TITLE PAGE

THE IMPACT OF EMPLOYEES PARTICIPATION IN DECISION

MAKING IN NIGERIAN PUBLIC SECTORS.
(A CASE STUDY OF POWER HOLDING COMPANY OF
NIGERIA (PHCN) ENUGU)

BY

OGBONNA MAUREEN OGECHI

IRPM/2008/055

A PROJECT PRESENTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL

RELATIONS AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT AND SOCIAL SCIENCES
CARITAS UNIVERSITY ENUGU

IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE

AWARD OF BACHELOR OF SCIENCE (B.Sc) DEGREE IN
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS AND PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT

AUGUST, 2012.

1
 APPROVAL PAGE

This is to certify that the project has been examined, approved and

accepted for the award of Bachelor of Science (B.Sc) Industrial

Relations and Personnel Management.

The research project titled “Impact of Employees Participation in

Decision Making in Nigerian Public Sectors” was conducted by

OGBONNA MAUREEN OGECHI under supervision and is hereby

recommended for approval.

_____________________ ___________________
Mr. Ugwuonu N.C. Mr. Ugwu C.U.
Project Supervisor Head of Department

______________________
External Examiner
Prof Onah Fab

2
 DEDICATION

This project is dedicated to the Lord, Almighty God who made me to

be what I am today and to be involved in such a marvelous project.

To him are all Glory, Honour and Adoration, now and forever, Amen.

Thank you Father.

3
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I must acknowledge and express my gratitude to all those who

contributed in one way or the other to bring about the fulfillment of

this research project. First and foremost, my profound gratitude goes

to the Giver and the owner of soul, for creating me in His own image

and likeness and for seeing me through in this course, to Him be the

Glory and Honour.

My gratitude goes to my lecturer and supervisor Mr. Ugwuonu

N.C., Mr. Ugwu, C.U. my Head of department, Mr. Obidi Oguagha Mr.

Oliver, N. and Mr. Isiaku.

To my parents, Mr. and Mrs. F. Ogbonna, I owe a debt of

gratitude for their parental support both financially and morally.

I cannot forget to recognize my lovely brother and sisters

among whom are Kelechi Ogbonna, Chilem Ogbonna, Chinedu

Chidinma, Odera Ogbonna, Chuks Chinedu for encouraging and

assisting me in one way or the other.

I must also acknowledge my friends and colleagues who stood

by me and provided constant encouragement and support. Mr. Uche

Uzoigwe, Ebere Okoli, Chioma Oguine, Ekene Okeke, Amah Beyrl,

Cynthia Obinodu, Mr. Stanley and my aunties; Rita, Florence,

Patricia, Josephine, veronica for their help.

4
 ABSTRACT

In a centralized organization, employees are not allowed to

participate in decision making. This is because it is feared that they
are not competent and as a result will not contribute meaningfully in
decision of the organization.
The essence of this project research is to assess the impact of
employees participation in decision making in Nigerian public sector.
The study was designed with descriptive survey method.
Questionnaire interview including library materials were also used in
collecting data. A test technique was used in testing for reliability of
instrument.
Research questions were posed and the understated hypothesis
tested with chi-square method. Employees participation serves as a
training and testing ground for future members of upper
management, lack of qualified and company oriented individuals
undermine employees‟ participation in decision making and the
availability of skilled individuals in organizational decision making
promotes productivity.
However, it was concluded accordingly, that employee‟s participation
serves as a training and testing ground for future members of upper
management. Lack of qualified and company-oriented individuals
undermine employees participation in decision making. Availability of
skilled individuals in organizational decision making promotes
productivity.

5
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title page - - - - - - - - i

Approval page - - - - - - - - ii

Dedication - - - - - - - - iii

Acknowledgement - - - - - - - iv

Abstract - - - - - - - - - v

Table of Contents - - - - - - - vi

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.0 Introduction - - - - - - - 1

1.1 Background of the Study - - - - - 2

1.2 Statement of the Problems - - - - - 4

1.3 Objectives of the Study - - - - - 4

1.4 Significance of the Study - - - - - 5

1.5 Scope of the Study - - - - - - 6

1.6 Limitations of the Study - - - - - 6

1.7 Research Questions - - - - - - 7

1.8 Research Hypothesis - - - - - - 8

1.9 Definition of Terms - - - - - - 9

1.10 Theoretical Framework - - - - - 10

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.0 Introduction - - - - - - - 14

2.1 The Concept of Employee Participation - - - 15

2.2 Factors that Influence Participation - - - 20

6
2.3 Prerequisites for Participation - - - - 23

2.4 Forms of Employee Participation - - - - 25

2.5 Different needs for Participation - - - - 33

2.6 Views Expressed Concerning Participation - - 34

2.7 Constraints to Participation - - - - - 37

2.8 The Range of Options for Employee Participation - 39

2.9 Arguments for Participation - - - - - 43

2.10 Arguments against Participation - - - - 44

2.11 Historical Background - - - - - 45

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH DESIGN METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction - - - - - - - 49

3.1 Design of the Study - - - - - - 49

3.2 Area of the Study - - - - - - 50

3.3 Population of the Study - - - - - 50

3.4 Sample and Sampling Technique - - - - 51

3.5 Instrument for Data Collection - - - - 52

3.6 Validation of the Research Instrument - - - 53

3.7 Reliability of the Research Instrument - - - 54

3.8 Method of Data Collection - - - - - 54

3.9 Method of Data Analysis - - - - - 55

CHAPTER FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

4.0 Introduction - - - - - - - 56

4.1 Presentation and Analysis of Data - - - - 56

4.2 Testing of Hypothesis - - - - - - 76

7
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

5.0 Introduction - - - - - - - 82

5.1 Summary of Findings - - - - - - 82

5.2 Conclusion - - - - - - - 84

5.3 Recommendations - - - - - - 85

5.4 Implications of Research Findings - - - - 88

5.5 Limitations - - - - - - - 89

5.6 Suggestions for Further Study - - - - 90

Bibliography - - - - - - - 91

Appendix - - - - - - - 93

8
 CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Employee participation is creating an environment in which

people have an impact on decision and actions that affect their jobs.

Employee participation is not the goal nor is it a tool, as practiced in

Nigerian Public sectors. Rather, employee participation is a

management and leadership philosophy about how people are most

enabled to contribute to continuous improvement and the on going

success of the public sectors.

Anyanwuocha (2003) explained that public sector are

government or state owned business organizations, which are

usually set up by act of legislation, with the main aim of maximizing

public welfare.

Moving decision making power downward in public sector is at

the core of what employee participation is all about. Teams are a

potentially powerful way to move power downward. The employee

participation have also been implemented in the Nigerian public

sectors in order to motivate the employees by involving them with

the management for taking serious decisions about the public sector.

Research on employee participation begun to provide

information on the number and types of programmes that exist, their

9
structure and their effects on a variety of social-psychological,

production and economic issues in the public sector.

To date, little is known about the financial condition of the

Nigerian public sectors with employee participation in decision

making. Although the popular literature suggest that employee

participation in decision making has been implemented in the

Nigerian public sector in distress and has been effective in restoring

financial health.

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

It should be recent that a decision is a choice whereby a

person forms a conclusion about a situation. Gostell L. Wand Zalkind

S.S. (1963) defined the term decision making as a choice process,

choosing one from among several possibilities. This depicts a course

of behaviour about what must be done or vice versa. Decision

however translated into concrete action. Planning engenders decision

guided by company policy and objectives, policies, procedures and

programmes.

The aim of decision making is to channel human behaviour

towards a future goal. Decision-making is however one of the most

important activities of management. It has been the pre-occupation

10
of all management of multifarious organization to multi-national

corporations.

Managers often consider decision making to be the heart of

their job in that they must always choose what is done, who will do

it, when, where and most of the time how it will be done.

Traditionally, managers influence the ordinary employers and

specifically their immediate subordinate in the organization. This has

resulted in managers‟ unnatural decision even in areas affecting their

subordinates. In Germany around 1951 a law was enacted which

provides for code termination and requires labour membership in the

supervisory board and executive committee of certain large

corporation enabling subordinates to participate in decision making

process resulted to relatively and peaceful labour management

relations.

The basic concept involves any power-sharing arrangement in

which workplace influence is shared among individuals who are

otherwise hierarchical unequals. Such power-sharing arrangements

may entail various employee involvement schemes resulting in co-

determination of working conditions, problem solving and decision

making.

It is in this context the researcher wishes to assess the “impact

of employee participation in decision making in Nigerian public

11
sector” using Power Holdings Company of Nigeria (PHCN) Enugu as a

case study.

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEMS

There has been a lot of controversy as to whether an employee

should participate in management decision making or not. Some

writers argued that employees should contribute in making decision

more especially where it affects them or their jobs. It is expected

that such participation will serve as training and testing ground for

future members of upper management.

In Nigeria, experts that refuted the above assertion see the

arrangement as a symptom of mal-organization. They maintained

that qualified, reasonable, honest and company oriented individuals

are not available at these lower organizational levels. But the big

question is, are skilled individuals really available? All these underlay

the need for an investigative study.

1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The general purpose of this empirical study is to assess the

employee‟s participation in managerial decision making in public

sector organization in Nigeria with reference to Power Holding

Company of Nigeria Enugu. The specific objectives are;

12
 1) To asses the impact of employee participation in

management decision making.

2) To determine the impact of employee participation and non-

participation in management decision on productivity of the

Nigerian Public Sector.

3) To make recommendations based on the research findings.

1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

It is expected that the study will inform the management of

the Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) Enugu that to

increase productivity and to ensure harmony between management

and the workers, there is need for employees participation in

decision making in the organization as it is a good motivation factor.

It will also help develop and maintain a quality work life, which will

provide an opportunity for employees job satisfaction and self-

actualization. It will also aid management of Power Holding Company

of Nigeria to introduce modern schemes for good relationship with

their workers, to enable them meet the challenges of change in the

future.

Finally, this work is also beneficial to the Nigerian Public Sector

in general and also important to government, academic potential and

future researchers on the issue of employees participation in decision

making.

13
1.5 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The study is limited as it looks at the impact of employees

participation in decision making in Nigerian Public Sectors, A case

study of Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) Enugu. Power

Holding Company of Nigeria is typical of public sector, but it has the

responsibility of providing the citizenry with power (electricity). And

it holds a large population of employees.

