ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR AND PERFORMANCE IN KENYA; A CASE

OF NAIROBI BOTTLERS LIMITED

JOSEPHAT KIIO KILUNGU

D53/OL/23175/2013

A RESEARCH PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF MASTERS OF BUSINESS

ADMINISTRATION DEGREE (STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT OPTION) OF

KENYATTA UNIVERSITY

JULY, 2017
 DECLARATION

This project is my own original work and has not been presented for award of any degree

in any University.

Signed: ___________________________ _________________

Josephat K. Kilungu DATE:

REG NO: D53/OL/23175/2013

This research project has been submitted for the course examination with my approval as

the University supervisor.

Signed: __________________________ Date_________________

Mr. Shadrack Bett

Department of Business Administration

ii
 DEDICATION

I dedicate this work to my wife Mwikali and my Son & Daughter, Safari and Noella for

their encouragement and support during the whole process

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank the Almighty God for giving me the opportunity and strength to

pursue my education. It is through His abundance grace that has brought this research

work this far.

This work would have not been possible without my supervisor Mr Shadrack Bett who

guided me all along the process. I acknowledge his patience, support and thank him most

sincerely for their tireless efforts.

I would like to thank my wife and children, for their support and wonderful ideas

throughout this process. Lastly, I also appreciate my friends who shared this journey with

me and encouraged me in the adventure of academics and have been my anchor.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION .......................................................................................................... ii

DEDICATION ............................................................................................................. iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................... iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................. v

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................ix

LIST OF FIGURES ....................................................................................................... x

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ......................................................................xi

OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF TERMS ............................................................xii

ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................... xiii

CHAPTER ONE ............................................................................................................ 1

INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background of the Study ........................................................................................ 1

1.1.1 Organizational Behavior .................................................................................. 5

1.1.2 Nairobi Bottlers Limited.................................................................................. 9

1.1.3 Organizational performance .......................................................................... 11

1.2 Statement of the problem ..................................................................................... 12

1.3 Objectives of the Study ........................................................................................ 14

1.3.1 General Objective ......................................................................................... 14

1.3.2 Specific Objectives........................................................................................ 14

1.4 Research Questions .............................................................................................. 15

1.5 Significance of Study ........................................................................................... 15

1.6 Scope of the Study ............................................................................................... 16

1.7 Limitations of the study ....................................................................................... 16

v
 1.8 Organization of the Study .................................................................................... 16

CHAPTER TWO ......................................................................................................... 18

LITERATURE REVIEW............................................................................................ 18

2.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 18

2.2 Theoretical Review .......................................................................................... 18

2.2.1 MARS model of individual behavior ............................................................. 18

2.2.2 Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory ............................................... 19

2.2.3 ERG theory ................................................................................................... 19

2.2.4 Fredrick Herzberg’s two factor theory ........................................................... 20

2.3 Empirical Review ................................................................................................ 21

2.3.1 Leadership and Organizational Performance.................................................. 21

2.3.2 Employee Motivation and Organizational Performance ................................. 24

2.3.3 Job satisfaction and organizational performance ............................................ 26

2.3.4 Group and Team work and organizational performance ................................. 30

2.4 Conceptual Framework ........................................................................................ 31

CHAPTER THREE ..................................................................................................... 33

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................................ 33

3.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 33

3.2 Research Design .................................................................................................. 33

3.3 Target Population................................................................................................. 33

3.4 Sample ................................................................................................................. 34

3.5 Data Collection Process ....................................................................................... 34

3.6.1 Reliability ..................................................................................................... 34

vi
 3.6.2 Validity ......................................................................................................... 35

3.7 Data Analysis ....................................................................................................... 35

3.8 Ethical Considerations ......................................................................................... 36

CHAPTER FOUR ....................................................................................................... 37

DATA ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION AND PRESENTATION ......................... 37

4.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 37

4.1.1 Response Rate ............................................................................................... 37

4.1.2 Validity and Reliability Test .......................................................................... 37

4.2 Demographic Information .................................................................................... 38

4.2.1 Age of the Respondents ................................................................................. 38

4.2.2 Gender of the Respondents ............................................................................ 39

4.2.3 Educational Level of the Respondents ........................................................... 39

4.2.4 Marital Status of the Respondents ................................................................. 40

4.2.5 Current Job Position of the Respondents........................................................ 41

4.2.6 Level of the Job ............................................................................................. 41

4.2.7 Years of Service ............................................................................................ 42

4.3 Organizational Leadership ................................................................................... 42

4.4 Employee Motivation .......................................................................................... 44

4.5 Job Satisfaction .................................................................................................... 45

4.6 Group and Team work ........................................................................................ 46

4.7 Organizational Performance ................................................................................ 47

4.7.1 Respondents’ Description of Performance ..................................................... 47

4.7.2 Extent of Respondents’ Agreement on Performance and OB ......................... 47

vii
 4.7.3 Organizational behavior patterns and Performance ........................................ 48

4.8 Regression Analysis ............................................................................................. 49

CHAPTER FIVE ......................................................................................................... 52

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................. 52

5.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 52

5.2.1 Organizational Leadership ............................................................................. 52

5.2.2 Employee Motivation .................................................................................... 52

5.2.3 Job Satisfaction ............................................................................................. 53

5.2.4 Group and Team work ................................................................................... 53

5.2.5 Organizational Performance .......................................................................... 53

5.3 Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 54

5.4 Recommendations of the Study ............................................................................ 54

5.5 Suggestions for Further Studies ............................................................................ 55

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 56

APPENDICES ............................................................................................................. 60

APPENDIX 1: LETTER TO RESPONDENTS.......................................................... 60

APPENDIX II: QUESTIONNAIRE........................................................................... 61

APPENDIX III: TIME PLAN .................................................................................... 66

APPENDIX IV: BUDGET ........................................................................................ 67

APPENDIX V: RESEARCH AUTHORIZATION LETTER ..................................... 68

APPENDIX VI: NACOSTI RESEARCH PERMIT ................................................... 69

viii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 4. 1: Response Rate ............................................................................................. 37

Table 4. 2: Validity and Reliability Test......................................................................... 38

Table 4. 3: Age of the Respondents................................................................................ 38

Table 4. 4: Marital Status of the Respondents ................................................................ 40

Table 4. 5: Current Job Position of the Respondents ...................................................... 41

Table 4. 6: Level of the Job............................................................................................ 41

Table 4. 7: Years of Service ........................................................................................... 42

Table 4. 8: Organizational Leadership............................................................................ 43

Table 4. 9: Employee Motivation ................................................................................... 44

Table 4. 10: Job Satisfaction ......................................................................................... 45

Table 4. 11: Group and Team work................................................................................ 46

Table 4. 12: Respondents’ Description of Performance .................................................. 47

Table 4. 13: Extent of Respondents’ Agreement on Performance and OB ...................... 48

Table 4. 14: Organizational Patterns and Performance ................................................... 48

Table 4. 15: Model Summary......................................................................................... 49

Table 4. 16: ANOVA..................................................................................................... 49

Table 4. 17: Regression Coefficients .............................................................................. 50

ix
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1: Conceptual Framework...................................................................................35

Figure 4. 1: Gender of the Respondents ......................................................................... 39

Figure 4. 2: Educational Level of the Respondents......................................................... 40

x
 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

CEO Chief Executive Officer

CCBF Coca-Cola Beverage Franchise

HR Human Resource

OB Organizational behaviour

NB Nairobi Bottlers Limited

TPM Total Productive Management

SABCO South African Bottling Company

PET Polyethylene Terephthalate

xi
 OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF TERMS

Job Satisfaction Has been defined in many different ways. It is

simply how contented an individual is with his or

her job, in other words, whether or not they like the

job or individual aspects or facets of jobs, such as

nature of work or supervision.

Organizational Behavior The study of the way people interacts within

groups. Normally this study is applied in an attempt

to create more efficient business organizations. The

central idea of the study of organizational behavior

is that a scientific approach can be applied to the

management of workers.

Organizational Performance Comprises the actual output or results of an

organization as measured against its intended

outputs (or goals and objectives)

Organizational Leadership A dual focused management approach that works

towards what is best for individuals and what is best

for a group as a whole simultaneously. It is also an

attitude and a work ethic that empowers an

individual in any role to lead from the top, middle,

or bottom of an organization

xii
 ABSTRACT

This study sought to find out the influence of organizational behavior on organizational
performance among beverage manufacturing companies in Kenya with Nairobi Bottlers
Limited being the case study. The objectives of the study was to determine the influence
of leadership on the performance of Nairobi Bottlers Limited, to explore the influence of
employee motivation on organizational performance of Nairobi Bottlers Limited, to
establish how employee job satisfaction influences the performance of Nairobi Bottlers
Limited and to evaluate the influence of group and team work on organizational
performance of Nairobi Bottlers Limited in order for it to gain competitive advantage
over its rivals in the franchise and industry. The study employed a descriptive research
design to establish the extent to which the independent variables influence the dependent
variable. The target population was all the employees of Nairobi Bottlers Limited who
are 1300. 20% of the population was taken as the sample which is 260 employees. A
step-wise regression model was used to analyze the data which was presented in tables,
charts, percentages and graphs. The study established that the feedback received from
respondents agrees with what they have actually achieved; the job is meaningful;
respondents feeling lucky being paid for a job they like; respondents enjoy the discussion
of their organization with people outside the organization; group and team work
significantly affects performance of an organization. The study concludes that
organizational leadership significantly influences performance; employee motivation
significantly affects performance of a firm; Job satisfaction has significant effect on
performance of an organization; group and team-work significantly affects performance
of an organization. The findings of the study would contribute to the existing knowledge
in organizational management and to increasing performance standards amongst the
management professionals and the entire industry through behaviour modification thus
providing a competitive edge. The study recommends that the management team of
Nairobi Bottlers should strengthen their leadership styles so as to motivate employees.
The human resource department of Nairobi Bottlers and all companies generally in
Kenya should ensure that jobs are meaningful to their employees through job rotations
and job enrichments; there is need for organizations to provide incentives that enhance
job satisfaction of their employees. The study recommended that there is also need to
conduct a similar study in the public and private sector in Kenya.

xiii
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Organizations face strong pressures in competitive environments to be efficient and at the

same time produce products of value. By ensuring that their workforce is optimal at all

times most organizations can gain competitive advantage (Rachel, 2008). Satisfied

employees form a bond with the company and take pride in their organizational

membership, they believe in the goals and values of the organization. Therefore, these

employees display high levels of performance and productivity (Steven, 2008).

Dissatisfied employees display characteristics of low productivity, absenteeism, and

turnover. These traits are highly costly for the organization. Therefore, it is crucial that

research is done to determine the relationship between motivation, job satisfaction, group

dynamics and team work, leadership, and employee performance (Jones et al, 2006).

