Declaration                                                                                                         i

Approval                                                                                                        ii

Dedication                                                                                                              iii

Acknowledgements                                                                                                 iv

Table of Contents                                                                                                    v

List of Tables                                                                                                               viii

List of Figures                                                                                                               ix

Abstract                                                                                   x


  • Background of the Study                                                                   1
  • Statement of the Problem                                                                   6
  • Objectives of the Study                                                                   7
  • Research Questions                                                                   7
  • Research Hypotheses                                                                   8
  • Significance of the Study                                                                   8
  • Scope of the study                                                                                                     9

1.8   Limitations of the Study                                                                     9

1.9.      Contextual Definition of Terms                                                                    10

1.10     Profile of the Universities under Study                                                            10

References                                                                                                                   13



2.1       Conceptual Framework                                                                15

2.1.1    Job Description                                                                                            18

2.1.2    Job Evaluation                                                                                                     19

2.1.3    Distinction of Reward                                                                                        21

2.1.4    Organisational Performance                                                                  26

2.1.5    Employee Performance                                                          28

2.1.6    Employee Morale                                                                            31

2.1.7    Employee  Job Satisfaction                                                                    31

2.1.8    Work Environment                                                                                   32

2.1.9    Job Enrichment                                                                                       34

2.2       Theoretical Framework                                                                               38

2.2.1    Systems Theory                                                                   41

2.3       Empirical Review                                                                                 43

2.4       Summary                                                                                  54

References                                                                                                  57



3.1       Research design                                                                                      65

3.2       Sources of data                                                                                      65

3.2.1    Primary sources of data                                                                                   65

3.2.2    Secondary sources of data                                                                   65

3.3       Population of study                                                                                   65

3.4       Determination of sample size                                                                     66

3.5       Sampling Technique                                                                              67

3.6       Method of data collection                                                                         68

3.7       Validity of research instrument                                                                 69

3.8       Reliability of research instrument                                                                  69

3.9       Method of data analysis                                                                              69

3.10     Decision rule                                                                                               70

References                                                                                                                  71


CHAPTER FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS         4.1       Introduction                                                                                                                72

  • Data Presentation                                                                                       72
  • Interview Responses                                                                                       86
  • Test of Hypotheses                                                                                            87
  • Discussion of Findings                                                                                   91



  • Summary of Findings                                                                            94
  • Conclusion                                                                                               94
  • Recommendations                                                                                   94
  • Suggestion for Further Studies                                                                   95
  • Contribution to knowledge                                                                       95

Bibliography                                                                                                                  96

Appendixes                                                                                                                    106




Table 3. 1:       Organisations and number of employees                                            66

Table 3. 2:       Stratification of the Sample Size                                                        67

Table 4.1:        Return Rate of Questionnaire                                                             72

Table 4.2:        Sex Distribution of Respondents                                                        73

Table 4.3:        Age Distribution of Respondents                                                       74

Table 4.4:        Respondents Distribution by Staff Category                                     75

Table 4.5:        Affecting Employee Morale using Employee Benefits                      76

Table 4.6:        Affecting Employee Job Performance via Staff

Development Opportunities                                                                78

Table 4.7:        Nature of Relationship between Work Environment and Employees’

Turnover                                                                                             81

Table 4.8:        Extent Job Enrichment Affects Employees’ Job Satisfaction            83

Table 4.9:        Summarised Regression Results for Hypothesis One                         87


Table 4.10:      Summarised Regression Results for Hypothesis Two                        88


Table 4.11:      Pearson Correlation Results for Hypothesis Three                             89

Table 4.12:      Summarised Regression Results for Hypothesis Four                        90



Fig  2.1            Reward System elements and Interrelationships                    23

Fig  2.2            Key variables Affecting Individual Behaviour                      30

Fig  2.3            Elements of Learning and Development                                37

Fig. 2.4:           Conceptual Reward Management and

Organisational Performance Model                                        38

Fig. 4.1:           Return Rate of Questionnaire                                                 73

Fig. 4.2:           Sex Distribution of Respondents                                            73

Fig. 4.3:           Age Distribution of Respondents                                           74

Fig. 4.4:           Distribution of Respondents by Staff Category                     75





