influence of enrichment strategies on job satisfaction of
TRANSCRIPT
1
ESBRA FAZARI TONYEBI BLAKES
PG/Ph.D./07/43094
INFLUENCE OF ENRICHMENT STRATEGIES ON JOB SATISFACTION OF ACADEMIC LIBRARIANS IN
UNIVERSITIES IN SOUTH -SOUTH, NIGERIA.
FACULTY OF EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT OF LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE
Paul Okeke
Digitally Signed by
DN : CN = Webmaster’s name
O= University of Nigeri
OU = Innovation Centre
ESBRA FAZARI TONYEBI BLAKES
INFLUENCE OF ENRICHMENT STRATEGIES ON JOB SATISFACTION OF ACADEMIC LIBRARIANS IN
SOUTH, NIGERIA.
FACULTY OF EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT OF LIBRARY AND INFORMATION
Digitally Signed by: Content manager’s Name
Webmaster’s name
O= University of Nigeria, Nsukka
OU = Innovation Centre
2
TITLE PAGE
INFLUENCE OF ENRICHMENT STRATEGIES ON JOB SATISFACTION OF ACADEMIC LIBRARIANS IN UNIVERSITIES IN
SOUTH-SOUTH, NIGERIA.
BY
ESBRA FAZARI TONYEBI BLAKES PG/Ph.D./07/43094
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN FULFILLMENT TO THE FACULTY OF EDUCATION OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Ph.D.)
IN LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE
DEPARTMENT OF LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA
NSUKKA .
SUPERVISOR: DR. N. E. ACHEBE
JANUARY 2015.
3
APPROVAL PAGE
This thesis by EsbraFazariTonyebiBlakes (Reg. No. PG/Ph.D./07/43094) has been approved
for the Department of Library and Information Science, Faculty of Education, University of
Nigeria, Nsukka.
By
________________________ ____________________
Dr. N.E. Achebe Dr. V.N. Nwachukwu
Supervisor Head of Department, Library and Information
Science. ________________________ ____________________
Internal Examiner External Examiner
________________________
Prof.UjuUmo Dean, Faculty of Education.
4
CERTIFICATION PAGE
I, EsbraFazariTonyebiBlakes a postgraduate student with Registration Number
PG/Ph.D./07/43094, has satisfactorily completed the research requirements for the award of
the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in Library and Information Science. The work
embedded in this thesis has not been submitted in part or full for any other degree or diploma
of this or any other university.
________________________ ____________________
EsbraFazariTonyebiBlakes Dr. N.E. Achebe
Student Supervisor
5
DEDICATION
This research work is dedicated to The Almighty God.
6
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The researcher is immensely grateful to Dr. N.E. Achebe who accepted to supervise
this work when the earlier supervisor disengaged from the employment of the university. She
is appreciated for the invaluable support, direction, painstaking assessments and sound
contributions to the successful completion of this work. Prof. Michael A. Afolabi, the first
supervisor is acknowledged for his down to earth mentoring and laying the foundation of the
study.
The researcher hereby acknowledge Dr. V.N. Nwachukwu and Dr. F.C. Ekere,Dr.
A.O. Ovute, Dr. V. Asogwa, and Dr. E.N. Nwosu, who are lecturers of the Department of
Library and Information Science and in the departments of Education,and Foundation
Education, all of the Faculty of Education,University of Nigeria, Nsukka.for reading the
work and making corrections. Dr. Nwachukwu, Dr. E. N. Nwosu and Dr. A. O.Ovute are this
study’s content and design readers respectively. These three, including Dr. F.C.Ekere also
read and made corrections. Dr. V.Asogwa and Dr. V. N. Nwanchukwu did the validation.
The lecturers’ tutelage and all the authors whose works were used in the cause of this
research work are highly appreciated.
The prayers, co-operation and support of my wife Elizabeth and children are highly
appreciated. Dr. DiepreyeOkodoko is highly appreciated for data analysis and making
corrections.Also, Sister Hannah Nseyo, Mrs. Ogbara, D. Liberty and Mr. ZidoughaDiepreye
are recognized for enthusically typing the whole work whenever called upon. Finally,the
researcher acknowledged the following persons; Mr. & Mrs. Patrick Ebikake, Mr.& Mrs.
Stephen Ebikake, Mrs. Preye George, Mr. E.A. Etebu and Pastor & Mrs. James Akpan who
from time to time assisted in prayers, gave financial, moral support and supplied the
resources the researcher needed for such a magnitude of academic work.
The researcher is grateful to all his benefactors, God bless all of them.
7
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pag
e
Title Page i
Approval Page ii
Certification iii
Dedication iv
Acknowledgements v
Table of Contents vi
List of Tables ix
List of Figures xi
Abstract xii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study 1
Statement of the Problem 9
Purpose of the Study 11
Research Questions 11
Hypotheses 12
Significance of the Study 13
Scope of the Study 15
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 16
Conceptual Framework 17
Concept of Librarianship 17
8
Concept of Enrichment Strategies 22
Concept of Job Satisfaction 33
Theoretical Framework 38
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs 39
Herzberg’s motivator-hygiene theory 43
Hackman and Oldham’s job characteristics model (theory). 45
Review of Empirical Studies 49
Summary of Literature Review
57CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODS
60
Design of the Study 60
Area of the Study 60
Population 61
Sample and Sampling Techniques 62
Instruments for Data Collection 62
Validation of the Instruments 71
Reliability of the Instruments 72
Method of Data Collection 72
9
Method of Data Analysis 73
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS 74
Research Questions 74
Testing of Hypotheses 79
Summary of Findings 83
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION OF RESULTS, CONCLUSION,
RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUMMARY
Discussions 85
Conclusion 92
Implication of the Study 92
Recommendations 93
Limitations of the Study 94
Suggestion for Further Study 94
10
Summary of the Study 95
References 97
Appendices 109
11
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Mean and standard deviation scores of difference between Federal and State universitiesthe influence of skill varietyon academic librarians’ job satisfaction. 74
2. Mean and standard deviation scores of difference between Federal and State universities the influence of task identity on academic librarians’ job satisfaction. 75
3. Mean and standard deviation scores of difference between Federal and State universities the influence of task significanceon academic librarians’ job satisfaction. 76
4. Mean and standard deviation scores of difference between Federal and State universities the influence of autonomy on academic librarians’ job satisfaction. 77
5. Mean and standard deviation scores of difference between Federal and State universities the influence of feedback on academic librarians’ job satisfaction.
78 6. Mean and standard deviation scores of difference between Federal and State
universities on the influence of jointenrichmentstrategies on academic librarians’ job satisfaction. 79
7. t-test analysis of difference between the mean scores ofFederal and State universities on the influence of skill varietyon academic librarians’ job satisfaction. 80
8. t-test analysis of difference between the mean scores of Federal and State universities on the influence oftask identity on academic librarians’ job satisfaction. 80
9. t-test analysis of difference between the mean scores of Federal and State universities on the influence of task significance on academic librarians’ job satisfaction. 81
10. t-test analysis of difference between the mean scores of Federal and State universities on the influence of autonomyon academic librarians’ job satisfaction. 81
11. t-test analysis of difference between the mean scores of Federal and State universities on the influence of feedback on academic librarians’ job satisfaction. 82
12. t-test analysis of difference between the mean scores of Federal and State universities on the influence of joint enrichmentstrategies on academic librarians’ job satisfaction. 83
12
LIST OF FIGURES
Table Pages
1.
2.
3.
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and Application in Academic Libraries
Job Characteristics Model
40
43
47
13
ABSTRACT
This study investigated the influence of enrichment strategies on job satisfaction of academic librarians in universities in South-South, Nigeria. The basic five enrichment strategies of Job Characteristics Model (JCM) examined were skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback. The population of the study consists of 224 academic librarians in eight universities owned by governments; Federal and State, andin the 2012/13 academic session. Sample size was all 224 academic librarians. The researcher used proportionate stratified random sampling techniqueand ex post facto design for this study. Three instruments, namely; Librarians’ Enrichment Strategies Questionnaire (LESQ), Librarians’ Job Satisfaction Questionnaire (LJSQ) and Librarians’ Enrichment and Satisfaction Interview (LESI)were used for the study. The LESQ and LJSQconsisted of 40 and 12 items respectfully. Also, the LESI is consisting of 18 structured interviews conducted on the eight university librarians seeking in depth opinions, ideas and meanings they attached to job enrichment strategies. Chronbach’s co-efficient alpha analysis establishes the reliability of LESQ and LJSQ at 0.73 and 0.71 respectfully.The strategies were analyzed thus; skill variety 0.72, task identity 0.73, task significance 0.79, autonomy 0.76, and feedback 0.75.Six research questions and five corresponding null hypotheses (question one to six) were formulated and tested at 0.05 levels of significance. Research question one to six wereanalysed with mean and standard deviation scores comparing the influence on academic librarians in Federal and State universities. The grand mean scoreresults show as follows; skill variety(Fed.&Stat;2.66), taskidentity(Fed.&Stat;2.70),tasksignificance(Fed.&Sta;.2.78),autonomy(Fed.&Stat;2.55) and feedback(Fed.&Stat;2.76). These were all greater than the cut-off mean of 2.50. This implies a positive influence of enrichment strategies on job satisfaction. T-test analysis was used for the six hypotheses. All the null hypotheses were retained. The hypotheses analysed show t-calculated and t-critical values on the strategies as follows; skill variety 4.926:1.960,task identity 1.388:1.960,task significance 1.440:1.960, autonomy 5.330:1.960and feedback 0.499:1.960.They were all retained because the t- calculated values were greater than their t- critical values at 0.05 alpha levels with 222 degrees of freedom.These found values enhanced the comparison between federal and state academic librarians. Nonetheless, there was little or no significant satisfaction difference between them. The findings in this study revealed that each of the enrichment strategies had significant influence on job satisfaction of the academic librarians. The researcher therefore made some recommendations namely; that University librarians should sustain the use of enrichment strategies to empower academic librarians to enhance their personal growth, meaningful work experience, commitment and work output. Academic librarians should be provided with relevant professional education; possibly through formal education, attendance of workshops, conferences and seminars. This will give them the required competence and organizational support to practice their (career), have the needed and deserved job satisfaction.
.
14
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study
Happiness and reward from work itself is obtainable from enriched jobs. Workers
want to be doing jobs where such a job empowers them, giving motivation and satisfying
their needs. Many authors have defined job in varying ways. For instance,Kumari (2013)
opined that “a job can be defined as group of homogeneous tasks related by similarity of
functions performed by an employee in an exchange for pay; a job consists of duties,
responsibilities, and tasks”.Jobs that offer workers’ desire to satisfy higher level needs such
as recognition for doing a good job, with visible achievement and the opportunity for growth
and responsibility do come by as a result of job design. Ali and Aroosiya (2013) opined that
“job design is the most important function of human resource management(HRM)”. It
involves the designing of contents, methodsand functions of job which require that the work
itself must be well structured and broken into bits that are definite, worthy of challenges,
satisfaction and motivation.
Furthermore, job design simply means thestructuring of work into units with inherent
potentials that empowers and motivates the worker in an organization. Job design is defined
by Patha (2002) as “the functions of arranging task, duties and responsibilities in an
organizational unit of work”. SmallBizconnet.com (2013) asserts that for many people, job
design is as important as fair remuneration in motivating employees to be more effective.
There are possibilities that an employer may incorrectly assume that money is the sole
motivator for their employees. Diverse views on money being a sole factor of motivation
cannot over shadow job design prospects yet money is one of the motivators as well as it is
needed to satisfy most basic needs.The study of Thapisa (1993) has revealed the importance
and need of job enrichment in influencing job satisfaction. He found out that to motivate
15
academic librarians, it is essential to study their job content with a view of enriching it.
Besides, Achebe (2004) investigated publishing professions among librarians and found that
librarians serve by promoting reading, organizing and providing access to books; interpreting
contents, among others. That, those job activities have the potentials of job enrichment and
enhancement.
Job content is derived from job activities which make up job description. These job
activities often state duties and taskswhich have inherent psychological factors that are the
core job holder’s internal experiences for which the study is investigating. According to
Armstrong cited in Kumari (2012) job design is the process of deciding on the content of job
in terms of its duties and responsibilities, and the methods to be used in carrying out the job
in terms of techniques, systems and procedures, and on the relationships. The author further
explained that co-operation, friendliness and respect should exist between the job holder and
his superior, subordinates and colleagues. When the current job design is such that it depends
on external factors (outside the job content) for motivation and is not capable of motivating
by itself, such a job leads to dissatisfaction. One of the most appropriate job designs that uses
job content which invariably yield satisfaction is job enrichment. Job enrichment involves
changing the design of the job only and not those things that should be provided from outside
the job itself.
Aswathappa (2006) explained that “there are many techniques in job design such as
job rotation, job engineering, job enhancementand job enrichment”. Nonetheless, job
enrichment is the main focus of this study and it is the one that offers satisfactory results that
change the job content and process to increase job satisfaction and performance. Garg and
Rastogi (2006) opined that:
“Job enrichment (JE) is the technique that entails enrichingjob content, requiring a higher level of knowledge skill,andgiving workers autonomy and responsibility in terms of planning, directing, controlling
16
their own performance, and providing the opportunity for personal growth and meaningful work experience”.
JE provides the workers more incentives to increase job satisfaction and productivity.
Besides, Kamka (2013) defined JE as “a way to motivate employees by giving them more
responsibilities and variety in their jobs”. Marcy Salterwhite cited in Lafeef (2012) posited
that “job enrichment is a motivational as well as a managerial tool or activity that includes
three step techniques, namely; turning employees efforts unto performance, linking employee
performance directly to reward, and employee involvement in the enrichment programme”.
The researcher adduced from the definitions above and asserts that JE is “giving the worker
more power and authority to freely use their abilities and good reasoning to perform their
duties”.
In 1975 Hackman and Oldham formulated a model; Job Characteristics Model (JCM),
on the assumption that any job can be described by five core job characteristics or
dimensions. When these are present three psychological states critical to job satisfaction are
produced resulting in positive outcomes. JCM evaluated job contents in terms of those job
dimensions and they are: skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and
feedback.These are the study’s topic title, “Enrichment Strategies”. These job characteristics
were defined by Hackman and Oldham (1976) in the following way:
Skill variety:“The degree to which a job requires a variety of different activities in carrying out the work, which involve the use of a number ofdifferent skills and talents of the person” (competence, skills and talentsneededto performthe job). Task identity:“The degree to which a job requires completion of a “whole” and identifiable piece of work that is; doing a job from beginning to end with a visible outcome” (the extent to which the job is seen as a whole identifiable task). Task Significance:“The degree to which the job has a substantial impact on the lives or work of other people, whether in the immediate organization or in the external environment” (how the job affects the well being of others).
17
Autonomy:“The degree to which the job provides substantial freedom, independence and discretion to the individual in scheduling the work and in determining the procedures to be used in carrying it out” (how job allows personal discretion and initiatives). Feedback:“The degree to which carrying out the work activities required by the job results in the individual obtaining direct and clear information about the effectiveness of his or her performance” (the extent to which the job itself provides information about job performance).
These definitions of Hackman and Oldham and the researcher’s explanation have
described the relationship between job characteristics and individual response to work.
Besides, the study of Numan (2007) posited that “the presence ofthese dimensions makes
each job a platform of need fulfillment for the employees”. Gautam (2012) opines that job
enrichment “is done to improve motivation level, empower employers, reduce attrition, to
engage and involve employee in the job itself”. The author asserts that job enrichment begins
with three fundamentals, namely; job analysis, personnel analysis and organizational
analysis. Job analysis makes it possible for the employer to access the job on the five job
characteristics and redesign it if needed. It is done considering the nature of the job itself and
not the person doing it. A job high on skill variety adds variety and kills monotony. A job
high on task identity helps an employee understand how his role fits into the bigger picture
and provides a sense of accomplishment. In addition, a job high on task significance makes
an employee feel that he is creating a difference and adding value. Likewise, jobs high on
autonomy unleash the creativity in an employee and provide the required flexibility. Finally,
jobs high on feedback provide room for continuous improvement and encouragement in the
form of appreciation or acknowledgement for the task well-done. Consequently, if the job
scores on all the strategies there is no need for the other two analyses
Employers use personnel analysis to access the need of the person occupying the job
position. This assessment is done in two areas, being growth and security oriented. On
growth, it serves as a motivational factor whereby workers are even willing to take risk for
18
growth; personal or professional. The other is security, if the person values security more
than growth; enrichment will not serve the purpose. This work corroborate Gautam’s
assertion that any attempt by job holder to desire factors outside more than those inside job
characteristics will lead to dissatisfaction. The last analysis is organizational; requires
congenial organizational climate and culture that support change. For example, if the
management style is autocratic then changes made on factors of autonomy and feedback will
not be materialized. It is only a democratic culture that will support change made to any of
the five job characteristics.
University library jobs ought to be enriched to give employees; particularly academic
librarians job satisfaction to dutifully serve their clientele. “The library is one democratic
institution that allows people of all background and abilitiesto have access to information and
a place of enjoyment for all categories of people” (Hayden, 2013). The academic librarians’
job should be well designed to equip them to positively impact on library users’ need. Jubb
and Green (2007) observed that “academic libraries have for centuries played critically
important roles in supporting research in all subjects and disciplines within their host
universities or colleges”. Guskin (1996) notes that “the use of university libraries promotes
active learning, thus contributing to students’ ability to think critically and work well
independently or in group”. An academic environment without a library is tantamount to a
person without a brain.On the other hand, Williams (1992) and Julien (2000) observed that
“regular library users are active learners who participate more in class, and read, write and
study more”. It is then obvious that jobs in libraries need to be designed to facilitate the above
observations and expectations. Specifically, libraries are established in university systems to
provide high quality information services in support of teaching and research for students,
academic staff and sundry users. Therefore, purposeful job design, such as job enrichment is
most needed for job holders. This design approach repositions the workers to have increase
19
intheir job techniques, processes and satisfaction. Academic librarians are one of those who
occupy a central position in the university library system in the provision of these invaluable
services so their jobs being enriched is very apt and they are the ones being studied.The
general job description for academic librarians in university libraries include the task to
acquire, exploit, manage, organize, evaluate and disseminate information. This is done to
provide support and partner with members of the university community including lecturing
staff, researchers. The University of Colorado Boulder Libraries’ (2013) job description
shows that academic librarians do the following jobs among others. They teach classes on
academic research, help individuals with their information needs, purchase books and
journals on particular subjects, provide information in variety of formats. Other duties
include to design, manage and maintain websites, incorporate new technologies into
instruction and research, work with academic departments and contribute to the scholarship
of the library and information science profession. Eglin (2012) asserted that academic
librarians are responsible for specific academic subjects, develop specialist knowledge, and
other functions such as resource ordering, loans, specialist collections, ICT systems and
library projects. The manager or leadership of university library, particularly, in Nigerian is
the University Librarian. According to Womboh (1992) the University Librarian is
responsible to the Vice-Chancellor for the administration and coordination of all library
services of the university and its campuses, colleges, departments, centers and research units.
His or herprofessionalism and managerial skills must be wielded to put money, materials,
machinery and men at work to get industrial success.The university librarian, therefore, is
saddled with leadership and managerial responsibilities to guide academic librarian’sactions
to get them working and motivating them.
Motivation is one of the most important concepts in human resource management and
development. Management Study Guide (2012) posits that “motivation can be understood as
20
the desire or drive that an individual has to get work done. It is a vital aspect in functioning
of every organization”. They further assert that the control given to an employee over his
work is meant to reward him intrinsically which is capable of bringing forth the inner force to
accomplish the designed tasks effectively and productively. This is the focus of human
resource management which every manager or leader is keenly interested in an effective
organization. Tella, Ayeni and Popoola (2007) posited that “in order to make employees
satisfied and committed to their jobs in academic and research libraries; there is need for
strong and effective motivation at the various levels, departments and sections of the library”.
Owolabi, Ajiboye, Bakare, Bello, Omotoso, and Adeleke (2013) and Otokiti, (2002) in their
studies on motivation of library staff asserted that staff who are highly motivated are always
committed to their work. Owolabi, et al,also found that “motivation, job satisfaction, and
organizational commitment were inherent in the job content of the librarians studied”. The
researcher agrees with the above explanations and assert that the manager include the
university librarian should always ensure that his or her staff work activities are well
designed, workplace environment is congenial and the spirit of cooperation, commitment and
satisfaction is prevailing.
Job satisfaction is the ultimate expectation of all organizational employees,including
academic librarians of university libraries. Job satisfaction is generally defined in terms of
people’s emotional reactions to their jobs. Thus, it refers to “how employees perceive their
jobs” (McShane and Glinow, 2005). According to Armstrong (2004)“job satisfaction refers to
the attitude and feelings people have about their work. Positive and favourable attitudes
towards the job indicate job satisfaction. Negative and unfavourable attitudes towards the job
indicate job dissatisfaction”. The researcher asserts that it is an emotional state resulting from
experiences at work. Bartolo and Furlonger(1999) opined that “if employees experience high
satisfaction with their jobs, it may create a pleasurable emotional state”.Furthermore,
21
Feinstein (2002) found job satisfaction as“a positive reaction with
organizations”.Researchers, both Green and Tsitsianis (2005) and Benz and Frey, (2008)
have found job content and job security to positively impact the overall job satisfaction of
employees.
The idea of job enrichment to increase job satisfaction was first developed by
Fredrick Herzberg (1974) in his Two-Factor Theory which has two dimensions. The first
being hygiene factor (extrinsic) that involves mostly the presence of dissatisfies. The second
factor led to satisfaction (intrinsic factors). Herzberg (1968) in his studies listed the
following as hygiene factors; namely; company policy and administration, supervision,
relationship with supervisor, working conditions, salary, relationships with peers, personal
life, relationship with subordinates, status, and security, while the satisfier factors were
recognition, work itself, responsibility, advancement and growth.Fincham and Rhodes (2005)
opined that there should be clear reasons given to explain the factors that influence their
choices of intrinsic motivators in relation to satisfaction or dissatisfaction of external
organizational factors. Nevertheless, Hackman and Oldham (1976) further improved on the
Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory and propounded the job characteristics model (JCM).
Lawrence (2001) posits that Hackman and Oldham developed their theory based on the job
itself which possessed fundamental characteristics needed to create conditions for high work
motivation, satisfaction and performance. The JCM of Hackman and Oldham (1976)
proposed that managers could change specific job characteristics (of the job itself) to
motivate and promote job satisfaction. The authors identified five core job characteristics
namely; skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback which are also
the basic elements of job design.
In universities in South – South Nigeria, academic librarians are employed and are
working in both Federal and State owned universities. Control of their physical library
22
operations is yet to be accomplished. Controlling one’s own work sphere can be seen as
simple as creating a new and better way to do some tasks. Academic librarians in this zone
must render more efforts trying to improve the work process around them or else become
irrelevant. Many of the academic librarians are still computer or technology phobic. The
personal computer has proved to be a revolutionary force in workplace, increasing efficiency
and speeding up laborious tasks and increasing job satisfaction. Proficiencies, skills and
talents are needed among the academic librarians inthis zone. Information communication
technologies competence should be acquired, even throughenriched jobs as skill variety is the
answer.
University library users ultimately are not finding what they need because enrichment
strategies are underutilized.The resources the users need and any tool that can make research
clearer or easier are the basis objectives of university libraries. Academic librarians are the
staff responsible with such duties therefore should be better equipped to serve students and
faculty members efficiently enriched jobs. Furthermore, information proliferation seemed to
have overwhelmed the academic librarians in South-South Nigeria universities. Over eighty
percent of university library information acquisition, exploitation, and organization activities
are manually executed. Although library school training in the technology basics could
proffer some succor and having qualified and experience academic librarians may not
necessarily be the only determinants of organizational success and employee job satisfaction.
The ways jobs are designed according to Wegge, Schmidt, Parkes, and Van Dick (2007) have
also been found to be a major determinant of work outcomes.
Statement of the Problem
Enrichment strategies, which are five core job characteristics are known as; skill
variety, task identity, task significance,autonomy, and feedback.A job in high in skill variety
means the work requires competences, skills, and talents. For task identity job is seen as
23
accomplished as a whole identifiable task. A job high in task significance allows worker’s
creativity and adding of value to clients and colleagues.Jobs high in autonomy permit
employee decisions and discretions. Feedback is high when job itself provide job holder
instant information about performance. There seemed to be low enrichment strategiesin job
contents of academic librarians in universities in South-South, Nigeria. This does negatively
affecting the exploitation and dissemination of information, teaching and research
information needs. Furthermore, access of information are not being professionally managed
which causes studentsto have low use of university libraries and library information
resources. Academic librarians’ jobs that are contentiouslylow in enrichment strategies have
other chains of adverse and unpleasant consequences. These include poor personalgrowth and
achievement, no supportive climate for change, andacademic librarians’ job dissatisfactionin
Nigeria generally and the South-South specifically.
Job enrichment is a technique of job design is made up of job characteristics (JC).
These JCs can be used by university librarians to connect situational characteristics of a job
with motivation to design employee jobs that are meaningful,interesting andso increase their
satisfaction, self worth and organizational performance. This is important because job
characteristics and the worker’s (academic librarians) psychological state when
combinedbring about job outcomes such as satisfaction and meaningfulness of work.Besides,
because the academic librarians’ jobs were not enriched in the South-South, Nigeria, they are
being boring, monotonous and carryminimal job satisfaction. This constitutes a problem and
the study is to determine the influence of job characteristics(enrichment strategies) on
academic librarians’ job satisfaction. Therefore,the problem of the study is: What is the
influence of enrichment strategies on job satisfaction of academic librarians?
