Time management: presenteeism versus management-by-objectives

Thumbnail Image

Date

2018-10

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

International Journal of Law and Management

Abstract

Purpose This study examined the actual productive hours of employees from the service sector in Ghana. Design/methodology/approach This study adopted an exploratory cross-sectional survey design. The purposive and convenience sampling techniques were used to identify the service organizations and recruited 520 employees in Accra for the study. Specifically, these respondents were workers from banks, insurance companies, auditing firms and oil and gas companies. The data were analyzed using frequencies and other descriptive statistics. Findings Results showed poor time management among the study organizations. It was reported that although most workers report to work as early as 6:30 a.m., they wait until 8:30 a.m. to commence the day’s work schedule. In addition, they start thinking of break at least 15 min before actual break time which decreases productivity. In addition, employees reported spending at least 30 min on break. They also added that, they start clearing the desks about 15 min before actual closing time and leave the office at exactly 5:00 p.m. Practical Implications This study shows that the physical presence of workers does not necessarily mean they are working. The study proposes an alternative way to increase productivity rather than relying on physical presence of the workers. Originality/value This study is among the few that empirically sought to explore the actual time that workers use in a day at work. Thus, it measured actual productive hours at of service employees in Ghana.

Description

Keywords

Presenteeism, Service industry, Time management, Exploratory survey, Management-by-objectives

Citation

Kwesi Amponsah-Tawiah, John Louis Opata, Samuel Doku Tetteh, (2018) "Time management: presenteeism versus management-by-objectives", International Journal of Law and Management, Vol. 60 Issue: 6, pp.1470-1484, https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLMA-01-2018-0010

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By