Examining Employee Relationship Management and Employee Performance Through Reward: Evidence from Nigeria

Home , Reward management

International Journal of Management (IJM) Volume 11, Issue 8, August 2020, pp. 380-393, Article ID: IJM_11_08_038 Available online at http://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJM?Volume=11&Issue=8 ISSN Print: 0976-6502 and ISSN Online: 0976-6510 DOI: 10.34218/IJM.11.8.2020.038

EXAMINING EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIP MANAGEMENT AND EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE THROUGH REWARD: EVIDENCE FROM NIGERIA

Arubayi, D.O Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Social Sciences, SITE III, Delta State University Abraka, Delta State. Nigeria

Onuorah A.C. Department of Accounting, Banking and Finance, Faculty of Management Sciences, Delta State University, Abraka, Asaba Campus, Nigeria

Egbule A.C.S Department of Business Administration, Michael and Cecilia Ibru University, Agbara-Otor, Nigeria

ABSTRACT Employees relationship management is a comprehensive approach that reflects a delicate balance in the development, recognition of human capital and interaction in the organization. Today, employee relationship management (ERM) has become important for gaining competitive advantage and improving performance. Hence the reward system is practice put in place to achieve favourable outcomes or consequences. The existence of these connections in the theoretical discussions led to the study of the connection between employee relationship management mechanisms and employee performance, with reward as a contributory factor in the organization. Data for the study were obtained using questionnaire survey method. Two hundred and twenty-two (222) employees of organizations in the telecommunications segment were selected as the statistical sample and two hundred and ten (210) responded to the questionnaire questions. Outcomes of the data analyses revealed that reward moderates the relationship between ERM component and employee’s performance in the telecommunications sector in Nigeria. The study contributes to the literature on ERM, particularly on the association between ERM, rewards and its contribution to employee performance in the telecommunications subdivision in Nigeria. Key words: Employee Relationship, Trust, Rewards, Performance

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJM 380 [email protected] Examining Employee Relationship Management and Employee Performance through Reward: Evidence from Nigeria

Cite this Article: Arubayi, D.O; Onuorah A.C. and Egbule A.C.S, Examining Employee Relationship Management and Employee Performance through Reward: Evidence from Nigeria, International Journal of Management, 11(8), 2020, pp. 380-393. http://iaeme.com/Home/issue/IJM?Volume=11&Issue=8

1. INTRODUCTION Employee relationship management in the workplace is a globally known concept in organizations and industries. The goal of employee relationship is to attain harmonious employee association and reduce conflict activities in employment (Torrington & Hall, 2017). One of the major concern of business organizations today is human resource and hence requires that people should be well managed and valued. The contributions they are making to the advancement of organization needs are to be well acknowledged for greater productivity. Human Resource Management (HRM) helps to keep a virtuous relationship among staff, upholds high confidence and offer good working environments for the organization (Bajaj et al., 2013). The application of employee relationship management (ERM) along with reward system which influences employee performance within an organization is now a key index for strategic human resource policy (Strohmeier, 2013). Rewards and its influence are also becoming a matter of concern in many organizations. Consequently, effective reward management arrangements with policies and strategies are compulsory to guarantee that the appreciation of the contribution of workers to the organization. The main concern of reward management is to ensure employees are well rewarded in relationship to their values in the organization. These practices also contribute to building a sturdy relationship between employee and employers. Literature has shown that while most workers at telecommunication sectors are on job, the workers seldom put in their best if the relationship between them and their employer is unwholesome or if they get a poor or unreasonable reward for their contributions in the work place (Bratton & Gold, 2003). In quest of creating an encouraging employee relation, good business environment should be part of all managers’ performance objectives. Employees are expected to be fulfilled with their jobs and offer more creative results, if the association between them and their company is solid enough (Strohmeier, 2013). While employees always desire to be recognized and appreciated, organizations are striving to have a work environment that recognizes and appreciates persons who are contributing to the progress of the organizations (Hall-Ellis, 2014). Subsequently, it has been discovered that reward systems are put in place for attainment of positive outcomes or consequences. Though current researches provide literatures on the consequences of employee relationship management (ERM) to employee performance and reward, the impact of reward system on employee relationship management (ERM) to employee performance is yet to be well established especially in Nigeria. This study was therefore aimed at investigating the moderating effect of reward in ERM by focusing on telecommunication companies in Nigeria.

2. OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY The study will;  assess the effect of ERM components on employee’s performance  determine the relationship ERM and reward at telecommunication sector.  determine the relationship employee performance and reward at telecommunication sector.  examine how reward moderates ERM and employee performance.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJM 381 [email protected] Arubayi, D.O; Onuorah A.C. and Egbule A.C.S

2.1. Research Questions In achieving the objectives, the study seeks to answer the following study questions.  What is the effect of ERM on employee’s performance?  To what extent does ERM relate to rewards?  To what extent does reward relate employee performance?  How does reward moderate the association between ERM and employee performance?

2.2. Research Hypotheses The null hypotheses used in the research are;

H0: There is no significant relationship between ERM component and employee’s performance.

H0: There is no significant effect of ERM on the rewards.

H0 : There is no significant effect of employee performance on rewards.

H0 : Rewards do not moderate the association between ERM and employee performance.

3. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 3.1. The Concept of Employee Relationship Management (ERM) Employee Relationship Management (ERM) is rather a new concept in the field of management. A wide-ranging definition hence recognizes ERM as approaches to successfully manage how organizations relate to potential, present and previous employees. Though they are lots of similarities between ERM and customer relationship management (CRM), the later is more comprehensible (Jyoti, 2014). ERM is a specific arena of human resource management (Rahman and Taniya, 2017). It involves accepting different approaches and practices to control the relations between employees and employers, and permits the establishment to accomplish its objective (Jing, 2013, p. 2). Rahman and Taniya (2017) described ERM as a method of handling the relationship between knowledge workers and corporations. Positive employee relationship enhances the accomplishment of organizational goals. Vineet et al. (2013) discoursed that ERM encourages morale, commitment and trust in the association. It also helps in refining working conditions, controlling human resource procedures and creating cordial relations between employees.

3.2. Employees Performance Performance entails what has been attained and how it was achieved. There are various ways for measuring the performance of a firm. The key performance indicators (KPIs) is however the most frequently used and has to do with financial outcomes (profitability) or output. The role of employees in the success of an organization is pivotal. Highly performing employees are needed in organizations in order for organizational goals to be met and for competitive advantage. Fulfilling everyday tasks and doing such at a high level could also be a source of satisfaction to an employee himself. The management of employees’ performance is important for achieving organizational goals. Part of the inclusive plan of an organization should be the assessing of an employee’s competency and the measurement of his or her productivity (Sarmad et al., 2011).

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJM 382 [email protected] Examining Employee Relationship Management and Employee Performance through Reward: Evidence from Nigeria

3.3. Reward Kilimo et al. (2016) opined that work rewards as an outcome of employee’s interaction with the given task, colleagues and organization. Herzberg's study (as cited in Damij et. al, 2015), anticipated that work rewards could be extrinsic or intrinsic. Hennessey et al. (2015) showed that rewards are provided by organizations to inspire employees towards achieving organizational goals. Goodale et al. (1997) showed that reward extrinsically and intrinsically motivates an employee in an organization. Kikoito (2014) suggested that reward is a key management tool for contributing to the effectiveness of an organization (Zhou, Qian, Henan, & Lei, 2009). Reward could therefore be said to be a compensation package to a person (s) in monetary and non-monetary terms for a job well done (Ballentine, McKenzie, Wysocki, & Kepner, 2009; Douglas, 2012).

3.4. The relationship between ERM on Employees Performance It is now a general knowledge that employees are important resource of serious minded firms. Given this, it is necessary for an organization to adopt an ERM model that makes the best use of its workers (Chandra, 2009, p. 16). Effective ERM enables an organization to personalize and improve employee relations which helps to contribute majorly to the success of the organization. In many organizations, there are usually some unidentifiable issues that cause productivity gaps (Vineet et al., 2013, p. 23). Robust employer-employee relationship can help in the enhancement of organizational capabilities (Wargborn, 2008, p. 74).

