kenya forest service final report... · 2017-11-12 · kenya forest service employee satisfaction...

Kenya Forest Service

“The Mirror Within”

Employee Satisfaction Measurement Survey

REPORT

November, 2010

Report Prepared By:

Samwel Mwai Msc. (Lead Consultant)

Team Members: Hezbourne Ouma Ong’elleh (M.A)

Caroline Nyambura (Msc) Willis Odhiambo Okul

Francis Ogot Conrad Siteyi

Zablon Onyango Wagalla Angela Kamakil

BREINSCOPE CONSULTANTS LIMITED Nairobi Office: 16th Floor, View Park Towers, Utalii Lane, P.O. Box 74656 - 00200, Nairobi, KENYA. Western Region Office: 10th Floor, Varsity Plaza, P.O. Box 084- Mega City-40123, Kisumu, KENYA. Tel: +254 (0)20-218 6424 Cell: +254 (0)729-325577 Email: [email protected] Web: www.breinscope.com

Kenya Forest Service Employee Satisfaction Measurement Survey

Page | 1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Research involving persons of different disciplinary and professional orientation is often a daunting and delicate exercise. We wish in this spirit to pay great compliments to all those who made this exercise a resounding success. Special thanks are extended to the Key Informants who accepted to provide the requisite information through interviews and one on one discussion. These included the Customers and staff members of the Kenya Forest Service across all the Conservancies. It may not be possible to mention everyone who has contributed to the success of this survey. We similarly acknowledge the numerous silent contributors, who may not have been mentioned here, but played a significant role in making the survey possible. Thanks to the Corporate Services Department headed by Lucy Kiboi with assistance from Abraham Wata, and field officers for ensuring that all the logistics were available when and where needed particularly in the mobilization process, administering questionnaires, data collection, facilitating all relevant literature and report sharing and dissemination sessions. It is worth noting that the unique people skills exhibited during the moments of interaction were the mirror image of the capacity strengthening conducted by KFS. We recognize the organization initiated by the entire KFS Staff. We were elated by the pivotal role played by all staff in ensuring the conduct of interviews and arranging for pre requisite logistics for the exercise. Thanks to all the consultant team members who endured the field hardships and extensive travel to ensure that the work is completed in time. Lastly, we wish to thank the Kenya Forest Service, specifically the Managing Director, Mr. D.K Mbugua for giving us the opportunity to carry out the noble assignment and accepting to be a reliable partner in the quest for improvement of use and management of Forest resources. Finally, thanks be to the Almighty for the safety and reassurance enjoyed during the exercise in the varied environments. May God bless you all abundantly.


Page | 2

Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................ 5 Chapter One: Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 6

1.1 Background to Kenya Forest Service and the Survey ........................................................................... 6 1.2 Purpose and Rationale of the Survey ..................................................................................................... 6 1.3 Specific Survey Objectives ...................................................................................................................... 6

Chapter Two: Literature Review ........................................................................................................................... 7 2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Importance of Employee Satisfaction ........................................................................................................... 7 2.3 Elements of Job Satisfaction ........................................................................................................................... 7 2.4 Employee Satisfaction versus Employee Dissatisfaction ............................................................................. 8 2.5 Employee Motivation, Performance and Work Conditions ........................................................................ 9 2.6 Providing an Enabling Environment for KFS Employees ........................................................................... 9 2.7 Improving Employee Productivity and Satisfaction.................................................................................. 10

Chapter Three: Methodology............................................................................................................................... 13 3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 13 3.2 The Research Design ............................................................................................................................. 13 3.3 Nature and Sources of Data .................................................................................................................. 13

3.3.1 Data Sources .................................................................................................................................... 13 3.2.2 Nature of Data ................................................................................................................................. 13

3.3 Survey Tools .......................................................................................................................................... 14 3.4 Methods of Data Collection .................................................................................................................. 14

3.4.1 Questionnaire Administration ....................................................................................................... 14 3.4.3 Conducting Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) ............................................................................... 15 3.4.4 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs)................................................................................................... 15 3.4.5 Review of documented information .............................................................................................. 15

3.5 The Sampling Frame ............................................................................................................................. 15 3.6 The Sample Size............................................................................................................................................ 16 3.7 Data Analysis ......................................................................................................................................... 17 3.8 Data Collection Limitations .................................................................................................................. 18

Chapter Four: Survey Findings ........................................................................................................................... 19 4.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 19 4.2 Overall Employee Satisfaction Index ................................................................................................... 19 4.3 Elements of Employee Motivation, Satisfaction and Performance ........................................................... 20 4.4 Assessment of Performance Factors ..................................................................................................... 22

4.4.1 The Need for good management and supervision ............................................................................. 22 4.4.2 Need for Information, Training and Development ....................................................................... 24

4.5 Highlights on Staff Issues, Concerns and Institutional Gaps .................................................................... 24 ` ....................................................................................................................................................................... 27

Chapter Five: Conclusions and Recommendations........................................................................................... 28 5.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 28 5.2 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................... 28 5.3 Recommendations ................................................................................................................................. 28

5.3.1 Recommendations for Policy and Institutional Improvement ..................................................... 28 5.3.2 Recommendations to Boost Staff Morale, Performance and Productivity ........................................ 29


Page | 3

Appendix A; Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Questionnaire .................................. 32 Appendix B; KII Guide for KFS Staff ................................................................................................................. 34 Appendix C: FGD Guide with KFS Staff ........................................................................................................... 36 Appendix D: KFS Employee Satisfaction Index (ESI) ...................................................................................... 37 Appendix F: KFS Work Environment Assessment Data .................................................................................. 39

List of Tables TABLE 1: KEY EMPLOYEE’S SATISFACTION DRIVERS……………………………………………………………..………..8 TABLE 2: FACTORS FOR SATISFACTION / DISSATISFACTION……………………………………………………………………………………..…...9 TABLE 3: ASPECTS ON GOOD MANAGEMENT AND SUPERVISION THAT ARE PERFORMING WELL................................... 22 TABLE 4: ASPECTS ON GOOD MANAGEMENT AND SUPERVISION THAT ARE PERFORMING POORLY ................................... 23 TABLE 5: EMPLOYEE SUGGESTIONS TO IMPROVE PRODUCTIVITY AND JOB SATISFACTION ............................................ 23 TABLE 6: EMPLOYEE SUGGESTIONS ON IMPROVING INFORMATION AND TRAINING ....................................................... 24

List of Figures FIGURE 1: A SAMPLE SHEET OF AN E-QUESTIONNAIRE ON A WEB BASED PLATFORM ...................................................................... 14 FIGURE 2: OF OVERALL ORGANIZATIONAL ESI ACROSS KFS SECTIONS / DEPARTMENTS ................................................................... 20 FIGURE 3: DISTRIBUTION OF SUPERVISORS BY SEX ................................................................................................................. 21 FIGURE 4: NUMBER OF PEOPLE DIRECTLY SUPERVISED BY EACH SUPERVISOR ............................................................................... 21 FIGURE 5: KFS SCORES ON ELEMENTS OF IMPROVING EMPLOYEE PRODUCTIVITY .......................................................................... 22


Page | 4

List of acronyms ASALs Arid and Semi Arid Lands CBO Community Based Organizations CSO Civil Society Organizations FA Forestry Associations FD Forest Department FLEG Forest Law Enforcement and Governance FIPU Forest Inspection and Protection Unit KKV Kazi Kwa Vijana KFC Kenya Forestry College KFS Kenya Forest Service KWS Kenya Wildlife Service KFWG Kenya Forest Working Group KIFCON Kenya Indigenous Forest Conservation Project MEA Multilateral Environmental Agreement M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MENR Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources NEMA National Environment Management Authority NEPAD New Partnership for Africa Development NGO Non-Governmental Organizations NMK National Museums of Kenya NP National Park NRM Natural Resource Management NTFP Non- Timber Forest Products NTZDC Nyayo Tea zone Development Corporation OP Office of the President PFM Participatory Forest Management SACCO Savings and Credit Cooperative UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change


Page | 5

Executive Summary “The Mirror Within” is a report based on a survey on Kenya Forest Service (KFC) employees’ attitudes, perceptions, feelings and opinions regarding aspects of the institution that influence their job motivation, work performance and productivity. This survey commissioned by KFS and conducted by Breinscope Consultants in July 2010, covered employee satisfaction while working at KFS. The survey sought to find out reasons for job satisfaction or dissatisfaction, possible ways of motivating and inspiring employees for improved productivity and performance, as well as getting an insight into employees’ welfare and communication concerns. A total of 331 employees’ participated in the survey. The general response rate for employees was eighty (80 %) percent of the projected 400 employees. Based on a survey model for research, a multi cluster sampling was used to select employees from the 10 conservancy areas. Nairobi which hosts the headquarters was also sampled to make the total sampled areas 11. At least a third of all zones comprising the sampled conservancies were represented. Key Informants and members in Focus Group Discussions were purposively selected using snow balling technique. Data collected was collated, cleaned and weighted to derive the overall employee satisfaction index from which survey interpretation and discussion is based. Survey results showed that Employee Satisfaction Index (E.S.I) for the Kenya Forest Service employees was Sixty Six Point Four Percent (66.4 %). This indicates a modest level of satisfaction among the employees of KFS. The ESI calculation was stratified further to cover satisfaction levels among managers or supervisors, and for those that were not managers or did not supervise others. The ESI for managers was 76.3% and that for non-managers was 56.5% showing a low employee satisfaction level among non-managers. The higher levels of satisfaction of managers can partly be attributed to the fact that majority of them had migrated to the new KFS compensation and benefit scheme while non-managers are still in the old ministry scheme. Additionally, majority of the sampled managers used the web-platform and were based at KFS headquarters pointing to the fact that their offices were more likely to be comparatively well equipped than those in the field offices. There is therefore need to provide at work place conditions that remove job dissatisfaction, inspire and promote higher productivity among staff, without which KFS stands the risk of reversing the modest gains so far realized. As a priority concern, KFS may need to work endeavor more towards; Bridging staffing gaps, in both numbers and skills, increasing staff remuneration, adequately providing support resources (i.e. vehicles, machinery, tools, equipment and other materials), and developing enabling infrastructure (i.e. roads, bridges, buildings and other structural facilities) for better service delivery. Other equally contentious issues relate to promoting equity and harmony among staff, making available and supporting career growth opportunities for all staff and recognizing and improving staff welfare concerns by being responsive to their family, housing, retirement, health and sanitation needs. With these requirements in place, conditions will be more enabling for all employees to work as a team, respect and support each other, and have pride in working for KFS.


