Keywords

Conflict, Corporate Communication, Grievance, Performance.

Introduction

In today's highly interconnected global economy, organizations encounter a more myriad of threats of internal and external disturbances to business undertakings (Ibidunn et al., 2015; D'Cruz, 1999; Osibanjo et al., 2016). Some grievances can be planned for, controlled, and mitigated; but additional high-impact, hard-to-predict circumstances are happening more frequently. Grievance commonly arises within a short duration and can affect a corporation's capacity to attain its goal. Grievance often results to significant economic or reputational loss (Kondalkar, 2007; Lewin & Peterson, 1988). Due to the uncertain nature of grievance and the likely consequence on an organization's viability, organizations require preparing in advance measures for managing it before it leads to crisis.

Today, the need to preserve a harmonious workplace connection to increase worker morale, enhance organizational efficiency, and improve organizational efficiency has rendered worker grievance leadership a severe and essential organizational issue. Employee grievance management has appeared as a top concern for many right-thinking executives and executives in our modern company field, as organizations trying to make the most of each of their staff need to be able to keep a harmonious management-labor connection that is essential to organizational sustainability, achievement, efficiency and improvement (Ebeguki et al., 2019). Grievances are issues, issues or conflicts raised by staff with their employers’ procedures to adapt the emotions, opinions and opinions of their staff in order to acquire the confidence, allegiance and wholehearted dedication of their staff, particularly when it goes to staff with channels to convey their grievances to management.

The nature and size of problems arising from bad grievance leadership have become worrisome. In reality, any organization that fails to put an adequate staff grievance system in location makes itself susceptible to systemic inefficiencies that are probable to affect the organization as a whole. Therefore, the leadership of employee grievances is essential for ongoing economic harmony and organizational efficiency. Grievance proceedings are carried out of the sensation that fellow staff or managers have breached the worker. Certainly, management's function and goal does not only result in attracting, maintaining, motivating staff, imposing penalties needed to obtain reactions to worker conduct, but also in ensuring that an efficient grievance management process is in location within the organization. Bean observed that employee-related grievance problems were discontent with the therapy they received. Grievances also result from the dispute between the employee and the strategy of their company (Lee & Ok, 2016).

Effective management of staff grievance in today's organizations is a crucial function for staff executives. Aboagye & Benyebaar (2012) argue that, if grievances are left untreated or dealt with inappropriately, they have a deep impact on motivation, morals, interactions between management and labor and have a negative impact on the organization's efficiency. Adelakun (2011) argues that by using the established method, executives attempt to decrease grievances and other difficulties that occur within the environment of an organization. Consequently, management and instant managers have a severe part to play in effective management of employees’ grievance. Therefore, grievances are signs of discontent on the portion of an organization's individual employees and organizations with representatives of common concern. Suppressing grievances has far-reaching consequences for manufacturing organizations ' survival, development, and efficiency.

Streams of recent research like Cleyman et al. (1995); Armstrong (2006) posit that firms cannot subsist without their personnel demonstrating effective ways of handling grievance. This can further be justified as scholars on Crisis Management (CM) opined that organizations that do not provide safe environment for the employees to raise their concerns can be referred to as fragile organizations. This might be responsible for the extinction of many Nigerian indigenous manufacturing firms in the market as the sector is dominated by firms with foreign affiliation. This can be justified as Manufacturing Association of Nigeria (MAN) posits that most manufacturing firms are no longer in existence. Furthermore, fragile social system (firms) is exposed to survival threat particularly in a highly competitive business environment. This argument becomes valid that for firms to remain in the market, management must be encouraged to establish formal grievance handling procedures that provide a safe environment for the employees to raise their concerns.

Extant literature has revealed that suppressed employees ' grievances can lead to casual strikes, sabotage, elevated degree of absenteeism, poor morale, quarrels, distrust, absence of engagement and employee injuries with their severe impact on performance, especially in the manufacturing sector. The manufacturing is ostensibly the most imperative and vital segment in human capital improvement (Ebeguki et al., 2019). It is viewed as crucial to the structure of a solid and feasible economy. A number of good manufacturing firms are not aware of the close relationships that exist between employees’ grievance and organization performance. Thus, efficient management of grievance processing can assist to boost the amount of employee fulfillment and also to prevent or decrease the absenteeism, alcoholism, accident, early arrival, absence of collaboration, insubordination, employee removal behavior instead of work, etc. Moreover, some organizations are not been fair in handling of grievance and not taking cognizance of how it has affected employees moral, styles in handling employee’s grievances which may give an impact on organizational performance (Salau et al., 2014).

