International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849

Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

WORKPLACE DISCRIMINATION AND EMPLOYEE

PERFORMANCE IN NIGERIAN FOOD AND BEVERAGE SECTOR

Osah Dennis Isaiah, Dr. Ukoha Ojiabo and Dr. (Mrs) A. D. Alagah
Department of Management,
Faculty of Management Sciences,
University of Port Harcourt, Nigeria

ABSTRACT
This research work was undertaken to empirically test the relationship which exists between
workplace discrimination and employee performance in the Nigerian Food and Beverage
sector in Rivers state. It further examines the extent to which discrimination in workplace
correlates with the efficiency of employees. The purposive sampling technique was used in
the selection of five (5) firms which are members of the Manufacturing Association of
Nigeria. A total sample size of one hundred and eighty-six respondents were selected with the
use of the Taro Yamane Formula. Using the Spearman rank order correlation coefficient, it
was found that there is a significant relationship between workplace discrimination and
employee performance. However, Gender discrimination, Religion discrimination and Ethnic
discrimination were negatively correlated with quality of work and employee efficiency.
Also, the variables were significantly moderated by organization culture. Drawing from the
findings, we recommended that managers in the food and beverage firms should properly
manage diversity in organization by organizing seminars for workers in order to enable them
see the benefits of diversity and thereby eliminate discrimination in the workplace. Finally,
Contribution to knowledge and suggestions for further studies were provided.

Keywords: Gender Discrimination, Religion Discrimination, Ethnic Discrimination,

Effectiveness, Employee effectiveness, Goal accomplishment, Workplace
Discrimination

61
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

1.1 Introduction

All organizations are set up to achieve expected goals. These goals can be fully achieved with
the optimal utilization of available resources like men, materials, machines and money. It is
worthy to note that employee, which is a resource for any organization plays an important
role of harnessing all other resources. It is in line with this, that scholars have sought to
understand the ways in which the efficiency of employee‘s performance can be bolstered
overtime due to their germane nature (Olajide, 2014). The role of employees in an
organization cannot be overemphasized, as increased organizational efficiency can be
achieved if there is proper management and equality of the workforce which would
subsequently increase profitability. The fact remains that companies who fully realize the
potential of their workforce, not only benefit from the reduced cost of recruiting new
personnel, but also motivate their own workforce to maximize their potential (Tesfaye, 2010).
Similarly, Channer, Abbassi and Ujan (2011) explained that employee performance
constitutes the life line of any institute and as such there should be an adequacy of training,
development, motivation and maintenance of these employees.

In recent times, as businesses begin to go global and with high intensity of labor mobility,
employees are bound to operate in an organization with diverse workforce in terms of age,
gender, ethnicity, religion etc. hence, it is important that these differences in the work
environment are been managed properly in a way void of discrimination in other that all
employees will be satisfied. Managing diversity is very essential for any organization,
especially in this era of globalization. Managing diversity is required to close the unfair
discrimination and thus enable employees to compete on equal basis. Diversity in the
workplace has overtime cumulated into various forms of discrimination. According to the
Australian Human Rights Commission (2014), workplace discrimination is the treatment of
certain workers in a less favorable manner than another group because of their background or
certain personal characteristics.

Omoh, Owusu and Mendah (2015) noted that workplace discrimination is a phrase that most
practitioners condemn and do not want to hear. It refers to discrimination in hiring,
promoting, job assignment, termination and compensation. Discrimination happens when an
employer treats an employee less favorably than others.

According to Hasan and Ali (2014); and Fatima and Omar (2014), the different dimensions of
workplace discrimination are; gender, discrimination, religion discrimination and ethnic
discrimination. Discrimination in workplace could be direct or indirect. It is direct
discrimination when an employer treats an employee less favorably than someone else. But
indirect discrimination happens when a working conditions or rule disadvantages one group
of people more than another. SEEDA (2006) reported that racial or ethnic discrimination in
the workplace has a huge impact both at individual and organizational levels. Hemphill and
Haines (1997) identified six main types of discrimination which are; disabilities
discrimination, sexual harassment, ethnic discrimination, race discrimination, sexual
orientation discrimination and gender discrimination. Although, most work have been done in

62
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

the developed countries on workplace discrimination and employee performance. These have
however been a dearth of empirical studies on the relationship of workplace discrimination
and employee performance as it relates to the Nigerian environment. It is this gap that has
informed this study. This study therefore tends to fill this gap by investigating into the
relationship between workplace discrimination and employee performance in the food and
beverage firms in Port Harcourt.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

The problems in the work place arising from discrimination are clearly evident to everybody.
The ways to eliminate discrimination in the work place have not yet been fully identified.
Especially in the food and beverage firms in developing nation like Nigeria, there has been
great discrimination activities which appear in the form of hiring only women even in roles
that men could rightly fit, employing based on the tribal card, a situation in which majority of
firms in a particular state possess a strong inclination to employ individual from the same
state rather than more qualified individuals which they liken to trust and security. Stunted
growth of employees in terms of position and pay, as management usually discriminate
towards promotion based on perception and are more likely to put certain set of individual
below their actual pay grade as a result of discrimination largely called ―reasons best known
to them‖ (Alpert, 2011; Omoh et. al., 2015).
Where workplace discrimination is practiced, employees suffer retaliation for opposing them
or for reporting violations to the authorities, this organizational vices is most common in our
part of the world, that is, Africa and most especially Nigeria in particular. Discrimination
results in and reinforces inequalities and could result in poor morale of employee, high
turnover, poor commitment and subsequently result in negative impact on the organizational
performance. The freedom of employee to develop their capabilities and to choose and pursue
their professional and personal aspirations is restricted, skills and competence cannot be
developed, rewards to work are denied and a sense of humiliation, frustration and
powerlessness takes over (Olsen, 2004).

Employee performance grounds of discrimination can be seen when individuals feel they are
mistreated because of their group membership, they often feel alienated and angry, which can
result in negative work-related behaviors. Perceived discrimination is also related to more
extreme work withdrawal behaviors, it is largely identified that discrimination turns the
employees emotionally brittle, simple peace loving employees transform into paranoid and
suspicious, fearful and angry individuals. Elimination of gender discrimination is crucial for
the satisfaction and motivation, commitment and enthusiasm and less stress of the employees
(Channar et. al., 2011).

Another noteworthy factor is ethnic and cultural differences as some individuals harbor unfair
prejudices against people of different colors, cultures, ethnicity or religion than their own.
Also is the existence of gender discrimination which represents one the oldest and most
common diversity issues in the workplace is the "men vs. women" topic (Patterson, 2015).
Employee poor performance result in low productivity, psychological distress, low employee
63
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

involvement, lack of loyalty of employee, low salary of employee, reduced organizational

and goodwill. Low employee performance negatively affects both individual and the entire
organization.

Hence, this research seeks to examine how discrimination in organization relates to employee
performance in the food and beverage firms in Port Harcourt, Rivers state.

