Transcampus.com

advert
Home Instructors Journals ContactUs
Home

 

Instructors

 

Journals

 

Contact Us

 

JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT VOLUME 7 NO 1, JUNE, 2009

MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS AND PRINCIPALS’ JOB PERFORMANCE IN SECONDARY EDUCATION IN ONDO STATE, NIGERIA

   

 S.O. Kolawole and S.O.Fashina

Department of Business Administration and Management, Rufus Giwa Polytechnic, Owo

   

   

Abstract

The study examines the relationship that exists between motivational factors and job performance of public secondary school principals through a descriptive research.  The focus of the study is on motivational factors as catalyst in propelling, enhancing, encouraging and stimulating principals as character moulders of students who are Nigeria’s future leaders.  A set of questions in the form of questionnaire was designed for data collection.  A research instrument titled ‘Motivational Factors and Principals’ Job Performance in Secondary Education in Ondo State, Nigeria’ was designed to measure the level of motivation in the area of job itself, promotion, prospects, recognition for achievement, supervisory styles, wages and salary, interpersonal relation with co-workers, quality of work done and knowledge of the job.  The questionnaire was administered personally by making use of field officers appointed by the researchers.  The results of the study showed that the motivation variables were found to be significant by difference in the job performance.

   

Keywords: Motivation, Principal, Job Performance, Job Satisfaction and Efficiency.

   

Introduction

The concept motivation is at the very heart of the study of work organisations.  The issue of motivating employees is of great concern to both management and workers in the organisation (Yalokwu, 2002).  Motivation therefore is primarily concerned with all the minor striving conditions often described as drives, desires and wishes which make the individual act in a certain way (Peretomode, 2001).

   

Many theorists over the years have attempted to define what motivates people at work, that is, what drives them to be productive and deliver what the organisation wants of them.  Psychological theorists such as Maslow (1954) believed that motivation is intrinsic.  It comes from underlying needs which all have such needs may be, for example, for power, achievement or a sense of belonging, in their view, it is management’s table to diagnose and satisfy those needs, if a worker is to perform adequately.  Other theorists such as skinner (1953), Vroom (1964) and Adams (1965) take new view that motivation is essentially extrinsic.  We make a deliberate decision about how hard to work depending on our analysis of costs and rewards.

   

Herzberg (1966) took up Maslow’s ideas to develop his two ‘factor theory’ in which he distinguished between potential satisfiers or what he called ‘hygiene factors’.  According to Herzberg, factors such as responsibility, a need for personal growth, recognition, achievement and work itself were ‘motivators’ factors such as pay, working conditions and status he regarded as ‘disatisfiers’.

   

The secondary school principals are not the only employees in the labour market but because of their involvement in character moulding and building of future leaders for the structural transformation of the nation coupled with moral regeneration, high degree of probity vis-à-vis accountability, the conditions of service of education should be made more attractive to prevent brain drain in order to maintain high level of academic standard at all levels of education in the country.  Hence, motivation is an act of providing an incentive to or for a person to satisfy a desired need.

   

Adesina (1982) opined that between 1962 and 1975 five high-powered commissions were put in place to find panacea to the problems that perennially bedevil principals condition of service in Nigeria, Adefarasin (1964), Asabia (1965), Adebo (1970) and Udoji (1975).  These commissions earned Nigerian principals respect and recognition as responsible members of the society. 

It is noteworthy to point out that previous and present governments assisted in the improvement of the teaching services in the country, however the implementation process is usually associated with lethargy in execution.  As a matter of urgency, a lot is required to improve the implementation of policies meant for the socio-economic well-being of school principals in Nigeria.

   

Studies have shown that principals are motivated to perform optimally their roles, duties and functions through many factors such as leadership style, efficiency and effectiveness, recognition for self-worth and self esteem, financial rewards, better working conditions, opportunity for personal development and training, environment and training, environmental factors and placement (Layinka, 2002).

   

Motivation is central to all forms of learning and it can be described as that which is responsible for the initiator and sustenance of behaviour, that is, it is goal-directed.  It is a construct, something we cannot see but observe the effect in the school context; motivation refers to the ability of the government to influence the principals to respond in certain expected ways.  Here, the government employs the use of various incentives in order to keep the interest of the principals so at the end, they can perform their teaching functions both effectively and efficiently.  Motivation can also be seen as the over-reaching concept that includes a number of relatively particularised conditions, that is, it is geared towards realising certain objectives (Fabunmi, 2000).  Efficient learning and performance according to him are dependent upon effective motivation. 

