Journal of Advance Research in Social science and Humanties (ISSN: 2208-2387)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.53555/nnssh.v4i7.112 Publication URL: http://nnpub.org/index.php/SSH/article/view/112

PARTICIPATIVE DECISION MAKING AND EMPLOYEE JOB PERFORMANCE

IN NIGERIAN ACADEMIC LIBRARIES
Agbese, Florence Ada Oyije, Phd)1*, Daramola, Cecilia Funmilayo2, Akidi, Juliana Obiageri, Phd3
*1Librarian 1, Samuel Osaigbovo Ogbemudia Library, University of Abuja desire9611@yahoo.com
2
Principal Librarian, Federal University of Technology, Akure funlayodaramola@yahoo.com
3
Deputy University Librarian, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, Umudike, Abia State. obyakidij@gmail.com

*Corresponding Author: -
Email: desire9611@yahoo.com

Abstract: -
In today’s rapidly changing environment, organizations are forced to find ways to be more competitive, flexible, and
adaptive. To survive and compete in this globalized world, organisations are required to get maximum benefits from
employees’ participation in decision making. Employee involvement in decision making is critical to the success of any
organization in terms of employee performance and organizational growth. Studies have shown that the manager’s
decision-making style has a direct implication for employee job performance. This paper therefore looked at the
relationship between the decision-making style of academic library leadership in Nigeria and employee job performance.
Importance of participative decision making was discussed, participative decision making in academic libraries in general
and Nigeria in particular and how it affects job performance of employee was also discussed. The paper also highlighted
the challenges of Participative decision making (PDM), and made recommendations based on the challenges identified.

Keyword: - Participative decision making, Employee, Job performance, Academic libraries, Nigeria

Vol. 4 No. 7 (2018) 6

Journal of Advance Research in Social science and Humanties (ISSN: 2208-2387)

INTRODUCTION
Every organization is set up primarily to meet stated targets as spelt out in the organizational goals and objectives.
However, neither the capital resources, no matter how robust the organisation’s capital base may be, nor other material
resources, including high technological advancement can make possible the attainment of those targets without active
interaction with the human resources. In other words, the employee can be said to be at the core of every organizational
success. Organizations therefore expect a certain level of performance from its employee, below which such employee
will be seen as not performing. The academic libraries, like all other organizations have their own expectations of their
employee performance. There are several factors that influence employee job performance. These include: pay package,
the job itself, promotion opportunities, support from supervisors, relationship with co-workers and the decision-making
style of the manager which is the focus of this paper.
As a manager of an organization, whether big or small, one is saddled with the responsibility of making decisions. How
to determine which decision is in the best interest of both the employees and the organization remains for the manager to
figure out. “It was as though most managers in the world were primarily interested either in results or in people. The
managers who were interested in results often seem to be labelled “autocratic,” while the managers interested in people
were often labelled “democratic.” The young man thought each of these managers—the “tough” autocrat and the “nice”
democrat—were only partially effective. “It’s like being half a manager,” he thought” (Blanchard & Johnson, 1981:
10).The difference between an effective and ineffective manager lies with their decision making style.
Decision making is a universal human phenomenon. The Business Dictionary defined decision making as the thought
process of selecting a logical choice from the available options. Decision making is the process of making a choice between
a number of options and committing to a future course of actions. Decision making is the process of identifying and
selecting a course of action to solve a particular problem. Decision making is an integral part of modern management
involving the process of making choices by identifying a decision, gathering information, and assessing alternative
resolutions. It is one of the core managerial functions. Harris (2012) proffers two definitions of decision making thus: (1)
the study of identifying and choosing alternatives based on the values and preferences of the decision maker and (2) the
process of sufficiently reducing uncertainty and doubt about alternatives to allow a reasonable choice to be made from
among them. Decision making is simply the process of choosing the best alternative for achieving objectives.

