INTRODUCTION

In the pursuit of enhanced employee efficiency and productivity,

organizations continually seek innovative strategies. While various
approaches have been employed to foster employee motivation, achieving
sustained commitment toward work-related goals remains challenging. A
prevailing debate centers around motivation, with some asserting its
intrinsic nature, thereby rendering it resistant to external influences.
Conversely, others posit that many methods exist to enhance employee
motivation, contingent upon discerning individual preferences. A fundamental
approach frequently adopted by employers is the provision of monetary
incentives, recognized for their potential to elevate motivation, efficacy,
and productivity (Ballentine et al., 2003; Mittal, 2022). These incentives
are designed to reward exceptional job performance through financial means.
The research underscores the diversity of desired monetary incentives shaped
by employees' career stages and generational characteristics. Given the
centrality of human resources to organizational success, motivating,
training, and developing employees assumes paramount significance, as
motivated individuals equipped with skills and knowledge demonstrate superior
performance.
In developing countries, such as Nigeria, where the cost of living is high
and quality of life may be compromised, the appeal of monetary rewards as a
motivator is pronounced. Notably, economic considerations underpin a
substantial portion of human activities. Consequently, monetary incentives
hold a substantial influence over work engagement and commitment.
Nevertheless, the efficacy of these incentives can be contentious, especially
when confronted with circumstances wherein financial rewards are withdrawn.
The Nigerian context exemplifies this dynamic, where employees persist in
their work despite prolonged delays in salary disbursement due to the
expectation of eventual compensation (Adegboyo, Keji, & Fasina, 2021).
Historically, salary and wages have been the oldest forms of monetary
incentives. This tradition endures in Nigeria, where both public and private
sector employees endure protracted delays in compensation yet persist in
their roles. While this may reflect primarily economic motivation, it
signifies the intricate interplay between financial remuneration and job
commitment (Ajibade & Salako, 2021; Calvin, 2017).
The present research seeks to explore the impact of monetary incentives on
employee performance within the Nigerian Automobile Industry. In this
context, employees represent invaluable assets essential for attaining
organizational objectives, yet, their underutilization remains a concern.
Poor motivation has been identified as a key contributor to diminished
employee performance, prompting investigations into motivating factors to
ameliorate this issue. Monetary incentives emerge as a crucial consideration,
with their application warranting examination for optimal performance
enhancement.
The historical background of the studied companies is provided below;
• Elizade Motors Limited: Elizade Motors, initially established as an
automobile marketing company in 1971, underwent incorporation in 1976 as
Elizade Nigeria Limited. It emerged as Nigeria's sole franchise dealer for
Toyota vehicles and parts. Under its robust management structure, Elizade
Nigeria Limited effectively positioned Toyota as the preferred car brand
 within the country. Collaborating with the East Asiatic Company of Japan,
the parent company of Toyota Motors, in 1986 led to the formation of
Toyota Nigeria Limited. This strategic partnership enabled Toyota Nigeria
Limited to become the exclusive distributor of Toyota vehicles in Nigeria,
managing a Semi Knock Down Assembly. With an annual turnover of N33
billion, an authorized share capital of approximately N750 million, and
total assets totaling around N8.1 billion, Elizade solidified its status
as a pioneering Automobile Franchise in Nigeria. The company's
headquarters are situated in Lagos, with branches spanning all six
geopolitical regions of the nation (Elizade, 2023).
• Coscharis Motors Limited: Incorporated in 1977, Coscharis Motors Limited
embarked on its journey as a servicing parts dealership, progressing to
full-fledged vehicle sales operations in 1982. The company has gained
prominence for providing luxury vehicle brands, including BMW, Jaguar, and
Land Rover. Coscharis Motors Limited also holds the exclusive franchise
for Ford Motors in Nigeria, with a Semi Knock Down Assembly plant in
Lagos. Its distribution system has effectively established Ford vehicles
as sought- after offerings in the Nigerian auto market. The company's
headquarters are located in Lekki, Lagos, with regional branches spanning
all geopolitical zones in the country (Coscharisgroup, 2023).

