Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology

ISSN No:-2456-2165

Effect of Nepotism on Productivity among

Public Servants in Nigeria

OKORO PRINCE NKEMAKOLAM1; KEVIN FERNANDEZ2

FACULTY OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS
UNIVERSITI MALAYA
KUALA LUMPUR

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1918

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

TABLE OF CONTENT

TABLE OF CONTENT 1919

ABSTRACT 1920

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1921

A. Background of The Study 1921

B. Justification of The Study 1921
C. Statement of Problem 1921
D. Research Questions 1922
E. Study Aims and Objectives 1922
F. Research Hypothesis 1923

CHAPTER TWO : Literature Review 1924

A. Introduction 1924
B. Conceptual Framework 1924
C. Theoretical Framework 1925
D. Empirical Review 1926

CHAPTER THREE: Methodology 1927

A. Introduction 1927
B. Research Method 1927
C. Research Philosophy 1927
D. Research Design 1927
E. Sampling Technique 1927
F. Data Collection Method 1927
G. Data Analysis Method 1927
H. Ethical Consideration 1928

CHAPTER FOUR: Result 1929

A. Introduction 1929
B. Reliability Statistics 1929
C. Data Presentation and Analysis 1929
D. Hypothesis Testing 1936

CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION 1939

A. Introduction 1939
B. Summary of Analysis 1939

CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSION 1940

REFERENCES 1941

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1919

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

ABSTRACT

The study aimed to investigate the impact of nepotism on the productivity of public servants within Nigeria's public
sector, with specific objectives including the examination of nepotism's effects on productivity, analysis of favouritism's
influence on productivity, exploration of cronyism's impact on productivity, and assessment of the relationship between
close network ties and effective teamwork in administrative policy. Employing a quantitative research design, data collection
involved the administration of a questionnaire featuring closed-ended questions distributed via an online survey using
Google Forms. Hypotheses were tested through Pearson correlation coefficient analysis. The findings indicated a positive
correlation between nepotism and productivity, as well as between favouritism and productivity within Nigeria's public
sector. Additionally, a weak positive correlation was observed between cronyism and productivity, alongside a similar
correlation between close network ties and effective teamwork in administrative policy. The research concluded that
nepotism significantly influences public servants' productivity within Nigeria's public sector. Recommendations stemming
from these findings include the establishment of transparent recruiting and promotion procedures grounded in merit and
qualifications, the provision of comprehensive training and development opportunities for all employees, and promotion of
diversity and inclusion in the workplace to mitigate nepotism and foster fairness.

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1920

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the Study

In the majority of nations, the public sector is tasked with providing the general public with critical services through institutions
run by government departments, agencies, and ministries (Uche et al. 2019). According to Alabi and Sakariyau (2013) and Kinyua
(2012), government agencies are among the largest employers of employment, therefore the competence and efficacy of public
institutions are essential to the success of countries. Nepotism can easily be allowed to take place in the hiring, promotion, and
training procedures in the management of public institutions, which is in contrast to the ownership and management of private sector
businesses in many countries (such as Nigeria). Compromises in human resource management practices make nepotism easily
tolerable (Nyukorong, 2014).

There is a common misperception that recruiting decisions within the public sector are more usually based on favouritism and
nepotism than on the necessary skills, expertise, or physical health. The intended audience for the job listings is the people who
interact often with these organisations. The public sector is vulnerable to a lot of internal and external pressure as well as bias when
it comes to filling job opportunities (Uche et al., 2019). The top management is under pressure from the political elite and their
friends and relatives. Due to pressure and bias, standards for competence, eligibility, knowledge, and suitability are ignored
throughout the employment process (Paais & Pattiruhu, 2020).

According to Elbaz, Haddoud, and Shehawy (2018), the prevalence of nepotism in human resource practises is a problem that
can be traced back to the diversity of racial and ethnic groups, religious affiliations, and strong familial ties (Firfiray, Cruz, Neacsu,
& Gomez-Mejia, 2018). Worldwide, nepotism affects a variety of organisations, not just those in the public and private sectors
(Gjinovci, 2016). Nepotism is a strategy employed to uphold family relationships at the expense of the productivity and skill of
workers hired by for-profit businesses. When it comes to performance and quality, nepotism almost always brings disappointing
outcomes. They most certainly lack the qualifications for the jobs that friends, family, or people with political clout are expected to
occupy. During trying times, they frequently receive favours, advancements, or protection. This impairs workplace performance
and productivity as well as leadership. While family members gain from nepotism, it harms those who oversee or work for the
unrelated recipients. The workers' perception that there is no fairness in the workplace is impacted by this circumstance. As a result,
a lack of confidence affects enthusiasm, efficiency, and satisfaction with work (Büte and Tekarslan, 2010). Nepotism, cronyism,
and favouritism are on the rise inside the public sector, relative to the private sector (Shabbir & Siddique, 2017). The key enabler
of nepotism, cronyism, and favouritism in these businesses is upper management. Favouritism often appears everywhere and, in
most organisations, (Ozler & Buyukarslan, 2011). When a competent individual is not hired due to personal bias, this practice is
known as favouritism (Kwon, 2006). Yet, nepotism must lead to a decline in organisational performance (Shabbir & Siddique,
2017). Favouritism, nepotism, and cronyism are the primary causes of employee dissatisfaction in any organisation (Ozler &
Buyukarslan, 2011). The argument is made in earlier literature that favouritism, nepotism, and cronyism have an impact on employee
careers and organisational success.

B. Justification of the Study

Nepotism, cronyism, and favouritism have all received criticism for allegedly being unethical (Abdalla, Magharabi & Raggad,
1998). Although wealthy countries have laws against preferential treatment, these practices are nevertheless widespread in
developing countries (Boadi, 2000). Significantly preferentially treated organisations are unable to manage their human resources
divisions independently. As a result, obtaining appointments based on the acquisition of skills and knowledge would seem
unachievable under these circumstances. If an employee is up against someone with privilege, they have a very slim probability of
earning the promotion. The research presented here aims to comprehend how nepotism affects public servants' productivity in
Nigeria's public sectors. There is a dearth of empirical information on the connection between nepotism and worker productivity in
the public sector, regardless of the actuality that research has examined nepotism with its effect on organisational outcome variables
with ambiguous results. Considering the foregoing, this study is vital to collect empirical information on the impact of nepotistic
practices on employees' productivity, particularly in the setting of Nigeria, where political intrigue permeates every aspect of life.

C. Statement of Problem
The term “nepotism” raises doubts because the word is filled with subtleties and concealed meanings, it describes the
interaction of organisational politics that results in a person's appointment to a role primarily because of their relatedness (i.e.,
familial ties, or lineage) (Bute, 2011). One of the issues facing modern firm management is the use of nepotism, which frequently
disregards the requirements for experience, professional expertise and mindset. Instead of using the merit-based reference, nepotism
focuses mostly on organisational political activity (Yasir et al., 2013). Particularly in the current system of political patronage,
nepotism has merged with the undesired culture that is being displaced daily. The practice of giving preferential treatment to kins
of institution owners or administrators is known as nepotism, which is a kind of corruption. According to some, the public sector
has devolved into a haven for nepotism as a result of poor institutional governance, with spouses, aunts, cousins, and brothers of top
management employees being hired to fill key posts regardless of their qualifications. Merit-based hiring and evaluation therefore
seem unlikely in such a situation. The detrimental impact of nepotism on employee productivity in the public sector cannot be

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1921

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

overstated because it undermines meritocracy, reduces job satisfaction, and demoralises the workforce. The high level of favouritism
in appointments, promotions, and resource allocation based solely on family or personal connections fosters a toxic work
environment that limits the potential of qualified employees and denies the general public services that could improve their well-
being. Additionally, nepotism within the public sector promotes corruption, which negatively affects the economy of the entire
nation. The prevalence of corruption within the public sector rises as an outcome of those who are appointed based on their
connections feeling compelled to their supporters and frequently engaging in dishonest behaviour to repay them. To achieve
sustainable development in the administration of publicly held institutions, cutting-edge human resource practices that are opposed
to the ideals of fairness, justice, and equity must be checked (James, 2018).

Legislative measures are used to prevent nepotistic behaviour in developed countries; however, despite these measures' benefits
to those nations, nepotistic behaviour persists frequently in the everyday operations of the business environment in developing
countries because the policies against such behaviour are not implemented there (Boadi, 2000; Arasli et al., 2006).

There has been a delay in studies on how nepotism impacts the effective operation of public sectors in terms of organisational
performance and ethical competence, although research on issues of corruption, nepotism, and godfatherism in most management
is expanding.

