1

URANTA, ROSELINE AGBOYEFORI APAWARI

PG/M.ED/11/58795

STRUCTURAL PATTERNS AND BUSINESS STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION IN THE

MANUFACTURING SECTOR IN SOUTH-SOUTH, NIGERIA

FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT

Ebere.omeje Digitally Signed by: Content manager’s Name DN : CN = Webmaster’s name O= University of Nigeria, Nsukka OU = Innovation Centre

2

STRUCTURAL PATTERNS AND BUSINESS STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION IN THE MANUFACTURING SECTOR IN

SOUTH-SOUTH, NIGERIA

BY

URANTA, ROSELINE AGBOYEFORI APAWARI PG/Ph.D/08/47306

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA

JULY, 2014

3

STRUCTURAL PATTERNS AND BUSINESS STRATEGY IMPLEMENT ATION IN THE MANUFACTURING SECTOR IN SOUTH-SOUTH, NIGERIA

URANTA, ROSELINE AGBOYEFORI APAWARI PG/Ph.D/08/47306

THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUI REMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (PhD) IN MANA GEMENT

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA

SUPERVISOR: PROF. U. J. F. EWURUM

4

APPROVAL

This is to certify that this thesis is undertaken by Uranta, Roseline Agboyefori Apawari

with registration number PG/PhD/08/47306 and has been prepared in accordance with the

policies and regulations governing the requirements for the award of PhD in Management

of the University of Nigeria, Nsukka.

…………………………………… ……………………………………… PROF. U. J. F. EWURUM Date Supervisor …………………………………… ……………………………………… DR. V. A. ONODUGO Date Head of Department

5

DECLARATION

I, Roseline Agbonyefori Apawari Uranta, a Postgraduate student in the

Department of Management, Faculty of Business Administration, have

satisfactorily completed the requirements of research work for the award of

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Management. The work embodied in this

Thesis is original and has not been submitted in part or full for any other

Diploma or Degree of this or any other University.

………………………………………….. ……………………………………..

ROSELINE A. A. URANTA Date PG/PhD/08/47306

6

DEDICATION

This work is dedicated to my lord Christ Jesus and the Burusu Kworopinyanama,

Timothy’s Compound in Queenstown both at home and abroad.

7

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

For one to come up to this level is not an easy task. So much has been experienced and

passed through, but I was courageous when I remembered advice from elders that:

“Do not tarry by the way. High hills grow less as we ascend them. That

which is lightly got is little valued. If you would get gold, you must dig

deeply: it is not got on the surface. Neither can you enter on the

possession of learning without some trouble”.

Of course, it costs so much but there are persons who assisted in different capacities to

reduce my burden of which I will like to express my feelings of thanks and honour.

Firstly, my intellectual debt is to those academicians and practitioners who have

contributed significantly to the emerging field of Structural Patterns and Business

Strategy Implementation and whose work I have utilized in this study.

I wish to express my profound gratitude and deep regards to my guide and scholarly

Supervisor, who gave me the golden opportunity to do this wonderful research on the

topic: Structural Patterns and Business Strategy Implementation in the Manufacturing

Sector of South-South, Nigeria. He is the immediate past Dean, Faculty of Business

Administration, but also the Head of Department of Management, University of Nigeria,

Enugu Campus – Prof. U.J.F Ewurum, for his exemplary guidance, monitoring and

constant encouragement throughout the course of this Thesis. The help, availability,

patience, objective critiques, commitment and correction of my doubts given by him time

to time shall carry me a long way in the journey of a new life on which I am about to

embark.

I would also like to express special gratitude to my lecturers in the Department of

Management, Faculty of Business Administration: the immediate past Head of

Department, Dr. Charity Ezigbo (Human Resources Management), Chief J. A. Ezeh

(Corporate Strategy), Prof. U. J. F. Ewurum (Analytical Technique), Prof. S. O.

8

Unyimadu (Research Methodology), Prof. C. I. Onwuchekwa of blessed memory

(Administrative Theory and Practice), Dr. O. C. Ugbam (Project Management and

Feasibility Studies), for the work they did by imparting their wealth of knowledge to me

up to this level, and the present Head of Department, Dr. V. A. Onodugo for his

intellectual contribution to this work.

I am equally grateful to all my academic mentors, who were committed in the

constructive criticism of the objective critiques on the matter. They are: Prof. U. J. F.

Ewurum, Prof. Jonny Eluka, Dr. Charity Ezigbo, Dr. E. K. Agbaze, Dr. O. C. Ugbam,

Dr. Ann Ogbo, Dr. B. I. Chukwu, and Dr. V. A. Onodugo.

I take this opportunity to express a deep sense of gratitude to the management of some

Manufacturing firms, such as, Rivers Oil Company (RIVOC), Air Liquid Nigeria, Flour

Mills, etc. for their cordial support, valuable information and guidance, which helped me

in completing this work through various stages. I am also obliged to staff members of the

Manufacturing firms that I studied for the valuable information provided by them in their

respective fields. I am grateful for their co-operation during the period of my assignment.

I thank my fantastic co-workers at the Publication Department of Rivers State House of

Assembly (RVHA), Port Harcourt, both retired and active. We are not so many, but we

have cooperative and understanding spirit for the progress of one another. I especially

thank Mr. I. S. Igah (retired) – my editorial Colleague; he has been encouraging right

from my Master of Business Administration (MBA) till this level when he retired from

the service. I must not fail to thank Mrs. Daba Seleye-Fubara – my editorial Colleague. I

firstly know her as Miss Daba Isoibite at the Federal Training Centre, Enugu where we

did our respective Diploma in Secretarial Studies. She also has encouraging and pushing

spirit for me to excel. I also have to recognize the assistance of Mr. Phimia Zaga, a

Clerk-at-Table, who always cared and kept me company in the course of study.

To you my friend, Mr. Napoleon Woke, a Rivers State man, whom I met at the

University of Nigeria, Enugu Campus while concluding your Master of Business

9

Administration (MBA) Accounting, who said ‘sister, I will assist you anywhere you need

my assistance’, and I replied that my problem was to visit the Manufacturing Firms in the

South-South, and you assisted me in that perspective, forbearing every insult,

embarrassment and closed doors of diverse firms. I am saying thank you so much. I

must not also forget to thank my reading mate, Mr. Gideon Uboh, he rendered helpful

advice and critiques to my writing.

We wish to thank the many people at the Students Centre, University of Nigeria, Enugu

Campus, such as: my research Analyst, Mr. Enyinnaya Ubani, for the wonderful job he

did. I am grateful for his knowledge sharing of research with me, the materials and

guidance he rendered to me. I also thank all others who did one job or the other,

especially Miss Chinyere Wariso for the formatting, photocopies, spiral binding and

internet browsing.

I am greatly indebted to the staff members of the Management Department Library,

Faculty of Business Administration, University of Nigeria, Enugu Campus, for their

wonderful support in accommodating me at the library whenever I wanted to read books,

monographs, dissertations, materials they were always available to gather information. I

am also thankful to Mrs. N. Ofordile, the Secretary to the Head of Department

(Management), for courtesy and accommodating whenever I entered her office. Special

appreciation goes to those who contributed in many important ways. While they are not

named here, their contributions have been important for this work.

Lastly, but certainly not the least, I want to thank members of my family who have been

so supportive. My appreciation goes to my parents, Late Mr. Edward Apawari Uranta

and Mrs. Esther Apawari Uranta for the work they did inspired children to become

educated. I will ever remember my elder sister, late Ms Patience Apawari Uranta, a

Senior Community Health Officer at the Primary Health Centre in Rivers State, who

passed away on 4th August, 2012 after a protracted illness. She was an encourager to my

educational excellence. My thanks also go to my two younger brothers – Jacob and

Joseph, for support and understanding during my absence for study. My son, Inyekuroma

10

and my niece, Tamunoiselegha, you are all great. I must not also forget to appreciate my

paternal cousin, Mrs. Victoria Ojo (nee Uranta) in the United States of America (USA),

who made it possible for me to make a journey to USA during the period of my study,

which also enabled me to make some academic research to support my work. In the

same vein, my warmth appreciation goes to my maternal cousin, Mrs. Oluchi Kalu (nee

Ekere), a Deputy Director at the National Library, Abuja, for giving me that push and

inspiration to further my study, when she said “Agbonye, go straight to Nsukka, pick

your PhD form, fill and submit”.

I am making this Thesis not only for marks but to increase my knowledge.

THANKS AGAIN TO ALL WHO HELPED ME.

To you the immortal, invisible, the helper of helpless, Almighty God that made this

work possible to me, I say glory, honour, majesty, dominion and all expression of

gratitude ascribed unto you in Christ Jesus name. Amen.

ROSELINE A. A. URANTAROSELINE A. A. URANTAROSELINE A. A. URANTAROSELINE A. A. URANTA

PG/PhD/08/47306

11

Abstract This study looked at the structural patterns and business strategy implementation in manufacturing sector of South-South, Nigeria. It formulated the following objectives: To determine the nature of the relationship between Line Structural Pattern and business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector; To identify the nature of the correlation between Staff structural pattern and beyond business strategy formulation aspect of business strategy implementation; To evaluate the bearing between matrix structural pattern and beyond strategic planning aspect; To determine the impact of informal organization on the business strategy execution aspect; To evaluate the extent social interaction impacts on business strategy evaluation aspect; and, To ascertain the relationship between bureaucracy and business strategy control aspect. Sample Proportion and Regression Analysis were used to test the hypotheses. Data were collected from the selected firms. The study discovered that there was a relationship between Line structure and business strategy implementation (rcal=0.9447> rcritical = 0.124; fcal = 1184.221> fcritical = 2.6089 p<0.05). There was a positive correlation between Staff structural pattern and beyond business strategy formulation aspect (Zc = 5.027> 1.96; P<0.05). There was a positive bearing between matrix structural pattern and beyond strategic planning aspect (rcal = 0.120 < rcritical 0.124; fcal = 1.55 < fcritical = 2.6049 p<0.05); There was a positive impact of informal organization on the business strategy execution aspect (rcal = 0.508 > rcritical = 0.124; fcal = 50.890 > fcritical = 2.6049; p<0.05); There was a large extent of social interaction impacts on business strategy evaluation aspect (Zc = 4.661 > Zc = 1.96; p<0.05); and, There was a positive relationship between bureaucracy and business strategy control (rcal = 0.522 > rcritical = 0.124; fcal = 54.574>fcritical = 2.6049; p<0.05). It was recommended that the strategic managers of the manufacturing firms studied should be backed by policy of continuity to determine the relationship between line and staff structural patterns and business strategy implementation with same influence and authority exercise; also use the informal organization type from clubs to achieve business strategy execution. Use social interaction to impact positively on business strategy evaluation; and bureaucratic procedures to fine-tune the business strategy control.

12

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title page - - - - - - - - - i

Approval page - - - - - - - - ii

Declaration - - - - - - - - iii

Dedication - - - - -- - - - iv

Acknowledgements - - - - - - - v

Abstract - - - - - - - - ix

Table of Content - - - - - - - - x

Table of Abbreviations - - - - - - - xv

List of Tables - - - - - - - - xvi

List of Figures - - - - - - - - xvii

CHAPTER ONE

1.1 Background of the Study - - - - - - 1

1.2 Statement of the Problem - - - - - - 7

1.3 Objectives of the Study - - - - - - 8

1.4 Research Questions - - - - - - - 9

1.5 Research Hypotheses - - - - - - - 9

1.6 Significance of the Study - - - - - - 10

1.7 Scope of the Study - - - - - - - 10

1.8 Limitations of the Study - - - - - - 11

1.9 Definition of Terms. - - - - - - - 12

1.10 The Profiles of Selected Manufacturing Organizations in the

South-South, Nigeria.- - - - - - - 13

Reference - - - - - - - - 19

13

CHAPTER TWO Review of Related Literature

2.1 Introduction - - - - - - - - 20

2.2 Conceptual Framework - - - - - - 20

2.2.1 The Concept of Structural Patterns - - - - - 20

2.2.2 The Concept of Organization Design - - - - 21

2.2.2.1 Types of organizational structure - - - - - 22

2.2.3 Types of Organization Structure - - - - - - 24

2.2.3.1 Mechanistic - - - - - - - - - 25

2.2.3.2 Organic - - - - - - - - - 25

2.2.4 The Concept of Business Strategy Implementation - - - - 26

2.2.5 The Concept of Beyond Strategy Formulation - - - - 27

2.2.6 The Concept of Beyond Strategic Planning - - - - - 28

2.2.7 The Concept of Business Strategy Execution - - - - 30

2.2.8 The Concept of Business Strategy Control - - - - - 30

2.3 Theoretical Framework - - - - - - 31

2.3.1 The Theory of Strategy and Structure - - - - - 31

2.4 Basic Model of Strategic Management - - - - - 33

2.4.1 Structure and Strategy - - - - - - - 34

2.5 The Strategic Management Process - - - - - - 36

2.6 Empirical Review - - - - - - - 49

2.6.1 Best Practices Of Structural Pattern And Business Strategy For

Employee Motivation - - - - - - - 50

2.6.2 The Contingency Approach to Structural Pattern - - - - 51

2.6.3 Business Strategy - - - - - - - - 53

2.6.4 Strategy Implementation - - - - - - - 55

2.6.5 Potential Problems and Solutions for Strategy Implementation - 67

2.6.6 Role of Top Management - - - - - - - 68

2.6.7 Some International context of Management - - - - - 70

2.7 Environment and Its Technique - - - - - - 71

2.7.1 Environment - - - - - - - - - 71

14

2.7.2 Technique - - - - - - - - - 74

2.8 Employee Expectation and Motivation - - - - 81

2.9 Influence of Innovation and Policy Implementation on Structural

Patterns and Business Strategy - - - - - - 88

2.9.1 Innovation - - - - - - - - - 88

2.9.2 Policy - - - - - - - - - 91

2.10 Coordination and Integration of Structural Patterns and Business

Strategy - - - - - - - - - 93

2.10.1 Coordination - - - - - - - - 93

2.10.2 Coordination Strategies - - - - - - - 95

2.10.3 Organizational Performance - - - - - - - 98

2.10.4 Human Resource of Organization - - - - - - 100

2.10.5 Human resource Management and Strategy - - - - - 101

2.11 Structural Patterns and Managerial Control in Organization - - 102 2.11.1 Structural Patterns - - - - - - - 102

2.11.2 Structure and Design - - - - - - - 106

2.11.3 Dimensions of Organizational Structure - - - - - 106

2.11.4 Line and Staff Position - - - - - - - 109

2.11.5 Determinants of Organizational Structure - - - - - 110

2.11.6 Organizational innovators - - - - - - - 111

2.11.7 Control - - - - - - - - - 111

2.12 Summary of the Review of Related Literature - - - - 113

References - - - - - - - - - 116 CHAPTER THREE

Research Methodology

3.1 Introduction - - - - - - - - 119

3.2 Research Design - - - - - - - 119

3.3 Sources of data - - - - - - - 120

3.3.1 Primary Data - - - - - - - - 120

3.3.2 Secondary Data - - - - - - - - 120

3.4 Population of the study - - - - - - 121

15

3.5 Sampling Method - - - - - - - 122

3.6 Sample Size Determination - - - - - - 122

3.7 Computation of Sample Size according to Sector - - - 124

3.8 Data Collection Instrument - - - - - - 125

3.9 Reliability of the Study - - - - - - 126

3.10 Validity of the Instrument - - - - - - 128

3.11 Method of Data Analysis - - - - - - 128

Reference - - - - - - - - 130

CHAPTER FOUR

Data Presentation and Analysis

4.1 Introduction - - - - - - - - 131

4.2 Data presentation - - - - - - - 131

4.2.1 Return Rate of Questionnaire - - - - - - 131

4.2.2 Demographic characteristics of Respondents - - - - 132

4.2.3 Nature of Relationship between Line Structural Pattern and Business Strategy Implementation in Manufacturing Sector - 136

4.2.4 Nature of Relationship between Staff Structural Pattern and

Business Strategy Implementation - - - - - 138 4.2.5 Bearing strength between Matrix Structural Pattern and

Business Strategy Implementation - - - - - 139 4.2.6 Extent Informal Structure impacts positively on

Business Strategy Implementation in Manufacturing Sector - - 141 4.2.7 Extent Social Interaction impacts on Business Strategy

Implementation in Manufacturing Sector - - - - 142 4.2.8 Improvement on Business Strategy Implementation

in the Manufacturing Sector through Bureaucracy - - - 144

4.3 Test of hypotheses - - - - - - - 145

4.3.1 Test of Hypothesis One - - - - - - 145

4.3.2 Test of Hypothesis Two - - - - - - 149

16

4.3.3 Test of Hypothesis Three - - - - - - 151

4.3.4 Test of Hypothesis Four - - - - - - 154

4.3.5 Test of Hypothesis Five - - - - - - 158

4.3.6 Test of Hypothesis Six - - - - - - 159

4.4 Discussion of Results - - - - - - 163

4.4.1 The Nature of Relationship between Line Structural Patterns and

Business Strategy Implementation in the Manufacturing Sector- - 163

4.4.2 The Nature of the Correlation between Staff Structural Patterns and

Business Strategy Implementation in the Manufacturing Sector- - 164

4.4.3 The Bearing strength between Matrix Structural Pattern and Business

Strategy Implementation in the Manufacturing Sector - - - 165

4.4.4 The Impact of Informal Organization on Business Strategy

Implementation in the Manufacturing Sector- - - - 166

4.4.5 The Extent Social Interaction impacts on Business Strategy

Implementation in the Manufacturing Sector - - - - 167

4.4.6 The Relationship between Bureaucracy and Business Strategy

Implementation in the Manufacturing Sector - - - - 169

Reference - - - - - - - - 172

CHAPTER FIVE

Summary of Findings, Recommendations and Conclusion

5.1 Introduction - - - - - - - - 173

5.2 Summary of Findings - - - - - - - 173

5.3 Conclusion - - - - - - - - 174

5.4 Recommendations - - - - - - - 175

5.5 Contribution to Knowledge - - - - - - 176

5.6 Future Research - - - - - - - 178

References - - - - - - - - 180

Bibliography - - - - - - - - 181

Appendix - - - - - - - - 189

17

TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS

SPBS - Structural Pattern and Business Strategy Implementation

SBU - Strategic Business Unit

CEO- Chief Executive Officer

SWOT- Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats

UK- United Kingdom

TQM- Total Quality Management

MIS- Management Information System

DSS- Decision Support System

CSLAC- Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre

MAN- Manufacturers Association of Nigeria

RBS- Rivers/Bayelsa States

EDO Edo/Delta States

MOU- Memorandum of Understanding

EIA- Environmental Impact Assessment

PPP- Public Private Partnership

18

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 List of Man Sector - - - - 121

Table 3.2 Rank Spearman-Pearson Lemma Postulation - 127

Table 4.1 Questionnaire Response Rate - - - - 131

Table 4.2: Return Rate of Questionnaire - - - - 132

Table 4.3: Type of Firm - - - - - - 132

Table 4.4: Foreign Percentage Ownership of Firm - - 133

Table 4.5: Nigerian Percentage Ownership of Firms - - 133

Table 4.6: Level of Work - - - - - - 134

Table 4.7: Highest Educational Qualification - - - 134

Table 4.8: Age Bracket - - - - - - 135

Table 4.9: Length of Service - - - - - 135

Table 4.10: Type of Organization - - - - - 136

Table 4.11: Responses to Questions 1 To 4 (Section B) - - 137

Table 4.12: Responses to Questions 5 To 8 (Section B) - - 138

Table 4.13: Responses to Questions 9 To 12 (Section B) - - 140

Table 4.14: Responses to Questions 13 To 16 (Section B) - 141

Table 4.15: Responses to Questions 17 To 20 (Section B) - 143

Table 4.16: Responses to Questions 21 To 24 (Section B) - 144

19

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1 Differences between Mechanistic and Organic structures 24

Figure 2.2 Environment, Strategy, Structure and Effectiveness - 26

Figure 2.3 Interrelationship of Structure and Strategy - - 35

Figure 2.4 Environment, Strategy, Structure and Effectiveness 36

Figure 2.5 Strategy Management Process - - - 54

Figure 2.6 Forces in the Organizational Environment - - 73

Figure 2.7 Primary SWOT Analysis Issues - - - 76

Figure 2.8 The Process of Delegation in a Formal Organization - 94

Figure 2.9 Hierarchy - - - - - - 96

Figure 2.10 Vertical and Horizontal Structures - - - 104

Figure 2.11 Employee Responses to Organizational Politics - 112

Figure 4.1 Return Rate of Questionnaire - - - - 131

Figure 4.2 Foreign Percentage Ownership of Firm - - 133

Figure 4.3 Nigerian Percentage Ownership of Firm - - 133

Figure 4.4 Respondents’ Level of work - - - - 134

Figure 4.5 Respondents’ Highest Educational Qualification - 134

Figure 4.6 Respondents’ Age Brackets - - - - 135

Figure 4.7 Respondents’ Length of Service - - - 135

Figure 4.8 Type of Organization - - - - - 136

20

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

Structural patterns and Business Strategy Implementation spanned all the eras of early

influences before 1750, the Industrial Revolution that started in Great Britain in 1750, the

Scientific Management Movement of Frederick Winsor Taylor of 1911 and the modern

era typified by American Management, Japanese Management and Nigerian

Management. In the early influences, Structural Patterns and Business Strategy

Implementation were relevant in the historical developments of the Catholic Church, the

early Egyptian empire when they build pyramids and the early Chinese empire and in the

empires of Western Sudan: Ghana, Mali and Songhai (Osae & Nwabara, 2000:5). The

three empires were known for trade in Gold and administration of the empires which

needed structural patterns and business strategy formulation. In the writings in the

Egyptian Papyri, there was evidence of how work was organized and how power,

influence and authority were exercised which needed structural patterns. All the

achievements in the early empires would not have been possible if they did not have

ideas in business strategy formulation, implementation, evaluation and control which

were aspects of strategic management.

The Industrial Revolution which started in Britain in 1750 was a system of movement

from the putting out system to the factory system. In the factories, work was organized in

which there were ordinary workers, supervisors and managers. The supervisors had more

authority than the ordinary workers and the managers had more authority than the

supervisors. So there were structural patterns. Causes of action were embarked upon in

order to achieve comprehensive objectives and strategies were designed and executed and

there was evaluation and control. So strategy formulation plus strategy implementation

plus evaluation and control totaled up to strategic management. At the end of the day

more good quality products were produced and there were a lot of inventions (Imaga,

2001:5).

21

The scientific management movement was pioneered by Frederick Winsor Taylor who in

1911 wrote his book on scientific management. He was referred to as the father of

scientific management because he contributed most to this schools of management.

Several practical applications of Taylor Scientific models abound. The brick laying

experiment and getting soldiers battle ready within a given time are some of the basic

applications. At the end of the day, it was possible to measure work using a stop clock.

But this didn’t last for jobs that took less than one second where the movie camera was

useful. It was also possible to separate work into planning and execution, the earlier one

to be done by managers and the later one to be done by the workers. It was also possible

to apply the principle of science to the management of work (Imaga, 2001:5-6).

The modern era is characterized by Japanese management, American management and

Nigerian management. The Japanese management is very impressive because the

Japanese do not have raw materials. They import raw materials and they export finished

products. The Japanese have achieved an economic miracle and is regarded as the second

largest economy in the world. Planning is done very slowly. There is emphasis on life

time employment and the use of quality circles. American management is also very

impressive. It was Henry Ford that designed the principle of mass production that made it

possible to produce cars at very little costs. The Americans built factories and asked the

Japanese to run the factory for them. The American economy is regarded as the biggest in

the world. Americans engage in planning but are very fast in taking decisions (Imaga,

2001:141-142). In the case of Nigerian management, the principles are also being applied

Organization has to do with arrangement. The Nigerian bureau of statistics by doing

some rebasing stated that the Gross Domestic Product growth rate between the last

quarter of 2013 and the first quarter of 2014 was 7.4%. This made the Nigerian economy

to be larger than that of South Africa and the biggest economy in Africa. Unfortunately,

there is very high level of unemployment, poverty rate and low education rate (Nigeria

Bureau of Statistics, 2004:1).

It involves structure, functioning, performances and behavior of groups and individuals

within them. It is association of two or more individuals who are working cooperatively

22

towards a common purpose under authority and leadership. Organization is a formal

association of individuals with a common purpose and with stipulated objectives to attain

under authority and leadership (Onwuchekwa, 1993:2). Organization implies a

formalized intentional structure of roles or positions. People working in an organization

must fill certain roles. And that these filled roles should be intentionally designed to

ensure that required activities are done and that activities fit together so that people can

work smoothly, effectively and efficiently in groups. There are two types of organization

- the formal and Informal. Formal organization means the intentional structure of roles in

a formally organized enterprise. If a manager is to organize well, the structure must

furnish an environment in which individual performance, both present and future,

contributes most effectively to group goals.

On the other hand, informal organization is a network of personal and social relations not

established or required by the formal organization but arising spontaneously as people

associate with one another. Thus, informal organizations-relationships not appearing on

an organization chart – might include the machine-shop group, the sixth-floor crowd, the

Friday evening bowling gang, and the morning-coffee “regulars”. Informal organization

is formed, then, by activities and human interactions that are not a formal part of the

organization (Koontz, et al: 1994:244). Organization shall achieve its goal effectively

when structure, strategy (especially, at the level of individual business or industry) and

implementation are put in place. Structural implementation is more concerned with the

match that should exist between strategy and structure. A change in strategy obviously

will bring a change in structure which some organizations do not put into consideration.

The match in structure and strategy has arisen out of research done by Chandler, 1962

who proposed the idea that structure follows strategy.

Structure and Strategy in organizations can be said to be as old as the origin of man,

family, communities and societies but the application of formal structure and strategy in

the achievement of organizational objectives can be linked to the emergence of the

industrial economies in the western world (United States and Europe). Chandler (1969:2)

has done a thorough work on Structure and strategy in reviewing what he referred to as

23

“Chapters in the history of American Industrial Enterprise”. His investigation into the

changing structure and strategy of the large industrial enterprise in the United States

began as an experiment in the writing of comparative business history.

The actual historical patterns of growth and organization building in the large industrial

enterprise were not, of course, as clear-cut as they are always theoretically defined in

most literature. Before 1850, very few American businesses needed the services of a full-

time administrator or required a clearly defined administrative structure. Industrial

enterprises were very small, in comparison with those of today. And they were usually

family affairs. The two or three men responsible for the destiny of a single enterprise

handled all its basic activities – economic and administration, operational and

entrepreneurial. In the agrarian and commercial economy of ante-bellum America,

business administration as a district activity did not yet exist. On mining, manufacturing,

marketing, and even transportation, the largest firms were directed by a General

Superintendent and a President or Treasurer.

The General Superintendent personally supervised the labouring force, whether miners,

operators, engineers, conductors, or station agents. In the bigger textile and other

manufacturing companies, the President or the treasurer usually handled the finances and

arranged for the purchasing of materials and the sale of finished products from and to

commissioned agents or other middlemen. On the railroad, the General Superintendent

carried on the commercial transactions of the company, setting rates, making contracts

with shippers, buying materials and equipment, as well as scheduling trains and keeping

track and equipment in good condition.

It was the growth of the railroads that initiated the development of modern administrative

structures. Before 1850, a very few of the very largest American economic enterprises

did develop embryonic administrative structures. John Jacob Astor’s American Fur

Company, Nicholas Biddle’s Second Bank of the United States, and the State Boards of

Public Works or Boards of Directors of Private Corporations that built the major canals

and first railroads, all these had field units and a headquarters. Astor’s American Fur

24

Company managed its virtual monopoly of the Fur trapping and trading business in the

vast region west of the Mississippi River and the great lakes through its western and its

northern departments. The departmental headquarters administered a number of

“outfits”, each headed by a “trader” who supervised the work of the clerks at the trading

posts and engages who did the actual trapping.

The coming of the first great integrated enterprises during the 1880’s and 1890’s brought

entirely new problems of industrial management and led to the building of the first

sizeable administrative structures in American industry. The new administration needs

came less from an increase in volume of output from the taking on of new functions. In

the 1870’s nearly all American industrial enterprises only manufactured. The more

common road to the formation of the vertically integrated enterprise was by way of

horizontal combination and consolidation. The threat of excess capacity appears to have

been a primary stimulus to initial combinations in most American industries. By 1920,

however, organization builders had yet to devise a structure by which a general office

might effectively administer a number of vertically integrated subsidiaries or divisions.

By that time a very few large holding companies did control a number of multi-function

as well as single-function subsidiaries and were faced with this administrative problem.

The application of science to the development of new products through institutionalized

research brought the same strategies of in the electrical electronics and to a somewhat

lesser extent, the power machinery and automobile industries. Growth through

diversification with several lines increased the number and complexity of both

operational and entrepreneurial activities even more than a world-wide expansion of one

line. So, the history of expansion of structure and strategy in organizations in the

American Industrial experience is a long one and subsequently exported into other parts

of the world by direct investments, multi-nationalization, trans-nationalization and

nationalization of operations. However, this study is restricted to structural pattern and

business strategy implementation (SPBSI) in the Manufacturing Sector.

Organizations are efficiency seeking systems. The pursuit of efficiency has made

organizations to seek the best alternatives to achieve legitimate goals. The organization

25

initially decides which industry to enter, how it will compete, who will be top managers,

and who will directly decide on the type of organization structure. Organization structure

will precede and cause changes in strategy. Steade, Lowry and Glos (1984:80) note

organization structure as the formal pattern of relationships among the parts of an

organization. Successful organization aligns authority and responsibility of various

departments in a way to reach overall objectives. These authority and responsibility are

organized through the forms of organization structure.

There are forms of organization structure, such as, Line, Line and Staff and Matrix or

Project organization. Koontz (1993: 294) defines line organization as that relationship in

which superior exercises direct supervision over a subordinate – an authority relationship

in direct line or steps, while Staff relationship is advisory. Matrix or hybrid is interesting

example of modern thinking that involves temporary, fluid work teams within the

framework of the pyramidal formal organization.

Organizational design comes into mind after thought. Whether organizational design or

redesign, no matter how good the process is change will disrupt employees’ lives and

impact company productivity. Strategy comes in place. Strategy means using a skill to

achieve a purpose. Those successful at implementing strategy give thought to their

organizational structure. Strategy process entails corporate planning, which has now

attained the level of strategic management. According to management scholars, the real

genius, however, is in implementing the strategy. Therefore, a look at the corporate

planning which has now attained to the level of strategic management model is necessary

for effective business strategy implementation. According to Ottih (2004), those who fail

to plan have already planned to fail. The fact is that firms who indulged in corporate

planning have been more successful than firms who do not indulge in corporate planning.

A lot of relative data are never diagnosed and analyzed properly to know the routines of

manufacturing process. Instead management system such as the surprise management is

now deviating manufacturing firms from their planned course of action.

Effective implementation depends upon carefully communicating the strategy to all

stakeholders – both inside and outside the organization. When strategy drives the

26

planning process, implementation is eased. When new strategies are implemented,

changes must often be made – particularly in terms of structure and processes in the

organization (Hrebeniak, 2010: 30). Firms can learn how to properly align corporate

structure with corporate strategies and how to integrate strategy formulation and

implementation by focusing on five core areas, such as: Strategy implementation model;

strategy change; Human Resources and strategy implementation; strategy and structure;

and, incentives and controls. There are several manufacturing firms, private and publicly

owned; operating in the South-South geopolitical zone of Nigeria, but there is dearth of

information on the pattern of their organizational structures and strategy implementation.

This is the problem necessitating this study.

This study is set out to identify the structural patterns of the manufacturing firms under

investigation, examine the inter-relationships among the various levels of hierarchy in

terms of communication flow, the relationship existing between the Board of Directors

and Chief Executive/Top management in the challenge of decision-making and general

areas of control of the Board of Directors; critique of the various firms’ strategy intent

variables (vision, mission, goals, objectives, definition of business, etc.); examination of

strategy implementation procedures existing in the firms. The study will also compare

these existing strategy implementation procedures in the firms with recommended

successful benchmarks internationally acclaimed in management literature,

reexamination of the theoretical implications of the existing patterns in the firms as

touching their suitability. It shall also compare and contrast the relative patterns in the

firms being studied.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Effective formulation and implementation of a business strategy is the yearning of every

business organization. This is necessitated by the fact that business success is a function

of the quality of resource inputs which must be duly formulated by a daring managerial

process. Many organizations, however, do not really understand the importance of good

strategy formulation and implementation. Many that understand do not have the effective

structure to implement them.

27

Many organizations do not demarcate line, staff, functional, matrix, informal structure,

social interaction and bureaucracy. This confusion affects the business strategy

formulation and implementation. Most business have ambiguous structural patterns

which make negative impacts on profitability, resource base, market share as well as

information technology acquisition of the firms.

Despite all the available provision by many theorists, there is problem of imbalance. The

imbalance in structural pattern has been witnessed in several organizations that retard the

proficiency and the employee productivity. This imbalance occurred as a result of culture

divergences and environmental differences that faced organizations in their daily

practices. It affects the patterning of functions, tasks and responsibilities of employee to

perform creditably well in the organization. Also, the poor structural pattern of

organization affects the style of employee satisfaction/innovation that they required to

gear the morale to work.

At present, there are no empirical solutions to the issues of existing structural patterns

among the firms of the manufacturing sector operating in South-South zone. There is

dearth of research and general information to provide clue to the answers. This is actually

the problem which this study is set to address.

1.3 Objectives of the Study

The purpose of this study is to examine the structural patterns and to ensure that effective

business strategy Implementation is put in place in the Manufacturing Industries. This

study looks at these problems with reference to South-South zone, Nigeria. The study

shall attempt to achieve the following objectives:

1) To determine the nature of the relationship between Line Structural Pattern and

business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector;

2) To identify the nature of the correlation between Staff structural pattern and

beyond business strategy formulation aspect of business strategy implementation;

3) To evaluate the bearing between matrix structural pattern and beyond strategic

planning aspect of business strategy implementation;

28

4) To determine the impact of informal organization on the business strategy

execution aspect of business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing

Sector;

5) To evaluate the extent social interaction impacts on business strategy evaluation

aspect of business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector; and,

6) To ascertain the relationship between bureaucracy and business strategy control

aspect of business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector.

1.4 Research Questions

The following research questions are raised for the study:

1) What is the nature of the relationship between Line Structural Pattern and

business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector?

2) What is the nature of the correlation between Staff structural pattern and beyond

business strategy formulation aspect of business strategy implementation?

3) What is the bearing between matrix structural pattern and beyond strategic

planning aspect of business strategy implementation?

4) What is the impact of informal organization on the business strategy execution

aspect of business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector?

5) What is the extent social interaction impacts on business strategy evaluation

aspect of business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector; and,

6) What is the relationship between bureaucracy and business strategy control aspect

of business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector?

1.5 Research Hypotheses

The following research hypotheses were formulated to guide the study in the

alternative that:

1) Line Structural Pattern has a positive effect on business strategy implementation

in the manufacturing sector.

2) There is a strong correlation between line structural pattern and beyond business

strategy formulation aspect of business strategy implementation in the

manufacturing sector.

29

3) There is a very strong variable between matrix structural pattern and beyond

strategic aspect of business strategy implementation in the manufacturing sector.

4) The informal organization impacts positively on business strategy implementation

in the manufacturing sector.

5) Social interaction impacts significantly on business strategy evaluation aspect of

business strategy implementation in the manufacturing sector.

6) There is a positive relationship between bureaucracy and business strategy control

aspect of business strategy implementation in the manufacturing sector.

1.6 Significance of the Study

This research work is significant because it will produce information on structural

patterns and Business Strategy Implementation in the manufacturing sector in South

South Nigeria that will of benefit and useful to;

1. Government officials of the Federal Ministry of Industries who formulate policies on

the operations of Small and Medium Enterprises in Nigeria.

2. Shareholders and owners of the manufacturing firms who formulate policies on the

Structural Patterns and Business Strategy Implementation in the manufacturing

sector.

3. Managers, supervisors and staff of the manufacturing firms who implement the

policies formulated.

4. External stakeholders: contractors, consultants, suppliers, tax collectors and other

government officials who want their monies when they fall due.

5. Present and potential customers and consumers of the products of the manufacturing

firms who want good quality products and services.

6. Researchers and students of Strategic Management, Business Policy and Strategy

Manufacturing Engineering, Manufacturing Management, Management and Business

Administration who need materials on the topic for their work.

1.7 Scope of the Study

The focus of the study is to determine the effect of structural patterns on business strategy

implementation in the manufacturing sector in South Southern Nigeria. The independent

30

variables were line structural pattern, staff structural pattern, matrix structural pattern,

informal organization, social interaction and bureaucracy. The dependent variables were

business strategy implementation, beyond strategy formulation, beyond strategy

planning, business strategy execution, business strategy evaluation and business strategy

control. The geographical scope is South Southern Nigeria. 124 manufacturing firms

were studied and the time scope of the study is 2011 – 2014.

1.8 Limitations of the Study

The major constraints of the study are as follows:

i) Attitude of Respondents to Questionnaire: Some of the respondents were

unwilling to corporate with the researcher since they derived no financial benefit

from the study. Others were apprehensive of the researcher’s intention, suspecting

that the researcher may disclose their organizations’ secrets to the public;

ii) Dearth in Research Materials: This is a new study in the Manufacturing

Industries in South-South Zone, Nigeria. No study has been focused in this

Area in terms of the Structural Patterns and Business Strategy

Implementation in the Manufacturing Industries operating in the area,

particularly policy implementation in the organization.

iii) Time and Finance: The researcher went to some firms several times before

attention would be given while sometimes, you are turned away with no attention

at all. Aside time, the researcher encountered some financial problems to produce

printing materials, to travel round and other exigencies for the administration of

questionnaires and to conduct interview; and,

iv) Power failure (electricity): The general epileptic power failure in Nigeria

hindered the rate at which this work could have been produced. And there is a

limit to which generating plant can serve anyone.

v) Difficulty in Analysing the Responses from the Oral Interview: The responses

are open-ended and so difficult to analyse. This limitation can be minimized by

using frequencies.

vi) Change of the Interviewing Situation: The oral interview has the limitation that

the interviewing situation may change from one occasion to another. Especially if

31

more than one field data collector is used to do the fieldwork. This limitation is

minimized by the Researcher doing most of the field work.

vii) The Abstraction of the Real System by the Model: The model has the

limitation that it is only an abstraction or representation of reality and not reality

itself. This limitation is minimized by relying on the responses from the senior

and junior staff of the manufacturing firm.

1.9 Definition of Terms

Beyond Strategy Formulation:

This is defined as the steps after the course of action for determining the comprehensive

goals and objectives are designed.

Beyond Strategic Planning:

This is defined as the steps after planning to plan environmental scanning and analysis,

company audit, formulation of objectives, determination of strategic options, choice of

the strategy, budgeting, evaluation and control.

Beyond Strategy Evaluation:

This is defined as the determination of whether the venture is making profit due to the

courses of action and if so, to continue and if not so, to modify the process.

Beyond Strategy Control:

This is defined as the process of trying to find out whether business plans are being

achieved, segregating into controllable and uncontrollable variables doing business

appraisal and continue if things are okay and correcting actions if things are not okay.

Aggregate Production planning:

This refers to the process of planning how to match supply with product or service

demand over a time horizon of about a year.

Boundary spanning:

This is creating roles within the organization that interfaces with important elements in

the environment.

Business Strategy Implementation:

32

This refers to the process of using stated skills and other available resources in an

industry to achieve organizational objectives.

Capacity spanning:

This means the process of determining the people, machines and major physical

resources that will be necessary to meet the production objectives of the business.

Communication Network:

This is the pattern of information flow among task group members.

Matrix organization:

This involves organization established for special duties such as, committees, task force,

agencies, authorities, boards, and other special projects.

Manufacturing Sector

In this study manufacturing sector means group of industries, organization, companies or

firms that have the sole responsibility for carrying out production processes. So,

organizations, industries, companies, enterprises or firms would be used interchangeably.

1.10 The Profiles of Selected Manufacturing Organizations in the South-South,

Nigeria.

In our research, we selected manufacturing organization in the South-South, for this

work. Many of the organizations operate in a closed system. They do not allow people to

get information from their firms thereby making it impossible for the researcher to obtain

detailed data. The manufacturing firms are unique in security in that non business

partners or clients are not welcomed in their premises. However, out of 124

manufacturing firms in the south-south, the researcher studied and obtained profiles of

some of them as follows:

Food, Beverages and Tobacco

(1) Nigerian Bottling Coy PLC, Plot 126, Trans Amadi Layout, P.H.

Nigeria Bottling Company Plc (NBC) is a Nigeria based company and it is

engaged in bottling and selling carbonated non-alcoholic beverages. Today, the

company is part of the coca-cola Hellenic Bottling Company (CCHBC), one of

the coca-cola company’s largest anchor bottlers worldwide. CCHBC operates in

33

28 countries, serving 540 million customers and selling over 1.3 billion unit cases

of beverages annually. The company is driven by over 6000 employees, a culture

of passion for excellence, sophisticated.

(2) General Agro-Allied Industry Limited Plot 78/79, Trans Amadi Layout, Port-

Harcourt.

This Industry produces and refined oil for other companies to label and distribute for

consumption. It is a foreign company. The ownership percentage is foreign 90%: Nigeria

10%

(3) Rivers Oil Company (RIVOC) Plot 80, Trans Amadi Layout, Port-Harcourt.

Rivers Vegetable Oil Company Ltd., (RIVOC) is the third largest Fast Moving

Consumer Goods (FMCG) manufacturing company in Nigeria. It is also the

largest producer of edible grade Palm Kernel Oil in country. Located in the

garden city of Port Harcourt in Rivers state the South-South of Nigeria with

hundreds of direct and thousands of indirect employment beneficiaries, RIVOC

has become a formidable corporate entity, with visible and significant

contributions to the industrial and economic growth of the country.

Their corporate vision is that of further expansion and growth especially in the

area of agro allied and consumer products with substantial and enviable local

raw material base. In the consumer product range their watch word is anchored on

Quality and this has been their conscious corporate response from inception, to

consumer reactions and preference.

This company is owned by the Rivers State Government. It is managed by foreigners the

percentage is foreign 60%, Rivers 40%. They produce vegetable edible oil, soup etc.

(4) Port-Harcourt Flour Mills

This company is owned by 2 states-Rivers and Bayelsa. it is also managed by foreigners.

The percentage ownership is Rivers 55%, Bayelsa 45%. They produce flour, Malzelina,

Semolina, Bran and Griddles. It is situated at No. 8A Industry Road, Port Harcourt.

(5) Bendel Feed and Flour Mill Limited Km 100, Benin-Auchi Road, Benin City,

Edo State Nigeria.

The service Centre offers milling of flour and livestock feeds production.

34

Rubber: It has at its disposal more than 6000 moulds for all kinds of profile types

made of standard and silicone rubber. The production qualities vary from NR,

SBR to high-grade Vinton ® material.

It has the possibilities to produce as well as bigger quantities in different

production methods like salt bath or infrared. Not only rubber but also the new

electrometric compounds in Type are available in small quantities.

(6) Pabod Breweries Limited, Trans Amadi Industrial Layout, Port Harcourt

This company is owned by Rivers State Government but managed by South African. The

percentage ownership is foreign 60%, Rivers 40%. They produce breweries such as malt,

beer, fruit juice and other soft of grand brand.

Chemicals and Non Metallic

(7) Air Liquid (Nigeria) PLC. Plot 108 Trans Amadi Layout, Port Harcourt.

This is French company that started operation since 1960 in Nigeria. It has a percentage

ownership of foreign 60%. Nigeria 40%. They produce Nitrogen, Oxygen, Co2 Industrial

Gas.

(8) West African Glass Industry, Plot 134 Trans-Amadi Layout, Port Harcourt.

This company produces breakable plates and glasses.

(9) Eagle Cement, Rumuolumeni Road, Port Harcourt.

Balkanization and bagging cement. It is an indigenous company for steel and

Fabrication.

(10) Crushed Rock Industries Nigeria Limited

It is a Nigerian-German outfit. Incorporated on 13th May 1976 to carry on

business as quarry masters and stone merchants. The study was on Crushed Road

Limited that situated at Akan-Kpan LGA, Cross Rivers State.

As Pacesetters in the Industry, Crushed Rock Industries like any other company

passed through several developmental stages and surmounted so many obstacles,

after which C.R.I. explored, drilled, excavated and finally developed the stone

technology in Nigeria.

Over the years, Crushed Rock Industries (Nigeria) Limited has developed into

Nigeria’s major producer and supplier of crushed granite aggregates, the sizes of

35

which range from (0 - 50) mm and above depending on our customer’s

requirements. They also produce unique polished Granite Tiles with International

reputation.

Crushed Rock Industries have many Quarries around the nation and their products

are in high demand for roads, bridges, runways and building construction.

Basic Metal, Iron and Metal Products

(11) Aluminum Smelting Company (ALSCON), Ikot Abasi waterside, Akwa Ibom.

This company is owned by the Federal Government of Nigeria, but it is managed by

foreigners, Russian. It has percentage ownership of foreign 60%: Nigeria 40%. They are

into fabrication of mould for the production of Aluminum Coil.

(12) First Aluminum Nigeria Limited, Plot 19-20 Trans-Amadi Layout, Port Harcourt

This company fabricate Aluminum coil which they distribute to Aluminum Industries.

They also produces sheets and circles collapsible. It is managed by foreigners. Foreign

60%; Nigeria 40%

(13) Best Alluminium Company, 85 Aba Road, Port Harcourt.

This company produces sheets from the coil. It is also managed by foreigners. The

percentage ownership is foreign 60%; Nigeria 40%

(14) Eastern Enamel Ware Factory Limited. Plot 29, Trans Amadi Layout, Port- Harcourt

This company produces plates, kitchen utensils, matchets etc. they are producers of

Household cooking utensils collapsible it is managed y labaneze percentage ownership is

foreign 60%: Nigeria 40%.

Electrical & Electronics

(15) Nigerian Engineering Works Limited (NEW), Trans Amadi Industrial Layout, P.H.

This company manufactures and services such items as Air Conditioner, Refrigerators,

Fans, bicycles, steel structure and Pipes, pressure vessels, siling cabinets, cupboards

wardrobe, chairs & desks, library shelving storage shelving industrial lockers and

fabrication, and parts for automobiles. It is owned by Rivers State Government but

managed by foreigners (India). The percentage ownership is foreign 60%: Nigeria 40%

Wood and Wood Products Including Furniture

(16) Idea Furniture Limited, Plot 98 Trans-Amadi Layout, Port Harcourt.

36

This is purely to produce furniture. It is a private org and owned by a Lebanese.

(17) Calabar Wood Export Processing Factory

This is known for wood exportation. The factory is located at the outskirts of the

Calabar Export Processing Zone (EPZ). Only recently, they have started to

embark on delivery of its factory equipment for installation towards the

manufacture of iron and steel products.

Motor Vehicle and Miscellaneous Assembly

(18) Almarine Limited, P.H Branch is at Kolokuma Road, Borikiri, Port Harcourt.

From inception in 1999, Almarine’s initial core business is in provision of

consultancy services in the design and project management of specialized

offshore vessel operating in the niche market of the Offshore Energy Industry.

The consultancy services include conceptualization of new offshore vessel

designs, through to project planning and management, right to the eventual

delivery of vessel to Owners.

Following the expansion of business activities, Almarine was privatized in 2002.

The company activities further extend to include Ship Agency and Ship

Management services complementing its initial consultancy services. Throughout

the years, Almarine has been involved in the construction, repair and conversion

of a range of offshore support vessels including Pusher Tugs, Anchor Handling

tugs, Standby Vessel, Seismic Support vessel and Diving Support Vessel.

They believe that every vessel & company is different and special, and they make

it a point to tailor their services to meet their clients’ unique requirements.

Almarine Limited (APL) is committed to providing quality, safe and efficient

product and services, in accordance with national and international laws, rules and

regulations and industry standards; and with the highest regard for the health and

safety of its personnel, the protection of the environment and property; and in a

highly ethical and efficient manner.

Over the years, Almarine Limited has developed and implemented policies and

procedures as part of the Management system that emphasizes on the safe

37

execution of day to day operations. This enables preventative actions to be taken

to avoid the occurrence of problems, whilst maintaining the ability to respond to,

and correct failures or hazardous situations should they occur.

The company produces and assembles boat, Yamaha Engines and Generators. It is 100%

foreign owned by John Holt.

Domestic and Industrial Plastic and Rubber

(19) Polo Packaging Industry Limited, 84 Trans-Amadi Layout, Port Harcourt.

This is a private org. They produce plumbing plastic materials and wires, as well as water

proofs.

(20) Integrated Rubber Products Nigeria, Plc, km 8 Benin-Sapele Road, Benin City, Edo State.

Integrated Rubber Products Nigeria Plc was incorporated 31st August 1984 and

became public limited liability Company Plc vide registration number RC 65033

DT 23rd July 1992. The principal activities of the company are the processing of

rubber and distribution of its products.

Floor ant slipping coatings, Metal bellows for compensation, Products made of

silicone rubber, Rubber linings, Spare parts for special equipment, Vehicle spare

parts.

There are also other 104 manufacturing firms in the population. Out of a total sample of

557 were chosen so there were also 537 other manufacturing firms that did not have

profiles but were in the sample and 10 out of their staff were chosen for interview.

38

REFERENCES

Hrebiniak, L.G. (2010), Executive Education, Pennsylvania: Wharton University of Pennsylvania, Knowledge Wharton.

Chandler, A. D. (1969) Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the history of the

American Enterprises. Kansas: The MIT Press Koontz, H and Weihrich, H (1994) Management: A Global Perspective,

Singapore, McGraw-Hill. Onwuchekwa, C.I. (1993) Management Theory and Organizational

Analysis: A Contingency Theory Approach, Enugu: Obio Nigeria Enterprises.

Ottih, L. O. (2004) Corporate Planning: A Process Approach, Owerri:

Springfield Publishers.

Steade, R. D; Lowry, J. R. and Glos, R. E. (1984) Business Its Nature and

Environment, Cinicinnati: South-Western Publishing Company.

Osae, T.A. & Nwabara, S.N. (2000), A Short History of West Africa A.D. 1000-1800, London: Hodder and Stoughton.

Imaga, E.U.L., (2001), Administrative and Management Theory and Practice, Enugu: Lano Publishers.

Nigerian Bureau of Statistics (2014), Some Development Indicators in Nigeria, Abuja: Nigerian Bureau of Statistics.

39

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 Introduction

The primary purpose of this chapter is to conduct a comprehensive review of Structural

Pattern and business strategy implementation literature in line with the objectives of the

study. The study shall first explain the concept of structure and strategy and discuss

some management theories on structural patterns and business strategy implementation,

which include many thinkers like Frederick Taylor, Henry Fayol, Max Weber,

Mintzberg, Chandler, etc. and analyze some frameworks that relate to the topic, such as

theories on structural patterns and strategy implementation. The study shall review the

empirical work conducted by some scholars, such as Chandler, Aston Group and others.

We shall also look at the definition of Structural patterns and strategy implementation;

Line, Staff, Matrix, Informal Organization, et cetera structural patterns in relation with

the concepts of beyond strategic formulation, strategic planning, business strategy

execution, business strategy evaluation and business strategy control in the

manufacturing industries in South-South, Nigeria. The chapter will be concluded with

the Summary of Review of Related Literature.

2.2 Conceptual Framework

2.2.1 The Concept of Structural Patterns

In this study, Structure is the way in which relationships between people or groups are

organized in an organization. Organization is an association of two or more individuals.

It accomplishes objectives through the structure. Cole (2005:184) sees the issue of

structure facing modern organization, and identifies the most important practical options

available to senior management. Mintzberg (1979) says it is the sum total of the ways in

which it divides the labour into distinct tasks and then achieves coordination between

them. Ezigbo (2007:23) defines organization structure as a formal system of tasks and

reporting relationships that coordinates and motivates organizational members so that

they work together to achieve organizational goals. David (2004:18) says it is the way an

organization arranges people and jobs so that its work can be performed and its goals can

be met. Onwuchekwa (1993:81) defines it as the framework through which an

40

organization achieves its objectives. Organizational design is the process to accomplish

results of the structure. We shall discuss organizational design.

2.2.2 The Concept of Organizational Design

The tasks of organization are distributed among its component parts for people’s

performance to accomplish results and that the jobs are done in two different ways –

instrumentally and economically. Organization is expected to do the right thing right with

a minimum cost. This cannot function effectively without organizational design.

Chandler (1962:13) has defined structure as the design of organization through which the

enterprise is administered. This design, whether formally or informally defined, has two

aspects. It includes, first, the lines of authority and communication between the different

administrative offices and officers and second, the information and data that flow through

these lines of communication and authority. Such lines and such data are essential to

assure the effective coordination, appraisal and planning so necessary in carrying out the

basic goals and policies and in knitting together the total resources of the enterprises.

These resources include financial capital; physical equipment such as plants, machinery,

offices, warehouses, and other marketing and purchasing facilities, sources of raw

materials, research and engineering laboratories and most important of all, the technical,

marketing and administrative skills of its personnel. It is on this note that Chandler says

structure follows strategy and that the most complex type of structure is the result of the

concentration of several basic strategies.

Langston et al (2002:10) have regarded organization design as office design. He says

that office design and organization can have a great impact on both the efficiency of the

building and the efficiency of its occupants. Anonymous (1997b:102) says that

organizations can change their office design not only to fuel productivity, but as a

catalyst for improving the way they do business.

Organizational design, when do well, has a flow. It begins with a general view and

gradually tests that view by creating more and more specific descriptions of what will go

on in the new organization. Organization design is a formal system of task and reporting

relationships that coordinates and motivates organizational members so that they work

41

together to achieve organizational goals. It is the process by which managers make

specific organizing choices that result in a particular kind of organizational structure

(Tamunomiebi 2005:104).

Onwuchekwa (1993:58) has said that organizational design is a managerial action which

aims at a structural response approach towards the reduction of crucial contingencies and

constraints for a focal business organization. He adds that the process aims at adjusting

the organizational structure of any business organization in relationship to the demands of

technology, people, strategy and environment. There are three (3) major processes of

organizational design. They are as follows:

• Detailing of organizational task (work), division of work and aggregation of

work into departments;

• Coordinating the activities of the organization for effective performance

(technological adaptation); and,

• Adjusting the structure of the organization to the demands of environment (i.e.

environmental adaptation and the problems of boundary spanning issues) (op cit).

This has to be done logically and authority should be granted so that conflicts do not

occur. The approaches for organizational design are explained as below.

2.2.2.1 Approaches to Organizational Design

We shall speak on the initial proponents of organizational design. They are as follow:

i. The Classical Management Theory;

ii. The Humanistic (neo-classical) Management Theory; and,

iii. The Contingency Management Theory.

Each Theory differs from the structure wherein Burns and Stalker (1961) points out two

basic structures. They are Mechanistic and Organic structure.

According to Onwuchekwa (1993:60), classical management approach focuses its interest

on finding “one best way” through which business organization can achieve economic

efficiency. It is influenced by the ideas of Fredrick Taylor (Scientific Management

School), Henry Fayol (Administrative Organization), Max Weber (the Bureaucratic

42

Management), and others. The organization structure recommended by the classical

management approach corresponds with the Mechanistic of Burns and Stalker (1961) (op

cit).

The Humanistic (Neoclassical) Approach emerged from the result of the Hawthorn

studies which was conducted by Elton Mayo and his fellow researchers from Harvard

University. It shows that if management of a business organization showed concern for

employees, there will be increase in productivity. Neoclassical Approach argued that

bureaucratic structure could be improved by making it less formal and by permitting

more subordinate participation in decision making. Some well known neoclassical

researchers are Mcgregor (1960), Argyris (1957), Likert (1961), and others. This group

also recommends Mechanistic structure as cited by Onwuchekwa (1993).

The Contingency Approach does not favour “one best way” approach to organizational

design. Instead the design of any organization is influenced by certain factors that make

demand on the structure of an organization. These factors are the strategy of the

organization, the technology employed, the environment and the people or managers of

the organization. Specifically on Technology, there are variations in technology such as:

a) Long-linked technology: It is serial interdependence. Activity B will start at the

end of A and C will start at the end of B.

b) Mediating Technology: This is mostly in service organizations. They link their

customers or clients which are interdependent e.g. banks, insurance, telephone

companies, post offices, etc.

c) Intensive Technology: These are found in organizations that have coordinated

aggregations of technologies, e.g. hospitals, research institutes, construction

companies.

However, for an organization to be effective and efficient after setting its goal, it must

reduce the influence of environmental variables by buffering, smoothing/leveling,

forecasting/adaptive and rationing (Onwuchekwa, 1993:43).

This group recommends Organic Structure (op cit).

43

2.2.3 Types of Organizational Structure

According to Aluko et al (2004:172) there are two broad types of structure in the

organization. They are:

i. The Mechanistic organization; and,

ii. Organic Organization.

According to Ezigbo (2007:50), a Mechanistic organization seems best suited to firms

operating in stable environments. This is an organization design in which activities are

broken into specialized tasks and decision making is centralized at the top. Tasks,

authority, responsibility and accountability for both managers and subordinates are

defined by level in the organization. Mechanistic organizations resemble bureaucratic

organizations; top management decides what is important and how to share this

information with everyone else in the organization.

An organic organization is well suited to a changing environment. This is an organization

design that stresses teamwork, open communication, decentralized decision-making. In

changing environments, the organization needs to respond quickly to changing markets

and/or create new markets for its products (op cit).

The differences between these two structures are in the figure below:

Mechanistic Organic

Tasks are highly specialized. Tasks tend to be interdependent. Tasks tend to remain rigidly defined unless changed by top management.

Tasks are continually adjusted and redefined through interaction.

Specific roles (rights, obligations and technical methods) are prescribed for each employee.

Generalized roles (responsibility for task accomplishment beyond specific role definition) are accepted.

Structure of control, authority and communication is hierarchical

Structure of control, authority and communication is a network.

Communication is primarily vertical between superior and subordinate

Communication is both vertical and horizontal, depending on where needed information resides

Communication primarily takes the form of instructions and decisions issued by superiors and of information and requests for decision supplied by subordinates

Communication primarily takes the form of information and advice among all levels.

Source: Burns, T. and Stalker, G.M. (1961), the Management of Innovation, London: Tavistock. Fig. 2.1: Differences between Mechanistic and Organic Structures

44

Above table on Mechanistic and Organic structure summarized the differences between

each other. The environment an organization operates determines the particular structure

to put in place.

2.2.3.1 Mechanistic

According to Cole (2005:84), in a study of the environment-structure relationship

conducted by Burns and Stalker, mechanistic systems are appropriate for conditions of

stability. He says their outstanding features are:

1) A specialized differential of tasks, pursued more or less in their own right;

2) A precise definition of rights, obligations and technical methods of each

functional role;

3) An hierarchical structure of control, authority and communication;

4) A tendency for vertical interaction between members of the concern;

5) A tendency for operations and working behaviour to be dominated by superiors;

and,

6) An insistence on loyalty to the organization and obedience to superiors.

2.2.3.2 Organic

Cole (2005:85) states that organic systems are appropriate for conditions of change.

Their outstanding features are summarized as follows:

1) Individual tasks, which are relevant to the total situation of the concern, are

adjusted and re-defined through interaction with others;

2) A network structure of control, authority and communication, where knowledge

of technical or commercial aspects of tasks may be located anywhere in the

network;

3) A lateral rather than vertical direction of communication through the organization;

4) Communications consist of information and advice rather than instructions and

decisions;

5) Commitment to the organization’s tasks seen to be more important than loyalty

and obedience

45

Cole has explained that Burns and Stalker do not see the two systems as being complete

opposites, but as polar positions between which intermediate firms could exist. They

stressed that they did not favour one or other system. What was important was to achieve

the most appropriate system for a given set of circumstances – a perfect expression of the

contingency approach.

Environment also has influence on the structure of organization. This can be summarized

on the figure below:

Stable Dynamic

Complex Decentralized bureaucratic

e.g. hospitals

Decentralized organic

Simple Centralized bureaucratic

e.g. mass production

Centralized organic e.g.

retailing or decentralized

bureaucratic

Source: Cole (2005) adapted from Mintzberg, H. the Structure of organizations: A synthesis of Research, Prentice Hall.

Fig. 2.2: Environmental Influences on Organizational Structure

2.2.4 The Concept of Business Strategy Implementation

Koontz et al (1994:169) say strategy concerns the direction in which human and material

resources will be applied in order to increase the chance of achieving selected objectives.

It is managing the interests and operations of a particular line of business. Business

strategy is formulated to meet the goals of a particular business. Strategy implementation

is the sum total of the activities and choices required for the execution of a strategic plan.

It is the process by which objectives, strategies, and policies are put into action through

the development of programs, budgets and procedures (Wheelen, et al 2010:320). For

strategy implementation to take place, it must go beyond allocation of resources to

achieve organizational objectives. It must be accompanied by strategic thinking that also

includes designing an appropriate organizational structure which brings about change.

Strategy implementation is a complex and dynamic process involving the communication

of the strategy, the deployment of the strategic plan to functional areas of the business,

leadership implementation and structural considerations. Also at issue are the

46

interrelationships between strategy implementation on the one hand, and the management

of change and culture on the other.

While strategy is a key factor in organizations, it is certainly not the sole determinant of

organizational performance. A popular framework developed by Peters and Waterman Jr.

(1982), which has proved useful as a diagnostic and remedial toolkit is the McKinsey 7-S

Framework. The model simply suggests that organizational performance is a function of

seven interdependent variables, each of which starts with the letter “S”. The variables are:

1. Structure

2. Strategy

3. Systems and procedures

4. Staff (people)

5. Style (management style)

6. Shared values (and guiding concepts) and

7. Skills (hoped-for corporate strengths).

The seven factors are relevant, not only in strategy formulation, but also in strategy

implementation. However, the following discussion shall be restricted to its relevance for

strategy implementation. For strategy implementation to be effective, it should take the

other six factors. Put differently, in implementing strategy, there is need to examine and

re-examine the other six factors in order to ensure that they are supportive, and not

subversive of the new strategy. There is definitely need for a fit between the strategy and

these factors (Agbonifoh, 2008:226).

2.2.5 The Concept of Beyond Strategy Formulation

Strategy formulation is the first step in the strategic management process. It entails the

design of the appropriate strategy. Strategic analysis will enable an organization to

understand its current position. This understanding is vital in enabling the organization to

determine where it could be and should be, a means for reaching there must be devised.

The means to reach where an organization could or should be is what is generally

referred to as a strategy. A strategy is a comprehensive plan stating how the corporation

will achieve its mission and objective. According to Thompson and Strickland (1996:16)

it is “management’s game plan for the business” which guides how an organization

47

conducts its business and how to achieve its goals. Anao (1979:1) defined strategies as

“schemes, methods, manoeuvres which management hopes to deploy in order to move

the organization from its present position to arrive at its target goal by the end of a

specified period, recognizing that during the intervening period, a host of changes are

going to take place in the environment”. Essentially, a strategy is a chosen course of

action for pursuing an objective.

In the third phase of the strategic management process, the concern is to design a

workable, practical and pragmatic line of action that will lead to goal achievement.

Strategy formulation can be viewed as “the development of long-range plans for the

effective management of environmental opportunities and threats, in light of corporate

strengths and weaknesses” (Wheelen and Hunger, 2008:9).

2.2.6 The Concept of Beyond Strategic Planning

These are the steps that follow after the steps listed below:

1. Planning to plan

2. Environmental scanning and analysis

3. Company audit

4. Formulation of objectives

5. Determination of strategic options

6. Selection of strategy

7. Budgeting

8. Evaluation and control (Unyimadu, 2000:100).

Planning to plan involves deciding to go into strategic planning. The Chief Executive

Officer informs the divisional managers that it is time to do another strategic planning.

This is the type of planning in the short-term, medium-term, long-term and perspective-

term so as to achieve comprehensive goals and objectives. Environmental analysis and

scanning is the next step. The environment is the totality of the variables and factors and

actions that affect the managers and staff and workers when doing their work. In the

PEST model of the environment, P stands for the political environment, E stands for the

economic environment, S stands for the socio-cultural environment and T stands for the

48

technological environment (Agbonifoh & Inegbenebor, 2008:63). The environment has to

be analysed and scanned during the process.

In the company audit, the important sections and activities are looked at. The sections

include finance, production, marketing, materials management, research and development

and innovation. The managerial activities include planning, organizing, staffing, leading

and controlling. In the formulation of objectives, the step involves looking at the short-

term aims of the organization. The short term aims would include maximization of profit,

going into external and internal growth and maximization of shareholders’ wealth. Profit

is the difference between sales revenue and total cost. The aim would be to maximize

sales revenue by either increasing price or quantity sold. Going into external growth

entails going into diversification or going into mergers, acquisitions and consolidations.

In maximizing shareholders’ wealth, the company aims at paying more dividends than

were paid the previous year to shareholders. In the determination of strategic options, the

options are along the sections. An example is to inject more capital into the business, to

produce more goods that are of good quality, to do international marketing, to use good

quality materials, to go more into research and development and to be innovative

(Unyimadu, 2000:102).

Out of the strategic options, there is a choice of an appropriate strategy or course of

action. The following elements are looked at:

i. The product-market scope.

ii. Growth vector.

iii. Goals and objectives.

iv. Deployment of emphasis.

v. Deployment of resources.

vi. Synergy.

Budgeting is an important step. A budget is a quantitative and financial statement

prepared prior to the period showing the revenue and expenditure. In business strategy

evaluation the chosen strategy is evaluated to see whether the goals and objectives are

being achieve. In business strategy control, the strategy is formulated, evaluated,

49

appraised, controllable and uncontrollable variables are segregated or separated and if

things are okay, the action is continued, if things are not okay, corrective action is done

(Unyimadu, 2000:104).

2.2.7 The Concept of Business Strategy Execution

The steps of business strategy execution includes the following:

1. Strategy planning

2. Formulation of strategy

3. Evaluation whether strategy is appropriate

4. Strategy execution

5. Strategy control.

In strategy planning, the steps have already been listed in the last section. In the

formulation of strategy, the strategy is designed after doing an environmental analysis

and scanning and doing a company audit. Evaluation is done to find out whether the

strategy is appropriate. If it is appropriate by looking at the elements, then the action

continues but if it is not appropriate, then there will be a need for corrective action.

Strategy execution is an important aspect of strategy implementation. It involves seeing

whether the strategy has been completed. If so, this will show in the goals and objectives

being achieved. If they are not being achieved, then there will be need for corrective

action. In strategy control, the strategy has been formulated, objectives and goals have

been set, there have been strategy appraisal and appreciation of results. Controllable and

uncontrollable variables are segregated and if things are okay then there will be

continuity but if things are not okay, corrective action has to take place (Unyimadu,

2000:106).

2.2.8 The Concept of Business Strategy Control

The steps of business strategy control include:

1. Formulation of strategy

2. Environmental scanning and analysis

3. Company audit

4. Determination of strategic options

50

5. Choice of strategy

6. Appraisal and appreciation of results

7. Performance appraisal

8. Segregation into controllable and uncontrollable variables continuing if things are

okay and correcting actions if things are not okay (Unyimadu, 2000:18).

In formulation of strategy, the strategy is designed by stating the elements, the course of

action to be taken and the goals and objectives to be achieved. Environmental scanning

and analysis are done along the PEST model. Company audit is also done by looking at

the sections and also the activities of the company. The strategic options are determined

along the performance of the sections. One particular strategy is chosen at a time; for

example, the company can initially go into market penetration or expansion and later go

into product diversification and even mergers. Results are appraised and appreciated.

Performance appraisal are also done, along the performance of the employees and the

performance factors of the company which includes productivity, profitability, gearing,

activity, liquidity and employee morale among others (Unyimadu, 2000:80).

Segregation of variables into controllable and uncontrollable variables is done. The

controllable variables are those within the control of the company. Uncontrollable

variables are those outside the company’s control. The action continues if things are okay

as shown by the achievement of the goals and objectives. Corrective action is done if

things are not okay (Unyimadu, 2000:82).

2.3 Theoretical Framework

2.3.1 The Theories of Structural Patterns

The framework is based on the idea of the structural and strategic theorists that deals with

structural patterns and strategy implementation. Whilst it may omit some aspects of

theorists, it nevertheless simplifies the study of the theoretical basis of the subject.

People have been shaping and reshaping organizations for many centuries. As we look

back the history of management, the earliest contributors were practicing managers as

well as social scientists. More recent theorists have tended to be academics or

management consultants. The early theorists can be divided into two main groups – the

51

practicing managers, such as Taylor and Henry Fayol, and the social scientists, such as

Mayo and McGregor. The practicing managers tended to reflect upon, and theorize

about, their personal experiences of management with the object of producing a set of

rational principles of management which could be applied universally in order to achieve

organizational efficiency. The resultant theories of management were concerned

primarily with the structuring of work and organizations. The label generally ascribed to

these theorists is ‘Classical’ or ‘Scientific Managers’. The two major theorists of this

approach are Henry Fayol (1841-1925) and F. W. Taylor (1856-1915). Their approaches

were generally prescriptive; they set out what managers ought to do in order to fulfill

their leadership function within their organization.

The classical approach to management was primarily concerned with the structure and

activities of formal or official organization. While Fayol and Taylor were grappling with

the problems of management, a German sociologist, Max Weber (1864-1924), was

developing a theory of authority structures in which he identified a form of organization

to which he gave the name ‘bureaucracy’ (Cole, 2005:4). They are ‘one best way

scholars’. They believe that the most efficient and effective organizations had a

hierarchical structure in which members of the organization guided in their actions by a

sense of duty to the organization and by a set of rational rules and regulations. When

fully developed, according to Weber, such organizations were characterized by

specialization of tasks, appointment of merit, provision of career opportunities for

members, routinization of activities, and rational, impersonal organizational climate.

Weber calls this a bureaucracy (Stoner, Freeman and Gilbert, 2005:250-252).

Other management thoughts such as Mintzberg and Alfred Chandler amongst others are

contributors to structure as well as strategy. Mintzberg gives five distinct tasks for

structural patterns. The distinct tasks are simple structure, machine bureaucracy,

professional bureaucracy, divisionalized form and adhocracy. It also has environmental

classifications such as mechanistic and organic. While Alfred Chandler pointed out

simple, functional and multi-dimensional structures and concluded that structure follows

strategy.

52

This investigation into the changing strategy and structure of the large industrial

enterprise in the United States began as an experiment in the writing of comparative

business history. The initial thought was that an examination of the way different

enterprises carried out the same activity – whether that activity was manufacturing,

marketing, procurement of supplies, finance, or administration – would have as much

value as a study of how a single firm carried on all these activities. Such a comparative

analysis could permit deeper probes into the nature of the function studied, and so

provide more accurate interpretations and more meaningful evaluations of the

performance of several different enterprises in that activity than could a whole series of

histories of individual firms. It could thus indicate more clearly the ways in which

American businessmen have handled that activity over the years.

Of the several activities carried on in American business that of administration appeared

to be among the most promising for such an experiment in comparative history. Business

administration has a particular relevance for today’s businessmen and scholars. The

enormous expansion of the American economy since World War II has led to the rapid

growth of a multitude of industrial companies. Their executives are faced with complex

administrative problems that before the war concerned only those of the largest

corporations (Chandler, 1962:1).

2.4 Basic Model of Strategic Management

Strategic management consists of four basic elements:

i. Environmental scanning

ii. Strategy formulation

iii. Strategy implementation

iv. Evaluation and control (Wheelen & Hunger, 2008:12)

Environmental scanning is the monitoring, evaluating and disseminating of information

from the external and internal environments to key people within the corporation. Its

purpose is to identify strategic factors – external and internal elements that will determine

the future of the corporation. The simplest way to conduct environmental scanning is

through SWOT become – management’s strategic vision of the firm’s future. The

53

mission statement promotes a sense of shared expectations in employees and

communicates a public image to important stakeholder groups in the company’s task

environment (Wheelen & Hunger, 2008:12).

Strategy formulation entails designing the appropriate strategy for the company. It is

done after environmental analysis and scanning. Environmental analysis is done along the

PEST model of the environment. Before formulating the policy, the strategic options are

looked into along the sections of the company. One of the strategic options is chosen

(Wheelen & Hunger, 2008:13).

Strategy implementation is the process by which strategies and policies are put into

action through the development of programs, budgets and procedures. This process might

involve changes within the overall culture, structure, and/or management system of the

entire organization. Except when such drastic corporate wide changes are needed,

however, the implementation of strategy is typically conducted by middle and lower-level

managers, with review by top management. Sometimes referred to as operational

planning, strategy implementation often involves day-to-day decisions in resource

allocation (Wheelen & Hunger, 2008:16).

Evaluation and control is a process in which corporate activities and performance results

are monitored so that actual performance can be compared with desired performance.

Managers at all levels use the resulting information to take corrective action and resolve

problems. Although evaluation and control is the final major element of strategic

management, it can also pinpoint weaknesses in previously implemented strategic plans

and thus stimulate the entire process to begin again (Wheelen & Hunger, 2008:17).

2.4.1 Structure and Strategy

According to Stoner (2005:313) successful implementation depends in part on how the

organization’s activities are divided, organized, and coordinated - in short, on the

structure of the organization. Not surprisingly, the chances that an organization’s

strategy will succeed are far greater when its structure matches its strategy. By the same

toke, as its basic strategy changes over time, so must its structure.

54

Over the years, as managers have tried to make structure fit strategy, this approach has

resulted in manager’s building larger and larger “semi-permanent” structures for their

organizations. Those structures logically followed strategies designed to make

companies bigger and more dominant in the marketplace. Today, many managers are

experimenting with very different looking organizational structures because they are

experimenting – and succeeding – with a radically different kind of organizational

strategy. Alfred Chandler found that managers at firms that developed new products

through a strategy of research and development leading to product diversification, such as

Westinghouse and General Electric, chose a decentralized structure. Other managers,

operating in industries in which markets were more predictable, production processes

were less dynamic, and competitive relationships were more stable, tended to choose

centralized authority. It is important to understand fully the elements or dimension of

organization structure for proper administration. Diagrams below show the

interrelationship of strategy and structure, their effectiveness in the operational

environment.

Source: Azhar Kazmi (2009) STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT AND BUSINESS POLICY “Structural Implementation. Structure and Strategy” Page 348. New Delhi. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited.

Figure 2.3: Interrelationship of structure and strategy

STRATEGY

STRUCTURE

Determines

Affects

55

Source: Azhar Kazmi (2009) STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT AND BUSINESS POLICY “Structural Implementation. Structure and Strategy” Page 350. New Delhi. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited

Figure 2.4: Environment, strategy, structure and effectiveness

2.5 The Strategic Management Process

Business organizations as institutions of society are usually goal-oriented and action-

driven. Strategic management helps organizations to achieve their long-term goals. This

is so if it is appreciated that the organization is established not just too meet immediate

needs but also to meet needs that will aid its continuous existence. In real terms, strategic

management is what provides an organization with the focus and impetus to consciously

sustain its existence with performances that are attractive and acceptable to all

shareholders. This therefore means that strategic management is an all-embracing tool in

the hands of organizational members to guarantee acceptable and sustainable

performance (Agbonifoh, 2008:230).

The all-embracing nature of strategic management makes it a complex process. Although

the degree of complexity varies from organization to organization on the basis of such

factors as size, age and type of management, some basic steps are usually involved. In

our definitions of strategic management previously, clearly shows that strategic

management is a process. For example, according to Harrison and St. John (1998)

strategic management is the process through which organizations analyze and learn from

Environment

Strategy

Structure

Effectiveness

56

their internal and external environments, establish strategic directions, create strategies

that are intended to help achieve established goals, and execute these strategies all in an

effort to satisfy key organizational stakeholders. From this, it is clear that strategic

management is a process. (Agbonifoh, 2008:230).

The New English Dictionary and Thesaurus (1994) defines a process as “a series of

events or actions”. Usually a process consists of a sequence of activities performed in

order to achieve a particular objective. A process consists of a number of interrelated and

interdependent sequences of activities that have a common purpose. A process therefore

consist of distinct but interrelated sets of activities that are in some sense interdependent

but all geared towards accomplishing a particular goal. Moreover, a process can be

thought of as a system or a set of integrated activities that is made up of component parts.

Clearly therefore, a process is a carefully arranged, graduated and progressive set of

activities that are not only intertwined but distinctively integrated to enable the

achievement of ascertained end results (Anao, 1979:5).

The explanation of a process above suggests, inter alia, that a process is characterized by:

i. Distinct sub-activities or components.

ii. Progression in terms of performance of sub-activities.

iii. Interdependence of the different activities.

iv. All the activities put together make up a whole.

v. The performance of the different activities is geared towards the attainment of a

specified goal.

Therefore, to say that strategic management is a process means that it is a system

made up of sub-systems/components which can be identified, assigned and performed

with a view to achieving a specified outcome (Unyimadu, 2000:102).

Usually, a detailed and carful examination of any definition of strategic management will

reveal to some extent its components. For example, a perusal of the definition will reveal

that the following components can be identified:

i. Analysis of internal and external environments.

ii. Establishment of a strategic direction.

57

iii. Creation of strategies to achieve established goals.

iv. Execution of the strategies created.

Distinct as these components appear to be, they may not be comprehensive enough to

portray all that is involved in strategic management. In a more elaborate fashion, strategic

management is defined in terms of five tasks/components. The tasks that they identified

include:

i. Developing a concept of the business and forming a vision of where the

organization needs to be headed. (This will usually also include the establishment

of a mission).

ii. Converting the mission into specific performance objectives.

iii. Crafting a strategy to achieve the targeted performance.

iv. Implementing and executing the chosen strategy efficiently and effectively.

v. Evaluating performance, reviewing the situation and initiating corrective

adjustment sin mission, objectives, strategy or implementation in the light of

actual experience, changing conditions, new ideas and new opportunities

(Agbaragu and Evbayiro-Osagie, 2008:30).

Furthermore, it summed up strategic management in the following mathematical

representation:

Strategic management = strategic planning + implementation + control.

An analysis of the different classification of the components of strategic management by

different authors would reveal that while some are too restrictive in terms of scope others

do not concisely capture its natty gritty. Most of the classifications exclude the

establishment of a strategic direction in terms of vision, mission and goals for an

organization in the strategic management process. These authors assume away the

existence of this key component of strategic management (Agbaragu and Evbayiro-

Osagie, 2008:31).

In conclusion, we may say that the components of strategic management include the

following:

58

i. Establishment of strategic direction or purpose: this is in the form of mission,

vision and goals.

ii. Strategic analysis: this is in terms of valuation of challenges, demands and

possibilities for an organization both within and outside of its borders.

iii. Strategy formulation/development: this is usually in the light of an understanding

of the strategic purpose and an adequate strategic analysis.

iv. Strategy implementation: by this we mean the deployment or movement of the

strategy from the boardroom to the battle field.

v. Strategic evaluation and control: this involves assessing the performance of the

strategy, correcting lapses and introducing improvements, if need be.

It should be noted that these activities are usually performed simultaneously and

continuously as long as the organization continues to exist. They do not necessarily have

to occur in a sequence.

At the center of strategic management is deciding where an organization is headed. In

practical terms, if a man wakes up in the morning, gets dressed and leaves home without

knowing where he is going, he is comparable to a psychiatric patient. Organizations do

not just exist; they exist to fulfill specific goals in society. Whether by design or not, from

the very beginning, every organization has a purpose. Usually, it is the owners that create

or establish the organizational purpose and hence its direction (Unyimadu, 2000:131).

In strategic management parlance, the purpose of an organization is usually its vision,

mission and goals. Formulating a vision and a mission as well as setting a goal for an

organization is usually the very first step in the strategic management process. A clear

understanding of the vision, mission and goals of an organization will make for better

performance for both individual workers and the organization at large. It is, therefore not

surprising that the annual reports of business organizations show their strategic purpose –

vision, mission, values, goals and objectives in the first few pages.

59

A vision is a dream which the promoters of the business have about its future. Visions are

dreams that drive organizations into action. They are usually foresights of the future

position of an organization. A vision is an idea of what an organization is trying to do or

to become. (Anao, 1979:7).

An organization’s mission is directly related to its vision. It usually related the

organization to society and the external environment while specifying the business of the

organization in terms of product and technology adopted. Mission is defined as a

statement that clearly defines an organization’s primary business, but limits the scope of

the firm’s activities in terms of the products or services offered, the technology used and

the market served (Wheelen and Hunger 2008:16).

Finally, in establishing the organization’s purpose, the goals of the organization will be

set. A goal is a specific and concrete end-result towards which an organization strives. It

is a desired future outcome that an organization strives to achieve. Lewis et al (1995)

define it as a very broad statement of the result that an organization wishes to achieve in

the long term which usually relates to the organizational mission and specifies the level

of performance that it desires to achieve. The second component of the strategic

management process is strategic analysis, which involves an analysis of an organization

in terms its environment and internal positioning/posture (Anao, 1979:8).

Strategic analysis involves both environmental analysis and organizational/internal

analysis. It is a forerunner to strategy formulation in the sense that it helps an

organization to identify its present position in the light of its strategic direction.

Environmental analysis involves trying to gain an understanding of the environment of

the business, the components of the environment, the present impact of the different

components on the business operations, the potential changes in the components of the

environment that will affect the business operations, identification of the extent and

potential opportunities for the business, identification of the threats to the business and

the nature of the competition in the industry (Anao, 1979:12).

60

Internal or company analysis involves evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of a

company. It entails determining exactly how an organization is operating and the

bottlenecks that are affecting operations. In carrying out internal analysis, the product-

market portfolio of the company is usually critically examined to find out if they are

adequately positioned to enable it meet its goals. It also involves examining and re-

examining the processes, structures, culture, technology, resources etc of an organization

so as to reveal its strengths and weakness (Agbonifoh, 2008:13).

Essentially, strategic analysis involves a diagnosis of whatever that relates to the

organization that affects performance. It requires that the strategist or analyst possesses

analytical, diagnostic and conceptual skills. Whereas environmental/external analysis will

reveal the threats and opportunities that face an organization, company/internal analysis

is geared towards identifying its strengths and weaknesses. The purpose is to enable

organizations know where they are in the light of where they are going and hence identify

the gap and the causes of the gap (Unyimadu, 2000:133).

The importance of strategic analysis lies in the fact that crafting an appropriate strategy is

heavily dependent on it. For example, for an organization in the Nigerian banking

industry that wants to be a dominant and full-service financial institution in Africa, in

designing a strategy, must first and foremost be sure how far it has gone in being the kind

of organization that it desires to be. This will involve understanding the situation in its

industry, the level of competition, what competitors are doing, the nature of its current

operations, the resources that are presently at its disposals, etc. Such an understanding

will reveal where the organization is on the road to its destination. This obviously will

enable it take the right decision as to what to do in the face of present circumstances to

reach its destination. This is the essence of strategic analysis (Agbaragu and Evbayiro-

Osagie, 2008:32).

Strategic analysis will enable an organization to understand its current position. This

understanding is vital in enabling the organization to determine where it could be and

should be. But for an organization to determine where it could be and should be, a means

61

for reaching there must be devised. The means to reach where an organization could or

should be is what is generally referred to as a strategy. A strategy is a comprehensive

plan stating how the corporation will achieve its mission and objective. It is

“management’s game plan for the business” which guides how an organization conducts

its business and how to achieve its goals. Strategies were also defined as “schemes,

methods, manoeuvres which management hopes to deploy in order to move the

organization from its present position to arrive at its target goal by the end of a specified

period, recognizing that during the intervening period, a host of changes are going to take

place in the environment”. Essentially, a strategy is a chosen course of action for

pursuing an objective (Agbaragu and Evbayiro-Osagie, 2008:25).

In this third phase of the strategic management process, the concern is to design a

workable, practical and pragmatic line of action that will lead to goal achievement.

Strategy formulation can be viewed as “the development of long-range plans for the

effective management of environmental opportunities and threats, in light of corporate

strengths and weaknesses” (Wheelen and Hunger, 2008:9). According to Griffin

(2004:202) strategy formulation “is the set of processes involved in creating or

determining the strategies of the organization”. It is a decision making process that

requires that an organization selects the best to actualize its strategic purpose. At

whatever level, the concern is to:

i. Generate alternate means for actualizing the organizational purpose,

ii. Analyse the different alternatives to reveal the contents and feasibility and

iii. Select the most appropriate strategy for the organizational purpose.

Strategy formulation is a very important aspect of strategic management because it is at

this stage that an organization decides on how to meet its goals. It is a process that takes

place at different levels of the organization. This is because strategies are formulated not

only at the corporate level but at the business and functional levels.

Apart from designing an appropriate strategy under this phase, policies are also

formulated. According to Wheelen and Hunger (2008:25), policies help in defining the

ground rules for the implementation of a strategy. A policy is the framework that guides

62

implementation of strategies. Such a framework is necessary so that implementation of

strategy is not bogged down by hiccups. Policy formulation is a part and parcel of this

phase of the strategic management process.

Once a strategy has been formulated and selected, the next task is to put to action the

strategy. Strategy implementation essentially is about activating the strategy so as to

produce the desired result. According to Thompson and Strickland (1996), the strategy

implementation function consists of seeking what it will take to make the strategy work

and to reach the targeted performance on schedule. In the words of Griffin (2004), it is

the method by which strategies are operationalizes or executed within the organization.

Strategy implementation is concerned with translating strategies into concrete action or

performance. In simple terms, it is putting the strategy chosen into action (Unyimadu,

2000:35).

There are three pertinent questions to be considered in implementation. These questions

are:

i. Who are the people who will carry out the strategic plans?

ii. What must be done?

iii. How are they going to do what is needed?

It is also noted that implementation involves:

i. Identifying and setting measurable annual goals.

ii. Designing of strategies for the functional areas.

iii. Formulation and communication of specific policies.

If an organization is able to provide answers to the questions raised above and perform

the tasks above, strategy implementation will be on course. However, some other issues

like organizational structure, corporate culture, and people are among the issues to be

considered in strategy implementation. On the whole, the potency of a strategy can only

be proven when the strategy is activated through implementation. The main thrust of

strategy implementation is how to translate strategies into programmes, budgets,

procedures, projects, etc for activation (Agbaragu and Evbayiro-Osagie, 2008:24).

63

Strategic evaluation and control is the final stage of the strategic management process. It

is an appraisal of the whole process to ensure that what was set out to be done was

actually done and necessary corrections made where deviations are noticed in terms of

sub-par performances. Essentially it is concerned with whether the organization actually

arrived at its pre-destination. Strategic evaluation and control concerns itself with

appraising the effect of strategy implementation to find out where an organization is, in

relation to its destination. It will normally involve assessing the appropriateness and

usefulness of a strategy in helping the organization to meet its goals and making

necessary adjustments where necessary. This is because, it reveals or brings out the

lapses in the strategy being implemented and so sets the process in motion again as

alternative strategies are then reformulated and implemented. Strategic control is

concerned with the question “how will the organization know when it was arrived? It is

also noted that “the process by which corporate activities and performance results are

monitored and actual performance compared with desired performance”. It normally

involves:

i. Identifying performance measures or what is to be measured

ii. Determining performance standards against which to compare actual performance

iii. Measuring actual performance in terms of results of operations

iv. Comparison of actual performance with performance standards so as to reveal any

deviation therein

v. Analysis of the deviations to ascertain actual causes of deviations

vi. Taking of corrective measures which may be in the form of alternative strategies

in some case reformation of objectives (Anao, 1979:6).

Strategic evaluation and control is so crucial to be strategic management process that

without it the process will not lead to the results desired. Its imperative lies in the fact that

participants in the process cannot think through the process with all certainty and be able

to foresee all that the organization may face when a strategy is deployed into action.

Moreover, the changing and dynamic nature of the environment may make strategies

inappropriate and implementation faulty. This may therefore call for reshaping of both

strategies and their implementation. For such reshaping to be meaningful and bring about

the desired results, strategy evaluation and control must be carried out.

64

Strategy evaluation forms an essential step in strategic management process as it enables

top managers to determine whether the chosen strategy is meeting the objectives of the

enterprise. It is an attempt to look beyond the obvious facts regarding the short-term

health of a business and appraise instead those more fundamental factors and trends that

govern success in the chosen field of endeavour. In this context strategy, evaluation

should provide answers to the following issues;

i. Are the objectives of the business appropriate?

ii. Are the major policies and plans appropriate?

iii. Do the results obtained to date confirm or refute critical assumptions on which the

strategy rests?

In order to find answers to these questions, it was suggested that a strategy should be

assessed on the following criteria:

a. Consistency.

b. Consonance.

c. Advantage.

d. Feasibility

Consistency: An important aspect of a chosen strategy is that it must not present

mutually inconsistent goals and policies. The strategy must be clear and explicit so that it

can foster a climate of tacit coordination. There are many types of inconsistency that can

occur to undermine a strategy. An example of inconsistency of strategy is a continuing

conflict between the functional areas. This is then the case when:

i. Inspite of changes personnel problems in coordination and planning continue and

tend to be issue – rather than people – based.

ii. After delegating authority down the line, operating problems are still brought to

the top for the resolution of policy issues.

iii. Success for one department means failure for another department (inconsistency

of objective structure). (Anao, 1979:7).

A second type of inconsistency that can occur is between organizational strategy and

organizational culture due to changes necessitated by the chosen strategy. The most

65

frequent source of such conflict is growth, a change from stable growth strategy to

growth strategy by diversification. As a result of the choice of a diversification strategy, a

decentralization of authority may be imperative against the existing centralization of

authority. Many executives may experience sharp sense of loss of authority.

Consonance: The notion of consonance is that a strategy must both match and be adapted

to its environment and at the same time ensures that the firm has special competitive

position or edge over other firms in the industry. Thus, the emphasis of consonance is on

the match between the strategy and the trends taking place in the external environment. In

order to evaluate the match between strategy and the major changes in the environment a

thorough examination and understanding of the basic pattern of economic relationships

that characterize the business is necessary. Once we have a thorough grasp of the basic

economic foundation that supports and defines the business, we can then determine the

likely impact of key trends and changes on the business existence.

However, evaluation of consonance is not an easy task because most of the critical threats

to a business are those which come from without, threatening an entire group of firms.

Another difficulty in appraising the fit between a firm’s mission and the changing

economic and social conditions over time is that trend analysis does not normally reveal

the most critical changes – they are the results of interactions among trends (Unyimadu,

2000:136).

Advantages: Competitive strategy is “the art of creating or exploiting those advantages

that are most telling, enduring and most difficult to duplicate”. The focus of competitive

strategy is on the difference among firms rather than their common missions. In this

context the focus is on “how can this function be performed better than or at least instead

of, the competitor”? Competitive advantage can be assessed in terms of three factors:

- Superior resources.

- Superior skills.

- Superior position.

Superior resources and/or superior skills represent the ability of a company to do more

and/or do it better than its rivals. Positional advantage, on the other hand, relates to being

66

“in the right place at the right time”. This can be gained through foresight, superior skills

and/or resources, or just through plain luck. Once gained, a good position is defensible, in

that it returns enough value to warrant its continued maintenance, and secondly

competitors would be deterred from full-scale attacks on the core of the business because

it will be costly be capture. Thus, entrenched firms can be almost impossible to unseat,

even if their raw skill levels are only average given that the basic environmental factors

that underlie it remain stable (Agbaragu and Evbayiro-Osagie, 2008:23).

Feasibility: A strategy must be feasible in terms of the firm’s existing or readily

obtainable skills and resources. Easily quantifiable in this context is a firm’s financial

resources and they are usually the first limitation against which strategy is tested. With

respect to the human skills assessing the feasibility of a strategy requires finding answers

to the following pertinent questions:

a. Has the organization demonstrated the problem-solving abilities and special

competences required by the strategy?

b. Has the organization demonstrated the coordination and integrative skills

necessary to carry out the strategy?

c. Does the strategy challenge and motivate key personnel and is the strategy

acceptable to those who must support it?

Let is be emphasized that it does not necessarily follow that a strategy which scored high

on the above criteria must also be successful, but certainly it has advantage over one that

falls short on one or more of the criteria.

Control is a corrective activity. It involves tracking the strategy once it has been

implemented, detecting any problem areas or potential problem areas, and making any

necessary adjustments. In this way, strategic control provides the manger with feedback

information regarding potential problems before it is too late to do something about it. In

addition, control measures actual performance, compare the measurement against

established standards, identifies and analyses deviations. In order to achieve its crucial

function of monitoring the strategy, it is necessary to first identify those parts of the

strategy that have a reasonable likelihood of variance and to which therefore the control

67

should focus. Identifying the potential trouble spots of a strategy is not an easy task,

because it requires experience and a thorough analysis of both the internal and external

environments.

Once the problem areas have been identified, for each variable, we can then develop an

early warning signal. Early warning signals will make it possible for any meaningful

changes in variable to be detected. Besides through the development of early warning

signals a list of milestones, or major intermediate progress points, relating to the

objectives being pursued, can be identified. Once these milestones have been identified,

they can then be carefully monitored (Agbaragu and Evbayiro-Osagie, 2008:21).

i. Financial Controls: Financial data are some of the most commonly used warning

signals. Such financial measures include consideration of profit, sales, return on

investment (ROI) return on equity, cost figures and trends in these and other

related measures. These financial figures are then subjected to close monitoring,

actual performance are then compared with projected or expected (planned)

figures. Substantial discrepancies in any of the figures are indications that

something unpleasant is happening.

The budgetary system is another tool frequently used for monitoring the performance of a

strategy. When used as a controlling instrument a budget offers many advantages:

a. The accounting information on which they are based. Besides, they do not

measure intangibles or nonfinancial objectives such as market share and morale.

b. Warnings of potential troubles may not arrive in a timely fashion.

c. Arbitrary cost allocations to meet financial reporting requirements can be

misleading.

ii. Nonfinancial Controls: Potential problems areas can also be identified through

the use of nonfinancial warning signals. Some of the most frequently used

nonfinancial signals include measures of productivity, measures of quality,

personnel related measures and feedback from customers. Most organizations use

a combination of financial and nonfinancial early warning signals.

68

The management function of evaluating and controlling of performance is to ensure that

enterprise objectives and plans devised to attain them are accomplished. In this context,

systematic evaluation and control keep top managers close to the pulse of the strategy and

provides important feedback, over time, for the adjustment and/or reformation of a firm’s

strategy. It should be pointed out, however, that evaluating and controlling function is the

responsibility of every manager, from the supervisor to the top manager, although the

scope of control varies among managers (Unyimadu, 2000:137).

The choice of criteria to facilitate strategic evaluation and control is not a simple task,

because the measures must provide a feedback to managers about the company’s progress

toward its overriding goals of profitability, survival and growth. Besides, evaluation and

control of strategy require management motivation, intuition and sensitivity to various

qualitative dimensions of the interface between the company and its environment.

The term performance gap refers to the difference between actual performance of a given

unit and the planned performance of that unit. The performance gap must be significant

enough to warrant unit. The performance gap must be significant enough to warrant

management efforts. This is then the case, for instance, if the planned performance is 20

percent growth in sales and earning but the actual performance is 12 percent. When such

a significant performance gap exists, management must carry out a thorough analysis of

the reasons for the variations with the intent to bring performance back in line with the

strategic plan (Agbonifoh, 2008:8).

2.6 Empirical Review

According to Chandler (1962:10), organizations pass through three stages of

development, moving from a unit structure, to a functional structure, and then to a

multidivisional structure. At first the organizations are small; there is usually a single

location, a single product and a single entrepreneurial decision maker. So as organization

grows, however, increased volume and additional locations eventually create new

challenges.

69

The first companies to devise “decentralized” form according to the preliminary study by

Chandler (1996) included the E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Company, General Motors

Corporation, Standard Oil Company (New Jersey), and Sears, Roebuck and Company.

Du Pont and General Motors began to fashion their new structure shortly after World

War 1. Jersey Standard started its reorganization in 1925, and Sears started in 1929.

Five other firms among the fifty studied – United States Rubber, B. F. Goodrich, Union

Carbide and Carbon, Westinghouse Electric, and the Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea

Company – initiated comparable changes between 1925 and 1932. Chandler concluded

that organizational structure followed and reflected the growth strategy of the firms. He

says that an organizational structure logically follows from, and facilitates, an

organizational strategy.

The above are all companies based in the United States. In Africa, it has to be recalled

that industrialization of this large scale were imported into the continent by the

multinationals, hence studies on the growth of structure and strategy in the continent and

in Nigeria specifically is not common. Inspiration on this important aspect of

organizations can only be drawn from the experiences of these western and accidental

countries and from literature. This makes it imperative to open up studies such as this to

initiative guideline for further work.

2.6.2 Best Practices Of Structural Pattern And Business Strategy For Employee Motivation

We have earlier discussed the dominance of the classical school and human

relations/social psychological schools; the systems approach views organization as a

system of interrelated sets of activities which enable inputs to be converted into outputs.

According to Stoner et al (2005:72) management views organization as a unified,

purposeful system composed of interrelated parts. This approach gives managers a way

of looking at the organization as a whole and as a part of the larger, external environment.

Research so far, has indicated that there is no one best way of designing organizations to

meet their current objectives. On the contrary, the suggestion is that the variables are so

volatile that only a ‘Contingency’ approach can prove practicable. This suggests that

70

organizations can only be made viable when steps are taken to adapt them to a particular

set of prevailing conditions (Cole, 2005:78). We shall discuss some of the approaches

that lead to the best practices as follow:

2.6.2 The Contingency Approach to Structural Pattern

This is no best method but every method depends on the circumstance or situation of it.

This is why it is sometimes called the Situational Approach. This approach was

developed by managers, consultants and researchers who tried to apply the concepts of

the major schools to real-life situations. When methods highly effective in one situation

failed to work in other situations, they sought an explanation.

According to the Contingency Approach, the manager’s task is to identify which

technique will, in a particular situation, under particular circumstances, and at a particular

time, best contribute to the attainment of management goals. Where workers need to be

encouraged to increase productivity, for example, the classical theorists may prescribe a

new work – simplification scheme. The behavioral scientist may instead seek to create a

psychologically motivating climate and recommend some approach like job enrichment –

the combination of tasks that are different in scope and responsibility and allow the

worker greater autonomy in making decisions. But the manager trained in the

contingency approach will ask, “Which method will work best here? If the workers are

unskilled and training opportunities and resources are limited, work simplification would

be the best solution. However, with skilled workers driven by pride in their abilities, a

job-enrichment programme might be more effective. The contingency approach

represents an important turn in modern management theory, because it portrays each set

of organizational relationships in its unique circumstances (Stoner et al, 2005:74).

The label ‘contingency approach’ was suggested by two American academics, Lawrence

and Lorsch (1967). These two Harvard researchers set out to answer the question what

kind of organization does it take to deal with various economic and market conditions.

They were concerned, therefore, with structure and environment as the two key variables

in their study (Cole, 2005:82). A British writer called Joan Woodward adopted this

71

approach with a research team on a study from the South East Essex College of

Technology during the period 1953-1958. They find some suitable form of classification

to distinguish between different categories of technology employed by firms, such as (1)

Unit and small batch production. This includes custom made products, the production of

prototypes, large fabrications undertaken in stages and the production of small batches;

(2) large batch and mass production. This encompassed the production of large batches,

including assembly-line production and mass production; and, (3) Process production.

This included the intermittent production of chemicals in multi-purpose plant, as well as

the continuous flow production of liquids, gasses and crystalline substances.

Burns and Stalker are famous study of the environment-structure relationship. They

conducted this study in Scotland and England in 1950s. And their study is on

Mechanistic and Organic Systems. These systems have been discussed extensively under

environment of organization.

The Aston Group – Pugh, Hickson and others now dispersed, began a major study into

various aspects of structure, technology and environment in the late 1960s. They

distinguished six primary variables of structure and considered them against a number of

contextual variables.

The structural variables were as follow:

(a) Specialization (of functions and roles);

(b) Standardization (of procedures and methods);

(c) Standardization of employment practices;

(d) Formalization (extent of written rules, procedures, etc.);

(e) Centralization (concentration of authority); and,

(f) Configuration (shape of organization).

Among the conclusions reached by the Aston team was the relevance of size to the

structural variables. As an organization grows beyond the stage at which it can be

controlled by personal interaction, it has to be more explicitly structured. Large size

tends to lead to – more specialization, more standardization, more formalization, but less

72

centralization. They concluded that it was possible to predict fairly closely the structural

profile of an organization on the basis of information obtained about the contextual

variables (Cole, 2005:87).

2.6.3 Business Strategy

There are levels of strategy. They are:

(i) Corporate-level strategy: This is formulated by the top management to

oversee the interests and operations of organizations made up of more than

one line of business;

(ii) Business-unit strategy (also called line-of-business strategy) is concerned

with managing the interests and operations of a particular line of business; and,

(iii) Functional-level strategy: This creates a framework for managers in each

function such as marketing or production to carry out business-unit strategies

and corporate strategies.

We shall discuss the Business Strategy

Business strategies are the courses of action adopted by an organization for each of its

business separately, to serve identified customer groups and provide value to the

customer by satisfaction of their needs (Kazmi, 2009:242). Some researcher regards it as

business-unit strategy, which is also called line-of-business strategy. Stoner et al

(2005:297) have defined business-unit strategy as strategy formulated to meet the goals

of a particular business. It is managing the interests and operations of a particular line of

business. It deals with questions such as: how will the business compete within its

market? What products/services should it offer? Which customers does it seek to serve?

How will the resources be distributed within the business? It attempts to determine what

approach to its market the business should take, and how it should conduct itself, given

its resources and the conditions of the market.

Nag, et al (2007:935) has viewed business strategy as the aggregated strategies of single

firm or a strategic business unit (SBU) in a diversified corporation. Equally, business

strategy is defined as one with if any crisis, where the leader has encouraged actively

seeking out opportunities, but strategic planning should be going on all the time.

Besides, creating new profit centres this practice will create a much stronger management

73

team and an abundance of mentoring situations which will bring out the best of all

involved (Mckay, 2010). According to Ezeh and Onodugo (2002:132) business strategies

aim at giving a competition to a firm’s product within the specific industry or market

segments, which it has chosen for itself. They have explained that there are two broad

categories of business strategies. Gupta et al (2008:57) have also said that Business

Level strategy is concerned with developing a firm-specific business model that will

allow the firm to gain competitive advantage over its rivals in the industry in which it

operates. We shall discuss them briefly as below:

Categories of Business Strategy

(i) The competitive; and,

(ii) Cooperative.

Ezeh and Onodugo (2002) have said that firms encourage a firm to battle to outwit other

firms in the industry, while the latter helps a firm to align and work with others to gain

strong competitive position in the market place.

Strategy Management Process is dramatized in figure 5 as follow

Source: Dan Schendel and Charles Hofer of 1978 in Stoner, J.A.F; Freeman, R.E and Gilbert, D. R. Jr (2005:296) MANAGEMENT (Pearson) Prentice Hall. Fig. 2.5: Strategy Management Process

Strategy Planning

Goal setting

Strategy formulation

Strategy Implementation

Administration

Strategy Control

74

2.6.4 Strategy Implementation

Strategy Implementation is the name we customarily give to the actions based on that

kind of planning. For a business strategy to succeed in an environment there must be

strategic planning. Strategic Planning is essential to companies’ survival and growth in

the rapidly changing Nigerian business environment. This is because organizations’

strategies are being influenced by many forces in the environment.

This includes administration and strategy control as in the figure above. Action for

implementation can be sudden if the policy makers identify some problem that can affect

public negatively. For example, as price of cement risen beyond affordable, the President

of Federal Republic of Nigeria intervened and said “the decision to bring down the price

of the product is to make it more accessible to Nigerians” He was sad about the rising

cost of the product and decided to call a meeting of the top five manufacturers to find a

way out of the problem. “And all stakeholders have agreed that there must be changes in

the price of cement in Nigeria.” (Horatius Egua, 2011:1) This is a sudden strategy

implementation.

Strategy Implementation is the sum total of the activities and choices required for the

execution of a strategic plan. It is the process by which objectives, strategies, and

policies are put into action through the development of programs, budgets and procedures

(Wheelen et al, 2010:320). Before strategy implementation, there must be strategy

formulation but, implementation is the key part of strategic management. Strategic

management is a set of managerial decisions and actions that determines the long-run

performance of a corporation. It includes environmental scanning (both external and

internal), strategy formulation (strategic or long-range planning), strategy implementation

and evaluation and control. The study of strategic management therefore emphasizes the

monitoring and evaluating of external opportunities and threats in light of a corporation’s

strengths and weaknesses. Originally called business policy, strategic management

incorporates such topics as strategic planning, environmental scanning and industry

analysis (op cit, 320). According to Chandler (1969:5) the corporations that have used

strategic management are as follows: General Electric and the Boston Consulting Group.

Wheelen et al (2010) have also contributed that over time, business practitioners and

75

academic researchers have expanded and refined these concepts. Initially, strategic

management was of most use to large corporations operating in multiple industries.

Increasing risks of error, costly mistakes and even economic ruin are causing today’s

professional managers in all organizations to take strategic management seriously in

order to keep their companies competitive in an increasingly volatile environment. A

manager’s attempt to better deal with their changing world, a firm generally evolves

through the following four phases of strategic management.

Phase I – Basic Financial Planning: Managers initiate serious planning when they are

requested to propose the following year’s budget. Projects are proposed on the basis of

very little analysis, with most information coming from within the firm. The time

horizon is usually one year. It goes with little information and time consuming. Some

normal company activities are often suspended for weeks while managers try to cram

ideas into the proposed budget.

Phase II – Forecast Based Planning: Annual budget become less useful at stimulating

long term planning, managers attempt to propose five year plans. Projects that may take

more than one year are considered at this point. Managers gather available information

from environmental data usually on ad hoc basis. So many endless meetings take place

to evaluate proposals and justify assumptions. It is also consuming time, often involving

a full month of managerial activity to make sure all the budgets fit together. The process

gets very political as managers compete for larger shares of funds.

Phase III – Externally oriented (strategic) planning: Frustrated with highly political yet

ineffectual five-year plans, top management takes control of the planning process by

initiating and competition by thinking strategically. Planning is taken out of the hands of

lower-level managers and concentrated in a planning staff whose task is to develop

strategic plans for the corporation. Consultants often provide the sophisticated and

innovative techniques that the planning staff uses to gather information and forecast

future trends. Ex-military experts develop competitive intelligent units. Upper-level

managers meet once a year at a resort “retreat” led by key members of the planning staff

to evaluate and update the current strategic plan. Top management typically develops

five-year plans with help from consultants but minimal input from lower levels. Such

76

top-down planning emphasizes formal strategic formulation and leaves the

implementation issues to lower management levels.

Phase IV – Strategic Management: Realizing that even the best strategic plans are

worthless without the input and commitment of lower-level managers, top management

forms planning groups of managers and key employees at many levels, from various

departments and work groups. They develop and integrate a series of strategic plans

aimed at achieving the company’s primary objectives. Strategic plans at this point detail

the implementation, evaluation and control issues. Rather than attempting to perfectly

forecast the future, the plans emphasize probable scenarios and contingency strategies.

The sophisticated annual five-year strategic plan is replaced with strategic information,

previously available only centrally to top management, is available via local area network

and intranets to people throughout the organization. Instead of a large centralized

planning staff, internal and external planning consultants are available to help guide

group strategy discussions. Although, top management may still initiate the strategic

planning process, the resulting strategies may come from anywhere in the organization.

Planning is typically, interactive across levels and is no longer top down. People at all

levels are now involved (op cit).

Strategy implementation almost always involves the introduction of change to an

organization. Managers may spend months, even years, evaluating alternatives and

selecting a strategy. Frequently this strategy is then announced to the organization with

the expectation that organization members will automatically see why the alternative is

the best one and will begin immediate implementation. When a strategic change is poorly

introduced, managers may actually spend more time implementing changes resulting

from the new strategy than was spent in selecting it. Strategy implementation involves

both macro-organizational issues (e.g., technology, reward systems, decision processes,

and structure), and micro-organizational issues (e.g., organization culture and resistance

to change).

77

(a) Macro-Organizational Issues

Macro-organizational issues are large-scale, system-wide issues that affect many people

within the organization. Galbraith and Kazanjian argue that there are several major

internal subsystems of the organization that must be coordinated to successfully

implement a new organization strategy. These subsystems include technology, reward

systems, decision processes, and structure. As with any system, the subsystems are

interrelated, and changing one may impact others.

Technology can be defined as the knowledge, tools, equipment, and work methods used

by an organization in providing its goods and services. The technology employed must fit

the selected strategy for it to be successfully implemented. Companies planning to

differentiate their product on the basis of quality must take steps to assure that the

technology is in place to produce superior quality products or services. This may entail

tighter quality control or state-of-the-art equipment. Firms pursuing a low-cost strategy

may take steps to automate as a means of reducing labor costs. Similarly, they might use

older equipment to minimize the immediate expenditure of funds for new equipment.

Reward systems or incentive plans include bonuses and other financial incentives,

recognition, and other intangible rewards such as feelings of accomplishment and

challenge. Reward systems can be effective tools for motivating individuals to support

strategy implementation efforts. Commonly used reward systems include stock options,

salary raises, promotions, praise, recognition, increased job autonomy, and awards based

on successful strategy implementation. These rewards can be made available only to

managers or spread among employees throughout the organization. Profit sharing and

gain sharing are sometimes used at divisional or departmental levels to more closely link

the rewards to performance.

Questions and problems will undoubtedly occur as part of implementation. Decisions

pertaining to resource allocations, job responsibilities, and priorities are just some of the

decisions that cannot be completely planned until implementation begins. Decision

processes help the organization make mid-course adjustments to keep the implementation

on target.

78

Organizational structure is the formal pattern of interactions and coordination developed

to link individuals to their jobs and jobs to departments. It also involves the interactions

between individuals and departments within the organization. Current research supports

the idea that strategies may be more successful when supported with structure consistent

with the new strategic direction. For example, departmentalization on the basis of

customers will likely implement the development and marketing of new products that

appeal to a specific customer segment and could be particularly useful in implementing a

strategy of differentiation or focus. A functional organizational structure tends to have

lower overhead and allows for more efficient utilization of specialists, and might be more

consistent with a low-cost strategy.

(b) Micro-Organizational Issues

Micro-organizational issues pertain to the behavior of individuals within the organization

and how individual actors in the larger organization will view strategy implementation.

Implementation can be studied by looking at the impact organization culture and

resistance to change has on employee acceptance and motivation to implement the new

strategy.

Peters and Waterman focused attention on the role of culture in strategic management.

Organizational culture is more than emotional rhetoric; the culture of an organization

develops over a period of time and is influenced by the values, actions, and beliefs of

individuals at all levels of the organization.

Persons involved in choosing a strategy often have access to volumes of information and

research reports about the need for change in strategies. They also have time to analyze

and evaluate this information. What many managers fail to realize is that the information

that may make one strategic alternative an obvious choice is not readily available to the

individual employees who will be involved in the day-to-day implementation of the

chosen strategy. These employees are often comfortable with the old way of doing things

and see no need to change. The result is that management sees the employee as resisting

change.

79

Employees generally do not regard their response to change as either positive or negative.

An employee's response to change is simply behavior that makes sense from the

employee's perspective. Managers need to look beyond what they see as resistance and

attempt to understand the employee's frame of reference and why they may see the

change as undesirable. Organizational objectives would be achieved if the rights are

done as below:-

(a) Effective Implementation of Strategies

In the view of Koontz et al (1993:181) strategic planning, to be effective, must go

beyond the allocation of resources to achieve organizational objectives. It must

be accompanied by strategic thinking that also includes designing an appropriate

organization structure, an effective management information system, a budgeting

system to facilitate the accomplishment of strategic objectives, and a reward

system that supports the strategy.

(b) Successful Strategy Implementation

Hrebiniak, (2010) has explained that implementing strategy gives you a broad

view of implementation and a thorough understanding of each piece of the

implementation process so you can make more informed decisions on efficiency

and effectiveness. You will learn how to properly align corporate structure with

corporate strategies and how to integrate strategy formulation and implementation

by focusing on five core areas:

1. Strategy Implementation Model: Equip your organization to adapt to change by

developing a model of appropriate structures, objectives, controls, integration

mechanisms, and incentives for implementing your strategy;

2. Strategic Change: Understand the stages of implementation, forces for and against

change, and ways to overcome resistance to change, and develop structures and

tactics to implement change;

3. Human Resources and Strategy Implementation: Integrate Human Resource

policies with strategy implementation needs;

4. Strategy and Structure: Understand how strategy affects structure and how the

choice of structure affects efficiency and effectiveness; and,

80

5. Incentives and Controls: Discuss ways to motivate and control performance,

including methods to achieve effective coordination.

According to some strategic implementation scholars, one of a CEO's key roles is to

communicate a vision and to guide strategic planning. Those who have successfully

implemented strategic plans have often reported that involving teams at all levels in

strategic planning helps to build a shared vision, and increases individuals' motivation to

see plans succeed.

Clarity and consistent communication, from mapping desired outcomes to designing

performance measures, are publicly celebrating large and small wins, such as the

achievement of milestones. To ensure that the vision is shared, teams need to know that

they can test the theory, voice opinions, challenge premises, and suggest alternatives

without fear of reprimand.

Implementing strategic plans may require leaders who lead through inspiration and

coaching rather than command and control. Recognizing and rewarding success,

inspiring, and modeling behaviors is more likely to result in true commitment than use of

authority, which can lead to passive resistance and hidden rebellion.

(c) Implementing Strategic Plans

Once strategies have been agreed on, the next step is implementation; this is

where most failures occur. It is not uncommon for strategic plans to be drawn up

annually and to have no impact on the organization as a whole.

A common method of implementation is hoopla—a total communication effort.

This can involve slogans, posters, events, memos, videos, Web sites, etc. A

critical success factor is whether the entire senior team appears to buy into the

strategy and models appropriate behaviors. Success appears to be more likely if

the CEO, or a very visible leader, is also a champion of the strategy.

Strategic measurement can help in implementing the strategic plan. Appropriate

measures show the strategy is focus of the strategy, aligning the workforce around

81

specific issues. The results can include faster changes (both in strategic

implementation and in everyday work); greater accountability (since

responsibilities are clarified by strategic measurement, people are naturally more

accountable); and better communication of responsibilities (because the measures

show what each group's primary responsibility is), which may reduce duplication

of effort.

Creating a strategic map (or causal business model) helps identify focal points;

showing the cause and effect linkages between key components. The map can

simultaneously express both the vision and mission and the plan for achieving

desired goals. If tested through statistical-linkage analysis, the map also allows

the organization to leverage resources on the primary drivers of success.

The senior team can create a strategic map (or theory of the business) by

identifying and mapping the critical few ingredients that will drive overall

performance. This can be tested (sometimes immediately, with existing data)

through a variety of statistical techniques; regression analysis is frequently used,

because it is fairly robust and requires relatively small data sets.

This map can lead to an instrument panel covering a few areas that are of critical

importance. The panel does not include all of the areas an organization measure,

rather the few that the top team can use to guide decisions, knowing that greater

detail is available if they need to drill down for more intense examination. These

critical few are typically within six strategic performance areas: financial,

customer/market, operations, environment (which includes key stakeholders),

people, and partners/suppliers. Each area may have three or four focal points; for

example, the people category may include leadership, common values, and

innovation.

Once the strategic map is defined, organizations must create measures for each

focal point. The first step is to create these measures at an organizational level.

Once these are defined, each functional area should identify how they contribute

82

to the overall measures, and then define measures of their own. Ideally, this

process cascades downward through the organization until each individual is

linked with the strategy and understands the goals and outcomes they are

responsible for and how their individual success will be measured and rewarded.

Good performance measures identify the critical focus points for an organization

and reward their successful achievement. When used to guide an organization,

performance measures can be a competitive advantage because they drive

alignment and common purpose across an organization, focusing everyone's best

efforts at the desired goal. But defining measures can be tricky. Teams must

continue to ask themselves, “If we were to measure performance this way, what

behavior would that motivate?” For example, if the desired outcome is world-

class customer service, measuring the volume of calls handled by representatives

could drive the opposite behavior.

(d) Cascading the Plan

In larger organizations, cascading the strategic plan and associated measures can

be essential to everyday implementation. To a degree, hoopla, celebrations,

events, and so on can drive down the message, but in many organizations,

particularly those without extremely charismatic leaders, this is not sufficient.

Cascading is often where the implementation breaks down. For example, only 16

percent of the respondents in a 1999 Metros Group survey believed that associates

at all levels of their company could describe the strategy. In a 1998 national

survey of Quality Progress readers, cascading was often noted as being a serious

problem in implementing strategic measurement systems.

Organizations have found it to be helpful to ask each functional area to identify

how they contribute to achieving the overall strategic plan (“functional area”

designating whatever natural units exist in the organization—functions,

geographies, business units, etc.). Armed with the strategic map, operational

definitions and the overall organizational strategic performance measures, each

83

functional area creates their own map of success and defines their own specific

performance measures. They can follow the model outlined above starting with

their own SWOT analysis.

For example, in the 1990s, Sears cascaded its strategic plan to all of its stores

through local store strategy sessions involving all employees. The plan was shown

graphically by a strategy map and reinforced through actions (such as the sale of

financial businesses like Allstate). Online performance measures helped store

managers to gain feedback on their own performance, and also let them share best

practices with other managers.

Functional area leaders may be more successful using a cascade team to add input

and take the message forward to others in the area. Developing ambassadors or

process champions throughout the organization to support and promote the plan

and its implementation can also enhance the chances of success. These champions

may be candidates for participation on the design or cascade teams, and should be

involved in the stakeholder review process.

(e) External Consultants

External consultants can play an important role in building and implementing

strategic plans if they are used appropriately. Rather than creating or guiding an

organization's strategy, the primary role of a consultant should be that of a

facilitator, a source of outside perspective, and perhaps as a resource for guiding

the process itself. This allows each member of the internal team to participate

fully without having to manage the agenda and keep the team focused on the task

at hand. Consultants can keep the forum on track by directing the discussion to

ensure objective, strategic thinking around key issues; tapping everyone's

knowledge and expertise; raising pertinent questions for discussion and debate;

managing conflict; and handling groupthink and other group dynamics issues.

Consultants can extract the best thinking from the group, and ensure that the

vision and mission are based on a sound, critical review of the current state and

84

anticipated future opportunities. Once this is accomplished, consultants can

facilitate the identification of desired outcomes and the drivers needed to achieve

them. They can also help to assure that a true consensus is actually reached, rather

than an appearance of a consensus due to fear, conformity, or other group effects.

During the cascading phase, consultants can help to avoid failure by facilitating

the linkage from the over-arching corporate strategy, through the departmental

and or functional level to the team and individual level. This is a point where turf

interests can invade the thought process, coloring local measurement design to

ensure local rewards. This may not align with the overall strategic intent, so care

must be taken to continually link back to the over-arching vision of the

organization.

Building and implementing winning strategic plans is a continuous journey,

requiring routine reviews and refinement of the measures and the strategic plans

themselves. By partnering with internal teams, stakeholders, and trusted external

consultants, leaders can develop better strategic plans and implement them more

successfully.

(f) Force Field Analysis One technique for evaluating forces operating in a change situation is force field

analysis. This technique uses a concept from physics to examine the forces for

and against change. The length of each arrow as shown in Figure 6 represents the

relative strength of each force for and against change. An equilibrium point is

reached when the sum of each set of forces is equal. Movement requires that

forces for the change exceed forces resisting the change. Reducing resisting forces

is usually seen as preferable to increasing supporting forces, as the former will

likely reduce tension and the degree of conflict.

This model is useful for identifying and evaluating the relative power of forces for

and against change. Likewise, it is helpful in visualizing salient forces and may

allow management to better assess the probable direction and speed of movement

in implementing new strategies. Forces for change can come from outside the

85

organization or from within. External forces for change may result from socio-

cultural factors, government regulations, international developments,

technological changes, and entry or exit of competitors. Internal forces for change

come from within the organization and may include changes in market share,

rising production costs, changing financial conditions, new product development,

and so on.

Similarly, forces resisting change may result from external or internal sources.

Common external pressures opposing change are contractual commitments to

other businesses (suppliers, union), obligations to customers and investors, and

government regulations of the firm or industry. Internal forces resisting change

are usually abundant; limited organizational resources (money, equipment,

personnel) is usually one of the first reasons offered as to why change cannot be

implemented. Labor agreements limit the ability of management to transfer and,

sometimes, terminate employees. Organization culture may also limit the ability

of a firm to change strategy.

The total elimination of resistance to change is unlikely because there will almost

always remain some uncertainty associated with a change. Techniques that have

the potential to reduce resistance to change when implementing new strategies

include participation, education, group pressure, management support,

negotiation, co-optation, and coercion.

Participation is probably the most universally recommended technique for

reducing resistance to change. Allowing affected employees to participate in both

the planning and implementation of change can contribute to greater identification

with the need for and understanding of the goals of the new strategy. Participation

in implementation also helps to counteract the disruption in communication flows,

which often accompanies implementation of a change. But participation has

sometimes been overused. Participation does not guarantee acceptance of the new

strategy, and employees do not always want to participate. Furthermore,

86

participation is often time consuming and can take too long when rapid change is

needed.

2.6.5 Potential Problems and Solutions for Strategy Implementation

Though strategy implementation can be important for a company, there can be a number

of factors that hamper implementation. One study of strategy implementation listed six

factors that could harm the process. Beer and Eisenstat, term them “silent killers,” and

that these factors include: either hands-off or “top-down” management, “conflicting

priorities,” bad senior management, insufficient communication, and inadequate

“coordination across functions.” Importantly, the majority of these issues concern senior

management, thus highlighting the importance of this level of an organization in strategy

implementation.

In Business Horizons (2008) also have highlighted the perils associated with inadequate

implementation. The authors point out that bad strategy implementation can lead to future

faulty strategy formulation, potentially creating a vicious circle.

However, the authors of this article also identify eight “levers” of implementation. They

divide these levers into two categories: structural and managerial.

The four “structural levers” are actions, programs, systems, and policies. In the case of

actions, the authors stress the importance of involving all levels of the company in

strategy implementation. “Programs” refers to the need to place innovation throughout a

company, particularly with regards to how an organization learns. “Systems” emphasizes

the importance of information technology to strategy implementation. The final structural

lever, “policies,” points to the need for companies to have formal policies that are in

harmony with the overall strategy.

The remaining four “levers” are classified as managerial. They are: interacting,

allocating, monitoring, and organizing. As this category suggests, the role of good

management is essential to strategy implementation. Likewise, specific levers, such as

“organizing,” highlight the role of a firm's culture in strategy implementation.

87

Ultimately, the authors of this article intend the levers to be used as analytical tools. An

organization can use these levers to identify deficient areas of an organization that might

hamper strategy implementation.

2.6.6 Role of Top Management

Top management is essential to the effective implementation of strategic change. Top

management provides a role model for other managers to use in assessing the salient

environmental variables, their relationship to the organization, and the appropriateness of

the organization's response to these variables. Top management also shapes the perceived

relationships among organization components.

Top management is largely responsible for the determination of organization structure

(e.g., information flow, decision-making processes, and job assignments). Management

must also recognize the existing organization culture and learn to work within or change

its parameters. Top management is also responsible for the design and control of the

organization's reward and incentive systems.

Finally, top management is involved in the design of information systems for the

organization. In this role, managers influence the environmental variables most likely to

receive attention in the organization. They must also make certain that information

concerning these key variables is available to affected managers. Top-level managers

must also provide accurate and timely feedback concerning the organization's

performance and the performance of individual business units within the organization.

Organization members need information to maintain a realistic view of their

performance, the performance of the organization, and the organization's relationship to

the environment (Encyclopedia of Management, 2009).

Furthermore, in the words of other authors, to implement means to take action or make

changes that you have officially decided should happen to a plan, policy, proposal, etc.

Strategy implementation almost always involves the introduction of change to an

organization. Managers may spend months, even years, evaluating alternatives and

selecting a strategy. Frequently, this strategy is then announced to the organization with

88

the expectation that organization members will automatically see why the alternative is

the best one and will begin immediate implementation. When a strategic change is

poorly introduced, managers may actually spend more time implementing changes

resulting from the new strategy than was spent in selecting it. Strategy implementation

involves both macro-organizational issues (e.g. technology, reward systems, decision

process, and structure), and micro-organizational issues (e.g. organization culture and

resistance to change) (Anthanassiou & Nigh,1999:83-92); Galbraith & Kazanjian, 1986)

In the words of Fubara (1999:187) a question of key importance in our research in

strategy has been: why do these organizations behave as they do? Hambrick (1984) as

cited by Fubara, had argued that organizational outcomes – both strategic and

effectiveness – are viewed as reflections of the values and cognitive basis of powerful

actors in the organization. According to Koontz et al (1994:244) organization implies a

formalized intentional structure of roles or position. It is often said that good people can

make any organization pattern work. Some even assert that vagueness in organization is

a good thing in that it forces teamwork, since people know that they must cooperate to

get anything done. So, Fubara asked question: who are these powerful actors? In his

research, he said he found that they were made up of people involved with Mckinsey’s

seven S’s known as strategy, structure, skills, systems, staff, style and shared values. He

explains that Strategy is a coherent set of actions aimed at gaining sustainable

competitive advantage even in the deployment of resources. Structure shows how tasks

are both divided and integrated. Systems indicate the process and flows that show how

things get done – information system, capital budgeting system, manufacturing process,

quality control systems and performance measurement systems. Style conveys tangible

evidence of what management considers important by the way things are done in the

organization. Staff here refers to people in the organization who get things done, usually

seen as corporate demographics. Shared Values refer to the super-ordinate goals, the

values possessed by the organization as a whole not by individuals (Waterman, 1982:71).

Furthermore, Fubara (1999) is of the view that in Fubara (1995), they studied corporate

strategy and the dialectics of ethnicity. He probed the working of the Seven S’s in

Nigerian organizations and observed that strategy does not proceed incrementally as it

89

ought to. The political realities of most organizations demand that many strategists and

non-strategists alike accept a strategy before it is implemented. He continues that most

developed countries’ strategists desirably give support for a strategy even during

formulation by encouraging would-be strategy implementation personnel to participate.

In Nigeria and in many firms in developing economies funded by governments, strategies

are decided and handed down for implementation process namely: intervention,

participation, persuasion and edict, succeeded differently. Again, he says in the work of

Nutt (1986) persuasion and participation tactics had 75% success rate, whereas

implementation by edict, had a much lower success rate of 17%.

Fubara continues that at the centre of implementation of a strategy is the shared value of

the organization. He says that in the more developed country management schemes, the

shared value of an organization is at the centre of an organization’s strategy and the nerve

centre linking all the aspects of the Seven Ss. It determines the corporate destiny; it is

shared by nearly all, understood by all and believed by all. The effect is successful

implementation. But in their earlier research, they found that the meaning of shared

value in developing economies has been distorted and interpreted to include ethnic

groupings, professional associations, class mates coalitions, alma materism, club

membership, church membership, old boys association groupings, etc. The effect has

metamorphosed into a criterion for selection of people into management positions for

implementation of strategy. The aftermath is differentiated loyalties in implementation.

It is followed by poor implementation and its consequences.

2.6.7 Some International context of Management

In business, many organizations operate internationally. This makes them to adopt their

different management styles in their area of operations. US companies such as Ford,

General Motors, Cocacola, Texaco and others systematically established operations in

other countries, such as the UK, Nigeria, etc. bringing their own know-how, management

attitudes and business styles.

90

Over the years, some Japaneze companies have established production and marketing

operations overseas, especially in the UK, Nigeria and in so doing have succeeded in

introducing a number of their production methods and personnel practices to the British

workforce as well as Nigeria.

More recently, a number of other Asian companies have begun investing in overseas

operations. South Korea and Malaysia have companies such as Daewoo Electronics,

Samsung having a firm presence in the UK. These and many more companies from

different parts of the world are what make up the management styles. The major thing is

their effectiveness and efficiency of the styles they adopt.

2.7 Environment and Its Technique

2.7.1 Environment

Environment is important factor to any business organization. Business organization

cannot function without environment. This is because, as business is created, it is

creating inside environment and the business operation itself is within the organization.

Therefore, organization cannot operate without environment. So, if any organization is to

be established, the structural pattern should be in line with the environment.

According to Aluko et al (2004:40) environment literally means the surrounding external

objects, influences, or circumstances under which someone or something exists. They

say that the environment of any organization is the aggregate of all conditions, events and

influences that surround and affect it. Since the environment influences an organization

in many ways, an understanding of it is of crucial importance to business policy and

strategy. And that it is important for strategists to study the dictates and influences of

these environmental factors so as to determine the various opportunities and problems

which the company might face.

Ezigbo (2007:207) defines organizational environment as a set of forces and conditions

outside the organization’s boundaries that have the potential to affect the way the

organization operates. She explained that these forces change overtime and thus present

managers with opportunities and threats. Changes in the environment, such as the

introduction of new technology or the opening of global markets, create opportunities for

91

managers to obtain resources or enter new markets and thereby strengthen their

organizations. In contrast, the rise of new competitors or an economic recession poses a

threat that can devastate an organization. Ezigbo stressed that the managers’

understanding of organizational environment forces, and their ability to respond

appropriately to those forces, are critical factors affecting organizational performance.

These forces that can affect organizational performance, she groups them into two. They

are macro or micro environment. Macro or general environment involves the external

factors that usually affect all or most organizations. While micro consists of such factors

in the organization’s immediate environment such as the company itself (organization),

the employees, members of management such as managers, directors etc., shareholders,

financial intermediaries (banks, credit organizations, insurance, agents, etc), suppliers,

competitors, customers, labour union, and the general public. Furthermore, the micro

environment can be called the task environment which includes those factors that directly

influence an organization’s growth, success and survival. The macro consists of the

larger societal forces that have very strong influence on the micro environmental factors.

They include the demography, economic, technological, political, global and cultural

forces. This is shown overleaf:-

92

Figure 2.6 Forces in the organizational environment

Above diagram is showing the place of forces and their groups. This is why Churchman

(1968) defines environment as something that lies outside the environment or system.

And that the environment matters for the organization relative to attainment of its

objectives. Those factors are both controllable and uncontrollable according to Imaga

(1996). It must be there but organization survives and grows only when it can adapt and

respond in time to the demands of the environment at micro and macro levels. Aluko et

al (2004:49) list out some of the industrial problems and various social ills that pervade

our business environment and militate against the success of many Nigerian managers,

such as:

(i) inadequate supply of raw materials;

The Organization

The Macro environment

Technological forces

Political Legal forces

Cultural forces

Global forces

Demographical forces

Economical forces

Task Environment

Suppliers

Labour Union

Regulators

Customers

Distributors

Competitors

Source: Adapted from Buchman, M and Reich, R. B. (2004) Organizational Behaviour: Spain Graficas Estella Publishing Co.

93

(ii) inadequate energy supply;

(iii) poor communication network

(iv) poor roads;

(v) unemployment;

(vi) poor management know-how;

(vii) inflation;

(viii) apparent religious divergence;

(ix) unstable political system;

(x) dishonesty and poor ethical standards;

(xi) high incidence of smuggling; and,

(xii) Government policy inconsistency.

They conclude that each of these problems has serious implications for accounting

management and productivity.

2.7.2 Technique

There are diverse techniques that organization uses in achieving their ultimate goals. We

shall discuss some of them as below.

SWOT Analysis

The environment of organization could be either internal or external. Internal

environment includes all factors within an organization which impart strengths or cause

weaknesses of a strategic nature, while the external environment includes all the factors

outside the organization which provide opportunities or pose threats to the organization.

The environment in which an organization exists can therefore be described in terms of

the opportunities and threats operating in the external environment, apart from the

strengths and weaknesses existing in the internal environment. The strengths,

weaknesses, opportunities and threats in the environment can be diagnosed through the

mechanics of the SWOT Analysis.

In the words of Nagarajan (2007:130) in a dynamic environment, a company must always

keep vigil to ensure that its competitive position is maintained or improved upon so that it

94

can exploit the situation for profit. Every organization operates in an environment that is

subject to constant changes. Hence, unless an organization adapts itself to the changing

environment, success can not be guaranteed. SWOT analysis provides an opportunity for

introspection into the organization’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. Of

these four aspects, strengths and weaknesses refer to the organization’s inner strengths

and weaknesses while opportunities and threats refer to factors external to the

organization over which the organization has no control. Furthermore, he says SWOT

analysis is done in many situations like mergers and acquisitions, takeovers, declining

trends in profits, growing competition in the field, expansion/diversification of activities,

product range extension, vertical integration, etc. Equally, it can also be done in the

absence of the above situation to improve upon the competition edge of an organization

and also to avoid any pitfalls lying ahead that may hamper the growth of the organization.

A systematic approach to understanding the environment is crucial for the existence,

growth and profitability of an organization. Such an approach is known as the SWOT

Analysis and is used for formulating effective policies and strategies that capitalize on the

opportunities through the use of strengths and neutralizes the threats by minimizing the

impact of weaknesses (Aluko; Odugbesan; Gbadamosi and Osuagwu, 2004:41).

The key to survive in the modern competitive Nigerian environment lies in having clearly

defined objectives and efficient and effective practices to achieve set objectives. The

organizational strategist should study the nature of competition in the industry of interest,

understand the strengths and weaknesses of his organization; and develop programmes

that can give his organization greater competitive advantage. Establishing competitive

advantage can take many forms such as market development, product development,

geographical expansion and rational use of the marketing-mix elements (op cit.).

95

SWOT represents: strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats as listed in the figure

below:

Internal (strength and

weaknesses)

Horizontal process

Organizational structure

Corporate culture

Management

Financial position

Operations

Marketing

Human resource

Research and development

Information systems

External (opportunities and

threats)

Customers’ value trends

Social trends

Demographic trends

Economic trends

Technological trends

Regulatory trends

Physical trends

Competitive trends

Source: Adopted from Stahl, M. J. (1995) Management: Total Quality in a Global Environment, Oxford, UK: Blackwell, p. 150.

Figure 2.7 Primary SWOT analysis issues

Through the above analysis, the strengths and weaknesses existing within an organization

can be matched with the opportunities and threats operating in the environment so that an

effective strategy can be formulated. An effective organizational strategy, therefore, is

one that capitalizes on the opportunities through the use of strengths and neutralizes the

threats by minimizing the impact of weaknesses, to achieve pre-determined objectives. A

simple application of the SWOT analysis technique involves these steps:

(a) Setting the objectives of the organization or its unit;

(b) Identifying its strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats;

(c) Asking four questions:

(i) How do we maximize our strengths?

(ii) How do we minimize our weaknesses?

(iii) How do we capitalize on the opportunities in our external environment; and,

96

(iv) How do we protect ourselves from threats in our external environment? (Kazmi,

2009:72)

An organization shall as well look into her customer satisfaction, even while putting

effort for the SWOT analysis. This is because when she satisfies customers’ need, it then

means a great opportunity has come into the business. This brings one to the issue of

Total Quality Management (TQM). We shall discuss Total Quality Management.

Total Quality Management (TQM)

Organizations have established new ways to build in quality to the control function.

These new ways depend on the tools which that organization adopts. Some use TQM,

Benchmarking and others. According to Stoner et al (2005:38) one popular approach is

Total Quality Management. They are of the view that TQM focuses management on the

continuous improvement of all operations, functions, and above all, process of work.

This is to say that TQM is an aspect of controlling whereby performance are measures

and check continuously for improvement.

Ezigbo (2005:139) is of the view that TQM is a management philosophy that seeks to

integrate all organizational functions (marketing, finance, design, engineering, production

and customer service) to focus on meeting customer needs and organizational objectives.

Koontz et al (1993:650) contribute that it involves the organization’s long- term

commitment to the continuous improvement of quality – throughout the organization, and

with the active participation of all members at all levels – to meet and exceed customers’

expectations. They add that this top-management-driven philosophy is considered a way

of organizational life. In a sense, TQM is simply effective management. In the words of

Koontz et al, when done effectively, TQM should result in greater customer satisfaction,

fewer defects and less waste, increased total productivity, reduced costs and improved

profitability, and an environment in which quality has high priority.

Researches have found out that several companies implemented this total quality

programme but the effectiveness of it becomes a matter of concern. Originally,

researchers say it started with American companies but they failed on their way. Then

Japanese picks it up and continue with it.

97

By this method, the Japanese has gained competitive advantage over others. The

competitive advantage the Japanese gained which is their success includes:-

Higher employee morale, dedication and loyalty; lower cost structure, including wages;

effective government industrial policy; Modernization after WWII leading to high capital

intensity and productivity; economies of scale associated with increased exporting;

relatively low value of the Yen leading to low interest rates and capital costs, low

dividend expectations and inexpensive exports; superior quality control techniques such

as Total Quality Management and other systems.

The Japanese challenge shook the confidence of the western business elite, but detailed

comparisons of the two management styles and examination of successful business

convinced westerners that they could overcome the challenge.

The first management theorist to suggest an explanation was Richard Pascale (Mckay,

2010). In 1981, Richard Pascale and Anthony Athos in the Art of Japanese Management

claimed that the main reason for Japanese success was their superior management

techniques. They divided management into 7 aspects (which are also known as

McKinsey 7S Framework): Strategy, Structure, Systems, Skills, Staff, Style and

Supraordinate goals (which we would now call shared values). The first three of the 7S’s

were called hard factors and this is where American companies excelled. The Remaining

four factors (skills, staff, style and shared values) were called soft factors and were not

well understood by American businesses of the time In Japan the task of management

was seen as managing the whole complex of human needs, economic, social,

psychological and spiritual. In America, work was seen as something that was separate

from the rest of one’s life. It was quite common for Americans to exhibit a very different

personality at work compared to the rest of their lives. Pascale also highlighted the

difference between decision making styles; hierarchical in America, and consensus in

Japan. He also claimed that American business lacked long term vision, preferring

instead to apply management fads and theories in a piecemeal fashion.

Based on the analysis by Richard Pascale above, Kenichi Ohmae who is the head of

McKinsey office published The Mind of the Strategist and explained that strategy in

98

America was too analytical. Strategy should be in a creative art. It is a frame of mind

that requires intuition and intellectual flexibility. He claimed that Americans constrained

their strategic options by thinking terms of analytical techniques, rote formula, and step-

by-step processes. He compared the culture of Japan in which vagueness, ambiguity, and

tentative decisions were acceptable, to American culture that valued fast decisions

(McKay, 2010).

Also Tom Peters and Robert Waterman (1982) released a study that would respond to the

Japanese challenge and collaborated with Pascale and Athos at McKinsey and Company

of 8 keys to excellence. They are:

• A bias for action – do it. Try it. Don’t waste time studying it with multiple reports

and committees;

• Customer focus – Get close to the customer. Know your customer;

• Entrepreneurship – Even big companies act and think small by giving people the

authority to take initiatives;

• Productivity through people – treat your people with respect and they will reward

you with productivity;

• Valued-oriented CEOs – The CEO should actively propagate corporate values

throughout the organization;

• Stick to the knitting – Do what you know well;

• Keep things simple and lean – Complexity encourages waste confusion; and,

• Simultaneously centralized and decentralized – Have tight centralized control while

also allowing maximum individual autonomy (Peters and Waterman, 1982 in

Mckay, 2010).

The basic blueprint on how to compete against the Japanese had been drawn. But as J.E.

Rehfeld (1994) explains it is not a straight forward task due to differences in culture. A

certain type of alchemy was required to transform knowledge from various cultures into a

management style that allows a specific company to compete in a globally diverse world.

Another important technique to look into for continuous improvement of the best

practices on structural pattern and business strategy implementation is benchmarking.

99

Benchmarking

Another tool of TQM is benchmarking, or comparing your own products and processes

against the very best in the world. Xerox uses benchmarking to improve the quality of its

product and its customer service. The process of finding the best available product

features, processes, and services and using them as a standard for improving a company’s

own products, processes and services (Stoner et al, 2005:251).

According to Ewurum (2002:189) benchmarking is a process of continuous improvement

based on the comparison of an organization’s process or products with those identified as

best practices. The best practice comparison is used as a means of establishing

achievable goals aimed at obtaining organizational superiority. Equally, Ewurum

(2002:188) is of the view that benchmarking is a management technique, which aims at

giving sequence and order to the search for superiority through comparison with the best

practice. He has explained that benchmarking has some characteristics such as structured

because it is formal and systematic. It is a continuous process because of changes in the

environment. Also, it is mostly documented, implemented and supervised.

History has said that benchmarking has been in existence but has not been effective until

this present time. It is all about looking at things of past and how it will help us to

understand and interpret the current events and equip us in predicting the future. It is

better to benchmark business process as against the final output. This is so because it

reveals performance gap. Every aspect of organization is to be benchmarked but the

greatest of it all is according to Ewurum, dependable source of needed capital, while to

another, it is staff training and motivation. Other areas that might be given priority

attention include customer satisfaction; cost reduction, equipment maintenance, debt

management, etc.

Another important tool for quality improvement is reengineering. We shall discuss

reengineering briefly as below.

Reengineering

Managers who practice dynamic engagement continually search for ways to unleash the

creative potential of their employees and themselves. This is when an organization

100

conducts a significant reassessment of what it is all about. Reengineering implies that

organizations are shifting patterns of relationships, not fixed entities like machines and

building. This is to say that organizational members are empowered to create new ideas

and products and relationships (Stoner et al, 2005). According to Hammer and Champy

(1993) Reengineering means radical rethinking and redesigning those processes by which

we create value (for customers) and do work.

For business organization to benchmark, that is remaining competitive, there is need to

reposition business processes so as to eliminate or reduce waste. It means restructuring

the entire business processes of the organization which is in line with SWOT. Ezigbo

(2005:130) contributes that reengineering is about cultural change. It is concerned with

decisions of a strategic and often political nature. It is about changing attitudes and

behaviour, skill requirement, changes in culture and values and likewise the points of

reference. Reengineering must be initiated at the highest level within a company. It is a

top down approach. According to Wheelen et al (2010:336) it is the radical redesign of

business process to achieve major gains in cost, service, or time. And business process

reengineering, strives to break away from the old rules and procedures that develop and

become ingrained in every organization over the year. They may be a combination of

policies, rules and procedures that have never been seriously questioned because they

were established years earlier.

2.8 Employee Expectation and Motivation

Motivation is the need that drives human behavior to a particular direction for

sustainability.

Motivation activates, directs and sustains human behaviour. It concerns with how the

direction would be sustained. There is always need that drives you to a particular

direction for sustainability.

a) Motivation Is Different For Each of Your Employees

According to Susan M. Heathfield (2011) every person has different motivations for

working. The reasons for working are as individual as the person. But, we all work

because we obtain something that we need from work. The something we obtain from

101

work impacts our morale and motivation and the quality of our lives. Here is the most

recent thinking about motivation, what people want from work.

b) Work Is About the Money

Some people work for love; others work for personal fulfillment. Others like to

accomplish goals and feel as if they are contributing to something larger than themselves,

something important. Some people have personal missions they accomplish through

meaningful work. Others truly love what they do or the clients they serve. Some like the

camaraderie and interaction with customers and coworkers. Other people like to fill their

time with activity. Some workers like change, challenge, and diverse problems to solve.

Motivation is individual and diverse.

Whatever your personal reasons for working, the bottom line, however, is that almost

everyone works for money. Whatever you call it: compensation, salary, bonuses, benefits

or remuneration, money pays the bills. Money provides housing, gives children clothing

and food, sends teens to college, and allows leisure activities, and eventually, retirement.

To underplay the importance of money and benefits as motivation for people who work is

a mistake.

Fair benefits and pay is the cornerstone of a successful company that recruits and retains

committed workers. If you provide a living wage for your employees, you can then work

on additional motivation issues. Without the fair, living wage, however, you risk losing

your best people to a better-paying employer.

In fact, recent research from Watson Wyatt Worldwide in The Human Capital Edge: 21

People Management Practices Your Company Must Implement (or Avoid) to Maximize

Shareholder Value, recommends, that to attract the best employees, you need to pay

more than your average-paying counterparts in the marketplace. Money provides basic

motivation.

102

c) Got Money? What's Next for Motivation?

I have read the surveys and studies dating back to the early 1980s that demonstrate

people want more from work than money. An early study of thousands of workers and

managers by the American Psychological Association clearly demonstrated this. While

managers predicted the most important motivational aspect of work for people would be

money, personal time and attention from the supervisor was cited by workers as most

rewarding and motivational for them at work.

In a recent Workforce article, "The Ten Ironies of Motivation," reward and recognition

guru, Bob Nelson, says, "More than anything else, employees want to be valued for a job

well done by those they hold in high esteem." He adds that people want to be treated as if

they are adult human beings.

While what people want from work is situational, depending on the person, his needs and

the rewards that are meaningful to him, giving people what they want from work is really

quite straight forward. People want:

• Control of their work inspires motivation: including such components as the

ability to impact decisions; setting clear and measurable goals; clear responsibility

for a complete, or at least defined, task; job enrichment; tasks performed in the

work itself; and recognition for achievement.

• To belong to the in-crowd creates motivation: including items such as receiving

timely information and communication; understanding management's formulas for

decision making; team and meeting participation opportunities; and visual

documentation and posting of work progress and accomplishments.

• The opportunity for growth and development is motivational: and includes

education and training; career paths; team participation; succession planning; cross-

training; and field trips to successful workplaces.

103

• Leadership is a key in motivation. People want clear expectations that provide a

picture of the outcomes desired with goal setting and feedback and an appropriate

structure or framework.

d) Recognition for Performance Creates Motivation

In The Human Capital Edge, authors Bruce Pfau and Ira Kay say that people want

recognition for their individual performance with pay tied to their performance.

Employees want people who do not perform fired; in fact, failure to discipline and fire

non-performers is one of the most de-motivating actions an organization can take - or fail

to take. It ranks on the top of the list next to paying poor performers the same wage as

non-performers in deflating motivation.

Additionally, the authors found that a disconnect continues to exist between what

employers think people want at work and what people say they want for motivation.

"Employers far underrate the importance to employees of such things as flexible work

schedules or opportunities for advancement in their decision to join or leave a company.

"That means that many companies are working very hard (and using scarce resources) on

the wrong tools," say Pfau and Kay (p. 32). People want employers to pay them above

market rates. They seek flexible work schedules. They want stock options, a chance to

learn, and the increased sharing of rationale behind management decisions and direction.

e) What You Can Do for Motivation and Positive Morale

You have much information about what people want from work. Key to creating a work

environment that fosters motivation is the wants and needs of the individual. I

recommend that you ask your employees what they want from work and whether they are

getting it. With this information in hand, I predict you will be surprised at how many

simple and inexpensive opportunities you have to create a motivational, desirable work

environment. Pay attention to what is important to the people you employ for high

motivation and positive morale. You will achieve awesome business success.

According to Robbins (2006:400), Motivation is the willingness to exert high levels of

effort toward organizational goals, conditioned by the efforts and ability to satisfy some

104

individuals. Ezigbo (2007:339) has defined motivation as the forces within a person that

affects his or her direction, intensity, and persistence of voluntary behaviour. She has

analysed a model of 3 common characteristics, such as:-

Needs Drivers or Motives Achievement of goals

Needs produce motives which lead to the accomplishment of goals, Needs are caused by

deficiencies, which can be either physical or psychological.

There are two main motivation theories. Content theories and Process theories (op cit)

f) Content Theories of Motivation

McGregor’s Theory X and Y

Theory X sees employees as being inherently lazy, requiring coercion and control,

avoiding responsibility and only seeking security while Theory Y sees people in a more

favourable light. In this Theory Y, employees are seen as liking work, which is as natural

as rest or play, they do not have to be controlled and coerced, so long as they are

committed to the organization’s objectives and they accept and seek responsibilities.

Maslow Hierarchy of Needs

Maslow Hierarchy is based on hierarchical model with basic needs at the bottom and

higher needs at the top. Secondly, people tend to satisfy their needs systematically

starting with the basic physiological needs and then moving up the hierarchy. Until a

particular group of needs is satisfied, a person’s behaviour will be dominated by them.

(Cole, 2004:35)

Mcllelands theories

Mcclleland’s Theory deals with three secondary needs such as need for achievement,

need for affiliation and need for power. Need for achievement is the desire to do

something better or more efficiently than it has been done before. Need for affiliation

refers to a desire to seek approval from others, conform to their wishes and expectations,

and avoid conflict and confrontation. Need for power refers to a desire to control one’s

environment, including people and material resources. (Ezigbo, 2007:344)

105

Herzbergs Motivator – Hygiene theory

Herzbergs proposes that employees are primarily motivated by growth and esteem needs,

such as recognition, responsibility, advancement, achievement, work itself and personal

growth. These factors are called motivators because employees experience job

satisfaction when they are received and therefore motivated to obtain them. However,

the most important hygiene factors or dissatisfiers were as follows: company policy and

administration, supervision – the technical aspects, salary, and interpersonal relations –

supervision and working conditions. According to Cole, the hygiene factors or

dissatisfiers are context because it relates to environment of work while the satisfiers or

motivators are content because it intimately related to work with its intrinsic challenges,

interest and the individual responses generated by them. Herzbergs theory in structure

led to considerable work on job enrichment – i.e. design of jobs so that they contain a

greater number of motivators.

In the words of Ezigbo, a unique characteristic of motivator – hygiene theory is that it

does not view job satisfaction and dissatisfaction as opposites: improving motivator

increases job satisfaction, but it does not decrease job dissatisfaction. Improving hygiene

reduces job satisfaction but it does not increase job satisfaction.

g) Process Theories

Expectancy theory: This was developed by Victor H. Vroom. It is a probability that a

particular action will lead to a desired outcome. Force = valence x expectancy.

Goal-setting: This is the process of motivating employees and clarifying their role

perceptions by establishing performance objectives. This means that motivation is

driven primarily by the goals or objectives set for themselves. It provides the driving

force. (Ezigbo, 2007; Cole, 2004 and Lock, 1968) Characteristics of effective goals are

as follows: - specific goals; result oriented; challenging; commitment; participation in

goal formation and feedback (Ezigbo, 2007:350).

h) Incentives

Wage is regarded as a reward which a worker receives for the service rendered to an

employer in short periods. Wages are paid daily or weekly while salary is paid monthly.

106

Wages are variable cost which varies with output while salaries in the short period are a

fixed cost since they do not vary with output.

However, the concepts of wages and salaries centre on general incentives of organization.

Incentives centres on the willingness of the organizational participants to contribute

individually to the common goals of the organization. A successful incentive programme

will not only increase profits but can also raise morale and inspire staff loyalty. Your

programme should include all the three greatest incentives:

• Empowering people – to do the thing you enjoy doing;

• Recognition – in all its various forms;

• Money.

The only way employees will fulfill your dream is to share in the dream. Reward

systems are the mechanisms that make this happen. “However, reward systems are much

more than just bonus plans and stock options. While they often include both of these

incentives, they can also include awards and other recognition, promotions, reassignment,

non-monetary bonuses e.g., vacations), or a simple thank you” “The journey is the

reward” (Mary Kay, 2010, Michael le Boeuf, 2010 on Internet). Lack of initiative: Poor

motivation and encouragement; people do not feel their contribution make a difference;

management fails to engage the organization effectively; people work defensively and

not creatively, they do their job, and nothing more. Such factors show signs of losing

organization.

So, the aim of incentives strategies in organizations is to direct organizational participants

to the common goal of the organization. If the common goal (effectiveness) of the

organization is not achieved, the organization will eventually cease to exist

(Onwuchekwa, 1993:169). Incentives strategies should be based on increasing those

areas where the workers consider advantageous, and eliminating or reducing

organizational actions which they consider disadvantageous. Types of incentives are

objective and subjective.

107

2.9 Influence of Innovation and Policy Implementation on Structural Patterns

and Business Strategy

Creativity, the ability and power to develop new idea, is important for structural pattern

and business strategy implementation. Effective structure requires good idea from

workers. And every business exists to furnish products or services. New products or

services, more than any other single factor, determine what an enterprise is or will be.

Equally, for effective business strategy implementation, there must be policies that give

an overall direction to operation. We shall look into the influence of innovation and

policy implementation on this issue.

2.9.1 Innovation

Innovation means creativity. Creativity is the ability and power to develop new idea.

Creativity is the responsibility of every manager in the organization. Aluko et al (2004)

say the entrepreneurial process starts with an individual getting an idea or innovation for

a new product, service, venture or business. This idea for new business, venture or

concern can emanate from an organized search for data and information, or through a

chance event. This explanation takes to the Robins/Judge (2009:668) on the meaning of

innovation. They say change refers to making things different. Innovation is a more

specialized kind of change. Innovation is a new idea applied to initiating or improving a

product, process, or service. So all innovations involve change, but not all changes

necessarily involve new ideas or lead to significant improvements. Innovations in

organizations can range from small incremental improvements.

Talking about the influence of innovation, Robins/Judge say that organic structures

positively influence innovation because they are lower in vertical differentiation,

formalization and centralization. Organic organizations facilitate the flexibility,

adaptation, and cross-fertilization that make the adoption of innovations easier.

Secondly, that long tenure in management is associated with innovation. Managerial

tenure apparently provides legitimacy and knowledge of how to accomplish tasks and

obtain desired outcomes. Third, innovation is nurtured when there are slack resources.

Having an abundance of resources allows an organization to afford to purchase

108

innovations, bear the cost of instituting innovative organizations. They conclude that

these organizations are high users of committees, task forces, cross-functional teams, and

other mechanisms that facilitate interaction across departmental lines.

In the words of Koontz (1994:216) he says, all too often it is assumed that most people

are noncreative and have little ability to develop new ideas. This assumption,

unfortunately, can be detrimental to the organization, for in the appropriate environment

virtually all people are capable of being creative, even though the degree of creativity

varies considerably among individuals. He states that generally speaking, creative people

are inquisitive and come up with many new unusual ideas; they are seldom satisfied with

the status quo. Although intelligent, they not only rely on the rational process but also

involve the emotional aspects of their personality in problem solving. They appear to be

excited about solving a problem, even to the point of tenacity. Creative individuals are

aware of themselves and capable of independent judgment. They object to conformity

and see themselves as being different.

Koontz adds that it is beyond question that creative people can make great contributions

to an enterprise. At the same time, however, they may also cause difficulties in

organizations. Change – as any manager knows – is not always popular. Moreover,

change frequently has undesirable and unexpected side effects. Similarly, unusual ideas,

pursued stubbornly, may frustrate others and inhibit the smooth functioning of an

organization. Finally, creative individuals may be disruptive by ignoring established

policies, rules and regulations.

As a result, the creativity of most individuals is probably underutilized in many cases,

despite the fact that unusual innovations can be of great benefit to the firm. However,

individual and group techniques can be effectively used to nurture creativity, especially

in the area of planning. But creativity is not a substitute for managerial judgment. It is

the manager who must determine and weigh the risks involved in pursuing unusual ideas

and translating them into innovative practices.

109

Stoner et al (2005:452) is not against the contribution above but he adds that individual

differ in their ability to be creative. Creative people also tend to be more flexible than

noncreative people. They are able and willing to shift from one approach to another

when tackling a problem. They prefer complexity to simplicity and tend to be more

independent than less creative people, sticking to their guns stubbornly when their ideas

are challenged. Creative people also question authority quite readily and are apt to

disobey orders that make no sense to them. For this reason they may be somewhat

difficult to manage in most organizations. Motivated more by an interesting problem

than by material reward, they will work long and hard on something that intrigues them.

Equally, just as individuals differ in their ability to translate their creative talents into

results, organizations differ in their ability to translate the talents of their members into

new products, processes, or services. To enable their organizations to use creativity most

effectively, managers need to be aware of this process of innovation in organizations and

to take steps to encourage this process. The creative process in organizations involves

three steps: idea generation, problem solving or idea development and implementation.

The generation of ideas in an organization depends first and foremost on the flow of

people and information between the firm and its environment. Outside consultants and

experts are important sources of information for managers, because they are frequently

aware of new products, process, or service developments in their field. Idea

development is greatly stimulated by external contacts; idea development is dependent

on the organization culture and processes within the organization. The organization

structure also plays an important role. Rigid organizational structures that inhibit

communication between departments will often keep potentially helpful people from

even knowing that a problem exists. By creating barriers to communication, rigidly

structured organizations may also prevent problem solutions from reaching managers

who need them. Management information systems (MIS), decision support systems

(DSS), and expert systems store and retrieve generated ideas and aid managers in idea

development. Implementation stage of the creative process in organizations consists of

those steps that bring a solution or invention to the marketplace.

110

Finally, Stoner et al say for innovation to be successful, a high degree of integration is

required among the various units of the organization. Technical specialists, responsible

for the engineering side of a new product, must work with administrative and financial

specialists responsible for keeping the cost of innovation within practical limits.

Production managers, helping to refine the specifications of the new product, must work

with marketing managers, who are responsible for test marketing, advertising, and

promoting it. Proper integration of all these groups is necessary for a quality innovation

to be produced on time, on budget, and for a viable market. Managers at organizations

that are too rigid structured may have a difficult time integrating such activities. In

contrast, frequent and informal communication across an organization has been shown to

have positive effects on innovation. For this reason, task forces and matrix-type

organizational structures, which encourage interdepartmental communication and

integration, are particularly suited for generating, developing, and implementing creative

ideas and approaches. We shall now look into influence of Policy implementation on

structural pattern.

2.9.2 Policy

Policy is related to strategy. The two give direction and is framework for plans. They are

not only basis of operational plan but also affect all areas of managing.

According to the New Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language (1994:777) Policy

could be defined as a selected, planned line of conduct in the light of which individual

decisions are made and coordination achieved. Koonz (1994:169) say that policies are

general statements or understandings that guide managers’ thinking in decision making.

He explains that managers ensure decisions fall within certain boundaries. They usually

do not require action but are intended to guide managers in their commitment to the

decision they ultimately make. However, that the essence of policy is discretion while

strategy, on the other hand, concerns the direction in which human and material resources

will be applied in order to increase the chance of achieving selected objectives.

According to Aluko et al (2004:2) policy is a guide to action. They explain that policies

generally, provide managers with criteria to follow, in order to implement operational

objectives. They further stated that policy is basically a statement, either expressed or

111

implied, of those principles and rules that are set up by executive leadership as guides and

constraints for the organization’s thoughts and action. Policy guides the organization’s

thinking concerning what should be done, how it should be done, who should do it and

where action should take place. Therefore, a sound organizational policy performs the

following functions:

a. It tends to prevent deviations from planned courses of action;

b. It ensures consistency of action;

c. It promotes intelligent co-operation;

d. It facilitates coordination of action;

e. It fosters an intelligent exercise of initiative;

f. It furnishes a basis for judging the quality of executive action; and,

g. It provides a guide for thinking in future planning.

Establishing policy may be described as formalizing organizational attitudes towards

specific types of repetitive problems. These would then be the basic framework of

principles and rule to be used as reference information for decision-making.

Consequently, they guide the organization’s managers in a continuing and consistent

patter of decision and direction of thought.

Policy implementation is the phase which has to do with the day-to-day use of policy by

the personnel in making managerial and operative decisions. It has to prove to be sound,

helpful guide for thought and action. The success of a policy depends on the ability of

the individual responsible for its application, as well as the effectiveness with which the

earlier phases of policy making were performed, especially the function of clarifying the

meaning and significance of a policy as it relates to a particular situation.

A policy may be known and understood but not accepted by the group that must apply or

conform to it. The application of a policy is not likely to be effective unless it is

accepted. Participation in policy formulation facilitates acceptance. A continuation of

policy education may be required. The executive may dictate the policies, but it is the

workers who carry them out. The big problem, then, is to inculcate in every member of

the organization, even the clerks and office boys, the spirit and letter of the policies

112

which the organization has bound itself to follow. This is the influence Policy

implementation has over structural pattern and business strategy implementation.

2.10 Coordination and Integration of Structural Patterns and Business Strategy

This segment of the work shall give us the essence of managerial activities for achieving

harmony among individual efforts toward the accomplishment of group goals. The

central task of the manager is to reconcile differences in approach, timing, effort, or

interest and to harmonize individual goals to contribute to organization goals. However,

we shall look into the meaning of coordination, coordination strategies, approaches to

coordination strategies and employee performance as below:

2.10.1 Coordination

All parts of a business firm have a common goal, that is, the success of the venture.

Therefore, all the various efforts must be coordinated.

According to Musselman, Hughes and Jackson (1981:118) Coordination is synchronizing

all individual efforts toward a common objective. Its purpose is to make sure things

happen at the right time and place, and in the correct order. Although personal contact is

the most effective means of achieving coordination, other devices are use. These include

forms of written communication – bulletins, letters and procedure and manuals. Group

meetings can also be effective.

According to Stoner, et al (2005:340), Coordination is the process of integrating the

activities of separate departments in order to pursue organizational goal effectively.

Without coordination, people would lose sight of their roles within the total organization

and be tempted to pursue their own departmental interests at the expense of

organizational goals.

According to Onwuchekwa (1993:80), Coordination helps an organization to integrate its

component parts towards the common goal of the organization. Coordination is primarily

achieved through effective communication system and also through the executive

positions in the organization structure. In order to achieve coordination in an

organization, the top managers must communicate to middle managers and these

113

managers communicate to their subordinate. Stoner (1982), cited by Onwuchekwa

(1993) has said that what is mostly communicated are goals of the organizations and how

these can be achieved by delegating responsibilities to executive managers throughout the

organization.

Figure 2.8 The process of delegation in a formal organization

Coordination is interdependent. Interdependent is a system. A system is viewed as a

whole. Organization is viewed as a system that coordinates each other. According to

Thompson (1967), cited by Onwuchekwa (1993:84), there are three types of

interdependences. These are Pooled, Sequential and Reciprocal interdependences. We

shall explain it.

Pooled Interdependency: They cannot interact together but they interact with the top

management. They have separate function to an organization. And the organization

supports each interdependent part with necessities.

Sequential Interdependency: The components start activities. A function of A, leads to

a function of B, till all, and for overall goal. This type of interdependent is serial. For

Company Objectives

are achieved by the delegation of :

Authority Responsibility

Accountability

with corresponding

Involving decision making for such functions as

Transportation Finance Marketing Managemen Authority

Source: Musselman, V.A; Hughes, E.H and Jackson, J.H. (1981:119):

Introduction to Modern Business: Issues and Environment “Organizational Structure and Behaviour” 8th Edition. Prentice Hall,

114

example, in the University, unless you complete year 1, you cannot enter year 2. All

manufacturing firms are sequential, that is why they are vertical.

Reciprocal: Output of a unit, turns to input to another unit. There is mutuality. For

example, airline organization has both maintenance unit and operations unit. The

maintenance unit for servicing aircraft becomes input for the operation unit.

2.10.2 Coordination Strategies

According to Mintzberg (1983) cited by Onwuchekwa (1993:86) the structure of

organization involves two fundamental requirements. These are the division of labour

into distinct tasks and the achievement of coordination among these tasks. There is need

to determine the major components of an organization during designing it, especially the

technology. This involves grouping it into departments and connections are established

within and between them in relationship to the formulated strategy of the organization.

The three types of interdependence we stated earlier above within an organization

facilitate the choice of coordination strategy. There are more coordination problems in

sequential than in pooled and more problems in reciprocal than in sequential.

Mintzberg has presented five types of coordination strategies. These are: Coordination

by mutual adjustment; direct supervision; standardization of work processes;

standardization of work outputs and standardization of workers’ skill while Thompson

has presented three types. These are: coordination by standardization; plan and mutual

adjustment. We shall explain these three types of coordination strategies by Thompson.

Standardization – there are routines, rules and regulations which guide actions of the

organization’s functional units. This happens in a stable, repetitive with appropriate

rules. Government organizations are good example of this in Nigeria, controlled by Civil

Service Commission. This organization practiced pooled Interdependency.

Plan – this coordination strategy involves schedule for their units to direct and control

actions. This is considered more appropriate in a dynamic situation, for example, an

unstable and changing environment. This organization practiced sequential

interdependency.

115

Mutual Adjustment – this involves new information which is transmitted into the

organization during the process of action, such as feedback. The Organic System of

(Burns and Stalker, 1961) is applicable here. This organization practiced reciprocal

interdependence.

Below diagram dramatizes departmentalization and hierarchy of organization.

This results from departmentalization or grouping of original activities/structure.

Figure 2.9 Hierarchy

Reducing the need for Coordination

Since coordination is very expensive, one of the ways to reduce it is to take appropriate

measures for the departmentalization of activities and the building of organizational

hierarchy (op cit), while Stoner et al (2005:350), suggests creating slack resources and

creating independent units. According to them, provision of slack (additional) resources

gives units leeway in meeting each other’s requirements. And creating independent units

whose members can perform all the necessary aspects of a task themselves rather than

relying on other departments. Though, some organizations pay more attention to

outsourcing their products without the use of their various departments. Pearce II, et al

(2003:288) has said that outsourcing is simply obtaining work previously done by

General Manager

Product 1

Product 2

Product 3

Engineering Purchasing Manufacturing Marketing

Maintenance Fabrication Assembling Quality

Sequential Interdependence

Reciprocal Interdependence

Pooled Interdependence

Source: Research work, 2011

116

employees inside the companies from sources outside the company. This is done through

contracting some functions of the organization out for external environmental

performance.

Matrix Organization Form – The Matrix organization is used when a project structure

is added to another structure. Stoner et al (2005:359) defines it as organizational

structure in which each employee reports to both a functional or divisional manager and

to a project or group manager. It results in bringing specialists from several different

parts of the organization together to work on a particular project. The group is led by a

project manager who has responsibility for the entire project. When it is completed the

group is dissolved and its members return to their respective departments.

The matrix organization disregards the unity of command principle, and the usual line

and staff concepts. Some critics of the plan indicate that it discourages informal groups

and the traditional supervisor-subordinate relations. On the other hand, the matrix

organization allows for maximum use of specialized knowledge, which goes flexibility in

the use of knowledge persons for difficult assignments.

The project or matrix manager must be extremely competent. This manager functions

with two bosses and without the clear authority that is usually thought necessary.

Wheelen, et al (2010:334) has said that the matrix structure is very useful when the

external environment (especially its technological and market aspects) is very complex

and changeable. It does, however, produce conflicts revolving around duties, authority,

and resource allocation. To the extent that the goals to be achieved are vague and the

technology used is poorly understood, a continuous battle for power between product and

functional managers is likely. Many project managers are engineers.

We have stated that communication is the key to effective coordination. This involves

through the use of basic management techniques such as chain of command and

Boundary spanning role. A job in which an individual acts as a liaison between

departments or organizations, task forces, committees and synthetic organizations that is

117

in frequent contact. Employee understands the needs, responsibilities and concerns of

both departments and can help the departments communicate.

(Musselman et al (1981:119), Stoner et al (2005:359) and Onwuchekwa, (1993:92).

We shall discuss organizational performance.

2.10.3 Organizational Performance

Performance is all about capability of accomplishing a set objective. It is applicable to

individual, groups and organization because they all have a purpose of existence.

Organizational performance comprises the actual output or results of an organization as

measured against its goals and objectives.

According to Onwuchekwa (1993:110), majority of business organization will

concentrate on assessing their performances on the basis of the historical improvement

approach. Two majority areas for assessment will be the profit margin, the sales, etc.

And that when comparing incomes with reference groups more criteria for that will be

involved and concentrate in the areas of profits, market shares, investment, structural

development features, etc. In the area of structural development which also affect the

public service. If any government has a budget to build in necessary infrastructure in a

particular area, and at the end of the day they achieve their purpose, which means their

performance is positive. But if they did not it means that they fail to achieve their

purpose. In the words of Badejo Ademuyiwa (2011) he says in the Business Day

Newsapers that Nigeria’s federal lawmakers spent N318.2 billion to make 12 laws in

three years – 2007 to 2010, amid rising unemployment, dwindling credit and spiraling

inflation. This is outrageous and performance is totally negative. In that same paper,

they say that “the performance of the present crop of lawmakers was disappointing, that

if you look at the huge sums spent on their salaries and allowances, you will see that we

have got no value for our money”. In the words of Musa Anwal Rafsanjani, the

executive director, Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CSLAC) also castigated

the Nigerian parliament for not being focused. According to him, the huge money the

legislators allocated to themselves has not translated into any meaningful impact on the

lives of Nigerians. There is no doubt that the Nigerian National Assembly is one of the

118

most expensive and extravagant in the world. Rafsanjani explains that the quality of a

parliament is determined by the laws enacted, oversight functions and others, designed to

make the country progress. But the lawmakers lack these qualities and this explains why

many of them lost their re-election bid. Our legislators are concerned too much about

money, and this has led to the several crises and scandals in the House of

Representatives, especially. This is affecting the progress of the country because there is

no continuity in their work. If they had performed, many would have continued where

they stopped. Now, fresh people will begin the process of law making. The low-

performance of the lawmakers, despite the huge disbursement to them from the national

treasury, has played a role in the outcome of the recent general elections during which

many of them lost re-election.

According to Richard et al (2009), organizational performance encompasses three

specific areas of firm outcomes: (a) financial performance (profits, return on assets,

return on investment, etc.); (b) product market performance (sales, market share, etc.);

and (c) shareholder return, economic value added, etc.). Specialists in many fields are

concerned with organizational performance including strategic planners, operations,

finance, legal and organizational development. In recent years, many organizations have

attempted to manage organizational performance using the balance scorecard

methodology where performance is tracked and measured in multiple dimensions, such as

• Financial performance (e.g. shareholder return);

• Customer service;

• Social responsibility (e.g. corporate citizenship, community outreach);

• Employee stewardship.

According to Cokins (2010), the essence of the balanced scorecard is to focus less on the

organizational structure and concentrate on designing a managerial system that aligns an

individual’s behaviour directly with the executive team’s strategic objectives through

cascading and linking since they believe that there may never be a perfect organizational

structure. It is a stage by stage process, and transparency is a necessary component. This

119

is done by introduction of reliable customer profitability and management reporting with

visibility to all dimensional managers of their dimensions’ consumed costs.

A multidimensional concept means that a separate manager is held accountable for each

dimension – and with consequences of reward or punishment. Multidimensional concept

is fundamentally different from matrix management with an employee team reporting to

two different supervisors.

2.10.4 Human Resource of Organization

The most important resources of an organization are its human resources – the people

who supply the organization with their work, talent, creativity, and drive. Thus, among

the most critical tasks of a manager are the selection, training, and development of people

who will best help the organization meet its goals.

Onwuchekwa (1993:116) has written that human beings are the most important

components of an organization and without understanding the nature of human beings

and their behaviour, it may be absolutely difficult to design organization and formulate

appropriate management strategies to achieve their objectives. Also, he has said that

human beings decide to work in a certain organizations because they want to satisfy

certain needs. Their behaviour in the business organization will be dependent on to what

extent they satisfy the needs that motivated their entry into the organization. It is

necessary to understand human beings as individuals as organizations’ members and as

citizens of a country or society.

Ezigbo (2007:315) posits that organizations should recognize the fact that human

resources are inevitable. This is because of their role as the prime mover or initiator of

all productive activities.

Without competent people at the managerial level – and indeed at all levels –

organizations will either pursue inappropriate goals or find it difficult to achieve

appropriate goals once they have been set. Therefore, Human resource management is

the management function that deals with recruitment, placement, training, and

development of organization members. (Stoner et al, 1989:329 and 2005:402)

120

2.10.5 Human resource Management and Strategy

Human resource management process cannot be divorced from strategy – the overall

direction of the firm. Unless Human resource management policies are influenced by all

stakeholders, the organization will fail to meet the needs of the stakeholders in the long

run and will fail as an organization.

The four C’s Model for Evaluating Human Resources

According to Stoner et al (2005:427), to evaluate the effectiveness of the Human resource

process within an organization, the Harvard Researchers have proposed a “ four C’s”

model:- competence, commitment, congruence and cost effectiveness.

Competence: train and develop employees in their work with skill and knowledge needed

now and in the future;

Commitment: Employee should be committed on their job. Record-keeping is necessary

to know when they are absent etc. from duty;

Congruence: Mutual understanding such as trust between employer and employee in the

organization.

Cost effectiveness: Conscious of wastages. Too much strike can reduce productivity and

increase wages in an organization. Cost effectiveness in terms of wages, benefits,

turnover, absenteeism, strikes etc. is necessary.

By shaping human resource management policies to enhance commitment, competence,

congruence and cost effectiveness, an organization increases its capacity to adapt to

changes in its environment. High commitment gives better communication. High

competence for versatile in skills and can take on new roles and jobs as needed. When an

organization is able to respond changes in environment demands cost effectiveness.

Human resource costs such as wages, benefits and strikes are kept equal to or less than

those of competitors. High congruence that stakeholders share a common purpose and

collaborate in solving problems brought about by changes in environmental demands.

The four ‘C’s model provide a usual model for evaluating how effectively an

organization’s human resource policy is supporting its business strategy.

121

2.12 Structural Patterns and Managerial Control in Organization

This segment of the objective of the study shall explain the meaning of structural pattern

with some relevant theorists on structure and design, including the structural dimensions.

It shall also explain the determinants of organizational structure and the relationship

between structure and strategy. Finally, it shall explain the power of control and its

relevance in the organization.

2.11.1 Structural Patterns

Pattern of event is the way in which something happens, develops or is done. It is a

regularly repeated arrangement of something in which each part is connected to the

others (Longman Contemporary Dictionary of English (2003:1434). The concept of

structural patterns concerns the organization structure and how things are done to achieve

their goals and objectives.

Structure has diverse meaning. In this study, it is the way in which relationships between

people or groups are organized in an organization. Organization is an association of two

or more individual. It accomplishes objectives through the structure. Cole, 2005:184 has

seen the issue of structure facing modern organization, and identifies the most important

practical options available to senior management. While Mintzberg (1979) says it is the

sum total of the ways in which it divides its labour into distinct tasks and then achieves

coordination between them. Ezigbo (2007:23) defines organization structure as a formal

system of tasks and reporting relationships that coordinates and motivates organizational

members so that they work together to achieve organizational goals. David (2004:18)

says it is the way an organization arranges people and jobs so that its work can be

performed and its goals can be met. Onwuchekwa (1993:81) defines it as the framework

through which an organization achieves its objectives. The tasks of organization are

distributed among its component parts for people’s performance to accomplish results in

organization structure.

There are two reasons for structural organization. They are instrumental and economic.

Instrumental is the primary reason for organization which is effectiveness.

122

Economically, organization survives when put in place appropriate technology,

environment, departmentalization and coordination. Thompson (1967) in Onwuchekwa

(1996:82) has used the concept of Synthetic organization to explain the importance of

organization structure in the achievement of both instrumental and economic efficiency.

He explained that Synthetic organization is a type of ad hoc organization which emerges

after a disaster has occurred in an area. In some developing countries, such as Nigeria,

they are known as Relief or Rehabilitation organization. They are mainly to relieve or

rehabilitate victims of disaster temporarily before major action takes place. However,

synthetic organization is instrumentally viable but not economically viable because they

utilize uncommitted resources from donors, there are planning deficiencies, no

coordinating strategies and there is enormous information deficiency and unpronounced

authority relationships. According to Kazmi (2009:346), structure is the arrangement of

tasks and sub-tasks required to implement a strategy. He explained that the

diagrammatical representation of structure could be an organization chart, but a chart

shows only the ‘skeleton’. The ‘flesh and blood’ that makes an organization alive is the

several administrative mechanisms, such as controls, that support the structure. All these

cannot be depicted on a chart. But a strategist has to grapple with the complexities of

creating the structure, making it work, redesigning when required and implementing

changes that will keep the structure relevant to the needs of the strategies that have to be

implemented. According to Kazmi, an organization structure specifies three key

components that are enumerated, such as (a) it identifies the formal reporting

relationships, including the number of levels in the hierarchy and the span of control of

managers; (b) it specifies the grouping of individuals into departments and of

departments into the total organization; and, (c) it consists of design of systems to ensure

effective communication, coordination and integration of efforts across departments.

The first two components constitute the structural framework, which the vertical structure

is created through the process of differentiation that involves division of labour and

specialization. The third component refers to the pattern of interactions among members

of the organization and is the horizontal structure, created through the process of

integration that involves cross-functional information systems and teamwork. Figure

2.10 shows these structures.

123

Figure 2.10: Vertical and horizontal structures.

Source: Azhar Kazmi (2009) STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT AND BUSINESS POLICY “Structural Implementation. What is structure?” Page 347. New Delhi. Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited.

The vertical structure is designed primarily for exercising control by superiors over

subordinates’ work in the organization. The horizontal structure is designed for

coordination and collaboration of work among peers in the organization. Typically, the

vertical structure will have these characteristics:

• Specialized tasks

• Hierarchy of authority

• Rules and regulations

• Vertical Communication and formal reporting systems

• Centralized decision making

• Emphasis on efficiency

The horizontal structure will have these characteristics:

• Shared tasks

• Flexible authority

• Few rules and regulations

• Horizontal communication and sharing of information

Horizontal structure dominant: Shared task Flexible authority Few rules and regulations Horizontal communication and sharing of information Decentralized decision making Emphasis on learning

Vertical structure dominant: Specialized task Hierarchy of authority Rules and regulations Vertical communication and formal reporting systems Centralized decision making Emphasis on efficiency

124

• Decentralized decision making

• Emphasis on learning

Vertical structures lead to many layers of management, thick boundaries between layers

preventing smooth communication, tight controls, rigidity, centralized decision-making

and too many specific ways of doing things stifling creativity. On the positive side, these

structures are well-suited for efficient and tightly-controlled operations. Such structures

are also called tall structures. These types of structures are best suited for organizations

making standardized products and services in large volumes, through mass production

systems, with established technologies, serving a wide market, having customers seeking

undifferentiated items for consumption. Examples of organizations that are likely to have

vertical structures are large manufacturing companies producing products for mass

markets and government bureaucracies serving multitudes of citizens.

Horizontal structures are lean and mean organizations with few layers of manager, a

liberal exchange of information between different layers and across departments, flexible

systems, and much delegation of authority leading to decentralized decision-making and

having an organization climate conducive to innovation. On the negative side, such

structures often result in loss of control and high costs of coordination and require highly

qualified employees with multiple skills. Such structures are also called flat structures.

These types of structures are suited to organizations that make differentiated products and

services through batch production systems, with advanced technologies, serving niche

markets with customers seeking premium items for consumption. Examples of

organizations that are likely to have horizontal structures are specialty manufacturers,

medium or small-sized service organization and non-profit organizations proving specific

social services.

Kazmi (2009:348) have said that the challenging aspect of creating an organization

structure is that requirements for vertical and horizontal structures coexist at the same

time. In a bank, for instance, cheque processing is a fairly standardized activity requiring

a low level of skills and repetitive operations with high centralization of authority. In the

125

same bank, the investment division or marketing department may perform specialized

activities requiring unique skills. You can observe that the characteristics of these two

types of structures that often coexist in organizations, are mutually contradictory,

resulting in an inherent tension. Real life organizations continually try to balance these

two conflicting structures and to minimize the tension.

2.11.2 Structure and Design

This refers to the way in which the various parts of an organization are arranged to ensure

orderliness and achievement of organizational mission. Furthermore, it refers to how the

various jobs or positions in an organization are arranged in some coherent manner to

achieve organizational goals and objectives (Aluko, Odugbesan, Gbadamosi and

Osuagwu, 2004:165). According to Onwuchekwa (1993:58; 81) organizational structure

is the framework through which an organization achieves its objectives while

organizational design is the process which aims at adjusting the organizational structure

of any business organization in relationship to the demands of technology and

environment. Furthermore, he states that organizational design involves three major

states of interdependent activities. They are:

1) Detailing of organizational tasks (work), division of work and aggregation of work

into departments;

2) Coordinating the activities of the organization for effective performance

(technological adaptation); and,

3) Adjusting the structure of the organization to the demands of environment (i.e.

environmental adaptation and the problems of boundary spanning issues).

2.11.3 Dimensions of Organizational Structure

Ezigbo (2007:28) has written that the elements of organizational structure are

specialization, standardization, coordination and authority. Specialization is the process

of identifying particular tasks and assigning them to individuals or teams who have been

trained to do them. Standardization refers to the uniform and consistent procedures that

employees are to follow in doing their jobs. They are written procedure, job descriptions,

instructions, rules and regulations. Coordination comprises the formal and informal

126

procedures that integrate the activities of separate individuals, teams, and departments in

an organization. Authority is basically the right to decide and act. It is the right to give

orders and decides what should be done.

According to Aluko et al (2004:165) the main dimensions or components of

organizational structure are:

I. Specialization or division of labour;

II. Standardization;

III. Formalization;

IV. Centralization and decentralization; and,

V. Configuration.

Specialization – This concerns with the division of labour within the organization and

the distribution of official duties among a number of positions. In every organization,

jobs are grouped according to specialty, e.g. Administration, Marketing, Production,

Finance et cetera. Jobs and staff are placed on these departments of specialty according

to capability of the individual.

Standardization - This involves certain standard, uniform procedures or culture for

handling certain matters in the organization. For example, the Publication Department of

the Parliaments has a procedure for recording daily debates of the House known as

Hansards.

Formalization - This refers to the extent to which policies, rules, procedures and

instructions are written down and followed. Rules, regulation and procedures are written

down and everybody in the organization is aware of it and cannot change it carelessly.

For example, job description, record of service, Confidential Annual Performance

Evaluation Report (CAPER) form of this category.

Centralization and Decentralization - This has to do with locus or place of authority to

make decision affecting the organization. Where decision is made by few people on the

top level, we can say it is highly centralized. But where decisions are made by lower

127

level of the organization, it is decentralization. Concept of decentralization can be

described as follows:

a. Decentralization of authority: This is the degree of discretion conferred on a

person to use personal judgment. It is a fundamental aspect of delegation;

b. Delegation of authority: It is impossible for one person to perform all the tasks

necessary for the accomplishment of group purpose. It is equally impossible for

one person to exercise all the authority for affecting the decisions of an

organization. Authority is delegated when organizational discretion is vested in a

subordinate by a superior. The entire process of delegation involves the

following: determination of results expected; assignment of tasks; delegation of

authority for accomplishing these tasks and exaction of responsibility for the

accomplishment of the tasks.

c. Clarity of delegation: Delegation of authority may be specific or general, written

or unwritten. It is preferably written. It must follow logically that the authority

should correspond to the responsibility. So, the principles are that assignment

should be defined and delegated in the light of the results expected; select the

person in the light of the job to be done; maintain open lines of communication;

establish proper controls; reward effective delegation and successful assumption

of authority.

d. Factors determining degree of decentralization: The factors include: (a) extent of

the coastline of the decision – important decisions are made at the upper level

instead of lower level (b) Degree of desire to maintain uniform policy – Those

who value consistency very much will be in favour of centralization of authority

(c) Economic size – The larger the firm, the more decisions to be made, and the

more point at which they must be made, the more difficult it is to coordinate them

(d) History of the enterprise – The enterprises which expand from within, or those

that expand under the direction of owner-founder, tend to keep authority

centralized (e) Management philosophy – Where top managers are autocratic,

they do not allow interference with their authority, and they tend to board

information (f) Desire for independence – This is due to long lines of

communication and by the practice of ‘passing the buck’ which cause frustration

128

to a person (g) Availability of managerial manpower – A real shortage of

managerial manpower would limit the extent of decentralization of authority,

since disposal of decision-making assumes the availability of trained managers (h)

Control techniques – Improvements in statistical devices, accounting control, and

other techniques have helped to make possible the current trend toward extensive

managerial decentralization (i) Geographical dispersion of activities – Where

performance of the job is done at different geographical locations, there is

compelling reason to decentralize (j) Business dynamics – If a business is

growing fast and facing complex problems of expansion, its managers,

particularly those responsible for top policy, may be forced to take a

disproportionate share of the decisions (k) Environment factors – External

influences may affect the degree of decentralization, e.g. government controls,

trade unionism and tax policies.

e. Span of Management: This concept relates to the number of subordinates a

manager can effectively supervise. Some of the determinants of span are

individual differences in managerial abilities, the type of people and functions

supervised, and the extent of communication effectiveness. A short span of

control results in a tall organizational structure, while a wide span results in a flat

organizational structure.

Configuration - This is the last component of organizational structure. It simply refers

to the shape of the organization. (That is, whether the organization structure is tall or

flat) Information on this can be found on an organization chart (Aluko, Odugbesan,

Gbadamosi and Osuagwu, 2004:165-168).

2.11.4 Line and Staff Position

Line authority is the simplest to understand as well as to agree about. It is the authority

that every manager exercises in respect of his or her own subordinates. Thus specialist

managers, such as chief accountants and personnel managers, exercise line authority over

their own staff. While staff authority is derived from the staff function, and this does

relate it to the advisory and service functions of internal structure of an organization.

129

Equally, Functional authority, unlike line authority, is not exercised by every manager. It

can only be exercised by managers of specialist functions, and it consists of the right to

order others, including other managers, as to what to do, and how to do it, in relation to

agreed aspects of their own particular specialist (Cole, 2005:197).

2.11.5 Determinants of Organizational Structure

This refers to factors that can influence or determine organizational structure. Structures

of organizations differ. But there could be generally accepted factors, such as:

1) The organization purpose or strategy;

2) The nature of task/work to be done to achieve the purpose or strategy;

3) The technology;

4) The environment; and,

5) The size of the organization.

Goals, purposes or strategy

This is what keeps organization moving in a deliberately chosen direction and prevents it

from drifting in undesired directions. While strategy is the chief determinants of

organizational structure and the processes by which tasks are assigned and performed,

motivated, rewarded and controlled.

The Nature of the Task

This is the type of work to be done. Are you trying to produce or manufacture something

or are you trying to market something?

Technology

Once the task has been defined, the next step is to determine how to perform it. So, it

involves breaking the task into steps or processes to be followed. The more complex the

task, the more difficult to give specific guidelines and therefore the less the formalization

or regimentation as to how the work should be done.

The environment

An organization interacts with its environment. Environment includes, competitors,

suppliers, customers, economic and technological conditions, regulatory agencies, and so

on.

130

The size of the organization

Small organization will be structured differently from the large organization. The larger

the organization, the greater the specialization of functions or division of labour and the

greater the likelihood for decentralization. Once the size of operations exceeds the

capacity of one man, responsibility for accomplishing key tasks and making decisions

must be assigned to individuals or groups (Aluko et al, 2004:169).

2.11.6 Organizational innovators

In the words of Chandler (1962:314), unless structure follows strategy, inefficiency shall

result. This certainly appears to be the lesson to be learned from the experience of our

four companies. Volume expansion, geographical dispersion, vertical integration,

product diversification and continued growth by any of these basic strategies laid an

increasingly heavy load of entrepreneurial decision making on the senior executives. If

they failed to reform the lines of authority and communication and to develop

information necessary for administration, the executives throughout the organization

were drawn deeper and deeper into operational activities and often were working at cross

purposes to and in conflict with one another.

2.11.7 Control

Power plays important role in the setting of goals. The concept of organizational control

structure is a distribution of means used by an organization to elicit the performances it

needs and to check whether the quantities and qualities of such performances are in

accord with organizational specifications.

Organizational control structure lays emphasis on organizational members. Control is the

way we turn the attention of the members in an organization towards intended

performance objective. In order to control their members, organizations institutionalize a

control system based on rewards and penalties. These control elements are supposed to

enhance compliance with the norms, regulations and orders of certain organization

(Onwuchekwa, 1993:179)

131

Power as a means of control in organization

According to Ezigbo (2007:55) power is the ability to influence the behaviour of others.

She itemized the five types of power identified by John French and Bertram Raven as

follows: Legitimate; reward; coercive; referent and expert.

Politics: Power in action

When people get together in groups, power will be exerted. People want to carve out a

niche from which to exert influence, to earn rewards, and to advance their careers. When

employees in organizations convert their power into action, we describe them as being

engaged in politics. Those with good political skills have the ability to use their bases of

power effectively.

Definition : There has been no shortage of definitions for organizational politics.

Essentially, however, they have focused on the use of power to affect decision making in

the organization or on behaviours members that are self-serving and organizationally

none sanctioned. For our purposes, we shall define political behaviour in organizations

as activities that are not required as part of one’s formal role in the organization, but

influence, or attempt to influence, the distribution of advantages and disadvantages

within the organization.

Figure 2.11 Employee Response to organizational politics

Source: Stephen P, Robbins & Seema Sanghi (2006:386), Organizational Behaviour “Politics: (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. India.

Perceptions of organizational politics

Decreased Job Satisfaction

Increased Anxiety and stress

Increased turnover

Reduced Performance

132

Politics is concerned with “the distribution of advantages and disadvantages within the

organization”, this include varied political behaviours such as withholding key

information from decision makers, joining a coalition, whistle-blowing, spreading

rumours, leaking confidential information about organizational activities to the media,

exchanging favours with others in the organization for mutual benefit, and lobbying on

behalf of or against a particular individual or decision alternative. There are Legitimate

and illegitimate dimension of political behaviour.

Legitimate political behaviour refers to normal everyday politics – complaining to your

supervisor by passing the chain of command, forming coalitions, obstructing

organizational policies or decisions through inaction or excessive adherence to rules and

developing contracts outside the organization through one’s professional activities. On

the other hand, there are also illegitimate political behaviours that violate the implied

rules of the game. Those who pursue such extreme activities are often described as

individuals who “play hard ball”. Illegitimate activities include sabotage, whistle-

blowing, symbolic protests such as wearing unorthodox dress or protest buttons, and

groups of employees simultaneously calling in sick.

2.12 Summary of the Reviewed Related Literature

The primary purpose of this chapter is to conduct a comprehensive review of structural

pattern and business strategy implementation in line with the objectives of the study.

Some management theorists on structural patterns and business strategy implementation

include: Frederick Taylor, Henry Fayol, Max Weber, Mintzberg, Mayo, Mcgregor,

Chandler, etc. Chandler (1962) study was for strategy and structure. According to

Chandler, organizations pass through three stages of development, moving from a unit to

functional and to a multidivisional structure. Initially, the organization is small; there is

usually a single location, single product and single entrepreneurial decision-maker. As

organization grows, increased volume and additional locations eventually create new

challenges. Chandler concludes that organizational structure followed and reflected

growth strategy of the firm. F. Taylor, Henry Fayol and Max Weber were labeled as

“Classical or scientific managers”. The classical approach to management was primarily

133

concerned with the structure and activities of formal or official organization. Fayol and

Taylor look into the problems of management while Max Weber develops a theory of

authority structure. They are “one best ways scholars”. They believed that the most

efficient and effective organization had a hierarchical structure in which members of the

organization guided in their actions by a sense of duty to the organization and by a set of

rational rules and regulations.

Mintzberg (1983) as cited by Onwuchekwa (1993:82) gives five distinct tasks for

structure. These are: simple structure, machine bureaucracy, professional bureaucracy,

divisionalized form and adhocracy, which have environmental structure, such as

mechanistic and organic. Line, staff, functional, matrix, informal structure, social

interaction and bureaucracy are employed in organization for effective co-ordination.

Strategy concerns the direction in which human and material resources will be applied in

order to increase the chance of achieving selected objectives (Koontz, 1994:169).

Business strategy is formulated to meet the goals of a particular business. It is managing

the interests and operations of a particular line of business. For strategy implementation

to take place, it must go beyond allocation of resources to achieve organizational

objectives. It must be accompanied by strategic thinking such as business strategy

formulation, strategic planning, business strategy execution, business strategy evaluation

and business strategy control (Unyimadu, 2000:100-106). It also includes, designing an

appropriate organizational structure which brings about change.

In all the studies reviewed above, one thing is remarkable outstandingly. None of those

works have been focused on the Manufacturing Sector operating in the South-South Geo-

Political Area in terms of the Structural Patterns and Business Strategy Implementation.

Most of the existing works on the subject area of this study are more theoretical

highlighting from management literature what the concepts of structural patterns and

business strategy are but not much has been done in tailoring these concepts to policy

implementations in organizations. Even where attempts have been made it has always

been on foreign organizations and countries. This study will therefore, deviate from the

situation by applying them not only to organizations operating in our country, Nigeria,

134

but specifically in the South-South Region. This is one gap that this study hopes to fill in

the body of management knowledge.

Secondly, management concepts are hardly put into practice in organization because lots

of managers of those organizations are not management expert. They are usually those

who have veered off from other allied disciplines like political science, history and other

social sciences because of privileges. So, in terms of application of management theories,

they usually find it difficult coupled with the problem of dearth of textbooks and

available research works to guide them. Therefore, the result of this study and subsequent

ones which this study will provoke will begin to fill the gap of dearth of information on

the issues of structural pattern and business strategy implementation.

135

REFERENCES

Ademuyiwa, B and Rafsanjani, M.A (2011) “N/Assembly spends N318.2bn to pass 12 bills in 3 years- one bill costs N26.5bn”, Business Day Newspaper, May 17th Volume 9 Number 89.

Agbaragu O.Z., & Evbayiro-Osagie, E. (2008), The Strategic Management Process. In

Strategic Management: Concept, Principles and Decisions, B.A. Agbonifoh, Editor, Benin City, Mindex Publishing Company Limited, 19-29.

Agbonifoh, B.A. (2008), “Issues in Strategy Implementation and Overview”. In Strategic

Management: Concept, Principles and Decisions, B.A. Agbonifoh, Editor, Benin City, Mindex Publishing Company Limited, 222-235

Anao, A.R. (1979) “Survival of Business Firms”, Management in Nigeria, July 1980,

cited in Osaze, E.B. (1998), Strategic Management in Nigeria: Text and Cases, Lagos: Centre for Management Development.

Anthanassiou, N., and D. Nigh. “The Impact of U.S. Company Internationalization on

Top Management Team Advice Networks.” Strategic Management Journal, January 1999. Volume 2 Number 1, 83-92.

Azhar Kazmi (2009) Strategic Management and Business Policy ‘Strategy

Implementation’ New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited. Bedford A. Fubara (1999) Strategic marketing for Service Firms Port Harcourt: Centre

for Corporate Policy and Strategic Research. Chandler, A.D. (1962) Strategy and Structure Cambridge: MIT. Press. Cole, C. A (2005) Management Theory and Practice “Organization Structures’. London:

Book Power Thomson Learning. Encyclopedia of Management (2009) “Strategy implementation”. Retrieved May 16,

2011 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3273100282.html

Ewurum, U.J.F. (2004) Advanced Analytical Techniques: Statistics and Linear

Programming Department of Management, UNEC Enugu: Unpublished Manuscript.

Ezeh, J.A. & Onodugo, V. A. (2002) Business Policy and Strategic Management: Issues

and Trends “Strategy Formulation and Business Strategies” Enugu: Kinsman Publishers Limited.

136

Ezigbo, C.A. (2007) Advanced Course on Management Theory and Application Enugu: (Immaculate Publications Limited).

Galbraith, J. and R. Kazangiran (1986): Strategy Implementation: Structure, System and

Process, St. Paul: West Publishing. Gary Cokins (2010) Advanced Cost Management and performance Improvement

Systems: Cokins’ Unique look at the World (Internet). Gupta, V. Gollakota, M and Srinivasan (2008) Business Policy and Strategic

Management: Concepts and Applications Business Strategy Formulation New Delhi: Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited.

Hambrick, D.C., Macmillan, I.C. and Day, D.C. (1982): “Strategic Attributes ad

Performance of Business in the Four Cells of the BCG Matrix: A PIMs Based Analysis of Industrial Product Business” Academy of Management Journal, Volume 225 Number 1.

Horatius Egua (2011) FG Issues cement manufacturers ultimatum to crash price,

Business Day Newspaper, May 17th Volume 9 Number 89. http:/humanresource.about.com/od/motivationrewardretention by 12:00pm.

KCPT 2 (June/July, 2011) “Daily Slogan Announcement” State of Missouri, Kansas City.

Koontz, H and Weihrich, H (1994) Management: A Global Perspective, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Langston, G and Lang-Kristenson, R (2002) Strategic Management of Built Facilities

Worker Productivity Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann Jordan Hill. Mckay, Colin (2010) Art Consoli- Business Strategist and Consultant to Management

“What is Business Strategy”? New York: Abineau Communications. Michael Aluko, Olusegun Odugbesan, Gbolahan Gbadamosi and Linus Osuagwu (2004)

Business Policy and Strategy ‘Strategy and Structure’. Lagos: Longman Nigeria plc.

Miebaka D. Tamunomiebi (2005) Organization Management and Behaviour Owerri:

Odesaa Education Books Nig. Limited. Odesaa Press. Musselman, V.A., Hughes, E.H. and Jackson, J.H. (1981) Introduction to Modern

Business: Issues and Environment “Organizational Structure and Behaviours” Eaglewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

137

Nag. R; hambrick, D.C.; Chen, M.J (2007) Strategic Management Journal “What is Strategic management really? Inductive derivation of a consensus definition of the field.” Volume 28, Issue 9.

Onwuchekwa, C.I. (1993) Management Theory and Organizational Analysis: A

Contingency Theory Approach “Organizational Design” Asata, Enugu: Obio Nigeria Enterprises.

Rehfeld, J.E. (1994) Alchemy of a Leader: Combining Western and Japanese

Management Skills to transform your company New York: John Wiley and Sons. Richard, A. (2009) Journal of Management “Measuring Organizational Performance:

Towards Methodological Best Practice” Modified on 16th September, 2010 http//www.google.com.//doc.m34 by 12:00pm

Stahl, M.J. (1995) Management: Total Quality in a Global Environment. Oxford,

Backwell. Stephen, P. R & Timothy A. J., (2009) Organizational Behavour New Jersey, Pearson

Prentice Hall. Stephens, P., Robbins, A. and Seema S., (2005) Organizational Behaviour Singapore,

Pearson Education. Pte Limited. Stoner, J.A. F; Freeman, R.E. and Gilbert, D.R. Jr. (2005) Management “Organizational

Design and Organizational Structure” Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Susan M. Heathfield (2011) Employee Retention-How to keep your best- tips and tools:

retrieved 16th May Hornby, A.S. The New Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language (1994) New York:

Lexicon International Publishers Guild Group. Thompson, A.A. (Jr.) and A.J. Strickland III (1996), Strategic Management: Concepts

and Cases, Boston: Irwin McGraw-Hill. Unyimadu, S.O. (2000), Business Policy Strategy and Management, Benin City:

Harmony Books. Wheelen, T.L. & Hunger, J.D. (2008), Strategic Management and Business Policy, Upper

Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

138

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

The Study is on structural patterns and business strategy implementation in the

manufacturing sector in the South-South Geo-Political Area. This chapter deals with the

overall research plan and basic design guiding the process of data collection, collation

and procedures necessary for the operation of this study. It embodies a comprehensive

analysis of the research design, data sources and collection, sampling procedures and

statistical tools to be employed. Research methodology cuts the road map for the

execution of research projects, by highlighting the step-by-step procedure to be taken in

carrying out a research study. This entails the techniques to be employed by the

researcher to find solutions or answers to the identified research questions. Among other

things, it involves the research design, the pilot study, the sources of data and research

techniques, the population, sampling method and sample size determination, reliability of

the study, validity of the instrument and the method of data analysis.

3.2 Research Design

The research design chosen for the study is a combination of a survey and oral interview.

Anyanwu (2000:39) notes that research design has to do with the development of

strategies for finding out something. This something is a missing link which after

discovered will help in the solution of identified problems. He explains that in life

generally, people do not jump on to solution of problems that confront them. They

normally sit back to assess the nature of the problems. Similarly, researchers determine

the nature of problems and develop plans on how to carry out scientific inquiries. As

noted by Babbie (1986:71), research design is all about why and how of the research

study.

This research adopted an in-depth one field study using the Analytical Survey method,

which of course uses a well-structured questionnaire, while an explanatory design will be

included to generate responses for explaining relationships among variables of the

139

system. This was achieved by interviews (semi-structured) to determine the degree of

fusion between structural pattern and business strategy implementation. This, it is hope

will enhance the validity of the study.

The study is also Evaluative and Survey Design. In the evaluation study, it looked into

the available data on structural pattern and business strategy implementation which is

essentially empirical. In the survey design, questionnaire was used to collect data.

3.3 Sources of Data

The study generated data from two principal sources – Primary and Secondary sources.

3.3.1 Primary Data

The Primary data were sourced using direct contact with the appropriate individuals with

the desired information. It was got from questionnaire and personal oral interviews

structured (structured and unstructured) was conducted on respondents who were ten (10)

staff of selected manufacturing firms that was used in the study. The questionnaire is the

chief instrument that was designed and used to collect data on the antecedents of

structural pattern and business strategy implementation in the firms.

3.3.2 Secondary Data

The Secondary data for this study were generated as follow:

I. Books, relevant academic journals, seminar and workshop papers, published

financial reports, magazines/newspapers, unpublished materials (theses,

dissertations and others) and monographs will be reviewed;

II. The Annual General Meeting of Rivers/Bayelsa States branch of the Manufacturers

Association of Nigeria (MAN); the Annual General Meeting of Cross River/Akwa

Ibom States branch of MAN; the Annual General Meeting of Edo/Delta States

branch of MAN and MAN websites will provide the lists of organizational staff and

sectors of MAN in the three branches.

III. The websites of some organizations were visited for relevant information.

140

3.4 Population of the Study

A total population of 1,240 senior and junior staff was used for the study. The Population

of the Study was obtained from the twenty (20) manufacturing firms studied in diverse

productions of goods in Edo/Delta, Bayelsa/Rivers and Cross River/Akwa Ibom States of

South-South, Nigeria.

Below are list of MAN sector in the South-South.

Table 3.1 List of MAN Sectors

S/No Sectors

1 Food, Beverages and Tobacco

2 Chemical and Pharmaceuticals

3 Domestic and Industrial Plastic and Rubber

4 Basic Metal, Iron and Steel and Fabricated Metal

Products

5 Pulp, paper and paper products, Printing Publishing

6 Electrical and Electronics

7 Textiles, Wearing Apparel, Carpet, Leather/Leather

Footwear

8 Wood and wood products including furniture

9 Non-Metallic mineral products

10 Motor Vehicle and Miscellaneous Assembly

Source: www. man.org

The population was further subjected to the two (2) criteria listed below before the

sample was taken. These critical variables are:

� As the researcher collected data through the administration of questionnaire and

interviews with all the staff that were concerned in the structural pattern and

business strategy implementation, hence all firms have their headquarters within

the said South-South Geo-Political Zone; and,

141

� The study is interested in Structural Pattern and Business Strategy

Implementation. Therefore, the researcher sampled on manufacturing firms that

are in the industry that are in diverse production of goods.

3.5 Sample Method

Sampling method is the process of selecting a part (called a sample) from the whole

(called a population or universe) in order to make statistical inferences (generalization)

about the whole. The listing of the accessible population from which a sample can be

drawn is referred to as the sampling frame. In this study, the sample frame was the list of

the manufacturing firms published by the Manufacturers Association of Nigeria

(Rivers/Bayelsa, Edo/Delta, Cross River/Akwa Ibom branches) which met the two

criteria stated above, which include:

The firm’s headquarter was within the South-South Zone; and,

Samples were only taken on manufacturing firms that are in diverse production of

goods.

Obasi (1999:134-142); Bowel et al (1980:14) and Ofo (1994:58) cherish the use of

random sampling as the best way of selecting a sample for a study. Besides, it promotes

the integrity and credibility of the research sample selection process, since the

appropriateness of the sampling method has a direct relationship with generalization

power of the results. The probability (chances) of a random sample representing a

population is very high and enables positive inferences to be drawn about the entire

population.

This research used the probability proportion to size (PPS) sampling method, which is a

variant of random sampling technique. This method enables the selection of the elements

included in the sample from target population.

3.6 Sample Size Determination

Various formula have been propounded for the determination of sample size, the best

method is to select a large sample size. The larger the sample size, the smaller the risk of

the sampling error. The problems of estimating the characteristics of a population would

142

be very simple if the data were uniform and having the same pattern as the population.

Since it is normally impossible for the researcher to reach the entire population, the

Freund and William formula as cited in Uzoagulu (1998:66, 67) was used to determine

the sample size of the strategic managers of industries in the manufacturing sector in the

South-South Area. He posits that this formula is mostly used for binomial-type

population or pooled, which is also infinitive.

The Freund and William formula as cited in Uzoagulu (1998:66, 67) is given as:

n = Z2Npq Ne2-Z2pq Where:

n = Sample

N = The Population

p = Probability of success/proportion

q = Probability of failure/proportion

Z = Standard error of the mean

e = Limit of tolerable error (or level of significance)

at 95% confidence level Z = 1.96

From the result of the pilot study, the ps (0.5) and the qs (0.5) were generated at α = 0.05

(limit of tolerable error), Z = 1.96. Thus, we have:

n = 1.962 1240(.5)(.5)

1240(0.05)2 – 1.962(.5)(.5)

= 3.841(1240) (0.25)

1240(.0025) – 3.8416 (0.25)

= 1190.896

3.1-0.9604

= 1190.896

2.1396

n = 557

143

The larger a sample becomes, the more representative of the population it becomes so

more reliable and valid the results based on it will become (Nwana, 1992:71). A sample

size of 557 is considered good for a study at this level (Unyimadu, 2005). He stresses

that current emphasis on sample size for PhD thesis is minimum of 500 (Unyimadu,

2009). Statistically, a sample (n) is assumed large when it is equal to or greater than 30

(n≥30). Authors like Nwana (1981:71) and Obasi (1999:136) have argued that a

combination of technical, human and financial issues define and determine the sample

size. These factors include, the population size, level of precision (accuracy), level of

variability of the factors to be estimated, the homogeneity of the population, prior

knowledge about the characteristics of the population

This research was concerned with the manufacturing firms in the South-South geo-

political zone of Nigeria presently made up of six states (Rivers, Bayelsa, Edo, Delta,

Cross River and Akwa Ibom states). The list of all the firms as published by the three

branches of Manufacturers’ Association of Nigeria (MAN) (Rivers/Bayelsa States

branch, Edo/Delta States branch and Cross River/Akwa Ibom States branch), constituted

the sample frame.

3.7 Computation of Sample Size According to Sector

The computation of sample size according to group of firms in each branch forms the

basis of our application of the probability of proportion to Sample (PPS) size method.

The method enables each group to be selected (according to proportion) from the study

population (see table 3.1).

This type of group by group calculations of sample size is a cost saving device, good data

collection and collation technique, sound application of precious time and available

resources etc. The procedure has no harmful impact on the nature of inferential statistics

and the resulting generalization about the population. If anything, it fast tracks the

realization of the research objectives (reliable and dependable findings). The sampling

proportion formula used by the researcher is called Bowley’s proportion allocation

statistical technique:

144

Nh = nNh N Where:

nh = The number of unit allocated to each stratum

Nh = The number of staff in each category

n = The total sample size

N = The total population

3.8 Data Collection Instrument

This study adopted both questionnaire and oral interview to collect data.

Questionnaire

The principal research instrument used for the data collection is the questionnaire.

Questionnaire is a list of questions to be asked the respondents and spaces in which to

record the answers. All the strategic managers were asked to complete a survey, which

include personal data, structural patterns and business strategy implementation.

Likert (5 points) scaled items were used to analyze structural pattern and business

strategy implementation. The Likert scale (5 points) are in different forms such as: Very

great extent (5), Great Extent (4), Moderate extent (3), Little extent (2), No extent (1);

Strongly agreed (5), Agree (4), Undecided (3), disagree (2), Strongly disagree (1);

Always (5), Frequently (4), Often (3), Seldom (2), Never (1); Very well (5), Well (4),

Moderate Well (3), Not Very Well (2), Not Well (1); Very significantly (5), significantly

(4), Little significantly (3), Very little significantly (2) and Not significantly (1);

Anyanwu (2000:79) posits that Likert scale was developed by Likert in 1932. And that

Likert scales require the respondents to indicate the degree of agreement or disagreement

with each statement. Tuckman (1972) cited in Obasi (1999:117-120), describes the

Likert scale questionnaires as a five-point scale in which the interval between each point

on the scale is assumed to be equal. It is used to register the extent of agreement or

disagreement with a particular statement on attitude, belief or judgment, describing a

situation or phenomenon. Most researchers make good use of it in eliciting attitudinal

and judgmental data from respondents. Luke et al (1987:173,174); Asika (1991:62);

145

Behling (1984:58) and Obasi (1999:144-154) define the questionnaire as a set of written

questions that contains the instructions on an objective about which the respondent’s

written or verbal opinions are sought. It measures the variables necessary to test the

research hypotheses or provide answers to research questions.

Interview

Interview was conducted to aid the efforts at effective data collection. The interview

obtained face to face information from the strategic managers on the structural pattern

and business strategy implementation, which is in place in their various firms.

The structured interview similar in content like the questionnaire allows the asking of

direct questions and to clear areas where the respondents lack understanding. Finally,

data collected were used as support in testing the corresponding research hypotheses.

3.9 Reliability of the Study

Test re-test reliability was used. The 557 respondents were approached with the research

instrument at two points in time. The scores were correlated and a Spearman’s Rank

Correlation coefficient of 0.95 and a Cronbach’s Alpha Coefficient of 0.90 showed that

the research instrument was reliable.

This is about the trust and dependable of the instrument. It ascertained its suitability for

the study. It refers to the tests about the degree (or extent) to which the study instrument

(questionnaire) perfect the desired measurements when applied to the desired objectives.

In the view of Anyanwu (2000:32) reliability is the ability of a particular measuring

instrument to yield similar results when applied to the same situation at different times.

Unyimadu (2005:158); Behling (1984:62); Kerlinger (1973:442), Asika (1991:73),

Babbie (1986:109) and Bowen et al (1980:11) refer it as the degree to which a measure

yields similar results for the same object at different times and under different conditions.

The outcomes must be consistent, dependable, stable, predictable and accurate. Based on

the establishment of the reliability of research instrument, the results generated can be

trusted or depended upon as genuine.

146

Researchers could test for reliability in various ways, such as test-re-test, multiple

(alternate) forms, etc. Test-re-test reliability is where the same measuring instrument is

applied on the same population but at different times. The higher the correlation of the

findings, the higher the reliability of the measuring instrument while the multiple forms

reliability test attempts to test for reliability through the use of the same instrument

administered on different dimensions of the same variable. For example, the measuring

instrument was the questionnaire while the variables were “structural pattern and

business strategy implementation.”

Rank Spearman formula - Pearson Lemma postulation of

1 – 6∑di2 n(n2 – 1)

di = difference in responses of pre and post tests

n = number of trials

A value of more than 0.50 shall be regarded reliable.

The Pre and Post-tests as conducted are shown below:

S/N Pre test Post test Difference (di)

di2

1 551 554 -3 9 2 554 556 -2 4 3 504 501 3 9 4 428 429 -1 1 5 492 490 2 4 6 499 498 1 1 7 511 513 -2 4 8 399 402 -3 9 9 287 290 -3 9 10 557 554 3 9 ∑di2

59

1 - ⌠ 6(59)⌡ 10(100-1) = 1-0.35

= 0.65

Since 0.65 is reasonably above average, the instrument was termed reliable.

147

3.10 Validity of the Instrument

The content validity was used. The stratified sampling method of probability sampling

was used to select the sample. The same version of the research instrument was

administered to all the respondents and this gave the instrument content validity.

The validity measure of an instrument determine the appropriateness of an instrument in

measuring what was intended to be measured (Uzoagulu, 1998:101).

The researcher subjected the instrument to face-to-face panel of the management

scientists’ critic. My supervisor vetted and other management experts on structural

patterns and business strategy implementation examined the appropriateness of the

instrument. Finally, their corrections were reflected in the construct.

3.11 Method of Data Analysis

The questionnaire was tested using

Simple percentage distribution formula

r x 100 n 1

r = number of variable responses from relevant questionnaire.

n = total number of responses from relevant questionnaire.

The hypotheses were tested using both Sample Proportion (Survey problem of

responsiveness of the respondent) and Regression Analysis. Sample Proportion was

Z = Ps-P

Pq n

Ps = Proportion of success in the sample of relevant questionnaire.

P = Proportion of success in the population from pilot study.

q = Proportion of failure in the population from pilot study.

n = Total number of responses from relevant questionnaire.

148

Sample proportion was used to test hypotheses H2 and H5. The rest (H1, H3, H4 and H6)

were tested using Regression Analysis.

The decision Rule for accepting any hypothesis is:

Do not reject H0 (null hypothesis) if and only if table value is more than calculated value.

The table value is shown below

Α Level of significance One tailed Two tailed

5% 1.645 1.96

Reject Ho

Reject Ho

Do not

Reject

149

REFERENCES

Anyanwu, A. (2000), Research Methodology in Business and Social Sciences Owerri:

Canun Publishers Nigeria Limited.

Babbie Earl (1986), The Practice of Social research, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Behling, J. H. (1984) Guidelines for preparing the Research Proposal, Revised Edition, New York: University Press of America Incorporated.

Bowen, B.D. and Weinberg, H.F. (1980): An Introduction to Data Analysis, San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Company.

Nwana, O.C. (1981), Introduction to Educational Research Ibadan: Heinemann Educational Books Limited.

Ofo, J.E. (1994): Research Methods and Statistics in Education and Social Sciences, Lagos: Jojo Educational Press Limited.

Unyimadu, S. O. (2005): Research Methods and Procedure In the Social Science. Benin City: Otoghagua Ent. Nigeria Limited.

Unyimadu, S.O. (2009): Lecture Notes on Sampling ‘Taro Yamane’, Enugu, University of Nigeria, Enugu Campus.

Uzoagulu, A.E. (1998) Practical Guide to Writing Research Project Report in Tertiary Institutions Determination of Sampling size Enugu: John Jacob’s Classic Publishers Limited.

150

CHAPTER FOUR

DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

4.1 Introduction

The data collected via the questionnaire are presented and discussed descriptively using

frequency table, percentages, mean and standard deviation. Hypotheses two and five

were tested using Z- test statistics and hypotheses one, three, four and six were tested

using Regression Analysis. These were done with the aid of the Statistical Package for

Social Sciences (SPSS) 17.0.

4.2 DATA PRESENTATION

4.2.1 Return Rate of Questionnaire

Questionnaire was distributed to 557 respondents in line with the calculated sample size,

442 returned, showing 79.35% of response. The questionnaire response rate is shown in

table 4.1.

Table 4.1 Questionnaire Response Rate

Respondents Distributed Returned Relative

frequency

Unreturned % unreturned % response

Top

managers

66 55 0.8333 11 16.67 12.44

Middle level

managers

463 367 0.7927 96 20.73 83.03

Special staff 28 20 0.7143 8 28.57 4.53

Total 557 442 0.7935 115 20.65 100

Source: Field Survey, 2012

In the distribution of the questionnaire for the top managers 55 questionnaires were

returned out of 66 questionnaires that were distributed. This gave a return rate of 0.8333.

For the middle level managers, 367 questionnaires were returned out of 463 that were

151

distributed and this gave a response rate of 0.7927. For the special staff, 20

questionnaires were returned out of 28 questionnaires that were distributed and this gave

a response rate of 0.7143.

Table 4.2: Return Rate of Questionnaire Frequency Relative Frequency

Total Administered 557 1

Returned 442 0.794

Not Returned 115 0.206

Source: Field Survey, 2012

Table 4.2 shows that out of the 557 questionnaires administered, only 442 of them were

returned. This gave a relative frequency of 0.794. 115 of them were not returned giving a

relative frequency of 0.206.

4.2.2 Demographic Characteristics of Respondents

The demographic characteristics of the respondents are presented in tables 4.3 to 4.10

Type of Firm

The type of firm that the respondents work with is presented in table 4.3.

Table 4.3: Type of Firm

Frequency Percent (%)

Private 442 100.0

Public 0 0.0

Total 442 100.0

Source: Field Survey, 2012 All the sampled respondents (100%) indicated that they worked with private firms.

Percentage Ownership of Firm

The Foreign and Nigerian percentage ownership of the firms that the sampled

respondents belong to are presented in table 4.4 and 4.5

152

Table 4.4: Foreign Percentage Ownership of Firm Percentage Ownership Frequency Percent (%)

0 – 25% 47 10.6

26 to 50% 0 0.0

51 to 75% 188 42.5

76 to 100% 207 46.8

Total 442 100.0

Source: Field Survey, 2012

Forty seven (47) respondents (10.6%) noted that the foreign percentage ownership of

their firm is 0 to 25%, 188 respondents (42.5%) noted that it is 51 to 75% and 207

respondents (46.8%) noted that it is 76 to 100%.

Table 4.5: Nigerian Percentage Ownership of Firms Percentage Ownership Frequency Percent (%)

0 – 25% 258 78.8

26 to 50% 0 0.0

51 to 75% 0 0.0

76 to 100% 94 21.3

Total 442 100.0

Source: Field Survey, 2012

Two hundred and fifty eight (258) respondents (78.8%) noted that the Nigerian

percentage ownership of their firms is 0 to 15% and 94 respondents (21.3%) noted that it

is 76 to 100%.

Level of Work

The level of work of the respondents is presented in table 4.6

153

Table 4.6: Level of Work Level of Work Frequency Percent (%)

Managerial 301 68.1

Supervisory 141 31.9

Clerical 0 0.0

Total 442 100.0

Source: Field Survey, 2012

Out of the sampled 442 respondents, 301 respondents (68.1%) that participated in the

study were of managerial status while 141 respondents (31.9%) were of supervisory

status.

Highest Educational Qualification

The educational qualification of the respondents is presented in table 4.7.

Table 4.7: Highest Educational Qualification Highest Educational Qualification Frequency Percent (%)

O/A level 47 10.6

Degree 301 68.1

Professional 94 21.3

Total 442 100.0

Source: Field Survey, 2012

Majority of the respondents (68.1%) have First Degree as their highest level of

educational qualification, followed by 21.3% of the respondents who have professional

qualifications and 10.6% of the respondents who have O/A level as their highest level of

education.

Age

The distribution of the respondents according to their age group is presented in table 4.8.

154

Table 4.8: Age Bracket Age Bracket Frequency Percent (%)

30-39 years 94 21.3

40-49 years 141 31.9

50-59 years 207 46.8

Total 442 100.0

Source: Field Survey, 2012 Two hundred and seven (207) respondents (46.8%) are aged 50 to 59 years old, 141

respondents (31.9%) are aged 40 to 49 years old and 94 respondents (21.3%) are aged 30

to 39 years old.

Length of Service

The distribution of the respondents according to their length of service in their respective

organizations is presented in table 4.9.

Table 4.9: Length of Service Length of Service Frequency Percent (%) 01-09 years 141 31.9

10-19 years 254 57.5

20-29 years 47 10.6

Total 442 100.0 Source: Field Survey, 2012 One hundred and forty one (141) respondents (31.9%) said that they had worked in their

respective organizations for 1 to 9 years, 254 respondents (57.5%) said that they had

worked there for 10 to 19 years and 47 respondents (10.6%) said that they had worked in

their organizations for 20 to 29 years.

155

Table 4.10: Type of Organization Type of Organization Frequency Percent %)

Local 66 14.9

National 141 31.9

International 141 31.9

Multinational 94 21.3

Total 442 100.0

Source: Field Survey, 20212

Fig. 4.8: Type of Organization

Sixty six (66) respondents (14.9%) noted that their organization is a local organization,

141 respondents (31.9%) said that it is a national one, another 141 respondents (31.9%)

said that it is an international one and 94 respondents (21.3%) said it is a multinational

organization.

4.2.3 Nature of Relationship between Line Structural Pattern and Business Strategy Implementation in Manufacturing Sector

In establishing the nature of relationship between line structural pattern and business strategy implementation in manufacturing sector, the responses to questions 1 to 4 are presented in table 4.11.

156

Table 4.11: Responses to Questions 1 to 4 (Section B) Question VGE

(%) GE (%)

ME (%)

LE (%)

NE (%)

Mean Std. Dev.

to what extent does the management of your organization ensure implementation of line structural pattern

94 (21.3)

254 (57.5)

94 (21.3)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

2.5543 1.25374

to what extent does the line structural pattern implemented by your organization enhance productivity

348 (78.7)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

94 (21.3)

0 (0.0)

3.7873 1.01016

to what extent do your organization varying business strategies meet with their prevailing challenges and competitions?

0 (0.0)

188 (42.5)

207 (46.8)

47 (10.6)

0 (0.0)

3.5747 .81932

to what extent does your organization adapt to change by developing business strategies model?

235 (53.2)

0 (0.0)

207 (46.8)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

3.3190 .65642

Overall Mean 3.3088 Source: Field Survey 2012 It is the view of the respondents that the management of their organization to a great

extent ensures implementation of line structural pattern. This is reflected in the responses

of 94 respondents (21.3%) and 254 respondents (57.5%) who said to a very great extent

and to a great extent respectively and the mean response score of 2.5543.

With a mean response score of 3.7873 and the responses of 348 respondents (78.7%), it is

the view of the respondents that the line structural pattern implemented by their

organization has enhanced productivity to a great extent.

With a mean response score of 3.5747, the responses of 188 respondents (42.5%), 207

respondents (46.8) and 47 respondents (10.6%) who said to a great extent, moderate

extent and little extent respectively, it is the general opinion of the respondents that there

is a great extent to which their organization’s varying business strategies meet with their

prevailing challenges and competitions.

As indicated by the mean response score of 3.3190 and frequency response of 235

respondents (53.2%) and 207 respondents (46.8%) who said to a very great extent and to

157

a great extent, it is the general opinion of the respondents that their organization, to a

great extent, adapts to change by developing business strategies model.

With an overall mean response score of 3.3088, the responses of the respondents

establish that there is a relationship between line structural pattern and business strategy

implementation in manufacturing sector.

4.2.4 Nature of Relationship between Staff Structural Pattern and Beyond Business Strategy Formulation Aspect of Business Strategy Implementation

In establishing the nature of relationship between staff structural pattern and beyond

business strategy formulation aspect of business strategy implementation, the responses

to questions 5 to 8 are presented in table 4.12.

Table 4.12: Responses to Questions 5 to 8 (Section B) Question SA

(%) A (%)

U (%)

D (%)

SD (%)

Mean Std. Dev.

organization's coordination strategies ensure proper division of labour and staff specialization

207 (46.8)

141 (31.9)

0 (0.0)

94 (21.3)

0 (0.0)

3.8937 1.07750

There is no staff coordination problem in my organization

94 (21.3)

94 (21.3)

47 (10.6)

160 (36.2)

47 (10.6)

3.0633 1.36046

staff have the necessary competencies and skills for technology in use in the organization

94 (21.3)

0 (0.00)

47 (10.6)

66 (14.9)

235 (53.2)

3.8077 .93878

the expectations of the organization with respect to organizational performance as measured against set goals and objectives are always frequently achieved

94 (21.3)

0 (0.00)

47 (10.6)

94 (21.3)

207 (46.8)

3.6810 1.03457

Overall Mean 3.6114 Source: Field Survey 2012

With 141 respondents (31.9%), 207 respondents (46.8%) and 94 respondents (21.3%)

strongly agreeing, agreeing and being undecided respectively and a mean response of

158

3.8937, it is the general view of the respondents that organization’s coordination

strategies ensure proper division of labour and staff specialization.

Having a mean response of 3.0633 and responses of 94 respondents (21.3%), 94

respondents (21.3%), 47 respondents (10.6%), 160 respondents (36.2%) and 47

respondents (10.6%) who strongly agreed, agreed, were undecided, disagreed and

strongly disagreed respectively, the respondents are undecided as to whether there is no

staff coordination problem in their organization.

With a mean response score of 3.8077 as well as the responses of 94 respondents

(21.3%), 235 respondents (53.2%), 47 respondents (10.6%) and 66 respondents (14.9%)

who strongly agreed, agreed, were undecided and disagreed respectively, it is the view of

the respondents that staff have necessary competencies and skills for technology in use in

the organization.

As 94 respondents (21.3%), 207 respondents (46.8%), 47 respondents (10.6%) and 94

respondents (21.3%) strongly agreed, agreed, were undecided and disagreed respectively

and with a mean response score of 3.6810, it is the general opinion of the respondents

that the expectations of the organization with respect to organizational performance as

measured against set goals and objectives are always frequently achieved.

Having an overall mean response of 3.6114, the respondents concur that there is a

relationship between staff structural pattern and beyond business strategy formulation

aspect of business strategy implementation.

4.2.5 Bearing Strength between Matrix Structural Pattern and Beyond Strategic

Planning Aspect of Business Strategy Implementation In establishing the bearing strength between matrix structural pattern and business

strategy implementation, the responses to questions 9 to 12 are presented in table 4.13.

159

Table 4.13: Responses to Questions 9 to 12 (Section B) Question A(%)

VF F(%) NF

(%) S (%)

N (%)

Mean Std. Dev.

how often are proposed business strategies implemented in your organization

0 (0.0)

47 (10.60)

188 (42.5)

207 (46.8)

0 (0.0)

3.3620 .66681

what is the frequency of implementation of matrix structural pattern in your organization

47 (10.6)

80 (18.10)

14 (3.17)

47 (10.6)

254 (57.5)

3.3190 .80252

how often are business strategies of your organization aligned to meet up the matrix structural pattern

47 (10.6)

0 (0.00)

94 (21.3)

141 (31.9)

160 (36.2)

3.2557 1.02144

how often are business strategies used as tools of corporate strategy formulation and implementation of the organization's matrix structural pattern?

17 (3.85)

141 (31.9)

30 (6.79)

47 (10.6)

207 (46.8)

3.4253 .81932

Overall Mean 3.3405 Source: Field Survey, 2012

With 207 respondents (46.8%), 188 respondents (42.5%) and 47 respondents (10.6%)

responding seldom, not frequent, frequent, often and very frequent respectively and a

mean response of 3.362, it is the opinion of the respondents that business strategies are

often implemented in their organization.

With the responses of 47 respondents (10.6%), 80 respondents (18.10%), 254

respondents (57.5%) and 47 respondents (10.6%) as well as the mean response of 3.3190,

the respondent noted that their organizations often implement matrix structural pattern.

As noted by the mean response score of 3.2557 and the responses of 47 respondents

(10.6%), 160 respondents (36.2%), 94 respondents (21.3%) and 141 respondents (31.9%)

whose responses are always, very frequently, and seldom respectively, organizations’

business strategies are often aligned with the matrix structural pattern.

With a mean response score of 3.4253 and response of always, frequently, often and

seldom by 17 respondents (3.85%), 141 respondents (31.9%), 207 respondents (46.8%)

and 30 respondents (6.79%) respectively, business strategies are often formulated as a

160

tool of corporate strategy to ensure implementation of the organization’s matrix structural

pattern.

Having an overall mean response of 3.3405, it is the general view of the respondents that

there are often bearing strength between matrix structural pattern and beyond strategic

planning aspect of business strategy implementation.

4.2.6 Extent of Informal Structure Impacts Positively on Business Strategy Execution Aspect of Business Strategy Implementation in Manufacturing Sector

In establishing the extent to which informal structure impacts positively on business

execution aspect of business strategy implementation in manufacturing sector, the

responses to questions 13 to 16 are presented in table 4.14.

Table 4.14: Responses to Questions 13 to 16 (Section B) Question VGE

(%) GE (%)

ME (%)

LE (%)

NE (%)

Mean Std. Dev.

to what extent has the informal structure (Ad Hoc, groups meeting etc.) of your organization enhanced quality control functions?

100 (22.62)

41 (9.28)

301 (68.10)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

3.6810 .46662

what is the extent to which total quality management, Benchmarking and Reengineering being implemented in response to the needs of the informal structure of your organization?

90 (20.36)

23 (5.20)

94 (21.3)

141 (31.9)

0 (0.0)

3.6176 1.08419

to what extent has the informal structure influenced policy formulation and implementation in pursuit of organizational goal

0 (0.0) 188 (42.5)

160 (36.2)

94 (21.3)

0 (0.0)

3.1493 .74405

to what extent closely related are the activities of the informal structure of the organization to goal attainment

0 (0.0) 160 (36.2)

47 (10.6)

235 (53.2)

0 (0.0)

3.2557 .63552

Overall Mean 3.4259 Source: Field Survey, 2012

161

The responses of 100 respondents (22.62%) and 301 respondents (68.10%) who said to a

very great extent and to a moderate extent as well as the mean response of 3.6810 shows

that informal structure (ad hoc, group meetings, etc) of their organizations enhances

quality control functions to a great extent.

As reflected by the responses of 90 respondents (20.36%), 23 respondents (5.20%), 141

respondents (31.9%) and another 94 respondents (21.3%) who said to a very great extent,

great extent, moderate extent and little as well as a mean response score of 3.6176, total

quality management, benchmarking and reengineering are greatly implemented in

response to the needs of informal structure of their organizations.

With 188 respondents (42.5%), 160 respondents (36.2%) and 94 respondents (21.3%)

responding to a great extent, moderate extent and little extent respectively and a mean

response of 3.1493, informal structure influenced to a moderate extent policy formulation

and implementation in pursuit of organizational goals.

As 160 respondents (36.2%), 47 respondents (10.60%) and 235 respondents (53.2%)

responded to a great extent, moderate extent and little extent respectively and a mean

response score of 3.2257, it is the view of the respondents that the activities of the

informal structure of their organization is moderately related to goal attainment.

Having an overall mean response of 3.4259, the extent of informal structure positive

impact on business strategy execution aspect of business strategy implementation in

manufacturing sector is moderate.

4.2.7 Extent Social Interaction Impacts on Business Strategy Evaluation Aspect of

Business Strategy Implementation in Manufacturing Sector In establishing the extent to which social interaction impacts on business strategy

evaluation aspect of business strategy implementation in manufacturing sector, the

responses to questions 17 to 20 are presented in table 4.15.

162

Table 4.15: Responses to Questions 17 to 20 (Section B) Question VW

(%) W (%) MW

(%) NVW (%)

NW (%)

Mean Std. Dev.

How well does your organization's culture play a role in organizational performance

207 (46.8)

94 (21.3)

94 (21.3)

47 (10.6)

0 (0.0)

3.7873 .89849

how well does your organization commitment to corporate social responsibility affect the implementation of business strategy

113 (25.6)

94 (21.3)

188 (42.5)

47 (10.6)

0 (0.0)

3.5747 .94044

How well is there coherence between organizational culture and business strategy implementation

235 (53.2)

63 (14.25)

50 (11.31)

94 (21.3)

0 (0.0)

3.3190 .80252

How well are your organization's business strategy implemented successfully irrespective of the organization’s social interactions

0 (0.0)

100 (22.62)

41 (9.28)

94 (21.3)

207 (46.8)

3.1063 .72218

Overall Mean 3.4468 Source: Field Survey, 2012 Two hundred and seven (207) respondents (46.8%), 94 respondents (21.3%), 207

respondents (46.8%) and 47 respondents (10.6%) responded to a very well, well,

moderate well and not very well respectively, indicating, in agreement with the mean

response of 3.7873, that organizational culture plays a great role in organizational

performance.

One hundred and thirteen (113) respondents (25.6%), 94 respondents (21.3%), 188

respondents (42.5%) and 47 respondents (10.6%) in responding to a very well, well,

moderate well and not very well respectively, indicated, as also revealed in the mean

response score of 3.5747, that organizational commitment to corporate social

responsibility affects very well the implementation of business strategy.

As revealed by the mean response score of 3.3190 and responses of 235 respondents

(53.2%), 50 respondents (11.31%) and 94 respondents (21.3%) who noted very well,

163

moderate well and not very well respectively, there is moderate coherence between

organizational culture and business strategy implementation.

The responses of 100 respondents (22.62%), 41 respondents (9.28%) and 94 respondents

(21.3%) which was very well, moderate well and not very well respectively and a mean

response score of 3.1063, it is the view of the respondents that organization’s business

strategy are moderately implemented irrespective of the organization’s social

interactions.

Having a mean response score of 3.4468, the respondents are of the general view that

social interaction impacts moderately on business strategy evaluation aspect of business

strategy implementation in manufacturing sector.

4.2.8 Improvement in the Business Strategy Control Aspect of Business strategy

Implementation in the Manufacturing Sector through Bureaucracy In establishing the improvement of Business Strategy Control Aspect of business strategy

implementation in the manufacturing sector through bureaucracy, the responses to

questions 21 to 24 are presented in table 4.16.

Table 4.16: Responses to Questions 21 to 24 (Section B) Question VS

(%) S (%) LS

(%) VLS (%)

NS (%)

Mean Std. Dev.

How well are bureaucracy processes felt in your organization

113 (25.6)

235 (53.2)

94 (21.3)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

4.0430 .68377

how well and efficient are business strategies implemented in your organization irrespective of the bureaucratic processes encourage staff performance

141 (31.9)

160 (36.2)

141 (31.9)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

4.0000 .79966

to what extent does the bureaucratic processes encourage staff performance?

94 (21.3)

160 (36.2)

94 (21.3)

47 (10.6)

47 (10.6)

3.4683 1.23631

to what extent does the bureaucratic process impact on organizational productivity?

0 (0.0) 188 (42.5)

66 (14.9)

141 (31.9)

47 (10.6)

2.8937 1.07750

Overall Mean 3.6013 Source: Field Survey, 2012

164

With the responses of 113 respondents (25.6%), 235 respondents (53.2%) and 94

respondents (21.3%) who indicated very significantly, significantly and little significantly

respectively and a mean response value of 4.0430, bureaucratic processes is significantly

felt in the organizations.

One hundred and forty one (141) respondents (31.9%), 160 respondents (36.2%) and 141

respondents (31.9%) responded very significantly, significantly and little significantly,

which indicates, as also revealed by the mean response score of 4.0, that business

strategies implementation in organizations irrespective of bureaucratic processes

significantly encourages staff performance.

With a mean response score of 3.4683, and responses of 94 respondents (21.3%), 160

respondents (36.2%), 94 respondents (21.3%), 47 respondents (10.6%) and 47

respondents (10.6%) which is very significantly, significantly, very little significantly,

little significantly and not significant, it is the view of the respondents that significant

impact of bureaucratic processes on encouragement of staff performance is little.

It is the view of the respondents that the significant impact of bureaucratic processes on

organizational productivity is little. This is revealed in the responses of 188 respondents

(42.5%), 66 respondents (14.9%), 141 respondents (31.9%) and 47 respondents (10.6%)

who said significantly, little significantly, very little significantly and not significant

respectively and a mean response of 2.8937.

With an overall mean response score of 3.6013, it is the view of respondents that

bureaucracy can improve business strategy control aspect of business strategy

implementation in the manufacturing sector.

4.3 TEST OF HYPOTHESES

4.3.1 Test of Hypothesis One

There is positive relationship between Line Structural Pattern and business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector, South-South Zone of Nigeria

In testing this hypothesis, the multiple linear regression analysis was used. The results

are presented and discussed below.

165

Regression Results for Hypothesis One

Descriptive Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation N

Q1 3.7873 1.01016 442

Q2 3.5747 .81932 442

Q3 3.3190 .65642 442

Q4 3.5317 .49956 442

Correlations

Q.1 Q.2 Q.3 Q.4

Pearson

Correlation

Q.1 1.000 .921 .424 .225

Q.2 .921 1.000 .253 .033

Q.3 .424 .253 1.000 .782

Q.4 .225 .033 .782 1.000

Sig. (1-

tailed)

Q.1 . .050 .050 .050

Q.2 .050 . .050 .245

Q.3 .050 .050 . .050

Q.4 .050 .245 .050 .

N Q.1 442 442 442 442

Q.2 442 442 442 442

Q.3 442 442 442 442

Q.4 442 442 442 442

166

Model Summaryb

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Durbin-Watson

1 .944a .890 .889 .33581 2.076

a. Predictors: (Constant), to what extent does your organization adapt to change by developing

business strategies model?, to what extent does the line structural pattern implemented by your

organization enhance productivity, to what extent do your organization varying business strategies

that meet with their prevailing challenges and competitions?

b. Dependent Variable: to what extent does the management of your organization ensure

implementation of line structural pattern

ANOVA b

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 400.618 3 133.539 1184.221 .000a

Residual 49.391 438 .113

Total 450.009 441

a. Predictors: (Constant), to what extent does your organization adapt to change by

developing business strategies model?, to what extent does the line structural pattern

implemented by your organization enhance productivity, to what extent do your

organization varying business strategies that meet with their prevailing challenges and

competitions?

b. Dependent Variable: to what extent does the management of your organization ensure

implementation of line structural pattern

167

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig. B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) -1.458 .137 -10.604 .000

Q2 1.093 .021 .887 52.136 .000

Q3 .186 .042 .121 4.445 .000

Q4 .204 .053 .101 3.815 .000

Source: Field Survey SPSS Analysis, 2012

a. Dependent Variable: to what extent does the management of your organization ensure

implementation of line structural pattern

Results

Q1 = -1.458 + 1.093Q2 + 0.186Q3 + 0.204Q4 (t = 52.136) (t = 4.445) (t = 3.815)

Where; Q1= extent of line structural pattern implementation

Q2= enhancement of productivity by line structural pattern

Q3= varying business strategies

Q4= developing business strategy model

R = 0.944

R2 = 0.889

F = 1184.221 (sig. = 0.000)

DW = 2.076

Interpretation

The model shows that with a constant value of -1.458, enhancement of productivity by

line structural pattern has positive effect (coefficient of Q2 = 1.093) on the extent of line

structural pattern implementation and this effect is significant as t = 52.136; varying

business strategies has positive effect (coefficient of Q3 = 0.186) on the extent of line

structural pattern implementation and this effect is significant as t = 4.445, and

168

developing business strategy model has positive effect (coefficient of Q4 = 1.093) on the

extent of line structural pattern implementation and this effect is significant as t = 3.815.

This result is strengthened with a further analysis which gives the rcal = 0.944 > rcritical =

0.124; Fcal = 1184.221 > Fcritical = 2.6049; p = 0.000 < 0.05. This indicates that the

variation explained by the model is not due to chance.

Decision

Based on this, the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis accepted

accordingly. Thus, there is positive relationship between Line Structural Pattern and

business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector, South-South of Nigeria.

4.3.2 Test of Hypothesis Two

There is a strong correlation between line structural pattern and beyond business

strategy formulation aspect of business strategy implementation in the

manufacturing sector.

In testing this hypothesis, the Z-test statistic was used. The results are presented and

discussed below.

Z-Tests Result for Hypothesis Two

Descriptive Statistics

N Mean Std. Deviation Minimum Maximum

mean response for

objective 2

442 3.6114 .85110 2.50 5.00

169

One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

mean response

for objective 2

N 442

Normal Parametersa,,b Mean 3.6114

Std. Deviation .85110

Most Extreme

Differences

Absolute .239

Positive .239

Negative -.171

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z 5.027

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .000

Source: Field Survey SPSS Analysis, 2012

a. Test distribution is Normal.

b. Calculated from data.

Results

Z (cal) = 5.027

Zcritical = 1.96

Sig. = 0.000 Interpretation

With a Z-value of 5.027, which is greater than the Zcritical of 1.96 (at 95% level of

significance), it is observed that there is a relationship between staff structural pattern and

business strategy Implementation. This result is significant as p = 0.000 < 0.05.

Decision

From the foregoing, the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis

accordingly accepted. Hence, there is strong correlation between Staff structural pattern

and business strategy implementation.

170

4.3.3 Test of Hypothesis Three

There is a very strong variable between matrix structural pattern and beyond

strategic aspect of business strategy implementation in the manufacturing sector.

In testing this hypothesis, the multiple linear regression analysis was used. The results

are presented and discussed below.

Regression Results for Hypothesis Three

Descriptive Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation N

Q9 3.3620 .66681 442

Q10 3.3190 .80252 442

Q11 3.2557 1.02144 442

Q12 3.4253 .81932 442

Correlations

Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12

Pearson

Correlation

Q9 1.000 .182 .553 .303

Q10 .182 1.000 .810 .442

Q11 .553 .810 1.000 .507

Q12 .303 .442 .507 1.000

Sig. (1-tailed) Q9 . .050 .050 .050

Q10 .050 . .050 .050

Q11 .050 .050 . .050

Q12 .050 .050 .050 .

N Q9 442 442 442 442

Q10 442 442 442 442

Q11 442 442 442 442

Q12 442 442 442 442

171

Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Durbin-Watson

1 .718a .515 .512 .46597 1.536

a. Predictors: (Constant), how often business strategies as a tool of corporate strategy

formulated ensure implementation of the organization's matrix structural pattern?, what is

the frequency of implementation of matrix structural pattern in your organization, how often

business strategies of your organization aligned to meet up the matrix structural pattern

b. Dependent Variable: how often are processed business strategies implemented in your

organization

ANOVA b

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 100.979 3 33.660 155.022 .000a

Residual 95.102 438 .217

Total 196.081 441

a. Predictors: (Constant), how often business strategies as a tool of corporate strategy

formulated ensure implementation of the organization's matrix structural pattern?,

what is the frequency of implementation of matrix structural pattern in your

organization, how often business strategies of your organization aligned to meet up the

matrix structural pattern

b. Dependent Variable: how often are processed business strategies implemented in

your organization

172

Coefficients

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig. B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 2.887 .113 25.457 .000

Q10 -.649 .047 -.781 -13.722 .000

Q11 .753 .039 1.154 19.485 .000

Q12 .051 .031 .063 1.632 .103

Source: Field Survey SPSS Analysis, 2012

a. Dependent Variable: how often are processed business strategies implemented in your

organization

Results

Q9 = 2.887 – 0.649Q10 + 0.753Q11 + 0.051Q12 (t = -13.722) (t = 19.485) (t = 1.632)

Where; Q9 = implementation of proposed business strategies

Q10 = frequency of matrix structural pattern implementation

Q11 = alignment of business strategy to matrix structural pattern

Q12 = frequency of business strategy ensuring matrix structural pattern

implementation

R = 0.120

R2 = 0.515

F = 155.022 (sig. = 0.000)

DW = 1.536

Interpretation

The model shows that with a constant value of 2.887, frequency of matrix structural

pattern implementation has a negative effect (coefficient of Q10 = -0.649) on the

173

implementation of proposed business strategies and this effect is significant as t = -

13.722; alignment of business strategy to matrix structural pattern has a positive effect

(coefficient of Q11 = 0.753) on the implementation of proposed business strategies and

this effect is significant as t = 19.485, and frequency of business strategy ensuring matrix

structural pattern implementation has a positive effect (coefficient of Q12 = -0.649) on

the implementation of proposed business strategies but this effect is not significant as t =

1.632.

This result is strengthened with a further analysis which gives the rcal = 0.120 < rcritical =

0.124; Fcal = 1.55 < Fcritical = 2.6049; p = 0.000 < 0.05. This indicates that the variation

explained by the model is not due to chance.

Decision

Based on this, the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis accepted

accordingly. Thus, there is very strong bearing between Matrix structural pattern and

business strategy implementation.

4.3.4 Test of Hypothesis Four

The informal organization impacts positively on business strategy implementation

in the manufacturing sector.

In testing this hypothesis, the multiple linear regression analysis was used. The results

are presented and discussed below.

Regression Results for Hypothesis Four

Descriptive Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation N

Q13 3.2557 .63552 442

Q14 3.6810 .46662 442

Q15 3.6176 1.08419 442

Q16 3.1493 .74405 442

174

Correlations

Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16

Pearson

Correlation

Q13 1.000 .276 .359 .461

Q14 .276 1.000 .601 .138

Q15 .359 .601 1.000 .521

Q16 .461 .138 .521 1.000

Sig. (1-tailed) Q13 . .050 .050 .050

Q14 .050 . .050 .002

Q15 .050 .050 . .050

Q16 .050 .002 .050 .

N Q13 442 442 442 442

Q14 442 442 442 442

Q15 442 442 442 442

Q16 442 442 442 442

Model Summaryb

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Durbin-Watson

1 .508a .258 .253 .54913 1.360

a. Predictors: (Constant), how well has the informal structure influenced policy formulation and

implementation in pursuit of organizational goal, to what extend has the informal structure (Ad

Hoc, groups meeting etc.) of your organization enhanced quality control functions, what is the

extent to which total quality management, Benchmarking and Reengineering being implemented in

response to the needs of the informal structure of your organization?

b. Dependent Variable: how well closely related are the activities of the informal structure of the

organization to goal attainment

175

ANOVA b

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 46.036 3 15.345 50.890 .000a

Residual 132.075 438 .302

Total 178.111 441

a. Predictors: (Constant), how well has the informal structure influenced policy formulation

and implementation in pursuit of organizational goal, to what extend has the informal

structure (Ad Hoc, groups meeting etc.) of your organization enhanced quality control

functions, what is the extent to which total quality management, Benchmarking and

Reengineering being implemented in response to the needs of the informal structure of

your organization?

b. Dependent Variable: how well closely related are the activities of the informal structure

of the organization to goal attainment

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig. B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 1.031 .250 4.128 .000

Q13 .287 .073 .210 3.951 .000

Q14 .006 .036 .011 .177 .860

Q15 .364 .043 .426 8.549 .000

Source: Field Survey SPSS Analysis, 2012

a. Dependent Variable: how well closely related are the activities of the informal structure of the

organization to goal attainment

176

Results

Q16 = 1.031 + 0.287Q13 + 0.006Q14 + 0.364Q15 (t = 3.951) (t = 0.177) (t = 8.549)

Where; Q13 = enhancement of quality control functions by informal structure

Q14 = implementation of TQM, benchmarking and reengineering

Q15 = influence of policy formulation and implementation by informal

structure

Q16 = relatedness of activities of informal structure to goal attainment

R = 0.508

R2 = 0.258

F = 50.890 (sig. = 0.000)

DW = 1.360

Interpretation

The model shows that with a constant value of 1.031, enhancement of quality control

functions by informal structure has a positive effect (coefficient of Q13 = 0.287) on the

relatedness of activities of informal structure to goal attainment and this effect is

significant as t = 3.951; implementation of TQM, benchmarking and reengineering has a

positive effect (coefficient of Q14 = 0.006) on the relatedness of activities of informal

structure to goal attainment but this effect is not significant as t = 0.177 and influence of

policy formulation and implementation by informal structure has a positive effect

(coefficient of Q15 = 0.364) on the relatedness of activities of informal structure to goal

attainment and this effect is significant as t = 8.549.

This result is strengthened with a further analysis which gives the rcal = 0.508 > rcritical =

0.124; Fcal = 50.890 > Fcritical = 2.6049; p = 0.000 < 0.05. This indicates that the variation

explained by the model is not due to chance.

Decision

Based on this, the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis accepted

accordingly. Thus, informal organization impacts positively on business strategy

implementation in South-South Zone of Nigeria.

177

4.3.5 Test of Hypothesis Five

Social interaction impacts significantly on business strategy evaluation aspect of

business strategy implementation in the manufacturing sector.

In testing this hypothesis, the Z-test statistic was used. The results are presented and

discussed below.

Descriptive Statistics

N Mean Std. Deviation Minimum Maximum

mean response for objective 5 442 3.4468 .61928 2.50 4.25

One-Sample Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test

mean response

for objective 5

N 442

Normal Parametersa,,b Mean 3.4468

Std. Deviation .61928

Most Extreme

Differences

Absolute .222

Positive .156

Negative -.222

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Z 4.661

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .000

Source: Field Survey SPSS Analysis, 2012

a. Test distribution is Normal.

b. Calculated from data.

Results

Z (cal) = 4.661

Zcritical = 1.96

Sig. = 0.000

178

Interpretation

With a Z-value of 4.661, which is greater than the Zcritical of 1.96 (at 95% level of

significance), it is observed that there is a moderate extent to which social interaction

impacts on business strategy implementation in the manufacturing sectors. This result is

significant as p = 0.000 < 0.05.

Decision

From the foregoing, the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis

accordingly accepted. Hence, social interaction impacts significantly on business

strategy implementation in South-South Zone of Nigeria.

4.3.6 Test of Hypothesis Six

There is a positive relationship between bureaucracy and business strategy control

aspect of business strategy implementation in the manufacturing sector

In testing this hypothesis, the multiple linear regression analysis was used. The results

are presented and discussed below.

Regression Results for Hypothesis Six

Descriptive Statistics

Mean Std. Deviation N

Q21 4.0430 .68377 442

Q22 4.0000 .79966 442

Q23 3.4683 1.23631 442

Q24 2.8937 1.07750 442

179

Correlations

Q21 Q22 Q23 Q24

Pearson

Correlation

Q21 1.000 .390 .405 .151

Q22 .390 1.000 .216 -.371

Q23 .405 .216 1.000 .597

Q24 .151 -.371 .597 1.000

Sig. (1-tailed) Q21 . .050 .050 .050

Q22 .050 . .050 .050

Q23 .050 .050 . .050

Q24 .050 .050 .050 .

N Q21 442 442 442 442

Q22 442 442 442 442

Q23 442 442 442 442

Q24 442 442 442 442

Model Summaryb

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate Durbin-Watson

1 .522a .272 .267 .58537 2.391

180

a. Predictors: (Constant), to what extent does the bureaucratic process impact on organizational

productivity, how well and efficient are business strategies implemented in your organization

irrespective of the bureaucratic processes encourage staff performance , to what extent do the

bureaucratic processes encourage staff performance?

b. Dependent Variable: how well are bureaucracy processes felt in your organization

ANOVA b

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

1 Regression 56.100 3 18.700 54.574 .000a

Residual 150.083 438 .343

Total 206.183 441

a. Predictors: (Constant), to what extent does the bureaucratic process impact on

organizational productivity, how well and efficient are business strategies implemented in

your organization irrespective of the bureaucratic processes encourage staff performance ,

to what extent do the bureaucratic processes encourage staff performance?

b. Dependent Variable: how well are bureaucracy processes felt in your organization

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig. B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 1.912 .212 9.006 .000

Q22 .350 .046 .410 7.554 .000

Q23 .117 .035 .211 3.367 .001

Q24 .112 .042 .177 2.673 .008

181

Coefficientsa

Model

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig. B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 1.912 .212 9.006 .000

Q22 .350 .046 .410 7.554 .000

Q23 .117 .035 .211 3.367 .001

Q24 .112 .042 .177 2.673 .008

Source: Field Survey SPSS Analysis, 2012

a. Dependent Variable: how well are bureaucracy processes felt in your organization

Results

Q21 = 1.912 + 0.350Q22 + 0.117Q23 + 0.112Q24 (t = 7.554) (t = 3.367) (t = 2.673)

Where; Q21 = bureaucratic process

Q22 = efficiency of business strategy implementation

Q23 = encouragement of staff performance via bureaucratic processes

Q24 = impact of bureaucratic process on organizational productivity

R = 0.522

R2 = 0.272

F = 54.574 (sig. = 0.000)

DW = 2.391

Interpretation

The model shows that with a constant value of 1.912, efficiency of business strategy

implementation has a positive effect (coefficient of Q22 = 0.350) on bureaucratic process

and this effect is significant as t = 7.554; encouragement of staff performance via

bureaucratic processes has a positive effect (coefficient of Q23 = 0.350) on bureaucratic

182

process and this effect is significant as t = 3.367 and impact of bureaucratic process on

organizational productivity has a positive effect (coefficient of Q24 = 0.112) on

bureaucratic process and this effect is significant as t = 2.673.

This result is strengthened with a further analysis which gives the rcal = 0.522 > rcritical =

0.124; Fcal = 54.574 > Fcritical = 2.6049; p = 0.000 < 0.05. This indicates that the variation

explained by the model is not due to chance.

Decision

Based on this, the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis accepted

accordingly. Thus, Bureaucracy improves significantly business strategy implementation

in the Manufacturing Sector, South-South, Nigeria.

4.4 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

In the course of our research work through the use of both questionnaire and oral

interview with some firms of manufacturing sector in the South-South, we observed and

learnt from each other as follows:

4.4.1 The Nature of Relationship between Line Structural Patterns and Business

Strategy Implementation in the Manufacturing Sector

In an attempt to determine the nature of the relationship between Line Structural Pattern

and Business Strategy Implementation in the Manufacturing Sector, the data in Table

4.11 was analyzed. It shows that there is the relationship between Line Structural Pattern

and Business Strategy Implementation in the Manufacturing Sector. And the test of

hypothesis one, shows that the Null Hypothesis is rejected while the Alternate Hypothesis

is upheld. This means that there is positive relationship between Line Structural Patterns

and Business Strategy Implementation in the Manufacturing Sector, South-South of

Nigeria.

183

In the course of fieldwork, we were meant to understand that Line Structure is mostly

invoked in the manufacturing firms. Consequently, manufacturing firms are centrally

managed. They operate in a stable environment. It is an organization design in which

activities are broken into specialized tasks and design making is centralized at the top

(Ezigbo 2007: 50; Cole 2005: 84). They operate in that form holistically from top to

down. By so doing, they achieve their aims and objectives. This means that they adapt

vertical structure that goes with mechanistic and that if there is need for any change in the

course of production/organization, they adapt to it. Mechanistic structure is one of the

structures of Burns and Stalker (1961). Aluko et al (2004:172) confirm that mechanistic

organization is among the two broad types of structure in the organization. Ezigbo

(2007: 50) says mechanistic organizations resemble bureaucratic organizations, top

management decides what is important and how to share this information with everyone

else in the organization.

4.4.2 The nature of correlation between line structural pattern and beyond

business strategy formulation aspect of business strategy implementation in

the manufacturing sector.

In the process to identify the nature of the correlation between staff structural pattern and

beyond business strategy formulation aspect of business strategy implementation, the

data in Table 4.12 was analysed. After the analysis, the Test of Hypothesis two shows

that the Null hypothesis is rejected and the Alternate hypothesis is accepted. This shows

that there is proper correlation between staff structural pattern and business strategy

implementation in the manufacturing sector of South-South.

In the course of investigation, we observed that the organization’s coordination strategies

ensure proper division of labour and staff specialization. The staff coordination is also

implemented, especially in the area of quality control unit. This is in line with

Onwuchekwa 1993: 80; Musselman, et al, 1981:118; Stoner et al, 2005: 340, that

coordination helps an organization to integrate its component parts towards the common

goal of the organization. These scholars also agree that coordination is primarily

184

achieved through effective communication system and also through the executive

positions in the organization structure.

The components of the organization are determined which involves grouping it into

departments and connections established within and between them in relationship to the

formulated strategy of the organization (Mintzberg, 1983; Onwuchekwa, 1993:86). This

is because they have the competencies and skills for technologies in use in the

organization in question as specialists are put to on-the-job training to master their jobs.

Competency of in the organization according to Harvard scholars means that employees

should be trained and developed in their work with skill and knowledge needed now and

in the future (Stoner et al, 2005:427). By this, on-the-job training, the organization

acquires competent personnel that enables them to achieve the set objectives and goals

frequently.

4.4.3 The nature of a very strong variable between matrix structural pattern and

beyond strategic planning aspect of business strategy implementation in the

manufacturing sector.

In the attempt to evaluate the nature of the relationship between matrix structural pattern

and beyond strategic planning aspect of business strategy implementation, Table 4.13

was analyzed. Thereafter, a test of hypothesis three shows that the Alternate hypothesis is

rejected and null hypothesis is upheld. This shows that there is no bearing between

Matrix structural pattern and business strategy implementation in the manufacturing

sector.

In the course of oral interview conducted, the manufacturing sector does not see any need

for Matrix structural pattern. Wheelen et al (2010:333) have said that Matrix structure is

appropriate when an organization is operating in functional (functional or product

structure) and geographic (divisional structure). The manufacturing sector has Quality

Control Unit in the factory and this unit perfectly tests and re-test quality product, if

possible improve on it. Stoner et al (2005:359) say it results in bringing specialists from

several different parts of the organization together to work on a particular project. Matrix

organization projects are not established, except by outsourcing suppliers for their

185

products. Outsourcing is simply obtaining work previously done by employees inside the

companies from sources outside the company (Pearce II et al, 2003:288). Manufacturing

firms claim to have professional experts in their organization, and training facilities are

also in place for the diverse products learning. So, there is no need getting out for

separate special assignments. By this method, the firms operate in closed system and

make their process intensive. Communication is strictly vertical between superior and

subordinate (Burns and Stalker, 1961; Ezigbo 2007:50). This shows that the firm is

security conscious and does not need intruders in their business.

4.4.4 The nature of informal organization impacts positively on business strategy

execution aspect of business strategy implementation in the manufacturing

sector.

Furthermore, in the attempt to determine the impact of informal organization on business

strategy execution aspect of business strategy implementation in the manufacturing

sectors, Table 4.14 was also analyzed. The Test of hypothesis four predicted that the Null

Hypothesis is rejected and the Alternate Hypothesis be accepted. This shows that there is

positive impact of informal structural pattern on business strategy implementation in the

manufacturing sector.

In the course of investigation through oral interview, we observed that some firms imbibe

ideas from anywhere so far as it can move the organization forward. Few firms were

found to prohibit informal ideas, except idea from the Chairman, especially when the

Chairman is the owner manager such as the Ellah’s Lake. Idea can come from

Junior/senior staff unions and the organization accepts it. Good idea from other food

producers and government are also put into consideration. It has influenced the policy

formulation and implementation in the organization because if you bring idea and it is

taken, the policy have stand. Informally, idea can come but the structure of

manufacturing sector cannot immediately use it unless it is centrally accepted by the

manager. This is in line with Koontz et al (1994:169) which point out that the essence of

Policy is discretion, while strategy on the other hand concerns the direction in which

human and material resources will be applied in order to increase the chance of achieving

186

selected objectives. On the other hand, Stoner et al (2005:452) explain that the

generation of ideas in an organization depends first and foremost on the flow of people

and information between the firm and its environment. Outside consultants and experts

are important sources of information for managers, because they are frequently aware of

new products, process, or service developments in their field.

In the aspect of best practices, the SWOT Analysis is useful. This means analyzing the

strength, weakness, opportunity and threats of internal and external environment.

Strengths and weaknesses refer to the organization’s inner perspective, while

opportunities and threats refer to factors external to the organization over which the

organization has no control (Aluko et al, 2004:41). Total Quality Management is an

aspect of SWOT. Benchmarking and Re-engineering are instruments for best practices of

organization and manufacturing sector mostly adopt these tools because they seek for

quality product, customer satisfaction, sustainability and profitability in their sector.

Hence, Koontz et al (1993:650) have said that when done effectively, TQM should result

in greater, customer satisfaction, fewer defects and less wastes, increased total

productivity, reduced costs and improved profitability, and an environment in which

quality has high priority. Stoner et al (2005:251) have also pointed out benchmarking as

a tool of TQM. Ewurum (2002:189) says it is a process of continuous improvement

based on the comparison identified as best practices. In the aspect of reengineering,

Stoner et al (2005 say that organizational members are empowered to create new ideas

and products and relationship. Whereas Hammer and Champy (1993) say it is radical

rethinking and redesigning those processes by which we create value (for customers) and

do work. And for goal attainment of the organization, Informal structure can aid to

achieve it.

4.4.5 The nature of interaction impacts significantly on business strategy

evaluation aspect of business strategy implementation in the manufacturing

sector.

Evaluating the extent social Interaction impacts on the business strategy evaluation aspect

of business evaluation aspect of business strategy implementation in the manufacturing

sector, the Data in Table 4.15 were analyzed. And the Test of Hypothesis five predicted

187

that Null Hypothesis is rejected while Alternate Hypothesis is upheld. Hence, Social

Interaction impacts significantly on business strategy implementation in the

manufacturing sector of South-South. Social interaction entails the culture of the

organization both within and outside the firm. Culture performs a number of functions

within an organization. It has a defining role; it conveys a sense of identity; it facilitates

the generation of commitment to something larger than ones individual self-interest; it

enhances the stability of the social system and it serves as a sense-making and control

mechanism that guides and shapes the attitudes and behaviour of employees

(Robbins/Judge, 2009:589; Kreitner et al, 2004:85).

In the course of the study, we observed that the operating firms have good relationship

with their operating communities. They give necessary assistance to the host

communities where they operate, by scholarships as at when due. This is likened as in

Japan the task of management was seen as managing the whole complex of human needs,

economic, social, psychological and spiritual (McKay, 2010). But, sometimes firms

suffer from youth restiveness because of terrain of the oil and gas that creates problem

between oil sectors, government and communities. Though, there is no better incentive

for the employees of the manufacturing sector in the South-South as compared to other

Sectors, such as oil and gas, banking and others. If an organization is able to respond

changes in environment demands cost effectiveness. And high congruence that

stakeholders share a common purpose and collaborate in solving problems brought about

by changes in environmental demands. (Stoner et al, 2005:427)

There is no one ethnic culture adapted in the organization rather the culture of the

organization is imbibed to everyone as soon as you find yourself as a worker in the

manufacturing sector. And this culture differs from sector to sector and from firm to

firm. So, age, tribes and other barriers are cut off and everybody work as one family

towards achievement of the organizational goal. However, culture of honesty, quality

product, hard work, commitment and others are expected from employees of

manufacturing sector. This brings about standardization of organization. Aluko et al

(2004:165) say standardization involves certain standard, uniform procedures or culture

188

for handling certain matters in the organization. In so doing, the strategy of organization

is implemented successfully irrespective of any restiveness in the operating community.

4.4.6 The nature of relationship between bureaucracy and business strategy

control aspect of business strategy implementation in the manufacturing

sector

Sequel to ascertain how bureaucracy improves business strategy control aspect of

business strategy implementation in the manufacturing sectors, Table 4.16 was also

analyzed. The Test of Hypothesis predicted that the Null Hypothesis is rejected and

Alternate Hypothesis accepted. This shows that bureaucracy can improve business

strategy implementation in the manufacturing sector of South-South.

But, in the course of oral interview conducted by the researcher, a good number of firms

of these sectors condemned the idea and said that too much formalization and rules do

not help them, rather they go on information, decision and immediate action to achieve

goal. This is to say that in as much as they applied tall structure which is vertical in

nature, they are dynamic where necessary, as to achieve organizational goal. According

to Kazmi (2009:346) a strategist has to grapple with the complexities of creating the

structure, making it work, redesigning when required and implementing changes that will

keep the structure relevant to the needs of the strategies that have to be implemented.

Whereas the owner manager firms, for example Ellah’s Lake plc that produces fish and

animals said they adopt a level of bureaucracy and they achieve their objectives with that

theory. Consequently, it entails large capital intensive and of international standard.

Finally, for all the points on discussions above, most workers in the manufacturing

industries pointed out the problems they face as follow:

� Poor infrastructural facilities;

� Economic problem because government abandoned them without show of

concern;

� No constant power and energy;

� Government policies, good on paper but no implementation;

189

� Spending lots of money on energy;

� No good industrial policies;

� Multiple Levies by Government both by the Local Government, State and Federal

Government

We also found out that most of their workers are illiterates and some of the

manufacturing firms have already gone liquidated. For example, the West African Glass

Industry, Crocodile Machetes et ceteral, all in Port Harcourt and few others in other

South-South zone. When we inquired from the skeletal few there about the causes of

liquidation, they responded that the management and internal control system were weak.

According to the respondents, the weaknesses are as follow:

i. Poor management.

ii. Lack of competency.

iii. Weaknesses in decision-making.

iv. Greed.

v. Stinginess.

vi. Improper personnel.

vii. Good formulation of ideas but poor execution.

The above points have really highlighted some of the problems or weaknesses in the

internal environment of the manufacturing firms in the South-South zone in particular

and Nigeria in general. In the liquidated firms’ premises, some people (securities and

gatemen with their families) run self businesses like selling some food items at the front

of the companies while some have claim ownership of the company premises and

become self-acclaimed landlord by way of renting and collecting money from tenants as

well as giving plot of land to build little structures. In the words of Aluko et al (2004:49)

some of the industrial problems and various social ills that pervade our business

environment and militate against the success of many Nigerian managers are as follow:

i. Inadequate supply of raw materials;

ii. Inadequate energy supply;

iii. Poor communication network;

iv. Poor roads;

v. Unemployment;

190

vi. Poor management know-how;

vii. Inflation;

viii. Apparent religious divergence;

ix. Unstable political system;

x. Dishonesty and poor ethical standards;

xi. High incidence of smuggling; and,

xii. Government policy inconsistency.

Aluko et al have concluded that each of these problems has serious implications for

accounting management and productivity.

191

REFERENCES

Azhar Kazmi (2009) Strategic Management and Business Policy, Third Edition, New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited.

Cole, C.A. (2005) Management Theory and Practice, London: Book Power, Thomson

Learning. Ewurum, U.J.F. (2004) Advanced Analytical Techniques: Statistics and Linear

Programming Department of Management, UNEC Enugu: Unpublished Manuscript.

Ezigbo, C.A. (2007) Advanced Analytical Techniques: Statistics and Linear

Programming Department of Management, UNEC Enugu: Unpublished manuscript.

Koontz, H and Weihrich, H (1994) Management: A Global Perspective New York:

McGraw-Hill. Kreitner, R. and Kinicki, A (2004) Organizational Behaviour New York: Irwin. McGraw

Hill Companies Incorporated. Aluko, M. Olusegun, O., Gbolahan, G. & Osuagwu, L. (2004) Business Policy and

Strategy, Lagos: Longman Nigeria plc. Musselman, V.A., Hughes, E.H and Jackson, J.H. (1981) Introduction to Modern

Business: Issues and Environment, New York Eaglewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Onwuchekwa, C.I. (1993) Management Theory and Organizational Analysis: A

Contingency Theory Approach, Asata, Enugu: Obio Nigeria Enterprises. Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge (2009) Organizational Behaviour New Jersey:

Pearson Prentice Hall. Stoner, J.A.F.; Freeman, R.E. and Gilbert, D.R. Jr (2005) Management, New York:

Pearson Prentice Hall.

192

CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION

5.1 Introduction

This chapter is for the summary of findings, recommendations that was made for the

study and the conclusions drawn from the study. It is based on the data analysis and

results of the field survey as contained in the previous chapter. Furthermore, the chapter

pointed out the way the study contributes knowledge. Finally, some suggestions are

made for future research on this topic.

5.2 Summary of Findings

The specific objectives were:

1. To determine the nature of the relationship between Line Structural Pattern and

business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector;

2. To identify the nature of the correlation between Staff structural pattern and

beyond business strategy formulation aspect of business strategy implementation;

3. To evaluate the bearing between matrix structural pattern and beyond strategic

planning aspect of business strategy implementation;

4. To determine the impact of informal organization on the business strategy

execution aspect of business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing

Sector;

5. To evaluate the extent social interaction impacts on business strategy evaluation

aspect of business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector; and,

6. To ascertain the relationship between bureaucracy and business strategy control

aspect of business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector.

It was found that:

a. There was a relationship between Line structure and business strategy implementation

in the manufacturing sector of South-South. And that the Line structure is mostly

invoked in the manufacturing firms.

193

b. There was a positive correlation between Staff structural pattern and beyond business

strategy formulation aspect of business strategy implementation.

c. There was a positive bearing between matrix structural pattern and beyond strategic

planning aspect of business strategy implementation;

d. There was a positive impact of informal organization on the business strategy

execution aspect of business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector;

e. There was a high extent of social interaction impacts on business strategy evaluation

aspect of business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector; and,

f. There was a positive relationship between bureaucracy and business strategy control

aspect of business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector.

5.3 Conclusion

This study on structural pattern and business strategy implementation in the

manufacturing sectors of South-South, Nigeria basically addresses five major issues on

the structure and strategy implementation. The study found out that:

There is relationship between Line structure and a proper correlation between staff

structure and business strategy implementation in the manufacturing firms of South-

South, respectively. And that Bureaucracy improves business strategy implementation in

the manufacturing firms thereof, because they operate in stable-dynamic and discard

every activity of intruders.

There is no need for Matrix structure and business strategy implementation in the

manufacturing firms of South-South. Hence, the manufacturing firms have professional

experts in place and training facilities are readily available for the diverse products.

There is a positive impact of Informal structure and business strategy implementation in

the manufacturing firms. Ideas for creativity can come from anywhere through the

management and it would be accepted for further implementation. There is also culture

of organizational standard for everyone to follow. Culture of SWOT that leads to TQM,

Benchmarking and Reengineering are welcomed in the manufacturing firms.

194

There is a positive impact of social interaction and business strategy implementation in

the manufacturing firms of South-South is significant. The operational firms co-operate

with their host communities accordingly. Though, their employees receive poor

incentives than their counterparts in other sectors. In some case there are problem of

youth restiveness that disrupt the business activities of the firms.

There are some manufacturing firms in the South-Southern Nigeria that have been

liquidated due to mal-administration and some socio-political ills. To a large extent,

social interaction impacted positively on business strategy evaluation aspect of business

strategy implementation implied that when the manufacturing firms interact properly,

socially, it would be easy to find out how well they have formulated, implemented and

evaluated their strategy. This showed that proper social interaction would lead to proper

courses of action for achieving proper goals and objectives. This would also mean that

with the social-cultural environment, a manufacturing firm could produce better quality

products and fulfill its promises to its stakeholders.

There is a positive relationship between bureaucracy and business control aspect of

business strategy implementation implied that even when a manufacturing firm was

bureaucratic and was bedeviled by redtapism, it could still appraise and appreciate its

strategy results. This implies that even with formalization of rules and procedures, a

manufacturing firm could appraise its performance. Even with a centralization of decision

making a manufacturing firm could continue when things were going well and correct

actions if things were not going well.

5.4 Recommendations

It is recommended that the strategic managers of the manufacturing firms studied

should backed by policy:

1. Continue to determine the relationship between line structural patterns and business

strategy implementation in order to use the way work is organized and the way

control, influence and authority are exercised to enhance determination of courses

of action.

195

2. Continue to identify the correlation between staff structural pattern and beyond

business strategy formulation to use how staff do their work to enhance strategy

design, implementation, evaluation and control.

3. Continue to use the matrix structural pattern to move beyond planning to plan up to

the steps of budgeting, evaluating and control.

4. Continue to use the informal organization of the type used in clubs to achieve

business strategy execution and implementation.

5. To use social interaction and socialization to impact positively on business strategy

evaluation to know how well the strategy is going.

6. To use bureaucratic procedures to fine-tune the business strategy control to find out

when the strategy is right and continue and when it is wrong to control action.

5.5 Contribution to Knowledge

The Study contributes to the importance of Bureaucracy even in a decentralized

organization; this opinion could be likened to the Neoclassical Approach argument that

bureaucratic structure could be improved by making it less formal and by permitting

more subordinate participation in decision-making. (Onwuchekwa,1993:60).

Even though there have been a lot of research work on Structural Patterns and Business

Strategy Implementation in the Manufacturing Sector, to the best of the knowledge of the

Researcher, no other Researcher has applied it to firms in the manufacturing sector in the

South-Southern Nigeria.

This study contributes to cost consciousness of Matrix organization. In the

manufacturing sector, there exists Quality Control Unit instead of Matrix organization. It

is advised that manufacturing sector should provide the necessary facilities to boost this

Quality Control Unit to enable them function effectively;

The study contributes to the best management practices, pointing out SWOT Analysis,

Total Quality Management (TQM), Benchmarking and Re-engineering, which if put in

practice seriously will produce efficiency and effectiveness in the manufacturing sector.

On the contrary, the suggestion is that the variables are so volatile that only a

196

‘Contingency’ Approach can prove practicable. This suggests that organizations can only

be made viable when steps are taken to adapt them to a particular set of prevailing

conditions (Cole, 2005:78);

The study contributes to the maintenance culture of standardization continuously in the

manufacturing firms. In the existing literature of Kreitner and Kinicki (2004:85), they

are organizational identity, sense-making device, collective commitment and social

system stability. They also pointed out the three major types of organizational culture as

thus – constructive, passive defensive and aggressive-defensive;

The study contributes that manufacturing firms should operate in open system to enable

them get better information from the public. According to Chandler (1962:318) if they

failed to reform the lines of authority and communication and to develop information

necessary for administration, the executives throughout the organization were drawn

deeper and deeper into operational activities and often were working at cross purposes to

and in conflict with one another. These manufacturing firms avoid outsiders

(intruders) and only operate on their own knowledge;

The study contributes that manufacturing firms should make provision for formal

education to their staff instead of low leveled or illiteracy. They should open their doors

for people to receive formal education as to improve the existing standards. A good

number of the staff is very low in education. Onwuchekwa (1993:116) have said that

human beings are the most important components of an organization and without

understanding the nature of human beings and their behaviours, it may be absolutely

difficult to design organization and formulate appropriate management strategies to

achieve their objectives. Stoner et al (1989:329 and 2005:402) have also said that

without competent people at the managerial level and indeed at all levels; organizations

will either pursue inappropriate goals or find it difficult to achieve appropriate goals once

they have been set.

197

The Study contributes that all existing manufacturing firms should embark on periodic

Environmental Audits of their facilities to ensure that their facilities are not having any

adverse impacts on the environment and where these occur, it will proffer adequate

ameliorable and mitigation measures.

The study contributes that Government should provide bail out fund for the

manufacturing sector. This would assist for the continual maintenance of facilities as not

to shut down. Tax holidays could also be proposed to ensure that manufacturers are

encouraged to set-up factories.

The study contributes that Public Private Partnership high venture should be in place to

restore some liquidated firms. However, The Rivers State Public Private Participation in

infrastructural Development Law (2009) defines PPP as: a commercial transaction

between the public sector and a private party in terms of which the private party (a)

performs an institutional function on behalf of the government. (b)acquires the use of

state property for its own commercial purposes (c) assumes substantial risks in

connection with the performance of the functions of the government and those of state

property; and (d) receives a benefit for performing the institutional function or from

utilizing the state property either by way of (1) consideration to be paid by the institution

which derives from a revenue fund or, government business enterprise from the revenue

of such institution or (11) charges or fees to be collected by the private party from users

or customers of a service provided to them; or (111) a combination of such consideration

and such charges or fees.

5.6 Future Research

Like most studies, this thesis is not without limitations. There are some limitations as

follow:

1. This study examined structural pattern and business strategy implementation. The

focus was on strategy implementation. This is because implementation of policies

has always be a problem in the manufacturing sector in particular and in Nigeria, in

general. Therefore, it is suggested that a study on strategy formulation be carried

out in the future.

198

2. This study also suggests that future research shall employ a case study so as to get

the effective causal relationship instead of survey of many firms.

3. This study also suggests that future research shall delve into other levels of

strategies such as Cooperate level and functional level, respectively.

4. This study also suggests that future researchers should endeavour to compare

individual business-line products to confirm the effective strategy implementation

in the manufacturing sector.

5. The study also suggests that future researchers should research into Structural

Patterns and Strategy Implementation in the other sectors in Nigeria.

199

REFERENCES

Chandler, A. D. (1962) Strategy and Structure, Cambridge: MIT. Press. Cole, C.A. (2005) Management Theory and Practice Organization Structures. London:

Book Power, Thomson Learning. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA of 1992..1995), Federal Republic of Nigeria

EIA, Act 86. Ezigbo, C.A. (2007) Advanced Analytical Techniques: Statistics and Linear

Programming Department of Management, UNEC Enugu: Unpublished manuscript.

Kreitner, R. and Kinicki, A., (2004), Organizational Behaviour, New York: Irwin,

McGraw Hill Companies, Incorporated. Onwuchekwa, C.I. (1993) Management Theory and Organizational Analysis: A

Contingency Theory Approach, Enugu: Obio Nigeria Enterprises. Pearce II, J. A. and Robinson, jr, R. B (2003) Strategic Management Formulation,

Implementation and Control, New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education. Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge (2009) Organizational Behaviour New Jersey:

Pearson Prentice Hall.

200

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ademuyiwa, B and Rafsanjani, M. A (2011) “N/Assembly spends N318.2bn to pass 12 bills in 3 years – one bill costs N26.5bn”, Business Day Newspaper, May 17th Volume 9 Number 89.

Ahiauzu, A (1999) The African Industrial Man Port Harcourt. International Centre for Management Research and Training (CIMRAT) Publication. Alfred D. Chandler, Jr., (1990), Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the Industrial Enterprise. Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London: The MIT Press.

Anderson, B. L. (2004) “Sufficient strategy in Business” Nigerian Journal of Management Strategy, Vol.18, No.141. Anonymous (1997a) “Design Does Make a difference in Worker Productivity” Facilities Design and Management, September. Anthanassiou, N., and D. Nigh. “The Impact of U.S. Company Internationalization on Top Management Team Advice Networks.” Strategic Management Journal, January 1999. Anyanwu, A (2000) Research Methodology in Business and Social Sciences, Owerri, Canun Publishers (Nig.) Ltd. Azhar Kazmi (2009) Strategic Management and Business Policy. New Delhi, Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Limited.

Babbie Earl (1986) The Practice of Social Research, Wadsworth, Wadsworth Publishing Company. Badejo Ademuyiwa and Musa Anwal Rafsanjani (2011) N/Assembly spends N318.2bn to pass 12 bills in 3 years – one bill costs N26.5bn, Business Day Newspaper, May 17th Vol.9 No.89 Bedford A. Fubara (1999) Strategic Marketing for Service Firms, Port Harcourt, Centre for Corporate Policy and Strategic Research.

Behling, J. H. (1984) Guidelines for preparing the Research Proposal, New York, University Press of America, Inc. Bowen, B. D. and Weinberg, H. F. (1980): An Introduction to Data Analysis: San Francisco, W. H. Freeman and Company. Chandler, A. D. (1969) Strategy and Structures: Chapters in the history of the American Enterprises, Kansas City, MIT Press. E-book available at http//books.google.com.ng//books?

201

Chandler, A. D. (1962) Strategy and Structure, Cambridge, MIT. Press. Cohen, S. A. (1980) The Big R: How to do research in Education: Introducing Research through Experimental Design, Mill Valley, Masterly Learning System.

Cole, C. A (2005) Management Theory and Practice “Organization Structures’ London, Book Power, Thomson Learning Coplien, J. (1995), “Organizational Patterns”. In James Coplien and Doug Schmidt, eds., Pattern Languages of Program Design, Addison-Wesley. Coplien, J. (2004), “The Culture of Patterns In Branislav Lazarevic”, ed., Computer Science and Information Systems Journal 1, 2, Belgrade, Serbia and Montenegro.

Crittenden, Victoria L., and William F. Crittenden. “Building a Capable Organization The Eight Levers of Strategy Implementation” Business Horizons, 51, no. 4 (July 2008). Cunningham, W. (1996), “Episodes: a pattern language of competitive development” In Vlissides et al., eds., Pattern Languages of Program Design – 2 Addison-Wesley. Encyclopedia of Management (2009) “strategy implementation.” Retrieved May 16, 2011 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2- 3273100282.html Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA of 1992..1995) “ Sectoral Guidelines” Federal

Republic of Nigeria EIA, Act 86.

Ezeh, J. A. & Onodugo, V. A. (2002) Business Policy and Strategic Management: Issues And Trends. Enugu, Kinsman Publishers Limited. Ezigbo, C. A. (2007) Advanced Course on Management Theory and Application. Enugu, Immaculate Publications Limited. Ewurum, U.J.F. (2004) Advanced Analytical Techniques: Statistics and Linear Programming, Department of Management, UNEC Enugu. Unpublished Manuscript. Florida Department of Health: Organizational Performance Improvement Process (2010) Floridahealth.com Galbraith, J. and R. Kazangiran (1986): Strategy Implementation: Structure, Systems and Process. St. Paul, M.N: West.

202

Gary Cokins (2010) Advanced Cost Management and Performance Improvement Systems, Cokins’ Unique look at the World Gupta, V, Gollakota, M and Srinivasan (2008) Business Policy and Strategic Management: Concepts and Applications. New Delhi, Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited. Hambrick, D. C., Macmillan, I. C. and Day, D. C. (1982): “Strategic Attributes and Performance of Business in the Four Cells of the BCG Matrix: A PIMs Base Analysis of Industrial Product Business” Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 225.

Hanson, C. J. (2011) “Environmental Influences on Organizational Structure Cambridge Journal of Management Journal Volume 18: No.1143. Harris, L. (1999) “Initiating Planning: The Problem of Entrenched Cultural Values.” Long Range Planning 32, no. 1

Harrison, N. (1996) “Organizational Patterns for Teams”. In Vslissides et al., eds., Pattern Languages of Program Design – 2. Addison-Wesley. Heathfield, S. M. (2011) Employee Retention – How to keep your best – tips and tools: Retrieved 16th May http://humanresource.about.com/od/motivationrewardretention Heskitt, J.L., W.E. Sasser, Jr., and L.A. Schlesinger (1997) The Service Profit Chain. New York: The Free Press,

Hillman, A., A. Zardkoohi, and L. Bierman. “Corporate Political Strategies and Firm Performance.” Strategic Management Journal, January 1999. Hrebiniak, L.G. (2010): Executive Education. Wharton University of Pennsylvania, knowledge Wharton Horatius Egua (2011) FG issues cement manufacturers ultimatum to crash price, Business Day Newspaper, May 17th Vol.9 No.89 International Operations Management (2002) Copenhagen, Copenhagen Business School Press. Kaplan, R.S., and D.P. Norton (1996) The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action. Boston: The Harvard Business School Press.

KCPT 2 (June/July, 2011) “Daily Slogan Announcement” State of Missouri, Kansas City. Kert, N. (1995), “Caterpillar’s Fate: a pattern language for the transformation from analysis to design” In James Coplien and Doug Schmidt, eds., Pattern Languages of Program Design. Addison-Wesley.

203

Koontz, H and Weihrich, H (1994) Management: A Global Perspective, Singapore McGraw-Hill. Kotter, J., and L. Schlesinger. “Choosing Strategies for Change.” Harvard Business Review, March-April 1979. Kouzes, J.M., and B.Z. Posner (1995), The Leadership Challenge: How to Keep Getting Extraordinary Things Done in Organizations, New York: Jossey- Bass. Kreitner, R. and Kinicki, A (2004) Organizational Behaviour Irwin. McGraw Hill Companies, Inc.

Kroeber, A. L. (1948), Anthropology: Culture Patterns, and Process, New York: Harcourt, Brace and World. Langston, G and Lang-Kristenson, R (2002) Strategic Management of Built Facilities “Worker Productivity” Oxford, Butterworth-Heinemann Jordan Hill. Lawrence, P. R. and Lorsch, J. W. (1967) Organizational and Environment, Harvard University Press. Laz, C. C. (2010) “Management Science” Management Science Journal, Volume 10, No. 18.

Lewin, K. Field (1951) Theory in Social Sciences. New York: Harper & Row,

Longe S. S. (2011) “Benchmarking” University of Ibadan, Management Journal Volume 25, No. 321.

Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (2001) London, Pearson Education Limited.

Manufacturers Assn of Nigeria (2009) ‘MAN Sectoral Group’ retrieved on September 2011 from http//www.man.com Mary Kay (2010) Successful Incentive, New Jersy, Abineau Communications. Mathew, C. J. (2008) “Boundary Strategy Adoption” Journal of Science Education Volume 18, No. 123. Mckay, Colin (2010) Art Consoli – Business Strategist and Consultant to Management “ What is Business Strategy?” New Jersy Abineau Communications. Michael Aluko, Olusegun Odugbesan, Gbolahan Gbadamosi and Linus Osuagwu (2004) Business Policy and Strategy. Lagos, Longman Nigeria plc.

204

Miebaka D. Tamunomiebi (2005) Organization Management and Behaviour Owerri, Odesaa Education Books (Nig.) Limited, Odesaa Press.

Moha, O.I.A. (2008) Management Relations, Aba: Ngwaland Publishers. Morgan, B.S., and W.A.Schiemann ((1999).“Measuring People and Performance: Closing the Gaps” Quality Progress 1 Munk, N. “How Levi's Trashed a Great American Brand.” Fortune, 12 April 1999. Musselman, V.A., Hughes, E.H and Jackson, J.H. (1981) Introduction to Modern Business: Issues and Environment, Eaglewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice Hall Nag, R; Hambrick, D.C.; Chen, M.J (2007) Strategic Management Journal. Volume 28, Issue 9. Nagarajan, K. (2007) Project Management New Delhi, New Age International (P) Limited.

Nwana, O. C (1981) Introduction to Educational Research, Ibadan: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd. Obediah, O. M. (2008) “Innovative Practices and Change Management” New York School of Management Journal, Volume 18, No.12.

Ofo, J. E. (1994): Research Methods and Statistics in Education and Social Sciences, Lagos: JOJO Educational Press Ltd. Ohmae, K. (1982) The mind of the strategist New York, McGraw Hill. Onwuchekwa, C. I. (1993) Management Theory and Organizational Analysis: A Contingency Theory Approach, Enugu, Obio Nig. Enterprises. Osuala, E.C. (2005) Introduction of Research Methodology: Onitsha, African First Publishers Ltd. Ottih (2004) Corporate Planning: A Process Approach, Owerri, Nigeria, Springfield Publisher Pascale, R. and Athos, A (1981) The Art of Japanese Management, London, Penguin. Pascale, R (1990) Managing on the Edge New York (Simon and Schuster).

Pearce II, J. A. and Robinson, jr, R. B. (2003) Strategic Management Formulation, Implementation and Control Strategy in Action, New York, McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

205

Peterside, O. O. (2009) “Organizational Design”, Lagos Business School Journal Volume 18, No. 143. Peters, T., and R. Waterman. In Search of Excellence, New York: Harper & Row 1982. Piercy, Nigel F (2003) Market-led Strategic Change: A Guide to Transforming the

Process of Going to Market. Oxford, Jordan Hill (Butterworth Heinemann) Plenert, Gerhard (2001), The eManager: Value Chain Management in an eCommerce World, Dublin, Ireland: Blackhall Publishing. Pugh, D. S. and Hickson, D. J. (1976) Organizational Structure in its context: The Aston Programme 1, Grower Publishing. Rehfeld, J.E. (1994) Alchemy of a Leader: Combining Western and Japanese Management Skills to transform your company New York (John Whily and Sons). Richard et al (2009) Journal of Management “Measuring Organizational Performance: Towards Methodological Best Practice” Modified on 16th September,2010 http://journalmanagement.com/od.organizationalperfrmance Rivers State Government of Nigeria (2009) Public Private Participation in Infrastructure

Development Law, Port Harcourt, Rivers State House of Assembly. Robert H. Waterman, Jr.(1982) The Seven Elements of Strategic Fit”, Journal of Business Strategy,Winter. Rucci, A.J., S.P. Kirn, and R.T. Quinn (1998) “The Employee-Customer-Profit Chain at Sears.” Harvard Business Review 76, no. 1. Schiemann, W.A., and J.H. Lingle(1999) Bullseye: Hitting Your Strategic Targets Through Measurement, Boston: The Free Press. Solomon, C.S.S. (2009) “The Generation of Ideas” Corporate Management Journal Volume 333, No.222. Stahl, M. J. (1995) Management: Total Quality in a Global Environment, Oxford, Blackwell. Steade, R. D, Lowry, J. R and Glos, R. E (1984) Business Its Nature and Environment, “Management and Organization of Human Resources” Cincinnati, South-Western Publishing Company. Stephens, P., Robbins and Seema Sanghi (2005) Organizational Behaviour Singapore, Pearson Education. Pte Ltd.

206

Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge (2009) Organizational Behaviour New Jersey, Pearson Prentice Hall. Stoner, J.A.F; Freeman, R.E and Gilbert, D.R. Jr. (2005) MANAGEMENT,

Englewood Cliffs, N. J. (Pearson) Prentice Hall. Susan M. Heathfield (2011) Employee Retention – How to keep your best – tips and tools: retrieved 16th May http://humanresource.about.com/od/motivationrewardretention

The New Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language (1994) New York. Lexicon International Publishers Guild Group.

Thomas, J. “Force Field Analysis: A New Way to Evaluate Your Strategy.” Long Range Planning, 1 December 1985.

Unyimadu, S. O. (2005): Research Methods and Procedures. In the Social Science, Management Sciences, Education, Science and Engineering, Benin City: Otoghagua Ent. (Nig.) Limited. Unyimadu, S. O. (2009): Lecture Notes on Sampling ‘Taro Yamane’, Enugu, University of Nigeria, Enugu Campus.

Uranta, R. (2010) “The impact of organizational culture on Organizational learning and attitudes Concerning change from an institutional perspective – Rivers State House of Assembly, Port Harcourt” unpublished. Uzoagulu, A. E. (1998) Practical Guide to Writing Research Project Reports in Tertiary Institutions. Enugu, John Jacob’s Classic Publishers Ltd. Wheelen, T. L. and Hunger, J. D. (2010) Strategic Management and Business Policy. New Jersey, Prentice-Hall Pearson.

Williams, B. (2010) Top Management Team Diversity in Manufacturing Organizations in South-South Nigeria: Conflicts and Changes, Enugu, Department of Management, UNEC. (Unpublished) Williams, F. (1979) Reasoning with Statistics San Francisco: Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc. Wilson, H. J; Guinan, P.J; Parise, S and Weinberg, B.D (2011) Harvard Business Review. “What happens when companies lack a Social Media Strategy?” July- August. Woodward, J. (1965) Industrial Organization – Theory and Practice, OUP.

207

Yamani, T. (1964) Statistics: An Introductory Analysis New York: Harper and Row Publishers. Zingh, B. M. (2011) “Internationalization of Management Strategies” African Journal of Social Sciences, Volume 8, No.148. Zunich, B. B. (2009) “Business Strategy and Control” London Business School Journal, Volume 18; No.14.

208

Appendix 1

QUESTIONNAIRE

Department of Management Faculty of Business Administration University of Nigeria Enugu Campus 26th June, 2012

……………………………….. ……………………………….. ……………………………….. Dear Respondent, A research is being conducted on the topic: ‘Structural Pattern and Business Strategy

Implementation: A study of Industries in the Manufacturing Sectors, South-South Geo-

Political Zone, Nigeria’. It is purely an academic documentation and not to pry

unnecessarily into your privacy. So, respond to the best of your knowledge as divulged

information would be treated in confidence.

In addition to the questionnaire, we shall need the assistance of the Top Managers

for an audience of interview.

I appreciate your honest information and thank you for a prompt attention and co-

operation.

Yours faithfully

ROSELINE A. A. URANTA

RESEARCHER

PG/Ph.D/08/47306

209

SECTION A: PERSONAL DATA

1. Is your firm a public or private organization? (a) Private (b) Public

2. What is the percentage ownership structure of the organization?

Foreign %....................... Nigerian %.............................

3. What is your level of work? (a) Managerial (b) Supervisory (c) Clerical

4. What is your highest educational qualification?

(a) FSLC (b) O/A Level (c) Diploma (d) Degree (e) Professional

5. What is your age bracket?

(a) 20-29 (b) 30-39 (c) 40-49 (d) 50-59 (e) 60 and above

6. How long have you worked in this organization?

(a) 01-09 (b) 10-19 (c) 20-29 (d) 30-39 (e) 40 and above

7. What type is your organization?

(a) Local (b) Regional (c) National (d) International (e) Multinational

210

SECTION B

Research Question 1:

What is the nature of the relationship between Line structural pattern and business

strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sectors?

Key: VGE = Very Great Extent (5); GE = Great Extent (4); ME = Moderate Extent (3)

LE = Little Extent (2); NE = No Extent (1).

S/N Question VGE GE ME LE NE 1 To what extent does the management of your

organization ensure implementation of line structural pattern?

2 To what extent does the line structural pattern implemented by your organization enhance productivity?

3 To what extent do your organization varying business strategies that meet with their prevailing challenges and competitions?

4 To what extent does your organization adapt to change by developing business strategies model?

Research Question 2:

What is the nature of the correlation between Staff structural pattern and beyond

business strategy formulation aspect of business strategy implementation?

Key: SA = Strongly Agree (5); A = Agree (4); U = Undecided (3);

D = Disagree (2); SD = Strongly Disagree (1)

S/N Question SA A U D SD 5 Organization’s coordination strategies ensure proper

division of labour and staff specialization

6 There is no staff coordination problem in my organization

7 Staff have the necessary competencies and skills for technology in use in the organization

8 The expectations of the organization with respect to organizational performance as measured against set goals and objectives are always frequently achieved

211

Research Question 3:

What is the bearing between matrix structural pattern and beyond strategic planning

aspect of business strategy implementation?

Key: A = Very Frequently (5); F = Frequently (4); O = Not Frequently (3); S = Seldom

(2); N = Never (1)

S/N Question A F O S N 9 How often are proposed business strategies

implemented in your organization?

10 What is the frequency of implementation of matrix structural pattern in your organization?

11 How often business strategies of your organization aligned to meet up the matrix structural pattern?

12 How often business strategies as a tool of corporate strategy formulated ensure implementation of the organization’s matrix structural pattern?

Research Question 4:

What is the impact of informal organization on the business strategy execution aspect of

business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector?

Key: VGE = Very Great Extent (5); GE = Great Extent (4); ME = Moderate Extent (3);

LE = Little Extent (2); NE = No Extent (1)

S/N Question VGE GE ME LE NE

13 To what extent has the informal structure (Ad Hoc, groups meetings etc.) of your organization enhanced quality control functions?

14 What is the extent to which Total Quality Management, Benchmarking and Reengineering being implemented in response to the needs of the informal structure of your organization?

15 To what extent has the informal structure influenced policy formulation and implementation in pursuit of organizational goal

16 To what extent closely related are the activities of the informal structure of the organization to goal attainment

212

Research Question 5:

What is the extent social interaction impacts on business strategy evaluation aspect of

business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector; and,

Key: VW = Very Well (5); W = Well (4); MW = Moderate Well (3); NVW = Not Very

Well (2); NW = Not Well (1)

S/N Questions VW W

MW NVW NW

17 How well does your organization’s culture play a role in organizational performance?

18 How well does your organization’s commitment to corporate social responsibility affect the implementation of business strategy?

19 How well is there coherence between organizational culture and business strategy implementation?

20 How well is your organization’s business strategy implemented successfully irrespective of the organization’s social interactions?

Research Question 6:

What is the relationship between bureaucracy and business strategy control aspect of

business strategy implementation in the Manufacturing Sector?

Key: VS = Very Significantly (5); S = Significantly (4); LS = Little Significantly (3);

VLS = Very Little Significantly (2); NS = Not Significant (1)

S/N Questions VS S LS VLS NS 21 How well are bureaucracy processes felt in your

organization?

22 How well and efficient are business strategies implemented in your organization irrespective of the bureaucratic processes encourage staff performance?

23 To what extent do the bureaucratic processes encourage staff performance?

24 To what extent does the bureaucratic process impact on organizational productivity?

213

Appendix II

INTERVIEW SCHEDULE

1. In your opinion, what do you understand by structural patterns and business

strategy implementation?

2. What pattern of structure is in place in your organization?

3. What is the nature of relationship between structural pattern and business

strategy implementation in your organization?

4. What is the nature of relationship between line structural pattern and business

strategy implementation in your organization?

5. What is the nature of relationship between staff structural pattern and beyond

Business strategy formulation aspect of business strategy implementation?

6. Do you establish special committees, agencies, authorities, task force etc.

aside from the main organization?

7. How strong is the bearing between the established special committee’s

structural pattern and beyond strategic planning aspect of business strategy

implementation?

8. To what extent does informal structural impact positively on execution aspect

of business strategy implementation in your organization?

9. To what extent does social interaction impact on evaluation aspect of business

strategy implementation in your organization?

10. How does bureaucracy improve business strategy control aspect of business

strategy implementation in your organization?

214

APPENDIX III

THE MEMBER COMPANIES OF MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION O F NIGERIA SOUTH-SOUTH GEO-POLITICAL ZONE

NAMES OF COMPANIES AND ADDRESSES RIVERS/BAYELSA BRANCH Air Liquide Nig Plc Plot 108, Trans Amadi Layout, Port Harcourt Almarine Limited Plot 28, Kolokuma Street, Borikiri, Port Harcourt Crocodile Matchets Nig. Ltd. Plot 29, Trans Amadi Layout, Port Harcourt Eastern Bulkcem Co. Limited Rumuolumeni, Port Harcourt Eastern Enamelware Factory Limited Plot 29, Trans Amadi Layout, Port Harcourt First Aluminum Nig. Ltd. Plot 19-21, Trans Amadi Layout, Port Harcourt General agro Ind. Limited Plot 78/79, Trans Amadi Layout, Port Harcourt Nigeria Bottling Co. Plc. Plot 126, Trans Amadi Layout, Port Harcourt Nigeria Engineering Works Ltd. Trans Amadi, Layout Port Harcourt

PRODUCTS MANUFACTURED Industrial and Medical Gasses and Welding Equipment Outboard Engine Boats Matchets Cement Household Cooking Utensils Collapsible Aluminum Coil, Sheets and Circles Collapsible Edible Vegetable Oil and Palm Kernel Pellets Coca Cola, Krest, Bitter lemon, Sprite and Fanta Steel structure & Pipes, Pressure Vessels, Filing cabinets, Cupboards Wardrobe, Chairs & Desk, Library Shelving storage, Shelving Industrial Lockers & Fabrication.

215

Notori Onne Via Port Harcourt PH Flour Mills Limited, 8A, Industry Road, Port Harcourt. QR Manufacturing and Trading Limited, Plot 75A, Trans Amadi Layout, P.H Rivers Vegetable Oil Co. Ltd. Plot 80, Trans Amadi Layout, P.H. Sun Flower Manfg. Co. Ltd. Plot 70, Trans Amadi Layout, P.H. Showers Limited 17, Ohaeto Street, D/Line, Port Harcourt Polo Packaging Ind. Limited Plot 84, Trans Amadi Layout, P.H. Nikko Industries Nig. Ltd. Choba, P.H. Galba Limited Plot 311, Trans Amadi Layout, P.H. Oil & Industrial Services Limited, P.H. Crushed Rock Ind. Nig. Ltd. PH/Aba Expressway, P.H. Danelec Limited Plot 278, Trans Amadi Layout, P.H. Dangote Bail Ltd Onne, P.H. Keedak Nig. Ltd. Plot 18, Trans Amadi Layout, P.H. Silhoute Intl. Ltd. Plot 102-105, Trans Amadi Layout, P.H.

Fertilizer Four & Malzelina, Semolina, Bran & Griddles Motor Vehicle Radiators Vegetable edible Oil Plastic bags, Containers and Household Utensils. Coveralls, Garment, Uniforms, safety Accessories and Wears. Polypropylene Woven bags and packaging materials. Nylon Fishnets, Auto Trawl Net Refurbished 1 Int. G82 13-N3 truck, Trailer Axles Plot G82 13-N3 Engine Refurbishing of Diesel and Gas Goanna, Shells, Biota & Ilula Granite Blocks and Aggregates Electrical/Electronic Regulators Cement Specially chemical & Water Treatment Application Furniture Manufacturing & Installation

216

West African Glass Ind. Plot 134, Trans Amadi Layout, P.H. Boskel Nig. Ltd. PH/Aba Expressway, P.H, Eastern Wrought Iron Limited Plot 47, Trans Amadi Layout, P.H. Protecting Coating Distributors 12A, Emekuku Street, D/Line, P.H. Dufil Prima Foods Ltd. Plot 29, Trans Amadi Layout, P.H. Far East Paint Lustre Ind. Ltd. Plot 170/171, Trans Amadi Layout, P.H. Hoison Energy & Resources Services. Ltd Trans Amadi Layout, P.H. Chief Ellah & Sons Nig. Ltd. 13, Forces Avenue, P.H. First (Best) Aluminum Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 85, Aba Road, P.H. Grand-Foods & Pharmaceutical Ltd. Akah-Ama Gboarian, Yenagoa Eleme Petrochemicals Co. Ltd. Eleme, P.H. Delta Plastics Ltd. Industrial Complex, Apa Ogwu Road, Off RD Road, Rumuodara, P.H. Office & Homes Ltd. Plot 38, Tombia Street, P.H.

Hollow Glass Containers Smokeless Flares for Oil & Gas Industry Bunk beds, Wrought Iron, Furniture, Hospital and School Furniture, Star Foam, Industrial and Domestic Tanks. Protecting Coating Paints & Paint Thinner Indomie Instant Noodles Brands Paints & Painting materials, ink, polish colouring & shading mixtures dyes, Lustre, Pigments, and Varnishes Resins. High Density Polypropylene; Waste bags and High Density Polypropylene Plastics Fish and Animal Aluminum Roofing Sheets & Cooking Utensils. Pharmaceutical Polypropylene, Polyprothylene Poly bags, Bop Brand Wrappers, Pure water films, Shopping bags, Pell bottles, Disposals, Plates. Office and Home Furniture

217

Grand Petro Allied Industries Ltd. Plot 5, Aka Estate, Aka-ama P.O. Box 259, Yenagoa

EDO/DELTA STATES BRANCH Andy Industries Ltd Off KM 8 Benin-Sapele Road, Benin City Apaco Foam & Chem. Industries Limited 3, Muobike Crescent, Owa-Ekei Road, Boji Agbor Asaba Aluminum Co. Ltd. Km 11 Asaba-Benin Road, Asaba Auslin Laz & Co. Limited Plot 2 Evboriaria, Off Km 8 Benin-Space Road, Benin City Bendel Brewery Limited Benin-Abor Road, Benin City Bendel Feed & Flour Mill Ltd. Km 100, Benin-Auchi Road, Benin City Belaglass Plc. Km 17, Warri-Patani Road, Ugheli Bob Oshodin Organization Ltd. Benin-Sapele Road, Benin City Cakasa Nigeria Co. Ltd Km 5 NPA Warri Road, Warri Camel Paints & Chem. Industries Ltd. 1 Yaya Close, Off Imudia Street, Agbor Cars Components (Nig.) Ltd. Ojugbana Drive, Off Ezenei Avenue, Asaba

PVC Pipes, Plumbing Fittings, Elbow etc. Performs, Caps, Gerri cans and other plastic materials Cosmetics and Plastics Containers Foam, Underlay Aluminum Roofing Sheets, Cooking Utensils Thermoelectric Cookers, Roofing sheets and Ice making machines. Beer and Malt drink Flour and Feed Industrial and Domestic Glass Wooden Furniture Industrial Fabrication Paints & Industrial Chemicals Safety Seat belt

218

Delta Packaging Co. Ltd. Ogorode Industrial Estate, Sapele Efehi Enterprises Ltd. 53, Akpakpava Street, Benin City Egbele Industries Ltd. Egbokodo-Ubeji Road, Ubeji, Warri Eribo Printers Ltd. 56 Eric Street, Benin City Esehi Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. 4B, 2nd Isuiwa Lane, Off MM. Way, Benin City Eternit Limited 102, Sapele-Warri Road, Sapele Fariog Nigeria Limited 12, Ogbewe Street, Ugbowo, Benin-City Floces Nigeria Limited 16, Eboh Road, Warri General Pipe Industry Km 1 Asaba-Ibusa Road, Asaba General Steel Mills Ltd. Km 1 Asaba-Ibusa Road, Asaba Glorylux Asso Industries Ltd. Km 14, Warri-Sapele Road, Effurun Guinness Nigeria Limited Benin/Agbor Road, Benin City Heroes Furniture Limited Effurun/Aladja Road, Warri Imoniyame Holdings Limited Imoniyame Ind. Estate, Iwhrekpokpor, Ugheli Integrated Rubber Prods. Limited Off Km 8 Benin-Sapele Road, Benin City

Packaging materials Motorcycle Assembly Toilet Flusing cistern, toilet seat and cover Books, Industrial Inks, Printing. Pharmaceutical Products Roofing Sheet, Ceiling Board Parquet Industrial Chemicals Square steel pipes Steel Products Venetian Blinds Beer and Malt Furniture Crumb rubber Car foot mat, rubber sheets

219

Iyayi Group Limited 6/8 Aghimien Street, Off Okhoro Road, Benin City Kimatrai Nigeria Limited Near Shrimp Road, Oghara Life Flour Mill Limited Ogorode Industrial Estate, Sapele Mac-Vico Inds. (Nig.) Ltd. 12 Omo ‘n’ Oguwe Street, Ohovbe Qtrs. Benin City Mid-steel Industries Ltd Benin-Auchi Road, Benin City Mix & Bake Flour Mill Ltd. New Poll, Warri Mouka Limited Km 13, Benin-Lagos Road, Okhumwun Village, Benin City Nigeria Bottling Co. Plc. Benin-Auchi Road, Eyean Village, Benin City Niki Manufacturing Co. Ltd. BMI Ogab Road, Benin City Nomagbon Services Ltd. 47, Forestry Road, Benin City Presco Plc. Km 22 Benin-Sapele Road, Obarelin Village, Benin City Sapele Integrated Inds. Limited Km 5 Sapele-Warri Road, Amukpe, Sapele Service Pharmaceutical Industries. Limited 21 Ewere Street, Off Umagbai/Eweka Road Benin City

Wood Products, Crumb rubber Crumb rubber Flour Foam, Underlay Aluminum Products and Roofing Sheets Flour Foam, Underlay Beverage Drink Biscuits and Confectioneries Pharmaceuticals Palm Oil and Palm Kernel Oil Crumb rubber Pharmaceutical

220

Seven Up Bottling Co. Plc Benin-Lagos Road, Iguosa, Benin City SIO Industries Limited Km 129 Asaba-Benin Express, Asaba The Freedom Group Limited 17 Ihama Road, GRA Benin City Top Feeds Limited Ogorode Ind. Estate, Sapele Trawlers Manufacturing Limited Afakpata Street, Off Enerhen-Effurun Road, Warri Udofe Metals Industries Limited Km 3 Igarra-Okpe Road, Okpe Vision Oxygen Co. Ltd. Benin-Lagos Road, Iguosa Benin City Vita foam Nigeria Plc. Km 5 Sapele-Warri Road, Amukpe, Sapele West African Fertilizer Co. Ltd. Km 169, Auchi-Okene Road, Okpella Zona Nigeria Limited 5 Eguadase Street, Benin City Happinex Foam Ind. Ltd. Uleh Road, Upper Mission Extension, Benin City Notre Dame Nig. Ltd. 90, Benin-Agbor Road, Ikpoba Hill, Benin City OHI Rubber Limited Km 38, Sapele-Benin Road, New Bridge, Amukpe, Sapele

Beverages Woven sacks 052-252134,252067 Animal Feed Glass Fibre Fishing Trawlers Wheelbarrows, Cooking utensils, Cars components Medical and Industrial Gas Foam, Underlay Fertilizers Nails Foam and Sheetings Bottled and Sachet Water Natural Rubber at Rubber crumbs.

221

CROSS RIVER/AKWA IBOM STATES BRANCH

Jackson Deros Free Zone Enterprise Niger Mills Co. Ltd. Trinity Merchandise Danelec Free Zone Enterprise, Calabar System Metals Calabar High, Calabar Stone Graft Granite Champion Breweries Akwa Rubber Estate Trufaith Company Limited Pencle Limited Alpha Ubo Manufacturing Co. Limited Peacock Paints Limited Etinam LGA, Akwa Ibom State Aluminum Smelting Co. Ltd (ASCON) Ikot Abasi LGA, Cross River State Una Ama Paper Mills (Nig.) Ltd. Calabar Wood Export Processing Factory Berger Paints Of Nig Ltd. (Pamol Nig. Ltd., 8th Mile, Calabar Unicem, Unicem Road, Off Diamond Hill, Calabar Dangote Four Mills

Crown Carpets Flours Garments (shirts) Transformers Long span roofing Sheet/cooking pots tiles Champion Beer Crude Rubber Cooking Gas Groundnut Oil Paints Long span Aluminum Zinc Paper Wood Paints Rubber Cement Flour

222

Shince Air-Conditioner (Free Trade Zone) Stone Craft Free Zone Enterprise (Now Free Trade Zone FTZ) Calabar 7Up Bottling Company African Quarries Mfaneson Road, Calabar M – Saleh Generators EPZ (Now Free Trade Zone FTZ) Calabar Arita Pharmaceutical Akwa Palms Limited Esiet Eket LGA, Akwa Ibom State Obasanjo Farms Limited Oban, Akankpa LGA, Cross River State Abi-Nsan Farm Limestone Limited Akankpa LGA, Cross Rivers State Calabar Wood Coy Highway, Calabar Nigeria News Print Manufacturing Coy Itu LGA, Akwa Ibom Ikot Ekpene Raffia Industry Ikot Ekpene LGA, Akwa Ibom State Eastern Match Company FTZ Calabar Akpabio Oil Palm Coy Akpabio LGA, Cross Rivers State Sun-Shine Batteries Limited Ikot Ekpene, Akwa Ibom State Crush-Rock Limited Akan-kpan LGA, Cross Rivers State

Air conditioners/Refrigerators Marbles Soft drinks Limestones Generators Drugs Vegetable Oil Agric food Limestone Plywood doors/Assorted plywood Papers Raffia bags, shirts and carving Matches Palm Oil Battery

223

Vita foam Industry Ikom LGA, Cross River State Champion Breweries Uyo, Akwa Ibom State Plasto Crown Uyo, Akwa Ibom State Calabar Confectionery Company FTZ Calabar Calaro Estate Akankpan, Cross River State

Granite/Crush Rock Foam/Mattress Beer/Malta Plastic/bottle cover Biscuit Palm Oil