Academy of Strategic Management Journal (Print ISSN: 1544-1458; Online ISSN: 1939-6104)

Research Article: 2020 Vol: 19 Issue: 6

Effect of Participatory Management on Employees Productivity among Some Selected Banks, Lagos, Nigeria

Oyo-Ita Dorothy, Covenant University

Worlu Rowland, Covenant University

Udoh Iboro, Covenant University

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of participatory management on employee productivity in selected banks in Lagos State. The central objective of the study is to examine the significant relationship between participatory management and employees’ productivity. A survey research design was employed for the study. The sample for the study comprised 220 staff from some selected banks. Regression analysis was used to measure the relationship between the independent variables and the dependent variables. SPSS was also adopted for the research in testing the research hypotheses. The results of the findings showed that there is a positive relationship between participatory management and employees’ productivity. The study concludes that participatory management has the ability to align employees with the system of the organization which will result in productivity in the organization. Based on the results, the study recommended that organizations should increase the intensity of involving employees in the decision making process for goals to be achieved faster and employees should be carried along in the strategic plans of organizations for better profitability.

Keywords

Participatory Management, Decision Making, Employees, Productivity.

Introduction

Management across all working environment have been working towards developing people-oriented behaviour in the organization which brought the implementation of participatory management (Abdulle & Aydintan, 2019). This method of management received great attention as it has been proven that it brings more benefit than harm to subordinates and also it enhances the relationship between subordinates and managers (Agbese et al., 2018).

Participatory management is a type of management style wherein subordinates split with their superiors a considerable level of decision-making power (Robbins, 2014). Subordinates are allowed to make decisions and participate in the process of making decision for the company. In this process, employee’s involvement may differ such as problem solving, goal setting, closely involved in decision making, serving on policy-making bodies and recruiting new co-workers (Cotton, 2014). Participation can be viewed as “opportunity to influence decisions”, and it is seen to encompass both structure and processes of power sharing (Karanja et al., 2018). A participative system is one in which opportunities are broadly pooled among all organization members (Robbins, 2014). With the wide encompassment of power, conflict of interest and meeting a consensus have to be considered as this can take away much of time resources (Agbese et al., 2018).

Employees would thoroughly understand the organizational goals and their relationship to these goals and its impact towards the organization. Employees would sense that their contribution to work will directly affect organizational performance as well as lead to better job performance and satisfaction (Apostolou, 2018). Being knowledgeable about the decision in the organization enables employees to work to their maximum capacity in their most effective way. The use of strict hierarchical controls as a means of organizational management seems unnatural and perhaps even dangerously subversive to democratic norms and the maintenance of democratic civic virtues (Hummel, 2018). This hardly occurs in organizations placing much weigh on democracy in its governance and social practice emphasizing fairness with equality. Decision-making, employee involvement, autonomy, problem-solving, participatory strategic planning, effective communication with superiors and information sharing are elements in participatory management practice which brings forth a sense of fairness and distinctiveness in employee (Lovrich, 2016).

In Nigeria, various researchers such as Adewunmi (2017), Fashoyin (2016) and Igbaria (2018) have supported the implementation of employee participation in the country’s working relationships system. They are also of the opinion that employee participation in managerial practices would reduce industrial conflict, increase productivity and performance of employees, ensure quick grievance proceedings and motivate workers.

The implementation of participatory management techniques in organizations in Nigeria will be affected by dimensions such as power distance, avoidance of uncertainty, individualism and collectivism (Fashoyin, 2016). Ordinary organizational members have less power in private organizations as compared to those with stronger positions. Here, employees will properly see that power is unequally distributed. Thus, a management style that promotes less power distance within the organization can be difficult to establish in Nigerian organizations (Adewumi, 2017). Participatory management has a technique that stimulates the empowerment strategies of employees through distribution of power, delegation and leadership with complete assurance and confidence in the employees, this is quite challenging in a culture that uses large power distance.

In the Nigerian banking sector, the challenge of whether employees should be involved in decision making, strategic planning and other aspects or activities related to their job is highly contentious (Fashoyin, 2016). Some organizations in Nigeria adopts participatory management but a number of Nigerian authors in management have a view that employee participation exist only on papers and not in reality (Banjoko, 2016). The explanation for this is that the basic requirements are not available to encourage participation in Nigeria. On the other hand, studies on leadership styles have revealed the enthusiasm of workers to partake in decision making and diverse aspects within their different organizations. Simultaneously, employees are vital elements towards the implementation of organizational goals and objectives. Essentially, this results in the fact that employees are operators and are in a greater position to tell the challenges they face in conducting a specific task and how to properly solve them (Tuuli & Rowlinson, 2019).

The issue arises from the fact that, although participation is captured but not clearly understood, its value is also not recognized (Yesufu, 2016). Most managers believe that their exclusive authority is the process of decision-making, and as such should be conserved. Also, top management prefer to stay distant from their employees while they create an all-important environment around them.

Most organization have encountered a lack of engagement on the part of the workers to carry out strategic plans made by top management that inevitably has significant implications on organizational performance (Tuuli & Rowlinson, 2019). A lot of disapproval resulting from management decisions has led to employees taking certain actions. Many researchers have shown that if employees are denied the opportunity to participate in strategic planning, it will result to job dissatisfaction, lack of commitment, low employee- employer relations (Abdulai & Shafiwu, 2014) which reduce productivity.

In reality, the insufficient support on the part of management to promote effective communication has a negative effect on organizational productivity (Ugwu et al., 2019). Lack of effective communication or motivation towards staff members which leads to a reduction in their commitment, morale as well as their enthusiasm on the job which will result to low productivity. In order to encourage high efficiency in the workplace, it is desirable for organizations to implement management by objective (MBO) at all levels of the organization (Ugwu et al., 2019)

In organizations where management consider employees as just hands to get jobs done, employees will appear to be doing well as they are given expectations and measures (Agbese et al., 2018). This can result into job dissatisfaction, low employee productivity, non- commitment to task and high rate of turnover in the long run. In this regard, this study is therefore set to explore the influence of participatory management on employees’ productivity in banking organization in Lagos state.

Objectives of the Study

The main purpose of this study is to explore the influence of participatory management on employees’ productivity in the Nigerian banking organizations. The clear objectives are to:

1) Investigate the impact of participatory decision making on goal accomplishment.
2) Assess the influence of participation in strategic planning on profitability.
3) Explore how communication affects the quantity of task completed.

Literature Review

Participatory Management

Despite the current growing use of the concept participatory management, researchers continue to have various interpretations for its key ideas. Mohrman & Lawler (2018) indicated that participatory management in terms of the scope of meanings is a very wide concept. This involves the management of modifications that impact the human, technical and economic facets of organisations underpinning those (Mohrman & Lawler, 2018).

Yukl (2015) implied that participatory management can be considered a clear form of managerial behaviour or leadership, but it can be seen in tandem with particular responsibilities and relating behaviours. According to Yukl (2015), participatory management can be called participatory leadership which is concerned with the attempts of managers to promote and support participation in decision making. This description limited participatory management to a technique for employees’ participation in the process of decision-making. Such a description corresponds to that of McCrimmon (2017), but highlighted that participation of teams is crucial to decision making.