Despite efforts to improve worker productivity, the prevalence of nepotism in Nigeria's government sectors continues to cause
concern. Therefore, it could be essential to comprehend how nepotism impacts productivity in Nigeria's public sectors to create
efficient policies and procedures to address the issue and optimise these sectors' productivity potential. The negative effects of
nepotism on employee output in Nigeria's public sectors highlight a serious issue that affects such sectors. Nepotism is a pervasive
practice in Nigeria's public sector, where people are routinely appointed based on their political affiliations, family ties, and personal
connections rather than their qualifications and performance. Nepotism's negative effects on employee productivity in Nigeria's
public sectors highlight a pressing problem that necessitates immediate government action to address. To improve Nigeria's public
sector's productivity and performance, the government must combat corruption, increase transparency, and promote meritocracy in
the selection of public officials.

In Nigeria, most government officials use their positions to assist others who are close to them even when they are unqualified
for the position. Due to nepotism, hiring and promotion decisions are no longer primarily based on merit, and inexperienced and
inept people are regularly appointed to positions of leadership. Such people might not have the skills required to perform the work
properly if they are hired for positions requiring specific training and knowledge. This could lead to inefficiency, poor decision-
making, and a lack of responsibility and may compromise the standards of public service. In the public sector, job interviews and
other selection criteria are compromised to ensure that the preferred candidate is appointed, to the actual performance of the job,
and the merit-based hiring and promotion system is eliminated due to nepotism. In this process, the nepotistic relationship is
exploited to engage in unethical behaviour like embezzlement and bribery, this can occur at various levels of government. These
corrupt practices can have detrimental effects on society as a whole, including the loss of public finances/monies, the decline in
public trust in public institutions, the incapacity of governmental organisations to successfully carry out their mandates, and
underqualified people who commonly hold positions of authority. As a result, the standard of service is frequently subpar, which
undermines public administration's trustworthiness. Governments therefore must combat nepotism and guarantee that public
appointments are made based on qualifications and merit rather than personal connections.

D. Research Questions

 The Study will Address the Following Research Questions;

 What is the effect of nepotism on the productivity of public servants in Nigeria’s public sector?
 Why is there an effect of favouritism on the productivity of public servants in Nigeria’s public sector?
 How does cronyism affect the productivity of public servants in the public sector in Nigeria?
 How do close network ties produce effective teamwork in administrative policy?

E. Study Aims and Objectives

This study aims to analyse the effect of nepotism on the productivity of public servants within Nigeria’s public sector. The
specific objectives are;

 To examine the effect of nepotism on the productivity of public servants in Nigeria’s public sector.
 To analyse the effect of favouritism on public servants' productivity in Nigeria's public sector.
 To investigate the effect of cronyism on public servants' productivity in Nigeria's public sector.
 To examine if close network ties produce effective teamwork in administrative policy.

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1922

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

F. Research Hypothesis

 The following Hypotheses in the Research Include:

 H1: There is no significant relationship between nepotism and the productivity of public servants in Nigeria’s public sector.
 H2: There is no significant relationship between favouritism and public servants' productivity in Nigeria's public sector.
 H3: There is no significant relationship between cronyism and public servants' productivity in Nigeria's public sector.
 H4: There is no significant relationship between close network ties and effective teamwork in administrative policy

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1923

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW

A. Introduction
This section critically examines the concepts, the theories and the empirical review of past findings. It explains the key concept
in the research topic, the theories relating to the study and the gap statement in the study.

B. Conceptual Framework

 Nepotism
The word nepotism has a negative connotation. When a position in a company is passed down to a person's family or relatives
without any interviewing or screening, this is known as nepotism. (Fisman, 2017). Nepotism is the technique of offering members
of one's family preferential treatment, usually through employment (Rimvydas and Ieva, 2020). When ties are more important than
credentials, competencies, abilities, and experience, nepotism is present and it has an impact on both employee and organisational
success (Nadeem, Ahmad, Ahmad, Batoo, & Shafique, 2015).

However, when talented employees find out about nepotism, they become unmotivated, their performance falls short of
expectations, and the majority of employees abandon their jobs; as a result, the turnover ratio in these organisations is exceptionally
high (Aldossari & Bourne, 2016). According to Breuer (2010), the workplace has developed for years to represent the diversity of
the people who work there, including their various backgrounds and points of view. However, the unfortunate truth is that nepotism
is still prevalent in the workplace, and it controls many aspects of business operations, including recruitment, promotions, and
compensation increases, amongst others. It poses a significant risk not only to the expansion of a business but also to the
advancement of an individual's profession. Nepotism can be very disheartening, particularly in conditions where jobs are scarce,
particularly if you see that someone else is getting a position that you believe you are qualified for. This practice can be found in
virtually all organisations, both governmental and private, and it is widespread. The most significant drawback of favouritism in the
workplace is that it frequently results in the exclusion of competent individuals who would have been able to make a significant
contribution to the organisation's overall performance, while also providing an advantage to those who do not merit it (Labrague et
al., 2017). It is critical to keep in mind that workplace nepotism primarily facilitates the appointment of candidates for positions
with lower levels of education, training, and experience based on their relationships with the hiring manager, other managers, or the
chief executive officer of the company (Meyer and Allen, 1990). Both developing and established nations experience a high level
of nepotism (Arash & Tumer, 2008).

 Favouritism
Favouritism is one factor that contributes to workplace tension in the hospitality sector. Favouritism refers to the practice of
hiring nieces, nephews, or other relatives primarily based on their kinship rather than their competence. Also, it is a form of special
treatment given to particular people based on their social connections (Iqbal & Ahmad, 2020). Such actions portray partiality and
unfairness, qualities that have been shown time and time again to pose a negative impact on employee outcomes. Favouritism fosters
knowledge-hiding behaviour and reduces workers' psychological capital. Favouritism could be real or perceived, and either would
be detrimental to the success of the firm and the well-being of its personnel. As a result, the worker might hide information that is
crucial to the operation of the business (Abubakar et al., 2017; Gaskin et al., 2016).

Nepotism and cronyism are two major types of favouritism, and they are both ethical issues for businesses in Malaysia, Nigeria,
and around the globe. Numerous writers have made the case that nepotism is harmful for some reasons (e.g., Bayhan, 2002; Ateş,
2005; Zler et al, 2007; Genç and Deryal, 2006; Arasl and Tümer, 2008; Ztürk, 2008). Public servants who are chosen for their family
connections may not perform as well as applicants who are appropriately qualified because they lack the requisite expertise and
understanding to do the job effectively. As a direct consequence of this, organisational harmony, fairness, and motivation are
annihilated, and inefficiency, a dearth of training opportunities, and stagnation in professional development are also produced.

 Cronyism
Appointing someone to a public post based on a friendship or its derivatives constitutes cronyism. According to Aligica and
Tarko (2014), cronyism is now classified as a relational or structural occurrence. The definition of cronyism as an interpersonal or
relational occurrence is "a mutually beneficial interaction wherein party A demonstrates preference to party B due to common
membership in a community of individuals at the cost of party C's comparable or greater entitlement to the prized resource" (Khatri
et al., 2006, p. 62). In a nutshell, favouritism given to an individual due to their relationships with others is known as cronyism.
Recruitment of close companions, friends, and close relatives without thoroughly evaluating their suitability for crucial positions.
Cronyism is an economic framework "in which individuals related to the political establishment who develop and implement policies
receive privileges that have significant economic value" as a structural or systemic phenomenon (Haber, 2002, p. 22). This kind of
system is known as "crony capitalism." In crony capitalism, companies cultivate and profit from their connections to politicians to
influence public policy in the direction of their goals (Smith & Sutter, 2012).

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1924

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

 Meritocracy
Meritocracy, as defined by Poocharoen and Brillantes (2013) and Imbroscio (2016), is a social system in which a person's
advancement within the community is determined by their skills and accomplishments as opposed to by their position in society,
familial background, or financial situation. Meritocracy, in particular, has grown in popularity as a good system in Western
countries. It is closely associated with the egalitarian and capitalist ideologies that are at the heart of the "American Dream." (Sealy,
2010). According to research by So (2015) and Zhang (2015), Asia was where the idea of meritocracy first arose, suggesting that it
was there before it spread to Western societies.

Meritocracy has ingrained the idea that anyone can succeed in today's society if they acquire the required skills, enabling
members of low-status groups to harbour aspirations of rising to higher social, economic, and hierarchical status (Wiederkehr et al.,
2015). In this way, meritocracy has been a driving force behind the upward movement that has kept society under control and
quelled unhappiness. Meritocracy has become ingrained as a guiding concept in many Confucian-heavy Asian nations, including
Malaysia, Singapore, Korea, and China. Meritocracy has been examined in a variety of academic sectors, including business, public
administration, education, psychology, and others, to better understand the cultural and social setting in which we live.