1.6 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

In the process of carrying out this project work, the researcher

was confronted with many challenges and limitations which are as

follows:

Time: There was time constraint for the research project and within

the time specified, the normal lecturer were also in progress,

therefore, the researcher was faced with a lot of stress to combine

the research work with her personal affairs and running from one

lecture to another. The effect of this work was that the period the

researcher was supposed to spend on findings and data collection

was limited and as a result more quality work was hindered.

Finance: The researcher was also faced with financial problems.

Researcher work is very tedious because it requires running from

one place to another in search of information, books, Journals, paper

14
and reports must be consulted but are not always available within,

there was the need to travel to gather some of the materials which

involved money. Also the researcher printed questionnaires which

was distributed to the staff of Power Holding Company of Nigeria

(Enugu) which also involved money.

Quality of Information: The analysis of the data in chapter four is

based on the information provided by the staff of Power Holding

Company of Nigeria (PHCN) Enugu. After administering

questionnaires, it was expected that the information needed will be

provided by both the senior and junior staff of the company. The

junior staff were reluctant to provide some of the important

information needed. This was on the ground that such information

are very secret, and it is called industrial espionage. This challenge

also affected the quality of information provided for the research

findings.

1.7 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

In a view accomplishing this research work effectively, the

researcher poses the following:

1) Does management make decision without pre decision and

consultation with employees?

15
 2) Does management change decision when rejected by

employees?

3) To what extent do employees participate in decision

making?

4) How often do employees meet to discuss with managers?

1.8 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS

The researcher formulates the following based on the

objectives and problems of this research work.

Hi: Employees participation serves as a training and testing

ground for future members of upper management.

Ho: Employees participation does not serve as a training and

testing ground for future members of upper management.

Hi: Lack of qualified and company oriented individuals undermine

employees participation in decision making at lower

organizational levels.

Ho: Lack of qualified and company oriented individuals does not

undermine employees participation in decision making at lower

organizational levels.

Hi: Availability of skilled individuals in public sectors decision

making promotes productivity.

16
Ho: Availability of skilled individuals in public sectors decision

making does not promote productivity.

1.9 DEFINITION OF TERMS

1) DECISION MAKING: The selection from among alternative a

course of action.

2) MANAGEMENT: Management can be defined as an art of

science of achieving the objective of a business in the most efficient

way. It is made up of top and middle level management. Top

management include: share holders, Board of Director, Managing

Directors or the Chief Executive/General Manager above department

level. middle level managers include: level of department manager,

deputy and assistant managers.

3) PRODUCTIVITY: A measure of how well resources are

brought together in organization and utilized for accomplishing a set

of result.

4) PUBLIC SECTOR: This is an organization that is owned and

managed by Government.

5) EMPLOYEES PARTICIPATION: This is creating an

environment in which people have an impact on decisions and

actions that affect their jobs in the organization.

17
1.10 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The Neoclassical theorists recognized the importance of

individual or group behaviour and emphasized human relations.

Based on the Hawthorne experiments, the neoclassical approach

emphasized social or human relationships among the operations,

researchers and supervisors (Roethlisberger and Dickson, 1943) it

was argued that these considerations were more consequential in

determining productivity than mere changes in working conditions.

Productivity increase were achieved as a result of high morale, which

was influenced by the amount of individual personal and intimate

attention workers received through participation in managerial

decision making.

The classical approach stressed the formal organization. It was

mechanic and ignored major aspects of human nature. In contrast,

the neoclassical approach introduced an informal organizational

structure and emphasized the following principles.

1) Individual: An individual is not a mechanical tool but a

distinct social being with aspirations beyond mere fulfillment

of a few economic and security works. Individuals differ

from each other in pursuing these desires. Thus, an

18
 individual should be recognized as interacting with social

and economic factors.

2) The work Group: The neoclassical approach highlighted the

social facets of work groups or informal organizations that

operate within a formal organization. The concept of „group‟

and it‟s synergistic benefits were considered important.

3) Participative Management: Participative management or

decision making permits workers/employees to participate

in decision making process. This was a new form of

management to ensure increase in productivity.

The system approach views organizations as a system

composed or interconnected and thus mutually dependent –

subsystem. These sub-system can be perceived as composed of

some components, function and process Albrecht (1983). Thus, the

organization consists of the following basic elements. Bakke, (1969).

i) Components: There are 5 basic interdependent parts of the

organizing system namely:

a) Individual

b) The formal and informal organization

19
c) Patterns of behaviour emerging from role demands of the

organizations.

d) Role comprehension of the individual

e) The physical environment in which individuals work.

ii) Linking Processes: The different components of an organization

are required to operate in an organized and correlated manner. The

interaction between them is contingent upon the linking processes

which consist of communication, balance and decision making.

a) Communication: Is a means for eliciting action, enacting

control and effecting coordination to link decision centre in

the system in a composite form.

b) Balance: Is the equilibrium between different parts of the

system so that they keep a harmoniously structured

relationship with one another.

c) Decision Analysis is also considered a linking process in the

system approach. Decision may be to produce or participate

in the system. Decision to produce depends upon the

attitude of individuals and the demands of the organization.

Decision to participate refers to the individuals decision to

20
engross themselves in the organization process, that

depends on what they get what they are expected to do in

participative decision making.

Conclusively, these theories are of the opinion that

workers/ employees should be seen as human beings with

social and economic needs and as such be allowed to

participate in managerial decision making as it affects them.

21
 CHAPTER TWO

2.0 INTRODUCTION

There is hardly any subject matter which had not been

previously written about directly or indirectly by others. Therefore,

the aim of this chapter is to evaluate these previous write-ups and to

determine earlier accomplishments in the fields as well as to disclose

where contributions are desirable.

Much have been said and written about the impact of

employees participation in decision making in Nigerian public sector.

Employee‟s participation serves as training and testing group for

future members of upper management, lack of qualified and oriented

individuals undermine employee‟s participation in decision making

and the availability of skilled individuals in organizational decision

making promotes productivity.

This chapter is broken into various subsections, review of

relevant literature (theoretical review), concept of participation,

factors that influence participation, prerequisites for participation,

forms of employee participation, different needs for participation,

views expressed concerning participation, constraints to

participation, the range of options for employee participation,

Arguments for participation, Arguments against participation.

22
2.1 THE CONCEPT OF EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION

Decision making permeates all aspects of the management

process. To every manager therefore, notwithstanding his/her level

in the organization, the importance of decision making can never be

over emphasized. So also is the need for participation of employees

in such managerial decision. Employee participation may be thought

of as the growing and receiving of information, advice and

suggestions and the sharing of experience among members of an

organization. In management, it particularly applies to allowing

employees to have a voice in shaping directly or indirectly what

affects them. It therefore can be seen as a sharing process among

managers and employees.

However, in the process of sharing, employees must be able to

display an upward exertion of control over management decisions.

According to Guest and Fat Chart (1974), the situation where

there is to be sharing of decision making may be no more than a

means whereby management controls the situations.

The workforce (employees) is allowed to „say” as long as what

they say has an agreement. When they disagree with management,

then they are taken away. Employees‟ exertion of control should in a

way lead to management‟s alteration or abandonment of proposed

plans that affect the employees.

23
 Participation of employees in managerial decision making is not

applicable to all organization. Varying leadership style is

characterized by the centralization of the decision making process on

the manager himself. Being an autocratic leader, the manager is

seen as one who commands and expects compliance. The dominant

force involved is power. However, since the managers view authority

as the only means of getting this done, performance of employees as

expected is always minimal.

Participation should not be thought of as a single process or

activity but rather as a whole range of processes and activities.

Tannaebaum and Schimidt (1974) described it as a continuum of

process ranging from the autocratic leadership style as also

described as free rein management because of its very little control

on influence over group members.

It is seen that between direct and indirect participation. These

are the benevolent autocracy, consultative management,

participation committee and democratic management. Mc Greg

(1960) described benevolent autocracy when he said:

“A group of managers view participation as a

useful item in their herd of managerial tricks. It is
for them a manipulative device for getting people
to do what they want, under condition which
include the participations, into thinking they have

24
 had a voice in decision-making, the idea is to
handle them skillfully that they came up with the
answer which the manager had in the first place,
but believing it was their own”.

In the participative/democratic, managers possess the

decision-making itself to his group with himself as a member.

However, before doing so, he defines the boundaries within which

the decision must be made.

It is assumed that growing or sharing of information is an

essential step in the process of participation and one of the first in

moving toward a more complete participation. A manager therefore,

depending on the people under him and the situation at hand must

vary his participative approaches.

According to Guest and Knight (1960), some obscene have

noted that while a continuum is a useful way of conceptualizing

participation, it does not in itself provide a definition. Furthermore, if

a definition does not use a control, then some of the approaches

falling on the continuum cannot be classified as genuine

participation. The authors referred as Pata man who used the term

“pseudo-participation” to refer to information giving and other forms

of activity where workers influence is minimal and which, at worst

25
might therefore be a little more than the sophisticated schemes of

management manipulation.

The concept of participation must be distinguished from

delegation even though both terms seemingly are the same.

Although in terms of participation and delegation, the manager feels

he is giving away „something‟ especially a thing that will weaken his

position, but the terms are still at variance with each other.

Delegation involves the assignment of duties, authority and

responsibility to subordinates. It is the vesting of decision making

power in the subordinates, unlike participation where the manger

reserves the right to make the main decision and responsibility for

such decision so made.

Notwithstanding, the above difference however, a manger can

inadvertnently delegate decision making to his subordinates under

the guise of participation. This is commonly found in the lassiez-faire

style of leadership. Nevertheless, in this situation, the responsibility

for the decision made still belongs to the manager. This distinction

must be made therefore, for a proper understanding of what

participation involves and more specifically employee‟s participation

in managerial decision making.

26
 According to Salamon, M. (1992), points straight away to this

difficulty and acknowledges that employee participation is a term

capable of at least three different meanings.

In one sense, it can be seen as a socio-political concept or

philosophy of industrial organization, and in this sense it is more

appropriately termed “workers control” or “industrial democracy”,

since employee self-management or control is the objective.

