DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS, ORGANISATIONAL CLIMATE AND CULTURE AS DETERMINANTS OF EMPLOYEES’ QUALITY OF WORK- LIFE IN ORGANISATIONS IN OGUN AND LAGOS STATES, NIGERIA BY SIKIRU OLAPADE, SALAMI B.Ed., MPP, M.Ed. (Ibadan) MATRIC NO: 85348 A THESIS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF ADULT EDUCATION, SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF EDUCATION, IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN, IBADAN JULY, 2014 CERTIFICATION I certify that Sikiru Olapade, SALAMI, undertook this study for the award of the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Adult Education (Industrial Education) in the Department of Adult Education, University of Ibadan, Nigeria, under my supervision. .……………………………….. ………………………….. Olajide O.E., Ph.D. Date B.Ed., M.Ed., Ph.D. (Ibadan) Department of Adult Education, University of Ibadan, Nigeria ii DEDICATION In praise of Almighty Allah, and in the memory of my late parents (PAPA ALAGBE SALAMI and MAMA AWELE SALAMI). iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I thank Almighty Allah for giving me the wisdom and strength to complete this study. My appreciation and gratitude go to my supervisor, Dr. O.E. Olajide for his patience, co-operation, comments and suggestions that improved the quality of this research work. I am very grateful sir. I am morally obliged to express my gratitude to some people for their immense contributions. I, therefore, appreciate the contributions made by these people. Although, it is impossible to mention the names of everyone involved, a special tribute should be paid to the following people. First, I owe a lot to Drs Sarumi, A.A., Kester, K.O. and Abu, P.B. of the Department of Adult Education, University of Ibadan, Professor Oyedeji, O.A. of Olabisi Onabanjo University and Dr Abimbola, O.A. of NISER, Ibadan deserve no less for the successful completion of the study from the beginning to the end. I appreciate their roles, encouragement and concern. My gratitude also goes to Professors Akintayo, M.O., Deborah Egunyomi and Aderinoye, R.A. as well as retired Professor E.E. Osuji. You are all wonderful people who are all real gem in my life. Similarly, my gratitude goes to Drs Akanji, T.A., Ojokheta, K.O., Medinat Momoh, Abiona, I.A., Olabisi Oladeji, Stella Odiaka and Omoregie, C.O.. God bless you all. I also appreciate the support and concerns of late Drs Okediran, A.A. and Adepoju, A.A., the then postgraduate coordinators of the Department of Adult Education for their immense contributions and suggestions. I wish to express my profound gratitude to all my lecturers in the Department of Adult Education especially the Head of Department Dr (Mrs.) Omobolanle Adelore who has in one way or the other contributed to my life aspiration. I am also appreciative of the moral and technical support of Professor Adeyemo, D.A., Drs iv Ajala E.M., Oyelami, R.O. and Jimoh, A.M. in completing the study. God bless you all and your families. Unforgettable are the efforts of my father and mother, Late Mr. and Mrs. Alagbe Awele Salami for laying that solid foundation upon which my present life is built. Equally worthy of special note are the immense contributions of my uncle, Mr. Olatinwo Alabi and my sister Mrs. Afusat Kareem for the special role they have played in my life. The Almighty Allah will reward you abundantly. My special thanks goes to members of staff of Idi-Itto High School II (Senior), Erunmu, Ibadan and Monatan High School (Senior) Wofun-Iyalode, Ibadan. I also appreciate the contributions of the following families: the Adeyemis, the Adurojas, Temilade Olawoye, the Akintans, the Allius, the Akanos, the Oyeyinkas, the Shittus, the Adebiyis, the Oyetolas, the Oladepos, the Onipedes, the Aborisades, the Adeyis, the Akinsipes, the Agboolas, Alhaji Gbolagun Onaolapo (BCOS) among others. Likewise I would like to express my special gratitude to Messers Fagade, L.K. and Olayiwola I.O. for taking pain to edit the manuscripts. God bless you all. There is no word sufficient to thank my dearest wife (my better half) Rasidat Tunrayo Salami for her support, encouragement and contributions from beginning of my course till the end of the programme. My wife was always there for me. God bless you, my dear. My children, Eniola Adenike Idayat and Zainab Moyosore Morenike, thank you very much for your understanding particularly when you needed me and I was not there for you. I appreciate you all. Thank you all. Olapade Salami v ABSTRACT Human resources are the most important and valued factor-input upon which every organisation achieves its desired goals and objectives; hence every organisation should ensure that employees‟ work values and expectations, known as Quality of Work-life (QWL) are always met and improved. However, QWL of an average Nigerian worker has been described as poor and low with negative consequences on their morale, commitment, efficiency and productivity; besides it has been attributed to employees‟ demographic factors and the organisational climate and culture in which they worked. Previous studies have concentrated more on the relative influence of these factors without considering their combined effects on QWL. This study, therefore, examined the extent to which demographic factors (age at work, sex, marital status, length of service, highest educational attainment and income), organisational climate (physical working environment, work involvement, organisational communication, organisational structure and worker-friendly policies) and culture (recognition of excellence/reward system, value for employees, allowance for creativity/innovation, teamwork and adaptation to change) predicted QWL in selected organisations in Ogun and Lagos states, Nigeria. The study adopted the survey research design. The multistage sampling procedure was adopted to select 99 management staff, 563 supervisors and 700 junior employees from 12 selected organisations in Ogun and Lagos States (three each from extractive, manufacturing, distributive, and services industries). Three scales were used: Organisational Climate Scale (r=0.89), Organisational Culture Scale (r=0.76) and QWL Scale (r=0.68). Two research questions were answered and four hypotheses were tested at 0.05 level of significance. Data were subjected to descriptive statistics, Pearson product moment correlation and multiple regression analyses. vi Demographic factors, organisational climate and culture significantly influenced QWL (F(16,1257) =.277.685); jointly accounting for 78% in the total variance of QWL. Their relative contributions were: organisational culture (β=.649); organisational climate (β=.237) and demographic factors (β=.089). Significant positive relationships existed among organisational climate variables and QWL as follows:worker-friendly policies (r=.678), organisational structure (r=.650), work involvement(r=.629), organsational communication (r=.567) and physical working environment (r=.501). Quality of Work-Life has significant positive relationship with organisational culture variables as follows: adaptation to change (r=.768), value for employees (r=.687), teamwork (r=.679), recognition of excellence/reward system (r=.660) and allowance for creativity/innovation (r=.624). Observed relationships among the demographic factors and QWL were: age at work (r=-.192), length of service (r=-.122), sex (r=.106), income (r=-.091), highest educational attainment (r=-.061) and marital status (r=-.053). Demographic factors, organisational climate and culture positively enhanced the quality of work life of employees in Ogun and Lagos states. Therefore, in motivating employees to optimal and higher productivity level, adequate consideration and attention should be given to all variables of organisational climate and culture. In addition, attention should be given to employees‟ job entry age, length of service, sex and educational attainment in motivating them to a higher productivity level. Key words: Quality of work-life, Organisational climate, Organisational culture, Demographic factors Word count: 452 vii TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTENTS PAGE Title Page i Certification ii Dedication iii Acknowledgement iv Abstract vi Table of Contents viii List of Tables xi List of Figures xii CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background to the Study 1 1.2 Statement of the Problem 7 1.3 Objectives of the study 8 1.4 Research Questions 9 1.5 Significance of the Study 9 1.6 Scope of the Study 10 1.7 Operational Definitions of Terms 11 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 2.1 Concept and Benefits of Quality of Work-Life (QWL) 14 2.2 Demographic Factors and Quality of Work-life (QWL) 41 2.3 Organisational Climate Variables and Quality of Work-Life 41 2.3.1 Physical work environment and Quality of Work-life in organisations 45 2.3.2 Work involvement and Quality of Work-life in Organisations 49 viii 2.3.3 Organisational Communication and Quality of Work-life in Organisations 53 2.3.4 Worker-Friendly Policies and Quality of Work-Life in organisations 57 2.4 Organisational Culture Variables and Quality of Work-Life 59 2.4.1 Recognition of Excellence/Reward System and Quality of Work-Life in Organisations 61 2.4.2 Creativity/innovation and Quality of Work-Life in Organisations 66 2.4.3 Teamwork and Quality of Work-Life in Organisations 69 2.4.4 Value for Employees and Quality of Work-Life in organisations 71 2.5 Quality of work-life and Job Performance 72 2.6 Quality of Work-life and Organisational Commitment 75 2.7 Quality of Work-life and Job Satisfaction 78 2.8 Concept of Organisational Climate in Organisations 82 2.9 Concept of Organisational Culture in Organisations 85 2.10 Empirical Studies 95 2.11 Theoretical Framework 98 2.12 Appraisal of the Literature 104 2.13 Hypotheses 106 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 3.1 Research Design 107 3.2 Population of the Study 107 3.3 Sample and Sampling Techniques 107 3.4 Instrumentation 109 3.5 Method of Data Administration 112 3.6 Method of Data Analysis 112 ix CHAPTER FOUR: DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS 4.1 Demographic Characteristics of the Respondents 113 4.2 Answer to Research Questions 119 4.2.1 Research Question 119 4.2.2 Hypothesis One 123 4.2.3 Hypothesis Two 126 4.2.4 Hypothesis Three 131 4.2.5 Hypothesis Four 135 CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 Summary 138 5.2 Conclusion 140 5.3 Limitations to the Study 140 5.4 Implications of the study 141 5.5 Recommendations 142 5.6 Suggestions for further study 143 REFERENCES 144 APPENDIX 168 x LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 2.1: Dimension and factors of quality of life 35 Table 2.2: Components of QWL in the view of different researchers 36 Table 2.3: Showing the separate factors that lead to satisfaction and dissatisfaction 101 Table 3.1: Distribution of the Sample Size 109 Table 4.1a: Multiple Regression Analysis showing the joint influence of demographic factors, organisational climate and culture variables on QWL in organisations 119 Table 4.1b: Relative individual influence of demographic factors, organisational climate and culture variables on QWL in organisations 120 Table 4.2: The relationship between QWL, Physical working environment, Work involvement, Organisational structure, Organisational communication and Worker-friendly policies 123 Table 4.3: The Relationship between QWL, Recognition of Excellence/ Reward System, Room for Creativity/ Innovation, Teamwork, Value for Employees and Adaptation to Change 126 Table 4.4: The Relationship between QWL, Age, Gender, Marital Status, Educational Attainment, Length of Service and Income 131 Table 4.5: PPMC Analysis on the relationship between QWL and job performance/ commitment 135 xi LIST OF FIGURES PAGE Fig. 2.1: Model for ensuring better Quality of Work- Life 103 Fig. 4.1: Distribution of the respondents by Age 113 Fig. 4.2: Distribution of the respondents by Gender 114 Fig. 4.3: Distribution of the respondents by Marital Status 115 Fig 4.4: Distribution of the respondents by Highest Educational Qualifications 116 Fig. 4.5: Distribution of the respondents by Length of Service 117 Fig. 4.6: Distribution of the respondents by Income Per Month 128 xii CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background to the Study An organisation is made of human, material, financial and technological resources. Observably, the human resources is generally considered as the most important factor and the most valued. This is because the human factor utilises other factors for achievement of desired objectives and stated goals of an organisation. From the foregoing, it is clear that human beings manage all other resources for the success of any organisation. Suffice it to say that the proper and efficient management of these resources is very essential and unless those who manage them are adequately motivated, valued and empowered, no amount of hardwork, investment or knowledge put in by the management will bring about the desired goals or results. It is therefore important to keep employees properly motivated, rewarded, valued, consulted and empowered so as to achieve the desired goals of an organisation. Thus, human resources management is one of the most complex and challenging fields of management since it deals with people‟s dimension in management (Nutchanath, 2007, quoted Tiyao, 1996). Given the nature of work in Nigeria, Nigerian employers need to utilise employees efficiently and effectively by making them contribute substantially to the growth and development of organisations. Thus, the productivity (performance) of an average Nigerian worker is critical to corporate organisations. Therefore, for any organisation to record success, the organisation “engine”, the employees must be focused on and they must be managed and coordinated appropriately to ensure they 1 give their best. Employees whose needs are most often not met by their organisations always demonstrate their dissatisfaction by performing below their actual abilities (Azril, Jegak, Asiah, Azman, Bahaman, Jamilah and Thomas, 2010). This is because the employees have certain expectations which if not met, their job satisfaction and commitment are likely to decline over time, which subsequently leads to low performance and high rate of turnover. These expectations of the employees in every organisation is known as the Quality of Work-Life (QWL) viewed as the sum total of the qualitative improvement, benefits and satisfaction the employees are expected to derive from their organisations. Among these are: good compensation, guaranteed health and safety, job security, career advancement, development of human capacity and good salary as well as other fringe benefits which are expected to improve from time to time. A cursory look at the Nigerian work environment seemingly shows that the physical working environment of many workplaces are poor and this exposes workers to a lot of hazards and risks which make average Nigerian workers face serious challenges in the course of performing their duties. These affect the morale of workers negatively and make them pass through a lot of stressful experiences at work as basic things like tools, equipment just to mention a few that will make their work to be effective are absent. Obviously, most people believe that an ideal physical environment that is mentally stimulating with all the necessary job tools present and ready for use will bring out the best in workers. Work environments that are good and safe boost the morale of a worker and he/she feels proud to perform his/her duties and responsibilities. That is, the type of work environment in which employees operate is likely to determine the way in which such organisations prosper. In one word, workers‟ productivity may not be optimal if the conditions of work are not favourable. 2 Many employers of labour assign duties and responsibilities to workers on the low level of the organisational structure for several reasons. They claim such employees are trustworthy, honest, loyal, committed and dedicated. Taking this type of step reduces the efficiency of workers as responsibilities are not assigned to appropriate people on many occasions. This development is a cog in the wheel of progress of many workplaces and thus has become worrisome. Besides, work involvement in Nigeria is not so much encouraged. The employer sees himself/herself as the overall boss who takes decisions most often unilaterally,forgetting that participation in decision-making should be encouraged. Many organisations do not encourage workers‟ union in order to prevent any form of strike action, work-to-rule or anything that can hamper the smooth running of the organisation. So, to a great extent, the quality of work-life (QWL) of an average Nigerian worker as regards work involvement leaves much to be desired. Ayatse (2005) in Ayatse and Ikyanyon (2012) observes that communication is needed to establish and disseminate the goals of the enterprise, but the picture of the Nigerian workplace depicts there is usually communication breakdown from different levels, it could be from the superior to subordinate or vice-versa. Many channels of communication are inefficient or insufficient. On many occasions, the superior may be incompetent and give instructions not clearly stated. Many organisations are full of things that can distract and many employees lack the listening skills that can make them perform optimally. This has negative consequences on organisations‟ performance and productivity. Apart from the above, most policies in Nigerian organisations are not worker friendly. Sometimes, employers adopt policies that are oppressive tools to the workers; like the „No work, No Pay‟ policy. The high level of unemployment in the 3 country has prevented most workers from leaving such organisations in order to keep body and soul together. More often than not, recognition of excellence/reward system, value for employees, giving room for creativity/innovation, teamwork and adaptation to change are relegated to the background in most organisations in Nigeria as employers regard workers‟ salaries and wages as enough and adequate to reward their commitment and dedication whereas wages and salaries are supposed to be enhanced and complemented with other benefits to make workers dedicated to their career and be satisfied with their jobs. For this reason, McCormick and Tiffin (1994) in Adio and Popoola (2010) observe that if workers perceive that their services are valued on the job, they will exhibit positive attitude and have more commitment to their jobs. Bhattacharyya (2005) also notes that most workers do not manifest creativity/innovation because new ideas are not appreciated from them, whereas technological development should be used to inject new ideas. Similarly, he stresses that if employees are left working alone without any support or supervision or working with colleagues and peers, their performance will be low and it can affect the quality of their productivity. Moreover, demographic factors such as age, marital status, gender, level of educational qualifications, length of service and income have a lot to do with workers‟ efficiency and commitment. A cursory look at workers‟ efficiency and commitment to work seemingly indicate that people who are energetic and mature in age are usually more dedicated to their jobs and workers who are single are more likely to be more unstable and move from one job to another. They do not have much responsibilities as married persons so they are not likely to stay long on a particular job, on the other hand, workers who are married show higher level of dedication and commitment to their jobs because they have responsibilities, such as the payment of children‟s school 4 fees, provision of food and shelter for their families and other duties to their in-laws and extended families. In most African societies people accord more respect to married people than single ones because of their experience, maturity and knowledge. High level of educational qualifications is also considered. In Nigeria, priority is on paper qualification, most employers request for high qualification level from potential employees. So, most workplaces have people with good qualification and to a great extent this promotes hard work and efficiency as well as commitment to work. However, there are cases where people with such high qualifications are found wanting as many go around with questionable certificates, that is, workers with low qualifications may sometimes perform better than those that possess high qualifications. Another important aspect is the income of the employees. Issues such as salary, bonuses, salary increment, medical benefits and allowances may sway employees‟ motivation to perform. Length of service is another pertinent factor, this relates to how long a worker has stayed on the job. Spending many years on a particular job makes an average worker gather experience that can make him/her solve different problems within the organisation. It exposes him/her to working in different areas or sections within the organisation which equips him/her with all the needed skills to make him/her efficient and dedicated. There are many adverse effects the scenario presented above have had and are still having on workplaces and organisations in Nigeria and other developing nations. Many workers have chosen to remain indolent and refused to put in their best services in their organisation, but stayed on so that they can continue to have their means of livelihood. This has resulted in low individual performance. Many workers have taken to absenteeism without any good reason and have taken to some other negative 5 work behaviours that have become a great setback for a number of organisations in Nigeria. The high rate of turnover could also be observed as employees move from one job to another looking for places where they could secure enhanced packages, job security and other benefits that will make life comfortable for them. High labour turnover leads to a decline in productivity, dissatisfaction and low commitment among others, this has become a persistent concern of economists and business analysts. Many employers feel they had put in a lot to set up their organisations and cannot afford to pay high salaries to workers or arrange for other benefits since they can always get cheap labour due to high rate of unemployment in the country. Workers have also decided not to be fully committed to their duties as a consequence of the low level of QWL. They do not have any passion for the job they do, their main concern is their pay income. They are not interested in any activity related to their organisations after the close of work. This has been responsible for divided loyalty as most employees look out for other means of making ends meet apart from what their organisation pays. This is very common in many public establishments in Nigeria. This shows that as important as the QWL is to optimal performance of workers in any organisation, there is the need to consistently understand the predisposing factors that could impede on the QWL of an average Nigerian worker. There is a very rich and vast literature on Nigerian workers and their level of productivity; some of which cover such areas as: Nigerian workers‟ attitude to work (Anikpo, 1984); Job satisfaction and commitment effects on productivity (Aremu and Ahmed, 1996); Reward system and labour productivity (Dike, 1999); Relationships between perceived organisational climate and job satisfaction and performance (Poon and Ainuddin, 2006); Organisational culture and employee commitment (Schein, 6 2008); The influence of corporate culture on organisational commitment (Zain, Ishak and Ghani, 2009); Demographic and psychological factors predicting organisational commitment (Salami, 2002); Investigating the relationship between QWL and organisational commitment (Normala, 2010); Work motivation, Job satisfaction and organisational commitment (Ayeni, Popoola and Adeyinka, 2007). However, as wide and rich as the aforementioned literature are, to the best of the researcher‟s knowledge, none of the previous studies had empirically examined and used a multivaried approach to determine the extent to which a combination of these predisposing factors influence the QWL among Nigerian workers, rather, most of the previous studies had been done examining isolated factors, hence the need for such a study, to fill this gap. 1.2 Statement of the Problem There have been accusations of low and poor quality of work-life among Nigerian workers and the reason for this is not far fetched. Most workers are said not to be adequately motivated with the exceptions of those who work in oil, banks and multinational organisations. Some workers believe that the wages/salaries being paid to them are subsistence, marginal and grossly inadequate to bring out the best in workers. The working conditions of Nigerian workers live much to be desired. Some employers do not make it a point of duty or priority to provide a conducive working environment for their employees. Consequently, the employees are not as committed as expected, their morale and efficiency/productivity are therefore seem as low below expectations. Given the high level of unemployment, coupled with limited job opportunities and high labour turnover, employers are not disposed to treat workers the way it should, because of the thinking that employees can readily be replaced. The results 7 are: poor workers commitment, low morale and low efficiency/ productivity. Poor communication network within organisation is also a problem that is quite prevalent in most organisations in Nigeria which is one of the contributory factors that tend to have adverse effects on workers productivity. These therefore, raise the salient questions of how can Quality of Work-Life of an average Nigerian employee be enhanced. Could a proper insight into the creation of positive organisational climate and culture enhance employees‟ QWL in Nigerian organisations? Would understanding of the demographic factors of the working class in Nigeria influence their QWL? It is against this foregoing that this study is poised to examine the roles of demographic factors, organisational climate and culture as determinants of employees‟ QWL in organisations in Ogun and Lagos States, Nigeria. 1.3 Objectives of the study The broad objective of the study is to ascertain the roles of demographic factors, organisational climate and culture as determinants of employees‟ QWL in organisations in Ogun and Lagos states, Nigeria. The specific objectives are to:  Establish the influence of organisational climate variables (physical working environment, work involvement, organisational communication, organisational structure and worker-friendly policies) on employees‟ QWL.  Determine the extent to which organisational culture variables (recognition of excellence/reward system, value for employees, room/allow for creativity/innovation, teamwork, and adaptation to change) will influence employees‟ QWL  Ascertain the extent to which demographic factors such as age at work, 8 gender, marital status, length of service, income and highest educational attainment influence employees‟ QWL.  Analyse the relationship between the QWL and job performance and commitment in organisations in Ogun and Lagos states, Nigeria. 1.4 Research Questions 1. To what extent do demographic factors, organisational climate and culture influence employees‟ QWL in organisations in Ogun and Lagos states, Nigeria? 2. What is the relative influence of each individual independent variables (demographic factors, organisational climate and culture) on QWL? 1.5 Significance of the Study Quality of Work-Life (QWL) has received enthusiastic support from various categories of people. Organisations have regarded it as a promising means of dealing with stagnating productivity, especially in Nigeria working environment and setting. In the same vein, it is significant to the employers in the sense that it could lead to healthy labour-management relations leading to improved productivity and accelerated national development. Since a happy and healthy employee will ensure reduced labour turnover, make good decisions and contribute positively to the organisational goal, an assured good quality of work-life will not only attract young and new talents but also retain the existing experienced workers. Again, the expected findings of the study will be beneficial to employees because they would have seen it as a means of improving working conditions and productivity and as a means of justifying higher pay. Not only that, it could also prevent the continuous decline in job attitudes of workers which always create a quiet 9 crisis and undermine the ability of employers to respond to workers‟ needs. The implementation of the expected outcome of the study will also lead to pleasant working conditions that could positively influence workers attitude and behaviour to work. The expected findings of the study would be of significance to government agencies and management as a means of increasing productivity and modalities of putting in place a better industrial democracy and reduced labour disputes. Also, the expected findings will create awareness on how management could utilise QWL to improve organisational climate and culture which can eventually bring about high productivity within the organisation. The expected outcome of this study will also add to the existing literature and expected further studies on QWL. The expected findings of the study would be more appropriate to employers and employees as well as management and government who are the major target of this research. 1.6 Scope of the Study This study focused on the extent to which demographic factors, organisational climate and culture will determine employees‟ QWL in selected organisations in Ogun and Lagos states, Nigeria. Three organisations were selected from each of extractive, manufacturing, distributive and services industries in Nigeria. The reason for the choice of these organisations in the aforementioned states was due to the concentration of industries, closeness to the seaport and availability of raw materials as well as to give the study a wide coverage. The 12 work organisations and their classifications are: 10 Extractive Industry Manufacturing Distributive Industry Services Industry Industry Ascon Oil and Gas Berger Paints Plc, Abams Chemicals First Bank Plc, Plc, Victoria Island, Ikeja, Lagos. Nig. Ltd, Ojota- Marina, Lagos. Lagos. Lagos. A.G. Nassima Nig. Lafarge Cement Plc, Richbase Nig. Ltd. Ogun State Ltd., Ijaye-Lagos. Sagamu, Ogun State. Idumota, Balogun Ministry of Health, Int‟l Plaza, Lagos. Abeokuta. De-Ayowalls Nig. Sona Breweries, Conoil Plc., Apapa, DHL Plc, Isolo, Ltd., Ipaja, Lagos. Sango- Otta, Ogun Lagos. Lagos. State. 1.7 Operational Definitions of Terms To avoid ambiguity and misinterpretation, some key terms used in this study were operationally defined. These are: Quality of work-life: QWL is used in this study as sum total of the qualitative improvement, benefits and satisfaction that the employees are able to derive from the organisation as workers. This is measured with the following indices: improved compensation, health and safety; job security, opportunity for career advancement and development of human capacity (training). Organisational climate is the composition of the nature of the work environment, measured within this study, using physical working environment, organisational structure, work involvement, organisational communication and worker-friendly policies as variables. Organisational culture is the composition that determines the nature of the work environment in which the participants of this study work. These are: recognition of excellence/reward system, value for employees, room/allow for creativity/innovation, 11 teamwork and adaptation to change. Demographic variables are those that are related to age at work, gender, marital status, length of service, income and highest educational attainment. 12 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK This chapter dwells literature that provides information on demographic factors, organisational climate and culture as determinants of employees‟ quality of work-life (QWL) in selected organisations in Ogun and Lagos states, Nigeria. The literature review would be carried out under the following sub – headings: 2.1 Concept and Benefits of QWL. 2.2 Demographic Variables and QWL 2.3 Organisational Climate Variables and QWL. 2.3.1 Physical Work Environment and QWL 2.3.2 Work Involvement and QWL 2.3.3 Organisational Communication and QWL 2.3.4 Worker-Friendly Policies and QWL 2.4 Organisational Culture Variables and QWL 2.4.1 Recognition of Excellence/Reward System and QWL 2.4.2 Creativity/Innovation and QWL 2.4.3 Teamwork and QWL 2.4.4 Value for Employees and QWL 2.5 QWL and Job Performance. 2.6 QWL and Organisational Commitment. 2.7 QWL and Job Satisfaction 2.8 Concept of Organisational Climate in Organisations 2.9 Concept of Oganisational Culture in Organisations. 13 2.10 Empirical Studies 2.11 Theoretical Framework 2.12 Appraisal of the Literature. 2.13 Hypotheses 2.1 Concept and Benefits of Quality of Work-Life (QWL) It is now widely accepted that workers do not simply give up their time in order to acquire cash incomes, but rather that work is an important part of their lives and the quality of their working life has real significance for them. Thus, if productivity and cash incomes rise but at the expense of less happiness in the workplace, there could be a tradeoff in which the gains from greater earnings are partially or even totally offset by rising personal costs (Hector, Gibson & Zorn (Jnr), 2009). For this reason, quality of work-life is a significant factor or dimension of quality of life. It is a concept being used for the first time in industrialised countries to solve labour problems in order to improve the quality of life of workers (Kheradmand, Valilou and Lotfi, 2010). From the view of Mesut, (2006) in Hajieh and Shahrnaz, (2013), QWL is defined as a method or approach that uses special techniques to improve and modify work. QWL is the views of individuals towards their jobs; namely, how much mutual confidence, appreciation, dominant work and suitable material and abstract investment opportunities in work environment were provided for staffs by managers. The method of solving labour problems of industrialised group of nations differ in accordance with each society in terms of problem and the conditions of the problems. QWL is a concept that has captured the imagination of managers and workers alike (Normala, 2010). According to Akdere (2006), in Normala (2010) the issue of work-life quality has become critical in the last two decades due to increasing 14 demands of today‟s business environment and family structure. In line with this, QWL is a concept of behavioural scientists, the term was first introduced by Davis in 1972 during an international labour relations conference (Nathur, 1989, Hian and Einstein, (1990) in Islam and Siengthai (2009). Quality of work-life (QWL) received more attention after United Auto Workers and General Motors initiated a quality of work-life programme for work reform. When initially developed in the mid- 1970s, QWL was defined in terms of people‟s reaction to work, particularly individual outcomes related to job satisfaction and mental health. Using this definition, QWL focus primarily on personal consequences of the work experience and how to improve work to satisfy personal needs (Kheradmand, Valilou and Lotfi, 2010). A number of researchers and theorists have been interested in the meaning of the quality of work- life concept and have tried to identify the kinds of factors that determine such an experience at work (Kahn, 1981; Mirvis and Lawler, 1982; Kalra & Ghosh, 1984; Kerce and Booth – Kewley, 1993) in Normala (2010). From the above, it is noted that different meanings were given, that is, there is no formal definition of QWL, but industrial psychologists and management scholars agree in general that QWL is a concept that deals with the well-being of employees and that it differs from job satisfaction (Quinn and Shephard, 1974; Davies and Cherns, 1975; Hackman and Suttle, 1977; Quinn and Staines, 1979; Kabanoff, 1980; Staines, 1980; Champoux, 1981; Kahn, 1981; Lawler, (1982); Efraty and Sirgy, 1988 in Normala, 2010. From the above, it has generally been agreed upon that quality of work-life is conceptually similar to well-being of employees but differs from job satisfaction which solely represents the workplace domain (Lawler, 1982 in Roopali, 2005). 