The Leadership Management Development Center (1997) has identified four (4) categories of decision-making style.
These are as follows:
1. Democratic decision making: This is a situation where the leader gives up ownership and control of a decision and
allows employee to vote.
2. Autocratic: In this style of decision making, the leader maintains total control and ownership of decision. In other
words, the leader forces his decision down the throats of the employees without asking for any suggestion or idea from
them
3. Consensus: Here the leader gives up total control of the decision. He involves every member of the organization or the
group in the decision-making process. The support of every member is obtained before a decision is reached. In other
words, everyone must agree and buy in on the decision.
4. Participative decision: This paper focuses on this style of decision making. It is when the leader involves some
groups/members of the organization in the decision-making process in order to discover other perspectives of the
situation. Here the leader deliberately asks and encourages employees to participate by furnishing the management
with their own ideas, perceptions, knowledge and information concerning the decision.

The purpose of the paper is to look at the influence of participative decision making on academic library employee job
performance. The paper will try to bring out how employees perform on their jobs when they participate in decision
making in their organizations. And to achieve this, literature will be searched to know what has been said about the
relationship between these variables. This paper started by highlighting the importance of participative decision making,
discussed the impact of participative decision making on employees’ job performance, discussed participative decision
making in academic libraries in general and in Nigeria in particular, highlight the challenges of participative decision
making (PDM) in academic libraries, made recommendations based on the challenges identified.

Importance of Participative decision making

Participative decision making may be defined as a process in which influence is shared among managers and subordinates,
a practice initiated and designed by management principally to increase employee commitment to the organization. PDM
encourages the involvement of manpower at all levels of an organization to analyze problems, develop new strategies, and
implement solutions. It can be seen as a form of management style that offers subordinates luxury of freedom with respect
to bridging the communication gap between managers and employees. Elnar (2014) reveals a significantly higher
organizational commitment and employee job performance when managers adopt participative management approach.
However, McCaffrey (2013) opines that it is important that managers who wish to adopt participative management style
take into cognizance issues such as who to involve their level, expertise and work maturity the timing, the intensity,
the availability of information, conflicts which might arise and the predetermination of the decision by procedures and
policies.
Bratton and Gold (2003) have identified two types of participative decision making. These are: direct and indirect
participation. (1) Direct participation refers to those forms of participation in which individual employees are involved in
decision making processes that affect their everyday work routines. (2) Indirect participation refers to those forms of

Vol. 4 No. 7 (2018) 7

Journal of Advance Research in Social science and Humanties (ISSN: 2208-2387)

participation in which representatives of the main body of employees participate in the decision making process (Bratton
and Gold, 2003; Akuoko, Dwamah & Ansong, 2012) assert that employee participation is an expression of the political
interests of workers that attempt to improve the terms of employment as well as challenge the system of power and control
that place workers in a position of social and economic subordination.
In today’s rapidly changing environment where organizations are forced to find ways to be more competitive, flexible,
and adaptive, employees are seen to be the most important asset in today’s organizations and their participation in decision
making at the workplace is more crucial than ever. PDM is getting more attention from researchers, human resource
experts and policy makers in the West as well as in African countries including Nigeria. To survive and compete in this
globalized world, organizations are required to get maximum benefits from employees’ participation in decision making.
Human beings are the most important resource in any organization because they perform most jobs in the organizations.
They stand at the focal point of every organizational success.
During the industrial age, many observers feared that machines would one day eradicate the need for people at work in
organizations. But contrary to that fear, the opposite has been the case.
People have become more important in today’s organizations than ever. Human beings have capabilities, abilities and
skills that drive organizational performance. Akuoko, Dwumah & Ansong (2012) suggest a synergy between human and
other resources such as money, materials, information and technology in order to get an organization to the peak of its
success. Bohlander and Snell (2004) quoting Thomas J. Watson, founder of International Business Machine (IBM) said
“you can get capital and erect buildings, but it takes people to build a business”. This is because no machine, no matter
how sophisticated, can operate itself, and even if it can, it will only do so to the extent to which it is programmed by human
beings. Hence, human beings remain the most important tool for organizational productivity in terms of growth and
success.
Participative decision making therefore acts as a force to motivate employees to meet specified organizational goals. The
main idea behind this style of management is to lend credence to Watson’s assertion by making optimum utilization of
intellectual and emotional human capital to achieve organizational goals. In Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory,
we are made to understand that workers need to feel a sense of belonging in their organisations. PDM satisfies that need
because it gives employees a feeling of importance. Treating employees as valued assets puts organizations at a vantage
position of gaining competitive advantage through their commitment, adaptability, high quality of skills and ultimately,
high level of performance. Also when employees are involved in the decision making process, it helps the manager who
listens carefully to the information collected, to have a more accurate understanding of the situation that should later result
in a better decision. Clement, Murugan and Petrus (2014) highlighted four (4) importance of PDM as follows:
Acceptance: Employees will more readily accept policies and decisions that were reached by general consensus. This cuts
down on the resistance that new company policies will experience and speeds up the process of implementing new ideas.
Morale: Employees that are given a voice in the operation of the company feel personally liable for the success of the
company. The staff morale remains at a high level because there is an appreciation for the chance to be part of the company
decision-making process. Employees will also take a more active role in improving the work conditions when they know
that they can directly affect the policies that govern the workplace.
Creativity: When you encourage employees to give their opinions on company issues, you will get a variety of solutions
to choose from. To be involved in the decision-making process for the company, the staff must be intimately involved in
how the company operates. Participative decision making (PDM) empowers employees to use their creativity to develop
more productive work processes and make the company more efficient.
Retention: A participative style of leadership offers employees more than just the opportunity to improve their income
through good performance. It gives them the chance to be active in determining the future success of the company.
Allowing employees to be active in the growth of the organization encourages those employees to stay with the company
to see their plans result in success. This will improve employee retention and cut down on the costs of turnover
Participative management allows for innovation and knowledge sharing between the managers and the employees. Top
management in many organizations makes decisions without considering the input of the employees at the other
managerial levels. Sometimes these decisions that are expected to be implemented by the lower level of employee become
difficult to be implemented because the lower management cadre was not involved in the decision-making process.
Participative decision making may therefore be said to have the potential for achieving outcomes unattainable by the
bureaucratic top-down structure.

