.056 = 12.59

:. The Table value = 12.59

The calculated value = O.806

DECISION:

Since the calculated value is well below the critical/table value, we

therefore:

Accept Ho: Links between participation and attitude change

appear to depend on the degree of influence granted to employees


83

ACCEPTANCE REGION (SHADED REGION)

(3) Table (4.3.3)

Ho - A combination of participation and welfare measures (such as

equal opportunities and family friendly policies), appears to

enhance Organizational performance and the quality of

working life

H1 - A combination of participation and welfare measures (such as

equal opportunities and family friendly policies) does not


working life.

REJECT Ho

95%

Critical

Value = 12 . 59

ACCEPT Ho

84

The above hypothesis 3, is analysed using research question 18:

Do you agree that a combination of participation and welfare

measures, (such as equal opportunities and family – friendly

policies) appears to enhance organizational performance and the

quality of working life?.


SOURCE: Questionnaire Reponses

To calculate the expected frequencies, “Eij”,

We use the formular; Eij = R x C n So for the following observed frequencies, we calculate the

expected frequencies thus;

“O” “Ei” 9 = 14 x 23 = 8. 9 36 4 = 14 x 12 = 4. 7 36

DEPT. STRONGLY AGREE

% AGREE % NOT AGREE

% TOTAL %

Marketing 9 25.00 4 11.11 1 2.78 14 38.89

Operations 8 22.22 3 8.33 - - 11 30.55

Security &

Drivers

4

11.11

3

8.33

-

-

7

19.44

Cleaners 2 5.56 2 5.56 - - 4 11.12

TOTAL 23 63.89 12 33.33 1 2.78 36 100

85

1 = 14 x 1 = 0. 4 36 8 = 11 x 23 = 7. 0

36

3 = 11 x 12 = 3.7

36

0 = 11 x 1 = 0.3

36

4 = 7 x 23 = 4.5

36

3 = 7 x 12 = 2.3

36

0 = 7 x 1 = 0.2 36 2 = 4 x 23 = 2.6 36 2 = 4 x 12 = 1.3

36

2 = 4 x 12 = 1.3 36 0 = 4 x 1 = 0.1 36

86

To calculate the Chi - square (X2), the following calculation

follows:-

Oi Ei Oi - Ei (Oi - Ei) 2 (Oi - Ei) 2 Ei

9 8.9 0.1 0.01 0.001

4 4.7 -0.7 0.49 0.104

1 0.4 0.6 0.36 0.900

8 7.0 1.0 1.00 0.143

3 3.7 - 0.7 0.49 0.132

0 0.3 - 0.3 0.09 0.300

4 4.5 -0.5 0.25 0.056

3 2.3 0.7 0.49 0.213

0 0.2 - 0.2 0.04 0.200

2 2.6 - 0.6 0.36 0.139

2 1.3 0.7 0.49 0.377

0 0.1 - 0.1 0.01 0.100

36 36 0 2.665

The calculated value = 2.665

For the table value, the table has 4 rows and 3 columns.

X2∝ (R-1)(C-1) = X295%(R-1)(C-1) = X20.05(4-1)(3-1) = X20.056

87

X2O.O56 = 12.59

:. The Table value = 12.59

DECISION:

Since the calculated value is well below the critical / table value,

we therefore:

Accept Ho : A combination of participation and welfare measures

(such as equal opportunities and family

opportunities and family – friendly policies), appears

to enhance organizational performance and the


ACCEPTANCE REGION (SHADED REGION)

REJECT Ho

95%

Critical

Value = 12 . 59

ACCEPT Ho

88

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, IMPLICATIONS OF FINDINGS,

RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION.

5.1. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

After the analysis, the following were discovered:

(1) The effects of participation schemes vary with the

environment into which they are introduced.

(2) An insecure workplace is likely to induce employees‟

compliance with participation measurers.

(3) An insecure workplace may not achieve from the employees,

the commitment needed for attitude change

(4) Links between participation and attitude change, appear to

depend on the degree of influence, granted to employees


(5) Low degrees of perceived influence granted to employees are

unlikely to produce positive results.