24
Purpose of the Study
This study’s main purpose is to determine the influence enrichment strategies on the
job satisfaction of academic librarians in universities in South-South, Nigeria. In this regard
the study was designed specially to achieve the following objectives:
1. To determine the influence of skill variety on job satisfaction of academic librarians.
2. To determine the influence of task identity on job satisfaction of academic librarians.
3. To determine the influence of task significance on job satisfaction of academic
librarians.
4. To find out the influence of autonomy on job satisfaction of academic librarians.
5. To determine the influence of feedback on job satisfaction of academic librarians.
6. To find out the level of influence of joint enrichment strategies (skill variety, task
identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback) on job satisfaction of academic
librarians.
Research Questions
The following research questions were used to guide the study:
1. What is the difference between federal and state universities mean scores on the
influence of skill variety on job satisfaction of academic librarians?
2. What is the difference between federal and state universities difference mean scores on
the influence of task identity on job satisfaction of academic librarians?
3. What is the difference between federal and state universities mean scores on the
influence of task significance on job satisfaction of academic librarians?
4. What is the difference between federal and state universities mean scores on the
influence of autonomy on job satisfaction of academic librarians?
5. What is the difference between federal and state universities mean scores on the
influence of feedback on job satisfaction of academic librarians?
25
6. What is the difference between federal and state universities mean scores on the level
of influence of joint enrichment strategies on job-satisfaction of academic librarians?
Hypotheses
To guide this study, the research questions were transformed into corresponding null
hypotheses as follows:
Ho1: There is no significant difference in the mean scores of Federal and
Stateuniversities tested at 0.05 level of significance on the influence of skill
variety on job satisfaction of academic librarians.
Ho2: There is no significant difference in the mean scores of Federal and State
universities tested at 0.05 level of significance on the influence of task identity
on job satisfaction of academic librarians.
Ho3: There is no significant difference in the mean scores of Federal and State
universities on the influence of task significance on job satisfaction of
academic librarians.
Ho4: There is no significant difference in the mean scores of Federal and State
universities tested at 0.05 level of significance on the influence of autonomy
on job satisfaction of academic librarians.
Ho5: There is no significant difference in the mean scores of Federal and State
universities tested at 0.05 level of significanceon the influence of feedback on
job satisfaction of academic librarians.
Ho6: There is no significant difference in the mean scores of Federal and State
universities tested at 0.05 level of significance on the influence of joint
enrichment strategies on job satisfaction of academic librarians.
26
Significance of the Study
The findings of this study are expected to be of value to university proprietors (who
are federal government, state governments and private owners) and university librarians.
Others include librarians (in universities and other organizations), and library educators.
The influence of enrichment strategies on job satisfactionof academic librarians is of
benefitto university proprietors because it would provide guide to current work structures that
are inhibiting performance anddesign jobs as a source of happiness and growth for the
workers whichleads to accomplishment of goals and objectives for the universities This is
achievable by changing the design of the job only, whereby simple job analysis, personnel
analysis and organizational analysis in terms of the five enrichment strategies (skill variety,
task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback). This yields congenial
organizational climate and culture that support improved motivation levels, empower
employers, reduce attrition, unionisms, and to engage and involve employee in the job itself.
This study would benefit university librarians as it would give them knowledge of
boring and monotonous jobs and design or redesign them with enrichment strategies. Their
basic function in this regard is to use the process of enrichment strategies to influence and
motivate people (academic librarians) within their set roles, guiding their actions to achieve
institutional and library goals and objectives. Specifically, meaningful jobs are often
designed by managers with the use of Job Characteristics Model (JCM) to enhancethe
workers’ variety of skills that have an identity, autonomy in decision making. Besides, their
jobs are enriched with feedback as the key to job satisfaction as well as motivation and
reduce turnover which improves performance.
Happiness and growth in a work place for the employee, particularly for the academic
librarian is of a very high premium. This is ensured in organizations where job enrichment
strategies are used in their job design. This study would therefore benefit academic
27
librariansfor the fact that it has revealed that the job itself is the source of happiness and
growth at work. The JCM’s job characteristics which are skill variety, task identity, task
significance, autonomy and feedback have very important effects on the following three
critical psychological states. First, the strategies of skill variety, task identity and significance
together contribute to a person’s experienced meaningfulness of the work. Secondly,
autonomy contributes to a person’s experienced responsibility for outcomes of work.
Thirdly, feedback enrichment strategy contributes to employee’s knowledge of the actual
result of work activities. Therefore, if JCM provides the motivating potentials academic
librarians need to perform jobs their job satisfaction can be assured because they will perform
work effectively as well as have opportunities for personal growth on the job.
This study is beneficial to library educators for the fact that academic librarian’s work
activities are professional in nature needing theory and practice and are done with variety of
activities. The continuous need for library education can never be over emphasized since
theory and practice are dynamic. Job enrichment is a fall-out of the need that would always
exist to either design or re-design jobs. This calls for library educators to use the core job
characteristics to foster effective professionalism in librarianship, competence and job
satisfaction and career development in their curriculum implementation. JCM had provided
the rudiments of job enrichment that teaches library managerial skills, employees (academic
librarians) skill and competences, responsibilities and opportunities for librarians’ personal
growth and meaningful work experience. Besides studies that provide academic librarians
with degrees and diplomas, workshops, conferences and other forms of short courses can be
used for the education of librarians. Furthermore, library educators would benefit when and
as they have need to evaluate the performance of their products; the librarians they had
trained. The use of assessment questionnaires, especially the Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS)
28
(Hackman and Oldham, 1975) do determine job activities, motivational potentials and
employee job satisfaction.
Scope of the study
The scope of this study was confined to five core enrichment strategies. They are skill
variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback. It was also restricted to
academic librarians in Federal and State university libraries. The geographical area covered
is South – South, Nigeria.
29
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
The review of literature was organized under the conceptual framework, theoretical
framework, related empirical studies and summary of literature review. For the purpose of
clear understanding, the relevant subheadings were treated under main headings as listed
below:
Conceptual Framework
� Concept of Academic Librarianship
� Concept of Enrichment Strategies
� Concept of Job Satisfaction
Theoretical Framework
� Maslow’s hierarchy of needs
� Herzberg’s motivator-hygiene theory
� Hackman and Oldham’s job characteristics model (theory).
Review of empirical studies
Summary of literature review
30
Concept of Academic Libraries
Academic according to Lechner (2004) in the New Webster’s dictionary of English
language means “scholarly; related to a school, college or university, the academic year”. It is
an aspect of life which has something to do with or that is related to the levels of education.
Furthermore, academic is defined in the Free Dictionary (2014) as “of relating to, or
characteristics of a school, especially one of higher learning and 2.(a) relating to studies that
are liberal or classical rather than technical or, vocational (b) relating to a scholarly
performance: a student’s academic average”. This author clearly states that ‘academic’
concerns only institution of higher education which precludes the primary and post primary
schools. The researcher adduced from the definitions above and defined academic as human
activity or conduct related to or carried out in schools of learning. On the other hand; library
is collection of books arranged by the owner or library professional for reading or study.
Reitz (2004) defined it as “a collection of books and other materials organized and
maintained for (reading, consultation, research, and the like).” Making meaning out of
‘academic’ and ‘libraries’ from the above explanations,the researcher has put them together;
‘academic libraries’ as a single thought.It is thus defined as “the workplace of librarians in
schools (institutions of learning) where books and other materials are collected, organized
and maintained for use to further 4education”.
The concept of academic libraries has had acceptance ages long ago by many
authorities worldwide due to the great importance and need for information in instruction,
cultivation and advancement of the education process. Many authors have defined academic
library in the deferent ways which have either broadened or given a clearer meaning to the
concept. An academic library, according to Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural
Science and Technology (2014) “is a library attached to an academic institution i.e. an
institution engaged in teaching and or research and imparting formal education to students
31
who aspire to complete a particular course under a prescribed syllabus”. The author further
stated that an academic library is a term used for libraries in all schools. These libraries are
those in “schools, colleges, universities and technological/engineering/medical institutions,
which may vary from one another in respect of courses offered by them”. This means that the
definition did include research institutes, yet it precluded primary and post primary schools.
An earlier explanation of academic libraries stated by Midda, Khan, Khan, and
Mukherjee (2009) opined that “academic libraries are an integral part of college, university or
other institutions of post secondary education mandated to meet the information and research
needs of its students, faculty, and staff”. These definitions could not take the primary and
secondary school library services along because students and staff herein are not involved in
activate life-impact research. Besides, Wikipedia (2014) defined academic libraries as a
“library that is attached to a higher education institution which serves two complementary
purposes to support the school’scurriculum and to support the research of the university
faculty and students”. This author explained that it is for higher educational institutions and
emphasized the university.
A university library is defined according to Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural
Sciences and Technology (2014) as “a library attached to a university.” That, it exists to cater
to the needs and requirement of students and teachers and to support the teaching and
research programmes of university.” Libraries have become so much of important for a
university that the university can hardly go without a library. In Nigeria, every course or
programme taught in any academic department must present the library holdings in this area
and must be assessed and scored by the national accreditation bodies such as;National
Universities Commission;for universities, and National Board for Technical Education; for
polytechnics,courses’ approval. At present, the nature and mode of tertiary level education is
such that a student or scholar is put into a situation so as to find a solution to problems, do
32
some creative thing or conduct a study on a project. The library is the most appropriate study
place to carry out an independent work outside class lectures.
Libraries established in the universities are academic libraries. An academic library is
a library which is associated or attached with any educational institution to support its
educational programmes (Gupta, 2011). By this definition academic library is an integral
part of formal education system which provides time bound education from primary school
level to university level. An academic library works as a base for teaching, learning,
research, and recreation. Gupta stated that academic libraries can be categorized into three
categories. They are school, college and university libraries.In this study only university
library was discussed.A library attached or associated with a university is that used by
students, teachers, researchers and administrative staff of the university as well as by others
research workers within the university, local community (by permission) and the alumina
outside the university is known as university community. According to the Association of
College and Research Libraries (2010), library systems at universities generally consist of a
main university library plus several branch or and special libraries. The role of academic
librarians in universities very much depends on the mission of the university and the
university library objectives. Emphatically, the academic librarian is expected serve
efficiently to bring about the realization of university goals of learning, teaching and
research. The satisfaction of being an academic librarian is often high. Universally, there are
recognized basic functions performed by a university library. The following, according to
Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology of Kashmir (2014) are
some academic librarians’ duties. They help in searching or and locating in bring
information, help in overcoming the cost barrier, transform students into scholars, providing
field of interest, training the users to handle library tool and gadgets, and ensuring access to
digital information sources other than it own (library) collection. Other functions are
33
providing platforms to hold group discussion, helping in conduction of research, inter library
loans, and library user education.
Furthermore, Gupta (2011) assert the following as academic librarians’ duties among
others; (1) by procuring comprehensive range of documents including books, manuscripts,
journals, magazines, newspapers, e-resources, databases, on varied subjects. It conserves
knowledge and ideas, and (2) by processing the procured documents with the help of
classification, cataloguing, proper self arrangements which gives easy and open access to
knowledge to its users. Academic Library like any other organization is a social arrangement
for achieving controlled performance towards goals that create value. Invariably, an
achieving academic library must have its activities managed by a work-force (librarians).
According to Boddy (2005:9) management is both a general activity and a distinct
occupation. In the first sense, people manage an infinite range of activities as well as
economic ones. In the academic library, the personnel that carry out work activities are
academic librarians (professional librarians), para-professional librarians, library assistants
and others who are technical, engineering (computer), administrative and clerical cadres.
This research work is limited only to professional librarians. Therefore, the researcher defines
an academic librarian as a person, who works professionally in an academic library, and
holds a degree (academic degree in librarianship known either as library science or library
and information science). The role of an academic librarian is continuously evolving to meet
social and technological needs. The job is undertaken by dedicated individuals, committed to
the ongoing development of their library and passionate about books (information materials)
and learning (Armstrong, 2007).
34
University Libraries: Job Design and Work Organization
How university libraries as organizations have responded to job design especially job
enrichment to impact or influence job satisfaction of librarians is very important. Many
university library management and university librarians have adopted several approaches to
bring about job satisfaction of their academic librarians. Nevertheless, not many studies are
known to use job design,particularly job enrichment. University library job design and work
organization is an ever on-going phenomenon because these jobs do determine the
organizational structures. Jobs are the reasons for the individual or individuals joined
together to accomplish all university library objectives and kinds of services. Each job is
known to have characteristics, tasks, functions and grouped into units or and divisions. In so
doing university library jobs would be clearly defined and easily enriched. The researcher is
of the view that with a clearly defined university library organizational structure library
managements and university librarians can use job design to divide into specific job tasks and
enriched to link the job satisfaction of academic librarians. Model or theories have been
propounded whereby such can be applied to enrich jobs.
Hackman and Oldham (1976) developed a job characteristics model (JCM) that
explains how specific job tasks (contents) can be designed to obtain jobs that are interesting,
motivating and satisfying. JCM is the foundation of job enrichment and can be applied to
university library work. According to Awathappa (2006) there are many job design
techniques which include job rotation, job engineering, job enhancement, and job enrichment.
Martell (1981)explained that job rotation, job engineering and job enhancement did not have
four vital factors of autonomy, control, decision making and feedback. These are the vertical
factors in a job complete in job enrichment, whereas the earlier three techniques are made up
of just a number and variety of tasks that isadding of tasks and are known as horizontal
factors.
35
Job enrichment (JE) as a job design technique is developed fundamentally to include
an important vertical factor which has to do with adding to or increasing the job content. The
enrichment strategies such as skill variety, autonomy and the like are added. An enriched job
can lead to experienced meaningfulness, responsibility and feedback by increasing the
amount of autonomy and responsibility needed to perform a job. According to Gang and
Rastogi (2006) the benefits of JE include increased knowledge, skill, autonomy and
responsibility and opportunities for workers personal growth and meaningful work
experience. Therefore, in the light of the above, the researcher was investigating the
influence of JE strategies on the job satisfaction of academic librarians in university libraries.
The Concept of Enrichment Strategies
To“enrich” means to improve the quality of (something); to make (something) better:
to make rich or richer especially by addition or increase of some desirable quality, attribute or
ingredient (Merriam – Webster.Com, 2013). It is also the act of making fuller or more
meaningful or rewarding (The Free Dictionary.com, 2013). Enrichment to this study is
defined by the researcher as the process through which something (job structure or content)
get better, more pleasing, rewarding and more satisfying. According to GeminiGeek.com
(2013) an enriched job is one in which the employee has additional activities or
responsibilities that he is anticipating. These tasks must have meaning for the individual
worker as well as for the company or organization in which it is being done. In the light of
above, enrichment and the word job enrichment has been interchangeably used in this work.
According to Stern (2010) the concept of job enrichment is a very broad theory within
the field of organizational behaviour that is applicable within all sectors of organization.
That, enrichment refers to different methods that are aimed at increasing employees job
motivation, satisfaction, self-worth, in an attempt to ultimately increasing the overall
employee productivity within the organization. Most commonly, job enrichment is attributed
36
to the process of job redesign, in order to reverse the negative effects of monotony in
employee tasks, which will include boredom, lack of autonomy, and dissatisfaction.
The evolution of the concept of job enrichment started in the middle of the 1950s.
Hall (2010) opined that it is response to dull, reutilized jobs that increased employee
dissatisfaction, leading to higher turnover at many companies. Enrichment strives to heighten
autonomy and variety in positions by allowing employees to engage in tasks that have
normally been reserved for workers in higher positions. According to Mione (2013) the basis
for job enrichment practices is the work done by Fredrick Herzberg in the 1950s and 1960s,
which was further refined in 1975 by Hackman and Oldham using what they called the Job
Characteristics Model (JCM).
The JCM, one of the most recognized and significant attempts to connect situational
characteristics of a job with motivation,is a most reliable support for manager to design
motivating jobs.JE matches job characteristics to personal needs. This concept can effectively
be used to guide actions that are internal between job characteristics and personal
characteristics and its relation to ideal organizational results. Robbins and Coulter (2003)
cited in UK Dissertations.com (2013) explain that JCM identifies five main job
characteristics which are important as they verify a range of aspects of employee’s attitude
and behaviour. According to Griffin, Patterson and West cited in stern (2010) the JCM is
formulated on the assumption that if five core (main) job characteristics are present, three
psychological states critical to motivation are produced, resulting in positive outcomes.
The three psychological states critical to motivation are feelings of meaningfulness of
work, feelings of responsibility for work outcome and knowledge or results. All the three of
them must be present for the positive outcomes to be realized. Subsequently, the theory JCM
proposes that these critical psychological states are created by the presence of the core job
characteristics. Each of those relationships is moderated by several moderators which may
37
differ for each individual (Hackman and Oldham, 1975). These three psychological
stateswere each defined in Jacko (2004) as follows:
Experienced Meaningfulness of Work: The degree to which the employee experiences job as one which is generally meaningful, valuable, and worthwhile. Experienced Responsibility for Outcomes of the Work: the degree to which the employee feels personally accountable and responsible for the results of the work done. Knowledge of Result: The degree to which the employee knows and understands, on a continuous basis, how effective he or she is performing the job.
Job enrichment, according to Google Sites.com (2013) is a job design technique that
varies the concept of job enlargement. Job enrichment adds new sources of job satisfaction
by increasing the level of responsibility of the employee in organization. While job
enlargement is considered as horizontal restructuring method, job enrichment is considered as
vertical restructuring method of moral excellence of giving the employee additional authority,
autonomy, and control over the way the job is accomplished. Job enrichment is very relevant
to this research work because firstly, Notes.Com (2011) explains that in the hygiene situation
work is dissatisfying and employees are not motivated while in the motivator conscious work
satisfies higher-level need such as recognition for doing a good job, achievement, and the
opportunity for growth and responsibility. These motivators are what actually increase job
satisfaction and performance. The second, JE is relevant to this study as well as being an
important strategy because enriching employee’s jobs can help meet some of their
motivational needs. The basic enrichment strategies needed are the JCM’s five core job
characteristics these are skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback.
Skill Variety
Skill variety is one of the enrichment strategies used by managers to motivate
employees. It gives workers the opportunity to use the range of their abilities. According to
38
Boddy (2005) skill variety is the extent to which a job requires a worker to make use of a
range of skills,talents and competences. Online Business Dictionary (2013) defined it as
range of abilities needed to perform a specific job. Positions which require an individual to
possess different skill sets in order to perform job duties are known to have a high skill
variety.Indeed, every employee including the academic librarian requires at least basic skills
for doing any particular professional work to be seen as well done. Skill variety suggests
knowledge and ability made apparent in practice. Feldman (2008) opines that skill variety is
the degree to which the job requires different skills underlying the activities that are part of
the job. The researcher is in support of these definitions and addsvoice to it that it is the
degree to which a job requires a variety of personal competence to carry out work.
Academic librarian’s work activities are professional in nature and are done with
variety of skills. These activities require use of different skills and talents of the person
(academic librarian). A routine administrator (administrative officer) in the library is low in
skill variety, while the cataloguing and classification librarians’ job is high in skill variety. It
is known to enhance and motivate an employee to see his job as meaningful. For instance, a
job that involves doing the same type of work can be boring. It may be boring to read the
same reference request letter many times each day. In contrast, a job that involves a variety
of skills (such as cataloguing a book) may alleviate boredom and foster greater meaning.
Greater skill variety has been found to be associated with greater perceived meaningfulness
of work (Hackman and Oldham, 1975), perils; Johns, Xie and Fang, 1992).
According to Marscafe Web Resource Document (2010) skill variety “is doing
different things, using different valued skills abilities and talents”. The findings of the
Federal Library &Information Center Committee (FLICC) (2008) explained that
competencies for a profession generally list or group a series of knowledge, skills, abilities
and behaviours that define and contribute to performance. Competences can be used to
39
design and develop job postings, position, descriptions, training and education programmes.
Competence to a large extent is a must to acquire for an individual employee as well as for
the academic librarians. For example, competences, skills and abilities needed for the
academic librarians work according to Canadian Association of Research Libraries (2010)
include; adaptability, flexibility and eagerness, communication and advocacy, negotiation,
change management, decision making, problem solving, initiative, innovation, collaboration,
marketing, monitoring, writing, and presentation skills.
Skill variety strategy of job enrichment also has job satisfaction potentials. Skill
variety leads to job satisfaction where enriched jobs in the workplace adopt the tasks
combination approaches of enrichment. Besides, when jobs are rotated employees are given
opportunity to use a variety of skills and perform different kinds of work. However, in all
these above jobs are not to be added to an employee’s job position, rather the worker should
be moved to do another job entirely. Feldman (2008) opined that the most common way to
provide opportunity for employee to use variety of skill is through job rotation. Move your
workers through a variety of jobs that allow them to see different parts of the organization to
use different skills and acquire different experiences. This can be motivating to produce
satisfaction especially for people in jobs that are very repetitive or that focus on only one or
two skills.
Task identity
Task identity is one of the enrichment strategies used by industrial and organizational
managers in designing jobs to motivate employees. This strategy can be used by university
librarians as well as any person in authority of leadership position in the university libraries.
Hackman and Oldham (1975) who propounded the JCM asserted that “task identity is the
degree to which the job requires the worker to complete a whole and identifiable piece of
work.” Numan (2007) suggests that job with good quality of task identity should be
40
providedin each task as clear as possible and be definite. Task identity shouldallow
completing tasks and creating a sense of achievement. This study corroborates with the view
of authors above as their definitions mean that the worker would see his or her task as a
whole and complete action with an end product instead of just one of the tasks and not a final
product.
Task identity’s main function according to the Hackman and Oldham’s job
characteristics model (JCM) is the provision of complete piece of work. Explanation
according to Lunenburg (2011) states that when employees work on a small part of the
whole, they are unable to identify any finished product with their efforts. Lunenburg’s work
was corroborated by this study which explained that when tasks are broadened to produce a
whole product or an identifiable part of it, then task identity has been established. For
example, dress designers will have high task identity if they do everything related to making
the whole dress (e.g. measuring the client, selecting the fabric, cutting, and serving the dress,
and altering it to fit the customer).
The importance of task identity as a job enrichment strategy is known in the area of
stimulating the worker to perform better and improve quantitatively and qualitatively on his
career. This is in agreement with Hackman, Oldham, Janson and Purdy (1975) who stated
that“task identity stimulates personal growth and development”. Adebayo and Ezeanya
(2011) opine that it may help employees achieve their work goals. Task identity is viewed as
helping employees to grow and develop and as such meet up with the demands of their job.
In this regard, the authors in their study of nurses in Jos found that when task identity
increases burnout is decreasing. Their finding is supported by other researchers (including
Grandy, Fish and Steiner, 2005; Pizam and Neumann, 1999; Adebayo and Ezeanya, 2010;
Bremner and Carriere, 2011).
41
Task identity does increase when jobs are enriched with tasks combination, and power
and authority redistribution of job enrichment options. Feldman (2010) posited that these
combined work activities provide a more challenging and complex work assignments. That,
the redistribution of power and authority to workers for making job-related decisions as well
as supervisors delegating more authority and responsibility increases task identity. Indeed,
by these activities mangers including university librarians can create work quality, value, job
satisfaction, and decreased absenteeism and turnover (Jewell and Siegall, 2011).University
library example of task identity is where and academic librarian who does only cataloguing
(material description details) of library materials without the classification (subject
arrangement aspect). He or she would feel that his or task in the section is incomplete. In
LIS, workers are grouped first; by function, then into product teams. Employees can operate
different functions in a section and work together to develop a specific product. Often, no
single person completes a job, though the cataloguing and classification section’s example is
unique.
Task Significance
According to DBA by Critical Action Learning (2010) task significance is the impact
one’s work has on others. Employees do desire to make significant contribution to the
organization in other to foster their sense of purpose, meaning and job satisfaction. Hackman
and Oldham (1975) cited in Jacko (2004) defined task significance “as a degree to which the
job has a substantial impact on the lives or work of the other people-whether in the immediate
organization or the external environment”. The researcher agrees with the above authors and
asset that this is typical of the technical, educative and social values of any academic
librarian’s work that impacts the lives of people (other library staff and library users).Task
significance is one of the five core job characteristics of job itself or job content used by
Hackman and Oldham (1980) to enrich jobs in their JCM. It is an enrichment strategy that
42
influences the employee to experience meaningfulness of work which leads to job
satisfaction. According to Lunenberg (2011), JCM is based on the assumption that jobs can
be designed not only to help worker get enjoyment but also to help worker to feel that they
are doing meaningful and valuable work. This is one of the cardinal premiums of task
significance.
A review of literature has had various views that task significance has profound
impact on employee’s behaviors, attitude and well-beings. Scholars have confirmed that task
significance plays a positive role in influencing employee’s job commitment (Badran and
Kafafy, 2008); (Stumpp, Hiilsherger, Muck and Maier, 2009) and job satisfaction (Fried and
Ferris, 1987;Badran and Kafafy 2008); ( D’Abate, Youndt and Wenzel, 2009).