   

Ejiogu (1985) asserted that motivation is the process by which management enables employees to direct their energies towards maximum attainment of the goals and objectives of the organisation, that is, towards a fulfilment of the desires of the management of employing that at all.  According to him, efficiency and effectiveness of the employees depends on their motives (inner state that directs and activate their performance) on which the management now finds means of activating positively.

Fabunmi (2000) opined that the different ways people would interpret the concept of motivation provided the means to develop the three major categories of contemporary motivation theories such as content, process and reinforcement. Efficiency is the cost effectiveness of the school or the organisation’s operations.  The efficiency of an organisation is measured by computing the amount of money used to produce a single unit and the amount of idle resources.  The lower the cost per unit, the more efficient the organisation (Peretomode, 2001).

   

Hypotheses

The following hypotheses would guide the study:

Ho1:    Motivational factors would not have any significant impact on principals’ job performance.

Ho2:    Leadership style would not have any significant impact on principals’ job performance.

H03:    The level of management would not have any significant impact on principals’ job performance.

Ho4:    The principals’ gender would not have any significant impact on job performance.

Ho5:    Composite motivational factors would not have any significant impact on principals’ job performance.

   

Methodology

Research Design

The study investigated the influence of motivation on principals’ job performance in public secondary schools in Ondo State with special reference to Akoko North-West, Akoko South-West, Akure South, Akure North, Okitipupa and Irele Local Government Areas of Ondo State; Nigeria.  The study used descriptive research design, which is concise, telegraphic and precise in presentation.

   

The Population of the Study

The population is taken to be all the secondary school principals in Akoko North-West, Akoko South-West, Akure South, Akure North, Okitipupa and Irele Local Government Areas of Ondo State – Nigeria.

   

Sample and Sampling Technique

One hundred and ten (110) principals were used out of one hundred and fifty (150) principals in public secondary schools that served as the sample size by using convenience sampling technique.

   

Research Instrument

A validated structured questionnaire was used to gather data from the school managers in the selected secondary schools.  Several instruments are available for measuring motivation as enumerated, viz:

   

Section ‘A’ discussed bio-data, Section ‘B’ – the Need Satisfactory Questionnaire (NSQ) on motivation as developed by Porter (1964) to measure modified Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.  Section ‘C’ discussed the Work Components Study (WCS) developed by Borgatta (1967) to measure management effectiveness and efficiency and the Educational Work Component Study (EWC) questionnaire constructed by Heller and Miskel (1973) to evaluate the principals’ job performance.  The method of scoring used was the Likert’s Rating Scale of 4 points weighted viz:

Strongly Agree (SA) = 4;                      Agree (A) = 3; 

Disagree (D) = 2                                  Strongly Disagree (SD) = 1

   

Test of Validity

In order to ascertain the content appropriateness of the survey instrument to achieve the result it is meant for, the sample of selected principals was involved in the secondary schools selected for the study by making use of content validity.

   

Instrument Reliability

In order to ensure the reliability of the instruments used, the split-half method was used to analyse the data obtained from randomly selected secondary school principals in sample size used.  The reliability coefficient was 0.93. 

   

Method of Data Analysis

The data collected for the study were coded and analysed by the computer analyst using Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (SPSS).

   

Testing of Research Hypotheses

A 2-way analysis and Schefee Post Hoc Test were used to determine the differences and relationships between the independent and the dependent variables in hypotheses 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.

   

Level of Significance

The significance level of testing hypotheses used in this study was 0.05.

   

Data Analysis

A two-way analysis of variance was used as the statistical tool to test the hypothesis formulated and revalidated by Scheffe Post Hoc Test.  The following hypotheses were tested:


   

Ho 1:   Motivational factors would not have any significant impact on principals’ job performance.

   

A two-way Analysis of Variance showing Significant Impact between Motivational Factors and Job Performance

   

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

f

Sig.

Motivation

   

   

   

   

   

   

High Motivation

97.105

2

60.08

22.77

0.000

   

Low Motivation

2563.79

2

75.37

   

   

Job Performance

   

   

   

   

   

   

High Job Performance

69.88

2

97.05

   

   

   

Source: Field Survey 2009

Low Job Performance

1675.46

2

78.88

   

   

   

   

The results of the table above revealed that there was a significant relationship between motivational factors and job performance f = 22.8, df = 2, sig = 0.00 P< 0.05.  The null hypothesis is therefore rejected.  Hence, motivational factors have significant impact on principals’ job performance.

   

Ho 2:   Principal Leadership Style would not have any significant impact on Principals’ Job Performance.


   

A two-way Analysis of Variance showing Significant Impact between Job Performance and Leadership Style

   

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

f

Sig.

