University of Nigeria Research Publications

NWOBI, Prudence Chisolu

Aut

hor

PG/M .BA/90/10545

Title

Evaluation of Motivational Tools and their Effects on output in some Selected Brewing

Industries in Anambra and Enugu State.

Facu

lty

Business Administration

Dep

artm

ent

Management

Dat

e

January, 1992

Sign

atur

e

EVALUATION OF MOTIVATICNAL TOOLS AND '

T H E I R EFFECTS ON OUTPUT I N SOME SELECTED BREWING

I N D'JSTRI ES I N ANAMBRA AND ENUGU STATES.

EVALUATION OF M O T I V A T I O N A L T O O L S AN D T t i E I R

E F F E C T S ON OUT?UT I N SOME S E L E C T E D BRENSNG

I N D U S T R I E S I N ANAMSRA AND ETJ'JGU STATES.

NWOBI PRUDENCE CHISOLU ( M I S S )

~ G / M B ~ / 9 0 / 1 0 5 4 5

DEPARTKFJIT O F MANAGEMENT

U N I V E R S I T Y OF I ~ I G E R I A

ENUGrJ CAMPUS

JANUARY, 1992-

EVALUATICN O F MOTIVATIONAL TOOLS AND T H E I R

E F F E C T S ON OUTPUT I N SOME SELECTED BREWING

I N D U S T R I E S IN ANAMBRA AND ENUGU STATZSo

A PROJECT REPORT I i u THE DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT

SUBMITTED TO THE .FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATICN

IN P A R T I A L FULFILMENT OF REQUIREMENT FOR T H E AWARD

O F T H E MASTER O F B U S I N E S S ADMINISTRATION (MBA)

DEGREE O F THE U N I V E R S I T Y O F N I G D R I A o

DEPARTMENT O F MANAGEMENT

U N I V E R S I T Y OF N I G E R I A

ENUGU CAMPUS

JANUARY, 1992.

DEDICATION

This project is dedicated to t h e Blessed memory of my beloved father Mr. GABRIEL IFEWACHO

OKAFOR NWOBI w

The success of t h e research i s large ly owed to

the ass is tance received i n t h e course of the s tudy ,

In this regard, I am s p e c i a l l y g r a t e f u l to my p r o j e c t

supervisor Mr. J.A. Eze for his expert guidance and

dedication towards t h e success of this research work,

I also s p e c i a l l y thank t h e General Managers, the

personnel ~ a n a g e r s and the other managers of t h e Sub-

sections of the companies s tud ied for t h e i r p r a c t i c a l

adv ice and the great interest shown in this work,

I am , e q u a l l y g r a t e f u l to the other employees of t h e

o r g a n i s a t i o n s for the relevant information they provided

w h i c h l e d to the success of t h i s research ,

My profound g r a t i t u d e a l s o goes to my room rnate-

Miss Chineze Iwobi, Miss Stella Ezenagu, M r . Peter

EEuvzor, M r . 0. Stanley and many other f r i e n d s for thier

p i e c e s of advice and invaluable h e l p throughout the

programmei I a l s o thank M r , Isaac E z i e m e for h i s

c a r e f u l n e s s a d endurance during the typing of t h e

proj ect,

X am g r e a t l y indebted to my late f a t h e r M r .

G.I.O. Nwobi f o r h i s f i n a n c i a l contr ibut ions and moral

support a l l through t h i s programme, My appreciat ion

a l s o goes to my mother Mrs, M - N , Nwobi for her own

contr ibut ions to the success of my s t u d i e s , I am also

greatly indebted to my brothers and sisters,Dr. A.C.

chigbo, D r . A.C. Agu and little master Lp;a B j - ~ ~ . b i

Charles Chimobi for t h e various ways t h e y contributed

to the success of my academic career ,

F ina l ly , my g r a t i t u d e goes to God for h i s cont i -

nued protect ion and guidance,

ENUGU , N I G E R I A , 1992 NWOBI P m C o

ABSTRACT

This s tudy examine t h e eva luat ion of mot ivat ionala

tools and t h e i r effects on output i n some s e l e c t e d

Brewing i n d u s t r i e s i n Anambra and Fnugu S t a t e s . The

s tudy, look at t h e adequacy of these motivat ional

t o o l s o f f e r e d by t h e brewing i n d u s t r i e s ,

The s tudy inves t iga ted i f any r e l a t i o n s h i p e x i s t e d

between mot ivat ion and output,

The study seeks to examine i f the employees of the

organisat ians , s tud ied are s a t i s f i e d w i t h the cond i t i on

of service i n their var ious organ i sa t ians and to as-

certain t h e effect o f boss subordinate r e l a t i o n s h i p on

employee performance a t work.

A sample of 32),workers were selected f o r t h e

t h r e e brewing i n d u s t r i e s s tudied . The instrument of t h e

study was the q u e s t i o n n a i r e complemented with o r a l

interview, Percentages, c h i -square and a n a l y s i s of

varience (ANOVA) were used to describe and malyse the

data.

The following results were obtained:

1. The op in ions of t h e employees i n the t h r e e

organisat ions , regarding t h e adequacy of the moti-

v a t i o n a l tools differ significantly.

2, There is n o s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n o p i n i m s of

the employees i n t h e three companies regarding

higher pay as t h e .best preferred mot ivat ional

tool for workers.

3. There \is s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between s a t i s f i e d

and d i s s a t i s f i e d workers w i t h regard to t h e

cond i t i ons of s e r v i c e i n their organisat ion .

4, There i s s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in workers res-

ponse regarding t h e effect of boss - subordinate

re1 a t i o n s h i p . on employee performance at work.

CERTIFICATION

NWOBI, PRUDENCE CHISOLU, a Postgraduate s t u d e n t

i n t h e Department of Management and with a registration

number PG/MBA/90/10545, has s a t i s f a c t o r i l y completed

the requirements for course and research work for t h e

degree of Masters of Business Administration (MBA) i n

Management. T h i s work embodied i n t h i s project report

is o r i g i n a l 'and has n o t been submftted i n part or f u l l

for any other diploma or degree of this or any o t h e r

university.

MR. JmA. EZE SUPERVISOR.

TITLE PAGE - m *

CERTIFICATION * DEIIICAT'I:ON + B

ACKNOWLEIX;EWrnT . , ABSTRACT 0

TABLE OF CONTFNTS

LIST OF TABLES

APP E3l DICES

CHAPTER ONE:

CHAPTER TWO:

2 .o 2 .I 2.2

INTRODUCTION

Background of the study

Statemenb of t h e problem htrpo& of the study S i g n i f f c a m e of the study

Scope/ Limi t a t 1 of t h e s tudy Obj ectivcs md Hypothesis

REV1 EW OF LITERATURE

What is motivation The factors that are f n f l u e n c l n g

PAG E _CI

makfvation among workers

Motivation and output

Importance of motivation in

selected companbes/brewing

i n d u s t r i e s

the

CHAPTER THREE:

3; 0 Brief Ef s t o r k a l Background o f the

Selected companies

Life Breweries

Premier Breweries

Diamond Breweries

CHAP3'E.R FOUR:

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

T h e Research Design

Desk Sw rvey : Secondary ,ESou2ces

Primary Sources

F i e l d Survey Instrument far data collection Populat ion for t h e study

sampling and sampling Technique

Sample 5f2e

Techniques of Data Analys i s

d AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

St ruc tu re and Charac te r i s tics of sespwdent compan5es

Testing of Research Hypokhcsf s

SUMMARY, RECOMMENDATICNS ~lrm FIN D'LIiGS, CCNCL'JSIW 5

Summary of Findings

Recommendations

LIST OF TABLES

4.4 Tota l Number of Employees Sampled By Sex

In t h e Various Breweries

5 . 1 r T Data Showing Sex Distribution of t h e

Companies 41

5.2.2 Age Dis'riButlon T n t h e Various Companies 42

5.T-3 Data Shewing Depaskmeltal Df strf bution of

of 'the Company 43

5.1*4 Data Shm~ing Academic Q u a l i f f c a t f Dn of t h e

Workers in the VasiOUS Ccmpanltes 44

5-1m5 Response To A v a i l a b i l i t y of Motivational

T o o l s in the Various Companies 45

5,1,7 Manag~mcnt Applicatlwr of The Motivat ional

Too,ls on t h e Eqtp16yees

5.1 Desc r ip t i on of Working Cond i t i ons I n

The Various Companies

5.2.9 Frequency of t h e Application of the

MutivatLonal Tools On the Employees

5.1.10 Boss-Subordinate Rclakionship

5 . 1 iJork Load of the employee^ in the Various Companies

5.1.12 Equal and Fair T r e a t m e n t on the Varibus

5 * l m T 3 Employees Description of T h e i r Job

1 4 C o n d i t i o n a l l t i e s For Promot ion of

Workers

5.1.15 Pramotim Prospects/Career Advancement

In the Various Organisation/Companies

5.2.15 Adequacy of The Motivational Tools

Applied For Higher output i n the Brewing

I n d u s t r i e s 58

5.1.17 Higher Pay is the Best Notivaticfhal Tool

For Workers 61

5.1.18 ANOVA Table For Hypothesis 2 63

5.1.19 Employees Satisfaction With The C o n d i t i o n s

of ServLce In t h e i r Organisat ion 65

5.1.20 Effect of Boss-Subordinate R e l a t i o n s h i p

M? Work Perforniance

APPW DICES

Sta t is t ica l Calciilatims For Hypothesis 1 2 i -Test) 86

Stat i sk ica l Calcuiakions For Hypothesis 2

( Two-h'ay AN OVA ) 88

S t a t i s t i c a l Calculat iof ls For Hypothesis 3 3

i f - ~ m t , 91

S t a t i s t i c a l Calculations For Hypothesis 4 2 ( 8 -~est). 92

I mO INTRODUCTION

A lot has been written on motivation and its

relationship w i t h productivity, s e l f - f u l f i l m e n t and

h i g h morale.

Hand book of Industrial and Organisa t iona l

Psychology ( 1 9 7 6 ~ 6 4 ) befines mot ivat ion for the purpose

of t h i s work ss na label for the determinat ion of t h e

choice to in i t i a t e effort, the choke to expend certain

amount of effort and the choice t o persist i n expending

ef for t over a period of time to achieve a gfven per-

formace o b j e c t i v e . " '

Hoy and Miskel (1978) deffneb motivat ion as t h e

complex forces, needs t e n s i o n states or other i n t e r n a l

p s y c h o l o g i c a l mechanisms that start and maintain

act iv i ty towards the achievement of personal goals.

Vroom (2964) further d e f i n e s motivatf on as a

process governing choices made by persons or tower

o r g a n i s a t i o n s among alternative forms of vo luntary

action. M o t i v a t i m is a complex factor as i t concerns

i n d i v i d u a l and their needs, and every i n d i v i d u a l i s

unique. But there are same t h i n g Individuals have i n

common for example, p h y s i c a l , social and growth needs,

except that t h e s t r e n g t h of t h e s e needs varies from

person to person and from t i m e to t i m e w f t h i n the same

person, The behavioural scimtisks s t a t e t h a t needs

express themselves in d i f f e r e n t ways i n different cultures,

The average need ~ t r u c t u r c differs from c o u n t r y to

country because different c o u n t r i e s t e a c h d i f f e r e n t

values ~ r l d behaviour.

Abel Ubeku (1975) in his analys is of the vaticus

r n o t i v a t l m a l t h e o r i e s put forward By t h e western

schal ars' to a s c e r t a i n the peacticabili t y wlthin t h e

Nige r i an environment, nbted that t h e y were n o t of

immediate r e l e v a n c e towards improving t h e p r o d u c t i v i t y /

w t p u t of t h e Niger ian employee in both public and

privake o r g a n i s a t i o n . From the discuasian so f a r t h e r e

i s no doubt t h a t the p r o d u c t i v i t y of employees I n an or-

ganlsat ia' l can be improved through greater i n c e n t i v e s

e s p e c i a l l y m m e t c l r y rewards t h a t w i l l e n a b l e employees

to meet to a greater e x t e n t their p h y s i o l o A c a l and

o t h e r needs which due to lack of f u l f i l l i n g them i n

Nigeria, are key motivators when satisfied.

Hcks artd Gul le t (999.7); further stated t h a t

slnca a l l managers work w i t h people, they must create

c o n d i t i o n s t h a t encourage employees to do a good job.

~ o t i v a t i n g others is an extremely complex process. It

provides external rewards auch as pay increase, pra i se

and prCrrrrotim, It also creates c o n d i t i o n s so t h a t

persons can get Wclf administeredvt rewards, such as

s a t l s f ac t ion from accomplishing a chal lenging ta sk ,

To be effective* mmagers must provide the r i g h t mBx

of both k i n d s of s a t i s f a c t i o n r

~h v i e w of t h e above discussim, Edwfn F l l p p

<2980) stated t h a t personnel management 2s t h e planning,

organlsing , direct ing and cantralllng of the procure-

men t , deve lopment , cmpe?lsatim, fn tegrak im, main te-

nance, and separatiaxi of humm resource t o the end t h a t

ind iv idua l , orgmilsational artd societal objectives arc

accamplished,

H i c k s , and G u l l e t f u r t h e r def ines managing as the

process ~f g e t t i n g t h i n g s done by and through &hers,

However Resis l i k e r t stated thak huntan resource

in every organisatlm i s i m p o r t a n t and managing it

also should be regarded as crucial i n v i m of the above

Every aspee5 of a firms a c t i v i t y i s determfncd by t h e competence and rnotivatLwr and genera l effectivemess of i t s human organisation of a l l

t h e task of management, managing t h e human component is the c o n t r o l and most impor t an t task. Because a l l else depends upon haw well it

mL

t c

1 e

C I

tl i

er

productiviky/mtput,

PrcductLvity will be the surnmaklm of efficiency

of technology, Zd$our, capital and effectEvenass of

mmagement and fs measured in terms oft

Output obtdned a Performance- achieved m p u t expended Resource cmsum@d,

Expressed d i f f e r e n t l y , p r o d u c t i v i t y is t h e r a t io of

useful results obtained to the resources expended i n

obtaining them,

Against thls background therefore, t h i s research

seeks to evaluate t h e motivational too ls and t h e i r

effects on ou tpu t in some s e l e c t e d brewing I n d u s t r i e s

in Anambra and Ehugu S t a t e s *

Statement 0% P r o b l e m .