The phrase "meritocracy" is portrayed in literature in a variety of ways. One technique is to consider meritocracy ideas as one
of the philosophies that promote a status-focused system. (Major and Kaiser, 2017). In this approach, the label "status-legitimising
beliefs" (SLBs) is used to characterise how the Meritocracy components of upward social mobility and hard effort are employed to
understand events in ways that explain social differences. As a result, SLBs incorporate two of the fundamental criteria of the
Meritocracy worldview.

Another tactic is to apply the Protestant Work Ethic (PWE; Weber, 1958). PWE symbolises the meritocracy notion that tenacity
is the secret to success, which was originally emphasised as a core characteristic. Consequently, PWE conviction is a component of
meritocracy. It is interesting to observe that the two conceptualizations of the "meritocracy" belief appear to be founded on identical
justification-motivated logic (Kunda, 1990), which asserts that people with a low social standing are more inclined to experience
unfair treatment and are additionally probable to be considered accountable due to their comparative disadvantage position (Levy
et al., 2005, 2006, 2010; Major and Kaiser, 2017). The meritocratic idea has been used in private companies as well; it frequently
corresponds with recruiting practices that evaluate candidates' services to the business while assessing achievement (Barbosa, 2014).
S'liwa and Johansson (2014) claim that Western businesses have long used the meritocratic management style to only handle hiring,
choosing, and promoting workers following meritocratic principles as opposed to the appointment and promotion of persons at
random.

C. Theoretical Framework

 Equity Theory
The premise of equity theory is that when employees sense unfairness in employment practices, they become disinterested in
both their employers and their positions. Employees may respond to this in a variety of ways, including demotivation, decreased
effort, discontentment, or in more extreme cases, disturbance. According to the 1965 Adams' Equity Theory of Motivation,
productive results and high levels of motivation are only possible when workers feel like their treatment is equitable. This concept
is comparable to Maslow's hierarchy of needs and Herzberg's two sorts of motivation, intrinsic and extrinsic. In business settings,
industrial psychologists frequently use equity theory to describe how a worker's motivation and their perceptions of fair or unfair
treatment are related. The equity theory, according to Adams (1965), presents the idea of societal comparisons by having workers
assess their personal inputs or results proportions in the context of comparisons with the contributions or results proportions of other
staff members. Inputs in this case include the employee's drive and desire, as well as their time, knowledge, credentials, and
experience (Carrell and Dittrich, 1978). Financial compensation, perks, bonuses, and flexible work schedules are examples of
outcomes. Employees who sense inequality will attempt to lessen it by altering inputs and/or outcomes directly, engaging in a
process known as cognitive distortion, or quitting the company (Carrell and Dittrich, 1978). These perceptions of injustice, or more
particularly corporate justice, are perceptions of inequity. This consequently has far-reaching effects on employee productivity and
performance as well as nepotism.

 Ethical Theory
Human actions should only be driven by goodwill, according to Immanuel Kant's ethical theory; the other two are not thought
to be morally acceptable. No matter whether one agrees with the approach or decision, one should only be driven by a sense of
obligation, according to the concept of "goodwill." (Graafland 2007, p. 176). The inference that motivation based on nepotism is
not motivated by kindness is made possible by this theory. Nepotism in the business world can be referred to as business corruption,
particularly if obligation ethics are used to explain the issue. The basic thesis of this statement is that a person should, under moral
norms, hire friends who have relevant industrial expertise over other applicants, even if they are more qualified, or have a higher
education. Nepotism, however, would be improper if one were to view this concept from the perspective of moral responsibility
because one should hire a worker who is thought to be more qualified for the post.

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1925

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

Furthermore, according to Schlick (2008), the urge to place morality's foundation on an unshakeable basis or maybe even to
eliminate the need for a foundation gives rise to the ethics of obligation. (p. 206). This theory contends that there are particular
standards for the ideal candidate in terms of nepotism. Relatives should not be hired unless they satisfy the qualifications or have
"absolutely firm ground" (Schlick 2008, p. 206). Otherwise, it amounts to corporate corruption and cannot be utilised to support the
ethical theory known as the ethics of responsibility. The issue is that, according to the ethics of responsibility, one should follow the
rules established at work and should not let personal preferences or other considerations get in the way of what they should do. Even
if individuals choose to employ relatives because it is morally right to do so and because it is in line with their moral convictions,
nepotism should be outlawed at all levels of authority, whether in business or politics.

D. Empirical Review
Büte (2011) looked into how nepotism affected the actions of staff of public banks operating in Ankara, Turkey, using a study
sample of 243 participants. According to his research, nepotism substantially lowers organisational commitment, work satisfaction,
and intent to keep staff.

Additionally, Nadeem et al. (2015) examined Pakistani telecom industry organisations. Their study also highlighted the
detrimental effects of favouritism and nepotism, showing that it was common practice to fill positions based on personal preferences.
Although it used to be the norm in only public organisations, this is no longer the situation. Both of the instances given were from
Muslim nations, where hiring relatives through nepotism is commonplace (Abdalla et al., 1998). This is because, like other less
developed nations, the state sector is the biggest employer in those nations.

Hussein and Jaafar (2023) conducted a study to explore the influence of nepotism and knowledge sharing (KS) on academic
staff productivity (PAS) in Jordan. While performance has been extensively studied in corporate settings, there is a dearth of research
on this topic within educational environments, particularly in developing countries where factors such as nepotism and trust have
not been sufficiently examined. The primary objective of this research is to investigate how trust, nepotism, and KS impact the
productivity of academic staff, while also examining the mediating role of trust in the relationship between nepotism, KS, and PAS.
Drawing upon theories and previous research, the study hypothesized that trust would moderate both the positive effects of KS and
trust on PAS, as well as the adverse effects of nepotism on PAS. Participants in the study were academic staff members based in
Amman, Jordan's capital city. Utilizing stratified random sampling, a total of 332 responses were gathered through an online survey.
Data analysis was conducted using Smart PLS.

The findings revealed that while nepotism poses a negative impact on PAS, both KS and trust had a positive influence.
Furthermore, trust was found to mediate the relationship between KS and PAS. These results suggest that institutions and individuals
are less effective in environments characterized by nepotism. Private sector organisations in developed nations typically perform
better than those in developing countries. However, this does not preclude the possibility of observing favouritism and cronyism in
those nations. On the other hand, these nations also frequently notice this phenomenon. For instance, according to surveys carried
out in Canada and Denmark, Ferlazzo and Sdoia (2012) found that 6% of participants said they were working for the same companies
that had previously hired both of their parents. It is important to note that Scoppa's study yielded comparable data.

According to Scoppa (2009), parents use their connections and prestige to their children's advantage in the Italian public sector.
According to Scoppa (2009), those who utilised information obtained from the Survey of Household Income and Wealth (SHIW),
which was done by the Bank of Italy every two years alongside samples from approximately 8,000 Italian households, kids of those
working in the public sector had been more probable to obtain employment that was public-sector-related at any level of education.
Except for the Trentino and Lazio regions, public sector employment is more common in Italy's southern regions, which raises the
possibility that there is a connection between socioeconomic status and the frequency of nepotism.

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1926

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY

A. Introduction
This area looks into and discusses the study methods, methodology, strategies, and approaches that were employed within the
course of this research.

B. Research Method
The study utilised a quantitative approach. According to Aliaga and Gunderson (2000), quantitative research collects numerical
data and analyses it using methods that have a mathematical foundation to understand occurrences. Statistics, numbers, and all of
these concepts serve to encapsulate a component of the essence of quantitative techniques. The approach of a quantitative
investigation supports the central principle of the empiricist worldview (Creswell, 2003). Quantitative research is the methodical
empirical analysis of observable events that makes use of statistical, mathematical, or computational techniques.

C. Research Philosophy
The philosophical underpinnings hold that the world exists and is knowable, and that researchers can use quantitative methods
to find it (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2000 in Fekede 2010). Quantitative research is connected to positivist epistemology. Neuman
(2003) asserts that positivism's goal is to find out as well as validate several probabilistic causal laws that can be utilised to predict
significant patterns in human behaviour. This is accomplished by a methodical approach that combines logical reasoning and
empirical research on human behaviour. Continually occurring patterns, knowledge that is complimentary to those patterns, and
factual truths that adhere to the laws of cause and effect are all components of social reality, according to positivism (Crotty, 1998;
Neuman, 2003). Positive thinking's basic tenet is that humanity should make every effort to develop methods that are as objective
as possible to produce the most accurate depictions of reality. While variables interact, shape events, and affect results, the researcher
is independent of the research subject. They commonly develop and put these theories to the test in experimental studies. Its most
well-known contributions include multivariate analysis and statistical prediction techniques. This philosophy holds that precise
knowledge is obtained through the empirical, frequently experimental, direct observation or control of natural processes.
Quantitative research is grounded in positivism, which is an epistemological tenet.