Principal Leadership Style

   

   

   

   

   

   

Good Leadership Style

1972.105

2

610.98

3.77

0.049

   

Poor Leadership Style

2256.79

2

715.37

   

   

Job Performance

   

   

   

   

   

   

High Job Performance

1669.88

2

697.10

   

   

   

Source: Field Survey 2009

 

 Low Job Performance

1465.46

2

798.88

   

   

   

   

The results of the table above revealed that there was a significant relationship between the principal leadership style and job performance

f = 3.77, df = 2, sig = 0.000, P < 0.05. 

   

The null hypothesis is therefore rejected.  Hence, motivational factors have significant impact on principals’ job performance.

   

Ho 3: Principal Leadership Style would not have any significant impact on Principals’ job performance.


   

A two-way Analysis of Variance showing Significant Impact between the Level of performance and Job Performance

   

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

f

Sig.

Level of Management

   

   

   

   

   

   

High Level

415.183

2

207.59

9.614

0.000

   

Low Level

1045.762

2

2319.078

   

   

Job Performance

   

   

   

   

   

   

High Job Performance

318.078

2

56.607

   

   

   

Source: Field Survey 2009

 

 Low Job Performance

56.146

2

21.593

   

   

   

 

The results of the table above revealed that there was a significant relationship between the level of management and principals’ job performance f = 9.614, df = 2, sig = 0.000, P < 0.05.  The null hypothesis is therefore rejected.  Hence, managerial level has significant impact of principals’ job performance.


   

Ho 4:   The Principals’ Gender Would Not Have Any Significant Impact on Job Performance.

 

   

 

   

A two-way Analysis of Variance showing Significant Impact between Job Performances

   

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

f

Sig.

Sex 

   

   

   

   

   

   

Male

56

147.29

2

13.47

0.128

0.000

   

Female

64

263.07

2

68.90

   

   

   

Total

120

   

   

   

   

   

Job Performance

   

   

   

   

   

   

High Job Performance

99.08

2

112.52

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

Source: Field Survey 2009

 

 Low Job Performance

115.46

2

102.09

   

   

   

   

 

 

The results of the table above revealed that there was no significant impact between sex and job performance – f = 13.47, df = 2, sig = 0.128, P > 0.05.  The null hypothesis is therefore accepted.  Hence, gender has no significant impact on principals’ productivity.  Composite motivational factors would not have any significant impact on principals’ job performance.

 

A two-way Analysis of Variance showing Significant Impact between Composite Motivational Factors and Job Performance

   

Sum of Squares

df

Mean Square

f

Sig.

Composite Motivation

   

   

   

   

   

   

High Motivation

297.105

2

160.08

9.336

0.000

   

Low Motivation

2563.79

2

175.37

   

   

Job Performance

   

   

   

   

   

   

High Job Performance

169.88

2

297.05

   

   

   

Source: Field Survey 2009

 

 Low Job Performance

1675.46

2

178.88

   

   

   

   

 

The results of the table above revealed that there was a significant relationship between Composite Motivational Factors and Job Performance – f = 9.336, df = 2, sig = 0.00, P < 0.05.  The null hypothesis is therefore rejected.  Hence, gender has no significant impact on Principals’ job performance.

   

Interaction Effect

Motivational factors greatly influenced job performance of principals.  Hence, motivational factors and job performance are positively related as hypotheses as indicated in Ho2, Ho3 and Ho5.  However, gender has no significant bearing on principals’ job performance as demonstrated by hypothesis 4.

22

 

Scheffe Post Hoc Comparison Showing Significant Differences In The Hypotheses Dependent Variable:

                                                        Job Performance

   

   

MEAN DIFFERENCE

STD. ERROR

95% CONFIDENCE INTERVAL


   

   

SIG.

UPPER BOUND

LOWER BOUND

Motivation

   

   

   

   

   

   

High Motivation

31.06

48

28.72

31.40

   

   

Low Motivation

30.98

67

30.64

33.33

Principal Leadership Styles

   

   

   

   

   

Good Leadership Style

26.39

90

30.36

39.56

   

Poor Leadership Style

24.90

68

29.56

37.48

Level of Management

   

   

   

   

   

High Level

13.67

56

23.09

26.71

   

Low Level

13.28

53

25.03

27.76

Composite Motivational Factors

   

   

   

   

   

High Motivation

20.80

61

25.56

22.36

   

Low Motivation

19.09

58

24.63

20.65

   

   


Source: Field Survey 2009

 

     


The Scheffe Post Hoc comparison revealed that those who were highly motivated to work had a higher mean than those who were not highly motivated with mean score of 13.67 higher than 13.28.  The implication is that, highly motivated workers would perform better than those who were not highly motivated.  The table further revealed that those who had good leadership style had higher mean than those who had poor leadership style with mean score of 26.39 higher than 25.90.  the implication of this is that those who have good principal leadership style at work would perform better than those who have poor leadership style.