According to Butali & Njoroge (2015), participatory management can be referred to the active participation of employees to help an organisation accomplish its goals and objectives by applying their own thoughts, skills and actions to solve problems and make decisions.

Robinson (2010) is of the opinion that decision is just as successful as its implementation and that those interested in making decisions are normally really involved to making decisions productive. Some managers also see participation as being a sole privilege. It should recognize that participatory management is not simply a tool for achieving organisational goals and objectives. Managers need to know the various tools required to achieve objectives. Adams (2017) considered that it would be better to use participatory management to the manager’s own interest rather than to the employee and organisation’s benefit. The next section outlined the various dimensions of participatory management by different scholars.

Also, various theorist used different terms to describe participatory management dimensions such as joint decision-making process, participatory strategic planning, effective communication, management style, partnership, problem-solving, power-sharing, delegated authority, employee empowerment, team work and consultations are used (Gresley, 2015; Gibson et al., 2016; Randolph, 2015). Hence, this research focused on the following dimensions which are: Decision making, Strategic planning, Effective communication and Teamwork elaborated in the next section.

Decision-making is an integral aspect of the managerial process. Decisions are made to fix problems, tackle issues, cope with crises and settle inevitable conflicts. Decision-making process is the key to planning (Ojokuku & Sajuyigbe, 2016). The decision-making concept involves identifying the problem, discovering, evaluating and selecting a course of action. It is described as a process or activity of selecting an appropriate course of action from many alternative courses (Nwanah et al., 2019). Involving employees in decision making can also be called participative decision making (PDM), it involves the share of decision-making in the workplace scenario (Randolph, 2015). Cotton (2014), defined participatory decision as joint decision-making between employers and employees. As stated by Gummesson (2018), participatory decision-making is a type of delegation where subordinates gain from greater control, freedom of expression in respect to reconciling the breakdown of communication between management and employees. It deals with the degree to which employees are involved in the strategic activities of the organisation.

Recent studies have revealed that strategic planning is among the most commonly utilized strategies for increasing productivity by both government and non-governmental organisations (Bryson, 2016; Gordon, 2016). According to Bryson (2016), strategic planning is a conscious, disciplined method to generating critical decisions and activities that form and direct what an organisation is, what it does and why. This is also known as “the way of knowing” (Bryson, 2016) that assist managers and leaders to handle critical problems and difficulties confronting their organisation. Evidence from academicians reveals that workplace practices that concentrated on employee productivity will lead to a lower reported level of absence and employee turnover, low employee morale and job complaints, lower level of job dissatisfaction, increased commitment and productivity (Brewer & Selden, 2017). Furthermore, studies reveal that there exists a positive impact on the welfare and mental state of the employees, intrinsic motivation and self-confidence as a result of employee involvement in strategic planning (Spreitzer et al., 2016; Bryson, 2016). This is because the perception of their organisation by employees influences their understanding of the organisational climate, which alternatively affects the manner they respond to their job and thereafter in the organisation, work modification, health and welfare (Macky & Boxall, 2018). In accordance to this, recent studies have shown that employee participation is strategic planning is one of the most commonly adopted approach to promote motivation (Bryson, 2016; Gordon, 2016).

Some aspects of research were not only concerned about the effect of participatory management on workers, but also what characteristics participatory managers define. It is noteworthy to recognize that the capability to communicate efficiently with subordinates was among the top ten most significant listed thirty-nine managerial characteristics of the managers (Emmert & Taher, 2016; Mokoena, 2017). The communication system must be two way, upward or downward, vertical or horizontal (Sharma & Sharma, 2014). Saleemi & Bogonko (2017), observed that since an organisation consist of different sub sections such as management, employees, customers and other subsystems, all the subsystems cannot exist except communication can effectively link all these parts together and coordinate their activities. Employees are given the ability to express their individual grievances by being able to interact effectively with their managers which serves as an ideal source of inspiration for the management and gain longstanding sustainability for the entire company (Voon et al., 2017). Employees have an increased level of job satisfaction, enthusiasm and professional self-esteem at the individual level (Hargreaves & Hopkins, 2017; Spreitzer et al., 2016; Johlke & Duhan, 2017). Referring to some researches, communication is believed to be effective when the following criteria are met: comprehension, consistency, and show of positive behaviours, smoothness of communication, positive outcomes, positive non-verbal communication and adaptation of the communicated messages (Robbins et al., 2015).

Employee Productivity

Employee productivity is an evaluation of the performance of an employee or set of employees. In the real sense, productivity is a factor that significantly impacts the profits of the organisation (Gummesson, 2018; Sels et al., 2016). Productivity can be measured with regards to employee’s output for a given duration of time. Employee productivity will be relatively evaluated when compared with the average output of another employee performing similar job. It can also be assessed by the product or service units that a worker can accomplish within a given time schedule (Piana, 2015). Since an organisation’s success depends primarily on the productivity of the employees, thus, employee productivity has become a vital target for organisations (Cato & Gordon, 2019; Gummesson, 2018; Sharma & Sharma, 2014). Mathias & Johnson (2016), described employee productivity as the degree of the quality and quantity of work accomplished, taking into account the cost of the resources utilized. McNamara (2018), also stated that, the organisation frequently expect results from the employees. Outcomes are frequently demonstrated in terms of products or services for an internal or external consumer (Sels et al., 2016). The result with regards to financial achievements, influence on a community and those whose outcomes are expressed with regards to costs, quality, quantity or time. Employee productivity can involve production quantity, production quality, production timeliness, presence at work and collaboration (Bernardin, 2017). Employee productivity can generally be defined as the intended task of the employees and the extent to which the tasks are performed. Various scholars have identified a good number of dimensions that can be used to portray employee productivity (Igbari, 2018). However, for the aim of this study the dimension selected (goal accomplishment, profitability, quantity of task completed and quality of task completed) were assessed in regards to the organisation, the employees and the job itself (Igbari, 2018).

Goal accomplishment is the mechanism by which human and other resources are combined to accomplish common goals and objectives. Firms’ objectives are strategic goals that the management of a firm sets out to highlight desired results and chart workers’ efforts (Igbaria, 2018). The setting of organisational objectives has several benefits: they chart workers efforts, validate the firm’s operations and nature, describe performance requirements, and provide restrictions for promoting unnecessary objectives and acts as cognitive rewards. Involving employees in setting goals also aid managers to appraise workers’ productivity. For instance, establishing personal worker objectives that support total firm objectives and evaluating personal performance against those individual objectives (Igbaria, 2018). While a firm can communicate its objectives through official networks, the most efficient and straight means to do so is through the workers’ involvement in the setting of goals (Igbaria, 2018).