A second use or meaning is as a generic term encompassing all

processes and institution. The widest interpretation of this includes

the whole spectrum of management – employee relationships from

simple information giving by management through to workers

control.

The third interpretation of the term employee participation

which Salamon identifies is one which seeks to distinguish it from the

traditional process of collective bargaining and the subject matter of

that bargaining. It is defined as a philosophy or style of management

recognizing both the need and right of employees to be involved with

management in processes which extend employee influence into

„new‟ areas of organizational decision making and which are less

„distributive‟ in their concerns and orientation, and more concerned

with the joint determination and resolution of problems.

27
 There are four different perspectives or models of participation

which includes:

i) One which emanates from a belief that participation

enhances job satisfaction.

ii) A second which believes that participation, or perhaps more

specifically involvement programmes will enhance

committee and that commitment leads to enhanced

performance.

iii) A third approach links participation with enhanced co-

operation and reduced levels of conflict.

iv) The fourth approach links „real‟ participation to those

situations in which there is some actual transfer of control

from management to labour, and tends to dismiss much

„participation‟ as no more than cosmetic or a sham.

2.2 FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE PARTICIPATION

There are generally three (3) principal factors that influence

the concept of participation. These are:

1) THE ORGANISATION: For effective participation to take

place, the organization must provide a psychological climate

conducive for participation. This means first, that it must initiate and

encourage a two way flow of information. If information is directed

28
only one way down, there is no meaningful exchange between

management and employees that can take place. Secondly, the

organization‟s attitude towards its employees to participate

effectively. They must be made to feel that their opinions and ideas

mean something, that they are valued both as persons and as

employees. As a general rule, theory and management philosophy

tends to stifle participation, where the theory approach encourages

it. It is true because participating, which grows out of the

assumption of theory, offers substantial opportunities for ego

satisfaction for the employees and thus can effect motivation

towards organizational objectives. Next, the organization‟s effort to

encourage participation must be sincere. If employee participation

programmes are used as a gimmick to improve “morale” with little or

no intent of using the employees‟ opinions or suggestions to

influence decision, it becomes meaningless and often does more

harm than good. According to Tannaembaum and Schmidt (1980)

problems may occur when the manager uses a democratic façade to

conceal the fact that he has already made a decision which he hope

the group will accept as its own. They added that the attempt to

make them think it was their idea in the first place is indeed a risky

one. Finally, the organization must establish guideline as to the

29
freedom managers can allow employees in making decision

concerning work in their department.

2) THE MANAGER: As a way of encouraging effective employee

participation in decision making the manger must operate a two-way

communication flow. His efforts to encourage participation must be

sincere and the freedom he can allow employees in making decision

concerning work in his department must not exceed the guidelines

established by the organization. He must always remember that

participation does not relieve him of authority or his responsibility for

making decisions. Also, the manager must realize that he has a dual

responsibility, one to his organization and the other to his

employees. Therefore, the desires and wishes of the employees must

always be considered but when a conflict exists, the manager is

obliged to support the goal of an organization.

3) THE EMPLOYEE: The degree at which an employee is allowed

to participate in decision making depends to a great extent on his

background and training. If the employee has no background on the

subject being discussed, no knowledge and competence with respect

to the problem, his opinions and suggestions will have little values.

In spite of this, however, his advice can be used to identify area of

concern and collection of information. On the other hand, if the

employee has considerate experience and training, his advice may

30
prove beneficial in making decision. Therefore, by allowing the

experienced and inexperienced to participate, both will feel that they

have some control over their work.

2.3 PREREQUISITES FOR PARTICIPATION

Certain conditions must be met before participation will exist in

their environment. Davis (1981) listed the major prerequisites as

follows:

1) There must be time to participate before action is required

as appropriate in emergency situations.

2) The potential benefits of participation should be greater

than it costs. For example, employees cannot spend so

much time participating that they ignore their work.

3) The subject of participation must be relevant to the

employee environment, otherwise employees will look upon

it merely as busy work.

4) The participants should have the ability such as intelligence

and knowledge to participate. It is hardly advisable, for

example to ask janitors in a pharmaceutical laboratory to

participate in deciding which fire chemical formula deserves

research priority, but they might participate in helping

resolve other problems related to their work.

31
5) Neither party should feel that its position is threatened by

participation. If workers think their status will be adversely

affected, they will not participate. Similarly, if managers feel

that their authority is threatened they will refuse to

participate or will be defensive.

6) Participation for deciding a course of action in an

organization can take place only within the group‟s area of

Job Freedom. Davis (1981) defined the area of job freedom

for any department as its area of secretion after all

restraints have been applied. Restraints in this content

include the framework within which the group make

decisions and such decisions cannot violate policy, collective

bargaining agreement and legal requirements. Restraints

also include obstacles due to the physical environment and

due to one‟s own limitations. Tannaembaum et al (1980)

added to his list of prerequisites by stating that participation

should occur if;

i) The subordinates have relatively high need for

independence.

ii) The subordinates have a readiness to assume

responsibility for decision-making.

32
 iii) They have a relatively high tolerance for ambiguity

(some employees prefer a wider area of freedom).

iv) They are interested in the problem and feel that it is

important and

v) They understand and identify with the goal of the

organization.

Having seen the factors influencing participation and the

conditions that must exist before it can effectively take place, it is

now imperative to look at the various forms of employee

participation.

2.4 FORMS OF EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION

There are two noteable different ways in which employees can

take part in decisions that affect them. These are;

Direct participation and

Indirect participation

Direct participation involves the individual himself relating to

decision that concerns him while indirect participation centre on

people representing the employees in decisions that affect them.

33
INDIRECT PARTICIPATION

The two ways that have been established as the dormant

means of participation with the enterprises are:

a – collective bargaining

b – joint consultation

A) COLLECTIVE BARGAINING: This form of indirect

participation is usually carried out between employers or their

representative and the representatives of the employees (that come

in form of trade union). Its primary purpose is purely economic.

According to Ubeku (1983) it is a system of wage and condition of

service determination in which the employer (management) shares

administrative decision making responsibility with the union. The

Nigerian Federal Ministry of Employment, Labour and Productivity

defined it as; negotiations about working conditions and terms of

employment between an employer, and group of employees with one

or more employers organization on the one hand and one or more

representative workers‟ organization, on the other hand with a view

to reaching an agreement.

This definition was supported by the British Ministry of Labour

when it said that collective bargaining is applied to those

arrangements under which wages and conditions of employment are

settled by a bargain in the form of an agreement between employers

34
or association of employers and workers or organizations. In recent

times, however collective bargaining has gone beyond the

determination and/or changes in wages fringe benefits and other

conditions of service of workers. It now also covers the retrenchment

practice and manpower planning of industries.

B) JOINT CONSULTATION: Joint consultation is any method of

establishing a two way communication between management and it‟s

employees in addition to those provided by normal day today

contact. It is a formal machinery for dealing with employees as a

group instead of dealing with them individually so as to avoid

petitions and demonstrations.

The objectives of joint consultations principally are:

i) To enhance the achievement of increased productivity by

involving the workers through their representatives, in the

planning of the production process.

ii) To set up a scheme for regular contact between

management and workers as a means of improving

communication and thereby lessening the suspicious of the

workers towards management plans and objectives.

iii) To meet the workers‟ demand for better insight (and voice)

into the management of the organization for which they

35
 work. In this way, a moral right would be satisfied and

increased co-operation and efficiency would result.

DIRECT PARTICIPATION

Writers agree that the aim of participation is to secure better,

greater employee involvement and thereby achieve a better use of

manpower skills and abilities, many of which are latent unless they

are released by leadership and managerial effort. The process of

direct participation of employees in managerial decision, which seeks

to expose those skills and abilities, can take place in diverse ways.

1) CONSULTATIVE MANAGEMENT: As the name implies, this

type of direct participation entails managers consulting with their

employees in order to encourage them to think about issues and

contribute their own ideas before decisions are made. Although

managers do not consult on every issue, they do set a climate for

consultation. However, they must be genuinely receptive to

employees‟ ideas so that employees do not see that shallowness of

any participative procedure that is not supported by a real desire for

employee ideas. Consultative management has the advantage of the

manager consulting with his employees at anytime without having to

go through the red type required by committee procedure. Also, this

36
manager can consult with any number of employees ranging from

one to a whole group.

2) GROUP DISCUSSION: This is form of democratic

management in which the manager refers a number of decisions to

the employee group so that the group‟s idea and influence can be

made use of. At times, especially in it‟s extreme form, managers can

loose control of whatever decision, they refer to their group because

it is based on a „one person, one vote line‟. According to Morgan,

(1980) group discussion is useful to gather/give information, praise

or command workers, develop understanding of common work goal,

work requirements and production standards, solve problems and

assist in decision making. However, for it to be effective there must

be a free exchange of information between employees and the

management in the discussion among the leaders and employees

involved.

3) BRIEFING GROUPS: These are shift and systematic means of

transmitting information throughout an organization. Information of

any kind is transmitted through the management system, and this is

done by holding regular meetings of fairly short duration. Also,

special meetings to communicate particular and vital piece of

information can be called. The advantage of briefing groups is that

37
information is communicated through formal management channels;

in this way, effective supervision which can be posed by other means

of communication can be bolstered. Also, morale and satisfaction is

enhanced, as there is face-to-face communication between the

manager and his subordinates. Some people have criticized briefing

groups as nothing more than a device for managerial control of

information.

4) WORK COMMITTEES: These are groups organized primarily

to consider jobs. Because of their nature, a lot of employees are

involved in them and they seek ways to improve their own

productivity. Work committees exist in both unionized and non-

unionized concerns. However, they have not been so popular

because they are over burdened with red tape. According to

researchers, companies used them for a while but then dropped

them because they became ineffective. For work committees to be

successful, management must have the capacity to offer ideas that

genuinely are helpful.

Types of work committees include quality control committees,

safety committees and labour-management committees.

38
5) SUGGESTION PROGRAMES: These are formal plans designed

to encourage employees to make recommendations concerning their

work and workplace. They primarily exists by written communication.

In some countries, suggestions that lead to work improvement or

cost saving attracts some rewards. Although, this form of direct

participation is found all over the world, it has some drawbacks. For

example, as suggestions are made by writer communication, the

motivation that comes from face-to-face discussion becomes lacking.

