THE EFFECTS OF JOB SATISFACTION ON EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE IN GOVERNMENT ENTERPRISES

ABSTRACT

The topic of this project report on the Impact of Job Satisfaction on employee performance in Government Owned Enterprises (GOE’s). There was a time when it was considered sound economic policy for government to establish and invest in corporation and enterprises. It was then agreed that government owned enterprises were better for stimulating and accelerating natural economic development rather than private initiative. This research therefore aimed at investigating, identifying, analysis and presenting research findings on the Impact of Job Satisfaction on employee performance. To achieve the above aims, research hypothesis were formulated to that whether promotion has no impact on job satisfaction, there is no relationship between salary and job satisfaction and conducive environment does not contribute to job satisfaction in government owned enterprises. The researcher made use of research questionnaire, which were designed and distributed to staff of these government owned enterprises. The method of analysis is the use of tables, percentage and chi-square. The major finding of the research is that promotion has a significant relationship with job satisfaction, there is relationship between salary and job satisfaction and conductive environment contribute to job satisfaction among employee in government owned enterprises. In view of the above findings the study recommended that:

 1.Government owned enterprises should see increase/prompt payment as a motivation factor, that can increase productivity in the organization.

 2. Government should use employee inputs as a criteria for promotion of workers, because most of these workers in government are idle.

3. Government should make the working environment conducive, so that the workers, can see their working environment as their second home.

 4. Government owned enterprises should adopt management by objective in which employee should be part in decision making of the organization so that all hands will be on deck.

 5. The structure of the organization should be restructure so that there will be cordial relationship between the employees and employer.

6.Working conditions should be improved and sustainable to enhance

performance.

 7. Management should be sensitive to the difference in needs and values among the employee. Every individual is unique and will respond differently to attempts to motive him or her.

 8. Management should be sensitive to employees, complaints about low pay and unchallenging work.

Too often management delude them into thinking that employees dissatisfaction can be lessened by painting work area piping in music, giving out a few more words of praise, or giving people longer work breaks.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page i

Certification ii

Dedication iii

Acknowledgement iv

Abstract v

Table of Content vi

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

The importance of qualified manpower in the social, political and economic development of any nation can hardly be over emphasized. No nation is known to have attained and sustained high level of economic growth and

development without ample supply of manpower.

Of all the factors that unlock the forces of economic and development, a

country’s human resources is the most vital because without, it all the other factors have to wait. (Nwachukwu 1988, p-128)

Positive changes in the quality of work force according to Nwachukwu,

account for rapid economic development that has taken place in advanced

countries, Kuznet in Nwachukwu once observed that “the major capital stock of an industrially advance country is not its physical equipment; it is the body of knowledge amassed from tested findings and discoveries of empirical science, and the capacity and training of its population to use this knowledge”.

At the organization level, the essence of any manpower programme is to

enhance the welfare of workers by maximizing their skills as well as the quality and quality of their employment opportunity and by so doing add to their economic strength (Nwachukwu ibid). Thus all employee programme are aimed at human resource development and utilization bearing in mind that a well-motivated and satisfied manpower is an asset to an organization, which enhances productivity. In a real sense, three important elements, money, man and material make up any business enterprises. While each of these elements is particularly importance in any organization, it is however the people or the human element that is often responsible for the success of an organization.

It is not uncommon to experience a situation where competing firms buy

materials in the same market, secure their money from the same sources and employ their personnel in the same area, yet one company emerges as being more productive and profitable than the other.

A study of such circumstances more often than not reveals that the

difference in the performance is due to the fact that one company has a more “satisfied” work force, hence more productive. With this illustration,

people/manpower determine the success of enterprises.

A well-known management theorist, Rensis Likert concludes, “All the

activities of any enterprises are initiated and determined by persons who make up that institution, underscores the importance of employee function. Plant, offices, computers, equipment and all else that a modern firm uses are unproductive except for human effort and direction. Of all the tasks of

management, managing the human component is the central and most important task because, all else depend on how well is done” (Likert quoted in Iyayi 1989, p.151). Personnel/employee administration is that organization or enterprises

function which is especially concerned with the management of the human

component in organizations.

This human component pervades the entire organization and because of this, it follows that the performance of the personnel, or at least an important part of it, devolves on all individuals and managers who in one way or another have responsibility for the performance of one or more subordinates in the organization. The management function of leading, directing and motivating are all personnel functions, which all management must perform. A manager who fails in any of these respects is also likely to fail in the performance of his/her primary responsibility even if such responsibility is for production, accounting or marketing (Iyayi ibid).