Profitability indicates the capacity to gain from all the business activities of an organisation, enterprise, organisation, or business. It indicates how efficiently the management can earn profit by using all the available resources in the market. According to Howard & Upton (1953), profitability is the capacity of a specified investment to gain a return on its use. The concept “Profitability” is not compatible with the concept “Efficiency”. Profitability is an indicator of efficiency; and is considered a determinant of efficiency and a guideline for higher efficiency. While profitability is an essential criterion for calculating performance, it is not possible to take the degree of profitability as a final prof of effectiveness (Andrews & Crowther, 2002). Often adequate profits can identify inefficiency and conversely, lack of profit can follow a proper degree of efficiency. The figure for the net profit merely shows a satisfactory equilibrium between the obtained and the given values. One of the indicators in which profitability of an organisation is largely dependent on is the improvement in operational efficiency. In addition, there are several other indicators apart from efficiency, which influence the profitability (Howard & Upton, 1953). When managers involve employees in the daily affairs of the organisation it brings about increased profitability for the employees and organisation as a whole.

The quantity of work is the number of works delivered or the absolute capacity of efforts accomplished by workers in an organisation (Avolio & Gardner, 2015). Organisations can have this accomplished when workers are involved in the process of the organisation and information is properly communicated to them. Quality of work is effort manufactured in relation to principles, inaccuracies, excess and rework. Workers who deliver quality work that is, work which meets principles with few inaccuracies or errors and minimal waste are recognized (Adedeji & Ugwumadu, 2018). Work quality is the worth of work provided by a person or group and it includes task completion, interactions and deliverables. Types of work quality includes: fit for purpose, conformance to requirements, completeness, correctness, accuracy and professional.

Theoretical Framework

Different authors came up with models and other theories on participatory management hence, within the content of the study, the researcher focused on the supporting theory of participatory management which is Theory X, Y and Z.

In McGregor (1960) publication termed the human side of business, developed Theory X and Theory Y style of management. He presented as well as explored the basic principles and differing perceptions about the existence of human being in an organisation on the foundations of Theory X and Theory Y management processes. McGregor (1960) advocated that leaders directed by Theory Y functioned under a collection of assumptions which he described as classical management and suggested that normally human beings desire to be controlled, avoid accountability and lack ambition. Consequently, these assumptions caused managers to avoid allowing workers control over their work setting. Theory X managers stresses the chain of command, foster motivational discipline or incentives strategies, and maintains close monitoring of employee actions. These findings led McGregor (1960) to arrive at a conclusion that the conventional management style was backward and inhibited the accomplishment of organizational objectives.

Based on that assumption, McGregor (1960) suggested a varying range of managerial assumption called the Theory Z leadership style. Theory Z promotes a participatory and engagement management style and endorses self-control, self-direction and employee contribution to organizational performance. Furthermore, Theory Z leaders assume that people are dedicated to their jobs and have the opportunity to search for job-related problems (Hindle, 2018). Leaders who practice Theory Z also assume that workers are naturally driven to worker and that leaders want to delegate authority down the command chain. Managers allow autonomy to people, and work is often designed to allow workers with the ability to be inventive and innovative. Managers who have applied Theory Z often structure the organizational environment in such a way that personal goals are linked to general organizational goals leading to increased creativity and productivity. Consequently, Theory Z leadership stresses on the existence of relationships that foster employers and employee relationships, creating a favourable environment that strengthens dedication to organization and encourages employees to practice initiative, ingenuity and self-direction (McGregor, 1960).

The important aspect of Theory Z to this study is that it promotes workers engagement because managers who implement it prefer to include workers in decision-making, as well as reinforce relationships (Sergiovanni, 2015).

Hypothesis Development

A good number of research work related to participatory management and employee productivity used different sub variables in explaining the connection between participatory management and employee productivity. However, there exist gap in literature on examining participatory management and employee productivity in the aspect of decision making and goal accomplishment; strategic planning and profitability.

Decision Making and Goal Accomplishment

A paper written by Lawan & Habu (2019) stated that participatory management is a strategy that moves decision-making processes down to lower-level personnel for feedback for appropriate planning and implementation of strategies. The utilization of participatory management enables workers to participate in decision-making due to an increased recognition that workers can generate value-oriented decisions which brings productivity and efficient results. The goal of the paper was to analyse the behaviour of management and employee viewpoint towards participatory management, the nature of participatory management in reality and the effects of participatory management on productivity. This study was facilitated by the assumption of some managers that discipline is a technique of control, debate persists about the fear of losing control about workers and the effect of those beliefs on the productivity.

Nwanah et al. (2019), focused on participatory decision-making and achievement of organisational goals. This research explored to what degree participatory decision-making impacts the accomplishments of an organisational goal. The research concluded that: employee participation in making decision dramatically increases work productivity; motivation for employees is required for employee participation; the strategy of employee participation in decision-making is vital in achieving organisational goals. In view of the findings from the research, they stated that the degree at which an organisation integrates the workers into policy formulation and execution relies on the successful achievement of any organisational goal. The research suggests that organisations should adhere to the ring show management theory as a means of survival.

This research by Ugwu et al. (2019) explored the nature of the correlation between participatory decision making and employee performance in selected hotel in Owerri, Imo State, Nigeria. The clear objective examined the correlation between leader behaviour and commitment of employees. Findings indicated that the selected hotels in Owerri, Imo State had a positive correlation between leader behaviour and commitment of the employee. The following suggestions were presented; in order to encourage high productivity in the workplace, it is beneficial for organisations to incorporate Management by objective (MBO) at any level of the organisation. Consequently, organisations are advised to increase the intensity and degree of employee participation between managers and subordinates in decision-making. Thus, the first hypothesis was developed:

H1 Participation in decision making does not affect goal accomplishment.

Strategic Planning and Profitability

Inadequate productivity in recent time has been a global challenge that besets organisations in Nigeria. Consequently, Nimfa & Buruche (2019), in their paper sought to examine the impact strategic planning through the optimal utilization of personnel in strategic planning development and the best selection of technology for strategic planning execution on organisational productivity using Cadbury manufacturing firm, Abuja as a case study. The key results include the need to follow a comprehensive strategic planning framework, select the appropriate technique for strategic planning execution and include practitioners and specialists in the strategic planning system. Suggestive from the analysis therefore is that organisational management in Nigeria needs to scan the environment and establish a comprehensive strategic plan that would monitor the effect of the business environment and provide the organisation with suitable new techniques for strategic planning execution. More so, the researchers claimed that professionals or experts need to be assigned in their respective areas of core competencies throughout strategic planning development. This would improve the organisation’s productivity, efficiency and effectiveness for global competitiveness.

The paper by Monye & Ibegbulem (2018) analysed the effect of strategic planning on organisational performance and profitability. According to the researchers strategic planning can be assessed with regards of how much it impacts organisational performance which affects its productivity. The key purpose of this research was to examine the planning performance correlation within an organisation and to assess the degree to which strategic planning influences output within an organisation, of which Zenith Bank PLC Warri was used as a case study. Related literatures were carefully reviewed with regards to the aforementioned purpose and three hypotheses were developed and tested in the research. The conclusion of the research was that strategic planning improves greater organisational performance, which in long term has an effect on its efficiency and that the magnitude of strategic planning is defined by managerial, environmental and organisational factors. Thus, the second hypothesis was developed:

H2 Participation in strategic planning does not have a significant effect on profitability.

