MONETIZATION REFORM POLICY AS A PREDICTOR OF STAFF PERFORMANCE ON THE PUBLIC SECTOR OF NIGERIA

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

People working for the government are regarded as permanent employees of the many government agencies that are in charge of carrying out the policies and initiatives of the government (Adebayo, 2019). As a result, employees from various government ministries, agencies, and parastatals make up Nigeria's public service. However, leaders  in the public sectors frequently start reforms with the intention of improving efficacy and efficiency. According to Olaleye (2021), reforms involve restructuring administrative frameworks and enhancing operational methods to enhance organizational effectiveness and efficiency. This perspective underscores how reforms can address operational, structural, and organizational challenges within an institution. Reforms denote deliberate changes implemented to enhance an organization's ability to adapt to evolving demands. Similarly, Adewumi (2018) suggests that reforms are typically pursued under the belief that achieving optimal performance within an organization is achievable if administrative processes are adequately equipped to provide necessary support. 

Over the past two decades, reforms in the public sector received global interest and attention from policy makers, practitioners, and scholars. 

Developed nations like the United States of America, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and Australia are the origins of these reforms. Prior to this reform, several administrative reforms had been implemented in the Nigerian public sector, with at least six major ones occurring since the country gained independence in 1960. These included the Morgan reform in 1964, Elwood reform in 1966, Udoji reform in 1974, Dotun Phillip reform in 1988, and Ayida reform in 1994. These nations' governments have started to restructure their public sector in an effort to boost economic growth by lowering operating expenses while preserving and enhancing the efficacy and efficiency of services offered to the populace (Ogden, 2019; Dorsuh and Yasin, 2018).In other achieve the aforementioned above,monetization policy was introduced.  The then president, Obasanjo's decision to implement the monetization policy stemmed from the alarming revelation that by the end of 2001, over 85% of public sector spending was allocated to overhead costs. It has been argued that a key strategy for ensuring effective governance involves enacting public policies aimed at reducing fraud, curbing wasteful spending of public funds and resources, and preventing the abuse of power by public officials (Olugbenga, 2021). The Obasanjo administration recognized the urgent need to scrutinize the excessive fringe benefits and allowances provided to public servants, which were consuming significant resources that could otherwise be directed towards social development projects benefiting the Nigerian population at large. 

The Monetization Policy was thus introduced to address the escalating annual expenditure on these benefits, with the aim of minimizing waste. Notably, substantial funds were being expended by the government on constructing, purchasing, or leasing residential accommodations for public servants. Moreover, considerable resources were allocated for the maintenance, renovation, and furnishing of these accommodations, as well as for procuring, fueling, and maintaining official vehicles for public servants. Some public officials were found to possess multiple official vehicles of various brands, leading to potential misuse and high maintenance costs. Additionally, utilities such as telephone, electricity, and other services provided in government-maintained official quarters for public servants were susceptible to abuse and misuse. In his inaugural address, Obasanjo highlighted that the disproportionate amount of revenue was being consumed by the operational costs of the government across all levels. It was evident that a comprehensive review of the governmental structure was necessary to achieve a reasonable balance between overhead costs, recurrent expenditures, and capital investments. 

Along with a host of other changes, monetization was the inspiration behind a number of systematic measures to reduce government financial mismanagement, lessen public servant abuse of resources, and increase worker productivity. The monetization program was swiftly put into effect because prominent government officials saw it as beneficial and in line with their interests (Egeonu & Okonkwo, 2021). The policy was implemented quickly because of the elite's identification with it, even though there were worries that it may favor some workers over others. But in contemporary organizational management, the public sector is starting to recognize how important fringe benefits are in shaping the overall culture of the company and improving employee engagement and performance.Against this backdrop, there is a need for comprehensive research to examine monetization reform policy as a predictor of staff performance on the public sector of Nigeria.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

The government believes that by implementing monetization reform policy, undesirable fiscal habits like misusing and wasting public resources will be greatly reduced. For example, a significant amount of money was spent by the government building, buying, or leasing housing for government employees. According to Iyayi (2020), a significant amount of funding was also set aside for the repair, upkeep, and furnishings of these types of facilities, as well as for the purchase, maintenance, and fueling of official vehicles used by public employees. In addition, many public employees have a history of owning multiple official vehicles that they use for both work and home use (Ihemereze et al., 2021). When the burden of government is lessened, undue pressure is removed on the nation's resources, and the government has more time to dedicate itself entirely to capital projects, the monetization policy becomes viable.

