An Assessment of Work Culture and Productivity Management among the Universities in Ghana - Research Paper Example

An Assessment of Work Culture and Productivity Management among the Public /Private Universities in Ghana An Assessment of Work Culture and Productivity Management among the Public /Private Universities in Ghana Introduction Work culture refers to the type of environment in which people work or conduct their businesses. Work culture influences workplace interactions and collaborations. It also impacts on the performance levels of employees in an organization, industry, or nation. Equally, productivity management provides opportunities for businesses, organizations and institutions to improve their performance and productivity levels (Black, 2008). Workplaces and work cultures that lack productivity management are faced with a risk of stagnation of work and performance standards (Aycan, 2007). Productivity management covers crucial issues such as wage negotiations, exchange rates, inflation rates and business decisions. Public and private universities in Ghana have different work cultures, and strategies for productivity management. Workplace culture and productivity management affect the training and education programs offered by Private and Public universities in Ghana (Black, Mendenhall & Oddou, 2011). Ghanaian universities have to contend or adjust to changes in employment standards, education levels of the workforce and society, composition of the workforce, levels of capital investments, government regulations and inflation (Berry, 2002). These factors have the potentials to affect the productivity rates or performance levels of private and public universities in Ghana. Universities in Ghana have the potential to manage a number of productivity factors. They have an ability to manage the utilization of knowledge, economies of scale, high worker turnover, labor unrests and employee motivation (Black & Stephens, 2009). Problem Statement The behavior of employees plays a crucial role in the success of universities in Ghana (Robbins & Judge, 2007). This study evaluates the differences in work culture and productivity management between private and public universities. It is known that work culture in Ghanaian universities helps in fashioning people based on the norms, values and beliefs of the culture (Chatman, 2009). Objectives The purpose of this study is to assess work culture and productivity management in Ghanaian private and public universities. During the course of the assessment, the study will outline some of the strengths and weaknesses of work culture and productivity management (McEvoy & Parker, 2005). An understanding of the two factors will help in highlighting the abilities of Ghanaian universities to provide quality education and training programs (Dolcos, 2006). The study examines the abilities of public and private universities to works based on their work cultures and productivity management. This paper is important for policy makers and financiers because it will provide a basis for understanding the performance levels of Ghanaian universities (Kristof-Brown, Zimmerman & Johnson, 2005). Additionally, the paper will help in galvanizing support that will help Ghanaian universities to strengthen their training programs and capacities. Literature Review Assessment of Work Culture in Ghanaian Private and Public Universities Approximately 2.5 million people work in the Ghanaian public and private universities. Collectively, these individuals have played a crucial role in increasing the performance and productivity levels of Ghanaian universities (Selmer, 2002). People working Ghanaian universities are guided by a number of principles, which contribute to the workplace culture in the country. Private and public universities consider time as a factor of performance and productivity. Time is one of the most important factors of productivity in Ghanaian universities (Whiteman, 2009). Regardless of the rigidity and load of the work schedules, the workplaces expect everybody to maintain or keep time. Flexible individuals are able to benefit from these workplaces because they can utilize maximum opportunities (Shaffer, Harrison and Gilley, 2009). Flexibility ensures that workers can attend to different assignments as they are assigned. It also ensures that people can keep a time buffer before they react to any eventualities (Booth, 2005). Even with the flexibility of time and timeframe, workers are expected to schedule appointments ahead. Private and public university workplaces do not separate personal and professional life. They are guided by the African focus on the stability of the family. Workers in Ghanaian universities have a hard time separating their personal life from their professional life. In these cases, colleagues in the workplace create personal relationships (Verquer, Beehr & Wagner, 2003). During these interactions and relationships, family is one of the main topics of discussion. Additionally, personal topics such as social life, health and wealth and commonly discussed in the workplace (DAC Network on Governance, 2006). These discussions are based on the fact that family life is a crucial social pillar of the Ghanaian society. Family is highly valued in the workplaces in Ghanaian universities. In most of the cases, meetings between colleagues and university staff are centered on personal talk. Private and public universities in Ghana also respect hierarchy and the higher social status. In this case, the social status commands are highly respected. The workplace addresses the elderly and people of the higher social class using the appropriate manner and respect (Deininger and Mpuga, 2004). Additionally, academic and professional titles are as vital as the hierarchical addresses. University academic staff in public universities requires people to address them using their titles. New employees are required to find out the academic titles of other employees in the workplace because they are expected to address other people according to their respective titles (Grindle, 2007). Ghanaian public universities are considered as cultural institutions. As a result, the government encourages the integration of suitable customary values and norms into the workplace through informal and formal introduction of cultural dimensions into the relevant aspects of the institutions (Henslin, 2009). The cultural values of public universities ensure that they have suitable cultural and customary values, which are developed and adapted according to the needs of the societies living around the universities. Private and public university’s workplace culture are comparable because they enshrine the Ghanaian concepts of attitudes for humanity and nature, environmental conservation and human dignity. Additionally, they emphasize on truthfulness, law and order, self-reliance, unity and peace, and national solidarity (Israel, 2007). Based on the Ghanaian culture, public universities enhance the Ghanaian cultural life through the development of workplace programs that contribute to the development of human resources (Owusu, 2003). Productivity Management Productivity management in Ghanaian Private Universities is achieved through the establishment of a productivity improvement program. This program focuses on the quality management of universities (Kiltgaard, 2007). This approach is used with an aim of increasing performance. The program enables managers to identify problems that affect productivity, in addition to developing appropriate programs that help in solving the problems (Kotter, 2006). The productivity improvement program is based on the recognition that effective and efficient utilization of resources is vital for maintaining competitiveness within the higher education sector. The productivity management program is based on vital elements such as the creation of organizational components, the provision of support to the managers of universities, open communication, measures and analysis and the involvement of employees (Mahler, 2007). These elements help in the management of productivity based on the knowledge that productivity is a ratio of what is produced with the resources needed to ensure productivity. In order to manage productivity, an output should be countable over a period of time. The output should be a direct outcome of identifiable activities. Methodology This study used the mix method of research by employing qualitative and quantitative approaches of research. The main aim of the mixed method of research is to address a research question based on relevant angles (Owusu, 2003). The mixed methodology also ensures that researchers can make appropriate use of previous studies on the research question. A mixed method of research is more comprehensive compared to approaching a research problem based on one viewpoint (Owusu, 2004). The mix method provides different tools and strategies that blend data and information across disciplines. Results and Discussion Results from the study were analyzed using statistical software called SPSS, Statistical Product and Services Solution. The data enabled the statistical evaluation of the study. An independent t-test tested the hypotheses outlined in the study. The parametric statistical test served as the independent variable (work culture and productivity management) (Owusu, 2005). The independent variables were public and private universities. The dependent variables included aspects such as turnover intention, work adjustments and organizational commitment (Rainey and Steinbauer, 2009). The dependent variables were continuous and measured on an interval basis. An eta square was used to measure the effect sizes of each independent variable. Summary of mean, independent t-test and standard deviation scores of differences in work culture and in public and private universities Variables N Mean SD df t Sig. Eta Public 84 76.905 6.654 109 4.924 0.000 0.18 Private 27 63.667 13.451 Total 111 140.572 20.105 (World Bank, 2000) The table shows that public universities have work cultures that present fewer adjustment problems to workers. This implies that workers in public universities are comfortable with their environment compared to their counterparts in private universities (Rainey, 2006). Summary of mean Standard deviation scores and independent t-test results of productivity management in public and private universities Variables N Mean SD df t Sig. Eta Private 84 14.988 2.864 109 5.206 0.000 0.199 Public 27 12.333 2.094 Total 111 27.321 4.958 (World Bank, 2002) The table shows that private universities have high levels of productivity management compared to public universities. This implies that productivity levels in public universities might be low because of the lack of productivity management (Sandbrook, 2003). Discussion Work culture and productivity management are crucial aspects of human resources management. They direct the behaviors of employees and levels of productivity within a workplace (Schein, 2002). Based on this information, this study focused on private and public universities and the differences between the two categories of universities based on work culture and productivity management (Stein, 2004). The study found that public universities have a favorable work culture that is supported by government policies. The work culture of private universities is dictated by the management of the university (Stevens and Teggemann, 2004). The study was characterized by innumerable limitations. Methodologically, the strategies used in sampling challenge the generalization of outcomes (Wilkins and Ouchi, 2003). Additionally, the study was faced with a challenge of evaluating the different work cultures in the universities. Conclusion The work culture of a university imprints on the beliefs, values and norms of university employees and students. Work culture can also be used to predict behavior. Private and public universities have different work cultures and productivity management tools because of their operational environments and foundations. Private universities work culture is restricted because they are privately-owned. Employees are expected to behave according to the wishes of the owners of the university. Private universities have advanced productivity management strategies because of the university’s emphasis on productivity. References Aycan, Z. (2007). Expatriate adjustment as a multifaceted phenomenon: Individual and organizational level predictors. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 8(4), 434-456. Berry, J. W. (2002). Acculturation and adaptation in a new society. International Migration Quarterly Review, 30, 69-87. Black, J. S. & Stephens, G.K. (2009). The influence of the spouse on American expatriate adjustment and intent to stay in Pacific Rim overseas assignments. Journal of Management, 15, 529-573. Black, J.S. (2008). Work role transitions: A study of American expatriate managers in Japan. Journal of International Business Studies, 19, 277-291. Black, J.S., Mendenhall, M.E., & Oddou, G. (2011). Toward a comprehensive model of international adjustment: An integration of multiple theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 291-317. Booth, D. (2005). What are the Drivers of Change in Ghana? CDD/ODI Policy Brief, No.1. Chatman, J. (2009). Improving interactional organizational research: A model of person-organization fit. Academy of Management Review, 14(3), 333-349. DAC Network on Governance. (2006). The Challenge of Capacity Development: Working Towards Good Practice. Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development. DCD/DAC/GOVNET (2005)5/REV1. Deininger, K. and Mpuga, P. (2004). Does Greater Accountability Improve the Quality of Public Service Delivery? Evidence from Ghana. World Development, 33 (1): 171-191 Dolcos, S.A. (2006). Managing Life and Work Demands: The Impact of Organizational Support on Work-Family Conflict in Public and Private Sectors. North Carolina State University. Unpublished PhD Dissertation. Grindle, M.S. (2007). Divergent Cultures? When Public Organizations Perform Well in Developing Countries. World Development, 25(4): 481-495. Henslin, J. (2009). Sociology: A Down-To-Earth Approach. (4th Ed) Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Israel, A. (2007). Institutional Development: Incentives and Performance. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University. Kiltgaard, R. (2007). Cleaning Up and Invigorating the Civil Service. Public Administration and Development, 17: 487-509. Kotter, J.P. (2006). Leading Change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Kristof-Brown, A., Zimmerman, R., & Johnson, E. (2005). Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A metanalysis of person-job, person-organization, person-group, and person-supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58(2): 281-342. Mahler, J. (2007). Influences of Organizational Culture on Learning in Public Agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 4: 519-540. McEvoy, G.M. & Parker, B. (2005). Expatriate Adjustment: Causes and Consequences’. In Selmer, J. (ed.) Expatriate Management: New Ideas for International Business. Westport, CT: Quorum Books. Owusu, F. (2003). Pragmatism and the Gradual Shift from Dependency to Neoliberalism: The World Bank, African Leaders and Development Policy in Africa. World Development. 31(10): 1655-1672. Owusu, F. (2004). Organizational Culture and the Performance of Public Organizations in Ghana: Learning from ‘Good Performers’. PREM Public Sector Department, Governance Knowledge Sharing Program. The World Bank. Owusu, F. (2005). Livelihood Strategies and Performance of Ghana’s Health and Education Sectors: Exploring the Connections. Public Administration and Development 25(2): 157-174. Rainey, H. G., and Steinbauer, P. (2009). Galloping Elephants: Developing Elements of a Theory of Effective Government Organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 9(1): 1-32. Rainey, H.G. (2006). Building an Effective Organizational Culture in James L. Perry (ed) Handbook of Public Administration 2nd Edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publications. Robbins, S.P. & Judge, T.A. (2007). Organizational Behavior, (12th Ed.). Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. Sandbrook, R. (2003). The Politics of Africa’s Economic Recovery. Cambridge University Press. Schein, E. (2002). Organizational Culture and Leadership 2nd Edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publications. Selmer, J. (2002). Practice Makes Perfect? International Experience and Expatriate Adjustment. Management International Review, 42(1): 71–87. Shaffer, M.A., Harrison, D.A. and Gilley, K.M. (2009). Dimensions, Determinants, and Differences in the Expatriate Adjustment Process. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(3): 557–81. Stein, H. (2004). Theories of Institutions and Economic Reforms in Africa. World Development 22(12): 1833-1849. Stevens, M. and Teggemann, S., (2004). Comparative Experience with Public Service Reform in Ghana, Tanzania, and Zambia. In Brian Levy and Sahr Kpundeh (eds) Building State Capacity in Africa: New Approaches, Emerging Lessons, Washington, DC: The World Bank. Pp43-86. Verquer, M.L., Beehr, T.A., & Wagner, S.E. (2003). A Meta-Analysis of Relations between Person-Organization Fit and Work Attitudes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63(3):473-489. Whiteman, M.F. (2009). Antecedents of repatriates’ intent to leave the organization. Doctoral dissertation, University of Sarasota FL, also published in Dissertation Abstracts International. Wilkins, A.L. and Ouchi, W. G. (2003). Efficient Cultures: Exploring the Relationship between Culture and Organizational Performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(3):468-481. World Bank. (2000). Reforming Public Institutions and Strengthening Governance. Washington, DC: The World Bank. World Bank. (2002). Reforming Public Institutions and Strengthening Governance: A World Bank Strategy, Implementation Update. Washington, DC: The World. Read More