What: kind of motivational t n o l s t h a t w i l l l e a d

to h i g h e r lave1 of o u t p u t in t h e various breweries.

Is there any r e l a t i o n s h i p between motivation and out-

put. To what extent does boss-subordinate relation-

ship affect wor!;~rs productivity in t h e var lws

brewing i n d u s t r i e s .

purpose of *he Study:

The m a j o r purpose of the study was to eva luate the

rnotivatim'ial tao ls and t h e i r effects on output in some

selected brewering i n d u s t r i e s in Anambra and l3ugu

states,

Specifically the study sought to f i n d out:-

( WRlch of the rnotivatAona1 tools would l ead to

higher o u t p u k c

(2) Whether higher pay serves as the best mot ivat ional

t o o l t h a t wou!.d l ead t o higher autput.

( 3 ) If t h e s e is a d t r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p between m o t i -

vation and productivityf~utput.

Stqnlficmce of. - the study,;

This study has a number of d l g n i i k a n t : dirnensians

to It, The result of this study should provide in-

formatfm on t h e b e s t mot ivat iona l tools t h a t can

improve the level of output i n the selected brewing

industr fes , The result should also reveal t h e extent

workers are satisfied w i t h t h e conditions of s e r v i c e

obtainable i n their r e s p e c t i v e organisat ion ,

Thls study shwlg also h e l p the management of the

: various companies to ascertain the effect of boss-

subordinate relationship on employee perf armance at

worker, T h i s fs important because t h e workers c o n s t i -

tute a vital aspect of the organisation and i f they

are n o t adequately managed, could l e a d to crisis i n

the various companies.

Furthermore a s i t u a t i o n of unrest in t h e various

companies affect8 productivity and creates more problem

for t h e management.

Scope and ,Wl . in i tation of the studyr

ThFs study w i l l cover three Breweries in Anambra

nnd ERugu stakes, and w i l l centre on the e v a l u a t i o n

of their m o t i v a t l m a l t o o l s and t h e i r effects on out-

put+ Moreso thelr impact on the morale and job sat ls -

fact lml of employees. The r e s u l t s ob t a lned from tMs

research may not be P e p r e s m t a t l v e of a l l employees i n

both the public. and private sectors but t h e y w i l l n o

doubt be helpful t o many o r g a n f s a t i m s . Exte rna l

factors t h a t hinge an motivation are beyond the scope

of t h i s work. T h i s is because they are many and varied

and w i l l blur the main h i g h l i g h t s of t h i s work i f

con sf desed

Qbjeck-lves of t he study:

The objectives df this s t u d y i n c l u d e to:

Ldentlfy t h e v a r i o u s mo t iva t iona l t o o l s used by

the brwing i n d u s t r i e s t o enhance p r o d u c t i v i t y ;

e x m i n e t h e adequacy of these mot iva t iona l t o o l s

offered by t h e brewing i n d u s t r i e s ;

examine the e x t e n t t o which h:-gher remuneratfon

is regarded as the b e s t preferred mot iva t iona l

t o o l for workers;

examine if t h e employees of the o r g a n i s a t l o n s

s t u d i e d are s a t i s f f e d wLth the c o n d i t i o n s of

service obtainable i n their respective organl-

( 5 ) t b - a s c e r t a i n the effect of boss-subordinate rela-

t i o n s h l p on employee perfomnar'ice at work,

Hypothesis t

The opinions of the employees in the three orgzmi-

satims regarding t h e adequacy of t h e motf va t i ona l

tools di f fe r ~ i g n i f i c a n t l y *

T h e r e i s significant d i f f e r m c e i n mployees moti-

vational response among t h e three brewlng companfes

w i t h regard to t h e use of h i g h e r pay as the b e s t

prkf erred motivatlonal t o o l for workers

T h e r e is s i g n i f i c a n t difference i n the employees

satisfactiotl with the c o n d i t i o n s sf service i n

the three o r g a n l s a t i ~ n s ~

There i s s i g n i f i c a n t di f f erence i n worker's

response regarding the effect of boss-subordinate

r e l a t i onsh ip on employee performance at work.

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF LI-TERATURE

2*1 What is Motivation

Mativatlon as one of t h e three f a c t o r s i n the

function of directing - i s described as a process tha t

arouses, channe l s , s u s t a i n s and g iven people's beha-

It i s concerned with t h e why of human behaviour what

it i s t h a t makes people do things (Donnelly et, a1

1971, pm1291 o r s i m p l y , i t is the s t imulat ion of

pecsple to action to accomplish desired goals (Fashions

in Ejiofar ek, a l , (1984, p.114).

Motivakial is a complex f a c t o r a s i t concerns

indiv idual and their needs and every individual is

unique, But there are some things that i n d f v i d u a l s

have in common for example, physical, s o c i a l and growth

needs, except that t h e s t reng th of t h e s e needs varies

from person to person and from time to t i m e within the

same person, The behaviaural scientists s t a t e t h a t

needs express themselves i n dif ferrsl t ways in different

cul ture . The average need s t r u c t u r e differs from

country t o count ry because different c o u n t r i e s teach

di f ferent values and bthaviaur. The b a s i c fact is that:

needs l i e behf nd human bthaviour, hence I t is necessary

to know a b u t them as t o know why people do what they

H a w is it ,suppased to Operate:

Human beings have complex characteristic hence

human needs that cond i t i on hurnm behavfewr are equa l ly

complex with a lot of varfatlons. Because of these,

motivation as part of the d i r e c t i n g func t lon in srgani-

satltons is equally complex for understanding and

operatLon. The r e s u l t is that mot iva t im has faced a

lot of thought and r e s e a r c h as to how i t operate in or-

ganfsation, Many p r o p o s a l s made over time have rmged

'from t h e work of Frederkck Taylor t o t h e Human

Rela t ions mavemmt to Abraham Maslow, Frederick

Hemberg to expeckmcy theory by V r m m and to McGreqor*~

theories X and Y. Chkpala, 1970 p.201-102).

MotivatiM T h r ~ u q h F i n mci a]. Incen ti vcs

Fsederf ck Taylor advanced t h e theory of mot ivat ion

through f i n a n c i a l incent ive, he staked t h a t to rnotlvate

workers to perform managers have at t h e t r d i s p o s a l

large incentives. This approach, based on an assumption

which was Later brought into f ocus as 'Cheary X by

Douglas McGregor (1960) s ta tes tha t workers are l azy

and can be motivated only with f i n a I c f a 1 rewards, Taylorts

. prescrLptian was critieised as t o o narrow, that i t

m p h a s i s e d on ly the economic a spec t s of w w a r k e r s a needs.

But applying this to Nigerian s i t u a t i c n Ejirnofor

( E j i o f o r 1984, p.122) s t a t e s that where the level of

education I s hEJw and where'skllled manpower i s i n shor t

a p p l y , the hfghest l e v e l of a s p i r a t i o n of many workers

remains within the range of s a t i s f y i n g t h e lower Level

needs, w h i c h more often khm not i s economic on the

selwanee of t h e crLticism depends on t h e s i t u a t i o n ,

The Workers S o c i a l Heeds:

The Human Relat ions Movement: attempted to fill

the gap i n Tay lor l s Theory by b r i n g f n g up t h e social

nctds of the workers a s a motivating f a c t o r to improve

prodrrctiviky. The movement proposed tha t i f workers

are treated as human being by management and i f an en-

vironment is created a t t h e work s i t u a t i o n in which

workers enjoy a sense of belonging with * h e i r mates

productivity would improve. (Akpala 1990 p.102).

Maslow@s Theory :

mraham Maslow apparently d i d a good job of bringing

together these i s o l a t e d views of mot ivat ion in terms of

needs, i n t o a u n i t e d thought of what motivates workers,

H e L d m t i f i e d human needs to b e many but i n t e r r e l a t e d ,

no t i sa l la ted i n s i n g l e needs , Those needs t h a t moti-

vate are known as connative or striving needs, for they

move people by a desire to satisfy them. The needs are

said by Maslow to be related i n a h f e r a r c h i c a l order

i n the s e n s e t h a t soma art highr?r in level than o t h e r s .

Those needs which come first must be s a t i s f i e d , a t

l eas t to some extent b e f o r e higher, more abstract

needs, emerge and become dominant over behaviou r,

Maslow s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of needs i n their hierar-

chical order is:

(1) P h y s i o l o g i c a l

12) S e c u r i t y

( 3 ) Social

(4) Esteem

(5) S e l f - a c t u a l i s a t i o n or self f u l f i l m e n t

(Akpala 1990 103).

2. The 1st l e v e l - Baslc P h y s i o l o q i c a l needs :

These con&is t of primary needs for s u s t a i n i n g t h e

human body, They arc needs for food, water,

c lothfng and s h c l t c t . Maslow states tha t when t h e s e

basic needs are s a t i s f i e d to a reasonable degree the

next higher l e v e l assumes importance,

2. The 2nd level - S e c u r i t y needs:

This need i s concerned w i t h assur ing the .indivi-

dual t h a t s a t i s f a c t i o n of h i s basic needs will be

continued. In other words, man needs p r o t e c t i o n against

changes, economic disaster and t h e like. Hence workers

and t h e i r un ions make demands on management for job

~ e ~ ~ r i k y and expmded f r i n g e bmefLts.

3. T h e 3rd Levelr Social needs:

ThiS , i s :the - need that centres on t h e i n d i v i d u a l s

desire for affection and association with others. I t

relates to giving and r e c e i v i n g l o v e and a f f e c t i ~ ,

4, The 4th Level - Esteem Needs:

T h i s concerns recogn i t ion by others of onevs

importance, Such r e c o g n i t i o n l e a d s to a f e e l i n g of

s e l f - c ~ n f i d e r r c e and prestige,

5. The 5th Level - S e l f A c k r a l i z a t i o n Needs:

This need i s t h e ukt imate i n Maslowts rankfng .

~t fis t h e need to r e a l i s e onegs capabilities and potentia-

l i t i e s by achieving some skated g5al5-

C r f tlcf sm -Of The Need Theory:

Kre i tne r : (pr304) s ta tes t h a t behavioural sc im tists

have attempted to t e s t Maslow's theory In real l i f e

and clalrn tha t : f t has some deficlmcics, t h a t practical

evidence shows a twc+level h i e r a r c r y r a t h e r t h a n a

ffvr?-level one, They accept the p \ y s i a l o g i c a l and

s a f e t y needs to be In hierarchy. But b ~ y o n d these

needs any of the other needs may merge as t h e s i n g l e

m a s t impor t an t , one depending on the p a r t i c u l a r

i n b i v l d m P . l ~ a t we s a i d above about motivation b ~ i n g

a complex factor is elaborated by Stmer (2978, p-407-

93, .HE s t a t e s t h a t motivation fs accsmpllcated concept,

flsst, because needs differ cons ide rab ly among i n d l -

vldrrals, seco?dly, t h e ways in which needs are evmt-

u a l l y trmslated i n t o ac t ions also vary considerably

b e t w e e n i n d l v f du als. T h i r d l y lndf v idua l s are n o t

c o n s l a t m t in the ways in which they act on t h e i r naeds

and the needs t h a t motivated k h e t r act ion at any given

t f m ~ , Hmlce t h e content of needs and their d r i v i n g

n a t u r e are only one aspect of t h e m o t i v a t i m func t ion .

Above a l l , It i s t h e cultural background on the

standard of the community and s o d e t y i n which the

-15-

unphyees l i v e t h a t g r e a t l y i n f l u e n c e t h d r perception

of t h e i r n e e d s (Sutermeistcr, 1963, p.9).

Although MaslawDs t h e m y has n o t stood well under

actual testing, still it h a s a a l l e d t h e attention of

managers of the e x i s t e n c e of t h e s e n e e d s and teaches

them t h a t a f u l f i l l e d need does not m o t i v a t e an i n d l v i -

dual , And all new t h e o r i e s build on t h e

i t Ss the expected sak5sfact ion of needs

and psychological t h a t stimulates people

(Vrow, 1964);

acceptance t h a t

bas ic , sacid

to perform

Sllveman (1978, pm81-821, fs i n apparent con-

fusion as h e asked one question a f t e r another about the

reality of Maslow~s hjerarchy of needs, hccordlng to

A i m , one might ask whether these needs are real, on

merely u s e f u l model for unders tand1 ng behaviour in

terms of how people would act if they w e r e motivated

by t h m . H e cont inues ; t o what extent f s i t true to

say t h a t all human beings in a l l cultures of the world

have these needs i n t h e same proport ion? Agafn he

added; must all t h e s e needs be satisfied in t h e

con t e x t of work?