15 In view of this, QWL is a complex, multidimensional, generic concept (Hsu & Kernohan, 2006). Most literature on the QWL originates from the discipline of Industrial Labour Relationships (Hsu & Kernohan, 2006 in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan, 2013). QWL has been defined by researchers in different ways, which has brought about certain equivalents such as work quality, function of job content, employee's well-being, the quality of the relationship between employees, working environment, and the balance between job demands and decision autonomy or the balance between control need and control capacity (Korunlca, Hoonakker, & Carayon, 2008; Lewis, Brazil, Krueger, Lohfeld, & Tjam, 2001; Schouteten, 2004; Van Laar, Edwards, & Easton, 2007 in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan, 2013). QWL is thus recognised as a multi-dimensional construct and the categorisation is neither universal or eternal. For this reason, past scholars and researchers have offered various definitions and suggestions of what constitutes QWL but the recent definition by Serey (2006) in Rethinam and Ismail (2008) on QWL is quite conclusive and best reflects features of the contemporary work environment. The definition is related to meaningful and satisfying work. It includes:  an opportunity to exercise one‟s talents and capacities to face challenges and situations that require independent initiative and self-directions;  an activity thought to be worthwhile by the individuals involved;  an activity in which one understands the role the individual plays in the achievement of some overall goals; and  a sense of taking pride in what one is doing and in doing it well. Glueck (1979) in Ilesanmi (2012) refers to quality of work-life to include management and supervisory style, freedom and autonomy to make decisions on the 16 job, satisfactory physical surroundings at work, job safety, satisfactory working hours and meaningful jobs. Similarly, Suttle (1976) in Ilesanmi (2012) defines quality of work-life as the degree to which members of a work organisation are able to satisfy important personal needs through their experiences in the organisation. He stresses further that the quality of work-life can be improved by introducing participative problem solving; restructuring work; introducing innovative reward and improving the work environment. It is hoped that these improvement will lead to a more participative corporate culture and thus higher productivity and quality products/services. In his opinion, Walton (1974) in Nutchanath, 2007 states that quality of work- life is a phrase that contains vast meaning. It is not merely the limit of working for 40 hours a week or labour law that protects child labour and equitable pay, but also the inclusion of the needs and wishes for better life of the people within the organisation. Hackman and Suttle (1977) in Nutchanath, (2007) propose that the quality of work-life served happiness and satisfaction of every performer in the organisation, whether at the levels of labourers, supervisors, management or company or agency owners. The good quality of working life is not only to make personnel have job satisfaction: it also results in other prosperities such as social, economic, environmental conditions and products. Most importantly, the QWL could lead to job satisfaction and attachment to the organisation. Also, it helps in boosting morale while reducing rates of absenteeism, labour turnover and accidents while the organisation‟s proficiency as regard encouragement and job satisfaction as well as product quality and amount are higher. Jenkins (1981) in Sivarethinamohan and Aranganathan (2013) has defined quality of work-life as “broad expression covering a vast variety of programmes, 17 techniques, theories and management styles through which organisations and jobs are designed so as to grant workers more autonomy, responsibility and authority than is usually done” (pg. 12735). Daniel (1982) defines quality of work-life as process for work organisation which enables its members at all levels to actively participate in shopping the organisation‟s environment, methods and outcomes. This value-based process is aimed toward meeting the twin goals of enhanced effectiveness of the organisation and improved quality of life at work for employees. Davis (1983) in Carayon, Hoonakker, Marchand and Schwarz (2003) has defined quality of work-life as “the quality of the relationship between employees and the total working environment, with human dimensions added to the usual technical and economic considerations” (pg. 80). Delamotte and Takezawa (1984) in Nutchanath (2007) point out the idea that quality of work-life originated from work and the idea that quality of life means the development of worker‟s life, having a better living condition to work in a good working condition, to receive fair benefits and reliable equal rights. According to these writers, quality of work-life means good results from work which benefit the workers as a result of the improvement of the organisation and its work nature, the special consideration given to a worker‟s work-life, work satisfaction and decision- making sharing. Kast and Rosenzweig (1985) in Nutchanath (2007) state that QWL refers to the perception about individuals‟ performance that they were involved in like sharing of opinions, solving problems and making decision within the organisation. Huse and Cummings (1985) in Nutchanath, (2007) define quality of work-life as the consistency between individuals‟ fulfillment and job satisfaction with organisational 18 proficiency. In other words, QWL is the organisational proficiency which is a consequence of workers‟ well-being, resulting from the perception of working experience that makes employees feel satisfied with that job. Huse and Cummings further explain that the quality of work-life affects the organisation in three ways: first, it increases organisational productivity; second, it increases work spirit, it enhances encouragement and motivation of workers and lastly, it helps to improve the potential of workers. Kreethong (1986) in Nutchanath (2007) states that quality of work-life comprise the characteristics of persons whose work-life was valuable or whose work led to a good living as accepted by the society. The quality of work-life is the combination between work and life that is, a person would feel satisfied with his/her work, cooperate to achieve the best outcome in pursuant of his/her objectives as he/she executes his/hers jobs, the result of which is happy living that will eventually lead to lives of value. Casio (1986) in Nutchanath (2007) specifies the meaning of quality of work- life in two characteristics: the first characteristics means working environment and other practices within an organisation such as job enrichment, democratic supervision, employee involvement and safe working conditions while the second is related to safety, good relationships between employees and employers, growth of career path and development of the working environment. Werther and Davis (1989) in Nutchanath (2007) have given the meaning of the quality of work-life as a good command of supervision, good condition of work, opportunity to enjoy good benefits, provision of good income and job-provoking interest, challenge and rewards. Werther and Davis believe the quality of work-life and the increase in productivity of the employee go hand-in-hand. 19 Naveekarm (1990) in Nutchanath (2007) defines the quality of work-life as the quality of the relationship between staff and job characteristics which is all about technical and humanistic characteristics while job characteristics means organisation climate which stimulates learning and improvement that will enable the individuals control their work for interesting and meaningful achievements in their jobs which can empower them to fulfill their personal needs. Kerce and Keweley (1993) in Nutchanath (2007) state that quality of work-life refers to groups, procedures or technologies which allow the working environment to provide more productivity and employees to have increased job satisfaction. The outcome focuses on employees rather than the management. The quality of work-life also has to do with involvement in problem solving, revision of working system, the act of making jobs interesting, the use of new methods in the reward system and the need to improve the working environment. Therefore, the quality of life of employees in an organisation comprise overall job satisfaction, job characteristics and attachment to work. Klinfuang, (2000) in Nutchanath (2007) states that the quality of work-life means the feelings or attitudes of people‟s perceptions of what self-working experience means by working with good performance that has value. People who are satisfied with their jobs feel such jobs respond to physical, mental, social and economical needs with adequacy and fairness. Islam and Seingthai (2009) quoted Robbins (1990) feel quality of work-life “as a process by which an organisation responds to employees‟ needs by developing mechanisms that will allow them participate fully in the decision-making that designs their lives at work” (pg. 3). In other words, it refers to the relationship between a worker and his environment, that can be broken down into different dimensions like 20 the social, technical and economic, in which the work is normally viewed and designed. Similarly, Chang and Tang, (2009) view QWL as meeting different needs of staffs including social needs, need to esteem and need to use skills. Lau, Wong, Chan and Law (2001) in Rethinam and Ismail, (2008) operationalised quality of work-life (QWL) as the favourable working environment that supports and promotes satisfaction by providing employees with rewards, job security and career growth opportunities. Indirectly, the definition indicates that an individual who is not satisfied with rewards may be satisfied with the provision of security and to some extent would enjoy the career opportunity provided by the organisation for their personal as well as professional growth. Heskett, Sasser and Schlesinger (1997) in Rethinam and Ismail, (2008) define quality of work-life as the feelings employees have towards their jobs, colleagues and organisations that ignite a chain leading to the organisations‟ growth and profitability. A good feeling towards their job means the employees feel happy in doing their work which will lead to a productive work environment. This definition provides an insight to the fact that satisfactory work environment is considered an avenue for providing better quality of work-life. Therefore, definition by Suttle (1977) in Rethinam and Ismail (2008) on Quality of Work-life (QWL) which considers it as the degree to which work is able to satisfy important personal basic needs through their experience in the organisation is no longer relevant. Generally, jobs in the contemporary work environment offer sufficient rewards, benefits, recognition and control to employees over their actions, although to some extent contemporary workforce are compensated appropriately, yet, their personal spending practices, lifestyles, leisure activities, individual value systems, health and so forth can affect their levels of need. It is similar to the argument posted in the Maslow‟s hierarchy of Needs in which an 21 individual has different level of needs because in reality what is important to some employees may not be important to others although they are being treated equally in the same organisation. In the researcher‟s opinion, this definition is focusing on personal needs but has neglected the fact that the construct of QWL is subjective and continuously evolves due to ever-growing needs of each and every employee. This review on the definitions of QWL indicates that it is a multi-dimensional construct, made up of a number of interrelated factors that need careful consideration to conceptualise and measure. It is associated with job satisfaction, job involvement, motivation, productivity, health, safety and well-being, job security, competence development and balance between work and non-work-life (Rethinam and Ismail, 2008). QWL is necessary for this competitive environment for maintaining qualified and skilled employees. High QWL would help to fulfil employees needs thereby fulfil the organisational goals effectively and efficiently. Quality of work life is a dynamic multi-dimensional construct that includes concepts such as job security, reward systems, training and career advancements opportunities and participation in decision making (Sarajii & Dargahi, 2006) in Nanjundeswaraswamy and Swamy (2013). Reyan (1995) in Nanjundeswaraswamy and Swamy (2013) believes that most studies done on the quality of work in the 60s focused on psychology of individuals and their perception of the industrial environment. Also, Huzzard (2003) in Nanjundeswaraswamy and Swamy (2013) points out that the concept of quality of work life in the 80s was a general term to include a set of condition in different fields such as organisation, work environment and partnership. Quality of worklife was an equivalent to concepts such as “humanisation of work” in Germany, “improvement working conditions” in France or “protection workers” in some Eastern Europe 22 countries. These differences imply different views of aspects of quality of working life. In other words, in the 80s, the concept of quality of working life detached psychology and approached a social approach; which was a technical perspective of organisation and team. Moreover, the concept of quality of work life is related to the social-technical systems in job enrichment which is associated with employees” participation and responsibilities in its own place (Hamidi & Mohamadi, 2012) in Nanjundeswaraswamy and Swamy (2013). Quality of work-life therefore is a concept relative to human beings, work and organisation, especially in response to the effects of work on an employee in terms of efficacy and effectiveness of the organisation (Nadler and Lawler, 1983) in Kandasamy and Screekumar, (2008). This concept has been used to increase the effectiveness of work by qualitatively and quantitatively increasing production and by reducing work leave, work absenteeism and work transfers which have resulted in improving the development of the work-life and have positively affected organisations through the development of a good quality of life for human beings with good quality of working suitability within the organisation, safety and good benefits with justice and equality in society (Kandasamy and Screekumar, 2008). In one word, quality of work-life is important because it is considered a supportive factor in motivating employees to work. Hackmain and Suttle (1997) in Nutchanath, (2007) suggest that quality of work-life affects increased job performance and satisfaction and feelings of affiliation toward the organisation while reducing the labour turnover and absenteeism. Similarly, Hector, Gibson and Zorn (2009) opine that quality of work-life is found to be significant by reducing absenteeism, minor accidents, grievances and quits. 23 In recent years, quality of work-life (QWL) is increasingly being identified as progressive indicators related to the functions and sustainability of business organisations. On the other hand, management recognises that a productive workforce will provide a global, sustainable competitive advantage for business organisations. Also, as the composition of the work force continues to change over the years, organisations that offer better benefits and supportive working environment are expected to gain leverage in hiring and retaining valuable people (Kheradmand, et al., 2010). Understanding quality of work-life in an organisation will clarify weak and strong points in the interface between that organisation and its employees. This recognition will lead to productivity and higher performance. Currently, management science considers human resources as the most important in an organisation‟s development, so the act of motivating them is a critical point. For this reason, it seems taking care of quality of work-life will reduce turnover and absenteeism which in turn will enhance job satisfaction and performance (Kheradmand, et al. 2010). In managing the quality of work-life within any group, the goal is usually to encourage and promote those virtues, attitudes, values and behaviour which the group cherishes and to discourage or punish those it abhors. Business organisations have different types of tangible and intangible benefits (as well as negative sanctions) which, if properly managed, could secure for them a committed and productive workforce. In general, the aims of QWL in business organisations are to attract, retain and motivate employees to achieve the corporate objectives of the organisation (Oladimeji, 1999). Similarly, Normala (2010) suggests that companies offering good quality of work-life and supportive work environment would likely gain leverage in hiring and 24 retaining valuable people and those companies with high quality of work enjoy exceptional growth and profitability. For this reason, in an organisation, a high level of QWL is necessary to continue to attract and retain employees (Bolhari, Rezaeean, Bolhari, Bairamzadem, and Soltan, (2011). Quality of work-life have been extensively discussed in academic books and journals, business-oriented publication and general-interest publications, for instance, Rethinam and Ismail (2008) reviewed different researches about meanings and constructs of QWL and designated that it is a multi-dimensional construct and is made of a number of inter-related factors. Bolhari et al. (2011) propose that the key constructs of QWL are higher payment, job security, better reward systems, growth opportunity and participative groups among others, despite this, the precise nature of QWL and its relationship to key criterion variables such as organisational climate and culture is still uncertain, to the point where Worral and Cooper (2006) report that a low level of well-being at work is estimated to cost about 5 to 10 percent of Gross National Product (GNP) per annum, yet, QWL as a theoretical construct remains relatively unexplored and unexplained within the organisational psychology research literature. Quality of Work Life (QWL) is a multi-dimensional construct, made up of a number of interrelated factors. It is associated with job satisfaction, job involvement, motivation, productivity, health, safety and well-being, job security, competency development and balance between work and non work life (De Jonge & Landerweerd, 1993; Hood & Smith. 1994: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Work Conditions, 2002) in Nutchanath (2007). QWL is also viewed as a wide-ranging concept, which includes adequate and fair remuneration, safe and healthy work conditions and social integration in the work organisation that enables an individual to 25 develop and use all his or her capacities. The definitions aim at achieving an effective work environment that meets the organisational and personal needs and values that promote health, well being, job security, job satisfaction, competency development and balance between work and non-work life. The definitions also emphasise good feeling perceived from the interaction between the individuals and the work environment. For the purpose of this study, Quality of work-life is defined as some total o the qualitative improvement, benefits and satisfaction that the employees are able to derive from the organisation as workers. That is, it is the expectations of employees at workplace. This implies that quality of work-life is dependent on the extent to which an employee feels valued, rewarded, motivated, consulted and empowered within the workplace (BNET Business Dictionary). It is therefore the quality of relationship between the employees and the total working environment. Walton (1974) in Nutchanath (2007) identifies the following components of the QWL, this consists of: (i) Adequate and fair compensation: employees should receive payment that meets socially determined standard of sufficiency or the recipient‟s subjective standards. Remuneration for certain work should bear an appropriate relationship to the payment received for other work. (ii) Safe and healthy environment: employees should not be exposed to physical condition or work arrangements that are unduly hazardous or unhealthy. In the future, when health becomes more important than comfort, more stringent standards than those of today will possibly be imposed. These may include minimising odours, noise or visual annoyance. (iii) Development of human capacities: To achieve this, organisations should 26 realise that varying degrees of work have become fractionated, deskilled and tightly controlled and that planning the work is often separated from implementing it. Also, jobs differ in how much they enable the worker use and develop his/her skills and knowledge, which affect his/her involvement, self- esteem and the challenge yielded by the work. Availability of opportunities to effect all these are indications of QWL. (iv) Growth and security: Attention needs to be given to the extent to which the worker assignment contributes to maintaining and expanding his/her capabilities, rather than leading to his/her obsolescence; the degree to which expanded or newly acquired knowledge and skills can be utilised in future work assignment and the availability of opportunities to advance in the organisation or career in terms of peers, family members or associates recognised. (v) Social integration: whether the employee achieves personal identity and self- esteem that has been influenced by such attributes as the climate of his workplace freedom from prejudice, a sense of community, interpersonal openness, the absence of stratification in the organisation and the existence of upward mobility or not-is another element.. (vi) Constitutionalism: This has to do with the right of the worker and the methods of protecting those rights. Wide variation exists in the extent to which the organisational culture respects personal privacy, tolerates dissent, adheres to high standards of equity in distributing rewards and provides for job process in all work-related matters. Despite these differences, all these attributes must exist and be maintained. (vii) The total life space: a person‟s work should have a balanced role in his life. 27 This role encompasses schedules, career demands and travel requirement that take a limited portion of the person‟s leisure and family time as well as advancement and promotion that does not require repeated geographical moves. (viii) Social relevance: organisation acting in a socially irresponsible manner cause increasing number of their employees to depreciate the value of their work and careers, that is, workers perceive the organisation is socially responsible for its products, waste disposal, marketing techniques, employment practices and participation in political campaigns. When these elements of social relevance exist, we can infer that QWL has taken place. Daniel (1982) in Nutchanath (2007) states the concept of the QWL as follows: Human beings need to receive environmental care in working with due respect and honour; be given support on matters wherein they can create new things; to learn and grow with the organisation; to perceive and understand duties in the organisation and know how their devoted performance affects the organisation; and to receive more responsibilities with maturity. Klatt, Murdick and Schuster (1985) in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan (2013) |have identified eleven dimensions of QWL. They are pay, occupational stress, organisational health programmes, alternative work schedules, participatory management and control of work, recognition, superior-subordinate relations, grievance procedure, adequacy of resources, seniority and merit in promotions, and employment on permanent basis. Kast and Rosenweig (1985) in Nutchanath (2007) proposes 7 components of the QWL. These are dignity and respect, self control or autonomy, recognition, reward, opportunity to develop, source of pride and job security. 28 Casio (1998) in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan (2013) states that the QWL comprises both the mental and objective aspects of work life. The objective ones emphasise the circumstances and procedures relating to promotion policies, participatory supervision, and safe working conditions, whereas the subjective relate to supervision, communication, leadership etc. He identified 8 factors that determine quality of work life as given under.  communication  employee involvement  desire and motivation to work  job security  career progress  solving problems  salary  pride of a job. Similarly, Casio (1989) in Nutchanath (2007) states that the QWL in work institution in the United States should consist of compensation, rmployee benefits, job security, selection of appropriate working time, work tension, involvement in making decision on relevant work, profit sharing, pension rights, welfare project for workers and four working days per week Naveekarn, (1990) in Nutchanath (2007) provides a concept of component for the QWL as follows security, fair pay, fairness in the workplace, job appeal and challenge, job variety, job, workplace and self control, challenge, responsibility, opportunity to learn and grow, feedback, authority, compliments and callenging tasks. Achinsmajarn, (1991) in Nutchanath (2007) provides his concept of components of QWL as follows security, equality in pay and rewards, fairness in the 29 workplace, freedom from bureaucracy and strict control, job meaning and appeal, job variety, job challenge, job, workplace and self control, scope in making individual decisions, opportunity to learn and grow, feedback and result acknowledgement, authority, recognition, social support, future progress, relationship between job and external conditions and selecting opportunity depending on preference, interest and expectation. Kerce and Kewley (1993) in Nutchanath (2007) present four aspects of quality of work-life as follows;  Overall job satisfaction  Facet job satisfaction such as payment, benefits, working condition, chances of advancement, job security, co-workers, physical surrounding, resources and equipment, chances to develop skills, supervision, opportunity for personal growth and development.  Job characteristics such as skill variety, task identity, task significance autonomy and feedback  Job involvement. Winter, Taylor and Sarros (2000) in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan (2013) viewed QWL for attitudinal response among the employees which includes role, stress, job characteristics, supervisory, structural and social characteristics to directly and in directly shape academicians' experiences and attitudes and behaviors. Mosharraf (2000) in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan (2013) measured QWL as follows the security of employment, job/role clarity, understanding supervisors, work not stressful, access to relevant information and social and welfare facilities. According to Nadler and Lawler in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan (2013), the types of QWL activities can be listed as (i) Participative problem solving, (ii) Work 30 restructuring, (iii) Innovative rewards systems and (iv) Improving the work environment. Bhanugopan and Fish (2008) in Gayathiri et al (2013) suggested indicators like lack of job stress, lack of job burnout, lack of turnover intentions and job satisfaction. They included measures like job satisfaction, earning money, membership in successful teams, job security and job growth. Connell and Hannif (2009) in Gayathiri et al (2013) reported three factors (i) Job content; (ii) Working hours and work-life balance; and (iii) Managerial/supervisory style and strategies. They believe key concepts tend to include job security, reward systems, pay and opportunity for growth among other factors. Measures of Quality of Work Life according to Adhikari and Gautam (2010) in Gayathiri et al (2013) are: adequate pay and benefits, job security, safe and health working condition, meaningful job and autonomy in the job. Measures of Quality of Work-Life include - (i) increased worker involvement, participation and power, (ii) Increased emphasis on employee skill development, (iii) Increased autonomy for action and decision making at worker level and (iv) Reduced status distinctions among levels in hierarchy. Mirsepasi, (2006) in Gayathiri et al (2013), having examined the different views and observed that QWL is explained by the following factors: (i) Fair and proper payment for good performance (ii) Safe and secure work situation, (iii) The possibility of learning and using new skills, (iv) Establishing social integration in the organisation, (v) Keeping individual rights, (vi) Equilibrium in job divisions and unemployment and (vii) Creating work and organisational commitment. Schermernrhorn and John (1989) in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan (2013) opined that the following factors must exist in the organisation – fair and adequate pay , health and safety of working conditions creating opportunities to learn, growth in the 31 professionalism path, professional integrity in the organisation , support of individual rights and proud of the job. Hsu and Kernohan (2006) in Gayathiri et al (2013) carried out a descriptive study with a convenience sample. They selected 16 focus groups, each containing 3-5 registered nurses with at least 2 years of experience in one medical centre and five regional hospitals. They identified 56 QWL categories and fitted into 6 dimensions namely, socio-economic relevance, demography, organisational aspects, work aspects, human relation aspects and self-actualisation. Major issues emphasised by focus groups are managing shift work within the demands of family life; accommodation; support resources; and nurses' clinical ladder system and salary system. Sirgy, Effraty, Siegel and Lee (2001) categorised QWL into two major categories: lower- and higher order needs. The lower-order QWL comprised of health/safety needs and economic/family needs whereas the higher-order QWL is comprised of social needs, esteem needs, self actualisation needs, knowledge needs, and aesthetic needs. For measurement, they suggested review in terms of the following seven categories of needs. 1. Health and safety needs (protection against disease and injury within and outside the workplace) 2. The needs of family economy (wages, job security and etc) 3. The need for social (cooperative work between colleagues, and having free time in the workplaces) 4. Social needs(having the cooperative work between colleagues and spare time at work place 5. The need for self-esteem (recognition and appreciation of the work inside and outside the organisation) 32 6. The need for training (training to improve job skills) 7. The aesthetic needs (creativity workplace and personal creativity and general aesthetics. Donald, (2005) in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan (2013) investigated QWL indicators in six Canadian Public Health Care Organisations (HCO's) by reviewing documentation relevant to QWL and conducting focus group or team interviews. Group interviews were taped and analysed with qualitative data techniques. They found employee well being and working conditions are important indicators of QWL. They found vagueness in defining QWL indicators and they suggested increased HCO resources, integration of HCO management systems will help to access the relevant information. Zare, Hamid, Haghgooyan, Zolfa and Asl, Zahra Karimi (2012 ) in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan (2013) undertook a study on quality of work life to identify its dimensions Library method was used to gather information on theoretical basics, literature and to identify aspects and scales. Field study method was used to gather information through questionnaires distributed among 30 experts. The data so collected was analysed using Analytical hierarchy process (AHP); it is found that QWL can be explained by four factors as given under. 1. Work life balance - Fair working hours , Work-life atmosphere, Opportunity for doing religious ceremonies, Ergonomics, No physical and mental damages, Distance between workplace and home 2. Social factors - The importance of work in the society, social integration in organisation, Social networks in work, Respecting employees, Self- esteem feeling in the organisation, Good colleagues 3. Economic factors - Salary, Health service, Insurance, Retirement, Job 33 security 4. Job content - Team working, independence, meaningful work, rich and challenging work, ownership feeling in work, the need of creativity in work, growth opportunity. From the above expositions, we can arrive at two conclusions. (i) QWL is a multi -dimensional concept. (ii) Due to its multi -dimensional nature, it is a relative concept which cannot be precisely defined and measured. 34 Table 2.1: Dimension and Factors of Quality of Work-Life Dimension Factors Job design Job content, work meaningfulness, work challenge, work richness, meaningful job and autonomy in the job, work restructuring, and job/role clarity. Work environment Improving the work environment, social and welfare and facilities facilities, etc. Job security Employment on permanent basis. Health, stress and Health and safety of working conditions, protection against disease safety and injury within and outside the workplace; occupational stress, organisational health programmes, job stress, and lack of job burnout. Wages and rewards Fair and adequate pay , fair and proper payment for good performance, Innovative rewards systems, the circumstances and procedures relating to promotion policies, seniority and merit in promotion and development. Work life balance Working hours and alternative work schedule. Aesthetics and General aesthetics,` free time in the workplaces, creativity workplace creativity and personal creativity. Conflict Cooperative work between colleagues' adequacy of resources, work and organisational equilibrium, and grievance procedure. Learning and Increased emphasis on employee skill development, possibility of development learning and using new skills, training to improve job skills, creating opportunities to learn, growth in the professionalism path, job growth and career progress Leadership and Superior -subordinate relations, Participatory supervision, employee Communication, desire and motivation to work, Creating work and empowerment organisational commitment, employee involvement, participation and power, Increased autonomy for action and decision making at worker level, access to relevant information and participative problem solving, Job satisfaction Recognition and appreciation of the work inside and outside the organisation, membership in successful teams, proud of the job, and lack of turnover intentions. Source: Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan (2013) 35 Regarding the definitions of QWL, researches have studied QWL components. Table 2.2 shows different views of researchers about QWL components (Su-li, 2008; Nanjundeswaraswamy & Swamy, 2013). Table 2.2: Components of QWL in the view of different researchers Author Component Saklami (1979) 1. Adequate and fair compensation; 2. Fringe benefits and welfare India measures; 3. Job security; 4. Physical work environment; 5. Work load and job stress; 6. Opportunity to use and develop human capacity; 7. Opportunity for continental growth; 8. Human relations and social aspect of work life; 9. Participation in decision making; 10. Reward and penalty system; 11. Equity, justice and grievance handling; 12. Work and total life space; and 13. Image of organisation. Stein (1983) 1. Independence and autonomy; 2. Being outstanding and important; 3. Property and belongingness; 4. Development and progress; 5. Outside reward. Levine, Taylor 1. Respect from supervisor and trust on employee's capability; 2. and Davis Change of work; 3. Challenge of the work; 4. Future development (1984) opportunity arising from the current work; 5. Self esteem; 6. Scope of impacted work and life beyond work itself; 7. Contribution towards society from the work. Marvis and 1. Safe work environment; 2. Equitable wages; 3. Equal Lawler (1984) employment opportunities; and 4. Opportunities for advancement UK Baba and 1. Job satisfaction; 2. Job involvement; 3. Work role ambiguity; 4. Jamal (1991) Work role conflict; 5. Work role overload; 6. Job stress; 7. UK Organisational commitment and 8. Turn-over intentions Cai Hui-ru 1. Quality Of Life: Compensation of services, welfare, work (1994) security, work support; 2. Social quality: relationship with superior, colleagues and clients; 3. Growth quality: participation management, rise, individual growth, self-esteem and work features. 36 Lau and Bruce 1. Job security; 2. Reward systems; 3. Training; 4. Carrier (1998) advancements opportunities; and 5. Participation in decision in US decision making Chen Jia- 1. Work environment; 2. Salary and allowances; 3. Welfare; 4. Rise; Sheng, Fan 5. Work nature; 6. Training and development; 7. Style of superior Jing-Li (2000) leadership; 8. Participation of colleagues; 9. Organisation face; 10. Communications; 11. Organisational rules; 12. Organisational culture and atmosphere; 13. Work time and work pressure. Thomas and 1. Favourable work environment; 2. Personal growth and autonomy Wah (2001) 3. Nature of job; 4. Stimulating opportunities and co-workers. Singaporean Ellis and 1. Poor working environments; 2. Resident aggression; 3. Pompli (2002) Workload, inability to deliver quality of care preferred; 4. Balance Canberra of work and family; 5. Shift work; 6. Lack of involvement in decision making; 7.Professional isolation; 8. Lack of recognition; 9. Poor relationships with supervisor/peers; 10. Role conflict; and 11. Lack of opportunity to learn new skills. Jia Ha wee 1. Need to surveillance; 2. Need to eagerness and desire; 3. Need to (2003) belongingness; 4. Need to self. Che Rose 1. Career satisfaction; 2. Career achievement; and 3. Career balance (2006) Malaysia Saraj and 1. Fair Pay and Autonomy; 2. Job security; 3. Reward systems; 4. Dargahi (2006) Training and career advancements; 5. Opportunities; 6. Participation Tehran in decision making; 7. Interesting and satisfying work; 8. Trust in senior management; 9. Recognition of efforts; 10. Health and safety standards at work; 11. Balance between the time spent at work and the time spent with family and friends; 12. Amount of work to be done; 13. Level of stress experienced at work; and 14. Occupational health and safety at work Quing Tao, 1. Work duties: work independence, importance of duties, work Peng Tian-Yu feedback, work importance; 2. Organisational environment: team 37 and Lou Jian spirit, interpersonal relations, management style; 3. Social (2007) psychology, Psychic and social support, mutual esteem, social picture of organisation and economical situation. Rethinam and 1. Health and well-being; 2. Job security; 3. Job satisfaction; 4. Maimunah Competence development; and 5. The balance between work and (2008) non work life Malaysia Hosseini 1. Adequate and fair compensation; 2. Safe and healthy working (2010) conditions; 3. Immediate opportunity to use and develop human capacities; 4. Opportunity for continued growth and security; 5. Social integration in the work organisation; 6. Constitutionalism in the work organisation; 7. Work and total life space and 8. Social relevance of work life. Muftah and 1. Physical; 2. Psychological; 3. Social factors Lafi (2011) Stephen (2012) 1. Adequate and fair compensation; 2. Fringe benefits and welfare India measures; 3. Job security; 4. Physical work environment; 5. Work load and job stress; 6. Opportunity to use and develop human capacity; 7. Opportunity for continued growth; 8. Human relations and social aspect of work life; 9. Participation in decision making 10. Reward and penalty system; 11. Equity, justice and grievance handling; 12. Work and total life space; and 13. Image of organisation Source: Nanjundeswaraswamy and Swamy (2013) This table presents a summary of a number of previous studies indicating the various dimensions deemed to be of significance for QWL of employees. From the above, it indicates that QWL is not a unitary concept but has been seen as incorporating a hierarchy of perspectives that not only include work-based factors such as job satisfaction, satisfaction with pay and relationships with work colleagues, but also factors that broadly reflect life satisfaction and generally, feelings of well-being (Danna and Griffin, 1999). The QWL is a very important factor that 38 management/employers must create in an organisation because, if personnel (workers) have a good QWL, the results will be job satisfaction, work committment, work efficacy, development of QWL in the organisation and reduced rate of turnover, absenteeism, lateness to work and employee transfer. A study carried out by Rose, Beh, Uli and Idris (2006) on analysis of QWL and career-related variables indicates there is a significant relationship between organisational climate and QWL because they opine that the elements that are relevant to an individual‟s QWL include the task, the physical work environment, social environment within the organisation, administrative system and relationship between life on and off the job. Similarly, a study conducted in Malaysia by Rose et al (2006) in Saad, Samah and Juhdi, (2008) further conclude that the most important predictor of QWL is organisational climate, followed by career achievement, career satisfaction and career balance. In the same vein, they opine that QWL consists of opportunity for active involvement in group working arrangements or problem solving that are of mutual benefit to employees or employers based on labour-management cooperation. Payne and Pheyesey, (2004) also confirm the relationship between organisational climate and quality of work-life, they view that the satisfaction of employees with organisational climate is a predictor of better performance and that organisational climate has direct bearing on employees‟ QWL. The satisfaction of employees with organisational climate enhances positive organisational outcomes: efficiency, productivity, organisational commitment and cohesiveness of workers while it reduces negative outcomes such as turnover, deviant behaviour at work and absenteeism. Murray, (1999) also supports the finding that organisations create positive organisational climate to retain employees by enhancing their morale and QWL. 39 In summary, QWL is viewed as a wide-range concept, which includes adequate and fair remuneration, safe and healthy working conditions and social integration in the work organisation that enables an individual develop and use all his or her capacities. The benefits of QWL to employees and organisation as indicated by Kandasamy and Sreekumar (2008) are highlighted thus; it;  provides the potential to attract high quality, innovative and productive staff in an increasingly competitive labour market.  