Page | 6

Chapter One: Introduction 1.1 Background to Kenya Forest Service and the Survey KFS is a pretty young Public Corporation. Established in February 2007 under the forest Act 2005, Kenya Forest Service (KFS) has a human capital establishment of over 5,000 employees distributed all over Kenya at the Headquarters, Conservancies and the Kenya Forest College. Customers benefiting from goods and services provided by KFS are varied and spread all over the country in ten conservancies. KFS engaged Consultancy Services from Breinscope Consultants Limited to conduct an Employee Satisfaction Survey to gather employees’ attitudes, perceptions, feelings and opinions regarding aspects of the institution that influence their job motivation, work performance and productivity. Survey’s outputs would provide employee feedback that will assist management in developing policies, programs and employee incentives that inspire staff to higher performance and productivity.

1.2 Purpose and Rationale of the Survey Employee satisfaction is a necessary precondition for the achievement of KFS’ Vision – ‘to be the leading organization of excellence in sustainable forest management and conservation’. Data and results of the survey will be used for a number of functions, namely:

i. Develop a targeted Human Resource (HR) management strategy to enhance employee retention, increase productivity, reduce turnover, recruiting, and training costs, get more energetic employees, and improve teamwork,

ii. Provide employees an opportunity to share their attitudes and opinions regarding their workplace,

iii. Provide higher quality services due to more competent, energized employees, iv. Provide an enabling working environment for all staff including all requisite

support needed to optimally perform their duties and responsibilities.

1.3 Specific Survey Objectives The survey was based on the following specific objectives;

i. Get a feedback on employee job satisfaction or dissatisfaction, ii. Find out how to best motivate the employees to improve productivity,

iii. Recommend programs that inspire staff to higher performance, iv. Gauge the effectiveness of communication within KFS, and v. Get employee feedback on welfare issues.


Page | 7

Chapter Two: Literature Review 2.1 Introduction This chapter reviews some of the relevant literature on employee motivation and performance needs. The review casts some light into how employee (dis)satisfaction influences management and operations of a state corporation. Here, the importance of employee satisfaction is given prominence. The chapter ends by providing some insights on to how employee satisfaction can be improved to motivate, inspire and optimize employee performance.

2.2 Importance of Employee Satisfaction Employees can make or break an organization. A number of studies have demonstrated that the success of any company is directly linked to the satisfaction of the employees who embody that company. According to Marc Drizin, an employee loyalty specialist, “Employees are assets with feet. They’re the only resource companies have that make a conscious decision to return the next day” (Drizin, 2003). Increasing levels of employee engagement can result in increased productivity, greater retention of employees, reduced costs, reduced absenteeism, and reduced theft. Employee engagement has also been shown to influence customer loyalty and engagement (Harter, Asplund, Killham, & Schmidt, 2004). Although employee engagement does not explain all of customer engagement, the sustainability of customer engagement will be at risk if employees remain disengaged across time. Studies by Gallup have shown that the highest levels of financial performance by a business unit occur at extremely high levels of employee and customer engagement (Harter, Asplund, & Fleming, August 2004). Engagement is evident among employees when they are “involved and enthusiastic”. Employees can become “involved and enthusiastic” when they have their basic needs met, have an opportunity to contribute, a sense of belonging, and chances to learn and grow (Harter, Asplund, & Fleming, August 2004). Employee satisfaction is an antecedent of employee engagement. It has been shown that employees with a higher job satisfaction believe that the organization will be satisfying in the long run, care about the quality of their work, are more committed to their organization, have higher retention rates, and are more productive (National Business Research Institute).

2.3 Elements of Job Satisfaction Error! Reference source not found.The table 1 below gives a list of specific elements influencing employee motivation and performance grouped in four broad categories also referred to as key employee’s satisfaction drivers. The list is not exhaustive but the review covers those elements relevant to KFS or a similar state owned corporation. Table 1: key employee’s satisfaction drivers


Page | 8

Key Employee Motivation, Satisfaction Driver

Specific element on Employee Motivation, Satisfaction

Career advancement opportunities within the organization

Career development opportunities for learning and professional growth (mentorships, cross training, etc.)

Job-specific training Opportunities to network with others (within or outside the organization) to

help in advancing one’s career Opportunities to use skills and abilities in work Paid training and tuition reimbursement programs

Relationship with Management

Communication between employees and senior management Autonomy and independence to make decisions Management recognition of employee job performance (feedback, incentives,

rewards) Relationship with immediate supervisor

Compensation and Benefits Compensation/pay Base rate of pay Opportunities for variable pay (bonuses, commissions, other variable pay,

monetary rewards for ideas or suggestions) Being paid competitively with the local market Health care/medical benefits Family-friendly benefits (life insurance for dependents, subsidized child care Paid time off (vacation, holidays, sick days, personal days, etc.) Retirement benefits and pensions. Flexibility to balance life and work issues (alternative work arrangements,

including job sharing, flex schedules, telecommuting, etc.) Work Environment Feeling safe in the work environment

Job security Meaningfulness of job (understanding how job contributes to society as a

whole) Organization’s commitment to corporate social responsibility (balancing

financial performance) with contributions to the quality of life of its employees, the local community

and society at large) Organization’s commitment to a ‘green’ workplace (environmentally

sensitive and resource efficient) Overall corporate culture (organization’s reputation, work ethics, values,

working conditions, etc.) Relationships with co-workers Contribution of work to organization’s business goals The work itself (it is interesting, challenging, exciting, etc.) Variety of work (working on different projects, using different skills)

2.4 Employee Satisfaction versus Employee Dissatisfaction An interesting observation made by Frederick Herzberg as far back as 1968 is that the factors that produce job satisfaction (and motivation) are separate and distinct from the factors that lead to job dissatisfaction (Herzberg, 1968). He concluded that job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction are not opposites.

The opposite of job satisfaction is No job satisfaction (not job dissatisfaction) The opposite of job dissatisfaction is No dissatisfaction (not job satisfaction)


Page | 9

His findings revealed that certain characteristics of a job are consistently related to job satisfaction, while different factors are associated with job dissatisfaction. These are: Table 2: Factors for Satisfaction / Dissatisfaction

Factors for Satisfaction Factors for Dissatisfaction Achievement Company Policies Recognition Supervision The work itself Interpersonal relationships Responsibility Work conditions Advancement Salary Growth Status and security

Majority of the factors that lead to extreme dissatisfaction are external (motivators) and are related to a human being’s basic biological needs and the built-in drive to avoid pain from the environment. When these external (environmental or “hygiene”) factors are managed poorly, they make employees miserable, and can be de-motivating. However, even if they are managed very well, they will not motivate the staff to work much harder or smarter. In other words, remedying the causes of dissatisfaction will not create satisfaction. It will placate your workforce, but will not motivate them to improve performance. Meeting the “environmental needs” is a minimum requirement or standard as far as employee performance is concerned, and not an advanced “mark of quality.” The key to motivating employees to greater productivity lies in addressing the factors that lead to extreme satisfaction, majority of which are internal or intrinsic motivators.

2.5 Employee Motivation, Performance and Work Conditions The recruitment and retention of qualified, skilled employees is the foundation of any enterprise whether private or public, small or large. Research indicates that employees who are satisfied with their jobs are more likely to stay with their employers. Keeping a cadre of happy and motivated employees, however, is often elusive as the expectations of employees shift. These changing expectations stem from demographic trends, such as growing numbers of generation Y employees (those born after 1981) and women entering the workforce, staff going on retirement, and more general changes in society, such as increased stress levels as employees attempt to juggle work and personal responsibilities. As life in Kenya becomes more challenging, employees may become more stressed. Therefore, the factors long thought to satisfy employees may be shifting, depending on attributes such as the gender and age of employees. In addition to demographic factors, the economic landscape in which most Kenyan employees find themselves such as inflation and many life’s uncertainties. Employees go to work not knowing what to expect; hiring freezes and layoffs lead to taxed resources and diminished employee morale.