Koontz eG a1 (1978) preferred to call motive

-16-

whicn t h e y s a id i s an i n n e r s tate that a ~ r g i z e s ,

act ivates , moves (hence mot iva t ion) and that d i r e c t s

or channe ls behaviour kowards goal.* To them rk

rnot ivat~an was a geqeral coflcepk applying t o t h e e n t i r e

class of drivds, desires, needs, w i s h e s and s imi la r

variables, the main connect ion however between

employee motivat ion and p e r f o r m a n c e i s that motiva-

tion includes the needs, d e s i r e s and impulses w i t h i n

a person md how h e goes about s a t i s f y i n g them, The

worker's performance on t h e JOB i s one outlet for the

s a t i s f a c t i o n of such needs and de, ires,

Frederick Herzberg proposed a t heo ry c a l l e d the

l t w 0 factor t heo ry of mot i9at ion. ITeszberg, -and h i s

c o l l e a g u e s seened t o accept the various needs by

Maslow and used Mas low~s need theory as a base f o r

carrying out: research among m i d d l e managers i n engi-

n e e r i n g and accounting and p re sen ted t h e i r two f a c t o r

n ead theory, They i d e n t i f i e d factors a t work w hich

r e l a t e t o man13 need as an an ima l , to s u r v i v e and avoid

pa in* (F rede r i ck Herzberg i n V i c t o r Vroon et, a l ,

2974, p.861. These factors they termed maintenance

or hyg iene factors which when absent, w i l l g i v e

d i s s a t f s f a c t i o n at work, but when present: w i l l n o t

necessarily motFvate w o r k e r s . They include s u c h t h i n g s

as company p o L i q and administration, supervi sf on, working

conditions, interpersonal r e l a t i o n s , salaries, s t a t u s ,

job d e a r i t y , and t h e s e would feature in Maslow@s

lower physiolagical and some of t h e social n e e d s ,

HerzbergtS o t h e r need factors are those, h e s a i d r e l a t e

to man as a humm who has to grow p s y c h o l q i c a l l y .

He termed them motivators, They involved the cantents

of t h e jab, achievement, cecogn Ltlan, professional

expertise and g r w t h in t a s k capability, T h e i r presence

in work ' s i t u a t i m would g i v e workers motivation,

CKoontz and ~ f ~ o n ~ . e l l ' , 1976, p.567).

These a l so would feature in Maslow*s higher needs of

self actualizatrj.on or self-realization, advancement md

growth on t h e job, Thus one c l u s t e r of factors relates

to whak a person d o e s (mativators, and the o ther to

t h e s i t u a t f a n in which he docs it (hygiene factors).

What HerzberQ d i d on the need theory i s to reduce

M a s l m ~ f ~ hierarchy to two need c l u s t e r s or a t w o

birnenslmal need structure, one need system for avoid-

ance of unpleasantness and a para l l e l need sy~tern for

person a1 growth.

K e i t h Davls (1981 pn.59) looks at Hemberg's

model as r e l a t i n g t o the advanced c o u n t r i e s w h e r e many

would seem t o h a v e s a t i s f i e d t h e i r low order needs and

are now rnotfvated mainly by hlgher order needs , The

lower o r d e r need may no l o n g e r produce s t r o n g , driving

forces t o the employee, So Herzbergts model i s n o t

genera l ly relevant t o Nigeria and the developing

cauntr ies . Even i n t h e advanced countries the t w o

factor t h e o r y of motivation would seem i n a p p r o p r i a t e far

a p p l i c a t i o n f o r mo t iva t i ng workers

at aP1'1~veLs and in a l l s i t u a t l u n s ,

Katz a d Kahn (1966:IS) in c r i t i c i z i n g Herzbcrgrs

t heo ry were of the op in ion t h a t his two f a c t o r t h e o r y

was too fdea l l zed a l o g i c a l p r o p o s i k i o n to f i t t h e

psychologi&l c.ornglexities of the real world.

L a w l e r an2 p o r t e r ( 1 9 6 7 t 6 ) c o u l d n o t unde r s t and

the rationale b e h i n d the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n Herzberg.

To them each of t h e factors h:ghllghted by Herzberg

satf sfiers or dissst isf iers - can contribute to b a t h

satisfaction artrld bcnefits t h a t actually contr ibute

p o s i t i v e l y towards m o t l v a t f n g t h e worker t o improve

h i s p r o d u c t i v i t y .

Sk inne r (197%) is the foremost exponent of beha-

viaur rnodific~tim or t h e pasf t i v e r e i n f o r c e m e n t t h e o r y ,

The theory sta tes t h a t people can be motivated by

properly d e s i g n i n g their work mvi-ronment and rewarding

good pef formance . Skinner contend that behavimr can

be changed by c h m y i n g t h e e n v i r o n m e n t i n w h i c h one

f u n c t i o n s . This i s c a l l e d operant condi t ion ing . By

rewarding desired behaviour and ignoring u n d e s i r a b l e

Behaviour, an individual or a group can i n f l u e n c e

sthers in a d e s i r e d dirccrtion* Ovsr a period of time,

the reinTorced behaviour will tend to be repeated

w h i l e the unrewarded behaviour w i l l t end to d i s a p p e a r

and be extinguished,

Vroon (1954'1 s t a t e s t h a t t h e r e i s move to t o

motfvat im thm needs, t h a t a need w i l l fat motivate

an individual unless he has a strong p r e f e r e n c e for

the outcome of h i s actim (Valence) and u n l e s s h e

believes that the outcome will satisfy h i s n e e d

(expectancy)* The arguement s ta tes t h a t it is t h e

strength of onel s p r e f e r e n c e for a certain outcome and

m e r s e x p ~ c k a k i m s of a c h i e v i n g the autmrne t h a t play

an impor ta re i n mot ivat ion. 'This e x p e c t a n c y t h e o r y

h o l d s that a person w i l l work towards something,

Mcclel land (1962):119), developed a c o n c e p t of

motivation based on t h e human need f o r achievement,

He says t h a t people w i t h a h i g h n e e d f o r achievement

have a compelling desire for s u c c e s s and an equally

Intense fear of fai1ure.w What is most s i g n i f i c a n t

about need ach ievemen t theory IS Mcc.lel lmd" claim

that t h e achievement rnet ive can be developed and taught

to u n d e r a c h i e v i n g perscns a cjroirps i n v a r i o u s

cultures, I k c l e l l a n d and his res$ arch team have carried

out e x t e n s i v e experimm ts a d t r a f n i n g programmes in

the Uni ted States, I t a l y e Poland and I n d i a . In a l l

cases, khe $raining prcqrammes w e r e successful i n

i n c r e a s i n g i n d i v i d u a l need f o r achievement , The pro-

grammes emphas5zed prestige, t h e practicability of

effecting change a d teaching i n t h e language and

t h i n k i n g p a k t e r n s h i g h need achievers.

H i d - s md G u l l e t (1937 p.427-428) stated t h a t

r n o t i v a t l ~ ~ n c~m he e:i +.her positive o r nega t ive ,

Posbtfve m o t i v a t i o n , sometimes, c a l l e d l t anx ie ty - reduc ing

m o t l v a t i n n ~ ~ , c r the ' +car ro t approach, tt of fors something

valualbl~ to the person, Examples include pay, p r a i s e

and possibilfty of becoming a permanent employee as

rewards for a c c e ~ t a b l e performance. Negative motiva-

t im, o f t e n called the "stick approach," u s e s Or

threatens punlshfien t, Examples are reprimands, threat s ,

of belng f i red , i f id threats of dmmtlm i f performance

is unacceptable. Each t y p e has 5 t s place i n organi-

zatf.ms, depending on the sf tuatlon, Motivation i s

closely intertwined with bshaviour, and t h e r e are

many dlverse factors that affect it. The needs of the

i n d i v i d u a l a d the attitude of management are two of

the mas< frnportant.

Pigers and Myers (1984 p.383).

A number of f9rms have adopted a behaviour modifi-

cation approach, based on t h e ideas of psychologists

B.F. Skinner of Harvard University, P o s i t i v e rewards

such as praise or r e c o g n i t i o n of high performance have

been used fo r some years by h e r y A i r F r e i g h t , among

others, Co Increase sales along w i t h employees morale,

*Productivity Gains from a pat t h e sack,"

However, according t o S t r m b (1979) Mc C a r n i c k

and Ilgcr (1980) motivation is a spec i f ic subse t of

-22-

a t t i t u d e , w h i c h is in f ac t , t h e morale and a f f e c t i v e

response need by organisa t ; ion mmbers, Hence morale

and affective r e s p o n s e are the index o f m o t i v a t i o n .

~ a s t a s i (1979) s t a t e d t ha t an anployeefs atti-

tude or opin ion surveys r n i ~ h t , i n c l u d e q u e s t i o n about

work schedules, rake of pay, fringe bmefits , company

cafeteria and relati.cn t o s u p ~ r v i s o r ,

2.3 Mot iva t ion - and O u t p u t :

Smith et, a1 (135~: 15-29} discussing the i m p o r t a n c e

of morale tovards d ~ t e r n t n i n g t i l ~ l e v e l of p r o d u c t i v i t y

of ar7 employee on t h e job, skressr 3. t h e term u s u a l l y

referred ko as sn attitude o f satisfaction w i t h , o r

d e s i r e to c o n t i n u e in' and willingness 'to strive for t h e

g o a l s of a p a r t i c u l a r group or Organisat ion '* , They

noted that in ,my o r g a n f s a t i c n , i f h i g h mora le of the

employee is important because p l m t output and effi-

clency or' operation depends upon employee co-opr-rakion

i n attaining necessary o u t p u t standard. High morale

accordlny to thorn is alsa iinwrtant b e c ~ u s e of the

i m p l i c a t i o n s of Low morale for industrial c o n f l k t .

F l i p p o (1983:294) recommends that fringe b e n e f i t s

must have an objec t lvc I n any organisa t ion , according

-234

t o h i m , whether l e g a l l y Imposed by state or federal

l e g i s l a t i o n , i n c h d e 'in t h e con tract 0 5 m employment

o r i n s t i t u t e d by management as wish f r inge b e n e f i t s

m u s t have an o b j e c t i v e , the utmost of w R i c h must be t o

enhance l o y a l l y , reduced La?:!lztlr t t ~ r n o v e r and increase

p m d u c t i v i t y / o u t p u t ,

Fe inberg (1965) in h i s o:.n dIscussim on t h e

importance of r n o t i v a t l m as a to61 1R the hmds of

mmagement , f o r irnprovirlg employee productivl tylout-

put , c o n c e n t r a t e d on t h e 1 c a d e r s h L q function w i t h i n

organisatLon s, He observed that managers a d s u p e r -

visors ( L i k e 1-Tcqrqor) eqn t rbbu ted to t h e p o s i t i v e

or negat ive orgrmisatfonal c l i n a t c p r e v a l e n t i n orga-

zations by t h e way t h e y t r e a t t h e i r e m p l ~ y t e .

Feinberg was of the view t h a t the pr imary means for a

supervisor -0 motivate h i s subordLnakes I s to show

t h a t he is conscious of t h e i r needs, ambftions, Fears

and t h e f a c t t h a t each person in the group 1s an

i n d i v i d u a l r

focu~sing on supervision as a means of

improving employee p r o d u c t i v i t y / o u t p u t by i n c r e a s i n g

h i s moralc Kate - et* _. d. t h e i r experiments

-24-

co rpo ra t ion i n United S t a t e s QE America, discovered

t h a t t h e a t t i t u d e s and behaviour of £erst l i n e

supwviadrs those c l o s e s t t o the rank and file of

employees are i m p o r t a n t factors in d e k ~ m i n f n g t h e

product iv i ty of a work group. T h e s e experiments re-

vealed t h a t t h e a t t i t u d e of employees towards

productivity could be i n f l u e n c e d posi t ivef y by super-

visors that adcptcd an employee c e n t r e d s s t y l e of

leadership r a t h e r than a purely product ion - centred

I f e c h u k w (1977: 39-421 argued t h a t p r o d u c t i v i t y

of t h e ' ~ i g e r i a n Workers tend t o be g e n e r a l l y low

because t h e Nicerim worker i s n o t public r e l a t i on

Conscious+ He does n o t see h i s work as a c o n t r i b u t i o n

of t h e overall progress of h i s o r g m i s a t i o n or the

s o c i e t y as a whale but merely as a means of ea rn ing

his LiveLihood. Hodever he cmceded t h a t t h i s Is due

t o t h e influence of internal and external environ-

mental factors.

Ubeku (19751, in h l s analysis of the various

rnotivat imal theories put fordasd by the w e s t e r n

s c h n l a r s to a s c e r t a i n t h e p r a c t i c e a b i l i t y w i th in the

-2 5-

N i g e r i a n envirmrnenk, noted t i ia t they were n o t of

immedi ake relev&nce towards improving t h e product ivi ty/

o u t p u t of t h e Niger ian employee i n b o t h public and

private o r g a n i s a t i o n .

From t h e discussion so far, t h e r e i s no d o u b t t h a t

t h e productivity of employees i n an o r g a n i s a t i o n can

be improved th rough g r e a t e r i n c m t i v e s especial1 y

monetary rewards that will enable employees to meet,

to meet, t o a oreater extent the i r p h y s i o l o g i c a l and

o t h e r needs which d u e to lack of fulfilling them in

Nigeria, are key motivators when satisfied.

