Research in human resource management.

Ace your studies with our custom writing services! We've got your back for top grades and timely submissions, so you can say goodbye to the stress. Trust us to get you there!

Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper


HI please read the articles given below. i have uploaded three documents, the article, guidelines for the assignment and the template which we have to follow and do the assignment.

please read all the three documents before making a bid. if you can do the assignment thern only send me a message and a bid.

once again read the guidelines document then see the template of the assignment and then read the article and do the assignment as per the guidelines and the template given.

the assignment must be exactly the same as the template.

i need the assignment by Sep 6th 2021.

Thank You.



Please select one of the attached articles for the purpose of this assignment.

       Now write a review of this article. The purpose of this review is to describe the journal article for an audience of non-experts, using an appropriate level of detail and formality so that the scientific issues are clear. The big goal is to investigate the applicability of the research to HR practices in Canada. Please use the attached template to write your paper.

Your key objectives are the following:

1.      To summarize this article for non-experts with enough details as to catch all the key things discussed including the methodology and the results.

2.      To connect research to practice- Comment on the applied potential of the article you are reviewing. This means you should focus more on the conclusions section of the article and focus more on the key results, how they can be adopted/applied in practice (in the industry, local organizations etc.). Comment on if you think the results can be generalized or not. Also, comment on the potential of furthering the research so as to becomes more relevant to HR practices in Canada.  

You may wish to consult your textbook, course notes, and other sources for additional details regarding the issues discussed. Be sure to cite these sources appropriately.

Specific Instructions: 

1.      Your paper should be typed, with double-spacing. Margins and font size should follow APA (e.g., 1-inch margins, Times 12-point font).

2.      The paper will fill between 5 and 7 pages (not including a title page, and the reference page, which must be included). All papers should adequately address the goals described above.

3.      Expectations:

a.       Opening paragraph needs to capture your audience and introduce your short paper. A thesis statement at the end of your introductory paragraph is mandatory.

b.      Each topic sentence of each body paragraph introduces the point of focus for that paragraph. (Each topic sentence in each body paragraph appears in the order stated in the thesis statement.)

4.      Title page, essay, and reference list all to APA formatting standards.

5.      A minimum of ten articles including the one you choose must be cited for this assignment within the body of your paper as well as on your reference list. All citations (in the text and on the reference page) must be consistent with APA style.

6.      Assume that your paper will be read by an intelligent layperson with no specific training in Human Resources. To be considered complete, your paper must include all information that would be necessary for such a reader to understand it.

7.      Limit the use of direct quotes, and make sure that you avoid plagiarism.

8.      You may not work together on writing your papers, although you should feel free to discuss the topics and the journal articles.


1.      Grading will be based on both content and writing.

 2.      When grading the form of your paper, I will examine the general clarity and organization of the paper.

 3.      The content portion of your grade will reflect the extent to which your paper completely and accurately achieves the goals described in the General Instructions. Note, however, that if your writing is not clear, this may have a negative impact on my ability to see that you have achieved these goals, so unclear writing may indirectly impact this part of your grade.

Important Note: You are strongly encouraged to re-read these instructions after writing your paper so that you don’t leave anything out.

 A note on Plagiarism

It is extremely important that your paper consists entirely of your own writing. There are two reasons for this. First, it is intellectually dishonest to claim credit for someone else’s writing. Second, I cannot evaluate what you have learned unless you express your ideas in your own words. Many students plagiarize papers without realizing that they are doing so, and it is, therefore, necessary to describe what plagiarism really means. Obviously, if you copy an entire paper from some other source, that is plagiarism. But it is also plagiarism to copy a single paragraph or even a single sentence. It is even plagiarism to change the individual words but copy the structure of someone else’s paragraph or sentence. A common form of plagiarism (and one that should be avoided) is a mixture of copying and paraphrasing, as exemplified by the following sentences:

The original sentence from published work: “Without an attentional mechanism that can bind together the features of a given object, incorrect combinations of features are likely to be perceived. Thus, just as in FIT, this analysis suggests that illusory conjunctions are likely to occur in the absence of attention.”

A plagiarized version: “Without attention to binding together the features, incorrect combinations of features are likely to be perceived. That is, illusory conjunctions are likely to occur in the absence of attention.”

It is easy to detect this sort of plagiarism. If I discover any plagiarism in your paper, your grade will be lowered significantly, and you may face severe sanctions from the University. The best way to avoid accidentally plagiarizing a paper is to write your paper based on your memory and not to look at any books or journal articles while you are writing. You should also be careful when looking at your notes, because your notes may contain exact duplicates of phrases from published works. After you have written a draft of your paper, you should then go back to the published works to make sure that your memory was correct.


Assignment 2: PM article Review (Add name of article here)

Your Name

University Canada West

HRMT 620: Human Resource Management

Instructor Name


Due Date, 20XX

(Present the study you are reviewing, name the design, and briefly explain the study. See the example abstract below, which you may use as a guide.)


This article, Insert Title Here, employs a [insert name of the quantitative design (e.g. experimental, correlational, quasi-experimental)] design and investigates …. using a sample of…. .


Indicate the journal article selected

Surname, Initial., Surname, Initial., & Surname, Initial. (Year). Title of journal article with no caps. Title of Journal, Volume number (issue number), page numbers.

Statement of Problem

[What is the research problem being addressed, and what are the specific research question(s)? What are the researchers trying to do? Why?]. What is your goal? How will you use this article to guide practice.

Literature Review

[Briefly describe relevant research that guided or precipitated this study. Include citations. Note: this should not be an exhaustive restatement of the article’s introduction; just summarize the key theory or empirical findings that provide the background and rationale for the study being reviewed.]

Hypotheses To Be Tested

[What are the hypotheses of this study? What did the researchers predict they would find?]


[Note: the content under each of these headings should be one or two lines.]


[Who were the participants (demographics), and how were they recruited/selected?]


[Briefly make note of the materials/measures that were used to assess the variables and to assess reliability and validity.]


[Briefly describe the procedure – what was done in the study?]


[Name the primary statistical design(s) employed. How were the data analyzed? What inferential analyses were performed? Which statistics and/or tests of significance were used?]


[Briefly describe the main findings (include numerical values where appropriate).]


Implications for HRM-

[What are the implications of the findings? Support your assertions with citations from the text and additional references where possible.]


(Please note this is the most important section of your paper. Use further research to develop this section)


[Summarize the main results with reference to the original hypotheses. To what extent were the hypotheses supported by the findings?]

Interpretation and Application

[Are the conclusions made by the author(s) warranted? What are the possible alternative explanations of the results? What are the strengths of the study? What was done well? What are the weaknesses/limitations of the study? Incorporate your knowledge of course-related concepts in your discussion of these questions (e.g., can the results guide practice, were they based on latest HR theories and ideas). Support your claims with material from the text and other scholarly references, as appropriate.]

For Further Study

[Recommend what should be done next in this area. How can this work be followed up or extended?]

References [alphabetical order]

Surname, Initial., Surname, Initial., & Surname, Initial. (Year). Title of journal article with no caps. Title of Journal, Volume number (issue number), page numbers.

Surname, Initial. (Year). Book title: No caps except after colon or if the capitalization is for proper nouns like names of assessment tools. City, State or Province written as 2 letter abbreviation, such as ON: Publisher Name.

Read online:
Scan this QR
code with your
smart phone or
mobile device
to read online.

South African Journal of Business Management
ISSN: (Online) 2078-5976, (Print) 2078-5585

Page 1 of 11 Original Research Open Access

Kehinde G. Somoye1
Şerife Z. Eyupoglu1

1Department of Business
Administration, Faculty
of Economics and
Administrative Sciences,
Near East University,
Nicosia, Turkey

Corresponding author:
Kehinde Somoye,
[email protected]

Received: 13 Nov. 2019
Accepted: 03 Apr. 2020
Published: 25 June 2020

How to cite this article:
Somoye, K.G., & Eyupoglu, S.Z.
(2020). The functionality
of reward in influencing
the reinforcement of
performance evaluation
criteria and organisational
commitment among
employees. South African
Journal of Business
Management, 51(1), a1848.