3.5. The Place of Reward in Work Engagement and Performance Relationship An appropriate reward is necessary for motivating employees to meaningful work in order to make employees feel thankful and more engaged in the workplace (Koskey, 2015). Maister et al. (2017) recommended that reward system that is seen as fair compensation to employees would give positive encouragement to employee behavior/attitude (Jackson, Rossi, Hoover, & Johnson, 2012). When outcomes are seen as fair by employees, that is, when rewards are commensurate with contributions, employees’ attitude/behavior would then be positively motivated. More still, studies have shown that when rewards match contributions, organizational citizenship conduct is stimulated (Hall-Ellis, 2014; Waal & Jansen, 2013; Jackson et al., 2012).

3.6. Empirical Studies The study conducted by Oluchi (2013) to assess the effect of fair reward system on employees job performance relied on Adams Equity Theory of motivation, that ―employees expect fair- mindedness when being rewarded for work done; and that people become dissatisfied, they reduce their involvement or seek improvement each time they perceive or feel that their efforts in the organization are not rewarded equitably.‖ Also that fairness depends on perceived market norms. Serena et al. (2012) examined the connection between rewards and employees job performance among banks in Bangladesh. Result obtained showed a significant relationship among the tested variables. The study of Nadeem et al. (2013) about India dealt with the relationship between performance appraisal (PA) and employee’s performance (EP). Finding from the study showed that there was a positive relationship between PA and EP. The study carried out by Fakharyan, Jalilv and, Dini, and Dehafarin (2012); Lillian and Mathooko (2011) and Peti Johann et al. (2001) also established that there is a relationship between PA and EP. The study done for 150 workers in the banking industry in Dera Ghazi Khan noted that banks do improve their performance through the PA.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJM 383 [email protected] Arubayi, D.O; Onuorah A.C. and Egbule A.C.S

From the work of Ming (2015), the study looked at the relationships among work engagement, reward, and job performance and revealed that work engagement positively predicts job performance and reward. From prior studies, the gaps identified are rather scope and conceptual gap. This is because all the studies seen and reviewed were conducted outside Nigeria and the findings may not be generalized in wider perspectives. Also, conceptual gap is the way the variables were defined by some previous research scholars as observed in the literature is different from this study conceptualization. These make the present study unique.

3.7. Materials and Methods A cross-sectional survey design was adopted using quantitative method to evaluate the case study of reward as a moderator in the relationship between ERM and EP of staff of mobile telecommunications companies in Delta State, Nigeria. The total population of this study was 500 staff and comprised 203 staff of MTN, 142 staff of Glo, 98 staff of Airtel and 57 staff of 9mobile (Etisalat). This covered all categories of staff in the companies, such as senior and junior staff, male and female. These figures were obtained from the staff data control section of the various firms. For the purpose of this study and to obtain a statistically reliable sample size, the Taro Yamani’s formula was adopted with a significant level at 0.05 and the sample size therefore was 222. Data for this study therefore, were obtained from primary sources. Structured questionnaires on five points adjusted likert scale, with responses ranging from ―strongly agree‖ to ―strongly disagree‖ were asked to show level of agreement or disagreement. Obtained data was analyzed using descriptive statistics such as frequency counts, percentages and average mean, as well as the inferential statistics such as; t-test and one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA).

4. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS While Table 1 shows the response rate, Table 2 shows that 45(21.4%) of the respondents are Top Management category, 94(44.8%) of the respondents are Middle Management category, while 87(38%) of the respondents are Operational Management category. This implies that majority of the respondents used for this study are in the Middle Management category.

Table 1 Response Rate Copies of Questionnaire Copies of Questionnaire % of Copies of Questionnaire Administered Returned Returned 222 210 94.6% Source: Field survey (2019)

Table 2 Functional Level of the Respondents Level of Study Frequency % Top Management 45 21.4 Middle Management 94 44.8 Operational Management 71 33.8 Total 210 100 Source: Field survey (2019)

4.1. Research Question One To examine the effect of ERM components on employee’s performance? Table 3 reveals the effect of ERM components on the EP. Therefore, the conclusion is drawn that the effect of ERM components on EP is high.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJM 384 [email protected] Examining Employee Relationship Management and Employee Performance through Reward: Evidence from Nigeria