D. Research Design
In this research, a descriptive design was utilized for this research. Descriptive research studies aim to collect information to
systematically describe a subject, environment, or population. Questions such as, "what," "when," "where," and "how" concerning
a study problem will surely be more beneficial than "why?" This strategy considers the use of several research approaches to
investigate the pertinent aspects. According to this method, the researcher just considers what has been stated or happened (Kumar,
2008). The descriptive approach can be used to explore the variables under discussion using a wide range of research methods,
which encompasses quantitative data.

E. Sampling Technique
Purposive sampling was the method of sampling utilised in this study, and individuals were selected due to their familiarity
with the chosen issue and the study's objectives. The population were two hundred (200) employees/participants, from two different
ministries, which are; the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Finance, that is to say, 100 participants each from both ministries
in Nigeria, were chosen as the sample size for this study. The Ministries of Education and Finance were selected as the study's
sample due to their representation of various government sectors and their distinct roles. The research aims to collect perspectives
and ideas from a diverse range of individuals within both ministries.

F. Data Collection Method

The research utilized a meticulously structured survey comprising two subsections. Initially, respondents were prompted to
provide demographic information such as age, gender, education level, and occupation, serving as foundational data for subsequent
analysis. The second section of the survey delineated dependent and independent variables central to the research focus, intended
to probe various facets related to the inquiry topic. The questionnaire was digitized using Google Forms, offering comprehensive
functionalities for robust data collection and management.

G. Data Analysis Method

Throughout this study, data underwent both descriptive and inferential statistical analyses employing various analytical
methods. Initially, descriptive statistical techniques such as mean values, frequency distributions, and percentage breakdowns were
utilized to provide an initial overview of the research findings. Additionally, inferential statistical methods were employed to delve
deeper into the relationship and impact of selected dependent and independent variables and to test hypotheses. Specifically, the
correlation coefficient method was employed to ascertain relationships between variables and validate tested hypotheses. Pearson
correlation analysis, in particular, was utilized to determine the strength and direction of relationships between variable pairs. The
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 26 software was chosen for its robust capabilities in conducting
descriptive and bivariate statistical analyses, generating output predictions, and identifying data clusters.

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1927

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

H. Ethical Consideration
Confidentiality is the practice of keeping respondents' information secret and secretive. They were treated in the strictest
confidence, according to the guarantees provided to respondents. The idea of trust is covered in this component, and participants
will be provided with the reassurance that neither the research's methodology nor its published findings were used to betray or
exploit their trust. The importance of their voluntary involvement and their freedom to withdraw at any moment were made clear to
the respondents. The respondents were explained the idea of informed consent and how it related to the questionnaires.

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1928

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

CHAPTER FOUR
RESULT

A. Introduction
The critical examination and interpretation of the data gathered from the online survey using Google Forms are the primary
topics of this section. The study's hypotheses were investigated using the collected data. To demonstrate the outcome of the study,
the chapter discusses both descriptive and inferential statistics. This chapter also includes information on the respondents'
demographics to the survey.

B. Reliability Statistics

Table 1: Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha N of Items
0.727 30

Table 1 above describes the final survey used in the study, which consisted of 34 questions. Of these, 30 questions employed
a Likert scale to measure the respondents' attitudes and opinions, while four questions were related to the socio-demographic details
of the participants. After receiving 200 responses, the data was analysed using the scale and reliability features in SPSS.

The reliability measures were used to assess the dependability of the survey questions. The statistics utilised to measure the
internal consistency of the items was Cronbach's alpha. The questions were deemed to be reliable, as indicated by Cronbach's alpha
score of 0.727. This result proves that the survey's questions are valid and consistently measure the same concept. The commonly
known internal consistency metric Cronbach's alpha was employed to conduct the dependability test.

C. Data Presentation and Analysis

This section analyses the information received from the participants' online surveys. The evaluation of the survey data is
succinct, and the primary aim of this section is to communicate the findings. To portray the results in an understandable format,
frequency distribution and percentages were used. The main topic of discussion will be the research conclusions and how they relate
to the goals and hypotheses of the investigation.

 Demographic Characteristics

Table 2: Respondents Demographic Characteristics

Variables Items Frequency Percentage
AGE GROUP 21-29 years 81 40.5
30-39 years 81 40.5
40-49 years 30 15.0
50 years and above 8 4.0

SEX Female 98 49.0

Male 96 48.0
Prefer Not Say 6 3.0

JOB LEVEL Junior staff 32 16.0

Management staff 29 14.5
Middle staff 80 40.0
Senior staff 59 29.5

EDUCATIONAL BSc/ HND/ Bachelor 134 67.0

QUALIFICATION MSc/MBA 30 15.0
OND/ NCE 28 14.0
Others 8 4.0

Source - SPSS Output

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1929

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

Fig 1: Graph Showing the Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Demographic Profile of the Survey Respondents.

 Age Group
By the above table, there were a total of 200 respondents. Among the participants, 81 were between the ages of 21 and 29
years, representing 40.5% of the overall participants. Similarly, 81 respondents were from the ages of 30 to 39 years, also making
up 40.5% of the overall participants. 30 participants were between the ages of 40 to 49 years, making up 15% of the overall
participants. In conclusion, 8 participants were 50 years above, representing 4% of the overall respondents. The table demonstrates
that the participants are spread out through a large range of ages, with a higher percentage of them being between the ages of 21 and
29 and 30 and 39 years.

 Sex
The data in the survey outcomes shows that there was a total of 200 participants. Of the 200 participants, 98 of participants
were female, representing 49% of the overall participants. Similarly, 96 of the participants were male, representing 48% of the
overall participants. Moreover, 6 respondents preferred not to state their gender, accounting for 3% of the overall respondents.

This data illustrates that the survey participants are both male as well as female, with most of the participants being female.
The gender distribution of the participants is a fundamental element to take into consideration when analysing the research’s
discoveries. The information also describes that a small fraction of participants preferred not to disclose their gender.

 Job Level
The survey successfully captured a wide range of staff from various organisation levels of the public sector, which shows that
from the 200 participants, 32 of them are junior staff, accounting for 16% of the overall respondents. Also, 29 of the participants
are management workers, representing 14.5% of the overall participants. In addition, 80 of the participants are middle staff,
accounting for 40%, making up the majority of the participants. In conclusion, 59 of the participants are senior staff, representing
29.5% of the total respondents. These discoveries, therefore, can help organisations to comprehend the views and opinions of their
employees across different levels.

 Educational Qualification
According to the survey outcome, out of the 200 participants, 134 of them have a BSC/HND/Bachelor degree, representing
67% of the overall participants. Also, 30 of the participants have an MSC/MBA degree, representing 15% of the overall respondents.
In addition, 28 of the participants have an OND/NCE degree, accounting for 14.0% of the total respondents. In conclusion, 8 of the
participants have other degrees, representing 4% of the total. I deduce from these discoveries that the participant’s educational
backgrounds are different, with a higher percentage of participants having gained a BSC, HND, or bachelor's degree. This
information depicts that the survey was successful in covering a variety of educational backgrounds, which can help organisations
understand the educational qualifications of their employees.

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1930

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

D. Variables

 Nepotism

Table 3: Respondents' View on Nepotism

S/N NEPOTISM SD D N A SA
Series-1 Employees always feel that they need a 0 ((0.0) 2 (1.0) 15 (7.5) 171 (85.5) 12 (6.0)
relative in a high-level position
Series-2 Executives’ relatives are frustrated by never 0 (0.0) 2 (1.0) 28 (14.0) 106 (53.0) 64 (32.0)
really knowing whether they were appointed
because of their talent or family ties
Series-3 Employees who are promoted or rewarded 0 (0.0) 3 (1.5) 21 (10.5) 93 (46.5) 83 (41.5)
only because of family ties are a negative
influence
Series-4 When a relative of an executive gets a job 0 (0.0) 4 (2.0) 18 (9.0) 100 (50.0) 78 (39.0)
here, he/she can never live up to the
expectations of the other employees
Series-5 Disagreements between family members in the 0 (0.0) 5 (2.5) 29 (14.5) 116 (58.0) 50 (25.0)
organisation become business problems in
organisations allowing nepotism
Source: SPSS Output
Where; SD – Slightly disagree, D – Disagree, N – Neutral, A – Agree, SA – Slightly agree.

Fig 2: Respondents' View on Nepotism

Where; SD – Slightly disagree, D – Disagree, N – Neutral, A – Agree, SA – Slightly agree

The "Respondents' view on Nepotism" data revealed that a larger fraction of the respondents, accounting for 85.5%, agree with
the statement that "Employees always feel that they need a relative in a high-level position." Similarly, the majority of the
respondents, accounting for 53.0%, agree with the statement "Executives' relatives are frustrated by never really knowing whether
they were appointed because of their talent or family ties." Furthermore, the majority of the participants, representing 46.5%, agree
with the statement "Employees who are promoted or rewarded only because of family ties are a negative influence." Similarly, a
higher fraction of the participants, representing 50%, agree with the statement "When a relative of an executive gets a job here,
he/she can never live up to the expectations of the other employees." Lastly, the majority of the participants, representing 58%,
agree with the statement "Disagreements between family members in the organisation become business issues in organisations
allowing nepotism." These findings demonstrate that the participants have a negative view of nepotism in the workplace, as they
believe it can have a detrimental impact on employee morale, business operations, and organisational performance.

