THE EFFECT OF ORGANISATION STRUCTURES AND COMPENSATION POLICIES ON EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE IN PUBLIC SERVICE INSTITUTIONS IN KENYA, A CASE OF THE WATER SECTOR TRUST FUND

WINNIE SIALO TINKOY, FESTUS H. MAKHAMARA, PhD

Abstract


Public service institutions have often been handicapped by inappropriate organisational structures featuring excessive levels of bureaucracy and characterised by formalisation, specialisation, impersonality and hierarchy. Many public sector organisations do not provide competitive compensation levels for their employees owing to pay structures that do not factor into consideration prevailing market valuations of certain jobs. The study’s objectives were to determine the influence of organisational structures, and compensation policies on employee performance in public service institutions in Kenya, A case of the Water Sector Trust Fund. The study adopted coordination theory and the expectancy theory of motivation. This study applied a descriptive research design. It focused on a target population of 150 staff of WSTF in their office premises in Nairobi County. A questionnaire was used for data collection due to the benefit of inclusion of more extensive enquiries. It then used SPSS as a platform for conducting the descriptive data analysis, correlation analysis and regression analysis. The results were then presented through the use of a mixture of graphs and tables. The study findings were that; WSTF has incorporated an organisational structure that has enhanced employee performance as evidenced by the adoption of a hierarchical structure where each manager oversees a smaller group of employees; and making decentralisation more effective through the adaptation to specific circumstances and objectives through a public sector restructuring exercise. However, more needs to be done to reduce the level of bureaucracy and the centralisation of top level decision making, as well as ensuring clarity in the management structures so as to remove blurred lines of authority and responsibility. The organisation has institutionalised compensation policies that have led to improved employee performance. WSTF has ensured the integration of communication content control in an effort to improve its communication. However, it has failed to enhance the competencies of their staff in essential skills such as communication despite having a bloated workforce. The performance of employees has been assured through positive reinforcements and fair treatment; greater job involvement of employees by adopting high performance work systems; and engaging in improved processes, procedures and techniques of innovation. However, it has been hampered by poor remuneration, delayed payment of salaries, stagnation in one position or job group for long.

Key Words: Coordination Techniques, Organisation Structures, Compensation Policies, Employee Performance Public Service Institutions

CITATION: Tinkoy, W. S., & Makhamara, F. H. (2023). The effect of organisation structures and compensation policies on employee performance in public service institutions in Kenya, A case of the Water Sector Trust Fund. The Strategic Journal of Business & Change Management, 10 (1), 440 – 453.


Full Text:

PDF

References


Agolla, J. E., & Van Lill, J. (2014). Assessment of Innovation in Public Sector Organisations in Kenya. ECIE 2014 University of Ulster and School of Social Enterprises Ireland Belfast, UK 18-19 September 2014, 1.

Ahmady, G. A., Mehrpour, M., & Nikooravesh, A. (2016). Organizational structure. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 230, 455-462.

Alford, J., & Greve, C. (2017). Strategy in the public and private sectors: Similarities, differences and changes. Administrative Sciences, 7(4), 35.

Araigua, G. (2020). The effects of employee empowerment strategies on employee job performance at Technical University of Kenya (Doctoral dissertation, University of Nairobi).

Bardram, J. (1998). Collaboration, coordination and computer support: An activity theoretical approach to the design of computer supported cooperative work. Ph. D. Thesis. DAIMI Report Series, 27(533).

Bhunia, A. (2013). Statistical methods for practice and research (A guide to data analysis using SPSS). South Asian Journal of Management, 20(1), 154.

Bindrees, M. A., Pooley, R. J., Ibrahim, I. S., & Bental, D. S. (2014). How public organisational structures influence software development processes. Journal of Computer Science, 10(12), 2593-2607.

Bogdał, M. (2013). Communication management in public sectors: the case of the Polish energy sector. Comunicação Pública, 8(n14), 7-23.

Butt, M. R., Imran, A., Shah, F. T., & Jabbar, A. (2013). Perception of organizational politics and job outcomes in a public sector organization: the moderating role of teamwork. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 18(9), 1268-1276.

Chemouni, B. (2017). The politics of core public sector reform in Rwanda. ESID Working Paper No. 88.