Table 3 Effect of ERM components on EP S/N ITEMS SA A D (2) SD Mean Decision (4) (3) (1) ( ̆) Freq. Freq Freq. Freq. . 1 The organization offers employee 124 41 28 17 3.29 Accepted with training chances that improve employee abilities 2 Organizational rewards scheme 95 78 18 19 3.19 Accepted characterized by its objectivity. 3 The boss delivers messages to 83 68 40 19 3.02 Accepted employees about issues relating to their job 4 Printed information is given to 70 73 52 15 2.94 Accepted employees in an easy-to- understand manner 5 Employees have trust in the promises 58 82 46 24 2.82 Accepted made by managers 6 Employees are self-assured about 62 83 45 20 2.89 Accepted their boss abilities 7 Partaking in organizational goal 47 75 62 28 2.69 Accepted setting helps employees to keep abreast with work process 8 Participation in identifying goals 54 75 61 20 2.78 Accepted strengthens employee- manager 9 Manager is concerned about the 41 20 68 81 2.10 Rejected working procedures and gives employees freedom to choose tasks because he trusts their opinions and decisions 10 Manager delegates some of his 47 20 63 80 2.16 Rejected duties to employees Aggregate Mean 2.79 Adopted Criterion Mean 2.50 Source: Field survey (2019)

4.2. Research Question Two To what extent does employee relationship management (ERM) relate to rewards? Data pertaining to the extent of the relationship between ERM and reward at telecommunication sector is revealed in Table 4. It was gathered that all five (5) items generated were accepted as the aggregate mean (3.15) was higher than the criterion mean (2.50). We conclude that employee relationship management (ERM) relate to rewards to high extent.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJM 385 [email protected] Arubayi, D.O; Onuorah A.C. and Egbule A.C.S

Table 4 Extent of the relationship between ERM and rewards S/N ITEMS SA A D (2) SD Mean Decision (4) (3) (1) ( ̆) Freq. Freq. Freq. Freq. 11 Rewards bring out my capacity to 92 81 18 19 3.17 Accepted take responsibility for daily work burden. 12 Employees have creative, productive 83 57 38 32 2.91 Accepted and innovative abilities for job development and rewards make them committed to it 13 Employees carry out orders from the 96 75 21 18 3.19 Accepted manager related to the work when they are rewarded regularly for their work. 14 A good reward system makes 90 86 12 22 3.16 Accepted employees have the ability to communicate and collaborate with their colleagues 15 Reward is a motivation for 108 72 22 8 3.33 Accepted employees to develop and improve their relationship with their employer Aggregate Mean 3.15 Adopted Criterion Mean 2.50 Source: Field survey, 2019

4.3. Research Question Three To what extent does rewards relate employee performance? Data in Table 5 reveals the extent of employee performance relates to rewards. The 2 items formulated were adopted as they have a mean (3.22) which is above the mean criterion (2.50). Hence, we conclude that reward relates to employee performance to a very high extent.

Table 5 Extent of EP relates rewards S/N ITEMS SA A D (2) SD Mean Decision (4) (3) (1) ( ̆) Freq. Freq. Freq. Freq. 16 There exist a fair regular basis for 89 102 9 10 3.29 Accepted measuring performance and individual contribution to business goals in my organization 17 Bonuses given to successful employees at 83 97 6 24 3.14 Accepted special days like Christmas raise their performance Aggregate Mean 3.22 Adopted Criterion Mean 2.50 Source: Field survey, 2019

4.4. Research Question Four How does reward moderate the relationship between ERM and EP? Information on the extent to which reward moderates the relationship between ERM and EP is revealed in Table 6. As shown in the Table, the aggregate mean (3.01) is higher in all the 3 items formulated than the criterion mean (2.50). It was shown that when they get rewarded anytime they do a good job, thus their relationship with colleagues and superiors

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJM 386 [email protected] Examining Employee Relationship Management and Employee Performance through Reward: Evidence from Nigeria

improves (3.00), the benefits such as rent, clothing, fuel for heating and social activities such as company picnics, travel organization increase my loyalty to the organization and success at work (2.91) and that the reward they receive for doing a good job affects their relationship with the employer and their performance (3.12). Thus, conclusion was reached that the extent to which reward moderates the relationship between ERM and EP is high.