promotes high levels of staff morale, job satisfaction, organisational commitment, dedication and loyalty amongst existing employees resulting in retention of current employees whose skills, knowledge and talents are invaluable.  enhances public perception of the organisation as one that demonstrates an appreciation of flexibility in work to assist staff in managing their work-life balance.  encourages multiple responsibilities without feeling guilty about sacrificing priorities at work or outside.  enhances the development of strong feelings in which will make them believe they are in control of their lives because they have choice as opposed to the feelings that they are being forced to sacrifice work or other priorities.  brings more secure and happier life and thus motivating – working conditions for employers that support their rights to make choice between work and home life. 40 2.2 Demographic Factors and Quality of Work-life (QWL) Demographic variables are used to show that age, gender, marital status, length of service, educational attainment and income have important influence on employees‟ QWL. Firebaugh and Harley (2000) in Adio and Popoola (2010) assert that if an organisation is to be successful, it must continue to satisfy employees‟ requests to make them committed and dedicated to work. Previous studies by Rose et al. (2006) indicate that age, sex, marital status, length of service and educational attainment have a significant relationship with quality of work-life. In the same vein, Shahril (1994) also indicates that both marital status and service tenure (length of service) had significant influence on employee job involvement. Though, Mishra (1985) in Islam and Siengthai, (2009) found in his study that age and length of service did not affect QWL, he agreed that higher level of education leads to higher level of QWL. Similarly, Bharathi, Umaselvi and Kumar (2010) are of opinion that demographic variables have a significant relationship with QWL. For instance, they proved there is no significant difference between the age, sex, designation and income levels of the respondents and their perceived levels of overall QWL. In the same vein, Bolhari, Rezaeean, Bolhari, Bairamzadeh and Soltan (2011) confirmed that demographic variables have a relation with QWL. They reveal a significant relation between age, work experience and staff income. 2.3 Organisational Climate Variables and Quality of Work-Life There are popular studied literature such as Azril, et al. (2010). Sirgy, et al. (2001) and Rethinam and Ismail, (2008) that establish the association between organisational climate and QWL. Among the main focus included in this study is physical work environment which has been identified as one of the important 41 determinants of QWL. The physical work environment centres on the physical space an employee is working in or a space that will be used in the future. The physical environment should be safe and healthy and provide the resources necessary to complete the assigned task. An ideal physical environment is mentally stimulated with all the necessary job tools present and ready for use. Physical working environment such as harmonious and safety working environments would bring comfort to employees thus providing them a better environment to perform their best (Azril, et al 2010). They stress further that work environment has an impact on QWL while Darlene and Borman, (1989) in Azril, et al (2010) prove that work environment such as physical environment, office colleague, job satisfaction and management supervision can construct quality of work–life and job satisfaction. Similarly, Brenner (2004) in Akinyele (2010) assert that the ability of employees within an organisation to share knowledge throughout the system depends on the conditions of their work environment. He stresses further that the survey revealed that corporate executives from various industries disclosed that many organisations do not fully leverage their physical work environment to enable increase collaboration, innovation and improve work effectiveness. It is also observed that employees tend to be more productive in a well-facilitated work environment, the quality of comfort derivable from work environment determines the level of satisfaction and productivity of workers. Workers‟ productivity cannot be optimal if the conditions of work environment are not favourable. Improved work environment will enhance employee productivity. For example, standard health facilities will protect life of the workers. In case of any hazard on the job, they have assurance of some income. This assured income tends to minimise inhibitory fears of the workers devoting themselves fully to their work. 42 Work involvement is another important driver for employees‟ QWL and this is proved through Obikoya and Adebanjo (2004), the researchers view participative management (work involvement) as the procedure whereby supervisors and executives consult with employees on matters affecting their interest before initiating action or establishing policies, that is, to have good labour-management relations, workers should have a say in matters affecting them within the organisation. Also, Eaton and Gordon, (1992) in Oladeji and Omokhabi, (2010) contend that the participation of staff (work involvement) in decision-making process, facilitates the relationships between the manager and staff and the working teams are effective for their performance. In the same vein, Ussahawanitichakit, (2008), Hutchinson and Garstika, (2006) in Azril et al, (2010) confirm that “if staff work individually without support from the manager or vice versa, their performance will decrease”. This assertion supports that all categories of workers should be carried along in decisions within the organisations. Organisational structure has also been identified as another important determinant of QWL. Organisational structure is “the way an organisation arranges people and jobs to meet organisational goals and to make achievement of targets feasible” (Zulfqar, Zafar, Ishfaq and Muhammad, 2010). It also refers to the employees‟ perception of the management of regulations and roles as well as the relationship of employee to organisation in accordance with line of authority and command (Nutchanath, 2007). Organisational structure has received much attention in the general management literature, for example, Nintzberg (1992) in Andrea, Laederach and Affolter (2010). The organisational structure characterised with participation in decision-making and role clarity has positive relationship with QWL and job satisfaction (Campbell, et al., 2004 in Zulfqar et al., 2010). The organisations 43 may be highly structured or loosely structure. The highly structured organisational activities are negatively related with QWL (Finlay, et. Al., 1995 in Zulfqar et. al., 2010). While in loosely structured organisations workers exhibit low anxiety and in highly structured (traditional and bureaucreatic) organisations they tend to reveal higher degrees of organisational anxiety(George and Bishop,1971 in Zulfqar et al. 2010). Organisational structure relates to the way the various parts of an organisagtion are configured and how this impacts on an organisation‟s ability to manage innovation (Andrea et. al., 2010). It can also be noted that organisational communication is another main factor influencing QWL. The organisational communication aspect such as information sharing if emphasised by the organisation, will benefit both sides, the employees and the employers. Candace (2008); Daley (2003) and Madlock (2008) in Azril et al (2010) have concluded that organisational communication has an influence on employees‟ QWL. Communication is the transfer of information from a sender to a receiver, with the message being understood by the receiver. Price (1997) in Ayatse and Ikyanyon, (2012) defines organisational communication as the degree to which information about the job is transmitted by an organisation to its members and among members of the organisation. Ayatse (2005) in Ayatse and Ikyanyon, (2012) observes that communication is needed to establish and disseminate the goals of the enterprise. Chen et al. (2006) in Ayatse and Ikyanyon, (2012) point out that research is lacking in examining employee satisfaction without communication process. There is therefore the need to explore the relationship between organisational communication and organisational variables since communication integrates different units and functions in an organisation. 44 Organisational policy is also observed to influence employees‟ QWL. Policy is the strategic direction that guides an organisation towards the achievement of the desired objectives and goals. Policy defines an organisation‟s response and positive objectives in its handling of specific business processes. Organisational polices, according to Keiningham, Aksoy, and Hsu, (2006) in Oladeji and Omokhabi, (2010) opine that the existence of fair policies and proper management styles are among the most important aspects of QWL and performance of staff (employees). They stress further that an understanding of the reason for developing a policy is very important as it will aid employees in applying it in their workplaces. 2.3.1 Physical work environment and Quality of Work-life in Organisations Quality of work-life is the quality of relationship between employees and the total working environment, with human dimensions, technical and economic consideration (Chelte, 1983; in Nanjundeswaraswamy & Swamy, 2013). However, many organisations limit their quality of work-life enhancement of employees to the acquisition of skills. About 86% of quality of work-life problems reside in the physical work environment of organisations. The type of work environment in which employees operate determines the way in which such organisations prosper (Akinyele, 2009). Kohun (1992) in Akinyele, (2010) defines work environment as “an entity” which comprises the totality of forces, actions and other influential factors that are currently and, or potentially contending with the employee‟s activities and performance. Similarly, Longman dictionary of contemporary English (2003) in Akinyele, (2010) defines work environment as „all the situation, events and people, just to mention a few that influences the way in which people live or work”. Work environment is the sum of the interrelationship that exists within the employees and between the employees and the environment in which the employees work. 45 Brenner (2004) in Akinyele, (2010) is of opinion that “the ability to share knowledge throughout organisations depends on how the work environment is designed to enable organisations utilise work environment as if it were an asset. This helps organisations improve effectiveness and allow employees benefit from collective knowledge” (pg. 301). In addition, Brenner (2004) in Akinyele (2010) argues that work environment designed to suit employee‟s satisfaction and free flow of exchange of ideas is a better medium of motivating employees towards high productivity. Work environment when appropriately designed, motivates employees toward high productivity. He stresses further that the ability of employees within an organisation to share knowledge throughout the system depends on the conditions of their work environment and that the survey revealed corporate executives from various industries disclosed that many organisations do not fully leverage their physical work environment to enable increase in collaboration, innovation and improve work effectiveness. It is also observed that employees tend to be more productive in a well-facilitated work environment. He states further that an effective work environment management entails making work environment attractive, creative, comfortable, satisfactory and motivating employees so as tos give them a sense of pride and purpose in what they do. The following are some of the tools used to measure work environment to improve productivity; noise control, contaminants and hazard control, enhancing friendly and encouraging human environment, job fit, rewards, feedback, work environment modelling, creating qualitative work-life concepts and making physical working conditions favourable (Cecunc, 2004; Opperman, 2002; Elywood, 1999 in Akinyele, 2010). The need to provide a safe work environment for employees had a long history 46 in human resource management. Beer (1994) in Akinyele, (2010) model of human resource management, acknowledges that work systems cannot only affect commitment, competence, cost effectiveness and congruence but also have long term consequence on workers‟ wellbeing, there is evidence to indicate that work systems designs may have effects on physical health, mental health and longevity of life. Conducive work environment ensures the wellbeing of employees which invariably will enable them exert themselves to their roles with all vigour that may translate to higher productivity (Akinyele, 2007 in Akinyele, 2010). The physical working environment according to Opperman (2002) in Akinyele, (2010), is a composite of three major sub-environments viz: the technical, the human and the organisational environments. Technical environment refers to tools, equipment, technological infrastructure and other physical or technical elements. This environment creates elements that enable employees perform their respective responsibilities and activities. The human environment refers to peers, others with whom' employees relate, team and work groups, interactional issues, the leadership and management. Human environment is designed in such a manner that encourages informal interaction in the work place so that the opportunity to share knowledge and exchange ideas could be enhanced. This is a basis to attain maximum productivity. Organisational environment include, systems, procedures, practices, values and philosophies. Management has control over organisational environment. For instance, measurement system where people are rewarded on quantity, hence workers will have little interest in helping those workers who endeavour to improve quality. Issues of organisational environment influence employees' QWL (Akinyele, 2010). 47 There are two types of work environment according to Kyko (2005) in Akinleye (2010), which are conducive and toxic work environments. Conducive work environment gives pleasurable experience to employees and enable them actualise their abilities and behaviour. This type of environment also reinforces self- actualising behaviours. For instance, an irresponsible employee can change into a responsible employee in a conducive work environment. Toxic work environment gives unpleasant experiences and at the same time, deactualise employees' behaviour. This environment reinforces low self-actualising behaviours and it leads to the development of negative traits of the employees' behaviour. In toxic work environment, responsible and sensible employees can change into irrational and irresponsible employees as a survival strategy Kyko (2005) in Akinyele (2010) identifies six factors which contribute to a toxic work environment hence contributing to productivity of workers. The factors are: opaque management, biased boss, company policies, working conditions, interpersonal relationship and pay. Physical working environment has been identified as one of the important determinants of QWL. The physical working environment centres on the physical space the employee is working in or a space that will be used in the future, therefore, management should ensure the physical working environment is clean, bright and attractive. Similarly, the physical environment should be safe and healthy and provide the resources necessary to complete the assigned task. An ideal physical environment is mentally stimulated with all the necessary job tools present and ready for use. Physical working environment such as harmonious environment and safety working environment would bring comfort to employees thus providing them a good environment to put in their best (Azril, et al 2010). Akinyele (2010) affirms that quality of comfort derivable from work environment determines the level of 48 satisfaction and productivity of workers. Workers‟ productivity cannot be optimal if the conditions of work environment are not favourable. He stresses further that improved work environment will enhance employee productivity. For example, standard health facilities will protect the life of workers. In case of any hazard on the job they have assurance of some income. This assured income tends to minimise any inhibitory fears of the workers devoting themselves fully to their work. Azril et al (2010) notes that work environment has an impact on QWL while Darlene and Borman (1990) in Azril, et al (2010) prove that work environment can construct QWL and job satisfaction. In line with the above submission; it shows there is a link between physical working environment and QWL in organisations. 2.3.2 Work involvement and Quality of Work-life in Organisations Work involvement in management is otherwise known as participative management or industrial democracy, therefore, the word may be used interchangeably. The initial reaction of any property owner is to say „I have a right to do what I like with my property or what is mine‟. Few will challenge this proposition. However, in producing goods and services in a modern economy, the services or skills of others are required, making production a co-operative effort based on specialisation of functions and thus division of labour. Ownership still retains its importance, but it may not on its own produce the goods and services, thus, how to get workers in any organisation to carry out necessary tasks has also become very important. It is in this broad sense that “work involvement” remains a subject of considerable interest (Adeleke, 2004). Although the concept “work involvement or participative management or industrial democracy” is widely used in industrial relations, its meaning is not as precise as many would hope for although there are some who believe their own 49 understanding or meaning of the term is the valid one. This is not surprising because the expression itself has a long history, dating back to the early 1900s, its meaning and usage changes with time, that is, it has various meanings. For this reason, work involvement can be defined to mean the ability of everybody involved in an organisation to participate actively in the decision making of the organisation to achieve a collective goal. This will involve the management team, the workers‟ union and the subordinates; in one word, the concept (work involvement) suggests that within or beyond contract time, all workers should be allowed to have a say in the running of the organisation (Adeleke, 2004). Also, Yusuf, (2000) points out that industrial democracy or work involvement is the scheme to give workers or their representatives power to negotiate and deliberate. This he explains is in contrast with the situation in which workers are consulted. Again, Adeleke (2004) views work involvement as meaning the same thing as “Common-Ownership and Worker ownership”. He adds that these terms are now archaic and therefore decided to use “industrial-ownership” to mean “the process by which those employed within enterprises directly or indirectly via elected representatives, participate in the direction and management of the organisation without necessarily owning the organisations”. In his opinion, Schregles, (1976) in Adeleke,(2004) believes workers‟ participation or work involvement is based on fundamental concepts of justice and the ordinary worker who invests his/her labour and ties his/her fate to his/her place of work has a legitimate claim to a share in influencing various aspects of the organisation‟s policy. This view explains the concept from the point that the workers who invest their lives to work in an organisation have the right to influence what will happen to them like the shareholders that invest their capital and are interested in making decision on it. 50 Akintayo (1985) in Adeniyi‟s, (2000) point of view is that the concept is synonymous with the concept of workers‟ participation. By this, it means a set of social or institutional devices by which subordinate employees, either individually or collectively become involved in one or more aspects of organisational decision making within the organisations in which they work. This is giving us another assumption of the concept, which is decentralisation of decision making in organisations. This suggests that other bodies apart from the management team like the workers‟ union, organisations among others should be allowed to take part in the decision making process. However, Ekpenyoug (1992) in Adeniyi (2000) states that our law does not state categorically that workers should participate in decision making in their various organisations. Although this problem is not restricted to developing countries alone, some state governments of developing and developed world have been paying lip service to the actual practice of this concept. This is to suggest that one of the problems facing the development of work involvement is the stand of the government on this issue. In the same vein, Agwu (1985) in Adeniyi (2000) is of the opinion that workers cannot participate in management at any level if the managers have to be put into consideration. This is why Akintayo (1985) in Adeniyi (2000) suggests the need to analyse the environments of a particular industry to find out the relative balance between the favourable and unfavourable variables to workers‟ participation. Further, he is of the opinion that the main function of the power- based participation is not to motivate industrial employees directly to increase productivity or efficiency, it is to protect workers‟ collective interest indirectly at workplace in all matters of common concern to them through the application of countervailing power against management. Considering the practice of work involvement in Nigeria, one would see that this is 51 hardly in existence in the nation‟s industrial relations, though Adeniyi (2000) quoted Aderinto (1979) identified some organisations that have strong plant unions with the involvement of their union leaders in some decision making processes. Despite some previous researches which stated that workers should not participate in decision making (Ekpenyoung1992): Agwu (1985) in Adeniyi (2000), the general perception is that people with high levels of work involvement are likely to put more effort into their jobs and therefore tend to display high levels of performance (Soonhee, 2002). Previous researches such as Mark and Nancy (1991) on work involvement provide some support for this notion. In the same vein, Soonhee, (2002) opines that researchers and human resource practitioners in the public and private sectors agree that work involvement improves `employees‟ quality of work-life and job satisfaction. In addition, despite the limited empirical support for work involvement and QWL relationship, the potential importance of an interaction between QWL and work involvement was proposed by Blau and Boal (1987) in Mark and Nancy, (1991). They predicted that various combinations of QWL and work involvement will have distinct consequences on organisations. For example, employees who exhibit high QWL and high work involvement should be the least likely to leave the organisation. Also, employees with low levels of QWL and work involvement should be the most likely to leave the organisation voluntarily (Mark and Nancy, 1991). The benefits of work involvement include;  It reduces industrial disputes resulting from better communication between management and labour (employee)  Improved decision-making processes resulting in high quality decisions  It increases creativity, enthusiasm and commitment to achieve the desired 52 goals and objective of the organisation  Lowered stress and increased well-being  It encourages better use of time and resources  It improves performance and productivity  It increases job satisfaction resulting in reduced absenteeism and staff turnover  Improved personal fulfillment and self-esteem  Reduction in wastage  It decreases resistance to technical change and reduction in labour turnover 2.3.3 Organisational Communication and Quality of Work-life in Organisations Communication can be defined as the interaction of people with each other formally or informally at workplace. Communication may be open or closed. In the open communication employees feel free to express their opinions, voice complaints, offer suggestions to their superiors, argue their point of view, and comment freely about policy decisions. While in closed communication, new ideas have a little space or cannot be expressed, people feel threat of criticism or punishment in sharing information of critical nature. Open communication enhances supportiveness, participation, and trustfulness while reduces effects of stress on employees. The open communication facilitates the participation of employees in decision making process, organisational actions can best be explained, and clarity of expectations of management from the employees on the basis of set standards, and they (employees) could contribute for fairness at workplace (Zulfqar, Zafar, Ishfaq and Muhammed, 2010). Attention has been given to the study of organisational communication in 53 organsational behaviour research as a result of the significance of this variable to organisational effectiveness. It has been observed that effective communication improves job satisfaction and employees‟ QWL (Holtzhausen, 2002 and Litterst and Eyo, 1982 in Ayatse and Ikyanyon, 2012). Research has also shown that communication improves employee job performance (Goris, 2007) in Ayatse and Ikyanyon, (2012). Poor communication on the other hand results in low employee commitment to the organisation (Kramer, 1999 in Ayatse and Ikyanyon, 2012). For this reason, in any organisation, the role of communication for its effective management cannot be under-estimated. Communication is the human activity that links people together and create relationship (Duncan and Moriaty, 1998) in Adeleke, (2004). This means individuals relate with each other by means of communication, that is, different units exist in an organisation and it is through communication that interaction takes place for the attainment of organisational goals. Cooren (1999) in Ayatse and Ikyanyon, (2012) asserts that communication constitutes the action of the organisation and the works of organising, coordinating, informing, arranging, staffing and other functions of management. Communication is vital in organisations such that Orpen (1997) in Ayatse and Ikyanyon (2012) argues that communication has a vital role in the failure or accomplishment of any organisation. Communication is the glue that binds people together in an organisation. Communication assists organisational members in accomplishing individual and organisational goals, implement and respond to organisational change; coordinate organisational activities and engage in virtually all organisational relevant behaviours (Kreitner, Kinick, and Buelens, 2002 in Adeleke, 2004). Communication is therefore essential for the life of any organised group as it is the means by which members share ideas, transmit basic norms and values and coordinate group activities towards 54 the achievement of set objectives. One can then conclude that communication is one of the basic tools of management. Good communication skills would make a difference in the way a manager performs his/her functions. Communication in an organisation can be formal or informal (Kandlousi 2010 in Ayatse and Ikyanyon, 2012). Formal communication channels are recognised formally or originally by the organisation. Formal communication follows the formal structure or hierarchy of the organisation , Guffy 2005 in Ayatse and Ikyanyon (2012) and can flow in downward, upward, and cross-wise directions. Downward communication flows from people at high levels to those at low levels in an organisational hierarchy; upward communication travels from subordinates to superiors and continues up the organisational hierarchy; while cross-wise communication flows among people on the same organisational levels, and among people at different levels who have no direct reporting relationships with one another. Informal communication on the other hand is based on social relationships and is inevitable in organisational life (Crampton 1998 in Ayatse and Ikyanon, 2012). Informal communication channel such as grapevine and gossips often fill the gaps formal communication fails to address (Gilsdorf, 1998 in Ayatse and Ikyanyon, 2012). While informal communication originates to serve employees' private purposes, formal communication is supposed to serve the purpose of the organisation. On the whole, both forms of communication are important and should be managed properly to enhance organisational effectiveness (Ayatse and Ikyanyon, 2012). Bernard (1938) in Adeleke, (2004) defines communication as the means through which the task and the resources needed to carry out an assignment, roles and duties, and the expected results are made known to the subordinates. This implies that communication is the transfer of information or message from one person to another. 55 Similarly, Rita Udall and Sheila Udall, (1979) in Sybil, Isaac and Oludayo (1995) view communication as the process by which one person (or group) shares and impacts information with another person (or group) so that both people (or group) clearly understand one another. In the same vein, Eyre, (1983) in Sybil et al (1995) defines communication as not just the giving of information, it is the giving of understandable information and the act of receiving and understanding the message, so, to him, communication is the transferring of a message to another party so that it can be understood and acted upon. Communication has been described as the fabric that holds people together in any social group be it a family, club or business organisation. Management is communication. Every managerial function, activity or decision involves some form of direct or indirect communication, therefore, managerial decisions and organisational policies are ineffective unless they are understood by those responsible for enacting or implementing them (Kreiter and Kinicki, 1998 in Sybil et al 1995). Most of the conflicts and problems in almost every organisation arise from lack of communication. It is therefore a crucial tool for an organisation to promote peace and harmony and thereby enhance motivation, dedication, commitment and job satisfaction which eventually brings employee QWL. Communication influences behaviour and therefore we need to establish thorough communication in our thoughts, words and deeds, to win the confidence of all those we work with so as to enable us attain our organisational goals. Communication serves to coordinate every management function and allows for interplay of relations for all the group of people involved in the management process. Also, in management, the informal group is well exploited to provide secret information which gives useful ideas for change; for instance, comments on the superior, subordinate, product, tastes and allied processes 56 of management are received through communication. In addition, ideas received from the information system enable managers make decisions. In other words, decisions are made in line with comments and observations which are well considered in terms of the values offered. Effective communication is therefore a prerequisite for the attainment of organisational objectives, it is in fact invaluable in an organisation for positive development (Shermen and Bohlander, 1992 in Sybil et al 1995). However, with the exception of Madlock (2008) and Candace (2008) in Azril et al (2010) little is known about the relationship between QWL and organisational communication since there is no enough empirical studies in Nigeria to show there is a link between the two concepts/variables. Thus, it is assumed that this study will determine if these two variables/concepts may be linked, that is, the researcher will examine if there is a strong positive relationship between QWL and organisational communication, meaning, the research will find out whether communication can influence employees‟ QWL in Nigerian organisations or not. 2.3.4 Worker-Friendly Policies and Quality of Work-Life in organisations Policy is a standing order or guide for making decisions on a given subject. Policy can be amended or adjusted whenever there is opportunity based on strong supportive action. Most often, policy statement flows from the strategists, but such may not always be so at times it flows from the following; management decision, subordinate decision, customers and also from external sources like state (for example, Lagos government bye laws) . Policy covers all the functional areas of an organisation, whichever area it is found, it tends to be administrative and operational in nature (Oyekunle andAdeniji, 2009). 57 According to them, good policy provides the following:  Consistency of activities  Creates room for clarity of rules and norms  It offers means of correlating the aspects of a business  It serves as a basis for assessing the competence of the leader  It serves as a basis for evaluating the effectiveness of executive leadership The features of a sound policy include:  It must relate the organisational objectives to its function  It must be based on the organisational objectives  Simplicity: The statement should be simple and understandable  It should be stable and flexible  It must be sufficiently comprehensive  It must conform to ethical standards. Organisational policy is observed to have influence on employees‟ QWL. Policy is the strategic direction that guides an organisation towards achievement of desired objectives and goals. Policy defines an organisation‟s response and positive objectives in handling specific business processes. Organisational polices, according to Keiningham, Aksoy, and Hsu, (2006) in Oladeji and Omokhabi, (2010) opine that the existence of fair policies and proper management styles are among the most important aspects of QWL and performance of staff (employees). Similarly, an understanding of the reason for developing a policy is very important as it will aid employees in applying it in their work place. Corroborating this submission, a Human Resource Expert, Frank, (2011) quoting from The Punch says: “Bearing in mind the times we live in today in terms of economy, it is imperative that any policy that is 58 implemented within an organisation should have a positive impact on the drivers that create constant and positive economic growth”. She noted that the ultimate goal of setting organisational policy is to influence behaviour, set clear requirements and guide people through business decisions. She further stressed that “it is important that a policy should be applied to the business process and strategy and should not be a one-time activity. Rather, it should be entrenched in the culture and climate of the organisation”. From the above, it is observed that every organisation is run by policies (laws and regulations) which are drawn from the core values of the organisation and that good policies can develop an organisation. From the above, it is observed that every organisation is run by policies (laws and regulations) which are drawn from the core values of the organisation and that good policies can develop an organisation. Obikoya and Adebanjo (2004) concluded that supervisors and executives should consult with employees on matter affecting employee‟s interest before initiating action or establishing policies for the organisation. 2.4 Organisational Culture Variables and Quality of Work-Life Recognition of excellence/reward system has also been identified as another important determinant of QWL; that is, an important aspect in intensifying employees‟ QWL is the remuneration/reward aspect. Good remuneration/reward schemes can be a catalyst of an organisation to intensify employees‟ QWL thus increasing the organisation‟s productivity. Benefits such as salary, bonuses, salary increment, medical benefits and allowances will sway employees‟ motivation to perform better in their tasks. Further, reward can be either financial or non-financial such as remuneration, compensation and incentives. Remuneration aspects such as salary, salary increment, 59 bonuses, allowances, pension and medical benefits are among the best examples and practices that motivate employees to give in their best to the organisation. Studies conducted by Davies (2001); Wan (2007); Martzler and Renzl (2007) in Azril et al (2010) conclude that remuneration is an important aspect if an organisation wants to see their “engine” (employee) performing their best. Remuneration can be seen as a form of recognition from the employer to their employee. Some of these studies further strengthened the studies of Okpara (2004); Oshagemi (2000) and Sloane and Williams (1996) in Azril et al (2010) who highlighted that differences in remuneration aspects received by the employees will suddenly affect their work satisfaction and work performance which can eventually lead to QWL among employees. In line with this, Doloi (2005); Ajila and Abiola (2004) and Nwachukwu, (1994) in Nwachukwu, (2007) through their researches have proved that remuneration/reward will boost employees‟ quality of work-life as they emphasise that efforts to provide the best remuneration/reward scheme must be initiated in cultivating workers‟ interests towards their job so as to make them happy in giving their best to the work. Previous studies such as Azril et al (2010), Rose et al. (2006) and Rethinam and Ismail (2008) also observe that value for employees determines their QWL. Value for employees is defined as the extent to which they perceive the organisation values their contributions and cares about their well-being (Saad, Samah and Juhdi, 2008). Value for employee-recognition is a key factor in influencing employee commitment to the organisation, job satisfaction, and general QWL. Many researchers like Azril et al. (2010) and Rose et al. (2006) have studied the relationship between value for employee and QWL of workers and have found it to have a positive impact on organisational commitment, employee performance as well as job satisfaction (Azril, et al., 2010). Corroborating this submission, Harrison (2010) in Azril et. al. (2010) 60 concludes that appreciation is a fundamental human need. Employees respond to appreciation expressed through recognition of their good work because it confirms their work is valued. When employees and their work are valued, their satisfaction, QWL and productivity rises and they are motivated to maintain and improve their good work. Creativity/innovation is another main focus included in the factors that determine employees‟ QWL. Creativity/innovation involves the use of new ideas and techniques. Studies by Bhattcharyya, (2005) conclude that workers do not manifest creativity/innovation because new ideas are not welcome from them; therefore, low commitment and lack of dedication are key factors which result to low productivity, to have committed and dedicated workers, employers should encourage and provide enabling environment for creativity/innovation. Teamwork is also an important strategy that strengthenes employees‟ QWL. Studies conducted by Phattanacheewapul and Ussawanitchakt (2006), Hutchinson and Garstika (2006) in Azril, et al. (2010) confirm that if employees are left working alone without any support or supervision or working with colleagues/peers, their performance will be low, it may affect the quality of their productivity; hence, team work remains relevant to organisational productivity. 