Furthermore,Humphrey, Nahrgang and Morgeson (2007) reported that task significance was
also positively related to growth satisfaction, internal work motivation, supervisor
satisfaction, co-worker satisfaction, compensation satisfaction, promotion satisfaction, and
job involvement.
Example of task significance in the university library is the circulation desk duties
staff handling diverse needs of library users at the loan services. This service would score
high on task significance, while the porter at the gate whose duties are library keeping, safety
and security of materials would score low. The value of the library porter’s services does not
impact high on other people, particularly the library users. For instance, checking users for
library materials (books, etc) does not create any valuable social relationship, and may even
anger the users. This service is low for the fact that porters are unlikely to be appreciated by
users. Checking of books, and the like, may be deemed being accused or suspected. The
researcher agrees with various authors above and asserts that the strategy of task significance
would enhance high rating of employee occupational status in society. Definitely, if the job
43
content of academic librarians is having the autonomy strategy university communities and
society will accord their occupational status high rating.
44
Autonomy
Autonomy is another job enrichment strategy and a topic that is of high importance to
university library managements (university librarians) and academic librarians.It is so valued
because it does predict job satisfaction, self determination and relation. Feldman (2008)
defined autonomy as “the degree to which an individual holding a job is able to schedule his
or her activities and decide on the particular procedures to be employed.” Furthermore,
Marcafe Web Resource Document (2010) asserts that job autonomy is the freedom to do
work as one deems fit.It is the discretion in scheduling, decision-making and means for
accomplishing job. The researchers see the above definitions as cogent because autonomy
gives the worker freedom and independence in scheduling work, and how it will be carried
out.
In fact, self-determination theory (SDT) (Deci and Ryan 1985, Gagne and Deci, 2005)
assert that autonomous forms of motivation are the result of psychological needs satisfaction,
and autonomy is one of the most important needs. Furthermore, self-determination is
associated with increased psychological functioning (Deci, 1980) so that autonomous
motivation should lead to positive outcomes. According to Morgesen and Humphrey (2006)
Galletta, Portoghese and Battistelli (2011) JCM of Hackman and Oldham suggested that job
autonomy is the extent to which a job allows freedom, discretion and independence to
schedule work, make decisions, and choose the procedures and methods to perform
activities.The researcher corroborates above authors, and is in support. This agreement is
based on the fact that in a job highly independent employees can perceive work outcomes as
it mostly depend on their efforts. The employees are the ones who feel personal responsible
for the success or failures of the actions. Pierce, Fussila and Cumming (2009) opine that
“among job characteristics, job autonomy could activate critical psychological states that
facilitate several positive employee states like intrinsic motivation”. According to George,
45
(2005) autonomy component of JCM describes personality as experienced responsibility for
work outcomes. That personality plays a very important role in determining the employee’s
intrinsic motivation and the right personality must “fit” the right job.
Furthermore, job autonomy is a work related strategy and has been found to have an
antecedent influence on employee’s global job satisfaction. It has been conceptually defined
as the degree to which employees are allowed freedom, independence and discretionary
powers when performing their job tasks and responsibilities (Slims, Szilagy and McKeney,
1976). The more autonomy a job has the greater the employee will be satisfied with his or
her job (Karim, 2008). For instance, jobs scoring high on autonomy in the university library
are such as committee assigned, and leadership duties. A typical example is, one where an
academic librarian is assigned library training programme to teach participants use of internet
search engines or online search. Such a librarian would not be regulated, he has freedom to
choose materials and schedule the programme. He would freely use his capabilities so as to
bear the greater responsibility for successes or failures by his efforts and in general the
greater job satisfaction. In contrast, an academic librarian assigned to train participants to
pass an external exam on computer applications would not have much responsibility to use
his capacities to succeed in his efforts. This task scores low on autonomy because the
external exams body regulates the effort of the trainer. In LIS, autonomy is enhanced and
made inherent in the organizational structures of libraries because they do allocate authority
among jobs, functions, divisions and units.
Several researches have been conducted to study autonomy predicting various
variables of employee satisfaction, motivation, behaviour and employee work outcomes. One
example is that, it has a statistically significant relationship between autonomy and job
satisfaction (Rockman, 1984, and Neumann, 1993). A study of Fried and Ferris, cited in
Spector, 2000) found a mean correlate of 0.34 between global job satisfaction and job
46
autonomy. In the light of the above findings, the researcher anticipates a statistically
significant relationship to exist between job autonomy and job satisfaction.
Feedback
Feedback is the fifth strategy of job enrichment concept. According to George and
Jones (2005) feedback is the extent to which performing a job provides an employee with
clear information about his or her effectiveness. This is the extent to which clear and direct
information is provided to the worker in order to evaluate his or her performance (Gordon,
1999). If a job possesses feedback, incubates will become more wary about their performance
and effectiveness (Robbins, 2001). Also Parker, Wall and Corderly (2001) highlight feedback
as an important job characteristic.Furthermore, Hackman and Oldham (1975) have
dichotomized feedback into two categories, namely; feedback from the job itself, and
feedback from agents. Feedback from job itself is the degree to which performing the job
tasks and responsibilities required by the worker results in obtaining information about his or
her performance, while feedback from agents is the degree to which employee receive direct
and clear information about his or her performance from supervisors and co-workers.
However, Jelstad (n.d., 2006) opines that feedback is also a social job factor of work
characteristics which focuses on the social environment at work. He argues in favour of
Morgeson and Campion (2003) who asserts that it is an interpersonal – social aspect of work
which has been missing from job characteristics conceptualization. Jelstad reiterated that
within the category of social job factors, feedback from others and co-worker relations are
selected variables. The work of Hackman and Lawler (1971) suggested that feedback from
others (co-workers, leaders) represents an important aspect of work. The researcher therefore
agrees with Jelsted since feedback would always occur only when there had been
communication between stakeholders in any situation.Neuman (1993) in his research, found a
statistically significant but weak positive relationship between job performance, feedback,
47
and job satisfaction; r = 0.27, P<.01. Fried and Ferris cited in Spector (2000) in a meta –
analytical study found a mean correlation of 0.29 between feedback and global job
satisfaction. In accordance with the fall-out of the above the researcher looks forward to
investigating the influence of autonomy if there exist a positive or negative statistically
significant relationship between feedback and job satisfaction.
An example of feedback in a university library system is with the library catalogue
production, a situation where workers are provided with very rapid information on their work
entry correctness. These details ought to include; cataloguing headings and entries,
classification subject fields, class number and cutter number. On the other hand, staff in the
same section assigned to re-cataloguing and re-classification task will have to wait much
longer before they find out whether the catalogue entries and classification subject numbers
were correct. LIS focus is on end user service; therefore, library workers are connected to
their work and product or service user. For instance, wrongly classified and shelved book
information will only come from the library user or library assistants doing shelving. This
kind of link is there in all functions, divisions, and units of the university library work which
provide feedback to employees.
Concept of Job Satisfaction
Job Satisfaction is one of the most researched areas in industrial and organizational
psychology. This is a confirmation of Hunter’s (2006) assertion on the history and
development of job satisfaction. Spector (1996) reported that over 12,400 studies were
published on job satisfaction by 1991. Hunter, in his studies using the EBSCO host, found
that an additional 9,177 studies were published on job satisfaction from 1991 to
2006.According to Kh Metle (2003) job satisfaction has been a popular topic for researchers
in a wide area of fields including industrial psychology, public administration, business and
higher education. Researchers in various areas of discipline have written countless articles
48
concerning the job satisfaction of their profession. Authors have borrowed from psychology,
business, administration, human resource management, and the wide umbrella of
organizational science to define, measure, and interpret the significance of job satisfaction in
their disciplines. However,a significant body of literature has not been sufficiently written
concerning job satisfaction in the field of librarianship (Ogungbeni, Ogungbo and Yahaya,
2013).
The principal reason as to why job satisfaction is so extensively researched is that it
relates to significant associations with several variables (Yousef, 2000). For example, it has a
positive association with life satisfaction, organizational commitment and job performance as
pointed out by numerous researchers (Judge, Boudreau and Bretz, 1994; Fletcher and
Williams, 1996; Babin and Boles cited in Buitendach and DeWitte, 2005) There is need to
research extensively on the job satisfaction in library work place because organizational
psychology affects librarians too. It is very important to note that factors that influence the
librarian as an individual can affect him or her performance as a service provider as well as
his job satisfaction. It is then a key to librarianship as to any other profession.
The term job satisfaction refers to a collection of feelings that an individual holds
toward his or her job. A person with a high level of job satisfaction has positive feelings
about the job, while the person who is dissatisfied with his or her job holds negative feelings
about it. Armstrong (2006) refers to “job satisfaction as the attitude and feelings people have
about their work. Positive and favourable attitudes towards the job indicate job satisfaction.
Negative and unfavourable attitudes towards the job indicate job dissatisfaction.” In addition
to having attitudes about their job as a whole, people also can have attitudes about various
aspects of their jobs such as the kind of work they do, their coworkers, supervisors or
subordinates and their pay (George and Jones, 2008). In the work of Mullins, (2005) found
out that job satisfaction is more than attitudes, but it is an internal state. It could, for
49
examples, be associated with a personal feeling of achievement, either quantitative or
qualitative. Aziri (2008) opine that “job satisfaction represents a feeling that appears as a
result of the perception that the job enables the materials and psychological needs.” In the
researcher’s view job satisfaction is a must capacity an employee obtains from his work,
workplace and organization for real lasting efficiency and effectiveness of work performance.
Oladele, Subir and Sebiba (2010) found in their research that additional job responsibility and
task properly structured is very essential in raising the motivation of employees. The
researcher is of the opinion that this can be addressed by job enrichment. Mohr et al cited in
Tausif (2012) opined that motivational hypotheses demonstrates that enrichment will increase
satisfaction in a number of types of enrichment activities such as information sharing, task
teams, excellence circles and training.
In order for an organization to be successful it must continuously ensure the
satisfaction of its employees. Job satisfaction is very important and many reasons have been
proposed. Olise (2005) suggested that managers should know that they are morally
responsible for maintaining a high level of job satisfaction in their organizations. That,
managers ought to be concerned about the impact job satisfaction has on performance. The
researcher is of the opinion that if they are to achieve results through people, and then the
extent to which these people (employees) are satisfied with their jobs should be a must to
managers.
According to Dean (2011) “job satisfaction is important not just because it boosts
work performance but also because it increases our quality of life.” Many people spend so
much time at work and if it is a dissatisfying one, the rest of their life soon follows.
Happiness in the workplace leads to much higher levels of productivity. The researcher is of
the view that job satisfaction increases employee morale; therefore employees are motivated
to be more willing to work harder to improve organization goals. A satisfied worker is an
50
asset to his or her organization. Thus an employee who is not satisfied or unhappy about his
work is seen as an expendable item of excess baggage (Martins, 1998) and an unnecessary
addition to his or her organization’s problems (Badawi, 2003). An employee satisfied with
his or her job is more likely to be creative, flexible, innovative and loyal to the organization. .
Gregory (2011) asserts that companies need good and knowledgeable employees. If these
employees are not treated fairly, they are going to take advantage of other job offers that will
provide more stability, more benefits, and more compensation. Luthans cited in VanDer Zee
(2009) opine that employees derive satisfaction from work that is interesting and challenging,
and a job that provides them with status. Kalinsky (2011) explained that “the tangible ways
job satisfaction of employees is revealed to the organization include reduction in complaints
and grievances, absenteeism, turnover, and termination as well as improved punctuality and
workers morale.”
A satisfied worker’s look is often bi-focal; at extrinsic motivators and the intrinsic
motivators. The work itself is an important factor of job satisfaction which is from the
intrinsic motivators. Luthans (2002) advocated that work itself could be a service of
satisfaction. If it is true, it is imperative that managers shouldcreate organizational climates
that facilitate satisfaction in the execution of jobs. According to Gibson, et al cited in Adeniji
(2011) employees should be given opportunities to advance in their field of work so that they
can accept responsibilities entrusted to them. The researcher is of the opinion that skill
development and training in form of workshop and conference attendances, and study leave
for higher performance and qualification can be offered to employees. This will encourage
and motivate workers to acquire desired skills and willingness to perform the job. Managers
should offer employees adequate feedback, attention and assistance when needed, and
provide bigger responsibilities, autonomy and challenging tasks as a means of enhancing the
quality of work life. The work itself being a powerful source of job satisfaction does not
51
stand alone but must be restructured or redesigned to motivate the job holder.The practice of
job restructuring or redesign is a job design technique of which job enrichment is the best
approach using job characteristics. Job enrichment is a job design strategy for enhancing job
content by building into it more motivating potentials. Lunenburg (2011) posits that the idea
behind job enrichment is that motivation can be enhanced by making the job interesting and
the worker so responsible that he or she is motivated intrinsically by performing the job.
Intrinsic motivators are factors derived from within the job content which include
recognition, work itself, responsibility, advancement and growth. On the other hand extrinsic
motivators (external factors) are derived from outside the job content which include,
company policy and administration, supervision, relationship with supervisor, working
conditions, salary (money), relationship with peers, personal life, relationship with
subordinates, status and security., These are the two dimensions of Herzberg (1968) two-
factor theory of motivation. They are very relevant and impact on the employee job
satisfaction. However, for the purpose of this research and brevity, only money and work
itself were discussed.Money seems to be a controversial topic related to motivating
employees. There are many supporters of financial incentives but on the other hand, there is
a large group of researchers who neglect the fact that money is a good motivator (Kirstein,
2011). Money is a motivator because it satisfies a lot of needs. It is a factor which is
indispensable for life and which is needed to satisfy basic needs of survival and security
(Armstrong 2007). According to Akintoye (2000) money remains the most significant
motivational strategy. As far back as 1911, Fredrick Taylor and his scientific management
associates described money as the most important factor in motivating the industrial workers
to achieve greater productivity. Katz cited in Sinclair, Tucker, Cullen and Wright (2005)
demonstrated the motivational power of money through the process of job choice.
52
Nevertheless, whereas money can be rated high in importance it does not give
employees a lasting job satisfaction. On the basis of the discrepancy notion of satisfaction;
Groot and Van den Brink (2000) provided contradictory evidence for the relationship
between pays and job satisfaction. Hamermesh (2001) found that changes in compensation
(increases or decreases) have concomitant impact on job satisfaction levels of employees.
Pragya (2008) described the relationship between non financial rewards and employees
satisfaction and found that non monetary rewards increase the job satisfaction of employees.
McClelland (1968) writes that “money is not nearly so potent a motivating force as theory
and common sense suggest it should be”. This statement was supported by Dewlurst,
Guthridge and Mohr (2009) who surveyed 1,047 executives, managers and employees around
the world which show that non cash motivators were more effective motivators than financial
incentives.
Mathauer and Imhoff’s (2006) study on health workers presented examples of support
hypotheses that money is not as good motivator as it is said to be. The researcher is in
agreement with thisview. Money’s importance does not over- whelm the non-monetary
factors of job satisfaction. For example, three weeks after winning $87 million, Pam gave
birth to Nicholas, and she said “Winning the lottery was priestly exciting, but it can’t
compare to Nicholas. I want him to grow up caring about people and knowing the value of
work. (Reed and Free,1995). Furthermore,review of literature also proved that money factor
of job satisfaction is not as good motivator as it is said to be, this study is guided by it and the
stronger motivator chosen is work itself.
Theoretical Framework
This study was guided by the following theories; Maslow’s (1943)Hierarchy of Needs
Theory, Herzberg’s (1959) Motivator - Hygiene Theory, and Hackman and Oldham’s (1976)
Job Characteristics Model (Theory).
53
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
In industrial and organizational development, and the human relations movement
brought concerns and studies about the manager’s assumptions of employees and the
approaches used to motivate employee excellence. These investigations known as the
Hawthorne studies reviewed that money and job security were not the only sources of
employee motivation led to human relation approach of employee motivation. The
Hawthorne studies implied that management should give at least as much attention to human
factors (Boddy, 2005). Maslow (1960), among other authors (researchers) like McGregor
(1960), and Aldefer (1972) emphasized the human side of organizations.
The current status is that, the theories of human needs were categorized into content,
process and work design (Boddy, 2005). Content theories help to explain why people work
by identifying human needs that work may satisfy. According to Ugah (2008) content
theories are concerned with identifying what factors in an individual or the work environment
is there that energize and sustain behaviour. The most well known and very often cited
author of motivational theory is Maslow with his hierarchy of human needs (Fincham and
Rhodes cited in Kirstein, 2011).
According to Fincham and Rhodes (2005) Maslow viewed human behaviour from the
existence of unsatisfied needs. Maslow organized the needs underlying human motivation in
a hierarchy of five levels starting with physiological needs, security needs, social needs, ego
or self-esteem needs and self actualization needs. According to Maslow, higher needs are not
felt until lower needs are fulfilled. Additionally, when a need is satisfied it does not influence
human behaviour anymore and as a result the focus is moved unto a need which is higher in
the hierarchy. His proposition is that human beings are insatiable. That, people always want
more and what they want depends on what they already have. Ogungheni, Ogungbi and
Yahaya (2013) opined that Maslow connects the creation of the existence of people’s sense of
54
satisfaction with the maintenance of the classified needs. Figure 1. below show Maslow’s
five hierarchy of needs.
FIGURE 1. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
SOURCE: Stoner, Freeman & Gilbert (2006). Management. 4thEd.
Physiological Needs
Physiological needs are primary needs. They include food, warmth, shelter, clothing,
sexual fulfillment, and an almost endless list of other bodily requirements(Walter, 1975).
According to Boddy (2005)Maslow proposed that if all the needs in the hierarchy are
unsatisfied then the physiological needs will dominate. People will concentrate on the
activities that enable them to obtain the necessities of life.
Security Needs
After the physiological needs are gratified the security (safety) needs emerge.
Satisfaction of these requires actual physical safety as well as a sense of being safe from both
physical and emotional harm (Walters, 1975). Many employees’ most important security
need is job security. Other security factors include increase in salary and benefits. Taljaard
Self-
Actualization
Need
Esteem
Social Need
Physiological Needs
SecurityNeed
Social Need
55
(2003) opined that many workers expresses their security needs as a desire for a stable job
with adequate medical, unemployment and retirement benefits. Organizations that provide
stability and such benefits are likely to have relatively low turnover and little dissatisfaction
among employees who are striving to meet these needs.
Social Needs
Social (belongingness) needs emerge after the security needs. These needs are
basically affiliation in nature, which are the needs for belongingness and love. According to
Jasmine (2010) since people are social beings, they need to belong and be accepted by others.
People try to satisfy their need for affection, acceptance and friendship.
Esteem Need
According to Maslow, once people begin to satisfy their needs to belong, they tend to
want to be held in esteem both by themselves and by others. This kind of need produces such
satisfaction such as power, prestige, status and self-confidence. Walters cited in Ven Der Zee
(2009) explained that need for esteem may be classified into two sub-sets. First, there is a
need or desire for strength, for achievement, for adequacy, for independence and freedom,
and for a personal sense of confidence in one’s competence in dealing with the world.
Secondly, there is a desire for reputation or prestige, that is; respect or esteem from other
people. The individual wants his or her competence recognized and appreciated by others.
Self Actualization Need
Self-actualization is not so much a state of being, like hunger to be satisfied by
periodic gratification. Rather it is a process in which one strives to become all that one is
capable of becoming (Walters, 1975). According to Maslow (1970), the physiological,
security, social and esteem needs are all deficit needs, whereas the self-actualizing need is
growth need. The self actualizing person is free from deficit needs, and engaged in the
process of realizing his or her capabilities, and of experimenting with his or her concept of
56
self. Taljaard (2003) assert that self – actualization needs are the desire for personal growth,
self fulfillment and the realization of the individual’s full potential. Traits commonly
exhibited include initiative, spontaneity and problem – solving ability. Managers who
recognize this motivation in employees can help them discover the growth opportunities
available in their jobs, or they can create special growth opportunities.In every organization,
including the university libraries, there cannot be a fast rule that workers’ aspiration would
follow the same direction. Therefore, Maslow’s hierarchical progress of needs cannot be
used in the same way for every academic librarian or workers. No doubt, library and
information science (LIS) managers including university librarians and library workers could
get guided onpersonnel who are engage in and persistent in deviantbehaviour. They can be
correctly identifies and their needs appease.
Maslow’s hierarchy of need theory has much relevance to this study. It provides
awareness of the general nature of the various levels of human basic needs fundamentally
useful to leaders and managers including university librarians. Furthermore, it is significant
to this research work because need (which always has inherent motive) lead to work itself
(library work). The concept of work (job) when designed with enrichment strategies gives
satisfaction to employees, including academic librarians. Figure 2. below shows some
possible applications in university library work environment.
57
LEVEL NEEDS EXAMPLES IN THE ACADEMIC LIBRARY WORKPLACE 1 Physiological • Enough work space
• Ergonomically designed work stations • Appropriate temperature • Convenient and reasonable food service facilitates
2 Security • Safety workplace • Stable wages and salaries • Job security • Retirement benefits • Health Insurance
3 Social • Employee social activities • Team work • Friendship • Sense of belonging • Affection
4 Self-esteem • Recognition • Awards • Prestige • Autonomy
5 Self- actualization • Well-being of others • Accepting self • Meaningful work
FIGURE 2: Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs and Application in Academic Libraries SOURCE: Ryan, R.M& Deci, E.L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54 - 67 Herzberg’s Motivator-Hygiene (Two-Factor) Theory
The motivator-hygiene theory of motivation was propounded by Fredrick Herzberg.
According to Badawi (2006) Herzberg proposed that individuals had two kinds of needs, that
is; needs that were hygiene and needs that were motivators. Herzberg’s theory came at the
time when it was assumed that what satisfied people were always just the opposite of what
satisfied them. The list of satisfiers and dissatisfiers represented entirely different aspects of
work. Thus, Herzberg’s proposition came as direct variant of Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy
of needs theory.According to Worlu and Chidozie (2012) Fredrick Herzberg (1959) in his
study concluded that factors found to affect job satisfaction included factors or needs such as
recognition and responsibility. Herzberg refers to these factors as “motivation factors”.What
58
this implies is that recognition and responsibility comes from doing the job itself. On the
other hand, the factors found affecting job dissatisfaction included salary, company policies,
technical competence, interpersonal relations and working conditions. These are factors
which Herzberg called “hygiene factors” which are related to the environment of the job.
Herzberg asserted that, if hygiene is denied, things can go from bad to worst.
In practice of industrial relations, Herzberg’s theory helps managers to be aware of
what to motivate workers; they must recognize the non-monetary factors (intrinsic
motivation) which make workers put in their best. Non – monetary incentives such as
challenging work, responsibility, advancement, independence can be achieved through job
enrichment. These factors involve what people actually do on the job and should be
engineered into the jobs employees do inorder to develop intrinsic motivation within the
work force (Herzberg, 1976, 1984). Also, managers must know that the hygiene factors
(extrinsic motivation) ought to be properly managed to prevent dissatisfaction at work.
Motivators are personal growth, passion for the job, social responsibility, opportunity for
advancement, respect, praise, recognition, and the feeling of achievement (Daft, 2003).
Frederick Herzberg examined motivation in the light of job content and context.
According to him, motivating employees is a two-step process. First is to provide hygiene,
and then later motivators. One continuum ranges from no satisfaction to satisfaction. The
other continuum ranges from satisfaction to no satisfaction. Motivators are necessary and
contributory factors for improvements in work performance, and move the employee beyond
satisfaction to superior performance. Hygiene factors, according to Herzberg, do not promote
motivation, but their absence can create employee dissatisfaction. These hygiene factors are
present in the work enrichment which are of the job context while motivator – factors are
present in the work itself as job content.
59
The impact and relevance of Herzberg’s Motivator – Hygiene (Two – Factor) theory
to library and information science (LIS) profession is monumental. For instance, Kishore
cited in Mallaiah and Yadapadithaya (2009)surveyed university librarians in India based on
Herzberg, Maslow and Vroom theories and found the following:
1) The choice of library profession, as career would be proceeded by a vocational growth
process.
2) People already in the library profession would be advising their children/kith and kin to
adopt librarianship as a career, and
3) Work efficiency would be related to both intrinsic and extrinsic motivating factors.
Besides, the gains of Fredrick Herzberg’s theory to LIS are that library managers
(including university librarians) would easily use it to psyche a non-committed librarians
motivate and energize them to get on to better job performance. Academic librarians’ job can
be redesigned to bring out the intrinsic motivators that make jobs challenging, interesting
(rewarding) and satisfying. The theory also doesleadto giving the employee feelings of
psychological growth which offer gains of sense of self actualization.
Hackman and Oldham’sJob Characteristics Model
The proponents of job characteristic model are J. Richard, Hackman and G.R.,
Oldham in 1979. They found this model on the basis of how best to offer employees job
satisfaction through the work itself which sought improvement on job design. History has it
that job design had come a long way from the time when workers did only one or two simple
things over and over again. This system was the mechanistic approach design by Fredrick W.
Taylor. It was known to have serious limitations so researchers sought out ways to make jobs
varied and challenging. According toLunenberg (2011:1) Hackman and Oldham extended the
work of Fredrick Herzberg and provided an explicit framework for enriching jobs. They
adapted job enrichment, a job design technique or strategy for enhancing job content by
60
building into it more motivating potentials. Hackman and Oldham (1980) studied
motivational job design on how jobs can be made more interesting from which they
propounded the job characteristics model (JCM) which is very influential model (theory) of
job enrichment. According to Numan (2007) this model is in compliance of Maslow’s needs
hierarchy and tries to constitute job characteristics which help motivate an employee in his
quest for progress. The JCM is widely used as a framework to study how particular job
characteristics impact on job outcomes, including job satisfaction (Wikipadia, The Free
Encyclopedia, 2013).