The following have been identified by Branch (2002) as importance of PDM:

• Innovation and increased efficiency: The problem-solving process and openness to new ideas can result in innovation.
Apart from this, there is also knowledge sharing amongst the workers and the managers as mentioned earlier. This means
that those who are part of a certain process at the ground level give inputs for improved efficiency of the same.
• Timeliness: There is improved communication between the managers and the workers and between workers across
different units. A loophole or flaw is reported in time.
• Employee satisfaction and Motivation: Empowering the employees increases their stake in their work. This increases
efficiency and productivity. Consequently, there is decreased absenteeism and less employee turnover. This also works
in attracting more people towards the organization and the job.
• Service quality: Involvement in decision making means that workers can immediately pin point and suggest remedial
measures for improving the efficiency of the process they are a part of.
• Less supervision requirement: With PDM in place in an organisation there will be less need of supervision.

Vol. 4 No. 7 (2018) 8

Journal of Advance Research in Social science and Humanties (ISSN: 2208-2387)

• Better grievance redressal: Increased communication paves way for reduced number of grievances and quick and
effective resolution of dispute (often on the spot). Union - management relationship is also benefited and strengthened,
Branch (2002).

Managers use employee involvement in key decision making not only to leverage employees' unique skills, but also to
motivate them, signalling that their contribution to the company is meaningful. This boosts employees’ morale and
motivates them to voluntarily release their creativity and innovation that help organizations edge out their competitors.
Participative decision encourages employees to take responsibility for their group activities. Human beings by nature do
not like to be associated with failure, and knowing that if your decision fails, you are the one that have failed, employees
who participated in a decision-making process will do anything to see that such decision succeeds. Participation
encourages people to accept responsibility for their group activities. It follows therefore that when employees are not
involved in decision making, it is unlikely that they will want to contribute meaningfully or show responsibility for actions.