© 2020. The Authors.
Licensee: AOSIS. This work
is licensed under the
Creative Commons
Attribution License.

Reward refers to a potent leverage to motivate employee behaviour, a particular monetary return
or event that employees receive in exchange for performed tasks in the workplace and a
precondition for achieving organisational goals (Cristofori, Salvi, Beeman, & Grafman, 2018;
Gbande, 2016; Franco-Santos & Gomez-Mejia, 2015). There are sources for rewards. Among
several sources for reward (such as job, skill, seniority), according to Hamukwaya and Yazdanifard
(2014), a proper performance-based reward system is fundamental. Before an employee can be
rewarded, there should be an objective yardstick to it which forms the bases upon what to be
rewarded. These yardsticks are called criteria. Using appropriate criteria by an employing
organisation to evaluate the employees can positively affect the organisational performance
(Pettijohn, Pettijohn, & Taylor, 2000). In practice, what is evaluated are the certain behaviours
required from employees to ensure that the services that bring forth performance are provided in
the organisations. However, the efficiency of this evaluation mainly rests on the criteria for
evaluation (Venclová, Salková, & Kolácková, 2013). For organisations to reinforce the desired
behaviours and making these behaviours to be exhibited continuously, reward is one of the
needed tools (Dad, Ali, Janjua, Shahzad, & Khan, 2010).

Organisational commitment (OC) is considered as one of the most important concepts in the area
of organisational behaviour and human resource management (HRM) (Dhar, 2015). It refers to
individuals’ loyalty or bond to their employing organisation (Demir, Sahin, Teke, Ucar, & Kursun,
2009). It has been a concept highly valued in every organisation that connects the employee to the

Purpose: The primary aim of this study was to provide empirical evidence on how reward can
trigger employees to act in a way that is in tandem with an organisation’s performance
evaluation criteria in the service delivery sector. In addition, it examines how organisations
can use reward to influence organisational commitment.

Design/methodology/approach: A descriptive cross-sectional survey design was adopted.
Primary data were collected using a structured questionnaire targeting the employees in the
Nigerian public service sector. To test its hypotheses, the study used the data collected from
522 respondents in Nigeria Local Government (LG). Data were analysed on SPSS (version 20)
using regression.

Findings/results: The analysis of this study identifies reward to influence performance
evaluation criteria and organisational commitment in the public service sector. The results
obtained demonstrate that reward has a significant influence on organisational commitment.
In addition, the reward system of an organisation was found to be a significant channel to
reinforce the desired behaviours that inform performance criteria.

Practical Implications: With the findings of this study it is concluded that reward is a
key variable that can help the public service sector to become more effective and efficient.
However, the use of reward by managers can make performance evaluation criteria worthy of
appreciation by the employees, thereby increasing organisational commitment.

Originality/value: This study revealed the dual role reward can play to influence employees’
organisational commitment, and the behaviours that organisations desire to reinforce in
performance evaluation criteria. This is the first study that examined this relationship.

Keywords: reward; performance evaluation criteria; organisational commitment; local
government; public service sector.

The functionality of reward in influencing the
reinforcement of performance evaluation criteria and

organisational commitment among employees

Read online:
Scan this QR
code with your
smart phone or
mobile device
to read online.

Page 2 of 11 Original Research Open Access

organisation (Oyeniyi, 2013). Among many scholars, Nazir,
Shafi, Qun, Nazir and Tran (2016) showed that increasing OC
is linked to a good reward system. Research shows that the
substantial level of reward offered by an organisation to its
employees for commitment can influence the employees
to be more committed. In practice, this suggests that the more
frequent the reward for commitment to employees, the
stronger the possibility to increase commitment.

In the service delivery sector, in which the public sector is a
key player, services such as education, energy, health, security,
roads, transportation, and many other services targeted at
citizens, tourists, public and private companies remain part
of their responsibilities. These responsibilities are channels of
investment to a nation’s economy in which its daily activities
are to be propelled by an effective and committed large pool
of human resources for good service delivery to the people.
However, in Nigeria, the Local Government (LG), which is a
service delivery sector, has not provided optimal services to
meet the basic needs of the people at grassroots level. One of
the reasons, as provided by Onyishi, Eme and Emeh (2012), is
that there is an inconsiderable commitment to duty on the part
of the employees. In addition, as highlighted by Simmons
(2015), reward in the LG does not take into account performance
as it is tainted with unfairness and nepotism. Unfortunately,
due to the increase in corruption level, exhibiting good
behaviours has lost relevance in the LG performance
evaluation criteria. The needed commitment in the LG can
occur if it administers reward appropriately to desired
behaviours exhibited to given responsibilities. This, as noted
by Pitt, Foreman and Bromfield (1995), can nurture employees’
committment to the organisation, making them serve it better.

Studies on the relationship between reward and OC is
considered less apparent in the LG and there is no study that
has examined the influence reward has on performance
evaluation criteria (PEC) in the service delivery sector. This is
a gap that this study intends to fill. It is against this
background that this study examines how organisations can
use a reward system to motivate employees to act in a way
that is in tandem with the organisation’s PEC and how
reward influences OC. The originality of this current study
reveals the dual role reward can play to influence employees’
OC and the behaviours that organisations desire to reinforce
in PEC. Coupled with this is the setting of the study which is
the Nigerian public service sector and no previous study has
examined this relationship. This study contributes to the
HRM and public service literature by revealing a deeper
relationship that exists between the investigated variables,
which can bring about effective public service delivery. The
conceptual framework for this study is presented in Figure 1.

Theoretical framework and
hypothesis development
In an increasingly competitive society as we have today,
organisations that are passionate about their visions and
missions are constantly adapting their strategies to attract,
motivate and retain competent persons. An efficient reward
system seems to be the best way to go about it. Reward is an
organisational obligation to the employees to compensate for
their contribution towards the attainment of organisational
goals (Nwokocha, 2016; Saleem, 2011). Many researchers
have argued that reward is the greatest source of motivation to
the employees (Tsede & Kutin, 2013; Karami, Dolatabadi, &
Rajaeepour, 2013; Nwokocha, 2016). It is known that
everyone needs motivation to function effectively and
efficiently. According to Armstrong (2010), reward is a form
of recognition of a person’s contribution. This recognition,
which can be tangible or non-tangible, is on the basis of the
job that such individuals do, level of their performance,
competence or skill (contingent or variable pay), or for their
services in the job (service-related pay) (Nwokocha, 2016). It
is in view of this that an organisational reward system has to
be well broadened to capture the contributions at a diverse
level. The essence of this reward is such that employees can
enhance the quality of their work (Mujtaba & Shuaib, 2010).
In the views of Karami et al. (2013), there are three reasons
why organisations should consistently give rewards. Firstly,
with a good reward system, the organisation attracts
employees with the necessary competence and qualifications;
secondly, the reward that is given to employees instead of
service compensation is a medium to get a response from the
previous performance; and thirdly, reward is a motivational
tool for future performance. This implies that with reward,
an organisation gets the best persons for the job and enhances
the commitment of the employees.

Performance evaluation criteria
In organisations, employees are adequately informed about
their roles through the job description. This job description
can include, for example, responsibilities, skills and job
input that relates to the specific jobs which are expected
to accurately reflect a comprehensive scope expedient
for employees’ success in the organisation (Jacobson,
Trojanowski, & Dewa, 2012). Mader-Clark (2013) noted that
job description communicates an organisation’s expectation
reflecting clear-cut goals. Besides, PEC can be interpreted to
be similar to organisational goals (Shen, 2004). The soft goal
is an example of an organisational goal that clearly explains
the nature of PEC. Fekete and Rozenberg (2014) and Kang
and Shen (2016) explained soft goals as work attitude and
behaviour, individual performance, experience, leadership
skills, interpersonal skills and customer service quality.