According to Hackman and Oldham (1979) there are five core job characteristics
(skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback) and these produce
three critical psychological states (experienced meaningfulness, experienced responsibility
and knowledge of actual results).These are work outcomesthat predicts job satisfaction, work
motivation, cures absenteeism, and the like. The JCM, cited in Adeniji (2011), asserts that
jobs which contain intrinsically motivating characteristics would lead to higher levels of
satisfaction as well as other positive work outcomes such as enhanced job performance and
lower withdrawal. Hackman and Oldham proposed that the core job characteristics (JC)
could be identified from job design and jobs being enriched. These JCs are ultimately
combine to form the motivating potential score (MPS) for a job. MPS is used as an index of
how likely a job is to affect an employee’s attitudes and behaviours.
The Hackman and Oldham’s JCM suggests a relationship between the five core job
dimensions (skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback) and the
occurrence of intrinsic motivation (Samarakoon, 2002). The JCM examines individual
responses to jobs as a function of job characteristics moderated by individual characteristics
(Atasoy (2004). The model also states that task characteristics ofjob response relations are
moderated mainly by the job incumbent’s needs(SeeFigure 3).
61
Figure 3: Job Characteristics Model SOURCE: J.R Hackman & G.R. Oldham (1975). Development of job diagnostic survey.Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(2), 159 – 170.
Hackman and Oldham (1980) theorized that enriching certain core job characteristics
alter people’s critical states in a manner that lead to several experiences beneficial to personal
and work outcomes (see Figure 3). They recommended measuring the degree to which
various job characteristics are present in each job that can be accomplished by using
questionnaire known as the Job Diagnostic Survey. (JDS) (Hackman and Oldham, 1975).
The JDS yields an index known as the motivating potential score (MPS) which show that a
job has the potential for motivating people. The formula for this MPS is as follows:-
MPS = (skill variety + Task identity + task significance) x autonomy x feedback 3
Lunerberg (2011) explain that skill variety, task identity and task significance are
additives, therefore, one or two of these job characteristics could be missing or measured as
Job
Characteristics
Psychological
State
Outcome
Employee Growth
Need Strength
Skill variety
Task identity
Task significance
Autonomy
Feedback
Experience
meaningfulness of
work
Experienced
responsibility for
work outcome
Knowledge of
work results
High performance
High motivation
High satisfaction
62
zero. In such a situation the employee could still experience meaningfulness of the work.
However, if either autonomy or feedback were missing, the job could offer no motivating
potential score (MPS = 0) because of the multiplier effect.
Hackman and Oldham’s (1980) JCM is beneficial to library management and
employees (academic librarians) because motivation is highly needed in LIS work
environment as their work is service oriented. The model using the job design technique of
job enrichment enhances the five core job characteristics(enrichment strategies) combined
toyield increased motivational potentials. Hosio (2005) looked at motivation theories and
models as a means of recreating, retaining and improving productivity in academic libraries,
especially during times of tight budgets. She argued also in favour of JCM as a means of
encouraging high performance, and supports the use of clear communication and
establishment of direct feedback channels. Hosoi noted that intrinsic rewards, like “thank
you” notes complements and employee recognition are motivators and often work better than
extrinsic rewards in sustaining motivation (2005).
Furthermore, Hosoi (2005) presented the idea of job design and job enrichment as a
means for motivation within the academic library incorporating the JCM model developed by
Hackman and Oldham. The reason for the choice JCM is because it involves designing the
job to include a variety of tasks (activities). Clearly defined tasks assign significance to the
tasksand autonomy for the individual in scheduling and procedures while direct feedback
gives responsibility to employees and increases their job satisfaction. Furthermore, it was
considered necessary because through job design and enrichment, the needs for job
satisfaction and self-actualization can be built into the job.
63
Review of Empirical Studies
In this study five empirical studies were reviewed and authors are as follows; Achebe
(2004), Tausif (2012), Adebayo and Ezeanya (2011) Casey, Hilton, Rossmaier and Sisson
(2009), and Rusconi (2005).
Achebe (2004) carried on a study titled, “an empirical study of professional
development factors and strategies for job enrichment and enhancement of librarians in
Nigeria”. The purpose of this study was to survey, identity and report findings on factors that
influence professional development and limit opportunities for job mobility as well as
functional empowerment of librarians. The population of the study was 104 respondents who
were teachers, library educators, librarians in public and academic libraries, publishers, book
binders as well as bookshop owners. These were from eleven (11) states of Nigeria namely;
Anambra, Benue, Delta, Enugu, Kaduna, Kwara, Lagos, Ondo, Oyo, Rivers and Sokoto. In
the methodology, stratified random sampling technique was used in selecting the states.
The study revealed that librarians are the highest group who are qualified and
professionally developed ranked at 31.6%. Library educator scored 26.3%, teacher librarians,
13.2%, authors, 10.5%, while publisher/editor/ compiler, library/information consultancy,
and bookshop dealers, scored 5.3% each. Analysed data on job mobility showed that the
remaining scored 31.6%, library educators, 20.4%, teacher librarians, 11.2%, while the jobs
of library/information consultancy, publisher/editor/compiler, author, and bookshop dealer
scored 5.3% each. The study of Achebe (2004) concluded that the level of professional
development and the prospects of job enrichment and enhancement were higher among
librarians and library educators than the other jobs investigated. She reiterated that “librarians
serve by promoting reading, organizing and providing access to books, interpreting contents,
etc.” Achebe’s work revealed that the librarian’s job activities have the potentials of job
64
enrichment and enhancement of which it’s bedrock to this study as well as a reason for
researching on the influence of enrichment strategies.
Tausif (2012) carried out a study on the influence of non financial rewards on job
satisfaction: a case study of educational sectors in Pakistan. He surveyed public sector school
teachers to examine the relationship of non financial rewards (which includes; promotion, job
enrichment and job autonomy) and employee’s satisfaction towards job. The research
sampling procedure was conducted through respondents entering into their offices chosen
randomly in the city of Wah Cantt, Pakistan. A total of thirteen (13) public schools were
involved, which had respondents divided into eight employees – age – categories between 20
to 60 with a difference of five years each. The study population was 500 employees and 200
which are 40% of the sample size population were used. The instrument for data collection
was questionnaire responded to by full-time employees and at 86% response rate.
Data in Tausif’s (2012) research were analyzed using Pearson correlations, mean, and
standard deviations for all independent variables and one way analysis of variance results for
age differences. Also regression analysis was used to test for significance for the changes
caused by job rewards linked to job satisfaction which is the dependent variable, and to test
the moderating variable age differences with respect to job satisfaction and job rewards.
The findings of Tausif (2012) revealed that the Pearson correlation matrix show
jobsatisfaction positively and considerably associated with non-financial rewards (promotion,
job enrichment, and task autonomy). The value of Pearson correlation (353) proved that
promotion was highly linked with job satisfaction and task autonomy (198). Job satisfaction
was considerably less linked with job satisfaction. Job satisfaction was considerably linked
with age (.137**). Age was also correlated with promotion, job enrichment and task
autonomy. Age differences being a moderating variable show that the mean and standard
deviation of job satisfaction, promotion, job enrichment and task autonomy have correlation.
65
Tausif found that job satisfaction increases with increase in age differences whereby old
workers were reporting high level of satisfaction 3.32. The research used two hypotheses;
Ho1: “Job rewards have positive relationship with employees’ job satisfaction” was sustained
because there was a significant relationship found. Besides, Ho2: “Age differences moderate
the relationship between job rewards and employee’s job satisfaction” show that the results
were significant.
Tausif’s study and its relevance to this study are that University Librarians who are
human resource (HR) managers of academic librarians can design jobs to obtain job
enrichment as well as task autonomy for employees’ job satisfaction. University library jobs
can be designed to harmonize the preferences of senior employees and those of fresh
employees. This does create room for all employees to get job satisfaction whatever work
they are given or assigned to perform.
A study on job enrichment was also carried out by Sulaiman Olanrewaja Adebayo and
Ifenna D. Ezeanya. Adebayo and Ezeanya (2011) surveyed on “Task identify and job
autonomy as correlates of burnout among nurses in Jos, Nigeria.” They examined the
relationship between task identity, job autonomy and burnout of nurses. The study was
carried out by means of field study. The population of the study was 79 qualified nurses
whose sample was drawn from four hospitals; all located in different parts of Jos metropolis.
A simple random sample of “yes” and “no” was adopted in selecting the sample. Those who
picked yes participated in the study. The authors used two instruments namely; Job
Diagnostic Survey (JDS) and Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI). JDS was a 21 – items scale
with seven sub-scales, and has been standardized in Nigeria by Omoluabi (2000). The MBI
was a 22 – items scale developed by Maslach and Jackson (1986), and was designed to
measure three components of turnout.The procedure of data collection was the administration
of 85 copies of task identity, job autonomy and burnout scales to nurses at the four hospitals.
66
This was achieved with the aid of hospital personnel officers. Out of 85 copies distributed,
81 copies were completed and returned. Two (2) copies discarded due to improper and
incomplete response. Seventy nine (79) which is 97.53% of properly filled copies were used
in analyzing the response data.
The data of Adebayo and Ezeanya (2011) was analyzed by the use of Pearson
Moment correlation statistics, mean, and standard deviation. The correlation matrix showing
relationship between task identify and burnout among nurses in Job is: task idenlity-4.25
(mean) 1.21 (SD) and burnout 62.37 (mean), 13.43 (SD) had significant of P<.01. The
correlation between job autonomy burnout is: job autonomy – 3.64 (mean). 1.38.(SD) had
significant no burnout of P<.01. Lastly, the correlation between task identity and job
autonomy among nurses in Jos is: task identity significantly correlate between task identity
and job autonomy.The findings revealed that task identity had a significant negative
relationship with burnout which suggests that nurses have a high perception of task identity.
This is in line with Hackman and Oidham’s (1975) concept of task identity which empower
employees’ the ability to perform task from beginning to end with a visible outcome. It
implies that from the study, when task identity was on the increase, burnout was decreasing.
Job autonomy was also found to have a significant negative relationship with burnout. The
nurse’s work designed with the component of autonomy reduces their experiences of burnout.
According to Hackman and Oldham (1975) autonomy deals with employee’s ability to
exercise discretion while performing their job.
The findings of Adebayo and Ezeanya (2011) were relevant to this study as they
found enrichment strategies as influencing factor for employees to perform their jobs
competently and have job satisfaction. For instance, increased task identity decreases
burnout and jobs with high autonomy reduces the experience of burnout. This portends that
university library work when enriched would be stimulating, interesting and challenging to
67
promote career and professional growth and development as well as employees job
satisfaction. Itdoes reduce negative work and organizational outcome.
Casey, Hilton, Rossmaier and Sisson (2009) studied Job Characteristics Model which
centres on companies in both manufacturing and service industries located in North and
Central America. Specially, the countries are the United States of America, Nicaragua,
Guatemala, Mexico and Costa Rica. Results of United States companies are compared to
those of non-US. Scores were calculated in mean for each of the five dimensions of the
model and the motivation potential score (MPS) ranged from one to 125. A two-tailed t-test
was used to determine if a significant difference exists between the samples. This study was a
comparative one, so the researchers used a one-factor ANOVA to determine the variation
between the subgroups.
The researchers developed two hypotheses to determine if a significant difference
exists between US and Non–US companies as follows: Ho1: There is no statistically
significant difference among the United States and Non-US survey results. Ho2: There is a
statistically significant difference among the United States and Non-US survey results. Three
convenience samples of three US Companies were selected for study as follows. The first
study was 192 out of 1000 plant employees, the second, (Study 2R) 330 out of 534 retail
store employees, and the third; (Study 2H) 89 out of 300 hospital employees. Furthermore,
convenience sample of five Non-US entities was also studied. In the first; is a sample of 233
out of 600 bank employs in Nicaragua, second study sample of 152 out 380 bank workers in
Guatemala. The third is study sample of 150 out of 180 food service workers in Nicaragua,
while the fourth and fifth study samples are 175 out of 274 and 28 out 52 small service
business owners in Mexico and bank employees in Costal Rica respectively.
The instrument used in all the above studies is the Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS). The
JDS is designed to measure the elements of job characteristics theory; employees experienced
68
psychological states, employees’ satisfaction with their job and job context, growth, and need
strength of respondents. The instrument is made of variety of scales and eight sections. The
researchers scored the instrument and used the results to compare each other. The
researchers claimed the instrument was reliable based on the substantive validity of JDS that
had been established (Hackam and Oldham, 1974) and the job dimensions themselves that
were found correlated by Hackman and Lawler (1971), Hackman and Oldham (1974), and
Taber and Taylor (1990).
The study of Casey, Hilton, Rossmaier, and Sisson (2009) revealed that skill variety
mean scores in the United States 1st study and two 2nd studies; (2R and 2H); 4.89, 4.89,
4.46 and 4.05 respectively. These are higher than the means score of five studies of the
entities of Central American countries. Task identity in the US Study One is 3.94, and it was
higher those in non-US studies II and III. However, US study 2R, 5.25 was higher than all
none US five studies. Task significance means scores for the United States are all higher
than the mean scores of the five studies of the Central American Countries. Autonomy mean
scores in the US Study One and 2R and 2H; 4.67 and 5.30 are higher than the mean scores in
the five studies of the Central American countries. Nonetheless, US study 2H, 3.56 is lower
than those in non-US study III, IV and V but only higher than study One. Feedback means
scores in the study One, study 2R and 24, 4.07, 4.05 and 3.36. Study One and Study 2R are
greater than the scores found in the five studies of the Central American countries. US study
2H, 3.36 is only higher Non-US study 5 (Costa Rica). The motivating potential score for US
studies are I, 89.59, 2R; 109.47, and 2H, 49.52. US Study 2H is comparable to Non-US
Study III, 53.53, Study IV; 52.05 and study V; 48.20.
The researchers postulated that culture may be a reason for the differences in the
scores. They performed a one – factor ANOVA to determine the variation between the
subgroups. Null hypothesis; Ho1: was rejected and concluded that there is a statistically
69
significant difference between the US and Non – US companies. Ho2 test revealed
statistically significance between the US and the Non- US companies, allowing validation for
the theory that culture or possible gender is the reason for the variances. The research of
Casey et al and this study are related as both of them are comparative in their settings to find
solutions. The authors used comparison to determine the influence of job characteristics to
arrive at their findings. The validity of JDS and the job dimensions found as correlates gave
this work’s researcher more impetus and insight to investigate into the influence of
enrichment strategies.
Rusconi (2005) researched on Job satisfaction and motivation of graduate engineers
and actuaries in South Africa. This study has three main purposes. Firstly, it examines the
level of job satisfaction and motivation of engineers and actuaries in South Africa and
compares this with other groups. Secondly, it examines the role of job design in their job
satisfaction and motivation. Thirdly, it recommends ways to increase the level of satisfaction
and motivation. The research methodology was based on Hackman and Oldham’s job
Characteristics Model (JCM) and accompanying Job Diagnostic survey (JDS).Three research
questions were raised by the author to guide his investigation. One: What is the level of Job
Satisfaction and motivation of graduate engineers and actuaries in South Africa and how does
this compare with other groups: Two: Does job design influence the level of job satisfaction
and motivation of graduate engineers and actuaries in South Africa? Three: How can the
level of job satisfaction and motivation be improved for engineers and actuaries? The
hypotheses tested by the researcher were as follows; Ho1: motivating potential scores (MPS)
are positively correlated with average satisfaction. Ho2: The job satisfaction and motivation
scores of engineers and actuaries are higher than those of a cross section of employees but
lower than those of other professional samples.
70
Primary data was collected by making use of the modified JDS and to supplement the
data informal interviews were also held with members of the professions. The survey data
were sent out results collected via e-mail. A total of 1300 surveys were sent to engineers (e-
mail addresses in Engineering Council of South Africa) and 197 of them received were
useable as follows: Chemical Engineers; 35, Civil Engineers; 38, Electrical Engineers; 32,
and Mechanical Engineers; 43. The sample used for Actuaries is 197 out of 830 populations.
Testing the statistical significance of the results was done with t – statistic, Exceland a
statistics tool “PH stat”was used. The method used was to do a simplelinear regression and
then to study the outcome of viewpoints. This included a visual inspection of the scatter and
residual plots and an ANOVA analysis.The results were divided into the following sections
(a) the MPS and average satisfaction, (b) the five job factors, and (c) personal outcomes.
Therefore, result of MPS and average satisfaction were calculated in standard deviation as
follows; Civil Engineers; 5.47, Chemical Engineers; 5.31, Actuaries; 5.45, Entire group; 5.45,
Engineers’ 5.27 Mechanical Engineers; 5.11 and Electrical Engineers; 5.22. In the section of
the five job factors the results on skill variety show that Chemical Engineers scored highest at
5.75 with electrical engineers lowest at 5.29. The entire results are not statistically
significantly different. Task identity results show that Actuaries is highest at 5.61 with
Electrical engineers at 4.99. This difference is statistically significant. Task significance
results show that Civil engineers scored higher at 5.65 with Chemical engineers at 5.42 which
give this factor a statistically significant difference. Autonomy factor results revealed Civil
engineers highest at 5.65 compared with Chemical engineers at 5.58. The entire results are
not statistically significantly different. Feedback job factor results show that it was lowest
score. Here, Chemical engineers were highest at 5.06 and Electrical engineers at 4.90. This
constituted a statistically significance difference. Also results of Engineers were higher than
Actuaries by only 0.01, which is hardly significant.
71
Furthermore, in the section of the personal outcomes the results show that Actuaries
scored higher at 5.07, Civil engineers, 4.97, with Electrical engineers the least at 4.55 of
which the overall is different statistically significant. Hypothesis settings revealed that Ho1 is
true. That MPS is positively correlated with the average satisfaction of the relation between
the two, 52% of the variation in satisfaction can be attributed to the MPS for the entire group.
Ho2 tested showing that it was rejected is not true. The comparative results show
thatprofessionals in this group tend to have a higher satisfaction than the non professionals. In
conclusion, there is usefulness of this as its methodology was based on Hackman and
Oldham’s JDS. The author also used a very comprehensive approach in measuring the
influence of the job characteristics (enrichment strategies) on job satisfaction of employees
comparing them in terms of their professions. Interview results were also used to supplement
primary data. These approaches and the findings were guides confirmed the validity of the
JCM which was used by the researcher to develop the instruments for data collection.
Summary Literature Review
The review of literature examined three relevant theories that are related to the study
which included: Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of needs, Herzberg’s (1974). Hygiene and
motivator and Hackman and Oldham;s (1976) Job Characteristic Mode (JCM). Maslow
asserts that needs determine human behaviour which was organized into a hierarchy of five
levels. In contrast, Herzbert’s theory opined that there were just two kinds of needs; hygiene
and motivators which create human satisfaction and they were derived from work itself.
Motivators are non-monetary (intrinsic) factors of motivation, what people actually do on the
job (enrichment factors). Hygiene factors are related to satisfaction from outside the job.
These hygiene needs were also termed rewards or extrinsic factors which are necessary and
contributory factors for improvement in work performance.
72
The theory of Hackman and Oldham JCM is fundamentally the framework for
enriching jobs unlike Maslow’s and Herzberg’s theories. JCM’s focus is motivational job
design to make jobs interesting, challenging, creation of employee’s growth and development
of potentials as well as satisfaction. Job characteristics of JCM gives or provides clear
impacts on job outcomes, including job satisfaction. The similitude of JCM with Maslow’s
and Herzberg’s are that with Maslow’s it is in compliance, where job characteristics help to
motivate employee’s quest for progress. JCM is an offshoot of Herzberg’s motivator of the
hygiene and motivator theory.The conditions of summarizing the three theories and their
relevance to this study are as follows: Maslow and Herzberg have theorized on human needs
and explained that needs can be satisfied if people work to get paid. Hackman and Oldham’s
JCM is relevant in that it builds into job more motivating potentials such as skill variety, task
identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback. These are the bedrock of job enrichment
which is derived from job design or re-design to foster and facilitate job satisfaction.
In summarizing the five empirical studies used in the work, the research categorized
them in terms of purpose. Four of them were investigations into the role of job design using
either of JCM, JDS and MPS which are all elements of Hackman and Oldham theory. Three
of the four compared their findings with other entities, one out of the five only did a survey
on the availability of enrichment characteristic among professional in same book trade. The
researcher have used these studies as springboard and guide to investigate the influence of
enrichment strategies of job satisfaction of academic librarians in South-South Nigeria.
However, this study is investigating the influence of enrichment strategies on job satisfaction
which is a gap in research that is being filled. Specifically, it brings up information on the
impact of job design on job satisfaction of academic librarian in Nigerian university, in the
South-South in particular. The methodologies used in the area of design of the study are all
73
different from the ex-post-facto design used in the work. This is also a gap which provides
appropriate approach in carrying such a research.
The five empirical studies revealed that Chronbach alpha was used to obtain the
reliability for all factors tested. Data in them were analyzed using Pearson Moment
Correlation, mean scores, standard deviation, regression analysis, and simple percentages. In
this study, mean scores, and standard deviation were used for the research questions while the
hypotheses were tested using t-test analysis. This is gap in terms of method of data analysis.
Two out of the five empirical studies were locally in Nigerian locality. This study had
a higher population and coverage in term of area. This is a gap, which creates or made
available job design or re-design research information.
74
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODS
This chapter described the design of the study, area of the study, population of the
study, sample and sampling technique, instrument for data collection, validity of the
instrument, reliability of the instrument, administration of the instrument and method of data
analysis.
Design of the Study
The research design adopted for this study was ex - post - facto research design.
According to Lammers and Badia (2005) this design is a non experimental research technique
used when researcher studies preexisting groups that are compared on some dependent
variable. The researcher has no control over the independent variable; job satisfaction (which
had had external causes). The preexisting groups (Federal and State Universities) are
compared by looking at the independent variable. These two groups have similar
backgrounds and were exposed to different conditions (some dependent variables) as a result
of their natural histories.Furthermore, the reason for utilizing this design is that, it will enable
the researcher to understand the difference in perception between two variables which are
quantitative. The ex-post - facto or causal comparative design is actually used in this study
because of the presence of qualitative independent variable (institutions), quantitative
independent variable (enrichment strategies) and the quantitative dependent variable
(academic librarians’ job satisfaction).
Area of the Study
The area of study is South-South of Nigeria. It comprises of six states namely; Akwa
Ibom, Bayelsa, Cross River, Delta, Edo and Rivers (see Appendix IV p.113). The
geographical area was politically recognized for administrative purpose in 1994-95
constitutional assembly during the era of late General Sani Abacha. The study area shares
75
common boundaries with the South East, South West, North Central and Cameroon. This
area is politically designated South-South Nigeria, and occupied a land mass of 84,487km
and had a population of 20,357,337 (2005 estimate figure) Wikipedia, 2009. It is located
within the tropical zone with a dominant vegetation of green foliage of tree belts. This zone is
known for heavy rainfall and major occupations are agricultures, trading, and the extraction
of raw materials, such as limestone, gold, and oil.
There is federal and state governments’ presence in terms of infrastructure and other
amenitiesincludes;airports, seaport, refineries, teaching hospitals and federal medical
centres,and the like. In addition to the aforementioned infrastructural presence, the study area
also has some important educational institutions that cater for the educational needs of the
area. However, this study was more concerned with the tertiary level of education in the area
of study. Specifically, there were 13 federal and state universities at the time of this study.
Furthermore, all the universities studied in the South-South zone of Nigeria are
having functional library systems and setting. They are all known to have satisfied various
National Universities Commission’s (NUC) course and facility accreditation requirements
and their universities have graduated students. Finally, these libraries have the relevant
workplace, work activities and personnel (academic librarians) and provide adequate grounds
for the researcher to carry out studies on job enrichment strategies for the enhancement of job
satisfaction.
Population of the Study
The population for this study consists of all academic librarians working in eight
Federal and State universities within the South-South region of Nigeria. This was made up of
224 academic librarians. The population was further distributed as 81 Federal and 143 States
University academic librarians respectively.
76
Sample and Sampling Techniques
All 224 academic librarians (100 percent) of the total population were selected for the
study. The researcher did no sampling because, the population was considered small.The
frame and distribution of population into Federal and State Universities is shown in Appendix
V, p.114.
Instruments for Data Collection Thefollowing instruments were used for the study.
1. Librarians’ Enrichment Strategies Questionnaire (LESQ, see Appendix I p. 109).
2. Librarians Job Satisfaction Questionnaire (LJSQ, see Appendix II. P. 111).
3. An interview schedule; Librarian Enrichment on Job Satisfaction Interview (LEJSI
seeAppendix III p. 112).
The Librarians enrichment strategies questionnaire (LESQ) and Librarians Job
Satisfaction Questionnaire (LJSQ) were developed. The LESQ and LJSQ questionnaire
instruments for data collection had two parts, A and B. Part A sought information on
demographic data of the respondents, while Part B sought information on academic
librarians’ job enrichment strategies. The Part B of LESQ was further divided into five
subsections. Each subsection of LESQ measured one job enrichment strategies with 8 items
and job satisfaction characteristics questionnaire. Items 7-14, 15-22, 23-30, 31-38 and 39-46
sought information on skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback.