2.6 Providing an Enabling Environment for KFS Employees Embedded in its Service Charter, KFS recognizes its staff as its most valuable resource and will therefore continue to motivate them through:

Providing equal opportunities to Men and Women Developing staff through training


Page | 10

Providing conducive working environment Continuous performance appraisal Efficient handling of personnel matters

Though committed to providing an enabling environment for employees, KFS is currently presented with the challenge of inadequate and/or weak structural/institutional capacity especially for forest law enforcement and governance associated with inadequate staff, low morale and poor equipment for forest guards, and inadequate training and knowledge on forest legislation on the part of prosecutors. This translates to poor enforcement of existing laws- which can be summed up as poor governance. Morale issues are not limited to ENCOM but transcend other programmes and sections within KFS (FLEG Report 2007).

2.7 Improving Employee Productivity and Satisfaction Based on the foregoing brief discussion on employee satisfaction and motivation, employee productivity and satisfaction can be improved by addressing factors at two key levels:

a) Level I: Eliminating job dissatisfaction b) Level II: Creating conditions for job satisfaction

2.7.1 Level I: Eliminating Job Dissatisfaction

1) Organizational Support

i. Fix poor and obstructive company policies ii. Provide effective, supportive and non-intrusive supervision: strike the right balance

in using a more employee-centered leadership style, under which their employees are welcome to participate in making decisions without going so far as to abdicate responsibility for decision-making

iii. Create and support a culture of respect and dignity for all team members iv. Ensure that wages are competitive (if they are competitive, communicate this fact to

all employees) v. Build job status by providing meaningful work for all positions

vi. Provide job security vii. A corporate emphasis on employee learning, development and growth

viii. Wide-ranging employee participation in the organization as a whole ix. "Walk the talk" by not only communicating the corporate strategy but by also

ensuring that it is applied consistently throughout the organization, including making the rewards system consistent with strategic goals

x. Management needs to follow through on promises and live the values they preach: eliminate all inconsistencies between promoting a belief in employees and managerial behavior or policies that undermines that commitment

xi. Weed out poor managers because many employees leave their jobs because they are unhappy with their bosses - "people don't leave their jobs, they leave their managers"


Page | 11

2) Clarity on roles and responsibilities

i. Ensure that each employee understands what to do and why, and how his or her role is aligned with the purpose of the work group and the organization

ii. Ensure that each employee is aware of the needs of (his/her) clients iii. Clearly communicate the standards of performance, and the consequences of failing

to achieve the standards

3) Support through appropriate resources and backing to achieve goals i. Ensure that there are adequate and appropriate supplies, equipment and supplies for

each employee ii. Ensure that there is a functional logistics system in place to maintain the supply of

adequate and appropriate supplies, equipment and supplies (no/minimal stock outs or breakdowns)

iii. Adequate staffing levels to handle the tasks required in the stipulated time iv. Adequate financial allocation to achieve the goals v. Adequate, comfortable and safe work place, including access to electricity, a light

source, a heat source, a water source, space for working, privacy, among others. Once these factors have been addressed, job dissatisfaction should be much less, and the organization can then proceed to motivating employees to greater productivity through Level II activities.

2.7.2 Level II: Creating Conditions for Job Satisfaction

According to Herzberg, every job should be examined to determine how it could be made better and more satisfying to the person doing the work – i.e. job enrichment. Things to consider include: 1) Opportunities to develop skills and knowledge and advance or grow

i. Encourage employees to take on new challenges and create opportunities for them to learn skills and broaden their knowledge

ii. Ask each employee to prepare a self-development plan and share it with the immediate supervisor

iii. Support employees in their efforts to learn new skills iv. Provide incentives, such as time away from work, for employees to acquire more

knowledge v. Arrange time for guest speakers from other departments, organizations, or countries

to help employees think in new ways vi. Arrange site visits to learn how other organizations or groups operate

2) Increased responsibility and opportunities to improve performance

i. Supervisors/managers should set performance goals with the work group ii. Assess current performance against group goals and identify opportunities for

improvement iii. Give work group members specific responsibility for leading a performance

improvement activity


Page | 12

iv. With the group, continually compare current activities with stated plans for improvement

v. Delegate responsibilities for addressing new challenges so that staff stretch their capabilities and develop new ones

vi. Develop adaptability to new circumstances by scanning the environment, identifying necessary changes in practices, and developing justifications for them, while continually communicating with and listening to employees to understand their reasons for resistance

vii. Personally model expected behaviors in your daily activities 3) Engendering a sense of pride in their work

i. Set high standards for the group, and recognize when they are met ii. Let others in the organization know about your group’s accomplishments

iii. Discuss frequently the importance of your group’s work and the impact it has on the lives of your clients

iv. Provide opportunities for the employees to interact with the beneficiaries of their work so that the self-perception of the value of their work can increase and lead to a higher level of motivation (Grant, Campbell, Chen, Cottone, Lapedis, & Lee, 2007)

4) Involvement and opportunities for advancement and growth

i. Provide employees with well-defined career paths (including a succession plan), mentors and tuition reimbursement for job-related education

ii. Involve employees in decision-making, especially when the decisions affect them directly. Employees are closest to the problem, and will typically have the best insight as to what to do. Involving them in decision-making will increase their commitment and improve the success of implementing new ideas or change.

iii. Acknowledge non-work priorities by recognizing and responding to employees' needs for greater balance in their lives, since employees will develop loyalty for organizations that respect them as individuals, not just as workers

Some specific principles suggested by Herzberg include:

i. Removing some controls while retaining accountability ii. Increasing the accountability of individuals for their own work

iii. Giving a person a complete natural unit of work (module, division, area, etc.) iv. Granting additional authority to employees in their activity (job freedom) v. Making periodic reports directly available to the workers themselves rather than to

supervisors vi. Introducing new and more difficult tasks not previously handled

vii. Assigning individuals specific or specialized tasks, enabling them to become experts

It’s important to note that not all jobs can be enriched, or need to be enriched. It is therefore important that supervisors develop the habit of constantly talking with their direct reports to find out what motivates the individual, and act on this information. The organization needs to support supervisors in this by putting in place policies and structures that enable the supervisors to be facilitators of the process of achieving quality service and higher levels of employee satisfaction.


Page | 13

Chapter Three: Methodology 3.1 Introduction This chapter covers the research design, nature and sources of data, methods of data collection, survey tools, the sample size, and data analysis procedures. The chapter ends by detailing some data collection limitations encountered during the field survey exercise.

3.2 The Research Design This exercise employed the survey model in research and combined both formal and informal methods of data collection. The formal methods of data collection included the use of questionnaires, interview schedules and guides. These methods generated quantitative data. Informal methods on the other hand entailed use of focus group discussions to provide in-depth qualitative data. This method is chosen because of its effectiveness in studying highly interactive social interactions, peoples underlying motivations, beliefs and values systems in settings as those presented in the survey (Kumar 1993). The formal methods as advanced by Emerton (1996) generated quantitative data that were statistically analyzed to draw conclusions. Further, random selection was used in selection of the sample areas. This method allowed statistical significance testing of variables as stipulated by Kuper and Kuper (1996) and Anderson (1980) on the use of survey models in research. On their part, informal methods gave an in depth analysis of the theme investigated (i.e. employee satisfaction) but not of its extent or pervasiveness.

3.3 Nature and Sources of Data 3.3.1 Data Sources

Data sources were obtained through the field exercise and by use of an on-line data collection platform with KFS staff with internet connectivity. Additional information was sourced from the internet and KFS official public records.

3.2.2 Nature of Data

Below is a list of information to be sought to accomplish the surveys’ objectives.

a) Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction - Measured how staff members identify with the Mission and Vision of KFS, their sense of job security, job stability and commitment and their job satisfaction

b) Supervisor/ Manager – Staff Relationships – Sought to know if Supervisors treat employees with respect, let employees aware of what is expected of them, and supporting them learn of new skills

c) Co-worker Relationships – Pursued how well employees related with their colleagues, and how the employees fitted in the function of the campus / institutional structures and systems.

d) Rewards and Opportunities - Measured how benefits contribute to Employee Satisfaction, their market competitiveness, internal equitability and opportunities present for employees to grow their Careers


Page | 14

e) Competencies, attitudes and expectations of employees - Measured competencies of employees and assessed suitability for their jobs, their attitudes and expectations towards the organization.

3.3 Survey Tools Several instruments were used to gather information on Employee Satisfaction namely; Questionnaires (both field-administered and on-line versions), interview schedules, focus group discussion guides and an observation record sheet. The questionnaire used to collect data on employee satisfaction is attached to this report as

3.4 Methods of Data Collection Data collection was structured to target employees Kenya Forest Service (KFS). In doing this, we liaised with the Human Resource (HR) Department as we sought to have a representative number of all workers spread in the different departments and working in different shifts. This was achieved by accessing and perusing some public domain official records and other documents at KFS headquarters. This proved handy in understanding KFS operations and helped in the production of this report.

3.4.1 Questionnaire Administration

The questionnaire involved asking both structured and open-ended questions representing the entire staff population across various departments and job group levels within KFS. Automated Data Collection – this employed an automated web based online platform. Electronic versioned Questionnaires were loaded into a web based tool, and emails sent to respondents inviting them to fill in the e-questionnaires. Staff emails were provided by the survey facilitator at KFS headquarters. Email reminders were employed to provide polite reminders to respondents so as to get as much high feedback as possible. Respondent anonymity and confidentiality were guaranteed ensuring maximum privacy.

