Determinants of retention strategies and sustainable performance of academic staff of government-owned universities in Nigeria

Introduction

Globally, the role of teachers in the University system is recognized as crucial in realizing academic goals designed to advance learning and overall quality of university education. Teachers are pivotal to the running of an effective and efficient university academic process and central to driving teaching and learning improvements in universities. The right representation of teachers in the university system in both quantity and quality is a sine qua non for instituting quality and standards in the university system^1–4.

Universities in Africa, through their traditional remits in education, research and innovation, have a major role to play in enabling the continent to achieve these noble objectives⁵. The Nigerian university system, being the largest and best established in the continent, should assume leadership in propelling the continent to these great heights^6–8. The early decades of the Nigerian university system were characterized by impressive achievements. Graduates from the system were reputed, nationally and globally for skills that lifted them high up on the relevance scale^9–11. Research output from the system was adjudged to be amongst the most impactful in solving national, regional and global challenges facing the society¹². While there have been spurts of growth which sustained these achievements, a general decline in quality still pervades the system which may ultimately inhibit the delivery of Africa's Vision 2063 and addressing global Sustainable Development Goals. Several variables are implicated in explaining declining quality^13–15.

These factors have also impacted the development of human capacity at multiple levels, which has developed at an uneven pace^16,17, often determined by the level of funding and innovation available to individual institutions^18,19. Over time, a comprehension gap has also set in between those who run tertiary institutions and the modernity of technology^20,21. This gap in many cases has created a vacuum in the championing of innovative ICT deployment that would have undoubtedly driven advancements in science and technology^22–25. This may imply that the leaderships of tertiary institutions have not been adequately motivated to champion technological innovations and create exposure for modern learning and knowledge sharing tools.

Facilities such as classrooms, lecture theatres, laboratories, workshops, and employee offices are far from being optimal. Though incremental changes are being made through Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TETFund) action, facilities are still over-stretched and badly managed in many universities^26,27. Hostel services are increasingly declining, the classes are overcrowded with poor infrastructure²⁸, the low quality and quantity of lecturers²⁹, a lack of laboratory and experimental materials²⁴, financial constraints and weak governance³⁰. Added to all these human failings, the environment in many of the universities in Nigeria is unfavorable³⁰ and not conducive to good curriculum delivery, or indeed, any form of teaching and learning³¹. Students are overcrowded in rooms with some hanging on to windows where ventilation is poor³², or flock around shades in the open. Electricity, enabling comfort, skills acquisition or laboratory work, is often absent, public address systems inadequate and digital technology to assist with knowledge transfer and interactive sessions - internet access, smart boards - absent in many institutions^31,33,34.

Extant literature has also shown that the efforts and commitments of government at all levels to reverse the decline has been worrisome. It has been observed that academic staff in Nigerian state universities have not featured among the top 500 scholars in various fields across the world^3,31,32. Importantly, the UNESCO indicated a minimum of 26% budgetary allocation to education, while the highest in Nigeria from 1990 till date has been 14%. This may probably be the reasons for the ranking status of Nigerian state universities in the global league table³¹. It is in this respect that the urgency of sustainable performance among academic staff must be viewed. This paper therefore examined the determinants and risk factors on the retention strategies and sustainable performance of academic staff of government owned universities in Nigeria. Consequently, this paper developed the following three hypotheses:

H1: Determinants and risk factors significantly influence academic staff retention

H2: Determinants and risk factors significantly influence sustainable performance of Universities

H3: Academic retention significantly influences sustainable performance of selected universities

Methods

This study adopted the descriptive research design, specifically, the use of quantitative approach³⁵. The adopted descriptive survey research facilitated detailed and credible assessment of the relationship among the determinants and risk factors, retention strategies and sustainable performance of academic staff. The adopted descriptive design made use of survey method based on the impracticability of studying the entire large population of universities in Nigeria. In essence, the survey method enabled the researcher to make inferences that are applicable to the entire population, based on Khong (2005) assertion that survey research is an appropriate method to generalize from a sample to a population.