The second instrument, LJSQ contained only 12 items without subdivision into smaller units.
Items 1-12 sought information on job satisfaction characteristics in this instrument. All
items of these instruments were measured on a 4-point rating scale of:
(1) Very Satisfied (VS) 4-points
(2) Satisfied (S) 3-points
(3) Dissatisfied (D) 2-points
(4) Very Dissatisfied (VD) 1-point
77
In-depth Interview Guide
In this research, structured interviews were conducted with the eight university
librarians. The interview schedule enables the researcher to seek in-depth opinions, ideas, and
meanings they attached to their acceptance of job enrichment strategies introduced for the
promotion of their employees (academic librarians) job satisfaction.
CATEGORIES DEVELOPMENT TO CODE STATEMENTS GIVEN TO THE EIGH TEEN ENRICHMENT
AND SATISFACTION INTERVIEW QUESTIONS .
Category Definitions
Competence: University Librarian’s perception concerning academic librarian’s ability, skill
and knowledge.
Training : University Librarian’s perception of academic librarian’s education to
acquire some proficiency.
Contribution: University Librarian’s perception of academic librarian’s possibility to
contribute.
Institution: University Librarian’s perception of academic librarian’s characteristics
associated with the library job, where academic librarians are
employed to work.
Commitment: University Librarian’s perception of academic librarian’scommitment
andwillingness to spend their time, energy and attention on library work.
Motivation: University librarian’s perception on academic librarian’s motivation related to
factors inherent in library work and activities.
Reward: University Librarian’s perception of something given or promise to academic
librarians in recognition of service rendered.
78
Self-Development: University Librarian’s perception on academic librarian’s
encouragement to develop themselves by learning new skills, achieve more knowledge and
toward achieving their full potential.
INTERVIEW CODING
Interpretation and Coding of Enrichment and Satisfaction Statements.
Eight categories (Competence, Training, Contribution, Institution, Commitment,Motivation,
Reward, and Self-development)
CATEGORIES DEVELOPMENT TO CODE STATEMENTS GIVEN TO THE EIGHTEEN
ENRICHMENT AND SATISFACTION QUESTIONS.
Category Definitions
Competence University Librarian’s perception concerning academic librarians’
ability, skill and knowledge.
Training University Librarian’s perception of academic librarian’s education
to acquire some proficiency.
Contribution University Librarian’s perception of academic librarian’s possibility
to contribute.
Institution University Librarian’s perception of academic librarian’s
characteristics associated with the library job, where academic
librarians are employed to work.
Commitment University Librarian’s perception of academic librarian’s commitment
and willingness to spend their time, energy and attention on library
work.
79
Motivation University Librarian’s perception on academic librarian’s
motivation related to factors inherent in library work and
activities.
Reward University Librarian’s perception of something given or promise to
academic librarians in recognition of service rendered.
Self-Development University Librarian’s perception on academic librarian’ encourage to
develop themselves by learning new skills, achieve more knowledge
and work toward achieving their full potential.
CODE BOOK
Interpretation and coding of enrichment and satisfaction statements.
Eight categories (Competence, Training, Contribution, Institution, Commitment,
Motivation, Reward, and Self-development) were developed to interpreted and code all
important elements mentioned in relation to the Enrichment and Satisfaction questions. The
eight categories are mutually exclusive. Inclusion criteria are not necessary mutually
exclusive, but intended to be helpful in the process of coding. Notwithstanding, the
statements used in this Appendix are not fully identical with actual statements drawn from the
interview text.
Procedure:
1. It is important to study the categories and the inclusion criteria before interpretation
and coding of statements.
2. Read statement
3. Think: what is the University Librarian referring to? Which of the elements
(categories) are mentioned?
4. One statement can be interpreted using several categories, but if participants mention
one category several times in one statement it should be only counted once.
80
5. It is important to study the categories and the inclusion criteria before interpretation
and coding of statements.
6. Read statement
7. Think: what is the University Librarian referring to? Which of the elements
(categories) are mentioned?
8. One statement can be interpreted using several categories, but if participants mention
one category several times in one statement it should be only counted once.
1. Competence
Competence: “the fact of having the ability or skill that is needed for something”
(Waters, 2004).
Definition : Individual University Librarian’s perceptions on academic Librarians
concerning their ability, skills, talents and knowledge.
Elaboration: Individual University Librarians considering a university library job, reflect
upon academic librarians competence; if they are competent to do the job or not. In
addition, University Librarians reflect on other academic librarians (colleagues)
perception of job holder’s competence.
Inclusion Criteria
• Individual University Librarians perception of benefits of training such as
competence for available designed jobs
• Individual University Librarian’s perception of academic librarian being the right
persons.
• Individual University Librarian’s perceptions of academic librarian being wanted
for the enriched job, because of their competence. Includes perceived training
support from the institution (organization).
81
2. Training
Training : “ the process of bringing a person, etc to an agreed standard of proficiency, etc,
by practice and instruction” (Lechner, 2004)
Definition: University Librarian’s perception of benefits of academic librarian’s being in
school or workshops, etc for proficiency acquisition or that are already acquired to do
jobs.
Elaboration: Individual University Librarian’s perception of how University Librarian’s
training can be used to determine who fits to a designed job, reflects on continuous
training programmes provided by the Institution to upgrade skills.
Inclusive criteria
• Individual university librarian’s perception of library jobs that are enriched and the
need for upgrading skills, and proficiency.
• Individual university librarian’s perception on training policy of the institution and
• University librarian’s actions on the use of training to equip academic librarian’s
proficiency.
3. Contribution
Contribution: “to give a part of the total, together with others” (Waters, 2004).
Definition: University librarian’s perception of academic librarians’ possibility to
contribute.
Elaboration: the category does only include a perceived possibility to contribute, not
a willingness to contribute. Even if university librarians perceive a possibility to
contribute, they may still be uncommitted to do so, for several other reasons.
Inclusion criteria:
• Individual university librarians perception of academic librarians if they have
a possibility to contribute
82
• university librarians perception of academic librarians if they don’t have a
possibility to contribute
• Individual university librarian’s perception of academic librarians if their
possibility to contribute would bring about job satisfaction and enhance
performance.
4. Institution:“an organization whose purpose is to further public welfare, learning, etc”
(Lechner, 2004).
Definition: University librarian’s perceptions of academic librarian’s characteristics
associated with the institution where the individual is a job holder in the library
unit/section.
Elaboration: University librarian’s perceptions of academic librarian’s evaluation of
the institution, reflections on type of unit/sectional composition, and if there is any
indication of conflict between the institutions they work in daily and the unit/section
where job is being done.
Inclusion criteria:
• Characteristics concerning type of leadership unit/section composition.
• Match between academic librarians and institution concerning type of
activities, interest and values.
• Mismatch between academic librarians and institution concerning type of job,
interests and values
• Match between the institution they work in daily and the unit/section where
jobs are being done.
Procedure:
5. It is important to study the categories and the inclusion criteria before interpretation
and coding of statements.
83
6. Read statement
7. Think: what is the University Librarian referring to? Which of the elements
(categories) are mentioned?
8. One statement can be interpreted using several categories, but if participants mention
one category several times in one statement it should be only counted once.
5. Commitment.
Commitment: “Being prepared to give a lot of your time and attention to do something
because you believe it is right or important” (Waters, 2004).
Definition : Perceived academic librarians’ commitment and willingness to spend time,
energy and attention on assigned library work.
Elaboration: The perceived time and energy academic librarians use in different arenas in
life. This often involves prioritizing. Individuals reflect on their willingness to divert time
and energy from other domains of life to give quality time to assigned library jobs.
Inclusion criteria:
• Academic librarians’ willingness to be a part of a larger whole
• Academic librarians willingness to use of their time and energy
• Academic librarians’ unwillingness to spend time and energy on an assigned library job,
because it takes time and energy from leisure.
• Academic librarians’ unwillingness to spend time and energy on assigned library work
because it takes time and energy from family.
6. Motivations:
Motivation: ‘A driving force or forces responsible for the initiation, persistence, direction,
and vigour of goal- directed behavior” (Colman, 2003)
Definition: Academic librarians’ motivation related to factors inherent in assigned library
work, where performance in itself provides pleasure and satisfaction.
84
Elaboration: Satisfaction and pleasure are experienced here and now. Individuals reflect
on how much they enjoy the work and all the activities associated with it.
Inclusion criteria:
• Academic librarians assigned library work meaningful, interesting, fun and exciting.
• Academic librarians find satisfaction in forming social relationships and working with
other people, including helping other people.
• Academic librarians find satisfaction in variety, doing something different from what they
are doing in their daily work due to enrichment strategies applied.
• Academic librarians find satisfaction in seeking, accepting and overcoming challenges.
7. Reward:
Reward: “Something given or promised in recognition of service rendered a driving force
of forces responsible for the initiation, persistence, persistence, direction and or in requital
for ill-doing” (Lechner,2004) vigour of goal directed behaviour” (Colman, 2O03).
Definition: Academic librarians’ motivation related to reward other than satisfaction,
especially materials.
Elaboration: includes often a calculative involvement. University librarian’s perception of
academic librarians’ reflection of reward outside the work itself, and work is worthwhile
because it has positive outcomes in other domains of life.
Inclusion Criteria:
• University librarians’ perception of academic librarians on library work performance, if it
will have positive effect on social status, recognition, visibility and opportunities for
network.
• University librarian’s perception of academic librarians when rewarded with
compensation/money.
85
• University librarian perception of academic librarians when provided with future career
opportunities.
• University librarian perception of academic librarians if they see work may harm their
reputation and future career opportunities.
8.Self-Development
Self: “a person’s own nature and qualities” (Waters, 2004).
Development: “the process of becoming bigger, stronger, better etc” (Waters, 2004).
Definition: University librarian’s perception of academic librarians’ motivation to develop
themselves by learning new skills, acquire more knowledge and work toward achieving
self full potential.
Elaboration: Learning is a key word. When individuals receive an invitation to perform a
library work or duty, they reflect on their possibility to improve their competences, skills
and abilities.
Inclusion criteria
• Possibility to improve knowledge, skills, abilities and competence in general, including
possibility to learn from others or colleagues.
• Possibility to keep abreast of the latest developments in librarianship and area of
specialization.
• Insight into other university libraries.
• Possibility to use competence and develop and learn.
Validity of the Instruments
The face and content validity of the instruments were carried out by the supervisor
and two experts, one in library and information science and one in measurement and
evaluation from the University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Anambra State. The expert from library
and information science carefully reviewed the relevance of the items in the two separate
86
questionnaires and interview schedule on the face value. The measurement and evaluation
expert critically analysed the clarity and appropriateness of each item and interview schedule
on the content value. All their corrections and comments were judiciously incorporated into
the final draft of the instruments. The experts and the supervisor’s approved a total of 52
items and 10 on the interview schedule as against the 65 and 15 initially proposed and
drafted, because some of the items were not approved.
Reliability of the Instrument
Librarians’ Enrichment Strategies Questionnaire (LESQ) and Librarians Job
Satisfaction Questionnaire” (LJSQ) were administered to 30 academic librarians in Imo State
University that were not part of the main study. The administration of the instruments were
carried out once and the scores obtained were used to establish the reliability coefficient
using Cronbach’s coefficient alpha method which yielded the following reliability
coefficients for the various variables of the instruments (skill variety, 0.72; task identity,
0.73; task significance, 0.79; autonomy, 0.76; feedback, 0.75; entire instrument, 0.75; while
that of the second instrument reliability coefficient was 0.71). The coefficient values were
considered as an acceptable reliability for the study. (see Appendix VI p. 115).
Method of Data Collection
The data were generated from questionnaires (LESQ), (LJSQ) and interview.
Research assistants were trained in each of the university libraries to administer the copies of
the two separate questionnaires to the number of academic librarians on the library’s staff list
and collect same from them. On the other hand, oral interview was conducted on only
university library managers. The researcher of this work went to universities and had one on
one interview session with the university library managers. Structured questions were asked
and notes were taken as the respondents answered the questions. Consequent upon the
research assistants’ collecting the completed forms from the respondents, the researcher
87
retrieved copies of the LESQ and LJSQ as well as the interview records for collating, coding
and analysis.
Method of Data Analysis
The data collected were analyzed using both descriptive and inferential statistics. The
descriptive statistics of simple percentages, mean and standard deviation were used for the
analyses of the demographic data of the respondents. However, the research questions were
answered with the analysis of mean and standard deviation. On the other hand, the
hypotheses were analyzed with the used of t-test analysis. All hypotheses were tested at 0.05
alpha levels.
88
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS
This chapter is concerned with the presentation, analysis and interpretation of result
arising from the data collected for the study. The descriptive and inferential statistics were
used for data analysis. The descriptive statistics of mean and standard deviation were used to
answer the research questions one to six, while the inferential statistics of t-test analysis was
used to test the hypotheses at 0.05 alpha level. The results of the analysis of data are
presented in tables 1 to 12.
Research Question One
What difference exists between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of skill variety on job satisfaction?
Table 1: Summary of mean and standard deviation scores of difference between Federal and State university’sacademiclibrarians on the influence of skill variety on job satisfaction
S/N Items Mean SD Total Mean F S F S FS
1 Job provides variety of experiences on the job.
2.88 2.71 0.827 0.941 2.77 0.903
2 Job utilizes employee talents, abilities and skills
2.77 2.58 0.841 1.010 2.65 0.954
3 Employee is allowed on the job training/for new skills, abilities and talents.
2.67 2.35 0.861 0.995 2.47 0.961
4 Job provides opportunity to use a lot of new technologies.
2.65 2.38 0.938 1.048 2.48 1.015
5 Employee intellect is used. 2.93 2.57 1.010 1.038 2.70 1.039 6 Job supports additional training
and education 3.09 2.74 0.883 0.977 2.87 0.956
7 Job provides variety of responsibilities
2.78 2.54 1.025 0.932 2.64 0.970
8 Job provides opportunities for period change of duty
2.68 2.69 0.906 0.915 2.68 0.910
Grand Total Mean 2.81 2.57 0.911 0.982 2.66 0.964
Cut-off Mean =2.50; FEDERALN = 81; STATEN =143 and TOTALN =224
The data presented in Table 1. indicates that, the mean score of academic librarians in
Federal universities (2.81) and that of the State universities (2.57) were greater than the cut-
89
off mean score of 2.50. On the whole the grand mean score of 2.66 was also greater than the
cut-off mean score of 2.50. This implies that there exists a difference between the opinion of
Federal and State Universities academic librarians on the influence of skill variety on job
satisfaction. Consequent upon the observed difference, the t-test analysis was carried out in
order to ascertain if the difference is significant (see Table 7.).
Research Question Two
Is there any difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of task identity on job satisfaction?
Table 2: Summary of mean and standard deviation scores of difference between Federal and State university’sacademiclibrarians on the influence of task identity on job satisfaction.
S/N Items Mean SD Total Mean F S F S FS
9 Employee understands the job from start to end.
2.69 2.77 0.861 0.853 2.74 0.855
10 Job is arranged to meet and talk with library users.
2.53 2.60 0.963 1.008 2.58 0.990
11 Job has good communication link with supervisor.
2.69 2.65 0.931 1.030 2.67 0.993
12 Employee is recognized by supervisor in performing his duties.
2.74 2.47 0.972 1.125 2.57 1.078
13 Job gives me sense of importance.
2.84 2.49 0.955 1.106 2.62 1.065
14 Job Provides terms-work opportunities
2.96 2.79 0.858 0.985 2.85 0.943
15 Co-workers respect each others 2.80 2.67 0.914 0.998 2.72 0.969 16 Job provides professional/career
fulfillment 2.65 2.97 0.964 0.896 2.86 0.931
Grand Total Mean 2.74 2.68 0.927 1.000 2.70 0.978 Cut-off Mean =2.50; FEDERALN = 81; STATEN =143 and TOTALN =224
The data presented in Table 2. reveals that, the mean score of academic librarians in
Federal universities (2.74) and that of the State Universities (2.68) were greater than the cut-
off mean score of 2.50. On the whole the grand mean score of 2.70 was greater than the cut-
off mean score of 2.50. This simply implies that there exists a difference between the opinion
of Federal and State university’sacademic librarians on the influence of task identity on job
90
satisfaction. Consequent upon the observed difference, the t-test analysis was carried out in
order to ascertain if the difference is significant (see Table 8).
Research Question Three
What difference exists between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of task significance on job satisfaction?
Table 3: Summary of mean and standard deviation scores of difference between Federal and State university’sacademic librarians on the influence of task significance on job satisfaction
S/N Items Mean SD Total Mean F S F S FS
17 How well I work affects other people.
2.83 2.80 0.803 0.866 2.81 0.842
18 Job influences day-to-day institutional success.
2.88 2.69 0.927 0.966 2.76 0.954
19 Job provides understanding of the institutional mission.
2.68 2.73 0.906 0.927 2.71 0.917
20 Job influences institutional decisions.
2.81 2.43 0.896 0.996 2.57 0.977
21 Job is valued by others. 2.68 2.71 0.878 1.040 2.70 0.983 22 Job gives sense of achievement 2.91 2.99 0.869 0.996 2.96 0.951 23 Job is intellectually stimulating 2.77 2.92 0.795 1.015 2.87 0.942 24 Job is of service to the university
community
3.04 2.80 0.872 0.890 2.89 0.889
Grand Total Mean 2.83 2.76 0.868 0.962 2.78 0.931
Cut-off Mean =2.50; FEDERALN = 81; STATEN =143 and TOTALN =224
The data presented in Table 3. shows that, the mean score of academic librarians in
Federal universities (2.83) and that of the State Universities (2.76) were greater than the cut-
off mean score of 2.50. On the whole the grand mean score of 2.78 was also greater than the
cut-off mean score of 2.50. This implies that there exists a difference between the opinion of
Federal and state Universities academic librarians on the influence of task significance on job
satisfaction. Consequent upon the observed difference, the t-test analysis was carried out in
order to ascertain if the difference is significant (see Table 9.).
91
Research Question Four
Is there any difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of autonomy on job satisfaction?
Table 4: Summary of mean and standard deviation scores of difference between Federal and State university’sacademic librarians on the influence of autonomy on job satisfaction
S/N Items Mean SD Total Mean F S F S FS
25 Job allows employee to do his work by himself.
2.68 2.59 0.849 0.891 2.62 0.875
26 Employee does the work as one sees it fit.
2.68 2.36 0.972 1.025 2.48 1.015
27 Job permits employee to act independently of his supervisor.
2.86 2.52 0.848 1.100 2.64 1.027
28 Job provides opportunity of self directed flexible working hours.
2.64 2.39 1.064 1.169 2.48 1.136
29 Employee gets optimal support from management
2.77 2.23 1.099 1.124 2.42 1.142
30 Job supervisor encourages freedom to rearrange tasks
2.72 2.47 1.015 1.149 2.58 1.107
31 Interference of co-workers is not encouraged
2.85 2.43 0.963 1.065 2.58 1.047
32 Doing the job does not involve too much responsibility
2.62 2.63 0.902 1.032 2.62 0.985
Grand Total Mean 2.73 2.45 0964 1.081 2.55 1.042 Cut-off Mean =2.50; FEDERALN = 81; STATEN =143 and TOTALN =224
The data presented in Table 4. indicates that, the mean score of academic librarians in Federal
Universities (2.73) was greater than the cut-off mean score of 2.50 and that of the State
universities (2.45) was less. On the whole the grand mean score of 2.55 was also greater than
the cut-off mean score of 2.50. This implies that there exists a difference between the opinion
of Federal and State university’sacademic librarians on the influence of autonomy on job
satisfaction. Consequent upon the observed difference, the t-test analysis was carried out in
order to ascertain if the difference is significant (see Table 10.
Research Question Five
What difference exists between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of feedback on job satisfaction?
92
Table 5: Summary of mean and standard deviation scores of difference between Federal and stateuniversity’sacademic librarians on the influence of feedback on job satisfaction
S/N Items Mean SD Total Mean F S F S FS
33 Job itself provides feedback. 2.96 2.80 0.813 0.866 2.86 0.849 34 On the job feedback is received
from co-workers about ones performance.
2.72 2.75 0.978 0.989 2.74 0.983
35 There is clear and direct information about job outcomes.
2.77 2.69 0.939 1.036 2.72 1.001
36 Employee gets performance information, directly from the work.
2.79 2.55 1.092 1.099 2.64 1.100
37 Employee gets regular updates. 2.81 2.57 0.923 1.097 2.66 1.042 38 Satisfaction of user are known
while doing my job 2.74 3.00 0.997 1.075 2.91 1.053
39 Satisfaction of supervisor is known while doing my job
2.72 2.85 0.978 1.061 2.80 10.32
40 Inclusive of my idea are known management policies/decisions
2.65 2.77 0.854 1.053 2.73 0.985
Grand Total Mean 2.77 2.75 0.947 1.035 2.76 1.006
Cut-off Mean =2.50; FEDERALN = 81; STATEN =143 and TOTALN =224
The data presented in Table 5. indicates that, the mean score of academic librarians in
Federal Universities (2.77) and that of the State universities (2.75) were greater than the cut-
off mean score of 2.50. On the whole the grand mean score of 2.76 was also greater than the
cut-off mean score of 2.50. This implies that there exists a difference between the opinion of
Federal and State university’sacademic librarians on the influence of feedback on job
satisfaction. Consequent upon the observed difference, the t-test analysis was carried out in
order to ascertain if the difference is significant (see Table 11.).
Research Question Six
Is there any difference between the mean scores of Federal and State Universities
academic librarians on the influence of enrichment strategies on job satisfaction?
93
Table 6: Summary of mean and standard deviation scores of difference between Federal and state university’sacademic librarians on the influence of joint enrichment strategies on job satisfaction
S/N Items Mean SD Total Mean F S F S FS
41 University Policies/administration are fair.
2.81 2.61 0.853 0.935 2.68 0.910
42 Supervisors possess leadership skills to motivate employee to work.
2.72 2.93 0.840 0.917 2.85 0.894
43 Financial benefits are sufficient for the job.
2.68 2.55 0.804 0.886 2.60 0.857
44 Job promotes interpersonal relationships
2.63 2.78 0.955 0.897 2.73 0.919
45 Office conditions are adequate. 2.68 2.67 0.834 0.878 2.67 0.861 46 Job itself is meaningful 2.62 2.75 0.874 0.938 2.70 0.916 47 Standards for jobs are achievable. 2.74 2.65 0.818 0.936 2.68 0.895 48 Individual talents being utilized are
recognized for accomplishments on the job.
2.75 2.45 0.956 0.998 2.56 0.991
49 Employees are seen as responsible owners of their job.
2.84 2.57 0.858 0.931 2.67 0.912
50 There is room for advancement on the job.
2.93 2.61 0.932 0.942 2.72 0.949
51 University Policies/administration are fair.
2.73 2.57 0.866 0.923 2.63 0.904
52 Supervisors possess leadership skills to motivate employee to work.
2.75 2.59 0.902 0.922 2.65 0.916
Grand Total Mean 2.74 2.64 0.874 0.925 2.68 0.910
Cut-off Mean =2.50; FEDERALN = 81; STATEN =143 and TOTALN =224
The data presented in Table 6 indicates that, the mean score of academic librarians in
Federal universities (2.74) and that of the State Universities (2.64) were greater than the cut-
off mean score of 2.50. On the whole the grand mean score of 2.68 was also greater than the
cut-off mean score of 2.50. This implies that there exists a difference between the opinion of
Federal and State university’sacademic librarians on the influence of enrichment strategies on
job satisfaction. Consequent upon the observed difference, the t-test analysis was carried out
in order to ascertain if the difference is significant (see Table 12.).
Hypotheses Testing
Hypothesis 0ne
There is no significant difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of skill variety on job satisfaction.
94
Table 7: t-test analysis of the difference between the mean scores ofFederal and State university’s academic librarians on theinfluence of skill variety on job satisfaction.
Variables N X SD df t.cal. t.crit. Decision at P < 0.05
Federal Universities 81 22.47 2.475 222 4.926 1.960 * State Universities 143 20.59 2.873 * = Significant at P < 0.05, N = 224
The data presented in Table 7. reveals that, the t-test analysis is significant at p < 0.05,
because the calculated t-test value of 4.926 is greater than the critical t-test value of 0.196 at
0.05 alpha levels with 222 degrees of freedom. Hence, the null hypothesis which states that
there is no significant difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of skill variety on job satisfaction is rejected.
Therefore, the alternative hypothesis which state that there is significant difference between
the mean scores of Federal and State university’sacademic librarians on the influence of skill
variety on job satisfaction is upheld.
Hypothesis Two
There is no significant difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of task identity on job satisfaction.
Table 8: t-test analysis of the difference between the mean scores of Federal and State university’sacademic librarians on the influence of task identity on job satisfaction.
Variables N X SD df t.cal. t.crit. Decision at P < 0.05
Federal Universities 81 21.91 2.576 222 1.388 1.960 NS State Universities 143 21.41 2.606
NS = Not Significant at P < 0.05, N = 224
The data presented in Table 8. shows that, the t-test analysis is not significant at p <
0.05, since the calculated t-test value of 1.388 is less than the critical t-test value of 0.196 at
0.05 alpha levels with 222 degrees of freedom. Hence, the null hypothesis which states that
95
there is no significant difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of task identity on job satisfaction is
retained.