1.3 Conceptual frameworks

Workplace Moderating Employee

Discrimination Variable Performance

Gender Quality of Output

Discrimination

Religion Organizational
Discrimination Culture
Employee Efficiency
Ethnic
Discriminations

Source: Adapted from Hasan and Ali (2014); Fatima and Omar (2014);Owolabi, (2012), Ali
and Yunus (2013).

1.4 Aim and Objectives of the study

The main aim of this study is to examine the relationship between Workplace Discrimination
and Employee Performance in Food and Beverage firms in Port Harcourt. The specific
objectives for this study are:

i. To examine the relationship between Gender Discrimination and Quality of Output of

Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt.
ii. To determine the relationship between Religion Discrimination and Quality of Output
of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt.

iii. To access the relationship between Ethnic Discrimination and Quality of Output of
Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt.

iv. To investigate the relationship between Gender Discrimination and Employee

Efficiency of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt.

v. To examine the relationship between Religion Discrimination and Employee

Efficiency of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt.

64
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

vi. To access the relationship between Ethnic Discrimination and Employee Efficiency of
Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt.

vii. To investigate the moderating role of Organizational Culture on the association

between Workplace Discrimination and Employee Performance of Food and
Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt.

1.5 Research Questions

Based on the preceding Research Objective, The following research questions were
formulated:

i. What is the extent of Relationship between Gender Discrimination and Quality of

Output of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt?

ii. What is the extent of Relationship between Religion Discrimination and Quality of
Output of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt?

iii. What is the extent of Relationship between Ethnic Discrimination and Quality of
Output of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt?

iv. What is the extent of Relationship between Gender Discrimination and Employee
Efficiency of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt?

v. What is the extent of Relationship between Religion Discrimination and Employee

Efficiency of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt?

vi. What is the extent of Relationship between Ethnic Discrimination and Employee
Efficiency of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt?

vii. What is the extent of moderation of Organizational Culture on the association

between Workplace Discrimination and Employee Performance of Food and
Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt?

1.6 Research Hypotheses

The proposed research work at hand will be guided by the following hypotheses stated in
their null form (H0:).

Ho1: There exists no significant relationship between Gender Discrimination and Quality of
Output of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt.

Ho2: There is no significant relationship between Religion Discrimination and Quality of

Output of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt.

Ho3: There is no significant relationship between Ethnic Discrimination and Quality of

Output of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt.
Ho4: There is no significant relationship between Gender Discrimination and Employee
Efficiency of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt.

65
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

Ho5: There is no significant relationship between Religion Discrimination and Employee

Efficiency of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt.

Ho6: There is no significant relationship between Ethnic Discrimination and Employee

Efficiency of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt.

Ho7: There is no significant influence of Organizational Culture on the association between

Workplace Discrimination and Employee Performance of Food and Beverage Firms
in Port Harcourt.

2.1 Theoretical Framework

Social Identity Theory

Social identity theory is a useful framework for defining perceived discrimination, but it is
important to recognize that an individual‘s identification with a particular group is not limited
to demography and does not occur in isolation. Additional aspects of group membership and
the environmental context (that is, the organization) must be considered as well. Intergroup
theory (Alderfer, Alderfer, Tucker, and Tucker, 1980) and embedded intergroup theory take
into account these considerations. Intergroup theory suggests that two types of groups exist in
organizations: identity groups and organizational groups. For example, one‘s identity group
may include individuals with similar demographic characteristics, such as race, gender, or
age, whereas one‘s organizational group may include individuals who share similar tasks,
hierarchical status, or function. According to this perspective, individuals are constantly
trying to balance the competing demands and expectations based on membership in their
identity and organizational groups. Intergroup theory, and more specifically embedded
intergroup theory, suggests that it is important to consider a constellation of organizational
relationships, such as individuals and their relationship with their coworkers, their
supervisors, and the organization itself, in assessing the impact of perceived discrimination.
Coleman and Deutsch (2000) present a human resource development model that builds on the
concept of embedded groups and interactional research. He suggests that the impact of
diversity involves interaction between individuals and their environment. This conceptual
model, the Interactional Model Of Cultural Diversity (IMCD), is based on the idea that an
employee‘s group affiliations, such as gender or race, can be analyzed on three levels—
individual, group intergroup, and organizational—which are consistent with the units of
analysis suggested by embedded intergroup theory. Taken together, these factors form the
diversity climate of an organization. A recent study by Barak, Cherin, and Berkman (1998)
successfully used this framework to examine the employees‘ perceptions of diversity at a
large electronics company. The authors suggested that future research should examine
employees‘ perceptions of discrimination and the impact on their organizational commitment
and job satisfaction.

There are several factors creating an environment where women are discriminated even in the
office and gender discrimination emerges right from the time a woman makes her choice of

66
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

work (Bilkis, Habib and Sharmin, 2010). Social identity theory opined that employees within
the organization categorize themselves and others into different groups on the bases of
common, similar or shared characteristics. Bilkis, Habib and Sharmin (2010) opined that
discrimination, especially gender discrimination lies at the imbalance of power in our society.
Perceived discrimination is a personal feeling that he/she is treated because of his/her group
affiliation. Furthermore, when individuals feel they are mistreated because of their group
affiliation, they often feel alienated and angry, which can result in negative work-related
behaviors.

2.2 The concept of workplace discrimination

Workplace discrimination is a phrase many human resource practitioners condemn and do not
want to hear. It refers to discrimination in hiring, promotion, job assignment, termination and
compensation. It must be noted that many jurisdictions prohibit some types of workplace
discrimination, often by forbidding discrimination based on certain traits (Dwomoh &
Owusu, 2012). Employment discrimination (or workplace discrimination) is discrimination in
hiring, promotion, job assignment, termination, and compensation. It includes various types
of harassment (Devah, 2009). Many jurisdictions prohibit some types of employment
discrimination, often by forbidding discrimination based on certain traits ("protected
categories"). In other cases, the law may require discrimination against certain groups
(Devah, 2009). In places where it is illegal, discrimination often takes subtler forms, such as
ethnic discrimination and requirements with disparate impact on certain groups. In addition,
employees sometimes suffer retaliation for opposing workplace discrimination or for
reporting violations to the authorities. "Workplace Discrimination" means unequal treatment
in a formal workplace. Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964 says that no person
employed or seeking employment by a business with more than 15 employees may be
discriminated against due to his or her race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. While
there are federal laws concerning discrimination, most states have enacted laws that prohibit
it. These laws may have different remedies than the federal laws and may, in certain
circumstances be more favorable than the federal laws. There are four major types of
employment discrimination, and other types can usually be dealt with in regard to one of
them.
Discrimination has been with mankind since time immemorial and people have experienced
discrimination of one form or the other. Especially in our part of the world, that is Africa;
Ghana for that matter, our cultures and some religious beliefs have allowed various forms of
workplace discrimination (Dwomoh & Owusu, 2012). Hellen Hemphill and Ray Haines
described four basic areas of discrimination (Hemphill and Haines, 1997, p.2):

* Isolated discrimination: Intentionally harmful actions undertaken by a dominant group

member against members of a subordinate group, without that action being social embedded
in the larger organization or community context;

67
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

* Small group discrimination: Intentionally harmful actions under taken by a few dominant
group members acting in concert against members of subordinate groups, without the
sanction of the larger organization;

* Direct institutional discrimination: Organizationally prescribed actions that, by intention,

have a negative impact upon members of subordinate groups which are routine actions
carried out by large numbers of employees guided by organizational norms and culture.