Whether monetary incentives are what Nigerian

employees n e e d , T h i s reskarch w i l l c1,osely go f u r t h e r

t o di scuss and a n a l y s e this p o i n t ,

3 e 0 BRIEF HISTORICAL EACKCZC ' * 3F THE SELECTED B ~ ~ E V ~ ' 31 EZ __I-

T h e t h r e e brevcries selected f o r t h i s s tudy are

L i f e Breweries, Fremier Sreweries and Diamond Breweries,

3 .I LIFE RREI.!ERIES - COI4PANY LIMITED .-* L i f e Brmeries Company O n i t s h a is locaked at

87/97 Port-Harco-~rt Road o n l t s h s , I t was i n c o r p o r a t e d

in 1974 w i t h a s h a r e c a p i t a l of H5.5 m i l l i o n , ~t was

a j o i n t wmturc b e t w e n 37 .hTigcriarls and FrtYlch

company (soCAFRINA)~ EIigerians owing 70% o f the shares

The share capi ta l as at t991 was MI m i l l i o n . The

company has a s t a f f s t r c n g k h of 279 e n p l o y e s . Cmc

cxpa r t r i a t e who i s the b o t t l i n g manager, 39 smior

s t a f f , 34 intermediate s t a f f and 205 j u n i o r s ta f f .

Present ly L i f c Brewcries Company Limited produces,

L i f e C o n t i n e n t a l Larger Beer, Gin Tonic and Savana

Pineapple d r i n k .

3 -2 P r e m i e r 9reyeries PLC.

Premier Bre:mries PLC O n i t s h a lccaked at i n d u s t r i a l

l a y o u t B r i d g e Head Cni t sha , was an o f f shor t of Golden

Guinea Bre3vddies Umuahia. The p l a n t star ted in 1974

-27-

but due to t h e skate creat ion in 1976, when t h e then

East C e n t r a l State was splited i n t o the old Anambra

S t a t e and t h e old Imo State the factory started formal

produckim in 1977, It was initially i n c o r p o r a t e d t o

brew Premier beer only,

P r e s e n t l y t h e factory produces Masters beer, and

MuLtfmaLt i n addi t lan t o t h e Premier beer, Premier

b ~ w e r i e s PLC has staff strength of 980 employees.

R e t a f l e d as fo1Lot~s: 64 Managers, 113 Supervisors and

foremen, B03* Occupational skillmen. The share capital

f o r the company was HlQrn in 1977 and I435 million in

1991* Out of the W35 million in 1991, 70% was fo r the

publ i c , 10% for the s t a t e s Anambra and mugu states,

207!, f o r NBCI (Nigerian Bank far Commerce and fndustry) . Finally the last 10% for N I D B (Nigerian ~ n d u s t r i a l

~ve lopmr3n t Bank );

Formerly, when Premier Breweries hadn* t gone

p u b l i c , government had Bm control i n w h i c h case they

send f fw (5) directors and appointed t h e c h a f r m m .

Presently government can only send one d i r e c t o r . The

AGM and t h e chai rman are appointed by the shareholders.

If-.

- -- . .

- . -.

I

PRE

MIE

R

BR

EW

ER

IES L

TD

OR

GA

AV

SA T

ION

- C

HA

R T

I B

OA

RD

OF

DIR

KT

OR

S 1 I

I

General M

anager

- C

ompany Secretary ri

I 1

I Assistant G

eneral hlattayer i

I (Technical)

i I

I L I

--I. -

Approved

organisation C

hart '1990

- i*. - .

3.3 Dimun-d B r e w - e r i e s L i m i t e d

Diamond B r e w e r ? G Limited a p r i v a t e l i m i t e d

l i a b l l i ' c y company s i t u a ' t e d a t 9th I4il .e C o r n e r , Nsude

Enuqu State s t a r t e d operation in October 1982, though

was i n c o r p o r a t e d i n July 1975. The company is in t h e

business of brewing b o t t l i n g , and market ing of beverages ,

Its products in ' c lude Monarch Extra l a r g e r b e e r - Monarch regular. beer, iliamalt - a RoPr -- a l c o h o l i c malt drink,

Hence t h e main Objective of the campany 2 s t o produce

and market alcohol ic bevcraees m d i t s r e l a t e d produc ts ,

The share c a p t t a l a t inception i s W8 million as a t 1987

and p r e s e n t l y in 2992 the share c a p i t a l i s s t i l l W8m.

The company has s t a f f strength of 362 employees which

a re d e t a i l e d as fo l lows : 54 rnmaqers, 53 supervisors

and 255 J u n i o r s t a f f . Among t h e manageflal l e v e l a r e

two expart r la tes. The G e n e r a l Manager and t h e

Technical Nan ag er . The organisa t ion c h a r t s enclosed, further i l l u s -

trate bo th t h e l i n e and s t a f f functions i n t h e various

organfsatims u n d e r study.

CHAPTER FOUR

RESEARCH M€THODOLOGY

Th i s chapter d e a l s with t h e d e s c r i p t l m 0 5 the

procedure adapted in c a r r y i n g out this research. I t

describes the research d e s i g n , the i n s t r m e n t for data

col3ect20~, tile population of the study, s a p l i n g

t e chn ique , sample size and t h e techniques of d a t a

analysis.

4.2 The Research Desiqn:

T h i s c o n s t i t u t e s t h e blue print for t h e collectiofl,

measurement and analysis of data, The methodology used

for the 'data c o l l e c t i o n comprise a desk survey and

ff e l d survey,

4 , Des-k survey: Secondary Sources.

desk survey was afmed at:

1. Xdmtify the var ious m o t i v a t i o n a l tools used by

the brewing i n d u s t r i e s to enhance p r o d u c t i v i t y ;

2, Examine the adequacy of these m o t i v a t i o n a l tools

offered by t h e brewing i n d u s t r i e s ;

3 , Examine the ex ten t to w5ich h i g h e r remuneratim

is regarded as the best preferred motivat ional tool

for workers;

4, Examine If the employees of the o r g ~ i s a t i o n s

s t u d i e d are s a t i ~ f i e d w i t h the csndltions of

service obtainable i n their r e spec t i ve organisa-

tf ons;

5. To ascertain the effect of boss-subordinate re-

l a t i o n s h l p on employee performance & work.

Towards t h i s end, the following companies were

consulted to1 obtain inforrnatlan:

(a) L i f e breweries company Limited Mitsha .

(bl Premiler Breweries PLC O n i t s h a

( c ) Marnand Br?~derle~ Limited, 9th Mile Corner Nsude,

In addi t im to k h e in format ion abtalned from the

abovenamed sources , t e x t books were equally consulted

in the conduct of the study,

4.1.2 P r i m ~ r y Sources:

U k i l i z l n g the inforrnatlm collected from t h e desk

survey arid talclng due cognisance of the objectives and

goals of this study, the necessary ques t ionna ire s were

designed for data ~ ~ I l e c t L M h r The nature of this

study requires t w o seckidns of klw. questions namely,

(1) Employees q u e s t i o n n a i r e ellel t ing ir'tformation on

t h e rnotivatianaL tools applied in t h e various

compm2es.

(2 1 Management Interview questions e l i c i t i n g fn-

formation on t h e mot i va t i ona l tools i n t h e

various companies from t h e top managers,

4,1,3 F i e l d Survey:

The i m p o r t a c e of a properly e x e c u t e d field survey

to t h e success of t h i s r e s e a r c h i s ~bviaus, I n o r d e r

t o achieve t h e o b j e c t i v e of the survey, t h e following

methodqlogy was adopted in gathering information from

selected companies.

(1) Actual visits to t h e companfes

(if 1 Distrlbutfng me copy of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e t o a

propxt imal number of employees in the various

sectims of t h e company ~ i s i t e d t o ensure radod-

zat ion and calle~tion made, and If t h i s was n o t

feasible, the copy of t h e questionnaire was later

'collected,

Atring each v i s i t attempt was also made to hold

discussions with the personnel managers d i r e t l y

involved i n the d a i l y p e r s o n n e l management of t h e

companies u n d e r s t u d y , In some cases r e f err&, was

made to o t h e r top managers in some other s e c t i o n s and were

a p p r o p r i a t e i n f o r r n a t i o n / c o l l e c t e d ; I

4 - 2 f n s t r u m ~ n t For Data Colleckim:

The i n s t r u m e n t u s e d for c o l l e c t i n g d a t a f o r t h i s

study was t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e . The design i n c l u d e d f i l l -

in, opw-ended, s t r u c t u r e d , r n u l t i p l e c h o f c e d and

d icho to rn i sed q u e s t i o n s , The q u e s t i o n s were c l e a r l y

simplified and s t r u c t u r e d i n a way devoid of any

mbfguity nnb t e c h n i c a l d e t a i l s .

Thus mcst of t h e questions s l m p l y r e q u i r e d res-

pondents to tick (4 ) a g a i n s t t h e a p p r o p r i a t e r e s p o n s e ,

I n all, t h e was made u p of two s e c t i o n s .

Section A, the employees personal data and s e c t i o n B

t h e employees working conditLons. T h e r e i s also i n t e r -

view quest ions fo r the top management.

4.3 Populakian :

The populat ion for t h e study i s made u p of t h r e e

brewing companies namely: The Life Breweries Company

L i m i t e d Cnitstta, P r e m i e r B r e w e r i e s PLC O n i t s h a and the

Diarn~nd B r e w e r i e s L i m i t e d 9 t h M i l e Corner Nsude Enugu.

The population s i ze is put a t 1,621.

4 +4 Samplinq and Samplinq -Technique:

Stratified random sampling technique was used to

cornpose t h e r e s e a r c h subjects of t h i s study, namely

t h e employees of the three Breweries. I n order to have

a proportima1 representation of t h e employees in the

three breweries, c o p h s of the q u ~ s t fonnaises were

administered among t h e female and male employees i n

the r a t l o of I t 5 in L i f e Breweries, 1:7 i n Premier

Breweries @Id 288 in Df amasld Brmeries. The t o t a l

number of employees sampled was 321,

Breweries , No. of NO, emplo- . sampled f Ratio yees

1

L i f e 279 I 5 5

P r e m i e r 980 194

Dl amm d 1 362 72 ' 1:8

/ 1621 321 T o t a1 7 1

4.4,1 m p J . z a : - The sample s i ze was f i n a l l y constikuted based on

' the f o l l m s i n g unbiased estimated method (Njoku, 1930,

pa401

where

n = 2 Iclu(e)

n 3 s a m p l e s i z e

N = population s i z e

e = prapdrtiorl of sampling error

(0.05 i n t h i s case).

Thus,

This

4.5

A 321 - corresponds to a sample proportion of:

Techn iques of Data hs lys i s ; I-

I n the data analysis the following statistics were * 2

used. Chi-square ( r! ) t e s t was applied at both 5% and

1% and 1% s i q n i f i c a n k levels to t e s t Hypothesis 1, 3

and 4.

Two-way h a l y s i s of variance test (AMOVA) wan

applied at 5% s i g n i f i c a n t l eve l t o test h y p o t h e s i s

2 and percentages.

Chf-square was used to test i f the o p i n i o n s of t h e

employees I n t h e three o r g a n i s a t i o n s r e g a r d i n g t h e

adequacy o f the r n o t i v a t i m a l tools differ , significantly

for hypo thes i s 1.

Analysis of variance ( A ~ o V A ) was used to v e r i f y

if there was any s i g n i f i c a n t d i f fe rence in employees

m o t i v a t i o n a l response among the three brewing companies

w i t h regard to khe use of higher pay as t h e best

pref &red motivational fool for workers fo r hypothesis 2 ,

Chi - squa re w a s also used t o verify i f there was

any s i g n i f i c a n t difference in the employees s a t i s f a c t i o n

with t h e c o n d i t L m 3 OF service i n t h e three o r g a n i s a t i o n s

for hypothesis 3 a d also to v e r i f y i f t h e r e was any

s l g n l f i c a r l t dif fercnce in workers response r e g a r d i n g t h e

effect of boss-suSordinate re1 ationship on employee

p e r f o r m a n c e a t work, for hypothesis 4.

P e r c e n t a g e s were used t o test f o r o ther q u e s t i o n s

not covered by the hypothesis in the course of the

study as were stated in the quest ionnaire .

CHAP-TER F I V E

5,O jlCPR%EWTATION- AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

This c h a p t e r d e a l s w i t h the p r e s e n t a t i o n of d a t a

used t o t e s t t h e h y p o t h e s i s , The f i n d i n g s from t h e

s tudy t h a t were not e x p l a i n e d by the hypokhesis

formulated are presented first folLowed by the t e s t s

of the h y p o t h e s i s . The presentation f a l l s i n t o two

s e c t l m s . Section A d e s c r i b e s the personal data o f

the respondents, w h i l e Sectim B d e s c r i b e s t h e issues

investLgated by t h e study,

5.1 --- Structure And Characteristics qespmdent Companies

D a k a showil'tq sex d i s t r l b u t i - o n of t h e canpm.ies -- Curnpany

L

Sex Ik L i f e I Premier Diamond L No. of Respon- dents

% , -

N o , of Respon- % dents-

* I No, of 1 ~ e s ~ o n - ~ % dents , 1

1

M a l e 46 83.6 168 1 86.6 64 'j 88,9 C

I 9 116.4 ' Female 1

26 { 13.4 j 8 , I

11+1

T o t a l j 55 T z o 0 . 0 72 200.0 I

Table 5.1.2 shows t h a t t h e male f o l k form t h e

major l ty o f the r e sponden t s as i n d i c a t e d by 83,6% i n

L i f e , 86,6% i n Premier and 88.9% in Diamond Breweries.

On the other hand t h e female respondents comprise 16-4s

in L l f e , 13.4% in Premier and 11.1% in Diamond Breweries,

Table 5.1.2. Age D l s t r i b u - t i o n in t h e Varfous Ccmpanies

- - - - - -

,F.R EFT3 ER DIAMON O

NO, of Respan1 % d W t s + I dent-s .