Also some managers look upon suggestions in their area as criticisms

of their own ability and gives employees little encouragement to

continue, therefore, for a suggestion programme to be effective,

employees must be made to feel that their suggestion will be

considered. In addition, they must be given assurance that their

ideas will not cause more work or cause other employees to loose

their jobs.

6) INDIVIDUAL CONTACT: This involves a day-to-day and face-

to-face exchange of opinions, information and experience between

the manger and his employees on an individual basis. There are not

formal preparations required and the employee is made to feel that

he is valued both as an employee and as a person. In spite of this

advantage however, there are certain inherent disadvantages. Some

39
mangers are reluctant to encourage employees to express

themselves concerning their jobs probably due to fear of loosing

control of their groups and the work situation. Also, some managers

feel that asking the advice of their employees show, weakness of

their leadership ability.

7) MIDDLE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEES: These are groups

composed primarily of middle level managers of an organization. The

central purpose is to develop these middle managers and prepare

them for top executive positions. It involves forming them into a

„junior‟ Board of Directors and giving them the opportunity to study

any problem, and recommend a course of action to top management

(so that top management rarely veto a recommendation).

Information is always made freely to the committees and idea

generation by members is not restricted by the presence of senior

executives.

According to Davis (1980), middle management committee is

an excellent way to develop executive skills among junior managers

and train them for top management. It encourages their growth and

helps to develop a spirit of corporation as they work together. It also

taps the process itself encourages them to study policy issues

carefully, take responsibility for their decision and broaden their

40
experience. The result is a programme that helps meet their desire

to participate and does so in a way that benefits managers, workers,

owners and consumers alike.

2.5 DIFFERENT NEEDS FOR PARTICIPATION

Although we have stated the different forms of participation, it

must not be assumed that employees in general love participation.

In fact, the amount and character of participation need to be geared

to the values, the skills and the expectations of the people involved if

productive results are to be obtained. According to Davis (1960),

some employees desire more participation because they tend to have

lower performance, low satisfaction, lower self-esteem, more stress

and other symptoms of tension and dissatisfaction. However, some

people desire a minimum participation and are not upset because

they lack it. He added that the difference between one‟s desire and

actual participating gives a measure of the match between a

company‟s practices and individual desire, that when employees

want more participation than they have, they are anticipatively

deprived and there is under participation. Conversely, when they

want, they are particularly „saturated‟ and there is over participation.

He then concluded by stating that where there is either under

participation or over participation, people are less satisfied than

41
those who participate to a degree that matches their needs.

Therefore, participation is not something that should be applied

equally to everyone, rather, it should match their needs as a

corollary to employee‟s attitude towards participation. They are

skeptical about it because they are afraid of the subject of loosing

authority. Contributors on the subject have treated to agree that this

reason is hardly a justifiable one because participative managers still

retain final authority. All they do is share the use of authority so that

employees will become more involved in the affairs of the

organization.

Concerning managers who still retain this attitude, Donnelly

(1986) stated that the extent you have to rely on authority of your

position, you are a questionable manager. If you are not in the

position to get people to accept ideas because they are sound, then

you are really not a good manager and so it is not a matter of

throwing positions of authority out of playing them down.

2.6 VIEWS EXPRESED CONCERNING PARTICIPATION

Miner (1978) stated that the major reasons for sharing

decision when sharing does occur is to improve the technical quality

of the decision. To him, diversity brings varied knowledge, abilities,

approaches and viewpoints to bear and these are what creative

42
decision require. He defined creative decision as decision that

embody something new and also have a redeeming value. Donnelly

(1996) concurred by saying that if the manager relies on his position

all the time for the quality of the decision, the quality will suffer.

It has also been stated that manager vary their approach in

terms of decision sharing with their subordinates. In crisis or

emergency situation when time for decision making is short,

managers naturally make the decision alone. Therefore, participation

does vary with circumstances like job pressure. Exuberance of the

economic climate and the existence of experience or skill in the

work-force. Some writers have argued that participation

programmes should not based alone on relatively „trival‟ decision like

the changing of operating procedures of immediate subordinates. In

some advanced countries, employees are involved in the selection,

design or purchase of new equipment. They can also have a

significant though not final say in fundamental issues as site location,

building design, internal plant. According to Haganes and Hales

(1983) stated that employees may be given a role in detailed

methods planning and design of their individual workplaces, tools

and fixtures, but rarely are they given any say in such major

investment decision as the choice or process, equipment or plant

layout, to say nothing of policy decision on plant size and location.

43
Yet it is these higher level decision that are the determinant of

working conditions and of moral and productivity. Heller and Wilpert

(1981) in their own research on employee participation concluded

that skill is one of the most important reason for using participation

methods. Where the decision making is surrounded by people who

have extensive experience or relevant job skills, he uses more power

sharing methods (for instance joint decision making or delegation).

According to them, in the obsence of skill and trust, participation

becomes an empty gesture and is seen by subordinates in this light.

This conclusion therefore, has important consequences for training

and skill development. The authors then suggested that the

introduction of formal employee participation schemes without

extensive investment in skill training would lead to ineffectiveness

and disappointment. The labour union views and attitude to

participate are not left out. Some writers have suggested that unions

are often highly suspicious and some times strongly opposed to

direct form of participation for two main reasons. Firstly,

management usually does it‟s introduction and this initiative in itself

is sufficient raise doubts about the aims of the exercise. Secondly, it

may appear to divert workers interest from representative form of

participation, and from which the unions draw part of their strength.

In other words, it blurs the conflict that exists between the union and

44
management, linked to this, the gains to be derived from direct

participation are more likely to accrue to management work force,

then to the unions as such. Also some union leaders fear that if

workers participate in helping management decide course of actions,

the unions ability to challenge these action is weakened. From this, it

is seen according to Guest and Knight (1981) that direct participation

represents a potential wedge between the workers and their unions,

raising genuine fears of a fragmentation of collective worker power

and influence.

2.7 CONTRAINTS TO PARTICIPATION

Constraints have been defined as all those element or features

of an organization which impinge on employees to decide or limit the

behavioural contents of their work. They come in various

dimensions; the preconditions for effectiveness mentioned earlier, to

some extent are limitations but there are others.

The views and tradition of an organization can pose a

constraint to a new manager in an organization. Those views and

traditional influence the behaviour of the people who work in them

and the manager may discover that to deviate radically from them is

likely to create problems for him, some organization for example,

45
insists that their managers must be dynamic, decisive and

persuasive.

Other organizations emphasize on the importance of the

manager‟s ability to work with others. Therefore, the idea of

organizational members especially the idea of manager‟s superiority

of who the desirable executive should be, will push the manager

towards one end or the other of the participation continuum.

The size of the working units of the organization including the

geographical distribution is another constraint to participation. Some

managers have very limited subordinates, which in some cases,

make participation impracticable. Similarly, the wide geographical

dispersion of the organization may make a system of participation in

decision making impossible. The nature of the problem may

determine the extent to which the manager can initiate his own idea

in the course of their work and when this happens, it will be in

operating matters only. A plausible excuse for this development may

be lack of technical knowledge on the part of the employees.

The pressure of time is another constraint. The more the

manager feels the urge for immediate discussion, the more difficult it

becomes for him to involve his subordinates in the decision making.

In organizations where the pressure is less intense, the opposite is

46
the case. Although the pressure of time is the mostly felt presence

on the manager, it can easily be managed at times.

The existing and potential legislation in some countries may

require participation to develop in certain ways. For example, in

Britain, the Health and Safety at work acts limits participation on

safety committees in many organizations to union members.

The history of an organization including its image in the eyes of

its employees can pose a constraint to participation. The idea of

organization traditionally known for paternalism, conflict or

manipulation cannot be changed overnight. Also, the current

organizational climate will influence the amount of confidence that

exists. That is why in some organizations the introduction of work

committees by management is seen by employees as another

illustration of management manipulation and thereby doomed to

failure.

2.8 THE RANGE OF OPTIONS FOR EMPLOYEE

PARTICIPATION

The range of options currently under discussion is shown on a

continuum (figure 2.1) which reflects the various degree of

participation that may be made available to employees. They range

from participation in the ownership of the organization by means of

47
 shareholdings through involvement in day-to-day operations to the

appointment of employee directors on company boards.

Share options/ Consultation Job Empowerment Collective Works Employee

Profit sharing enrichment by delegation bargaining Council directions

Lower power Great Power/

influence Influence

Fig 2.1 Range of options for employee participation

1) Share Options/Profit – Related Pay: Share option schemes

offer employees the chance to own share in their company and thus

participate in the financing, as well as to receive all the information

normally made available to shareholders. This option does give

employees the chance to take a stake in their employer‟s business,

but is scarcely relevant if one considers “participation” to involve

sharing in decisions. There have also been schemes to link employee

effort to overall profitability by permitting profit-related elements in

total pay.

48
2) Consultation: This can be seen as “participation” only in the

sense that employees are consulted about decisions affecting their

working lives. This does not imply that employers need take any

notice of employees‟ views. However, there have been efforts in

recent years to give communications with employees a higher

profile. Companies that make use of workplace consultative groups

(e.g quality circles) are not only engaging in a management-

employee dialogue, but in many cases are actively encouraging such

consultation or order to improve working methods, quality standards

and productivity. This form of consultation comes much closer to real

participation in decision making, at least so far as operational

matters are concerned.

3) Job Enrichment: It can also add to employee motivation by

increasing their responsibility for their work outputs and increasing

job interest. However, it does not usually offer any real opportunity

to participate in even the operational decisions taken in the

organization.

4) Empowerment Through Delegation: A participation

management style that encourages real delegation of authority

implies that all employees will be encouraged to play a part in the

49
decisions affecting their work. In practice, this may be no more than

a paternalistic method of involving employees in day-to-day affairs.

However, where a bonafide approach to participation is adopted,

then it is likely that employees will in fact become „empowered‟ by

being able to share fully in decisions affecting their immediate work

affairs.

5) Collective Bargaining: Managements are currently in a

strong negotiating position mainly because of

i. The continuing limits on trade union sanctions,

ii. The increased competitiveness of the market place.

