ABSTRACT
Staffs training development are indispensable features if an establishment is achieving its aims in an environment that is ever dynamic and volatile. In the same vein, establishments operate policies the making of which employees may have input. In line with the above, this study is an investigation into the impact of training and development on organizational effectiveness within the financial service sector.
With reference to Union Bank of Nigeria Plc, Lagos, the researcher relied on primary data obtained from the staff of the organization by means of questionnaire administration. The sample size of the research was determined from the staff strength using the random sampling method. The results of tested hypotheses revealed that training and development of employees increase efficiency in policy making.
Similarly, the non-challant attitudes of management toward training could hinder employees’ participation in policy making. In conclusion, priority given to staff training and development is reflected in the quality of policy and the sophistication of the policy making process. As part of its recommendations, the study highlighted, among others, the need to extend training to all levels of staff and ensure that the issue is not unduly politicized.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title ii
Certification iii
Dedication iv
Acknowledgements v
Abstract vi
Table of Contents. vii-viii
CHAPTER ONE
Introduction
1.1 Background to the Study 1
1.2 Statement of the Problem 1
1.3 Purpose of the Study 3
1.4 Significance of the Study 4
1.5 Statement of Hypothesis 5
1.6 Scope of Study 6
1.7 Limitations of the Study 7
1.8 Definition of Terms 7
1.9 The Corporate Profile of Union Bank of Nigeria Plc 8
CHAPTER TWO
2.0 Literature Review 11
2.1 Introduction 11
2.2 The Concept of Policy 12
2.3 Policy Formulation and Policy Options 16
2.4 Training and Development 22
2.5 Determination of Training Needs 35
2.6 Content of Training and Development Pgrogramme 37
2.7 Evaluation of Training and Development 39
2.8 Types of Training 43
2.9 Relationship between Training, Development and
Education 48
2.10 Conclusion 50
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 Research Methodology 51
3.1 Research Design 51
3.2 Population of Study 51
3.3 Sampling Size 51
3.4 Sampling Method 52
3.5. Sources of Data 52
3.6 Validity of the Measuring Instrument 52
3.7 Reliability of the Measuring Instrument 53
3.8 Method of Data Collection 53
3.9 Method of Data Analysis 53
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 Data Analysis and Interpretation 54
4.1 Data Analysis 54
4.2 Hypothesis Testing 62
CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 Summary, Conclusion and Recommendations 69
5.1 Summary 69
5.2 Conclusion 70
5.3 Recommendations 71
Bibliography 72
Appendix
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
Organizations are agents or organs of policy implementation, and within the context of their delivery of service or production, they are also empowered to make certain policies. Policy making is an integral feature of every establishment which has been designed for specific goals.
However, policy making is not considered as the common prerogative of all staff members. Effective policy making is thus a function of experience, competence and functional training.
While the government defines its policy objectives and fashions out policy statements in practically all spheres of national life, establishmentsare expected to operate within the confines of laid down policies.
Training and development are means by which employees’ productivity is enhanced (Collins, 2001 164). At the same time, top officials’ sensitivity and ability to formulate and respond to policies may receive impetus from training and development as Balogun (1997:74) rightly points out
The irony of how training and development are handled in the public sector lies in the poor commitment to such programmes. In an age when corruption appears to have occupied a large proportion of government business, money allocated for training and development is either diverted or those who in fact should have been given the opportunity for training are never considered. The fact that policies are prone to public criticism suggests that those who formulate policies and those who implement them should be expose to regular training and development programmes as Daily’s work (2004:35) concludes.
Because of the whims and caprices exhibited by human beings, and in an Attempt to avoid domination by the mighty, policy making is inevitable as this ensures that people conduct themselves within a civilized frame of behavior. On the other hand, the process of training is ultimately aimed at coursing a significant increase and change in the ability of employees to contribute to the effectiveness of an establishment and laid down policies.
(Makinde,2005:17) Training is considered as pervasive management activity occurring within an organizational context.