Communication and Quantity of Task Completed

The study by Ong et al. (2019) titled Exploring the Impact of Communication on Employee Productivity aimed to determine styles of communication like horizontal, downward and upward communication that affect productivity of employees in a property development company in Malaysia. The collection of data was done through the use of questionnaire. One-hundred and twenty (120) respondents partook in the research. The findings showed that downward communication (DC) and horizontal communication (HC) had significant positive effect on employee performance. The study result was capable to offer foresight and valuable knowledge to the property development firms in order to fully appreciate the significance of communication with workers in increasing workers, productivity. In order to establish a better communication between supervisors and subordinates, management can arrange further events like inter-departmental meetings. Appropriate training and improvement plan will set out for effective communication within the organization.

Another study by Asamu (2015) on the Impact of Communication of Workers Performance in Selected Organization in Lagos State showed that communication is an essential aspect of corporate activity in today’s world. The author went on to suggest that as the global world has become broad, the majority of organisations need to fulfil their needs by communication with a lower resource. The research explored the critical correlation between communication and performance of staff in some selected organisations in Lagos State, Nigeria. The data was collected through questionnaires with a sample size of one-hundred and twenty (120) respondents. The findings of this research indicated that there is a relationship between effective communication and performance of staff, productivity and commitment. The research suggested that managers ought to interact frequently with workers to increase workers commitment and performance.

A research work conducted by Otoo (2015) on the Effect of Communication on Employees Performance at Ghana Revenue Authority, Kumasi; the researcher stated that communication is expected to take place in every organisation where information is conveyed from one individual to another, by utilizing both verbal and non-verbal methods. Such as all other organisation, the Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA) uses communication in its everyday tasks; in communication between supervisors and subordinates, including staff, both formally and informally in the midst of challenges. This was mitigated by the coming together of the three (3) Revenue Agencies- Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Custom Excise and Preventive Service (CEPS) and Value Added Tax Service (VAT) forming GRA as one authority. Clarity of role has become a concern because workers in diverse departments have to shift and share office space with colleagues. The research primarily looked at the communications programs obtainable in GRA and assessed the performance of employees. It also identified the correlation between effective organisational communication and the performance of employees. It also defined the communication means which employees found to be the most valuable. Furthermore, it also found gaps and breakdowns in GRA’s communication channels. Primary data was used. The findings proved that the communication mediums commonly utilized one-on-one, mobile, memos, email and grapevines; with the most effective medium of communication which is face-to-face. GRA employees accomplish well to some extent. The study found different employees’ performance metrics which correlates with the differing measures of effective organisational communication. Thus, the third hypothesis was developed:

H3 Communication does not affect the quantity of task completed.

Methododology

Research Methods

The research used the quantitative method because the data was obtained by means of questionnaire administered to the participants. This was adopted because of the convenience and that other researches on this aspect used qualitative method. A survey research design was used for this research. The research applied survey research design because a structured questionnaire was employed just to collect data from respondents. The survey research design was used as it is an applicable design for figuring out how participatory management affects the productivity of employees at a period of time.

Population Determination

The population target for this research was all managers and other staff of some selected banks all located at 57 Marina, Lagos Island, Lagos State. These banks were selected because previous studies on participatory management have been able to look into few bank branches in Kenya and other countries. Not much has been done in Nigerian bank headquarters located in Lagos State hence the researcher used some of these selected banks. 120 workers were selected randomly from each of the banks which resulted to a population of 480. The adjusted population adopted was arrived based on the availability of annual reports within the period of study. This was to ensure consistency of data and completeness of observations. The sample size was determined using Taro Yamane formula which placed the sample size at 220.

Sampling Techniques

The managers and other administrative staff samples were chosen by using both purposive and convenience sampling (haphazard sampling) techniques. Managers in the various banks were purposely selected. This technique was adopted because it can be effective in cases where one needs to quickly reach a targeted sample and where proportionality sampling is not the main priority. A relatively small sample is taken over a very short time period in the convenience sampling technique. This method makes it possible to generalize since there is little variability in population (Singh & Masuku, 2014).

Data Validity and Reliability

Content validity which was employed for the as experts assisted in reviewing the items in the instruments.Generally, content validity entails appraisal of a new instrument guarantees that it contains all the elements that are vital and removes unwanted elements to a specific construct area (Straub et al., 2004). The result of the reliability was 0.855 which showed that all indicators met the requirements of internal consistency/Cronbach Alpha (Table 1).

Table 1: Results Of Reliability Test
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach’s Alpha Number of items
0.855 30

Quantitative Data Analysis and Data Findings

This section displays the stated demographic profile of the respondents, presenting distribution in terms of age, gender, marital status, educational requirement, number of years in the organization and position in the organization.

Overview of the Participants

The Table 2 above highlights the demographic distribution of the respondents. The first section displays the age of the respondents who participated in this study, 100 participants are in the age bracket of 20-29 with a percentage of 49.5%, 65 participants in the age range of 30-39 with a percentage of 32.2% and 37 participants are within the age range of 40-49 with a percentage of 18.3%. A great number of participants are in the age range of 20-29 indicating that majority of staff in the banking organization are young graduates and smart.

Table 2: Demographic Distribution Of The Respondents
    Frequency Percent
Age 20-29 100 49.5
30-39 65 32.2
40-49 37 18.3
Total 202 100.0
Gender Male 97 48.0
Female 105 52.0
Total 202 100.0
Marital status Single 113 55.9
Married 86 42.6
Divorced 3 1.5
Total 202 100.0
Highest educational qualification OND/HND 6 3.0
B.Sc 122 60.4
M.Sc/MBA 74 36.6
Total 202 100.0
Number of years in the organization 1-5 118 58.4
6-10 38 18.8
11-15 38 18.8
16-20 6 3.0
21-25 2 1.0
Total 202 100.0
Position Manager 42 20.8
Other staff 160 79.2
Total 202 100.0

The second section shows the gender of the respondents who participated in this study, 97 participants are male with a percentage of 48.0% while 105 participants are female with a percentage of 52.0%. This shows that majority of the respondents in this study are females.

113 are single with a percentage of 55.9%, 86 of the respondents are married with a percentage of 42.6% while 3 of the respondents are divorced with a percentage of 1.5%. This shows that majority of the respondents are single.

The educational qualification of the respondents who participated in this research, 6 of the respondents have OND/HND degree with a percentage of 3.0%, 122 participants have their B.Sc degree with a percentage of 60.4% while 74 have their M.Sc./MBA degree with a percentage of 36.6%. Evidently, majority of the participants hold a B.Sc. as their highest educational qualification. Given these statistics, all the respondents are sufficiently educated to be included in the study sample.

The number of years the participants have been in the organization were revealed , 118 of them have been in the organization for 1-5 years with a percentage of 58.4%, 38 respondents have been in the organization for 6-10 years with a percentage of 18.8%, another 38 have been in the organization for 11-15 years with a percentage of 18.8%, 6 of the participants have been in the organization for 16-20 years with a percentage of 3.0% while 2 of the respondents have been in the organization between 21-25 years with a percentage of 1.0%. The statistics clearly shows that most of the respondents have worked in the banking organization between 1-5 years.