Table 6 How reward moderates the relationship between ERM and EP S/N ITEMS SA A D (2) SD Mean Decision (4) (3) (1) ( ̆) Freq. Freq. Freq. Freq. 18 When I get rewarded anytime I do a good 79 81 20 30 3.00 Accepted job, my relationship with colleagues and superiors improves 19 The benefits like rent, clothing, fuel for 77 75 21 37 2.91 Accepted heating and social activities such as company picnics, travel organization increase my job performance loyalty to the organization. 20 The reward I receive for doing a good job 94 66 32 18 3.12 Accepted affects my relationship with my employer and my performance Aggregate Mean 3.01 Adopted Criterion Mean 2.50 Source: Field survey (2019)

5. TESTING OF THE HYPOTHESIS The following null hypotheses in this study were tested

Hypothesis I

H0: No significant relationship between ERM component and EP. In testing this hypothesis, the researcher employed the independent t-test and one way ANOVA statistical tool. Table 7 shows the result of the analysis.

Table 7a Independent T- test statistics on the significant difference between ERM component and EP. Variable No Mean S. D D.F t-cal t-crit Sig. (2- Remarks tailed) ERM component 20 64.80 24.934

EP 2.493 1.96 .022 20 40.30 22.462

38 Significant

Table 7b One-way ANOVA to Hypothesis I Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 6002.5 1 6002.500 10.659 .002 Within Groups 21399.4 38 563.142 Total 27401.9 39

Table 7 reveals a significant positive relationship between ERM component and EP. The computed mean and standard deviation of ERM component (64.80; 24.93) was higher than EP (40.30; 22.46) respectively. Calculated value of 2.493 is greater than Critical value of

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJM 387 [email protected] Arubayi, D.O; Onuorah A.C. and Egbule A.C.S

1.96, at 0.05 level of significance. Meanwhile, the F critical at 5 percent level of significance was 10.66. It therefore means that the alternative hypothesis that there is significant relationship between ERM component and EP is accepted.

Hypothesis II

H0: There is no significant effect for employee relationship management on the rewards. In testing this hypothesis, the researcher employed the independent t-test and one way ANOVA statistical tool. The result of the analysis is presented in Table 8.

Table 8a Independent T- test statistics on the significant difference between effect for ERM and Employee’s rewards Variable No Mean S. D D.F t-cal t-crit Sig. (2- Remarks tailed) Employee relationship 10 84.00 14.094 management 11.243 1.96 .000 Employee’s Rewards 10 21.00 8.717

18 Significant

Table 8b One-way ANOVA to Hypothesis II Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 19845.0 1 19845.0 144.502 .000 Within Groups 2472.0 18 137.3 Total 22317.0 19

Table 8 revealed the significant effect of ERM and employee’s reward. The computed mean and standard deviation of ERM (84.80; 14.09) was higher than employees rewards (21.0; 8.71) respectively. Calculated value of 11.243 is greater than Critical value of 1.96, degree of freedom 18 given at 0.05 level of significance. Meanwhile, the F critical at 5 percent level of significance was 144.502. It therefore means that the null hypothesis formulated which states that there is no significant relationship between ERM and the rewards is rejected while the alternative hypothesis is obtained. This implies that there is significant effect of ERM and employee’s reward.

Hypothesis III In testing this hypothesis, the researcher employed the independent t-test and one way ANOVA statistical tool. The result of the analysis is presented in Table 9.

H0 : There is no significant effect for employee performance on rewards

Table 9a Independent T- test statistics on the significant difference between effects of employee performance and Employee’s rewards Variable No Mean S. D D.F t-cal t-crit Sig. (2- Remarks tailed)

t n

Employee a c

10 92.7500 8.42120 fi performance 19.669 1.96 .000 i n g i

Employee’s Rewards 10 12.2500 8.01561 6 S

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJM 388 [email protected] Examining Employee Relationship Management and Employee Performance through Reward: Evidence from Nigeria

Table 9b One-way ANOVA to Hypothesis III Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 12960.500 1 12960.500 191.771 .000 Within Groups 405.500 6 67.583 Total 13366.000 7

Table 9 revealed the significant relationship between employee relationship performance and employee’s rewards. The computed mean and standard deviation of employee performance (92.75; 8.42) was higher than employees rewards (12.25; 8.01) respectively. Calculated value of 19.669 is greater than Critical value of 1.96, degree of freedom 6 given at 0.05 level of significance. Meanwhile, the F critical at 5 percent level of significance was 191.77. It therefore means that the null hypothesis formulated is rejected. This implies that there is a significant relationship between the effects of employee performance on employee’s reward.

Hypothesis IV In testing this hypothesis, the researcher employed the independent t-test and one way ANOVA statistical tool. The result of the analysis is presented in Table 10.