Results

A total of 400 copies of the questionnaire were indiscriminately distributed to selected Universities' academic personnel in Southern Nigeria. There were 370 copies of the questionnaire collected, reflecting a response rate of 90%. After the data screening process, 362 respondents were retained for further analysis, while eight copies were discarded because they were not completely filled. Table 3 showed the distribution of biographical data of the respondents in terms of gender, current rank/status, work experience and highest education. Individual-level results from each participant are available as Underlying data³⁶.

Results in Table 3 on demographic characteristics revealed that majority of the respondents were predominantly male (60.2%) and majority of the respondents fall within Lecturer II (representing 45%). Lecturer II are lecturers in higher education without professorial status. In total, 60% academic staff had masters’ degree and 62.4% had below 11 years work experience in their current universities.

Structural models

In SEM, the structural model is the inner model. The structural model can be measured using values and significant values of the path coefficients (R2). PLS-SEM was used to analyze the path, because PLS does not need any assumptions about normal distribution⁴⁴. The use of bootstrapping becomes important for determining the significance level^16,20,43. Figure 1–Figure 3 showed the outcomes of the structured model with standardised parameter estimate. The independent variables (determining and risk factors) accounted for approximately (R² = 0.436; R² = 0.483) 43.6% and 48.3% of the variance in the academic staff retention (ASR) and sustainable performance (SP) of universities. The path coefficients and structural model results were demonstrated in Figure 1–Figure 3, respectively. The path coefficients for retention strategies and sustainable performance were presented in Table 5, while the summary of hypotheses testing was demonstrated in Table 6.

Figure 1. The basic co-efficient algorithms.

Figure 2. Basic co-efficient algorithms and bootstrapping P-values.

Figure 3. Basic co-efficient algorithms and bootstrapping T-values.

Table 5. Path coefficients for idea exploration and task performance.

Variables and cross loading	Path co- efficient	Standard deviation	T-statistics	P-values
Determinants/Risk factors → Academic Retention	0.66	0.07	8.94	0.00
Determinants/Risk factors → Sustainable Perf.	0.68	0.11	6.29	0.00
Strengths → Academic staff Retention	0.25	0.06	3.95	0.00
Strengths → Sustainable Performance	0.26	0.07	3.56	0.00
Weaknesses → Academic staff Retention	0.41	0.09	4.47	0.00
Weaknesses → Sustainable Performance	0.42	0.10	4.24	0.00
Opportunities → Academic staff Retention	0.15	0.07	2.19	0.03
Opportunities → Sustainable Performance	0.23	0.10	2.36	0.02
Threats → Academic staff Retention	0.18	0.05	3.35	0.00
Threats → Sustainable Performance	0.19	0.05	3.42	0.00
Academic Retention → Sustainable Performance	0.19	0.07	2.66	0.01
	R Square (R2)		R Square (R2) Adjusted
Determinants and Risk factors	0.70		0.69
Academic staff Retention	0.44		0.43
Sustainable Performance	0.48		0.47

Table 6. Summary of hypotheses testing.

Hypothesis	β	SE	CR	p-value	Remark
H1: DRF → ASR	0.66	0.07	8.94	0.00	Supported
H2: DRF → SP	0.68	0.11	6.29	0.00	Supported
H3: ASR → SP	0.19	0.07	2.66	0.01	Supported

Β: beta coefficient; SE: standard error; CR, critical ratio.

The path coefficient of all constructs indicates significant relationships between retention strategies predictions and sustainable performance in the analysis at 0.05, except. The model indicated statistically significant path co-efficient, specifically, significant relationship was found between determining/risk factors and academic staff retention (β=0.66, p=0.000), determining/risk factors and sustainable performance (β=0.68, p=0.000); and academic staff retention and sustainable performance (β=0.19, p=0.010). Hence, all path coefficients were of practical importance, since they are above 0.05.