Participative decision making and employee job performance

Often times we take decisions to do things that suits us as individuals, but at other times our decisions have a far-reaching
implication on a whole lot of other people because we are social beings, at such times, it is proper to involve those others
in our decision-making process. Participative decision making is premised on the basis of simple, straightforward logic of
benefits. Over the years managers have become more and more aware that human resource is a key success factor in any
organisation. The quest for organisational success has therefore driven managers to explore different management
techniques, including PDM. Today’s work environment demands that organisations deliberately and consciously invest
in their human capital in order to get the best out of them, so as to achieve organisational success Agu & Olele (2014).
The way businesses are run today is a lot different from the way they were run some forty-fifty years ago. This is due
majorly to technological advancement, which has largely resulted in globalization, proliferation of information, merger
and acquisition, changing nature of work/work environment and stiff competition, to mention just a few. Udu & Aturu-
Aghedo (2016) observed that organisations must jettison old management practices based on excessive authority in order
to survive intensive competitive situations in the business world. Managers must embrace the management style that
encourages employee participation in organisational activities and decision-making process. Akinyemi and Ifijeh (2013)
insist that there is a direct relationship between the leadership style employed by library leadership and the library staff
job performance.
Employee performance is an important building block of an organisation, therefore, factors which lay the foundation for
high performance must be analyzed by the organization. It is natural for anyone to want to pursue a course he or she has
a stake in, and to see that it succeeds. Nothing can be more inspiring than being given the opportunity to participate in
deciding issues that concern you. Participating in decision making process does not only give the participant a sense of
belonging, but also serves as a stimulating force to follow through to ensure the success of the decision. Experience has
shown that employee participation is positively related to performance, satisfaction and productivity of employees. This
holds true for almost all situations and circumstances, beginning from simple decisions taken at domestic level to more
complex ones taken at work place. For instance, a wife/husband is more likely to support and accept responsibility for
domestic decision taken jointly with the spouse than for that taken by either of the spouses alone, no matter how noble
such decision might be. Literature revealed that most employees desire a greater role in decision making and that
participation is likely to promote job satisfaction, organizational learning among others, and ultimately, increase in overall
performance (Chiva et al., 2007; Kitapci and Sezen, 2007, Parnell, Swody and Powell, 2007; Ukko et al., 2009; Wright
and Kim, 2004). Some authors have argued that PDM has emotional effects of increased employee job satisfaction and
organizational success (Guthrie, 2001; Witt et al., 2000).
Blanchard and Johnson (1981) in their classic (best seller) titled “The One Minute Manager” clearly illustrated the
relationship between PDM and employee job performance. In this book, the authors have carefully demonstrated that to
get the employee to perform maximally, the answer lies with involving them in all decisions. The book is all about a
manager (The one-minute manager) agreeing with his employees on what needs to be done and setting the goal (s)
together. They do this in their regularly scheduled meetings that hold three (3) hours every Wednesday. Here is an excerpt
from the book:
The young man said, “I’d like to ask you some questions about how you manage people.”
The manager willingly said, “Fire away.” “Well, to begin with, do you hold regularly
scheduled meetings with your subordinates?”
“Yes, I do—once a week on Wednesdays from 9:00 to 11:00. That’s why I couldn’t see you
then,” responded the manager. “What do you do at those meetings?” probed the young man.
“I listen while my people review and analyze what they accomplished last week, the problems
they had, and what still needs to be accomplished. Then we develop plans and strategies for
the next week.”
“Are the decisions made at those meetings binding on both you and your people?” questioned
the young man. “Of course, they are,” insisted the manager. “What would be the point of
having the meeting if they weren’t? (Blanchard & Johnson,1981:12).

This allegorical story of the “most effective manager” as portrayed in “The One Minute
Manager” attempted to sum up the influence of PDM on employee job performance. The effect cuts across all human
endeavours, it is the same on libraries as it is on manufacturing industries and down to family setting. All Blanchard &

Vol. 4 No. 7 (2018) 9

Journal of Advance Research in Social science and Humanties (ISSN: 2208-2387)

Johnson are saying is, let us rub minds, develop the goals together, everyone knows what is expected of him/her from
the beginning, and then everybody swings into action with very minimal supervision.