Consequently, there is proof of substantial resource loss as a result of waste, mishandling, and misuse of public facilities across the country, mostly from the supply of necessities like free energy, phone service, housing, transportation, and healthcare. Over time, the cost of maintaining these facilities has grown significantly and now exceeds the amount spent on salaries and wages.Additionally, the monetization policy that has been put in place is causing problems for Nigerian public employees. Government quarters held by civil servants were sold as part of the monetization process, among other changes. For the governmental staff who had the necessary money to pack in, those who could not afford to pay for their living spaces in the government quarters were tossed outside (Habibulah, 2022).Similarly, the overall amount deducted from Nigerian public sector employees' salaries is likewise problematic. Then, curious about how the monetization policy was being implemented, civil personnel started asking questions. What is the rationale for implementing the monetization policy?  It is in the light of these that the study seeks to examine monetization reform policy as a predictor of staff performance on the public sector of Nigeria.

1.3 Objectives of the Study

The main purpose of this study is to examine monetization reform policy as a predictor of staff performance on the public sector of Nigeria. Specifically, the study will;

1.Determine whether monetization as a reform policy is effectively implemented in the public sector of Nigeria.

2.Determine the level of employees acceptability of monetization as a reform policy  in the public sector of Nigeria.

3.Determine the impact of monetization as a reform policy on staff performance in the public sector of Nigeria.

1.4 Research Questions

The following questions have been prepared for the study:

To what extent has the monetization policy been implemented in federal government agencies?

Are monetization provisions adequately accessible to all categories of workers within federal government agencies?

What are the factors that influence the effective implementation of the monetization policy in federal government agencies?

What are some potential strategies to enhance the implementation of the monetization policy within federal government agencies?

1.5 Research Hypotheses

Ho: The implementation of monetization as a reform policy has no significant impact on staff performance in the public sector of Nigeria.

Ha: The implementation of monetization as a reform policy has a significant impact on staff performance in the public sector of Nigeria.

1.6 Significance of the Study

The success of any research endeavor is evaluated based on its contribution to existing knowledge and its ability to address gaps in the literature concerning the subject under examination. This study demonstrates a positive outlook in this aspect, as it acknowledges the correlation between the implementation of the monetization policy and the enhancement of performance in the public sector of Nigeria. Moreover, the study's findings will foster a deeper understanding of the monetization policy among employees in public sector of Nigeria, providing insights into its effects on them. Additionally, the study will bring attention to all aspects of the monetization policy, equipping the general public with the necessary information to critique the policy constructively. Furthermore, other students who may decide to conduct studies in this area will have the opportunity to use this study as available literature that can be subjected to critical review. Invariably, the result of the study contributes immensely to the body of academic knowledge with regard to monetization reform policy as a predictor of staff performance on the public sector of Nigeria.

1.7 Scope of the study

The scope of this study is boarded on monetization reform policy as a predictor of staff performance on the public sector of Nigeria. Empirically, this study will determine whether monetization as a reform policy is effectively implemented in the public sector of Nigeria, the level of employees acceptability of monetization as a reform policy  in the public sector of Nigeria, and the impact of monetization as a reform policy on staff performance in the public sector of Nigeria.

Geographically, the study will be delimited to staff in the Nigerian civil servants in Akure, Ondo state, Nigeria. 

1.8 Limitation of the study

In the course of carrying out this study, the researcher experienced some constraints, which included time constraints, financial constraints, language barriers, and the attitude of the respondents. In addition, there was the element of researcher bias. Here, the researcher possessed some biases that may have been reflected in the way the data was collected, the type of people interviewed or sampled, and how the data gathered was interpreted thereafter. The potential for all this to influence the findings and conclusions could not be downplayed. 

More so, the findings of this study are limited to the sample population in the study area, hence they may not be suitable for use in comparison to other schools, local governments, states, and other countries in the world.

1.9 Definition of Terms

Monetization: is the process of converting non-monetary benefits, such as healthcare plans, housing allowances, or transportation subsidies, into cash equivalents.

Policy: A plan of action agreed or chosen by a political party, a business, etc. (Hornby, 2018)