Procedures are becoming increasingly common in organizations and workforce engaged in both union and nonunion organizations. The situation is becoming increasingly diverse, according to Sundaram & Saranya (2013). If grievance is not settled or correctly addressed in the organization, it produces unsuccessful employees and subsequently undermines the effectiveness that would lead in a large workforce or worker. Employee Grievance leadership remained a challenge in the manufacturing sector. The management of employee grievances by workers observes that processes constitute a number of values and guidelines that assist in work relationships and how they should be performed to reflect organizational processes used by sides in dealing with many daily issues. Extant literature has shown that none of the existing studies has looked into the issue of what an unfair handling grievance of employee has caused them to leave their present job. Many studies have existed on managing employees’ grievances and its effects on organizational survival. However, fewer of these studies, if any, have really attempted to explore managing employees’ grievances and its effects on organizational performance. This research stands to fill that missing intellectual gap by answering the research questions:

i. To what extent can the grievance management strategies (i.e. avoidance, dominating, compromise, obliging and integrating) affect the performance of the selected manufacturing firms?
ii. What are the variations in the grievance management strategies across the demographic characteristics of staff in the selected manufacturing firms?

Literature Review

There have been different views about the role of grievances in organizations. The views concerning grievance have evolved since the emergence of workplace grievance. Diverse insights concerning grievance has led different scholars to approach it in a distinct manner which plays a vital part in sustaining a favorable workplace atmosphere, this views can either lead to an optimistic or adverse organizational atmosphere. Grievances are a vital part and also present in every sphere of an individual’s life. Grievance occurs when there is a disagreement, different views concerning a desired outcome, a correlation, and capacity to negatively affect the relationship if not addressed with a sense of necessity. Grievance is considered as a displeasing occurrence in any organization or institute; so far people have to compete for recognition, power and resources.

Grievance is unavoidable even among family members, friends and colleagues at work or in the workplace.

Classical View (1930-1940)

Classical approach to grievance believes that all grievances are heinous and should be avoided. The classical school of thought, views grievance as harmful and it’s correspondingly used with terms like viciousness and obliteration. This mindset is still embraced mostly among labor union movements. The viewpoint that grievance is harmful to workplace success and it should be sidelined was strongly advocated by Fayol & Weber. Grievance is an outcome of deprived transmission and interpretation of message and disbelief among people; it can only be eradicated or managed only by the top level management. This view believes that grievance should be eluded, although despite this there is a want to investigate the sources of grievances and the management. So as to increase organizations productivity.

Contemporary View (1940-1970)

Considering that another school of thought “Human Relations” (behavioral/ contemporary approach), dominant from 1940s and 1980s, saw grievance as natural existence in all institutes and segments of the society and argued for the acceptance of grievances. It believes grievance is needed for the development and advancement of the organization, it also believes it helps the organization in achieving its set goals. It accepts grievances and believes its profits the organizations productivity.

Interactionist View

The Interactionists differing with the earlier views perceive grievances as an asset to be heartened based on an agreement that it is balanced, friendly and nonviolent in other for change and innovation to take place. Interactionalists ask how there is grievance. What techniques are to be used in expressing it? Leffel gave an illustration which likened grievance to an animal in the animal kingdom, discovering itself in a hostile setting; to survive its needs accommodative skills, to this effect it develops different adaptable abilities, which means its adapts or diminishes. So it was postulated that adaptable skills can lead new innovations and inventions, denial to this adaptable abilities leads to unproductivity. Grievance is a symbiotic relationship among individuals/groups when one of the parties observes that there are a mismatched objectives and aims, which could lead to an obstruction from realizing these objectives.

Forms of Workplace Grievance

Workplace grievance consists of interpersonal and intergroup grievance. Interpersonal consists of coworkers or superiors while intergroup grievance is between the diverse departments in the workplace. There are three forms of grievances which are: process grievances, relationship grievance and task grievances.

Process grievance: According to Jehn & Mannix (2001) this is a brawl about how a duty should be accomplished and the roles and responsibilities of each individual in a group also the delegation of authority. Process grievance has been researched to be linked with low self-confidence, poor performance (Jehn, 1997) and low team productivity (Jehn, 1999).

Relationship grievances: According to Jehn (1995) this occurs when there are interpersonal mismatches between individuals in a group, such as personality clashes due to different temperaments, pressure, hostility and frustration. This type of grievance generates destructive emotions within a person. Examples include nervousness, doubts, or bitterness (Jehn, 1995), anger, and fright of rejection from the group participants.

Task grievances: This is when there is an argument over the context of disagreements about the content of a duty or a job objective, which involves circulation of resources, processes, and analysis of facts. It involves diverse standpoints on beliefs, opinions and this could correspond with vigorous deliberations and individual enthusiasm. Task grievance has been linked with numerous valuable impacts which include improving the interpersonal relationship among group members, which led to more productivity and inventions and leads to better service delivery. Task grievance may be associated to diverse damaging effects which include: low employee morale, poor team spirit and nervousness.

