Branch (1975) was of the view that productivity means the continuing improvement of the firm management performance in the use of resources and though the operations it is conducted. However the purpose of this work highligts those factors responsible for low productivity among Nigerian workers.

The research tends to focus on those means that will be applied to get workers committed to tier work using effective national tool to enhance and increase productivity level of the public organization, Nepa Enugu zonal office as the study scope. Data were collected from both primary and secondary sources, the analysis and secondary sources, the analysis of the research brought out a population size used to determine the basis for the information gathered and analyzed.

The use of percentage % helped to further the test o the data analyzed. The findings of the research observed by the help of questionnaires and interviews embarked upon as the factors responsible for the low productivity of Nigeria workers.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Production both private and public organization is simply the

Interrelationship between input and output.

Inputs are resources such as labour materials and work done products distributed or services rendered.

In Nigeria, works have been exercising some or certain problems that have been militating against productivity level which has completely affected the gross domestic product of the nation

The government is trying to see that productivity maintains an impressive level, the ministry of labour and productivity. National productivity center etc. are doing everything to alleviate the problems of low productivity of the Nigeria workers.

In view of these one may ask why the Nigerian worker is still faced with the problem of low productivity, inspire of all the government efforts to improve productivity.

Briefly we take short history of NEPA which is a service organization in viewing the general Nigeria workers.

Electricity development in Nigeria started towards the end of the 19th century, when the first generating plant was installed in the city of Lagos in 1898. Later, other electricity undertakings were set up by the native and municipal authorities in different part of the country. In 1950, in order to integrate power development in the country and make it effective, the federal government passed the electricity corporation of Nigeria ordinance No.15 of 1950. This ordinance brought under one umbrella all the electricity undertakings owned and controlled by the native and municipal authorities under the public works department

The electricity corporation of Nigeria (ECN) became the statutory body responsible for generating transmitting, distributing and sales of electricity to all customers in Nigeria.

By Decree No.24 of 27th June, 1972, the electricity corporation of Nigeria (ECN) and Niger Dams Authority (NDA) were merged by the Federal Government to become the National Electricity Power Authority. Power generation in Nigeria started with a humble but steady beginning with only the Ijors, Delta, Egbin, sapele, Afan thermel power stations, Kainji Jebba and Shiroro Hydro power station, with the generation capacity increased from 20mw to over 6,000mw in the year 2002

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Research has been carried out in Nigeria; regrettably not much has been done in the way of solving the problem facing the Nigeria workers.

This has been detrimental to the increase of productivity which will contribute to the development of nation like Nigeria. In order to increase productivity among the workers in Nigeria with athe help of NEPA as a guide the following bottle neck were observed.

The fear of Job security among workers.

The workers should be assumed of their jobs.

The motivational tool and incentives were not properly provided to the workers that will make them to put in their best.

The job evaluation system has been carried out in an unfair manner

Lack of programmes provision for developing staff made many junior staff undertake personal training at the detriment of the employers.

THE OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The objective or purpose of the stud is to discover the

Following:

1. To closely look at those factors responsible for low productivity.

2. To review the current operating standard that will be of gret help in the task of increasing productivity.

3. To verify what should be done to increase the overall interest of the workers to enhance productivity.

4. To find out the ways to ensure commitment to work in order to increase productivity.

To investigate how effective the motivational method already applied has promoted productivity.

RESEARCH QUESTION

To carry out the research effectively, a number of related

Questions covering the productivity of workers in NEPA have been raised.

The following questions were used to acquire the necessary information on the study.

What factors were responsible for the low productivity of the workers?

What will encourage a worker to work diligently and put in his best at work?

What types of work environment will help to facilitates a worker in carrying his duties.

Does management style of leadership affects workers productivity level?

What additional incentives will the management apply to increase productivity?

SCOPE

The research gave much consideration to the problems

associated with low productivity among workers in the public and private organization where productivity level can be measured.

The study intends to cover a public sector which is National Electricity power Authority.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The result of research will help to address those problems

that militates against low productivity of workers in the public and private sector of the economy.

The research also will provide management the needed background in theory and practice for the implementation of the policies as well as coordinating, organising and controlling of the affairs of the public sector.

H will also help the NEPA management in dealing with the productivity problems.

This work serves as a research material for the future workers that could handle related study.

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

CONCEPT OF PRODUCTIVITY.

For some times now, the constant worrying problems that has

confronted management in both private and public sector organization has been on how to improve productivity.

In other words, management has given their individual thought and fought to eradicate the problem of low productivity.

It has also been discovered that different managers have applied various approaches to solve the problem because of htier individual orientation and differences.

The public organizations which have their goals as the production of social benefit in the process have reduction of social cost to the society.

Therefore, their profit index is ambiguous because the goal is the material welfare of the members of the society.

This is the reason why some of them have being inefficient and therefore call for commercialization.

Tunde Ishmeal (2002) writing on labour, productivity and industrial engineers defined productivity as the “achievement of desired output coupled with a maximum utilization of resources that is man, money, material and machinery”

He said that in order to increase productivity of our country, slashing of wages of workers in order to match productivity. He also said that since our economy is labour intensive, emphasis should be designed to suit the economy.

Terba (2002) pointed out that productivity of labour in industry depends not only on the quality and quantity of labour used, but also on the quality and quality of their inputs that are cooperate with labour.

ATTRIBUTABLE FACTORS TO PRODUCTIVITY

Taylor (1999) in his write up suggested three causes which

led to low productivity in the country.

The fallacious belief of the workers that any increase in-output would inevitably result in unemployment.

The defective system of management which makes it necessary for each worker to restricted his output in order to protect his interest.

