Project Materials




Need help with a related project topic or New topic? Send Us Your Topic 



Chapter one


1.0 Background of the Study

Choosing the appropriate compensation and benefit system to boost employee productivity is difficult. If an employee selects an incentive that has little meaning for her employees, productivity declines.

Furthermore, the company loses the time and money invested on the inefficient rewards programme. To choose an effective recognition system for increasing productivity, an employer should establish defined and measurable productivity goals, understand what motivates her employees, and consider employing a variety of rewards and perks.

WORKER REWARD: is one of the most important management actions. It has been the obsession of all management in a wide range of organisations, from tiny businesses to big organisations.

WORKER REWARD: In an organisation, the process of taking action by an official person or body to approve, amend, or reject a preferred viewpoint or a set of issues. This could take the form of legislation being enacted or an executive order being issued within an organisation. This approach entails the art of day-to-day.

WORKER REWARDS: These are used in the operation of an organisation.

FOR WORKERS’ REWARD To be considered effective, there must be competing options. Before WORKERS REWARDS: are implemented, some recommendations will be rejected, while others will be accepted and changed.

The disparities will be narrowed, bargains will be formed, and in some cases, the workers’ reward will be assumed to be a formality. In other words, the question will be debatable until the votes are counted or the workers’ incentive is disclosed.

Managers frequently regard worker reward making to be the heart of their job, requiring them to always decide what has to be done, who will do it, when, where, and, most importantly, how it will be done.

Traditionally, managers have influenced regular employees, particularly their immediate subordinates in the organisation. As a result, managers have implemented unnatural worker rewards, even in cases affecting their subordinates.

In Germany, a law was passed in 1951 that allows for code termination and demands labour membership on the supervisory board and executive committees of some large corporations. However, worker participation in the reward-making process led in generally harmonious labour management notation.

1.2 Historical Background

It was founded in the 1970s as a joint venture between the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) and Daimler-Benz AG (“Daimler”) of Germany, with others contributing 25%, to import and construct entirely knocked-down Mercedes-Benz trucks and business in Nigeria.

According to its memorandum of association, ANAMMCO is established to carry on the business of important of completely knocked down sets of Mercedes Benz commercial vehicles and passenger cars, as well as spare parts pertaining thereto, and the assembly of same in Nigeria under licence from Daimler or from local suppliers.

Daimler and ANAMMCO signed into manufacturing and agency agreements, which granted ANAMMCO selling rights to trucks and buses imported in entirely knocked-down condition and assembled and/or manufactured solely in Nigeria, as well as spare components.

ANAMMCO was built to manufacture and assemble a range of Mercedes-Benz commercial vehicles, agricultural tractors, cars and spare components. Buy, sell, rent, or hire, repair, modify, or deal in equipment components, parts, accessories, and other items for vehicle and tractor personnel. The company employs 800 employees. Facilities:

The corporation has a large number of assets. Buildings, Hospital, Machinery and Equipment. Recreational Facilities: Tennis court and swimming pool; branch offices in key cities like Lagos, Abuja, and Port-Harcourt for sourcing, manufacturing, and distribution.

300,000 square metres of land training school/center. Utility services include water and electricity. NOTE: The company imports totally knocked down vehicles from Daimler “CBenz AG” in Germany, Brazil, Spain, and P.T. German Motors in Indonesia.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

There has been much debate about whether an employee should participate in managerial worker reward decisions or not. Some writers claimed that employees should help to increase worker rewards, particularly when it affects them or their jobs. Such participation is planned to serve as a training and testing ground for future upper-level management members.

In Nigeria, specialists who contested the preceding assertion regard the arrangement as a symptom of mal-organization. They asserted that qualified, reasonable, honest, and business-oriented individuals are not accessible at these lower organisational levels.

However, the key question is if all competent individuals are actually available. All of this supports the need for an inquiry research.


The overall goal of this empirical study is to evaluate the impact of employee participation on managerial worker reward decision-making in Nigerian public sector organisations, specifically ANAMMCO Limited.

To determine the effect of employee engagement or non-participation in management WORKERS REWARD on organisational production. Make recommendations based on research findings.

1.4 Significance of the Study

The research findings will be useful to the managers and staff of ANAMMCO Limited. It would also benefit other public sector organisations in Nigeria, as well as the government, academics, and future researchers interested in the problem of employee participation in managerial workers’ reward decisions.

This empirical study is also relevant to the researcher because it is a partial prerequisite for the award of a Degree at SCHOOL OF BUSINESS.


The study looks at how organisations compensate Nigerian workers to boost productivity, using ANAMMCO Ltd as a case study. Due to time constraints and other circumstances, the investigation was limited to a single ANAMMCO Ltd, Port Harcourt. It looks at the reward system and how it affects worker productivity.


To effectively carry out this research, the following questions are posed. Do management staff make Workers Reward decisions without prior discussion and involvement with employees?

Do management change agents offer rewards when employees reject them?

To what extent do employees engage in worker reward decisions?

How often do employees have meetings with their managers?

1.7 Research Hypothesis

Based on the study’s aims and challenges, the researcher develops the following hypothesis.


H0: Management implements Workers Reward without prior discussion or consultation with employees.


H0: When employees reject ANAMMCO Ltd’s Workers Rewards, management changes them.

H1: The management of ANAMMCO Ltd changes Workers Rewards when they are rejected by employees.

1.10 Limitations of the Study

A work of this sort is difficult to complete or perform. And, as a result of budget issues, time limits, respondents’ apathy, and bureaucratic procedures involved in data release, the study was severely hampered.

1.11 Definition of Terms

1) WAEC: West Africa Examination Council

2) NECO: National Examination Council Organisation.

3) ANAMMCO—ANAMBRA Motor Manufacturing Company

4) CKD—Completely Knocked Down

5) BSC = Bachelor of Science.

Need help with a related project topic or New topic? Send Us Your Topic 


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.