staff housing: panacea to academic productivity (nigerian istitutions) real estate devlopment :...

STAFF HOUSING: PANACEA TO ACADEMIC PRODUCTIVITY (NIGERIAN ISTITUTIONS)

2015 ERES Conference held June 24-27, 2015 onREAL ESTATE DEVLOPMENT :

Housing Economics and Housing Policy

Presenters: NNAMETU, Jovita N.

ALAKA, Iheanyi N.OKORONKWO, Chikezie.

2

Background on Academic Staff Housing

Housing challenges Accommodation: non availability; inaccessibility;

non-affordability; unfavorable and inconvenient housing;

Insecurity;

Proximity to workplaces.

2015 ERES CONFERENCE ISTANBUL, TURKEY, June 24-27th

3

General Implications to Staff Productivity

Unhealthy climate for work efficiency

Underperformance of staff and students

Poor research collaborations among academics

Stress, etc.


4

Problem Statement

Both the State and the Federal Government established seven (7) functional tertiary educational institutions in Imo State.

These institutions have negligible or no staff quarters especially for her academics (Researchers investigation, 2015).


5

Problem Statement (cont’d) Albeit some of these institutions are situated within

the sub-urban areas and commuter routes, the challenges of accommodation is presumed not to be prioritized for decades now.

An evaluation of the costs and benefits of the non residency policy within the various institutions is not yet conducted; thus underscoring its effects on the productivity of workers.


6

Problem Statement (cont’d)Convenient and academically - friendly

accommodation for academic staff remains a critical challenge within Imo State and is presumed a setback to the institutions goals and staff performances.

Depending on the peculiarity of the institution concerned, their housing challenges and effects on workers performances, and the best staff housing approach is yet to be appraised.


7

Aim of the study

This study aims to examine the causes, challenges and effects of the lack of staff housing on the productivity of academics in selected tertiary academic institutions in Imo State.

This is with the view to exploring the feasibility of alternative housing to support the workers and their households as better strategy to improving their performances at work.


8

Methodology

Design: Case Study research involving cross-sectional field survey approach

Sample Procedure: Multistage sampling design


9

Sampling Procedure

• 3 selected samples were IMSU (urban)

• FUTO (sub-urban)

• IMOPOLY (commuter/rural)

Institution Selection by Neighborhood type (SRS Technique)

• Each quota targeted 100 per Institution

All cadres of academic staff (QS Technique)

• 300 respondents were sampled

Respondents sampling (SST)


10

Methodology (cont’d)

Data Collection Techniquestructured questionnaire

Data Presentation The Likert Table Frequency Table

Data analysis techniquesLikert measurement (response impacts)Simple percentages


MAJOR REASONS FOR CHOICE OF ACCOMMODATION

Kimp

1 Lack of staff accommodation for Academics FUTO 1.00 IMSU 2.00 IMOPOLY 2.00

2 Rent non affordability around campus neighborhoods FUTO 0.06 IMSU 1.15 IMOPOLY -1.00

3 Insecurity of workers family FUTO 0.01 IMSU 0.12 IMOPOLY 0.77

4 Proximity of accommodation to other activity centre of household interest

FUTO 1.12 IMSU -1.00 IMOPOLY 1.45

Findings-

11

2015 ERES CONFERENCEJune 24-27th

Causes of Academics choice of residential accommodation location

12

Productivity Challenges (Academic Staff)

Impact (priority) per Case Study FUTO IMSU IMOPOLY

Lateness to work 0.35 (5) -0.77 (8)

0.95 (3)

Fatigue at work 0.39 (3) 0.12 (6) 0.73 (5)

Loss of Man-hour 0.64 (2)

0.16 (4) 0.93 (4)

Lesser time spent at workplace

0.16 (6) 0.98 (2)

1.13(2)

Greater distractions 0.37 (4) 0.07 (7) 0.51 (6)

High daily trip costs 0.82 (1)

1.08 (1)

1.81 (1)

Decreasing motivation 0.37 (4) 0.14 (5) 0.42 (7)Alteration of work time schedule

-0.12 (7) 0.18 (3) 0.37 (8)

Findings- Challenges 2015 ERES CONFERENCE ISTANBUL, TURKEY, June 24-27th

13

Findings- Effects S

PRODUCTIVITY IMPLICATIONS OF WORKERS

RESIDENCE PROXIMITY TO WORKPLACE

Response level

N FUTO IMSU IMOPOL

Y

1

.

