A proposal on an investigation of job satisfaction on employee’s performance in Government owned enterprises
Background of the study
The importance of qualified manpower in the social, political and economic development of any nation can hardly be over emphasized. No nation is known to have attained and sustained high level of economic growth and development without ample supply of manpower. Of all the factors that unlock the forces of economic and development, a country’s human resources is the most vital because without, it all the other factors have to wait. (Nwachukwu 1988, p-128) Positive changes in the quality of work force according to Nwachukwu, account for rapid economic development that has taken place in advanced countries, Kuznet in Nwachukwu once observed that “the major capital stock of an industrially advance country is not its physical equipment; it is the body of knowledge amassed from tested findings and discoveries of empirical science, and the capacity and training of its population to use this knowledge”. At the organization level, the essence of any manpower programme is to enhance the welfare of workers by maximizing their skills as well as the quality and quality of their employment opportunity and by so doing add to their economic strength (Nwachukwu ibid). Thus all employee programme are aimed at human resource development and utilization bearing in mind that a well-motivated and satisfied manpower is an asset to an organization, which enhances productivity. In a real sense, three important elements, money, man and material make up any business enterprises. While each of these elements is particularly importance in any organization, it is however the people or the human element that is often responsible for the success of an organization. It is not uncommon to experience a situation where competing firms buy materials in the same market, secure their money from the same sources and employ their personnel in the same area, yet one company emerges as being more productive and profitable than the other. A study of such circumstances more often than not reveals that the difference in the performance is due to the fact that one company has a more “satisfied” work force, hence more productive. With this illustration, people/manpower determine the success of enterprises. A well-known management theorist, Rensis Likert concludes, “All the activities of any enterprises are initiated and determined by persons who make up that institution, underscores the importance of employee function. Plant, offices, computers, equipment and all else that a modern firm uses are unproductive except for human effort and direction. Of all the tasks of management, managing the human component is the central and most important task because, all else depend on how well is done” (Likert quoted in Iyayi 1989, p.151). Personnel/employee administration is that organization or enterprises function which is especially concerned with the management of the human component in organizations. This human component pervades the entire organization and because of this, it follows that the performance of the personnel, or at least an important part of it, devolves on all individuals and managers who in one way or another have responsibility for the performance of one or more subordinates in the organization. The management function of leading, directing and motivating are all personnel functions, which all management must perform. A manager who fails in any of these respects is also likely to fail in the performance of his/her primary responsibility even if such responsibility is for production, accounting or marketing (Iyayi ibid). The fact that all managers perform personnel functions is however, not to imply that they are all personnel managers. In every organization, there is a distinct department or section that is specifically charged with the responsibility of initiating and formulating policy as well as providing advice, service and control of all personnel matters. Thus, although the people designated as personnel managers perform all the personnel functions of all managers, they in addition, usually have broad human skills, and specific technical skills for dealing with people oriented problems in the organization. The personnel manager usually applies his/her technical skills in dealing with issues that arise in the following major areas: employment, training and development, transfer, promotion and lay off, wage and salary administration, health and safety, discipline and discharge, industrial and labour relations, employee benefits and services, and personnel and behaviourial research. The above, constitute staff conditions of service, which is the hub of personnel management and on which depends industrial peace, industrial expansion and the general well being of the staff and the organization ( Abah 1997, p.238).
Based on this background the researcher wants to investigate job satisfaction on employees performance in Government owned enterprises.
Objective of the study
The following objectives will be assessed;
- To identify the role of promotion on job satisfaction among staff.
- To determine effect of salary on job satisfaction among staff.
- To identify the important of conductive environment on job satisfaction
- What is the relationship between promotion and job satisfaction among staff?
- Is there any relationship between salary and job satisfaction among staff?
- To what extent does conducive environment contribute to job satisfaction among staff?
H0: There is no relationship between promotion and job satisfaction
H1: There is relationship between promotion and job satisfaction among staff.
H0: There is no relationship between salary and job satisfaction among
H2: There is relationship between salary and job satisfaction among
H0: Conducive environment does not contribute to satisfaction among staff
H3: Conducive environment do contribute to satisfaction among staff