There is a common theme, which persists when managers are confronted with the

question of describing their most frequent or troublesome problems. This theme which

managers most often describe is “people problems”. They talk about their boss’s poor

communication skills, employee’s lack of motivation, conflicts between team members,

overcoming employee resistance to company reorganization, and so on. In today’s

increasingly competitive and demanding workplace, it is difficult for managers to

succeed on their technical skills alone. They need to have good people skills as well

(Kurt, 2007). Organizational behavior is the study of people at work. It concentrates on

the influence that individuals, groups, and structure have on behaviour within

organizations. Applying knowledge to improve organizations effectiveness is the chief

1
goal of organizational behavior and also because organizational behaviour is concerned

specifically with employment related situations it emphasizes behaviour related to jobs,

work, absenteeism, employment turnover, productivity, human performance, and

management (Varawalla, 2010).

Every business tries to achieve its objectives and in order to achieve these objectives

organizations must ensure that their human resource (HR) department is in the finest

condition. The human resource (HR) department of any organization is considered the

most important resource an organization has, thus companies must ensure that their work

force is well trained and effective (Kreitner, 2001). Employees who are satisfied with

their jobs may display an increased work performance and ethic compared to an

employee who is dissatisfied. Employees who are satisfied with their positions may

display this type of behaviour because they do not desire to lose a position that makes

them content. Dissatisfied employees on the other hand may not display such behaviour

because they are not as satisfied by the position (Mullins, 2007).

The organization and the design of jobs can have a significant effect on staff. Attention

needs to be given to the quality of working life in an organization. Managers need to

understand that a positive work life can lead to an increase in employees’ performance

(Nimalsthasan, 2004). Job satisfaction is a multifaceted concept, which can mean

different things to different people. Job satisfaction is usually linked with motivation, but

the nature of this relationship is not clear (Buchanan, 2006). The relationship between job

satisfaction and employee performance is an issue of continuing debate and controversy

(Putman, 2002). One view associated with the early human relation’s approach is that

satisfaction leads to performance (Buchanan, 2006).

2
An organization and its members form a relationship, which is influenced by what

motivates them to work, and the rewards, which they receive. The satisfaction of staff

and their levels of performance are significantly affected by the work organization, and

the design and content of jobs. It is up to the manager to know how best to elicit the co-

operation of staff and try to direct their efforts to achieving the objectives and goals of the

organization (Mullins, 2007).

Kreitner et al. (2001) suggest that motivation is not the only contributor for job

performance. Along with ability, motivation is a combination of feelings and emotions,

level of skill, facilitating and inhibiting conditions, which are not under the control of the

individual, and knowledge about how to complete the task. However, it is clear that if a

manager wants to improve the work of the organization, then he must give attention to

the level of motivation of the members in the organization. He must also encourage staff

to direct their efforts towards the successful attainment of the goals and objectives of the

organization (Mullins, 2007:250).

Motivation is a complex subject, which is influenced by many variables. It is the result of

either internal or external sources. Intrinsic motivation occurs when forces within an

individual results in certain behaviour and involves performing work for its own sake

(Jones et al., 2006). According to Harris (2010), most South Africans are not happy with

their jobs. The Job Crystal Happiness Indicator takes a look at how salary, level of

seniority and location affects how happy South African employees are. Employees

earning higher salaries and in more senior positions tend to be the happiest, with

employees living away from major metropolitan areas being happier (Heger, 2011). The

Job Crystal happiness indicator showed that less than half were happy with their roles.

3
Munyeki (2011), opines that it is clear that companies that focus on gaining staff buy-in

for companywide goals and objectives, at the expense of meeting employees’ individual

career goals, are going to find it difficult to hold on to top talent. The two go hand in

hand in terms of attracting and keeping star performers. JobCrystal compiles the

happiness indicator from the data it collects when candidates enter their details on the

talent management portal. JobCrystal completed a second happiness indicator, which

looked at which South African companies had the happiest staff, and were the best places

to work (Kanyuira, 2011). There was a low correlation between companies where

employees were the happiest and those rated the best place to work. Even if employees

buy into the company culture, vision and environment, they also need to have their

individual goals and requirements met in order to be happy.

Koontz (2010), opines that employers and employees have a part to play in the process.

Employee-employer relationship is a 50\50 responsibility, when it comes to staff

satisfaction, employers are responsible for supplying employees with all the tools

required to do their jobs. The recession has highlighted people’s needs for fulfilling basic

wants, for example, taking care of their families. Companies have not been equipped to

give increases, and this is contributing to high level of unhappiness in the workplace,

Harris (2010). The compensation, benefits and rewards system must be aligned.

Employees emulate behaviour that they see being rewarded, Musyoki (2010).

This research sought to analyze the effect of organizational behaviour on performance of

stakeholders in an organization. Low job satisfaction can lead to a low morale, which will

cause the employee to work less and concentrate more on the negative aspects of his/her

job, leading to low self-esteem and a general malaise that will inadvertently spread across

4
his/her social circles. People around them are likely to feel the frustration and may even

have to bear the brunt of this malaise. This depression could also have a huge influence

on their personal relationship and family life. In many cases, an unhappy worker may

have marital problems and health problems caused by stress. Looking at it from an

employer’s perspective, there will be a sharp decrease in productivity. Again, a person

who is not satisfied with his job will see that his relationships with people at work will

begin to suffer, causing inter personal stress at work. This behaviour will limit scope for

progression, hence exacerbating an already difficult situation. Employees with low

morale have a systemic influence on the organization, Varawalla (2010).

1.1.1 Organizational Behavior

Organizational behavior (OB) is the study of the way people interact within groups.

Normally this study is applied in an attempt to create more efficient business

organizations. The central idea of the study of organizational behavior is that a scientific

approach can be applied to the management of workers. Organizational behavior theories

are used for human resource purposes to maximize the output from individual group

members, Rawal (2009). There are a variety of different models and philosophies of

organizational behavior. Areas of research include improving job performance,

increasing job satisfaction, promoting innovation and encouraging leadership. In order to

achieve the desired results, managers may adopt different tactics, including reorganizing

groups, modifying compensation structures and changing the way performance is

evaluated, Ngo (2009).

While Organizational Behavior as a field of academic study wasn’t fully recognized by

the American Psychological Association until the 1970’s, it’s roots go back to the late

5
1920’s when the Hawthorne Electric Company set up a series of experiments designed to

discern how changes in environment and design changed the productivity of their

employees. Their various studies, conducted between the years of 1924 and 1933, were

broad and meticulously measured over large periods of time. The studies included the

effect of various types of breaks (lots of small breaks and a few long ones) on

productivity, productivity in isolation, and productivity in varying levels of light. The

most famous finding resulting from the Hawthorne Studies is what is now called the

Hawthorne Effect, the change in behavior of a test subject when they know they’re being

observed, Rachel (2008).

The idea of looking scientifically at behavior and productivity in the workplace with the

goal of increasing the amount and quality of work an employee can get done, along with

the idea that workers were not interchangeable resources but were instead unique in terms

of their psychology and potential fit with a company. These ideas were radically new

when Hawthorne first began the studies, and they helped create a field of study and an

entire professional field, Rawal (2009). Organizational behavior has focused on various

different topics of study. In part because of the Second World War, during the 1940’s the

field focused on logistics and management science. During this period the emphasis was

on using mathematical modeling and statistical analysis to find the best answers for

complex problems. Studies by the Carnegie – or freshwater – School economics in the

1950’s and 1960’s furthered these rationalist approaches to decision making problems.

In the 1970’s, theories of contingency and institutions, as well as organizational ecology,

resource dependence, and bounded rationality came to the fore as the field focused more

6
on quantitative research. These findings and sets of theories helped organizations better

understand how to improve business structure and decision making, Putman (2002).

Since the 1970’s, a good deal of the work being done in the field of organizational

behavior has been on cultural components of organizations, including topics such as race,

class, gender roles, and cultural relativism and their roles on group building and

productivity. These studies, a part of a shift in focus in the field towards qualitative

research, and among other things, take into account the ways in which identity and

background can inform decision making (Robbins, 2008).

Academic Programs focusing on organizational behavior are usually found in business

schools, and schools of social work and psychology. They draw from the fields of

anthropology, ethnography, and leadership studies and use quantitative, qualitative, and

computer models as methods to explore and test ideas. Depending on the program one

can study specific topics within organizational behavior, or broader fields (Rachel, 2008).

Micro organizational behavior involves cognition, decision making, learning, motivation,

negotiation, impressions, group process, stereotyping, and power and influence while

marco-organizational behavior covers organizations as social systems, dynamics of

change, markets, relationships between organizations and their environments, as well as

identity in organizational process, how social movements influence markets, and the

power of social networks (Saan, 2004).

Findings from organizational behavior’s body of research can be used by executives and

Human Relations professionals better understand a business’ culture, how that culture

may facilitate or hinder productivity and employee retention, and how to best evaluate

7
candidates skill set and personality during the hiring process(Jones, 2006). The

application of theory and knowledge from the field of organizational behavior can be

broken down into sections of Personality, Job Satisfaction and Reward Management,

Leadership, Authority, Power, and Politics. There is rarely one correct way to assess the

right way to manage any of these things, but OB research can provide a set of guidelines

and topics to follow (Jacqueline, 2007).

Personality, essentially a series patterned behavior, plays a large role in the way a person

interacts with groups and produces work. Knowing a person’s personality, either through

a series of tests, or through conversation can give a better idea of whether they’re a fit for

the environment they’d be hired into, and how best to motivate that person. Theories

around job satisfaction vary widely, but some argue that a satisfying job consists of a

solid reward system, compelling work, good supervisors, and satisfactory working

conditions (Isaiah, 2000). While leadership, what it looks like and where it is derived

from is a rich topic of debate and study within the field of organizational behavior. When

one views it connected to management, it can be broad, focused, centralized or de-

centralized, decision-oriented, intrinsic in a person’s personality or a result of a place of

authority (Buchanan, 2006).

On the other hand power, authority, and politics all operate inter-dependently in a

workplace. Understanding the appropriate ways, as agreed upon by a workplace rules and

general ethical guidelines, in which these elements are exhibited and used are key

components to running a cohesive business (Rachel, 2008). This study, therefore, sought

8
to find out the relationship between organizational behaviour and performance among

beverage manufacturing firms in Kenya.

1.1.2 Nairobi Bottlers Limited

Nairobi Bottlers limited is one of the Coca-Cola Bottling Franchised plants in Kenya.

Others include Coastal Bottlers, Mount Kenya Bottlers, Kisii Bottlers and Almasi. NBL

is majorly owned by the South-African Bottling Company and Centum holdings in

Kenya. The company employs approximately 1300 people, and it is the biggest single

bottling plants in the SABCO group, as well as CCBF in Kenya. Departmental functions

include manufacturing, sales, logistics and support functions such as human resource and

finance.

