EFFECTS OF MOTIVATION AND JOB SATISFACTION OF OFFICE PERSONNEL TOWARDS ORGANIZATIONAL PRODUCTIVITY

ABSTRACT

Organizational productivity is the retention power of every organization as it ensures the loyalty of its market share. This is because it represents their value and creates a corresponding demand for organizational service. This study was undertaken to examine the effects of motivation and job satisfaction of office personnel towards organizational productivity. The survey research method was adopted in this study. The data were collected from fifty-eight (58) respondents of National Social Insurance Trust Fund (NSITF) who were enrolled in the study. A null hypothesis was tested using Granuer test and rejected. The findings of this study shows that there is a direct relationship between personnel motivation, job satisfaction and organizational productivity. This study recommended developing efficient workplace mechanism to ensure employee are at their best to deliver quality service.

Table of Contents

Abstract

Chapter One

Introduction

1.1 Background Of The Study

1.2 Statement Of The Problem

1.3 Objectives Of The Study

1.4 Significance Of The Study

1.5 Research Question

1.6 Research Hypothesis

1.7 Scope And Limitation Of Study

Chapter Two

Review Of Literature

2.1 The Conceptual Studies

2.2 The Nexus Between Motivation And Productivity

2.3 Theoretical Framework

2.4 Empirical Studies

Chapter Three

Research Methodology

3.1 Introduction

3.2 Research Design

3.3 Research Settings

3.4 Sources Of Data

3.5 Population Of The Study

3.6 Sample Size Determination

3.7 Instrumentation

3.8 Reliability

3.9 Validity

3.10 Method Of Data Collection

3.11 Method Of Data Analysis

3.12 Ethical Consideration

Chapter Four

Data Presentation, Analysis And Interpretation

4.1 Demographic Information

4.2 Research Questions

4.3 Test Of Hypothesis

Chapter Five

Summary, Conclusion And Recommendation

5.1 Summary

5.2 Conclusion

References

Questionnaire

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the study

Productivity is a constant factor for every effective organization. Organizations gear towards effective productivity because it represents their value and creates a corresponding demand for organizational service. Organizational productivity is the retention power of every organization as it ensures the loyalty of its market share. Productivity however can be referred to as the quantity of work that is attained in a unit of time by means of the factors of production. These factors include technology, capital, entrepreneurship, land and labour. It is the link between inputs and outputs and increases when an increase in output occurs with a lesser than comparative increase in input. It also occurs when equal amount of output is generated using fewer inputs (ILO, 2005). Bhatti (2007) and Qureshi (2007) were of the perspective that productivity can be seen as a measure of performance that encompasses both efficiency and effectiveness. It can also be referred to as the ratio of output or production capacity of the workers in an organization. It is the correlation that exists between the quantity of inputs and outputs from a clearly defined process. The performance of a business which determines its continued existence and development is largely dependent on the degree of productivity of its workers. According to Yesufu (2000) the prosperity of a nation as well as social and economic welfare of its citizens is determined by the level of effectiveness and efficiency of its various sub components.

Productivity is a total measure of the efficiency or capacity to transform inputs that is raw materials into finished products or services. More precisely, productivity is a measure that indicates how well essential resources are used to accomplish specified objectives in terms of quantity and quality within a given time frame. It is suitable when measuring the actual output produced compared to the input of resources, taking time into consideration. Hence, productivity ratios indicate the extent at which organizational resources are effectively and efficiently used to produce desired outputs. Efficiency takes into account the time and resources required to execute a given task. Therefore, it can be concluded that effectiveness and efficiency are significant predictors of productivity.However, productivity is a function of effective use of all the factors of production which human resource is the driver of other resources. The implication of this is that productivity is highly dependent on the human factor of production. The way and manner the human resource is coordinated and applied can determine the result attached to productivity.