Employers are therefore less inclined to engage in negotiations

with their employees, since this may restrict their flexibility in

responding to changes in market conditions. Should labour become a

scarce commodity, then unions will be in more powerful position to

insist on joint negotiations before agreeing to major changes in

policies or practice. Barging by it‟s very nature is adversarial and its

outcomes therefore, depend on the relative power of the parties and

the extent to which compromises can be reached. Compared with

consultation collective bargaining is an essentially active form of

employee participation, but in the past often reflected the views of a

50
minority of employees even in situations where union membership

was high.

6) Works Councils: These are essentially joint bodies of

managers and employees established to consider and agree key

maters affecting employment within the organization. They are not

for union-only employees, as would be the case in collective

bargaining, but must be open to all grades and groupings of

employees regardless of any union membership.

8) Board Representation: The appointment of rank-and-file

employees to non-executive directorships on the company‟s board is

another manifestation of employee participation. This option ensures

that employee‟s viewpoint are heard at board discussions and

debated. However, given the nature of all directors‟ responsibilities

as company directors, the actions of employee directors outside the

board are strictly limited.

2.9 ARGUMENTS FOR PARTICIPATION

Many writers see participation as a way of improving

employees‟ morale and effectiveness. Managers who allow

subordinates to participate in their decisions achieve better results

than those that keep subordinates at arms length.

51
 Many leading companies see employee participation as a way

of improving customer service as well as possibly enhancing

employee motivation and interest.

According to Patchen (1986) most studies indicate that when

employees are encouraged and provided with the proper setting to

decide for themselves or in combination with others how their work

should be done, their motivation to do the work is likely to be

considerably enhanced.

Davis (1981) listed the potential benefits of participation which

makes it indispensable as including higher output, better quality of

work, higher job satisfaction, greater commitment of goals, better

acceptance of change, less absence, reduced stress and turn over

and greater self-esteem.

2.10 ARGUMENTS AGAINST PARTICIPATION

Some writers postulate that there are some risk connected

with participation. McGregor (1960) stated that the usual fear is that

if employees are given an opportunity to influence decisions affecting

them, they will soon want to participate in matters which should be

none of their concern. However, he was quick to counter this

argument, he added that management who express this fear most

52
acutely tend to have a very narrow conception with the growth of

employees and their increasing ability to undertake responsibility,

there will of course be an expectation that employees will become

involved in an increasing range of decision making activities.

2.11 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The history of electricity development in Nigeria can be traced

back to the end of the 19th century when the first generating power

plant was installed in the city of Lagos in 1898. from then until 1950,

the pattern of electricity development was in the form of individual

electricity power undertaking scattered all over the towns. Some of

the few undertaking were Federal Government bodies under the

public works department, some by the Native Authorities and others

by the Municipal Authorities. Electricity Corporation of Nigeria.

(ECN).

By 1950, in order to integrate electricity power development

and make it effective, the then colonial Government passed the ECN

ordinance No. 15 of 1950. With this ordinance in place, the electricity

department and all those undertakings which were controlled came

under one body.

53
 In the early 1960s, the Niger Dam Authorities (NDA) and

Electricity Corporation amalgamated to form the Electricity

Corporation of Nigeria (ECN). Then, immediately after the Nigerian

Civil War, the management of ECN changed nomenclature to NEPA.

What is currently referred to as the Power Holding Company of

Nigeria was formally known as National Electricity Power Authority.

The ECN and the Niger Dam Authority (NDA) were merged to

become the National Electric Power Authority (NEPA) with effect from

the 1st of April 1972. The actual merger did not take place until the

16th of January, 1973 when the first General Manager was appointed.

Despite the problems faced by NEPA, the Authority has played an

effective role in the nation‟s socio-economic development thereby

steering Nigeria into a greater industrial society. The success story is

as a result of careful planning and hardwork.

FUNCTIONS OF POWER HOLDING COMPANY OF NIGERIA

The statutory function of the Authority is to develop and

maintain an efficient co-ordinate and economically system of

electricity supply throughout the federation. The decree further

states that the monopoly of all commercial electric supply shall be

enjoyed by NEPA to the exclusion of all other organizations. This

54
however, does not produce individuals who wish to buy and run

thermal plants for domestic use from doing so.

NEPA, from 1989, has since gained another status that of

quasi-commercialization. By this, NEPA, from 1989, has been

granted partial autonomy and by implication, it is to feed itself. The

total generating capacity of the six major power stations is 3,450

mega watts. In spite of considerable achievements of recent times

with regards to its generating capability, additional power plants

would need to be committed to cover expected future loads. At

present, efforts would be made to complete the on-going power

plant projects. Plans are already nearing completion for the

extension and reinforcement of the existing transmission system to

ensure adequate and reliable power supply to all parts of the

country.

COMPANY OVERVIEW

Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) produces and

distributes power through its subsidiaries. The company‟s

subsidiaries include General Companies (GNCO), TRANSYCO, and

Distribution Companies (DISCO). It offers services including

construction and engineering of power generating units;

55
maintenance and servicing of power grids; dams operations and

water management for power generation, flood control, and

navigations; resettlement; maintenance of control equipment,

protections and communications; maintenance scheduling; and

security and post contingency analysis. Power Holding Company of

Nigeria, formerly known as National Electric Power Authority (NEPA),

was founded in 2005 and is headquartered in Transformer House

Maitama Abuja, Nigeria.

56
 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.0 INTRODUCTION

This chapter focused on a clear and concise description of the

procedures and manner through which this research work was

conducted. Data has to be gathered for proper analysis and

investigation of employee‟s participation in decision making in public

sector organizations using Power Holding Company of Nigeria Enugu,

as a case study. Therefore, an attempt was made in this chapter to

show the “how” of this research by considering areas such as design

of the study, research instruments, population of the study, sample

and sampling techniques, method of data analysis and reliability of

instrument.

3.1 DESIGN OF THE STUDY

The research design used in any study is determined by the

nature of the research problems and the objectives of the study.

The research design appropriate and which was chosen for this

academic research is the descriptive survey which involves studying the

employee‟s participation in decision making in Nigerian Public sector

using Power Holdings Company of Nigeria Enugu, as a case study. The

reason for this is to make for easier acceptance, the evaluative

57
assessment and comments of respondents as representing the

impact and extent to which employees participate in managerial

decision making in Power Holding Company of Nigeria Enugu.

3.2 AREA OF THE STUDY

The location of this study was at Power Holding Company of

Nigeria, Regional Head Quarters Enugu Okpara Avenue, Enugu East

Local Government Enugu State.

3.3 POPULATION OF THE STUDY

Population can be defined as a group from which a sample is

drawn. It can be anything depending on what you are studying.

Harper (1971) viewed population as the group of people or items

from which information can be obtained.

The population to be survey must be clearly defined before any

research can be carried out. Therefore, the population of the study

focused on the four functional departments of Power Holding

Company of Nigeria located at the head office in Enugu namely;

Commercial/Accounts, Administration/Personnel, Production/Operations

and Marketing/Sales.

Respondents for this study consists of managers, officers and

staff responsible for the daily execution of key tasks within the

58
organization and are therefore capable of providing the required

information.

3.4 SAMPLE AND SAMPLING TECHNIQUES

It is virtually impossible to cover the views of the entire staff in

all the branches of Power Holding Company of Nigeria, operating

across the country, owing to time and financial constraints. However,

a sample size of fifty staff working at the Head office was chosen for

the conduct of this study. The sample size was chosen using a non-

probability method of sampling whereby staff covered were picked as

having the requisite understanding of the subject and who were

most likely to provide required information based on the judgment of

the researcher. The organization was divided into four strata based

on it‟s four functional areas covering Commercial/Accounts,

Administration/Personnel, production/operation and Marketing/Sales.

20 respondents were picked from the Administration/personnel

department due to their high understanding of the subject on focus.

10 each were picked from the remaining three departments. This is

necessary so as to ensure the validity of the judgement or outcome

of the research. We can apply Yaro Yamane‟s model for finding the

sample.

59
The formula is as thus;

n = N
1+Ne2

Where,

n = Sample size

N = Total population

I = Constant

e = Margin of error

57
1+57(0.05)2
= 50

3.5 INSTRUMENT FOR DATA COLLECTION

QUESTIONNAIRE

Since the descriptive survey research design has been chosen

for this research study, therefore the research instrument which was

applicable and chosen is the questionnaire drawn to elicit information

on the research topic from the respondents. The questionnaire was

constructed as a quick way to cover the scope of the question that

was asked from the respondents during the interview process.

Though, there is no generally acceptable laid down procedures

specially for the construction of a good questionnaire, the researcher

60
followed by acceptable rule in order to serve as a guide in the

construction of the questionnaire and the interview conducted.

Misleading, ambiguous and bias questions were avoided.

ORAL INTERVIEW

Interview was also conducted on the general manager and the

heads of departments of the four functional areas/departments of

Power Holdings Company of Nigeria Enugu, to know their taken on

employee‟s participation in decision-making in Nigeria Public sector.

Finally for easy editing and reference purpose, questionnaires

were arranged in a logical sequence and numbered.

3.6 VALIDATION OF THE RESEARCH INSTRUMENT

Pre-test questionnaire is the administration of the

questionnaire on people who have likely information on the case

study. A pilot study was conducted on staff of the company from the

administration/personnel department before the final questionnaire

was drafted. This was done to correct certain problems and

standardize the final draft of the questionnaire.

61
3.7 RELIABILITY OF THE RESEARCH INSTRUMENT

In order to maximize the reliability of the instrument the

researcher with the help of experts in measurements and evaluation

ensured that the questions in the questionnaire are not ambiguously

presented to the respondents. In other words to ascertain the

reliability of the instrument, questionnaires have been used by

several researchers who have come out with reliable solution to the

problems.

3.8 METHODS OF DATA COLLECTION

In attempting to carryout this research work, the sources of

data collection are;

1. PRIMARY SOURCE: This data was collected directly from

the sample population under study through the use of

questionnaire constraining structured questions explaining

clearly the objective of the survey and the data

requirement, which were prepared in standard questions

with exact wordings to be answered uniformly by the

respondents indicating their level of agreement or

disagreement.

2. SECONDARY SOURCE: This data was also sourced from

relevant journals, company‟s policy manual, annual reports

62
 existing research materials from learned scholars and

available textbooks on the research topic.