Nairobi Bottlers has received couple of awards since its inception and these include; in

1995, NBL received the ‘Highest Quality Award’ and was named Kenya’s ‘Bottler of the

Year’. In 2007, NBL won two awards in the prestigious Company of the Year Awards for

Kenyan companies and organizations. In 2008, NBL won the first runner-up award in the

prestigious ‘Company of the Year’ Award in Kenya. In 2009, NBL won the Marketing

award in the prestigious Company of the Year’s Award .Quality awards from the Coca-

Cola Company which Nairobi Bottlers has received due to outstanding quality of its

products include-Gold award in 2009 ,Gold award in 2010 and Bronze award in 2011,

NBL (blog). In the manufacturing category, NBL was the best in the SABCO group in

2014, which was mainly driven by implementation of TPM. Other functions such as

finance and logistics were the best in SABCO group as well on their deliverables.

9
Kenyans enjoy a wide range of beverages, including Coca-Cola, Coke Light, Sprite,

Stoney, Dasani and those from the Krest, Schweppes and Sparletta groups. In 2015, 43

million unit cases of product were sold in the Kenyan market which was a record

performance since the inception of the plant. Direct distribution of product to customers

by the company is 10% whereas 90% of distribution is done by Manual Distribution

Centers (MDCs) .Growth of the future consumption drinks category has seen the

company invest in a state of the art new mega-line for Coca Cola PET drinks.

Kenya based Nairobi Bottlers Ltd like any other bottling plant belongs to Coca-Cola

international Ltd, an Atlanta based multinational carbonated soft drinks firm. The soft

drink industry consists of establishments primarily engaged in manufacturing non-

alcoholic, carbonated beverages, mineral waters and concentrates and syrups for the

manufacture of carbonated beverages. Establishments primarily engaged in

manufacturing fruit juices and non-carbonated fruit drinks are classified in canned and

preserved fruit and vegetable industry. Their principal activities and products include:

Aerated waters, carbonated beverages, mineral and spring waters, soft drink concentrates

and syrup, preparation and carbonation.

Nairobi Bottlers Ltd business is based on franchising, a co-operative diversification

strategy that provides an alternative to vertical integration whose basis is to achieve a

relatively centralized control of the way business is run without significant capital

investment (Hitt, 1997). The ongoing business relationship between the franchiser the

franchises includes Trade mark, the service and the product, the marketing strategy,

10
operational guidelines, business standards, quality controls, technology and Human

Resources among others.

1.1.3 Organizational performance

According to Chen (2002), organizational performance means the transformation of

inputs into outputs for achieving certain outcomes. With regard to its content,

performance informs about the relation between minimal and effective cost (economy),

between effective cost and realized output (efficiency) and between output and achieved

outcome (effectiveness)”. There are various ways to understand organization

performance but in this study it has been judged upon the growth of the company and

sales performance which lead towards the growth. Sales performance can be explained as

all the activities or investment carried out in the firm in the given period of time. It can be

measured by total amount of revenue collected for the goods sold. Growth revenue

defines as total amount of money collected by the company for the goods they sold in a

specific time and this amount is calculated before any expenses are subtracted (Robbins,

2008).

Effectiveness of the organization depends on the three basics performance determinants.

Efficiency is defined as a term practiced by organization or firm to use people and

resources to carry out important operations in way which minimizes the costs. When the

resources will be used in a proper way as compared to the competitors the cost of

operation will decrease and the profit margin will increase (Putman, 2002). Efficiency is

important when the competitive strategy of the firm offers products and services at lower

rates than the competitors. Human resource relation is defined as trust, organizational

11
commitment, collective identification and cooperation among the employees (Bass 1990

Yuki &Tabler 2002). Innovative adaption includes increase in market share, sales growth

from year to year, generating and maintaining loyal customer base.

1.2 Statement of the problem

To increase motivation of employees, managers should assist them in achieving their

performance goals through coaching and support, and in so doing increase their effort-

performance relationship (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2001).As a manager or businesses owner

one should be interested in their employee’s attitudes because attitudes give warnings of

potential problems and because they influence behaviour. Satisfied and committed

employees, for instance, have lower rates of turnover, absenteeism, and withdrawal

behaviours (Mullins, 2007). They also perform better on the job.

In many organizations resignations and absenteeism are major problems; in order to keep

this down, managers should do things that will generate positive job attitudes (Buchanan,

2006). The most important action managers can take to raise employee satisfaction is to

focus on the intrinsic parts of the job, such as making the job more interesting and

challenging (Dogan, 2009). Positive reinforcement is a powerful tool for modifying

behaviour. By identifying and rewarding performance-enhancing behaviours,

management increases the likelihood that such behaviours will be repeated (Robbins,

2001: 31-32).

Organizational behaviour has almost all the concepts, which encompass the need for

change. These include attitudes, perceptions, teams, leadership, motivation,

organizational design and the like (Putman, 2002). When one enquires about change, it is

12
impossible to not think about these concepts. If we consider a working environment,

which was perfectly static, employee’s skills and abilities were always up to date and

incapable of deteriorating, and if tomorrow were always exactly the same, as today, then

organizational change would have little or no relevance to managers (Steven, 2008).

According to Euro monitor 2016, currently in the Kenyan market International companies

continue to experience stiff competition from local players who performed well in 2015.

The positive performance of domestic firms is driven by the growing popularity of their

products, particularly among the burgeoning middle-class population. Domestic firms are

also supported by wide distribution channels, strong promotional events, affordable

pricing models and innovative, attractive packaging. The entry of new players such as

Ketepa Ltd and TreeTop brands into categories such as bottled water, carbonates and

juices is expected to contribute to the reduction of volume and value sales for large firms

that traditionally dominated soft drinks. Many new players leverage their products on

comparably lower prices, fashionable pack sizes and designs to lure consumers.

Research investigating the relationships of leader and follower psychological capital,

service climate, and job performance in United States police have been carried out (Fred

et al., 2010) results revealing that leader psychological capital was positively related to

follower performance, with this relationship mediated by follower psychological capital.

According Walumbwa et al (2005) his study explored the nature of the relationship

between transformational leadership and two work-related attitudes, organizational

commitment and job satisfaction, by comparing Kenya and the United States. The results

13
showed that transformational leadership has a strong and positive effect on organizational

commitment and job satisfaction in both cultures

Research by Leleiet al (2015), examined organizational citizenship behavior in Kenyan

banks focusing on Altruism and Courtesy as independent variables, and their impact on

performance. In the recent past, Coca-Colamarket share has dropped to 48.6% from

51.3% (Statista 2016) due to domestic competition. According to human resource records

for Nairobi bottlers 2016, on average in the last 3 years, the company is losing 5%

annually of its critical staff to direct competition.

Every organization’s members share a constellation of skills, abilities, and motivations

that differentiates it from every other firm. To gain advantage, managers must be able to

capitalize on these individual differences as jobs are designed, teams are formed, work is

structured, and change is facilitated. Hence this study sought to investigate the

relationship between organizational behaviour and performance at Nairobi Bottlers

Limited located in Nairobi County as a strategy to maintain competitive edge.

1.3 Objectives of the Study

1.3.1 General Objective

The main objective of this study was to investigate the extent in which organizational

behaviour influence performance with a special reference to Nairobi Bottlers Limited, a

soft drink manufacturing company in Kenya.

1.3.2 Specific Objectives

The study was guided by the following specific objectives;

14
 i. To determine the influence of leadership on the performance of Nairobi Bottlers

Limited.

ii. To explore the influence of employee motivation on performance of Nairobi

Bottlers Limited.

iii. To establish how employee job satisfaction influences the performance of Nairobi

Bottlers Limited.

iv. To evaluate the influence of group and team work on performance of Nairobi

Bottlers Limited.

1.4 Research Questions

This study sought to answer the following research questions:

i. Does leadership influence performance of Nairobi Bottlers Limited?

ii. What is the influence of employee motivation on performance of Nairobi Bottlers

Limited?

iii. What is the effect of employee job satisfaction on performance of Nairobi Bottlers

Limited?

iv. How significantly do group and team work of employee’s influence performance

of Nairobi Bottlers Limited?

1.5 Significance of Study

The study would contribute to the existing knowledge in organizational management and

to increasing performance standards amongst the management professionals and the

entire industry through behaviour modification thus providing a competitive edge. It

would help improve the management of beverage organizations. It would also provide

15
information to the policy makers and planners in both governmental and non-

governmental organizations on areas of focus and avoid duplication of interventions of

related services. The study will provide a platform on a number of management policies

for more research in order to establish more of them and how they influence the

employee management within and/or without the scope of study. This study would be

used for the future and references.

1.6 Scope of the Study

The conceptual scope of this study lied on the influence of organizational behaviour on

the performance of corporate organizations in Kenya. The specific context of interest was

Nairobi Bottlers Limited in Kenya. It is believed that this would provide adequate

information for the study and therefore give reliable results and findings.

1.7 Limitations of the study

One of the limitations of the study will be the challenge of insufficiency of funds to meet

all the financial obligations adequately. However the researcher will optimize available

resources in the prevailing circumstances. Unwillingness of respondents to take part in

giving required information is anticipated as a challenge. The problem will be curbed by

assuring respondents that the study is merely academic and their information will be

handled with confidentiality.

1.8 Organization of the Study

The study comprises five chapters. Chapter one involves background of the study,

statement of the problem, purpose of the study, objectives of the study, research

16
questions, and significance of the study, limitation of the study, scope of the study and

organization of the study.

In chapter two literature review includes the introduction, theoretical review: Mars model

of individual behaviour, Abraham Maslow hierarchy of needs, ERG theory and

Herzberg’s two factor theories. Empirical review: Leadership, employee motivation, job

satisfaction and group/team work and their influence on firm performance, and

Conceptual Framework.

Chapter three deals with research methodology involving introduction, research design,

target population, sampling design, rationale for sample selection, data collection

instruments, questionnaires, validity of the research instrument, reliability, data analysis

and ethical considerations. Chapter four dealt with data analysis, findings and

interpretation of the results. Finally chapter five include summary of findings,

conclusions and recommendations of the study.

17
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the literature review on strategies and organizational

competitiveness. It summarizes the information from other scholars who have carried out

their research in the same field of study. The chapter presents the theoretical review,

empirical review, summary the research gaps and the conceptual framework.

2.2 Theoretical Review

This study was anchored on two theories; Mars model of individual behaviour, Abraham

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory and ERG theory.

2.2.1 MARS model of individual behavior

MARS model explain individual behavior as a result of internal and external factors or

influences acting together. The name of the model is an acronym of the four major factors

that have an effect on employee performance, which are; Motivation, Abilities, Role

perception and Situational Factors (MARS). Individual values, personality, perceptions,

attitudes, and stress form a basis on which the factors interact (Heller 2004). These

factors are highly interrelated in organizations. Unless all of the elements of the MARS

model are satisfied, employee behavior and performance will be affected and negatively

impacted. For example, enthusiastic and employee with high motivation level who is

skilled in running the work (ability), and understands the job duties (roles perception)

well, will not be able to perform their job well if there is a lack of the adequate and

sufficient resources (situational factors).