Hypothesis Three
There is no significant difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of task significance on job satisfaction.
Table9:t-test analysis of the difference between the mean scores of Federal and stateuniversity’sacademic librarians on the influence of task significance on job satisfaction.
Variables N X SD df t.cal. t.crit. Decision at P < 0.05
Federal Universities 81 22.59 2.607 222 1.440 1.960 NS State Universities 143 22.07 2.613 NS =Not Significant at P < 0.05, N = 224
The data presented in Table 9. indicates that, the t-test analysis is not significant at p <
0.05, because the calculated t-test value of 1.440 is less than the critical t-test value of 0.196
at 0.05 alpha level with 222 degrees of freedom. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected. This
implies that, significant difference does not exists between the mean scores of Federal and
State university’sacademic librarians on the influence of task significance on job satisfaction.
Hypothesis Four
There is no significant difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of autonomy on job satisfaction.
Table 10: t-test analysis of the difference between the mean scores of Federal and State university’sacademic librarians on the influence of autonomy on job satisfaction
Variables N X SD df t.cal. t.crit. Decision at P < 0.05
Federal Universities 81 21.81 2.784 222 5.330 1.960 * State Universities 143 19.64 3.022 * = Significant at P < 0.05, N = 224
96
The data presented in Table 10. reveals that, the t-test analysis is significant at p <
0.05, because the calculated t-test value of 5.330 is greater than the critical t-test value of
0.196 at 0.05 alpha level with 222 degrees of freedom. Hence, the null hypothesis which
states that there is no significant difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of autonomy on job satisfaction is rejected.
Therefore, the alternative hypothesis which states that there is a significant difference
between the mean scores of Federal and State university’sacademic librarians on the
influence of autonomy on job satisfaction is upheld.
Hypothesis Five
There is no significant difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
Universities academic librarians on the influence of feedback on job satisfaction.
Table 11: t-test analysis of the difference between the mean scores of Federal and State university’sacademic librarians on the influence of feedback on job satisfaction.
Variables N X SD df t.cal. t.crit. Decision at P < 0.05
Federal Universities 81 22.16 2.608 222 0.499 1.960 NS State Universities 143 21.99 2.700 NS = Not Significant at P < 0.05, N = 224
The data presented in Table 11. indicates that, the t-test analysis is not significant at p
< 0.05, because the calculated t-test value of 0.499 is less than the critical t-test value of
0.196 at 0.05 alpha level with 222 degrees of freedom. Hence, the null hypothesis which
states that there is no significant difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of feedback on job satisfaction is retained.
Hypothesis Six
There is no significant difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of enrichment strategies on job satisfaction.
97
Table 12: t-test analysis of the difference between the mean scores of Federal and State university’sacademic librarians on the influence of joint enrichment strategies on job satisfaction.
Variables N X SD df t.cal. t.crit. Decision at P < 0.05
Federal Universities 81 32.88 3.269 222 2.449 1.960 * State Universities 143 31.74 3.369 * = Significant at P < 0.05, N = 224
The data presented in Table 12. reveals that, the t-test analysis is not significant at p <
0.05, because the calculated t-test value of 2.449 is greater than the critical t-test value of
1.960 at 0.05 alpha level with 222 degrees of freedom. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected.
Therefore, the alternative hypothesis which states that there is a significant difference
between the mean scores of Federal and State university’sacademic librarians on the
influence of enrichment strategies on job satisfaction is retained.
Summary of Findings
The summary of findings is as follows:
1. There is a significant difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
Universities academic librarians on the influence of skill variety on job satisfaction.
The mean score of academic librarians in Federal universities (2.81) is greater than
the mean score of academic librarians in State universities (2.68) on the influence of
skill variety on job satisfaction.
2. There is no significant difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of task identity on job satisfaction.
3. There is no significant difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of task significance on job
satisfaction.
4. There is a significant difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of autonomy on job satisfaction. The
98
mean score of academic librarians in Federal universities (2.73) is greater than the
mean score of academic librarians in State universities (2.45) on the influence of
autonomy on job satisfaction.
5. There is no significant difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of feedback on job satisfaction.
6. There is a significant difference between the mean scores of Federal and State
university’sacademic librarians on the influence of joint enrichment strategies on job
satisfaction. The mean score of academic librarians in Federal universities (2.74) is
greater than the mean score of academic librarians in State universities (2.64) on the
influence of enrichment strategies on job satisfaction.
99
CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS, CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATIONS AND
SUMMARY
This chapter discusses the major findings of the study based on six research questions,
five hypotheses and interview excerpts that guided the study. The conclusion, educational
implications, recommendations, limitations of the study, areas for further research, and
summary of the whole study were presented. The following headings were used in guiding
the discussions:
(a) The influence of skill variety on job satisfaction of academic librarians.
(b) The influence of task identity on job satisfaction of academic librarians.
(c) The influence of task significance on job satisfaction of academic librarians.
(d) The influence of autonomy on job satisfaction of academic librarians.
(e) The influence of feedback on job satisfaction of academic librarians.
Discussions
The Influence of Skill Variety on Job Satisfaction of Academic Librarians
The result revealed that there is a significant influence of skill variety on job
satisfaction of academic librarians. Table 1 shows that academic librarians who were exposed
to the implementation of skill variety have job satisfaction carrying out library operations.
Interview discussion with university librarians revealed that academic librarians were often
encouraged attending conferences, workshops, and seminars to learn or update knowledge
and skills on their jobs. Furthermore, they all attest to fact that library funding is dwindling
and this negatively affects the upgrading and procurement of equipment and technologies to
sustain competences.
100
Based on the findings of the study, it shows that academic librarians find skill variety
as a veritable factor and that it had a major influence and importance on impacting job
satisfaction. This corroborates Hackman and Oldham (1974; 1976) who opined that, skill
variety, like task identity, and task significance is a psychological factor contributing to
workers’ experiencing meaningfulness of their work. The importance of skill variety among
academic librarians in this study could be attributed to fact that almost all university libraries
in the area and Nigeria at large were introducing higher levels of technology and equipment
use. This could have led to more staff being proficient in these technologies and machines.
The finding is in line with the assertions of Utmost and Rosenback (1980) who stated
that job redesign tasks when combined logically and meaningfully improves skill variety.
Efficient and effective delivery of library services these days require the academic librarian to
be competence and skilled with information acquisition, organisation, dissemination and the
use of information communication and technologies. Therefore, the researcher is in
agreement with Utmost and Rosenback and thinks that, at worst, the academic librarians
ought to have a basic skill with the computer to access, process and communicate
information.
Furthermore, the researcher agrees with Ogboro (2006) who posit that employees
considered skill variety most importantly to change. Employee jobs designed to provide new
methods, techniques and abilities in doing the work the way one had not done it before, and
where high success is achieved definitely this would bring about their increased employee job
satisfaction. In addition, Badran and Kafapy (2008) asserted that the change in job
characteristics positively affected the level of change in job satisfaction. In the opinion of the
researcher, the huge moneys spent on equipment and training is very meaningful but without
enriching the job contents is a colossal waste. An effective spend as this to bring about lasting
employee job satisfaction, organizational high performance and output would require
101
combination of job design. Nonetheless, the finding did not agree with Ogboro (2006) whose
study ranked skill variety highest. In this research work, skill variety data shows that it is
second in ranking. The researcher has considered that there were differences in work
environment, organizational objectives, employee attitudes and culture. There were so many
predictors not common between the settings of the two studies (Nigerian and United States).
The Influence of Task Identity on Job Satisfaction of Academic Librarians.
The data in Table 2 revealed that there is a high influence of task identity on job
satisfaction of academic librarians This is an indication that academic librarians whose duties
were enriched with task identity enjoyed significant job satisfaction. University librarians
revealed from the interview discussions that all library duties culminate at a visible outcome
and each outcome is one of the various user needs. Invariably, all library user needs met were
the library services and academic librarians are mandated to complete any given task hence
skills training, working materials and personnel were provided.
The researcher is in agreement with Badran and Kafapy (2008) who asserted that it is
important to point to the fact task identity could be considered to be a predictor of job
satisfaction among other dependent factors. Badran and Kafapy studied the effect of job
redesign on job satisfaction, resilience, commitment and flexibility. It revealed that job
redesign (which is job enrichment) positively affected the level of job satisfaction, resilience,
commitment and flexibility. This is also in line with assertions of Hackman and Oldham
(1976,1980), that the intrinsic value and motivating potential of a job are based on certain
task dimensions, such as task identity and autonomy, task significance, feedback and skill
variety. The academic librarians’ jobs are often within a well define unit or section of the
library organisation. For instance, an academic librarian cataloguer works in the cataloguing
section or unit which is responsible for the preparation of materials for access to the library
user. This entails; cataloguing processes, classification, book labeling, loan/book ticket
102
pasting, spine identification labeling, library catalogue cards and catalogue files and filing
operations either computerized or manual. All these operations are domiciled in this section,
and by the time a book is ready for shelving at the circulation section, the cataloguer is
expected to do a complete job pertaining his section’s responsibilities.
The findings also agree with Mind Tools Ltd (2010) who posited that combined work
activities provide a more challenging and complex work assignment. Task identity does
increase when jobs are enriched with task combination, power and authority redistribution of
job enrichment options. The researcher agrees with Mind Tools Ltd that combining work
activities made the job more relevant and created commitment for the academic librarian to
do a piece of job from starting to finish with joy.
The Influence of Task Significance on Job Satisfaction of Academic Librarians
The result in Table 3 shows that there is an influence of task significance job
enrichment strategy on job satisfaction of academic librarians. Interview with university
librarians revealed that library work units and activities rely on one another and in the same
vain service outlets are not independent of other units.
The above finding is in agreement with Goris (2000) who opined that task
significance, like task identity, skill variety, autonomy and feedback are expected to lead to
the psychological states of experienced meaningfulness, experienced responsibility and
knowledge. These states hypothetically will lead to high levels of performance and
satisfaction. Academic librarians’ job impacts one another and the library user directly.
Therefore, it seems that they see the meaningfulness of the job and derive satisfaction. This
is predicated on the fact that they need opportunity to grow within their job in order to remain
content with the work. Besides, user satisfaction is a key to enjoying library work. Doing
something dear to an organisation increases moral justification that they are themselves
stakeholders which make them happier. For example, Circulation librarians’ or Reference
103
librarians’ job entail handling diverse needs of library users, thus they are expected to exhibit
good morale and go into action to render those services. In this regard almost every academic
librarian’s work or library duties score high in task significance and this influences their job
satisfaction.
Furthermore, the finding of the study is in line with Orpen (1979) whose research
showed that employees in enriched condition perceived increased employee job satisfaction,
job involvement, and internal motivation.This means that employees whose jobs were not
enriched did not get job satisfaction. Orpen’s study was carried out in terms of Hackman and
Oldham theory of job characteristics and had suggestive evidence that enrichment can cause
substantial improvements in employee attitudes. In fact, when the academic librarians’
attitudes improves, the researcher believe that others would see them as competent or doing
well, so they will keep on or going on to do more to boost their egos. The problems of low
professional status rating among others in university community and society generally would
change. In this regard the importance of task significance influencing employee job
satisfaction is overwhelming.
The findings are also in agreement with Renn and Vendenberg (1995) whose study
found that greater perceived meaningfulness of work is associated with greater task
significance. The results show that academic librarians’ work was designed to impact others
within and outside their institutions as well as have significantly contributions to these
institutions.
The Influence of Autonomy on Job Satisfaction of Academic Librarians
The finding in Table 4 reveals that there is an influence of autonomy on job
satisfaction of academic librarians. This could be further interpreted to mean that academic
librarians’ work in the libraries is enriched with autonomy strategy and they were getting job
satisfaction. The interpretation of interview discussions with university librarians is that
104
autonomy positively influences employee job satisfaction.They suggested that one must not
lose sight of the individual personality factors such as individual staff maturity, commitment,
and knowledge that are of importance to all library tasks which are best achieved where there
is employee willingness.
This finding is in line with Ogboro (2006) who asserted that positive influence of
autonomy adds validity to the theoretical conceptualization that job redesign (enrichment
strategies) enhances an employee’s sense of impact and autonomy (self-determination).
Besides, autonomy gives a sense of empowerment and enhances coping capacity which
facilitates constructive responses. For instance, many of the academic librarians who are
sectional heads have subordinates who could be junior librarians, para-professionals and
library assistants. Those who are heads must have had the trust of the university librarians
who delegate authority to them and so down the structure of the work force. Autonomy can
be maximized where such heads and those given assignments or tasks are often not rigorously
supervised and so given free hand to plan and carry out their duties assigned.
The finding also agrees with Edem and Lawal (1999) study revealed that the variables
of recognition, responsibility and achievement had significant influence on job satisfaction
and publication output. Any employee whose worth and work itself is not recognized by his
boss would get frustrated and be dissatisfied at work. The researcher found that academic
librarians so recognized (given enabling factors) are those trusted by their bosses.Therefore
autonomy component should be made available or extended to all employees through job
redesign.It must not be selective if it should benefit all employees. These enabling factors,
according to Pagano (1993) are either context or environmental, and that feelings about
adequacy or ineffectiveness to cooperate with supervision, and a sense of fairness within the
organisation are all important to job performance, job satisfaction and never perfect.
105
The Influence of Feedback on Job Satisfaction of Academic Librarians
The result revealed that there is a positive influence of feedback strategy on job
satisfaction of academic librarians (Table 5). The finding is in agreement with O’Reilly III,
Parlette and Bloom (1980), who opined that employees who desire to identify with the
organizational goals value their organizational membership and intend to work hard to
achieve the overall organizational mission. The researcher is of the opinion that academic
librarians need to know about the quality of individual performance because work output or
product or service goes with accuracy, adequacy and currency of the information. These jobs
demand precision and require feedback from time to time from within and outside their
libraries. Therefore, the import of this is strict adherence to exactness of performance
standards which leave the academic librarian presuming all the time and feedback is the one
million answers. This is greatly influenced by job satisfaction. In addition, feedback would
provide the academic librarians with knowledge of results of their tasks performed.
The findings are in conformity with Muindi (2011) who posited that moderate index
on job satisfaction positively correlated to aspects of working conditions; feedback, job
design, pay, promotion and use of skills and abilities. This corroborates Ogboro (2006)
whose research found feedback highest level of change and autonomy the lowest among the
job characteristics. In this study, feedback was found to rank second among the enrichment
strategies. Feedback in the parlance of university libraries seems like equilibrant equation in
physics; the values on the left must equal those on the right (Heat lost equals to heat gained).
This is the assessment of the library user if it’s satisfactory or unsatisfactory which
sometimes can be known on the spot without waiting for too long. It is important that the
knowledge of the result of academic librarians’ task were expected as soon as possible. Poor
or unsolicited needs that get to the library clientele put library workforce in disrepute.
106
Conclusion
Based on the above findings and discussions of this research work, the following
conclusions were reached:
1. Skill variety has a significant influence on job satisfaction of academic librarians.
2. Task identity has a significant influence on job satisfaction of academic librarians.
3 Task significance enrichment strategy has a significant influence on job satisfaction of
academic librarians.
4 Autonomy has significance influence on job satisfaction of academic
librarians.
5 Feedback has a significant influence on job satisfaction of academic
librarians.
Implications of the Study
This study revealed that enrichment strategies and job satisfaction factors empower
academic librarians to have competencies essential for being successfully, responsible and
accountable for information acquisition, organization, dissemination and the use of
information communication and technologies. The findings have it that the academic
librarians whose jobs are enriched acquire more relevant and appropriate skills, abilities and
talents to perform their duties. Finally enrichment strategies do integrate the needs of
academic librarians and those of the libraries specifically and the universities generally.
Enrichment of job in practice go beyond job designing, it requires good funding and goodwill
on the part of institutional management, and commitment and self-determination on the part
of employees (including academic librarians). Therefore, the implications for the library and
information science profession are that the profession should:
1. Have performance standards and competencies for librarians working in
universities.
107
2. Provide professional directives that encourage sustenance efforts toward library
workflow redesign and process improvement.
3. Have standards and guidelines on library human resource encompassing job
specification, job description, analysis, performance appraisal and evaluation.
4. Provide guidelines to increase productivity and job satisfaction through enrichment
strategies.
5. Provide guidelines to increase leadership positions through job enrichment
strategies whereby academic librarians are given enough freedom, power and
authority to use a wide range of abilities and self confidence to practice their
profession.
6. Provide guidelines for university library funding, academic librarians’ staff training,
retraining and development for the realization of the job to be more interesting and
rewarding which shall project the improvement of quality of working life (QWL).
7. Provide guidelines for the education of academic library professionalisms and work
hand in hand with the Nigerian Librarians Registration Council and to make
available government laws, regulations, directives, standards and policies applicable
to academic libraries.
Recommendations
Based on the results and implications of this study, the following recommendations are made:
1. University authorities, particularly university librarians should endeavour to examine
library jobs that have become boring and monotonous to restructure and enrich them
to attain work motivation, job satisfaction and increase retention.This would
reposition academic librarians to have a happy working life and improved job
performance.
108
2. University librarians should sustain the use of enrichment strategies to empower
academic librarians to enhance their personal growth, meaningful work experience,
commitment and work output.
3. University libraries should be adequate funded and academic librarians provided with
relevant professional education; possibly through formal education, attendance of
workshops, conferences and seminars. These would equip them to plan, control, etc.,
and acquire competence for the variety of library tasks.
4. Librarians’ Registration Council of Nigeria should make available government laws,
regulations, directives, standards and policies applicable to academic libraries to
proprietors of universities, educators of librarians and the general library professional
body with the sole purpose of enforcing them.
Limitations of the Study
This study is limited to the description of influence enrichment strategies on the job
satisfaction of academic librarians of which the results or findings did not include any field
experimental data that would have required long observation on the respondents. Besides, the
researcher had to make several visits before getting the university librarians to be
interviewed.Furthermore, interview answers were difficult to summarize because most of the
interviewees did give enough time to think deeply of the questions thrown to them before
answering. Jotting down was not easy and a lot of time was spent on coding, analyzing and
conclusions on each aspect.
Suggestion for Further Study
The following under listed suggestions should be further researched
1. Field experiment on the influence of job enrichment strategies of academic
librarians’ job satisfaction in Nigerian universities.
109
2. Field experiment on the influence of job enrichment strategies on the productivity of
academic librarians.
3. The sustainability of job enrichment strategies in times of emerging new techniques,
technologies and process improvements in the job of academic librarians.
4. Academic librarians’ commitment and leadership positioning through job enrichment
strategies.
Summary of the Study
The main objective of this study was to investigate the influence of enrichment
strategies (skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback) on job
satisfaction of academic librarians in universities in the South-South of Nigeria. The research
design adopted for this study was ex-post factodesign. The population of the study was 224
academic librarians of the 2012/2013 academic session in universities in the South-South of
Nigeria. No sampling technique was adopted. All the 224 academic librarians from the eight
studied universities in the zone were used because it was considered small. Data from the
population was used to assess the relative incidence and interrelation of the naturally
occurring variables.
The instruments used in gathering data for the study were a 52-item questionnaire
titled Librarians’ Enrichment Strategies Questionnaire (LESQ), and Librarians’ Job
Satisfaction Questionnaire (LJSQ), and interview (for university librarians only). However,
the LESJSQ sought information on skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy,
and feedback, and job satisfaction characteristics respectively. The instrument was
developed by the researcher and face validated by supervisor, two lecturers from University
of Nigeria, Nsukka, from the Department of Educational Arts and Library and Information
Science respectively. Cronbach’s coefficient alpha was used to establish the reliability
coefficient of the LESQ and LJSQ; 0.73 and 0.71 respectfully.
110
Data gathered in this study were analysed with mean and standard deviation for
research questions one to six, while t-test analysis was used on all the hypotheses tested at the
0.05 level of significance. From the results obtained, a moderately positive relationship
existed between skill variety and job satisfaction of academic librarians. The influence of
skill variety impacted positively on job satisfaction of academic librarians and this could be
attributed to the introduction of higher technology and equipment by most universities.
The result also shows that task identity had a highly positive influence value on job
satisfaction of academic librarians. The influence of task identity being highly positive on
job satisfaction of academic librarians was attributed to the fact that academic librarians see
their individual assigned piece of job from start to finish.
The result also revealed that there exist a moderately positive relationship between
task significance and job satisfaction of academic librarians. The influence of task
significance enrichment strategy on job satisfaction of academic librarians was attributed to
librarians’ perceived meaningfulness of their work and conducive work environment. They
valued their work and so it impacted on others.
The findings also revealed that the influence of autonomy on job satisfaction of
academic librarians is moderately positive. The moderately positive influence of autonomy
on job satisfaction of academic librarians was attributed to librarians’ opportunity of self-
determination, empowerment and sense of coping capacity which facilitate constructive
responses without rigorous supervision.The results have also show that feedback has positive
influence on job satisfaction of academic librarians.
111
REFERENCES
Achebe, N. E. (2004). An empirical study of professional development factors and strategies for job enrichment and enhancement of librarians in Nigeria. Coal City Libraries.1(1),1-16.
Adair, J. (2007). Leadership and motivation: The fifty –fifty rule and eight key principles of
motivating others. London: Kogan Page. Adebayo, S.O. & Ezeanya, I.D., (2010). Effects of job autonomy, task identity and
profession among health workers in Jos, Nigeria. European Journal of SocialSciences. 14 (1), 116 – 124
Adebayo, S.O. & Ezeanya, I.D., (2011). Task identity and job autonomy as correlates of
burnout among nurses in Jos, Nigeria. International Review of Social Sciences and Humanities. 2 (1), 7 – 13.
Akintoye, I.R. (2000). The place of financial management in personnel psychology: A paper
presented as part of personnel psychology guest lecture series. Department of Guidance and Counselling, University of Ibadan, Nigeria.
Adeniji, A.A. (2011). Organizational climate and job satisfaction among academic staff in
some selected private university in Southwest Nigeria. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Ota, Nigeria: Covenant University.
Ali, M.A.M.& Aroosiya, M.A.C.F. (2013). Impact of job design on employee’s performance
(with special reference to school teachers in the Kalmunai Zone).Retrieved 17/7/13 from: http://www.kin.ac.ik/fcms/.../docs/microsoft%20-% 20HRMo13.pdf
Allen, R.E. (1984). The pocket Oxford dictionary of current English. Oxford:Clarendon
Press. America Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
Engineers(ASHRAE).(1966). Thermal comfort conditions (ASHRAE Standard No. 55–66New York., N.Y” ASHRAE.
Armstrong, C. (2007). Working as a librarian. Retrieved 5th October 2014.
From:http://www.jobs.ac.uk/careers-advice/non-academic-case-studies/618/working-as-a-libarian/
Armstrong, M. (2004). A handbook of human resource management practice 9thed. London:
Kogen Page Publishing. Armstrong, M. (2006). A handbook of human resource management practice 10thed.
London: Kogen Page Publishing. Armstrong, M. (2007). Employee Reward Management and Practice. London and
Philadelphia: Kogan page.
112
Association of College and Research Libraries (2010). Guidelines for university library services to undergraduate students. Retrieved 1/10/13 from: http://www.ala.org/ala/,grps/divs/acrl/standards/l/u/sundegraduate. cfm
Aswathappa, K. (2006). Job analysis and job design. Human Resource andPersonnel
Management 4th Edition. India: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company. Atasoy, T. (2004) comprehensive study of job satisfaction in large and small size enterprises.
Unpublished master thesis.. Calisma Middle East Technical University. Aziri, B. (2008). Menaxhimi I burimeve njerezore, Satisfactioni nga puna dhe motivimi I
punctoreve. Gostivar: Tringa Design. Badawi, G. (2003). Some demographic variables and determinants of job satisfaction of
female librarians in Nigeria. Nigerian Libraries. 37(2), 17-33. Badran, M. A. & Kafafy, J. H. (2008). The effect of job design on job satisfaction, resilience,
commitment and flexibility: The case of an Egyptian public sector bank. International Journal of Business Research 8(3): 27-41.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Banjoko, S.A. (1996). Human resource management. Lagos: Saban Publishers. Baron, R. (1986). Behaviour in organisation. Newton: Newton. MA: Allyn and Bacon. Bartolo, K. & Furlonger, B. (1999). Leadership and job satisfaction among aviation fire
fighters in Australia. Jouranl of Managerial Psychology. 75, 362-383. Benz, M.& Fray, B.S. (2008). Being independent is a great thing: Subjectiveevaluations of
self. employment and hierarchy. Economica. 75, 362 – 383. Bhagat, R. S. (1982). Conditions under which stronger job performance – job satisfaction
relationships may be observed: A close look at two situational contingencies. Academy of Management Journal. 25, 772-789.
Blum, M. & Naylor, J. (1986). Industrial Psychology: Its theoretical and social foundation.
New York: Harper and Row. Boddy, D. (2005). Management: An introduction. (3rd ed.). Harlow, England: FT/Prentice
Hall. Bremner, N.& Carriere, J. (2011). The effects of skill variety, task significance, task identity
and autonomy on occupational burnout in a hospital setting and the mediating effect of work meaningfulness. Telfer School of Management, WP. 11.02
Buitendach, J. & Witte, H. (2005). Job insecurity, extrinsic and intrinsic job satisfaction and
affective organizational commitment of maintenance workers in a parastatal. South African Journal of Business management. 36(2), 27 – 37.