Furthermore, while defining performance evaluation,
Seniwoliba (2014) explained it to be an evaluation process
where quantitative scores are assigned to a certain employee’s FIGURE 1: Conceptual framework.



Performance evalua�on

Page 3 of 11 Original Research Open Access

performance based on predetermined criteria. The criteria
are borne out of the understanding of the relative connections
they have with organisational performance. Inspiring the
implementation of PEC among employees can be a positive
move for an organisation for its potency to encourage
employees to behave in the desired way that suits the
expectations of the organisation for success. From another
perspective PEC describes the common beliefs of employees
accompanied by a greater degree of agreement and
compliance (Saturno, Palmer, & Gascón, 1999). When an
employee has a trait or displays a behaviour naturally that
favours or disfavours organisational goals, a point of
confluence between the employee and employer can
positively or negatively alter the future relationship between
both sides. This remains one out of many reasons why criteria
are needed to be clear, with both sides agreeing to it for
performance evaluation.

According to Duraisingam and Skinner (2005), PEC is to be
correctly identified by organisations. Also, the employees
need to perceive these criteria as being relevant and
applicable to their daily tasks, acceptable and fair and
mutually agreed between management and employees.
Participation of employees in the development of these
criteria aids their perception in that it fosters cooperation
between the managers and the employees, thereby preventing
any future conflicts between them (Islam & Rasad, 2006).
Objectivity is one characteristic of a fair performance
evaluation which is to be based on behaviours regarding
some functions that are under the control of the employees
(Çelik, 2014). Communication is key here. Just as
communicating the result of an evaluation process to
employees is important, so is the communication of PEC.
As noted by Erdogan (2000), this is the duty of an employing
organisation. As a fair process, these criteria are to be
understood by the employees prior to the evaluation period
(Erdogan, 2000). And as a matter of preference, what makes
up the PEC, indicate importance and what is absent, indicate
unimportance (Islam & Rasad, 2006).

Organisational commitment
Organisations that thrive in a very competitive market do
consider having committed employees as part of their human
resources so as to achieve their set goals and objectives
(Milgo, Namusonge, Kanali, & Makokha, 2014). Being seen
as a necessary part of the organisation creates a psychological
relationship between the organisation and the employees,
whereby the employees see themselves as part of a team
working towards the success of the organisation (Brenda &
Onuoha, 2016; Khan et al., 2014). For both the employing
organisation and the employees, it has been related to
valuable outcomes that can bring about increased feelings of
belonging, security, efficacy, greater career advancement,
increased compensation and increased intrinsic rewards
for the employees (Azeem, 2010). Its antecedents include
several variables such as job satisfaction, motivation,
participative decision-making, organisational support,
financial reward, communication, promotion prospects and

leadership (Lok & Crawford, 2004; Salami, 2008). Coupled
with this, it has been noted to be dependent on some
demographic variables such as age, organisational tenure
and education (Elizur & Koslowsky, 2001).

One of the most widely accepted definitions of OC is given
by Allen and Meyer (1990). They defined OC as affective
(which means employees devote themselves to actions
because of the desire to achieve goals in favour of their
organisation), continuance (which means being calculative as
an employee before taking a decision to leave an organisation –
an ability that creates an awareness), and normative (which
is the costs that employees would have to obtain if the
decision to leave an organisation is inevitable). As noted by
Nehmeh (2009), OC is what sustains employees to stay in the
organisation for a long tenure, makes them understand the
goals and work assiduously towards meeting the targets.
According to Irefin and Mechanic (2014), individuals who are
less committed, are more interested in their personal success
than the organisational success; in effect, they do not put
their heart into the job and an opportunity elsewhere would
result in their quitting their job. On the other hand, committed
employees will see themselves as a part of the organisation
and remain loyal to it (Permarupan, Al-Mamun, Saufi, &
Zainol, 2013). They see the success of the organisation as
theirs too and any danger to the organisation is considered as
a threat to them too (Irefin & Mechanic, 2014). So OC can be
seen as the extent to which the employees see themselves as
part of the organisational values and missions and are
committed to achieving them.

Reward and performance evaluation criteria
In the list of decisions that an average organisation makes,
one of the top priorities need to be the reward system. On one
side, human resources in an organisation must be paid for
their work. Meanwhile, from a general point of view, it must
be stated that work is not an end in itself, rather a means that
gives individuals the opportunity to acquire the resources
needed to enjoy their time away from the job (Wrzesniewski,
McCauley, Rozin, & Schwartz, 1997) Realistically, work is
essential, nevertheless, the acquired resources can be money
which is associated with employees’ perception of their
work. The perception may be just to be present at work
regularly during the working hours, carry out the necessary
tasks and get paid at the end of the month. This primarily
gives employees the opportunity to afford their basic
needs, go on vacations and be at leisure. On another side,
employees would not only settle for a salary as they are
also interested in promotion, advancement, fringe benefits,
to mention a few (Dewhurst, Guthridge, & Mohr, 2009).
Correctly rewarding employees can direct them to achieve
the goals of the organisation which may have an indirect
influence on the quality of services delivered to the customers
(Asaari, Desa, & Subramaniam, 2019).

It is observed by Paulsen (2002) that an organisation can be a
group of coordinated people working as a team to achieve a
set of goals – especially the soft goals, which precisely explain

Page 4 of 11 Original Research Open Access

the nature of PEC as noted previously. In order to meet these
soft goals, amongst other requirements, an important one is
building a team who knows the nature of the tasks to be
carried out and can get them done with the appropriate
behaviours for organisational performance.

In the public sector, as claimed by Verbeeten (2008), there
are many managers at different levels who have multiple
goals and this can complicate the criteria applied to the
administration of rewards to employees. For employees’
sake, the public sector has to be consistent with clear
operating goals. According to Van der Hoek, Groeneveld and
Kuipers (2018), having clear operating goals can help
employees in knowing the expectations of the organisation
and behave in a way that will make the goals achievable. In
principle, when managers come to a decision that a team is
needed to achieve a set of goals, each member of this team
should have a strong feeling that their behaviours will be
rewarded by the criteria accepted by the management. This
can prompt the exhibition of behaviours to central goals and
encourage not just the freedom in how these goals are
achieved but also in offering rewards appropriate to it.

While at the point of hiring new employees, organisations
look for some specific behaviours that are core ingredients to
achieve the organisational performance. By rewarding these
behaviours, new or incumbent employees are routinely
reminded of the goals of the organisation and how to achieve
them. By so doing, these behaviours become criteria to
evaluate the employees.

The relationship between reward and PEC was clearly
understood when viewed under the lens of Skinner’s theory.
According to the theorists, Luthans and Kreitner (1985),
four behaviourally oriented strategies were proposed by
Skinner to shape employees’ behaviours. They are positive
reinforcement, negative reinforcement, punishment and
extinction (Luthans & Kreitner, 1985). This study focuses on
the first, which is positive reinforcement. It was said that
behavior reinforced by a reward is likely to be repeated
(Scott & Cogburn, 2017). For instance, an employee who is
rewarded for punctuality or innovation at the workplace will
put more effort into this behaviour. One of the main functions
of performance evaluation is that it describes the behaviour
that is desired, coupled with an observation of employees’
true behaviour (Šišinački, Dobiš, & Šišinački, 2017).