2.4.1 Recognition of Excellence/Reward System and Quality of Work-Life in Organisations One topic which deserves close attention in any review of the management of an organisation is its reward system. A critical examination of the ways in which the reward system available to an organisation is managed is necessary to ensure that the principles adopted are such that guarantee the commitment of members as well as motivate them to put in their best in the service of the organisation. In the light of this, 61 reward systems were largely seen as a basic necessity to attract and retain competent employees. Reward system encompasses compensation, benefits and incentives. Rewards are vital components in determining the level of effort individual is willing to exert in his/her job; it might be money or promotion. Reward system covers a host of tools aimed at making the workforce more productive. There are broadly two elements to reward systems. First, the classic benefits offered as packages to staff such as company car, paid holiday, medical insurance, mobile phone, company discounts, luncheon vouchers and gym membership while the second element is intangible rewards which is designed to stimulate employees and encourage better performance such as company culture, team-spirit, leadership/management style, career development, working environment and practices (Dike, 1999). As a scholar of industrial relations, it is appropriate to underscore the remarkable benefits a society receives from a good reward system, that is, if workers are well rewarded, they will work with high morale and eventually there will be resultant increase in their outputs (productivity) but on the other hand, if they are under-rewarded their productivity is bound to drop. Not only that, they will not have the resources to purchase the goods and services produced in the economy and if money is not changing hands in any economy, economic gridlock will result with its attendant socio-political problems. For instance, a poor and hungry worker, no matter how information conscious he/she may be, will not spend the little money at his/her disposal on a newspaper. Economic survival is more important to a poor worker than buying a newspaper, not to mention milk which we may regard as a luxury in present day Nigeria. He /She will rather spend his/her money on staple food, such as rice, gaari and yam. Even the issue of democracy is not important to a hungry man. He is obviously interested in the politics that matters in the politics of survival. In 62 retrospect, if newspaper and milk are not sold these corporations could collapse, therefore, workers are likely to be detached, and unemployment would skyrocket. Given the magnitude of this problem, we cannot but ask some salient questions; how does a manager expect a worker to improve on his productivity without being adequately rewarded? And how does an organisation without rewarded workforce expect the employees to produce good quality products and services? How is the organisation going to make profit if the workers cannot produce due to lack of commensurate rewarded? In any serious and competitive society, workers are one of the tools for economic progress. Their welfare should be taken into consideration, because without a dedicated workforce an organisation crumbles. But in this country (Nigeria) the story is different because the nation‟s reward system is probably the poorest in the entire globe. Workers are used and abused, harassed, threatened and often discarded without any reward for their contribution to the organisations where they work and to the society at large. In one word, lack of adequate reward for excellent performance is one of the reasons for the increasing level of low productivity in the organisations. Thus, poor reward system in the organisation have negatively impacted workers‟ morale, productivity and the health of the entire economy. Having identified the problems facing an average worker in Nigeria, how can the employers of labour in the society improve their productivity? Efforts in this direction must include appropriate reward for excellent performance which “is the art of stimulating someone to action by creating a safe environment” (Donadio, 1992 in Dike, 1999). Nigeria should reward its labour force, because it cannot effectively compete in the emerging global economy with angry and hungry workers. Towards this end, Greene, 1991, in Dike, 1999, notes that the only enduring competitive 63 advantage in this global economy is a high- quality, well-rewarded and motivated workforce willing to work together as a team to increase productivity. The reward system can be either financial or non-financial, worthy of note is the financial reward offered employees. Salary is one of the financial rewards offered employees in organisations. Dike, (1999) in his research concludes that paying a competitive salary will motivate and keep the best employees. This assertion is keenly supported by Herzberg‟s Two-factor theory which states; the higher Needs (motivational factors) should be satisfied accordingly, while balancing it with the low level needs. Bonuses is another financial reward which makes employees realise that the more they work, the more they get paid. This supports what Dike, 1999 states; To motivate the best employees, the employee must be given a good pay. This promotes teamwork as the workers would know that any success made is as a result of their collective efforts and they are being rewarded for it. Pension fund, health and medical benefits are among the financial reward. These benefits go a long way in motivating employees because they know their retirement is being taken care of and also that they are covered in case of health and medical need or emergency. Another financial reward is the opportunity to have flexibility in their working hours and having a variety of options like part-time working, job sharing, home working and compressed hours. It is noted that workers perform better when given opportunity to work at their individual pace (work-life -balance). The flexible work hours would serve as a good source of motivation because they are allowed to work at their own pace and would eliminate stress during work and in turn would increase productivity. Holiday allowance is another major financial reward. This generous holiday allowance gives the employees the opportunity to relax and renew their soul after long period of hard work. Holiday rejuvenate employees who will in turn 64 increase productivity of the organisation as they resume refreshed and ready to tackle more of the organisational goals. Despite all what have been said about financial rewards, the role played by the non-financial rewards in motivating Nigerian workers to enhance productivity cannot be under-estimated. For this reason, recognition of good performance is one of the non-financial reward systems. It is being noted that being recognised for a job well done or excellent performance can motivate workers which eventually enhance high productivity. Family friendly benefits (FFB) such as family leaves, child care referrals or onsite child care and lactation programmes for nursing mothers is another non- financial reward system. Other non-financial reward systems are: Gain sharing plans, Stock options to the management and Employee Assistance Programmes. Akinwale, (1999) is of the opinion that reward systems are of great benefit to the employer and the employee. For instance, when reward systems are provided, they induce loyalty in workers by being more dedicated and committed to their jobs, that is, workers will be able to put in their best through punctuality, full attendance and contribution of ideas. Also, when staff buses convey employees in different sections of an organisation to the workplace, the best in terms of employee contribution is attained. Again, productivity is usually high in organisations that provide good reward system. The aphorism “to whom much is given, much is expected” becomes the slogan of the workplace. In addition, when good facilities are provided, it allows for a conducive environment for workers‟ productivity. It is necessary, therefore, to consider the contributions and interest of workers in the administration of reward system in organisations. Over the years, there have been numerous studies on what motivate employees to put in their best at work. So, in order to attain high levels of performance, 65 employers depend on their employees, thus, they (employers) must understand what motivates them (employees), such an understanding is essential in improving reward system, and ultimately in ensuring the success of the organisation, it is therefore perceived that reward system can be a successful motivator of employee performance. 2.4.2 Creativity/innovation and Quality of Work-Life in Organisations The terms creativity and innovation are often used interchangeably (Man, 2001 in Bhattacharyya, 2005). Throughout the creativity literature, and particularly the literature focused on organisational creativity, the term „innovation‟ is often used and the distinction between creativity and innovation is an important one (Mclean, 2004). However, there is a clear distinction between creativity and innovation, the former being the generation of ideas and the latter its implementation. Creativity is generally of three types, viz: individual creativity, group/team creativity and organisational creativity. This study focuses only on organisational creativity. Innovation is also classified as incremental innovation and radical innovation. In differentiating between creativity and innovation, creativity is knowledge based while innovation is value added work. Innovation is not just creativity but also implementation (Tong, 2000 in Bhattacharyya, 2005). Innovation is a social phenomenon, it occurs when people think about new ideas, accept these and work together to realise the ideas. Although the measurement of creativity deserves a lot of attention, words associated with this definition of creativity include idea, invention, and breakthrough. However, innovation is „a process of developing and implementing a new idea‟ (Van de Ven and Angle, 1989) in McLean, (2004). They go on to write that “innovation refers to the process of bringing any new problem solving idea into use, it is the generation, acceptance and implementation of new ideas, processes, products, or 66 services” McLean, (2004). Amabile, 2004 in Bhattacharyya, 2005, defines creativity as the process involved in developing an idea for a new product. Similarly, Gurteen, 1998 in Bhattacharyya, 2005, views creativity as generation of ideas whereas innovation is putting these ideas into actions by sifting, refining and implementing. Hence, he believes creativity requires divergent thinking process, while innovation a convergent thinking one. Again, Amabile (2004) in Bhattacharryya, (2005) differentiates between creativity and innovation as follows: Like other researchers, I define creativity as the production of novel and useful ideas in any domain while I define innovation as the successful implementation of creative ideas within an organisation. Thus, no innovation is possible without the creative processes that mark the front end of the process: identifying important problems and opportunities, gathering information, generating new ideas and exploring the validity of those ideas. The difference between these two terms is critical to human resource practitioners and scholars. Creativity is a phenomenon that is initiated and exhibited at the individual level; Variables such as personality, motivation (Collins and Amabile, 1999) in Bhattacharryya, 2005) are related to creativity at the individual level. Certainly, environmental factors at the group and organisational levels, including organisational culture and climate influence these variables and therefore impact individual‟s behaviour but the focus of creativity is primarily on the individual. Innovation operates much more at the group and organisational levels. The focus is more on interrelationships, interactions and dynamics among actors and components of the organisation and its environment Mc Lean, (2004). Bhattacharyya (2005) views innovation as a process where ideas are generated and transformed for implementation to business products and services. In this era of 67 globalisation and competition, creativity and innovation are considered key factors for survival, success and excellence of organisations (Bhattacharyya, 2005). He considers creativity an element of competitive advantage for organisations. The most profitable new products will be those that meet the customer needs more effectively than the competitor‟s products, and are therefore preferred by more customers (Mc Adam and McClelland, 2000 in Mclean 2004). Innovation and creativity benefit companies beyond direct sales growth or efficiency improvements. A company that establishes an effective creativity and innovation process is likely to realise social benefits that arise from team work and employee motivation (Bhattacharyya, 2005). These differences have implications for human resource practitioners and scholars in how they study creativity and innovation; they may impact the research question, the unit of analysis and the research design. For human practitioners, the differences will impact the way in which they define issues in an organisation, assess situations and develop and implement solutions. The terms “creativity” and “innovation” will be used as defined above as much as possible, however, in receiving the literature, the terms were used interchangeably and it was difficult to differentiate at times which definition was being used. Organisational climate, organisational culture, leadership style, resource and skill and structure are five factors that affect organisational creativity (Andriopaulose, 2001 in Bhattacharyya, 2005). It is postulated that organisational creativity will enhance creative excellence and organisational innovation will enhance innovational excellence, while innovation and creativity will enhance competitive excellence of the organisation. Surprisingly, given the importance of creativity and innovation in organisations, to the best of the researcher‟s knowledge, there has been relatively little empirical work done in the area of organisational culture and creativity and 68 innovation (Oldham and Cummings, 1996 in Mclean, 2004). In one word, the literature on organisational culture and creativity and innovation is not extensive, there have been some high-quality and influential pieces of research by a number of scholars. 2.4.3 Teamwork and Quality of Work-Life in Organisations Even the ablest of persons cannot do everything alone. Team effort and team spirit is always required. Your own hardwork is of course important, but organisational and institutional base is essential. The most successful men are not those who burn the midnight oil themselves, but are able to lead, guide and inspire others to work for them. For this reason, teamwork is considered as one of the more progressive tools of current company- organisational practice. Performance of the team is higher than performance of an individual when there is work requiring broader scope of knowledge, judgments and opinions. The advantage of teamwork is significant growth in productivity in the spheres that require creative solving of different tasks, high degree of adaptability and operative management. Teamwork also creates environment which facilitates knowledge and information exchange and so called knowledge sharing. Teamwork could also lead to more job autonomy, more responsibility and more job satisfaction. Most of the latest studies refer to the positive impact of teamwork implementation on productivity and company efficiency increase (Akyay and Gonca, 2009). The impact of teamwork on work situation primarily depends on the manner in which it is implemented, therefore, we cannot treat all new forms of work organisations under the same umbrella, a distinction and classification of different forms of teamwork might be useful. Teamwork requires an explicit decision by the team members to co-operate in meeting the shared objective. This requires that team members sacrifice their 69 autonomy, allowing their activity to be coordinated by the team, either through decisions by the team leader or through shared decision making. As a result, the responsibilities of professionals working as a team include not only activities they deliver because of their specialised skills or knowledge, but also those resulting from their commitment to monitor the activities performed by their teammates, including managing the conflicts that may result (Oandasan, 2006 in Akyay and Gonca, 2009). Teamwork can be effective when members have faith in their ability to solve problems, are positive about their activities and trust each other. Teamwork is seen as a way to improve quality of services, not only through improved efficiency but also through a happy and healthy workforce. When teamwork is been created, members will see themselves as a group of people all working for a common goal, rather than a bunch of individuals competing with each other (Dave, Dault and Priest, (2007). A body of literature has examined the link between teamwork and employees‟ QWL and organisational performance (Karia and Ahmad, 2000 in Zain, et al. 2009). These studies found that teamwork is one of the important dimensions in influencing organisational success as well as achieving good relationship between workers and managers. Studies confirmed that an organisation that practices some levels of teamwork often experienced an increase in employees‟ commitment to the organisation. It is also confirmed that teamwork is important in facilitating employees‟ ability to work together in completing a task (Zain, et al. 2009). It is believed that dedicated, loyal and committed workers feel more comfortable working as a team rather than as an individual and that there is always in existence, workplace decisions based on consensus, cooperation within departments, sharing of ideas, cliques look out for eachother, job participation and interpersonal cooperation. To conclude, teamwork is essential in organisations because division of labour 70 among workers means no single professional worker can deliver a complete episode of work. 2.4.4 Value for Employees and Quality of Work-Life in organisations Value for employees is defined as the extent to which employees perceive the organisation values their contributions and cares about their well-being. Value for employees is a key factor in influencing employee commitment to the organisation, job satisfaction and general QWL. Many researchers like Azril et. al. (2010) and Rose et al. (2006) have studied the relationship between value for employees and QWL of workers and have found it to have a positive impact on organisational commitment, employee performance as well as job satisfaction (Azril et al. 2010). Corroborating this submission, Harrison (2010 in Azril et al 2010) concludes that appreciation is a fundamental human need. Employees respond to appreciation expressed through recognition of their good work because it confirms their work is valued. When employees and their work are valued, their satisfaction, QWL and productivity rises and they are motivated to maintain and improve their good work, that is, value for employees programmes are an important way for labour- management committees to acknowledge and reward individual and team efforts that enhance labour-management cooperation, quality of services, and employee morale. In the same vein, Rakesh (2006) opines that employers should give full credit for work well done. One of the deepest urges in human nature is the craving to be appreciated. Give plentiful of it. Nothing builds up a person so much as approbation and appreciation. Value for employees reinforces individual and group motivation to achieve and take responsibility and contributes to work improvements which leads to a more positive work atmosphere. Value for employees programmes can be based on length 71 of service (minimum of 10years) or sustained or exceptional one-time performance or achievement. Recognition can focus on efforts that have improved labour- management cooperation, safety and health, QWL or service delivery. Similarly, McCormick and Tiffi (1994) in Adio and Popoola (2010) observe that if workers perceive that their values are realised in the job, they exhibit a positive attitude and have greater commitment to their jobs. Previous studies such as Azril et al. (2010), Rose et al. (2006), and Rethinam and Ismail (2008) indicate that value for employees determines employees‟ QWL in organisations. 2.5 Quality of work-life and Job Performance Similarities exist between QWL and job performance in that both are organisationally based. Job performance is a function of the individual and the organisation. Therefore, the two constructs are situationally based and contextual to the workplace. This means individuals and organisations are predictors of job performance (Rose at al. 2006). Many studies have examined the multi-dimensional and complex construct of job performance. For example, Campbell and co-workers identified eight major dimensions of performance: Job-specific task proficiency; non- job specific task proficiency; written and oral communication tasks; demonstration effort; maintaining personal discipline; facilitating peer and team performance; supervision and management and administration. A number of theoretical perspectives have been put forth, some representing performance on jobs in general and some specific to managerial jobs. In the literature, dimensions of individual job performance include units of production, quality of work, tenure, supervisory and leadership abilities, output, quality, lost time, turnover, training time, promotion and satisfaction. 72 Moreover, Judge, T.A., Bono, J.E., Thoreson, C.J. and Patton, G.K.(2001) describe characteristics that can predict future job performance. Their list includes past performance on related jobs, job knowledge, psychomotor skills, cognitive abilities, social skills and job related attitudes such as the need for achievement, enthusiasm, stress and control. Viswesvaran and co–workers identified ten dimensions of job performance: Overall job performance; Job performance or productivity; Quality; Leadership; Communication competence; Administrative competence; Effort; Interpersonal competence; Job knowledge and Compliance with or acceptance of authority. Further, Jugde et al. (2001) identified eight dimensions: quality of work; planning; organisational commitment; job knowledge; allocation; interpersonal orientation; self-development and account management. Similarly, Rose et al. (2006) identified seven dimensions of job performance: Effort; Consistency; Timeliness; Work; Competence; commitment and Excellence. Nwachukwu (2007) maintains that one can not carry out any improvement on job performance until one is clear about the level of the organisation‟s performance. They therefore suggested three main levels of job performance thus: - The organisation level which deals with the organisation as a whole – its strategy, its overall goals and measures. - The process level is where the main work of the organisation takes place. If the organisation level is the skeleton, the process level is the muscles. As muscles connect different bones, so processes involve more than one functional area of the organisation. - Finally, the job/performer level is where individuals perform. An individual‟s job is like a cell of the organisation. The individual works in relation to other individuals, and often finds himself/herself part of more than 73 one process. Nwachukwu, (2000) in Nwachukwu, (2007) has observed that the manager‟s attitude to work, his quest for excellence and his continued expectation of higher standards of excellence influence the performance of his subordinates. Nwachukwu also states that: “A manager that accepts low quality or mediocre performance or appears to rationalise for employees where quality work is required, directly encourages substandard performance” (pg. 228). Employees are motivated to improve performance through opportunities for training and skill development and employee involvement in process design and decision-making, through direct contact with customers and a strong emphasis on team work and mutual support. The high performance work system model emphasises employee participation in organisational decision making that is supported by self- managing work team and extensive sharing of financial and other performance information throughout the organisation. Job performance can lead to job satisfaction, an average employee looks forward to the day he will earn promotion, promotion is a reward for past performance, an encouragement to help him continue to excel, an individual‟s effort, abilities, trait and task perception determine his/her performance (Nwachukwu, 2007). In general, past studies on QWL and job performance suggests that these two varibales may be linked. However, not much previous research have examined the links between quality of work-life and job performance in a field of study except Rose et al. (2007) and Kheradmand, et al. (2010) who did an analytical and convincing work on it as well as Lau (2000) in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan (2013) who used an ad hoc approach to study two key elements of the service profit chain model, namely 74 QWL and performance. The study showed that there is a significant relationship between QWL and job performance. 2.6 Quality of Work-life and Organisational Commitment Commitment is an internal decision which cannot be force on someone. It occurs when one‟s thoughts and emotions are pointing to the same direction. Commitment is the degree of dedication to a profession or occupation (Meyer, 1993 in Adio and Popoola 2010). Organisational commitment (OC) is distinct from other forms of commitment, such as job commitment and career commitment. Buchanan (1994) in Adio and Popoola (2010) views commitment as a situation where an individual directs efforts toward organisational and professional goals and gains intrinsic satisfaction through achievement. Organisational commitment (OC) has been a popular topic of research in organisational behaviour (Meyer and Allen, 1997 in Normala, 2010). Mowday, (1982 in Normala, 2010) view organisational commitment as a strong belief in an organisation‟s goals and values, a willingness to exert considerable effort on behalf of an organisation and a strong desire to remain a member of the organisation. Organisational commitment also refers to the strength of an employee‟s involvement in and identification with the organisation (Hellrigel, Slocum and Woodman, 1998 in Normala, 2010). The organisational commitment of a worker could be said to be the ability of an employee to perform the job effectively, maintaining loyalty, involvement and identification, despite the shortcomings of the job, such as recognition, working environment, achievements, social relationships and benefits (Mark and Nancy, 1991). According to Steers (1991) in Normala, (2010), the sources of organisational commitment may vary from person to person. (Caldwell, 1990 in Normala 2010) 75 suggests that organisational commitment is largely determined by the rewards offered by the organisation particularly financial rewards. Allen and Meyer (1990) in Normala, (2010) conceptualise organisational commitment in terms of three distinct dimensions; affective, continuance and normative. Affective commitment is characterised by the presence of emotional attachment to the organisation such that the affectively committed individual identifies with is involved in and enjoys membership in the organisation (Allen and Meyer, 1990 in Normala, 2010). The affectively committed employees remain with an organisation because they want to (Meyer, Allen and Gellatly, 1990 in Normala, 2010). The continuance dimension of commitment refers to an awareness of the cost associated with leaving an organisation. Employees whose primary link to the organisation is based on continuance commitment remain because they need to do so (Meyer and Allen, 1991 in Normala, 2010). The normative dimension of organisational commitment focuses on feelings of loyalty to a particular organisation resulting from the internalisation of normative pressures exerted on an individual (Hackett, Bycio and Hausdorf, 1994; Popper and Lipshitz, 1992 in Normala, 2010). Mark and Nancy (1991) suggest that internalisation occurs when the induced values of the individual and the organisation are in congruence. (Allen and Meyer 1990 in Normala, 2010) also stress that individuals exhibit committed behaviour because it is the right thing to do. Employees who are normatively committed feel they ought to remain with the organisation (Meyer and Allen, 1991 in Normala, 2010). Organisational commitment is defined as the overall strength of an employee‟s identification and involvement in an organisation, paving the way for employees to be satisfied with the organisation in which they work can be said to be as crucial as providing goods and services (Akyay and Gonca, 2009). In this regard, taking the 76 positive effects of organisational commitment into account, the significance involved augments. Organisational commitment has become an issue of great importance to be dealt with, because it helps to increase employee performance (Meyer et al, 1989; Meyer et al, 1993; Meyer et al, 2002) in Normala (2010) and helps to minimise turning up late to work, absenteeism and leaving. This concept of organisational commitment has become a major focus of a number of studies; however, no comprehensive definition to cover all disciplines has yet been rendered (Normala, 2010). The foremost reason for it is that researches from different fields of study such as sociology, social psychology and organisational behaviour have dealt with the topic based on their fields of study. Hence, it is no surprise that the literature accommodates various definitions related to organisational commitment (Normala, 2010). Employees with high level of organisational commitment have significant contributions to the achievement of the organisation under competitive conditions (Akyay and Gonca, 2009). Commitment of employees to the organisation and using all his/her skills and expertise for the advancement of the organisation concerned is a significant issue. organisations may prefer to work with those with high level of organisational commitment, it is believed that challenges encountered on the way to reaching goals may be overcome by such employees. Attitude of employees in terms of organisational commitment is the key guide for the success of the business. In Nigeria, studies on organisational commitment have been considered important in understanding employee behaviour. Many researchers have examined and established the importance of organisational commitment in their studies (for example Ayeni, popoola and Adeyinka, 2007; Salami, 2002; and Adio and Popoola 2010). The accumulated research findings on organisational commitment to date have 77 linked this construct to various antecedents and outcomes. However, few researchers concluded that there is a positive and significant relationship between QWL and organisational commitment. For instance, Ashoob (2006) in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan (2013) examined the relationship between QWL and organisational commitment and found that there is a positive and significant relationship between QWL and organisational commitment. Similarly, Asgari, Mohammad Hadi and Dadashi as well as Mohammad Ali (2011) in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan (2013) undertook research to determine the relationship between QWL and organisational commitment. They prove that there is a significant relationship between QWL and organisational commitment. Again, Turner and Chelleadurai (2005) in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan (2013) studied the relationship between commitment to university and willingness to work among 205 students who had student jobs, and found out that there is a significant relationship between commitment to university and willingness to work. Thus, it is assumed that there is a strong positive relationship between QWL and organisational commitment, meaning, the higher the quality of work-life, the stronger will be the organisational commitment of employees (Normala, 2010). In line with this, Mowday (1979 in Normala, 2010) suggests that employees who exhibit high organisational commitment are happier at their work, spend less time away from their jobs and are less likely to leave the organisation. Similarly, Porter, Steers, Mowday, and Boulian (1974) in Adio and Popoola (2010) observe that committed employees are innovative and creative. 2.7 Quality of Work-life and Job Satisfaction Job satisfaction as a concept in behavioural science has attracted the attention of human resource practitioners and scholars for two main reasons. First, human resource practitioners know they are normally responsible for maintaining a high level 78 of job satisfaction in their organisation and second that managers are concerned about the impact job satisfaction has on performance. The above reasons indicated that if human resource practitioners are to achieve results through people (employee), then the extent to which these employees are satisfied with their job should be of concern to human resource practitioners (Adeniyi, 2000). Job satisfaction is an attitude individuals have about their job, which result from the perception of their jobs, based on factors at the work environment. Job satisfaction, a worker‟s sense of achievement and success, is generally perceived to be directly linked to productivity as well as to personal well being Kruegar, Kevin, Lohfeld, Gayle, Lewis and Tijam, (2002). For an organisation to operate to the optimal level, the needs of the employees should be met often, this is to say that job satisfaction is an important variable to consider when evaluating an organisation's success, for organisations to be successful they must continuously ensure the satisfaction of their employees. Although, job satisfaction cannot be seen, it can be inferred. It is an emotional response to a job situation (Kruegar et al, 2002). Job satisfaction as a concept is very pervasive at any organisation. This is because it determines workers' productivity and morale. If a worker is not satisfied with his job, the organisation‟s goals, workers' morale and personal growth will be hampered (Adeniyi, 2000). Syptak, Marsland and Ulmer (1999) in Kruegar et al. (2002) state that few organisations place job satisfaction as top priority because they fail to understand that satisfied employees tend to be productive, creative and committed. Job satisfaction further implies enthusiasm and happiness with one's work. The Harvard Professional Group (1998) views job satisfaction as the radiant that leads to recognition, income promotion and the achievement of other goals that lead to a general feeling of fulfillment (Palmer, 2000 in Kruegar et al, 2002). 79 In the same vein, (Berry, 1997 in Kruegar et al. 2002) defines job satisfaction as "an individuals reaction to the job experience". He posits further that for an organisation to be productive, the employees' welfare should be met, that is to say, job satisfaction is an important variable to consider when evaluating an organisation's success. Job satisfaction is often achieved where performance is recognised by appropriate and equitable performance related pay supplemented with other perks, benefits and non-financial recognition and rewards, which meets the employees' expectation. Job satisfaction is often a strong motivator in work endeavours. Research has shown that job satisfaction can lead to high performance especially for professionals and high-level employees, commonly known as talent (Achal Khanna, 2007). Job satisfaction implies doing a job one enjoys, doing it well and being suitably rewarded for one's efforts. There are various components that are considered to be vital to job satisfaction. These variables are important because they all influence the way a person feels about his/her job. These components include the following: pay, promotion, benefits, supervisor, co-workers, work conditions, communication, safety, productivity and the work. (Berry, 1997 in Kruegar et al. 2002), however, each of these factors figures into an individuals job satisfaction differently; for instance, one might think "pay" is considered to be .the most important component in job satisfaction, whereas, it may not be true because some employees may be more concerned with their working environment. Locke and Lathan, (1976) in Adeniyi, (2000) define job satisfaction as "pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of ones‟ job or job experience". Employee needs and wants are satisfied when they perceive that rewards from the organisation, including compensation, promotion, recognition, development and meaningful work, 80 meet or exceed their expectation (Hackman & Oldham, 1980) in Gayathiri and Ramakrishwan (2013). Job satisfaction is also referred to as the employee's perception of how well a job provides those things that are viewed as important, such as work, pay, promotion opportunity, supervision and contentment. The importance of job satisfaction cannot be ignored because its absence often leads to lethargy and reduced organisational commitment (Lyuth and Verdim, 1998 in Kruegar et al. 2002). Lack of job satisfaction of employees in a workplace can predict their quitting the job (Adeniyi, 2000). Sometimes, workers may quit from public organisations to private and from one profession to another that is considered a greener pasture. From the above, one can infer that job satisfaction- as a concept, is very pervasive in any organisation; this is because it determines workers‟ productivity and morale. Satisfaction occurs when employees feel an obligation to the clientele and have a positive attitude toward their jobs and receive the necessary recognition from within the organisation; while on the other hand, dissatisfaction often occurs when the goals and policies of the organisation are not clearly defined and understood. Most employees attach greater importance to job satisfaction than to the level of their salary; that is, staffs are likely to achieve job satisfaction if management engages the right people for the jobs, if there are adequate education and training schemes, and if there is full and free communication between management and workers (Barnet and Louderback, (2001 in Kruegar et al. 2002). Satisfaction on a job might be motivated by the nature of the job, its pervasive social climate and extent to which workers peculiar needs are met (Osagbemi, 2000 in Adeniyi, 2000). Finally, it appears that the main outcomes of an effective QWL programme are imporved working conditions for employees and greater organisational effectiveness for employees. QWL positively 81 facilitates the creation of a more flexible, loyal, and motivated workforce, and thereby determines the company‟s competitiveness (Adkhikari Gautam, 2010) in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan (2013). 