Flynn et al. (1995) claimed that there is a significant relationship between core quality management practices (technical factors) and quality management infrastructure (human factors); they mentioned that the human factors positively impact the technical factors. Their study, further, showed that the human factors have both direct and indirect impact on performance through their impact on technical factors of quality management. Indeed, the human factors act to create an appropriate environment to implement the technical aspect; this fact refers to the influence of the human factors on the implementation of technical factors. On the other hand, the human factors also impact organizational performance in the same way that the traditional human resource management impact organization performance (Ahire et al., 1996).Besides, Ahire suggestion was similar to the claim of Flynn et al. (1995); Ahire claimed that the human factors directly and indirectly impact organization performance. Furthermore, Rahman & Bullock (2005) examined the relationship between the soft factors (human factors) and the hard factors (technical factors) and their impact on organization performance. They found a positive relationship between both soft and hard factors and organization performance, since the soft factors directly impact the hard factors and organization performance. They also found indirect relationship between the soft factors and organization performance; the soft factors indirectly impact organization performance through their direct impact on the hard factors. As well, Abdullah et al. (2008) suggested that the effective implementation of the soft factors in the organization plays a central role in the quality improvement, which acting to improve performance and productivity. However, they examined the direct and indirect relationship of the soft factors on organization performance. Their results found direct positive effect of soft factors on organization performance, and they also found indirect effect of soft factors on organization performance through their direct effect on quality improvement that acts as a mediator factor for the relationship between the soft factors and organization performance.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Often times some employees could find themselves subject to greater demands and responsibilities than they are capable of handling. They suffer from raised stress levels which can be detrimental to an employee’s emotional and physical responses, thus, causing challenges for both the employee and the organization (Leong, Furnham, & Cooper, 1996). Research has linked work instability to role ambiguity and role conflict (Chang, 2008) and indicated that certain factors, such as work overload and poor working conditions often result in negative mental and physical health consequences for employees (Murphy, Cooper, & Payne, 1988). According to Schabracq & Cooper (2000), stress is a key factor of low motivation and morale which lead to low performance, high turnover, low job satisfaction, increased absenteeism, and low quality products and services. Lack of employee motivation and job satisfaction can directly affect organizational productivity. Nigerian companies therefore ought to identify the cause of low employee motivation and develop mechanism for to ensure adequate job satisfaction.It is based on this premise that this study is undertaken to examine the Effects Of Motivation And Job Satisfaction On Office Personnel Towards Organizational Productivity.

1.3 Objectives Of The Study

The primary aim of this study is to examine the effect of motivation and job satisfaction on Office personnel for enhanced productivity. Specifically, this study seeks to:

1. Determine the role of motivation in organizational productivity.

2. The impact of job satisfaction on organizational productivity.

3. The relationship between employee motivation, job satisfaction and organizational productivity.

1.4 Significance Of The Study

Organization emphasize on employee productivity. This is exhibited in the amount of workload the employee are expected to carry out. This study will help organizations especially the private sector organization understand their role in increasing employee productivity and the impact motivation and job satisfaction has on the overall organizational productivity. The findings of this study will prove important for policy makers such as the Nigeria Social Insurance Trust Fund (NSITF) as the structure the framework between employee and employer.

1.5 Research Question

The following research questions guided this study:

1. What is the role of personnel motivation in improving organizational productivity?

2. What is the impact of job satisfaction on organizational productivity?

3. Is there any relationship between personnel motivation, job satisfaction and organizational productivity?

1.6 Research Hypothesis

H0: Personnel motivation and job satisfaction do not lead to organizational productivity.

Ha: Personnel motivation and job satisfaction leads to organizational productivity.

1.7 Scope and Limitation of study

This study is carried out to assess how personnel motivation and job satisfaction of office personnel affects organizational productivity. The focus element of this study is the office personnel. There are other factors that likely affects organizational productivity. However, this study focuses on office personnel. Furthermore, the findings of this study was limited to the selected organization. This means that the findings may not be applied to all organizations or organization of non-service industry.

---

---