The web based platform used intelligent analysis algorithm that provided real time data

analytics as recipients responded and data filled in / received (see Figure 1 below). Figure 1: A Sample Sheet of an e-Questionnaire on a Web Based Platform

Field-based (one-on-one) Data Collection – Data were gathered employing Breinscopes’ qualified data collection enumerators who were already adequately trained to handle the


Page | 15

questionnaire. Again, respondent anonymity and confidentiality was guaranteed ensuring maximum privacy.

3.4.3 Conducting Key Informant Interviews (KIIs)

This involved undertaking the Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) targeting Section Heads, and a sample of middle and lower level employees in various departments. The KIIs were done after identifying Key Informants and conducted using a predetermined guide with open ended questions. The KIIs were important in gathering in depth qualitative knowledge and understanding the various services offered by KFS. It also provided better insights into specific variables affecting the various divisions or programme operations of KFS related to the objectives of this survey. Respondents to this tool included Directors, Heads of support services, Senior Deputy Directors, Senior Assistant Directors, Deputy Directors and Section Heads.

3.4.4 Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) The FGDs were conducted by a moderator, note takers and observer using a predetermined focus group guide with relevant themes and sub-themes. The FGD tool was used as a guide to facilitate discussions with sampled homogenous groups (e.g. Forest Rangers, Support Staff (SS), Nursery Attendants or Artisans) with an aim of providing a clear understanding on perceptions relating to employee satisfaction as well work environment conditions. Additionally this tool served as a platform to validate information generated the questionnaire or that gathered via the key informants. As practice, a minimum of 10 and a maximum of 15 participants were allowed in any single session of an FGD. Plate 1 above gives a picture on how an FGD was conducted.

3.4.5 Review of documented information

During this phase, background information to help better understand KFS and put the survey exercise into context was obtained from the KFS documented sources, internet, and other relevant published sources. Information gathered here was immensely helpful in understanding the policy and institutional environment within which KFS operates that directly or indirectly affected employee satisfaction.

3.5 The Sampling Frame The survey used various sampling techniques for quantitative and qualitative data acquisition. Geographical units within which survey respondents were selected were done using a multi-stage cluster sampling criteria. This sampling technique was preferred for sampling large areas considering the vastness in terms of geographical coverage by the KFS’s Mandate in service delivery. In this regard, the primary unit was represented by the 10 KFS’s conservancies in the country. In this survey, all the 10 conservancies were sampled. Secondary units (i.e. Zones within conservancies) were randomly selected with at least a third of the zones within each conservancy being part of the sample. Special consideration was given to provide diversity along agro-ecological zonations where both high potential and Arid and Semi-arid areas were represented. Quality assurance was guaranteed by an elaborate system of checks and balances that ensured all quality control measures were adhered to during the survey. These included but not limited to; reviewing of the study tools, pre-testing of tools; project supervision against a survey quality control checklist; cross-checking the completed tools (for accuracy, correctness, consistency, and completeness) and data cleaning.


Page | 16

3.6 The Sample Size A total of 331 employees’ participated in the survey. The general response rate for employees was eighty (80 %) percent of the projected 400 employees. The sample size was determined using the Fisher et al (1995) method for population below 10,000. This formula first computes the requisite sample size for population more than 10,000 before fitting it in the modified model for populations below 10,000. The Fisher et al (1995) based calculation for the first part of the sample size for population greater than 10,000 is done in equation one next. Equation 1: For Population more than 10,000

Where: Z -: is the corresponding standard score with the probability of error at 0.05 and a confidence level of 95%, which is 1.96 P-: is the occurrence level of the phenomenon under study and is equal to 0.5 where the occurrence level is not known q -: is the absence of the phenomenon under consideration and is equal to 0.5 where the value is not known D -: is the design effect and is equal to the number of groups to be compared in this case d -; is the selected probability of error of the study corresponding with 95% confidence level in this case 0.05

Substituting for the values:

In order to determine the sample size for the study, a modified Fisher et al (1995) formula for sample size determination for populations less than 10,000 was applied in equation two next.


Page | 17

Equation 2: For Populations Less than 10,000

Where: nf = is the sample size when population is less than 10,000 n = the sample size when the population is above 10,000 N = the population of the target sub-population

3.7 Data Analysis Data gathered was collated and analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). Both descriptive and inferential statistics were used. Summary statistics were used in presenting the data which encompassed use of multi-response cross-tabulations and contingency tables to generate frequencies and percentages. Additional descriptive analytical tools such as the SWOT and Content Analysis were used to classify data and look for patterns and themes within discussions with the Focus Group Discussions. The overall Employee Satisfaction Index (ESI) was derived by weighting scores based on one standard parameter seeking overall satisfaction with KFS as a place of work (see appendix A item 7 in the employee questionnaire). Frequencies were generated based on a four-point scale importance ranking, where;

A. “4” was extremely satisfied B. “3” was satisfied C. “2” was dissatisfied, and D. “1” extremely dissatisfied

Customer satisfaction index was computed by summing the frequencies of A and B divided by the base (i.e. total number of responses on the item); CSI = A + B/ N Where, N = Base or total number of all responses on the item from all respondents The score generated was converted to 1 to 100 scale (%) for ease of reporting. The index was interpreted based on established standards on employee satisfaction surveys where a score of above 80 signifies high satisfaction, while anything below 60 percent satisfaction connotes low satisfaction.


Page | 18

3.8 Data Collection Limitations The following data gathering challenges and constraints were faced;

1) Survey Preparedness: in many instances the field offices had not been informed by the Karura Headquarters about the conduct of the survey. A lot of time was spent by the survey team on introductions and explaining the purpose of survey. In other instances, the survey team found the fields officers in zonal offices and stations away from post or busy with other assignments. On the similar grounds, organizing for meetings and subsequent FGDs with CFA’s was difficult without a prior notice or ample time for preparation.

2) Outright rejection: Some employees refused to participate in the data gathering process in

the pretext that they were not KFS employees. This related to employees who still draw their salary from the ministry, a major reason for their unwillingness to participate usually indicated as, “KFS is not my employer”. Yet minority group felt that there have been too many surveys by KFS and little to show in terms of improvement. To them, this survey was viewed as a waste of time.

3) Transport logistics: sampled customers and employees were spread all over the country in

huge geographical areas and more often in difficult terrains. Without 4 by 4 vehicles, reaching out these places often presented problems. A case in point was Mt. Elgon and Kapolet Forest in Cherengani Hills. On the journey to and from Kapolet for instance, the survey team experienced two flat tyres and engine problems thus presenting unnecessary time delays.

4) The scope: the actual survey in reality involved simultaneously undertaking three distinct

surveys, namely; Customer Satisfaction, Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment, and Corruption Perception Baseline Surveys. Though this ensured optimal use of time and other logical resources, there was much pressure regarding the workload. There was too little time to administer too many instruments with very few enumerators.


Page | 19

Chapter Four: Survey Findings 4.1 Introduction This chapter section presents findings on employee satisfaction working at Kenya Forest Service (KFS) from ten operating locations i.e. conservancies and eight key sections and departments. A total of 331 respondents participated in the survey, with a response rate across different questions of 82-89%. The principle focus of the survey was to seek employee opinions about their job with Kenya Forest Service as they pertain to the following areas, which have been shown to influence performance by creating a work climate that motivates staff:

1) Overall Satisfaction with Kenya Forest Service as an employer 2) Clarity of job expectations: Communication of clear job and performance expectations

that are aligned with organizational goals 3) Performance feedback: clear, timely, descriptive and direct feedback on performance to

identify and acknowledge good performance and correct performance problems 4) Motivation: how the organization encourages good performance 5) Knowledge and skills to do the job right 6) Organizational Support: Create the necessary communication channels so that everyone’s

description of job roles and responsibilities are communicated and tied to strategic direction The questionnaire used in the survey had three sections, with a total of 54 questions. Section A had questions relating to demographic information (age, sex, education, length of service, department), Section B had questions for supervisors or managers to assess their competency at supervision, and Section C had questions on general satisfaction and the availability of factors that enhance performance within KFS. All results were processed anonymously.

4.2 Overall Employee Satisfaction Index One question in the questionnaire sought to get the employees’ opinions on their overall satisfaction with Kenya Forest Service as a place to work. Respondents were expected to rank their overall satisfaction on a four-point scale from 1 to 4, where “4” is extremely satisfied and “1” is extremely dissatisfied. The responses to this question were used to calculate the Employee Satisfaction Index (ESI) for the whole organization, and also for the different departments and /or sections. In addition, the ESI for employees who are supervisors/managers was computed separately from that for employees who are not supervisors/managers. In interpreting the Employee Satisfaction Index, a rating of 80 percent or higher represents high employee satisfaction. Any ESI below 60 percent signifies low satisfaction among your employees. Out of the 331 survey participants, 217 of them responded to the question on overall satisfaction. Of these, a total of 144 gave a response of either satisfied or extremely satisfied, while 73 gave a response of either dissatisfied or extremely dissatisfied.