(6) Middle Management appears to resist participation initiatives,

which are perceived as reducing their influence or authority,

thus posing an obstacle to the success of participation

programme.

89

(7) A combination of financial and work – related participatory

measures can have a positive impact on company


initiatives in the same manner.

(8) Some Employees respond well to financial initiatives and

others to more work –related elements.

(9) The assumptions, that participation measures should affect

all employees identically, regardless of gender, race, age,

and contractual status is not agreed to.

(10) The assumptions above, can amplify social disadvantage.

(11) Disadvantaged groups, such as older workers, disabled

people, and those with caring commitments may have only a

restricted voice at work.

(12) A combination of participation and welfare measures (such as

equal opportunities and family friendly policies) appears to


working life.

(13) Policy support should focus on union recognition and activity

within a human rights framework.

(14) The statement above, (number 13), can positively influence

employees‟ behaviour towards Organizational goals.

90

5.2 IMPLICATIONS OF THE RESEARCH FINDINGS

In Research Finding 1:- The effects of participation schemes

vary with the environment into which they are introduced. This

means that the impact of employee participation on company

performance varies from companies to companies whether large or

small firms, and also varies between different national conditions.

The effect of employee participation on Access Bank, Enugu may

not be the same with First Bank, Enugu or any other company.

Also the effect may equally not be the same with Access Bank,

Lagos.

In Research Finding 2:- An insecure workplace, is likely to

induce employees‟ compliance with participation measures. When

there is job insecurity in the bank or the economy the employee in

order to protect their jobs, will be willing to participate to move the

company forward, and thus prevent insecurity.

In Research Finding 3: An insecure workplace may not achieve

from the employees, the commitment needed for attitude change.

Even though the employees will be willing to participate in order to

secure their jobs, this does not necessarily mean that their

behaviours will change automatically. There may be other means

to achieve attitude change other than insecure work place.

91

In Research Finding 4:- Links between participation and attitude

change, appear to depend on the degree of influence granted to

employees under participation measures. Participatory measures

such as team working and high – involvement work practices

demonstrated improvements in performance, but can also have

less positive outcomes for employee and social well – being.

Performance changes may occur because, participation leads to

changed attitudes, which lead to higher performance.

In Research Finding 5: Low degrees of perceived influence are

unlikely to produce positive results. Where employees‟ expectations

have been raised by introducing participation, but there is little real

improvement in employee influence; workers may express

resentment and dissatisfaction.

In Research Finding 6: Middle management appears to resist

participation initiatives, which are perceived as reducing their

influence or authority, thus posing an obstacle to the success of

participation programmes. High degrees of employee influence

may mean that managers‟ input in decision – making is reduced.

This can be from the concern that their authority is being

compromised, or through dilution of the decision – making process,

which may result in reduced competitiveness.

92

In Research Finding 7:- A combination of financial and work -

related participatory measures can have a positive impact on

company performance, as employees do not all react to

participation initiatives in the same manner. This combination may

act upon employee perceptions, encouraging high – trust relations

within the workplace, and allowing employees with different

motivations to enjoy the benefits of participation.

In Research Finding 8:- Some Employees respond well to

financial initiatives and others more to work – related matters. This

shows that employment relationship tends to be individualistic.

Employees have their own preference in their relationship with

their employers, and this also depends on what is obtainable in the

company. This new partnership is being encouraged between

employees, unions and employers.

In Research Finding 9:- The assumption that participation

measures should affect all employees identically, regardless of

gender, race, age, and contractual status is not agreed to. A major

social obstacle to participatory forms of work organization is that

they can result in increased work effort and responsibilities, which

can be incompatible with family situations or caring responsibilities.

93

In Research Finding 10:- Assumptions above can amplify social

disadvantage. Other significant implications are that participatory

schemes may amplify existing social inequalities in the workplace.

This may result in not getting the necessary input from all

concerned.