In other words, when organisations create the appropriate
climate of organisational support such as rewards, they
reinforce these desired behaviours among employees.
Failure of an organisation to identify, design and roll out a
reward system will automatically and purposely reinforce
undesirable behaviour among employees. The effectiveness
of PEC depends on how just, well and fair organisations
reward their employees. The reason for an employee to have
low ratings in performance may be because of the poor
reward system of the organisation. In the following sequence,
this study proposes the following hypthesis:

H1: The reward system of an organisation is a channel to
reinforcing the desired behaviours that inform PEC

Reward and organisational commitment
While a myriad of studies have shown a strong correlation
between an organisational rewarding system and OC
(Eisenberger & Stinglhamber, 2011; Malhotra, Budhwar, &
Prowse, 2007; Mabaso & Dlamini, 2018; Milgo et al., 2014;
Nazir et al., 2016), there has been no comprehensive study
that proves otherwise. Korir and Kipkebut (2016) examined
the effect of reward management on employees’ commitment
in the universities. The study found that financial reward
management practices collectively have a significant effect
on OC. While examining the effect of reward practices on
employee commitment, Okinyi (2015) assessed the reward
policies put in place by faith-based health organisations to
enhance employees’ commitment and also examined the
effect of intrinsic rewards on employees’ commitment in
the organisation. It was revealed that there is a strong
relationship, and the better the practice, the more committed
employees will be to the organisation. Similarly, Brenda
and Onuoha (2016), while examining the relationship
between dimensions of reward management strategies (pay
structures and employee benefits) and the indicators of OC
(affective and continuance commitment), the findings
showed a positive relationship between reward management
strategies and OC. It was concluded that the implementation
of pay structures and employee benefits significantly
enhances OC (affective and continuance commitment).
Ahmed, Ismail, Amin, Ramzan and Khan (2012) and Smyth
and Zimba (2019) describe reward to organisational support
and employees always try to give their best in the form of
commitment to return this support.

However, in this section, this study intends to understand
how the Social Exchange Theory (SET) is applied in this
relationship. Previously, this theory has been used in health
care (Guo, Guo, Fang, & Vogel, 2017; Nazir, Qun, Hui, &
Shafi, 2018), social psychology (Chernyak-Hai & Rabenu,
2018; Wikhamn & Hall, 2012), business (Jeong & Oh, 2017),
and marriages (Sabatelli, Lee, & Ripoll-Núñez, 2018), to
mention a few. Its main foundation emphasised on the
assumption that purposive actors engage and nurture
relationships according to the belief that rewards will be
beneficial (Zafirovski, 2005). The exchange relationship
between two or more actors, which can be a worker and an
organisation, is the core concern of SET. An exchange takes
place within an environment where there are interaction,
allowing actors to manage resources that are valued by other
actors (Molm, Takahashi, & Peterson, 2000; Nunkoo, 2016). In
addition, in the exchange for criteria such as innovativeness,
communication or reliability in service delivery, employees
anticipate organisational support such as rewards. Similarly,
organisations expect employees to perform with desirable
results in exchange for rewards. According to Lin, Chiu and
Liu (2019), SET puts forward that provision for reward
should be done appropriately to enhance performance. This
stems from the fact that as employees gain the support of

Page 5 of 11 Original Research Open Access

their employing organisation, they feel obligated to embrace
the norm of reciprocity for this support by ensuring that
they become a better performer for effective organisational
performance (Tokay & Eyupoglu, 2018). Quite plainly, an
organisationally committed employee is expected to be a
better performer (Al Zefeiti & Mohamad, 2017).

Employees are the human resources that evaluates the
favourable and unfavourable factors in the organisation
before taking action. For example, the voluntary exchange of
symbolic resources takes place when employees understand
that there are benefits attached, according to Hsu, Yin and
Huang (2017). This is the norm of reciprocity, and as affirmed
by Sungu, Weng and Kitule (2019), it plays a significant role
in strengthening the social framework. According to Brown
and Roloff (2015), organisational support will strengthen
an employee’s belief that the organisation recognises
and rewards increased performance. More so, favourable
opportunities for rewards serve to communicate a
positive valuation of employees’ contributions. This enables
employees to interpret the organisational value and become
committed to it.

On the authority of SET theorists, it has been proposed that a
reward brings forth greater commitment from employees,
which has a positive effect on their future engagement
toward organisational goals (Tsai & Kang, 2019). Reward
systems exist with a specific long-run objective to motivate
employees to work towards the achievement of organisational
goals (Abbah, 2014; Anku, Amewugah, & Glover, 2018). This
is possible when the reward system has brought about
commitment in the employees. In the study of Osemeke
(2016), it was identified that OC is greatly influenced by the
type of reward that the employees receive. Also, employees’
commitment to their organisation is enhanced by the use of
a profit-sharing arrangement (Long, 2000; Osemeke, 2016),
which is a system with the intent of returning to the
employees a share of the fruits of their collective labour
(Coyle-Shapiro, Morrow, Richardson, & Dunn, 2002).

By utilising SET to examine the relationship between reward
and OC, the evidence shows that better understanding is
obtained with regard to the reason why employees increase
their OC with a good reward practice. A social exchange
relationship suggests obligation and rights on the
organisation and its employees (Liu, Loi, & Ngo, 2018).
The employing organisation should offer rewards to its
employees, in exchange for their commitment. Based on this
premise, this study proposes the following hypothesis:

H2: Organisation reward practice positively influences OC
among employees

Data collection and measurement
The primary data used in this study was gathered via
administration of a structured questionnaire. This
questionnaire was administered to LG employees in two
states in Nigeria. Local government workers represent a part
of the workforce under the Nigerian public service sector.

Several studies that have been carried out to examine the
public sector have also used LG employees as respondents of
their surveys (Sam-Okere & Agbeniga, 2014). There are six
states in the Southwest region of Nigeria. A multistage
sampling technique was used in the process of selecting the
states used for this survey. Two out of the six states were
selected, namely Ekiti State and Osun State. Ekiti state has
16 LGs while Osun State has 30 LGs. In Ekiti state the three
biggest LGs were selected with a total population of 2471
employees and in Osun State the seven largest LGs were
selected with a total population of 1951 employees. At the
time this study was carried out, as released by the Director of
Personnel Management of the 10 LGs, the total population
was 4422. For this population size, according to Krejcie and
Morgan (1970), 354 is suitable at ±5% precision level and
95% confidence level. A stratified sampling technique was
adopted to select the employees to participate in the
survey. There are nine departments in the LGs in the two
states used for this study and they are administration
and general services, budget and planning, finance and
supply, agriculture and food security, works, water and
environmental sanitation, town and regional planning, social
and community development, and primary health care. Each
department of the LG formed a stratum. To have a robust
result, 600 copies of questionnaires were administered in the
10 LGs and 525 copies were collected from the field of survey.
The respondents were at ease with the objectives of the study
due to the simplicity of each item of the questionnaire. The
respondents were offered gifts worth 2 USD each to motivate
them to voluntarily respond to the items of the questionnaire.
The questionnaire had a cover page on which they were
informed of the researchers’ strict adherence to the rules of
confidentiality and anonymity. No one was forced to attempt
the questionnaire and anyone who was no longer interested
to continue the survey was allowed to opt out.