Page | 20

Based on these responses, the overall Employee Satisfaction Index for the Kenya Forest Service employees is Sixty Six Point Four Percent (66.4 %). This indicates a modest level of satisfaction among the employees of KFS. The ESI calculation was stratified further, and determined for employees who are managers or supervisors, and for those who are not managers or supervisors. The ESI for managers was 76.3% and that for non-managers was 56.5 %1. The higher levels of satisfaction of managers can partly be attributed to the fact that majority of them have migrated to the new KFS compensation and benefit scheme while non-managers are still in the old ministry scheme. Additionally, majority of the sampled managers used the web-platform and were based at KFS headquarters pointing to the fact that their offices were more likely to be comparatively well equipped than those in the field offices. Figure 2: of Overall Organizational ESI across KFS Sections / Departments

The complete breakdown of the ESI by sections and departments is appended to this report as Appendix . Figure 2 above illustrates the overall ESI as well as ESI by sections. Revealed differences in scores across Sections and Departments further suggest disparities in resource allocations and consequent influences on implementation capacities. Three prime influences relate to finances, staffing resources (both size and competencies) and support resources dedicated to achieving specific section/departmental objectives. These disparities further extent into KFS programmes and projects2. Non-managers scores also indicated differences in their scores as extensively revealed by the Focus Group Interviews. Among the least satisfied were Artisans, Forest Guards, Extension Workers and Casual labourers.

4.3 Elements of Employee Motivation, Satisfaction and Performance Performance Improvement (PI) or Human Performance Technology (HPT) is a methodology for improving the quality of institutional and individual performance. Performance Improvement recognizes the fact that to improve job performance, factors such as lack of knowledge or skills, motivation, incentives, environmental factors, resources, feedback, coaching, and supervisory support, among others, must be addressed. According to the Performance Improvement Approach, there are certain conditions needed for people to perform well, including:

Clear job and performance expectations Clear and immediate feedback on performance A supportive environment, including adequate and proper tools, supplies, and work space

1 Score for non-managers fell short of the 60 percent margin by 3.5 %, interpreted to mean low satisfaction 2 The survey did not cover satisfaction levels across programmes and projects because not all were represented in the sampled sites.


Page | 21

Motivation to perform to expectations (intrinsic motivation to do the job) Knowledge and skills to do the job (technical competencies matching the job requirements) Organizational support in the form of strategic direction, leadership and management

communication, organizational structure, and well-conceived job roles and responsibilities Out of 331 survey participants, 118 were supervisors, representing 35.6% of the respondents. The following sections highlight the key findings about the Kenya Forest Service supervisors. Figure 3: Distribution of Supervisors by Sex

Majority of the supervisors (43.2%) who participated in the survey oversee 1-5 people, as shown in the figure 4 below. Figure 4: Number of People Directly Supervised by Each Supervisor

All employees who participated in the survey were required to respond to questions that assessed the ability of Kenya Forest Service to meet the various needs of the employees and enhance optimal performance. The respondents were also asked to rate how important each of these aspects is to them on a scale of 1 to 4, where “4” is extremely important and “1” is extremely unimportant. Generally, all the factors assessed were found to be important, as more than 80% of the respondents gave them a rating of either “3” or “4” (important or extremely important). The last two questions in the survey tool were open-ended questions that required respondents to suggest how their productivity and overall satisfaction can be improved. Out of the 331 survey participants, 283 responded to the question on how to improve productivity and 267 responded to


Page | 22

the question on how to increase the level of satisfaction at work. The figure 5 below presents survey findings on six elements of improving employee productivity. Figure 5: KFS Scores on Elements of Improving Employee Productivity

Findings above show high employee ratings on transparency, job and job recognition which all surpassed the borderline towards satisfaction. Three other elements came close to the 60percent mark of satisfaction, namely; communication / feedback, motivation and team work. Trailing were job clarity and knowledge of mission and purpose. These elements of job productivity are discussed in detail below.

4.4 Assessment of Performance Factors 4.4.1 The Need for good management and supervision

There were 14 questions related to the need of staff for good management and supervision. Table 3: Aspects on Good Management and Supervision That Are Performing Well3

Aspect / element Yes Importance

Rating of 3+4 FQ % FQ %

My fellow team mates are committed to doing quality work 238 82 189 91 The mission/purpose of our organization makes me feel my job is important 236 86 203 96 The results I am expected to achieve are very clear to me 231 82 211 96 I would be afraid to disclose my HIV status because I feel that I would lose my position

72 25 166 84

I feel that I am part of a team 204 74 177 94 My supervisor motivates me to improve my performance by providing timely and constructive feedback to me

194 69 195 91

My supervisor seems to care for me as a person 190 68 185 90 I feel completely free to raise and discuss personal problems and professional challenges with my supervisor without fear of punishment or victimization

185 65 181 89

3 The aspect was considered to be performing well if more than 60% of the respondents agreed that it was present (where appropriate).


Page | 23

The fact that only 25% of the respondents indicated that they would be afraid to disclose their HIV status is a strength because it shows that there is generally a low perception of potential to discriminate against persons living with HIV within the KFS fraternity. Table 4: Aspects on good management and supervision that are performing poorly

Aspect / element Yes Importance

Rating of 3+4 FQ % FQ %

In the last seven days, my immediate supervisor has recognized, acknowledged or praised me for doing good work 168 57 182 87

I know and understand the organization’s HIV workplace policy 138 48 185 92 In the last six months, someone has talked to me about my progress 131 45 174 87 I feel that there is a transparent system in place at my workplace to recognize and reward individuals for their good work 110 38 172 83

If I am unwell, I can easily access immediate and good care 105 38 174 89 In the last six months, I have had the opportunity to engage in social events or occasions at work (e.g. games) 65 23 169 85

The top five aspects on good management and supervision that the respondents felt are extremely important to them:

If I am unwell, I can easily access immediate and good care (currently performing poorly) I know and understand the organization’s HIV workplace policy (currently performing

poorly) The mission/purpose of our organization makes me feel my job is important I feel that I am part of a team I feel completely free to raise and discuss personal problems and professional challenges

with my supervisor without fear of punishment or victimization The top five aspects on good management and supervision that the respondents felt are important to them (all currently rated as performing well):

The results I am expected to achieve are very clear to me My fellow team mates are committed to doing quality work My supervisor motivates me to improve my performance by providing timely and

constructive feedback to me The mission/purpose of our organization makes me feel my job is important My supervisor seems to care for me as a person

The following are the recommendations given by the staff through the open-ended questions that relate to meeting their need for good management and supervision: Table 5: Employee Suggestions to Improve Productivity and Job Satisfaction

Suggestions given to improve productivity Suggestions given to improve satisfaction

1) Appreciation (by superiors) 2) Faster processing/payment of imprest/claims 3) Better medical care 4) Salary/allowance increase 5) Improve terms of service 6) Commuter allowance 7) Job absorption by KFS 8) Promotion

1) Better interpersonal relationship between seniors & juniors 2) Reduce on bureaucracy i.e. it takes too long for a simple

exercise to go through 3) Better medical scheme 4) Additional staff 5) Pay overtime/allowances 6) Transfers 7) Job rotation


Page | 24

4.4.2 Need for Information, Training and Development

There were five questions that assessed the fulfillment of the need for information, training and development. All the five aspects except two of them were rated as performing well. The two that received a low rating are:

This last year, I have had opportunities at work to learn and grow I feel that there is a transparent system in place to ensure that staff that require training

relevant to their work are supported by the institution to do the training This observation corresponds to the supervisors’ self-assessment in which majority of them indicated that they had not performed very well when it came to arranging for training needed by the staff they supervise. The organization therefore needs to put a transparent system in place to address the need for continuous training and development among the staff. The following are the recommendations given by the staff through the open-ended questions that relate to meeting their need for information, training and development: Table 6: Employee Suggestions on Improving Information and Training

Suggestions given to improve productivity Suggestions given to improve satisfaction

1) More training courses especially in participatory forest management and forest-based enterprises

2) Avail Scholarships for staff at the Kenya Forestry college (KFC)

3) Study excursions and information exchange visits for Staff at KFC to cover research institutions, universities and other institutions of higher learning

4) More exposure to forest practices in other countries

1) Recommending trainings for employees should be seen to be fair and cut across gender dimension

4.5 Highlights on Staff Issues, Concerns and Institutional Gaps Emerging from the key informant interviews and focus group discussions the following list of issues and concerns were highlighted.

(a) Staff Welfare

Majority of the staff belonged to a contributory savings scheme. Two schemes mentioned were Mazingira and Asili SACCO. Being a contributory scheme, employees particularly at low cadre level indicated that their salary scale were quite low to afford the deductions when such external parameters such as inflation and increasing cost of living were factor in. Generally, in the eyes of this staff, who are yet to migrate to the KFS salary scheme, found the welfare systems in place biased towards KFS employed4 staff members. This was best articulated by one staff commending on the medical scheme given below in verbatim.

A similar trend was revealed in bereavement support provided junior employees when they loose their loved ones. 4 Connotes recruited and paid the new parastatal rates and not seconded of paid from the ministry.

“Malaria does not discriminate; the severity with which it attacks children is the same for boss’s child or his junior’s son or daughter. While the boss is well taken care of at a good private hospital, I have to line up in the district hospital for service and pray that they will be discharged as this may be too expensive beyond the limits set by NHIF.