Grievance Management Theories

This segment will be the reviewing of different theories of grievance management created by different management theorists. Grievance management theories and approaches are from time to time used alternatively and they denote the social orientation of a person involved in grievance (Rahim, 2002). Some authors call them theories; others argued that they are styles. Grievance management styles are systematic reactions or collections of behaviors that people use in grievance. According to Riaz et al. (2012) grievance management theories has its origin from social psychology and organizational research. The earliest theories were propounded by the likes of Thomas & Schmidt (1976), Blake et al. (1964), while researchers like Pruitt (1983) and Rahim & Bonoma (1979) came later on. The first researcher to discuss grievance management models is considered to be Follett, while the researcher recognized to be the first to present a theoretical technique for categorizing grievance management theory was Blake et al. (1964) and it was classified into five forms: Problem-solving, smoothing, withdrawing, forcing and compromising.

Thomas & Schmidt (1976) and Pruitt (1983) were declared to have introduced a theory focused on the regards for the parties involved in the grievance. When parties get involved in grievance for their personal gains is called assertiveness while cooperativeness is the regard for the interests of others, According to Pruitt (1983) these styles were called problem-solving (high self-assurance/high cooperativeness), delay (low self-assurance /low cooperativeness), and competing (high self-assurance/low cooperativeness), yielding (low self-assurance /high cooperativeness). Problem solving technique is a better choice at solving grievances because it is advantageous to both parties.

Follett Mary Parker

According to Follett, who recommended methods for resolving grievance which includes compromise, integration, domination, suppression and avoidance? According to her, domination means one party/individual being triumphant over the other party/individual in grievance situations (win/lose approach). While in compromise style, the both parties/individual involved lie down there interest and try to reach a middle ground to satisfy each other’s concern. But she pointed out that, most individuals do not respond well to the idea of forfeiting their concerns for some else sake. Moreover In integrating style, parties/individuals have the zeal to reach an agreement that would be advantageous and acceptable to the both parties/individuals. The integrating style was recommended as the best according to her (Riaz et al., 2012).

Rahim & Bonoma (1979) when different scholars had suggested diverse approaches on handling grievance, but Rahim & Bonoma’s (1979) approaches on handling grievance seems to be the most widespread as there are factual proof to authenticate them. According to Rahim & Bonoma (1979) the different strategies of managing grievance is subdivided into two elements: concern for self and concern for others. The level at which an individual endeavors to please his or her self is called regard for self. While the second elements clarify the level (high or low) at which an individual endeavors to please the concern for others. These elements portrayed the reason for a person’s action in the course of grievance (Rahim & Bonama, 1979). It was started that advance studies buttressed these elements (Van de Vliert & Kabanoff, 1990). The five strategies for handling interpersonal grievance was a blend of the two concerns as represented in the diagram below Figure 1.

The analysis of Figure 1 includes the following:

1. Integrating Style: High regard for self and high regard for others.
2. Avoiding Style: Low regard for self and low regard for others.
3. Obliging Style: Low regard for self and high regard for others
4. Compromising Style: Moderate regard for self and moderate regard for others.
5. Dominating Style: High regard for self and low regard for others.

The Blake et al. (1964) managerial grid theory of grievance management was embraced by Rahim & Bonoma (1979). Nevertheless, they identified the elements in different way: Regard for others and Regard for self. According to Rubin et al. regard for self-element is subject to the level at which an individual wants to fulfill his personal interest while the second element is to what extent an individual can ease the worries of others. Their grievance management strategies were named as follows: avoiding, integrating, obliging, dominating and compromising.

Avoiding Grievance Management Style

In understanding to McMahon & April (1994) it is the point at which an individual concentrates itself from any issue that includes struggle and furthermore relinquishes individual destinations which incorporate the affiliations worried in the contention. This style is also recognized as pulling back or rejecting style (Hussein et al., 2017). As indicated by Kassim & Ibrahim (2014), avoiding style is a strategy for displaying absence of enthusiasm as though the contention isn't significant and it conceals its thought. Workers who get worried in strife with their bosses are probably going to respond in avoidance conduct (Parasuraman et al., 1982; Noah & Steve, 2012).

Dominating Grievance Management Style

It is otherwise called a competing strategy. It involves high respect for self and low respect for other people and it is a win- lose situation (Rahim & Magner, 1995). This technique happens when individual examines that his or her grip is harming to other people. This technique is progressively advantageous when there are crisis needs that require rapid reaction with limited time, however this technique is normally opposed by representatives.

Compromising Grievance Management Style

As indicated by Rahim (2002) and it’s a technique that involves when every gathering undertakings to deal with their contention with the guide of perceiving an answer which is halfway attractive to the gatherings (Ebeguki et al., 2019). Bargaining strategy alludes to part the likenesses, substituting and seeking after an expedient center ground position. Bargain can be recognized as “arranging or exchange”. It tends to be regulated when the differing parties have risen to power and objectives with indistinguishable significance. This system is possibly viewed as fine when the issues included are calmly critical.