I t

Table 5.1.2 shows that t h e age range between 20-30

Below 20 1 m - 1 - i - I

20-30 50 90.9 1 155 1 19.9 1 60 1 8813

form t h e b u l k of the working population, fo l lowed by 31-

40 and 4 2 5 0 . The age r ange of 20-30 shows t h e f~llawlng

I

i n d i c a t i o n 90';s as in L i f e , 79.9% in Premier and

31-40 5 8

4

83.3% i n Diamond. Age range or 31-40 indicated 9.1%

13.4

6.7 CI

11*1

5.6 I

i n Life, 13.4% i n Premier and 11.1% in Diamond. 41-50

Total 55 I 100 1 194 1 100 72 1 I 0 0 >

age range ind i ca ted N i l i n Life, 6.7% in P r e m i e r and

5-67 i n Diamond. The research ind i ca ted t h a t n o worker

is above 50 years 2n tbe three companies from the

number sampled.

Table 5.T.3 pat a s howinq Dep-artmen t_al Diseri bu t i m of t h e company.

L %

'1 I i ! Accounts 1 16 i29.1 l9 I 9m8 1

12 65 k33.5 ;

product ion 42.

Adminis tsatkf t 12 58 129.9 8

Marketing I 22 33 17.0

Enqineerinq 3 5.5 -19 9.8 , 4 1 j::, :

55 . 1 i IOO / 194 1 100 I - 72

1 Total 4 I-00

T a b l e 5.1.3 shows t h e departmental representat ion

of the respondmts and their percentages which i s

representative enough,

Table 5.1,4 Dak-a. ,ahow_inq Academic Qual i f ica t ion of ti-LE ' 'orkers i n t h e V a r i o u s c o m p a n i e s ,

Academic W a l i f i c a t h n t - 7 ~ ~ 1 No, of

1 Respon 1 d e n t s I

FSLC/WASC/GCE I & C I T Y & GUILD 1 38

, % / -Re~-pQn / 'I I Reapon / % d e n t s I den ts

B i;

T&le 5.l.4 shows that t h e bulk number of workers

f a l l w i t h i n the ffrst 'and t h e second cateqories w i t h

a percen tage of 69.2% far Life Breweries, 56.7% f o r

Pfernier Dretreries and 88.8% for Diamond Breweries.in

I n a d d i t i o n 18,29%, 33,5% and 5.6% r e s p e c t i v e l y for the

three organisa t ionsl First degree and its e q u i v a l e n t

are 9, l$ , 548% and 5.6% respectfvely. I n Life 8reweries

3 -6s possess t h e M.B.A. none for Premier and Diamond

and n o Ph.D i n t h e popula t ion sampled,

Question;. .( l) of t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e in s e c t i o n B

reads :

Do you have m o t i v a t i o n a l tools i n your company,

Table 5+1.5 I n d i c a t e d t h a t the three companies a p p l i e d

motivational t o o l s on t h e i r employees as shown by t h e

percentage number of r e sponden t s as 83.6%, 68.1% and

68,1% r e s p o n d e n t s for Life, Premier and Diamond Breweries, C.

A p e r c e n t a g e of 16.4% f o r L i f e , 31.9% for Premler and - 31.9% for Diamond shows that motivational tools are

not applied i n t h e i r organisatiofl. This c o u l d mean?

t h a t t h e s e number do not u n d e r s t m d what m o t i v a t i o n a l

tmls arc.

Table 5.1.6

m e s t i o n (2 )

r4otivatianal Tools Applied in the th ree b r a a n i s a t i m s ,

From question humber (21, it is gathered that Life

~reweries Campmy Limited offered the fallowing fringe

bene f ik s to L t s employees,

Hnusing allowance/ f ree quarters Transport allowance

Leave and leave allowance

Pension a d gra tu i ty Overtime allawanee and salary advatscc,

Lorn t o staff payable within a s p e c i f i e d period,

Cash bmuses , lunch subsidy and medical services

and Public Relaklon materials

Free Issue of F i n i s h e d p m d u c t d of the eoppany,

Motorcyble and B l c y e l e advance

Premier Breweries PLC offers:

Housing a1 Bowanee, Insurance

Transport allowailce, Pension 8 Gratuity

Issue and Leave allowance

Free medical services, Inservice krainlf lg

subs id ized can teen services

Cash bonuses & Public Rela t i on materials facilities far sports and social a c t i v i t i e s

Essential cornmodf ties, overtime md call duty

allowmce.

Biarnond Brewer: es L i m i t e d o f f e r s :

Housing allowance, Transport allowance

L ~ a v e and leave a1 lowance, subsidized can t e e n

services, Pension and G r a t u i t y paid on r e t i r e m e n t ,

S h i f t a l lowance , free i s s u e of Seer and Diamalt.

Facilities for sports and social activities Public Relation materials, overtime a1 lowance

Table 5 m I r 7 m

Quest ion 3: Do t h e management a p p l y t h e s e tools on

t h e employees,

C o m ~ a n y PREMIER I D I k M m D Op' i ions . 9 No. o f ;

X

a

Table 5.1,7 shows t h a t the management apply these

motivational t o o l s on t h e i r w o r k e r s . T h e number of

r e s p o n d e n t s fo r the t h r e e companies r e s p e c t i v e l y stands

as 83.69 f o r L i f e , 90.2% for Premier and 59.7% f o r

Diemmd Breweries. on t h e nega'ctve s i d e , the number of

rr spondent~ stands as 16.4%, 9.8% and 40.31 r e s p e c t i v e l y

i n d i c a t i n g that either these group of workers a re not

s a t Z s f i e d w i t h t h e i r jobs or d i d n o t unde r s t and what

motivational tools meant.

Ques t i on 5 : How would you d e s c r ~ b a your working c o n d i t i o n g e n e r a l l y ,

COMPANY Canparty LIFE o p t i o n s No. 'of 1

Respon : 1 d e n t s I

1 O

Very safe 26 113.41

Safe I

URsafe 58 29.9 23.6

Ext remal y I u n s a f e I - m w -8 4 5.6

mn't: know 6*7 4 5.6

55 i, 100 3 194 1 100. 7 2 ; 100

Table 5,l.a shows that a large number of w o r k e r s described

t h e i r work ing c o n d i t i o n as general ly very safe and safe

w h i c h shows 50.977 f o r L F f e , 13.4% fo r Premier, 8.3% f o r

~ i a r n ~ n d and 40% for Life, 50% f o r Premier and 56.9% f o r

far Diamond r e s p e c t i v e l y , A small propo r t i on of workers

described their worklng cvnditim as generally unsafe,

extremely u n s a f e and a f e w were undecided.

Question 7; For how long do you p l a n t o remain i n this 0

o r g a n i s a t i o n ,

* good number of workers were undec ided as t o how

l o n g t h e y w i l l rernain i n t h e s e o r g a n i s a t i o n . A few

number of workers stated that they w i l l leave as soon

as t h e y a re able t o g e t a new job which is better t h a n

what they have a t t h e moment,

Table 5.2.9.

Question 8 : How often are the motivational too ls

Everyday 14

Once a wedk 5

once i n a month 26

Once in a year 34.7

N o t a t a l l - 13.8 - - - I

TOTAL 55 100 [ 194

TaSle 5*1.9 shows that t h e m o t i v a t i o n a l tools are

a p p l i e d ?o rsrkers i n Life breweries on the f o l l o w i n g

basis. i n t h e f o l l o w i n g p r o p o r t b n everyday 25.5% o n c e

a week 9,1%, once a month 47,2% and once a year 18,2%

respectf v d y In the varlous sec tLons /depar tments i n t h e

Premier b r e w e r i e s app ly mo t iva t ima l tools on

workers i n the f o l l o w i n g p r o p o r t i o n 16.5%, 20.1%,

33,5%, 20,1% anand 8.8% r e s p e c t i v e l y .

Diamond Breweries apply i t s own i n t h i s p r o p o r t l o n

Generally t h e motivaticmals t o o l s are a p p l i e d i n

t h e s e varinus cornpanfes mainly once I n a month and o n c e

i n a year,

Quest ion 9: How many of t h e motivational t o o l s i n c r e a s e productivity.

S p e c i f i c a l l y h i g h e r pay and good working environ- of

m e n k i n tems/_boss -subordinate r e l a t i o n s h i p increase

praductivLty of workers,

Table 5,l.'

Quastion 10:. . What is the kind of R e l a t i o n s h i p that - ,

e x i s t between you and y o u r boss,

~xce ' l l cn t

Cordial

d u s t cord ia l

Not cu rd i a l

M n l t knot$

Table 5,~.10 shpws t h a t i n Life.breweries the

r e l a t i o n s h i p t h a t e x i s t s between t h e workers and t h e i r

boss stands as E x c e l l e n t 30.%, Cordial 63.6?&, J u s t

cordial 5.5% r e spec t ive ly . This Could be a t t r i b u t e d to

t h ~ fact t h a t L i f e Breweries is a p r i v a t e company,

Premier breweries shows t h e following p r o p o r t i o n 16,5%,

Dimand shows 5,6%, 70.8% and 23.6% r e s p e c t i v e l y ,

The workers i n the t h r e e o r g a n i s a t i o n m a i n t a i n a cordial

r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h t h e i r boss i n t h e following p r o p o r t i o n

63.6% fo r Xfe, 59,8% far Premier and 7Qm% for

Dl amon d brewries . Table 5.1.11

mestLon 22: What is your work load,

C ~ M P A ~ J Y

COMPANY P-R EP'II ER DLANOrr D

OPTIONS 1 No. c.f r( No, of I: Respon ' % Respon 1 % d e n t s I dents I

I

S I Overlaad i 26 / 47.3 65 1 33.5 i ' 19 : 26.4

M~derate j 27 149.1 129 1 66.5 5.1 70.8 t Not over loaded / 2 1 3 . 6 j .. - 3 1 2 2m8

I

D M I ~ t know I , - I I - I - 1

I

TOTAL 72 200

Table 5.1.11 shows that the work load of workers

is c f t h e r overleaded or moderate in the following

percentages 47.3% and 49.1% for L i f e breweries, Premier

breweries 33.5% and 66,5%, Diamond breweries 26.4% and

70*8% respectively. L i f e and Df amond breweries have not

over loaded as 3,6% and 2,B% respec t ive ly .

. . - I . .

Table 5.1.12 . . . .

mestion 13: I; e&ry employee given equal and fair

treatment ' w i t h others in a l l t h e

Y e s

1 dents f 1 d e n t s I

1: i I 1 i i 4s I St.8 1 5 i 3 Y 37 j 5 L . 4

Table 5,1.12 shows t h a t in L i f e and Diamond

breweries,. h i g h e r proportion of workers 81.8% and

51.4% are of khe opin ion tha tevery employee i s given

equal and fair treatment while in Premier brewerlee;

63.4% were given unequal and u n f a i r t reatment and only

36.6% accepted to have enjoyed equal and fair t r ea tmen t

w i t h athers,

Qeast5.m 14: If y o u r answer for quest ion NO, 13 is No,

Give reasons,

T h e warkcrs gave t h e following reasms:

Differences in Academic qual i f ica t f on andlor

t e c h n i c a l knowledge

Individual differences

Preferential treatment

God f atherism

Same are in a more sk912ed jobs than others.

Table 5.1.13 shows tha t a greater p e r c e n t a g e of

workers said t h a t t h e i r job is c h a l l e n g i n g and self

f u l f i l l i n g . Showil as 94.5% for Life breweries, 56.7%

for P r e m i e r breweries and 62.5% f o r Diamond breweries.

The f o l l o w i n g proportion stated that their job is

manageable 5,5% for Life, 33+5%, for P E e m i e r and 23.6%

so far Diamond breweries o n l y a few em?loyees are of the

opl-nion that t h e i r job is d u l l and monotonr~us,

r ep resen t ly a perccnt~yc of 9.3 f ; r P r e m i e r 13.9% for

Premier 13 ,% for Diarnmd brmeries.

T a b l e 5.1.14

Question 47: Is y o u r p r c r n ~ t i o n b . x e d on:

COMPAN Y OPTICNS

M e r i t

Godf athertsm

Table S*lm'14 shows that prorl,otf&i:-is based on t h e

four o p t l o n s except in L i f e breweries where it is based

on m e r l t and G o d f ~ t h e r i s m in thc f o l l o x f n g proportLon

96.4% on m c r i and 3.T: cn Godfatherism.

Generally promoti-on in t he three organisation I s

m a i n l y based on n c r i t .

Table 5+1,1Sz

Question ZBt

The re a r e good prospec- k s fa r promo- tian Jcareer advancement:

In your apin lon , h m ~ would you

rate prcmot lm prospects career

There a r c no p r o s p e c t s

Table 5,1.25 shows that a large percentage of

workers are of the op in ion t h a t there are some prospects

b u t there Is need for irnprovenent, The proportian is

as foll0frOfrg 60% for Life breweries, 60.3% for Premier

breweries and 86.1% for Diamond brweries~

-5 7-

TE:SSTING QF RESEARCH ---a- HYPQTHESXS .