18
2.2.2 Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory

Abraham Maslow proposed the theory called hierarchy of needs theory. Maslow believed

that within every individual, there exists a hierarchy of five needs and that each level of

need must be satisfied before an individual pursues the next higher level of need, Maslow

(1943). According to Abraham Maslow's theory, only a small percentage of the

population reaches the level of self-actualization. The organization can satisfy its

employees’ various needs. In the long run, physiological needs may be satisfied by the

person’s paycheck, but it is important to remember that pay may satisfy other needs such

as safety and esteem as well. Providing generous benefits that include health insurance

and company-sponsored retirement plans, as well as offering a measure of job security,

will help satisfy safety needs.

Social needs may be satisfied by having a friendly environment and providing a

workplace conducive to collaboration and communication with others. Company picnics

and other social get-togethers may also be helpful if the majority of employees are

motivated primarily by social needs. Providing promotion opportunities at work,

recognizing a person’s accomplishments verbally or through more formal reward systems

and job titles are ways of satisfying esteem needs. Finally, self-actualization need may be

satisfied by the provision of development and growth opportunities on or off the job, as

well as by work that is interesting and challenging.

2.2.3 ERG theory

ERG theory was developed by Clayton Alderfer in1941. It is a modification of Maslow’s

hierarchy of needs. Instead of the five needs that are hierarchically organized; Alderfer

19
proposed that basic human needs may be grouped under three categories - Existence,

Relatedness, and Growth. The theory's name is based on the first letter of each need.

Existence refers to our concern with basic materials such as hunger, thirst and safe

condition. Relatedness on the other hand, refers to the motivation we have for

maintaining interpersonal relationships like involvement with family, friends, co-workers

and employers. Finally growth is the intrinsic desire for personal development for

example, the desire to be creative, productive and to complete meaningful tasks. The

implication of this theory is that we need to recognize the multiple needs that may be

driving individuals at a given point to understand their behavior and properly motivate

them.

2.2.4 Fredrick Herzberg’s two factor theory

In this study, the theory used as backdrop in measuring the effect of non-financial

incentives on the job satisfaction of Nairobi Bottlers employees was Herzberg's Two-

Factor Theory. Psychologist Frederick Herzberg (1966) investigated the question “what

do people want from their jobs?” Through this question Herzberg identified the factors

that lead to extreme satisfaction (motivators) and extreme dissatisfaction (hygiene).

Factors leading to satisfaction such as achievement, recognition, responsibility, the work

itself, advancement and growth are also called intrinsic factors, whereas those leading to

dissatisfaction, when not present, such as company policy and administration,

supervision, interpersonal relations, and working conditions are called extrinsic factors.

Herzberg argued that there are two distinct human needs portrayed, namely as

physiological needs that can be fulfilled by money, for example, to purchase food and

20
shelter, and the psychological need to achieve and grow, and this need is fulfilled by

activities that cause one to grow, Biris (2011)

2.3 Empirical Review

2.3.1 Leadership and Organizational Performance

A manager's approach can have an influence on the productivity of her staff and the rest

of the organization. Organizational efficiency is dependent on each department, led by its

manager, performing its job and contributing to the success of the company. Thus the

way in which a manager makes decisions, delegates responsibility and interacts with

employees can affect the entire organization(Harris, 2006). Leadership styles can affect

communication and productivity. Bureaucratic leaders tend to slow up communication by

checking to make sure that every part of the message and delivery method follows strict

company guidelines. This can hamper communication and prevent employees from

getting instructions and information they need to do their jobs. Leaders who do not solicit

input from others can distort information to fit their own needs thus information that is

distributed throughout the organization becomes inaccurate and ineffective.

Employee input can be valuable in creating more efficient work methods and improving

productivity. But the leadership style used by management can affect the effectiveness of

employee input. A manager with a democratic leadership styles accepts input from

employees and uses the pertinent information to improve the work process. Other

managers may completely dismiss employee input because they do not want to make any

changes to the way things are done. Another response could be to allow employees to do

what they want in terms of work processes, which would create procedural problems

21
throughout the company (George, 2012). A staff that feels motivated and has confidence

in the company's vision can be productive. Leadership style has a direct influence on

employee morale. Autocratic leaders that do not seek input from employees tend to

alienate their staff and diminish the employee feeling of involvement. Democratic leaders

are open to employee involvement and allow employees to feel part of the company's

success. When the staff feels alienated, morale and productivity suffer. A manager that

involves employees in the company's operations builds morale and improves

productivity.

Managers who set clear goals maximize employee productivity. Managerial style also has

an effect on how goals are set. A transformational leader uses high energy and inspiration

to motivate employees to success. These kinds of leaders set specific employee goals and

give employees all the tools they need to reach those goals. A leadership style

emphasizing empowerment can creates clear goals. Empowered employees make their

own day-to-day decisions, but they are guided by strict company goals. A servant

leadership style is one where the manager tends to follow the staff consensus. It can be

difficult to develop and maintain production goals when a manager does not enforce

adherence to company mandates (Harris, 2006).

Leadership refers to the behavior/ attitude of a leader to collect and direct the individuals

towards any goal. Leadership is a communication process of leader and individuals. So

the effectiveness of an organization depends upon the effective leader and effective

leader is that person who has an effective leadership style. Leadership is a very important

factor for any organization or group.

22
There are three famous ways in which we can describe leadership from different

perspectives (Buchanan, 2006).Achieve target through others which means that there are

lot of leaders who have been working hard to lead their teams or groups towards the

success yet this achievement wouldn’t have been possible without the participation of

every member of the team. So it is fair to provide the true definition of leadership which

includes those helping hands. In the past leaders have been using hierarchy and issuance

of an order to complete the given task. But the leaders of the modern times have come up

with a different approach and changed it to the investment of trust to their people, with

skilled employees working together in a friendly environment to achieve the goals.

Mostly in the organizations management styles are widely spoken rather than leadership

styles. This style of leadership basically involves ruling out of position less leadership

and welcomes the informal one. The only difference is you do not claim certain powers

on members. Dominating power of leadership: This type of leadership explains the

individual who stands out and is dominant in a group or tribe is said to be their leader. It

simply explains that leader is meant to have power over his people by holding top

position for certain duration of time. This basically needs the mutual understandings

between the people that they will obey the rules. In this type of leadership one doesn’t

have to be a good motivator relational leader of the people.

Positive change towards the better journey: In this type of leadership it is basically

challenge for the status quo towards a better world. Leader is said to have courage to

stand up and let them heard even if it means a great risk to them. But in this type of

leadership you don’t have to hold a formal appointment as long as you think that change

is needed off you go and challenge the status quo. This also gives chance to employees to

23
become a leader even though they don’t have the right skills or are authorized to take

charge.

2.3.2 Employee Motivation and Organizational Performance

Motivation is the key of a successful organization to maintain the continuity of the work

in a powerful manner and help organizations to survive. Motivation is finding a need

inside the employees and help to achieve it in a smooth process. Motivating the staff

leads to broaden their skill to meet the organizational demands. Each branch manager

should have the responsibility to work with the staff to find out their individual needs and

put them side by side to the organization needs (Dogan, 2009).

Dissatisfaction also, might work as guidance for the managers to explore the need of the

staff and start with it to motivate them and attract them to do better performance.

Motivation drives the human beings to reach their goals and organization goals through

every challenge and constraint they face in their workplace; considering it as an

advantage to go ahead in the direction they have put for themselves. The need of

achievement always results in a desire to do extra effort to have something done better,

and have the desire for success. The manager should motivate the employees to get things

done through them without asking them what to do. Extrinsic motivation on the other

hand, results from the attainment of externally administered rewards including pay,

materials, possessions, prestige, and positive evaluations among others. Hamner and

Hammer (1976), have carried out research on the behaviorist tradition of changing

behavior by manipulating extrusive contingencies, Maslow (1943) addressed similar

needs.

24
Whether in the form of wages, piecework or any other incentive pay, bonuses, stock

options, company-paid insurance, or any of the other things that may be given to people

for performance, money is important. The way to ensure that money has meaning, as a

reward for accomplishment and as a way of giving people pleasure from

accomplishment, is to base compensation as much as possible on performance (Koontz

and Weihrich, 1990; Edwin, 1993).

According to Koontz &Weihrich (1990), this is the attempt to build into jobs a higher

sense of challenge and achievement. A job may be enriched in variety, by giving workers

more freedom in deciding about such things as work methods, sequence, and pace or the

acceptance or rejection of materials; giving workers a feeling of personal responsibility

for their tasks; taking steps to make sure that workers can see how their tasks contribute

to a finished product and the welfare of an enterprise; involving workers in the analysis

and change of physical aspects of their work environment, such as layout of the office or

plant temperature, lightening and cleanliness.

People can be taught to become more motivated showing them how to deconstruct tasks

and challenges, and how to feel less intimidated by their job roles. Demonstrating to them

how to cope in the workplace can lead directly to improved motivation (Daniel, 2001).

The managers may decide to sponsor employees for further training at the expense of the

company. This can work as a way of motivating and retaining qualified employees.

Despite mixed feelings about team-building activities, the fact that they encourage people

to work together outside the office environment can be a definite advantage. They can

25
encourage healthy competition and give each member of staff the opportunity to be on

the winning team. Improving team relationships can result in increased productivity and

morale, and can lead to a much happier and healthier working environment. Such

exercises can also help in the resolution of pre-existing issues within the team (Kurt,

2007).

2.3.3 Job satisfaction and organizational performance

Job satisfaction of employees plays a very vital role on the performance of an

organization. It is essential to know as to how employees can be retained through making

them satisfied and motivated to achieve extraordinary results. Target and achievement

depends on employee satisfaction and in turn contribute for organizational success and

growth, enhances the productivity, and increases the quality of work (Steven, 2008). It is

indispensable for an organization to exactly feel as to what employees feel, think, and

wish and to discover and make strategies that how the staff dedication and commitment

can be improved. Through this initiative business outcomes can be improved,

productivity can be enhanced, commitment can get strengthened. Increasing staff

satisfaction is very vital and important factor for the success of an organization(Kreitner,

2001).

It is the general understanding that job satisfaction is an attitude towards job and

organizational performance depends on staff satisfaction. Persons having high level of

job satisfaction hold positive attitudes towards his or her job, while a person who is

dissatisfied with his or her job holds negative attitudes about the job and even about the

organization (Saan, 2004).It is factual that employee satisfaction is an innermost concern

26
in the business. It is a multi-factorial construct. Employee satisfaction contains basic

factors, excitement factors. Basic Factors are the minimum requirements that cause

dissatisfaction. Excitement factors increase employee’s satisfaction and performance

factors result in satisfaction only when performance is high (Rachel, 2008).