H0 : Rewards do not moderate the association between ERM and EP.

Table 10a Independent T- test statistics on the significant difference between rewards as moderator of ERM and EP Variable No Mean S. D D.F t-cal t-crit Sig. (2- Remarks tailed) Rewards as moderator 10 78.6667 9.13601 of ERM 14.756 1.96 .000 EP 10 26.3333 7.71146

10 Significant

Table 10b One-way ANOVA to Hypothesis IV Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig. Between Groups 8216.333 1 8216.333 114.967 .000 Within Groups 714.667 10 71.467 Total 8931.000 11

Table 10 revealed the significant relationship between employee relationship performance and employee’s rewards. The computed mean and standard deviation of employee performance (78.67; 9.14) was higher than employees rewards (26.33; 7.71) respectively. Calculated value of 14.756 is greater than Critical value of 1.96, degree of freedom 10 given at 0.05 level of significance. Meanwhile, the F critical at 5 percent level of significance was 114.97. It therefore means that the null hypothesis formulated which states that rewards do not moderate the association between ERM and employee performance on rewards is rejected while the alternative hypothesis is accepted. This implies that rewards moderate the association between ERM and EP.

6. DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS The discussion of findings was based on analyzed data which was collected through the administration of the questionnaire on examination of ERM and EP, with reward as a moderator in the organization using MTN, Glo, Airtel and 9Mobile (Etisalat) Nigeria in Delta

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJM 389 [email protected] Arubayi, D.O; Onuorah A.C. and Egbule A.C.S

State. As revealed in Table 7 pertaining hypothesis I, ERM and EP offer employee with training opportunities that advance his abilities. Findings from this study also show that managers are not concerned about the working procedures and do not give employees right to choose duties because they do not trust their decisions. Managers did not also delegate power to employees working with them and this had a negative effect on productivity and employees’ performance. This finding is in consonance with the opinion of Fapohunda (2013) who argued that good relationships and strong sensitive leadership can bring about a cohesive department. Also, it agrees with the opinion of Buttle, (2009) that ERM offers support to employees through workflow modeling. Table 8 representing argument for hypothesis II, relates to the effect of employee relationship management on the at telecommunication sector. It was gathered that rewards bring out an employee’s capacity to take responsibility, makes him or her creative, productive and innovative. Reward therefore is a motivational factor needed for employees to develop and improve their relationship with their employer. On the other hand if employees are not rewarded appropriately for their hard work, an employee would develop grudges against the manager, and this may result in the employee not carrying out manager’s instruction, which will in turn affect negatively the overall performance of the organization. Hence, we say that employee relationship management (ERM) relates to rewards to high extent. This is consistent with the findings of (Agwu 2013: Farah, Sze & Fakhrul, 2014: May, Xiaoyan & David, 2020 and Tymon 2013) that effective reward contributes to the growth and fulfillment of employee in an organization. The researcher believes that reward system is important to employees because it satisfies a number of their most important needs and a highly tangible way of recognizing employee contribution and their worth. The results illustrated reward moderates the relationship between employee relationship management and employee performance, because reward is a powerful motivating factor that helps employee to know how well they have achieved their objectives and whether their achievements are appreciated. The study revealed in Table 9 covering hypothesis III on effect of employee performance on rewards that there is a fair consistent basis for measuring performance and individual contribution to business objectives in my organization and that bonus given to them at special days such as Christmas days, to successful Employees, increase their performance. When employees are rewarded, they feel they are indebted to the organization and want to do everything to increase their effort and performance to deliver more. Reward motivates the employees, makes them feel the organization meant well for them, and so they are eager to give back to the organization by increasing their effort. Hence, it was concluded that reward relates to employee performance to a very high extent. This agrees with the opinion of Vineet et al. (2013) that employee relationship determines the performance of employees through motivation. On the other hand, frontline employees are rewarded with non-financial, like recognition, were perceived as important to the attainment of job satisfaction and achievement of objective (May, Xiaoyan & David, 2020), Employees who fully satisfied with their pay will result in a higher level of satisfaction, and employees who get recognized tend to have higher self-esteem, more confidence and more willingness to take new challenges (Pratheepkanth, 2011). When organizations are able to gain a thorough understanding of their employees’ expectations in return for their hard work, they are capable of determining their reward strategies which can help to deliver what is really needed (Silverman, 2004). Increasingly, organizations should not just emphasized on financial alone, but also have to cover non-financial aspect as well to boost frontline employees’ job satisfaction (Farah, Sze & Fakhrul, 2014).