113
Business Dictionary .com (2013). Skill variety. Retrieved on 12/9/13 from: http://www.businessdictionary. Com./definition/skill-ariety.htm/Business Review. Jan/Feb 68 (1), 53 – 63.
Canadian Association of Research Libraries (2010). Core competencies for 21stcentury
CARL librarians. Retrieved on 14/9/13 from: http://www.cart-abrc.ca/uploads/pdfs/core-comp-profile-e.pdf
Celik, A. (1990). Tiirkiye’de Universite Kutuphaneleri bilgi aoy kurulmasijna ylipkin
sorunlar. (yagymlanmamy/doktora teze) Ankara: Hacettepe Universitesi SBE. Colman, A.M (Ed). (2003). A dictionary of psychology (3rd Ed.) New York: Oxford
University Press. D’Abate, C. P., Youndt, M. A. & Wenzel, K. E. (2009). Making the most of an internship:
An empirical study of internship satisfaction. Academy ofManagement Learning & Education. 8 (4): 527-539
Daft, R.L. (2003). Management 6th ed. Mason, OH: South – Western Danner, R.A (2008). Skating with Donovan: Thoughts on librarianship as aprofession. Legal
Reference Service Quarterly, 27 (2 – 3), 117 – 136 Das, B. (1999). Comprehensive industrial work design model. Human Factors and
Ergonomics in Manufacturing. 9(4), 393 – 411 Dean, J. (2011). PsyBlogy: 10 psychological keys to job satisfaction. Deci, E.L. & Ryan, R.M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human
behaviour. New York, NY: Plenum Press. Deci, E.L. (1980). The Psychology of Self-determination. Washington, DC: Hezth. Dewhurst, M., Guthridge, M., & Molir, E. (2009). Motivating people: Getting byoud
money. Mckinsey Quarterly Retrieved 25/5/10:http:llwww.Mckinseyquarterly.com/motivating-people-getting-beyoud- money-2400.
Drucker, P. (1968). The practice of management. London: Pan. Edem, U. S. & Lawal, O. O. (1999). Job satisfaction and publication output among librarians
in Nigerian universities. Library Management. 20 (1 & 2), 39-46. Eglin, J. (2011). Academic Librarian: Job description. Retrieval 5/5/13 from:
http://www.propose.ac.uk/academic_librarian_job_description.htm Encyclopedia Britannica (2010). Library. Retrieved on 1/10/13 from:
http://search.eb.com.cwplib.proxy.Iiu.edu/eb/article – 62077
114
Fajana, S. (2002). Human Resource management: An introduction. Lagos: Labofin and Company.
Federal Library & Information Center Committee (FLICC)) Library of Congress (2008).
Federal librarian competences. Retrieved 30/8/13 from: http://www.loc.gov/flicc/ publications/lib-compt/lib-compt-Oct 2008 pdf
Feinstein, A.H. (2002). A study relationships between, job satisfaction and organizational
commitment among restaurant employees. Jouranl of Managerial Psychology. 23(7), 33 - 57.
Feldman, R.S. (2008). Improving job satisfaction. Retrieved 13/5/10 from: http://source of
insight.com/2008/01/07/improving + job + satisfaction Fincham, R. & Rhodes, P. (2005). Principles of Organizational Behavior. New York: Oxford
University Press, Inc. The Free Dictionary (2014) Academic. Retrieved on 6th October 2014 From:
http:/www.thefreedictionary.com/academic. Fried, Y., & Ferris, G. R. (1987). The validity of the job characteristics model: Areview and
Meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology. 40 (2): 287-322 Garg, P.& Rastogi, R. (2006). New mode of job design: Motivating employees performance.
Journal ofManagement Development, 25 (6), 572 – 58 Gargne, M. & Deci, E.L. (2005). Self determination theory and work motivation. Journal of
Organizational behavior. 26: 331 – 362. Gautam, P. (2012). Job enrichment. Retrieved 30/7/13
http://padmangautam.blogspot.comm/search/label/Job Enrichment GeminiGeek.com(2013). What is job enrichment? Retrieved 30/7/13 from:
http:www.thegeminigeek.com/what-is-job-enrichment George, J. & Jones, G. (2005). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behaviour.
New Jersey: Pearson/Prentice Hall George, J.M. & Jones. G.R. (2008). Understanding and managing organizational behaviour.
5th ed. New Jersey, N.J: Pearson/Practice-Hall. Google Sites.com (2013). Job enrichment. Retrieved 12/9/13 from: http://www. What is
Human Resources.com/job-enrichment Gordon, J.R. (1999) Organizational behaviour A diagnostic approach. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Goris, J. (2000). The effects of communication direction on job performance and
satisfaction: A moderating regression analysis. Journal of Business Communication. 37(4), 348-368
115
Graham, M.E. 1988). The effects of automation in libraries: The implications for work
organization and job design. Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http:// etheses.dur.ac-uk/6422/. Retrieved on 3/9/13 from: http://www.etheses.dur.ac.uk/6422/1/6422-3722.pdf
Grandy, A. A., Fish, G. M. & Steiner, D. D. (2005). Must services with a smile bestressful?:
The moderating role of personal control for America and Frenchemployees. Journal of applied Psychology. 90(5), 893 – 04.
Green, F. and Tsisianis, N. (2005). An investigation of national trends in jobsatisfaction in
Britain and Germany. British Journal of Industrial Relations. 43(3), 401 – 429. Gregory, K. (2011). The importance of job satisfaction. Retrieved 29/8/13 from:
hitp://www.neumann.edu/academics/divisions/business/journal/review2011/Gregory.pdf
Groot, W.,& Maessen van den Brinle, H. (2000). job satisfaction wages and allocation of men
and women. In D. Kluwer (ed). Advances in quality of life,theory and research. Amsterdan, Netherlands: Kluwer
Gupta, J. (2011). Types of libraries. Retrieved 1/10/13 from: http://
usww.kuk.ac.in/userfiles/file/distrence-education/Year-2011-2012/B-Lib %201.pdf Guskin, A. E. (1996). Facing the future. Change. 28(4), 26-38. Hackman, J.R. & Lawler, E.E, (1971). Employee reactions to job characteristics. Journal of
Applied Psychology Monograph. 55,259 – 286. Hackman, & J. R. & Oldham, G. R. (1975). The basics of job design. Retrieved 30/3/09
from: http:www.buec.udel.edu/baroudi/lectures/html Hackman, J. R. & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal
of Applied Psychology. 60, 159 – 170. Hackman, J. R. & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design work: Test of a
theory. Organisational Behaviour and Human Performance. 16, 250 – 279. Hackman, J. R. & Oldham, G. R. (1980) Work redesign. Reading, MA,: Addison Wiley Hackman, J.R., Oldham, G.R., Janson, R. & Purdy, K. (1975). A new strategy for
jobenrichment. California Management Review. 17 (4), 57 – 71. Hamermesh, D. (2001). The changing distribution of job satisfaction. Journal ofHuman
Resources. 56 (1), 1 – 30. Hart, G. (2010). Job satisfactions in a South African academic library in transition. Journal of
Academic Librarianship. 36(1), 53-62.
116
Herzberg, F. (1959). Motivation to work. New York: Wiley Herzberg, F (1974). Motivation-Hygiene Profiles: Pinpointing what aids theorganization.
Organizational Dynamics. Autum, 3 (2), 18 – 29. Herzberg, F. (1976). The managerial choice: To be efficient and to be human. Homewood,
IL: Dow Jones Irwin. Herzberg, F. (1984). Herzberg on motivation. Cleveland, OH: Penton Media INC. Hosoi, M. (2005). Motivating employees in academic libraries in tough times. In Tmompson,
H.A. (Ed). Currents and convergence: Navigating the rivers of change. Proceedings of the twelfth National Confrence of Association of College and Research Libraries, April 17-10, 2005, Minneapols, Minnesota (pp. 43 –49. Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries
Humphrey, S.E., Nahrgang, J. D. & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Integrating motivational, social
and contextual work design features: A meta-analytical summary and theoretical extension of work design literature. Journal of Applied Psychology. 92(5): 1332 – 1356.
Hunter, P.E. (2006). Viability of the job characteristics model in a team environment:
Predictive of job satisfaction and potential moderators. Ph.D.Dissertation. University of North Texas; Texas.
Hayden, P. T. (203). The Library as an institution of knowledge. American Library. 16 (b),
18-33. Illuminating Engineering Society (IES), Nomenclature Committee (1979). Proposed
American national standard nomenclature and definitions forIlluminating Engineering Society. 9(1), 2 – 46.
Jacko, P. (2004). Enriching the jobs enrichment theory: Research methods for thesocial
scientist. Madrid: Carlos III University. Retrieve 11/9/13 from: http://www.sk/pj/works/enriching.pdf
Janson, P. & Martin, J. K. Job satisfaction and age: A test of two views. Social Forces. 60
(4), 1049 – 1102 Jelstad, B. (n.d., 2006). Job characteristics and its outcomes: A comparative workdesign
study of non-profit and profit organizations. Retrieved 19/9/13 from: http://www.polis.no/paper/Aarhus05/PJELSTAD-PDF
Johns, G., Xie, J.L. & Fang, Y. (1992). mediating and moderating effects in job design.
Journal of Management, 18, 657-676. Johnson, B. & Christensen, L. (2004). Educational research: Qualitative, quantitative and
mixed approaches. 2nd Ed. New York: Pearson.
117
Jubb, N. & Green, R. (2007). Researchers’ use of academic libraries and their services. Retrived 31/5/10 from: http://www.rin.ac.uk/system/files/.../Researchers-librariesservices-report.pdf
Julien, H. (2000). Information literacy instruction in Canadian academic libraries: Longitudinal trends and international comparison. College and Research Libraries. 61 (6)
Kalinsky, B. (2011) Encyclopaedia of business and finance. New York: Macmilan Reference. Kamka,K.J. (2013). What is the meaning of job enrichment? Retrieved 10/3/12
from:http://www.ehow.com/about 6505655-meaning-job-enrichment-html Karim, V.H.A (2008). Investigating the correlates and practices of job satisfaction among
Malaysian academic librarians. MalaysianJournal of Library Information Science. 13 (2), 69 – 88.
Kirstein, M. (2011). The role of motivation in human resource management: Importance of
motivation factors among future business persons. Kumari, R. (2012). Principles underlying job enlargement, job enrichment and jobrotation.
Retrieved 30/7/13 from: http://www.slideshare net/Ritika Kumari/Principles-underlying- job enlargement-job- enrichment- and – job- ratation.
Lammers, W. J. & Badia, P. (2005). Fundamental of behavioral research. California:
Thomson and Wadsworth. Retrieved 25/9/14 from: http://www.psychwiki.com/wiki/What_is_ex_post_facto_design%3F
Lawrence, R. M. (2001). The application of Hackman and Oldham’s jobcharacteristics model
and perceptions Community Music School faculty have towards their job. Unpublished doctoral thesis. North Texas: University in the Library. Library Philosophy and Practice.Retrieved. 17/7/13 fromhttp://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/mbllin/ugah 5-htm
Lateef, O. A. (2012). Job enrichment as a tool of a effective motivation of humanresource.
Retrieved 7/8/13 from: http://www.ayoodulaja.wordpress.com/2012/08/05/job- enrichment - as - a tool of – effect – motivation..
Lechner, D.E (Ed). (2004). The New Webster’s dictionary: of the English Language
(International Ed.). New York; NY: Lexicon International-Pub. Guild Group. Lunenbury, F.C. (2011). Motivating by enriching jobs to make them more interesting and
challenging. International Journalof Management Business,and Administration. 15 (1) 1 – 11
Luthans, F.(2002) Organizational behaviour. 8th ed. Chicago: Masty. Luthans, F. (2005). Organizational behaviour. 10th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill McClelland, D. (1968) Money as a motivator: Some research insights. The McKinsey
Quarterly. Feb 68 (57)2, 23 – 28.
118
McKay, D.R. (2013). Professionalism: How to conduct yourself at work. Retrieved01/10/13
from: http// career planning. About. com/od/workplace survival/a/professionalism.htm Mc Shane, S.L.& Glinow, M.A. (2005). Organizational behavior. 3rd ed. New Delhi,India:
Tata McGraw- Hill, Inc. Mallaiah, T.Y. & Yadapadithaya, P.S. (2009). Intrinsic motivation of librarians in university
libraries in Karnataka. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 29(3) 36-42.
Management study guide.com (2012) Importance of motivation in human resource
development (HRD). Retrieved on 8/8/13 from: http://wwwmanagementstudyguide.com/motivation-in-humanresource-development.htm.
Marscafe Web Resource Document (2010). Job diagnostic survey: A quick job satisfaction
analysis. Retrieved 27/5/10 from:http://www.marscafe.com/php/hrs/ds.php3 Martell, C. (1981). Improving the effectiveness of libraries through improvements in the
quality of working life. College & Research Libraries. September, 435 – 446. Maslow, A. H. (1964). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper and Row. Mathauer, I. & Imhoff, I: (2006). Health worker motivation in Africa: The role of non-
financial incentives and human resource management tools. Human Resources for Health. Retrieved on 2/6/10 http:www.human-resources-health.com/content/4/1/24.
Merriam – Webster.com (2013). Enrich. Retrieved 12/9/13 from: http://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/enrich. Midda, A.M. Khan, A., Khan, B. and Mukherjee, S. (2009). Change of activities in academic
library system in India. ICAL 2009-Change Management. 321-325p. Retrieved 25th Sept. 2014. From:http://www.crl.ac.du.in/ical09/papers/index_files/ical/53_153 _336_1_RV.pdf.
Mind Tools Ltd. (2010). Job enrichment. Retrieved 27/5/10 from: http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/new/TWM 81.htm
Mione, P. (2013). Job enrichment. Retrieved, 4/8/13 from: http:/edweb.
Sdsu.edu/people/arossett/pie/interventions/jobdesign-l.htm Morgeson, F.R. & Campion, M.A. (2003). In W.C. Borman, D.R. IIgen & R.J.Klimoski
(Eds). Handbook of Psychology. Vol 12, 425 – 452. Mottaz, C. J. (1988). Determinants of organizational commitment.
HumanRelations,41(6):467-482 Muindi, F.K. (2011). The relationship between participation in decision making and job
satisfaction among academic staff in the School of Business, University of Nairobi.
119
Journal of Human Resources Management, Research. Retrieved 3/8/11 from: http://www.ibimapublishing.com/journals/ JHRMR/jhrmr.htm
Mullins, L. J. (1998). Management and organizational behaviour.(2nd ed). New Delhi: Wheeler Publishing.
Mullins, J.L. (2005). Management and organizational behaviour. (7th ed ). Essex: Pearson
Education Limited. Neumann, E. (1993). Antecedents and consequences of satisfaction and commitment among
expatriate manager. Group and Organizational Management. 18(2), 153 – 187 Neumann, W.L. (2000). Social research method: Quantitative and qualitative approaches.
Boston: A Pearson Education Publication. Numan, S.(2007) Motivation through job enrichment: What are the key components?
Leadership? Management,. Monday 19 November. Retrieved 27/8/13, from: http://www thepersonalfinancier.com/?s = search = her…
Ogboro, I. O. (2006). Organisational commitment, job redesign, employee empowerment
and intent to quit among survivors of restructuring and downsizing. Retrieved 13/8/11 from: http://www.jbam.com/pubs/jbam/ .../jbam_7_3_1organisational commitment.pdf
Ogungbeni, J. Ogungbo, W & Yayaha, J. (2013). Emotional intelligence, job satisfaction and
librarians’ performance. Journal of Research in Education and Society. 4 (1), 53 – 61 Oladele, O.I.; Subair, S.K. & Sebina, N.V. (2010). Knowledge and utilization of job
enrichment techniques among district agricultural officers in Botswana. African Journal of Agricultural Research. 5(21). 2918 – 2924.
Olise, F. (2005). Human resource management: Tradition, transition, and trend. Lagos:
Emmanuel Concepts. Omohiabi, P.F. (2000). Job diagnostics Survey Manual. Lagos: PPC consultant Online Library Learning Centre’s Glossary (2010). Special libraries (from the Board of
Regents of the University System of Georgia website). Retrieved 1/10/13 from: http://www.usg.edu/galileo/skills/ollc-glossary.phtmlS
Opatha, H.H.D.N.P. (2002)Performance Eualvation of Human Resource 1st Edition. Colombo, Sri Lanka: The Author Publication. Orpen, C. (2008). The effects of on enrichment on employee satisfaction, motivation,
involvement, and performance: A field experiment. Retrieved 15/5/09 from: http://hum.sagepub.com/cgi/content/ abstract/ 32/3/189.
O’Reilly III, C, Parlette, G. & Bloom, J. (1980). Perceptual measures of task characteristics:
The biasing effects of differing frames of reference and job attitudes. Academy of Management Journal. 23(1), 118-131.
120
Oshagbemi. T. (2000). Satisfaction with co-workers’ behaviour. Employee Relations. 22, 88 -106.
Otokiti, S.O. (2002).Theoretical concepts of scope of management. Lagos: Vantage Publication Company.
Owolabi, K.A. et al (2013). Librarians attitude toward monetary and non-monetary incentives in University Libraries: A case of selected university libraries in Nigeria. Annals of Library andInformation Studies. 60 (Mar), 22 – 26. Pagano, R.F. (1993). An organizational to enhance work motivation – Part 1. Retrieved
from http://www.thefreelibrary.com/An+organisation+tool+to+enhance+work+motivation+-+part+1-a013403888.
Perry, J & Lee, G. (2007). The meaningfulness of work and public service motivation: A
panel of study of National Service Participants. Paper presented at the public management. Retrieved on 18/09/13 from:
Renn, R.W. & Vandenberg, R.J. (1995). The critical psychological states: An
underrepresented component in Job Characteristics Model Research. Journal of Management, 21, 279-303
Pierce, J.L., Jussila, L. & Cummings, A. (2009). Psychological ownership with the job
design cocntect: Revision of the job characteristics model. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior. 30, 477 – 496.
Pizam, A. & Neumann, V. (1999). The effect of task characteristics on hospital employees
job satisfaction and burnout. Sage Journal.http://,ht.sagepub.com/content. Pragya, S. (2008) Scope of Non-monetary rewards. Indian Journal of IndustrialRelations.
44(2), 256-271. Parker, S.K., Wall, T.D. & Corderly, J.L. (2001) Future work design research and practice:
Towards an elaborated model of work design. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 74,413 – 440.
Reed, S., & Free, C. (1995) The big payoff. People. October. 16, 1 – 45. Reitz, J.M. (2004). Dictionary for library and information Science. Westport, Conn: Libraries
Unlimited. Renn, R.W. & Vandenberg, R.J. (1995). The critical psychological states: An
underrepresented component in Job Characteristics Model Research. Journal of Management, 21, 279-303
Rockman, I. F. (1984) Job satisfaction among faculty and librarians: A study of gender,
autonomy and decision – making opportunities. Journal of Library Administration. 50(3), 43 – 56.
Robbins, S.P. (2005) Organizational behaviour: New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
121
Sabol, D. A. 2013). The different types of Libraries. Retrieved 1/10/13 from: http://lis510 –
libraries. Wikispaces.com/Different + typest oft libraries. Samarakoon, J.L. (2002) job satisfaction of knowledge workers and retention strategies in
software development industry of Sri Lanka. Sir Lanka Journal of management3 (3) p.1to12.
Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology of Kashmir(2014).
Academic libraries. Retrieved 26th Sept. 2014 From: http://skuastkasmir.ac.m/index.php?option-com content&view
Sinclair, R.R., Tucker, J.S., Cullen, J.C., & Wright, C. (2005). Performance difference
among four organizational commitment profiles. Journal of Applied Psychology. 90(6), 1280-1287
SmallBizconnet (2013). Motivating emplyoyees: Motivating theory job design. Retrieved 28/7/12 from: http://tookit.smallbiz.nsw.gov.an/part/8/40/193 Spector, P.E. (1996) Industrial and organizational psychology: Research and Practice. New
York: Wiley. Stern, J. (2010) PA 720 – Organizational behaviour concept: Job enrichment. Retrieved
27/5/10 from http://wano.sfsu.edu/cyprain/documents/pdf-job-enrichment pdf Stoner, J.A.F., Freeman, R. E, & Gilbert, D. R. Jr. (2006). Management. (6th ed.). New
Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India Stumpp, T., Hiilsheger, U.R., Muck, P.M. & Maier, G.W. (2009). Expanding the link
between core self-evaluation and affective job attitudes. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology. 18(2): 148 -166
Taljaard, J.J. (2003). Improving job performance by using non-monetary reward systems to
motivate low skilled workers in the automotive component industry. Retrieved 6/9/13 from: http:// www.dspace.mmuca.za:8080/jspui/bistream/10948/131/1/Taljaard JJ.pdf
Tausif, M. (2012). Influence of non financial rewards on job satisfaction: A case study of
educational sector of Pakistan. Asian Journal of ManagementResearch. 2(1), 688 – 696.
Tella, A., Ayeni, C. O. & Popoola, S.O. (2007). Work motivation, job satisfaction, and
organizational commitment of library personnel in academics andresearch, libraries in Oyo State, Nigerian. Library Philosophy and Practice. April,1 -16.
UKDisertations.com (2013). Motivation and rewarding system. Retrieved 9/8/13from:
http://www.ukdissertations./dissertations/ Utmost, D. D. & Rosenbach, W. E. (2008). From theory to action: Implementing job
enrichment in the Air Force. Air University Review. Mar – Apr. Retrieved 12/6/09 from http://www.airpower. maxwell. af.mil/ airchronicles/ aureview_toc...
122
Ultmost,D.D., Bell, C.H., & Mitchell, T.R. (1976). Effect of job enrichment and task goals
on satisfaction and productivity: Implications for job design. Journal of Applied Psychology. 61(4), 379 – 394.
University of Colorado Boulder Libraries (2013). What academic librarians do.
Retrieved30/7/13 from: http://ucblibraries.colorado.edu/Librarianship/index.ht, Van Der Zee, D.J. (2009). Organizational commitment and job satisfaction: Aquantitative
study at the Durban office of the Department of Labour. MasterDegree Dissertation Durban University of KweZulu-Natal, Durban, SouthAfrica.
Wahba, S.P. (1975). Job satisfaction of librarians: A comparison of between menand women.
College and Research Libraries 36 (1), 45 – 54. Waters, A. (Ed).(2004). Oxford student’s dictionary of English (6th Ed.). New York: Oxford
University Press. Yusuf, F. & Iwu, J. (2010). Use of academic libraries: A case study of Covenant University,
Nigeria. Chinese Librarianship: An international Electronic Journal, 30. Retrieved 16/3/12 from: http://www.iclc.us/cliej/c130Y1.pdf
123
APPENDIX I
LIBRARIANS’ ENRICHMENT STRATEGIES QUESTIONNAIRE PART A: Demographic Data of Respondents Instruction : Please kindly tick (√) the appropriate answer box or fill in writing in the spaces provided. 1. Sex: Male Female 2. Age: 18-25yrs 26-35yrs 36-45yrs Above 45yrs 3. Present official capacity in library
i) Designation ----------------------------------------------------------------
ii) Section/Unit (a) -----------------------------------------------------------
4. Working experience (in years) 1-7yrs 8-14yrs 15-28yrs above 28yrs 5. Number of times changed job/turnover as a librarian Not at all Once Twice Above twice 6. Educational qualifications: BA/B.Sc/BLS MA/M.Sc/MLS Ph.D PART B: Job Enrichment and Satisfaction Characteristics Instruction : Rate the extent to which the following apply to you in terms of job enrichment characteristics, where;
Q/N
Enrichment and Satisfaction Characteristics
Tick ( √ ) Appropriate Agreement Rate
4 3 2 1 SECTION I: SKILLS VARIETY
1. Job provides variety of experiences on the job. 2. Job utilizes employee talents, abilities and skills 3. Employee is allowed on the job training/for new skills,
abilities and talents.
4 Job provides opportunity to use a lot of new technologies. 5 Employee intellect is used. 6 Job supports additional training and education 7 Job provides variety of responsibilities 8 Job provides opportunities for period change of duty
4 3 2 1 Strongly Agree
Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
124
SECTION II: TASK IDENTITY 9 Employee understands the job from start to end. 10 Job is arranged to meet and talk with library users. 11 Job has good communication link with supervisor. 12 Employee is recognized by supervisor in performing his
duties.
13 Job gives me sense of importance. 14 Job Provides terms-work opportunities 15 Co-workers respect each others 16 Job provides professional/career fulfillment
SECTION III: TASK SIGNIFICANCE 17 How well I work affects other people. 18 Job influences day-to-day institutional success. 19 Job provides understanding of the institutional mission. 20 Job influences institutional decisions. 21 Job is valued by others. 22 Job gives sense of achievement 23 Job is intellectually stimulating 24 Job is of service to the university community
SECTION IV: AUTONOMY 25 Job allows employee to do his work by himself. 26 Employee does the work as one sees it fit. 27 Job permits employee to act independently of his
supervisor.
28 Job provides opportunity of self directed flexible working hours.
29 Employee gets optimal support from management 30 Job supervisor encourages freedom to rearrange tasks 31 Interference of co-workers is not encouraged 32 Doing the job does not involve too much responsibility
SECTION V: FEEDBACK 33 Job itself provides feedback. 34 On the job feedback is received from co-workers about
ones performance.