Inefficient rule of thump, effort-wasting method of work. The aim of scientific management is to overcome these obstacles and this could be achieved by a systematic study of work to discover the most efficient methods of performing the job and a systematic of management to discover the most efficient methods of controlling the workers.

This would bring a great increase in efficient and with its prosperity to the benefit of all, since a highly efficient prosperous business would be in a better position to ensure a well paid employment of workers

According to Taylor (2002) what the workmen want from their employers beyond anything else is high wages and what employers want from workmen most is low cost of labour.

The existence or absence of these two elements forms the best index to either good or bad management.

To achieve good result in productivity, Taylor lays down four great principles of management.

(a) The development of a Trey science of work. By this Taylor pointed out that employers do not really know what constitutes a fair day’s work for an employee. As a result the employers complain about the inadequacies of their workers while workers do not know what is expected of them. In view of the above, the employees should know that he would receive a high rate of pay much higher them the average worker would receive in unscientific factories.

He would also lose income if he failed to achieve his objective.

THE SCIENTIFIC SELECTION AND PROGRESSIVE DEVELOPMENT OF THE WORKMAN

To earn this high rate of pay a workman would have to be

intellectually qualities to enable him achieve the output. Then he must be systematically trained to be a first class worker. Taylor believed that every worker could be a first class man at some jobs.

Taylor maintained that it is this process that cause them mental revolution in management and invariably the resistance to scientific management and invariably the major resistance to scientific management, comes from the side of management. At this point the workers are willing to cooperate to do good job for a high rate of pay.

(d) The constant and intimate cooperation of management and men.

In Taylor’s (1999) view, there is an almost equal division of work and responsibility between management and workers. Then management take over all work for which they are better fitted than the workmen, that are the specification and verification of the method, which is time, price and quality standards of job, and the continuous supervision and control of the worker doing it.

With this personnel corporation, the opportunities for conflict are almost eliminated since the operation of this authority is not arbitrary; the manager’s decisions are based on the scientific study of the work. Finally the co-operation of the work force is obtained monetary incentives.

Taylor assumes that man’s primary motivation for work was financial commitment. That is in order to maximize productivity and obtains work of the highest quality, the manager must give some special incentives to his men beyond that which is given to the average in the trade.

In practices this involves a huge incentives scheme based on piece of work that will go along way to increase productivity.

Taylor (1999) saw scientific management as solution to many industrial problems and at the same time increases both the quality and quantity of the product. It brings to the end conflict between employers and employee.

This is because the employer is concerned with higher profits and the emplyee with higher wages. Two of the assumptions which underline Taylor’s principles have been singled out for critisms.

First, Taylor assumes that man’s primary motivation for work is economic and he will therefore respond positively to financial incentives. This view – motivation based on a concept of economic man has rejected.

Secondly, Taylor’s view workers as individuals rather than members of social groups. His plan to increase productivity involved the provision of financial incentives for individual workers.

He however failed to consider the influence of informal work groups on the behaviour of the individual worker.

Kootz, O. Dannel and weignich (2001) maintain that one can not focus on the availability and prices of capital for enterprises but also has to consider productivity.

They further stated that there are many ways to increase productivity. One approach, for instance, is good management, which focuses on increase involvement, effective training and open communication. Productivity also depends on other factors such as the state of technology and other co-efficient of labour capital, material infrastructures etc.

From the views of the experts in management, it could be realized that productivity is not solely dependent on labour since the efficiency and productiveness of labour also depend upon other variables such as capital materials, infrastructure, technology etc.

They further argued that even when management approaches like training, motivation, incentives etc, are fulfilled, the unavailability of other co-efficient of labour will militate against high productivity.

There is need for the measurement of productivity so that the manager may know what result are occurring to his decisions and how

Secondly, his judgement is being exercised. That is by measuring productivity which will reveal whether he is judging and deciding correctly.

At this point performance against plan, targets or cost standards will be determined. FLIPO (2001) a professor at the Harvard Business school, on his part conducted a series of experiments designed to investigate the relationship between working condition and productivity

He started by the assumption at the scientific management believing that the physical conditions of the work environment, the aptitude at the work and the financial incentives were the main determinants of productivity and variables such as levels lighting and heating, the length and frequency of rest period and the value of monetary incentives. The result was to be no relationship between productivity and the various factors examined.

At this point, mayor changed his direction of research. Instead of focussing on the factor that are important that is by scientific management he examined workers attitudes towards their work and behaviour as members of informal work group.

He conducted a research in which fourteen workers were placed in different jobs in order to measure the workers pay was based on group incentives schemes and efforts instead of productivity.

Stoner (2001) in his catalog lies a range of need for which workers are assumed to remain satisfied in their employment. These includes social needs such as a friendship, group support, acceptance, approval, recognition and status and the need for self actualization which involves the development of the individuals talents.

If these needs are not met, workers suffer psychological and the efficiency of the organization is impaired or weaken.

He further argued that in order to maximize productivity, manager must make sure that the personal satisfaction of workers are met which also embrace cooperation.

It is therefore dear that the concept of motivation has been a subject for academic that is what it involves and the application to the workman in the organization chart.

Whatever approach management takes towards the achievement of organizational goal, productivity is consist of financial rewards to the worker as a way of making the worker to produce more therefore remuneration are emphasized. It is also the social needs of the workers to be motivated and the emphasis is on the improve of the quality and status of work situations. It also involves incorporating the workforce in the day to day decisions making process of the organization the way the workers sees himself as part of the production process thereby produces more.

Nwachukwu (2003) see participative in management as a process whereby workers discuss with their supervisors and influence decision that affect them.

It explores the feelings and opinions of the workers about their jobs. With the participative in management ovary group is consulted before any change is made.

Through the system every workers develops a sense of participation which result in high productivity and at the same time become a new form of supervision.