Page | 25

Yet another concern articulated by the Forest Guards (FG) was the policy requirement to stay in camps in often very remote places which to them compromised family closeness and made them vulnerable to reproductive health risks including spread of HIV and Aids. An assessment of the existing HIV intervention programmes shows a focus on awareness creation and prevention measures. This points to the need for interventions to go beyond awareness and prevention to tackle critical workplace interventions.

(b) Career Advancement Opportunities There were few chances available for career growth among lower cadre staff manifested by limited training and promotion opportunities. Trainings were said to be largely available to managers, a fact corroborated by the wide-range of trainings that managers had participated in at the time the survey was conducted. Few scholarships and exchange visits for KFC lecturers were also mentioned as affecting staff performance at the college. Lack of upward mobility in salary grades was also a concern where one employee had stuck in one job group since 1984.

Closely linked to trainings was lack of recognition by KFS management of proficiency tests and work experience which was noted as a main hindrance to job promotions. Respondents felt that these two aspects should be reconsidered in the recruitment of staff from the ‘old’ system to KFS. Feelings are that the new recruitment policy may bring in ‘highly trained’ and often young professionals but miss out on the knowledge of hindsight available among olds guards. They in fact took pride in the abilities to induct and orientate the new recruits at work upon recruitment.

(c) Reward and recognition

Most managers fumbled on the question how they recognized, appreciated and rewarded employees perhaps owing to rigid and bureaucratic systems in place to accomplish this important job satisfaction attribute. The tedious process of writing and approving a recommendation, more often than not needing a chain of signatures, and the long wait to realize returns on exemplary performance needs to be reconsidered. Nevertheless staff members were able to mention some rather informal and personal methods of recognizing a well done job. These methods include;

Word of mouth recognition by a way of a simple thank you or keep up the good job. Assigning the staff more challenging roles as a way of noting and building staff‘s

confidence in the abilities to deliver. Giving a treat e.g. hosting a small party or buying lunch or coffee to recognize to

recognize a job well done that involved concerted efforts of staff e.g. a prize or trophy awarded the office in an exhibition or other contest.

(d) Remuneration and Emoluments

The greatest impediment to employee satisfaction was the lack of a harmonized salary scheme. As reported by employees, two systems exist, the KFS system based on the new salary and benefit package after the transition from a department to a public corporate and the ‘others’ scheme. Majority of staff in field offices have not migrated to the new scheme which made the feel excluded and therefore the choice of the term ‘others’-associated with KFS but not really belonging. Salaries in this category come from the ministry. The delayed implementation of the new scheme by making it harmonized and inclusive has not only affected employee motivation but also perpetuated fears regarding job security. Job tenure uncertainties among affected employees raised a concern about their ever being brought on board


Page | 26

the KFS system considering the rigorous recruitment requirements now in place. They also noted that the three year contract that was indicated in their appointment or secondment letters had long expired. Overall, staff has high expectations of better pay if they migrated to KFS, a reason for their anxiety.

Other employee concerns revolved around low housing and commuter allowance, delayed implementation of risk allowance for the Forest Rangers and meager subsistent allowance given when out of duty station for guards and extension workers.

(e) Workload / job pressure

Forest guards indicated being overburdened by work partly a result of the vast areas of forests manned and the limited logistical and organizational support provided in their line of ENCOM duties. Rough estimates, for instance, place one guard in charge of 900 ha of forested land. General staff deficits have also meant multi-tasking where one employee performs more than one Job Description e.g. a forest ranger who doubles as a clerk or a secretary who also performs cleaning duties. Though this was is by and large unwelcome among employees, the underlying contentious issue is lack of commensurate compensation and not the impracticality of this arrangement. The unmentioned bottom-line seems to suggest, ‘work more and be paid more’. This mentality also reins among drivers who felt that they too needed extraneous duty allowance as most were on call always.

(f) Staff competency

Most support staff and all ground staff at KFC were unskilled laborers employed on casual terms. In Kinale Forest Station, despite its huge coverage and potentials for revenue generation had only one forester deployed. The high turn over of unskilled labour in the Kazi Kwa Vijana (KKV) was also mentioned as one impediment is acquisition of skills and mastering of the delicate art of tending nurseries and performing other silvicultural practices. Crafted to benefit as many youth as possible, a new crop of KKVs is recruited long before the previous batch has acquired the necessary skills.

Survey results also reveal the need to bridge skill gaps in areas such as on-farm tree planting, dry land forestry, farmer field schools and general group dynamics brought about by the concept of participatory forest management approaches.

(g) Communication

Feed back mechanisms in the old system of administration are still affecting senior-junior employee relationships. The old boy mentality still reigns where foresters had immense discretionary powers breeding fear among junior employees. Reporting systems for progress was also a grey area where low cadre could not clearly comprehend their work outputs to the overall strategic goals of the organization as manifested by the statement, ‘my boss told me so’ when probed on how their work fitted in the picture of new KFS mandate. This is indicative of the need to open two way communication channels and effective mentoring mechanisms which should begin by properly articulating the implications of the new policy and structural changes at KFS. All steps and efforts made towards achieving strategic goals should be communicated to all staff based on an acceptable feedback mechanism with room in the framework for thorough consultation in order to bring out all staff views in decision making processes. This was summed up by one employee who recommended the needed to improve interpersonal relationships at work. She would


Page | 27

like to see management desisting from the culture of the rather impersonal communication through memos but rather through an in-house open forum where all staff participate in critical decision making events. This would be a turn-around from formal and top-down communication model that requires actions based on instructions from above.

(h) Resource efficiency

Results indicate some measure of resource inefficiencies at KFS. Those mentioned by staff relate to the rather new trend of outsourcing services even in situations where capacity was available within the organization to do the job. Three examples that explained this were in the vehicle service and maintenance section. Even where capacities do not measure up, staff felt that it was wise and more beneficial in the long term to build their capacities by exposing them to best practices e.g. recommending and supporting their training at the GM Kenya.

The second example of resource efficiency was drawn from the road unit where otherwise serviceable machinery and equipment were left to waste away. Last but not least is KFC guest house and conference hall which is yet to be optimized. With improved visibility of the facility alongside deployment of qualified staff, an opportunity exists to run it as a business enterprise for revenue generation. Other cross-cutting resource saving opportunities that are available but not yet fully explored by include power (electricity) saving in offices including as well as use of renewable energy forms such as solar energy for lighting and heating. KFS should also take leadership in advocating and laying the infrastructure for resource recycling and reuse e.g. paper and wood. Effective collaboration with partners will also ensure prudent use of resources (both physical and financial) while helping reduce role conflicts across agencies or sectors.

`


Page | 28

Chapter Five: Conclusions and Recommendations 5.1 Introduction This chapter presents the survey’s conclusion and recommendations. The chapter begins by highlighting all the salient findings of the survey from which conclusions are drawn. The chapter ends by suggesting recommendations on the way forward for KFS in improving employee satisfaction for enhanced performance and productivity. Conclusions are largely drawn from the wide breath of KFS documents and the realities on the ground as manifested in the survey results.

5.2 Conclusions The low employee satisfaction levels among non-managers emerged as the one major threat factors towards achieving the strategic goals of KFS. Without intervening, by providing conditions that remove job dissatisfaction, inspire and promote higher productivity among staff, KFS stands the risk of reversing the modest gains so far realized. As a priority concern, KFS needs to work hard towards;

(a) Bridging staffing gaps, in both numbers and skills, particularly in ENCOM and Extension Sections to meet the now critically deficient areas of operation.

(b) Lobbying for, resource mobilization and allocating more financial resources to increase staff remuneration, adequately provide support resources (i.e. vehicles, machinery, tools, equipment and other materials), and develop enabling infrastructure (i.e. roads, bridges, buildings and other structural facilities) for better service delivery.

(c) Promoting equity and harmony among staff where staff have common reference terms of employment, work as a team, have pride of work and endeavor to improve the image of the organization.

(d) Making available and supporting career growth opportunities for all staff. (e) Recognizing and improving staff welfare concerns by being responsive to their family,

housing, retirement, health and sanitation needs. With the foregoing employee needs and demands in picture, and with diligent efforts exerted towards realizing them, KFS’s future and image is certainly going to be bright. The commitment to and the means for reaching this desired image is there. The challenge remains in translating this compelling desire into tangible actions that can be felt on the ground, thus where all employees work as a team, respect and support each other, and have pride in whatever job niche they belong.

5.3 Recommendations 5.3.1 Recommendations for Policy and Institutional Improvement

Based on the survey findings the following recommendations are suggested for improving the Policy institutional environment in order to enhance employee satisfaction and generally promote best practices within KFS.