2.8 Concept of Organisational Climate in Organisations Numerous definitions have been used to explain the climate concept. For instance, organisational climate is the combined perceptions of individuals that are useful in differentiating organisations according to their procedures and practices (Sterling Books Nig. Ltd). Forehand and Gilmer (1964) in Poon and Ainuddin (2006) for example, refer to climate as a set of relatively enduring characteristics that describes an organisation, distinguish it from other organisations and influence the behaviour of organisational members, while Litwin and Stringer (1968) in Poon and Ainuddin (2006) view climate as a set of measurable properties of the work environment perceived by the people in it and these properties are assumed to influence motivation and behaviour. By synthesising the definitions of various researchers, Pritchard and Karasick (1973), in Poon and Ainuddin (2006) define organisational climate as a relatively enduring quality of an organisation‟s internal environment which results from the behaviour and policies of its members, is perceived by its members, and acts as source of pressure for directing activity. Organisational climate can also be defined as employees‟ subjective perceptions of the work environment which are descriptive and these perceptions can lead to affective responses which govern employees‟ behaviour. Since organisational climate involves perceptions of an organisation‟s environment, different organisations with differing practices and procedures may have different climates. 82 Organisational climate can also be viewed as that which is represented by the employees perceptions of the objective characteristics of an organisation (Landy, 1989 in Poon and Ainuddin 2006). For example, the number of managers employed by an organisation is objective, but employees‟ feelings about those managers is subjective. Climate differs from the structure of an organisation. Structure is the anatomy of the organisation, the bare bones or the skeleton. Climate, on the other hand, is the way the employees view the personality of the organisation. Muchinsky (1987 in Poon and Ainuddin 2006) debate whether the components of climate are actual attributes of an organisation or merely the perceptions of the employees working in the organisation. That most researchers concur that organisations differ by climate, implies that it could be seen as an organisational attribute. Yet, such a view contradicts the idea expressed by Landy (1989) in Poon and Ainuddin (2006) above, that climate is a representation of employees‟ perceptions. However, the concept proved ambiguous, nebulous and controversial. The main problems in the conceptual clarification concern whether climate should be conceived of in terms of the objective (physical or structural) features of the organisation or the subjective (perceptual) reactions to the organisation. Hence, Gershon, Stone and Bakken (2004) argue that a perceived climate concerns the attributes of an organisation and those of the perceiving individual and that as most often conceived, climate was simply an alternative label for affective responses to organisation, like job satisfaction. James and Jones (1974 in Gershon et al. 2004) suggest that the psychological climate can be used to emphasise the fact that it is the aggregated cognitive interpretation of an organisation‟s workforce which arise from experience in an organisation that provides a representation of the meaning inherent in the organisational features, events and processes. Organisational climate is generally 83 believed to exert a considerable influence on the behaviour of employees (Prichard and Karasick, (1973 in Poon and Ainuddin 2006). This is another reason why there has been a long-standing interest in the study of organisational climate among organisational researchers. Its importance is partly due to its hypothesised relationship to other organisational phenomena including job satisfaction, quality of work-life, job performance, leadership behaviours, and the quality of work group interaction. Organisational climate is generally believed to have influence on the behaviour of employees, therefore, physical work environment, organisational structure, work involvement, organisational policy and organisational communication can influence the quality of work-life in organisations since quality of work-life deals with the relationship between the employees and the total working environment. In summary, the above studies indicate that there is still considerable diversity in the number and type of dimensions used to explain the climate. It is difficult to identify several core climate dimensions relevant to heterogeneous organisations because climate involves employees‟ perception of their work environments and different types of organisations with their differing practices and procedures which have relatively unique climates,(Muchinsky 1976 in Poon and Ainuddin 2006). Organisational climate clearly influences the success of an organisation. Many organisations, however, struggle to cultivate the climate they need to succeed and retain their highly effective employees. HeIIriegel and Slocum (2006) explain that organisations can take steps to build a more positive and employee-centred climate through communication, values, expectations, norms, policies and rules, programmes and leadership. 84 2.9 Concept of Organisational Culture in Organisations Organisations as cultures are like mini societies with their own distinct or unique values, rituals, ideologies and beliefs. This distinction brings out important cross-national variations in styles. The unfolding trends in any organisation are reflections of like trends in people‟s mind, showing why there are strong and uniform corporate cultures as well as fragmented ones or sub-cultures. For example, Nigeria has fragmented cultures, which results in weak national culture, while Japan has a cohesive and strong national culture. It is realised that organisations rest in or rely on shared meanings within a common context that allows people to behave in organised way. The above helps managers to rethink corporate functioning dimensions such as strategy, structure, design and the nature of leadership and management from the perception of organisational cultures (Chukwuemeka, 2010). Organisational culture has assumed considerable importance in the 21st century because of its impact on employee performance and job satisfaction. It is the imperative of every organisation to understand its own dynamic culture so that workers can capitalise on the insights generated by the cultural perspective to wield control over their organisations. The culture of an organisation has importance on its performance, though, culture is one aspect that is not tangible, yet, it plays a very important role to the success of any business enterprise (Robbins, 2000 in Schein 2008). Research has suggested that understanding organisational culture as a management philosophy is essential to managing an organisation in improving its overall performance. Therefore, one of the eminent themes that is often discussed and debated in management and business literature is the influence of organisational culture on organisational performance. 85 In the light of this, Chukwuemeka (2010) quoted Denison (1996) defines organisational culture as the set of shared taken-for-granted implicit assumptions that a group holds and that determines how it perceives, thinks about, and reacts to its various environments. According to him, this definition brings out three (3) key characteristics of organisational culture. They are as follows:  Organisational culture is passed on to new employees through the process of socialisation.  Organisational culture influences our behaviour at work and  Organisational culture operates at two different levels. Each level varies in terms of outward visibility and resistance to change. Similarly, the organisational culture constitutes a field of management, with a history relatively recent, which started to gain general acceptance barely in the second th decade of the 20 century (Rosca, Sirbu and Rosca, 2000).There is no single definition for organisational culture. The topic has been studied from a variety of perspectives ranging from disciplines such as anthropology and sociology to the applied disciplines of organisational behaviour, management science and organisational communication, that is, organisational culture is an idea in the field of organisational studies and management which describes the psychology, attitudes, experiences, beliefs and values (personal and cultural values) of an organisation. Organisational culture is a management philosophy and a way of managing an organisation in improving the effectiveness and efficiency of its performance. Understanding organisational culture is essential since it is able to influence the thoughts, feelings, interactions and performance in an organisation. The understanding of the importance of organisational culture is evident as most organisations acknowledge that an organisation‟s well founded culture could 86 contribute to achievement in every aspect of performance whether in economy, growth and financial (Zain, et al. 2009). Defining the organisational culture, Mclean and Marshall in (Rosca et al. 2000) show that it represents “an assembly of traditions, values, procedures, conceptions and attitudes that create the context of the activity within the organisation.” In the same vein, Mullins (1999) defines organisational culture as collection of traditions, values, beliefs, policies and attitudes that constitute a pervasive context for everything one does and thinks in an organisation. Collins and Porras (2000) state that organisational culture refers to a system of shared meaning held by members that distinguish one organisation from others. They believe these shared meanings are a set of key characteristics and that the organisation values and the essence of an organisation‟s culture can be captured in seven primary characteristics. These characteristics are:  Innovation and risk-taking: The degree to which employees are encouraged to be innovative and take risks;  Attention to detail: The degree to which employees are expected to exhibit precision analysis and attention to detail;  Outcome orientation: The degree to which management focuses on results or outcomes rather than on the techniques and processes used to achieve those outcomes;  People orientation: The degree to which management decisions take into consideration the effect of the outcomes on the people within the organisation;  Team orientation: The degree to which work activities are organised around teams rather than individuals; 87  Aggressiveness: The degree to which each worker is aggressive and competitive rather than being an easygoing individual and  Stability: The degree to which organisational activities emphasise maintaining the status quo in contrast to growth. Each of these characteristics exists on a continuum from low to high, so; appraising the organisation on these seven characteristics, gives a composite picture of the organisation‟s culture. Moorhead and Griffin (1999), authors of books on organisational culture, feel compelled to develop their own definitions of culture. Most definitions refer to some sort of values, beliefs and attitudes that are held by individuals and the organisation. Upon close examination of the definitions, it can be assumed that there exists a general agreement that organisational culture comprises common beliefs, attitudes and values. These values according to them, help employees understand how they should act in organisations. Organisational culture exists on several levels, which differ in terms of visibility and resistance to change. When it comes to changing the culture of the organisation, it becomes difficult to determine which are the more: or less important elements that help shape an organisation‟s culture. Hofstede (1990) developed a four- layered hierarchical model of culture which helps to identify and categorise the constituent elements of culture. The importance of organisational culture can not be easily overlooked. For instance, Mullins (1990) attests that culture helps to account for variations among organisations and managers, nationally and internationally. Similarly, Morgan (2009) in Chukwuemeka (2010) states that once management and workers understand the influence of culture on workplace behaviour, they soon realise organisational change in cultural change and that all aspects of corporate transformation can be appreciated 88 with organisation perspective in mind. Culture helps to explain why different groups of people perceive things their own way and perform things differently from other groups. Culture can help reduce complexity and uncertainty. It provides a consistency in outlook and values and makes possible the process of decision-making, co- ordination and control. In the same vein, Sheridan (1992) explains that culture performs certain functions. For instance, culture supplements rational management and creation of work. Therefore, organisational culture cannot suddenly change the behaviour of people in an organisation. Culture communicates to people through symbols, values, physical settings and language, and thereby supplements the rational management tools such as technology and structure. Culture facilitates induction and socialisation: induction is a process through which new entrants to an organisation are socialised and indoctrinated in the expectations of the organisation, its cultural norms and undefined conduct. Further, Chukwuemeka (2010) highlighted four (4) functions of organisational culture as follows:  Give members an organisational identity. The organisation is known as being an innovative company that relentlessly pursues new product development.  Facilitates collective commitment. A company that employees are proud to be part of.  Promotes social system stability. Social system stability reflects the extent to which the work environment is perceived as positive and reinforcing, and conflict and change are managed effectively.  Shape behaviour by helping members make sense of their environment. This function of culture helps emploees understand why the organisation 89 does what it does and how it intends to accomplish its long-term goals. This is achieved through detailed career feedback to employees. Chukwuemeka (2010) quoted the Oxford Advanced Learner‟s Dictionary defines culture as the customs and beliefs, art, way of life and social organisation of a particular country or group. Chukwuemeka (2010) speaks further that the word culture derives metaphorically from the idea of cultivation; the process of tilling and developing land. It usually refers to the pattern of development reflected in the society‟s system of knowledge, ideology, values, laws and day-to-day ritual. The newcomer imbibes the culture of the organisation, which may involve the need to change his/her attitudes and beliefs to achieving an internalised commitment to the organisation. Culture promotes code of conduct; for instance, a strong culture in an organisation explicitly communicates modes of behaviours so that people are conscious that certain behaviours are expected and others would never be visible. The presence of a strong culture would be evident where members share a set of beliefs, values and assumptions which would influence their behaviour in an invisible way. Where culture has been fully associated by people, they persistently indulge in a typical behaviour in a spontaneous way. Promotion of the culture of quality can help achieve good business results. For this reason, Chukwuemeka (2010) states that the concept of culture shows that different groups of people have different ways of life. He speaks further that as people enter various organisations as employees, they must orient themselves in the cultures of their respective organisations. Similarly, Mcewan (2001) postulates that as a concept, culture is inseparable from the notion of human society. Cowling and James (1994) support Mcewan in the postulation that an organisation cannot be separated from the culture of a society. To try and change the prevailing culture 90 within an organisation, one has to take cognisance of the relevant societal culture. Robbins (2000), on the other hand, argues that a company‟s organisational culture does not pop out of thin air and once it is established, it does not fade away. An organisation‟s current customs, traditions and general ways of doing things are largely due to what it has done before and the degree of success it has had with these endeavours. Robbins, further emphasises that the founders of an organisation have a major impact on that organisation‟s early culture. They have a vision of what the organisation should be and they are not constrained by previous customs and ideologies. The process of culture creation occurs in three ways: First, founders only hire and keep employees who think and feel the way they do; second, they indoctrinate and socialise these employees to their way of thinking and feeling and finally, the founders own behaviour acts as a role model that encourages employees to identify with them and thereby internalise their beliefs, values and assumptions. When the organisation succeeds, the founder‟s vision becomes a primary determinant of that success. At this point, the founder‟s entire personalities become embedded in the culture of the organisation. Robbins (2000) further explains that culture is transmitted to employees in a number of forms, the most potent being, stories, rituals, symbols and languages. Till date, research has not uncovered a universal typology of cultural styles that everyone accepts. However, some authors and scholars provide various types of organisational culture. For instance, Chukwuemeka (2010) highlighted three (3) types of organisational culture thus:  Constructive culture in which employees are encouraged to interact with others and to work on tasks and projects in ways that will assist them in 91 satisfying their needs to grow and develop.  Passive-defensive culture is characterised by an overriding belief that employees must interact with others in ways that do not threaten their own job security. This culture reinforces the normative beliefs associated with approval, conventional, dependent and avoidance.  Aggressive-defensive culture encourages employees to approach tasks in forceful ways in order to protect their status and job security. Again, Hellriegel, Slocum and Woodman (2001) describe four types of culture: bureaucratic; clan; entrepreneurial and market cultures; Bureaucratic Culture: An organisation that values formalty, rules, standard operating procedures and hierarchical co-ordination has a bureaucratic culture. Clan Culture: Tradition, loyalty, personal commitment, extensive socialisation, teamwork, self management and social influences are attributes of clan culture. Its members recognise an obligation beyond the simple exchange of labour for salaries. The members understand that their contributions to the organisation may exceed any contractual agreements. Entrepreneurial Culture: High levels of risk taking, dynamism and creativity characterise an entrepreneurial culture. There is a commitment to experimentation, innovation and the need to be on the leading edge. This culture does not just quickly react to changes in the environment, it creates change. Market Culture: The achievements of measurable and demanding goals, especially those that are financial and market based, characterise a market culture. Hard driving competitiveness and profit orientation prevail throughout the organisation. In a market culture, the relationship between an individual and an organisation is contractual. The individual is responsible for some levels of reward in return: These four culture types 92 all represent different types of management philosophies or styles. The cultures of these organisations are governed by how these companies are run or the beliefs of the founders of the organisation, Essentially, the cultures in these organisations are driven top-down, with emphasis on the type of business or industry that this organisation serves. Similarly, Harrison and stokes (1993) also identify four culture types. These four culture types are: power, role, achievement and support cultures. The Power Culture A power oriented organisation is based on inequality of access to resources. In other words, the people in power use resources to either satisfy or frustrate the needs of others, and by so doing, they control the behaviour of others. Leadership resides in the person who is in charge, and rests on the leaders‟ ability and willingness to administer rewards and punishments. At best, the power-oriented leader is firm, fair and generous and has loyal subordinates. At worst, the power-oriented leader leads by fear, with abuse of power for personal gains. The Role Culture In a role culture oriented organisation, structures and systems give protection to subordinates and stability to the organisation. The duties and rewards of employees roles are clearly defined. This is usually defined in writing as a job description. People in these organisations perform specific functions in order to receive defined rewards and the individuals and the organisation, are expected to keep to their parts of the bargain. The main values of a role-oriented organisation are order, dependability, rationality and consistency and at best, this type of organisation provides stability, justice and efficient performance. People are protected in their jobs and need to spend less time looking after themselves, and can devote more energy to their work. 93 The Achievement Culture The achievement oriented organisation is known as the aligned organisation because it lines people up behind a common vision or purpose. This type of organisation uses the mission to attract and release the personal energy of its employees in the pursuit of common goals. There is an inner commitment within these achievement-oriented individuals. Many people like their work and want to make a contribution to the society, thus enjoying an intrinsic reward. A typical type of achievement-oriented organisation would be an intensive care unit in an hospital or voluntary community organisation. The support culture The support culture may be defined as an organisational climate that is based on mutual trust between the individual and the organisation. In such organisations, people are valued as human beings and are not just cogs in a machine. This culture centres on warmth and even love and it makes people want to come to work in the morning, not only because they like their work but also because they care for their colleagues. Quality and service often show in support-oriented organisations, since successful approaches to quality improvements are often based on small work teams. People contribute towards the organisation out of a sense of commitment. Employees feel a sense of belonging and that they have a personal stake in the organisation. These four types of culture all have different implications to the success of a business where the power culture is dependent on a central power source with rays of power and influence spreading out from the central figure. These types of culture are strong and have the ability to move quickly and can react well to threat and danger, as postulated by Handy (1993). The role culture, according to Harrison (1993) gives protection to subordinates and stability to the organisation. He also claims that people 94 are protected in their jobs in a role orientation and need to spend less time looking out for eachother and can devote more energy to their work. The achievement culture organisation expects its employees to contribute their personal energy in return for rewards. This type of organisation is known as an aligned organisation because it lines people up behind a common vision or purpose (Harrison and Stokes 1993). Harrison and Stokes (1993) affirm that quality and service often show in support-oriented organisations, since successful approaches to quality improvements are often based on small work teams. Most organisations view culture as a critical factor to organisational success and came up with a view of “the way we treat our people affects the way our people treat our customers and in turn our success which includes employees‟ performance” (Zain, et al. 2009 cited Flamholtz and Randle 1998). Such view has led the organisation to a number of human resource practices designed to enhance employees‟ feeling of being valued by the organisation. Organisational culture is a key aspect to the organisation‟s success or failure, that is, it shapes the way people act and interact and strongly influences how things get done Gershon et al; (2004). 2.10 Empirical Studies There is ample literature and empirical studies to support demographic factors, organisational climate and culture as determinants of employees‟ QWL in Nigerian organisations. It should be noted that the three parties to industrial relations, that is, the government, the employer as well as the employees play different roles in an organisation. These parties have to work as a team to achieve the desired goals of an organisation. In order to achieve this, organisational climate and culture play prominent roles. In managing the QWL within any group, the goal is usually to encourage and promote those virtues, attitudes, values and behaviour which the group 95 cherishes and to discourage or punish those it abhors. In general, the aims of QWL in business organisations are to attract, retain and motivate people on the right quality needed to achieve the corporate objective of the organisation (Oladimeji, 1999). Another finding related to the present study is that of May, Lau and Johnson, 1999 in Normala, (2010) who suggest that companies offering good QWL and supportive work environment would likely gain leverage in hiring and retaining valuable people and those companies with high quality of work enjoy exceptional growth and profitability. These findings of Havlovic, Scobel. Straw and Heckscher cited in Bolhari, Rezaeean, Bolhari, Bairamzadem & Soltan, (2011) also report that the key constructs of QWL are higher payment, job security, better reward systems, growth opportunity and participative groups among others. This indicates that in an organisation, a high level of QWL is necessary to continue to attract and retain employees. In another study, Danna and Griffin, (1999) conclude that the QWL is a very important factor that management/employers must create in an organisation because, if personnel (workers) have a good QWL, the results will be job satisfaction, work commitment, work efficacy, development of QWL in the organisation and reduced rate of turnover, absenteeism, lateness to work and employee transfer. In addition, a study carried out by Rose, et al. (2006) on an analysis of QWL and career-related variables indicate there is a significant relationship between organisational climate and QWL because they opined that elements that are relevant to an individual‟s QWL include the task, the physical work environment, social environment within the organisation, administrative system and relationship between life on and off the job. They went further to conclude that the most important predictor of QWL is 96 organisational climate, followed by career achievement, career satisfaction and career balance. In the same vein, they opine that QWL consists of opportunity for active involvement in group working arrangements or problem solving that are of mutual benefit to employees or employers, based on labour management cooperation. Payne and Pheysey, (2004) confirm the relationship between organisational climate and QWL, they view that the satisfaction of employees with organisational climate is a predictor of better performance and that organisational climate has direct bearing on employees‟ QWL. They went further to conclude that satisfaction of employees with organisational climate enhances positive organisational outcomes: efficiency, productivity, organisational commitment and cohesiveness of workers while it reduces negative outcome such as turnover, deviant behaviour at work and absenteeism. Further, Murray, (1999 in Patricia, Michael, Feldman, Linzer, Peng, Roblin, Scott-Cawiezell, Waren and Williams 2005) also supports the present study and opine that the organisations‟ create positive organisational climate to retain employees by enhancing their morale and QWL. Similarly, Kandasamy and Screekumar (2008) also support the present study by highlighting the benefits of QWL to employees and organisation. Firebaugh and Harley (2000) in Adio and Popoola (2010) also support the present study and assert that if an organisation is to be successful, it must continue to satisfy employees‟ request to make them committed and dedicated to work. In the same vein, previous studies by Rose, et al. (2006) is in line with the present study indicating that age, sex, marital status, length of service and educational attainments have a significant relationship with QWL. Similarly, Bharathi et al. (2010) also 97 support the present study, they are of opinion that demographic variables have significant relationship with QWL. For instance, they prove there is no significant difference between age, sex, designation and income levels of the respondents and their perceived levels of overall QWL. Bolhari, et al. (2011) are also in line with the present study confirming that de;mographic variables had a relation with QWL. They went further to reveal that there is a significant relation between age, work experience and staff income. Another finding related to this study is Robbins (2000) in Schein (2008) who asserts that culture is one aspect that is not tangible, yet, it plays a very important role in the success of any business enterprise. He posits further that understanding organisational culture as a management philosophy is essential to managing an organisation in improving its overall performance. Other studies (Azril, et al.; 2010; Sirgy, et al.; 2001; Rethinam and Ismail, 2008) among others endeavour to establish the association between organisational climate/culture and QWL. 2.11 Theoretical Framework A theory is a set of propositions that seek to explain interrelationship among phenomena. A theoretical framework therefore provides the propositions upon which a study can be achieved. Olayinka and Owumi (2006) write; Similarly an appropriate and relevant theory to guide the study is inevitable. Put differently and in simple terms, no one builds a house without a plan. This is essentially the role a theory plays in research. It directs or patterns the trend of discussions (P.61). The framework of this study was based on the following three theories: - Needs satisfaction theory - Two-factor theory (Motivator-Hygiene Theory) 98 - Affect Theory Needs Satisfaction theory Porter (1961) in Kara (2012) developed Needs Satifaction Theory. Needs satisfaction theory is based on seven major Needs, each having several dimensions. These are:  Health and safety Needs (protection from ill health, injury at work, outside of work and enhancement of good health;  Economic and family Needs (pay, job security and other family needs);  Social Needs (collegiality at work and leisure time off work);  Esteem Needs (recognition and appreciation of work within an organisation and outside the organisation);  Actualisation Needs (realisation of one‟s potential within the organisation as a professional);  Knowledge Needs (learning to enhance job and professional skills); and  Aesthetic Needs (creativity at work as well as personal creativity and general aesthetics. This theory is relevant to the study since the success of any organisation is highly dependent on how it motivates, rewards, values, consults and empowers its workforce. This theory is therefore anchored on the researcher‟s study because economic and family needs, esteem needs as well as actualisation needs among others are majorly based on Needs satisfaction theory. Of all the theories discussed or reviewed, Needs satisfaction theory is the most important theory that this study would be anchored on since it deals with component of QWL such as valued at work, motivation, reward, consultation and empowerment. For instance, economic and family needs comprise pay, job security and other family needs which can be 99 affiliated to reward; esteem needs comprise recognition and appreciation of work which can also be affiliated to value for employees,again, actualisation needs comprise realisation of one‟s potential which can be affiliated to work involvement; social needs which can be affiliated to teamwork; and aesthetic needs which can be affiliated to creativity/innovation. Two-Factor Theory (Motivator-Hygiene Theory) This theory was propagated by Frederick Hertzberg in 1959. Two-factor theory (also known as Motivator-Hygiene Theory) attempts to explain satisfaction and motivation in the workplace. This theory states that satisfaction and dissatisfaction are driven by different factors-motivation and hygiene. Motivating factors are those aspects of the job that make people want to perform and provide people with satisfaction, for example, achievement at work, recognition and promotion opportunities, these motivating factors are considered to be intrinsic to the job or the work carried out. On the other hand, hygiene factors include aspects of the working environment such as pay, company policies, supervisory practices and other working conditions. This theory is relevant to the study because it analyses the factors that cause satisfaction or dissatisfaction within a workplace. In the same vein, the theory itemises six factors that cause dissatisfaction and the top six factors which lead to satisfaction. 1 00 Table 2.3: Showing the separate factors that lead to satisfaction and dissatisfaction Leading to Dissatisfaction Leading to Satisfaction  Company policy  Achievement  Supervision  Recognition  Relationship with superior officers  Work itself  Work conditions  Responsibility  Salary  Advancement  Relationship with co-workers  Growth NOTE: These factors would serve to remove These are factors that will induce an the impediments to positive work attitudes. individual to put forth adequate effort in the accomplishment of organisational goals. Source: Syptak, Marsland and Ulmer (1999) Affect Theory The Affect theory was officially launched in 1976 by Edwin A. Locke. This theory is arguably the most famous job satisfaction model. The main premise of this theory is that satisfaction is determined by a difference between what one wants in a job and what one has in a job. The theory further states that how much one values a given facet of work (e.g. the degree of autonomy in a position) moderates how satisfied/dissatisfied one becomes when expectations are or are not met. The theory explains further that when a person values a particular facet of a job, his/her satisfaction is more greatly impacted positively (when expectations are met) and negatively (when expectations are not met), compared to one who does not value that facet. To illustrate this, if employee A values autonomy in the workplace and employee B is indifferent about autonomy, then employee A would be more satisfied in a position that offers a high degree of autonomy and less satisfied in a 101 position with little or no autonomy compared to employee B. This theory also states that too much involvement in a particular facet will produce strong feelings of dissatisfaction. This theory is relevant to the study since the success of any organisation is highly dependant on how it motivates, values, rewards, consults and empowers its workforce. For instance, according to Affect theory, QWL depends on how employees‟ expectations are met which anchored on the above mentioned components of QWL. Again, this theory is significant in the area of organisational culture and climate as determinants of employees‟ QWL since organisations are required to adopt a strategy to improve the employees QWL to satisfy the organisational objectives and employees‟ needs. Developing a Framework for the understanding of this study A framework is the structure of idea or concept put together, which interrelates the theory involved in a question while a concept is a word or phrase that symbolises several interrelated ideas. A concept does not need to be discussed to be understood while a theory is to be discussed. However, since we are using interrelated concepts in the conceptual framework designed by the researcher, the relationships between the concepts are discussed below: 102 De mographic factors - Age at work - Gender - Marital status - Highest educational attainment - Length of service Quality of work-life - Income - Better Organisational climate compensation var iables - Health and Outcome: - Physical working safety - Job Performance, environment - Job security - High productivity, - Organisational - Opportunity for - Low absenteeism, structure career - High commitment/ - Work involvement advancement dedication - Organisational - Development - Reduction in communication of human labour turnover - Workers‟ friendly capacity policies Or„gsa n isational culture variables - Recognition of excellence/reward system - Value for employees - Creativity/innovation - Teamwork - Adaptation to change Figure 2.1: Conceptual Framework for ensuring better Quality of Work- Life Figure 2.1 shows the relationship between independent (demographic factors, (organisational climate/culture) and dependent variables (employees‟ QWL). In every organisation, organisational climate and culture regardless of the demographic characteristics of the employees should be used as potent tools or impetus to motivate or serve as values to ginger a sense of QWL that will invariably ginger them to higher performance. In essence, these independent variables should give employee or guarantee better compensation, job security, health and safety, opportunity for career advancement and opportunity for human capital development. Once this is done, the employees would be committed to their responsibilities and schedule which would invariably lead to better performance and higher productivity. 