3.9 METHOD OF DATA ANALYSIS

For proper analysis and interpretation of the data to address

the problems stated, questions and hypothesis, the use of tables and

statistical mode of data presentation formed the basis for analysis.

The frequency of answer was shown by providing a frequency table

for responses to each of the relevant questions in the questionnaire.

In analyzing the employee‟s participation in decision making in

Nigerian public sector a case study of Power Holding Company of

Nigeria Enugu, the chi-square method was used. Chi-square method

which is denoted by X2 and pronounced Kai square is a parametric

hypothesis testing statistical technique.

The chi-square formula is shown below.

X2 = Ei(oi – ei)2
ei

Where,

X2 = Chi square
Ei = Summation of all item in 1 term
0i = Observed frequency
ei = Expected frequency

63
 CHAPTER FOUR

DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

4.0 INTRODUCTION

This chapter focused on the analytical aspect of the research

work. The general report of activities conducted on the primary data

collected from the sample population was made for proper

presentation and analysis of responses generated from the

administered questionnaire. The presentation was divided into two

parts. Section I covered the classification of respondents according

to Sex, Age, Educational Background, Department, Status (position

within the organization) and Working Experience. Section II covered

the classification of responses according to the research questions

and hypothesis.

4.1 PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

The result was presented in tables and analyzed using

percentage while the chi square test was used for the hypothesis. A

total of fifty copies of the questionnaire were administered on

respondents working in the four functional areas of the organization

at the Head Office out of which forty copies were successfully

completed and return representing 80% of the total number

64
distributed while ten copies were not returned which represents 20%

of the total questionnaire administered.

DISTRIBUTION AND COLLECTION OF QUESTIONNAIRE

QUESTIONNAIRE ADMINISTRATION

TABLE 1

QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE

Returned 40 80%

Not Returned 10 20%

Total 50 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

Table 1 shows that out of 50 copies of questionnaire

administered at Power Holding Company of Nigeria, only 40 that is

80% were returned as duly completed. While 10 that is 20% were

not returned.

65
TABLE 2 - ANALYSIS OF RESPONDENTS BY SEX

QUESTION 1

SEX RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

MALE 28 70%

FEMALE 12 30%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

From the above analysis, there are more males than females in

the staff composition. The reason for this may be because of the

nature of the work which often require more human capital which is

always available among the male folk. Hence, management must be

careful not to favour one gender with the right to participate in

decision making thereby neglecting the other to prevent non-

compliance with organizational goals and objectives.

66
TABLE 3 – ANALYSIS OF AGE DISTRIBUTION OF THE

RESPONDENTS

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

20 – 30 Years 20 50%

31 – 40 Years 16 40%

41 years and above 4 10%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

Table 3 indicates that the active workplace in age 20 – 30

years and 31 – 40 years represents 50% and 40% of staff that are

aware of employee participation in the organisation while only 10%

or ages 41 and above belong to the older staff. This proportion is

good for easy assessment of employee‟s participation in decision

making.

67
TABLE 4 – ANALYSIS OF EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

SSCE/GCE 9 22.5%

OND 20 50%

HND/B.Sc 10 25%

OTHER HIGHER CERT. 1 2.5%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

Table 4 indicates a total of 77.5% or 31 respondents that have

sound educational background, ranging from OND, HND/B.Sc and

other higher certificate as having a great understanding of

employees‟ participation and its impact in increasing productivity in

an organization.

TABLE 5 – ANALYSIS OF RESPONDENTS DEPARTMENT

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

Commercial/Accounts 10 25%

Administration/Personnel 14 35%

Production/Operations 6 15%

Marketing/Sales 10 25%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

68
 Table 5 shows that all the departments responded well to the

questionnaire and it is an indication that all departments are aware

of the impact of employee‟s participation in decision making in the

organization.

TABLE 6 - ANALYSIS OF RESPONDENTS STATUS

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

Top management 2 5%

Middle level management 14 35%

Junior Staff 24 60%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

Table 6 shows both Junior Staff and middle level management

staff responded well to the questionnaires which leads to the

conclusion that a true picture of impact of employees‟ participation in

decision making in the organization will be obtained. 24 or 60% of

the respondents were Junior staff, fourteen (14) or 35% of the

respondents are middle level management staffs and only two (2) or

5% are top management staff.

69
TABLE 7 – QUESTION 6: HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN WITH

THE ORGANISATION?

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

Below 1 year 2 5%

1 – 5 years 14 35%

6 – 10 years 14 35%

11 years & above 10 25%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

Table 7 indicates that 25% of respondents have served the

company for eleven years and above, 35% have served the company

for between one and five years, while only 5% have served the

company under two years. We can therefore, conclude that up to

95% of the respondents who have served the organization for

between one year and eleven years plus must understand what

employee‟s participation in decision making is all about.

70
TABLE 8 – QUESTION 7: DOES MANAGEMENT STAFF MAKE

DECISIONS WITHOUT PRE AND POST DISCUSSION AND

CONSULTATION WITH EMPLOYEES?

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

Yes 22 55

No 12 30

Don‟t know 6 15

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

Table 8 above shows the response on whether management

staff make decisions without pre and post discussion and

consultation with employees. A critical look at Table 8 shows that 22

respondents (55%) says that management staff makes decision

without pre and post discussions and consultants with employees

while 12 or 30% says that management staff do not make decision

without pre and post discussion and consultations with employees.

Notwithstanding 6 or 15% of respondents don‟t know whether

management staff make decisions without pre and post discussions

and consultations with employees.

71
TABLE 9 – QUESTION 8: DOES MANAGEMENT CHANGE

DECISION WHEN REJECTED BY EMPLOYEES?

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

Yes 8 20

No 28 70

Don‟t know 4 10

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

An examination of Table 9 shows that 8 respondents

representing 20% says that management changes its decision when

rejected by employees, while 28 or 70% of the respondents says

that management does not change its decision when rejected by

employees and 4 or 10% of respondents don‟t know whether

management changes its decision when rejected by employees.

72
TABLE 10 – QUESTION 9: TO WHAT EXTENT DOES EMPLOYEE

PARTICIPATE IN DECISION – MAKING?

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

ADEQUATE 13 32.5%

INADEQAUTE 20 50%

DON‟T KNOW 7 17.5%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

AS it can be seen from Table 10, 13 respondents representing

32.5% described the extent of employee participation to be adequate

while 20 or 50% of the respondents asserted that the extent of

employee participation in decision – making is inadequate. However

7 or 17.5% of the respondents maintained that they don‟t know the

description they would give as to the extent of employee

participation in decision-making in the company.

Let us recall at this juncture, employees participate in decision-

making only in trivial issues like changing of duties and never on

serious ones. Also, the purpose of most meetings with employees

was to brief them about new decisions that have even taken by the

management. In fact, management consults employees for advice

73
and suggestions but little use is made of such advice and

suggestions. Therefore, management is more autocratic than

democratic as it makes decisions irrespective of worker‟s feelings

and expects compliance. For that reason, employees cannot reject a

management decision and even if there is objection to such a

decision, management does not normally change such decisions.

However, the only meaningful participation by employees in

decision-making is mostly through the workers‟ union especially

during collective bargaining. The respondents concluded that there is

under participation by employees in decision-making in the company

and thus, emphasized that employees‟ desire be more meaningful

participation than they are getting at the moment.

TABLE 11 – QUESTION 10: HOW OFTEN DOES EMPLOYEES

MEET TO DISCUSS WITH MANAGERS?

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

ALWAYS 15 37.5%

SOMETIMES 24 60%

NEVER 1 2.5%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

74
 Table 11 indicates that 15 or 37.5% of the respondents say

that employees always meet to discuss with managers while the

majority of them said that employees sometimes meet to discuss

with managers. This number was found to be 24 (60%) of the

respondents. However, only (2.5%) respondent asserted that

employees never meet to discuss with managers.

TABLE 12 – QUESTION 11: FACTORS THAT ARE CONSIDERED

BEFORE AN EMPLOYEE IS INVOLVED IN DECISION-MAKING.

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

Rank in Organization 10 25%

Educational Qualification 5 12.5%

Experience 5 12.5%

All of the above 20 50%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

Table 12 shows that rank in the organization, experience and

educational qualification are factors that are considered before an

employee is involved in decision–making. This inference is confirmed

by the data in Table 12 in which 20 (50%) of respondents said that

all the above factors are considered before an employee is involved

75
in decision-making. A further examination of Table 12 indicated that

the factors “educational qualification” and experience” secured the

same number and percentage of respondents. This is found to be 5

respondents (12.5%) each respectively. Thought a critical

examination of table 12 indicates that 10 (25%) of respondents

asserted that rank of the employee in the company influences

whether he/she could be involved in decision-making in the

company.

TABLE 13 – QUESTION 12: DESCRIPTION OF LEVEL OF

EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION IN DECISION – MAKING.

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

Employees participate Fully in

decision-making 5 12.5%

Employees participate

Partially in decision-making 14 35%

Employees do not participate

in decision-making 21 52.5%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

76
 Table 13 reveals the description of level of employees‟

participation in decision making in the company. A look at table 13

indicates that 5(12.5%) said that employees participation fully in

decision making while 14(35%) respondents opined that employees

participate partially in decision-making in the company. However,

21(52.5%) of the respondents said that employees do not participate

in decision making in Power Holding Company of Nigeria, Enugu.

TABLE 14 – QUESTION 13: DESCRIPTION OF LEVEL OF

PRODUCTIVITY WHEN EMPLOYEES ARE NOT INVOVLED IN

DECISION-MAKING

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

Productivity is High 6 15%

Productivity is Medium 11 27.5%

Productivity is Low 23 57.5%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

Table 14 depicts the responses of respondents on their

description of the level of productivity when employees are not

involved in decision-making. A critical examination of table 14 shows

that 6 (15%) respondents asserted that productivity is high when

77
employees are not involved in decision making while 11(27.5%) of

the respondents asserted that productivity is medium when

employees are not involved in decision making and 23(57.5%)

respondents believed that productivity is low when employees are

not involved in decision-making.

TABLE 15 – QUESTION 14: HOW OFTEN DOES MANAGEMENT

STAFF DELEGATE AUTHORITY FREELY TO SUBORDINATES.