Employee satisfaction is closely related to productivity which is then related to firm

profitability. Employee satisfaction has a positive persuade on organizational

performance. Beside this, firm profitability has a reasonable non-recursive effect on

employee satisfaction. Employee satisfaction plays a considerable role in enhancing the

firm profitability and improving operational performance of organizations and quality of

goods and services. There is no doubt in it that employee satisfaction is critical to attain

quality and profitability in organization. Employee satisfaction impacts quality at

industry, to achieve quality and profitability at organization, employee satisfaction is

fundamental and without it, organization cannot think of being successful (Jones, 2006).

An imperative relationship exists between employee and organization. This employee

organization relationship plays an important role in success of any organization. There is

a need of developments in it. Managers are believed to develop a role relationship in

which actions and decisions should promote the interest of organization. Employee

involvement and contributions in organization is outcome of the interest. The quality of

employee organization relationship requires fulfillment of needs, quality of interaction,

adaptability and identification. Employee empowerment is also an effective way of

satisfying them. When employees are given employee empowerment, then it leads to job

satisfaction (Dawal, 2009).

27
Employee satisfaction is in fact job satisfaction. Job satisfaction is an important job

organization factor. Both of them are significantly related. Therefore, it is necessary to

maintain job satisfaction so that employees can be motivated. In studying job satisfaction,

job rotation, work method, problem solving and goal setting are important factors to

consider and job satisfaction is also influenced by employee’s are, marital status and

work experience (Mullins, 2007). Lawler (2011), cites six separate studies of the

relationship between pay and performance, and finds that “their evidence indicates that

pay is not very closely related to performance in many organizations that claim to have

merit increase salary systems. The studies suggest that many business organizations do

not do a very good job of tying pay to performance. This conclusion is rather surprising

in light of many companies’ very frequent claims that their pay systems are based on

merit.

It is particularly surprising that pay does not seem to be related to performance at the

managerial level. Thus, the Medoff and Abraham (2007) evidence seems to be indicative

of general performance measurement and compensation systems, and we have no

thorough understanding of the forces responsible for these practices. Other forms of

compensation systems include Profit Sharing, Gain Sharing. Under profit-sharing,

payouts are based on organization-wide profits. The plan has two potential advantages.

First, it may provide an incentive for employees to act in the best interests of the

organization, rather than pursuing narrower goals. Second, by making a portion of

compensation vary with organization profits, an organization can align its labor costs

more closely with its ability to pay.

28
Thus, during business downturns, it has fewer fixed labor costs. Weitzman and Kruse

(1990) have provided a comprehensive review of profit-sharing research. Based on

previous attitude surveys, they concluded that both employees and employers believe that

profit-sharing has positive effects on organization performance. Further, they found

consistent evidence of statistically significant and positive links between profit-sharing

and organization performance, usually defined as value added. Nevertheless, Gerhart and

Milkovich (1990) raised some issues that might temper the positive evaluation reached by

Weitzman and Kruse. As one example, the use of value added as a dependent variable

carries potential risks because it is not a measure of physical productivity. Instead, it is

defined as the degree to which the price of a product exceeds the cost of factor inputs

(e.g., labor). Obviously, the price of a product can be influenced by factors other than

productivity.

Weitzman and Kruse (2009),seem to recognize this and other potential problems with the

profit-sharing literature. They note that "A limitation of the econometric studies is that

they shed little light on the mechanisms through which profit sharing may affect

productivity" (p. 139). The reason for interpreting the profit-sharing research cautiously

is that there are both conceptual problems and roadblocks that have arisen in practice. For

example, from a motivational point of view, it is not clear that any single employee will

see much link between his or her performance and the organization profits because of the

large number of people and factors that influence profits (i.e., "line of sight" problem).

This, together with the “free rider” problem suggests that the motivational effect of such

a plan may be limited.

29
2.3.4 Group and Team work and organizational performance

Teamwork has emerged in recent years as one of the most important ways in which work

is being reorganized (Osterman 1994; Waterson et al. 1997). This idea of delegating

responsibilities to work groups has been diffused under a range of different labels.

Human resource management (HRM), modern socio-technical theory, business process

re-engineering and lean production all embrace the core principles of team-working

(Benders and Van Hootegem1999; De Sitter et al. 1997; Kleinschmidt and Pekruhl 1994;

Kuipers and Van Amelsvoort1990) and suggest an important link with organizational

performance (Hammer and Champy 1993; Katzenbach and Smith 1993;Womack et al.

1991).

Various arguments have been advanced to explain the effectiveness of team-based work.

For example, both socio-technical theory(e.g. De Sitter 1994; Pasmore 1988) and work

design theory (Hackman and Oldham 1976)have focused on the design of the group’s

task to explain positive results; self-leadership theory has identified supervisory behaviors

that help self-managing teams achieve success (Manz & Sims 1987); and theories of

participative management argue that certain aspects of the organizational context

contribute to the effectiveness of teams (e.g. Lawler 1992; Glew et al. 1995).

However, theoretical arguments about the effectiveness of teams are not enough. The

next logical step in the cycle of scientific enquiry is the testing of these theories in

practice. Various methodological approaches can be taken to assess the benefits

associated with teams. Field experiments or intensive case studies allow the careful

monitoring of the effects of workplace changes on outcomes, qualitatively and

30
quantitatively as well as over considerable periods of time. Such research provides

insight and suggests hypotheses, but it is difficult to generalize on the basis of its findings

(Ichniowski et al. 1996, 303).

In contrast, survey-based research, if appropriately conducted, does allow generalization

to the population at large. Two reviews of the team working literature carried out

approximately ten years ago showed that some survey-based research was already in

existence (Cohen and Bailey 1997; Guzzo and Dickson 1996), but they also indicated that

very little of this empirical work considered issues of overall organizational performance.

Indeed, some authors have argued that the evidence regarding the impact of teamwork at

the level of the workplace is often based upon anecdotes or descriptive case analyses

(Appelbaum et al. 2000, 13; Cohen and Ledford 1994, 13–15). However, over the last

decade, studies have begun to emerge that attempt to evaluate group performance at

different levels of the organization and to assess the wider benefits of teamwork.

Team work and groups in an organization exist to improve productivity among

employees. It helps to motivate, accommodate and make employee efficient and effective

in their work.

2.4 Conceptual Framework

A conceptual framework is a basic structure that consists of certain abstract blocks which

represent the observational, the experiential and the analytical aspects of a process or

system being conceived. It is a set of broad ideas and principles taken from relevant fields

of enquiry and used to structure a subsequent presentation. The interconnection of

31
independent and dependent variables completes the framework for certain expected

outcomes.

Independent Variables Dependent Variable

Figure 2.1: The Conceptual Framework

Source: Author (2016)

32
 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

In this chapter the research identified the procedures and techniques that were used in the

collection, processing, analysis and presentation of data. Specifically the following

subsections were included; research design, target population, data collection

instruments, data collection procedures and finally data analysis.

3.2 Research Design

Research design refers to the method used to carry out a research. Orodho (2003) defines

a research design as the scheme, outline or plan that is used to generate answers to

research problems. Research design is an understanding of conditions for collection and

analysis of data in a way that combines their relationships with the research to the

economy of procedures. The research study applied a descriptive study design since the

influence of the independent variable on the dependent variable was measured.

3.3 Target Population

According to Ngechu (2004), a population is a well-defined or set of people, services,

elements, events, group of things or households that are being investigated. The sampling

plan describes how the sampling unit, sampling frame, sampling procedures and the

sample size for the study. The researcher focused on all the employees of Nairobi

Bottlers Plant. The current number of employee is 1300 according to the Human

Resource Department at the head office.

33
3.4 Sample

A purposive sampling approach was used in this study to allow the researcher to pick

random staff from various departments within the company. A sample of 20-30% of the

entire population was significant for the study to draw conclusions and recommendations,

(Mugenda and Mugenda, 1999). The population being large and given the limitations of

time and resources, 20% of the population of 1300 was taken. Therefore the sample was

260 employees of Nairobi Bottlers.

3.5 Data Collection Process

Primary data was used in the study. The data was collected from respondents using

closed ended and open ended questionnaire. Drop and pick method was used to

administer the questionnaire. Hence each respondent received the same set of questions

in exactly the same way. The respondents were made aware of purpose of the research

and will be assured of their confidentiality. Questionnaires are suitable to obtain

important information about the population and are said to reach large number of subject

who are able to read and write independently (Orodho, 2004).

3.6 Validity and Reliability of the study

3.6.1 Reliability

According to Mugenda and Mugenda (2003) Validity is the accuracy and meaningfulness

of inferences that are based on the research results. This represents the relevance of the

data collected and conclusions drawn from. A small pre-test on a sample was done at the

headquarters on the managers sampled and their test analyzed before a full data collection

34
exercise will be done. This was to enable the researcher fine tune any areas that are not

clear to enable valid data collection for the analysis.

3.6.2 Validity

Reliability is the consistency of a set of measurement items (Hair et al. 2000). The

researcher used the commonly used internal consistency measure called Cronbach’s

Alpha (α) which is generated by the data analysis software SPSS. It indicates the extent

to which a set of test items can be treated as measuring a single latent variable (Cronbach,

1951). The reliability test of 0.7 is recommended for any researchable study.

3.7 Data Analysis

Collected data will be chronologically arranged with respect to the questionnaire outline

to ensure that the correct code will be entered for the correct variable cleaned and

tabulated. The tabulated data will be analyzed using descriptive and regression analysis

with the aid of Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS 21.0). Multiple regression

statistics was used to establish the relationship between organisational behaviour and

performance among based on the regression model shown here below

The model for the study was specified as follows;

P=α0 +β1M+β2Js+β3L +β4Gt+εi

Where;

P = Organizational Performance

α0 - intercept coefficient

M –Employee motivation

Js –Job satisfaction

35
 L – Organizational Leadership

Gt – Group and Teamwork

εi – error term (extraneous variables)

β1,β2,β3and β4=regression coefficients

3.8 Ethical Considerations

Informed consent was obtained from all those participating in the study. Those not

willing to participate in the study were under no obligation to do so. Respondents’ names

were indicated anywhere in the data collection tools for confidentiality and information

gathered was only used for the purposes of this academic study. The necessary research

authorities were consulted and permission granted.

36
 CHAPTER FOUR

DATA ANALYSIS, INTERPRETATION AND PRESENTATION

4.1 Introduction

In this chapter, the researcher presents the findings of the analysis of the research data

that was gathered exclusively using structured questionnaires. The researcher analyzed

the collected data using SPSS software through descriptive and inferential statistics.