It is generally believed that the government ought to promote public Interest and justify its actions as being in the public interest. In most cases, people’s appreciation of government is restricted to making and enforcement of laws. They simply have not given any prominent weight to government’s role in formulating and implementing public policies (Jeffery, 2002:19). Perhaps only the enlightened and concerned members of the academic and social critics have done this, and will continue to do so.
In many cases, however, every training activity is aimed at accomplishing the dual function of utilizing and improving existing skills and techniques of operating. However, to achieve success, training activities or practices must fulfill certain important conditions.
Employees must also fully understand and appreciate the reason for Undergoing a certain training activity.
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Organizations are supposed to be the vehicles for bearing and implementing policies in order to realize latent objectives. In the same process, they have the prerogative to make certain policies within their areas of operational jurisdiction. Apart from the fact that most public establishments pay lip service to training, others invest in training and development but hardly obtain value-returns in terms of relevant expectations. Some factors may be responsible.
Perhaps the attitude of employees to training and development is not tuned right. It may also be possible that employees fail to see any personal benefits from such training and development programmes. Many establishments approach and meet training needs in an adhoc or haphazard way without a systematic objective expected in behavioural terms from employees at the end of such training and development terms from employees at the end of such training and development programmes. This is where the need for evaluation arises.
To achieve the objectives of effective training and development, there has to be a proper articulation of staff development scheme for all levels of staff and a well-designed plan of deploying staff appropriately. But such features appear lacking a Union Bank of Nigeria Plc. Again, Inadequate funding is another constraint to the successful implementation of training and development plans. Employees may attend a training programme
That has no direct bearing on the tasks they perform daily. This cannot in any way sharpen their ability to contribute to the process of policy making nor implementation. Where staff training and development are not carried out or they lack the quality that can improve the skills of employees, employees’ ability to improve the policy making process will be negatively affected. Quality policy making is the product of sound training and development of staff, but much inadequacy is apparent in service establishments including Union Bank of Nigeria Plc.
1.3. PURPOSE OF STUDY
In order to arrive at a logical conclusion and ensure that a research is not conducted in a disorderly manner, the purpose of study is imperative.
The study has been designed:
I. To examine the relationship between staff training and policy making:
II. To examine the relationship between staff development and policy making;
III. To ascertain the extent to which staff development has any impact on policy making;
IV. To ascertain the extent to which staff development has any impact in policy making;
V. To find out ways and means of instituting standard staff training and development schemes that would make for improved performance in terms of policy making in a service establishment; and
VI. To make recommendations, where necessary, based on the findings from the study.
1.4 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
This study is considered significant and a valuable addition to the store of existing knowledge in the area of training, development and policy making. A considerable difference exists between the principles and practice of training. However, only very few materials, if any, provide empirical evidence to back this assertion. Again, materials that provide a detailed description of training and development in view of policy making in service establishments are scarce. This gap is being therefore filled with this study.
If training activities do not achieve their objectives, a good starting point would be to discover if such activities conform to the principles under which they are practiced. Therefore, this study would provide valuable insight as to reasons why training and development should sharpen officers’ ability to make and implement good policies. The results of this study, it is expected, would have strong implication on organizational policies as regards training, development and policy making.
As such, administrators, policy analysts, critics, managers and top government functionaries among others are bound to benefit immensely from this study. It s recommendations would also help in making effective policies at the establishment level. Students within the fields of public administration, political science, human resources management and interested members of the public would serve as a detailed and systematic presentation of findings with supportive data.
1.5 STATEMENT OF HYPOTHESES
The following hypotheses were tested in the study.
Hypothesis I
Ho: Training and development of employees do not increase efficiency in policy making in service establishments.
H1: Training and development of employees increase efficiency in policy making in service establishments.
Hypothesis II
Ho: Non-challant attitude of management officials to employees’
training and development have not hindered employees’ training and development have hindered employees’ positive participation in policy making.
H1: Non-challant attitudes of management officials to employees’ training and development have hindered employees’ positive participation in policy making.
1.6 SCOPE OF THE STUDY
The study was restricted only to training, development and policy making with reference to public establishments. Specifically, the Union Bank of Nigeria Plc was incorporated as a case study reference. The study therefore embraces the staff of the establishment as population of study from which the sample size was determined. The study was only aimed at assessing the impact of training and development of staff on policy making.