The t e s t i n g procedure uscd i s the

sampling t h e o r y mc :hod. I n accordance

c l a s s i c a l or

with the method

m e accep.ks or rej c c t Qn hy: -;.thesis based an t h e '\

sampling information only. S i n c ~ the sample n s e d for

the s t u d y varies soniewhst from i t s p o p u l a t i o n w e must

judQe whether o r not these d i f f c r c n c t e s are statistically

SignlficEtnt if there is good r c n s c n t o believe t h a t the

diffarmce does not r e p r e s e ~ t random sampling varj;+ions

~ R l y . In the following classical tests of s ign i f i c cmCe

t w o k i n d s of h y p o t h e s i s , the null and t h e alternative

are used. The nu l l h y p o t h ~ s i s i s u s e d f ~ r t h e testing:

The Adequacy n f the --- Motivationz'l Tools Applied For Hfqher O u t p u t In t h e Brcwiqs ----- Lnduztries:

Various motivatfl .ona1 tools, which i n c l u d e higher

pay and f r i n g e benef i t s , ere used in the brewing

i n d u s t r i e s t o enable workers a c h i e v e aptirnum producti-

vLty. The following table presents the r e s p o n d e n t s

a p i n l o n regarding the adequacy or otherwise of t h e s e

motivation a1 tools,

Agreed

M sagreed

bont-t know I 5 - - . I 6 8 31

'- 5 144 _ 72 _

F r m the above t a b l e m a j o r l t y of the respondents

in t h e three o r g a n i s a t i o n s agreed t h a t the m o t i v a t i o n a l

tools a p p l i e d f o r h i g h e r ou tng t are adequate. However,

an equal number of respondents i n the Premier Breweries

PLC disagreed with this viec4. Minori ty opinion, on

t h e o the r h m c t , h e l d varying ~ i e ~ r s c o n c e r n i n g t h e

adequacy of t h e z c not ivat lonaJ tools, The s i g n f f i c a n h e

of t h e s e differences i n opinions would be s u b j e c t e d t o

a s t a t i s t i c a l test.

Hypothesis I;

Hot The o p l n i ~ n s of t h e ~ p l c h y ~ e s i n t h e t h r e e

organisa t ions regarding the adequacy of t h e

m o t i v a t i o n a l tools dc n o t d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y

Hi z T h e opinions of t h e employees i n t h e t h r e e orga-

n i s a t i o n s reg;.rding the adequacy of t h e motiva-

t i o n a l tools d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y .

2 The chi-square (?.. ) t e s t will be applied at both

5% and 1% significant levels to test the hypothesis.

The d e g r e e s of freedom I d - f ] i s d e t e r m i n e d from

the formula:

where

C 3 khe nunher of cd.urnns

r = t h e number of rows

Decision - Ru 1-e :

Accept the null h y p o t h e s i s i f the c a l c u l a t e d chi-

square rate is less than that gat from t h e stat is t ical 1

table, otherwise reject.

The cr i t i ca l t e s t values frm t h e chl-square

table at: 5% and 2% s ign f f i cmk Ievcls md at 8 degree

of freedom are:

Calculated value:

Decislon : 2

Slnce the c a l c u l a t c d ~ of 63.600 ( s e e appendix 1)

is greater thm t h e crLtica'P t e s t values at both 5% and

1% s i g n f f l c - m t 'levels. Be reject the n u l l hypothesis

of no differmce. T h e r c f c r c , w e cc.lcIu* e t h a t t h e

regardfng thc ad,quacy of t h e motivational tools d i f f e r

Some wor!:ers of t h e b r ~ ~ w i n g i n d u s t r i e s s t u d i e d

fe l t tha t hig3er pay represented the best: motivational

tool for then. Cn the other hand, t h e rest of t h e

workers f e l t t h a t h i g h e r pay cou ld r a t h e r serve as

the p r e f e r r e d motivational t o o l nor p r o v i d e enough

r n o t i v a k l ~ , required for h i g h e r o u t p u t . The f o l l owing

t a b l e presents the r e s p o n d e n t s o p i n i o n on this i s sue ,

I No, of Respondents i n Each C o y , . -- Respmse 3 1,rI.E -- PF:&iv;IEZ 1 DX.AMCIU D

I 1

From .the table , major i ty of the rkpondents

r e m d n e s t r o n g l y agreed t h a t h i g h e r pay ?he b e s t

Strongly agreed 26 1

i I 33

Agreed i 12 I 97 I 3 1 71 t

preferred m o t i v a t i o n a l tool for workers. Cn t h e other

hand, m i n o r i t y of t h e m s p ~ n d e n t s e i t h e r agreed o r dis-

2 4

2

' 72

Strongly disagreed Disagreed

agreed to kh4s view. The significance of t h e s e

I

0

17 j 26

d l f f e r ~ n c e s in t h e opinions of t h e r e s p o n d e n t s would

D o n ' t know 1 0 0 I - 1

T Q T A L . . I . 5 5 - 1 I T - 4 -

be subjected to a s t a t i s t t c a l t e s t ,

Hypothesfs 2:

Ho: T h e r e 1s no significant difference in employees1

motiva t iona l response ainong t h e three brewing

cornpmies w i t h regard to the use of h i g h e r pay

as the best preferred motivational tool for

workersm

H2: T h e r e is s i r j n i f i c e n t d i f fe rence in eiaployeest

rn~tPvatXmet1 response m m g t h e three brewing

com?anies w i t h regard tb the use of hZqher pay

as t h e bests preferred t r t ~ t i vc t t l ona l :+&I ?or

workers.

The tido-way a n a l y s i s of vari mce [,'NOVA) t e s t

will i>@ a p p l i e d at Sf< s i q n i f t c a n t level to test

the hypothesis (see a p p m d i x 2).

B e t w e e n Response sum of squares or between r w s IBSSR),

Between compmies sum of squ sres or Setwem colurnns

Between cornpxtics -stun of squares or 5etween columns

Table 5.1,TB

ANOVA T a b l e ( s e e ap?endix 2 for details) l-- -T-- I 1 u

Source of DmFr j Sum of , Mean

V a r i a t im Squ.ares Square . R a t i o

B e t w e e n 1 I 1

Response 1 4 6313-5 1 I

4 1 i companies 3.25

'

~ e s i d u d l f 8 i2826.4 1353.3 i q

Decision RuLe:

Accept t h e null h y p o t h e s i s [Ho] if the c a l c u l s t e d

F- value Ts less t h a n t h e critical va lue Of F otherwise

reject 140.

The c r t t i ca l t e s t v a l u e s from t h e F - B i s t r i bution

table at the 5% significant level are:

Between Response:. I?(0.05)4,8 3.84

Between companies: €(0.0512,8 = 4-46

Decis ion:

[ I 1 Between. Response:.

Observed F = 1578.4 -*- 353.3 = 4-47

C r i t i c a l value f o r t e s t P (0,0534,8 = 3,84

The observed value of F f a l l s o u t s i d e t h e accept-

ance region for t h e test: and t h e r e f o r e r e p r e s e n t s a

s i g n i f i c a n t resul t. 9!e re jesk L i ~ e n u l l h y p o t h e s i s and

c o n c l u d e that the differences in t h e mylqrees o p i n i n n s ,

r ega rd ing higher pay as bes t preferred m o t l v a t i m a l

tool far workers, are s i g n i f i c a n t ,

Observed F = 1149+8 1 3.25 x3-3-

Critical v a l u e f o r test: F10.0~)2,8 = 4,46

T h e observed value of F f a l l s within the acceptance

region a n d thercfvrc r c p r e s e n ts a n o n - s i g n i f i c s n t r e s u l t ,

We accept the ndSl hypothesis and c o n c l u d e that t h e

differences i n o p i n i o n s among f ie three companies

emvloyecs, r e q a r d i n g higher pay as b e s t preferred

m o t i v a t i o n a l tool for workers, are n o t significant.

The observed d i f f e r e n c e s may ba attributed random "

o f sznpl r lng variations only.

Employees S z i i . s f a c t i o n >!itil t h e C o n d i t f ons of Service - --I--- ~n their o = n l s a t i c n s . -.. - -

Sornekimes workers in a p a r t i c u lar o r g a n i s a t i o n I V P ~

n o t b e s a t i s i i e d w i t h t h e entire cmditims of service

i n t h e i r org=mlsat ion, I n the three brewinq com?anias

covered in the st- . tdy, some of the r e s p o n d e n t s feel they

a r e s a t i i s f i e d w h i l e others hr:ld a c o n t r a r y view:

The fulLm!lng t a b l e presents the employees p e r c e p t i o n

of the service c o n d i t i o n s i n their o r g a n i s a t i c n .

loyees S a t i s f a c t i o n Wi-th The Conditions - Of Serv ice i.n- T'ne i r O r q a n i f__ .--

- COMPAN Y

A PREMIER I DIANCN D I I

Frnm t h e table, majority of the e ~ 2 l o y e e s i n t h e

w i t h the conditions o f se rv ize i n c h e i r o r g a n i s a t i o n .

-66-

On the o t h e r -hand, m a j o r i t y of ti^^ workers in the

Premier and Diamond breweri 2s fe l t dissat i s fLed, T h e

s l g n i f t c a n c e of t h e .differenzes in einployees percept ion

of t h e service c o n d i t i o n s would be subjected to a

s t a t i s t i ca l test.

H y p o t h e s i s 3: --

T h e r e is no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r m ~ e i n the employeesm

sa';isfacticn w t t h t h e conditions af scrvfce in the

There is s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e LR tlhe e r n p l o y e ~ ~ '

sa t i s f ac t ion w i t h the c o n d i t i o n s of service i n t h e

tllrec orgmisat : ions . 2

Tine chi-square IX. ) t e s t t ~ i J . 1 be applied a t b o t h

DecisLon Rule:

Accep t k h e ' n u l l - h y p o t h e s i s i f the c a l c u l a t e d

ch i - square valu& is "1 ess than t h e 'tabu1 ar chi -squ ,332

value, othe.wisc reject,

The critical t e s t values from t h e c h i - s q u a r e taSle

at 5% and 1% s i g n i f i c a n t l eve l s and a t 2 degrees of

freedom are:

C a l c u l a t e d $2 value:

= 50.077 (see append ix 3 for d e t a i l s ) ,

Decision:

Since t h e c a l c u l a t e d 2 of 50.077 (see a p p e n d i x 3 )

is greatcr than the critical test values a t b o t h 5% &?d

1% s i g n i f i c a n t levsls, we reject the null hypothesis of

no d i f f e r e n c e . Therefore, w e c o n c l u d e that there i s

significant d i f f e r e n c e b e t w ~ m satisfied and d i s s a t i s -

fied w o r k e r s w i t h regard t o the conditions of s e r v i c e

in t h e i r o r g & i s a t i o n s .

The ~f f-cct of Boss-Subordinate Relatlonshlp on Work Perf orinars cc . )_-

Apar t from the factors which bear d i r e c t l y on

workers p r o d u c t i v i t y , some invisible factors, such as

boss - subord i r l a t e relationship, may also a c c o u n t for l o w

or high productivity of workers. In the t h r e e Srewing

companies mvercd in this study, some of t h e workers

c l d m e d t h a t boss s u b o r d i n a t e relationship does n o t

affect their work performance w h i l e son~e others h e l d

a contrary view. These d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e response of

t h e two cakegories of workers would be s u b j e c t e d to a

s t a t i s t i c h l tes t ,

T h e f a l l o w i n g tab le p r e s s n t s the response of t h e

workers HI t h e a b ~ v e i s s u e .

Table 5.1.20

Effect -- of Bass-Subordinate Relationship on Work Performance

-

I COMPANY 1 P R EPI'l: ER I LlIAF.CN 3 - -1

Fron t h e t q D l e , m a j o r l t y 05 t h e respondents i n

the Pre:nizr and Diamond brewrries claiined tha t Soss-

subordinate r e 1 a t i m s h j . p affects t h e i r performance a t

w o r k whlle major i ty o;C t h e r e s p o n d e n t s in L i f e breweries

Ltd, c la imed it does not, On the o the r hand, r a j o r l t y

of t h e respondents in P r e m i e r anb Diamond Steweries

c l a i n e d t h a t Eass-subordinate r e l a t i o n s h i p does n o t

a f fec t t h e i r work pcrforrnmce while in t h e L i f e

breweries t h e c a n t r a r y was the case. These difference

i n w o r k e r s respmze would be subjected to a statisti-

c a l t e s t as f c ~ l 2 o ~ s :

Hypothes is 4:-

Ho:

HI:

T h e r c is no significant d i f f e r e n c e i n workers

response regarding the e f f eC t of b o s s - s u b o r d i n a t e

r e t a t i o n s h i p an employee p ~ r Y c ~ r m a n C e a t w o r k ,

T h e r e is s i g n i f i c a n t d i f fercnce in v ! e r k ~ r S (

resp:lsc regzr4ing the el'fcct 0 5 S a s s - S ~ S o r 5 i f l a t c

rcl a t i c n s h i p on ern~loyeo per Forrnance at w o r k . 2

The c h % - s c ; u ~ e (x ) t e c t will be a p p l i e d a t b o t h

where,

c = the number of columns

r = kke number of rows

Thus,

Decision Rgle: .

Accept t h e null h \ l p o b h c s i ~ if t h e c a l c u l a t e d c h i -

square va lue i s less t han t h e t a b u l a r chi-squsre value ,

otherwise reject.

T h e c r i t i c a l test values from t h e ch i - square tab le

at 5% a n d . 1 ~ s i g n i f i c a n t levels and at 2 degrees of

freedom are:

2 *(0.05,2)

Decision :

value: K

= 23.701 (see appendix 4

f o r details).

S i n c e the calcula ted chi-square g) v a l u e . of

23.701 (see a p p e n d i x 4 ) is greater khan t h e c r i t i c a l

te5t values a t b o t h 5% arid 1% s i g n i f i c a n t levels, w e

reject; the n u l l hypothesis of n o difference. There-

f o r e , w e c o n c l u d e t h a t there is significant d i f f e r e n c e i n

workers r e s p o n s e regarding the effect of boss-

s u b o r d i n a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p wl employee p ~ r f o r m a n c e at

work.

M~maqernent I n t e r v i e w Quest ions For the Three Companies.

1, What is the objective of t h e company

L l f E. P r e m i e r - 1 Diamond -

2, What are t h e c o n s t r a i n t s f a c i n g your p r o d u c t i o n

P r o f i t .maximiza t ion 1 Profit rnaxirniza- p r o f i t rnwirniza- and o f f e r of m?loy- t i o n and o f f e r t i c n and o f fe r

system?

men t , ,

L I F E

; employment t o of m p l oymet I t ' i n d i v i d u a l s , o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o

p s p l e .