• Stallion Motors Limited: Stallion Motors stands as a prominent

automotive brand in Nigeria, overseeing the franchise for the Hyundai
vehicle brand. The group, founded by an Indian family that settled in
Nigeria during the early 1950s, has diversified its portfolio to encompass
esteemed vehicle brands such as Volkswagen, Porsche, Audi, and Honda. The
company's commitment to becoming a leading vehicle brand in Nigeria and
Africa is reflected in its vision. With a Semi Knock Down Assembly Plant
established in Lagos, Stallion Motors has created a robust distribution
network that ensures its presence across all geopolitical zones in the
nation (Stallion, 2023).
The primary research objectives encompass a comprehensive investigation into
employee motivation and performance dynamics within the Nigerian Automobile
industry. Firstly, the study analyses the impact of Cash Bonuses (Sales
Commission) as a monetary incentive on employee performance. Secondly, it
explores the correlation between retirement benefits and employee job
satisfaction. The research also endeavors to scrutinize the efficacy of Pay
rise in elevating the overall performance levels of individual workers within
the Nigerian automobile sector. Lastly, the study intends to discern the
significance of Profit Sharing as a determinant of workers' performance in
the Nigerian automobile industry. Through these objectives, the research
sheds light on the intricate interplay between monetary incentives and
employee engagement, ultimately contributing to a deeper understanding of
organizational performance factors.
executing incentive packages, ensuring transparency and equitable treatment
across the workforce.
Types of Monetary Incentives
Incentives represent crucial drivers that influence employee behaviour. When
viewed through the lens of fostering successful strategy implementation, an
effective incentive or reward program. These accomplishments can revolve
around bolstering organizational proficiency, encompassing aspects such as
flawless manufacturing, punctual delivery, expedited cycle times, elevated
customer satisfaction, reduced costs, and other related dimensions.
In research conducted within a Nigerian factory, Oloko (1977) categorized
reward elements according to their decreasing frequency of mention. The items
included the following: Opportunities in the company for advancement, job
security, salary or wages, medical and health facilities, working on the job
you prefer, pension scheme, credit for the job you do - recognition, good
people to work with, supervisor's temperament and attitude, vacation and
holiday practice, housing, company's attitude toward employees, incentive
schemes, physical working conditions. This list reflects the diverse elements
individuals value and respond to within the workplace, highlighting the
multifaceted nature of incentives in shaping employee engagement and
performance.
Monetary incentives constitute external factors that wield influence over
motivation. Diverse forms of monetary incentives exist, with several
prominent types outlined below, accompanied by succinct explanations:
i. Salary or Wages: This stands as one of the most time-honoured and
paramount motivational factors in human history. It encompasses monetary
compensation received at the conclusion of a stipulated work period,
typically bi-weekly or monthly. Notably, salary and wages should be both
reasonably fixed and punctually disbursed (Resca & Munandar, 2022).
ii. Bonus: A bonus encompasses an additional payment beyond the regular
salary. Its purpose lies in incentivizing employees who achieve their
sales targets or teams that successfully complete projects within
stipulated timelines or exceed production benchmarks. Companies might
also grant year-end bonuses or long-service bonuses as tokens of
recognition for loyalty. It is crucial to underscore that bonuses are
intrinsically linked to organizational profitability and productivity
(Sorn, Fienena, Ali, Rafay, & Fu, 2023).
iii. Pay Raise: A pay raise signifies an augmentation of an employee's
salary. Such increments are extended to employees who have either
demonstrated outstanding performance over a duration or have offered
long-standing service to the organization. Furthermore, pay raises are
granted to individuals who have been promoted to higher roles within the
company (Coron, 2020).
iv. Profit Sharing: This represents an admirable means of rewarding staff
members. It entails the distribution of a portion of the company's
profits among employees, with the allocation contingent upon position
and years of service within the organization. Profit sharing cultivates
a sense of belonging among employees (Cheadle, 1989).
v. Stock Option: Under this arrangement, employees receive company shares
under preferential terms, culminating in financial gains for the
employee (Bergman & Jenter, 2007).
vi. Allowances: Allowances encompass varied financial incentives extended to
employees based on merit and requisites. Illustrative examples include
Traveling Allowance, House Rent Allowance, Training Allowance, and
Education Allowance for employees' children.
vii. Retirement Benefits: This involves monthly contributions from both
employers and employees, constituting a percentage of the employee's
salary. Managed by a dedicated fund manager, this sum is set aside and
accessible to the employee upon retirement from the company. In everyday
parlance, this is commonly referred to as a pension (Hansen, 2010).
Advantages of Monetary Incentives
Monetary incentives offer a range of advantages that significantly impact
employee motivation and overall organizational performance. In the context of
this study, we will delve into ten distinct advantages of monetary
incentives. One of the primary advantages of monetary incentives lies in
their simplicity and straightforwardness. Implementing monetary incentive
schemes provides a clear and uncomplicated approach to reward employees who
consistently exhibit high levels of productivity (Read, 2005). Such schemes
are not only effective in acknowledging hardworking employees but also serve
as a direct means of influencing desired employee behaviours. Unlike certain
incentive methods that demand personalized approaches, monetary incentives
require no individual customization. The uniform nature of compensation
ensures that each employee is adequately rewarded for their contributions,
making it a convenient avenue for organizations to express appreciation and
incentivize performance (Atmaja, Zaroni, & Yusuf, 2023; Hackethal, Kirchler,
Laudenbach, Razen, & Weber, 2023).
Nearly every employee aspires to be acknowledged and rewarded for their
exceptional performance. Employing monetary incentives elevates their
productivity levels and provides an effortless mechanism to offer extra
compensation. This, in turn, enhances employee morale, encouraging them to
maintain high levels of dedication and effort (de Walque et al., 2022).
Monetary incentive programs cultivate an environment where employees feel
their efforts are recognized and appropriately compensated. This dynamic
fosters a sense of assurance among employees that their achievements will be
rewarded, motivating them to devise innovative approaches to accomplish
targets and enhance overall performance. Consequently, the organization
benefits from a more positive and motivated workforce (Pancasila, Haryono, &
Sulistyo, 2020).
Monetary incentives gratify employees and significantly impact their
productivity levels (Mdhlalose, 2022). Given that financial incentives drive
many employees, the prospect of earning such rewards propels them to
intensify their efforts, thereby augmenting their overall productivity.
Monetary incentives serve as a just and impartial tool for evaluating
employee performance. Those employees who consistently deliver quality work
within stipulated timeframes are often the ones to achieve the organization's
objectives. Utilizing monetary incentives as rewards provides a fair
assessment of performance, enabling the recognition of diligent employees
based on their accomplishments. Monetary incentives offer employees an
element of control over their earnings (B. J. Ali & Anwar, 2021). This
autonomy empowers employees with the belief that their hard work can directly
translate into increased income. The prospect of enhanced financial reward
becomes a driving force that propels employees to amplify their work efforts,
leading to improved outcomes. They are an excellent means to reward high-
performing employees. Often, organizations have multiple employees who
consistently contribute at a commendable level. In such instances, monetary
rewards can be extended as a direct acknowledgement of their exceptional
efforts, thereby motivating them to sustain their high level of performance.
Promotions are not always frequent, creating a dilemma for management when
dealing with employees who consistently excel before the scheduled promotion
cycle. In these scenarios, monetary incentives present an immediate and
practical solution. As these incentives deliver immediate gratification, they
can be bestowed upon employees who warrant recognition without necessitating
a promotion (Asaari, Desa, & Subramaniam, 2019).
Monetary incentive programs prove to be advantageous not only for rewarding
existing employees but also for attracting new talent. Highlighting an
organization's incentive plans during recruitment becomes an effective
strategy to entice skilled candidates. The prospect of earning monetary
rewards can serve as a persuasive factor for potential recruits, fostering a
more competitive recruitment process. Incorporating these advantages into the
study's framework illuminates the multifaceted impact of monetary incentives
on employee engagement, motivation, and organizational success (Acheampong,
2021).
Structuring Monetary Incentive
The strategic dimension of this study underscores the pivotal role of
monetary incentives within organizational dynamics. The foremost objective
behind any monetary incentive facilitated by management is to drive specific
outcomes that culminate in enhanced profitability and heightened productivity
for the organization. The configuration of the monetary incentive scheme
holds sway over its effectiveness on employees and its ensuing advantages for
management. Designing the scheme demands a strategic approach that resonates
with employees, engendering a sense of anticipation and elevating
productivity, thereby aligning with the desired organizational objectives.
Examples elucidate the versatility of such structuring.
Industry standards can serve as a foundational reference when structuring the
monetary incentive scheme. For instance, in sales programs, incentives often
manifest as commissions or bonuses contingent on sales achievements. These
may take the form of per-sale rewards or cumulative aggregates over a
specified period. A team-oriented approach might involve setting collective
goals and rewarding the team upon successful attainment. Consider an
illustration where the accounting team sustains an error rate below two per
cent for a month, warranting a reward of N2000 for each team member. Such an
approach nurtures teamwork, fostering an environment where mutual support is
valued—a prime example of a team-based incentive structure.
Furthermore, the scheme could encompass all employees, as exemplified by
year-end bonuses or profit-sharing mechanisms tied to performance
evaluations. Over time, employees come to rely on these bonuses,
incorporating them into their holiday budgets. This integration underscores
the potent influence of such incentives, bolstering employee commitment to
their duties. A meticulously structured payment scheme harmonizes
management's objectives and monetary incentives' purpose, facilitating their
seamless alignment. Organizations can harness their transformative potential
by strategically embedding such incentives to propel productivity, nurture
commitment, and accomplish defined strategic outcomes (Cheese, Thomas, &
Craig, 2007).
Non-Monetary Incentives
Although our study is focused on monetary incentives, other incentives are
given to employees which are not monetized. These incentives are known as
non-monetary incentives. Non-monetary incentives are also effective in
employee motivation and performance (Abdullah & Wan, 2013; Jeffrey, 2004). We
will only list the various types available but will not go into details as it
is not the focus of our study. The major types of non-monetary incentives are
medical incentive schemes ( popularly known as HMO), company transport
schemes, staff quarters, work from home, vacations, free meal vouchers,
children scholarship schemes, loan assistance, career development schemes,
recognition on birthdays, outstanding employee plaques, life insurances
schemes, and free mobile phones.
Employee Motivation
While motivation theories have not been immune to criticism, it is noteworthy
that managers frequently build their pay and reward systems upon these
theoretical foundations. Moreover, these theories underscore the
acknowledgement of individual differences, thereby linking rewards to
performance, contributing to a more personalized approach to motivation
strategies.
Repenning (2002) exploration reveals a significant nexus between innovation
failures and motivational challenges within organizations. He highlights
three pivotal feedback processes—reinforcement, diffusion, and normative
pressure—that wield decisive roles in shaping innovation dynamics. Although
these processes' constituents and interconnections are well-documented in the
literature, their synthesis provides an innovative, streamlined perspective
on the implementation of innovation.
As per Moon (2000), managerial reform has brought forth key concerns
centering on motivation, organizational efficacy, and performance-driven
management. This encompasses areas such as pay-for-performance, performance
measurement, participatory decision-making processes, and adaptable
organizational cultures. The concept of pay-for-performance, for instance,
has been embraced by numerous public agencies as an avenue to invigorate
motivation and elevate organizational performance within the public sector,
particularly under the Performance Management and Recognition System (PMRS).
A core premise underpinning pay-for-performance is its direct correlation
between performance and financial rewards, with the intent of bolstering
public employees' organizational commitment, fostering enhanced effectiveness
and job satisfaction.