Integrating Grievance Management Style

As indicated by Rahim (2002) this methodology is connected with earnestness, scattering of data, critical thinking, and assessment of varieties and searching for substitutes that are fantastic to every gathering. Be that as it may, this methodology is worried about association in the midst of gatherings to achieve a palatable arrangement (Rahim & Magner, 1995). Incorporating approach alludes to the capability of a manager to work together with his or her representatives to profile answers that fulfill their desires (Ebeguki et al., 2019). This procedure is also recognized as cooperation whose transcendent objective is to fulfill the wants of the every party.

Obliging Grievance Management Style

As indicated by Ebeguki et al. (2019) this methodology is used when people/party relinquishes its needs for the other party/person. It is recognized as accommodative methodology and furthermore a lose-win approach. Relationship is increasingly fundamental to one gathering then the other, so it's slanted to make forfeits for the benefit of the other party, just to see the other loose.

Organizational Performance

According to Bidwell, performance is the accomplishment of a given task measured against predetermined known standards of accuracy, completeness, cost and speed. Organizational performance as, the analysis of a company (organization)’s performance in comparison to its goals and objectives. It is an organization's real output/results acquired when evaluated against its expected performance (goals and goals), according to Farlex. Richard et al. suggests that organizational output includes three particular fields of the results of organizations-economic quality (earnings, return on capital, return on capital, etc.); consumer performance (revenues, business share, etc.) which are the three main results of the analyzed commercial organizations. However, production capacity performance is another factor of analysis for organizations. For experts in multiple areas, including strategic managers, activities, finance, legal and organizational growth, organizational efficiency is a notion of utmost significance. It could be described in two main respects: a) financial performance, which involves efficiency, market share, profitability, marketing proportion of fresh goods, capital employed and Return on Assets (ROA), Return on Investment (ROI), Earnings per Share (EPS) and Net Income after Tax (NIAT).

Empirical Review

Okoli et al. (2017) conducted a research on grievance management and organizational performance among staff in selected public universities in the South East. A survey research design was used and questionnaires were distributed. The population study is 460 while the sample size was 210; it was arrived using Krejcie & Morgan formula. A total of 190 copies of questionnaire were examined. The hypothesis was verified at a 5% level of significance using the Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation Coefficient. The result showed that there was a substantial relationship amidst integrating style and organizational performance with a correlation coefficient of 902 (r=0.902<0.05). It was determined that the style adopted in handling grievance determines how fast the grievance will be managed.

A study on grievance handling strategies affecting employees’ workplace allegiance at Kenya Seed Company. The focus of this research was to examine if the grievance handling strategies affects workplace commitment. The Dual Concern Model was used to determine the grievance handling strategies of parties involved in grievance. Workplace allegiance was studied as it has been discovered that institutions benefit most from this pattern, for the reason being that it enhances efficiency, productivity and it promotes an organizations culture and loyalty. 82 Seed indigenous organizations were reviewed as case studies. Using Organizational Grievance Inventory–II (ROGI–II) and Organizational Commitment Questionnaire (OCQ) the assessment of the grievance management techniques and workers devotion was evaluated. Data was analyzed using descriptive techniques. It was discovered that workers felt their loyalty was being questioned, when avoidance and dominating approach were used while integrating, compromising and accommodating styles boost loyalty. Involving the approaches for managing grievance in the organizations policies and employment contracts were recommended, to determine the workers commitment.

Mba carried out a research about grievance management and employees productivity in Julius Berger Nigeria Plc. Bonny Island. A descriptive research design was used in implementing the study using 50 purposively selected sample respondents consisting of 25 managerial employees and 25 non-managerial employees. The focus of the study is the use of cross sectional survey research design in generating the necessary primary data. Data collected were examined using descriptive and inferential statistics. Results from the data analysis pointed out that there is a significant relationship that exists between grievance management strategies and employees’ performance and no changes exist between managerial and non-managerial employees ‘views of the value of grievance management strategies. The research therefore recommended among others: promotion of industrial democracy, regular management/employees meetings, and strict implementation of collective agreements and regular review of personnel policies.

Sundaram & Saranya (2013) carried out a study on grievance handling approaches and the influence on organizational dedication it surveyed among Women Employees in IT sector in Chennai city. Data was acquired using the questionnaires which were distributed to 108 women employees working in IT sector. The variables were measured under the different grievance management styles such as Emotional expression, Grievance approach and Self-disclosure whereas organizational commitment was measured using Continuance Commitment, Normative commitment, and Affective Commitment. Results from correlation shows there is a link between grievance handling approaches and workplace commitment. By implication, it means that improved grievance management practices will lead to more loyalty and improved job performance from the employee.

The influence of grievance management on employee’s performance using Nigerian Breweries Plc, Iganmu, Lagos State, Nigeria as a study. A survey research design was administered in the research. Questionnaires were administered to acquire data; the time frame for the study was from 2005 - 2014. The study made use of ordinary Least Square and the results showed that there is a relationship between management of grievance and workers’ productivity in Nigerian Breweries Plc. It was recommended that the organization should improve their techniques for managing grievance because it increases workers’ productivity.