S h o r t a g e a E raw m a t e r i a l s &Id problem of gettbng enough f o r e i g n exchange 1 eads to h igh cost of p r o d u c t i o n ,

Foreign exchange s c a r c i t y , pro- blem of s p a r e p a r t s , i m ~ o r t r e s t r i c t i o n on raw m a t e r i a l & spare-par t s , Ageing m a c h i n e s mast of w h i c h break down i n - t e ~ m i t H I t L y

D I A M m - D -

High cost of s p a r e - p a r t s due t o SAP. S h o r t a g e o f raw m a t e r i a l s , 90% are locally sourced. High cost o f ch&mical s e,g enzyme Ter- m m y 1

3 , Do you have E x p a r t r i a t e s i n y o u r company

4, What are t h e i r condition of service as compared

w i t h their Nigerian c o u n t e r p a r t s .

LL FZ ! PREMI EE 1 DI AMEN D

LIFE ! PREMIER 1 - DIAMOND

Yes

His condition of . serv ice i s q u i t e d i f f e r e n t . H e i s an c o n t r a c t , H e i s t h e b o t t l i n g manager.

No I Yes

DIAMON b B R S J E R I ES

1 Two e x p a t r i a t e s , The General Manager

E x p a r t r i a t e 1 N i o e r i a n -counterpart

I I

and t h e T e c h n i c a l Manager, They have better c o n d i t i o n of s e r v i c e than t h e i r

Loaned car Pay fo r accommodation g i v m by t h e company, Buy h i s food/ sometimes s u b s i d i z e d . Much lower pay, F r e e t r a n s p o r t o n l y f o r cormany's b u s i n e s s p u r p a s e s I

M i q e r i a n counter-

Free c a Free accommodation F r e e food Higher pay ' i n form o f expatriate q u o t a Free t r a n s p o r t to evaryr:movernent i n c l u d i n g a i r flight to home and back,

I

5 . me5 the source of raw mater ia l affect y w r productivity?

L I F Z

Y e s , Grains if not properly t & e n care of due to weather, can affect yLeld a n d

-a= praduct~vity. I, it is scare, the cost of product ion will be high .

a f f e c t y i e l d s raw m a t e r i a l s

p r o d u c t i m , expens ive ,

I

i 6, How docs ti-,e problem w i t h you," i n f r a s t r u c t u r e s

affect, your level of productivity.

= 2 - -

!4hen PIEPA is off Genera to r will h c on, t hough cannot carry a l l t h e p l a n t s and e q u i p - m e n t ~ .

L . .. - *.-

T h e r e b y af C c c t i n g p ro i f !~c t i v i t y / J j . t l ~ ~ ~ l t ?.v~tcr there will be no produc t ion . phone is very e s s e n t i a l it saves t i m e arid money.

Power ZaL lure I Genera to r s affects m a c h i n e s a d availaSle, do pr:~t i!~ct i~t l is at a no t s u s t a i n s tand s t i l l and ! P r aduc t ion at a l l affects t h e company* s, times v3en N EPA prafitaSility,

- 1 1 . 1 - L . \ I . d . . - -

i4ater is vcry im- lack of treated p o r t ant f o r produ- water i n c r e z s i n g &ion. Phone equal ly cost o: p r ~ d u c t i o n is a :aster ~nsans because t h e y h a v e of com:wn icct Lon, to tre%3t theLr a n d saves cost. water Lcforc use.

]Lack oi adequate ' teiephofle services crcates c o ~ r n u n f - c a t i 2 n gap Set- ween worktzrs and

I cus tocers i v n c e , resultin; to fie- - qu en e ~..mc;ilen t 0 f S k a f f ; ~ a r t i c u l a r i y pPm1ucCLi~n s t a f f ,

7 . How do yua f i n a n c e your p r o j e c t , 10c:lly or i n t e r n a t i o n a l y

L I F E 1 PRE!n.ER - DIAKCN D

~ o t h , though i t L o c a l l y : 8 r w t e c h Both l o c a l l y depends l a r g e l y on Germany of5ers (a) throi- igh i n t e r - the type of project / t e c h n i c a l a d v i c e n a l l y g e n e r a t e d b e i n g e x e c u t e d , I and' m a i n t e n a n c e , rever.ue/reserved

f u n d (b) Bank ( loan. I n t e r n a -

l t i o n a l l y , Cc) Through overseas c o r r e s p o n d e n c e . Banking and ouk T e c h n i c a l partner- S t e l l a h r t o i s , Belq i i~m.

8. How f n r ris y o u r company af Fected by g o v e r n m e n t pol ic ies m d tarriffs, Xhat s t e p s do you take t o overcone t h e effect.

LIFE 1 P F,EMI ER 1 DI AMON D I

Source of rzw 1 Raw materials material i s main ly are rnainly locally and a few s o u r c e d l o c a l l y materials imporked 90% l o c a l l y a n d

Raw materials are l o c a l l y sourcedc Company pays huge t a x to g o v e r n m e n t

10% importation. 1 hence n e t profit i s a d v e r s e l y affected. Insolving t h e p r o b l e m ,

ties. a n o n - a l c o h o l i c beverage D i a m ~ l t was developed w h i c h i s not t a x a b l e , I n - creased other sources of r e v e n u e t h a t 9s n o t f r o m the com- p a n y end product.

C C

9. Is t h e market far your p r o d u c t s r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e , how do you market y o u r p roduc t s .

[ OIANON D

! Yes, D i s t r i b u k e d / t h r o u g h mainly (a) 1 W h o l e s e l l e r s (b) I I R e t a i l e r s I c )

~ro rno t ion -E ,g Trade f a i r s .

LI FE I P R_E' T_ER

TO. Plhat: are t h e m a r k e t i n g p r o b l e m e n c o u n t e r e d , and how do y w e l i m i n a t e them,

Y e s , Markets th rougl - m a i n l y (a) D i s t r F - b u t a r s (b) Special o u t l e t s . ( c ) P . R . Sales

L I F E DI hMCN D

Yes , P r o ? tcts arc mzrke ted through

:: various d i s t r i - bu t i v e ch -mne l s (a) D i s t r L b u l o r s (5) S e n s i t i v e

o u t l e t s (c) P . R . s a l e s

Problems:-packaging 1 P r c h l y s : Tran- Hakeria l s, tran- Fortation s p o r t 2 Raw I Lack of c!eliv- m a t e r i a l s erv vzn, Lack

I ( d ) - d e l i v e r y ,

I S o l u t i o n :-Making 1 of spare p a r t s n e l z e s s s r y and ! to r e p a i r t h e adequate- arrange- vehi- m e n t to p r o c u r e j cles. them. 1 s o l u t i o n : Many

i c u s t o m e r s collecf t h e i r quota

! from t h e cornpmy Some spare- parts are

; l o c a l l y manu- f a c t u r e d a t 1 N n w l .

) -- Problem: Lack of I d e l i v e r y v a n s , Inefficient distri- bution s y s t e m Pricing policy n o t e f f k i e n t . Mismanage- m e r ~ t s of fund, Lack of a w a r e n e s s ' of the pr?oductsm

I Solution: C r e a t e I * - mare awareness

t h r o u g h t h e use of 1 e l e c t r o n i c media &

B i l l boards. Empha- I s i z e on a d v e r t / m a r k e t i n g fo r t h e I f i n i s h a d proc iuc t s .

27.. What 5s the estimate of your monthly s t a f f salaries

LIFE f - PREMIER - 1 DIA MON D

12. Ilo you ham5 Personnel management p rob lems

LI-F E I P R E M I E R ) DIAMOND - I

13. What i s the k i n d of r e l a t i o n s h i p t h a t exist betwcen the mmaqmen-t and t h e i r employees

Yes, though n o t Yes, t hough of I i Yes . A p p r o p r i a t e prominent various c a p x i t L e s , p e r s a n n e l are not

S o ~ e have led t o usual 1 y employeed

I c . T s p e n s i c n o f workerd t h e r e f o r e p r o b l e m s

LIFE 1 PREMIER ? D I A M C N D i:

Very c o r d i a l / Just cardial [ C o r d i a l t

I I

14, Do your workers derive job sat is fact ion on t h e i r job.

are c r e a t e d . Irtade- quate incentive, overtime payment only t o Junior staff

,, Some p e r s o n n e l problems have l e d to

I s u s p e n s i o n of staff

1 5 * What a r e the m o t i v a t i o n a l t o o l s a v a i l a b l e i n y w r organisa t ion . Do they i n c r e a s e t h e o u t p u t o f your workers .

LIFE

Housf ng allowmcEs/ Free quarters Transpo r t al 204.vance Leave & l e a v e a l low- ance, Pwsicrr & G r a t u i t y , Overtine a1 louance, Salary advance, Loan and c a s h bonuses , Lunch subsidy, Medf cal services Public R e l a k i , M , ;, Free

t h e material 5 i s s u e o f finished

PREMIER

Housing a l l ow an ce I n s u r a n c e , Trans- p o r t allowance, Pension & gratui ty Leave & Leave a l l o w a n c e , Free medical s e r v i c e s Inservf ce t r a i n i n g su bsi dl zed can t em service. Cash bonuses, P u b l i c r e l a t i o n materials, F a c i l i t i e s f o r sports & social a c t i v i t i e s , E s s e n t i a l commo- di ti es , n w r t i m e allowance, and call duty allow- ance.

F a c i l i t i e s f a r sports arid soc i a l activ3. ties. Public Relatf on m a t e r i a l s and overtime and kilometre allowance.

These motS-vatimal tools increase workers1 autpu t l e v e l .

16. What is t h e work load of your workers

17 I n wha t manner do your workers express their leve of gr ievance?

LIFE PREMIER A DI AMON D

Overload and moderate Moderate 1 Moderate

Df AMQN D

Thrzrugh presehka- t i o n to Union l e a d e r s who channel same to

1 managcmmt , if the former cannot s o l v e t h e problem, Somet imes through c o m m i t t e e which l i e s between staff and t h e canteen workers/rnanaqer.

LX FE I - P R E M I E R

Normally through 1 Complain to

18, Haw do you replace e x i s t i n g vacancies in your

t h e i r supervisors -and u n i o n leaders, and thus to t h e i r Head af dcpa r tm~n t and m m a g m e n t i f there i s no s o l u t i ~ r

company.

t h e i r imm-diate boss. Who then c h a n n e l s it t o t h e rnaager t h e n to the manage- m e n t , if need be.

LIFE 1 PREMIER

Through normal recruitment p o l i c y ~dverkismenls and interview,

Through i n t e r n e 1 and e x t e r n a l adver t isem~,r l t , I n tcrnal adverks! through line movemcn t of workers from one department t o another,

D I & r n O N D

Through adverki - sement and interview.

19, M y w ever have s tock out, Haw do yacl g e t rid of i d?

Yes **Reorder ' s t o c k w , Under an extreme scarcity, barrow from sister brewery,

Yes "Makc c a s h purchases ( i . e w i t h o u t LPOs) Borrow from ' other brewer1 es.

20, HOPI do you compete with other larger beer in t h e market;?

LIFE 1 PR EMT ER ! DIAMCN D --. -

Favourable in some areas around ~ n u g u and unfavourable in some other areas outside the state,

Compete very effect ively a d inf act covers a wider area than others in market '

operation.

Favourably i n most areas,

CHAPTER S I X

6-01 SUMMARY, RECOMMm DATIONS AND CWCLUSION

I n this chapter, the f i n d i n g s a r i s i n g from t h e

personal research are sunmarfsed, F ~ l l m i n g the

summary, are t h e r e c m r n ~ d a t i ~ n s , conclusions and

sugpest:ons for further research i i n t h a t order.

In the summary that follows, t h e hypothesis are

discussed one after the c t i ~ e r and other items in t h i s

q u e s t i o n n a i r e and the interview q u e s t i o n s not covered

i n t h e h y p o t h e s i s t e s t i n g ,

6.1 . Summary of F i n d 1 nns-:

The answers t o t h e h y p o t h e s i s t e s t i n g are

presmted as fo l lows :

6.1.1. Hypothesis 1:

Table 6.1.16 I n d i c a t e d the varrous responses by t h e

employees of t h e t h r e e brewing Lndustries, The

hypothesis shows that t h e opinions of t l ~ e employees

i n the t h r e e o r g a n i s a t i o n s regarding t h e adequacy of

t h e m o t i v a t i o n a l t o o l s d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y .