In Research Finding 11:- Disadvantaged groups; such as older

workers, disabled people, and those with caring commitments, may

have only a restricted voice at work. The participation scheme is

likely to exclude certain individuals or groups as above, by making

it difficult for them to take part in these schemes. Compound

disadvantage may accrue through excluding these employees from

input into decision making, thereby possibly distancing them

further through consequent actions.

In Research Finding 12:- A combination of participation and

welfare measures (such as equal opportunities and family – friendly

policies appear to enhance Organizational performance and the

quality of working life. Certainly, there are indications that

possessing and expressing a „voice‟ in Organizational affairs, can be

associated with positive performance effects, and that a collective

voice may be most effective.

94

In Research Finding 13: - Policy support should focus on union

recognition and activity within a human rights framework. There

are practical problems, though the evidence shows that, even

where unions are recognized, their impact on human right issues,

such as work – life balance or promoting gender equality, may be

restricted. Second, employers do not necessarily associate union

presence with effective employee or Organizational performance.

In Research Finding 14: - The statement above can positively

influence employees‟ behaviour towards Organizational goals. It

has been argued that union revitalization will occur, as a result of

the „representation gap‟ for employees, which has been generated

through the decline of union presence. This suggests that

government policy consideration should be given to greater

support for union recognition and activity, and for a stronger

human rights framework for the protection of vulnerable individuals

and groups of employees. Unions themselves, as the prime

„champions‟ for human rights at work, also need to look at the

most effective ways, in which they could attract, represent, and

retain a more diverse membership.

95

5.3. RECOMMENDATIONS:

It has been found out that combinations of participation and

welfare measures (such as equal opportunities and family – friendly

policies) appear to enhance both Organizational performance and

the quality of working life.

Policy support should focus on union recognition and activity within

a human rights framework, since this can positively influence

employees‟ behaviour towards Organizational goals, and employer

behaviour towards their employees. One visible approach that

combines participation with welfare is trade union presence and

recognition. There is strong evidence that union recognition

improves the scope and scale of welfare policies such as family -

friendly employment within organizations, though not necessarily

their operation at workplace level.

Given the findings, policy - makers should be especially concerned

about the policy implications for participation in terms of potentially

excluded groups. This is especially the case, since small firms,

(which are particularly affected by the current lack of policy co-

ordination) employ a disproportionately high population of both

women and ethnic minorities. Ignorance of these differences within

96

the workforce could lead to participation schemes that undermine

equality of opportunity within the workplace.

5.4. CONCLUSION:

Without adequate knowledge of how and why participation

schemes are achieving results, studies will continue to produce

contradictory findings.

However, it seems clear that combinations of financial and work –

related participation schemes, also collective and individualized

participation schemes, can exert positively synergistic effects. Of

particular importance are the social and economic contexts, into

which a participation scheme is introduced. Changes in legislation

concerning participation and union recognition are important

considerations, given the evidence linking unionism to improved

performance. In addition, the role of other complementary

legislative and policy changes must be taken into account, since

the combination effect appears to extend beyond bundles of

participatory practices.

SUGGESTION FOR FURTHER STUDY.

Employee participation and Company performance: A review of the

literature by Juliette summers and Jeff Hyman is published by the

Joseph Rowntree Foundation as part of the Work and Opportunity

series.

97

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Access Bank Nigeria Plc – Annual Report & Accounts 2008. March 2008,(P 35).

Ackroyd.S. and Procter.S. (1998), British Manufacturing

Organization and Work Place Industrial Relations: some attributes of the new flexible firm. British Journal of Industrial Relations, Vol. 36, No 2, PP 163 – 184.

Ben – Ner.A. and Jones .D.C. (1995), Employee Participation,

Ownership and Productivity: A Theoretical Frame Work, Industrial Relations, Vol. 134, No 4, PP532 – 554.

Bryson.A and Millward.N. (1997), Employee Involvement in Small

Firms. London: Policy studies Institute. Castells . M. (2000), The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford:

Blackwell. Joseph Rowntree Foundation (2005) - Employee Participation and

Company Performance. http://www.jrf.org. UK/sites/files/jrf/1859352995.pdf.