Page | 29

a) Recasting KFS Image: work on branding and repackaging KFS’s image as a corrupt-free, gender sensitive, customer-centric, and employee friendly organization. Simple and practical measures that will help arrive at this image include:

i) Increasing KFS visibility by developing or embracing a Corporate Social Responsibility

strategy that contributes to community development especially around gazetted forests, respects its workers and family and fights corruption internally and outside the organization. Schools and health clinics are examples of community projects that may appeal to forest adjacent communities while taking care of family welfare issues for KFS staff in forest stations.

ii) Evolving a communication policy to improve public relations to rework the image that now hold that the service as corrupt and opens two-way communication channels complete with explicit feedback mechanisms between senior and junior staff.

iii) Crafting a gender policy that ensures gender parity in recruitment, job promotions and in other career development opportunities particularly in field offices. Similarly, this policy should be able to recognize and respect the sanctity of the family institution which should also include tangible actions working towards promoting family welfare.

iv) Establishing Grass-root presence; KFS should develop an enabling framework of implementation that lets the benefits that the Forest Act 2005 has brought to trickle down to the field where majority of customers and frontline staff (KFS foot soldiers) are to be found.

v) Walking the talk; the top KFS leadership should be exemplary in their conduct of duties as opposed to ‘preaching water and drinking wine’ kind of scenario. This means embracing all values of the organization as provided in the service charter, leading in integrity and professionalism, and active in promoting team building. Team building is especially important to boost staff morale and in working towards overall accomplishment of KFS strategic plan, 2009-2014.

b) Review on some governance aspects; whereas the rationale for centralizing operations within KFS are pretty obvious and advantageous, this has often presented bureaucratic stumbling blocks that subsequently led to delay in service delivery and adversely affected staff morale. Areas that need policy review and changes in the existing institutional arrangements and which present a strong case for decentralization or devolved powers, include;

i) Removing red tape, a major cause for procurement delays, to enhance timely

purchase of new equipments and materials as well as restocking those in short supply or out of stock.

ii) Fast tracking migration of staff from ministry to KFS-so far a painfully protracted exercise- and harmonize salaries to have a level playing field for all staff.

iii) Empowering zonal managers or district forest officers to instill staff discipline or temporarily suspend errant employees. The current system where the KFS Director has to assent to any action on staff discipline is unnecessarily long and burdensome on the Director.

5.3.2 Recommendations to Boost Staff Morale, Performance and Productivity

1) Put in place more consultative structures and processes to buttress transition of staff from the ministry to KFS mainstream.

2) Recognize KFC staff in policy documents and staff transfers and rotations.


Page | 30

3) Remuneration should be reviewed upwards for staff not employed by KFS. 4) Staff Welfare schemes should be set up as applicable. 5) Career development; (provide relevant training opportunities for lower cadre staff, have a level

playing field and less bureaucratic policy on the promotion of employees). Recognize proficiency tests in recruitment and consideration for promotion. In so doing tap the skills of experienced staff within the sector that may lack professional certificates (i.e. degrees and diplomas) but non-the-less have skills to do job specific tasks as well as help retain institutional memory.

6) Provide adequate transport (enough serviceable vehicles) and / or fuel for extension officers. Allocate a vehicle(s) specific to forest patrol.

7) Provide adequate and modern communication gear for rangers. 8) Initiate reward schemes for creativity and innovation to cover outstanding (best) practices that

either bolster revenue collection or save operation costs for the institution. 9) Review prosecution procedures. The current illegal forest harvesters’ arrest-to-prosecution

cycle is not only delayed but emasculates and puts a heavy burden on the rangers/foresters on the subject of proof and witness.


Page | 31

References

Drizin, M. (2003, September 1). Worker loyalty pretty low. Retrieved July 21, 2010, from United Press International: http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2003/09/01/Worker-loyalty-pretty-low/UPI-98111062459018/

Grant, A. M., Campbell, E. M., Chen, G., Cottone, K., Lapedis, D., & Lee, K. (2007). Impact and the art of motivation maintenance: The effects of contact with beneficiaries on persistence behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , 103, 53-67.

Harter, J. K., Asplund, J. W., & Fleming, J. H. (2004). HumanSigma: A Meta-Analysis. The Relationship Between Employee Engagement, Customer Engagement, and Financial Performance. Retrieved July 21st, 2010, from Gallup Management Journal: http://gmj.gallup.com

Harter, J. K., Asplund, J. W., Killham, E. A., & Schmidt, F. L. (2004). Employee engagement and performance: a meta-analytic study of causal direction. Gallup Research Report.

Herzberg, F. (1968). One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees? Harvard Business Review , 46 (1).

National Business Research Institute. (n.d.). Special Reports: Managing Job Satisfaction. Retrieved July 21, 2010, from National Business Research Institute: http://www.nbrii.com/Employee_Surveys/Job_Satisfaction.pdf


Page | 32

Appendix A; Employee Satisfaction and Work Environment Survey Questionnaire

SECTION A: DEMOGRAPHICS

1. Age [ ] 20 years and below [ ] 21 – 30 years [ ] 31 – 40 years [ ] 41 – 50 years [ ] Above 50 years

2. Sex [ ] Male [ ] Female

3. Education level completed

[ ] None [ ] Primary [ ] Secondary

[ ] Tertiary (Certificate, Diploma) [ ] Degree [ ] Postgraduate (Postgraduate Cert. Masters, PhD)

4. How long have you worked at the Kenya Forest Service? (tick the one applicable to you) [ ] Less than 1 year [ ] 1 – 2 years [ ] More than 2 years

5. Section/ Department

[ ] SUPPORT SERVICES Finance & Administration Human Resources & Administration Corporate Services

[ ] TECHNICAL ADVISORY Forest Extension Services Forest Conservation and Plantation Management

[ ] FIELD OPERATIONS Forest Conservancy Areas Forest Zones Forest Stations Forest Extensions

[ ] ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE Intelligence Administration Conservancy Investigation

[ ] KENYA FORESTRY COLLEGE [ ] SUPPLY CHAIN [ ] CORPORATE COMMUNICATIONS [ ] LEGAL [ ] INTERNAL AUDIT

6. Do you supervise (oversee) any staff? [ ] Yes (proceed to section B) [ ] No (proceed to section C)

SECTION B: EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION FACTORS 7. Overall satisfaction: On a four-point scale, where “4” is extremely satisfied and “1” is extremely dissatisfied,

how satisfied are you with Kenya Forest Service (KFS) as a place to work? [ 1 ] Extremely Dissatisfied [ 2 ] Dissatisfied [ 3 ] Satisfied [ 4 ] Extremely Satisfied

Specific factors: For this section, tick “Yes” if you agree with the statement and “No” if you disagree with the statement. In addition, indicate how important that factor is to you on a four-point scale where “4” is extremely important and “1” is extremely unimportant

Yes

(Agr

ee)

No

(Disa

gree

)

Extr

emel

y U

nim

port

ant

Uni

mpo

rtan

t

Impo

rtan

t

Extr

emel

y Im

port

ant

8. The results I am expected to achieve are very clear to me Yes No 1 2 3 4

9. The mission/purpose of our organization makes me feel my job is important Yes No 1 2 3 4

10. My supervisor motivates me to improve my performance by providing timely and constructive feedback to me Yes No 1 2 3 4

11. In the last seven days, my immediate supervisor has recognized, acknowledged or praised me for doing good work Yes No 1 2 3 4


Page | 33

12. I feel that there is a transparent system in place at my workplace to recognize and reward individuals for their good work Yes No 1 2 3 4

13. I feel that I am part of a team Yes No 1 2 3 4

14. I feel completely free to raise and discuss personal problems and professional challenges with my supervisor without fear of punishment or victimization

Yes No 1 2 3 4

15. My supervisor seems to care for me as a person Yes No 1 2 3 4 16. My supervisor encourages my development Yes No 1 2 3 4 17. I have all the materials and equipment I need to do my work right Yes No 1 2 3 4

18. I have the knowledge and skills I need to do my work to the required standards and expectations Yes No 1 2 3 4

19. I feel that there is a transparent system in place to ensure that staff that require training relevant to their work are supported by the institution to do the training

Yes No 1 2 3 4

20. My fellow team mates are committed to doing quality work Yes No 1 2 3 4 21. In the last six months, someone has talked to me about my progress Yes No 1 2 3 4 22. This last year, I have had opportunities at work to learn and grow Yes No 1 2 3 4

23. List three (3) things that you feel will improve your productivity 24. List three (3) things that you feel will increase your level of satisfaction at work


Page | 34

Appendix B; KII Guide for KFS Staff

EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION AND PERFORMANCE SURVEY Focus Group and Number of Discussants: Facilitator: Rappoteur: Date:

Request for your Participation

Hallo, my/our name is/are ____________________________ from Breinscope Consultants Ltd. I/we am/are here to assist Kenya Forest Service in undertaking an assessment of level of satisfaction of it’s customers in relation to set objectives. The purpose of this assessment is to gather information on the level of satisfaction of customers so far. This information will help Kenya Forest Service to re-plan for future activities. You were randomly chosen from among other customers and all your responses will be kept confidential. If you accept to participate, the exercise will last for 30 minutes. Your participation is voluntary. Purpose: This tool is important in gathering in depth qualitative knowledge and understanding the various services offered by KFS. It also provides better insight into specific variables affecting the various divisions or programme operations of KFS related to the objectives of this survey. Respondents to this tool will include Directors, Heads of support services, all senior Deputy Director including middle level and low cadre staff). A) i) General Information on KFS and its operations (senior cadre staff section)

(Interviewing Cues: Delve on KFS strategy, Policies; Service Charter etc. Additionally, cover relationships with other Departments and Institutions)

1. What is the role of KFS in protecting and managing Forest Resources in the country?

2. Who are KFS partners (both NGO-based and Governmental)? In what areas do you work together? (Interviewing Cues: Require mention milestones in partnerships).

3. What necessitated the programmatic shift from being a mere Government department (Forest Department) to the ‘new face’ now referred to as Kenya Forest Services? Has the shift yielded any favorable changes (Interviewing Cue: Ask for areas/sections that changes have taken effect in)?