6.1.2, Hypqthesl-s- 2:

Table 5.1.28. The two way h a l y s i s of various (ANOVA)

tested was used t o t e s t hypothesis 2, T h e r e s u l t of

t h e t e s t i n g shows that the d i f f e r e n c e s i n opinions

among the three companies~ employees regarding h i g h e r

pay as best preferred r n ~ t l v ~ t i m a l tool f o r workers

are not significant. The observed differences may be

a t t r i b u t e d t o rarldorn or sampling variations o n l y , It

i s easily discernable t h a t money be it salary, wages

or cash bonuses, holds a-great appeal. to the w o r k e r in

the Brewing f n d u s t r l e s s t u d i e d and would m o t i v a t e h l m

when &drninistered in t h e r r i g h t * d o s e ,

6.1.3 -'

Table 5.1.19 shows employee sakis fact ion with t h e

c o n d i t i o n s of service in their organisat ion, From the

t a b l e m a j o r i t y of workers in Life breweries are

sat1 sfied w i t h t h e c o n d i t i o n s of service in t h e i r

cornpanp. Most of the w o r k e r s in P r e m i e r and ~ i a m o n d

breweries show t h a t they a re dissatisfied with t h e

cond i t i on of service i n t h e i r company. A test ~f

t h i s h y p o t h e s i s 3 came o u t With C h a result t h a t t h e r e

i s slgnificmt difference between s a t l s f i s d and

d i s s a t i s f i e d workers with r e g a r d t o t h e c o n d i t i o n s of

service i n their o r g a n i s a t i o n ,

6.1.4 Hyp~thesls 4:

Table S,2.20 shows ef f ect of Boss-subordinate r e l a t i o n -

s h i p on work performance. + From t h e ' t a b l e m a j o r i t y of

w o r k e r s in Premier and Diamond breweries are of t h e

o p i n i o n t h a t boss-subordinate re1 a t i o n s h i p affects

their performance a t work w h i l e m a j o r i t y of worker in

L i f e breweries h o l d a c o n t r a r y view. T h i s was

subje;cted t o h y p o t h e s i s stat is t ical t e s t i n g and came

out with t h e r e s u l t t h a t there i s slgniff icant d i f f e r e n c e

i n workers response r e g a r d i n g t h e effedt of boss-

subordinate re1 a t i o n s h t p on employee performance a t

work.

The artalysis further shows t h a t t h e labour force

far the v a r i o u s companies are w i t h i n t h e age m g e of

20-40 years a d j u s t a f e w above 40 years,

Qua l i f i ca t i on wise, they arc mainly f irst degree

holders. and o t h e r qualLficat1ms below f irst degree,

Most of the workers arc of the opinEm that t h e i r

working environment i s q u i t e safe. T h e i r ptoblem is

the bettermmt of t h e i r condition of service, ~ o s t of

t h e workers rated promotion prospect and career

adva?cment very h i g h i n whfch case there a r e some

prospects but there is need for improvement.

6.2 Recommendation:

On t h e bas i s of the f i n d f n g s of t h i s r e sea rch ,

t h e following recommendation are proposed,

The management has to improve on the c o n d i t i o n

of service of Nigerian workers taking cognisance to

t h e goad c m d i t i o n of service for the e x p a t r i a t e s .

The various companies should improve on t h e i r

products and the marketing s t r a t e g y applied. They

should crcate more awareness for t h e i r company's

p r o d u t t s through a g g r e s s i v e promot ion t h r o u g h el e t h - !

n l c media, radio, newspapers, b i l l boards etc, There-

by making more sales and h i g h e r n e t p r o f i t .

The man agernent should e n s u r e cordi a l boss-subor-

dinate re1 a t i o n s h i p in t h e i r various o s g m i s a t i m ,

t o Increase p r o d u c t i v i t y and rnmimise p r o f i t since

t h e o b j e c t i v e s of these companies i s profit maximizat ion ,

The dissatisfied workers shou2b e x p r e s s t h e i r

grievm ces appropriately w i t h o u t involving them-

selves i n d e s t r u c t i v e d d ' w n s t r a t i o n . The existing

vacr?cies i n the v a r i o u s companies shh l ld be appropriately

rep1 aced,

The motivational tools applied in t h e var ious

companies should be made adequate fo r workers ' ,

to increase p r o d u c t i v i t y b The introduction o f any

incentive plan or service should be s e l e c t t v e r a t h e r

than on an aecross t h e board basis, Each organlsa-

t i o n should study the employees w i t h i n and apply what

they really need and not what i t appears to the

m a n agernmt they, want , Flllppo (1980) aptly described

it t h i s way, t h a t of s a k i ~ y f n g a real need, would

appear to b e too obvious to need statement. However,

many' t i rnes, b e n e f i t s have been i n s t a l l e d , only to b e

met with employee apathy on o u t r f ght . resistance. The

ego i n some managers has l e d them to belleve t h a t they

know what is b e s t for t h e i r employees, Though in t h e

langrun the reverse i s the c a s e .

6.3 Cm CLWS-IW

This s t u d y h a s been directed a t the evaluation

of motivat ional tools and t h e i r effects cn output I n

some selected brewing i n d u s t r l e s in Anambra and mugu

stakes.

"he study has been able to establish t h e following:-

1. The opinions of t h e employees i n t h e three organi-

s a t i ons regardSng the adequacy of t h e motivational

to& varies.

2, The employees of t h e three companies were of the

apir?iw t h a t h i g h e r pay i s the best m o t i v a t i o n a l t o b l .

Agreed 2 7 - Dlsag re~d 8

column t o t a l 134 I 72

20% Total, )II C o l u m n Tota l --.- G r a n m s T - -

Observed

St rong ly agreed 1 26 1-97 1 33 1 156

-a__.- -+ Agreed

I a 1 124 - 1 2 / '71 - - I Strongly - -

disagreed -- 4 Disagreed 17 1 26

Correction Terfl, T 2 - - -

1Y

YES 65 3 1 I 144

NO 129 41 177

C0LUW.C 55 194 7 2 3 21

TOTAL - -.--+_-. -+*- --- _- -L- -

w h e r e , ei

Observed ' Frequ FP-cvloj)

w h e r e

DAVIS K I (19~1) % u - k ~ r -4 ? ' gL r a r f i r l . c , W? .>n i c -- n.-?., . T ~ F : 9 Ncw E e l h i TatT: FZac G s a w - ' r l i l l P u b l i s h i n g Co. Lkd.

E X O F O R P , MID i d I A G O N V. (ed.1 (1,584) The N i g e r i a n - t_ r *s_rh ;hk~~n -, 1 - i f j e ~ , Niger ia :

Longman

FEId BERG M.R. (1965)' Effective PS ychology for Pianagers. Lnqle'r.~aod Cliffs M .J.: Prcnk icc - ! - l a l I Inca

FLIPPO 8 . (1983) P e r s o n n e l Management Koqakusha: M c G r a w 4 i I l Book Co.

IFECHUX:8!U J.A.C. (19771 Work att i . tudcs in N i g e r i a . Niqcriz: Longman

KATZ ?&D ILthi R . (1966) "Social Psychology of orqmisa t i onz London: John ! ' iiley & Sons.

KOONTZ 3. MID O ' D D ~ I ~ E L L . C. (T.976) .Management, A system and Conkinaency Analysis ,To!.:yo: NcGraw-Hill.

LAWLER E,E. (iii) AND PORTER L.l.1, 119671 Antecedent

PIGORS P , MYERS - G-- (T.%Z) -Persnnne l Admini s t r a t i o n . A nnsnt- M- vtew a n d a mr-thode Ninth Ed, S i n g a p o r e :

F l c G r a w - H i l l I n t e r n a t i o n , Book Company. . -

SKIdNER B.F. (1971) Seyond Freedom and D i g n i t y , New york: A l f r e d m p t .

SMITH -R.C. AND WESTERN R . 3 . (195tl Jtudies of Morale ,methodology -. and criteria. S a n m t o n i o : USA. ...

STOVER, J .A.F . (1978) London: Pren t icc -Hal l 1nkcrnationa1 f n c ,

STRAUB 3 r T e ET, AX,, (2979) A p d f ~ d Manaaerncnt,Nei~ ~ o r k : Winthrop Publ ishers Inc.

SUTERMETSTER R.A. (1963 1 P m n l P an-dod i~c t iv i ty - New Yoric: McGraw-Hi11 Book Ca., Inc,

UBZKU AeKe (t9751, Porsmnrsl W a n ~ , o s m m t i n Niger ia , Benin City :. Et i l lope P b 5 l i s n T n q ' Cornpm y .

VRoOM V.H. (1964). Work and Notivaticn,New -- york: John VJiley & Sons I n c .

Handbook

Handbook On t h e Condition of Services f o r Employee

in the three o r g a n i s a t i o n s and companies studied.

Handbook of I n d u s t r i a l and o r g a n i s a t f on a1 Psycho5ogy

2376,

-95-

W A G E M E N T INTERVIEV! QUESTIONS

What is the object ive of your company

Mhak are the constraifits f ac ing your p r o d u ~ t l ~ n systefn

Do ycxr have ~xpaC,rT a t e s i n your campmy

Does the source of raw material affect your p r ~ d u c k i v i t y ---- H ~ V does the probl m w i t h your in f ras tmckures a f fec t your 1 . c v ~ l e f p r o d u c t i v i t y .

H m r do ~ Q U finance y o u r prof ect; l o c a l l y or .. in tcm ~ t l o n a l ly .--a- - - How far I s your company a f f ~ c t e d by government po'licies a d Tar r i f f s . ':lhat steps do you t a k e t o

Is the m a r k e t for.your products readily a v a i l a S l e , how do lrou m a r k e t your products,

- ---. - .

Wnzt nrp Li~e n a r k c t i n q r;roblerns ~ n c o u n t e r e d and i:oq.-? dcs ;.3:.: c:l!nin a t e thcrr;

---.-_I-- : :-: -

_ _ C - - - - - - .-- -a-

?."lak , 4 . i- L , l - e k i n d d r e l a t i < ; n s h i p Zhat e x i s b Sct*:!ecn t i i ~ s~r?::ank 2nd t h r 3 i r -:?ploy ees .

16. !.hat is the woi-!c load of your w o r k e r s

18. How dn y m replace existing vaczncies in your cm=any?

I_)--

19. Do you- evr3.r have skockouk, H 3 b l do you get rid 0 5 of thc pr03lcm - -- --*

Grcduate School of B u s i n e s s ~Adrninis t r a t i o n , Bcpar tment of Ikn?gernent University of NigerLa, Enugu Ca~pus E ~ u ~ u

Dear SirfMadm,

This q d e s t i o n n a i r e is par: of a research project on the Evaluation of m o t i v a t i o : ~ n l tools a13 t h e i r effects on out]-:ut Ln some selected Brewing i n d u s k r i e s in Anambra S t a t e ' and Enugu Stake be ing carried out a t tho Departmcnk GE Managcnent, L ! i v c r s Z t y of N L g e r i a Enugu- Campus for ' ihc degrel? of Master of B u s i n e s s Administration [MBAI.

You have been selected as a r e s p a n d e n t because of your i rnpor ' iant r o l e i n the X v a l u s t l m of Piotivakional t o o l s and t i?e iz"effectc un o : ~ t p u t ,

Plezsc ms?!er t h e q y e s t i o n s that fol low honestly. T h e r e arc no r l g h t a n d wronq ansxer. A l l i n f o m a t i o n s u p p l i e d ' ; i ~ u L d be u s e d in c o n f i d ~ n c e md s o l e l y for academlr ana lys i s .

Yours sincerely,

1. Sex:

Age: , ' -

Department:. , ,

What LS lrour ro le i n thc o r ~ a n i s a t i o n ? -

what I s ),our academic q u a l i f i c a t i o n ?

How l n n y have you been working in t h i s company

D o you h a k ' r n o t i v a t i o n a l ' ooXs i n your company?

yes N O - 1 7 If t h e answer t o q u e s t i o n No, 1 is Yes, name these

t o o l s _. - Do the managmcnt apply these tools on t he

employees yes /1 NO .m The mbfsivational tools a p p l i e d in t h e o r g m i s a t b n

is adequate. .

(a) Strongly agreed (b) Agreed /1 - a (c) Di5a(lree /1 ( d l S t r o n g l y disagree U - (e) Don*t :know/ - 1 How w m l d you describe y o u r wad-:fng c o n d i t i o n -- ICI

generally3 (a) Very safe - / / (b) Safe / - ( c ) Unsafe ( d ) Estremely u n s a f e - / / (e) Donwt. knwd ~7 A r e you satisfied w i t h the c o n d i t i o n of services in - t h i s o r g a r i s a t i o n (a) Yes - / (b) No /7 For how long do you p l a n to r ~ m a i n i n thie o r g a n i s a t i o n

How often a re t h e rnotivatimial tools a p p l i e d on . . - - mployea:s. (a) ~very ' day U (b) Cnce a week //

LC - ( c ) Cnce i n a month / ( d l Cnce a yeas

(el Not at a l l ~7 HOW many of t h e m o t i v a t i o n a l tools increase

productj.vi ty.

What i s the kind of z e ? a t i o n s h i p t h a t e x i s t - between you md your b-. 5s. ,a) Excellent J 1 - - - (b] C o r d i a l / (c3 Just cordial i d )

IC)I - N o t cordial J (e) Dont know L/ Does your relationship with your bass affect your

pe r fonmce a t work? (a ) Yes T/ (b) No - What is your wark load? (a) Overload L i (b) Moderate ~7 (c) Not over loaded

( c i ) Dontt know /1 Is every employee giyen equal and fair treatment wf th others in all sections? (a) Yes ./7 (b) No If your answer to ques t ion No, 13 is No Give

reasons

Higher pay is t h e best preferred motlvatlonal tools - for employees(a) Strongly agreed (b] Agree - - / / (c) Strongly disagree / ( d l Disagree -

(e) h n t t know / How v o u l d you describe your job?

(a) O . a l l e n g i n g and self-fulfilling 1 7 (b) n:1I and monotonous ( r e p e t t t t v e ) a ( c ) MiVIageable /7 (d) Any other s p e c i f y

Is y o u r promotion based on

(a) Merit

(b) b e n i o r i t y /'7 -

( d ) , b o d - f a t h e r i s m /1 I n your o p i n i o n , how would you r a t e promot ion

p r o s p e c t s / C a r e e r advancement i n your o r g a n i s a t i o n ,

( a) o here are good p r o s p e c t s f o r prornat ion/Career advancement

(b) T h e r e are n o p r o s p e c t s I

(c ) : ' T h e r e are some p r o s p e c t s but t h e r e i s n e e d

:kor improvement /1 +

( d ) :Any' o t h e r comments b