103 2.12 Appraisal of the Literature In the literature reviewed, there is a general belief among the scholars and researchers that the most important predictor of QWL is organisational climate/culture, followed by job satisfaction. Moreover, there is general consensus among majority of the authors that organisational climate clearly influences the success of an organisation. Many of the authors opine that organisational culture is a key aspect to the organisation‟s success or failure and that it shapes the way people act and interact with one another. Majority of the authors agree that work involvement improves employees‟ QWL and job satisfaction. Moreover, in the literature reviewed, there is unity of thought that when reward systems are provided, they induce loyalty in workers by being more dedicated and committed to their jobs, that is, workers will be able to put in their best through punctuality, full attendance and contribution of ideas. However, it has not been clearly justified in the literature reviewed that physical working environment influences employees‟ QWL in terms of conducive environment. The study is expected to fill the gap. In the literature reviewed, there is no substantial evidence to prove the relationship between organisational culture and creativity/innovation, that is, given the importance of creativity and innovation in organisations, there has been relatively little empirical work done in the area of organisational culture and creativity/innovation. Also, in the literature reviewed, there is unity of thought that teamwork would positively influence employees‟ QWL in private and public organisations. There is substantial evidence in the literature reviewed that performance of the team is higher than performance of an individual when there is a work requiring broader scope of knowledge, judgments and opinions. Similarly, in the 104 literature reviewed, there is consensus of opinion that teamwork is one of the important dimensions in influencing organisational success as well as achieving good relationship between workers and managers and that an organisation that practices some levels of teamwork often experience increase in employees‟ commitment to the organisation. It is also established that team-work is important in facilitating employees‟ ability to work together in completing a task. Further, in the literature reviewed, there is unity of opinion that there is a link between QWL and job satisfaction in that the extent to which the employees are satisfied with their job indicate high QWL. However, in the literature reviewed, there is a divergent view about the relationship between QWL and organisational commitment, some authors believe Nigerian workers are not committed to organisations while others believe they are not committed to organisational goals, in one word, organisational commitment should be a reciprocal relationship between employers and employees and as such, each party has to play its role. Moreover, in the literature reviewed, there is a general consensus among majority of the authors who believe there is a link between QWL and job performance since job performance can lead to job satisfaction and QWL. For instance, an average employee looks forward to the day he/she will earn promotion, promotion is a reward for past performance, an encouragement to help him/her continue to excel, an individual‟s effort, abilities, trait and task perception determine one‟s performance, however, there is no substantial evidence in the literature reviewed that there is a link between QWL and organisational communication since to the best of the researcher‟s knowledge there is no empirical studies in Nigeria to show there is a link between the two variables. The study is expected to fill such gap. 105 2.13 Hypotheses The following hypothesis were tested in the study at 0.05 level of significance Ho1: There is no significant relationship between each of the organisational climate variables (physical working environment, work involvement, organisational structure, organisational communication and worker-friendly policies) and employees‟ QWL. Ho2: There is no significant relationship between each of the organisational culture variables (recognition of excellence/reward system, value for employees, teamwork, room/allow for creativity/ innovation and adaptation to change) and employees‟ QWL. Ho3: There is no significant relationship between each of the demographic factors (age at work, gender, marital status, length of service, highest educational attainment, and income) and employees‟ QWL. Ho4: There is no significant relationship between the QWL and high job performance/commitment. 1 06 CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY This chapter discusses methodology and description of the procedure adopted in carrying out this research under the following sub headings: research design, population of the study, sample and sampling techniques, research instrument, validity and reliability of the instruments, administration of the instruments and method of data analysis. 3.1 Research Design The study adopted the descriptive survey research design of the ex-post facto type. This research design was adopted because the variables used had occurred and could not be manipulated. In other words, they were studied exactly as they existed. 3.2 Population of the Study The target population for this study are all employees in work organisations in the four sectors of the extractive, manufacturing, distributive and services industries in Ogun and Lagos States, Nigeria. 3.3 Sample and Sampling Techniques Multistage random sampling procedure was adopted, therefore, the sampling technique was divided into three stages. Stage I: The cluster sampling technique was used to select 12 work organisations in line with the existing classification of manufacturing, distributive, extractive and services industries in the two states, thus: 107 Extractive Industry  Ascon Oil and Gas Nig. Ltd; Victoria Island, Lagos.  A.G. Nassima Minerals Nig. Ltd, 38, Ijaye Street, Lagos.  De Ayowalls, Nig. Ltd, 20, Adebisi Street, Ipaja-Lagos. Manufacturing Industry  Berger Paints Plc, Ikeja, Lagos.  Lafarge Cement WAPCO Nigeria Plc, Shagamu, Ogun State.  Sona Breweries, Sango-Otta, Ogun State. Distributive Industry  Abams Chemicals Nig. Ltd, Ojota-Lagos.  Richbase Products Distribution Ltd, Balogun Idumota Int‟l Plaza, Lagos.  Conoil Plc, Apapa-Lagos. Services Industry  First Bank Plc, Marina, Lagos.  Ogun State Ministry of Health Abeokuta, Ogun State.  DHL Plc. Isolo, Lagos. Secondly, the stratified sampling technique was adopted to stratify workers into three strata along the management staff, middle level and line level staff. Lastly, a proportionate random sampling technique of 20 percent was adopted to select from each category of the total population in the 12 selected work organisations. In all, a total of 1,362 respondents were used for the study. 108 Table 3.1: Distribution of the Sample Size CATEGORY OF SELECTED TOTAL POPULATION SAMPLE SIZE INDUSTRY ORGANISATIONS BY LEVEL 20 Percent MGT* MID* LINE* MGT* MID* LINE* Ascon oil and gas Plc, 150 20 75 55 4 11 15 Victoria Island Lagos Extractive Industry A.G. Nassima 705 7 200 498 1 100 40 De Ayowalls Nig. Ltd. 240 24 180 36 5 7 36 Manufacturing Berger Paints Plc, 980 180 450 350 36 70 90 Industry Ikeja Lagos Lafarge cement 725 50 387 288 10 58 77 Sona Breweries, 560 40 280 240 8 48 56 Distributive Abams Chemicals 580 45 409 126 9 25 82 Industry Richbase Nig. Ltd. 220 20 170 30 4 6 34 Conoil, Plc 760 8 252 500 2 100 50 Service Industry First Bank Plc, 1,265 62 735 468 12 94 147 Ogun State Ministry 441 35 292 114 7 23 58 of Health, Abeokuta DHL Plc, Isolo 185 3 70 112 1 22 14 TOTAL 6,811 494 3,500 2,817 99 563 700 Total sample 1,362 size Source: Researcher‟s Field Survey 2011. Key: MGT = Management level staff. MID = Middle level staff. LINE = Line level staff. 3.4 Instrumentation The major instruments used for this study were four sets of Scales and Key Informant Interview from the respondents. The four sets of Scale were: Demographic Factors Scale, Organisational Climate Scale, Organisational Culture Scale and QWL Scale. Demographic Factors Scale The scale contains seven question items. It was developed by the researcher. The seven-items scale was presented to experts in industrial relations and cost construction to ensure face and content validity of the instrument. A test – retest reliability was established using Pearson product moment correlation of r=0.93; 109 indicating that the instrument‟s reliability is high. Organisational Climate Scale The scale was constructed along the modified four points Likert-type scale. The scale was developed by Plus Delta Consulting. It contains 50 question items out of which 15 were selected within five organisational climate variables such as: physical working environment, work involvement, organisational communication, Organisational structure and worker-friendly policies which will determine the r value. For critical appraisal and in order to affirm appropriateness of the content and face validity of the instrument, the draft copies of the scale were given to experts in Departments of Adult Education, Educational Management, Economics, Sociology, Psychology and those in scale construction and psychometrics from University of Ibadan. The supervisor modified some items and restructured the content of the scale. A test-retest reliability was established using Pearson Product Moment Correlation of r = 0.89; indicating that the instrument‟s reliability is high. Organisational Culture Scale This was structured along four points Likert-type scale. The scale contains 15 question items developed by Holistic Management Pty. Ltd. (1999). It measures the organisational culture variables such as: recognition of excellence/reward system, value for employees, teamwork, creativity/innovation and adaptation to change which will determine the r value. For critical appraisal and in order to affirm the appropriateness of the content and face validity of the instrument, the draft copies of the scale were given to the experts in Departments of Adult Education, Educational Management, Economics, 110 Sociology, Psychology and those in scale construction and psychometrics from University of Ibadan. The supervisor modified some items and restructured the content of the scale. A test-retest reliability was established using Pearson Product Moment Correlation of r=0.76, indicating that the instrument‟s reliability is high. Quality of Work-Life Scale This was structured along four point Likert-type scale. The scale contains 20 question items developed by Santosh-tekumalla (2011). It measures the QWL variables such as: better compensation, health and safety, job security, opportunity for career advancement and development of human capacity which determined the r value. For critical appraisal and in order to affirm the appropriateness of the content and face validity of the instrument, the draft copies of the scale were given to the experts in Departments of Adult Education, Educational Management, Economics, Sociology, Psychology and those in scale construction and psychometrics from University of Ibadan. The supervisor modified some items and restructured the content of the scale. A test-retest reliability was established using Pearson Product Moment Correlation of r=0.68, indicating that the instrument‟s reliability is high. The second research instrument is Key Informant Interview (KII). This consists of 18 items self-developed oral questions which the respondents will be required to respond to. The 18-items scale was presented to the experts in order to ensure face and content validity of the instrument. A test-retest reliability was established with Pearson Product Moment Correlation of r = 0.72, indicating that the instrument‟s reliability is high. 111 3.5 Method of Data Administration A letter of introduction from the Head, Department of Adult Education facilitated the distribution and collection of data from 12 selected organisations in Ogun and Lagos states, Nigeria. A total of 1,362 copies of the scale were administered to the respondents. In order to make the administration of the scale less cumbersome, four trained research assistants were engaged. The researcher personally travelled to each of the 12 selected organisations in Ogun and Lagos states, Nigeria to deliver the scale to personnel departments. He spent quality time with each of the trained research assistants to explain the whole process of administration to them. Out of 1,362 copies of the scale administered, 1,274 copies were returned and properly completed. Thus, 1,274 were used for the analysis. 3.6 Method of Data Analysis The collected data were analysed using simple descriptive statistics of frequency counts, percentages, charts, Pearson Product Moment Correlation and Multiple Regression Analysis, while the qualitative data were content analysed. Multiple Regression Analysis was used to determine the relative individual and joint influence of demographic factors, organisational climate and culture on employees‟ QWL. 112 CHAPTER FOUR DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS This chapter contains the results and discussions from the analysis of data collected through research instruments. The findings are presented in charts, followed by their interpretations and discussions. This was done in three parts: the first dealts with the demographic information on the respondents used in this study, the second reports on the answer to research question while the third is on testing of hypotheses. 4.1 Demographic Characteristics of the Respondents The characteristics of the respondents for the study is one of the basic requirements for understanding issues on organisational climate and culture as determinants of employees‟ QWL in organisations in Ogun and Lagos states, Nigeria. In addition, the characteristics provide the demographic elements that define the appropriateness of the participants for the study. Fig. 4.1: Distribution of the respondents by age 1 13 Fig. 4.1 shows that 162 (12.6%) of the respondents are below 25 years, 629(49.4%) are between 26 and 35 years, 351 (27.6%) are between 36 and 45 years while 132 (10.4%) are above 45 years. The result reveals that ages within 26 and 35 years carried majority of the respondents used for the study. This implies that the respondents can be regarded as people who are energetic, mature, dedicated and trusted with given assignments in their workplace, thereby promoting efficiency. This finding is consistent with the Mathieu and Zajac (1990 in Adio and Popoola 2010) which affirm that demographic variables such as age is very important factor influencing employees‟ QWL. They stress further that an older person may be more committed and dedicated than a younger person who may change from one job to another at will. Fig. 4.2 shows the distribution of the respondents by gender. It shows that the male respondents numbered 816 (64%) while their female counterparts numbered 458 (36%). The result reveals there are more male than female respondents. This confirms the findings of Adio and Popoola (2010) which state that demographic factors like gender influences employees‟ QWL. 114 Fig 4.3 shows that majority of the respondents, 992 (78.0%) are married while single respondents accounted for 282 (22%). The marital status is necessary in order to determine their level of maturity. This is also to determine the socio-economic demands placed on them in relation to achieving the goals and objectives of the organisation. Married workers tend to show more level of dedication and commitment to their jobs because they are constrained by family commitment, and thereby being likely to be more committed and dedicated to their jobs. This finding corroborates that of Meyer and Allen (1984) in Meyer and Allen (2007) who report that married workers showed more loyality and commitment to work than single workers. 1 15 Fig. 4.4 on the educational qualifications of respondents reveals that 52 (4.1%) have primary school leaving certificate, 198 (15.5%) have WASC/GCE, 380 (29.8%) have OND/NCE, 546 (42.9%) have First Degree/HND while 98 (7.7%) have higher degrees. This result reveals that 1,274 (100%) respondents had one educational qualification or the other. Majority of the respondents had the required basic qualification to fill the questionnaires. This supports the findings of Adio and Popoola (2010) which assert that demographic variables such as academic qualifications are very important factor in employees‟ QWL since higher qualification may lead to job satisfaction and QWL. 1 16 Fig. 4.5 indicates that 340 (26.7%) have served 1 to 5 years, 544 (42.7%) have served 6 to 10 years, 136 (10.7%) have served 11 to 15 years, 131 (10.3%) have served 16 to 20 years, 72 (5.6%) have served 21 to 25 years, 39 (3.1%) have served 26 to 30 years while 12 (0.9%) have served 30 and more years. This indicates that most of the respondents were qualified and had enough experience to answer the questions appropriately. It also shows that their responses to the items on the questionnaires could be relied on as regards their length of service in the selected organisations. It is evident that a large number of respondents had worked for over ten years in their respective organisations. The presumption is that for a worker to be retained on the job implies that he/she is productive, efficient and contributing to the performance of the organisation. 1 17 Fig. 4.6 indicates that 42 (3.3%) earn between 0 and N30,000, 262 (20.6%) earn between N31,000 and N60,000, 374 (29.3%) earn between N61,000 and N90,000, 344 (27.0%) earn between N91,000 and N120,000, 164 (12.9%) earn between N121,000 and N150,000 while 88 (6.9%) earn above N150,000. This finding shows that a well paid worker will be positively influenced to perform well in an organisations. 118 4.2 Answer to Research Questions This section provides the analyses and discussion of findings for each of the objectives raised for the study as well as the research questions and hypotheses which they are anchored. 4.2.1 Research Question 1: To what extent do demographic factors, organisational climate and culture jointly influence QWL in organisations in Ogun and Lagos states, Nigeria. Table 4.1a below provides explanation for the understanding of the data collected on research question 1. Table 4.1a: Multiple Regression Analysis showing the joint influence of demographic factors, organisational climate and culture variables on QWL in organisations Model Sum of DF Mean Square F Sig. Squares Regression 127219.05 16 7951.191 277.685 .000 Residual 35992.805 1257 28.634 Total 163211.86 1273 2 2 R = .883, R = .779, Adj. R = .777 and Std. Error = 5.3511 Table 4.1a shows that the joint influence of demographic factors, organisational climate and culture on employees‟ QWL is significant at 0.05 level. F(16,1257) = 277.685, P < .05. The result also reveals the following values: (R = .883, 2 2 R = .779, Adj. R = .777). This implies that about 78% of the total variation of QWL is jointly accounted for by the combination of the independent variables. 1 19 Research Question 2: What is the relative influence of each individual independent variables (demographic factors, organisational climate and culture) on QWL? Table 4.1b below provides explanation for the understanding of the data collected on research question 2 Table 4.1b: Relative individual influence of demographic factors, organisational climate and culture variables on QWL in organisations Model Unstandardised Standardised T Sig. coefficient Coefficients B Std. Error Beta (Constant) 5.075 1.548 3.279 .001 Demographic factors 1.036 .459 .089 2.258 .024 Organisational climate .331 .033 .237 10.126 .000 Organisational culture .904 .032 .649 28.482 .000 The result from Table 4.1b shows the relative influence of each of the independent variables on the dependent variable and it shows that all the independent variables have significant influence on the dependent variable at 0.05 level. As shown on Table 4.1b, the most potent of all the independent variables is organisational culture (=.649, t = 28.482, P < .05), followed by organisational climate (=.237, t= 10.126 P<.05) while the least is demographic factors (=.089, t= 2.258 P<.05). The findings indicate that all the organisational culture variables: recognition of excellence/reward system, room/allow for creativity/innovation, teamwork, value for employees and adaptation to change have significant influence on employees‟ QWL in Nigerian organisations. This is in line with the findings of Lawler (1990) in Lawler (2005) that organisational culture plays a central role in QWL. Again, the 120 finding support Morgan (2009) in Chukwuemeka (2010) who observe that once management and workers understand the influence of culture on workplace behaviour, they sooon realise organisational change in cultural change and that all aspects of corporate transformation can be appreciated with organisation perspective in mind. The finding also supports Ashkenesy, Wilderom and Peterson (2000) who observe that a healthy organisational culture is a must for success within the organisation. This also supports Robbins (2000) in Schein (2008) who contend that the culture of an organisation has important impact on its performance. He posits further that culture is one aspect that is not tangible, yet, plays a very important role as regards the success of any business enterprise. This finding is also in line with the findings of Rosca, et al. (2000) that the satisfaction of employees‟ with conducive organisational climate enhances positive organisational outcome, such as: efficiency, productivity, organisational commitment and cohesiveness of workers and it reduces negative outcomes; turnover, deviant behaviour at work, stealing of company property and absenteeism. Similarly, Murray (1999) in Patricia et al (2005) observes that satisfaction with organisational climate is relevant because of its effects on productivity and the success of the company. Positive climate environment of an organisation has positive relationship with QWL and job satisfaction while negative climate condition relationship causes higher labour turnover and absenteeism. This finding is also in line with Pettitt and Ayers (2002) who observe that freedom and openness in information sharing among organisational members build mutual trust that helps create positive and effective organisational climate. This also confirms the findings established by Hellriegel and Slocum (2006) who observe that organisational climate influences the success of an organisation. 121 Poon and Ainuddin, (2006) state, if management does not take time to understand the climate and culture that motivates an organisation, problems are inevitable and that new procedures and activities will be very difficult to implement if they do not meet with the organisation‟s climate and culture. Managers can foster the development of a positive climate and culture by employing people who share the same values and vision the organisation represents. Ashkenasy, et al. (2000) opine that an effective means of keeping employees aligned with the values and goals of an organisation is by developing a climate and culture that encourage employees to be more focussed on their work; therefore, leaders must perform an active role within their organisation‟s climate and culture. They state further that to maintain a healthy organisational climate and culture, the leader has many factors that must be balanced. Maintaining a healthy organisational climate and culture may be viewed as an entire strategic operation in itself. A healthy organisational climate and culture is a must for success within the organisation. This affirms the findings of Bolhari, et al. (2011); Bharatti, et al. (2010); Mishra (1985) in Islam and Siengthai (2009) and Rose, et al. (2006) which state that demographic variables had positive relation with QWL. 1 22 4.2.2 Hypothesis 1: There is no significant relationship between each of the organisational climate variables and employee’s QWL. Organisational climate indices comprise physical working environment, organisational structure, work involvement, organisational communication and worker-friendly policies. Table 4.2 as well as the discussion on them gives a clear picture and understanding of the information collected from the respondents on objective 2 and Ho1. Table 4.2: The relationship between QWL, Physical working environment, Work involvement, Organisational structure, Organisational communication and Worker-friendly policies Quality of Physical Work Organisational Organisational Worker- work-life working involvement structure communication friendly environment policies Quality of work-life 1 Physical working .501** 1 environment Work .629** .549** ' 1 involvement Organisational .650** .444** .590** 1 structure Organisational .567** .463** .582** .750** 1 communication Worker-friendly .678** .503** .620** .683** .670** 1 policies Mean 60.3006 8.9992 8.6413 9.2402 9.5871 9.0495 S.D 11.323 2.9483 2.0456 2.0394 1.8690 1.9426 ** Sig. at .01 level Table 4.2 shows that all indices of organisational climate have significant relationship with employees‟ QWL: Physical working environment (r= .501, P<.05), Work involvement (r= .629, P<.05), Organisational structure(r=.650, P<.05), 123 Organisational communication(r=.567, P<.05) and Worker-friendly policies(r= .678, P<.05). The research finding shows there is high positive relationship between organisational climate variables and employees‟ QWL in Nigerian organisations. All the 12 work orgainsations chosen and the samples thereof, show the extent of organisational climate variables on employees‟ QWL. The findings of this study support Azril et al (2010) who discovered that harmonious and safe working environment would bring comfort to employees thus providing them a better environment to perform their best and that work environment has an impact on QWL while Darlene and Borman, (1989) in Azril et al (2010) establish that physical working environment can impact QWL and job satisfaction. Similarly, Akinyele (2010) found that quality of comfort derivable from work environment determines the level of satisfaction and productivity of workers. Workers‟ productivity cannot be optimal if the conditions of work environment are not favourable. He stresses further that improved work environment will enhance employee productivity. The findings also corroborate Soonhee (2002) who opines that people with high level of work involvement are likely to put more effort into their jobs and therefore tend to display high performance. He states further that researchers and human resource practitioners in the public and private sectors agree that work involvement improves employees‟ QWL and job satisfaction. Similarly, Mark and Nancy (1991) contend that employees with low levels of QWL and work involvement should be the most likely to leave the organisation voluntarily. The findings of the study also corroborate (Holtzhausen, 2002 and Litterst and Eyo, 1982 in Ayatse and Ikyanyon, 2012) that effective communication improves job 124 satisfaction and employees‟ QWL. In the same vein, the findings also support (Goris, 2007) in Ayatse and Ikyanyon, (2012) that communication improves employee job performance. The findings of the study is in line with Keiningham, Aksoy, and Hsu, (2006) in Oladeji and Omokhabi, (2010) that the existence of fair policies and proper management styles are among the most important aspects of QWL and performance of employees. These findings also support Obikoya and Adebanjo (2004) that supervisors and executives should consult with employees on matters affecting their interest before initiating action or establishing policies. 125 4.2.3 Hypothesis 2: There is no significant relationship between each of the organisational culture variables and employee’s QWL. Organisational culture indices comprise recognition of excellence/reward system, room for creativity/innovation, teamwork, value for employees and adaptation to change. Table 4.3 as well as the discussion that follows provide explanation for the understanding of the data collected on objective 3 and Ho2. Table 4.3: The Relationship between QWL, Recognition of Excellence/Reward System, Room for Creativity/ Innovation, Teamwork, Value for Employees and Adaptation to Change Quality of Recognition of Creativity/ Team work Value for Adaptation work-life excellence/ innovation employees to change reward system Quality of work-life 1 Recognition of .660** 1 excellence/Reward system Creativity/Innovation .624** .714** 1 Teamwork .679** .540** .537** 1 Value for .687** .539** .570** .613** 1 employees Adaptation to .768** .557** .534** .557** .584** 1 change Mean 68.3006 7.9812 8.7520 9.1586 9.0416 8.6735 S.D 11.3230 2.2838 2.0381 1.7642 1.8174 2.0925 ** Sig. at .01 level The results from Table 4.3 show that all the organisational culture variables have significant relationship with employees‟ QWL at 0.05 level. QWL and recognition of excellence/reward system(r=.660, P<.05), QWL and room for 1 26 creativity/innovation(r=.624, P<.05), QWL and teamwork(r=.679, P<.05), QWL and value for employees(r=.687, P<.05), QWL and adaptation to change(r=.768, P<.05). The research finding shows there is high positive relationship between organisational culture variables and employees‟ QWL in Nigerian organisations. All the 12 work organisations chosen for the research show the extent to which organisational culture variables had significant and positive effects on employees‟ QWL. The finding from the above shows a significant relationship between each of the organisational culture variables on QWL since p is less than 0.05. It shows that organisational culture variables significantly influence employees‟ QWL in Nigerian organisations. The findings of the research corroborate with the studies done by Wan, (2007); Martoler and Renzl (2007); and Davis (2001) in Azril et al. (2010) who conclude that remuneration is an important aspect if an organisation wants its employees to perform optimally. The findings also support Nutchanath, (2007) who indicates that the higher the income obtained by the workers, the higher the level of QWL. This implies that compensation and incentives are the most important factors for working conditions. Therefore, every worker must have adequate income for living in accordance with the social status of each individual because compensation and incentives are the result of work in which the employee can utilise or exchange with others in response to physical and mental human needs. The finding implies that reward is a motivating factor for employees‟ QWL because incentives and welfare packages have motivating effects on people at work. This finding is consistent with O‟Driscoll and Randall (1999) in Dike (1999) that rewards offered by an organisation would have a positive effect on employees‟ commitment and dedication towards their 127 work and organisation. The finding also supports Akinwale (1999) that reward systems are of great benefit to the employer and the employee. He stresses further that when rewards are provided, they induce loyalty in workers by being more dedicated and committed to their jobs. This implies that workers will put in their best by being punctual at work and contribution of ideas. He adds that when staff buses convey employees in different sections of an organisation to the workplace, the best in terms of employee contribution is attained and that productivity is usually high in organisations that provide good reward system. This implies that the aphorism “to whom much is given, much is expected” becomes the slogan of the workplace. Also, he stresses that when good facilities are provided, it allows for a conducive environment for workers‟ productivity. It is necessary, therefore, to consider the contributions and interests of workers in the administration of reward system in organisations. The findings of the research contradict Bhattcharyya, (2005) who concludes that workers do not manifest creativity/innovation because new ideas are not welcome from them. Similarly, the finding of the research indicates that a feeling should be created in the organisation that everyone is important at his/her workplace and should be trated with dignity. The findings of the research was in line with Harrison, (2010) in Azril et al (2010) who afirms that when employees and their work are valued, their satisfaction, QWL and productivity will rise. The finding supports Olise (2005) who indicates that respect for the dignity of the worker as a human being motivates and facilitates the employees‟ enormous potential for contribution and growth of the organisaiton. The finding also supports Rakesh (2006) that full credit should be given to employees for work well done. He stresses further that one of the deepest urges in human nature is the craving to be appreciated and that nothing builds up a person so 128 much as approbation and appreciation. Therefore, efforts should be made to gain the confidence of the worker to be seen as a member who is important to the organisation. The findings of the study also support Zain, et al. (2009) that teamwork is one of the important dimensions in influencing organisational success as well as achieving good relationship between workers and managers. They stress that an organisation that practices teamwork often experience increase in employees‟ commitment to the organisation. They also add that teamwork is important in facilitating employees‟ ability to work together in completing a task. This implies that dedicated, loyal and committed workers are comfortable working as a team rather than individually. The result also implies that teamwork is essential in the organisations because no single professional worker can deliver a complete product or service. Similarly, Rakesh (2006) also supports the finding of the study that even the ablest of persons cannot do everything alone. Team effort and team spirit is always required. Your own hardwork is of course important, but organisational and institutional base is essential. The most successful men are not those who burn the midnight oil themselves, but are able to lead, guide and inspire others to work for them. The findings of the research are also in line with studies conducted by Phattancheewapul and Ussahawanitichakit (2008); Hutchinson and Garstika (2006) in Azril et al (2010) who submit that if employees are left working alone without any support or supervision or working with colleagues/peers, their performance may be low, thus, it can affect the quality of their productivity. This implies teamwork is relevant to organisational productivity. In conclusion, the issue of organisational culture of an organisation has an important impact on its performance. The understanding of the importance of organisational culture is evident when most organisations acknowledge that an organisation‟s well-founded culture could contribute to its achievement in every 129 aspect of performance whether in economy, growth and financial. Most organisations view culture as a critical factor to organisational success and came up with a view of “the way we treat our people affects the way our people treat our customers and in turn our success which includes employees‟ performance” Such view has led the organisation to a number of human resources practices designed to enhance employees‟ feeling of being valued by the organisation and that organisational culture is a key aspect to the organisations‟s success or failure, that is, it shapes the way people act and interact and strongly influences how things get done. 1 30 4.2.4 Hypothesis 3: There is no significant relationship between each of the demographic factors and employee’s QWL. Demographic factors include age at work, gender, marital status, length of service, highest educational attainment and income. Table 4.4 as well as the discussion on them give a clear picture and understanding of the information collected from the respondents on objective 4 and Ho3. Table 4.4: The Relationship between QWL, Age, Gender, Marital Status, Educational Attainment, Length of Service and Income Quality of Age Gender Marital Educational Length of Income work-life status attainment service Quality of work- 1 life Age -.192** 1 Gender .106** -.165** 1 Marital status -.053 .408** -.026 1 Educational -.061* -.013 -.036 .005 1 attainment Length of -.122** .042 -.084** .076** .783** 1 service Income -.091** .013 -.046 . .027 .920** .911** 1 Mean 60.3006 2.3600 1.3600 1.7800 3.3500 2.3900 3.4600 S.D 11.3230 0.8300 0.4800 0.4200 0.9700 1.3700 1.2400 ** Sig. at .01 level, * Sig. at .05 level The result on Table 4.4 shows that only gender has positive significant relationship with employees‟ QWL at 0.05 level (r=.106, P < .05) while marital status has no significant relationship with employees‟ QWL (r= -.053, P>.05). On the contrary, the remaining demographic variables have negative but significant relationship with employees‟ QWL age (r= -.192, P <.05), educational attainment(r= 1 31 -.061, P<.05), length of service (r= -.122, P<.05), and income (r= -.091, P< .05). Findings of the research indicate that only gender has a positive significant relationship with QWL while there is a negative significant relationship between QWL and age, QWL and educational attainment, QWL and length of service, QWL and Income but none between QWL and marital status. Notably, the negative relationships observed imply that the higher the age, educational attainment, length of service and income of an employee, the lower the QWL. The interpretation is that as workers advance in age, the economic law of diminishing returns sets in and productivity decreases. This is probably why employers of labour in public and private organisations make their workers proceed on retirement from active service after the age of sixty. Similarly, advancement in educational attainment which may enhance promotion of workers may get to a level where such qualifications and certificates may no longer affect workers‟ promotion, so, there may be low QWL. Same also goes for length of service, at a certain point, boredom, frustration and tiredness set in and workers‟ level of productivity goes down drastically as most of his/her ideas are no longer relevant (outdated) and results in low QWL. Finally, it gets to a stage when income of an employee remains static for a period of time and it is directly affected by economic situation like inflation. This may make the employee uncomfortable and leads to low QWL. The current findings affirm Rose et al. (2006) who observe that QWL is influenced by demographic variables of the respondents. Similarly, Bolhari, et al. (2011) establish a significant relationship between demographic variables and QWL. The current finding is consistent with Bolhari, et al. (2011). They contend that age, work experience (length of service) have significant relationship with QWL 132 while they observe there is no significant relationship between gender (sex) and QWL. On the other hand, the finding contradicts Nanjundaswaraswamy (2013) that there are no significant relationship between demographic characteristics of employees and QWL. The finding also contradicts Rose, et al. (2006) and Shahril (1994) that marital status have significant relationship with QWL. Similarly, Bolhari et al (2011) contradicts the finding, observes that there is no significant relationship between gender (sex) and QWL. In the same vein, the finding contradicts Mishra, (1985 in Islam and Seiengthai, 2009) who observed that age and length of service do not affect QWL. Notably, the finding of the study supports the relationship between age, sex and length of service and QWL. However, the above was collaborated by the findings of Key Informant Interview (KII) conducted among the employees of the selected industries in Ogun and Lagos States, Nigeria. For instance, Employee A is of the opinion that maturity is an important factor to be considered in job placement and execution because of the seriousness and sense of responsibility that such employee will attach to the assigned work. Also, Employee B agreed that job description will depend on the gender of the workers, for example, some jobs are socially ascribed while others are biological. Therefore, assigning responsibilities and duties may depend on the nature of the job. Again, Employer C is of the opinion that married people are more dedicated, loyal and committed to work than single ones because they have responsibilities and dependants to take care of. Therefore, most organisations see marriage as an indication of employee‟s being responsible and committed to their jobs. 133 Further, Employee D agreed that the more a worker stays on a job, the more the experience he/she gathers, therefore, this makes him/her perform effectively well which can lead to adequate promotion and benefits. Besides, Employee E said that it is difficult to conclude that educational attainment promote workers‟ efficiency or reduces workers‟ performance because people who work in factories perform optimally, yet they have low academic attainment. Therefore, there are many cases where academic attainment do not lead to high performance. Lastly, Employee F agreed that a worker who earns good salary and benefits shows more commitment and loyalty to his/her job because the income serves as an incentive that motivates and drives him/her to work harder, but when the income is poor, it dampens the morale of the worker. 