Scholars across diverse disciplines exhibit profound interest in human

motivation and organizational commitment. Motivation constitutes a focal
point of research attention within public administration studies. Triggered
by concerns about dwindling morale and motivation among public employees,
numerous scholars have focused on motivational quandaries, job satisfaction,
and organizational commitment within public institutions. Despite existing
studies exploring the interplay between motivation and organizational
commitment, a plethora of conceptual and methodological uncertainties
persist. For instance, the term "organizational commitment" lacks a singular,
precisely delineated definition. Angle and Perry (1981) consolidate diverse
interpretations of commitment by encapsulating it within a comprehensive
framework based on prior studies. The multifaceted nature of the concept is
evident, encapsulating a willingness to invest energy and loyalty in social
systems, a sense of bound identity, and an emotional attachment to an
organization beyond utilitarian considerations. Variations of commitment,
including organizational identification and involvement, have also emerged.
Nonetheless, despite the nuanced interpretations, organizational commitment
remains more apt for gauging human behaviour within organizations compared to
related metrics like job satisfaction or involvement, as Crewson (1997)
affirms.
Wittmer (1991) study underscores distinctions in values and reward
preferences between public and private sector managers. Monetary incentives
wield greater sway over motivation among private sector managers, while
factors such as promotion, prestige, co-worker camaraderie, and opportunities
for public service exhibit no significant sectoral variance. Falcone (1991)
delves into job satisfaction disparities among public, private, and hybrid
organizations, positing that public entities often exhibit lower job
satisfaction levels. Nagin, Rebitzer, Sanders, and Taylor (2002) insights
delve into economic incentive models, which revolve around the notion that
employees, as "rational cheaters," gauge their actions' consequences and
shirk if perceived benefits outweigh the costs. Organizations counter this
behaviour through monitoring and incentive pay strategies, rendering shirking
unprofitable. This perspective, prevalent in economics, is met with
skepticism by human resource practitioners and other social science
disciplines engaged in employment relationship studies. In addressing
shirking tendencies, economists propose incentive payment systems. Benabou
and Tirole (2003) advocate that the rational cheater model's validity is
empirically verifiable, albeit challenging. If rational cheating holds,
reduced monitoring should yield heightened shirking, particularly among
employees for whom the employment relationship's value is lower. However,
empirical assessment of this model encounters obstacles, including rational
cheaters' penchant for engaging in hard-to-detect shirking behaviour and
disentangling monitoring effects from other unobserved factors within the
firm's human resource system.
In conclusion, the synthesis of these theories and insights highlights the
intricate tapestry of motivation within organizational contexts. The
interplay between theory and practical application underscores the complex
nature of employee motivation and its vital role in shaping organizational
outcomes.

The Link between Monetary Incentives and Employee Motivation

Citing Kossek and Van Dyne (2008), M. Ali, Kulik, and Metz (2011) assert that
flexible work programmes have been established to have a positive
relationship with motivation, job satisfaction, work schedule satisfaction,
and productivity. Also, higher levels of job satisfaction with employee work
schedules and duties can assist ingenuity and innovation and enhance problem-
solving by managers in the organization. The following incentive and
motivation programmes have a link with motivation theory.
a. Employee involvement programs: These include participative management,
representative participation, quality circle, and employee stock ownership
plans. The employee involvement program is consistent with Maslow's
 higher-order need, McGregor's Theory Y, and Herzberg's Intrinsic factors.
It is a participative process that uses the entire capacity of employees
and is designed to encourage increased commitment to the organization's
success. The underlying logic is that involving workers in decisions that
will affect them and increasing their autonomy and control over their work
lives will make employees
more motivated, committed to the organization, productive, and satisfied
with their jobs (McGregor, 1960).
b. Variable pay program: The forms of variable pay programs include wage
incentives, profit sharing, bonuses, piece-rate plans, and gain sharing.
These programs make it possible for a person to be paid not only for time
on the job or seniority but a portion of an employee's pay is also based
on some individual or organizational measure of performance, or both. The
programs reduce pay expenses when performance declines. The lower-order
needs of the individual will be induced to higher performance in order to
receive higher wages (Kuhn & Yockey, 2003; Milkovich, Newman, & Milkovich,
2014).
c. Skill-based Pay Plans: These set pay levels on the basis of how many
skills employees have or how many jobs they can do rather than having an
individual's job title define their pay category. Skill-based pay plans
are consistent with Maslow hierarchy of need theory because, among
employees whose lower-order needs are substantially satisfied, the
opportunity to experience growth can be a motivator (Jerome, 2013).
Theories of motivation are not useless as many people think. Rather, managers
and organizations use them to build practical incentive programs. They have
been used to introduce a number of programs designed to increase employees'
motivation, productivity, and satisfaction.
Employees Performance
Huselid (1995) extensive research encompassing 968 US companies, conducted
through questionnaires, unveils a compelling linkage between employee
motivation and performance outcomes. Complementing this, Arthur (1994) study
delving into labour efficiency underscores that enterprises adopting high-
commitment strategies significantly manifest elevated performance levels.
This convergence of findings substantiates the assertion that employee
performance constitutes a pivotal determinant of overall productivity. Given
its direct relevance to managerial concerns, this notion assumes paramount
importance, emphasizing both output quantity and quality per employee.
According to Nishii, Lepak, and Schneider (2008), specific attitudes and
behaviours exhibited by employees play a pivotal role in influencing their
performance levels. Variables such as absenteeism, turnover rates, and job
satisfaction significantly contribute to shaping performance outcomes.
Recognizing the symbiotic relationship between employee performance and
organizational viability, the imperative emerges to gauge and govern
performance to ensure organizational sustenance. Labour productivity emerges
as a crucial metric, denoting output per unit of time worked.
Owing to the pivotal role of human input as a production factor, the
enhancement of employee productivity has perpetually been a focal point. This
emphasis on productivity aligns with the necessity for measurement,
constituting an indispensable facet of the control process. It is pertinent
to acknowledge that productivity materializes as an outcome of performance,
thereby highlighting the interconnectedness of these concepts. Notably,
productivity assessment in certain domains poses challenges; for instance,
quantifying the productivity of knowledge workers proves more intricate than
that of skilled labour. Within the automotive sector, productivity is held in
high esteem, thus prompting the formulation of guiding principles,
regulations, and protocols aimed at optimizing employee performance. This
multifaceted approach encompasses motivation augmentation, refinement of
reward
mechanisms, acknowledgement of exceptional performance, and cultivation of
collaborative abilities among employees. Amidst these strategies, the
question arises—how can employees be most effectively motivated to elevate
their performance?
A consensus prevails that an amalgamation of monetary and non-monetary
incentives stands as a cornerstone for bolstering productivity and
performance. However, the present study accentuates the focal point of
monetary incentives and their profound influence on motivation and
performance within the automobile industry. This research probes the
intricacies of how monetary incentives influence motivation dynamics and
ultimately amplify the performance of employees in the dynamic Auto-Industry
landscape.
Theoretical Framework
Three specific theories were formulated around the 1950s, which though now
heavily criticized, and their validity called into question, are probably
still the best-known explanations for employee motivation.
Two of those theories formulated by the organization behaviorists are
relevant to our study and can be applied by organizations implementing
monetary incentive schemes. These two theories are Maslow Abraham hierarchy
of needs theory (1943, 1948) and Frederick (Herzberg) Motivation-Hygiene
Theory (1959). Notably, there have been many other motivation theories, but
the above theories represent a foundation from which other theories have
grown.
Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs Theory
Maslow hypothesized that five groups of needs are arranged in hierarchical
order within every human being and that as each of these needs becomes
substantially satisfied, the next need becomes dominant. The needs are
(McLeod, 2007);
a) Physiological Needs: These include hunger, sex, shelter, clothing, and
other bodily needs.
b) Safety Needs: These refer mainly to freedom from bodily threats, such as
security and protection from physical and emotional harm,
c) Social Needs: These include the need for affection, a sense of belonging,
acceptance, love and friendship.
d) Esteem Needs: These include internal factors such as self-respect,
autonomy, and achievement and external factors such as status, recognition
and attention.
e) Self-Actualization Needs: These include the drive to become what one can
become, such as growth, achieving one's potential, and self-fulfilment.
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs Theory segregates human needs into two distinct
categories: lower-order and higher-order needs. Within this framework,
physiological and safety needs fall under the realm of lower-order needs,
while social, esteem, and self-actualization needs are classified as higher-
order needs. The differentiation lies in the mode of satisfaction— higher-
order needs are gratified internally, whereas lower-order needs are
predominantly met through external means such as wages, union agreements, and
job tenure.
The appeal of Maslow's needs theory stems from its logical simplicity,
rendering it comprehensible and accessible. Despite its widespread
recognition, its claims remain unsubstantiated by empirical research.
Nonetheless, its acknowledged relevance has catalyzed its pervasive adoption
among practising managers, serving as a guiding framework for incentivizing
and motivating their workforce.
This theory's significance is germane to our study due to its inherent
ability to elucidate the value of employees' roles. It empowers workers to
comprehend how their job roles contribute to their individual journey toward
self-actualization. Armed with this insight, employees garner a sense of
esteem and respect, cultivating a deep-seated motivation to excel in their
roles.
In conclusion, Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs Theory provides a structured
framework for understanding human needs and offers a compelling avenue to
inspire and elevate employee performance. Its intuitive nature has led to its
integration into managerial practices, exemplifying its influence in shaping
employee motivation strategies.
Frederick Herzberg Motivation-Hygiene Theory
This theory posits the presence of two distinct work motivators—extrinsic and
intrinsic factors—with the premise that an individual's relationship with
work is foundational, exerting a profound influence on success or failure.
Within this framework, work attitude emerges as a pivotal determinant of
outcomes. The extrinsic factors, termed hygiene variables, are recognized as
sources of dissatisfaction. These encompass physical work conditions,
interpersonal relationships, company policies, administrative aspects,
supervision, salary, job security, status, and personal life. Dissatisfied
respondents attribute these factors to the moments when they feel
discontented about their roles.
In contrast, intrinsic variables, referred to as motivators or satisfiers,
are identified as potent contributors to job satisfaction. These elements
play a marginal role in engendering dissatisfaction. Motivators encompass
achievement, recognition, the nature of the work itself, responsibility,
advancement, and growth. Herzberg's proposition of the duality of
satisfaction and dissatisfaction asserts that satisfaction is distinct from
its absence, and similarly, dissatisfaction is separate from its absence.
Factors leading to job satisfaction are fundamentally disparate from those
contributing to job dissatisfaction. While the motivation- hygiene theory
gained recognition, it faced scrutiny and skepticism, raising concerns about
its validity and methodological underpinnings.
 International Journal of Advanced Economics, Volume 5, Issue 7, September 2023

This theory's applicability to our study and the workplace is

evident in its prescription for cultivating a contented and
productive workforce. It underscores the imperative of
bolstering both motivator and hygiene factors. To instil
motivation, it is essential to ensure employees feel valued and
supported. Regular feedback, clear growth prospects, and
opportunities for advancement are pivotal. Creating optimal
working conditions and ensuring fair compensation is paramount
to mitigating job dissatisfaction. Cultivating supportive
relationships with team members is equally crucial. It is
important to recognize the diversity of employee motivations,
as one approach might not resonate with all. In alignment with
this, Paul Hebert of Symbolist advocates a personalized
benefits approach, asserting that true engagement arises by
addressing dissatisfaction issues and then focusing on
individuals' aspirations within the organizational context.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Research Design
The descriptive research design was used for this study. The
design was appropriate because the research is a case study
approach, and data were collected for the purpose of
interpreting the phenomena that exist, the altitude that
prevails, and the opinions that the respondents held.
Study Area
The study area of this project is the Lagos metropolitan area,
where the head offices of the companies used as the case study
are located.
The Population of the Study
The population for the study comprised male and female, junior,
Senior, and management staff selected from the three companies
used as a case study. A total of 150 persons were randomly
selected.
Sampling Procedures and Sample Size Determination
Simple random sampling was used to select 150 persons from the
population in the three companies used as the case study, which
means 50 people from each company. The sampling frame was
designed to mark from 01-50 for each company. And then, using
the statistical table of random members, the desired sample
size of 120 was selected.
Source of Data and Data Collection Method
The data used for this study are primary sources from the staff
of the three companies (Elizade Limited, Coscharis Plc. and
Stallion Plc.) through the use of a questionnaire as a data
collection method. The questionnaires were distributed to a
sample population from each company understudy and were
Ihemereze, Eyo-Udo, Egbokhaebho, Daraojimba, Ikwue, & Nwankwo, P.No. 162-186 Page 175
Sex Frequency Percentage
Male 87 Internationa 72.5%
l Journal of
Female 33 Advanced 27.5%
Total 120 Economics, 100%
the
Age Bracket questionnaire.
LessVolume30 5, but 40 but lessre-test
Test, 50 and method
No was used to test the
TOTAL
Issue
than 30 less
reliability of than
7, the than 50
instrument;
above data collected
response on were subject to
September
40 Age
co-efficient correlation test.
Frequency 18 202342 36 15 9 120
Percentage DataAnalysis
15% Technique
35% 30% 12.5% 7.5% 100%
Data collected through the questionnaire was tabulated,
analyzed and subjected to statistical tools. A simple
percentage was used to present the demographic data.
Correlation statistics were computed to test the four
hypotheses of the study. The p-value was compared with the 5%
or 1% level of significance to accept or reject the null
hypothesis (HO).
DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS, AND INTERPRETATION
Distribution of Respondents
This study aimed to assess the influence of monetary incentives
on the performance of workers within the Nigerian context,
specifically focusing on the Automobile Industry. The data
presented in the following tables were gathered through the
distribution of questionnaires to obtain insights into this
phenomenon.
A total of 150 feedback forms (questionnaires) were
disseminated among the participants, resulting in 120 completed
forms returned for analysis. The subsequent tables illustrate
the distribution of respondents based on factors such as
Gender, Age, Educational Background, Years of Work Experience,
and Employment Status within the company (Tables 1-5). To
analyze the collected data, descriptive statistics involving
frequencies and simple percentages were employed, offering
valuable insights into the perceptions and experiences of the
participants. Distributi
on of
Responde
nts based
on
Gender
Table 2
Distribution
of
Respondents
based on Age

Table 2 shows the educational level of respondents. It shows

that 44.2% of respondents have bachelor's degrees. This implies
that the majority of workers in the automobile industry have a
bachelor's degree. We can conclude that the automobile industry

Ihemereze, Eyo-Udo, Egbokhaebho, Daraojimba, Ikwue, & Nwankwo, P.No. 162-186 Page 176
Educational Below BSc Bachelor's Master’s Professional Others TOTAL
Qualification Degree
or International Degree Qualification
Equivalent
Journal of
Frequency 29 Advanced 53 24 14 - 120
Economics,
24.2%
Percentage educated 44.2%Table20%
11.6% - experience shows
100%that 80.8% of
staff.
Volume 5
on work
5, Issue
Status Frequency Percentage
7, September
the Nigerian Automobile industry has over two years of work
2023
experience.45We shall look at the 37.5%
Junior Employee various questions as presented
in the feedback form and analyze them according to the several
Senior Employee 45 37.5%
sub-headings (Salary, Bonus, Pay-Raise, Profit Sharing and
Manager Distribution
Retirement of 30
Benefits) 25%
Respondents
Total based on 120 100%
Educational
Below 2 years 23 19.2%
Qualification
2 years and above 97 80.8%

Total 120 100%

Table 4
Salary SA A U D SD
Distribution of
Salary and wages in the automobile industry does Frq 30 36
1 Respondents 20 12 22
not reflect standard set by salaries and
based on
wages commission. 16.7% 10.0% 25.0% 18.3% 30.0%
Company Status %
My salary in my company is not in tandem with Frq 39 32 28 7 14
2
what my colleagues are receiving in % 32.5% 26.7% 23.3% 5.8% 11.7%

Table 5
Distribution of Respondents based on Work
Experience
Years of Experience Frequency Percentage

(i) Salary
Table 6 on Salary indicated that 30 % of our respondents
strongly agree that the salary and wages in the industry do not
reflect the standard set by the salary and wages commission,
and 43.3% also feel that their salaries should be reviewed
every 2-3 years. The analysis shows that most of the
respondents are not satisfied with the salary structure of the
Sal
automobile industry, which may negatively impact their
ary
Fee
dba
ck
For
m

Ihemereze, Eyo-Udo, Egbokhaebho, Daraojimba, Ikwue, & Nwankwo, P.No. 162-186 Page 177
 similar industry. ; Frq 52 46 4
3 Salaries in automobileInternational
industry need to beof Advanced
Journal 43.3%
% Economics, 38.3% 3.4%
reviewed every 2-3 years
Volume 5, Issue 7, September 2023 12 6
TOTAL 10% 5%

(ii) Bonus
Table 7 on Bonus Payment shows that Bonus has high degree of influence on the performance of
employees in the Automobile Industry, 60% strongly agree that Bonus payment is a key motivating
factor towards performance.

Table 7
Bonus Feedback Form
Bonus SA A U D SD

1 Payment of performance bonus should be Frq 69 45 - -

6
part of company policy and mode of
operation. % 57.5% 37.5% 5% - -

2 Bonus payment is a motivating factor for me Frq 72 41 5 2 -

to work hard and double my performance % 60% 34.2% 4.2% 1.6% -
3 Bonus payment should come as at when due. Frq 46 52 18 4 -
Delay or non-payment demoralizes my performance. % 38.3% 43.3% 15% 3.4%
TOTAL

Pay Rise SA A U D SD

Increase in salary would improve my Frq 75 43 - -

1 2
performance.
% 62.5% 35.8% 1.7% - -
(iii) Pay Rise
Table
2 Pay Rise gives me8a high
shows
level ofthat a payFrqrise75 is a strong
satisfaction 40 4motivation
1 for
-
and fulfilment. % 62.5% 33.3%
employee performance. Over 60% of the staff strongly agreed 3.4% 1.6% -
3 Pay Rise is a strong - - -
that paymotivating
rise factor
is afor key
one factor.
Frq 75 45
to work hard % 62.5% 37.5% - - -
TOTAL
P
Table 8
a
y

R
i
s
e

F
e
e
d
b
a
(iv) Profit Sharing
c
Table
k 9 shows that more of our respondent (39.2%) does not care
much about profit sharing as it does not determine their
motivation
F to work.
o
Ihemereze,
r Eyo-Udo, Egbokhaebho, Daraojimba, Ikwue, & Nwankwo, P.No. 162-186 Page 178
m
 Profit Sharing SA A U D SD
Inter
natio
1
Openness of management nal on profit sharing boost Frq 60
43
2
5
10
stakeholders confidenceJourin the
companyTab nal % 50% 35.8% 1.7% 4.2% 8.3%
le
P9 of
Adva
2 Profit rsharing is a strong
ncedmotivating factor Frq 13 13 4 47 43
o in the Automobile
for staff Econ industry % 10.8% 10.8% 3.4% 39.2% 35.8%
f omic
3 As an employee I benefit from my company Frq 12 18 8 37 45
i
profit sharing s, % 10% 15% 6.7% 30.8% 37.5%
Volu
TOTAL t me
(v) -
Retirement Benefit
5,
Issue
Table 10sshows the impact 7, of retirement on workers' motivation. The employees strongly agreed
h
that the company policies should include good retirement benefits.
Sept
a embe
Table 10 r r
Retirementi Benefit Feedback2023 Form
Retirement Benefit SA A U D SD
n
g
1 Automobile
F companies have the best Frq 30 13 27 24
retirement benefits. 26
e
e % 21.7% 25% 10.8% 22.5% 20%
d
2 The retirement benefit of my company gives Frq 31 33 17 20 19
b
me aa high level of Job Satisfaction % 25.8% 27.5% 14.2% 16.7% 15.8%
3 Good retirement benefits should be included Frq 57 34 4 15 10
c
in company policies % 47.5% 28.3% 3.4% 12.5% 8.3%
k
TOTAL
F
o
r
m

Data Analysis and Interpretation

We shall be looking at the five factors (Salary, Bonus, Pay
Rise, Profit Sharing and Retirement Benefit) from our
questionnaire to test for general acceptance of our study using
the Chi-square test. First let us develop a contingency table
from the respondent answers gotten.
To achieve this, we shall summarise our respondent answers into
only two answers (Agree and Disagree)
Note: Agree = SA +A; Disagree = SD + D
Table 11 shows the Observed figures from our study, but to
calculate the Chi-square, we need to get the Expected figures

Ihemereze, Eyo-Udo, Egbokhaebho, Daraojimba, Ikwue, & Nwankwo, P.No. 162-186 Page 179
Factor Agree Disagree Total
International Journal
Salary of Advanced a 89 b 290 c
201
Economics, Volume
5, Issue 7, September
Bonus 325Table 11 d 6 e 331 f
2023
Observed Figures
Pay Rise 353 g 1 h 354 i
from our Study
Profit Sharing 159 j 187 k 346 l

Retirement Benefit 211 m 115 n 326 o

Total 1249 398 1647

Factor Agree Disagree Total

Salary 219.9 70.1 290

Bonus 251.0 80.0 331

Pay Rise Applying 268.5 the formula85.5 in Equation

354 1 to calculate the Expected of
both agreed and disagreed. Expected of both agreed and disagreed =
(a + b Xa + d^+ 9 + J + m) (1)
Profit Sharing 262.4 83.6 346
Where N is the sum total, the expected contingency table is shown
in Table 247.2
12. 78.8 326
Retirement Table 12
Expected
Benefit
Contingency

Total 1249 398 1647

Applying the Chi-square formula in Equation 2.

(0
C h i — s qu ar e = £ (2)

Where O = Observed and E= Expected

The Chi- square =397.6, while the square root of 397.6 = 19.9
Degree of freedom = (r-1) (c-1) (3)
DF = (5-1) (2 - 1)
DF = (4) (1)

Ihemereze, Eyo-Udo, Egbokhaebho, Daraojimba, Ikwue, & Nwankwo, P.No. 162-186 Page 180
 International Journal of Advanced Economics, Volume 5, Issue 7, September 2023

DF = 4
The probability = 0.005
Since the Chi-square value is 397.6 and the degree of freedom
is 4, when this is entered into the chi-square distribution
table with 4 degrees of freedom and reading along the row we
find that at 0.005 probability level, the chi-square value will
be reading 14.86 (or 3.85 which is the square root.) which is
less than the calculated chi-square value of 397.6 (or 19.9
which is the square root) therefore we reject all the null
hypothesis "Ho."
Test For Hypothesis / Discussion on
Findings The hypothesis for the study is:
HO= Null Hypothesis H1=
Alternate Hypothesis
The HO= Null Hypothesis is further broken down into the following
according to test variables:
HO1: Cash Bonus (Sales Commissions) do not have any effect on
employee performance in the Nigerian Automobile Industry
HO2: Retirement Benefits do not lead to Job satisfaction in
the Nigerian Automobile Industry. HO3: Pay rise is not
effective on worker's performance in the Nigerian Automobile
Industry. HO4: Profit sharing is not relevant to workers'
performance in the Nigerian Automobile industry.
However, H1= Alternate Hypothesis, shows that the variables
( Salary, Bonus, Pay Rise, Profit Sharing and Retirement
Benefits) significantly impact worker's performance in the
Nigerian Automobile Industry.
The two hypotheses were examined employing the chi-square
contingency table method. The questionnaire, encompassing
questions related to the Five Factors of monetary incentives,
delved into key aspects such as salary, bonus, pay rise, profit
sharing, and retirement benefits. These questions underwent
scrutiny via the chi-square formula/analysis. The computed chi-
square results established a correlation between the variables
or factors of monetary incentives and the performance of
workers within the Nigerian Automobile Industry. This deduction
arises from the observation that the calculated chi-square
value surpasses the critical value in the chi-distribution
table, considering a degree of freedom of 4—consequently, all
the Null hypotheses "Ho" were refuted.
Thus, the outcomes of the chi-square analysis corroborate the
Alternate Hypothesis, indicating that Monetary Incentives
(Salary, Bonus, Pay Rise, Profit Sharing, and Retirement
Benefits) significantly impact workers' performance in the
Nigerian Automobile Industry.

Ihemereze, Eyo-Udo, Egbokhaebho, Daraojimba, Ikwue, & Nwankwo, P.No. 162-186 Page 181
 International Journal of Advanced Economics, Volume 5, Issue 7, September 2023

performance and job satisfaction. We had excellent responses

from workers in these sections; the percentage was between 60%
- 75%. Workers in the Nigerian Automobile Industry see these
two factors as a key determinant of their performance.
Our finding also revealed that Profit Sharing is not a common
practice within the industry, and in instances where it was
carried out, Workers complained of a lack of transparency.
Thus, they demand that transparency and openness be employed in
this regard, which will further motivate the players in the
industry. Our study further revealed that Retirement Benefits
within the Automobile Industry are not encouraging to the staff
and demand that the key players in the Automobile Industry
should improve upon such an important factor. In summary, our
finding supports our alternate hypothesis, which states that
monetary incentives significantly impact workers' performance
within the Nigerian Automobile Industry. Conclusion
The primary objective of our study was to comprehensively
investigate the "Effect of Monetary Incentives on Workers Performance," using
the Nigeria Automobile Industry as a pertinent case study.
Drawing upon the insights garnered from our extensive survey,
we are pleased to present the following well-grounded
conclusions:
1. Our investigation reveals that individuals within the
Nigerian workforce possess a comprehensive grasp of the
diverse elements and factors comprising monetary incentives.
These individuals also keenly understand how these pivotal
factors have intricately shaped and influenced their
workplace performance.
2. Among the various incentive elements, our findings
underscore the profound impact of incentives such as bonuses
and Pay-Rise on workers' performance. These incentives
emerge as the most influential factors driving enhanced work
performance within the studied context.
3. The research further highlights the critical significance of
consistent and timely salary reviews. A consistent review
process is imperative for sustaining high workforce
motivation and performance levels. The need for management
to ensure periodic and timely salary adjustments becomes
apparent.
4. Our study also reveals a noteworthy insight regarding Profit
Sharing incentives. Within the Nigeria Automobile Industry,
the practice of Profit Sharing is not a prevailing norm.
Additionally, workers express reservations concerning the
transparency of the process, emphasizing the need for

Ihemereze, Eyo-Udo, Egbokhaebho, Daraojimba, Ikwue, & Nwankwo, P.No. 162-186 Page 182
 International Journal of Advanced Economics, Volume 5, Issue 7, September 2023

Recommendations
Based on the comprehensive conclusions drawn from this study,
we offer the following strategic recommendations to optimize
the relationship between monetary incentives and workers'
performance within the Nigerian Automobile Industry. It is
recommended that organizations proactively communicate to their
employees that exemplary performance will be duly rewarded
through monetary incentives. This entails establishing a clear
link between reward and performance, with bonus and pay-raise
structures being predicated on individual or team
accomplishments. Transparency in outlining these performance-
based incentive mechanisms can significantly elevate employee
motivation.
Management across diverse companies within the Automobile
Industry should prioritize consistent and timely reviews of
workers' salaries. Ensuring that remuneration reflects
prevailing standards and expectations, as relevant regulatory
bodies advocate, can cultivate a sense of equity and value
among employees. Equally crucial is the punctual disbursement
of bonus payments, as this punctuality reinforces the
connection between performance and reward, sustaining high
levels of employee motivation. To invigorate employee
performance, organizations are encouraged to adopt pay rise
policies that are intrinsically tied to enhanced performance.
Regular review and adjustment of salaries to reflect employees'
dedication and competence can serve as a potent motivational
tool, amplifying commitment and efforts. Management should
proactively reassess the retirement benefit structure within
the Automobile Industry. The aim is to bolster job satisfaction
among employees, thus fostering a sense of security and well-
being. By enhancing retirement benefits, organizations can
create a more conducive work environment that nurtures
dedication and engenders superior performance. A paramount
recommendation is the cultivation of transparency across all
facets of monetary incentive processes. Management's commitment
to transparent practices ensures that incentive-related
operations are executed fairly and without ambiguity. This
transparency reinforces employees' trust in management and
amplifies their motivation to perform optimally.

References
Abdullah, A. A., & Wan, H. L. (2013). Relationships of non-
monetary incentives, job satisfaction and employee job
performance. International Review of Management and Business Research,
Ihemereze, Eyo-Udo, Egbokhaebho, Daraojimba, Ikwue, & Nwankwo, P.No. 162-186 Page 183
 International Journal of Advanced Economics, Volume 5, Issue 7, September 2023

Motivation and its Influence Job Satisfaction. International Journal of

Engineering, Business and Management, 5(2), 21-30.
Ali, M., Kulik, C. T., & Metz, I. (2011). The gender diversity-
performance relationship in services and manufacturing
organizations. The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
22(07), 1464-1485.
Angle, H. L., & Perry, J. L. (1981). An empirical assessment of
organizational commitment and organizational
effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1-14.
Arthur, J. B. (1994). Effects of human resource systems on
manufacturing performance and turnover. Academy of Management
Journal, 37(3), 670-687.
Asaari, M., Desa, N. M., & Subramaniam, L. (2019). Influence of
salary, promotion, and recognition toward work motivation
among government trade agency employees. International Journal of
Business and Management, 14(4), 48-59.
Atmaja, D. S., Zaroni, A. N., & Yusuf, M. (2023). Actualization
of performance management models for the development of
human resources quality, economic potential, and financial
governance policy in Indonesia Ministry Of Education.
Multicultural Education, 9(01), 1-15.
Ballentine, A., McKenzie, N., Wysocki, A., Kepner, K.,
Farnsworth, D., & Clark, J. L. (2003). The role of
monetary and non-monetary incentives in the workplace as
influenced by career stage. Department of Food and Resource
Economics, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural
Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, Fl.
Benabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2003). Intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation. The Review of Economic Studies, 70(3), 489-520.
Bergman, N. K., & Jenter, D. (2007). Employee sentiment and
stock option compensation. Journal of Financial Economics, 84(3),
667-712.
Calvin, O. Y (2017). The impact of remuneration on employees'
performance (a study of Abdul Gusau Polytechnic, Talata-
Mafara and state college of education Maru, Zamfara
State). Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review (Nigerian chapter),
4(2), 34-43.
Cheadle, A. (1989). Explaining patterns of profit-sharing
activity. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 28(3),
387-400.
Cheese, P., Thomas, R. J., & Craig, E. (2007). The talent powered
organization: Strategies for globalization, talent
management and high performance: Kogan Page Publishers.
Coron, C. (2020). Equal pay index for men and women: the
performative power of quantification conventions. Gender,

Ihemereze, Eyo-Udo, Egbokhaebho, Daraojimba, Ikwue, & Nwankwo, P.No. 162-186 Page 184
 International Journal of Advanced Economics, Volume 5, Issue 7, September 2023

Public Productivity & Management Review, 385-396.

Groysberg, B., Abbott, S., Marino, M. R., & Aksoy, M. (2021).
Compensation packages that actually drive performance.
Harvard Business Review, 99(1), 102-111.
Hackethal, A., Kirchler, M., Laudenbach, C., Razen, M., &
Weber, A. (2023). On the role of monetary incentives in
risk preference elicitation experiments. Journal of Risk and
Uncertainty, 66(2), 189-213.
Hansen, J. S. (2010). An introduction to teacher retirement
benefits. Education Finance and Policy, 5(4), 402-437.
Herzberg, F. (2005). Motivation-hygiene theory. Organizational behavior
one: Essential theories of motivation and leadership, eds
JB Miner, ME Sharpe Inc, New York, 2(4), 61-74.
Huffmire, D. W., & Holmes, J. D. (2006). Handbook of effective
management: How to manage or supervise strategically. (No
Title).
Huselid, M. A. (1995). The impact of human resource management
practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate
financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 635-
672.
Jeffrey, S. (2004). The benefits of tangible non-monetary
incentives. University Of Chicago, Graduate School Of Business, 5.
Jerome, N. (2013). Application of the Maslow's hierarchy of
need theory; impacts and implications on organizational
culture, human resource and employee's performance.
International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 2(3), 39-45.
Kossek, E. E., & Van Dyne, L. (2008). Face-time matters: A
cross-level model of how work- life flexibility influences
work performance of individuals and groups. In Handbook of
work-family integration (pp. 305-330): Elsevier.
Kreilkamp, N., Matanovic, S., Schmidt, M., & Wohrmann, A.
(2022). How executive incentive design affects risk-
taking: a literature review. Review of Managerial Science, 1-26.
Kuhn, K. M., & Yockey, M. D. (2003). Variable pay as a risky
choice: Determinants of the relative attractiveness of
incentive plans. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
90(2), 323-341.
McGregor, D. (1960). Theory X and theory Y. Organization Theory,
358(374), 5.
McLeod, S. (2007). Maslow's hierarchy of needs. Simply Psychology, 7(1-
18).
Mdhlalose, D. (2022). The innovative employee: the assessment
of reward equity on the predisposition to make creative
contributions through literature review. Journal of Human
Resource and Sustainability Studies, 70(3), 433-448.

Ihemereze, Eyo-Udo, Egbokhaebho, Daraojimba, Ikwue, & Nwankwo, P.No. 162-186 Page 185
 International Journal of Advanced Economics, Volume 5, Issue 7, September 2023

Nagin, D. S., Rebitzer, J. B., Sanders, S., & Taylor, L. J.

(2002). Monitoring, motivation, and management: The
determinants of opportunistic behavior in a field
experiment. American Economic Review, 92(4), 850-873.
Nishii, L. H., Lepak, D. P., & Schneider, B. (2008). Employee
attributions of the "why" of HR practices: Their effects
on employee attitudes and behaviors, and customer
satisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 61(3), 503-545.
Oloko, O. (1977). Incentives and reward for effort. Management in
Nigeria, 15(5), 18-24.
Pancasila, I., Haryono, S., & Sulistyo, B. A. (2020). Effects
of work motivation and leadership toward work satisfaction
and employee performance: Evidence from Indonesia. The
Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 7(6), 387-397.
Pfeiffer, T., & Velthuis, L. (2009). Incentive system design
based on accrual accounting: A summary and analysis.
Journal of Management Accounting Research, 21(1), 19-53.
Read, D. (2005). Monetary incentives, what are they good for?
Journal of Economic Methodology, 12(2), 265-276.
Repenning, N. P. (2002). A simulation-based approach to
understanding the dynamics of innovation implementation.
Organization Science, 13(2), 109-127.
Resca, Y, & Munandar, A. (2022). Analysis of implementation:
the payroll accounting system and employee wages. Fair Value:
Jurnal Ilmiah Akuntansi dan Keuangan, 4(10), 4564-4570.
Sorn, M. K., Fienena, A. R., Ali, Y, Rafay, M., & Fu, G.
(2023). The Effectiveness of Compensation in Maintaining
Employee Retention. Open Access Library Journal, 10(7), 1-14.

Conflict of Interest Statement

No conflict of interest has been declared by the authors.

Ihemereze, Eyo-Udo, Egbokhaebho, Daraojimba, Ikwue, & Nwankwo, P.No. 162-186 Page 186