Participative decision making in academic libraries

Academic libraries are libraries that are attached to institutions of higher learning to serve two complementary purposes
of supporting the institution’s curriculum, as well as support the research activities of the faculty members and students.
Autocratic and bureaucratic management style, where the university librarian traditionally makes decisions and passes it
down to the employees has been prevalent in academic libraries, but the changing role of information manager, emerging
technology, international/national competitors, and growing customer expectations have forced many organisations
including libraries to begin to look inward and consider alternative ways of doing business, especially with respect to
people management. To say that academic libraries have for the past few years been operating in a high velocity
environment where information demand, competition, technology and information access are constantly changing, is to
say the least. Academic libraries all over the globe seek to sustain competitive competencies in the changing environment
(Gichohi, 2015).
In general, library managers who carry their employees along in decision making are better equipped to sense, act and
adapt upon a dynamic environment because the participative style of decision making in the library is superior to the
traditional bureaucratic one. A widespread participation in decision making by the library staff, especially, the professional
staff is imperative for employee job performance. Where participative management is prevalent, the library management
gains the willingness of their staff to work hard and improve their efficiency. Reese (2009), giving examples of
collaborative decision making in special collections and technical departments, assert that participative management was
needed for effective and efficient working.
It is generally believed that when the techniques of participative management are applied in an organization, in this case,
academic library, the morale of staff, the quality of decisions, the accuracy of communication, the relationships between
management and staff and the quality of library service will improve. Employee participation in decision making in
academic libraries gives the library administration access to critical information closest to the source of many problems
associated with poor quality service. When employees have the opportunity to be involved in and exert influence on
decision making processes, their participation promotes commitment to the decisions that are made and they are motivated
to carry such decisions out to the later.

Participative decision making in Nigerian academic libraries

Academic libraries all over the globe are going through fundamental transformation and true paradigm shift, library leaders
are therefore always on the lookout for better solutions to keep pace with the ever-changing information environment and
provide customer-focused services. Batool & Anwar (2016) believe the adoption of best PDM practices in libraries should
lessen the pressure of administrative issues on library managers and improve employee job performance resulting in
quality library service. Akor (2014) posit that library staff become nonchalant about their library work when the leadership
is autocratic in his decision making, which invariably impact their job performance negatively. Adamaechi & Romaine
(2002) remark that leadership is very essential in any group or organization and can mean the difference between the
success or failure of any group or joint activity.
Ogba (2013) found that academic libraries leaderships in Nigeria are more autocratic in their management and decision
making. This finding was corroborated by Akor (2014) in his interview with some academic librarians in Benue state
where it was found that the academic library heads are autocratic in their decision making.
Despite the influence of participative decision making (PDM) on employee job performance as seen in literature, it has
been observed that some heads of academic libraries in Nigeria do not take advantage of it. They prefer rather to act like
“super humans who know it all”. They rarely hold meetings with employees. Once in a while, when they call for meetings
it is to inform employees of what they have decided to do. They do not solicit for suggestions or contributions from
employees. This kind of leadership style often fosters resentment, lack of cooperation and other frictions in the library. In
fact, employees find it difficult to hide the fact that they are wary of such meetings. Like some of them are often heard
saying “what is the point of the meeting, he/she could have as well communicated his/her decision to us through memo”.
It is not enough that employees are not encouraged to make their suggestions; the ones who dare to make suggestions are
labeled with all kinds of names. Employees are often heard saying among themselves, “your boss said we should do this
or that”, this way they make light of whatever they have been told to do, and if they do those things at all, it is to avoid
been penalized. They do not show any commitment because as far as they are concerned, it is the boss’s decision, not
theirs.

Challenges of participating decision making (PDM) in Nigerian academic libraries

1. Lack of requisite skill/knowledge of academic library work that will help employee make useful contributions
2. Reluctance on the part of the leadership to involve employees
3. Lack of willingness on the part of some employees to participate
4. It is also argued that PDM is slow and therefore waste valuable time
5. Traditional hierarchical top-down decision-making style prevalent in libraries

Vol. 4 No. 7 (2018) 10

Journal of Advance Research in Social science and Humanties (ISSN: 2208-2387)

Conclusion
Participative decision making is critical to the success of any group activity and should not be taken for granted if success
must be achieved. If any organization needs employee participation to succeed, the academic libraries need it much more.
However, studies have shown that most academic library heads in Nigeria do not see the need to involve the employees
in the decision-making process. Some of them see doing that as a sign of weakness or relinquishing power. As they try to
hold on to power by all crooked means, they lose the support of the employees and this translates to poor employee job
performance.

Recommendations
The following recommendations are made based on the challenges identified above:
• Library staff should be given the necessary training that will equip them with requisite skills/knowledge so they can
make useful inputs in decision making process
• Both university and college librarians should change their orientation about side-lining employees in decision making
• Employees should learn to see the success of their libraries as their own personal success and so be willing to participate
in any decision that will ensure such success
• Academic library leaderships should realize that the speed of decision is not as important as its positive outcomes
• Academic library leaderships in Nigeria should begin to embrace change in order to be able to stay competitive.