Less attention to students performances 42

(6)

53

(4)

73 (5)

2

.

Poor staff collaboration for more serious

researches

76

(1)

81

(1)

100

(1)

3

.

Lack of off-work environment for social

interaction

23

(7)

71

(2)

78 (4)

4

.

Delay in assessment of students results 66

(3)

46

(5)

89 (2)

5

.

Avoidance of tasking administrative duties 54

(5)

14

(8)

61 (7)

6

.

Lack of concentration as the official close

time approaches

57

(4)

34

(6)

72 (5)

7

.

Relaxing of due punishment of staff who

defaults at work due to difficulty of coming to

work regularly

13

(8)

24

(7)

33 (8)

8

.

Demand for improved working conditions 71

(2)

56

(3)

85 (3)

2015 ERES CONFERENCEJune 24-27th

14

Findings- Consideration Priorities(1) 2015 ERES CONFERENCE

June 24-27th

Implications Reactions TotalResponse

%Response

FUTO IMSU IMOPOLY

Adequate 100 0 100 200 0.67

Not Adequate 0 11 0 11 0.04

Grossly inadequate

0 89 0 89 0.29

Total 100 100 100 300 1.00

Land Availability for Staff housing Project

15

Findings- Consideration Priorities(2) 2015 ERES CONFERENCE

June 24-27th

POSSIBLE FACTORS MILITATING STAFF HOUSING DELIVERY Response Impact (Kimp)

FUT

O

IMSU IMOPOLY

Mobility to school (if located off

campus)

1.12 1.82 -0.44

Politics of accommodation allocation

to staff

0.60 0.10 -0.19

Project financing arrangement 1.19 1.00 0.98

Property maintenance and

management

0.31 0.34 0.36

Property type 1.08 1.65 0.75

Proximity acceptability to other

activity places

1.89 1.80 1.07

Rent determination and payment mode 1.03 -0.9 0.45

16

Findings- 2015 ERES CONFERENCE

June 24-27th

SSuitable PPP Strategy for Staff Housing Development

ImpactN FUTO IMSU IMOPOL

Y1 Acquire a land outside the campus, design a

suitable staff housing estate adequate for the full-time academics and develop by Build, Own, Operate and Transfer PPP model approach, and make adequate transportation arrangement for staff and their household.

0 79 0

2 Secure a sizeable land within the campus, and adopt the Design, Build, Lease, Operate and Transfer PPP approach to develop a befitting Staff community housing estate

26 0 16

Best Staff Housing Model Approach (1)

17

Findings-2015 ERES CONFERENCE

June 24-27th

3 Secure a land within the campus, design a suitable staff housing estate adequate for the full-time academics and develop by Build, Own and Operate, and Transfer PPP approach.

82 0 93

4 Secure a land outside the campus, design a suitable staff housing estate adequate for the full-time academics and develop by Build, Own and Operate, and Transfer PPP approach.

0 3 0

5 Acquire sizeable land for vertical magnificent residential skyscrapers outside the campus, adopt the most feasible PPP model and arrangement to achieve it, and make adequate transportation arrangement for staff and their household.

32 87 0

Best Staff Housing Model Approach (2)

18

.

• Thank You for listening


19

Sample Size Distribution2015 ERES CONFERENCE

June 24-27th

SAMPLE DISTRIBUTIONAbbrev ACADEMICS CADRE Urban

(IMSU)Sub-urban

(FUTO)Commute

r/ Rural

Aggregate

(IMOPOLY)

Academics

Academics

Academics

Academics

P/CL Professor/ Chief lecturer

4 4 4 12

R/PL Reader/ Principal Lecturer

8 8 8 24

SL Senior Lecturer 11 11 11 33LI Lecturer I 14 14 14 42LII Lecture II 22 22 22 66AS/LIII Asst. Lecturer/ Lecturer III 27 27 27 81

LIII/GA Grad Assts 8 8 8 24Tech Technologists 6 6 6 18 Total Sample 100 100 100 300

staff housing: panacea to academic productivity (nigerian istitutions) real estate devlopment :...

Documents