   

Discussion of Findings

The results of this study had clearly demonstrated significant impact of motivational factors on principals’ job performance most especially hypotheses one, two, three and five.  Motivational factors, leadership style, level of management do affect principals’ job performance as manifested in hypotheses Ho1, Ho2, Ho3 and Ho5.  However, gender has no significant impact on principals’ performance as manifested by hypothesis 4.

   

23

Olayinka (2002) affirmed that the teachers are motivated to perform optimally their roles, duties and functions through many factors such as leadership style and effectiveness, recognition for self worth, self esteem, financial rewards, better working conditions opportunity for personal development and training, environmental factors and placement. Halpin (1967) affirmed that the principals’ policies facilitate the principals’ accomplishment of their tasks.  The group members enjoy friendly relations of intimacy.  The principals obtain considerable job satisfaction and are sufficiently motivated to overcome difficulties and frustration.  They process the incentive to work things out and to keep the organisation moving.

   

The table 5 revealed that those who had high level of management effectiveness had a mean score of 13.67 while those with low level of management effectiveness had a mean score of 13.28.  This means that high level of management effectiveness workers will perform better in the work place than their counterparts.  Finally, the table reveals that principals with highly composite motivational factors would perform better than low composite motivational factors with mean score of 20.80.

   

Conclusion

The study revealed that there is a positive correlation between motivation, leadership style, effectiveness and efficiency vis-à-vis job satisfaction and the level of job performance of principals in public secondary school in the selected local government areas of Ondo State, Nigeria by rejecting the null hypothesis.

   

The study manifested that the principals tend to perform optimally when they are positively reinforced by the appropriate quarters.  There is a positive linkage between the principals’ motivation and job performance.

   

Recommendations

The principals’ welfare should be prioritised by those who are involved in the management of education industry in the country most especially in polity, the experts, the professionals and the administrators or bureaucrats involved in the decision making on educational matters in all level of government in the country.  The government agencies involved in the educational management should make teaching profession more lucrative and attractive to the potential principals and as a matter of urgency, prevent brain drain from educational industry.

   

The operational environment of teaching and learning should be made more conducive and congenial for teaching and learning to enable the principals to combine both human and material resources to achieve the set of goals of academic excellence cum moral upbringing of the students. The financial perquisites of principals should be paid as at when due to enable them to keep body and should together in the process of discharging their duties.

The promotion of principals should be based on merit.  The management of secondary school administration should be more democratic and less autocratic; however no leadership style is permanent.  It depends on situational factors.  The principals should endeavour to inculcate esprit de corps or the smooth running of the school when they are directly involved in the decision making process.  


References

Adams, S (1963): Towards An Understanding of

Inequity, Journal of Abnormal and Social

Psychology, Vol. 67, No. 5; No., Pp. 422-436.

   

Adesina, S ((1982): Planning and Education

Development in Nigeria, Ibadan: Board Publication

Ltd.

   

Akinson, J W (1964): An Introduction to

Motivation, New York: Van Nostrand Publisher.

   

Drucker, D R (1992): People  and Performance,

London: William Heinemann Ltd.

   

Ejiogu, A M (1985): Theories of Job Satisfaction

and Job Performance: An Overview and Critique,

Lagos: Joja Educational Research and Publishers

Ltd.

   

Enumerukem, J O (1994): Research Methods and

Statistics in Education and Social Science, Lagos:

Joja Educational Research and Publishers Ltd.

   

Fabunmi, M (2000): Management and Motivation,

Ibadan: Odun Press.

   

Halpin, A W (1967): Theory and Research in

Administration, New York: Macmillan.

   

Herzberg, F (1984): Work and Nature of Man,

New York: World Publication.

   

Maslow, A H (1954): Theory of Human

Motivation, British Journal of Industrial Relation,

Vol. 2 (3), 370-396.

   

National Policy on Education (1981): National

Policy on Education in Nigeria, Lagos: Federal

Ministry of Information.

   

Peretomode, V F  (2001): Educational

Administration: Applied Concepts and Theoretical

Perspectives for Students and Practitioners, Lagos:

Jaja Press Ltd.

   

Skinner, B L (1953): Science and Human

Behaviour, New York: Appleton Century-Crafts.

   

Vroom, V H (1964): Work and Motivation,

London: John Wiley Nut.

   

   

Yalokwu, R O (2002): Fundamentals of Management, Lagos: Panaf Press Ltd.