This study assessed the relationship between reward management and organizational performance in selected universities in Enugu State. The specific objectives of the study were to: (i) ascertain the extent to which employee benefits affect morale of employees’ of universities in Enugu State, Nigeria, (ii) ascertain the extent to which staff development opportunities affect job performance of employees’ of universities in Enugu State, Nigeria, (iii) determine the nature of the relationship between work environment and turnover of employees’ of universities in Enugu State, Nigeria and (iv) assess the extent to which job enrichment affects job satisfaction of employees’ of universities in Enugu state Nigeria. The study adopted the descriptive research design which employed a case study. The population of the study was 8623 staff of three universities in Enugu State, namely; University of Nigeria, Nsukka (UNN), Enugu State University of Science and Technology (ESUT) and Godfrey Okoye University, Enugu. UNN and ESUT were chosen because they were the only federal and state universities in Enugu State while Godfrey Okoye University was selected because of its proximity and accessibility of information. The sample size of 368 was obtained using William Godden formula. Simple random sampling technique was used to select respondents from each of the selected institutions. Data were collected using researcher – developed questionnaire and oral interview. Content validation was carried out using 2 experts from both the industry and the academia. A pilot study was conducted to check the reliability of the research instrument with Cronbach’s alpha, giving a coefficient of 0.98, indicating a high degree of items consistency. Simple percentages, frequency, mean and standard deviation were used.  Linear regression and Pearson Product Moment Correlation were used for data analysis at 5% probability level of significance. The results of this study showed that employee benefits significantly affect the morale of employees’ of universities in Enugu State, Nigeria (p = 0.002 < 0.05, r = 0.87), staff development opportunities significantly affect the performance of employees’ of universities in Enugu State, Nigeria (p = 0.000 < 0.05, r = 0.91), there is a positive relationship between work environment and employee turnover of universities in Enugu State, Nigeria(p = 0.005 < 0.05, r = 0.83), and job enrichment does significantly affect the job satisfaction of employees’ of universities in Enugu State, Nigeria (p = 0.000 < 0.05, r = 0.93). The study recommended that Universities in Enugu State, Nigeria should ensure that employees’ are promoted based on merit, as at when due, treated with respect, mentored and appreciated to ensure better performance; Staff development opportunities should be created for employees’ of universities in Enugu State, Nigeria; management of universities in Enugu State, Nigeria should ensure that the work environment is very conducive for employees; and employees’ should be encouraged to exercise their skills, with adequate supervision, job empowerment, and the provision of adequate information and knowledge which enhances  job performance.



Background of Study


The current economic difficulties have thrown into sharp relief not just what people get paid, but whether it is fair, from a perspective of many stakeholders resulting in a challenging balancing act for reward (Cotton, 2013:3). With the increased global competition, developments in Information Communication and Technology (ICT), and changes in workplace demographic characteristics, organisations need to reform their reward system to be relevant in terms of performance in order to get the best from its employees and withstand the tides of incessant competition (Ibrahim, Mayendesifuna, Buteeme and Lubega, 2013). A survey on global talent management and reward by Towers Watson (2012) in partnership with worldatwork reported that 63% of employers have difficulty in attracting the skills required for business growth and 47% faced problems of retaining top talents. The mismatch alignment between what employers are ready to offer in terms of rewards and what employees’ wants is assumed to be the reason for this difficulty in attracting talent and the loss of intellectual capable employees (Maycock and Salawudeen, 2014).


The basic premise of reward systems which is to maintain employee motivation in order to increase production and sustain a competitive edge, while keeping costs low has been evident throughout the centuries but was especially dominant during the historical period spanning the late 1800s to the early 1920s, a period known as the scientific management era (Kanin-Lovers and Porter, 1991; Milkovich, Newman and Gerhart, 2011; Wren, 1987 cited in Caudill and Porter, 2014). Management then as a discipline was itself in its infancy. The idea was to bring ‘science’ to bear through time and motion study and to link pay to production of ‘pieces’ on the production lines typified by those created by Henry Ford in his US car manufacturing plants. With manufacturing in the most advanced economies today balanced and sometimes outflanked by the service industries, the question of what that ‘piece’ (of work) would be, how it should be incentivised through rewards, and what effort employees should be expected to contribute to produce it becomes ever more complex (Caudill and Porter, 2014). And the numerous reward types on offer further complicates  the challenge of designing, communicating and monitoring what, since the 1990s, has been referred to as the ‘total reward’ approach (Cotton, 2013).


Total reward, which is a tool of reward management, is seen by market analyst as top priority of UK human resource agenda (Armstrong and Brown, 2005, cited in Nazir, Shah and Zaman, 2012). Total reward is a term adopted to describe a reward strategy that brings additional components such as learning and development, together with aspects of the working environment, into the benefits package (Armstrong and Brown, 2001 cited in Zhou, Qian, Henan and Lei, 2009).

The influence of effective rewards management on employees’ affective commitment, motivation and subsequent high organizational performance has been recorded by Google Inc., which currently ranked 4th in Fortune’s Top 10 Best Companies to work for, branding it as one of the most desirable employers worldwide (CNN Money, 2011, cited in Nujjoo and Meyer, 2012). The report from the company indicates a high rate of employee satisfaction, low employee turnover and high organizational profitability due to the fact that its employee management and retention strategies incorporate both monetary and non-monetary rewards. Google’s reward management strategy in line with changing work patterns includes flexi-time and a work environment that reconciles employees’ work-life balance (Nujjoo and Meyer, 2012).In a survey on drivers of organizations reward strategies, Tower Perrin (2007)showed that 31% of organizations are using rewards to retain top performers, 29% to attract talents and only 4% to reduce costs. Therefore, the importance of employee’s role in sustainable competitiveness has led to the paradigm shift from cost as a driver of reward strategy to its use as leverage to motivate and retain the existing talents and attract new ones (Maycock and Salawudeen, 2014). In Nigeria, KPMG surveyed 86 organisations in different sectors of the economy on their human resource (HR) practices and found that more Nigerian organisations are taking active steps to align their HR and reward strategies to international best practices. The organisations appreciate the fact that their ability to stay ahead of competition is dependent on being able to weave a competitive advantage around their people and so for them, focus on effective people management should continue in the future as HR becomes more strategically positioned to attract, motivate and retain top talents, as well as provide measurable support to enable organisations achieve business goals (Ajayi,Apanpa, Alile, and Ogbonna, 2014).