4.1.1 Response Rate

The researcher targeted 260 employees of Nairobi Bottlers. However, out the 260

questionnaires that were issued out to these respondents by the researcher, 190 of them

were dully filled and returned to the researcher. This gave a response rate of 73%. The

response rate concurred with Babbie (2004) who asserted that return rates of above 50%

are acceptable to analyze and publish, 60% is good and 70% is very good and above 80%

is excellent.

Table 4.1: Response Rate

Response Rate Frequency Percentage
Response 190 73
Non Response 70 27
Total 260 100

4.1.2 Validity and Reliability Test

In order to determine the validity and reliability of the research instruments, a pilot

testing was conducted and a Cronbach’s alpha, was used as a benchmark. Orodho,

(2004), recommends an r of at least 0.7 or above for reliable data. The findings are

indicated in Table 4.2 below.

37
Table 4.2: Validity and Reliability Test
Validity and Reliability Test No. Of Items Cronbach’s alpha
Organizational Leadership 7 0.723
Employee Motivation 6 0.717
Job Satisfaction 5 0.720
Group Team Work 6 0.715
Organizational Performance 6 0.733

Table 4.2 above indicates the extent to which organizational behaviour influences

performance with a special reference to Nairobi Bottlers Limited, a soft drink

manufacturing company in Kenya. From the findings, organizational leadership had a

Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.723, employee motivation had 0.717, job satisfaction

had 0.720, group team work had 0.715 and organizational performance had 0.733. It is

therefore clear that all the coefficients were more than 0.7 and therefore the scales used

were highly reliable.

4.2 Demographic Information

The general information about the respondents who took part in the study are indicated in

subsequent sections.

4.2.1 Age of the Respondents

The age of the respondents is indicated in Table 4.3 below.

Table 4.3: Age of the Respondents

Frequency Percentage
20-24 Years 3 1.6
25-29 Years 36 18.9
30-34 Years 38 20.0
35-39 Years 37 19.5
40-44 Years 39 20.5
Above 45 Years 37 19.5
Total 190 100.0

38
From the findings, 1.6% of the respondents were aged 20-24 years, 18.9% had 25-29

years, 20% had 30-34 years, 19.5% had 35-39 years, 20.5% had 40-44 years and 19.5 had

over 45 years of age.

4.2.2 Gender of the Respondents

The study sought to establish the gender of the respondents and the findings are indicated

in Figure 4.1.

Figure 4.1: Gender of the Respondents

From the findings, 59% of the respondents were females while 41% were males. This

indicates that the study was representative of all gender.

4.2.3 Educational Level of the Respondents

The study sought to examine the level of education of the respondents and the findings

are indicated in Figure 4.2 below.

39
Figure 4.2: Educational Level of the Respondents

From the Figure 4.2 above, 1.6% of the respondents had secondary school education,

39.5% had diplomas, 39.5 had degrees and 19.5% had post graduates. This indicates that

the respondents of the study were literate enough and therefore they had knowledge of

how to effectively handle the questionnaires.

4.2.4 Marital Status of the Respondents

The study sought to examine the marital status of the respondents and the findings are

indicated in Table 4.4

Table 4.4: Marital Status of the Respondents

Frequency Percentage
Single 41 21.6
Married 112 58.9
Others 37 19.5
Total 190 100.0

From the findings, 21.6% of the respondents were single, 58.9% were married and 19.5%

had other marital status. This indicates that most of the respondents were responsible

enough.

40
4.2.5 Current Job Position of the Respondents

The study sought to examine the current position of the respondents and the findings are

indicated in Table 4.5.

Table 4.5: Current Job Position of the Respondents

Frequency Percentage
Administrative 36 18.9
Technician 39 20.5
Executive 38 20.0
Senior Executive 37 19.5
Senior Manager 40 21.1
Total 190 100.0

From the findings, 18.9% of the respondents held administrative positions, 20.5% held

technical positions, 20% held executive positions, 19.5% held senior executive positions

and 21.1% held senior managerial positions. It is therefore clear that the study engaged

respondents from all the positions and levels with the organizational establishment.

4.2.6 Level of the Job

The study sought to evaluate the level of the respondents and the findings are indicated in

Table 4.6.

Table 4.6: Level of the Job

Frequency Percentage
Entry Level 75 39.5
Supervisory Level 75 39.5
Managerial Level 40 21.1
Total 190 100.0

From the findings, 39.5% of the respondents were at entry level, 39.5% were at

supervisory level and 21.1% were at managerial level.

41
4.2.7 Years of Service
The period in years that respondents had worked with the organization is indicated in

Table 4.7.

Table 4. 7: Years of Service

Frequency Percentage
Less than 2 years 3 1.6
2-5 years 36 18.9
6-10 years 77 40.5
Above 10 years 74 38.9
Total 190 100.0

From the findings, 1.6% of the respondents had worked for less than 2 years, 18.9% for

2-5 years, 40.5% for 6-10 years and 38.9% for above 10 years. This indicates that

majority of the respondents had worked in their organization for a relatively longer

period of time and therefore they were more knowledgeable and informed.

4.3 Organizational Leadership

Several statements describing the general perceptions of the respondents towards the

leadership nature in their current organizations were carefully identified by the

researcher. The respondents were then allowed to indicate the extent of their agreement

with each of these statement using a Likert scale of 1-5 where 1 strongly disagree, 2

disagree, 3 neutral, 4 agree and 5 strongly agree.

42
Table 4. 8: Organizational Leadership
Description Mean Std. Dev
I am satisfied with the way my organization provides me with
3.02 .633
feedback
The feedback I receive on how I do my job is highly relevant 3.02 .902
My organization is good at providing recognition for good
3.17 1.17
performance
The feedback I receive agrees with what I have actually
4.36 .816
achieved
I think that my organization attempts to conduct performance
4.11 .829
appraisal the best possible way
My organization seems more engaged in providing positive
feedback for good performance than criticizing poor 3.39 .794
performance
Performance appraisal is valuable to me as well as to my
3.97 .682
organization

From the findings of the study, respondents being satisfied with the way their

organization provides them with feedback had a mean of 3.02 with standard deviation of

0.633; the feedback respondents receive on how they do their job is highly relevant had

mean of 3.02 with standard deviation of 0.902; the organization is good at providing

recognition for good performance had a mean of 3.17 with standard deviation of 1.17.

The feedback that respondents gave agreed with what they have actually achieved, the

mean was 4.36 with standard deviation of 0.816; respondents thinking that their

organization attempts to conduct performance appraisal the best possible way, the mean

was 4.11 with standard deviation of 0.829; the organization seems more engaged in

providing positive feedback for good performance than criticizing poor performance had

a mean of 3.39 with standard deviation of 0.794 and performance appraisal is valuable to

43
respondents as well as to their organization had a mean of 3.97 with standard deviation of

0.682.

4.4 Employee Motivation

A number of statements that describe employee motivation were carefully identified by

the researcher. The respondents were then requested to indicate the extent of their

agreement with each of these statements using a Likert scale of 1-5 where 1= strongly

disagree, 2= disagree, 3 neutral, 4 agree and 5 strongly agree.

Table 4.9: Employee Motivation

Description Mean Std. Dev
The tasks that I do at work are enjoyable 3.78 .408
My job is so interesting that it is a motivation in itself 3.22 1.15
The tasks that do at work are themselves representing a
3.36 1.02
driving power in my job
My job is meaningful 4.03 1.09
I feel lucky being paid for a job I like this much 3.81 .750
The job is like a hobby to me 3.00 1.40

From the findings of the study, the tasks that respondents do at work are enjoyable had a
mean of 3.78 with standard deviation of 0.408, the job is so interesting that it is a
motivation in itself had mean of 3.22 with standard deviation of 1.15; the tasks that
respondents do at work are themselves representing a driving power in my job had a
mean of 3.36 with standard deviation of 1.02.

According to Koontz and Weihrich (1990), a job may be enriched in a variety of ways;
by giving workers more freedom in deciding about such things as work methods,
sequence, and pace or the acceptance or rejection of materials; giving workers a feeling
of personal responsibility for their tasks; taking steps to make sure that workers can see
how their tasks contribute to a finished product and the welfare of an enterprise;
involving workers in the analysis and change of physical aspects of their work
environment, such as layout of the office or plant temperature, lightening and cleanliness.

44
In respect to whether the job is meaningful, the mean was 4.03 with standard deviation of

1.09; respondents feeling lucky being paid for a job they like this much had a mean of

3.81 with standard deviation of 0.750 and the job is like a hobby to respondents had a

mean of 3.00 with standard deviation of 1.40.

4.5 Job Satisfaction

Several statements that describe job satisfaction were carefully identified by the

researcher. The respondents were then requested to indicate the extent of their agreement

with each of these statement using a Likert scale of 1-5 where 1 strongly disagree, 2

disagree, 3 neutral, 4 agree and 5 strongly agree.

Table 4.10: Job Satisfaction

Description Mean Std. Dev
I will probably look for a new job in the next year 3.40 1.03
I may quit my present job next year 3.22 .744
I will likely actively look for a new job within the next three
4.19 .755
years
I often think about quitting my present job 3.80 .969
I do not see much prospects for the future in this organization 4.01 .634

On whether respondents will probably look for a new job in the next year; the mean was

3.40 with standard deviation of 1.03; respondents may quit their present job next year had

a mean of 3.22 with standard deviation of 0.744 and respondents will likely actively look

for a new job within the next three years had a mean of 4.19 with standard deviation of

0.755.

With regard to whether respondents often think about quitting their present job, the mean
was 3.80 with standard deviation of 0.969 and on whether respondents do not see much
prospects for the future in this organization had a mean of 4.01 with standard deviation of
0.634. The finding is in line with (Saan, 2004) who held thatit is the general

45
understanding that job satisfaction is an attitude towards job and organizational
performance depends on staff satisfaction. Persons having high level of job satisfaction
hold positive attitudes towards his or her job, while a person who is dissatisfied with his
or her job holds negative attitudes about the job and even about the organization.

4.6 Group and Team work

The researcher identified several statements that describe group and team work and

respondents of the study were requested to indicate the extent of their agreement with

each of the statement using a Likert scale of 1-5 where 1 is strongly disagrees, 2 disagree,

3 neutral, 4 agree and 5 strongly agree.

Table 4.11: Group and Team work

Description Mean Std. Dev
I don’t feel emotionally attached to this organization 3.82 .760
I do not feel a strong sense of belonging to my organization 4.00 1.26
This organization has a great deal of personal meaning for me 3.82 .423
I really feel as if this organization’s problems are my own 3.18 1.16
I do not feel like “part of the family” at my organization 4.20 .750
I enjoy discussing my organization with people outside it 4.21 .740

From the findings, on whether respondents feel emotionally attached to the organization,

the mean was 3.82 with standard deviation of 0.760; respondents feeling a strong sense

of belonging to their organization had a mean of 4.00 with standard deviation of 1.26; the

organization having a great deal of personal meaning for respondents had a mean of 3.82

with standard deviation of 0.423; respondents feeling as if the organization’s problems

are their own had a mean of 3.18 with standard deviation of 1.16.

