Correlation Analysis on the Influence of Supervisors Support on Organizational
Performance of Public Universities
The study conducted correlation analysis in order to ascertain the relationship and the
strength of associations between Supervisors Support and Organizational Performance
of Public Universities. The findings are presented in Table 4.8.
Table 4.8: Correlation Analysis on the Influence of Supervisors Support on
Organizational Performance of Public Universities
Organizational Performance of Public
Universities
Supervisors
Support
Pearson’s Correlation 0.980**
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000
N
170
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
The results in Table 4.8 shows that there was a positive significant linear relationship
between Supervisors Support and organizational performance of public Universities in
Mount Kenya region (r =0.980, p<0.01). This implies that improving supervisor’s
support will enhance organizational performance. These findings are in agreement with
a study by Baldwon (2014) which asserts that Support from the supervisors is one of the
most influential tools of enhancing transmission of training. Cromwell and Kolb (2011)
further note that supervisors affect transfer outcomes directly or indirectly because they
affect trainee’s motivation in transferring different skills in the duties given. Supervisor’
personal role is important because it reassures positive relations and increases self-
confidence of the employees and in return improves performance (Arnold, 2011).
4.4.3 Status of Motivation in Public Universities
The researcher sought to determine whether motivation had an effect on employees’
performance. Table 4.9 outlines the results
Table 4. 9: Status of Motivation in Public Universities
Statements
Not at all
Low extent
Moderate extent
Great extent
Very Great Extent
Mean
SDev
1.The University I work for
provides external support
such as offering external
trainings improves
employees’ technical skills. 4.1% 22.4% 50.6% 26.5% 6.5% 4.2 0.81
2.I usually go for external
trainings 4.1% 22.4% 54.7% 14.1%
6
3.5% 3.9 0.82
3.I am usually rewarded for
job well done 7.1% 14.1% 52.9% 19.4% 4.7% 4.0 0.83
4.I am usually self-motivated
to perform the duties given 0.6% 2.4% 34.75.% 49.4% 11.8% 4.7 0.73
I generally put an extra mile
in their duties am assigned 0.0% 8.8% 27.6% 54.4% 8.2% 4.4 0.94
The study results in table 4.9 indicate that the respondents agreed to a moderate extent
that the institutions provided prospects for promotion of better performance.
Specifically, (83.6%) of the respondents agreed that their institutions provided external
support such as offering external trainings that helped to improve employees’ technical
skills. (Mean
= 4.2; SD=0.81); (72.3%) of the respondents agreed that they usually go for external
trainings (Mean = 3.9; SD=0.82); (77) percentage of respondents agreed that they were
usually rewarded for good work and this motivated them to perform better (Mean = 4.0;
SD=0.83). It was apparent (95.9%) that the respondents agreed that they were usually
self-motivated to perform the duties given (Mean = 4.7; SD=0.73). Additionally,
(90.2%) that the respondents agreed they generally put an extra mile in duties they are
assigned to
perform (Mean = 4.4; SD=0.94). The inferences are confirmed by the standard
deviations that are all below 1 (range from 0.73 – 0.94).
The study found out that with regards to workplace rewards, employees were content
with the reward system of their organization which included provision of external
support such as offering external trainings that improves employees’ technical skills as
well as rewarding them for a job well done. Some respondents expressed that
motivation is an internal and it energizes, directs and supports a certain behavior. Most
respondents were of the opinion that intrinsic factors of motivation like promotions,
training and development determine the increase of the satisfaction that leads to
personal realization. The findings in addition suggested that although financial rewards
were not very significant, they need to be beefed up since some respondents indicated
that fair compensation and incentives promoted employee performance.
Organizations valued training and development by ensuring that they examined all plans
regarding training and development. Training and development opportunities were also
availed to employees. This is similar to Tzafrir (2005) who found out that training is an
important element in producing the human capital, it provides employees with the skills,
abilities and knowledge required to perform their tasks. In order to create a shared
vision, the university management needs to always be looking for new ideas, matching
the organizational strategy, and has to be sufficiently intelligent to seize the good ideas.
For the individuals that are part of the organization, the motivation is what thrusts them
to action. The leader uses his interpersonal aptitudes to kindle people’s energy and help
them see how they could mutually beneficial. The person supporting the motivation is
not a leader unless he can create a vision shared by everybody.
The results are further in agreement with findings of a study by Zlate, (2015) concluded
that motivation is the key problem that the universities have to solve today. Madrah
(2013) also revealed that career development programme is a vital human resource
development and management function in the workplace. It empowers the HR
Managers, Managers, and their stakeholders to work together to plan, organize,
formalize, lead, and observe career programmes to develop not only employees’ jobs
but the entire stage,
process, balance between individual career goals and organization
workforce requirement. The findings from open ended questions found out
that the employees valued trainings on their job descriptions. The
organizations hence should ensure that they come up with plans regarding
training and development in order to motivate the employees.
4.4.3.2 Correlation Analysis on the Influence of Motivation on
Organizational Performance of Public Universities
The study conducted correlation analysis in order to ascertain the
relationship and the strength of associations between Motivation and
Organizational Performance of Public Universities. The findings are
presented in Table 4.10.
Table 4. 10: Correlation Analysis on the Influence of Motivation on
Organizational Performance of Public Universities
Organizational Performance of Public
Universities
Motivation Pearson’s Correlation 0.982**
Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000
N
170
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
The results in Table 4.10 shows that there was a positive significant linear relationship between
Motivation and organizational performance of public Universities in Mount Kenya region (r
=0.982, p<0.01). This implies that improving supervisor’s support will enhance organizational
performance. These findings are in agreement with a study by Wang (2015) who found that
motivation is a force that influences the employees’ behaviors in an organization on persistence
to face obstacles. The findings further agree with Rossett (2011) who found that High
organizational performance is achieved by having employees who are ready to exercise effort in
the roles they are assigned to do. Further, Cavanaugh (2011) in his study concluded that
stimulating dependability is a key element of motivating employees hence increasing this
increases the overall productivity and performance.