The questionnaire that was used for this study was
designed according to the literature review of this study.
All the constructs in the questionnaire were measured
using existing scales. The reward items were adapted from
the study of Kassabgy, Boraie and Schmidt (2001), OC from
the study of Meyer and Allen (1997) and PEC from the
study of Othman (2014). Also, some items were edited to
suit the tonality of this study. In OC items ‘organisation’
was replaced with ‘LG’. For example, ‘The setting of our
Local Government is comfortable’. For PEC, the initial
construct was, for example, ‘Job Knowledge’ and it was
reconstructed to be ‘I am evaluated based on Job
knowledge’. The items for reward were not edited and they
were used just as it was adapted. All the items were on a
Likert scale ranging from strongly agree (1) to strongly
disagree (5). The questions in the questionnaire were
sectioned into two. The first section of the questionnaire
contained all the items related to reward, PEC and OC
variables, and they were mixed. No identification of
sections for each variable was done so as to avoid common
method variance. The second section contained the
demographic variables. It was placed as the second section

Page 6 of 11 Original Research Open Access

so as to avoid social desirability response since it contains
some personal information needed for this study. After
data were collected, they were transferred to an SPSS
spreadsheet and from inspections, there were no extreme
figures. Afterwards, the Mahalanobis distance was
calculated through SPSS to identify multivariate outliers
and from inspections three (3) values were observed to be
lower than the p-value (p < 0.001). These three (3) responses
were completely removed from the dataset, leaving 522
responses for the study’s analysis. The descriptive
information for the demographic variables as shown in
Table 1 reveal that more than half of the respondents are
female (52.3%) while the respondents in the age group of
41 – 50 years (36.4%) are above one third. The respondents
with 11–15 years length of service are 28.5%. The majority
are Bachelor ’s degree holders (52.7%).

Analysis and results
The existing items for each of the variables of the study were
subjected to principal factor analyses to ascertain if the items
loaded appropriately. Based on the result, items that had a
factor loading above 0.40 are retained and Table 2 presents
the reliability for these retained items, which are all
acceptable. Common method bias was checked through
Harman’s single-factor test. The single factor accounted
for 20.1%, which invariably accounts for a minority of the
variance in the model of this study.

Table 3 presents the descriptive information on the perception
of the employees concerning the criteria their employing
organisation base their performance evaluation on. Analysis
of the mean scores of PEC shows that employees perceived
all the criteria to be important as they agreed to being
evaluated on their bases. However, reliability (mean = 1.95,
SD = 0.77), behaviours (mean = 2.01, SD = 0.92) and work
management (mean = 2.08, SD = 0.86) had the highest scores,

Results: Test of relationship
The correlation statistics are presented in Table 4 with two
levels of significance (p = 0.05, and p = 0.01). It was discovered
that reward and OC are significantly and positively correlated
(r = 0.36, p < 0.01). Reward and PEC are also significantly and
positively correlated (r = 0.18, p < 0.01). All of the controlled
variables except age were observed to correlate with other
variables. They were used in the subsequent regression
models of study variables.

Results: Test of regression analysis
Using regression analysis, based on 522 entries, the two
hypotheses of this study were tested and Tables 5 and 6
present the regression analysis results. As shown in Table 5
the PEC was regressed on the controlled variables and
reward with results in model 1 and 2 respectively. In model 1,
none of the controlled variables significantly affected PEC.
In model 2 rewards were introduced and only gender was
observed to affect PEC (b = 0.09, p < 0.05). However, reward
was observed to influence PEC (b = 0.19, p < 0.001). The R2
(0.05) revealed that 5% of the variance in PEC could be
explained by the variance in the reward. It can be said that
most influence that is experienced by PEC does not come
from rewards alone, but also from gender, even though it has
a small contribution. Hence, hypothesis 1 was supported,
which states that the reward system of an organisation is a
channel to reinforce desired behaviours that inform PEC.

As shown in Table 6, OC was regressed on the controlled
variables and reward. In model 1, regarding the controlled
variables, organisational tenure and education negatively and
positively affected organisational commitment respectively
(b = -0.09, p < 0.05 and b = 0.09, p < 0.05). The R2 (0.02) revealed
that 2% of the variance in OC could be explained by the

TABLE 3: Employee perception on performance evaluation criteria.
Items Mean Standard deviation

Reliability 1.9518 0.77334
Behaviour 2.0116 0.92366
Work management 2.0751 0.86331
Communication 2.0809 0.85492
Decision-making 2.0906 0.92242
Innovativeness 2.0983 0.90685
Ability to receive instruction from superior 2.1252 0.92463
Ability to understand 2.1252 0.91624
Ability to finish work on time 2.1464 0.92673
Handling office equipment 2.1676 0.93662
Leadership 2.2697 1.08360
Interpersonal relations 2.4066 1.06653

TABLE 2: Post reliability report.
Variable Number of retained items New Cronbach’s Alpha

Affective 3 0.83
Continuance 3 0.57
Sub total 6 0.70
Reward 5 0.75
PEC 12 0.84
Total – 0.75

OC, organisational commitment; PEC, performance evaluation criteria.

TABLE 1: Descriptive statistics of the demographic variables.
Variable Options Frequency Percentage

Gender Male 249 47.7
Female 273 52.3

Age 30 years and below 112 21.5
31–40 years 163 31.2
41–50 years 190 36.4
51–60 years 55 10.5
61 years and above 2 0.4

Length of Service 1–5 years 130 24.9
6–10 years 89 17.0
11–15 years 149 28.5
1–20 years 110 21.1
21 years and above 44 8.4

Education BSc 275 52.7
MA/MSc 40 7.7
M.Phil 22 4.2
PhD 6 1.1
Others 179 34.3

BSc, Bachelor of Science; MA/MSc, Master of Arts/Master of Science; M.Phil, Master of
Philosophy; PhD, Doctor of Philosophy.

Page 7 of 11 Original Research Open Access

variance in the organisational tenure and education. This
implies that most influence that is experienced by OC
does not come from the controlled variables, even though
their contribution is minimal. Introducing rewards in
model 2, none of the controlled variables affected OC.
However, rewards were observed to significantly predict
OC (b = 0.36, p < 0.001). The R2 (0.14) shows that 14% of
the variance in OC could be explained by the variance in
rewards. Hence, hypothesis 2 was supported, which states
that the reward practice of organisation influences OC among

In this cross-sectional study based on LG employees, the
important objective was to present more grounds for
understanding how reward positively influences the
behaviours that organisations desire to reinforce in PEC and
how reward influences OC. The discussion of the findings of
this study is presented below.

The results of this study showed that reward significantly
influences OC. The public service sector needs to give

commensurate reward to their employees in exchange for
their services. A lot of empirical findings have given credence
to the fact that reward greatly influences organisational
commitment. For instance, Chen, Yang, Gao, Liu and De Gieter
(2015), Danish and Usman (2010), Korir and Kipkebut (2016),
Mabaso and Dlamini (2018), Miao, Newman, Sun and
Xu (2013), Paşaoğlu (2015), Taba (2018) found that reward
was positively related to OC. This relationship may be due to
the strategies of recognition and appreciation of employees
based on either their behaviours, performance or both. An
average employee will not work for free and this means that
reward can be a signal for an employee to know how well
he/she is contributing to the resultant performance of the
LG service delivery. Rewarding employees, not only in the
monetary form but also in non-monetary forms via expression
or statement of gratitude or by offering greater responsibility,
can increase their commitment. Nonetheless, a positive
relationship was established by the result of this study, which
simply means that higher reward will bring about increasing
employee commitment. This implies that incumbent
employees are retained coupled with substantial overall
organisational performance.

TABLE 6: Regression analysis of the influence of reward on organisational commitment.
Variable R R2 df F T β

Model 1 0.125 0.02 518 2.736* – –
Gender – – – – -0.249 -0.011
Organisational tenure – – – – -2.006 -0.088*
Education – – – – 1.969 0.086*
Model 2 (OC) 0.380 0.144 518 21.642*** – –
Gender – – – – 0.139 0.006
Organisational tenure – – – – -1.923 -0.079
Education – – – – 1.503 0.062
Reward – – – – 8.783 0.360***

OC, organisational commitment.
*, Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed); **, Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed); ***, Correlation is significant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed).