1.7 LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
It is a limitation that in the conduct of research, not all questionnaires administered are promptly returned. This could have a bearing on the result as available data may not be adequate enough to make generalization. Again the subjectivity of respondents over which the researcher has no direct control is a major constraint. Using the Union Bank of Nigeria Plc as representative of other service establishments in the service sector is a significant limitation because opinions differ among the various staff of service establishments. Incorporating only the staff of union Bank of Nigeria Plc is thus a limitation as this has reduced the coverage of the study and its sample size.
1.8 DEFINITION OF TERMS
The following terms as defined have been used accordingly in the body of this report.
Boost: In this study, any action taken by management to encourage staff morale is considered as relevant.
Objective: Every establishment has a reason for existing and goals to accomplish. The purpose of an establishment rightly therefore indentifies its expected result.
Subvention: Most government establishment receive statutory financial allocations yearly from the government to enable them accomplish their objectives.
Policy: A guide to action or behavior is considered as a policy. Establishments do not just act or perform tasks outside their constitutionally ascribed jurisdiction. They must be guided by a set of rules and regulations.
Staff Development: Since employees are expected to remain stagnant, they grow through experience and exposure to new ways of doing things. Hence all programmes designed for this purpose are considered as constituting staff development.
1.9 THE CORPORATE PROFILE OF UNION BANK OF NIGERIA PLC.
Union Bank of Nigeria Plc is a lender in the Nigerian Financial Sectors with a total of 311 branches nationwide. The bank has a full fledged branch in London which is currently being updated into a subsidiary.
The Bank also operates a representative office in South Africa. It is wholly owned and managed by Nigerians.
The Bank had the largest asset among Nigeria’s financial institutions; totaling N329.6 billion as at the financial years ended March 312, 2003.
Its gross earnings stood at N2=34.7 billion with a current core capital of N31.2 billion. Union Bank of Nigerian Plc was established in 1917 as a Colonial Bank with its first branch in Lagos. In 1925, Barclays Bank was formed to take over the activities of the Bank.
Between 1959 and 1970, fifty new branches were established to bring the total number of 59, the Bank was legally incorporated in Nigeria as a wholly owned subsidiary of Barclays Bank International Limited and renamed Barclays Bank of Nigeria Limited. The ownership structure remained unchanged until 1971 when 8.33% of the Bank’s shares were offered to Nigerians. In the same year, the Bank was listed on the Nigerian stock Exchange. As a result of the Nigerian Enterprises Promotion decree of 1972, the Federal Government of Nigerian acquired 51.6% of the Bank’s shares, leaving Barclays Bank Plc, London with 40%. In 1979, Barclays Bank sold its 50% shareholding to Nigerians. This resulted in the change of the Bank’s name from Barclays Bank of Nigerian to Union Bank of Nigerian Limited to reflect its new image and ownership structure.
The remaining shareholding was disposed in 1989. Presently, Union Bank Plc is one of the oldest independent and non-governmental banking institutions wholly owned and managed by Nigerians. The Bank’s corporate head office is located at 36, Marina in Lagos. The Bank has a total of 7,645 employees occupying various positions at its various branches and head office. The Bank operates a wide range of banking services which include:
- Current Accounts
- Saving Accounts
- Time Deposit Scheme
- Cashing Credit Facility
- Foreign Currency Domiciliary Account
- Agricultural Lending Scheme
- Bankers’ Acceptance
- Bill Discounting
- Credit Information Services and Trade Enguires
- Equipment leasing
- Export Documentation and Finance
- Loans and Overdrafts
- Funds Transfer within and outside Nigeria
- Letter of Credit
- Loan Syndication
The bank has put in place the structures, strategies and strong management team to enable it stay ahead of competition. In every State where Union Bank of Nigeria Plc operates branches, there is an area office which co-ordinates the branches within the State. The Iganmu and Ojuelegba branches of the Bank in Lagos were selected for this study.