On respondents feeling like “part of the family” at their organization had a mean of 4.20

with standard deviation of 0.750 and the respondents enjoying the discussion of their

organization with people outside it had a mean of 4.21 with standard deviation of 0.740.

46
4.7 Organizational Performance

The study sought to determine how organizational behavior affects performance of

Nairobi Bottlers Ltd. The findings are indicated in subsequent sections.

4.7.1 Respondents’ Description of Performance

Respondents were requested to indicate how they would describe the performance of

their firm in the last three years.

Table 4. 12: Respondents’ Description of Performance

Frequency Percentage
Average 75 39.5
Good 78 41.1
Very Good 37 19.5
Total 190 100

From the findings in Table above, 39.5% of the respondents indicated that performance

of their firm in the last three years has been average, 41.1% indicated well and 19.5%

indicated very well.

4.7.2 Extent of Respondents’ Agreement on Performance and OB

Respondents were further requested to indicate the extent of their agreement on how

performance is influenced by organizational behavior.

47
Table 4. 13: Extent of Respondents’ Agreement on Performance and OB
Frequency Percentage
Neither agree nor disagree 73 38.4
Somewhat agree 79 41.6
Strongly agree 38 20.0
Total 190 100.0

From the responses of the study, it was established that 38.4% of the respondents were

not sure whether organizational behavior affects performance, 41.6% somewhat agreed

and 20% strongly agreed.

4.7.3 Organizational behavior patterns and Performance

The respondents of the study were requested to indicate the extent of their agreement on

the statements of organizational behaviour patterns and how they influence performance.

A Likert scale of 1-5 where 1= strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3 neutral, 4 agree and 5

strongly agree was used.

Table 4.14: Organizational behaviorpatterns and Performance

Description Mean Std. Dev
Organizational leadership 3.21 .740
Employee motivation 4.01 .642
Job satisfaction 3.79 .978
Group and team work 4.42 .495

On organizational leadership, the mean was 3.21 with standard deviation of 0.740;

employee motivation had a mean of 4.01 with standard deviation of 0.642; job

satisfaction had a mean of 3.79 with standard deviation of 0.978 and group and team

work had a mean of 4.42 with standard deviation of 0.495.

48
4.8 Regression Analysis

The researcher conducted multiple regression analysis to determine the relationship

between organizational behaviour and performance with a special reference to Nairobi

Bottlers Limited, a soft drink manufacturing company in Kenya.

Table 4. 15: Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
1 .811a .6574 .647 .09984

From the Model summary above, the value of R is 0.811, R square is 0.6574 and adjusted

R square is 0.647. With an R square of 0.6574, this indicates that 65.7% of the variation

in performance of Nairobi Bottlers Ltd is explained by the four independent variables of

the study. An R of 0.811 indicates that there is strong and positive correlation between

the variables of the study.

Table 4. 16: ANOVA

Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.
Regression 19.629 4 4.90725 88.739 .000b
Residual 10.223 185 .0553
Total 29.859 189

From the ANOVA Table above, the value of F calculated is 88.739 while F critical as

obtained from F tables is 0.0963. The value of F calculated is greater than F critical,

(88.739>0.0963) at 0.05 level of significance, this indicates that the overall regression

model was significant and therefore a reliable predictor for the study.

49
Table 4.17: Regression Coefficients
Unstandardized Standardized t Sig.
Model Coefficients Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) 3.393 .319 10.636 .000
Organizational Leadership .608 .006 .530 97.314 .000
Employee Motivation 1.796 .010 1.065 185.499 .000
Job Satisfaction .645 .007 .447 86.326 .000
Group and Teamwork 1.100 .006 .925 191.977 .000

From the Table above, the resultant equation therefore becomes:

P=3.393 +0.608L+1.796M+0.645Js +1.1Gt+εi

Where;

P = Organizational Performance; α0 - intercept coefficient; εi – error term (extraneous

variables); L – Organizational Leadership; M –Employee motivation; Js –Job

satisfaction and Gt – Group and Teamwork.

Therefore, when all the variables of the study were to be held constant, performance of

Nairobi Bottlers Ltd would be at 3.393; a unit increase in organizational leadership

holding other variables constant would increase performance by 0.608; a unit increase in

employee motivation holding other variables constant would increase performance by

1.796, a unit increase in job satisfaction holding other variables constant would increase

performance by 0.645 and a unit increase in group and team holding other variables

constant would increase performance by 1.10.

At 5% level of significance, the study established that the p values of all the independent

variables (organizational leadership, employee motivation, job satisfaction, group and

team work) had 0.000, 0.000, 0.000 and 0.000 respectively as p values. Since the p values

50
are less than 0.05, this indicates that all the independent variables were statistically

significant.

51
 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction

This chapter presents a summary of the research findings as per the objectives of the

study. There is also the conclusion of the study based on the findings. The chapter also

contains the conclusion of the study in line with the research findings. The

recommendations for further studies serves significant role to future scholars and

academicians.

5.2 Summary of the Findings

This section presents a summary of the research findings as per the objectives of the

study.

5.2.1 Organizational Leadership

The study established that the feedback that respondents gave agreed with what they have

actually achieved, the mean was 4.36 with standard deviation of 0.816; respondents

thinking that their organization attempts to conduct performance appraisal the best

possible way, the mean was 4.11 with standard deviation of 0.829. Performance appraisal

is valuable to respondents as well as to their organization had a mean of 3.97 with

standard deviation of 0.682.

5.2.2 Employee Motivation

From the findings of the study, the job is meaningful, the mean was 4.03 with standard

deviation of 1.09; respondents feeling lucky being paid for a job they like this much had

52
a mean of 3.81 with standard deviation of 0.750; the tasks that respondents do at work

are enjoyable had a mean of 3.78 with standard deviation of 0.408.

5.2.3 Job Satisfaction

The study established that respondents will likely actively look for a new job within the

next three years had a mean of 4.19 with standard deviation of 0.755. On whether

respondents do not see much prospects for the future in this organization had a mean of

4.01 with standard deviation of 0.634. With regard to whether respondents often think

about quitting my present job, the mean was 3.80 with standard deviation of 0.969.

5.2.4 Group and Team work

The study established that respondents enjoy the discussion of their organization with

people outside it had a mean of 4.21 with standard deviation of 0.740. Respondents feel

like “part of the family” at their organization had a mean of 4.20 with standard deviation

of 0.750. Respondents feel a strong sense of belonging to their organization had a mean

of 4.00 with standard deviation of 1.26.

5.2.5 Organizational Performance

The study established that group and team work had a mean of 4.42 with standard

deviation of 0.495.Employee motivation had a mean of 4.01 with standard deviation of

0.642. The job satisfaction had a mean of 3.79 with standard deviation of 0.978.

From regression analysis findings, it was established that at 5% level of significance, the

study established that the p values of all the independent variables (organizational

leadership, employee motivation, job satisfaction, group and team work) had 0.000,

0.000, 0.000 and 0.000 respectively as p values. Since the p values are less than 0.05, this

53
indicates that all the independent variables were statistically significant.

5.3 Conclusion

Organizational leadership significantly influences performance. The feedback that

respondents gave agreed with what they have actually achieved and respondents think

that their organization attempts to conduct performance appraisal the best possible way,

Employee motivation significantly affects performance of a firm. The job is meaningful.

Respondents feel lucky being paid for a job they like this much

Job satisfaction has significant effect on performance of a firm. Respondents will likely

actively look for a new job within the next three years. Respondents do not see many

prospects for the future in this organization.

Group and team-work significantly affects performance of an organization. Respondents

enjoy the discussion of their organization with people outside it. Respondents feel like

“part of the family” at their organization.

5.4 Recommendations of the Study

The management team of Nairobi Bottlers and other companies in Kenya should

strengthen their leadership styles so as to motivate employees. There is need to conduct

performance appraisal on a regular basis Nairobi Bottlers Ltd and other companies

operating in Kenya.

The human resource department of Nairobi Bottlers and all companies generally in

Kenya should ensure that jobs are meaningful to their employees through job rotations

54
and job enrichments.

There is need for organizations to provide incentives that enhance job satisfaction of their

employees. Companies in Kenya should encourage their employees to hold discussions

about the organization with people outside.

5.5 Suggestions for Further Studies

The current study was carried out using primary data that was gathered by the use of

structured questionnaires; it is therefore important that future studies be carried out using

both secondary and primary data. The current study investigated the effect of

Organizational leadership; Employee motivation; job satisfaction and group team work

on performance and from regression analysis, R square was 65.7% indicating that there

are other variables that affect performance and therefore future studies should be done to

establish these factors. There is also need to conduct a similar study in the public and

private sector in Kenya.

55
 REFERENCES

Adigum, I. O. and Geoffrey, M S. (1981). Sources of Job motivation and satisfaction

among British and Nigerian Employees, Journal of Social Psychology, 132 (3),
369-376.

Albanese, R. (1975). Management: Toward Accountability for Performance, Irwin Inc.

Illions.

Aldag, R. J. and Timothy, M. S, (1981). Management, South-Western : Ohio. 1981.

Becvar, D.S.andBecvar, R.J. (2003). Family therapy; a systemic integration (5thed.).

Boston;Allyn and Bacon.(3rd or 4th edition.)

Buchanan, K. (2006). Job performance and satisfaction. [online]. Available from:

http://ezinearticles.com/?Job-Performance-and-Satisfaction&id=290072
[Accessed: 15/06/10]

Carroll, S, Keflas, R. and Watson,(1964). Job Satisfaction and Productivity, Irwin :

Illinois.

Cook, C.W. &Hunsaker, P.L. (2001). Management and Organizational Behaviour (3rd
Edition). Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Cramer, M. Duncan, T. (1981). Commitment and Satisfaction of College Graduates in an

Engineering Firm, Journal of Social Psychology, 133 (6), 791-796. Personnel
Psychology Journal, 63 (4), 937 -963.

Cummings, K. (1970). Job satisfaction and Performance, Journal of Social Psychology,

141 (5) 541-563.

David, F, Joseph and William, K. (1970) Job satisfaction Commitment, Irwin : Illions.

DoganGursoy., (2009). Employee satisfaction, customer satisfaction, and financial

performance: An empirical examination. International Journal of Hospitality
Management 28 (2009) 245–253.

Drucker, P. F, (1989). Management Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices Ahamed Abad :

Allied Publishers.

Fred O. Walumbwa, Bani Orwa, Peng Wang, John J. Lawler (2010)Human Resource
Development Quaterly Journal, 16 (2), 235 – 256

Fred O. Walumbwa, Suzanne J. Peterson, Bruce J. Avoloi, Chad A. Hartnell

(2005)Internaional Journal of Business Humanities and Technology, 5 (4)

56
Gerhart, Barry &. Milkovich, George T. (1990). Organization Differences in Managerial
Compensation and Financial Performance”. Academy of Management Journal,
Vol. 33, 663-691.