Collm, A., & Schedler, K. (2014). Strategies for introducing organizational innovation to public service organizations. Public Management Review, 16(1), 140-161.

Crowston, K., Rubleske, J., & Howison, J. (2015). Coordination theory: A ten-year retrospective. In Human-computer interaction and management information systems: Foundations (pp. 134-152). Routledge.

Curtis, C. A. (2015). Understanding communication and coordination among government and service organisations after a disaster. Disasters, 39(4), 611-625.

Dahiru, T. (2008). P-value, a true test of statistical significance? A cautionary note. Annals of Ibadan postgraduate medicine, 6(1), 21-26.

Daniel, C. O. (2019). Compensation management and its impact on organizational commitment. International Journal of Contemporary Applied Researches, 6(2), 26-36.

Erkoc, T. E. (2017). Bureaucracy and Efficiency. Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance, ed. Farazmand A. (Cham: Springer, 2017), 1-7.

Fatimayin, F. O. (2018). What is communication? The National University of Nigeria.

Figenschou, T. U., Fredriksson, M., Kolltveit, K., & Pallas, J. (2021). Public bureaucracies. Power, Communication, and Politics in the Nordic Countries, 325.

Franken, E., & Plimmer, G. (2019). Mediocre and harmful public sector leadership. International Journal of Public Leadership, 15(4), 274-296.

Fred, C. L. (2011). Expectancy theory of motivation: Motivating by altering expectations. International Journal of Management, Business and Administration, 15(1), 1-6.

Fredriksson, M., & Pallas, J. (2018). Public sector communication. The International Encyclopedia of Strategic Communications. Eds: RL Heath, W. Johansen. Wiley-Blackwell.

Gautam, A. (2020). Role of coordination in effective public service delivery system. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 10(3), 158-201.

Gneezy, U., Leibbrandt, A., & List, J. A. (2016). Ode to the sea: Workplace organizations and norms of cooperation. The Economic Journal, 126(595), 1856–1883. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44076877

Gomes, P. (2018). Heterogeneity and the public sector wage policy. International Economic Review, 59(3), 1469–1489. http://www.jstor.org/stable/45018797

Gordon, N., Davidoff, F., Tarnow, E., Reidenberg, M. M., & Endriss, K. (2002). A question of response rate. Science, 25(1), 25.

Grant, C., & Osanloo, A. (2014). Understanding, selecting, and integrating a theoretical framework in dissertation research: Developing a “blueprint” for your house. Administrative Issues Journal Education Practice and Research, 4 (2), 12–26.

Hamilton, D. F., Ghert, M., & Simpson, A. H. R. W. (2015). Interpreting regression models in clinical outcome studies. British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery, London, United Kingdom, 4(9), 152-153.

Hanafi, H. M., & Ibrahim, S. B. (2018). Impact of employee skills on service performance. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR, 7(12), 587-600.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.61426/sjbcm.v10i1.2550

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

PAST ISSUES:
20242023202220212020201920182017201620152014
Vol 11, No 2 [2024]Vol 10, No 4 [2023]Vol 9, No 4 [2022]Vol 8, No 4 [2021]Vol 7, No 4 [2020]Vol 6, No 4 [2019]Vol 5, No 4 [2018]Vol 4, No 4 [2017]Vol 3, No 4 [2016]Vol 2, No 2 [2015]Vol 1, No 2 [2014]
 Vol 11, No 1 [2024] Vol 10, No 3 [2023] Vol 9, No 3 [2022]Vol 8, No 3 [2021]Vol 7, No 3 [2020]Vol 6, No 3 [2019]Vol 5, No 3 [2019]Vol 4, No 3 [2017]Vol 3, No 3 [2016]Vol 2, No 1 [2015]Vol 1, No 1 [2014]
  Vol 10, No 2 [2023] Vol 9, No 2 [2022]Vol 8, No 2 [2021]Vol 7, No 2 [2020]Vol 6, No 2 [2019]Vol 5, No 2 [2018]Vol 4, No 2 [2017]Vol 3, No 2 [2016]  
  Vol 10, No 1 [2023] Vol 9, No 1 [2022]  Vol 8, No 1 [2021]Vol 7, No 1 [2020]Vol 6, No 1 [2019]Vol 5, No 1 [2018]Vol 4, No 1 [2017]Vol 3, No 1 [2016]   


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.