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1931

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

 Favouritism

Table 4: Respondents' View on Favouritism

S/N FAVOURITISM SD D N A SA
Series-1 Supervisors are afraid of subordinates who are 0 ((0.0) 5 (2.5) 35 (17.5) 106 (53.0) 54 (27.0)
related to high-level executive
Series-2 Executives are more interested in keeping 0 (0.0) 5 (2.5) 29 (14.5) 111 (55.5) 55 (27.5)
relative in good positions than they are in those
employees’ performance or the organisation’s
productivity
Series-3 Ability, knowledge and skill are of secondary 0 (0.0) 3 (1.5) 23 (11.5) 106 (53.0) 68 (34.0)
importance when promoting the employees in the
public service
Series-4 Organisations permitting employment of 0 (0.0) 2 (1.0) 26 (13.0) 112 (56.0) 60 (30.0)
executives’ relatives have a hard time attracting
and retaining quality people who are not relatives
Series-5 The number of public servants who were 0 (0.0) 5 (2.5) 21 (10.5) 103 (51.5) 71 (35.5)
employed due to connections is higher
Source: SPSS Output
Where; SD – Slightly disagree, D – Disagree, N – Neutral, A – Agree, SA – Slightly agree.

Fig 3: Respondents' View on Favouritism

Where; SD – Slightly disagree, D – Disagree, N – Neutral, A – Agree, SA – Slightly agree.

The "Respondents' view on Favouritism" data indicates that the majority of the participants, representing 53%, support the
assertion that "Supervisors are afraid of subordinates who are related to high-level executives." Similarly, the majority of the
participants, representing 55.5%, support the assertion "Executives are more interested in keeping relatives in good positions than
they are in those employees' performance or the organisation's productivity." Furthermore, the majority of the participants,
representing 53.0%, support the assertion "Ability, knowledge and skill are of secondary importance when promoting employees in
the public service." Similarly, a higher fraction of the participants, representing 56%, agree with the sentence. Lastly, a higher
fraction of the participants, representing 51.5%, support the assertion that" The number of public servants who were employed due
to connections is higher". These findings demonstrate that the participants have a negative view of favouritism in the workplace, as
they believe it can have a detrimental effect on staff morale, organisational performance, and the ability to attract and retain quality
employees.

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1932

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

 Cronyism

Table 5: Respondents’ View on Cronyism

S/N CRONYISM SD D N A SA
Series-1 Managers are uncomfortable with the presence of 0 ((0.0) 1 (0.5) 34 (17.0) 115 (57.5) 50 (25.0)
those employees with close personal ties to high-
level executives
Series-2 Friendships and relationships are considered 2 (1.0) 3 (1.5) 31 (15.5) 92 (46.0) 72 (36.0)
primarily to promoting the employees
Series-3 I am careful when speaking to friends or 0 (0.0) 5 (2.5) 20 (10.0 100 (50.0) 75 (37.5)
acquaintances of executives
Series-4 Public servants frequently believe they need a 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 28 (14.0) 102 (51.0) 70 (35.0
friend or associate in a senior position in order to
get hired and promoted.
Series-5 When subordinates are close friends or associates of 0 (0.0) 2 (1.0) 30 (15.0) 109 (54.5) 59 (29.5)
high-level executives, supervisors are terrified of
them.
Source: SPSS Output
Where; SD – Slightly Disagree, D – Disagree, N – Neutral, A – Agree, SA – Slightly Agree.

Fig 4: Respondents' View on Cronyism

Where; SD – Slightly Disagree, D – Disagree, N – Neutral, A – Agree, SA – Slightly Agree

The "Respondents' view on Cronyism" data shows that a higher fraction of the participants, accounting for 57.5%, agree with
the statement that "Managers are uncomfortable with the presence of employees with close personal ties to high-level executives."
Similarly, the majority of the participants, representing 46%, support the assertion that Friendships and relationships are considered
primarily for promoting employees. Moreover, a higher percentage of the participants, representing 50%, agree with the statement
"I am careful when speaking to friends or acquaintances of executives." Similarly, the majority of the participants, representing
51%, support the assertion" Public servants frequently believe they need a friend or associate in a senior position to get hired and
promoted." Lastly, the majority of the participants, representing 54.5%, agree with the statement "When subordinates are close
friends or associates of high-level executives, supervisors are terrified of them." These findings illustrate that participants have a
negative perception of cronyism in the workplace, as they believe it can create a culture of fear and discomfort among employees.

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1933

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

 Productivity

Table 6: Respondents’ View on Productivity

S/N PRODUCTIVITY SD D N A SA
Series-1 Employees absorbed through family relatives have 0 ((0.0) 1 (0.5) 32 (16.0) 112 (56.0) 55 (27.5)
low work performance
Series-2 Nepotist employees hardly accomplished tasks 0 (0.0) 1 (0.5) 22 (11.0) 114 (57.0) 63 (31.5)
quickly and efficiently
Series-3 Nepotist employees hardly meet up with their target 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 24 (12.0) 105 (52.5) 71 (35.5)
Series-4 Direct employees always set a high standard of task 0 (0.0) 3 (1.5) 19 (9.5) 97 (48.5) 81 (40.5)
accomplishment
Series-5 Direct employees easily achieve task 13 79 16 (8.0) 38 (19.0) 54 (27.0)
accomplishment (6.5) (39.5)
Source: SPSS Output
Where; SD – Slightly disagree, D – Disagree, N – Neutral, A – Agree, SA – Slightly agree

Fig 5: Respondents' View on Productivity

Where; SD – Slightly disagree, D – Disagree, N – Neutral, A – Agree, SA – Slightly agree.

The "Respondents' View on Productivity" data depicts that the majority of the participants, representing 56%, support the
assertion that " Employees hired through family connections have low work performance." Similarly, the majority of the
participants, representing 57%, agree with the statement, “Nepotistic employees hardly accomplish tasks quickly and efficiently."
Moreover, the majority of the participants, representing 52.5%, agree with the statement "Nepotistic employees hardly meet up with
their targets." Similarly, a higher percentage of the participants, accounting for 48.5%, agree with the statement “Direct employees
always set a high standard of task accomplishment." However, the majority of the participants, representing 39.5%, disagree with
the statement "When subordinates are close friends or associates of high-level executives, supervisors are terrified of them."

Therefore, these findings suggest that participants believe that nepotism can negatively impact productivity in the workplace,
as employees hired through family connections may not be as efficient and effective as direct employees.

 Close Ties

Table 7: Respondents’ View on Close Ties

S/N CLOSE TIES SD D N A SA
Series-1 I interact with other members of my team 0 ((0.0) 2 (1.0) 25 (12.5) 116 (58.0) 58 (29.0)
outside of work-related activities
Series-2 I share personal information with my teammates 0 (0.0) 1 (0.5) 25 (12.5) 106 (53.0) 68 (34.0)
Series-3 I socialise with people outside of my close 0 (0.0) 1 (0.5) 22 (11.0) 111 (55.0) 66 (33.0)
network ties
Series-4 I make efforts to cultivate stronger relationships 0 (0.0) 2 (1.0) 18 (9.0) 113 (56.5) 67 (33.5)
with family and close friends
Series-5 My family and my close friend’s network have 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 19 (9.5) 111 (55.5) 70 (35.0)
helped me to achieve some goals in life
Source: SPSS Output
Where; SD – Slightly disagree, D – Disagree, N – Neutral, A – Agree, SA – Slightly agree.

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1934

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

Fig 6: Respondents' View on Close Ties

Where; SD – Slightly disagree, D – Disagree, N – Neutral, A – Agree, SA – Slightly agree.

The "Respondents' view on Close Ties" data shows that a higher fraction of the participants, accounting for 58%, agree with
the statement "I interact with other members of my team outside of work-related activities." Similarly, the majority of the
participants, representing 56%, agree with the sentence "I share personal information with my teammates." Also, 55%, agree with
the statement "I socialise with people outside of my close network ties." Similarly, a higher percentage of the participants,
representing 56.5%, agree with the statement "I make efforts to cultivate stronger relationships with family and close friends."
Lastly, a higher fraction of the participants, representing 55.5%, agree with the statement "My family and my close friend’s network
have helped me to achieve some goals in life." These findings suggest that participants believe in the importance of close ties and
social relationships in their personal and professional lives.