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

ALWAYS 5 12.5%

SOMETIMES 14 35%

NEVER 21 52.5%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

Table 15 indicates that 5(12.5%) of respondents maintained

that the management staff always delegate authority to the

subordinates while 14 (35%) of respondents said that the

management sometimes delegate authority freely to subordinates.

Notwithstanding, 21 (52.5%) of respondents maintained that

management never delegates authority freely to subordinates.

78
TABLE 16 – QUESTION 15: THE IMPACT OF UNSKILLED

EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION IN DECISION MAKING ON

PRODUCTIVITY

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

HIGH PRODUCTION 3 7.5%

MEDIUM PRODUCTIVITY 10 25%

LOW PRODUCTION 27 67.5%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

Table to shows that 3(7.5%) of respondents asserted that the

impact of unskilled employee participation in decision-making on

productivity was high productivity. 10 (25%) respondents said that

the impact of unskilled employee participation said in decision-

making on productivity is medium productivity. However, the

majority of the respondents 27 (67.5%) agree that the impact of

unskilled employee participation was low productivity.

79
TABLE 17-QUESTION 16: THE IMPACT OF SKILLED EMPLOYEE

PARTICIPATION IN DEICISION MAKING ON PRODUCTIVITY.

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

HIGH PRODUCTION 29 72.5%

MEDIUM PRODUCTIVITY 8 20%

LOW PRODUCTION 3 7.5%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

Table 17 indicates that majority of the respondents

representing 29 (72.5%) said that the impact of skilled employee

participation in decision-making on productivity is high productivity,

while 8 (20%) of the respondents asserted that productivity is at

medium when skilled employee participation is at medium when

skilled employee participation in decision is allowed. But 3(7.5%)

respondents said that the impact of skilled employee participation in

decision-making on productivity is low.

Where employees are allowed to participate in decision-

making, the benefits of such participation include higher output,

better quality of work, job satisfaction, greater commitment to goals,

better acceptance of change, less absenteeism, reduced stress and

80
turnover and greater self-esteem. The opposite would be the case if

there is inadequate or no employee participation.

The respondents suggested the encouragement of adequate

employee participation in decision making in the company.

TABLE 18 – QUESTION 17: THE IMPACT OF EMPLOYEES

PARTICIPATION ON THE EMPLOYEE’S EFFICIENT TO WORK.

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

POSITIVE 30 75%

NEGATIVE 8 20%

NO EFFECT 2 5%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

Table 18 indicates indications that 30(75%) of the respondents

assert that the impact of employee‟s participation on the employee‟s

efficiency to work is positive, while 8 (20%) of respondents

maintained that the impact of employee‟s participation on the

employee‟s efficiency to work is negative and 2 (50%) of

respondents said that employee‟s participation has no effect on

employee‟s participation.

81
TABLE 19 – QUESTION 18: DOES EMPLOYEE’S

PARTICIPATION SERVE AS TRAINING AND TESTING GROUND

FOR EMPLOYEES?

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

YES 23 57.5%

NO 11 27.5%

DON‟T KNOW 6 15%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

Table 19 depicts the responses of respondents on whether

employee‟s participation serves as training and testing ground for

employees. A look at the table shows 23(57.5%) of respondents

asserted that employees participation serves as training and testing

ground for employees while 11 (27.5%) of the respondents asserted

that employees participation does not serve as training and testing

ground for employees and 6 (15%) of respondents don‟t know if

employee‟s participation serves as training and testing ground for

employees.

82
TABLE 20 – QUESTION 19: DOES INEFFICIENT AND

INCOMPETENT INDIVIDUALS UNDERMINE EMPLOYEE’S

PARTICIPATION?

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

YES 26 65%

NO 8 20%

DON‟T KNOW 6 15%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

Table 20 indicates that 26 (65%) of the respondents agree

that inefficient and incompetent individuals undermine employee‟s

participation in decision-making in the organization while 8 (20%) of

respondents said that incompetent and inefficient individuals

undermine employee‟s participation in decision-making in the

organization and 6 (15%) of respondents don‟t know if inefficient

and incompetent individuals undermine employee‟s participation in

decision – making in the organization.

83
4.2 TESTING OF HYPOTHESIS

The hypothesis is tested using the chi-square statistical tool.

X2 = Σi(oi – ei)2
ei

Where, oi = Observed frequencies

Σi = Summation of all item in 1 term

ei = Expected frequency

X2 = Chi-square

The level of significance is 0.05

HYPOTHESIS I

Hi: Employees‟ participation serves as training and testing ground

for future members of upper management.

TABLE 19 – QUESTION 18: DOES EMPLOYEES’

PARTICIPATION SEVES AS TRAINING AND TESTING GROUND
FOR EMPLOYEES?
VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

YES 23 57.5%

NO 11 27.5%

DON‟T KNOW 6 15%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

84
VARIABLES Oi Ei Oi – Ei (Oi – ei)2 (Oi – ei)2
Ei
YES 23 13.3 9.7 94.09 7.07

NO 11 13.3 - 2.3 5.29 0.39

DON‟T KNOW 6 13.3 - 7.3 53.29 4.01

Total 40 11.47

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

X2 = 11.47

Where Ei = Sum of responses = 40 = 13.3

No of categories 3

To determine the degree of freedom

n – 1 = 3 – 1 = 2 level of significance is 0.05

X2 critical value is 5.991

Decision Rule: If X2 calculated is greater than X2 critical value

accept the alternative hypothesis. Otherwise do not reject the

alternative hypothesis.

Decision: Since X2 calculated (11.47) > X2 critical value (5.991), the

alternative hypothesis is accepted which means that employees

participation serves as a training and testing ground for future

members of upper management.

85
 HYPOTHESIS 2

Hi: Lack of qualified and company oriented individuals undermine

employees‟ participation in decision-making.

TABLE 20 – QUESTION 19: DOES INEFFICIENT AND

INCOMPETENET INDIVIDUALS UNDERMINE EMPLOYEES’

PARTICIPATION?

VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

YES 26 65%

NO 8 20%

DON‟T KNOW 6 15%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

Using Chi-square, we have

VARIABLES Oi Ei Oi – Ei (Oi – ei)2 (Oi – ei)2

ei
YES 26 13.3 12.7 161.29 12.13

NO 8 13.3 - 5.3 28.09 2.11

DON‟T KNOW 6 13.3 - 7.3 53.29 4.01

Total 40 18.25

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

86
 X2 = Σ(oi – ei)2
ei

Where, oi = Observed frequencies

ei = Expected frequency

The level of significance is 0.05

ei = Sum of responses = 40 = 13.3

No of categories 3

X2 = 18.25

Degree of freedom = n – 1

= 3 – 1 = 2 level of significance is 0.05

X2 critical value is 5.991

Decision Rule:

Accept alternative hypothesis if X2 calculated value is greater

than X2 critical value. Otherwise, do not reject the alternative

hypothesis.

Decision: Since X2 calculated value (18.25) > X2 critical value

(5.991), we accept the alternative hypothesis, which states that lack

of qualified and company oriented individuals undermine employees‟

participation in decision making. It is further evidently in Table 20

87
 where 65% of respondents agreed that inefficient and incompetent

individuals undermine employees‟ participation in decision making.

HYPOTHESIS 3

Hi: Availability of skilled individuals in organizational decision

making promotes productivity.

TABLE 17 - QUESTION 16: THE IMPACT OF SKILLED

EMPLOYEE PARTICIPATION IN DECISION MAKING ON
PRODUCTIVITY
VARIABLES RESPONDENTS PERCENTAGE %

High productivity 29 72.5%

Medium productivity 8 20%

Low productivity 3 7.5%%

Total 40 100%

Source: Field Survey Questionnaire, 2012.

VARIABLES oi Ei oi – Ei (oi – Ei)2 (oi – Ei)2

Ei
High productivity 29 13.3 15.7 246.49 18.53

Medium productivity 8 13.3 -5.3 28.09 2.11

Low productivity 3 13.3 -10.3 106.09 7.98

Total 40 100% 28.62

88
 X2 (oi – ei)2
ei

Where oi = Observed frequency

ei = Expected frequency

The level of significance is 0.05

ei = sum of responses = 40 = 13.3

3

X2 = 28.62

Degree of freedom = n – 1 = 3 – 1 = 2 level of significance = 0.05

X2 critical value is 5.991.

Decision Rule: If X2 calculated value is greater than X2 critical value

accept alternative hypothesis. Otherwise, do not reject the

alternative hypothesis.

Decision: Since X2 calculated value (28.62) > X2 critical value

(5.991), the alternative hypothesis is accepted, which means that

availability of skilled individuals in organizational decision making

promoted productivity. It is further seen in Table 17 where 72.5% of

respondents agreed that the impact of skilled employees in decision

making on productivity is that productivity is high.

89
 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

5.0 INTRODUCTION

This chapter focused on the summary arising out of the

findings and analysis carried out in the previous chapters.

Conclusions thereon were stated. Recommendations were made for

not only the benefit of both the manager and employees of Power

Holding Company of Nigeria Enugu, but at the organisation at large.

5.1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

Employees‟ participation is a feature in all organizations,

whether small, medium or large, but the procedures, methods and

levels of participation used by small, medium and large organisation

often differ significantly. Similarly, there are variations in employees‟

participation procedure from one section of the business to another.

The objective of the study was not to define employee participation

only, but to find out its impact on the productivity of an organisation.

In chapter one, the problem being investigated was clearly stated

and this was aimed at considering and assessing the impact of

employees‟ participation in decision making on the productivity of

90
Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) Enugu, also, theoretical

framework was made on the research. In chapter two, all known

literatures that were relevant to the study under focus were

reviewed.

On methodology, in chapter three, descriptive information on

statements of study population, sampling technique and size,

research instrument, methods of data collection and the analysis

were given. As a result of the critical presentation and analysis of

data in chapter four, various facts as regard employees‟ participation

in decision making were unveiled. For instance, the following

observations were made by the researchers as a result of the study

carried out:

1. The extent to which employees‟ participation in decision

making of the company is inadequate.

2. The Study also revealed that staff rank, educational

qualifications and experience are the determining factors for

employee participation in decision making.

3. It was further highlighted in this study that employees do

not always meet to discuss with managers, they do that

occasionally (sometimes).