Discussions

H1: Determinants and risk factors have significant relationship with academic staff retention

The first hypothesis tested the relationship between determinants and risk factors and retention of academic staff of selected universities. The result of the test indicated that the determinants and risk factors such as adequacies in facilities for teaching, learning and research, adequate funding, quality of graduates, efficacy of research and postgraduate training, consistent regulation and so on have strong positive impact on academic retention (β=0.66, p=0.000). This implies that a unit change of these factors will lead to increase in academic retention by 66%. This finding that showed significant and direct relationship between the variables is consistent with previous studies^{15,18,19,26,30,33,40,44,45}. They argued that analyzing the factors that influence employee retention benefits both human resource management and employees in their career planning. According to the findings, all of the factors or indicators that influence employee retention are linked. One appears to have an impact on the other. So an employee's decision to leave the company is influenced by a combination of factors rather than a single factor. While it is true that meeting all of an employee's demands is impossible, organizations can still make efforts to keep their employees.

H2: Determinants and risk factors have significant relationship with sustainable performance

The second hypothesis tested the relationship between determinants and risk factors and sustainable performance of selected universities. However, this result established that the determinants and risk factors such as consistent regulation by NUC and professional bodies, promotion of ICT-driven universities and fostering skills development and entrepreneurship programmes have strong positive impact on sustainable performance of universities. This revealed that sustainable performance of universities are influenced by some determining and risk factors. This finding that showed significant and direct relationships between the variables, consistent with previous studies^{1,2,12,17,18,32,44,46,47}. These researchers ascertained that recruitment and selection should be based on merit with no favoritism, and the organization should work to groom the employees (i.e. academic staff) by continuously polishing their skills and abilities through training and development. There should be a proper work-life balance, as well as job security for employees. According to the findings of the study, the best way to improve long-term performance is to identify employee expectations, and then to meet those expectations. Organizations must strive to implement retention strategies that are as effective as possible.

H3: Academic staff retention has significant direct relationship with sustainable performance

This study posited a direct significant relationship between academic staff retention and sustainable performance. The hypothesis was found to be significant (β=0.19, p=0.000) suggesting academic staff retention impact on sustainable performance of selected universities. This implies that a unit change of academic staff retention will lead to increase in sustainable performance of universities by 19%. The current study finding was similar to previous findings^{4,8,13,21,34,35,41,45,47}. These researchers predicted that rewards and recognition, as well as employee intention to stay in the organization, are positively correlated, meaning that if an organization provides appropriate rewards and recognition to its employees for doing good, the retention rate will improve. They went on to say that the work environment has a positive impact on employee retention. That is, if a company provides a good working environment for its employees, they are more likely to stay with the company for a long time.

Conclusion

The study concludes that urgent effort to comprehensively address the dilapidation and inadequacy of teaching and research facilities in all Nigerian universities is required in order to make them globally competitive and better positioned for excellence in teaching, learning and research. Academic staff believed that salaries, academic promotion, and development were the most important factors, and that their expectations were not met in these areas. While academic staff mobility and career advancement were the top priorities for teaching and research staff, policies and regulations supporting promotions were unclear at the participating universities. Salary disparities were identified as one of the main reasons for academics leaving their profession, among other factors. However, if adequate funding is provided, Nigerian universities will not only meet the needs of the growing population but can be at par with other top universities elsewhere in the world in the development of vital highly skilled manpower, research and innovations which are the tools for the growth of a great and dynamic economy.

The importance of human resources, viz academic staff in achieving organisational viz university goals has been underscored, especially the need for creating a motivating work environment that no only motivates but engages workers in productive work outcomes. As a result, the researchers recommended that the selected universities' management needs implement engendered policies that can improve working conditions, particularly those that allow academic staff to balance teaching with research and community outreach, treat men and women equally in terms of promotions, job benefits, and dealing with gender sensitive issues when offering promotions.

Recommendations

Based on the findings and conclusion, the authors proffered the following recommendations:

Data availability