Juliette Summers (University of Stirling) and Jeff Hyman (University of

Aberdeen) (2007) – Employee Participation And Company Performance: A Literature Review. Joseph Rowntree Foundation. http: //www.jrf.org.uk/node/2322

http://www.jrf.org/

98

QUESTIONNAIRE

APPENDIX - PERSONAL LETTER

Department of Management, Faculty of Business Administration, University of Nigeria, Enugu Campus.

Dear Respondent,

I am a Post – Graduate Student of the University of Nigeria in the

above-mentioned department, with Registration Number –

PG/MBA/06/45751. Currently, I am conducting a research on the

topic: “The Impact of Employee Participation on Company

Performance; A Study of Access Bank Nigeria Plc, Enugu”. The

research is purely for academic documentation, and any

information divulged will be treated with utmost confidentiality.

Please, study the questionnaire and kindly supply all the

information required.

Thanks for your co-operation

Yours faithfully,

Odo Adaobi .V.

99

INSTRUCTIONS

Please follow the instructions carefully, and tick (√) in the option of

your choice. Thank you.

PART 1

(1) Sex: (a) Male (b) Female

(2) Marital Status: (a) Single (b) Married

(3) Age:

(a) 21 - 30 years

(b) 31 - 40 years

(c) 41 - 50 years

(d) 50 years and above

(4) How long have you worked in this Bank?

(a) 5 - 10 years

(b) 11 - 20 years

(c) 21 - 30 years

(d) 31 years and above

(5) What section of the Bank do you belong?

(a) Operations

(b) Relationship office/Marketing

(c) Security

(d) Cleaners

100

6) To what category do you belong in the Bank?

(a) Management staff

(b) Senior staff

(c) Junior staff

PART 11

(7) Do you agree that the effects of participation schemes vary

with the environment into which they are introduced?

(a) Yes

(b) No

(8) Does an insecure work place environment induce employees‟

compliance with participation measured

(a) Yes

(b) No

(c) I do not know

(9) Does an insecure workplace help to achieve the commitment

needed for attitude change?

(a) Yes

(b) No

(c) I do not know

101

(10) Links between participation and attitude change appear to



(a) Strongly Agree

(b) Agree

(c) Not Agree

(11) Is it true that low degrees of perceived influence granted to

employees are unlikely to produce positive results?

(a) Yes

(b) No

(c) I do not know

(12) Middle Management appears to resist participation initiatives,

which are perceived as reducing their influence or authority,

this posing an obstacle to the success of participation

programmes

(a) Agree

(b) Disagree

102

(13) Do you agree that a combination of financial and work-

related participatory measures can have a positive impact on

company performance as employees do not all react to

participation initiatives in the same manner?

(a) Strongly Agree

(b) Agree

(c) Not Agree

(14) Some Employees respond well to financial to initiatives and

others to more work – related to more work – related

elements.

(a) Yes

(b) No

(c) I do not know

(15) Do you agree to the assumptions that participation measures

affect all employees identically regardless of gender, race,

age, and contractual status?

(a) Agree

(b) Disagree

(16) Can the assumption above, amplify social disadvantage?

(a) Yes

(b) No

(c) I do not know

103

(17) Disadvantaged groups, such as older workers, disabled

people, and those with caring commitments, may have only a

restricted voice at work

(a) Yes

(b) No

(c) Sometimes

(18) Do you agree that a combination of participation and welfare

measures (such as equal opportunities and family friendly

policies) appears to enhance organizational performance and

the quality of working life?

(a) Strongly Agree

(b) Agree

(c) Not Agree

(19) Policy support should focus on union recognition and activity

within a human rights frame work.

(a) Yes

(b) No

(c) I do not know

104

(20) The statement above (No 19) can positively influence

employees‟ behaviour towards organizational goals.

(a) Yes

(b) No

(c) I do not know

Documents

TITLE PAGE COMPANY PERFORMANCE - University Of Nigeria Nsukka ADAOBI VIVIAN.pdf · workforce. Most obvious is that the labour force is becoming increasingly qualified, as older non