91
5.2 CONCLUSION

The following conclusions were made from the findings of this

study:

Employees‟ participation serves as training and testing ground

for future members of upper management. Also lack of qualified and

company-oriented individuals undermine employees‟ participation in

decision making at lower organizational levels.

The availability of skilled individuals in organizational decision

making promotes productivity. Management is encouraged to make

decisions with pre and post discussion and consultations with

employees. They should also change their decisions when rejected

by employees as it may not be favorable to the employee or may be

capable of hindering objectives.

However, the extent to which subordinates participate in

decision making is inadequate, management should henceforth

improve the degree of employees‟ participation in decision making.

This is because, if employees participate adequately in decision

making, it will result to high productivity in the organisation.

Managers should be meeting frequently with the employees to

discuss issues about the organisation as this will help to widen the

employees‟ knowledge and also increase their understanding as it

pertains to decision making and their aspect of the job.

92
 Since the yardstick of employees‟ participation in decision

making is on his staff qualification, rank and experience on the job, it

is worthwhile that management train and development employees to

keep pace and these criteria.

5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS

In a view to improve and ensure high productivity and better

labour management relations, the following recommendations are

made;

THE ORGANIZATION

Power Holdings Company of Nigeria Enugu should provide a

psychological climate conductive for effective employee participation

in decision making to take place. It should encourage and initiate a

two-way flow of information, so as to ensure a meaningful exchange

between management and employees. As a way of encouraging

employees to participate effectively, he must be made to feel that

his opinions and ideas mean something and that he is valued both as

a person and an employee. Also, the organization‟s effort to

encourage participation must be sincere. If employees‟ participation

programmes are used as gimmick to improve „moral‟ with little or no

intent of using employees‟ opinion and suggestion to influence

93
decision, it becomes meaningless and often does more harm than

good. Power Holding Company of Nigeria Enugu should establish

guidelines as to the freedom managers could allow employees in

making decisions concerning work in their departments.

Also, since the company utilizes rank, education and

experience in determine who should be involved in decision making

there is need to instigate and encourage study leave with or without

pay and part time programmes to enable the employees‟ knowledge,

competence and position in the organisation. Also, the organisation

should allow the experienced and inexperienced to participate in

decision. This will make both feel that they have some control over

their work.

THE MANAGER

As a way of encouraging effective employee participation in

decision-making the manager must operate to two-way

communication flow. His effects to encourage participation must be

sincere and the freedom he can allow employees in making decision

concerning work in his department must not exceed the guidelines

established by the organization. He must always remember that

participation does relieve him of authority or his responsibility for

making decisions. The last word rests with him. Also, the manager

94
must realize that he has a dual responsibility – the manager‟s

responsibility to his organization and the other of his employees.

Therefore, the desire and wishes of the employees must be

measured against the goals and objectives of the organization.

Management should try and develop group discussions among

employees. Decisions can be referred to these groups and in this

way, they will develop a perception of common work goals and

requirements including the production standard expected of them, an

eventually influenced decision-making in the company.

THE EMPLOYEE

The importance of employees‟ advice and suggestions in the

growth of the company cannot be overemphasized. Employees

should therefore be allowed to participate in management decision-

making, the benefits of such participation include higher output,

better quality of work, higher job satisfaction, greater commitment

to goals, better acceptance of change, less absence, reduced stress

and turnover and greater self-esteem.

However, the degree of which an employee is allowed to

participate in decision making depends to a great extent on his

background and training. If the employee has no background on the

subject being discussed, in other words no knowledge and

95
competence with respect to the problems, then his opinion and

suggestions will have value. Therefore, employees should design

appropriate method of improving their educational background so as

to be able to contribute meaningful in decision making process in the

organization. Inspite of the poor background however their advice

and opinion can still provide information in the area of concern. By

attending meeting, both the experienced and inexperienced will feel

that they have some control of their work. it is hoped that the

implementation of the above recommendations by the Power Holding

Company of Nigeria Enugu would guarantee a better employee

management relation and this, will improve the level of productivity.

5.4 IMPLICATION OF RESEARCH FINDINGS

From the research findings, the following could be implied.

Where the management of Power Holding Company of Nigeria Enugu

views my recommendations with scorn, the organization will not

have high level of performance from it‟s workers, also will lead to

demotivation, low productivity, in efficiency among management

staff and employees. But, where by the recommendations of this

research be strictly implemented, as it will help to increase

productivity and bring more profit to the company.

96
5.5 LIMITATIONS

In conducting the research work, due to time and finance

constraints studying all the Nigerian Public sectors would be difficult

but was limited to just one public sector which is Power Holding

Company of Nigeria Enugu. The following were included:

TIME: There are time constraints for the research project and within

the time specified, the normal lecture was also in progress,

therefore, the researcher was faced with a lot of stress to combine

both the research work and the lecture together. The implication of

this work was that the period the researcher was supposed to spend

on findings was limited as a result more quality work may be hindred

or affected.

FINANCE: Capital has been rated the most important resources to

carryout a given project. Research work to this end was not left out

because the information needed to write this project was not

gathered in one place.

QUALITY OF INFORMATION: The analysis of the data depended

largely on the information that the researcher acquired from the staff

of Power Holding Company of Nigeria Enugu. After administering the

97
questionnaire it was expected that the information needed was

provided by the management of Power Holding Company of Nigeria

Enugu.

5.6 SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY

Further researchers on the impact of employees participation in

decision making in the Nigerian public sectors should endeavour to

further the study on the following:

1) Further study should be carried out using more public

sectors.

2) Further study should implore other means of data collection

method.

3) Further study of this topic should test more hypothesis

other than the ones tested here and use another method of

hypothesis testing different from the chi-square methods

used in the study.

98
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abel, K.U. (1983), “Industrial Relations in Developing Countries”: A

case study of Nigeria. London: The Macmillian Press Ltd.

Dalton, E. (1968), “Personnel Management: Theory and Practice”.

London: The Macmillian Company.

David, Guest, Derek, F. (1994), “Workers’ Participation: Individual

Control Performance”. London: Institute of Personnel
Management.

Frank, A. Bennard, H. W. (1981), “Competence and Power in

Managerial Decision-Making”. Chictrester: John.

George, S. (1966), “Participation Management” A Critique/LR,

Research, Darton M ac Farland.

Imaga, E.U.L. (1985), “Workers’ Participation in Management in

Nigeria: An Empirical Investigation”. India Journal of Industrial
Relations.

James, E. Morgan, Jr. (1973), “Principles of Administration and

Supervisory Management”. New Jersey: Prentice Hill Inc.

Keith, D. (1981), “Human Behaviour of Work: Organizational

Behaviour”. New York: McGraw Hill Inc.

McGregor, D. (1960), “The Human Side of Enterprise”. New York

McGraw Hill Inc.

99
Rensis, L. (1961), “New Patterns of Management”. New York:
McGraw Hill Book Company Inc.

Roethlisberger, F.J. & W. (1943), “Management and the Worker:”

Dickson J. Cambridge, MA Harvard University Press.

Tannaehbaum, R. and Warrant, H.S. (1958), “How to choose a

leadership pattern” Business Review, Harvard: March-April.

100
 APPENDIX I

Caritas University,
Amorji – Nike,
Department of Industrial
Relations and Personnel
Management,
Emene,
Enugu State.

Dear Respondents,

QUESTIONNAIRE ON PROJECT

I, Ogbonna Maureen Ogechi, a final year student of Industrial

Relations and Personnel Management Caritas University Amorji –
Nike, Enugu State.

I am carrying out a research on “The Impact of Employee‟s

participation in Decision Making in Nigerian Public Sector,” a case
study of Power Holding Company of Nigeria, Enugu State.

I plead that you answer the following question with all sincerity. Your
responses will not be used for any other purpose than this research.

Thanks for your cooperation.

Yours faithfully,

OGBONNA MAUREEN O.

101
 APPENDIX II

QUESTIONNAIRE

SECTION A

1. Sex

Male [ ]

Female [ ]

2. Into which of the following range of age do you fall?

20 – 30 years [ ]

31 – 40 years [ ]

41 years and above [ ]

3. Educational background

SSCE/GCE [ ]

OND [ ]

HND/B.Sc [ ]

Other Higher Certificates [ ]

4. Respondent‟s Department

Commercial/Accounts [ ]

Administration/personnel [ ]

Production/operations [ ]

5. Respondent‟s status

Top Management [ ]

Middle Level Management [ ]

Junior Staff [ ]

102
6. How long have you been with the Organization?

Below 1 year [ ]

1 – 5 years [ ]

6 – 10 years [ ]

11 – years and above [ ]

SECTION B

7. Does management staff make decisions without pre and post

discussion and consultation with employees?

Yes [ ]

No [ ]

Don‟t know [ ]

8. Does management change decision when rejected by

employee?

Yes [ ]

No [ ]

Don‟t know [ ]

9. To what extent do employees participate in decision making?

Adequate [ ]

Inadequate [ ]

Don‟t know [ ]

10. How often do employees meet to discuss with managers?

Always [ ]

Sometimes [ ]

Never [ ]

103
11. Factors that are considered before an employee is involved in

decision making:

Rank in the organization [ ]

Education qualification [ ]

Experience [ ]

All of the above [ ]

12. Which of the following best describes your organization‟s level

of employee participation in decision making?

Employees participation fully in decision making [ ]

Employees participation partially in decision making [ ]

Employees do not participation in decision making [ ]

13. Description of level of productivity when employees are not

involved in decision making.

Productivity is high [ ]

Productivity is medium [ ]

Productivity is high low [ ]

14. How often does management staff delegate authority freely to
subordinates?
Always [ ]
Sometimes [ ]
Never [ ]
15. The impact of inadequate employee participation in decision-
making on productivity.
High productivity [ ]
Medium productivity [ ]
Low productivity [ ]

104
16. The impact of adequate employee participation in decision

making on productivity.

Productivity is high [ ]

Productivity is medium [ ]

Productivity is high low [ ]

17. The impact of employee participation in the employee

efficiency to work.

Positive [ ]

Negative [ ]

No effect [ ]

18. Does employee participation serve as training and testing

ground for employees?

Yes [ ]

No [ ]

Don‟t know [ ]

19. Does inefficient and incompetent individuals determine

employees‟ participation in decision making in the

organization?

Yes [ ]

No [ ]

Don‟t know [ ]

105