4. Where do you see KFS in the next 10 years? (Interviewing Cue: Relate to strategic plan, service charter)

5. How do you reward, give recognition and create opportunities for your staff?

6. What hindrances or challenges do you encounter in meeting your objectives? (Focus on resource capacities (human, physical and financial), policies and the legal framework, politics etc.

7. What needs to be changed / improved based on your experience, to best meet KFS strategic goal(s)?


Page | 35

ii) Middle level and Lower cadre staff section Cover relationships among staff, other departments and sister institutions.)

8. Kindly describe the nature of your work on a day to day basis? (Interviewing Cue: Capture understanding of

work related roles and responsibilities.)

9. What would you pinpoint as the most remarkable achievement in your work? (Interviewing Cue: Pay attention to job planning, decision making, implementation, monitoring and reporting structures)

10. How does your work fit in the larger picture/framework of KFS operations (Interviewing Cue: Focus respondents grasp on collaboration, partnerships within KFS.)

11. Whom or what departments/sections do you work closely with to ensure attainment of your objectives?

12. Do you think your time and resources made available to do your work have been optimally utilized? (Establish resource use efficiency i.e. whether wastage occurs.)

13. What challenges/impediments do you encounter in performing your roles and responsibilities at your line of work? (Probe interviewee on relationships with staff i.e. both seniors and colleagues or peers, support resources available, organizational politics, policy demands etc.)

B) Job Performance and Motivational Factors

1. What motivates/inspires you in your work (remuneration, rewards and opportunities, recognition for work done etc.)

2. What do you consider as the most important factor/s that can affect your motivation and/or job performance?

3. Describe your work environment? (to cover physical attributes {space, support materials and equipment, protective gear} and psychosocial attributes {relationship with colleagues/seniors, organizational politics, staff leave days, training opportunities etc})

4. What attributes do you think define a good working relationship between an employee and his/her seniors (KFS Board, PS and Minister Ministry of Environment and Forest Resources if interviewing is the Director or a Deputy Director) and likewise between an employee and his/her co-workers? (Look into inter-personal relationships, sensitivity to others’ needs, ability to delegate duties/coach and mentor others and work a s a team)

5. Do you think those attributes have been applied optimally in KFS? (Look for any gaps, strengths and weaknesses)

6. Have you participated in any on-the job training in the last three years? (Probe on the nature of training and where trained as well as how the opportunity arose-whether mandatory or recommended by management.)

C) Work Environment-Health and well being

1. Do you belong to any staff welfare/compassion/bereavement/medical/retirement/loan scheme? If yes, kindly state how it is run and whether it has been helpful? (For the latter question, probe on challenges, useful issues and concerns on the management of the scheme)

2. What are your views on working with people who are HIV and Aids positive and state whether KFS has supported HIV and Aids positive person in the Institution? (If supported delve on how the institution has extended this support to affected staff.)


Page | 36

Appendix C: FGD Guide with KFS Staff EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION SURVEY

(Targets groups, guards, extension workers, support staff, nursery attendants, staff with more than 5 yrs with KFS, Road units, KFC staff (both academic and non academic.)

1. What do you like MOST at work at KFS?

2. What DON’T you like at your work place?

3. To whom do you owe success of work in your section and generally KFS? (Please pursue elements such as team work, coordination)

4. What (of policies or practices) would you want retained in operations of KFS? (Capture opinions on strengths in organizational behavior, attitudes, perceptions, best practices etc.)

5. What would you want changed and why (focus on gaps, weaknesses, constraints)

6. Probe on opinions on who has the responsibility of effecting the changes.

7. Is corruption a real threat or just a mere over stated fact to operations of KFS?

8. What role does staff has corruption eradication?

9. Comment on the influences of work environment in your motivation or performance on your daily tasks? ( pursue physical, psychological, political and historical attributes)

10. How different is KFS and the former Forest Department? (To be done with staff who have experienced with transition from the Forest Department to KFS)


Page | 37

Appendix D EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION INDEX (ESI) FOR THE KENYA FOREST SERVICES

Section/Department Total Respondents from Section

Responders to question from

Section

Responses on Overall Satisfaction

Employee Satisfaction Index Calculation

1 2 3 4 3 + 4 ESI (%) Organization-wide (overall) 331 217 31 42 113 31 144 66.4

Managers/Supervisors only (overall) 118 71 14 17 37 3 40 56.3

Non-Managers only (overall) 191 131 39 39 48 5 53 40.5

SUPPORT SERVICES 95 63 6 18 36 3 39 71.9

Finance & Administration 48 30 0 8 20 2 22 73.3

Human resource & Administration 36 24 5 5 13 1 14 58.3

Corporate services 11 9 1 5 3 0 3 33.3

TECHNICAL ADVISORY 43 27 5 6 16 0 16 69.3

Forest extension services 24 13 0 5 8 0 8 61.5

Forest conservation & plantation management 19 14 5 1 8 0 8 57.1

FIELD OPERATIONS 110 75 29 19 24 3 23 40.7

Forest conservancy areas 24 14 7 2 5 0 5 35.7

Forest zones 36 27 11 9 6 1 7 25.9

Forest stations 32 21 11 3 6 1 7 33.3

Forest extensions 18 13 0 5 7 1 8 61.5

ENFORCEMENT & COMPLIANCE 46 29 5 12 11 1 12 51.4

Intelligence 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0

Administration 15 6 0 3 2 1 3 60

Conservancy 28 22 5 8 9 0 9 40.9

INVESTIGATION 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 -


Page | 38

Section/Department Total Respondents from Section

Responders to question from

Section

Responses on Overall Satisfaction

Employee Satisfaction Index Calculation

1 2 3 4 3 + 4 ESI (%) KENYA FORESTRY COLLEGE 18 12 5 3 4 0 4 33.3

SUPPLY CHAIN 9 8 3 1 4 0 4 50

CORPORATE COMMUNICATIONS 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 100

INTERNAL AUDIT 6 4 0 0 4 0 4 100

LEGAL DEPARTMENT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - KEY: 1 - Extremely Dissatisfied 2 – Dissatisfied 3 - Satisfied 4 - Extremely Satisfied


Page | 39

Appendix F: KFS Work Environment Assessment Data

Statement

Responses Rating on Importance of Aspect

Yes No 1 2 3 4 3+4 (%) FQ % FQ % FQ % FQ % FQ % FQ %

NEED FOR GOOD MANAGEMENT AND SUPERVISION 1. My fellow team mates are committed to doing quality work 238 82 52 18 8 4 10 5 92 45 95 46 91

2. The mission/purpose of our organization makes me feel my job is important 236 86 40 14 3 1 6 3 81 38 122 58 96

3. The results I am expected to achieve are very clear to me 231 82 52 18 7 3 2 1 100 45 111 50 96

4. I feel that I am part of a team 204 74 70 26 6 3 6 3 68 36 109 58 94

5. My supervisor motivates me to improve my performance by providing timely and constructive feedback to me 194 69 88 31 10 5 10 5 94 44 101 47 91

6. My supervisor seems to care for me as a person 190 68 91 32 12 6 9 4 76 37 109 53 90

7. I feel completely free to raise and discuss personal problems and professional challenges with my supervisor without fear of punishment or victimization 185 65 99 35 7 3 16 8 66 32 115 56 89

8. In the last seven days, my immediate supervisor has recognized, acknowledged or praised me for doing good work 168 57 125 43 12 6 15 7 76 36 106 51 87

9. I know and understand the organization’s HIV workplace policy 138 48 147 52 6 3 11 5 60 30 125 62 92

10. In the last six months, someone has talked to me about my progress 131 45 158 55 13 7 12 6 70 35 104 52 87

11. I feel that there is a transparent system in place at my workplace to recognize and reward individuals for their good work 110 38 178 62 14 7 21 10 75 36 97 47 83

12. If I am unwell, I can easily access immediate and good care 105 38 173 62 16 8 6 3 38 19 136 69 89

13. I would be afraid to disclose my HIV status because I feel that I would lose my position 72 25 216 75 15 8 16 8 69 35 97 49 84

14. In the last six months, I have had the opportunity to engage in social events or occasions at work (e.g. games) 65 23 221 77 13 7 17 9 73 37 96 48 85

NEED FOR INFORMATION, TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT 15. My supervisor encourages my development 195 70 82 30 11 6 9 5 81 41 95 48 90

16. I have the knowledge and skills I need to do my work to the required standards and expectations 237 81 56 19 9 4 6 3 67 33 122 60 93


Page | 40

Statement

Responses Rating on Importance of Aspect

Yes No 1 2 3 4 3+4 (%) FQ % FQ % FQ % FQ % FQ % FQ %

17. I feel that there is a transparent system in place to ensure that staff that require training relevant to their work are supported by the institution to do the training 110 38 179 62 20 10 12 6 58 28 116 56 84

18. This last year, I have had opportunities at work to learn and grow 156 55 130 45 11 6 14 7 69 35 103 52 87

19. I know the procedure to follow when I need to request for more supplies or equipment 229 80 58 20 8 4 5 3 85 44 96 49 93

IMPORTANCE RATING KEY: 1 - Extremely Unimportant 2 - Unimportant 3 - Important 4 - Extremely Important

kenya forest service final report... · 2017-11-12 · kenya forest service employee satisfaction...

Documents