Finally, the last section displays the position of the respondents in the organization, 42 of the respondents are managers with a percentage of 20.8% while 160 respondents are other staff in the organization with a percentage of 79.2%. This shows that majority of the respondents occupy various positions in the banking organization.

Descriptive Analysis of Data on Significant Variables

This segment elaborates on participants’ replies to assertions about participatory management and employees’ productivity. Participants specified whether they strongly agree, agree, disagree or strongly disagree with the assertions given. Below are the assertions and the tables illustrating the frequency and percentage distribution of replies as well as their explanations?

Table 3 shows the response of respondents on decision making; 17 of the respondents strongly agree that management solicits the views of employees in evaluating decisions with a percentage of 8.4%, 117 respondents agree with a percentage of 57.9%, 62 respondents disagree with a percentage of 30.7% while 6 respondents disagree to the item with a percentage of 3.0%. Additionally, 64 of the participants strongly agree that information is gathered before decisions are made with a percentage of 31.7%, 107 participants agree to the item with a percentage of 53.0%, 28 participants disagree to the item with a percentage of 13.9% while 3 participants strongly disagree to the item with a percentage of 1.5%. Finally, under decision making, 99 participants strongly agree that decisions are made in line with the goals of the organization with a percentage of 49.0%, 95 participants agree to the item with a percentage of 47.0% while 8 participants disagree to the item with a percentage of 4.0%. The inference of the mean at 2.71, 3.14 and 3.45 shows that majority of the participants agree to three items under the decision making construct.

Table 3: Participatory Management
Decision Making
Statement SA A D SD Total Mean
Management solicits the views of employees in evaluating decisions. 17
(8.4)
117
(57.9)
62
(30.7)
6
(3.0)
202
(100.0)
2.71
Information is gathered before decisions are made. 64
(31.7)
107
(53.0)
28
(13.9)
3
(1.5)
202
(100.0)
3.14
Decisions are made in line with the goals of the organization. 99
(49.0)
95
(47.0)
8
(4.0)
  202
(100.0)
3.45
Strategic Planning
  SA A D SD Total Mean
Strategic planning is done in line with the organization’s mission. 97
(48.0)
88
(43.6)
17
(8.4)
  202
(100.0)
3.39
Plans done are geared towards proper allocation of resources. 51
(25.2)
137
(67.8)
11
(5.4)
3
(1.5)
202
(100.0)
3.16
Employees are innovative during a strategic planning process. 63
(31.2)
104
(51.5)
32
(15.8)
3
(1.5)
202
(100.0)
3.12
Communication
  SA A D SD Total Mean
There is a clear communication of information. 39
(19.3)
142
(70.3)
15
(7.4)
6
(3.0)
202
(100.0)
3.05
Management have an effective feedback system. 30
(14.9)
120
(59.4)
43
(21.3)
9
(4.5)
202
(100.0)
2.84
Managers directly communicate with employees. 41
(20.3)
129
(63.9)
29
(14.4)
3
(1.5)
202
(100.0)
3.02

Table 3 shows the response of respondents when they were asked questions about strategic planning; 97 of the respondents strongly agree that strategic planning is done in line with the organization’s mission with a percentage of 48.0%, 88 respondents agree to the item with a percentage of 43.6% while 17 respondents disagree to the item with a percentage of 8.4% In addition, 51 of the participants strongly agree that plans done are geared towards proper allocation of resources with a percentage of 25.2%, 137 participants agree to the item with a percentage of 67.8%, 11 participants disagree to the item with a percentage of 5.4% while 3 participants strongly disagree to the item with a percentage of 1.5%. Lastly, under strategic planning, 63 participants strongly agree that employees are innovative during a strategic planning process with a percentage of 31.2%, 104 participants agree to the item with a percentage of 51.5%, 32 participants disagree to the item with a percentage of 15.8% while 3 strongly disagree to the item with a percentage of 1.5%. The inference of the mean at 3.39, 3.16 and 3.12 portrays that majority of the participants agree to the three items under the strategic planning construct.

Responses on communication showed that 39 of the respondents strongly agree that information is communicated in a clear manner with a percentage of 19.3%, 142 respondents agree to the item with a percentage of 70.3%, 15 respondents disagree to the item with a percentage of 7.4% while 6 participants strongly disagree with a percentage of 3.0% Furthermore, 30 of the participants strongly agree that management have an effective feedback system with a percentage of 14.9%, 120 participants agree to the item with a percentage of 59.4%, 43 participants disagree to the item with a percentage of 21.3% while 9 participants strongly disagree to the item with a percentage of 4.5%. To sum up, under communication, 41 participants strongly agree that managers communicate directly with employees with a percentage of 20.3%, 129 participants agree to the item with a percentage of 63.9%, 29 participants disagree to the item with a percentage of 14.4% while 3 strongly disagree to the item with a percentage of 1.5%. The inference of the mean at 3.05, 2.84 and 3.02 shows that majority of the participants agree to the three items under the communication construct.

Table 4 shows the responses of goal accomplishment as an indicator to employee productivity; 119 of the respondents strongly agree that goals are achieved faster when employees are involved with a percentage of 58.9%, 75 respondents agree to the item with a percentage of 37.1% while 8 respondents disagree to the item with a percentage of 4.0%. In addition, 67 of the participants strongly agree that goals are monitored on a regular basis with a percentage of 33.2%, 121 participants agree to the item with a percentage of 59.9% and 14 participants disagree to the item with a percentage of 6.9%. Lastly, under goal accomplishment, 68 participants strongly agree that managers ensure that goals are implemented with a percentage of 33.7%, 126 participants agree to the item with a percentage of 62.4% while 8 participants disagree to the item with a percentage of 4.0%. The implication of the mean at 3.54, 3.26 and 3.29 illustrates that majority of the participants agree to the three items under goal accomplishment construct.

Table 4: Employee Productivity
Goal accomplishment
Statement SA A D SD Total Mean
Goals are achieved faster when employees are involved. 119
(58.9)
75
(37.1)
8
(4.0)
202
(100.0)
3.54
Goal is monitored on a regular basis. 67
(33.2)
121
(59.9)
14
(6.9)
  202
(100.0)
3.26
Managers ensure that goals are implemented. 68
(33.7)
126
(62.4)
8
(4.0)
  202
(100.0)
3.29
Profitability
  SA A D SD Total Mean
Employees enjoy increased earnings. 29
(14.4)
99
(49.0)
50
(24.8)
24
(11.9)
202
(100.0)
26.5
Return on asset is positive. 34
(16.8)
121
(59.9)
26
(12.9)
21
(10.4)
202
(100.0)
2.83
There is no room for debts as purchases are paid off almost immediately. 34
(16.8)
97
(48.0)
48
(23.8)
23
(11.4)
202
(100.0)
2.70
Quantity of task completed
  SA A D SD Total Mean
My team exceeds the task required each day. 29
(14.4)
123
(60.6)
47
(23.3)
3
(1.5)
202
(100.0)
2.88
Task is usually completed within the specific time frame. 32
(15.8)
127
(62.9)
43
(21.3)
  202
(100.0)
2.94
There is increase in production in my organization. 43
(21.3)
133
(65.8)
24
(11.9)
2
(1.0)
202
(100.0)
3.07

Profitability as an indicator to employee productivity in Table 4 also shows that; 29 of the respondents strongly agree that enjoy increase in salary with a percentage of 14.4%, 99 respondents agree to the item with a percentage of 49.0%, 50 respondents disagree to the item with a percentage of 24.8% while 24 participants strongly disagree with a percentage of 11.9%.

