TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Background of Study
1.2 Statement of Problems
1.3 Research Objectives
1.4 Research Question
1.5 Research Hypothesis
1.6 Scope of Study
1.7 Significance of study
1.8 Limitation of study
1.9 Definition of terms
CHAPTER TWO
2.0 Literature Review
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 Research methodology
3.1 Research Design
3.2 Population of study
3.3 Sampling Design and Procedure
3.4 Data Collection Instrument
3.5 Administration of Data Collection Instrument
3.6 Methods of data analysis
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 Data Presentation and Analysis
4.1 Data Presentation
4.2 Test of Hypothesis
CHAPTER FIVE
5.0 Summary, Conclusion and Recommendation
5.1 Summary
5.2 Conclusion
5.3 Recommendation
References
Questionnaire
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
The
history of civil service reforms in Nigeria predates independence and is loaded
with barrage of reforms, yet little or nothing has been achieved in terms
efficiency and service delivery due to some factors such as lack of wider
consultation, parallel constitutional reforms, non-implementation of reforms’
principles, politicisation, marginalization and discriminatory policies,
dehumanization of workers, infiltration of mediocre in the civil service, and
the need to increase productivity (Okorie and Onwe, 2016; Eze, 2013; Igbokwe, 2012; Oyovbaire,
2008). For instance, between 1934 and
2015, the Nigeria civil service has experienced over twenty four reforms
covering the Hunt Commission (1934), the Harragin Commission (1946), the Foot
Commission (1948), Adebo Commission (1954), the Gorsuch Commission (1954) and
Mbanefo Commission (1959), the Morgan Commission (1963), the Elwood Commission
(1966), the Adebo Commission (1971), the Udoji Commission (1974), the Dotun
Philips
Commission
(1988), the Ayida Commission (1995), the various Obasanjo reforms between
1999-2007,
the Yar’Adua reform (2008-2010), and the Jonathan reforms (2011-2015).
These
reforms pursued the building of institutional and personnel capabilities for
the mobilization and efficient management of available resources to ensure
increased services delivery and improved outcomes. The core thrust of these has
being to ‘reposition and reprofessionalise the public service for greater
efficiency, effectiveness in service delivery, accountability, transparency,
and overall national productivity’ (Ajayi, 2006, p.2). They are intended to
change the way government does its work in view of present, emerging and
anticipated realities in governance, development, and national objectives
(Igbokwe, 2017; Olaopa, 2008). Reforms are therefore a primary instrument for
institution transformation, rules and procedural alteration or change,
fostering innovation, and social change. It calls for the reexamination of
institutional structures, processes, techniques, management practices, and
integration of customers’ complaints for a better society.
In
spite of the resources expended or spent, the success and impact of this
process are subject to environmental factors in Nigeria, which include
management dimension and the context of the reforms (Igbokwe, 2017; Olaopa,
2011). Consequently, the civil service reforms of the 21st century
Nigeria, which focused on building “a
civil service that is performance and result oriented, professional and
technologically sensitive, and committed to a continuous improvement in the
conduct of government business and the enhancement of national productivity’
(Ajayi 2006, p.4), factored in the ‘administrative dimensions’ in the reforms.
Rules and procures in Ministries, Departments, and Agencies (MDAs) in the civil
service became key elements of the reform initiatives.
In
the pre-2000 era, the MDAs exercise a monopoly of public issues that is devoid
of public input and participation, which is retrogressive and
anti-developmental. This is characteristic of Nigerian civil service reforms,
which is tied to its colonial root. The Britain imposed a unified but alien
civil service on Nigeria without giving much thought to its impact on the
Nigerian traditional communities with their conflicting values, interests,
norms and authority structure, and people’s reactions or feelings (Kinglsey,
1963). There were no provisions for assessing customers’ satisfaction,
reactions, demands/inputs, which will orchestrate alteration of processes and
rules for better outcome. The civil service is known for “over-centralization;
incessant conflicts between the cadres; Scant emphasis on results and concrete performance;
excessive focus on compliance with regulations, forms and procedures,
counter-productive separation of authority from responsibility at the top of
the Civil Service hierarchy; dangerously low staff morale and productivity:
inappropriate staff deployment practices which often ignored the profession or
specialization of staff…” (Philips, 2010, p. 12) The quest to resolve this
lacuna orchestrated the technical assistance of the Department For
International Development (DFID) – a British agency – in developing a framework
or template for quality service. The Federal Executive Council (FEC) received
and approved this framework, which metamorphosed into SERVICOM in March
2004.