TABLE 5: Regression analysis of the influence of reward on performance evaluation criteria.
Variable R R2 df F t β

Model 1 0.109 0.01 518 2.059 – –
Gender – – – – 1.937 0.085
Organisational tenure – – – – 0.620 0.027
Education – – – – 1.616 0.071
Model 2 (PEC) 0.222 0.05 518 6.675*** – –
Gender – – – – 2.179 0.094*
Organisational tenure – – – – 0.747 0.032
Education – – – – 1.334 0.058
Reward – – – – 4.505 0.194***

PEC, performance evaluation criteria.
*, Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed); **, Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed); ***, Correlation is significant at the 0.001 level (2-tailed).

TABLE 4: Correlation analysis.
Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

OC (1) 3.16 0.60 1 – – – – – –
Reward (2) 2.77 0.86 0.363** 1 – – – – –
PEC (3) 2.14 0.56 0.147** 0.179** 1 – – – –
Age (4) 2.37 0.95 0.018 0.011 0.042 1 – – –
Gender (5) 1.52 0.50 -0.004 -0.051 0.092* -0.107* 1 – –
Length of Service (6) 2.71 1.28 -0.088* -0.024 0.022 0.634** -0.078 1 –
Education (7) 2.57 1.84 0.087* 0.073 0.048 -0.074 -0.062 -0.028 1

OC, organisational commitment; PEC, performance evaluation criteria.
*, Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed); **, Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Page 8 of 11 Original Research Open Access

Accordingly, the organisational reward is essential for the
actualisation of the essence of the primal idea of PEC, a
proactive behaviour, amongst the employees. Based on the
findings of this study, it was found that reward influenced
PEC positively. This is because organisational goals require
some attitudes and behaviours that are essential to attain set
objectives. Due to this they become part of the criteria to
reward performance. In short, these attitudes and behaviours
are seen, recognised and harvested by the organisation from
their employees because they reward it.

The public sector has set objectives which are accomplished
through employees displaying some required abilities.
Additionally, they know these abilities and their employees
are evaluated based on them, coupled with a reward attached
to it. Having a reward system that is openly rolled out fairly
and justly to employees who perform well can increase the
dexterity in expressing expected and demanded abilities
towards subordinates and tasks assigned to them. In other
words, rewarding employees can be a medium to ensure
that the public sector gets the specific types of behaviour
they are looking for. As a tool to direct these behaviours for
organisational benefits, managers use them as criteria for
performance evaluation. However, according to the equity
theory, when employees observe an imbalance in the reward
for their input (which reflects the criteria for performance
evaluation), the more distress they may experience in the
form of anger (Al-Zawahreh & Al-Madi, 2012). In support of
this observation, Maicibi (2003) stated that rewards should
generally be commensurate to employees’ job input.

The Nigerian public sector rewards employees who have the
required knowledge about their job, show a high level of
honesty and trustworthiness, coupled with reliability under
pressure, and display good behaviour and a high level of
commitment. These are classed as the top five most important
criteria perceived by the respondents of this study, which is a
mirror of what the public sector rewards most since it is key
to excel in service delivery. It does not mean that the public
sector does not reward skills like the ability to handle
office equipment, leadership skills or interpersonal relations
(which are the three criteria of least importance), but this
order speaks volumes of what they want most from their
employees. Hence, the positive relationship established in
this study points out that the most important criteria in
performance evaluation is what the Nigerian public sector
places preference on in terms of values and reward.

From a theoretical perspective, this study enriches the
understanding of Skinner’s theory of reinforcement (Skinner,
1969) and SET in the context of the public service sector.
Firstly, this study validates the reinforcement theory which
gained its support in the established link between reward
and PEC. It can be deduced that the higher the rewards, the
more the behaviours that organisations desire to reinforce in
PEC. Secondly, this showed how SET can be applied to have
a deeper understanding of the functions of reward influencing

commitment. It was emphasised in this study that the need to
have a good reward system for employees will herald the
possibility for a desirable outcome such as the commitment
of employees to their organisation.

From a managerial perspective human resource managers in
the Nigerian public sector need to know which criteria are
appropriate and also ensure their employees are aware of
these criteria that would be used to carry out the performance
evaluation and influence their rewards. An organisation
should be meticulous and flexible to juxtapose their required
evaluation criteria with the observed performance of the
employees. This brings about feedback and extensive review
that is satisfactory, thereby allowing a fair and just reward
system. A public sector that wants to satisfy their customers
needs to identify the most important attitudes and behaviours
inherent in their employees and create an evaluation system
that adopts these attitudes and behaviours as criteria to be
evaluated and rewarded. This will bring about good service
delivery to the service consumers.

Nevertheless, managers need to understand that what is
rewarded will be repeated irrespective of the capacity,
responsibility and level the good employees occupy in the
public sector. This can cause a causal sequence in the
organisation that will yield positive results especially when
the salient use of these attitudes and behaviours are within
the scope of the evaluation criteria. In as much as the public
sector understands the importance of commitment, reward
can be utilised to influence it. Fair and just reward attached
to impressive competencies makes OC increase among the
employees. Managers in the public sector can seize this
opportunity because it turns out to be a channel of relevant
work efficiency of the employees. In addition, managers can
class reward as a germane factor of current OC programs in
their organisations, for it has the potential to foster the
progress factor in line with the performance of employees.

While this study was carried out, the researchers were faced
with some limitations which include the characteristics of the
respondents in the population and the sample size. The pool
of the respondents was drawn from employees in LG with
a small sample size. Coupled with this is the problem of
common method bias. The items of the questionnaire used
for the survey of this study were mixed and the collected
data was self-reported. However, the research design was
cross-sectional. We suggest that future studies can use a
longitudinal or experimental design to get a better result.

This work is based on the doctorate degree dissertation of
K.G.S. titled ‘Examining the effect of human resources practices
on organisational commitment in the Nigerian public service
sector’, which will be submitted (planned date of completion:
June 2020) to the Near East University, North Cyprus. The co-
author of this article is the supervisor of the dissertation.

Page 9 of 11 Original Research Open Access

Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no financial or personal
relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them
in writing this article.

Authors’ contributions
Both the authors contributed equally to the planning,
researching, structuring, writing and the revision of the

Ethical consideration
This article followed all ethical standards for a research
without direct contact with human or animal subjects

Funding information
This research received no specific grant from any funding
agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Data availability statement
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data
were created or analysed in this study.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of
the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or
position of any affiliated agency of the authors.

Abbah, M.T. (2014). Employee motivation: The key to effective organization

management in Nigeria. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 16(4), 1–8.

Ahmed, I., Ismail, W.K.W., Amin, S.M., Ramzan, M., & Khan, M.K. (2012). Theorizing
antecedents of perceived organization support: A literature review approach.
Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 12(5), 692–698.

Allen, N.J., & Meyer, J.P. (1990). Organizational socialization tactics: A longitudinal
analysis of links to newcomers’ commitment and role orientation. Academy of
Management Journal, 33(4), 847–858.

Al-Zawahreh, A., & Al-Madi, F. (2012). The utility of equity theory in enhancing
organizational effectiveness. European Journal of Economics, Finance and
Administrative Sciences, 46(3), 159–169.

Al Zefeiti, S.M.B., & Mohamad, N.A. (2017). The Influence of organizational
commitment on Omani public employees’ work performance. International
Review of Management and Marketing, 7(2), 151–160.

Armstrong, M. (2010). Armstrong’s handbook of reward management practice:
Improving performance through reward. London: Kogan Page Publishers.

Anku, J.S., Amewugah, B.K., & Glover, M.K. (2018). Concept of reward management,
reward system and corporate efficiency. International Journal of Economics,
Commerce and Management, 6(2), 627–637.

Azeem, S.M. (2010). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment among
employees in the Sultanate of Oman. Psychology, 1(04), 295–299. https://doi:

Asaari, M. H. A. H., Desa, N. M., & Subramaniam, L. (2019). Influence of Salary,
Promotion, and Recognition toward Work Motivation among Government Trade
Agency Employees. International Journal of Business and Management, 14(4),

Brenda, K., & Onuoha, B.C. (2016). Reward management strategies and organizational
commitment in the banking industry in Yenagoa, Bayelsa state. International
Journal of Advanced Academic Research/Social and Management sciences, 2(8),

Brown, L.A., & Roloff, M.E. (2015). Organizational citizenship behaviour: Organizational
communication, and burnout: The buffering role of perceived organizational
support and psychological contracts. Communication Quarterly, 63(4), 384–404.