* Indirect institutional discrimination: Practices that have a negative impact upon members of
a subordinate group, even though the prescribed norms and regulations guiding these actions
were established with no intent to harm subordinate group members. Hellen, Hemphill and
Ray Haines also described six main types of discrimination (Hemphill and Haines, 1997,
pp.17- 27):
 Disabilities Discrimination
 Ethnic Discrimination
 Sexual Harassment
 Race Discrimination
 Sexual Orientation Discrimination
 Gender Discrimination
For the purpose of this study, workplace discrimination has been discussed with the help of
the following dimensions:

2.2.1 Dimensions of Workplace Discrimination

For the purpose of the present study, Workplace Discrimination has been discussed with the
help of following dimensions:

2.2.1.1 Gender Discrimination:

No law has ever attempted to define precisely the term‘ discrimination‘, in the context of
workforce, it can be defined as the giving of an unfair advantage (or disadvantage) to the
members of the particular group in comparison to the members of other group (Channar et al.
2011)

Even though there are regulations that are used to promote equality within the workplace,
discrimination is still rampant. Women still do not measure up to men when it comes to
income, employment rates and occupational range. Women‘s average salary is 72 to 88
percent of men‘s, even when variables such as education, age, position and job tenure are
considered (Wadhwa, 2006). In most countries, the glass ceiling is ever present for women
and the wage differences are significant compared to men. Based on a report by Catalyst in
2005, only ―one in fifty eight woman were CEO‘s in the Fortune 500; an additional nine were
CEO‘s in Fortune 501-1000 companies‖ (Michael, Daniels, and Barry 2007). Women are
also more likely to be stuck in low-paid but more secure positions (i.e. education and
healthcare). Historically the rate of employment for women was lower; however, due to the
late 1800s recession the participation of women in the workforce has surpassed that of men.

68
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

―Discrimination can occur at every stage of employment, from recruitment to education and
remuneration, occupational segregation, and at time of layoffs‖ (Hart, 2007).

The disadvantage usually results in the denial or restriction of employment opportunities, or

discrimination in the terms of benefits of employment. Discrimination is a subtle and
complex phenomenon that may assume two broad forms as highlighted by Akua and Cecilia
(2015):
1. Unequal (Disparate) Treatment: This is an intentional discrimination treatment. For
example, it would include hiring or promoting one person over an equally qualified
person because of the individual‘s race, sex etc. or paying a male more than a female
to perform the same job.
2. Adverse Impact: Reskin (2008) write that it is a consequence of an employment
practice (application of identical standards for every one) that results in a greater
rejection rate for a minority group than it does for the majority group in the
occupation. This concept results from a seemingly neutral, even unintentional
employment practice consequence.

Research has shown that the ways that men and women are treated differently in the
workplace can be nearly imperceptible at the level of the individual and emerge only when
aggregated across individuals (Heilman & Welle, 2005). Crosby (2004), for example,
demonstrated that by and large, women do not acknowledge the ways that gender
discrimination may have affected their own career experiences. They are more likely to
assume personal responsibility for receiving fewer organizational resources than their male
coworkers. These same women, however, believe that gender discrimination exists in the
workplace and affects the resources that other women receive. It has been argued that gender
discrimination is difficult to perceive because it accounts for a small portion of variance in
organizational decision-making (Barret & Morris, 2003).

Gender stereotypes lie at the heart of many of our perceptions of the workplace and the
people that operate within it (Heilman & Welle, 2005). Descriptive and prescriptive
stereotyping exerts significant impact on men‘s and women‘s organizational experiences. The
impact of stereotyping processes links up onto two types of discrimination, formal and
informal (Stangor, 2001). Formal discrimination refers to the biased allocation of
organizational resources such as promotions, pay, and job responsibilities, while informal
discrimination centers on the interactions that occur between employees and the quality of
relationships that they form (Mannix & Dovidio, 2002).

2.2.1.2 Religion Discrimination:

Religion discrimination, the second construct, involves maltreatment as a relation to the
religious background of the employee (Goleman, 1998). While religion discrimination is
more than resisting explosive or problematic behavior, it is putting your momentary needs on
hold, to pursue your larger and more important goals (Garner, 2009) i.e. it is the ability to
regulate distressing effects like anxiety and anger, and to inhibit emotional impulsivity
(Goleman,1995). It covers the ability to regulate emotions in both ourselves and others. For
69
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

example, an emotionally intelligent politician might raise his own anger and use it to deliver a
powerful speech to stimulate righteous anger in others (Amjad, 2009).

2.2.1.3 Ethnic Discrimination:

Ethnic discrimination in the work place occurs when one employee is treated differently
from another due to the fact that he/she belongs to a particular ethnic or having a different
skin color or nationality. It is one of the fastest growing fields of law. While the overall
number of claims has increased, the number of ethnic discrimination claims often keeps up
with general economic conditions and employment layoffs. Zick, Pettigrew and Wagner
(2008) noted that ethnic discrimination directed at immigrants are a wide spread phenomena
across Europe and other parts of the world.

It is normal that when layoffs occur, discrimination claims go up as well, some of which are
legitimate and some of which are not. Gibereubie, Osibanjo, Adeniji and Oludayo (2014)
noted that a recruitment policy devoid of ethnic discrimination enhances employee
performance in an organization. Solving the problem of ethnic discrimination in the work
place involves three things: understanding the problem, educating the public on ethnic
discrimination, and finding ways to address and overcome the issue. There has been growing
scientific interest in examining the perception of racial or ethnic discrimination and its
contribution to productivity. Discrimination has been defined as the exclusion of some groups
from the sharing of power, income and satisfaction (Hall et al., 1998; Lawler and Bae, 1998),
or the unequal treatment of some groups (Ataov, 2002). Discrimination has been often
interpreted in a very broad manner and clearly described as an outcome driven by a wide
range of different, sometimes overlapping, processes (Basu and Eser, 2003). In many
instances within the workplace, these processes operate conterminously to undermine the
value and productivity of specific groups of employees (Olsen, 2004; Joseph Rowntree
Foundation, 2003; Butt and O‘Neil, 2004). Most studies found that discrimination in all its
forms prevents individuals from accessing, or progressing within, the labour market. SEEDA
(2006) reported that racial or ethnic discrimination in the workplace has a huge impact both
at individual and organization levels. It has been estimated that at any one time around
500,000 people are suffering from work related stress at a level that makes them ill (HSE,
2005).

2.3 The Concept of Employee Performance

Employee performance which leads to improved corporate performance if well-handled can
be explained to be a process for establishing a shared workforce understanding about what is
to be achieved at an organization level. It is about aligning the organizational objectives with
the employees' agreed measures, skills, competency requirements, development plans and the
delivery of results. Good organizational performance refers to the employee performance
(Iqbal, Ahmad, Haider, Batool and Ain, 2013).

Research appears to take care of the same core construct: Employee Performance and
performance. Since the beginning of industrialization, the concept of assessing Employee
Performance has been crucial in organization practice and theory. Generally, it is not clear
70
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

what experts mean whenever they make reference to effectiveness and it has led to
ambiguities in interpreting the results of their work. Armstrong (2001) sees performance as
behavior which shows the way in which teams and individual with an organization get work
done. Mooney (2009) opined that performance is not only related to result but it also relates
with activities and behaviors of staff that they used to achieve their growth goals.

The sad thing is, just a few studies have tried to give a definition of employee performance.
The effective management of people in teams can produce greater performance levels and
greater employee performance‖ (Potgieter, 2003). There exist four approaches to employee
performance listed below.
a) Goal Approach: the goal approach is also called rational-goal or goal-attainment
approach; it has its origins in the mechanistic view of the organization. This approach
assumes that organizations are planned logical, goal-seeking entities and they are meant
to accomplish one or more predetermined goals. Goal approach is worried with the output
side and whether or not the organization attains its goals with respect to preferred levels
of output. Goals defined areas in which organization have been or are expecting to be
directing their energy (Gable, 2006). It sees effectiveness with respect to its internal
organizational objectives and performance. Typical goal-attainment factors include profit
and efficiency maximization. The key constraint of this approach pertains to the content
comparability of organizational goals. The dependable identification of comparable and
practically appropriate goals within groups of organizations is thus a serious problem.
What a company declares as its formal goals don‘t always echo the organizations actual
goals. Therefore, organizations formal goals are typically dependent upon its standards of
social desirability. As goals are dynamic, hence they will probably change as time passes,
simply because of the political make-up of an organization. Organizations short-term
goals are usually not the same as their long term goals. More specifically organizations
which are goal mented tend to avoid more negative outcomes (Gable, 2006). The
utilization of goals as a standard for assessing Employee Performance is challenging. The
goal approach presumes consensus on goals. Considering the fact that there are numerous
goals and varied interests inside an organization, consensus, is probably not possible.

b) System Resource Approach: This approach to employee performance was developed in

response to the goal approach. The system resource approach sees an organization as an
open system. The organization obtains inputs, participates in transformation processes,
and generates outputs. This approach emphasizes inputs over output. The systems
resource model defines the organization as a network of interrelated subsystem
(Cunningham, 2001). It sees most organizations as entities which function in order to
survive, at the same time rivaling for scarce and valued resources. It assumes that the
organization consists of interrelated subsystems. If any sub-system functions inefficiently,
it is going to influence the performance of the whole system. The disadvantages of this
approach relate to its measurement of means. An issue with this approach is that a higher
amount of obtained resources is not going to promise effective usage. In addition, it is
tough to define an ideal degree of employee efficiency across distinct organizations.

71
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

c) Internal Process Approach: This approach has been developed in response to a fixed
output view of the goal approach. It looks at the internal activities. Employee
performance is assessed as internal organizational health and effectiveness. According to
internal-process approach, effectiveness is the capability to get better at internal
efficiency, co-ordination, commitment and staff satisfaction. This approach assesses
effort as opposed to the attained effect. The organization may assure its existence and
development by synergetic implementation of efficiency and effectiveness the process
control (Potocan 2006). Some experts have criticized the internal-process approach, like
the system-resource approach, cannot lead to legitimate indicators of employee
performance itself. Rather, it is accepted as an approach for studying its assumed
predictors. Similar to the system-resource approach, the internal-process approach could
possibly be applied only where comparable organizational outcomes can hardly be
assessed accurately. This approach deals more with narrowly with internal mechanism
(Sharma, 2017).

d) Strategic Constituencies Approach: This focuses on the groups that have a stake in the
organization which are directly or indirectly influenced by the company (Sharma 2017).
This approach suggests that an efficient organization is one which fulfills the demands of
those constituencies in its environment from whom it needs support for its survival. It
assesses the effectiveness to satisfy multiple strategic constituencies both internal and
external to the organization. Strategic constituencies approach is ideal for organizations
which rely highly on response to demands. The organization is seen as a set of internal
and external constituencies that negotiate a complex set of constraints, goals and referents
(Henri, 2003).

2.3.1 Measures of Employee Performance

The various authors further identify the following criteria to assess employee performance;
namely:

2.3.1.1 Quality of Output –

Quality trumps quantity—especially when you consider employee productivity.

Sure, meeting deadlines is important and does reflect on individual performance, but if
what‘s being produced is of lower quality, meeting deadlines takes a back seat. Measuring
quality of output is subjective. What and how you measure is very dependent on the industry
you‘re in and the specific duties and tasks of the employee. According to Gallie (2003), there
is a noticeable congruence in terms of the aspects of works that is considered crucial for
wellbeing.

One thing to consider, however, is the percentage of work output that is rejected or must be
redone. With talent management software, like onboarding for new hires or 360-degree
performance reviews for existing staff, you can gain more insight on individual performance.
Organizational goals are strategic objectives that a company's management establishes to
outline expected outcomes and guide employees' efforts, effectiveness is measured or gauged
72
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

by how well the organization meets or exceeds its goals. Quality of Output is the most widely
used effectiveness criterion for organizations. Dahi, Nesheim and Olsen (2009) propose six
(6) dimensions to be included in the measurement of quality of work which are; job security,
pay and fringe benefit, intrinsic reward system, work intensity, skills and autonomy. There
are many advantages to establishing organizational goals: They guide employee efforts,
justify a company's activities and existence, define performance standards, provide
constraints for pursuing unnecessary goals and function as behavioral incentives.
Friedman (2013) noted that having a working environment that promotes wellness and
happiness do not only increase the mood of employees but also the quality of output.
Organizations should clearly communicate organizational goals to engage employees in their
work and achieve the organization's desired ends. While an organization can communicate its
organizational goals through formal channels, the most effective and direct way to do so is
through employees' direct supervisors. This allows managers to work with their staff to
develop smart goals that align with the organization's goals.

2.3.1.2 Employee Efficiency–

This second criterion relates to both employees inputs and outputs. An efficient employee is
able to maximize their productivity with minimum effort or expense. Costly mistakes are few
and far between, deadlines are met and quality of work is not sacrificed. Simply put, they get
the job done. Childs (2009) noted that empowerment of staff or individually to do what is
needed can help achieve efficiency of employee.

To measure individual efficiency, try conducting team assessments. Team assessments can
provide an in-depth evaluation of a team‘s ability to meet goals, as well as identify
challenges. Additionally, communicating with the people who an employee works with on a
day-to-day basis can give you valuable insight on how an employee is performing—insight
you might not otherwise get. Childs (2009) asserted that while hiring employee, one should
look for actualisers which has different traits that propel efficiency. An employee is deemed
effective in this regard if it what he or she sets out to achieve. Resource based approach
assesses effectiveness by observing the beginning of the process and evaluating whether the
organization effectively obtains resources necessary for high performance. Employee
Performance is defined as the ability of the organization to obtain scarce and valued
resources. Ex: Low cost inputs, high quality raw materials. (In many not-for-profit
organizations it is hard to measure output goals or internal efficiency.)

2.4. Organizational Culture

The culture of an organization has tremendous effects on the direction of the organization and
to the behaviors of people within it. Organizational culture governs what the enterprise stands
for with regard to how it allocates resources, its organizational structure, system in use,
people, results and rewards, problems and opportunities and the way it deals with them
(Ugoani, 2015). Organizational culture gives people a sense of how to behave, and what they

73
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

should do or not do. The culture of an organization is a composite of many variables such as
economic environment, purpose, shareholders interest, organizational maturity, personalities
as well as ethics and philosophy (Agulanna & Madu, 2003). Culture is that complex whole
which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, laws, customs and other capabilities acquired
by man as a member of a society. This complex whole designs and structures a system of
ideas which influences the management of individuals and group operations in any
organization. Hence the understanding of cultural diversity leads to cross – cultural literacy
that gives rise to efficiency and effectiveness. Organizational culture refers to the character of
an organization, its history, its approaches to decision making, its way of treating employees,
and its way of dealing with the outside world. Another school describes organizational
culture as ―the sum total of shared values, symbols, meanings, beliefs, assumptions and
expectations that organize and integrate a group of people who work together‖. Ravasi and
Schultz (2006) noted that organizational culture is a set of shared assumption‘s which guide
what takes place in any organization.

Experts identify two types of organizational culture such as authoritarian and participative.
Authoritarian cultures feature centralized decision making with the Chief Executive Officer
(CEO) and a few high-level managers. Departments have different agenda sometimes in
conflict with each other. Employees do not perceive rewards for innovation, but following
orders. They believe that their managers are interested in them only as workers and not as
people. Lund (2003) claimed that organizational culture influences behaviors and individual
attitudes. Authoritarian cultures are closed and resistant to change from outside the
organization. Organizations with participative cultures, feature the common value of team
work, employees feel empowered to make decisions rather than to wait for orders from those
in authority or in power. The departments work together ―like a well-oiled machine‖.
Department goals match overall organizational goals. Workers feel valued as people, not just
as employees. Participative organizational cultures are open to new ideas from inside and
outside the organization. Lau and Ngo (2004) is of the opinion that organizational culture
depicts the collective values, principles and beliefs of organizational members.

The primary responsibility for organizational culture belongs to management- the decision
makers of the organization. Successful managers seek a workplace culture that supports the
goals of the organization.

2.5 Empirical Literature

Abbas, Hameed and Waheed (2011) evaluated the influence of Gender discrimination on
employee performance in Nigeria, Three dimensions of gender discrimination are included in
this research that is hiring discrimination, promotion discrimination and facilities
discrimination. Data was obtained by 200 telecom supervisors of Pakistani industry. Further
utilizing the quantitative to analyze the study data i.e. correlation & regression tools. The
study discovered that gender discrimination in promotion and facilities are more responsible
for the level of employee performance.

74
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

Akua band Cecilia (2015) evaluated the issue of gender discrimination in the work place;
specifically to assess how gendered assumptions affect women and to find out the factors
affecting women‘s participation in Higher Education (HE) management and to ascertain
whether prejudices regarding gender occur in the professional setting and how it hinders
women‘s advancement into top ranking management positions. Interviews were conducted
with primary data gathered upon interviews with ten women administrative professionals in
five public universities in Ghana, are used to assess gender discrimination and the way it has
affected the individuals and their careers. The findings from the study revealed that women
are indeed underrepresented in the management of higher education institutions in Ghana.

Omoh, et al., (2015) evaluated workplace discrimination and its influence on employees‘
performance in Ghana. Questionnaires were collected from 159 employees drawn from 5
different organizations in 5 different sectors on whether discrimination at the workplace has
any influence on employees‘ performance. A chi square test statistic (X2) 1.91 was calculated
which the result was less than the critical value of 3.841. This makes the study accept the null
hypothesis and concluded that employees in Ghana do not see workplace discrimination as
strange actions by managers that will influence their performance negatively.

Uzma (2004) found out that identity is created through the society, environment and parents.
It is a two-way process - how people view you and how you view yourself. Attitude of
parents towards their children formulate their identity. Parents usually consider their
daughters as weak, timid, and too vulnerable; they need to be protected by the male members
of the society. Because of this reason females cannot suggest or protest. This is the first step
of subjugation and suppression. According to her, even the educated females have the double
identity – professional and private. Another finding of her research was that the income of the
women is not considered as the main financial source for the family, but as supplementary to
the income of their males. She also found that those results were not valid for the upper and
advanced families, where complete freedom is given to their females.

Sahdat, Sajjad, Faroog and Rehman (2011) evaluated the impact of workplace discrimination
on job satisfaction and productivity. It was discovered that workplace discrimination is
positively correlated with the job satisfaction increasing employee‘s performance and
organization productivity. It has been noticed that job satisfaction and positive feeling
increase desired expansion.

Ugoani (2016) investigated the relationship between workplace discrimination and

organizational competitiveness: management model approach. The survey research design
was used to explore the relationship between workplace discrimination and organizational
competitiveness. The study found that workplace discrimination has strong positive
relationship with organizational competitiveness.
Shahhossa, Silong, Ismaill and Uli (2012) examined the effect of workplace discrimination
on the job performance of the individuals from a theoretical viewpoint. More specifically, it
embarks on the link between the nature of workplace discrimination and the job performance.

75
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

The study discovered a positive correlation between workplace discrimination and job
performance.

3.1 Research Design

Parahoo (1997) describes a research design as ―a plan that describes how, when and where
data are to be collected and analysed‖; it represents the blue print of the study. For the
purpose of this study, The cross-sectional survey design will be utilized which is an aspect of
the quasi-experimental research design as it represents a type of observational study that
analyses data collected from a population, or a representative subset, at a specific point in
time - that is, cross-sectional data.

3.2 Population for the Study

A research population is generally a large collection of individuals or objects that is the main
focus of a scientific query. It is for the benefit of the population that researches are done
(Explorable, 2009). The accessible population consist of the fifteen (15) registered food and
beverage firms in Port Harcourt as contained in the Port Harcourt business directory
Rivers/Bayelsa state chapter. The accessible Population of this study will be drawn from the
5 selected Food and Beverage firms in Rivers State, Port Harcourt. These firms were selected
based on the fact that they have existed for a long period i.e. over a decade.

3.3 Sampling Technique

This study utilizes the probability sampling technique. Due to the fact that samples are
selected based on simple random techniques, which give all the individuals in the population
equal chance to be selected in order to avoid bias in the study as the study is carried out
within the confines of Port Harcourt in Rivers state.

3.3.1 Sample Size

The sample size will be determined by using the Taro Yamane‘s formula at a 0.05 level of
significance I.e. 95% confidence level. A sample size of 186 respondents was obtained.
The sample size for each firm was determined by using the Bowley‘s (1964) population
allocation formula.

3.4. Data Collection Method

This study will be utilizing the primary source of data which will be gotten from the
respondents via a carefully structured questionnaire.

3.5 Operational Measures of Variables

The response modes were based on the 5 point Likert scale ranging from 5= Strongly Agree,
4 = Agree, 3 = Neutral, 2 = Disagree and 1 = Strongly Disagree.

Specifically, the dimensions will entail 15 questions (items) which will be adapted from the
32 item Workplace Discrimination Pattern Questionnaire (HQS) of Hasan and Ali (2014),
Fatima and Omar (2014), Owolabi, (2012), Ali and Yunus (2013), but will be refined to a 5
76
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

point scale as it originally consists of a 7 point scale to bring it to unison with the measures
which will be entailed items adapted from the works of Cameron (1986); Caneron (1986) in
Kinicki and Kreitner (2003).

The moderating variable ‗Organizational Culture‘ was adapted from related studies by Roger
Harrison's (1975) Diagnosing Organizational Ideology.

3.7 Data Analysis Technique

All statistical analysis will be carried out using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences
(SPSS) version 22. While partial correlation will be utilized for the moderating variables,
organizational culture

4.1 Test of Hypotheses

Table 1 Hypotheses Testing Results
Hypotheses Outcome Decision Extent of
Relationship
Ho1 There exists no significant relationship between sig. = 0.000
Reject null Negative
Gender Discrimination and Quality of Output of
hypothesis relationship
Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt. rho = -0.566

Ho2 There is no significant relationship between sig. = 0.000

Reject null negative
Religion Discrimination and Quality of Output of
hypothesis relationship
Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt. rho = -0.398

Ho3 There is no significant relationship between sig. = 0.000

Reject null Negative
Ethnic Discrimination and Quality of Output of
hypothesis relationship
Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt. rho = -0.360

Ho4 There is no significant relationship between sig. = 0.000 Moderate

Reject null
Gender Discrimination and Employee Efficiency positive
rho = 0.559 hypothesis
of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt. relationship

Ho5 There is no significant relationship between sig. = 0.000

Reject null Negative
Religion Discrimination and Employee Efficiency
hypothesis relationship
of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt. rho = -0.334

Ho6 There is no significant relationship between sig. =0.000

Reject null
Ethnic Discrimination and Employee Efficiency Positive
hypothesis
of Food and Beverage Firms in Port Harcourt rho = 0.306 Relationship

Ho7 There is no significant influence of sig. = 0.000

Organizational Culture on the association Reject null
Positive
between Workplace Discrimination and rho = 0.481 hypothesis
Relationship
Employee Performance of Food and Beverage
Firms in Port Harcourt
Source: SPSS Data, 2017

77
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

4.2 Discussion of findings

This study investigated the relationship between workplace, discrimination and employee
performance, it further investigated how organizational cultural moderated the relationship
between the variables.

The analysis between gender discrimination and quality of output revealed that there exists a
significant negative relationship between gender discrimination and employee quality of
output. This implies that when gender discrimination increases, the quality of output by the
employee reduces drastically and vise visa. This finding is supported by previous work by
Abbass et al; (2011) where they remarked that gender discrimination in promotion of
employee has a negative relationship with employee performance.

The result of this analysis shows that there exist a significant relationship between religion
discrimination and quality of output. However, the relationship was negative. This implies
that organizations which are characterized by religion discrimination will definitely have
employees with low quality of output. Hence for organization to enhance the quality of work
of their staffs, they should put in more effort to combat the idea of religion discrimination.
This finding is in line with that of Athena and Daisii (2014), which maintained that a negative
relationship exists between religion discrimination and employee work related performance.

The result of the analysis showed that the P-value (0.000) is less than 0.05 which indicated a
significant relationship between the variables. However, the relationship was negative given
that the rho = -0.398. This implies that when ethnic discrimination exists in organization, the
employee quality of output reduces. This finding is in line with the argument of Gibereubie,
Osibanjo, Adeniji and Oludayo (2014) which stated that employee performance is enhanced
when the workplace is void of ethnic discrimination.

The result of the analysis reveals that there exist relationships to a significant level between
gender discrimination and employee efficiency. The variable was positively correlated. This
implies that gender discrimination does not affect the employee efficiency. The reason could
be that employees that are discriminated as a result of their gender put in their best in their
work to outperform even the target set for them and to prove to those discriminating them
that they have potentials which are unique irrespective to their gender. This result disagrees
with that of Athena and Daisii (2014) which posited that negative relationships exist between
the variables. The reason for the variations of findings could be because the research was
carried out in different environment having workforce with varied mindset, orientation and
belief.

78
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

The relationship between religion discrimination and employee efficiency was significant.
However, the variables were negatively correlated. This shows that religion discrimination in
the workplace will impact negatively on the efficiency of employees. In order words, when
religion discrimination increases in the workplace, the efficiency of employees reduces. This
finding agrees with that of Athena and Daisii (2014) which found a negative significance
between the variables.

The result of the analysis revealed a positive relationship between ethnic discrimination and
employee efficiency. This shows that ethnic discrimination does not in any way reduce the
efficiency of employee in the workplace. This result agree with that of Omoh, Owusu and
Mendah (2015) which found that employees in Ghana do not see workplace discrimination as
a strange action by managers that will influence their performance negatively.

The result of the moderating influence of organizational culture on the relationship between
the variables was positively significant. This shows that organizations that have a culture
which values all employees and involve employees in decision making irrespective of their
ethnicity, gender and religion background will have a workforce characterized with high
performance. This aligns with the findings of Ugoani (2015) which found out that a strong
positive association exists between workplace discrimination and organization culture
equilibrium.

5.1 Conclusion
Based on the findings of this work, it is easily deduced that an organization which is unable
to eliminate religion discrimination, gender discrimination and ethnic discrimination will end
up having a workforce characterized with low quality of output. Employees that are
discriminated are bound to suffer work related stress which affects the quality of their work.
When this occurs, such categories which are discriminated act and exhibit behaviors which
could negatively affect the entire operations and performance of the organization. Employer
efficiency is affected when discrimination is on high side in the organization. An efficient
employee possesses the capability to maximize their productivity with minimum effort or
expenses. The accumulation of different employee efficiency results in the total efficiency of
the organization. An employee is seen to be efficient when he/she is able to achieve with
minimum resource what the organization stipulated for him/ her. Unfair prejudices in the
workplace against people of different color, cultures, ethnicity or religion background
reduces creativity of worker, induces deviant behavior and could lead to high frequent
turnover in the organization. Hence, we hereby conclude that discrimination in the
organization has more negative impact on the employee performance and in the long run
negatively affect the performance of the entire organization. More so, organizational culture
moderates the relationship between workplace discrimination and employee performance

79
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

5. 2 Recommendations
1. Managers in the food and beverage firms should properly manage diversity in the
organization by organizing seminar for workers in order to enable them see the
benefit of diversity in the organization.
2. Managers of the food and beverage firms should set up ways through which employee
can report any form of discrimination to management and such complaints should be
handled with optimal seriousness, promptly and confidentially in order to eliminate
discrimination.
3. Managers should be religiously tolerant, they should avoid prejudicing a segment in
the organization as a result of religious belief in other to foster harmony and unproved
individual performance.
4. There should be a proper training for managers and supervisors on how to adequately
respond to discrimination in the organization.
5. Managers should enact workplace policy to reduce discrimination and such policy
should be reviewed frequently to ensure that its effectiveness is maintained.
6. Managers should ensure equal opportunity of promotion and career success for all
categories of employee irrespective of their gender.
7. Organizational culture should encourage employees irrespective of gender, age, ethnic
group or religious belief to participate in decision making as this will help reduce
discrimination in the workplace.

5.5 Suggestion for Further Study

Further research should be conducted to know how workplace discrimination relates
with employee turnover in the organization. Also, future researches should examine how
workplace discrimination relates with employee performance in a different sector of the
economy.

80
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

REFERENCES
Abbas, Q, Hameed A & Waheed, A. (2011). Gender discrimination and Its effect on
employee performance/productivity. International journal of humanities and social
science.1(15).171-176.
Akua, A.A & Cecilia.A (2015). Gender discrimination In the workplace: A study of women‘s
participation in higher education management in Ghana. Afro Asian journal of social
sciences.6(3). 2229-5313.
Alderfer, C. P., & Smith, K. K. (1982). Studying intergroup relations embedded in
organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27, 5–65.
Alderfer, C. P., Alderfer, C. J., Tucker, L., & Tucker, R. (1980).Diagnosing race relations in
management.Journal of applied behavioral science, 16, 135–166.
Ali T. A. and Yunus T. (2013).Effect of dıstrıbutıve Justıce, procedural justıce and
organızatıonal trust on affectıve commıtment.Inter-disciplinary journal of research in
business, 2(8), 61- 66.
Allen, R. E., & Keaveny, T. J. (1985).Factors differentiating grievant and
nongrievants.Human relations, 38 (6), 519–534.
Alpert, Y., (2011). Managing human resource, productivity, quality of work life, profits (4th
edition).McGraw hill internationals.
Athena, C, T & Daisii, C.W (2014). How gender discrimination affects the performance of a
firm. China business studies concentration. 1(1).01-42.
Australian human rights commission (2014). Workplace discrimination, harassment and
bullying. SYDNEY.
Baridam, D.M., (2001). Research method in administrative sciences (3rd ed.) port Harcourt
.sherbrook associates
Bllkis, A., Habib, S.B., & Sharmin, T. (2010).A review of discrimination in employment and
workplace. ASA University review, 4(2), 137-150.
Borgman, C. L., (2010) Research data: Who will share what, with whom, when and why?
China- North American Library Conference.
Cameron, K. S. (1986). Effectiveness as paradox: Consensus and conflict in conceptions of
employee performance. Management science, 32(5), 539-553.
Channar, Z.A, Abbassi, Z & Ujan, I.A (2011).Gender discrimination in workforce and its
impact on the employees.Pakistan journal of commerce and social sciences.5(1).177-
191.
Cherin, D. A., & Berkman, S. (1998). Organizational and personal dimensions in diversity
climate: Ethnic and gender differences in employee perceptions. Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science, 34 (1), 82–104.
Chikaodilip, O., (2010). The impact of job satisfaction on employee performance in
government owned enterprises. A publish master thesis, University of Nigeria, Enugu.
Childs, D., (2009). Improving employee productivity and efficiency. Environment finance
review, 52-55.
Coleman P., & Deutsch, M. (2000).Major texts on peace psychology.

81
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

Coleman P., & Deutsch, M. (2000).The handbook of conflict resolution; Theory and
practices.San Francisco; Jossey-bass publishers.
Cox, T. (1993). Cultural diversity in organizations: Theory, research, and practice. San
francisco:
Cox, T., & Nkomo, S. (1993). Race and ethnicity.In R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.), Handbook of
organizational behavior.New York: Marcel Dekker.
Cunningham, J.B., (2001). Approaches to the evaluation of organizational effectiveness.
University of Victoria, Canada.
Dehl, S.A., Nesheim, T. & Olsen, K, M. (2009).Quality of work-concept and
measurement.Edinburgh RECWOWE Publication.
Deshwal, P. (2016). Impact of workplace discrimination on organizational
performance. International journal of advanced research in management and social
sciences, 5(1), 173-182.
Dickerson, M. (1998).Women-owned businesses are fastest growing in U.S., report says. Los
Angeles Times, p. C6.
Dwomoh, G., Owusu, E. E., & Mensah, A. F. (2015). Workplace discrimination and its
influence on employees performance: The case Of Ghana. International journal of
information, business and management, 7(3), 226.
El-Haddad, A. (2009). Labor market gender discrimination under structural adjustment: The
case of Egypt‖. SRC/CIDA research program on gender and work.2 (1). 45-76
Erik, B, &Marita O. (2006). The emotional intelligence in relation to workplace discrimination
where is it? Women‘s and men‘s career prospects in the private vs. the public sector in
Sweden 1979-2000.
Fatima, I.Y.A.Y & Omar, M.A (2014).The impact of organizational justice on the behaviour
of organizational citizenship.An applied study on the employees of the department of
income and sales tax in Jordan.Australian journal of business and management
research, 3(11), 12-29.
Friedman, E., (2013). Five ways to improve your employee‘s quality of work and life.
Workology Inc.
Gable, S.L., (2006). Approach and abidance social motives and goals.Journal of personality,
74(1), 175-222.
Gallie, D. (2003). The quality of working life; is Scandinavia different? European sociological
review 19, 61-79.
Giberevbie, D.E., Osibanjo, A.O., Adaniji, A.A., & Aludayo, A.O, (2014). An empirical study
of gender discrimination and employee performance among academic staff of
government universities in Lagos State, Nigeria.International journal of social, human
science and engineering. 8(1), 101-108.
Goleman, D. (1995). Workplace discrimination. New York: Bantam.
Goleman, D. (1998). Working with workplace discrimination. New York: Bantam books
Gutek, B. A., & O‘Connor, M. (1995).The empirical basis for the reasonable woman
standard.Journal of social issues, 51 (1), 151–166.
Gutek, B. A., Cohen, A. G., & Tsui, A. (1996).Emotional intelligence in relation to workplace
discrimination sex discrimination.Human relations, 49 (6), 791–813.
82
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

Habib, Z. (2000).Through the brick wall and the glass emotional intelligence in relation to
workplace discrimination: women in the civil services in Bangladesh. Gender, Work
and Organization, 7(3), 197-209.
Hall, C.C.I. (1997). Cultural malpractice: The growing obsolescence of psychology within the
changing U.S. population. American psychologist, 52 (6), 642–651.
Harrison, R. (1975). Diagnosing organization ideology. The 1975 annual handbook for group
facilitators, 101-107.
Hasan, B.M & Ali.Y.Y (2014), Developing the organizational Justice scale and examining
teachers and chool administrators views about organizational justice in primary
schools, Journal of educational studies, 4(1), 33-50.
Heilman, M. &. Welle H. (2005). Formal and informal discrimination against women at
work: the role of gender stereotypes. New York: Centre for public leadership.
Hemphill, H., & Haines, R. (1997). Discrimination, harassment, and the failure of diversity
training: What to do now. Greenwood Publishing Group.
Igbal, N.; Ahmad, N.; Haider, Z.; Batool, Y.; & Ain, Q.U (2013) Impact of Performance
appraisal on employee‘s performance involving the moderating role of motivation.
Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review 3(1), 37-56.
Jayaratne, S. (1993).The antecedents, consequences, and correlates of job satisfaction.In R. T.
Golembiewski (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior.New York: Marcel Dekker.
Jorfi, H., Jorfi, S., Fauzy, H., Yaccob, B., &Nor, K. M. (2014). The impact of Workplace
Discrimination on communication effectiveness: Focus on strategic alignment. African
Journal of Marketing Management, 6(6), 82-87.
Kaas, L., & Manger, C. (2012). Ethnic discrimination in Germany's labour market: a field
experiment. German economic Review, 13(1), 1-20.
Khoavi, B. G., Manafi, M., Hojabri, R., Farhadi, F., & Gheshmi, R. (2011). The impact of
Workplace Discrimination towards the effectiveness of delegation: a study in Banking
Industry in Malaysia. International journal of business and social science, 2(18).
Kinicki, A & Kretner, R (2003), Organizational behaviour: key concepts, skills and best
practices. McGraw-Hill Irwin,
MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., & Fetter, R. (1993).The impact of organizational
citizenship behavior on evaluations of salespersons‘ performance.Journal of
marketing, 57, 70–80.
Mays, V. M., Coleman, L. M., & Jackson, J. S. (1996). Emotional Intelligence in relation to
workplace discrimination race-based discrimination, employment status, and job stress
in a national sample of black women: Implications for health outcomes. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 1 (3), 319–329.
Mirage, L. (1994).Development of an instrument measuring valence of ethnicity and
perception of discrimination.Journal of multicultural counseling and development, 22,
49–59.
Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1982).Employee-organizational likages: The
psychology of commitment, absente emotional intelligence in relation to workplace
discrimination, and turnover. New York: Academic Press.

83
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

O‘Reilly, C. A. III, Chapman, J., & Caldwell, D. F. (1991). People and organization culture:
A profile comparison approach to assessing person-organization fit. Academy of
Management Journal, 34 (3), 487–516.
Okpara J.O., (2002). The impact of salary differential on managerial job satisfaction.A study
of the gender gap and its implications for management education and practices in a
developing economy.Journal of business development nation 65-92.
Olajide, O.T (2014). Employees‘ attitudes and efficiency of human resource management
practices: Evidence from Nigeria. European journal of business and
management.6(31).68-72.
Omoh, G.D, Owusu, E.E &Mendah, A.F (2015). Workplace discrimination and its influence
on employee performance: The case of Ghana. International journal of information,
business and management, 7(3), 2260231.
Organ, D. W. (1988).Organizational citizenship behavior.San Francisco: New Lexington
Press. Organ, D. W., & Ryan, K. (1995).A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and
dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behaviors.Personnel Psychology,
48 (4), 775–802.
Owolabi, A. B. (2012). Effect of organizational justice and organizational environment on
turn-over intention of health workers in Ekiti state, Nigeria.Research in World
Economy, 3(1), p28.
Patterson, G. (2015). Discrimination in International Trade, the Policy Issues: 1945-1965.
Princeton University Press.
Podsakoff, P., MacKenzie, S., Moorman, R., & Fetter, R. (1990). Transformational leader
behaviors and Emotional Intelligence in relation to workplace discrimination effects on
followers‘ trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship
behavior.Leadership Quarterly, 1(2), 107-142.
Potocan, V., (2006).Business operations between efficiency and effectiveness.Journal of
information and organizational sciences 30(2) 251-262.
Ramanauskas, K. (2016). The impact of the manager's workplace discrimination on
organizational performance. Management theory and studies for rural business and
infrastructure development, 38(1), 58-69.
Renee, M. (2014). Labor market gender discrimination under structural adjustment: The case
of Egypt. SRC/CIDA research program on gender and work.2 (1). 45-76
Sahdat, M., Sajjad, S. I., Faroog, M. U., & Rehman, K. (2011). Workplace discrimination and
organizational productivity: A conceptual study. World applied sciences
journal, 15(6), 821-825.
Sanchez, J. I., & Brock, P. (1996). Outcomes of emotional intelligence in relation to
workplace discrimination among Hispanic employees: Is diversity management a
luxury or a necessity? Academy of management journal, 39 (3), 704–719.
Schmitt, M. T., Branscombe, N. R., Postmes, T., & Garcia, A. (2014). The consequences of
perceived discrimination for psychological well-being: A meta-analytic
review. Psychological Bulletin, 140(4), 921.
Secy, S., (2013).The sexual harassment of women at workplace.Prevention, prohibition and
redressal. New Delhi.
84
 International Journal of Advanced Academic Research | Social & Management Sciences | ISSN: 2488-9849
Vol. 3, Issue 11 (November 2017)

Shahhossa, M., Silong, A. D., Ismaill, I. A., & Uli, J. N. (2012).The role of workplace
discrimination on job performance. international journal of business and social
science, 3(21).
Sharma, M., (2017).Organizational effectiveness, business management ideas.
Shellenbarger, S. (1993, Sept. 3). Workforce study finds loyalty is weak, divisions of race and
gender are deep. Wall Street Journal, p. B1.Shull, S. (1993).A kinder, gentler
racism?The reagan-bush civil rights legacy.Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
Susan, T, & Laurie, L.(1998). Gender discrimination and the workplace: an examination of
rational bias theory, Sex Roles. A journal of research, 38, 1-28.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1985).The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S.
Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (2nded.). Chicago:
Nelson-Hall.
Tesfaye, Y. (2010). The effect of discrimination on job performance and job satisfaction.
Thomas, D. A., & Alderfer, C. P. (1989). The influence of race on career dynamics: theory
and research on minority career experiences. In M. B. Arthur, D. T. Hall, & B. S.
Lawrence (Eds.), Handbook of career theory.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
U.S. Equal employment opportunity commission, office of research, information, and
planning. (1998)
Thorat, S., & Neuman, K. S. (2012). Blocked by caste: economic discrimination in modern
India.Oxford University Press.
Ugoani, J.N.N. (2016). Workplace discrimination and organizational competitiveness:
management model approach.
Uzma S. (2004). Literacy and women‘s identity, Proceedings of the International Conference
on social sciences: Endangered and engendered, fatima jinnah womenUniversity,
Rawalpindi, Pakistan, 84-96
Wayne, F. C. (1995). Managing human resource, productivity, quality of work life, Profits,
McGraw Hill Internationals (4th edition).
Zick, A, Pettigrew, T.F., & Wagner, U. (2008).Ethnic prejudice and discrimination in Europe.
Journal of social issues, 64(2), 233-251

85