Marchington et al. (2016) conducted a study on grievance management styles as a mechanism for an industrious performance in business companies. The results discovered that grievance management has a progressive effect in promoting productivity among workers. The study suggested that approaches and contents of the grievance should be examined before determining to implement an appropriate strategy for the management of grievance. The study suggested that the organization should evaluate the reasons for grievance in the organization bearing in mind the organizations success.

A research on the effect of grievance handling approaches on educational employee’s efficiency using few carefully chosen public and private universities in South-West Nigeria as a study. This study employed the use of Rahim & Bonoma’s theory of managing relational grievance and contingency concept to describe the variations in grievance handling approaches used in handling grievances in selected Nigerian universities and the effect on the productivity of staffs. The primary and secondary sources were used in obtaining data; the primary data was obtained using questionnaires and interviews. Three hundred and sixty-eight (368) duplicates of questionnaires were distributed to educational staffs of selected private and public universities. Data was gathered and collected for analysis. For the data analysis both descriptive and inferential statistical techniques were used. The results showed that the approaches for managing grievance have substantial influence on the efficiency of staffs. The study recommended that staffs should endeavor to contribute valid opinions that will assist the academia management in finding fixed answers to occurrence of grievances. While the government should embrace dialogue and other multi-dimensional approaches to industrial relations.

Methodology

The target population of this study comprised 300 staff of the selected manufacturing firms on the floor of Nigerian Stock Exchange (NSE). All the target population has their operating headquarters in Lagos State, Nigeria, which is the nation’s commercial nerve center with a high rate of business, human, and cultural diversities. The population comprises staff whose population is three hundred (300). This study uses the multi-stage sampling technique that entails probability sampling technique and non-probability sampling techniques. For the non-probability sampling techniques, the study use purposive and convenience sampling respectively while the use of stratified sampling represents the probability sampling technique.

The use of questionnaire was adopted to elicit information from the cross section of the selected population. The choice of survey (questionnaire) method was based on its time effectiveness as well as its general picture of respondents’ opinions which enhances hypotheses testing. The instrument used is divided into five segments i.e. A-E. Section A comprises of items that are used to gather demographic and socio-economic characteristics of respondents. Section B to E entails the research instruments for data collection which consists of items regarding the latent constructs of the subject matter under consideration. More so, five-point Likert scale (5-Strongly Agreed, 4- Agree, 3-Undecided, 2-Strongly Disagree, 1-Disagree) that best describes the extent to which the respondents agreed with each item in the questionnaire is used.

SPSS software 25 and regression analysis was used which enabled the researchers to synthesize and summarize the quantitative data in a well-structured manner. The descriptive method was adopted based on means and percentage analysis of the study while regression analysis was used to examine the relationship between the variables of interest of all the hypotheses. The use of regression was validated by ensuring that all missing values and outliers were treated. The purpose of this validation is avoided producing biased results when inferences about a population are drawn. Finally, rigorous effort was made to ensure privacy and confidentiality of information given by all respondents. The respondents were assured that all information or data gathered from the study will be used purely for the purpose of the study.

Data Presentation and Analysis

The unit of analysis for this study was the staff of the selected manufacturing firms. Each firm has unique sets of grievance management strategy to facilitate firms’ performance. The researcher distributed 300 copies of the standardized questionnaire to the selected respondents. Only 220 copies of the questionnaire were recovered, and were deemed useable for the analysis. This reflected a response rate of 73.3 percent which is reasonable to draw empirical generalization and inferences on the relationship among the variables. The demographic characteristics of the selected employees and their significance to the study are presented in Table 1.

Table 1 Demographic Characteristics (N=220)
		Frequency	Percent
Gender	Male	91	41.4
	Female	129	58.6
	Total	220	100
Age	21-30	70	31.8
	31-40	131	59.5
	41-50	8	3.6
	51 and above	11	5
	Total	220	100
Marital status	Single	115	52.3
	Married	105	47.7
	Total	220	100
Educational Qualification	OND/NCE	3	1.4
	B.SC/HND	72	32.7
	M.Sc./MBA	93	42.3
	PHD	52	23.6
	Total	220	100
Number of years spent in current organization	less than 5 years	85	38.6
	5-10 years	128	58.2
	11-15 years	7	3.2
	Total	220	100
Employment status	Full time	120	54,5
	Contract staff	100	45.5
	Total	220	100

Analysis of Research Questions

To address Research Question 1, Table 2 shows the extent at which grievance management strategies (i.e. avoidance, dominating, compromise, obliging and integrating) affect the performance of the selected manufacturing firms. Regression was used to measure the effect and the relationship between grievance management strategies (i.e. avoidance, dominating, and compromise, obliging and integrating) and performance of the selected manufacturing firms. The hypothesis was stated in null form:

Table 2 Regression Analysis For Grievance Management Strategies And Performance
Model Summary
Model	R	R Square	Adjusted R Square	Std. Error of the Estimate
1	0.456a	0.208	0.201	0.86362
ANOVA
Model	Sum of Squares	Df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Regression	10.543	1	10.543	15.256	0.000b
Residual	150.657	218	0.691
Total	161.200	219
Coefficients
Model	Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.
	B	Std. Error
(Constant)	2.490	0.094		7.324	0.000
Avoiding	0.331	0.085	0.356	4.906	0.000
Dominating	0.338	0.104	0.366	5.799	0.000
Compromise	0.261	0.089	0.296	4.576	0.000
Obliging	0.254	0.075	0.230	3.492	0.001
Integrating	0.175	0.141	0.184	1.980	0.046

H₀: Avoidance grievance, dominating grievance, compromise grievance, obliging grievance and integrating grievance management strategies have no significant effect on the performance of the selected firm.

The table presents the results that revealed the degree to which the variance in organizational performance is explained by avoidance grievance, dominating grievance, compromise grievance, obliging grievance and integrating grievance management strategies. This is represented by R square which equals 0.208 and expressed is 20.8%. This shows that avoidance grievance, dominating grievance, compromise grievance, obliging grievance and integrating grievance management strategies only accounts for 20.8% of organizational performance, while the standard error estimate is .86362 which signifies error term.

Decision Rule and Interpretation

Null hypothesis should be rejected when the significance value is below 0.05. Basically, the ANOVA table shows that the F value is 15.256 at 0.000b Significance level. The implication is that that avoidance grievance (β =0.331; t=4.906; p<0.000), dominating grievance (β=0.338; t=5.799; p<0.000), compromise grievance (β =0.261; t=4.576; p<0.000), obliging grievance (β=.254; t=3.492; p<0.000) and integrating grievance management (β=0.175; t=1.980; p<0.000) have significant influence on organizational performance.

Decision

The Null hypothesis is therefore rejected because the significance is below 0.05. Therefore, there is a significant influence of avoidance grievance, dominating grievance, compromise grievance, obliging grievance and integrating grievance management on organizational performance.

To address Research Objective 2, Table 3 revealed the variations in the grievance management strategies across the demographic characteristics of staff in the selected manufacturing firms. The use of Kruskal Wallis Test was also carried out to depict the difference in employees’ perception of grievance management strategies as demonstrated in Table 3.

Table 3 Variation In Grievance Management Strategy Across Respondents’ Demographic Characteristics
	Gender	Age	Educational Qualification	Marital status	Experience
Chi-Square	7.836	5.524	8.933	6.802	9.164
Df	4	4	4	4	4
Asymp. Sig.	0.099	0.033	0.016	0.004	0.002

Using grievance management (dependent variable) and demographic characteristics of respondents (independent variable) which include gender, age, marital status, educational background, and experience of employees) as the independent variables. Kruskal Wallis Test was carried out, which showed that the difference in employees’ perception of grievance management by gender (λ2=7.836, df=4, P>0.05) was not significant. The result portrayed that the differences in employees’ perception of grievance management by age (λ2=5.524, df=4, P<0.05), educational background (λ2=8.933, df=4, P<0.05), marital status (λ2=6.802, df=4, P<0.05), and work experience (λ²=9.672, df=4, P<0.05) were statistically substantial. This implies that the differences in employees’ perception can be linked to age, educational background and work experience. With specific reference to experience and level of educational background.

Discussion of Findings

The first hypothesis predicted that avoidance grievance management strategy has a significant effect on the performance of the selected manufacturing firms. Using regression analysis, the result derived showed that there is a relationship between avoidance grievance management strategy and employees’ commitment. This means that the employee’s understand the fact that there are sometimes that the organization needs to turn a blind eye to certain situations and from the result it shows that despite this the employees are still committed to their duties to the organization. This repudiates what (Jehn, 1995) said.

The second hypothesis predicted that dominating grievance management strategy has a significant role on the performance of the selected manufacturing firms. Using regression analysis, the result derived showed that there is an effect of competitive grievance management strategy on job effectiveness. There are times in which the organization needs to make an urgent decision concerning the affairs or the structures of the organization and a delay in such decisions could lead to serious devastation. Despite this dominating strategy, employees are still emotional attached to the organization (Herscovitch & Meyer, 2002).

The third hypothesis predicted that compromise grievance management strategy has a significant effect on the performance of the selected manufacturing firms. Using regression analysis, the result derived showed that compromise grievance management strategy has an influence on employees’ efficiency, According to Akintayo (2012) when integrating and dominating strategy fail or are ineffective, the best alternative is compromise strategy because it takes into consideration the needs and wants of both parties and how both parties can have their needs satisfied. This means the organization and the employee are able to find a balance in the sense that both parties are satisfied because a middle ground has been reached.