35 There is clear and direct information about job outcomes. 36 Employee gets performance information, directly from the
work.
37 Employee gets regular updates. 38 Satisfaction of user are known while doing my job 39 Satisfaction of supervisor is known while doing my job 40 Inclusive of my idea are known management
policies/decisions
125
APPENDIX II LIBRARIANS’ JOB SATISFACTION QUESTIONNAIRE
Job Satisfaction Characteristics
Tick ( √ ) Appropriate Agreement Rate
Instruction : Rate the extent to which the following apply to you in terms of job enrichment characteristics, where;
1. University Policies/administration is fair. 2. Supervisors possess leadership skills to motivate employee to work. 3. Financial benefits are sufficient for the job. 4. Job promotes interpersonal relationships 5. Office conditions are adequate. 6. Job itself is meaningful 7. Standards for jobs are achievable. 8. Individual talents being utilized are recognized for accomplishments on the job. 9. Employees are seen as responsible owners of their job. 10. There is room for advancement on the job. 11. Reward from outside while doing the job is adequate 12. Reward from inside while doing the job is adequate
4 3 2 1 Strongly Agree
Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree
126
APPENDIX III INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
ON LIBRARY ENRICHMENT ON JOB SATISFACTION CONDUCTED ON UNIVERSITY LIBRARIANS SKILL VARIETY
1. When and how often do you offer skill training to create proficiency on the various jobs you have?
2. Does training benefited employees in carrying out their jobs? 3. What else do you do when employee’s abilities are below expectation, even after
training? TASK IDENTITY 4. What are the expectations of employees as they perform a whole of it? 5.In library service, users are thought to be receivers of end-product, how does staff see a whole piece of work since the various sections since not all the sections meet users? 6. How do you design jobs that are in bits and pieces to make whole? TASK SIGNIFICANCE 7. How are library jobs unique within and to the entire university community? 8. How do library jobs create sense of belonging among library staff? 9. Do library job promote faith in the university as an organization? AUTONOMY 10. How is individual staff allowed independent thought while performing their jobs? 11. Are staff free to manage time while performing duties? 12. How well are library jobs performed without supervisor and management control measures? FEEDBACK 13. What kind of comments do you consider appropriate that can improve staff jobs satisfaction and job quality? 14. How does feedback content improve library activities? 15. Job feedback critique may result to conflicts, how are these resolved? JOB SATISFACTION 16. Are staff happy when doing jobs are tied to educational level? 17. How would you explain that the higher paid have more job satisfaction? 18. Does the librarians’ job satisfaction enhance their respect in society and the university communities?
127
APPENDIX IV Distribution of Population of Librarians in the South-South Zone of Nigeria
S/N
Universities
Year of Establish-
ment
Population of Librarian
Percentage on Total
Librarians
1. Ambrose Alli University, Ekpoma, Edo State.
1980 25 11
2. Delta State University, Abraka, Delta State.
1981 81 34
3. Niger Delta University, Wilberforce Island, Bayelsa State.
2000 26 11
4. Rivers State University of Science and Technology, Port Harcourt, Rivers State.
1979 11 5
5. University of Benin, Benin City, Edo State.
1970 17 7
6. University of Calabar, Calabar, Cross River State.
1975 18 8
7. University of Port Harcourt, Port Harcourt, Rivers State.
1975 22 9
8. University of Uyo, Uyo, Akwa Ibom State.
1991 24 10
Total 224 100% SOURCE: Field Work 2013.
128
APPENDIX V Table 3.1: Sample frame and distribution of samples into Federal and
State Universities S/N Universities Population of Academic
Librarians Sample of Academic Librarians
1 Federal 81 81
2 States 143 143
3 Total 224 224
129
APPENDIX VI
Calculated Cronbach’s coefficient alpha reliability values
S/N Name of variables in the instrument
Number of items
Mean of items
Items mean variance
R
1 Skills variety 8 2.896 0.933 0.72 2 Task Identity 8 2.896 0.897 0.73 3 Task significance 8 2.504 0.970 0.79 4 Autonomy 8 2.258 1.043 0.76 5 Feedback 8 2.288 1.046 0.75 6 7
LESQ LJSQ
40 12
2.388 1.789
0.913 0.694
0.73 0.71
130
APPENDIX VII SUMMARY DATA FOR CRONBACH’S EFFICIENT ALPHA FOR
ESTIMATION OF RELIABILITY S/N Name of Instrument No. of
items Mean of
Items Item mean variance
r
1 LJESQ 35 2.536 0.923 0.86
131
APPENDIX VIII SCORING OF LIBRARIANS’ JOB ENRICHMENT STRATEGIES AN D
JOB SATISFACTION CHARACTERISTICS QUESTIONNAIRE (LJESQ)
Response Abbreviation Position
item score Negative item
score Very satisfied VS 4 1 Satisfied S 3 2 Dissatisfied D 2 3 Very Dissatisfied VD 1 4
132
APPENDIX IX
SCORES OF ACADEMIC LIBRARIANS CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO INSTITUTIONS, SKILL VARIETY, TASK IDENTITY, TASK SI GNIFICANCE,
AUTONOMY, FEEDBACK AND JOB SATISFACTION
S/N Institutions SVS TIS TSS AS FS JSS
1 1 24 28 29 30 27 32 2 1 19 19 20 19 20 30 3 1 20 24 23 26 25 38 4 1 24 21 22 21 22 36 5 1 21 25 26 28 26 36 6 1 23 25 25 24 25 30 7 1 20 22 22 23 21 37 8 1 25 26 23 25 21 32 9 1 22 22 21 21 22 32 10 1 25 26 27 25 25 35 11 1 20 22 22 21 20 38 12 1 25 23 24 23 19 33 13 1 26 19 24 25 21 37 14 1 25 22 25 23 20 33 15 1 24 18 23 24 22 36 16 1 21 19 25 20 19 23 17 1 25 22 24 25 19 27 18 1 19 21 28 20 22 26 19 1 24 24 20 22 22 30 20 1 22 20 24 16 25 30 21 1 22 20 21 23 22 38 22 1 22 24 23 20 27 33 23 1 19 23 20 22 27 36 24 1 19 24 25 17 20 26 25 1 20 18 17 18 17 33 26 1 19 19 25 17 19 33 27 1 23 19 19 18 19 36 28 1 22 18 25 19 22 34 29 1 19 20 21 21 23 38 30 1 24 24 25 23 24 35 31 1 23 19 18 21 21 35 32 1 22 22 21 21 23 32 33 1 24 20 21 21 21 35 34 1 26 25 22 22 21 31 35 1 23 20 20 20 19 32 36 1 23 16 18 18 18 29 37 1 20 23 22 24 23 28 38 1 24 22 22 22 21 32
133
39 1 26 22 23 21 20 27 40 1 25 19 19 19 20 34 41 1 23 20 20 19 19 31 42 1 18 21 19 25 19 35 43 1 23 19 23 25 21 30 44 1 24 23 22 24 24 36 45 1 18 21 19 26 23 33 46 1 16 22 24 23 25 30 47 1 24 26 23 19 23 31 48 1 23 25 22 19 20 29 49 1 23 22 24 20 19 38 50 1 25 21 22 20 20 30 51 1 23 20 23 21 21 34 52 1 24 22 23 22 23 36 53 1 22 20 20 21 23 35 54 1 21 17 24 22 24 34 55 1 25 20 26 22 28 35 56 1 19 21 25 22 23 30 57 1 20 21 23 20 27 35 58 1 17 18 18 18 23 29 59 1 22 18 23 18 22 31 60 1 19 21 24 21 19 33 61 1 25 22 18 21 19 34 62 1 23 21 16 25 21 33 63 1 24 20 24 22 24 34 64 1 19 22 23 20 25 33 65 1 24 21 24 21 27 33 66 1 21 24 25 21 22 30 67 1 25 22 23 24 23 34 68 1 23 22 26 20 19 27 69 1 24 23 23 22 18 31 70 1 23 23 21 21 23 30 71 1 28 22 18 22 21 32 72 1 19 27 26 29 29 36 73 1 24 26 25 25 24 33 74 1 21 23 20 18 23 36 75 1 25 24 22 23 20 35 76 1 25 27 24 24 26 34 77 1 22 26 25 25 25 40 78 1 26 24 23 21 23 38 79 1 22 23 24 23 22 33 80 1 26 27 27 27 25 33 81 1 22 23 22 18 20 31 82 2 23 18 19 22 23 34 83 2 24 21 20 25 23 33 84 2 26 21 23 25 21 34
134
85 2 22 22 23 23 20 32 86 2 22 21 21 20 20 37 87 2 19 17 18 19 20 30 88 2 21 16 26 21 18 34 89 2 21 21 23 21 22 33 90 2 22 24 28 22 26 35 91 2 22 20 22 22 23 30 92 2 20 20 28 22 25 29 93 2 23 21 23 23 22 29 94 2 26 18 29 26 22 34 95 2 24 20 26 23 20 35 96 2 24 23 27 23 18 32 97 2 24 20 24 23 24 35 98 2 25 26 25 24 23 35 99 2 23 22 22 22 21 36 100 2 25 22 23 15 19 35 101 2 15 23 17 22 18 35 102 2 18 19 22 21 22 34 103 2 20 24 18 19 25 38 104 2 22 22 20 16 28 33 105 2 18 20 14 21 24 32 106 2 17 20 21 23 22 34 107 2 22 18 18 22 18 35 108 2 19 22 21 17 24 36 109 2 21 18 18 21 22 33 110 2 15 27 29 24 27 38 111 2 17 20 19 18 22 33 112 2 16 24 23 23 24 32 113 2 23 26 24 20 27 33 114 2 22 23 23 16 24 37 115 2 17 25 21 20 23 38 116 2 17 21 21 19 20 33 117 2 23 27 24 21 27 25 118 2 18 20 20 22 20 28 119 2 20 23 23 17 20 26 120 2 14 22 21 22 23 33 121 2 15 23 18 21 21 29 122 2 18 21 20 21 21 28 123 2 21 24 23 18 22 33 124 2 18 25 21 17 20 33 125 2 25 22 22 18 22 32 126 2 19 19 20 17 21 27 127 2 20 16 25 15 26 31 128 2 21 20 23 18 24 24 129 2 20 21 23 20 22 31 130 2 17 24 24 15 23 31
135
131 2 21 21 21 17 25 31 132 2 22 20 19 21 22 31 133 2 23 16 21 22 23 26 134 2 24 15 22 19 26 34 135 2 23 16 20 23 24 29 136 2 18 19 21 23 22 35 137 2 23 19 22 20 24 29 138 2 15 18 21 22 24 35 139 2 21 19 21 24 19 33 140 2 20 22 22 17 19 25 141 2 20 19 21 23 18 35 142 2 15 21 20 17 22 31 143 2 23 21 18 24 18 33 144 2 24 24 20 16 23 35 145 2 16 21 20 19 18 33 146 2 21 21 22 16 24 27 147 2 24 18 23 23 19 34 148 2 21 20 22 21 25 35 149 2 22 18 20 23 24 37 150 2 20 25 24 18 24 27 151 2 21 22 22 22 23 31 152 2 26 23 24 24 23 23 153 2 21 23 19 23 21 33 154 2 21 22 23 23 22 26 155 2 25 26 24 20 23 35 156 2 21 19 20 18 20 24 157 2 20 21 19 20 20 30 158 2 18 17 17 17 16 30 159 2 20 25 24 23 24 30 160 2 20 18 20 19 19 32 161 2 22 23 24 18 21 26 162 2 17 21 22 23 23 30 163 2 26 22 24 23 21 25 164 2 20 22 20 20 24 27 165 2 21 24 24 22 25 28 166 2 19 21 21 21 23 31 167 2 26 27 23 17 17 30 168 2 24 24 25 23 16 33 169 2 18 23 24 16 24 29 170 2 19 22 23 23 23 36 171 2 23 27 20 15 17 34 172 2 15 20 23 19 25 30 173 2 17 25 23 20 23 34 174 2 17 22 21 14 18 33 175 2 22 26 20 21 23 24 176 2 18 25 20 23 24 33
136
177 2 16 21 20 20 18 32 178 2 17 21 20 14 16 33 179 2 15 22 22 22 24 34 180 2 18 25 26 17 23 29 181 2 16 20 23 20 24 27 182 2 23 19 25 16 25 31 183 2 19 21 22 17 23 33 184 2 22 20 22 18 21 33 185 2 18 20 20 24 23 35 186 2 19 19 18 21 21 29 187 2 22 19 24 17 18 37 188 2 21 22 23 19 26 32 189 2 24 22 21 15 21 36 190 2 20 25 19 14 20 28 191 2 20 22 18 17 22 33 192 2 24 27 22 15 24 30 193 2 23 27 25 19 25 28 194 2 24 20 28 19 23 31 195 2 18 17 24 20 24 29 196 2 19 19 22 19 27 29 197 2 19 19 18 18 22 33 198 2 18 22 24 17 19 32 199 2 20 23 22 19 20 30 200 2 24 24 27 18 23 34 201 2 19 21 22 20 23 33 202 2 22 23 24 22 21 30 203 2 20 21 27 24 18 28 204 2 25 21 24 17 26 35 205 2 20 19 23 16 23 32 206 2 16 18 20 14 28 35 207 2 23 23 27 15 22 35 208 2 22 21 20 24 22 32 209 2 22 20 20 14 23 36 210 2 19 20 23 16 22 32 211 2 20 19 21 17 26 27 212 2 21 19 21 18 21 37 213 2 19 21 22 23 24 35 214 2 23 24 20 15 25 30 215 2 21 23 22 18 22 33 216 2 22 25 21 16 23 34 217 2 26 23 26 17 17 34 218 2 25 20 24 17 22 32 219 2 22 19 22 15 18 33 220 2 21 20 23 17 20 33 221 2 20 21 25 23 14 28 222 2 22 23 22 15 21 36
137
223 2 20 23 23 16 18 25 224 2 17 24 26 21 21 27 KEY:
Institutions Federal Universities = 1 State Universities = 2 SVS = SKILL VARIETYSCORES TIS = TASK IDENTITYSCORES TSS =TASK SIGNIFICANCESCORES AS = AUTONOMY SCORES FS = FEEDBACKSCORES JSS = JOB SATISFACTION SCORES
138
APPENDIXX
COMPUTER PRINT OUT OF PERCENTAGE, MEAN, STANDARD DE VIATION, T-TEST ANALYSIS OF ALL THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYP OTHESES
Means
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Included Excluded Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
ITEM1 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM2 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM3 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM4 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
Report
INSTITUTION ITEM1 ITEM2 ITEM3 ITEM4
FEDERAL UNIVERSITIES
N 81 81 81 81
Mean 2.88 2.77 2.69 2.65
Std. Deviation .827 .841 .861 .938
STATE UNIVERSITIES
N 143 143 143 143
Mean 2.71 2.58 2.35 2.38
Std. Deviation .941 1.010 .995 1.048
Total
N 224 224 224 224
Mean 2.77 2.65 2.47 2.48
Std. Deviation .903 .954 .961 1.015
Means
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Included Excluded Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
ITEM5 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM6 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM7 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM8 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
Report
INSTITUTION ITEM5 ITEM6 ITEM7 ITEM8
139
FEDERAL UNIVERSITIES
N 81 81 81 81
Mean 2.93 3.09 2.78 2.68
Std. Deviation 1.010 .883 1.025 .906
STATE UNIVERSITIES
N 143 143 143 143
Mean 2.57 2.74 2.56 2.69
Std. Deviation 1.038 .977 .932 .915
Total
N 224 224 224 224
Mean 2.70 2.87 2.64 2.68
Std. Deviation 1.039 .956 .970 .910
T-Test
Group Statistics
Institutions N Mean Std.
Deviation Std. Error
Mean
Skillvascores
FEDERAL
UINVERSITIES 81 22.47 2.475 .275
STATE UNIVERSITIES 143 20.59 2.873 .240
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
95% Confidence
Interval of the Difference
Lower Upper
Skill Variety
Equal variances assumed
1.937 0.165 4.926 222 0.000 1.875 0.381 1.125 2.625
Equal variances not assumed
5.133 187.270 0.000 1.875 0.365
1.154 2.595
140
Means
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Included Excluded Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
ITEM9 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM10 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM11 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM12 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
Report
INSTITUTION ITEM9 ITEM10 ITEM11 ITEM12
FEDERAL UNIVERSITIES
N 81 81 81 81
Mean 2.69 2.53 2.69 2.74
Std. Deviation .861 .963 .931 .972
STATE UNIVERSITIES
N 143 143 143 143
Mean 2.77 2.60 2.65 2.47
Std. Deviation .853 1.008 1.030 1.125
Total
N 224 224 224 224
Mean 2.74 2.58 2.67 2.57
Std. Deviation .855 .990 .993 1.078
Means
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Included Excluded Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
ITEM13 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM14 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM15 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM16 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
141
Report
INSTITUTION ITEM13 ITEM14 ITEM15 ITEM16
FEDERAL UNIVERSITIES
N 81 81 81 81
Mean 2.84 2.96 2.80 2.65
Std. Deviation .955 .858 .914 .964
STATE UNIVERSITIES
N 143 143 143 143
Mean 2.49 2.79 2.67 2.97
Std. Deviation 1.106 .985 .998 .896
Total
N 224 224 224 224
Mean 2.62 2.85 2.72 2.86
Std. Deviation 1.065 .943 .969 .931
T-Test
Group Statistics
Institutions N Mean Std.
Deviation Std. Error
Mean
Taskidscores
FEDERAL
UINVERSITIES 81 21.91 2.575 .286
STATE UNIVERSITIES 143 21.41 2.606 .218
Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for
Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Task identity
Equal variances assumed
0.068 0.795 1.388 222 0.166 0.501 0.361 -0.210 1.212
Equal variances not assumed
1.393 169.940 0.165 0.501 0.360 -0.219 1.211
142
Means
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Included Excluded Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
ITEM17 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM18 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM19 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM20 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
Report
INSTITUTION ITEM17 ITEM18 ITEM19 ITEM20
FEDERAL UNIVERSITIES
N 81 81 81 81
Mean 2.83 2.88 2.68 2.81
Std. Deviation .803 .927 .906 .896
STATE UNIVERSITIES
N 143 143 143 143
Mean 2.80 2.69 2.73 2.43
Std. Deviation .866 .966 .927 .996
Total
N 224 224 224 224
Mean 2.81 2.76 2.71 2.57
Std. Deviation .842 .954 .917 .977
Means
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Included Excluded Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
ITEM21 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM22 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM23 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM24 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
143
Report
INSTITUTION ITEM21 ITEM22 ITEM23 ITEM24
FEDERAL UNIVERSITIES
N 81 81 81 81
Mean 2.68 2.91 2.77 3.04
Std. Deviation .878 .869 .795 .872
STATE UNIVERSITIES
N 143 143 143 143
Mean 2.71 2.99 2.92 2.80
Std. Deviation 1.040 .996 1.015 .890
Total
N 224 224 224 224
Mean 2.70 2.96 2.87 2.89
Std. Deviation .983 .951 .942 .889
T-Test
Group Statistics
Institutions N Mean Std.
Deviation Std. Error
Mean
Tasksigscores
FEDERAL
UINVERSITIES 81 22.59 2.607 .290
STATE UNIVERSITIES 143 22.07 2.613 .218
Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for
Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Task Significance
Equal variances assumed
0.037 0.847 1.440 222 0.151 0.523 0.363 -0.193 1.238
Equal variances not assumed
1.441 166.569 0.152 0.523 0.363 -0.194 1.239
144
Means
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Included Excluded Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
ITEM25 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM26 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM27 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM28 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
Report
INSTITUTION ITEM25 ITEM26 ITEM27 ITEM28
FEDERAL UNIVERSITIES
N 81 81 81 81
Mean 2.68 2.68 2.86 2.64
Std. Deviation .849 .972 .848 1.064
STATE UNIVERSITIES
N 143 143 143 143
Mean 2.59 2.36 2.52 2.39
Std. Deviation .891 1.025 1.100 1.169
Total
N 224 224 224 224
Mean 2.62 2.48 2.64 2.48
Std. Deviation .875 1.015 1.027 1.136
Means
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Included Excluded Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
ITEM29 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM30 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM31 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM32 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
145
Report
INSTITUTION ITEM29 ITEM30 ITEM31 ITEM32
FEDERAL UNIVERSITIES
N 81 81 81 81
Mean 2.77 2.72 2.85 2.62
Std. Deviation 1.099 1.015 .963 .902
STATE UNIVERSITIES
N 143 143 143 143
Mean 2.23 2.47 2.43 2.63
Std. Deviation 1.124 1.149 1.065 1.032
Total
N 224 224 224 224
Mean 2.42 2.56 2.58 2.62
Std. Deviation 1.142 1.107 1.047 .985
T-Test
Group Statistics
Institutions N Mean Std.
Deviation Std. Error
Mean
Autonomyscores
FEDERAL
UINVERSITIES 81 21.81 2.784 .309
STATE UNIVERSITIES 143 19.64 3.022 .253
Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for
Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Autonomy
Equal variances assumed
4.312 0.039 5.330 222 0.000 2.178 0.401 1.373 2.984
Equal variances not assumed
5.453 177.798 0.000 2.178 0.399 1.390 2.967
Means
146
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Included Excluded Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
ITEM33 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM34 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM35 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM36 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
Report
INSTITUTION ITEM33 ITEM34 ITEM35 ITEM36
FEDERAL UNIVERSITIES
N 81 81 81 81
Mean 2.96 2.72 2.77 2.79
Std. Deviation .813 .978 .939 1.092
STATE UNIVERSITIES
N 143 143 143 143
Mean 2.80 2.75 2.69 2.55
Std. Deviation .866 .989 1.036 1.099
Total
N 224 224 224 224
Mean 2.86 2.74 2.72 2.64
Std. Deviation .849 .983 1.001 1.100
Means
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Included Excluded Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
ITEM37 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM38 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM39 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM40 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
147
Report
INSTITUTION ITEM37 ITEM38 ITEM39 ITEM40
FEDERAL UNIVERSITIES
N 81 81 81 81
Mean 2.81 2.74 2.72 2.65
Std. Deviation .923 .997 .978 .854
STATE UNIVERSITIES
N 143 143 143 143
Mean 2.57 3.00 2.85 2.77
Std. Deviation 1.097 1.075 1.061 1.053
Total
N 224 224 224 224
Mean 2.66 2.91 2.80 2.73
Std. Deviation 1.042 1.053 1.032 .985
T-Test
Group Statistics
Institutions N Mean Std.
Deviation Std. Error
Mean
Feedbackscores
FEDERAL
UINVERSITIES 81 22.16 2.648 .294
STATE UNIVERSITIES 143 21.99 2.700 .226
Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for
Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Feedback
Equal variances assumed
0.027 0.869 0.449 222 0.654 0.167 0.373 -0.567 0.902
Equal variances not assumed
0.452 168.949 0.652 0.167 0.371 -0.565 0.900
148
Means
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Included Excluded Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
ITEM41 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM42 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM43 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM44 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
Report
INSTITUTION ITEM41 ITEM42 ITEM43 ITEM44
FEDERAL UNIVERSITIES
N 81 81 81 81
Mean 2.81 2.72 2.68 2.63
Std. Deviation .853 .840 .804 .955
STATE UNIVERSITIES
N 143 143 143 143
Mean 2.61 2.93 2.55 2.78
Std. Deviation .935 .917 .886 .897
Total
N 224 224 224 224
Mean 2.68 2.85 2.60 2.73
Std. Deviation .910 .894 .857 .919
Means
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Included Excluded Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
ITEM45 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM46 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM47 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM48 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
149
Report
INSTITUTION ITEM45 ITEM46 ITEM47 ITEM48
FEDERAL UNIVERSITIES
N 81 81 81 81
Mean 2.68 2.62 2.74 2.75
Std. Deviation .834 .874 .818 .956
STATE UNIVERSITIES
N 143 143 143 143
Mean 2.67 2.75 2.65 2.45
Std. Deviation .878 .938 .936 .998
Total
N 224 224 224 224
Mean 2.67 2.70 2.68 2.56
Std. Deviation .861 .916 .895 .991
Means
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Included Excluded Total
N Percent N Percent N Percent
ITEM49 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM50 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM51 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
ITEM52 * INSTITUTION 224 100.0% 0 0.0% 224 100.0%
Report
INSTITUTION ITEM49 ITEM50 ITEM51 ITEM52
FEDERAL UNIVERSITIES
N 81 81 81 81
Mean 2.84 2.93 2.73 2.75
Std. Deviation .858 .932 .866 .902
STATE UNIVERSITIES
N 143 143 143 143
Mean 2.57 2.61 2.57 2.59
Std. Deviation .931 .942 .923 .922
Total
N 224 224 224 224
Mean 2.67 2.72 2.63 2.65
Std. Deviation .912 .949 .904 .916
150
T-Test
Group Statistics
Institutions N Mean Std.
Deviation Std. Error
Mean
Jobsatscores
FEDERAL
UINVERSITIES 81 32.88 3.269 .363
STATE UNIVERSITIES 143 31.74 3.369 .282
Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for
Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
95% Confidence Interval of the
Difference
Lower Upper
Job Satisfaction
Equal variances assumed
0.484 0.487 2.449 222 0.015 1.135 0.464 0.222 2.049
Equal variances not assumed
2.470 170.455 0.014 1.135 0.460 0.228 2.043