Gerhart, Barry. &. Milkovich, George T. (1989). Salaries, Salary Growth, and
Promotions of Men and Women in a Large, Private Firms. In Roben Michael,
Heidi Harunann, &. Brigid O'Farrell (eds.), Pay Equity: Empirical Inquiries.
Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Gerhart, Barry. &. Milkovich, George T. (1990). “Employee Compensation: Research

and Practice”. In Marvin D. Dunnette&. Leaetta M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of
industrial &. Organizational psychology. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists
Press, Second Edition, Volume 3.

Gibson, J. L, John, M. Ivancevich, H. and Donnely Jr, (1991). Organizations, Behavior,

Structure, Process, Irwin : Illions.

Greenberg, J. and Robert, A. B. (1993). Behaviour in Organizations, Allyn and Bacon :

Needham.

Hamner, W.C. (1975). How To Ruin Motivation with Pay. Compensation Review 7:17-
27.

Harris, M. (2010). You can be happy at work...Sunday Times (Career section): July 11.
PG 1 [Accessed: 11/06/10]

Hartmann, Heidi I., Roos, Patricia, A. &. Treiman, Donald J. (1985). “An Agenda for
Basic Research on Comparable Worth”. In Heidi t. Hartmann (Ed.), Comparable
worth: New directions for research. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Hatcher, L. &.Ross, T.L. (1991).” From Individual Incentives to an Organization-Wide

Gain Sharing Plan: Effects on Teamwork and Product Quality”. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, U, 169-183.

Hertzberg, F. (1987) One more time : How do you motivate employees ? Harvard
Business Review, September, October.

Howell, W. C. and Rober L. D. (1974). Essentials of Industrial and Organizational

Psychology, The Dorsey Press: Illinois.

http://www.humanresources.hrvinet.com/importance-of-employee-
satisfaction/[Accessed: 15/09/2010]

Isaiah O. Ugboro, Kofi Obeng., (2000). Top management leadership, employee

empowerment, job satisfaction, and customer satisfaction in TQM organizations:
an empirical study. Journal of Quality Management 5 (2000) 247-272.

57
Jacqueline A-M. Coyle-Shapiro, Lynn M. Shore., (2007). The employee–organization
relationship: Where do we go from here? Human Resource Management Review
17 (2007) 166– 179.

Jensen, M.C. (1986a). Agency Cost of Free Cash Flow: Corporate Finance and
Takeovers. American Economic Review 76 (May): 323-329.

Jensen, M.C. (1986b). The Takeover Controversy: Analysis and Evidence. Midland
Corporate Finance Journal 4, No 2 (Summer): 6-32.

Jones, G.R., George, J.M. & Hill, C.W.L. (2006). Contemporary Management (4th
Edition). Boston: McGraw- Hill.

Kohn, A. (1988). Incentives Can Be Bad for Business. INC (January): 93-94. European
Journal of Business and Management www.iiste.org ISSN 2222-1905 (Paper)
ISSN 2222-2839 (Online) Vol.5, No.5, 2013

Kreitner, R. &Kinicki, (2001). Organizational Behaviour (5th Edition). Boston:

McGraw-Hill.

Kruse, D.L. (1991). “Profit-sharing and Employment Variability: Microeconomic

evidence on the Weitzman theory”. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 44,
437-453.

Kurt Matzler, Birgit Renzl., (2007). Assessing asymmetric effects in the formation of
employee satisfaction. Tourism Management 28 (2007) 1093–1103.

Lawler, E.E. III. (1986). “What's Wrong With Point Factor Job Evaluation”.
Compensation and Benefits Review, 18 (2), 20-28.

Lawler, Edward E. III. (1971). Pay and Organizational Effectiveness: A Psychological

View. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Lawler, Edward E. III. (1980). Pay and Organization Development. Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley.

Mirvis, C. and Lawer (1977). Job Satisfaction and Job Performance in Bank Tellers,
Journal of Social Psychology

Mullins, L.J. (2007). Management and Organizational Behaviour (8th Edition). Pearson
Education: Upper Saddle River: New Jersey.

Ngo, D. (2009). Importance of employee satisfaction. [online]. Available from:

Nimalathasan, B. (2004). Job satisfaction and employees’ work performance: a case

study of people’s bank in Jaffna Peninsula, Sri Lanka. University of
Craiova.

58
Putman, D.B. (2002). Job Satisfaction and Performance Viewed From a Two
Dimensional Model. [online].

Rachel W.Y. Yee, Andy C.L. Yeung, T.C. Edwin Cheng., (2008). The impact of
employee satisfaction on quality and profitability in high-contact service
industries. Journal of Operations Management 26 (2008) 651–668.

Robbins, S.P. (2008). Organizational Behavior (9th Edition). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Rue, L.W., Byars, L.L. (1992). Management skills and application, 6th ed., New Jersey:
Prentice- Hall International.

S.Z. Dawal, Z. Taha, Z. Ismail.,(2009). Effect of job organization on job satisfaction

among shop floor employees in automotive industries in Malaysia. International
Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 39 (2009) 1–6.

Saari, L.M., & Judge, T.A. (2004). Employee Attitudes and Job Satisfaction. Human
Resource Management, 43 (4), 395-407.

Salesboom.com Inc (2003). Employee Motivation & Job Satisfaction= Small business
Success

Steven P. Brown, Son K. Lam., (2008). A Meta-Analysis of Relationships Linking

Employee Satisfaction to Customer Responses. Journal of Retailing 84 (3, 2008)
243–255.

Varawalla, S. A. (2010). Why is Job Satisfaction Important? [online]. Wikipedia, the free
encyclopedia (2009)

59
 APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1: LETTER TO RESPONDENTS

Dear Sir/Madam

I am a student at Kenyatta University pursuing a Master Degree in Business

Administration, specializing in Strategic Management. As part of the requirement for the

award of the degree, I am required to carry out a research on Organizational Behaviour

and Performance in Kenya; A Case of Nairobi Bottlers Limited.

Kindly help me complete the research by filling the attached questionnaire. Data

obtained herein will be entirely used for academic purposes and your responses will be

strictly confidential.

Thank you.

Josephat K. Kilungu

60
 APPENDIX II: QUESTIONNAIRE

A STUDY ON ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOIUR AND PERFORMANCE IN

KENYA; A CASE OF NAIROBI BOTTLERS LIMITED

The answers provided for this questionnaire will solely be used for academic purposes
and they will be treated with the highest level of confidentiality.
Section A: Demographic Information
Please Tick “X” in the box that best describes yourself:-

1. Age

20-24 years 25-29 years 30-34 years 35-39 years

40-44 years 45 years and above

2. Gender

Female Male

3. Educational Level

Secondary Diploma Degree Post-graduate

4. Marital Status

Single Married Others

5. Current Job Position

Administrative/Clerical Assistant Manager

Technician Manager

Executive Senior Manager

Senior Executive Others (please specify)

6. Please state your level or job group.....................................................................

7. How many years have you worked for current employer?

Less than 2 years 2-5 years

61
6-10 years More than 10 years

Section B: Organizational Leadership

The following set of statements describes your general perceptions towards the leadership

nature in your current organization. For each statement, please indicate to which extent

you feel it is agreeable or disagreeable. Please Tick “X”on one answer. There’s no right

or wrong answers.

Description Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Disagree Agree
2 3 4
1 5
I am satisfied with the way my
organization provides me with
feedback
The feedback I receive on how I do
my job is highly relevant
My organization is good at
providing recognition for good
performance
The feedback I receive agrees with
what I have actually achieved
I think that my organization
attempts to conduct performance
appraisal the best possible way
My organization seems more
engaged in providing positive
feedback for good performance than
criticizing poor performance
Performance appraisal is valuable to
me as well as to my organization

Section C: Employee Motivation

The following set of statements describes your feelings towards your current job

regarding motivation. For each statement, please indicate to which extent you feel it is

agreeable or disagreeable. Please Tick on one answer. There’s no right or wrong answers.

62
Description Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
2 3 4
1 5
The tasks that I do at work are
enjoyable
My job is so interesting that it is a
motivation in itself
The tasks that do at work are
themselves representing a driving
power in my job
My job is meaningful
I feel lucky being paid for a job I
like this much
The job is like a hobby to me

Section D: Job Satisfaction

The following set of statements describes your career plans and job satisfaction in the

near future. For each statement, please indicate to which extent you feel it is agreeable or

disagreeable. Please Tick on one answer. There’s no right or wrong answers.

Description Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Disagree Agree
2 3 4
1 5
I will probably look for a new job in
the next year
I may quit my present job next year
I will likely actively look for a new
job within the next three years
I often think about quitting my
present job
I do not see much prospects for the
future in this organization

63
Section E: Group and Team work on D

The following set of statements describes your ability to perform your job in your

organization. For each statement, please indicate to which extent you feel it is agreeable

or disagreeable.

Description Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Disagree Agree
1 2 3 4 5
I don’t feel emotionally attached to
this organization
I do not feel a strong sense of
belonging to my organization
This organization has a great deal of
personal meaning for me
I really feel as if this organization’s
problems are my own
I do not feel like “part of the
family” at my organization
I enjoy discussing my organization
with people outside it

Section F: Performance

1. How would you describe the performance of your firm in the last three years?
Very bad [ ]
Bad [ ]
Average [ ]
Good [ ]
Very good [ ]

2. To what extent do you agree or disagree that the performance is influenced

by, organizational behaviour?

Strongly agree [ ]
Somewhat agree [ ]
Neither agree nor disagree [ ]

64
 Somewhat disagree [ ]
Strongly disagree [ ]

3. To what extent do you think the following organizational behaviour patterns

influences performance of NBL?

Strongly Disagr Neutra Agre Strong

ee l e ly
Organizational Disagree agree
Behaviour Patterns

□1 □2 □3 □4 □5
Organizational
leadership
□1 □2 □3 □4 □5
Employee motivation
□1 □2 □3 □4 □5
Job satisfaction
□1 □2 □3 □4 □5
Group and team
work

Thank you very much for your assistance in completing this questionnaire.

65
APPENDIX III: TIME PLAN

66
 APPENDIX IV: BUDGET

NO ITEMS COST (KSHS)

1 Stationery ( 6 Reams Printing Paper) 3,000.00
2 Travelling 10,000.00
3 Typing & Printing 10,000.00
4 Photocopying & Binding 10,000.00
5 Analysis 20,000.00
6 Sub – Total 53,000.00
7 Miscellaneous (10%) 5300
TOTAL 58,300

67
APPENDIX V: RESEARCH AUTHORIZATION LETTER

68
APPENDIX VI: NACOSTI RESEARCH PERMIT

69