Hypothesis 4 predicted a significant influence of obliging grievance management strategy on the performance of the selected manufacturing firms. Using regression analysis, the result derived showed that accommodative grievance management strategy has an effect on employees’ commitment. According to Herscovitch & Meyer (2002) the employees value their membership to the organization, as a result of that they comply with whatever policies the organization brings forth whether they find it favorable or not. Likewise the organization also values its employees because of the values they add to the organization. Therefore both parties accommodate each other despite their shortcomings (Schreier, 2012).

Hypothesis 5 predicted that collaborative grievance management strategy has a significant effect on the performance of the selected manufacturing firms. Using regression analysis, the result derived showed that there is no effect of Collaborative grievance management strategy on job satisfaction. According to (Fleishman & Harris, 1962; Mubezi, 2013; Fisher & Buglear, 2010) if there is delay or obstruction in the passage of information, little time for consideration of the information passed could affect employee’s affective commitment. Making the employee’s feel like they don’t matter or have an opinion in the affairs of the organization.

Recommendations

By studying the findings and the conclusions that has been stated above, it can be resolved that, the objectives of the research have been reached and the following recommendations which can not only be applied in the manufacturing sector but other sectors include:

1. Organizations should encourage mutual relationship among employees, as well as provide conducive working conditions/ environment for employees, like organizational learning, effective communication among employees, which will enhance their productivity and organizational performance. Different strategies of managing grievance ought to be educated by the management of the universities so that notwithstanding when they do not think about the contention like relational struggle, the general population included will pick the best approach.

2. The individuals involved in grievance ought to be liberal and prepared to hear out the other individual so as to take the most ideal and sane choice while managing grievance. Employees should be educated that grievance is not a bad occurrence and also should be educated about the five strategies of managing grievance and also the strengths and weakness associated to each strategy. Organizations should emphasize on team building and create an environment that encourages respect and equality among employees. Finally, organizations should inhabit the culture of involving the employee’s in decision making process and also every employee should be given the privilege of expressing themselves.

Conclusion

Research is an unavoidable boundless circle and data is dynamic and broad, accordingly there will be further investigates on this theme. The discoveries of this research supplement past investigations in demonstrating proposals for approaching studies which are rearranged underneath;

1. There should be more studies carried out in Nigeria because most studies were carried out in Kenya and Jordan. Seeing the littleness of the example measure, expanded research with a bigger example estimate incorporating impersonation in different areas with higher population would improve the legitimacy of the exploration and own speculation and clearing expressions increasingly appropriate. Other researchers could endeavor to make use of mixed method that is quantitative and qualitative research method

2. The conclusion drawn from this research work is limited due to the restricted sample size of employees; subsequent studies may therefore be embarked upon to explore the subject on managing employee grievances and its effect on organizational performance. Also this research was carried out in Ibese, Ogun State; another research could be made in other states/regions of Nigeria. Furthermore, managing employee grievances and it effect on organizational could be studied in the manufacturing industry.

Acknowledgement

We kindly acknowledge the supports received from the CUCRID Directorate and Management of Covenant University.

References

Aboagye, P., & Benyebar, K. (2012). Industrial Relations in Ghana: The Law and Practice (3rd Edn.) Ghana Universities Press, 66–85.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Adelakun, O.J. (2011). Human capital development and economic growth in Nigeria.European Journal of Business and Management,3(9), 29-38.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Akintayo, D. (2012). Working environment, workers’ morale and perceived productivity in industrial organizations in Nigeria.Education Research Journal,2(3), 87-93.

Google Scholar

Armstrong, M. (2006).A handbook of human resource management practice. Kogan Page Publishers.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Blake, R.R., Mouton, J.S., Louis B.. Barnes, & Larry E. Greiner. (1964).Breakthrough in organization development. Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

Cleyman, K.L., Jex, S.M., & Love, K.G. (1995). Employee Grievances: An Application of the Leader-Member Exchange Model.The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 3(2), 156-174.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

D'Cruz, M.N. (1999).A practical guide to grievance procedure, misconduct and domestic inquiry. Leeds Publications.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Ebeguki, I., Salau, O., Hezekiah, F., Maxwell, O., & Ogueyungbo, O.O. (2019). Workplace conflict management and administrative productivity of staff of selected ICT driven public universities.International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology,10(3).