1 34 4.2.5: Hypothesis 4: There is no significant relationship between the QWL and high job performance/commitment Table 4.5 as well as the discussion that follows provide explanation for the understanding of the data collected on objective 5 and Ho4. Table 4.5: PPMC Analysis on the relationship between QWL and job performance/ commitment Variable Mean Std. N R P Remark Dev. Quality of work-life 60.3006 11.3230 1274 .689** .000 Sig. Job performance/Commitment 25.5863 05.0727 ** Sig. at .01 level Table 4.5 shows there is a significant relationship between QWL and job performance/commitment at 0 .05 level (r=.689, p < .05). Thus, it is inferred that job performance/commitment had positively influenced employees‟ QWL in this study. Premised on this, the null hypothesis is rejected. The finding shows there is high relationship between job performance/commitment and QWL in Nigerian organisations. This is consistent with Lau (2000) in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan (2013) that there is significant relationship between QWL and job performance. Again, this is in line with Azril et al (2010) who establish significant relationship between QWL and job performance. They are of opinion that in order to ensure the success of an organisation, the employees which are the engine must be focused. This engine (employees) must be serviced accordingly to ensure they give their best. Employees whose needs are not met by the organisation always demonstrate their dissatisfaction by performing below their actual ability. Similarly, this finding corroborates Almalki, Fitzgerald 135 and Clark (2012) that QWL has been found to influence the commitment of health professionals. In other words, the above statement by these researchers connotes there is a significant relationship between QWL and job performance/commitment. This finding is also in line with Nwachukwu, (2000) in Nwachukwu, (2007) who observes that a manager‟s attitude to work, his/her quest for excellence and his continued expectation of higher standards for excellence influence the performance of his subordinates. Nwachukwu also states that: “A manager that accepts low quality or mediocre performance from employees where quality work is required, directly encourages substandard performance”. Similarly, Nwachukwu, (2007) states, employees are motivated to improve performance through opportunities for training and skill development and employee involvement in process design and decision- making, through direct contact with customers and a strong emphasis on teamwork and mutual support. He states further that job performance can lead to job satisfaction and that an average employee looks forward to the day he/she will earn promotion, promotion is a reward for past performance, an encouragement to help him continue to excel, an individual‟s effort, abilities, trait and task perception will determine his/her performance. The findings corroborate Ashoob (2006) in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan (2013) that there is a significant relationship between QWL and organisational commitment. Similarly, Asgan, Mohammad Hadi and Dadashi as well as Mohammad Ali (2011) in Gayathiri and Ramakrishnan (2013) prove that there is a significant relationship between QWL and organisational commitment. Also, the findings corroborate Hosseini and Musavi, (2009) that there is a significant relationship between QWL and Organisational commitment; however they found no significant relationship between dimensions of life quality, fair and enough 136 payment with affective commitment and normative commitment. The findings also support Mowday (1979) in Mohd Hanefah, Zain, Matzain and Ismail (2003) who suggests that employees who exhibit high organisational commitment are happier at work, spend less time away from their jobs and are less likely to leave the organisation. He states further that better work experience may nurture employee‟s commitment to their organisations; thus, it is assumed there is a strong positive relationship between QWL and organisational commitment, meaning that the higher the QWL, the stronger the organisational commitment of employees. 1 37 CHAPTER FIVE 5.0 SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 Summary This chapter presents the summary, conclusion, policy implications, recommendations and suggested areas for further research as well as limitations to the study. The primary purpose of this study is to establish the extent to which demographic factors, organisational climate and culture are determinants of employees‟ QWL in organisations in Ogun and Lagos states of Nigeria. This is with view to establish the relevance and roles of demographic factors, organisational climate and culture in an organisation which will serve as predictors of performance which eventually leads to productivity. The research is presented in five chapters. Chapter one dealt with the introduction, background to the study, statement of the research problem, objectives, significance, research question, scope of the study and operational definitions of terms/concepts. Chapter two was on the literature review and theoretical framework. The literature review assisted in exploring past efforts and recent ones while the theoretical framework explained the relationship between the variables under study, that is, the theoretical framework provided propositions on which the study was premised and the conceptual model used was predicated on the theoretical framework. The three theories reviewed were Need Satisfaction Theory, Two-factor theory (motivator-hygiene theory) and Affect Theory. The chapter concluded with the hypotheses formulated for the study. Chapter three of the study dealt with the research methodology which 138 comprised the research design, population, sample and sampling techniques, research instruments, validity and reliability of the instruments, procedure for administration of questionnaire and methods of data analysis. Chapter four presented findings and discussions. The data collected were analysed using descriptive statistics of simple percentages and also the inferential statistics of Pearson Product Moment Correlation (PPMC) and multiple regression analysis were used to answer research question and to test the hypotheses of the study at .05 alpha level. The major findings of the study are:  Demographic factors, organisational climate and culture correlated significantly and positively with QWL at (P<.05).  There is significant relationship between each of the organisational climate variables and employees‟ QWL in Nigerian organisations.  There is significant relationship between organisational culture variables and employees‟ QWL in Nigerian organisations.  There is significant relationship between demographic factors and employees‟ QWL except marital status.  There is a significant relationship between job performance/commitment and QWL.  There is a general concensus that majority of workers put on negative attitudes to work as they are not committed, dedicated and loyal.  Generally, it was observed that majority of workers may not have adequate benefit of regular promotion since performance and productivity are used as criteria for promotion of workers especially in public organisations in Ogun and Lagos states, Nigeria.  Conducive working environment with adequate facilities which could 139 motivate and bring job satisfaction was not available in most organisations in Ogun and Lagos states, Nigeria. In conclusion, the chapter five of the study dealt with summary, conclusion, recommendations and implications of the study as well as suggestions for further studies. 5.2 Conclusion In view of the findings from this study, it is evident that demographic factors, organisational climate and culture will impact employees‟ QWL in organisations. Notably, there was a general consensus that a good number of workers in the public sectors covered in the study (Ministry of Health) are not dedicated, loyal and committed in terms of productivity. That is why, Worral and Cooper, (2006) report that a low level of well-being at work is estimated to cost about 5 to10% of Gross National Product (GNP) per annum in Nigeria. In addition, the government and employers should ensure workers are properly rewarded, valued, consulted, empowered and motivated to achieve the desired organisational goals and to improve employees‟ QWL in Nigeria organisations. 5.3 Limitations to the Study This study covered two states in South Western Nigeria. The two states are Ogun and Lagos. The difficult location of some companies was a serious constraint on the movement of the researcher. The logistic problem of traffic jam also affected the time spent on the field as it was unavoidably extended. Again, a number of private organisations such as First Bank, Plc; Berger Paints, Plc, Lafarge Cement, Plc and Sona Breweries, Plc were not forthcoming in releasing information with the fear of exposing their organisations, claiming it was against their ethics. Meanwhile, it is 140 pertinent to remark that all identified problems mentioned did not have any negative effect on the quality of the study as the results are cogent and empirical. 5.4 Implications of the study The result of the study has implications for employers and employees as well as organisations in general. The result shows that majority of workers in Nigerian organisations put on negative attitudes to work as they are not committed, dedicated and loyal. Since performance and productivity is one of the criteria that are used for the promotion of workers in private and public organisations in Nigeria, it implies majority of the sampled workers may not have the benefit of regular promotion. Therefore, workers that want positive change of job status with attached benefits should be more productive in terms of output. The result of the research shows that a conducive working environment with adequate facilities would do everything possible to motivate and bring job satisfaction thereby having significant influence on organisational productivity. The result also shows that marital status has no significant relationship with employees‟ QWL. The findings also show that organisational policy influences employees‟ QWL. This has implications for the employers and the management hence, if there are no standard rules and regulations that can encourage and retain employees it can result to high labour turnover with adverse implications for an organisation. The findings and recommendations can also form a baseline information for further information for those who want to carry out further studies in this area. 141 5.5 Recommendations The following recommendations are made premised on the findings of the research.  Employers should employ workers who are energetic and mature to work, and that people (employees) should be allowed to participate in managing their workplace and take part in decision-making on matters affecting them and their organisations for better performance. At the same time, organisations should encourage their employees to work with people or group instead of working alone which can enhance productivity.  Employers should respect and give responsibilities to married people than single ones because they are more reliable when it comes to dedication and commitment.  Employers should encourage and support employees in acquiring higher levels of education which can lead to high productivity and thus improved performance and enhanced income.  Emloyers should motivate, value, reward, consult and empower employees so that optimal and higher productivity can be attained in Nigerian organisations.  The goal of the organisation should be well defined and it should be known to everyone including the lower level employees.  There should be minimum secrecy about decisions, once we accept the principle of participative management (work involvement).  Management should give full credit since one of the deepest urges in human nature is the craving to be appreciated.  Management should ensure physical conducive environment in the following ways: continuous, committed and concerted housekeeping, safety provisions and promotion, providing good working environment and occupational health and medical services. 142  Management should attract, retain and motivate employees on the right quality needed to achieve the corporate objectives.  Management should give room for both upward and downward communication flow within the organisation so that employees will be empowered with correct information and not base their actions and decisions on rumours.  Management should always see to the welfare of the worker so that they will be more loyal, dedicated and committed to their job for enhancement of improved productivity.  A feeling should be created in the organisation that everyone is important at his/her place of work and should be dealt with dignity. 5.6 Suggestions for further study This study does not in any way claim to have exhausted the investigation of all variables that may be used for this study, since it is virtually impossible to investigate all the variables that could affect employees‟ QWL in organisation, the following are therefore suggested for further studies;  The study can cover either the whole of South-West or the whole country instead of limiting it to Ogun and Lagos states.  The study can lay more emphasis on what most of the employees consider to be factors or forces that affect their QWL.  There may be other determinants of QWL apart from organisational climate and culture, thus, job characteristics may be one among them.  A modified 5-point Likert scale that will give room for neutrality of response by respondents could be used in further research in order to establish if the same results would be generated or not. 143 REFERENCES Achal Khanna, 2007. Job satisfaction and performance retrieved from http.www.academic journals on March 6, 2010. Adeleke, A. 2004. Management: concepts and applications. Lagos: Concept Publications Limited. Adeniyi, E.O. 2000. Participating management, job satisfaction and commitment among secondary teachers in Ogun State, Nigeria; Ph.D. Thesis, university of Ibadan, Ibadan. Adhikari, D.R. and Gautam, D.K. 2010. Labour legislations for improving quality of work-life in Nepal. International Journal of Law and Management, 52.1:40-53. Adio, G. and Popoola, S. O. 2010. Demographic variables and self-efficacy as factors influencing career commitment of librarians in federal university libraries in Nigeria. Accessed from http://wwwweb pages.uidaho.edu on September 14, 2012. Adkins, B. and Caldwell, D. (2004). Firm or subgroup culture: Where does fitting in matter most? Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 25.8:969-978 Ahmed, P.K. 1998. Culture and climate for innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 1.1:30-43 Accessed from http.www.wiki.com on March 6, 2012. Ajila, C. and Abiola, A. 2004. Influence of reward on workers performance in an organisation. Journal of Social Sciences 8.7:12. Retrieved from http:www.krepublishers.com on July 8, 2010. Akdare, M. 2006. Improving quality of work-life: implications for human resources. The Business Review, Cambridge: 6.1:173-177. Accessed online on July 8, 2010. Akintayo, M.O. 1985. Industrial democracy and labour management relations in Nigeria. The Nigerian Journal of Industrial Education and Labour Relations. Nigeria: Ibadan University Press. Akinwale, E.J.A 1999. Human resources management: an overview. Lagos: Concept Publications Limited. Akinyele S.T. 2007. A Critical Assessment of Environmental Impact on Workers Productivity in Nigeria. Res. J. Bus. Manage. 1.1: 50-61. Akinyele, S.T. 2010. The influence of work environment on workers productivity: a case of selected oil and gas industry. Lagos, Nigeria. African Journal of Business Management, 4.3: 299-307, March 2010. Accessed online at http.//www.academic journals on 14th September, 2012. 144 Akyay, U. and Gonca, K. 2009. A study into organisational commitment and job involvement: an application towards the personnel in the central organisation for Ministry of Health in Turkey. Ozeam Journal of Applied sciences, 2.1: Al- Shammari. 1994. An analysis of the organisational climate and effectiveness in Jordanian industrial companies. Dirasat, 21.2:43-58. Allen, N.J. and Meyer, J.P. 1991. The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organisation. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63:1-18. Almalki, M.J., FitzGerald, G. and Clark, M. 2012. The relationship between quality of work-life and turnover intention of primary health care nurses in Saudi Arabia. rd Assessed online at http:// www.biomedcentral.com on 23 May, 2013 Amabile, T.M. 2004. Innovation and creativity quotes. Retrieved on July 27, 2004 from http://www.innovationtools.com Andiviopoulos, C. 2001. Determinants of organisational creativity: a literature review. Management Decision, 39.10:834-840. Accessed from http.www.wikipedia.com on February 10, 2012. Andrea, S., Laederach, E.M. and Affolter, A. 2010. Trends and innovation for the postal markets conference. Retrieved from http. Wikipedia. Anikpo, M.O.C. 1984. Identifying the needs of the Nigerian worker. In Managing the Nigerian workers, Eds., Longman, Lagos, Nigeria. Aremu, S. and Ahmed, A. 1996. Job satisfaction and commitment effects on productivity among old and new generation bank workers in Nigeria. African Journal of Labour Studies. Armstrong, H. 2004. Reward management (online), London, Kogon Page, Available from http;//site.ebrary.com/lib/staffordshone/doc./id=10084445 & pp. 81 Accessed on July 11, 2007. Armstrong, H. 2006. Handbook of human resource management practice, (online) 12th edition, London, Kogan page, available from http;// site ebrary.com/lib/Staffordshire/doc/id=10124811&pp.281. Armstrong, M. 1991. Personnel management practice, 4th Ed. London: Kogan Ltd, 270. Aromolaran, E.A. 2000. Fundamentals of management. Lagos: Published by BVL Print Technologies. Ashkanasy, N. M., Wilderom, C. P. M., and Peterson, M. F. 2000. Handbook of organisational culture and climate. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage. 145 Ashoob, T. 2006. Study of the relationship between quality of work-life and organisational commitment of the high schools of Gonbad-e-Kavus city. Masters Dissertation. Ashrafi, B 1995. Factors influencing organisational commitment to staff Eastern Alborz Coal Company, State Management, Tarbiat Modarres University, thesis M.A. Askari, M, Seyadat, S.A & Arizi, H.R., 2003. Compared the relationship between organisational commitment and mental health and school administrators in public and private schools in Tehran, Islamic Azad University Journal (Isfahan), No. 20 and 19 Aswathapa 1997. Human resources and personal management. New Delhi, Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing company Ltd. Ayatse, F. A. and Ikyanyon, D.N. 2012. Organisational communication, job stress and citizen behaviour of IT employees in Nigerian universities. Journal of Business Administration Research, 1.1. Accessed on line at htpp://dx.doi.org.on14th September, 2012. Ayatse, F.A. 2005. Management information system: A global perspective. Makurdi: Oracle. Ayeni, C.O., Popoola S.O. and Adeyinka, T. 2007. Work motivation, job satisfaction and organisational commitment of library personnel in academic and research libraries in Oyo State, Nigeria. Accessed online from http://www/Wikipedia.com on July 11, 2007. Azril, M.S.H,, Jegak, U., Asiah, M., Azman, A.N., Bahaman, A.S., Jamilah, O. and Thomas K. 2010. Can quality of work-life affect work performance among government agriculture extension officers? A case from Malasia. Accessed from http.www.wikipedia.com on December 8, 2011. Baba, V.V. and Jamal, M. 1991. Routinisation of job context and job content as related to employees quality of working life: a study of psychiatric nurses. Journal of Organizational Behaviour 12:379-386. Bailey,. N. I. 2002. The relationship between organisational climate and job satisfaction as reported by branch campus executive officers in multicampus community college systems. Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida. Baleghixadeh, S. and Gordani, Y. 2012. Motivation and quality of work life among secondary school English Foreign Learning teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education 32.7. Accessed from http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte on March 6, 2014. Beerfields, S. 2003. Quality of working life. Acciirt working paper 56. University of Sydney www.aciirt.com Berry, L.M. 1997. Psychology at work. San Francisco. Mc Grau Hill companies. 146 Bhanugopan, R. and Fish, A. 2008. The impact of business crime on expatriate quality of work-life in Papua New Guinea. Australian Human Resources Institute, 46.1:68-84. Bharathi, P.S., Umaselvi, M. and Kumar, N.S. 2010. Quality of work-life: perception of college teacher. Accessed form http.www.wikipedia.com on August 6, 2010. Bhattacharyya, S. 2005. Creativity and innovation for competitive excellence in organisations. Accessed from http:www.wikipedia.com on May 12, 2012. Blunt, P. and Popoola, O. 1985. Personnel management in Africa. London: Longman. Bolhari, A., Rezaeean, A.; Bolhari, J., Bairamzadeh, S.; and Soltan, A.A. 2011. The relationship between quality of work-Life and demographic characteristics of information technology staff. Journal of International conference on computer communication and Management. Accessed from http.//www.wikipedia.com on th 14 September, 2012. Brenner P. 2004. Workers physical surrounding. Impact Bottom Line Accounting: Smarts Pros. Com Buchholz, W. 2001. Open communication climate. Retrieved January 18, 2009, [Online] Available: http://www.pdx.edu/media/w/o/Workplace.pdf Burruss, J. 1996. Managing for motivation and performance improvement. In N. Boulter, M. Dlziel and J. Hill (Eds.), People and competences: The route to competitive advantage (pp. 91-103). London: Kogan Page. Caldwell D 2001. Employee motivation under merit systems. Public Personnel. Management, 7:65 Calori, R. and Sarnin, P. 1991 Corporate Culture and economic Performance: A French Study. Organisational Culture. 12:49-74. Cameron, K. S. and Quinn, R. E. 1999, Diagnosing and Changing Organisational Culture: Based on the Competing Values Framework, Prentice Hall, ISBN 978-0-201-33871-3. Campbell, S.L., Fowles, E. R., and Weber, B.J. 2004. Organisational structure and job satisfaction in public health nursing. Public Health Nursing, 21.6:564-571. Candace, W., Vanc, A. and Stafford, G. 2008. Internal communication, information satisfaction and sense off community: The effect of personal influence. Retrieved from http://www.instituteforpr.org/files/uploads/whitevancstafford.pdf Carayon, P., Haims, M.C., Brunette, N.J. and Hoonakker, P. 2002. Quality of working life among women and minorities in the information technology workforce: a pilot study. Accessed on line on February 12, 2014. 147 Carayon, P., Hoonakker, P., Marchand, S. and Schwarz, J. 2003. Job characteristics and quality of working life in the IT workforce: the role of gender. Accessed on line on February 12, 2014. Casio, W.F. 1998. Managing human resources: productivity, quality of work life. Journal of Nursing Economics 23.5:319-326. Accessed online on March 6, 2010. Casio, W.F. 2003. Managing human resources: productivity, quality of work life, profits. 6th Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill. Cecunc, E. 2004. Improving employee productivity in regulating industries. New York: Academic Press. Chan, W.K. and Wayatt, A.T. 2007. Quality of work life: a study of employee in Shanghai, China. Asia Pacific Business Review, 13.4:501-517. Accessed online on April 6, 2011. Chang, F. and Tang, C. 2009: Quality of Work-life as a Mediator between Emotional Labour and Work Family Interference”, Springer Science Business Media, LLC. Journal of Management Sciences, 5.3:8-20. Accessed online on February 12, 2011. Chappell, S.K. 1995. The relationship between organisational climate and job satisfaction as reported by community college chief instructional officers. Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville. Charles-Pauvers, B. and Wang, Z. 2006. Organisational Commitment Examining the Case of China. (Online). Informaworld. Available from: http://www.informaworld.com.html. [Accessed 24 March 2007] Chelte, A.F. 1983. Organisational commitment, job satisfaction and quality of work- life. U.M.I. Dissertation Information Service. Chen, J., Silverthorne, C. and Hung, J. 2006. Organisational communication, job stress, organisational commitment and job performance of accounting professional in Taiwan and America. Leadership and Organisational Development Journal, 23.4:242-247. http://dx.doi.org. Accessed on July 6, 2010. Chen, T.Y., Chang, P.L., and Yeh, C.W. 2004. An investigation of career development programmes, job satisfaction, professional development and productivity: The case of Taiwan. Human Resource Development International, 7.4:441-463. Chukwuemeka, N. 2010. Human resource management: a practical guide. Nsukka: Great Ap Express Publishers Ltd. Clarke, S., Sloane, D. and Aiken, L. 2002. Effects of hospital staffing and organisational climate on needle stick injuries to nurses. American Journal of Public Health. 148 Collins, M.A. and Amabile, T.M. 1999. Motivation and creativity. In Sternberg, R.J. Ed. Handbook of creativity, p. 297-312. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Concha, A. 2009 The impact of role stress on workers‟ behaviour through job satisfaction and Organisational commitment. International Journal of Psychology, Spain. Connell, J. and Hannif, Z., 2009. Call centres, quality of work-life and human resources management practices – An in-house/out-sourced comparison. Employee Relations, 31.4:363-381. Considine, G. and Callus, R. 2002. The quality of work life Australian employees – the development of an index. Working Paper 73. Sydney: ACIRRT, University of Sydney. Accessed online on March 6, 2010. Cooren, F. 1999. The organising property of communication. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Crampton, S.M., Hodge, J.W. and Mishra, J.M. 1998. The informal communication network: Factors influencing grapevine activity. Public Personnel Management, 27.4:569-584. Retrieved online on July 8, 2010. Cumming, N.W. 1993. The theory and practice of personnel management. London: Butterworth Heinemann Limited. Danna, K. and Griffin, R.W. 1999. Health and well-being in the work-place. Journal of Management. – retrieved from http.llen. urikipedia. Org./wiki/quality of work-life. Darabi, M., Mehdizadeh, A.H., Arefi, M. and Ghasemi, A.K. 2013. Relationship between quality of work life and job satisfaction on school teachers in Kermanshah. Journal of Educational and Management Studies 3.4:508-513. Accessed from www.science.line.com on March 6, 2014. Darlene, M.O. and Borman, W.C. 1990. More evidence on relationships between the work environment and job performance. Journal of Human Performance, 2:113- 130. Dastmalchian, A., Blyton, P., and Adamson, R. 1991. The climate of workplace relations. London: Routledge. Dave C., Dault M and Priest A. 2007. Effective Teamwork in Health. Accessed from htpp.www.wikipedia.com on January 10, 2010. Davies, D., Taylor, R. and Salovey, L. 2001. The role of appraisal, remuneration and training in improving staff relation in Western Australian accommodation industry: A comparative study. Journal of European Industrial Training, 25:366-373. 149 Davis, L.E. 1983. Learning from the design of new organisation. The quality of working life and the 1980s. H.F. Kolodny and H. Van Beinum Eds. New York: Praeger Publishers. P. 65-86. De Cuyper, N. 2009. Job insecurity and employability in fixed-term contractors, agency workers, and permanent workers: Associations with job satisfaction and affective organisational commitment", Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, US. Accessed online on March 6, 2011. Debrentani, U. and Kleinschmidt, E.J. 2004. Corporate culture and commitment: impact on performance of international new product development programmes. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21:309-333. Denison, D. 1996. What is the difference between organisational culture and organisational climate? A native‟s point of view on a decade of paradigm wars. Academy of Management. Desantis, V. and Durst, E. 1996. Comparing job satisfaction among public and private sector employees. American Review of Public Administration Journal, 26.3. th Dessler, G. 2008. Human resource management (11 ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson, Prentice Hall. Dike, V.E. 1999 Reward system and labour productivity. Accessed from th http.//www.wikipedia.com on 10 September, 2012. Dike, V.E. 1999. Reward system in Nigeria: worker morale and productivity. th Accessed from http.//www.wikipedia.com on 10 September, 2012. Dirani, K. and Kuchinke, 2011. P. Job satisfaction and organisational commitment: validating the Arabic satisfaction and commitment questionnaire (ASCQ), testing the correlations, and investigating the effects of demographic variables in the Lebanese banking sector, Doloi, H. 2005. Analysis of incentivised remuneration schemes in construction industries. Proceeding of the 22nd International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction, September 11-14, Ferrara-Italy pp. 1-7. Donadio, P.J. 1992. Capturing the principles of motivation. Business Credit, 40. Donald, C. 2005. Quality of working life indicators in Canadian health care organisations: A tool for healthy health care workplaces. Journal of Occupational Medicine, 5.1:54-59. Drory, A. 1993. Perceived political climate and job attitudes. Organisational Studies, 14, 59-71. Easton, S. and Van Laar, D. 2013 User Manual for the Work-Related Quality of Life (WRQoL) Scale. University of Portsmouth. UK 150 Efraty, D. and Sirgy, M.J. 1990. The effects of quality of working life (QWL) on employee behavioural responses. Social Indicators Research, 22.1:31-47. Accessed online on March 6, 2010. Elizur, D. and Shye, S. 1990. Quality of work life and its relation to quality of life. Applied Psychology: An International Review. 39.3:275-291. Ellis, N. and Pompli, A. 2002. Quality of working life for nurses. Commonwealth, development of health and ageing, Canberra. Retrieved from Wikipedia, free encyclopaedia on June 8, 2010. Elywood, J. 1999. Models for production and operation design. Berkeley University of California Press. Fink, J. 1983 Designing & Managing Organisations, Richard D. Irwin Inc., Homewool. Finlay, W., Martin, J.K., Roman, P.M., and Blum, T.C. 1995. Organisational structure and job satisfaction. Administration and Society, 27.3:427-450. Fisher, B. 2006. How to motivate employees in tough financial times. Journal of National Research Bureau, 67.4:9-11. Accessed from th http.//www.wikipedia.com on 10 September, 2012. Fisher, D.C. 2003. Why do lay people believe that satisfaction and performance are correlated? Possible sources of a common sense theory. Journal of Organisational Behaviour 24.6:753-777. Accessed online on July 8, 2010. Forehand, G.A. and Gilmer, B.V.H. 1964. Environmental variation in studies of organisational behaviour. Psychological Bulletin. 62:361-382. Ganguly, Rochjita M. 2010. Quality of work life and job satisfaction of a group of university employees. Asian Journal of Management Research, 209-216. Retrieved online on April 8, 2011. Gayathiri, R. and Ramakrishnan, L. 2013. Quality of work-life-linkage with job satisfaction and performance. International Journal of Business and Management Invention. 2.1:1-8. Accessed from www.ijbmi.org. on February 12, 2014. Geartner, S. 1999. Structural determinants of job satisfaction and organisational commitment in turnover models. Human Resource Management R, 9.4:479-493. Accessed online on June 8, 2010. Gershon, R., Stone, P. and Bakken, S. 2004. Measurement of organisational climate and culture.Journal of Nursing Administration. Accessed from th http.//www.wikipedia.com on 14 September, 2012. Gilsdorf, J.W. 1998. Organisational rules on communication: How employees are and are not leaving the ropes. Journal of Business Communication, 35.2:173-201. Accessed online on June 6, 2010. 151 Glazer, S. 2004. A study of the Relationship between Organisational Commitment and Human Values in Four Countries. Human Relations Journal 57:323-345. Periodicals Press. Glueck, W.F. 1979. Foundations of personnel. Business Publication Inc. Golkar, H. 2013. The relationship between quality of work life and job satisfaction: a survey of human resource managers in Iran. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 5.8. Accessed from ijcrb.webs.com on March 6, 2014. Goris, J.R. 2007. Effects of satisfaction with communication on the relationship between individual-job congruence and job performance/satisfaction. Journal of Management Development, 26.28:737-752. Accessed online on July 8, 2010. Goris, J.R., Vaught, B.C. and Pettit, J.D. 2000. Effects of communication direction on job performance and satisfaction: A moderated regression analysis. Journal of Business Communication, 37:348-368. Gratto, F.J. 2001. The relationship between organisational climate and job satisfaction for directors of physical plants. Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida. Greene, R.J. 1991. A 90 model for performance management. Human Resources Magazine, 62-63. Guffy, M.E., Rhoddes, K. and Rogin, P. 2005. Business Communication. Toronto: South-Western America. Hajieh, R.F. and Shahrnaz, V., S. 2013 Study of Relationship of Quality of Work-Life (QWL) and organisational commitment. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business. 4:9. Hamidi, F. and Mohamadi, B. 2012. Teachers‟ quality of work-life in secondary schools. International Journal of Vocational and Technical Education, 4.1:1-5. Handy, C. 1993. Understanding Organisations. London. Penguin Books. Hardin, E. 1960. Computer automation, work environment and employee satisfaction: A case study. Journal of Industrial Labour Relations Review, 13:559-567. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/psss/2520205. Harrison, R. 1993. Diagnosing Organisational Culture – A Trainers Manual. Amsterdam: Pfeiffer & Company. Harrison, R. and Stokes, H. 1993. Diagnosing Organisational Culture. Amsterdam; Pfeiffer and Company. Havlovic, S.J. 1991. Quality of work life and human resource outcomes. Journal of Industrial Relations, 30.3:469-479. Accessed online on March 6, 2010. Hector, C., Gibson, J. and Zorn, T.E. (Jnr) 2009. New technology and the quality of working life in New Zealand. Accessed online on February 12, 2014. 152 Hellriegel, D. Slocum, Jr. J. W. and Woodman, R.W. 2001. Organisational Behaviour. 9th Edition. Sydney: Thomson Learners. Herscovitch, L., and Meyer, J.P. 2002. Commitment to organisational change: Extension of a three-component model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87.3:474-487. nd Herzberg, F. Mausner, B. and Snyderman, B. 1959. The motivation to work. 2 Ed. New York: John Wiley. Hofstede, G. 1990. Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in work- related Values. Beverley Hills California: Sage. Hofstede, G. H. 2001 Culture‟s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviours, Institutions, and Organisations Across Nations. Sage Publications. Holistic Management Pty Ltd 1999. Organisational culture questionnaire. Retrieved from http://www.wikipedia.com on June 8, 2010. Holtzhausen, D. 2002. The effect of divisionalised and decentralised organisational structure on a formal internal communication function in a South African Organisation. Journal of Communication Management, 6.4:323-339. Accessed online on June 6, 2010. Hong, A.M. 1995. Impact of employee benefits on work motivation and productivity, (online) available from http:www.emeraldinsight.com./insight/view content item do? Content type = article and content Id = 141245, Accessed on June 19, 2007. Hosseini, M. and Musavi, Z. 2009. The Relationship between quality of work-life and organisational commitment, Department of Physical Education, Isfahan University, thesis Ph.d. Hoy, W.K., Smith, P.A., and Sweetland, S.R. 2003. The Development of the Organisational Climate Index for High Schools: Its Measure and Relationship to Faculty Trust. HIGH SCHOOL JOURNAL. 86, 38-49. Hsu, M. and Kernohau, G. 2006. Dimension of hospital nurses‟ quality of working life. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 54.1:120-131. rd Huse, E.F., and Cummings, T.G. 1985. Organisational development and change. 3 Ed. St Paul, Minnesota: West Publishing. Hutchinson, S. and Garstika, M.L. 2006. Sources of perceived organisational support: Goal setting and feedback. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 26:1351- 1366. Hyzzard, J. 2003. The convergence of the quality of working life and competitiveness. A current Swedish literature review, National Institute for Working Life, Stockholm. 153 Ilesanmi, O.A. 2012. Job design and improved quality of work-life of Nigerian secondary school teachers. Accessed from htpp://www.