Furthermore in Table 4, 34 of the participants strongly agree that the return on asset is positive with a percentage of 16.8%, 121 participants agree to the item with a percentage of 59.9%, 26 respondents disagree to the item with a percentage of 12.9% while 21 participants strongly disagree to the item with a percentage of 10.4%. Finally, 34 participants strongly agree that the organization gives no room for debts with a percentage of 16.8%, 97 participants agree to the item with a percentage of 48.0%, 48 participants disagree to the item with a percentage of 23.8% while 23 strongly disagree to the item with a percentage of 11.4%. The result of the mean at 2.65, 2.83 and 3.29 shows that majority of the participants agree to the three items under the profitability construct.

Quantity of task completed as an indicator to employee productivity in Table 4 shows that; 29 of the respondents strongly agree that their team exceeds the task required of them with a percentage of 14.4%, 123 respondents agree to the item with a percentage of 60.6%, 47 respondents disagree to the item with a percentage of 23.3% while 3 participants strongly disagree with a percentage of 1.5% Additionally, 32 of the participants strongly agree that task are completed within the specific time frame with a percentage of 15.8%, 127 participants agree to the item with a percentage of 62.9% and 43 participants disagree to the item with a percentage of 21.3%. Lastly, 43 participants strongly agree that there is increase in production with a percentage of 21.3%, 133 participants agree to the item with a percentage of 65.8%, 24 participants disagree to the item with a percentage of 11.9% while 2 strongly disagree to the item with a percentage of 1.0%. The interpretation of the mean at 2.88, 2.94 and 3.07 indicates that majority of the participants agree to the three items under quantity of task completed construct.

Test of the Hypotheses

H01 Participation in decision making does not affect goal accomplishment

Table 5 shows that (R) in the model summary table indicates a 0.182 relationship of decision making on goal accomplishment which indicate a very weak relationship. The table presents the results that revealed the extent to which the variance of the dependent variable (goal accomplishment) is explained by the independent variable (decision making). This is denoted by R square which equals 0.033 and expressed in percentage as 3.3%. This shows that decision making only accounts for 3.3% of the variance in goal accomplishment. Hence, other factors not included in the model explain 96.7% (i.e., 100%-3.3%) of the variance in goal accomplishment. The standard error estimate is .56491 which signifies error term.

Table 5: Model Summaryb
Model R R2 Adjusted R2 Std error of the estimate
1 0.182a 0.033 0.028 0.56491
Anovaa
Model 1   Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig
Regression 2.180 1 2.180 6.831 0.010b
Residual 63.825 200 .319    
Total 66.005 201      
Coefficientsa
Model 1   Unstandardized
B
Coefficients Std. Error Standardized Coefficients
Beta
T Sig
(Constant) 2.922 0.243   12.017 0.000
Decision Making 0.182 0.070 0.182 2.614 0.010
  1. Predictors: (Constant), Decision Making
  2. Dependent Variable: Goal Accomplishment

In Table 5 the ANOVA showed that the F value is 6.831 at 0.010b level of significance. The implication is that decision making has a significant influence on goal accomplishment. The constant B=2.922 is the intercept in the regression equation. This means that when decision making is at point 0, goal accomplishment is 2.922. B value for decision making is 0.182 which is the slope of the regression equation; each unit increase in decision making will lead to a 0.182 increase in goal accomplishment. The table above shows that decision making has an effect on goal accomplishment and their level of significance. (β=0.182; t=2.614; p<0.05).

H02 Participation in strategic planning does not have a significant effect on profitability

Table 6 shows that (R) in the model summary table indicates a 0.520 relationship of strategic planning on profitability which shows a moderate relationship. The table presents the results that revealed the extent to which the variance of the dependent variable (profitability) is explained by the independent variable (strategic planning). This is denoted by R square which equals 0.270 and expressed in percentage as 27%. This shows that strategic planning only accounts for 27% of the variance in profitability. Hence, other factors not included in the model explain 73% (i.e., 100%-27%) of the variance in profitability. The standard error estimate is 0.71030 which signifies error term.

Table 6: Model Summaryb
Model R R2 Adjusted R2 Std error of the estimate
1 0.520a 0.270 0.267 0.71030
Anovaa
Model 1   Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig
Regression 37.373 1 37.373 74.075 0.000b
Residual 100.904 200 0.505    
Total 138.277 201      
Coefficientsa
Model 1   Unstandardized
B
Coefficients Std. Error Standardized Coefficients
Beta
T Sig
(Constant) 0.543 0.271   2.009 0.046
Strategic Planning 0.674 0.078 0.520 8.607 0.000
  1. Predictors: (Constant), Strategic Planning
  2. Dependent Variable: Profitability
 

The ANOVA in Table 6 shows that the F value is 74.075 at 0.000b level of significance. The inference is that strategic planning has a significant effect on profitability. The constant B=.543 is the intercept in the regression equation. This denotes that when strategic planning is at point 0, profitability is 0.543. B value for strategic planning is 0.674 which is the slope of the regression equation; each unit increase in strategic planning will lead to a 0.674 increase in profitability. The table above indicates that strategic planning has an influence on profitability and their level of significance. (β=.520; t=8.607; p<0.05).

H03 Communication does not enhance the quantity of task completed among employees

Table 7 shows that (R) in the model summary table point to a 0.346 relationship of communication on quantity of task completed which indicates a weak relationship. The table presents the results that revealed the extent to which the variance of the dependent variable (quantity of task completed) is explained by the independent variable (communication). This is denoted by R square which equals 0.119 and expressed in percentage as 11.9%. This shows that communication only accounts for 11.9% of the variance in quantity of task completed. Hence, other factors not included in the model explain 88.1% (i.e., 100%-11.9%) of the variance in quantity of task completed. The standard error estimate is .57038 which signifies error term.

Table 7: Model Summaryb
Model R R2 Adjusted R2 Std error of the estimate
1 0.346a 0.119 0.115 0.57038
Anovaa
Model
1
  Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig
Regression 8.820 1 8.820 27.111 0.000b
Residual 65.066 200 0.325    
Total 73.866 201      
Coefficientsa
Model   Unstandardized
B
Coefficients Std. Error Standardized Coefficients
Beta
T Sig
Model
1
(Constant) 2.041 0.203   10.077 0.000
Communication 0.338 0.065 0.346 5.207 0.000
  1. Predictors: (Constant): Communication
  2. Dependent Variable: Quantity of Task Completed
 

The ANOVA in Table 7 shows that the F value is 27.111 at 0.000b level of significance. The interpretation is that communication has a substantial effect on quantity of task completed. The constant B=2.041 is the intercept in the regression equation. This means that when communication is at point 0, quantity of task completed is 2.041. B value for communication is 0.338 which is the slope of the regression equation; each unit increase in communication will lead to a 0.338 increase in quantity of task completed. The table above specifies that communication has an impact on quantity of task completed and their level of significance. (β=.346; t=5.207; p<0.05).