Google Scholar

Fisher, C., & Buglear, J. (2010).Researching and writing a dissertation: An essential guide for business students. Pearson Education.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Fleishman, E.A., & Harris, E.F. (1962). Patterns of leadership behavior related to employee grievances and turnover.Personnel Psychology, 15(2), 43–56

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

Herscovitch, L., & Meyer, J.P. (2002). Commitment to organizational change: Extension of a three-component model.Journal of Applied Psychology,87(3), 474.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

Hussein, A.F.F., Al-Mamary, Y.H.S., & Hassan, Y.A.G. (2017). The relationship between conflict management styles and organizational commitment: A case of Sana'a university.American Journal of Science and Technology,4(4), 49-66.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

Ibidunn, S., Osibanjo, A.O., Adeniji, A.A., Salau, O.P., & Falola, H.O. (2015). Talent retention and organizational performance: A competitive positioning in Nigerian banking sector.Periodica Polytechnica Social and Management Sciences,24(1), 1-13.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Jehn, K.A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict.Administrative Science Quarterly, 256-282.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Jehn, K.A. (1997). A qualitative analysis of conflict types and dimensions in organizational groups.Administrative Science Quarterly, 530-557.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Jehn, K.A. (1999). Diversity, conflict, and team performances summary of program of research.Performance Improvement Quarterly,12(1), 6-19.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Jehn, K.A., & Mannix, E.A. (2001). The dynamic nature of conflict: A longitudinal study of intragroup conflict and group performance.Academy of Management Journal,44(2), 238-251.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Kassim, M.A.M., & Ibrahim, H.I. (2014). Conflict management styles and organizational commitment: A study among bank employees in Penang.International Journal of Business, Economics and Law,4(1), 45-53.

Google Scholar

Kondalkar, V.G. (2007). Organizational behavior, new age international (P) Limited

Google Scholar

Lee, J., & Ok, C.M. (2016). Hotel employee work engagement and its consequences.Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management,25(2), 133-166.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

Lewin, D., & Peterson, R.B. (1988).The modern grievance procedure in the United States. Praeger.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Marchington, M., Wilkinson, A., Donnelly, R., & Kynighou, A. (2016).Human resource management at work. Kogan Page Publishers.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

McMahon, A.M., & April, M. (1994).Understanding language change. Cambridge University Press.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Mubezi, J.W. (2013). The assessment of employee grievances handling in public higher learning institutions in Tanzania: The case of University of Dar-es-salaam and Muhimbili University of Allied Sciences.Unpublished master’s thesis, Department of Management, University of Tanzania.

Google Scholar

Noah, Y., & Steve, M. (2012). Work environment and job attitude among employees in a Nigerian work organization.Journal of Sustainable Society,1(2), 36-43.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

Okoli, I. E., Okeke, K. C., & Nuel-Okoli, C. M. (2017). Conflict Management and Employee Commitment among Academic Staff in Public Universities in South East, Nigeria.International Journal of Advanced Academic and Educational Research,13(2), 84-103.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Osibanjo, O., Salau, O.P., Falola, H., & Oyewunmi, A.E. (2016). Workplace stress: implications for organizational performance in a Nigerian public university.Business: Theory and Practice,17(3), 261-269.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Parasuraman, S., Drake, B.H., & Zammuto, R.F. (1982). The effect of nursing care modalities and shift assignments on nurses' work experiences and job attitudes.Nursing Research.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Pruitt, D.G. (1983). Strategic choice in negotiation.American Behavioral Scientist,27(2), 167-194.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

Rahim, M.A. (2002). Toward a theory of managing organizational conflict.International Journal of Conflict Management.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

Rahim, A., & Bonoma, T.V. (1979). Managing organizational conflict: A model for diagnosis and intervention.Psychological Reports,44(3_suppl), 1323-1344.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

Rahim, M.A., & Magner, N.R. (1995). Confirmatory factor analysis of the styles of handling interpersonal conflict: First-order factor model and its invariance across groups.Journal of Applied Psychology,80(1), 122.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

Riaz, M.K., Zulkifal, S., & Jamal, W. (2012). Conceptualizing the relationship between individualism–collectivism and conflict management styles at individual level.Research Journal of Economics, Business and ICT,5, 34-38.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

Salau, O.P., Adeniji, A.A., & Oyewunmi, A.E. (2014). Relationship between elements of job enrichment and organizational performance among the non-academic staff in Nigerian public universities.Marketing and Management Journal,12(2), 173-189.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Schreier, M. (2012).Qualitative content analysis in practice. Sage publications.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

Sundaram, M.V., & Saranya, N. (2013). Employee Grievance.Journal of Business Management & Social Science Research (JBM & SSR).

Google Scholar

Thomas, K.W., & Schmidt, W.H. (1976). A survey of managerial interests with respect to conflict.Academy of Management Journal,19(2), 315-318.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

Van de Vliert, E., & Kabanoff, B. (1990). Toward theory-based measures of conflict management.Academy of Management Journal,33(1), 199-209.

Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

Received: 14-Dec-2021, Manuscript No. ASMJ-21-5547; Editor assigned: 13-Jul-2021, PreQC No. ASMJ-21-5547(PQ); Reviewed: 03-Aug-2021, QC No. ASMJ-21-5547; Revised: 27-Dec-2021, Manuscript No. ASMJ-21-5547(R); Published: 03-Jan-2022