 Effective Teamwork

Table 8: Respondents’ View on Effective Teamwork

S/N EFFECTIVE TEAMWORK SD D N A SA
Series-1 Close network ties are important among team 0 ((0.0) 0 (0.0) 38 (19.0) 115 (57.5) 47 (23.5)
members for achieving effective teamwork
Series-2 I motivate my team with different strategies 0 (0.0) 2 (1.0) 17 (8.5) 108 (54.0) 73 (36.5)
Series-3 My teammates understand my strengths and 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 22 (11.0) 99 (49.5) 79 (39.5)
weaknesses
Series-4 My teammates go above and beyond to support me 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 24 (12.0) 116 (58.0) 60 (30.0)
Series-5 I participate in team building activities often 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 21 (10.5) 99 (49.5) 80 (40.0)
Source: SPSS Output
Where; SD – Slightly disagree, D – Disagree, N – Neutral, A – Agree, SA – Slightly agree.

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1935

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

Fig 7: Respondents' View on Effective Teamwork

Where; SD – Slightly disagree, D – Disagree, N – Neutral, A – Agree, SA – Slightly agree.

The "Respondents' view on Effective Teamwork". data shows that a higher fraction of the respondents, accounting 57.5%,
agree with the sentence "Close network ties are important among team members for achieving effective teamwork." Similarly, a
higher percentage of the participants, accounting 54%, agree with the sentence "I motivate my team with different strategies."
Moreover, the higher fraction of the participants, accounting 49.5%, agree with the statement "My teammates understand my
strengths and weaknesses." Similarly, the higher fraction of the participants, representing 58%, agree with the statement "My
teammates go above and beyond to support me." Finally, most of the participants, accounting 49.5%, agree with the statement" I
participate in team building activities often." These findings suggest that participants believe in the importance of close network
ties, motivation, understanding of strengths and weaknesses, and team building activities in achieving effective teamwork.

E. Hypothesis Testing

 Hypothesis One

 H0: There is no significant relationship between nepotism and the productivity of public servants in the public sector in Nigeria
 H1: There is a significant relationship between nepotism and the productivity of public servants in the public sector in Nigeria

Table 9: Result of the Correlation Coefficient Test

NEPOTISM PRODUCTIVITY
NEPOTISM Pearson Correlation 1 .277**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 200 200
PRODUCTIVITY Pearson Correlation .277** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 200 200
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Source: SPSS Output

The relationship between nepotism and productivity is shown by the Pearson correlation coefficients, significance levels also,
and the quantity of cases in Table 9 above. According to the premise that the data is normally distributed, the Pearson correlation
coefficient represents the interrelationship between nepotism and productivity. There is a weak but positive association between
nepotism and productivity, as indicated by the correlation coefficient of 0.277 between the two variables. Since each variable
(nepotism or productivity) has a perfect positive linear relationship with itself, the correlation coefficients on the major diagonal are
all 1.0. In the correlation table, the significance level, commonly known as the p-value, is also included. It denotes the likelihood
of receiving findings as extreme as the one seen. The correlation is considered to be of low significance in this instance since the
significance level, or p-value is 0.000. This shows that there is an association between nepotism and productivity, indicating that
productivity may rise or fall as nepotism increases. Overall, the outcomes imply that there is an interrelationship between nepotism
and productivity, but it is a weak relationship. The null hypothesis (H0) is rejected in favour of the alternate hypothesis (H1), which
contends that nepotism and employee productivity in Nigeria's public sector are significantly correlated.

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1936

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

 Hypothesis Two

 H0: There is no significant relationship between favouritism and public servants' productivity in Nigeria’s public sector
 H1: There is a significant relationship between favouritism and public servants' productivity in Nigeria's public sector.

Table 10: Result of the Correlation Coefficient Test

FAVOURITISM PRODUCTIVITY
FAVOURITISM Pearson Correlation 1 .272**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 200 200
PRODUCTIVITY Pearson Correlation .272** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 200 200
**. Correlation is Significant at the 0.01 Level (2-Tailed).
Source: SPSS Output

The Pearson correlation coefficients, significance levels also, and the number of cases for the correlation between favouritism
and productivity are displayed in Table 10 above. The correlation coefficient between favouritism and productivity is 0.272, which
shows that there is a weak but favourable relationship between the two. The correlation table also shows the significance level,
which indicates the likelihood of getting findings as extreme as the one reported. The correlation in this instance has a low level of
significance, as shown by the significance level or p-value of 0.000. In other words, if favouritism rises, productivity may rise or
fall, indicating that there is a straight relationship between the two. Overall, these findings indicate that there exists a connection
between favouritism and productivity, but it is not a strong relationship. The null hypothesis (H0) is rejected in favour of the alternate
hypothesis (H1), which claims that favouritism and worker productivity in Nigeria's public sector are significantly correlated.

 Hypothesis Three

 H0: There is no significant relationship between cronyism and public servants’ productivity in Nigeria’s public sector.
 H1: There is a significant relationship between cronyism and public servants’ productivity in Nigeria’s public sector.

Table 11: Result of the Correlation Coefficient Test

CRONYISM PRODUCTIVITY
CRONYISM Pearson Correlation 1 .261**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 200 200
PRODUCTIVITY Pearson Correlation .261** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 200 200
**. Correlation is Significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Source: SPSS Output

The Pearson correlation coefficients, significance levels also, and the number of cases for the correlation between cronyism
and productivity are displayed in Table 11 above. Assuming that the information is properly distributed, the Pearson correlation
coefficient is a measure of the linear connection between cronyism and productivity. The correlation coefficient between cronyism
and productivity is 0.261, which shows that there is a weak but favourable relationship between the two. The correlation table also
shows the significance level, which indicates the likelihood of getting findings as extreme as the one reported. The correlation in
this instance has a low level of significance, as shown by the significance level or p-value of 0.000. In other words, if cronyism
rises, productivity may rise or fall, indicating that there is a straight relationship between the two. Overall, these findings suggest
that there exists a connection between cronyism and productivity, but it is not a strong relationship. The null hypothesis (H0) is
rejected in favour of the alternate hypothesis (H1), which claims that cronyism and worker productivity in Nigeria's public sector
are significantly correlated.

 Hypothesis Four

 H0: There is no significant relationship between close network ties and effective teamwork in administrative policy
 H1: There is a significant relationship between close network ties and effective teamwork in administrative policy

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1937

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

Table 12: Result of the Correlation Coefficient Test

CLOSE TIES EFFECTIVE TEAMWORK
CLOSE Pearson Correlation 1 .281**
TIES Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 200 200
EFFECTIVE TEAMWORK Pearson Correlation .281** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 200 200
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Source: SPSS Output

Pearson correlation coefficients, significance levels, and number of cases for the association between strong network linkages
and successful teamwork are displayed in Table 12 above. Given that the data is assumed to be regularly distributed, the Pearson
correlation coefficient serves as a measurement of the association between strong network linkages and productive teamwork. The
correlation coefficient between strong network linkages and productive teamwork is 0.281, which depicts that there is only a weak
positive correlation between these two factors. The chance of generating findings as extreme as the one observed is shown by the
p-value, which is also presented in the correlation table. The correlation in this instance has a low level of significance, as indicated
by the p-value of 0.000. This shows that there is a relationship between tight network connections and productive teams, which
means that as close network connections grow, effective teamwork may or may not grow as well. Overall, these findings suggest
that there exists a connection between close network ties and effective teamwork, but it is not a strong relationship. As a result, the
alternate hypothesis (H1), which contends that strong network linkages and productive teamwork in administrative policy are
significantly related, is accepted over the null hypothesis (H0).

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1938

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

CHAPTER FIVE
DISCUSSION
A. Introduction
This section provides a comprehensive overview of the analysis conducted in the preceding chapters. It endeavours to identify
any limitations inherent in the study, assess the implications of the research findings, and proffer recommendations based on the
outcomes.

B. Summary of Analysis

 Hypothesis One: The analysis reveals a positive correlation between nepotism and productivity within Nigeria's public sector,
albeit with slight significance. These findings suggest a discernible connection between productivity levels and the prevalence
of nepotism, favouring the alternative hypothesis (H1) over the null hypothesis (H0).
 Hypothesis Two: Similarly, the analysis indicates a positive correlation between favouritism and productivity in Nigeria's public
sector, albeit with a weak association. While a connection between favouritism and productivity is evident, its impact appears
to be relatively modest, supporting the alternative hypothesis (H1) over the null hypothesis (H0).
 Hypothesis Three: The analysis suggests a tentative positive relationship between cronyism and productivity within Nigeria's
public sector. These results underscore the existence of a discernible connection between cronyism and productivity levels,
favouring the alternative hypothesis (H1) over the null hypothesis (H0).
 Hypothesis Four: Findings suggest a marginally favourable association between close network ties and effective teamwork in
administrative policy. The data highlight a linear relationship between close network ties and effective teamwork, suggesting
that as close network ties strengthen, the potential for productive teamwork also increases, supporting the alternative hypothesis
(H1) over the null hypothesis (H0).

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1939

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

CHAPTER SIX
CONCLUSION

According to the findings, there is a weak but positive connection between cronyism and worker productivity in Nigeria's
public sector, that is, even while productivity may increase or decrease, cronyism increases. This shows that cronyism is just one
of many elements that could have an impact on public servants' productivity in Nigeria. For the functionality of a country, the
productivity of public servants from all public sectors is paramount, therefore officials should consider these findings.

According to the research, the impacts of cronyism, favouritism, and nepotism on the output of the public sector are
insignificant. These actions may at first increase employee loyalty and trust, but they can also have unfavourable effects, such as a
decline in meritocracy and a decline in staff motivation as a result of a feeling of unappreciation. If productivity is to be maximised
in the public sector, it is crucial to find a balance between keeping good relations and making sure that procedures are fair and open.
Close network ties and effective teamwork play a role in administrative policy, when individuals within an organisation get along
well and build solid relationships within themselves, sharing knowledge, resources, and expertise is made possible thereby, fostering
better judgement and efficient policy execution.

Additionally, by fostering productive teamwork and bolstering close network ties, organisations can create an environment
that is conducive to collaboration, creativity, and ultimately the successful implementation of administrative policies.

Finally, the effect of nepotism on the productivity among public servants in Nigeria cannot be overemphasized because it
undermines meritocracy, reduces job satisfaction, and demoralises the workforce and, negatively impacts the economy of the
country.

A. Recommendations
This research represents an examination of the impacts of nepotism on the productivity of public servants in Nigeria’s public
sectors.

I recommend that further research on investigating how organisational environment and culture encourage or discourage
nepotism might provide further information about its effects on productivity. Since cultural norms, legal systems, industrial
characteristics, and socioeconomic factors can all affect the prevalence and impact of nepotism, it is paramount to find contextual
factors that influence outcomes by comparing how nepotism affects productivity across various cultures and business sectors.

 Based on the Survey Results, Several Recommendations can be Proposed Regarding the Impact of Nepotism on Productivity:

 Implement clear and transparent hiring and promotion policies founded on merit and qualifications, rather than personal
connections.
 Provide comprehensive training and development opportunities for all employees to enhance their skills and knowledge for job
success.
 Cultivate a culture of fairness and transparency by offering regular feedback and recognition, fostering open communication,
and encouraging collaboration among team members.
 Promote diversity and inclusion in the workplace to mitigate nepotism and foster an equitable culture.
 Institute an independent review process to ensure impartiality and fairness in hiring and promotion decisions.
 Take decisive action against instances of nepotism, including disciplinary measures or termination of involved employees.
 Offer avenues for employees to contribute feedback on organizational policies and practices, leveraging this input for continuous
improvement.
 Educate employees on the adverse effects of nepotism on productivity and the significance of fair and transparent hiring and
promotion procedures.
 Cultivate a positive work environment by prioritizing work-life balance, providing competitive compensation and benefits, and
facilitating opportunities for career progression.
 Lead by example by demonstrating a steadfast commitment to fairness and transparency in all organizational decisions and
actions.

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1940

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

REFERENCES

[1]. Abdalla, F. H., Maghrabi, S. & Raggad, G. B. (1998). ‘‘Assessing the Effect of Nepotism on Human Resource Managers
Toward Nepotism: A Cross-Cultural Study’’, International Journal of Manpower, 19(8), 554-70.
[2]. Abubakar, A.M., Namin, B.H., Harazneh, I., Arasli, H., & Tunç, T. (2017). Does gender moderate the relationship between
favouritism/nepotism, supervisor incivility, cynicism and workplace withdrawal: A neural network and SEM approach. Tour.
Manag. Perspect., 23, 129–139.
[3]. Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental and social psychology.
Academic Press.
[4]. Alabi A., & Sakariyau, R. T. (2013). Democracy and politics of godfatherism in Nigeria: The effects and way forward,
International Journal of Politics and Good Governance, 4(2), 1-21
[5]. Albalawi, A. S., Naughton, S., Elayan, M. B., & Sleimi, M. T. (2019). Perceived organizational support, alternative job
opportunity, organizational commitment, job satisfaction and turnover intention: A moderated-mediated model.
Organizacija, 52(4). https://doi.org/10.2478/ orga-2019-0019
[6]. Aldossari, M. A., & Bourne, D. J. (2016). Nepotism and turnover intentions amongst knowledge workers in Saudi Arabia.
In The Laws of the Knowledge Workplace. Routledge. https://doi. org/10.4324/9781315556215
[7]. Aliaga, M., & Gunderson, B. (2000). Interactive Statistics. Saddle River, pp.3-15
[8]. Aligica, P. D., & Tarko, V. (2014). Crony capitalism: Rent-seeking, institutions and ideology. Kyklos, 67(2), 156-176. doi:
10.1111/kykl.12048
[9]. Allen, N.J., & Meyer, J.P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and normative commitment
to the organization. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 63, 18-38.
[10]. Arasli, H., Bavik, A. & Ekiz, H. (2006). The effects of nepotism on human resource management: the case of three, four and
five-star hotels in Northern Cyprus. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 26(7), 295-308
[11]. Armenakis, A. A., & Bedeian, A. G. (1999). Organizational change: A review of theory and research in the 1990s. Journal
of Management, 25(3), 293-315. https://doi. org/10.1177/014920639902500303
[12]. Barbosa, L. (2014). Meritocracy and Brazilian Society, RAE-Revista de Administração de Empresas, 54(1), 80-85.
[13]. Bassey, M. (1995). Creating Education through Research: A Global Perspective of Educational Research in the 21st
Century. Moor Press
[14]. Bing, G. (2002). Selecting Your Employer: A Guide to an Informed Pursuit of the Best Career for You. Butterworth-
Heinemann.
[15]. Boadi, G. E. (2000). Conflict of interest, nepotism and cronyism. Source Book, 5, 195-204. Available at
https://www.academia.edu/65918278/Effect_of_Nepotism_on_Employee_Emotional_Engagement_Interplay_of_Organisat
ional_Politics?from_sitemaps=true&version=2
[16]. Breuer, K., P., Nieken, & Sliwka, D. (2010). Social ties and subjective performance evaluations: An empirical investigation.
IZA DP, 4913.
[17]. Bute, M. (2011). The effects of nepotism and favouritism on employee behaviours and human resources practices: research
on Turkish public banks. Today's Review of Public Administration, 5(1), 185-208.
[18]. Büte, M. (2011). Perceive nepotism and its relation to job satisfaction, negative word of mouth and intention to quit.
Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 10(36), 187-203.
[19]. Büte, M. & Tekaslan, M., (2010). Nepotizm'in Çalışanlar Üzerine Etkileri: Aile İşletmelerine Yönelik Bir Saha Araştırması,
Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, Bahar 2010, Cilt:6, Yıl:6, Sayı:145(1), 1-21.
[20]. Carrell, M. R., & Dittrich, J. E. (1978). Equity theory: The recent literature, methodological considerations, and new
directions. Academy of Management Review, 3, 202- 210.
[21]. Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, (2000). Research Methods in Education (5th Ed.) Routledge Falmer
[22]. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Qualitative, Quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. 2nd Edition. SAGE Publications
[23]. Crotty, M. (1998). The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process. Allen and Unwin
[24]. Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., & Lowe, A. (2002). Management research: An introduction. Sage Publications.
[25]. Elbaz, A. M., & Haddoud, M. Y. (2017). The role of wisdom leadership in increasing job performance: Evidence from the
Egyptian tourism sector. Tourism Management, 63, 66-76.
[26]. Elbaz, A. M., Haddoud, M. Y., & Shehawy, Y. M. (2018). Nepotism, employees’ competencies and firm performance in
the tourism sector: A dual multivariate and qualitative comparative analysis approach. Tourism Management, 67, 3-16
[27]. Ferlazzo, F., & Sdoia, S. (2012. Measuring nepotism through shared last names: Are we moving from opinions to facts?
PLOS ONE, 7(8), e43574.
[28]. Firfiray, S., Cruz, C., Neacsu, I., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2018). Is nepotism so bad for family firms? A socioemotional
wealth approach. Human Resource Management Review, 28(1), 83-97
[29]. Fisman, R. (2017). Corruption: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford University Press.
[30]. Gaskin, J. & Lim, J. (2016). Model Fit Measures. Google Scholar. 2016. Available online:
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=Gaskin%2C+J.+%26+Lim%2C+J.+%282016%29%2C+%2
2Model+Fit+Measures&btnG= (accessed on 29 March 2023).
[31]. Gjinovci, A. (2016). The impact of nepotism and corruption in the economy. Knowledge Horizons Economics, 8(2), 133.
[32]. Graafland, J. J. (2007). Economics, ethics, and the market: introduction and applications. Taylor & Francis.

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1941

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

[33]. Gul, e. (2022). Leaders’ style and employees’ performance: is organizational cronyism a missing link? Administrative and
Management Sciences Journal, 1. 87-93. 10.59365/amsj.1(1).2022.36.
[34]. Haber, S. H. (2002). Crony capitalism and economic growth in Latin America: theory and evidence. Hoover Press.
[35]. Hellriegel, D., & Slocum, J. (2011). Organisational behaviour, southwestern. (13th ed.). Mason, Ohio Thomson, USA:
Cengage Learning.
[36]. Hussein, N. & Jaafar, A. (2023). The Effect of Nepotism and Knowledge Sharing on the Performance of Academic Staff in
Jordan: The Mediating Role of Trust. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 12, 337. 10.36941/ajis-2023-0053.
[37]. Ignatowski, G., Sułkowski, Ł., Stopczyński, B. (2020). The perception of organisational nepotism depending on the
membership in selected Christian churches, Religions, 11(1), 47. https://doi. org/10.3390/rel11010047
[38]. Imbroscio, D. (2016). Urban Policy as Meritocracy: A Critique, Journal of Urban Affairs, 38(1), 79-104.
[39]. Iqbal, Q., & Ahmad, N.H. (2020). Workplace spirituality and nepotism-favouritism in selected ASEAN countries: The role
of gender as moderator. J. Asia Bus. Stud., 14, 31–49
[40]. James, L. (2018). Management systems and performance frameworks for sustainability: A roadmap for sustainably managed
enterprises. Routledge
[41]. Jones, R. G., & Stout, T. (2015). Policing nepotism and cronyism without losing the value of social connection. Industrial
and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 8, 2–12
[42]. Kerse, G., & Babadag, M. (2018). I’m Out If Nepotism is in: The Relationship Between Nepotism, Job Standardization and
Turnover Intention. Ege Academic Review, 18(4), 631-644. https://doi.org /10.21121/ eab.2018442992
[43]. Khatri, N., Tsang, E. W. K., & Begley, T. M. (2006). Cronyism: a cross-cultural analysis. Journal of International Business
Studies, 37(1), 61-75. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400171
[44]. Kim, S. (2003). Research paradigms in organisational learning and performance: Competing modes of inquiry. Information
Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 21(1), 9-18.
[45]. Kumar, C. R. (2008). Research Methodology. APH Publishing Corporation
[46]. Kwon, I. (2006). Endogenous Favoritism in Organizations. Topics in Theoretical Economics, 6(1), 01-24.
[47]. Labrague, L. J., McEnroe‐Petitte, D. M., Gloe, D., Tsaras, K., Arteche, D. L., & Maldia, F. (2017). Organizational politics,
nurses’ stress, burnout levels, turnover intention and job satisfaction. International Nursing Review, 64(1), 109-116.
https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.12347
[48]. Nadeem, M., Ahmad, R., Ahmad, N., Batool, S. R., & Shafique, N. (2015). Favouritism, Nepotism and Cronyism as
Predictors of Job Satisfaction: Evidence from Pakistan. Journal of Business and Management Research, 8, 224-228.
[49]. Neuman, W., L. (2003). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. (5th ed.). Allyn and Bacon
[50]. Nyukorong, R. (2014). Corruption, nepotism or the “Whom You Know” factor and how it affects recruitment in the Banking
Sector of Ghana. Developing Countries Studies, 4(24), 38-53
[51]. Oláh, J., Kovács, S., Virglerova, Z., Lakner, Z., Kovacova, M., Popp, J. (2019a). Analysis and comparison of economic and
financial risk sources in SMEs of the Visegrad group and Serbia. Sustainability, 11(7), 1853, 1-19. https://doi.
org/10.3390/su11071853
[52]. Oláh, J., Virglerova, Z., Popp, J., Kliestikova, J., & Kovács, S. (2019b). The assessment of non-financial risk sources of
SMEs in the V4 countries and Serbia. Sustainability, 11(17), 4806, https://doi. org/10.3390/su11071853
[53]. Olusoji Damaro, A., & K.O., E. (2022). Effects of Workplace Harassment and Favouritism on Staff Performance in Nigeria.
International journal of scientific research and management, 10(09), 3851–3860. https://doi.org/10.18535/ijsrm/v10i9.em04
[54]. Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2003). Expanding the framework of internal and external validity in quantitative research. Research in
the Schools, 10(1), 71-90.
[55]. Ozler, H., & Gümüştekin, G. E. (2007). Aile Işletmelerinde Nepotizmin Gelişim Evreleri Ve Kurumsallaşma. Selçuk
Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 1(17), 437-450.
[56]. Paais, M., & Pattiruhu, J. R. (2020). Effect of motivation, leadership, and organizational culture on satisfaction and employee
performance. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics, and Business, 7(8), 577–588.
https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no8.577
[57]. Park, S., Grosser, T., Roebuck, A. & Mathieu, J. (2020). Understanding Work Teams from a Network Perspective: A Review
and Future Research Directions. Journal of Management. 46. 014920632090157. 10.1177/0149206320901573.’’’
[58]. Pearce, J. L. (2015). Cronyism and nepotism are bad for everyone: The research evidence. Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, 8(1), 41-44. DOI: 10.1017/ iop.2014.10.
[59]. Poocharoen, O. & Brillantes, A. (2013). Meritocracy in Asia Pacific: Status, Issues, and Challenges. Review of Public
Personnel Administration, 33(2), 140-163.
[60]. Pooja, B. (2019). Types of sampling in research. Journal of the Practice of Cardiovascular Sciences, 3(5), 157-163.
[61]. Rijkers, B., Caroline Freund, & Antonio Nucifora (2014). "The Perils of Industrial Policy: Evidence from Tunisia." mimeo,
the World Bank.
[62]. Rimvydas Ragauskas, I. V. (2020). Nepotism, political competition and over-employment. Political Research Exchange,
2(1). doi:10.1080/2474736X.2020.1781542
[63]. S´liwa, M., & Johansson, M. (2014). The Discourse of Meritocracy Contested/Reproduced: Foreign Women Academics in
UK Business Schools. Organization, 21(6), 821-843.
[64]. Sealy, R. (2010). Changing Perceptions of Meritocracy in Senior Women's Careers, Gender in Management. An International
Journal, 25(3), 184-197.

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1942

Volume 9, Issue 11, November – 2024 International Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology
ISSN No:-2456-2165

[65]. Shabbir, B. & Siddique, H. (2017) Impact of Nepotism, Cronyism, and Favoritism on Organizational Performance with a
Strong Moderator of Religiosity. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, 8(4), 299-309. Available at
https://www.ijser.org/researchpaper/Impact-of-Nepotism-Cronyism-and-Favoritism-on-Organizational-Performance-with-
a-Strong-Moderator-of-Religiosity.pdf
[66]. Smith, D. J., & Sutter, D. S. (2012). Gauging the perception of cronyism in the United States.
[67]. So, B. W. Y. (2015), Exam-centred Meritocracy in Taiwan: Hiring by Merit or Examination? Australian Journal of Public
Administration, 74(3), 312-323.
[68]. Trevor, C. O. (2001). Interactions among actual ease of-movement determinants and job satisfaction in the prediction of
voluntary turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 44(4), 621-638. https://doi. org/10.5465/3069407
[69]. Uche, C., Akaighe, G., Oni, O. & Asekun, A. (2019). Effects of nepotism on the ethical competence and performance of
public institutions in Nigeria. Unilag Business Journal, 5(2), 110-120. Available at
http://ujb.unilag.edu.ng/article/view/1080/860
[70]. Vveinhardt, J., & Sroka, W. (2020). Nepotism and favouritism in Polish and Lithuanian enterprises: the context of
organizational microclimate. Sustainability, 12(4), 1425; https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041425
[71]. Wiederkehr, V., Bonnot, V., Krauth-Gruber, S., & Darnon, C. (2015). Belief in School Meritocracy as a System-Justifying
Tool for Low-Status Students, Frontiers in Psychology, 6(1) 1053.
[72]. Yanchus, N. J., Periard, D., & Osatuke, K. (2017). Further examination of predictors of turnover intention among mental
health professionals. Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, 24(1), 41-56. https://doi. org/10.1111/jpm.12354
[73]. Yasir, R., Hafiz, Z., Zafar, H., Muhammad, M. & Amir, K. (2013). Impact of organizational politics and favouritism on
employees’ job satisfaction. Elixir Management Arts, 64, 19328-19332
[74]. Zhang, Z. (2015). Crowding Out Meritocracy? – Cultural Constraints in Chinese Public Human Resource Management,
Australian Journal of Public Administration, 74(3), 270-282.

IJISRT24NOV1205 www.ijisrt.com 1943