References
[1].Adamaechi, B. & Romaine, H. A. (2002). Issues, Problems and Prospects of Free Conpulsory and Qualitative
Education in Nigeria. Onitsha: Nigeria Education.
[2].Agu, M. & Olele, H. (2014). Perception Survey of Emploees' Participation in Decision Making and Organisational
Productivity in Julius Berger Nigeria PLC, Bonny Island. British Journal of Economic, Management and Trade, 4(4),
820-837.
[3].Akinyemi, N. & Ifijeh, G. (2013). Leadership Style and Job Commitment of Library Personnel in Universities: a Study
of Private University Libraries in South West, Nigeria. Journal of Information and Knowledge Management, 4(1), 92-
105.
[4].Akor, P. (2014). Influence of Autocratic Leadership Style in the Job Performance of Academic Librarians in Benue
State. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 4(7).
[5].Akuoko, K., Dwumah, P. & Ansong, F.. (2012). Employee Involvement in Decision Making and Workers'
performance in Selected Organisations in Ashanti Region of Ghana. Excel International Journal of Multidisciplinary
Management Studies, 11-23.
[6].Batool, S. & Anwar, M. A.. (2016). Participative Management Practices in the University Libraries of Punjab
(Pakistan): Perception of Senior Librarians. Pakistan Journal of Information Management and Libraries, 18(2).
[7].Blanchard, K. & Johnson, S. (1981). The One Minute Manager. New York, USA: Blanchard Family Partnership &
Candle Communication Corporation.
[8].Bohlander, G. & Snell S. (2004). Managing Human Resources. New York: South-Western.
[9].Branch, K. M. (2002). Chapter 10 Participative Management and Employee Performance. Retrieved from
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/doe/benchmark/ch10
[10]. Bratton, J. & Gold, J. (2003). Human Resource Management: Theory and Practice. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
[11]. Busck, O. K. (2010). The Transformation of Employee Participation: Consequences for the Work Environment.
Economic and Industrial Democracy, 31(3), 285-305.
[12]. Chiva, R., Alegre, J. & Lapredra, R. (2007). Measuring Organsational Learning Capacity among the Workforce.
International Journal of Manpower, 28(3), 224-242.
[13]. Clement, B., Murugan, C. & Petrus, N. (2014). The Impact of Participative and Directive Leadership on
Organisational Culture: An Organisational Development Perspective. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences,
5(23).
[14]. Gichohi, P. M. (2015). The Strategic Management Practices in Academic Libraries in Kenya:
[15]. The Case of USIU Library. Library Philosophy and Practice.
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1215
[16]. Guthrie, J. (2001). High-Involvement Work Practices, Turnover and Productivity: Evidence from New Zealand.
Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 180-190.
[17]. Kitapci, H. & Sezan, B. (2007). The Effect of Participation in Decion Making, Individual Improvement Efforts and
Training on the Quality of the Product Design Process. Product Planning and Control, 18(1), 3-8. Leadership
Management Development Center. (1997).
[18]. McCaffrey, D. . (2013). The Appeals and Difficulties of Participative Systems. Organisation Science, 6(6).
[19]. Ogba, E. (2013). Leadership Style and Organisational Commitment of Workers in Some Selected Academic
Libraries in Delta State. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 3(7), 110-
118.
[20]. Reese, G. (2009). An Examination of the Role of Participatory Management in Academic Special Collections
Departments. Library Leadership and Management, 23(4), 161-167.
[21]. Swody, C. & Powell, G. (2007). Determinants of Employee Paticipation in Organisation's Family-Friendly
Programs: a Mutli-level Approach. Journal of Business and Psychology, 22(2), 111-122.

Vol. 4 No. 7 (2018) 11

Journal of Advance Research in Social science and Humanties (ISSN: 2208-2387)

[22]. Ukko, J. K. (2009). Employees Satisfied with Performance Measurement and Rewards: Is it even Possible?
International Journal of Business Excellence, 2(1).
[23]. Witt, L. A. (2000). The Role of Participation in Decision Making in the Organisational Politics in Job Satisfaction
Relationship. Human Relations, 53(3), 341-358.

Vol. 4 No. 7 (2018) 12