Çelik, D.A. (2014). Enabling more objective performance appraisals: A training
program model of pinpointing. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 150,

Chen, F., Yang, M., Gao, W., Liu, Y., & De Gieter, S. (2015). Impact of satisfactions with
psychological reward and pay on Chinese nurses’ work attitudes. Applied Nursing
Research, 28(4), e29–e34.

Chernyak-Hai, L., & Rabenu, E. (2018). The new era workplace relationships: Is social
exchange theory still relevant? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 11(3),

Coyle-Shapiro, J.A.M., Morrow, P.C., Richardson, R., & Dunn, S.R. (2002). Using profit
sharing to enhance employee attitudes: A longitudinal examination of the effects
on trust and commitment. Human Resource Management: Published in
Cooperation with the School of Business Administration, The University of
Michigan and in alliance with the Society of Human Resources Management,
41(4), 423–439.

Cristofori, I., Salvi, C., Beeman, M., & Grafman, J. (2018). The effects of expected
reward on creative problem solving. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral
Neuroscience, 18(5), 925–931.

Dad, H., Ali, R., Janjua, M.Z.Q., Shahzad, S., & Khan, M.S. (2010). Comparison of the
frequency and effectiveness of positive and negative reinforcement practices in
schools. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 3(1), 127–136. https://doi.

Danish, R.Q., & Usman, A. (2010). Impact of reward and recognition on job satisfaction and
motivation: An empirical study from Pakistan. International Journal of Business
and Management, 5(2), 159–167.

Demir, C., Sahin, B., Teke, K., Ucar, M., & Kursun, O. (2009). Organizational commitment
of military physicians. Military medicine, 174(9), 929–935. https://doi.

Dewhurst, M., Guthridge, M., & Mohr, E. (2009). Motivating people: Getting beyond
money. McKinsey Quarterly, 1(4), 12–15.

Dhar, R.L. (2015). Service quality and the training of employees: The mediating role of
organizational commitment. Tourism Management, 46, 419–430. https://doi.

Duraisingam, V., & Skinner, N. (2005). Performance appraisal. In N. Skinner,
A.M. Roche, J.O’Connor, Y. Pollard, & C. Todd (Eds.), Workforce development TIPS
(Theory into practice strategies): A resource kit for the alcohol and other drugs
field. Adelaide: National Centre for Education and Training on Addiction (NCETA),
Flinders University.

Eisenberger, R., & Stinglhamber, F. (2011). Perceived organizational support: Fostering
enthusiastic and productive employees. Washington, DC: APA Books.

Elizur, D., & Koslowsky, M. (2001). Values and organizational commitment.
International Journal of Manpower, 22(7), 593–599. 10.
1108/01437720110408967 Erdogan, B. (2000). Antecedents and consequences of
justice perceptions in performance appraisals. Human Resource Management
Review, 12(4), 555–578. (02)00070-0

Fekete, M., & Rozenberg, I. (2014). The practical model of employee performance
evaluation. In Human capital without borders: Knowledge and learning for quality
of life; Proceedings of the Management, Knowledge and Learning International
Conference (MakeLearn), Portoroz Slovenia, 25-27 June 2014. pp. 141–149.

Franco-Santos, M., & Gomez-Mejia, L. (2015). Reward systems. Human Resource
Management, 1-6.

Gbande, R. (2016). Effects of reward system on productivity in the local government
system in Benue state. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 7(22),

Guo, S., Guo, X., Fang, Y., & Vogel, D. (2017). How doctors gain social and economic
returns in online health-care communities: A professional capital perspective.
Journal of Management Information Systems, 34(2), 487–519.

Hamukwaya, S.I., & Yazdanifard, R. (2014). How a proper performance related reward
system can contribute to work performance excellence. Open Journal of Business
and Management, 2(03), 189–194.

Hsu, C., Yin, C.P., & Huang, M.F. (2017). Understanding exchangers’ attitudes and
intentions to engage in Internet bartering based on SET and TRA. International
Journal of Business and Information, 12(2), 149–182.

Irefin, P., & Mechanic, M. (2014). Effect of employee commitment on organizational
performance on Coca Cola Nigeria limited Maiduguri, Borno State. IOSR Journal of
Humanities and Social Science, 19(3), 33–41.

Islam, R., & bin Mohd Rasad, S. (2006). Employee performance evaluation by the AHP:
A case study. Asia Pacific Management Review, 11(3), 1–16.

Jacobson, N., Trojanowski, L., & Dewa, C.S. (2012). What do peer support workers do?
A job description. BMC Health Services Research, 12(1), 205–216. https://doi.

Jeong, M., & Oh, H. (2017). Business-to-business social exchange relationship beyond
trust and commitment. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 65,

Kang, H., & Shen, J. (2016). International performance appraisal practices and
approaches of South Korean MNEs in China. The International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 27(3), 291–310.

Karami, A., Dolatabadi, H.R., & Rajaeepour, S. (2013). Analyzing the effectiveness of
reward management system on employee performance through the mediating
role of employee motivation, case study: Isfahan regional electric company.
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 3(9),

Page 10 of 11 Original Research Open Access

Kassabgy, O., Boraie, D., & Schmidt, R. (2001). Values, rewards, and job satisfaction in
ESL/EFL. In Z. Dornyei & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Motivation and second language
acquisition (pp. 213–237). Honolulu: University of Hawaii, National Foreign
Language Resource Center.

Khan, F., Rasli, A.M., Yusoff, R.M., Ahmed, T., ur Rehman, A., & Khan, M.M. (2014). Job
rotation, job performance, organizational commitment: An empirical study on
bank employees. Journal of Management Info, 1(3), 10–13. https://doi.

Korir, I & Kipkebut, D (2016). The effect of reward management on employee’s
commitment in the universities in Nakuru county – Kenya. Journal of human
Resources Management, 4(4), 37–48. 2016

Krejcie, R.V., & Morgan, D.W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607–610.

Lin, C.P., Chiu, C.K., & Liu, N.T. (2019). Developing virtual team performance: An
integrated perspective of social exchange and social cognitive theories. Review
of Managerial Science, 13(4), 671–688.

Liu, Y., Loi, R., & Ngo, H.Y. (2018). Linking organizational social exchange to intention
to leave: Does normative commitment matter? The International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 1–21.

Lok, P., & Crawford, J. (2004). The effect of organisational culture and leadership style
on job satisfaction and organisational commitment: A cross-national comparison.
Journal of Management Development, 23(4), 321–338.

Long, R. (2000). Employee profit sharing: Consequences and moderators. Relations
Industrielles/Industrial Relations, 55(3), 477-504.

Luthans, F., & Kreitner R. (1985). Organizational behavior modification and beyond.
Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.

Mabaso, C.M., & Dlamini, B.I. (2018). Total rewards and its effects on organisational
commitment in higher education institutions. South African Journal of
Human Resource Management, 16(1), 1–8.

Mader-Clark, M. (2013). The job description handbook. California: Nolo Publishing

Maicibi, N.A. (2003). Pertinent issues in employees management. Kampala: MPK
Graphics (U) Ltd.

Malhotra, N., Budhwar, P., & Prowse, P. (2007). Linking rewards to commitment: An
empirical investigation of four UK call centres. The International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 18(12), 2095–2128. 09585190

Meyer, J.P., & Allen, N.J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace. Theory, research and
application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Miao, Q., Newman, A., Sun, Y., & Xu, L. (2013). What factors influence the
organizational commitment of public sector employees in China? The role of
extrinsic, intrinsic and social rewards. The International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 24(17), 3262–3280.