SERVICOM,
which is an acronym for ‘Service Compact with all Nigerians’ came into effect
in March 2005. It is fundamentally a customer orientation package that is
characterised by such philosophies like: there is no need for MDAs if they do
not render services and government will crumble; “To keep the synergy fresh, it
is of note to find out who is responsible for poor service delivery. Is it the
customer or the provider? How can a bridge be re-constructed so that the aim
will be achieved?” (Okorie and Odo, 2014, p. 269) Therefore, the SERVICOM
initiative was necessitated by the need to eradicate inefficiency and
incorporate quality into government services. In the context of SERVICOM, poor
or ‘bad’ services mean, in practical terms, that “someone has done what should
not be done, or… left undone what should have been done” (The SERVICOM Book,
2006:7). The SERVICOM policy was implemented, effective from March, 2005,
through the establishment of a SERVICOM Unit (SU) in every ministry (MSU),
extra-ministerial departments (EMSU), and parastatal (PSU). This study
therefore examines the implementation of the reform policies in the civil
service of the five states of the Southeast Nigeria.
Objectives
of the Study
The
general objective of the study is to evaluate the level of implementation of
SERVICOM reforms in the civil service of the five states of the Southeast
Nigeria. The specific objectives of the study are to:
1.
Find out if the civil
service commissions in the five states of Southeast Nigeria have established
SERVICOM units and procedures.
2.
Ascertain if the
civil service commissions in the five states of Southeast Nigeria have
incorporated feedback, appropriate complaint and administrative procedure, and
staff training into their administrative procedure.
3.
Assess the extent to
which customer problem and satisfaction survey mechanisms for assessing public
services has been effectively used by the civil service commission in the five
Southeast states.
Research
Questions
This
research seeks answers to the following questions:
1.
Has the civil service
commission in the five States of Southeast of Nigeria established SERVICOM
units?
2.
Has the civil service
commission in the five States of Southeast of Nigeria incorporated feedback,
appropriate complaint and administrative procedure, and staff training into
their administrative procedure?
3.
To what extent has
the civil service commission in the five States of Southeast of Nigeria
effectively applied customer problem and satisfaction survey mechanisms to
assess public services?
Significance
of the Study
This
study has both theoretical and empirical significance particularly for
researchers and practitioners in the field of public administration, civil
service and customers’ satisfaction. Empirically, through the study of SERVICOM
and its implementation ministries (MSU), extraministerial departments (EMSU),
and parastatal (PSU) in the five States of Southeast of Nigeria, this study
shall exposes the major limitations in its implementation. Therefrom, it shall
provide viable framework for solving both SERVICOM hindrances and the problems
confronting effective service delivery in the civil service to the public. In
addition, the data provided by the study shall be of benefit to African Peer
Review Mechanism in its evaluation of Nigeria’s implementation of good
governance policies.
Theoretically,
this study provides the data on the implementation of SERVICOM reforms in the
ministries (MSU), extra-ministerial departments (EMSU), and parastatal (PSU) in
the five States of Southeast of Nigeria thereby enhancing comparative study of
the phenomena with other states outside the region by the academia. Therefore,
the study shall serve in the validation and localisation of the British
framework using Southeast environment. It shall also complement the efforts in
the academia to assess the potency of SERVICOM as a reform alternative for
solving the problems confronting Nigeria Civil Service.