The criteria for rating Universities all over the world include amongst others, their research outputs (demonstrated in terms of publications in referred journals, number of postgraduate outputs (particularly doctoral), and the quality of academic staff (doctoral). The numberand quality of academic staff, coupled with theireffectiveness make the difference in universityeducation production function. As Evenson (2004) surmises

The escape route from the mass poverty now endemic in most African countries is improved income. This means invention and reinvention, innovation, and reverse engineering and such processes require skills that can be produced only in higher education programs(p.174).

Nwadiani and Akpotu, (2002) note that university education in contemporary times the world over, is becoming an exceedingly complex enterprise and this complexity requires a high degree of competence and proven scholarship from the university academic staff in particular and the entire staff in general(Samuel and Chipunza, 2013: 97 – 99). They contribute much to the social, political and economic development of a nation and that is why every government is making efforts to budget a huge amount to that sector (Ajayi, Awosusi, Arogundade and Ekundayo, 2011).

In the UK, government know that the success of their universities depends very substantially upon their having a staff that is motivated, committed and supportive of the institutions’ mission to conduct internationally-leading research and teaching and so developed a framework known as the ‘Science and Innovation Investment Framework 2004–2014’ (HM Treasury et al., 2004 cited in Hooley, Kent and Williams, 2010). This framework has ensured that universities received substantial investment from government through year-on-year increases in the budget. The money has enabled higher education in the United Kingdom to expand through the recruitment of new staff, both academic and those in professional and support roles and to repair or replace a decaying research infrastructure. While Government, the European Union and others seek to develop an environment within which human capital investment is emphasised, it is left to individuals within universities to interpret this and implement it ‘on the ground’ (Hooley, Kent and Williams, 2010).


In Nigeria, successive government seems to see education as a social (welfare) services to the citizenry. Education is not vigorously pursued as a vital and dynamic sector that determines all spheres of development and so lip service is paid to the effective management and dynamic approach to its development (Hamza, 1999). Though the number of universities has been increasing as reported by NUC in 2008, the number of qualified teachers is not increasing proportionately (Adeniji, 2011). Thus, there had been constant mobility of these highly skilled persons from one university to another or to other countries abroad where the environment is more conducive to work and there is better remuneration package. This mobility has been tagged as ―brain drain and is the major challenge of Nigerian universities. Other challenge facing Nigerian universities include incessant strikes, weak accountability for educational performance, poor work environment, academic staff shortage, corruption, et cetera (Ajayi, Awosusi, Arogundade and Ekundayo. 2011). In addition, the motivation of university employees’ has been reported to be affected by challenging situations like irregular research investment (Igwe, 1990 and Donwa, 2006), inadequate resources to acquire advanced information technologies such as internet, intranet, extranet, browsers, data warehouse, data mining techniques, software agents, (Donwa,2006, Krubu and Osawaru, 2011, cited in Ohiorenoya and Eboreime, 2014), lack of feedback regarding personnel evaluation reports, management emphasis on particular administrative style, workload, lack of support from superior in terms of mentoring to salary package, unchallenging jobs, et cetera (Adeniji, 2011). There are cases of some absentee lecturers that come to class only when exams are around to rush their lectures. Some of the lecturers also have been alleged of using graduating students to lecture students, record scores and compute student results. Also, there are observed cases of arbitrary award of marks, examination malpractices and students tell stories of academic staff that abandon their students to chase contracts and political appointments (Ajayi, et al. 2011). The researcher also observed that this does not affect the lecturers only. It is also seen in the way some non-teaching staff do their work. There are instances of absences among these calibres of staff, lateness, lack of initiative in the performance of duties, lack of commitment to task and the organization, luke-warmness, work stress, delays in administrative performance, et cetera.


One of the factors influencing performance is identified to be motivation to perform well on the job (Van- Knippenber 2000) which can be influenced by rewards. The need to ensure that employees perceive organization reward  as fair and directed toward their satisfaction on the job is necessary to harness employee’s potential for business benefit (Jonathan et al. 2010; Cooke et al. 2014 cited in Maycock and Salawudeen, 2014). A lot has been researched about reward management. However, little attention seems to have been given to variables such asemployee benefits, staff development, work environment, job enrichmentand their effect on performance. Against this background, the study attempted to contribute to the knowledge base by assessing the relationship between reward management and organisational performance of universities in Enugu State, Nigeria.


1.2       Statement of Problem



Leave a comment

Open chat
How may we assist you please?
× How can I help you?