Discussion

This was based on the discoveries made by the researcher on the field; the empirical findings tested three hypotheses using the frequency table and multiple regression method. Based on this the empirical findings are presented below:

Participation in Decision Making Does Not Have Any Effect on Goal Accomplishment

The first hypothesis stated that participation in decision making does not have a significant effect on goal accomplishment. The final result being subjected to statistical test showed that participation in decision making played a very important role in goal accomplishment of banking organizations with a level of significance of 0.010, therefore the null hypothesis was rejected. The findings supported the study by Lawan & Habu (2019) were they mentioned that the utilization of participatory management enabled workers to participate in decision-making due to an increased recognition that workers can generate value-oriented decisions which brings productivity and efficient results. Also, Nwanah et al. (2019) conducted a research were they found out that participation in decision making automatically increases work productivity and motivation and encouraged managers to integrate employees into policy formulation to achieve organizational goals. Furthermore, Ugwu et al. (2019) explored the relationship between participatory decision making and employee performance and discovered that in order to encourage high performance in the workplace the intensity of participation between managers and subordinates in decision making must be increased.

Participation in Strategic Planning Does Not Have a Significant Effect on Profitability

The second hypothesis stated that participation in strategic planning does not have a significant effect on profitability. The final result being subjected to statistical test showed that participation in strategic planning played a very important role in profitability of banking organizations with a strong level of significance of 0.000, therefore the null hypothesis was rejected. The result of this hypothesis was confirmed with a research done by Nimfa & Buruche, (2019) and they noted that involving employees in the strategic planning framework would improve organizational productivity, effectiveness and global competitiveness. Also Monye & Ibegbulem (2018) discovered that involving employees in strategic planning improved greater organisational performance, which in long term had an effect on its efficiency and that the magnitude of strategic planning is defined by managerial, environmental and organisational factors. Ikoro & Nwosu, (2017) also discovered that allowing employees participate in the strategic planning process brought about all round organisational performance.

Communication Does Not Affect Quantity of Task Completed

The third hypothesis stated that effective communication does not have a significant effect on quantity of task completed. The final result being subjected to statistical test showed that effective communication played a very important role in quantity of task completed in banking organisations with a strong level of significance of 0.000, therefore the null hypothesis was rejected. Udejinta (2018) supported the result of this hypothesis by claiming that effective communication increases productivity and that organisations must adopt an effective communication structure that will motivate employees to give their best. Shonubi & Akintaro (2016) also confirmed that effective communication leads to greater organisational performance and that communication should be both done through downward and upward patterns with a feedback process in place.

Conclusion

The research examined the effect of participatory management on employee productivity in selected banks in Lagos State. Employees in banking organizations need to be motivated to go beyond ordinary expectations by attending to their needs and moral values to ensure the survival and performance of the organization. This will require participatory management. The study concludes that participatory management has the ability to align employees with the system of the organization which will result in productivity in the organization. Sharing decisions with employees will emit empowerment and create ownership. Exercising a participatory management at a reasonable level gives employees a sense of belonging and makes them ready to support business goals and objectives. Although the management invites employees’ contributions, but the final decision-making authority still rest on the management. Involving employees in vital areas of the organization will keep them motivated thereby enhancing all round productivity. Participatory management has been found to help in the accomplishment of goals, profitability, quantity and quality of work completed. Participatory management improves the productivity of employees because employees are asset that can think, express opinions and suggest innovative ideas that can lead to continuous improvement thereby ultimately increasing the performance of the organization.

The implication of this study is a collection of assumption, facts, theories, data and figures explaining the relationship between participatory management and employee productivity which can be of help to researchers and managers and employees in organizations especially the banks in Nigeria. Also managers should have confidence and trust in their employees and by involving them because employee participation will result in a sense of responsibility, conscientiousness and belonging in the workplace.

Recommendations

In the light of the findings and conclusions, the following recommendations have been put forward and are believed to go a long way to ensure participatory management in the banks in Lagos State.

  1. Organisations are advised to increase the intensity and degree of employee participation between managers and subordinates in decision making to bring about achievement of goals.
  2. Nigerian organisations should pay very close attention to involving employees in the strategic planning process because this will motivate them to give their best since they have been involved in the process.
  3. In order to establish effective communication between supervisors and subordinates, management can arrange further events like inter-departmental meetings. Trainings on effective listening skills and the right tone of voice will equally go a long way to enhance better communication in organizations.
  4. Management should also institute a feedback mechanism to track the flow of information in the organization.

Acknowledgement

The authors acknowledge the financial support of Covenant University-Centre for Research and Development (CUCRID) regarding the data article.

References

Abdulai, I.A., & Shafiwu, A.B. (2014). Participatory decision making and employee productivity. A case study of community banks in the upper east region of Ghana. Business and Economics Journal5(3), 1-10.

Abdulle, A., & Aydinta, N.B. (2019). The effect of teamwork on employee performance in some selected private banks in mogadishu-somalia.

Adams, R. (2017). Good data (Online) Available at: https://help.gooddata.com/doc/en

Adedeji, A.O., & Ugwumadu, O.C. (2018). Factors motivating employee loyalty and employee retention in deposit money banks in Nigeria. International Journal of Human Resource Studies8(3), 300-313.

Adewumi, D. (2017). Effects of participatory management on organizational growth. The International Journal of Educational Management, 16(5), 142-149.

Agbese, F.A.O., Daramola, C.F., & Akidi, J.O. (2018). Participative decision making and employee job performance in nigerian academic libraries. Journal of Advance Research in Social Science and Humanities4(7), 15-28.

Andrews, D., & Crowther, F. (2002). Parallel leadership: A clue to the contents of the black box of school reform. International Journal of Educational Management, 16(4), 152-159.

Apostolou, A. (2018). Dissemination of innovation and knowledge management technique. Business and Economics Journal, 5(3), 22-35.

Asamu, F.F. (2015). The impact of communication on workers’ performance in selected organizations in Lagos State. IORS Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 19(8), 75-82.

Avolio, B.J., & Gardner, W.L. (2015). Authentic leadership development: Getting to the root of positive forms of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 315-338.

Banjoko, S.A. (2016). Human resource management: An expository approach. Lagos. Pumark Nigeria Limited.

Bernardin, H.J. (2017). Human resource management: An experiential approach. Tata: McGraw-Hill Publishers.

Brewer, G.A., & Selden, S.C. (2017). Why elephants gallop: Assessing and predicting organizational performance in federal agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(4), 685-712.

Bryson, J.M. (2016). Strategic planning for public and nonprofit organizations: A guide to strengthening and sustaining organizational achievement. John Wiley & Sons.

Butali, P., & Njoroge, D. (2015). Effect of employee participation on organizational performance with organizational commitment as a moderator. International Journal of Scientific Research and Management, 6(6), 478-485.

Cato, S.T., & Gordon, J. (2019). Relationship of the strategic vision alignment to employee productivity and student enrolment. Research in Higher Education Journal, 7(3), 1-20.

Cotton, J. (2014). Employee involvement: Methods of improving work performance and work attitudes. New Burry Park, CA: SAGE publications.

Emmert, M.A., & Taher, W.A. (2016). Public sector professionals: The effects of public sector jobs on motivation, job satisfaction and work involvement. The American Review of Public Administration, 22 (1), 37-48.

Fashoyin, S.C. (2016). Communication in Business. (5th ed). Frenchs Forest: Prentice-Hall.

Gibson, J.L., Ivancevich, J.M., Donnelly, J.H.J., & Konopaske, R. (2016). Organization: Behaviour, structure, processes. Boston: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Gordon, G.L. (2016). Strategic planning for local government. ICMA Publishing.

Gresley, K. (2015). Employee empowerment. Employee Relation, 27(1), 364-368.

Gummesson, E. (2018). Productivity, quality and relationship marketing in service operations. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 10(1), 4-15.

Howard, B.B., & Upton, M. (1953). Introduction to business finance. McGraw-Hill.

Hummel, S. (2018). Strategic management and business policy. New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Ltd.

Igbaria, M. (2018). Job performance of MIS professionals: An examination of the antecedents and consequences. Journal of Engineering, Technology and Management, 8, 141-171.

Ikoro, E.I., & Nwosu, N.L. (2017). Effects of strategic planning on organizational performance (A study of Nigerian Bottling Company, Enugu). International Journal of Economics and Business Management, 3(9), 1-12.

Johlke, M.C., & Duhan, D.F. (2017). Supervisor communication practices and service employee job outcomes. Journal of Service Research, 3(2), 154-165.

Karanja, E.W., Muraguri, C., & Kinyua, G. (2018). Effects of teamwork on performance of the water service regulatory board. The Strategic Journal of Business & Change Management, 5(3), 1-6.

Lawan, I., & Habu, A.B. (2019). Participative management and employee perspective: Its impact on decision making and productivity in Nigeria. Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 19(7), 14-22.

Lovrich, A. (2016). Effective communication and employees’ performance. Journal of the British Accounting Review, 34(4), 20-30.

Macky, K., & Boxall, P. (2018). High involvement work processes, work intensification and employee well-being: A study of New Zealand worker experiences. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 46(1), 38-55.

Mathias, R.L., & Johnson, J.H. (2016). Human Resource Management. Thomson, South-Western: Mason Publishers

McCrimmon, M. (2017). What is Leadership Style?. Thousand Oaks, C. A: Sage.

McGregor, D. (1960). Theory X and theory Y. Organization Theory358, 374.

McNamara, C. (2018). Field Guide to Leadership and Supervision for Non-profit Staff. Amazon: McGraw-Hill Publishers.

Mohrman, S.A., & Lawler, E.E.I. (2018). Participative managerial behaviour and organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 1(1), 45-49.

Mokoena, S. (2017). Effective participative management: Does it affect trust levels of stakeholders in schools? Journal of Social Sciences: Interdisciplinary Reflection of Contemporary Society, 30 (1), 43-53.

Monye, M.C., & Ibegbulem, A.B. (2018). Effect of strategic planning on organizational performance and profitability. International Journal of Business & Law Research, 6(2), 31-40.

Nimfa, D.T., & Buruche, E.G. (2019). Impact of strategic planning and organizational productivity in Nigeria.

Nwanah, C.P., Ofobruku, S.A., Okafor, C.M., & Mba, N.M. (2019). Impact of participatory decision making on organizational goal attainment. International Journal of Business, Economics and Management, 6(1), 1-15.

Ojokuku, R.M., & Sajuyigbe, A.S. (2016). Effect of employee performance in decision making on performance of selected small and medium scale enterprises in Lagos, Nigeria. European Journal of Business and Management, 6(10), 93-97.

Ong, C.H., Delanie, A.H.Q., Tan, O.K., Maiazitulaidawati, M.H., &Lim, L.P. (2019). Exploring the impact of communication on employee productivity. International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, 8(3), 654-658.

Otoo, F. (2015). Effect of communication on employee performance at Ghana Revenue Authority, Kumasi. A Master’s Thesis, Kwame Nkrumah University, Ghana.

Piana, V. (2015). Employee engagement: A driver of organizational effectiveness. European Journal of Business and Management, 3(8), 53-39.

Randolph, W.A. (2015). Navigating the journey to empowerment. Organizational Dynamics, 24(4), 19- 32.

Robbins S.P. (2014). Organizational behaviour. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Robbins, S.P., Judge, T.A., & Campbell, T.T. (2015). Organizational behaviour. Essex, England: Pearson Education Limited.

Robinson, J. (2010). Triandis' theory of interpersonal behaviour in understanding software piracy behaviour in the South African context. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of the Witwatersrand.

Saleemi, N.A., & Bogonko, J.B. (2017). Management simplified. Nairobi: N.A. 

Sels, L., De Winne, S., Delmotte, J., Maes, J., Faems, D. & Forrier, A. (2016). Linking HRM and small business performance: An examination of the impact of HRM intensity on the productivity and financial performance of small businesses. Small Business Economics, 26(1), 83-101.

Sharma, M.S., & Sharma, M.V. (2014). Employee engagement to enhance productivity in current scenario. International Journal of Commerce, Business and Management, 3(4), 595-604.

Shonubi, A.O., & Akintaro, A.A. (2016). The impact of effective communication on organizational performance. International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Invention, 3(3), 1904-1914.

Singh, A.S., & Masuku, M.B. (2014). Sampling techniques and determination of sample size in applied statistics research: An Overview. International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management, 2, (11), 1-22.

Spreitzer, G.M., De Janasz, S.C., & Quinn, R.E. (2016). Empowered to lead: The role of     psychological empowerment in leadership. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 20(4), 511-526.

Straub, D., Boudreau, M.C., & Gefen, D. (2004). Validation guidelines for IS positivist research. Communications of the Association for Information systems13(1), 24.

Tuuli, S.A., & Rowlinson, H. (2019). Understanding the link between participation in decision-making and organizational citizenship behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 367-382.

Udejinta, M.O. (2018). Effective communication and employee productivity. International Journal of Communication, 9, 413-422.

Ugwu, K.E., Okoroji, L.I., & Chukwu, E.O. (2019). Participative decision making and employee performance in the Hospitality Industry: A study of selected hotels in Owerri Metropolis, Imo State. Management Studies and Economic Systems, 4(1), 57-70.

Voon, M.L., Lo, M.C., Ngui, K.S., & Ayob, N.B. (2017). The influence of leadership styles on employees’ job satisfaction in public sector organizations in Malaysia. International Journal of Business, Management and Social Sciences, 2(1), 24-32.

Yesufu, B. (2016). Human communication: Principles and contexts. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

Yukl, G. (2015). Leadership in organizations. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall International Inc.

Get the App