As shown in Table 10 relating to hypothesis IV on how reward moderates the relationship between employee relationship management and employee performance, it was

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJM 390 [email protected] Examining Employee Relationship Management and Employee Performance through Reward: Evidence from Nigeria gathered that when employees get rewarded anytime they do a good job, thus their relationship with colleagues and superiors improves, also, that the benefits such as rent, clothing, fuel for heating and social activities such as company picnics, travel organization increase my loyalty to the organization and success at work and that the reward they receive for doing a good job affects their relationship with the employer and their performance. Mehmood (2013) pointed out that rewards play a vital role on increasing employee rewards and change the behavior of dissatisfies employees. This is in alignment with Agwu (2013), that organizations always try to align their reward strategy with the human resource strategy which finally leads to create an integration between reward strategy and promote employee relationship management. Reward develops a smooth relationship between the employee and employer, and when the relationship is strengthened, it automatically results to increase in their performance with workplace. It could therefore be put in summary form that the employees of the telecommunication companies whose relationship with the managers is good produce better performance and this comes with appropriate rewards for efforts. Furthermore, people are better motivated to perform when reward is in place. Thus, reward will have an effect to employees’ relationship management and subsequently enhancing job performance. It was therefore suggested that the extent to which reward moderates the relationship between ERM and EP is high. This is in line with the report of Rahman and Taniya (2017) that improvement in employee relationships in organizations leads to better performance.

7. CONCLUSION Employee performance describes how an employee carries out the tasks that make up the job. Good performance results from efforts, ability and direction. Employee relationship management (ERM) component has been shown to be related to employee’s performance (EP). Organisational rewards are an important incentive for enhancing high job performance from individual. As such appropriate reward is important in motivating employees to develop healthy relationship with their employers. Reward is vital in determining ERM and EP. Hence, based on the findings from this study, it can concluded that the effect of ERM components on the EP in telecommunication studied is high. Meanwhile, ERM is related to rewards and that reward in turn is related to EP.

8. RECOMMENDATIONS  Comprehensive reward scheme should be designed to motivate the workforce in telecommunication industry  Communication industry needs to implement appropriate reward system for moderating the effects of ERM on employee performance  In order to facilitate employee performance we recommend selecting a bundle of the suggested reward and bonus system aligned upon the particular needs of the telecommunication organisation.  Manager should concern the working procedures and gives employees freedom to choose tasks and partake in decision making to enhance their performance.

9. CONTRIBUTION TO KNOWLEDGE The research is predominantly valuable human resource management. As it has been discovered that enough research has not been done on reward as a moderator between ERM and EP. This reveals that ERM significantly predicted EP and reward moderated the relationship between employee relationship management and performance of the employees

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJM 391 [email protected] Arubayi, D.O; Onuorah A.C. and Egbule A.C.S in the telecommunication companies. The research also provides a good stand for employer to benchmark for superior designed reward systems or mechanisms to improve on EP. Some key gaps in literature have equally been filled by the study.

REFERENCES [1] Agwu, M.O.,(2013) Impact of Fair Reward System on Employees Job Performance in Nigerian Agip Oil Company Limited Port-Harcourt, British Journal of Education, Society & Behavioral Science, 3(1), pp 47-64. [2] Ajila C, Abiola A. Influence of rewards on employee’s performance. J. Soc. Sci. 2004;8(1):7- 12. [3] Aktar S, Sachu M, Ali M. The impact of rewards on employee performance in commercial banks of Bangladesh: An empirical study. IOSR Journal of Business and Management (IOSR- JBM) ISSN: 2278-487X. (Nov. - Dec. 2012). 2012; 6 (2): 09-15. [4] Bajaj, R., Sinha, S., & Tiwari, V. (2013). Crucial Factors of Human Resource Management for Good Employee Relations: A Case Study. International Journal of Mining, Metallurgy & [5] Chinomona, R., & Sandada, M. (2013). Shared Goal, Communication and Absence of Damaging Conflicts as Antecedents of Employee Relationship Strength at Institutions of Higher Learning in South Africa. [6] Farah L. B., Sze S. T, Fakhrul Z. A., (2014). Reward management and job satisfaction among frontline employees in hotel industry in Malaysia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 144 (2), 392 – 402 [7] Fluegge-Woolf, E.R. (2014). Play hard, work hard. Management Research Review, 37(8), 682-705. [8] Freda, A. (2014). Assessment of records management practices among the administrative staff of University of Education, Winneba–Kumasi (UEW-K) and Mampong (UEW-M) Campuses (Doctoral dissertation, Department of Managerial Sciences, A Thesis submitted to the Department of Managerial Sciences, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology). [9] Hall-Ellis, S.D. (2014). Reward systems promote high-performance work teams achieving library mission. The Bottom Line: Managing Library Finances, 27(2), 66-69. [10] Herington, C., Johnson, L., & Scott, D. (2009). Firm–employee relationship strength—A conceptual model. Journal of Business Research, 1096–1107. [11] Jyoti, Jeevan. (2014). Exploring talent management practices: antecedents and consequences. International Journal of Management Concepts and Philosophy. 8. 220-248. 10.1504/IJMCP.2014.066903. [12] Kuzu, Ömür & Özilhan, Derya. (2014). The Effect of Employee Relationships and Knowledge Sharing on Employees’ Performance: An Empirical Research on Service Industry. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 109. 1370-1374. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.639. [13] Lagergren, N., & Andersson, V. (2013). Becoming the CFO’s best friend by gaining a deeper customer understanding. Master Thesis. [14] Loi Saw Ming, (2015). The Moderating Effect Of Reward In The Relationship Between Work Engagement And Job Performance. A Master’s Thesis Of Business Administration (Corporate Management), Faculty Of Business And Finance, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman. [15] May X. B., Xiaoyan C,., & David S. (2020). A part analysis investigation of the relationships between CEO pay ratios and firm performance mediated by employee satisfaction. Advances in accounting, 48 (1), 1-14.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJM 392 [email protected] Examining Employee Relationship Management and Employee Performance through Reward: Evidence from Nigeria

[16] M. O. Agwu, (2013) Impact of fair reward system on employees job performance in Nigerian Agip Oil Company Limited Port – Harcourt, British journal of education, society and behavioural science; 3(1) 47-64,. [17] Md. Sahedur Rahman, Rabeya Khatun Taniya, Effect of Employee Relationship Management (ERM) on Employee Performance: A Study on Private Commercial Banks in Bangladesh, Human Resource Management Research , Vol. 7 No. 2, 2017, pp. 90-96. doi: 10.5923/j.hrmr.20170702.03. [18] Noordin, F., Omar, S., Sehan, S., & Idrus, S. (2010). Organisational Climate and Its Influence on Organisational Commitment. International Business & Economics Research Journal, 9(2), 1-10.Management. [19] Oluchi, O. (2013). Co-operation Between Employee and Management to In-crease Productivity: A Case Study of Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited. International Business. [20] Rashmi Ranjan and Dr. Umesh Mishra (2017) Journal of Business and Management Volume 19, (June 2017), PP 22-30 from www.iosrjournals.org [21] Rowland, C., & Hall, R. (2014). Management learning, performance and reward: theory and practice revisited. Journal of Management Development, 33(4), 342-356. [22] Serena Aktar, Muhammad Kamruzzaman, Md. Emran Ali (2012). The impact of rewards on employee performance in commercial banks of Bangladesh: An empirical study, IOSR Journal of business and management, pp 09-15. [23] Sinha, S., & Bajaj, R. (2013). Successful Human Resource Management Determinants to Build Good Employee Relations. International Journal of Human Resource Management and Research, 3(2), 31-36. [24] Strohmeier, S. (2013). Employee relationship management —realizing competitive advantage through information technology. Human Resource Management Review, 93–104. [25] Waal, A.D., & Jansen, P. (2013). The bonus as hygiene factor: the role of reward systems in the high performance organization. Evidence-based HRM: A Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship, 1(1), 41-59. [26] Wargborn, C. (2008). Managing Motivation In Organizations - Why Employee Relationship Management Matters. Saarbruecken: VDM. [27] Yongcai, Y. (2010). Employee Relationship Management of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises. International Conference on E-Business and E-Government. IEEE.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJM 393 [email protected]