Milgo, A.C., Namusonge, G., Kanali, C., & Makokha, E.N. (2014). Reward and
compensation as a determinant of employee commitment: A survey of KTDA
tea factories in Kenya. European Journal of Business and Management, 6(15),

Molm, L.D., Takahashi, N., & Peterson, G. (2000). Risk and trust in social exchange: An
experimental test of a classical proposition. American Journal of Sociology, 105(5),

Mujtaba, B.G., & Shuaib, S. (2010). An equitable total rewards approach to pay for
performance management. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 11(4),

Nazir, S., Qun, W., Hui, L., & Shafi, A. (2018). Influence of social exchange relationships
on affective commitment and innovative behavior: Role of perceived
organizational support. Sustainability, 10(12), 4418.

Nazir, S., Shafi, A., Qun, W., Nazir, N., & Tran, Q.D. (2016). Influence of organizational
rewards on organizational commitment and turnover intentions. Employee
Relations, 38(4), 596–619.

Nehmeh, R. (2009). What is organizational commitment, why should managers want
it in their workforce and is there any cost effective way to secure it. Swiss
Management Centre Working Paper, 5, 1-11. Retrieved from https://www.

Nunkoo, R. (2016). Toward a more comprehensive use of social exchange theory
to study residents’ attitudes to tourism. Procedia Economics and Finance, 39,

Nwokocha, I. (2016). Managing reward strategy to enhance employee performance,
retention and productivity in organizations: A general overview. International
Journal of Development and Management Review, 11(1), 20–38.

Okinyi, O.M. (2015). Effect of reward practices on employee commitment in faith-
based health organizations in Kakamega County, Kenya. International Journal of
Management Research & Review, 5(5), 729–743.

Onyishi, A.O., Eme, O.I., & Emeh, I.E.J. (2012). Problems of personnel management in
Nigeria: The Nigerian local government system experience. Oman Chapter of
Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 34(953), 1–14.

Osemeke, M. (2016). Identification of determinants of organizational commitment
and employee job satisfaction. An International Multi-disciplinary Journal,
Ethiopia, 10(2), 81–102.

Othman, N. (2014). Employee performance appraisal satisfaction: The case evidence
from Brunei’s Civil Service. Doctoral dissertation, University of Manchester.

Oyeniyi, O. (2013). Organizational commitment and market orientation of Nigerian
non-oil exporting companies. African Journal of Economic and Management
Studies, 4(1), 95–108.

Paşaoğlu, D. (2015). Analysis of the relationship between human resources
management practices and organizational commitment from a strategic
perspective: Findings from the banking industry. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 207, 315–324.

Paulsen, M. B. (2002). Evaluating teaching performance. New Directions for
Institutional Research, 2002(114), 5-18.

Permarupan, P.Y., Al-Mamun, A., Saufi, R.A., & Zainol, N.R.B. (2013). Organizational
climate on employees’ work passion: A review. Canadian Social Science, 9(4),

Pettijohn, C.E., Pettijohn, L.S., & Taylor, A.J. (2000). Research note: An exploratory
analysis of salesperson perceptions of the criteria used in performance appraisals,
job satisfaction, and organizational commitment. Journal of Personal Selling &
Sales Management, 20(2), 77–80.

Pitt, L.F., Foreman, S.K., & Bromfield, D. (1995). Organizational commitment and
service delivery: Evidence from an industrial setting in the UK. International
Journal of Human Resource Management, 6(2), 369–389.

Sabatelli, R.M., Lee, H., & Ripoll-Núñez, K. (2018). Placing the social exchange
framework in an ecological context. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 10(1),

Salami, S.O. (2008). Demographic and psychological factors predicting organizational
commitment among industrial workers. The Anthropologist, 10(1), 31–38. https://

Saleem, S. (2011). The impact of financial incentives on employees’ commitment.
European Journal of Business and Management, 3(4), 258–266.

Sam-Okere, J., & Agbeniga, F.I. (2014). Training as capacity development for
effectiveness and productivity of lower cadre employees of local governments.
Journal of Research and Development, 2(3), 1–10.

Saturno, P.J., Palmer, R.H., & Gascón, J.J. (1999). Physician attitudes, self-estimated
performance and actual compliance with locally peer-defined quality evaluation
criteria. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 11(6), 487–496. https://

Scott, H.K., & Cogburn, M. (2017). Behavior modification. In StatPearls [Internet].
StatPearls Publishing. Retrieved June from

Seniwoliba, J.A. (2014). Assessing the performance appraisal concept of the Local
Government Service in Ghana. African Journal of Business Management, 8(15),

Shen, J. (2004). International performance appraisals: Policies, practices and determinants
in the case of Chinese multinational companies. International Journal of
Manpower, 25(6), 547–563.

Simmons, R. (2015). Constraints on evidence-based policy: Insights from government
practices. Building research & information, 43(4), 407-419.

Šišinački, A., Dobiš, B., & Šišinački, J. (2017). Successful organizations driven
by employee performance evaluation. Obrazovanje za poduzetništvo-E4E:
znanstveno stručni časopis o obrazovanju za poduzetništvo, 7(2), 189–204.

Skinner, B. F. 1969. Contingencies of reinforcement. New York: Appleton-Century-

Smyth, I., & Zimba, C. (2019). An investigation into apprenticeship completion and
retention in Northern Ireland: A social exchange perspective. International Journal
of Training and Development, 23(1), 89–115.

Sungu, L.J., Weng, Q.D., & Kitule, J.A. (2019). When organizational support yields both
performance and satisfaction: The role of performance ability in the lens of social
exchange theory. Personnel Review, 48(6), 1410–1428.

Taba, M.I. (2018). Mediating effect of work performance and organizational
commitment in the relationship between reward system and employees’ work
satisfaction. Journal of Management Development, 37(1), 65–75. https://doi.

Tokay, Ö., & Eyupoglu, S.Z. (2018). Employee perceptions of organisational democracy
and its influence on organisational citizenship behaviour. South African Journal of
Business Management, 49(1), 1–9.

Tsai, J.C.A., & Kang, T.C. (2019). Reciprocal intention in knowledge seeking: Examining
social exchange theory in an online professional community. International Journal
of Information Management, 48, 161–174.

Tsede, O. A., & Kutin, E. (2013). Total reward concept: A key motivational tool for
corporate Ghana. Business and Economic Research, 3(2), 173-188. https://doi.

Van der Hoek, M., Groeneveld, S., & Kuipers, B. (2018). Goal setting in teams:
Goal clarity and team performance in the public sector. Review of public
personnel administration, 38(4), 472-493.

Venclová, K., Salková, A., & Kolácková, G. (2013). Identification of employee
performance appraisal methods in agricultural organizations. Journal of
Competitiveness, 5(2), 20–36.

Page 11 of 11 Original Research Open Access

Verbeeten, F. H. (2008). Performance management practices in public sector
organizations. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 21(3), 427-454.

Wikhamn, W., & Hall, A.T. (2012). Social exchange in a Swedish work environment.
International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(23), 56-64.

Wrzesniewski, A., McCauley, C., Rozin, P., & Schwartz, B. (1997). Jobs, careers, and
callings: People’s relations to their work. Journal of Research in Personality, 31(1),

Zafirovski, M. (2005). Social exchange theory under scrutiny: A positive critique of its
economic-behaviorist formulations. Electronic Journal of Sociology, 2(2), 1–40.

Copyright of South African Journal of Business Management is the property of African
Online Scientific Information System PTY LTD and its content may not be copied or emailed
to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

Looking for top-notch essay writing services? We've got you covered! Connect with our writing experts today. Placing your order is easy, taking less than 5 minutes. Click below to get started.

Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper