Dynamics of Participative Management Practices and Organisational Commitment of Workers in Selected Public Polytechnics in Ogun State

Dynamics of Participative Management Practices and Organisational Commitment of Workers in Selected Public Polytechnics in Ogun State

¹Jimoh, Tajudeen Adisa, ²ADEOYE, Adedoyin Comfort

¹Office Technology and Management Department, the Federal Polytechnic, Ilaro

²Office Technology and Management Department, the Federal Polytechnic, Ilaro, Ogun State, Nigeria

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.8120068

Received: 07 October 2024; Accepted: 17 October 2024; Published: 02 January 2025

ABSTRACT

This study examines the influence of participative management approach on organisational commitment of workers in two selected public polytechnics in Ogun State.  The study employed multi-stage sampling involving stratification, equal allocation and randomization to select 300 senior staff from the three workers’ unions in the Institutions.  Three hypotheses were raised on which a 4-point Likert questionnaire was developed. Data collected were analysed with simple frequency and percentage while the hypotheses were tested with regression statistics at 95% confidence interval.  The results show that participatory management has significant impact on the three levels of organisational commitment examined among workers of the selected polytechnics. It was concluded that participatory management approach is an effective mechanism to earn desirable level of commitment of workers in pubic polytechnics and similar organisations, and that allowing workers of different cadres and job categories to participate in decision-making leads to positive attitudinal change and dedication towards work and the institution as a whole.  The study recommends, among others, that management of the polytechnics and other higher institutions should further embrace participative management approach with a view to earning the commitment of their staff.

Keywords:  Affective commitment, Continuance commitment, Normative commitment, Participative management,

INTRODUCTION

The achievement of organisational does not only depend on material factors such as money, technology, equipment, buildings or other assets but also on the successful management of the people in the organisation.  People are the engine that drives business success and they contribute not only labour, but also intellectual capital to an organization. They are capable of solving problems, making decisions, and generating learning that improves the organization. The level of goal achievement, core competence, and survival of any organisation rely heavily on the capacity, attitude, orientation and disposition of the people it employs.

As a result of the importance of people in the break-even and sustainability efforts, organisations are moving towards more appealing management approach and leadership structures.  Many studies in management and leadership have revealed that management or owners of organisations need to provide effective management system which is capable of encouraging the employees to offer their contributions to achieve organisational objectives and contribute to the success and growth of the organisation (Ezekiel, et al., 2015).

Public tertiary institutions, being an important component of the Nigerian education sector, constantly deal with implementation of decisions and the attendant effect on employees’ performance and organisational success.   This level of education plays pivotal role in societal development through education and research, and benefits significantly from fostering high levels of organizational commitment among their staff.  Commitment of workers in such institutions is essential for advancing Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) related to education. This dedication is crucial for ensuring equal access to higher education, improving student outcomes, and fostering inclusive learning environments (Meyer & Allen, 1991).  According to Cotton et al. (1988), committed employees exhibit higher levels of job performance and are less likely to leave.  This stability and enhanced performance are vital for achieving SDG targets such as lifelong learning opportunities and skill development for employment (UNESCO, 2017). Thus, fostering organizational commitment among tertiary institutions’ workers contributes to the realization of these global educational goals.

Studies have shown that participative management leads to improved educational outcomes and that the involvement of teaching personnel in decision-making on curriculum design and pedagogical strategies often results in more relevant and engaging educational programmes, directly enhancing the quality of education provided (Voogt et al., 2016; Munna1 & Abukalam, 2021).   Much dissatisfaction emanating from management decisions usually lead to many of the actions taken by employees and their unions, owing to the dissatisfaction felt and expressed by staff on such decisions (Akhmad et al., 2020).  In response to such challenges and in meeting work demands, management personnel in polytechnics, like other institutions of higher learning, explore and implement different forms of strategies that could enable them motivate staff, improve employees’ commitment and enhance their work performance with a view to ensuring institutional sustainability.

One of the different forms of management approaches is the participative management style which is adopted by most leaders in organisations to increase employee performance, through the involvement of all members to partake in organisational activities (Wang et al., 2022).  However, limited empirical studies exists in extant literature on management style deployed by polytechnic leadership and the level of involvement of workers in the decision-making processes especially in the context of polytechnics in Nigeria.  There is also insufficient empirical evidence on the effectiveness of management styles to prove which approach or strategy is most effective in earning the commitment of workers in the Nigerian polytechnics.  Hence, this study sets to fill this gap by examining the level of participative management and its influence on organisational commitment of workers in public polytechnics in Ogun State.

One of the many factors which studies have pointed out to be crucial to employees’ identification with the organisational goal is the loyalty expressed by the workers and the commitment which stimulates them towards goal achievement (Emami & Darabi, 2012). Organizational commitment is studied as one of the most essential factors for the effectiveness of an organization, and is viewed as one of the primary factors driving efficiency at work and low turnover intentions.  Being committed transcend the usual status of membership of a workplace, it primarily denotes the manifestation of desirable attitude to the organisation and the willingness to constantly and deliberate deploy efforts for the sake of the firm.  Organizational commitment depicts the attachment of an employee to a particular organization as well as willingness to maintain membership in the organization (Singh & Gupta, 2015). According to Emami and Darabi (2012), organizational commitment is a term used to depict an employee’s level of psychological bond to an organisation relative to others and how such individual identifies with the activities and image of the organization. It is demonstrated by the presence of a strong belief in the organization’s objectives and core values, a willingness to go above and beyond in support of those interests, and a strong desire to stay a member of the organization.

Employers who can keep their staff commitment levels high are better equipped to handle difficult situations and hold onto their workers for extended periods of time (Ezekiel, et al., 2015). Similar to this, a variety of elements, including organizational commitment, job satisfaction, remuneration, and others, have an impact on an employee’s job performance in terms of the quality and quantity of work they accomplish while doing their obligations (Singh & Gupta, 2015). According to Burton and Wells (2014), employees who feel highly devoted to their firm will be more motivated and perform well, suggesting that one element influencing performance is an individual’s level of commitment.

The three elements which constitute the popular Meyer and Allen’s (1997) model of employees’ level of commitment are affective, continuous, and normative commitment. How much attachment and identification of an individual with an organization is revealed by their affective commitment, which encompasses identification, involvement, and emotional connection. The normative components of  commitment reflects an employee’s feeling of obligation to an organization, and his often influenced by social norms in the work environment. Continuance commitment refers to a person’s need to stay with the company because they believe that leaving would cost them money (Glazer et al., 2004; Al-Jabari & Ghazzawi, 2019). According to these three aspects, individuals stick with their organization because they feel compelled to (continuance commitment), because they want to (affective commitment), and because they feel they should (Normative commitment) (Singh & Gupta, 2015).

Committed employees are a valuable asset to any firm, as their length of service is mostly determined by corporate commitment. Strong advocates, superb team players, low absenteeism, and high staff productivity are a few of the main advantages and benefits of organizational commitment (Kearney, 2017). However, a strong culture of teamwork, clear communication of expectations and goals to the workers, work ethics, a positive work culture, the development of trust, the encouragement of innovation, constructive criticism, effective task delegation, and many other factors are fundamentally important to continuance commitment (Singh & Gupta, 2015). to improve organizational commitment.

Every organisation has certain set goals to which resources are deployed, strategies and approaches are employed and efforts are channeled towards managing both human, material and technological resources and for general administration and running of an organization. Often called “management styles,” this phrase simply refers to an organizational management approach, which is defined as the way a manager administers an organization ((Singh & Gupta, 2015). It encompasses all strategies employed by the manager to encourage staff members to comply with their directives, including organizing, supervising, and directing. Instead of providing instructions on how to perform an action, management style serves as a framework for action. The degree to which a manager continuously and gradually guides subordinates toward a specified goal decided upon by the organization is a measure of their effectiveness. Management styles were categorized by Effere (2005) as participative, laissez-faire, democratic, autocratic, paternalistic, and persuading. Nonetheless, the focus of current study is participatory management.

A recurring subject in study on business, policy, and practice is participatory decision making. Determining whether management methods have a good or negative impact on performance has been the main goal of management (Somech, 2002). Bergen & Bressler (2014) state that the average worker in modern times seems content with management’s open-door policy when there are sufficient channels for efficient communication, consultation, and power delegation that includes some level of participation. Gupta (2015). This is known as participative management, and its goal is to involve people in the organization’s decision-making process in order to give them a sense of recognition and belonging. This could boost their morale because they will perceive themselves as highly significant members of the organization (Hartong & Koopman, 2011). Such person(s) will inevitably produce more in terms of productivity as a result of this (Goodnight, 2011). Because of this, an increasing number of organizations are adopting the practice of including their staff in managing the business (Ezekiel et al., 2015).

According to Issifu and Adinan (2014), the terms “participation in management” might refer to distributed leadership, open-book management, participative decision-making, employee empowerment, shared leadership, or industrial democracy. The concern of managers to foster more involvement of workers in decision making has been increasing in recent times owing to expected increase in workers’ commitment, satisfaction, and organizational success all that have been attributed to companies’ efforts in making their workforce a prominent concern (Steinheider & Wuestewald, 2016).  Giving members of a group, such as workers in an organization or residents in a community, the opportunity of involvement decision-making is known as participatory management (Guyot, 2011). With the use and encouragement of collaborative decision-making, managers are decentralizing authorities and decision-making efforts in organisation leading to high commitment of worker, higher quality decisions, and happily motivated workforce (Guyot, 2017).  Cotton et al. (2016) observe that participative management takes different format such as employee ownership, workers direct participation in work decisions, representative participation through unions or representatives of workers, consultations, informal participation by observation etc. Participative approach to management can be used in any form of organisation, big or small, but it is particularly characterized  by openness and employees’ empowerment through their involvement in  problem solving, consultation and organizational decision-making (Chan, 2019; Huang et al., 2021).

In public organisation, employees rely on their unions to bargain for them when it comes to better pay and working conditions. But without properly acknowledging employees’ rights to participate in decision-making, reaching a mutually advantageous agreement becomes challenging, which may have an impact on organizational productivity. Numerous organizational and individual elements affect how well a given management system works when it comes to raising employee performance (Ezekiel et al., 2015; Okpalibekwe et al., 2015).

The dynamics of participative management approach and organisational commitment of workers in this study is anchored on the transformational leadership theory and the social exchange theory.  James MacGregor Burns’ 1978 transformational leadership theory described the process and dynamic in which managers, supervisors, subordinates and every member of the work organisation lend support to each other with a view to ensuring that morale is high in achieving set heights and goal. His contributions, refined by Bass Bernard in 1981, established the groundwork for the idea that leadership is a process centered on relationships and the development of both leaders and followers. B. Expanding upon Burns’s exposition, Bass presented the notions of the “four I’s”: idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. These four elements became fundamental to the theory of transformational leadership, offering empirical support and facilitating the theory’s pragmatic implementation across diverse organizational settings

Idealized influence explains how leaders’ attitude and behaviour function as models of emulation by employees and how these translate to respect and trust accorded to the leader. When employees perceive their leaders as role models, they are more likely to develop a strong emotional attachment to the organization, increasing their affective commitment (Wang et al., 2014).  Inspirational motivation reflects the leaders’ characteristics of communicating compelling vision of the future and demonstrating enthusiasm and optimism, which inspire and motivate employees to strive for higher performance and align their personal goals with organizational goals (Puni et al., 2018).  According to Mittal and Dhar (2015), The third element of the transformational leadership paradigm, intellectual stimulation, shows how leaders can foster creativity and innovation by pushing staff members to exercise critical thinking and come up with novel solutions to challenges. Employee contributions and ideas are valued by them. Because it fosters a culture of ongoing learning and growth, this intellectual stimulation increases employees’ commitment by giving them a sense of worth and empowerment.  Lan et al (2020) describe individualized consideration as an attribute of transformational leaders, giving of personalized attention and mentorship to employees as. They understand and address the individual needs and aspirations of their team members.

The social exchange theory posits that social behaviour is the result of an exchange process aiming to maximize benefits and minimize costs.  According to the theory, relationships are maintained through a series of reciprocal exchanges that are perceived as fair and beneficial.  the key components of the theory are reciprocity, trust and Fairness, and Commitment.  Relating these components to participative management and organisational commitment of workers, reciprocity depicts mutual exchange of resources and benefits between employees and management; trust and fairness is the perception that the organization values and fairly treats employees; and commitment is the degree to which employees are dedicated to the organization based on the benefits received from their participation.  When management involves employees in decision-making, it creates a sense of reciprocity and trust, and employees perceive participative management as a benefit, leading to increased commitment.  Employees who feel valued and fairly treated are more likely to develop a stronger attachment to the organization, increasing their normative and affective commitment.

METHODOLOGY

This study employed the survey approach involving the use of questionnaire for the purpose of data collection. All employees, both teaching and non-teaching, at two public polytechnics in Ogun State (the Federal Polytechnic, Ilaro and the Moshood Abiola Polytechnic, Abeokuta) constituted the study’s population. The Polytechnics had three labor unions: the Senior Staff Association of Nigerian Polytechnics (SSANIP), the Non-Academic Staff Union (NASU), and the Academic Staff Union of Polytechnic.

Multi-stage sampling, involving purposive, stratification and randomization was adopted in the selection of the sample.  Purposive sampling was used to limit the selection of the sample to only the senior staff members. Stratified equal allocation was used to select 50 staff members (sampling unit) from each of the three union strata to make 150 participants from each school and a total of 300 from the two selected polytechnics.  Random sampling was used for the selection of subjects from each of the three union clusters across the two polytechnics to make 300 staff members surveyed in the study.   286 questionnaires were filled and returned, 5 were incorrectly or incompletely filled, thus leaving 281 that were used for analysis.

The following postulations were made:

H₀1: Participative Management does not have any significant contribution to normative commitment of workers in the selected pubic polytechnics in Ogun State.

H0₂: Participative Management does not have any significant contribution to affective commitment of workers in the selected pubic polytechnics in Ogun State.

H0₃: Participative Management does not have any significant contribution to continuance commitment of workers in the selected pubic polytechnics in Ogun State.

A 4-point likert questionnaire was designed and used as the instrument of data collection. Factor inputs for participative management were adapted from Employee Participation Scales of Chumba (2004) and Ugwu, et al. (2020).   Organisational Commitment has three scales – affective commitment, normative commitment and continuance commitment scales which were adapted from Allen and Meyer (1996) and Majid and Ibrahim (2017).

RESULTS

Table 1: Descriptive Responses on Participative Management

The table details descriptive statistics for each item on participative management.   The mean scores range from 3.40 to 3.85, indicating generally positive perceptions of participative management, the standard deviations range from 0.354 to 0.696, reflecting varying degrees of agreement among respondents, and the Kurtosis values range from -2.006 to 6.858, indicating varying distributions with some items having responses tightly clustered around the mean and others more spread out.  The average mean score of 3.644 suggests an overall positive perception of participative management, indicating that, respondents have a positive perception of participative management, and since the mean value is closer to 4 (on a likely 4-point scale), it suggests that respondents generally agree or strongly agree with the statements about participative management.  The average standard deviation of 0.555 indicates moderate variability in responses, and suggests that while there is some diversity in how respondents perceive participative management practices, there is a reasonable level of agreement among them.   The average skewness of -1.568 shows that the distribution of responses is negatively skewed. The average kurtosis of 2.372 suggests a leptokurtic distribution, meaning the responses are more peaked around the mean with some outliers. This indicates that while most respondents have similar positive perceptions, there are a few different responses.

Table 2:  Descriptive Responses on Normative Commitment

The table presents descriptive statistics for four items used to assess the workers’ level of Normative Commitment.  The overall average mean score of 3.7 indicates generally positive perceptions of normative commitment among respondents. This suggests that respondents feel a sense of obligation, loyalty, guilt, and indebtedness towards their organization.  From the table, the average standard deviation of 0.571 indicates moderate variability in responses, suggesting a fair degree of agreement among respondents.  While the skewness is -1.978, depicting a strong left skew, indicating that most responses are on the higher end of the scale, reflecting positive sentiments, the average kurtosis of 3.993 indicates a leptokurtic distribution, meaning responses are highly concentrated around the mean with fewer outliers.  The response pattern indicates a strong normative commitment of the employees to the organization – they feel obligated to stay, would feel guilty if they left, believe their organization deserves their loyalty, and feel indebted to their employer.  There is a strong consensus, particularly for “sense of obligation,” which suggests a strong consensus among respondents, with most people giving high ratings to these items.

While the result revealed that there is some variability in responses, the skewness and standard deviation values suggest that most respondents lean towards a positive perception of their normative commitment.  The results suggest that the organization enjoys a high level of normative commitment from its employees, which could be beneficial for retention and overall organizational stability.

Table 3:  Descriptive Responses on Affective Commitment

In the above table, all the respondents expressed perceptions indicating positive sentiment to each of the items.  The overall average mean score of 3.7 indicates generally positive sentiments towards affective commitment among the respondents, and an illustration that the respondents are happy to spend their careers at the organization, see its problems as their own, feel a familial connection, have an emotional attachment, and feel a sense of belonging.  On the average, the standard deviation of 0.555 indicates moderate variability in responses, suggesting a fair degree of agreement among respondents.  Skewness value of -2.0438 further reflects positive sentiments about affective commitment, and the average kurtosis of 5.1402 indicates that the responses are highly concentrated around the mean with fewer outliers.  Overall, the responses indicate that employees have a positive affective commitment to their organization. They generally feel happy, see organizational problems as their own, feel a familial bond, have an emotional attachment, and feel a sense of belonging to the organization.  The table reveal strong consensus in the high kurtosis values, particularly for items like “seeing the organisation’s problems as my own,” suggest a strong consensus among respondents, with most people giving high ratings to these items.  This analysis suggests that the organization enjoys a high level of affective commitment from its employees, which could be beneficial for employee engagement, motivation, and overall organizational performance.

Table 4:  Descriptive Responses on Affective Commitment

This table presents statistical measures for items relating to continuance commitment towards an organization. These are statements or items that assess different aspects of continuance commitment, which reflects the perceived costs associated with leaving an organization.

The mean values range from 3.48 to 3.76, centered around 3.644 for the average.  Std. Dev values range from 0.482 to 0.616, with an average of 0.5372.  Negative skewness values (-1.645 to -2.737) indicate that the distributions are skewed to the left (fewer extreme low values and more high values), especially notable in “Level of likely disruption” and “Scarcity of options”.  Positive skewness (0.77) for “Personal sacrifice” suggests a slight skew to the right, indicating more respondents might perceive higher personal sacrifices.  High kurtosis (e.g., 9.768 for “Level of likely disruption”) indicates a distribution with heavier tails and more extreme values, potentially reflecting strong opinions or varied perceptions about the disruption caused by leaving the organization.

The average mean score of 3.644 suggests a high level of continuance commitment across all items.  The item “Level of likely disruption” stands out with a higher mean (3.76) and significantly higher kurtosis (9.768), indicating that respondents perceive a notable disruption if they were to leave the organization. The negative skewness (-2.737) suggests that most respondents are in agreement regarding this potential disruption.  The standard deviations show that there is variability in how respondents perceive the necessity of staying (“Necessity of staying”) and the scarcity of leaving options (“Scarcity of options”), despite similar mean scores. The wide range of kurtosis values indicates varying degrees of extreme responses or outliers across different items, particularly evident in “Level of likely disruption”.

Hypotheses

The hypotheses were tested with regression statistics at 0.05 level of significance.  Hence, each test of hypothesis was taken as significant if the P-value was less than 0.05 and the null hypothesis was rejected.

Hypothesis 1:Participative Management does not have any significant contribution to normative commitment of workers in the selected pubic polytechnics in Ogun State.

Table 5:  Model Summary

The table presents the results of a correlation analysis for the relationship of participative management style (PM) being the independent variable and normative commitment (NC), the dependent variable. The R coefficient of 0.322 indicates a moderate positive correlation between Participative Management Style (PM) and Normative Commitment (NC). It suggests that as participative management increases, normative commitment also tends to increase. R-square value (Coefficient of Determination) of 0.104 points to approximately 10.4% of the variance in Normative Commitment (NC) that can be attributed to participative management style (PM). This means that participative management is responsible for a small but significant portion of the variation in NC.

Table 6:  ANOVA^a

The ANOVA table above presents the analysis of variance results for the regression model.  The model fits the data well, as indicated by the significant F-statistic (32.218) with a p-value of 0.000. This implies that the model explains a significant portion of the variance in Normative Commitment (NC).  The statistical significance depicted by the very low p-value (0.000) confirms that the relationship between PM and NC is statistically significant, meaning that PM significantly contributes to explaining variations in NC among workers in the selected polytechnics in Ogun State.  The results implies that participative management style has a significant impact on the normative commitment of workers.

Table 7:  Coefficients^a

The results suggest that participative management style (PM) has a statistically significant positive influence on normative commitment (NC) among workers in the polytechnics studied in Ogun State. Specifically, for every one-unit increase in participative management style, normative commitment is predicted to increase by approximately 0.237 units, after accounting for other factors (if included in the model). This positive coefficient suggests a direct relationship where improvements in participative management are associated with higher levels of normative commitment among employees.  The Constant (13.398) which is the expected value of normative commitment when participative management is zero, represents the baseline level of normative commitment in the absence of participative management.   The t-value (5.676) assesses the hypothesis that the coefficient is different from zero. The high t-value here suggests that PM significantly influences NC, and the p-value of 0.000 (which is less than 0.05) confirms that the relationship between PM and NC is statistically significant, and very unlikely to have occurred by random chance.  With these results, the null hypothesis 1 was rejected and the alternative hypothesis accepted.

Hypothesis 2: Participative Management does not have any significant contribution to affective commitment of workers in the selected pubic polytechnics in Ogun State.

Table 8:  Model Summary

The R value of 0.408 above indicates a moderate positive correlation between participative management (PM) and affective commitment (AC). This suggests that as participative management practices increase, affective commitment among workers tends to increase as well. This correlation, while moderate, points to a meaningful relationship that could have practical implications for institutional management.   However, the R² value of 0.166 indicates that 16.6% of the variance in affective commitment is explained by participative management, suggesting that while PM is a significant factor in influencing AC, there are other factors contributing to the remaining 83.4% of the variance. This could be as a result of the complexity of affective commitment and the significance of other influential factors on affective commitment of the workers.  This is further strengthened with the adjusted R² of 0.163, slightly lower than the R². reinforcing the notion that while PM is a relevant factor, additional variables likely play significant roles in determining affective commitment.

Table 9: ANOVA^a

The ANOVA results above show that the regression model is statistically significant (p-value < 0.05).  It depicts that participative management significantly influences affective commitment, making it a crucial factor for to consider in this context.  The F-value of 55.591 suggests a strong explanatory power of the test, and suggesting that the implementation of participative management practices will foster employees’ emotional attachment.  The P-value of 0.000 in the ANOVA results implies that participative management style has a significant impact on the affective commitment of the workers.

Table 10: Coefficients^a

As shown in Table 10, the unstandardized coefficient for the constant (8.058) represents the expected level of affective commitment when participative management is zero. This baseline indicates that even without participative management, there is a moderate level of inherent commitment. The unstandardized coefficient for PM (0.278) indicates that for each unit increase in participative management, affective commitment increases by 0.278 units. This positive coefficient suggests that enhancing participative management practices can lead to a noticeable increase in employees’ affective commitment.  The t-statistic for PM (7.456) is significantly higher than the critical value, indicating that PM is a significant predictor of AC. This high t-value provides strong evidence that the relationship between PM and AC is robust.  With p-value (0.000), it is confirmed that the relationship between participative management and affective commitment is statistically significant, which is highly unlikely a result of a random chance situation, thus providing statistical support to reject the null hypothesis 2, and accept that participative management has significant contribution to affective commitment of workers in the selected pubic polytechnics in Ogun State.

Hypothesis 3: Participative Management does not have any significant contribution to continuance commitment of workers in the selected pubic polytechnics in Ogun State.

Table 11:  Model Summary

An overview of the relationship of continuance commitment (CC), reflecting employees’ perceived costs of leaving the organization, with participative management (PM) is provided in the model summary above.  The correlation coefficient (R) of 0.222 indicates a weak positive relationship between PM and CC. suggesting a slight rise in continuance commitment among employees as an outcome of participative management practices in the selected Polytechnics.  The coefficient of determination denoted by R² value of 0.049 implies that only 4.9% of the variance in continuance commitment can be attributed to participative management practices.  At a moderate level of prediction accuracy, this implies the dominance of other factors outside this test influencing the employees’ continuance commitment.

Table 12:  ANOVA^a

The ANOVA table delves deeper into the significance of the regression model.  The F-statistic of 14.468 depicts the overall significance of the regression. A higher F-value indicates a more significant relationship between PM and CC.  The low p-value (0.000) suggests strong evidence that there is a significant relationship between the variables. This means that changes in continuance commitment are associated with changes in participative management practices, although the effect size (R² = 0.049) suggests that PM explains only a small portion of the variability in continuance commitment.

Table 13:  Coefficients^a

The coefficients table provides specific details about the magnitude of influence of participative management practices and continuance commitment.  For every one-unit increase in PM, CC is predicted to increase by 0.184 units.  From the result, participative management demonstrates a statistically significant but relatively modest impact on continuance commitment among workers in the public polytechnics. While PM enhances CC, its effectiveness depends on various contextual factors within the organizational setting.

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

Findings from this study underscores the complex dynamics of employee commitment and the role of management practices in shaping such organizational outcomes. Implementing effective participatory management strategies can contribute to a more engaged workforce and foster a supportive organizational environment conducive to achieving institutional goals.  The findings indicate that participative management is well-regarded by the respondents, with most agreeing that such practices are present and beneficial within their institution. This positive perception is consistent, with moderate variability and a tendency for responses to cluster around higher values, reflecting strong approval of participative management practices.

The aggregate result revealed good positive contributions of participative management to organisational commitment of workers in the selected polytechnics.  These findings support Cotton et al. (2016) and Al-Jabari and Ghazzawi (2019) that the level involvement and sense of belonging shared in an organisation determine workers’ dedication and performance on their jobs.  The findings portray significant positive relationship between participative management and each of the levels of organisational commitment– normative, affective and continuance commitment of the workers.  The engagement of workers unions in decision making on matters affecting their members facilitates the workers’ willingness to be part of the process of implementing the decisions.  The workers will display sense of obligations to remain with the polytechnics, have the feeling of guilt or feel indebted to leave.  This lends support to Jabari and Ghazzawi (2019) that participatory approach to management and decision making is directly related to level of commitment felt and portrayed by workers.

This result shows varying level of impact of participative management on normative, affective and continuance commitment with affective commitment yielding higher influence from participative management, followed by normative commitment.  This portrays that the workers in the public polytechnics exhibit varying levels of the organisational commitment parameters as posited by Eralm (2020) that workers in an organisation can experience the three or two of the three levels of commitment in varying degrees.  This is an indication that the level of involvement of workers in decision on issues affecting them, employment condition, performance and evaluation, remuneration, welfare, training opportunities and arrangement, enhance commitment to the actualization of initiatives and implementation of policies of the management.

The commitment of educators and administrative staff is essential in fostering a conducive learning environment, promoting inclusive education, and ensuring high standards of teaching and research. The present study found that participative management significantly enhance this commitment.  This approach to management practices allows employees to have a voice in decisions that affect their work and the institution’s direction. This involvement increases their sense of ownership and responsibility, thereby enhancing their organizational commitment. For instance, Kim (2002) found that participative management practices significantly boost job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Similarly, Spreitzer (1995) noted that psychological empowerment, a key component of participative management, leads to higher levels of employee motivation and commitment.

As Meyer and Allen (1991) highlight, employees who feel their input is valued are more likely to develop strong emotional ties to their institution. This emotional bond is particularly important in tertiary education, where the quality of teaching and research depends heavily on the dedication and passion of the staff.  similarly, normative commitment, which reflects a sense of obligation to remain with the organization, can also be strengthened through participative management. When employees are involved in decision-making, they develop a sense of loyalty and duty towards their institution. This loyalty is critical for retaining talented educators and researchers, which is essential for maintaining high standards of education and achieving SDGs related to education. Cotton et al. (1988) found that participative decision-making practices lead to higher levels of normative commitment, as employees feel morally obligated to stay with an organization that values their contributions.

The need for workers to perceive greater personal investment in the organization, making the prospect of leaving less appealing, is particularly relevant in public tertiary institutions, where the continuity of academic programmes and research initiatives is crucial. Empirical evidence suggests that participative management reduces turnover intentions, thereby enhancing continuance commitment (Dirks & Ferrin, 2002).

Public polytechnics and other tertiary institutions with high levels of organizational commitment are better positioned to implement policies and practices that promote access to quality education for all, including marginalized and disadvantaged groups. UNESCO (2017) underscores the role of committed educators in achieving SDG targets such as equal access to tertiary education and the elimination of gender disparities in education.

Furthermore, committed employees are more likely to engage in continuous professional development, thereby enhancing their skills and competencies.Participative management fosters a collaborative culture that is essential for research and innovation. Through, participative management, institutions can foster a more engaged and motivated workforce, which is essential for achieving educational quality and equity.

Strengthening the affective, normative, and continuance commitment of employees can reduce turnover rates, thereby maintaining institutional stability and continuity in achieving long-term educational goals.   Committed and engaged employees are more likely to contribute effectively to the institution’s mission of providing inclusive and quality education.

A study by Cummings and Oldham (1997) highlighted that collaborative efforts in research settings lead to higher quality and more impactful outcomes, contributing to the institution’s overall innovation capacity.   In addition, establishing committees that include representatives from various staff levels ensures diverse perspectives are considered in decision-making processes, enhancing the inclusivity and effectiveness of these decisions.  Regularly soliciting and acting on feedback from staff members demonstrates that their opinions are valued, increasing trust and commitment.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study confirm that employee participation in decision-making and management procedures is a requirement of participative management. According to the study’s findings, it can be said that allowing employees to participate in decision-making raises their level of commitment while also encouraging creativity and innovation within the company. Participatory decision-making is a useful tool for increasing workers’ organizational commitment. Employee commitment to the organization increases when they are required to participate in decision-making in any capacity. This is because they feel acknowledged, motivated, and like they are part of a team that is working toward the organization’s goal because they are involved in the decision-making process.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the result of this study, it is concluded that participative management guarantees the involvement of workers on important decision relating to their job, their wellbeing in the organisation, performance evaluation and growth in the organisation.  It is the management technique that is directly related to the organisational commitment of workers in the selected polytechnics and is capable of earning the support and loyalty of the workers to the vision, ideals and policies that are critical to the achievement of the organisational objectives.

Earning organizational commitment through participative management and employee involvement is essential for the sustainability and success of tertiary institutions. Empirical evidence supports the notion that these strategies improve job satisfaction, reduce turnover, and foster innovation, aligning with several SDGs, including quality education, decent work, and economic growth. By creating an inclusive and respectful organizational culture, tertiary institutions can enhance their workforce’s commitment, contributing to their long-term sustainability and effectiveness

In tandem with the findings, it is recommended that Management of pubic polytechnics should strengthen the involvement of the workers in important decision-making process, Heads of departments, unit and sections should pay attention to the need to carry their team along especially on work-related issues and major decisions in the institutions. In a similar way, workers should be adequately informed of major decisions and happenings in the institutions with a view to facilitating sense of recognition and belonging.  While workers’ onions should regularly update their members on important decisions about their working condition, performance evaluation and career growth, the window of involvement or participation should be utilized effectively by the unions to drive home their needs and aspirations.

REFERENCES

1. Akhmad, B. A., Suryadi, B. & Rajiani, I. (2020). Communicating the dissatisfaction in workplace among public sector employees: Loyalty and neglect as an alternative model of responses. Polish Journal of Management Studies 21(1), 9-20.
2. Al-Jabari, B. & Ghazzawi, I. (2019). Organisational commitment: A Review of the conceptual and empirical literature and a research agenda. International Leadership Journal, 11(1), 78-119.
3. Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63(1), 1-18.
4. Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1996). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: An examination of construct validity. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 49(3), 252-276.
5. Bernardes, A. (2015). Implementation of participatory management model: Analysis from a political perspective. Journal of Nursing Management, 23(7), 888-897.
6. Burton, V. W., & Wells, T. L. (2014). Retaining and motivating employees: Compensation preferences in Hong Kong and China. Personnel Review, 31(4), 402-431.
7. Chan, S. (2019). Participative leadership and job satisfaction: The mediating role of work engagement and the moderating role of fun experienced at work. Leadership & Organisational Development Journal. 40, 319–333. 10.1108/LODJ-06-2018-0215.
8. Chumba, J. R. (2004). A survey of employee participation in management in the top ranking private secondary schools in Nairobi. International Journal of Leadership Perspectives, 4(5), 121-134.
9. Cotton J. L., David A. V. & Kenneth R. J. (1988).  Employee participation: Diverse forms and different outcomes. Academic Management Review 13, 8-22.
10. Cummings, A., & Oldham, G. R. (1997). Enhancing creativity: Managing work contexts for the high potential employee. California Management Review, 40(1), 22-38.
11. Daly, M. C., et al. (2014). Organizational climate, performance, and participatory management. International Journal of Public Administration, 37(8), 495-507.
12. Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 611-628.
13. Emami, M. & Darabi, M. (2012). Organisational commitment and the implications for employees and organisations.  Elixir Psychology 49, 10147-10151.
14. Ezekiel, K. M., Thomas, K. C. & Joseph, K. K. (2015). Impact of participatory management on employee performance: A case of moi university.  Global Journal of Commerce and Management Perspective, 4(2), 54-59.
15. Goodnight R. (2011). Laissez-Faire Leadership. Encyclopedia of Leadership. London, UK: Sage Publications.
16. Guyot, Sylvain (2011). The instrumentalization of participatory management in protected areas: The Ethnicization of participation in the Kolla-Atacameña Region of the Central Andes of Argentina and Chile. Journal of Latin American Geography. 10(2),  9–36. .
17. Hartong, D. N. D. & Koopman, P. L. (2011). Leadership in organizations. Handbook of industrial, work & organizational psychology, SAGE Publications, 166-187.
18. Huang S. Y. B., Li M. W., Chang T. W. (2021). Transformational leadership, ethical leadership, and participative leadership in predicting counterproductive work behaviors: evidence from financial technology firms. Front. Psychol. 12:658727. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.658727
19. Huang X., Lunj L.A., Gong Y. (2010). Does participative leadership enhance work performance by inducing empowerment or trust? Behaviour, 31 (1), pp. 122-143.
20. Issifu A. A. & Adinan B. S. (2014).   Participatory decision making and employee productivity: A case study of community banks in the Upper East region of Ghana.  Business and Economics Journal, 2(4).
21. Kearney W. (2017) A Proven Receipt for Success: The Seven Elements of World Class Manufacturing.  National Productivity Review. 16: 67-76.
22. Kim, S. (2002). Participative management and job satisfaction: Lessons for management leadership. Public Administration Review, 62(2), 231-241.
23. Lan, T., Okechuku, C., Zhang, H., & Cao, M. (2020). How transformational leadership influences team performance: The mediating roles of collective efficacy and team trust. Management Decision, 58(8), 1427-1442. doi:10.1108/MD-12-2018-1364.
24. Majid, M. & Ibrahim, A. (2017).  Measurement of organisational commitment and factors influencing the level of commitment of employees: An empirical investigation of higher education system.  International Journal of Management & Business Studies, 7(1), 14–18
25. Meyer, J. P., et al. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61(1), 20-52.
26. Meyer, JP & Herscovich, L. (2014). “Commitment in the workplace: Toward a general model “Human Resources Management Review, 11: 299 -326.
27. Mittal, S., & Dhar, R. L. (2015). Transformational leadership and employee creativity: Mediating role of creative self-efficacy and moderating role of knowledge sharing. Management Decision, 53(5), 894-910. doi:10.1108/MD-07-2014-0464.
28. Munna1, A. S.  & Abukalam, M. D. (2021). Teaching and learning process to enhance teaching effectiveness: A literature review. International Journal of Humanities and Innovation, 4(1), 1-4.
29. Okpalibekwe, U. N., Onyekwelu, R. U. &   Dike, E. E. (2015).  Collective bargaining and organizational performance:  A Study of the Nigeria Union of Local Government Employees of Idemili North Local Government Council, Anambra State (2007 -2012). Public Policy and Administration Research, 5(4), 53-68.
30. Puni, A., Mohammed, I., & Asamoah, E. S. (2018). Transformational leadership and job satisfaction: The moderating effect of contingent reward. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 39(4), 522-537. doi:10.1108/LODJ-11-2017-0358.
31. Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580-607.
32. Voogt, J. M., Pieters, J. M., & Handelzalts, A. (2016). Teacher collaboration in curriculum design teams: effects, mechanisms, and conditions. Educational Research and Evaluation, 22(3–4), 121–140.
33. Singh, A., & Gupta, B. (2015). Job involvement, organisational commitment, professional commitment and team commitment. International Journal of Management Review, 22(6), 1192-1211.
34. Somech, A. (2002). Explicating the complexity of participative management: An investigation of multiple dimensions. Journal of Educational Administration, 38(3), 341-371.
35. Steinheider, Bayerl & Wuestewald, R. (2016). Participative decision making, Retrieved from http://academics/research/particpative_decision-making.htm
36. Ugwu K. E., Ijeoma C. C. & Nnaji-ihedinmah N. C. (2020). Participatory management and employee satisfaction: Evidence from Afam Power Plc, Port Harcourt, River State, Nigeria.  Transatlantic Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 2(1-2), 57-80
37. United Nations. (2023). Sustainable Development Goals. Retrieved from https://sdgs.un.org/goals.
38. Wang, H., Sui, Y., Luthans, F., Wang, D., & Wu, Y. (2014). Impact of authentic leadership on performance: Role of followers’ positive psychological capital and relational processes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35(1), 5-21. doi:10.1002/job.1850.
39. Wang, Q., Hou, H. & Li, Z. (2022).  Participative leadership: A literature review and prospects for future research. Front Psychol. 3(13). doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.924357.
40. Wayne, S. J., Shore, L. M., & Liden, R. C. (1997). Perceived organizational support and leader-member exchange: A social exchange perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 40(1), 82-111. doi:10.2307/257021.