(Wikipedia.com.on14th September, 2012). Islam, M.Z. and Siengthai, S. 2009. Quality of work-life and organisational performance: empirical evidence from Dhaka export Processing zone. Retrieved from Wikipedia. com on July 8, 2010. Jagannathan, L. and Akhila, P.R. 2009. Predictors of quality of work life of sales force in direct selling organisations, The IUP Journal of Management Research, VIII.6:51-59. Accessed online on June 10, 2010. James, L.R. and Jones, A.P. 1974. Organisational climate: A review of theory and research. Psychological Bulletin, 81:1096-1112. Jayaratne, G. and Reade C., 2002 Team Composition and Effectiveness: A Research Note on the Application of Belbin‟s Team Role Theory to a Sri Lankan Garment Manufacturer, Sri Lankan Journal of Management, 7.1&2:45-65. John, P. and Natalie, J. 2004. Employee commitment survey. Academic Users Guide. Johnson, J.K.M., Pitt-Catsouphes, M., Besen, E., Smyer, M. and Natz-Costa, C. 2008. Quality of employment and life satisfaction: a relationship that matters for older workers. A research centre supported by the Alfred O. Sloan Foundation. Accessed on March 6, 2014. Johnson, S.K. 1999 A Longitudinal Study of Quality of Work-life and Business Performance, South Dakota Business Review, http://www.phoenixleadership.come, accessed on 12-07-06. Judge, T.A., Bono, J.E., Thoresen, C.J. and Patton, G.K. 2001. The job satisfaction- job performance relationship; a qualitative and quantitative Review. Journal of American Psychological Association, Inc. 127.3. Kahn, R. 1981. Work and health. New York: Wiley. Kalva, S.K. and Ghash, S. 1984. quality of work-life: a study of associated factors. The Indian Journal of Social Work, 45-54. Kandasamy, I. and Sreekumar, A. 2008. WRKLFQNAL: a tool for measuring quality of work-life. Accessed from http.www.wikipedia.com.onJuly23,2011. Kandlousi, N.S., Ali, A.J. and Abdullahi, A. 2010. Organisational citizenship behaviour in concern of communication satisfaction: the role of the formal and informal communication. International Journal of Business and Management, 5.10:51061. Accessed online on June 6, 2010. Kara, D. 2012. Gender differences n perceptions of employee quality of working life indicators in Five Star Hotels in Turkey. International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, 2.4. Accessed from www.hrmars.com/journals on March 6, 2014. 154 Karia, N. and Ahmad, Z.A. 2000. Quality practices that pay: Empowerment and teamwork. Malaysian Management Review, 35.2:66-36. Keiningham, T.L., Aksay, L. and Hsu, M. 2006. A Longitudinal analysis of customer satisfaction and share of wallet: Investigating the moderating effect of customer characteristics, Journal of Marketting. Vol. 7, No. 4 Kheradmand, E., Valilou, M. and Lotfi, A. 2010. The relation between quality of work-life and job performance. Accessed from http.//www. Wikipedia. Com on June 10, 2011. Kindt, C. A. 2008. Relationship between organisational climate and job satisfaction. Among middle school principals. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Florida Central Florida. Accessed online on June 6, 2012. Klatt, Murdick and Schuster 1985. Human resource management. Ohio, Charter E. Merrul publishing Company, pp. 585-592. Kohun, S. 1992. Business Environment. Ibadan: University Press Kyko OC (2005). Instrumentation: Know Yourself and Others Longman Dictionary of rd Contemporary English (2003) 3 editions: Harloa Pearson Educational Limited. Korunka, C., Hoonakler, P. and Carayon, P. 2008. Quality of working life and turnover intention in information technology work. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing and Service Industry, 18:409-423. Kramer, M.W. 1999. Motivation to reduce uncertainty: A reconceptualisation of uncertainty reduction theory. Management Communication Quarterly, 13.2:305- 316. Retrieved online on June 6, 2010. Kreitner, R., Kinicki, A. and Buclens, M. 2002. Organisational behaviour. New York: McGraw- Hill. Kruegar, D., Kevin, S. Lohfeld, A, Gayle, B. Lewis, T. and Tjam, W. 2002. Specific predictors of job satisfaction. Retrieved on July 10, 2009 at http.//www.biomedtral.com. Lambert S. 2005. Added Benefits: The Link between work-life benefits and organisational citizenship. Academic Management Journal. 43:5. Lau, R.S.M. 2000. Quality of work-life and performance. An ad hoc investigation of two key elements in the service profit chain model. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 11.5:422-437. Accessed online on June 10, 2010. Lau, R.S.M. and May, B.E. 1998. A win-win paradigm for quality of work-life and business performance. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 9(3), pp. 211-226. Lau, T., Wong, H., Chan, K.F. and Law, M. 2001. Information and technology and the work environment. Does it change the way people interact at work? Human Systems Management, 20.3:267-280. 155 Lawler, E.E. 1982. Strategies for improving the quality of work-life. Journal of American Psychology, 33:486-493. Lawler, E.E. 2005. Job attitudes and employees motivation, Theory, Research and practice. Hill, New York. Leopold, J. 2005. Employee participation, involvement and communications. The strategic managing of human resource. J. Leopold, L. Harris, and T. Watson Eds. Essex, England: Prentice-Hall Pearson Education, 434-60. Levine, M., Taylor, J. and Davis, L.E. 1984. Defining quality of work-life. Human Relations Journal, 37:81-104. Accessed online on June 6, 2010. Lewis, D., Brazil, K., Krueger, Whfeld, L. and Tjam, E. 2001. Extrinsic and intrinsic determinants of quality of work-life. Leadership in Health Services, 14:7-15. Litterst, J.K. and Eyo, B. 1982. Gauging the effectiveness of formal communication programmes: A search for the communication-productivity link. Journal of Business Communication, 19.2:15-26. Retrieved online on June 6, 2010. Litwin, G.H. and Stringer, R.A. 1968. Motivation and organisational climate, Cambridge; Boston: Harvard University Press. Locke, E.A. 1974. Job satisfaction as an indicator of quality of employment, Canada. Retrieved from http.www.wikipedia.com. on March 6, 2007. Long, J.L. and Swortzel, K.A. 2007. Paper presented: Factors influencing job satisfaction of extension agents in the Mississip State University, proceedings of the 2007 AAAE Research conference, volume 34. th Luthans, F. 1995. Organisational Behaviour. 7 Edition. Singapore: McGraw-Hill. Lyons, T.P. 1985. Personnel function in a changing environment. London: Pitman Publishing Limited. Madlock, P.E. 2008. The link between leadership style, communicator competence and employee satisfaction. Journal of Business Communication, 45:61-78. Man, J. 2001. Creating innovation, Work study, 50.6:229-233. Accessed from http.//www.wikipedia.com. on February 6, 2012. Manouchehr, J., Khodabakhsh, D. and Fatemeh, K. 2012. The relationship between quality of work life with staff performance of Iranian Gas Engineering and Development Company. Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology, 4.15:2503-2514. Accessed on March 8, 2014. Mark, A.H. and Nancy, E.D. 1991. Organisational commitment, job involvement and turnover; a substantive and methodological analysis Journal of Applied Psychology, 6. 3 Accessed from http.www.wikipesia.com. on January 10, 2012 156 Martel S. and Dupuis, B. 2004. Quality of work-life: theoretical and methodological problems, and presentation of a new model and measuring instrument. Martin, J. 2002. Organisational culture: Mapping the terrain. Thousand Oaks, Sage. Martzler, K. and Renzil, B. 2007. Assessing asymmetric effects in the formation of employee satisfaction. Journal of Tourism Management, 28:1093-1103. May, B.E., Lau, R.S.M. and Johnson, S.K. 1999. A longitudinal study of quality of work-life and business performance. South Dakota Business Journal, 58.2:3-7. Accessed online on July 8, 2010. Meyer, R.C. and Shoorman, D.F. 1998 Differentiating antecedents of organisational commitment: A test of March and Simon, model. Journal of organisational behaviour, 19:1. Mc Lean, L.D. 2004. Organisational culture‟s Influence on Creativity and Innovation: A Review of the literature and implications for Human resource Development. Accessed from htpp.www.wikipedia.com on March 6, 2012. McAdam, R. and McClelland, J. 2000. Individual and team based idea generation within innovation management: organisational and research agenda. European Journal of Innovation Management, 5.2:86-97. Mcewan, T. 2001. Managing Values and Beliefs in Organisations. New York: Prentice Hall. Mensah, A.O. and Lebbaeus, A. 2013. The influence of employees‟ self-efficacy on their quality of work life: the case of Cape Coast, Ghana. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 4.2. Accessed on March 6, 2014. Mensut, 2006. Quality of work-life of employees daily rehabilitation centres in Tehran Welfare State. Rehabilitation Management, University of Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, M.A. Thesis. Meyer, J. and Allen, N. 1996. The Measurement and Antecedents of Affective, Continuance and Normative Commitment to the Organisations. Journal of Occupational Psychology. 63:1-18. Meyer, J. P. and Allen, N. J. 1991. A three-component conceptualisation of organisational commitment: Some methodological considerations, Human Resource Management Review, 1:61-98 Meyer, J.P. Allen, N.J. and Sulsky L.M. 1999. Commitment in the workplace: Theory, Research and Application. [Online]. Canadian Psychology. Available from: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/miqa3711/html. [Accessed 24 March 2007] Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. 2006 A three-component conceptualisation of organisational commitment: Some methodological considerations, Human Resource Management Review, 1:61-98. 157 Meyer, J.P. and Allen, N.J. 2007. A three-component conceptualisation of organisational commitment: Some methodological considerations, Human Resource Management Review, 1:61-98. Meyer, J.P., Srinivas, E.S., Lal, J.B., and Topolnytsky, L. 2007. Employee commitment and support for an organisational change: Test of the three- component model in two cultures. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 80.2:185-211. Mirsepasi, N. 2006. The mutual impact of productivity and quality of work-life. Economic and Management Journal. 17. Mirvis, P.H. and Lawler, E.E. 1984. Accounting for the quality of work-life. Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 5:197-212. Modaff, D.P., De Wine, S., and Butler, J. 2011. Organisational communication: Foundations, challenges and misunderstandings (2nd Ed.). Boston: Pearson Education. Mohd H., Zain, M.M; Matzain, A.Y. and Ismail, H. 2003. Quality of work-life and organisational commitment among professionals in Malaysia. Retrieved from hptt.www. Wikipedia.com on March 6, 2007. Molly, R. T., 2007. Creating culture of innovation (http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/profit/features/p17andrew-143871.html), Oracle Magazine. th Moorhead, G. and Griffin, R.W. 1999. Organisational Behaviour. 5 Edition Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. Morin E.M. and Morin W. 2003 Quality of Work-life and Firm Performance, http://www.fgvsp.br, accessed on 01-11-2006. Mowday, R. T., Porter, L.W., and Steers, R.M. 2006. Employee Organisation Linkages. New York: Academic Press. Mowday, R.T., Porter, L.W. and Steers, R.M. 1982. Employee organisational linkage, Warr, P. (Editor) Organisational and Occupational Psychology, New York: Academic Press. 219-229. Mowday, R.T., Poter, L.W. and Steers, R.M. 1982 Organisational Linkage: The Psychology of Commitment, Absenteeism, and Turnover. New York: Academic Press, Pp. 20 – 22 Muchinsky, P.M. 1987. Organisational communication: Relationship to organisational climate and job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 20:592-607. th Mullins, L. 1999. Management and Organisational Behaviour. 5 Edition. Portsmouth: Pitman Publishing. Murray, R.E. 1999. Job satisfaction of professional and paraprofessional library staff of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Master thesis, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 158 Nadler, D.A. and Lawler, E.E. 1983 Quality of Work-life: Perspectives and Directions, Organisational Dynamics, 5.3:10-17. Nanjundeswaraswamy, T.S. and Swamy, D.R. 2013. Quality of work-life of employees in private technical institutions. International Journal of Quality Research 7.3:3-14. Nanjundeswaraswamy, T.S. and Swamy, D.R. 2012. A literature review on quality of work life and leadership styles. International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications, 2.3:1053-1059. Accessed online on June 8, 2010. Nelson B. 1999. Low cost ways to build employee commitment [online]. Nelson Motivation Inc. Available from: http://www.inc.com/articles/1999/12/16412.html. [Accessed 28 April 2008] Newstrom, J.W. and Davis, K. 2002. Organisational Behaviour. Human Behaviour at Work. 11th Edition: New Delhi Tata McGraw – Hill Publishing Company Limited. Nmadu, T.M. 1999. Human resources management: an introduction. Kaduna: Jofegan Associates. Normala, D. 2010. Investigating the relationship between quality of work-life and organisational commitment amongst employees in Malaysian firms. International Journal of Business and Management, 5.10. Accessed from http://www.wikipedia.com on June 8, 2011. Nutchanath, W. 2007. Factors related to quality of work-life among bus drivers under Bangkok mass transit authority. Accessed from http.// www.wikipedia.com on October 6, 2011. Nwachukwu, C.C. 1987. Management theory and practice. Onitsha: Africana FEB Publisher Limited. Nwachukwu, C.C. 2000. Human resources management. Port Harcourt: University of Port Harcourt Press. Nwachukwu, C.C. 2007. Management: theory and practice. Revised edition, Onitsha: Africana First Publishers Limited. 226-228. O‟ Reilly, C.A. and Chatman, J. 1986. Organisational Commitment and Psychological Attachment: The effects of Compliance, Identification and Internationalisation on Pro-social Behaviour, Journal of Applied Psychology, 6.71: 492-499. O‟Reilly, C.A., Chatman, J., and Caldwell, D.F. 1991. People and organisational culture: A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organisation fit. Academy of Management Journal, 34:487-516. Obikoya, J.O. and Adebanjo, T.A. 2004. Eds. Elements of management. Ago-Iwoye: CESAP, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye. 159 Okpara, J.O. 2004. The impact of salary differential on managerial job satisfaction: A study on gender gap and its implication for management education and practices in a developing economy. Journal of Business Development Nations, 8:66-92. Okpara, J.O. 2007. The effect of culture on job satisfaction and organisational commitment: A study of information system managers in Nigeria. Journal of African Business, 18.1:113-130. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/JI56008n017. Oladeji, S.O and Omokhabi, A.A. 2010. Impact of quality of work-life on performance level of adult and non-formal education employees in Oyo and Lagos states. International Journal of Continuing and Non-formal Education, volume7.2. Oladimeji, A. 1999. Human resources management in Nigeria. Lagos: Business and Institutional Support Associates Limited. Olayinka, A.I. and Owumi, B.E. 2006. Preparing a research proposal. A.I. Olayinka, V.O. Taiwo, A, Raji-Oyeleke and I.P. Farai Eds. Methodology of basic and applied research. 52 Ibadan; The Postgraduate school, University of Ibadan, Ibadan. Oldham, G.R. and Cummings, A. 1996. Employee creativity: Personal and contextual factors at work. Academy of Management Journal, 39.3:607-655. Olise, F. 2005. Human resources management: Tradition – Transition – Trend. Lagos: National Library of Nigeria Cataloging in Publication Data. Onasanya, S.A.B. 1999. Effective personnel management and industrial relations. Lagos: Centre for Management Development. Opperman, C.S. 2002. Tropical Business Issues. Partner Price Water House Cooper. Orpen, C. 1997. The interactive effects of communication quality and job involvement on managerial job satisfaction and work motivation. The Journal of Psychology, 131.5:519-522. Accessed online on July 8, 2010. Oshagbemi, T. 2000. Satisfaction with co-workers‟ behaviour. Journal of Employee Relations, 22:88-106. Oyekunle, O.O. and Adeniji, W.A. 2009. Integrated management, New revised edition. Osogbo: Deji Press and Publishing Co. Palmer, C. 1995. Organisational climate and job satisfaction as reported by Florida Community College health occupations program directors. Doctoral dissertation, University of Florida. Parker C., Baltes B. and Young. S. 2003 Relationships between psychological climate perceptions and work outcomes: a meta-analytic review. Journal of organisational behaviour. 160 Parker, O. and Wright, L. 2002. Pay and Employee Commitment: The Missing Link. Ivey Business Journal. Pp. 70. Richard Ivey school of Business. Patricia, W. S., Michael, I.H., Feldman, P., Linzer, M., Peng, T., Roblin, D., Scott- Cawiezell, J., Waren, N., and Wiliams, E.S. 2005 Organisational climate of staff working conditions and safety– An integrative model. Retrieved from htpp. www. Wiki.com. Patterson, M.G., West, M.A. and Shacklenton, V.J., 2005. Validating the Organisational Climate Measure: Links to Managerial Practices, Productivity and Innovation, Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 1.26:379-408. Payne, R.L. and Pheysey, D.C. 2004. Organisational climate index: a reconceptualisation and application to business organisation. Accessed from htpp.www.wikipedia.com July 18, 2010. personality: New York. Perera, T. 2002. Employee Commitment : A Study of Selected High Performing Companies in Sri Lanka, Sri Lankan Journal of Management, 7.3 & 4. Pettitt, J.M., and Ayers, D.F. 2002. Understanding conflict and climate in a community college. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 26.2:105-120. Petty, M.M., Beadles, N.A., Lowery, C.M., Chapman, D.F., and Connel, D. W. 1995. Relationships between Organisational Culture and Organisational Performance. Physchological Reports. 76:483-492. Phattanacheewapul, A. and Ussahawanitchakit, P. 2008. Organisational justice versus organisational support: The driven-factors of employee satisfaction and employee commitment on job performance. Journal of Academic Business Economy, 2:22-30. Phusavat, K. 2001 Examination into the Interrelationships between Quality of Work- life and Productivity, Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Department of Industrial Engineering Kasetsart University, Bangkok. Accessed online on April 10, 2009. Plus Delta Consulting: Organisational climate survey. Retrieved from http://survey.plusdelta.net/questionniare/www.com on June 6, 2010. Poon M.L. and Ainuddin, R.O. 2006. Relationships between perceived organisational climate and job satisfaction and performance Accessed from http.www. Academic Journals.org. on August 9, 2010. Porter, L.W. 1961. A study of perceived need satisfactions in bottom and middle management jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 45.1:1-10. Price, J.L. 1997. Handbook of organisational measurement. International Journal of Manpower, 18.4:303-558. Retrieved online on July 8, 2010. 161 Pritchard, R.D. and Karasick, B.W. 1973. The effects of organisational climate on managerial job performance and job satisfaction. Organisational Behaviour and Human Performance Journal, 9:126-146. Pugalendhi, S.B., Umaselvi, M. and Nakkeeran, S.K. 2010. Quality of work life: perception of college teachers, MPRA Paper 27868, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 01 September, 2010. Accessed online on July 10, 2012. Rakesh, K.M. 2006. The power of positive management: a practical guide of professionals. New Delhi: Sterlin Publishers Ltd. Rao, T.V. 2004 Readings in Human Resource Development, New Delhi: Oxford & IBH Publishing Co. Rathi, N. 2009. Relationship of quality of work life with employees‟ psychological well-being. Journal of Business Insights and Transformation, 54.2:53-60. Accessed online on March 6, 2011. Rethinam G.S.and Ismail, M., 2008. Constructs of quality of work-life: a perspective of information and technology professionals Retrieved from htpp.llen. Wikipedia/European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol.7 , No 1. On June 6, 2010. Rethinam, G.S. and Ismail, M. 2006. Work condition and predictors of quality of work-life of information system personnel. Accessed on line on February 12, 2014. Reyan, G.N. 1995. Theoretical basic for the quality of work-life concept. University of Siena: Quality (esprit project 8162)9 working paper. Robbins, S.P. 2001. Organisational Behaviour. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Robbins, S.P. 2003. Organisational Behaviour. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Roopali, J. 2005. Work values and the quality of employment; a literature review. Retrieved from htpp/Wikipedia/www.com on October 6, 2010. Rosca, D., Sirbi, M. and Rosca, C. 2000. The organisational culture and the factors of its formation. Retrieved from htpp.www.wiki./com on April 12, 2009. Rose, R.C., Beh, L., Uli, J. and Idris, K. 2006. An analysis of quality of work-life and career related variables. American Journal of Applied Sciences. Retrieved September 6, 2009, http./www.wikipedia.com. Saad, H.S., Samah, A.J.A. and Juhdi, N. 2008. Employees‟ perception on quality of work-life and job satisfaction in a private higher learning institution. Journal of International Review of Business Research Papers vol. 4 No. 3 pp 23-34. Accessed from http.//www.wikipedia.com on March 6, 2012. 162 Sabarirajan, and Geethanjali, N. 2011. A study on quality of worklife and organisational performance among the employee of public and private banks in Dindigul. International Journal of Economic Research, 2.6:38-45. Accessed online on April 6, 2013. Sadris, S. and Goveas, C. 2013. Sustainable quality of work life and job satisfaction (An Indian case study). Elite Research Journal of Education and Review, 1.5:48-54. Accessed from http://www.elite-researchjournals.org/erijer/index.htm on March 8, 2014. Salami, S.O. 2002. Demographic and psychological factors predicting organisational commitment among industrial workers. Accessed from http.www.Wikipedia.com on June 8, 2008. Salmani, D. 2003. Quality of work life and its relation to performance and productivity in organisations. Knowledge Management Issue 61-60:97-73. Accessed online on March 6, 2010. Salmani, D. 2005. Improving the quality of working life and organisational behaviour. Tehran: School of Mangement. Santosh-tekumlla 2011. Questionnaire on quality of work-life. Retrieved from http://www.wikipedia.com on January 8, 2012. Saraji, g.N. and Dargahi, H. 2006. Study of quality of work-life. Iranian Journal of Public Health, 35.4:8-14. Schein, E.H. 1999. Organisational Culture. American Physchologist, 45:109 – 118 Schein, E.H. 2008. Organisational culture and employee commitment: a case study. Accessed from htpp.www.wikipedia.com on January 8, 2012. Schermernhorn, J.R. and John, R. 1989. Management for productivity, John Wiley and Sons. Schleicher, D., Watt, J. and Greguras, G. 2004. Re-examining the job satisfaction performance relationship: The complexity of attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89:167-177. Schneider, B. 1987. Organisational climate. Personnel Psychology, 28:447-479. Schouteten, R. 2004. Group work in a Dutch home care organisation: does it improve the quality of working life? The International Journal of Health Planning and Management, 19:179-194. Scott, T., Mannion, R. and Marshall, M. 2003. Does organisational culture influence health care performance? A review of the evidence. Journal of Health Service Research and Policy. 8:2. Sekeran, U.2004 Research Methods for Business, New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc. 163 Serey, T.T. 2006. Choosing a robust quality of work-life. Journal of management. 27. Shahbazi, B 2007. The relationship between quality of work-life and performance of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, educational director of faculty members", Tehran University. Education and psychology. Department of Educational Management Planning. Educational Management, thesis M.A. Accessed online on June 8, 2010. Shahril, H. 1994. The relationship of quality of work-life programmes and the influence of socio-demographic factors with employee job satisfaction and job involvement; a case study of SIRIM. Accessed online on March 6, 2010. Sheridan, J. E. 1992. Organisational Culture and Employee Retention. Academy of Management Journal, 35:1036-1056. Simpson, G.L. 2006. Building Employee Commitment, An Imperative For Business Success. [online] The Mansis Development Corporation. Available from: http:www.mansis.com [Accessed 14 May 2008]. Sinha, P. and Sayeed, O. B. 1980. Measuring QWL in relation to job satisfaction performance in two organisation. Managerial Psychology 2:15-30. Sirgy, M.J., Efraty, D., Siegel, P. and Lee, D. 2001. A new measure of quality of work based on need satisfaction and spillover theories: social indicators research. Accessed online on June 8, 2010. Sivarethinamohan, R. and Aranganathan, P. 2013. Impact of quality of work-life (QWL) on employee retention in Indian information technology section. Elixir International Journal. Available online at www.elixirpublishers.com. Accessed on line February 14, 2014. Sloane, P. and Williams, H. 1996. Are overpaid workers really unhappy? A test of the theory of cognitive dissonance. Journal of Labour, 10:3-15. Solinger, O.N., Van Olffen, W., and Roe, R.A. 2008. Beyond the three-component model of organisational commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93.1:70- 83. Accessed online on April 12, 2011. Soonhee, K. 2002. Participative management and job satisfaction: lessons for management leadership. Journal of management. 12. Spytak, J.M., Marsland, D.W. and Ulmer, D. 1999. Job satisfaction putting theory into practice. American Academy of Family Physicians. Retrieved from http://www.afp.org/fpm/991000fm/26.html. on November 1, 2008. Steer, R. M and Porter, L.W. 1991. Motivation and Work Behaviour. New Delhi: McGraw–Hill, INC,. 5th Ed. Steers, R.M. 1991. Organisational effectiveness: A behavioural view. Santa Monica California: Goodyear Publishing Co., Inc. 164 Su-li, Z. 2008. Analysis of utility of employee‟s quality of working life and assessment model, National natural science fund of china. Accessed online on April 12, 2011. Suttle, J.L. 1977. Improving life at work; behaviour science approaches to organisational change. J.L. Suttle (Ed). Santa Monica California: Goodyear Publishing, P. 4. Sybil, J., Isaac, O. and Oludayo, S. 1995. Introduction to communication for business and organisations. Ibadan: Spectrum Books, Ltd. Syptak, J.M., Marsland, D. and Ulmer, D. 1999. Job satisfaction: putting theory in to practice. Family practice management. Retrieved from http.www.afrp.org/on October 28, 2004. Tajammal, H. and Summia, S. 2014. Do employees‟ job satisfaction, involvement and commitment mediate relationship between quality of work life and employees‟ retention? Middle East Journal of Scientific Research 19.1:115-122. Accessed from idosi.majsr on March 8, 2014. Turner, B.A. and Chellenadurai, P. 2005. Organisations and occupational commitment, intention to leave and perceived performance of intercollegiate coaches. Journal of Sport Management. Ukko, J., Tenhunen, J. and Rantanen, H. 2008. The impacts of performance measurement on the quality of working life. International Journal of Business Performance Management 10.1:86-98. Accessed online on July 8, 2010. Umoren, I. 2011. The Punch: Effective policies as drivers of organisational growth. Published on September, 7, 2011 V room, V.H. 1964. Work and motivation. New York: Wiley. Van de Ven, A.H. and Angle, H.L. 1989. An introduction to the Minnesota innovation research programme. Research on the management of innovation. Pg. 3-30. New York: Harper and Row. Van Laar, D., Edward, J.A. and Easton, S. 2007. The work-related quality of life scale for healthcare workers. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 60:325-333. Vohra. D.K. 2003. Employee commitment and corporate excellence. IT People. Mumbai: Indian Express Group Walton, R.E. 1974. Quality work-life indicators: Prospects and problems. In Portigal, A.H. Eds. Measuring the quality of working life. A symposium on social India indicators of working life. Ottawa, 19-20. Walton, R.E. 1975. Criteria for quality of working life. L.E. Davis, A.B. Cherns, and Associates Eds. New York: The Free Press. 1:71-104. 165 Wan, H.L. 2007. Remuneration practices in chemical industry in Malaysia: The impact on employee satisfaction. Journal of Compensation Benefit Review, 39:56-67. Westerman, J.W. and Simmon, B.L. 2007. The effects of work environment on the personality performance relationship: an exploratory study. Journal of Management Issue, 9.2: 288-305. Wilburn, R. 2006. Quality of work life, Encyclopedia of Management, 741-744. Retrieved http://law-journals-books.vlex.com/vid/quality-of-work-life- 517588808. on March 6, 2010. Winter, R., Taylor, T. and Sarros, J. 2000. Trouble at mill, quality of academic work life issues within a comprehensive Australian University. Studies in Higher Education, 25.3:279-294. Witt, L.A., Andrews, M.C., and Kacmar, K.M. 2000. The role of participation in decision-making in the organisational politics-job satisfaction relationship, Journal of Human Relationship, 53, 341-358. Worall, L. and Cooper, C.L. 2006. The quality of working life: managers‟ health and well-being. Executive report chartered management institute. Retrieved from www.wikipedia.com on March 6, 2010. Wyatt, T.A.T and Wah, C.Y. 2001. Perception of quality of work life: a study of Singaporean employees development. Journal of Human Resources Management,m 16.2:7-16. Accessed online on April 6, 2010. Young, A., Young-Hee, Y. and Ruggier, J.S. 2009 Organisational culture, quality of work-life, and organisational effectiveness in Korean University Hospitals. Accessed from http.www.wikipedia.com on March 10, 2009. Yusuf, N. 2000. A study of worker participation in management decision-making within selected establishments in Lagos, Nigeria. Ph.D Thesis, University of Ibadan, Ibadan. Zain, Z.M., Ishak, R. and Ghani, E.I. 2009. The influence of corporate culture on organisational commitment. A study on a Malaysion listed company. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences. Accessed from htpp.//www. on March 6, 2012. Zamanou, S. and Glaser, S.R. 1994. Moving towards Participation and Involvement. Journal of Business Studies. Vol. 19, p. 99 Sage Publications. Zare, Hamid, Haghgooyan, Zolfa and Asl, Zahra Karimi 2012. Determining and prioritizing the criteria and scales of quality of work-life by AHP Method. European Journal of Social Sciences 27.3:346-359. 166 Zulfqar, A, Zafar; A; Ishfaq A; and Muhammad, M.N. 2010 Organisational climate (OC) as Employees‟ Satisfier: Emperical Evidence from Pharmaceutical sector. International journal of Business and Management. Vol. 5, No. 10. Zuzana, S. 2007. Factors of organisational climate influencing learning in companies-Retrieved from http.www.wikipedia.com on July 12, 2010. 1 67 APPENDIX I INSTRUMENT 1: QUESTIONNAIRE ON DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS, ORGANISATIONAL CLIMATE/CULTURE AND EMPLOYEES’ QUALITY OF WORK-LIFE This questionnaire is strictly for research purpose. It is not meant to intrude into your privacy. Any response got from this scale will be treated with confidentiality. Please respond to it appropriately. SECTION A QUESTIONNAIRE ON DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS, 1. Age: Below 25 years ( ), 26 - 35 years ( ), 36 - 45years ( ), above 45years ( ) 2. Gender: Male ( ) Female ( ) 3. Marital Status: Single ( ) Married ( ) 4. Highest educational attainment: Primary School Leaving Certificate ( ), WASC/GCE “OL” ( ), OND/NCE ( ), First Degree/HND ( ), Highest Degree ( ), Others ( ) 5. Department: 6. Length of Service: 1-5years ( ), 6-10 years ( ), 11-15 years ( ), 16-20 years ( ), 21-25 years ( ), 26-30 years ( ), above 30years ( ) 7. Income per month (N): 1-30, 000 ( ), 31, 000-60, 000 ( ), 61, 000-90, 000 ( ), 91, 000-120, 000( ), 121, 000-150, 000 ( ), above 150, 000 ( ) 168 SECTION B QUESTIONNAIRE ON ORGANISATIONAL CLIMATE S/N ITEMS SA A D SD 8. My department has adequate tools and technologies to perform our work. 9. The management lay more emphasis on the safety of their workers. 10. There is job security in my place of work. 11. I often take part in decision making on matters that will affect us as workers. 12. I do participate with others in setting pace of work done. 13. There is openness to suggestions from people at all levels in my organisation. 14. My organisation is a very formal and structured place. 15. Work assignments are distributed fairly. 16. Clear reporting structures have been established. 17. I receive the information I need to perform my job well. 18. Interpersonal communication and relationships contribute to organisational performance. 19. Our face-to-face meetings are productive. 20. The organisation‟s goals and objectives are clear to me. 21. In my place of work, organisational policies are reviewed regularly to assess its effectiveness. 22. Employees have a good balance between work and personal life. 169 SECTION C QUESTIONNAIRE ON ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE 23. Rewards are given out to suit the preference of the recipients. 24. I am always rewarded and recognised for my outstanding work. 25. I am satisfied with the benefits offered to me through this job. 26. “We have always done it that way” is a philosophy that describes my company‟s response to new ideas. 27. My superior officer values new ideas and implements them quickly. 28. I am encouraged to develop new and more efficient ways to do my work. 29. Knowledge and information sharing is a group norm across the organisation. 30. Employees consult each other when they need support. 31. Individuals appreciate the personal contributions of their peers. 32. I feel valued as an employee. 33. I am treated with respect by management and colleagues. 34. The people I work with take a personal interest in me. 35. In my organisation, change is viewed as a challenge and an opportunity. 36. Performance evaluations in this organisation measure an employee‟s adaptation to change. 37. There is adequate opportunity for periodic changes in duties in my organisation. 1 70 SECTION D: QUESTIONNAIRE ON QUALITY OF WORK-LIFE 38. The job allows me use my skills and abilities to the maximum level. 39. I am treated with respect in the work place. 40. Conditions in the job allows me to be productive. 41. The organisation provides an opportunity to develop my own abilities. 42. The organisation provides enough instruction to get the job done. 43. The organisation is providing high quality tools and techniques to do the job. 44. The opportunities for promotion are good. 45. The safety of workers is at high priority. 46. The infrastructure facilities are good. 47. Fringe benefits are good in the organisation. 48. The superior is concerned about the welfare activities of employees. 49. There is job security. 50. The superior is helpful to me in getting the job done. 51. The suggestions given by me are always accepted and motivated by the superior. 52. I am proud to be a part of this organisation. 53. The training opportunities have really helped in improving the quality of work. 54. The work is always stressful. 171 55. The organisation does a good job of linking rewards to job performance. 56. I feel my work allows me to do in a particular area where I can do best. 57. Sense of belonging increase with cooperation. 58. There is a balance between stated objectives and resources provided by the organisation. 1 72 APPENDIX II INSTRUMENT 2: ORAL QUESTIONS WITH RESPONSE FROM THE RESPONDENTS AGE AT WORK Question: i. Does age at work contribute to the effectiveness of workers? ii. Does maturity play any significant role in the efficiency of workers? iii. What does age at work have to do with the performance of workers? Response: i. Yes because workers who are mature are more committed and dedicated to work. ii. Maturity is very important because mature workers know what to do and they are serious minded at work. iii. Age at work has a lot to do because mature workers who have responsibilities and families to cater for are more serious than their younger counterparts. GENDER Question: i. Are male workers more committed than female workers? ii. Does gender have any contribution to performance of workers in an organisation? iii. Are male or female workers preferred in many organisations? Response: i. Well, it depends on the nature of the job. Some jobs require male workers while female are preferred in others. So it is very difficult to say one gender is more committed. ii. The Nigerian society gives equal opportunity to both sexes, so it 173 actually depends on the job they do. iii. In manufacturing industries where workers are needed for hectic jobs male workers are preferred while service rendering jobs usually prefer female workers, so it depends. MARITAL STATUS Question: i. Are married people more dedicated to work than single ones? ii. Is it true that workers that are single move from one job to another? iii. Has marital status got anything to do with the performance of workers in organisation? Response: i. Yes, married people are more dedicated, they have responsibilities and dependants and so they need jobs more than single people. ii. It is true because, they are more concerned with the pay packet and age is on their side to make various choices. iii. Yes, marital status is important. Most organisations see marriage as an indication of being responsible and committed. LENGTH OF SERVICE Question: i. Is there any relationship between the length of service of a worker and his performance? ii. What influence does length of service have on the contribution of a worker to an organisation? iii. What role does length of service play on the quality of work-life of an employee? Response: i. Yes there is, the more a worker stays on a job, the more the experience 174 he/she gathers and this makes him/her perform effectively well. ii. It has a lot of influence, he is given recognition by the management and his views are respected. iii. The length of service earns the worker promotion, more benefits and recognition and respect. HIGHEST EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT Question: i. What contribution does a high academic attainment have on job performance? ii. How true is it that educational attainment promote workers efficiency in organisations? iii. Is it true that low academic attainment reduce workers‟ performance in organisations? Response: i. It is very difficult to explain because there are many cases where academic attainment do not lead to high performance, but most organisations prefer it. ii. It ought to promote workers efficiency but it does not in many cases. iii. This may not be true. People who work in factories perform optimally, yet they have low academic attainment. INCOME Question: i. Does the income of a worker contribute to his or her commitment to work? ii. What effect does the income of a worker have on his/her performance? iii. Can the income of a worker motivate or de-motivate his or her 175 commitment to duty in an organisation? Response: i. Yes, that is true. A worker who earns good salary is motivated to be committed to duty. ii. The income of a worker is an incentive that drives him to work very well. So, there is a strong relationship between income and performance. iii. The income of a worker should motivate him/her to work harder, but when the income is poor, it dampens the morale of the worker. 176