CHAPTER FOUR

DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

4.1 Data Presentation and Analysis

The data used for the study are presented below:
Table 4.1 Audit Committee Size, Audit Committee Qualification, Audit
Committee Experience, and Organisational Effectiveness
Options Audit Audit Audit Organisationa
Committee Size Committee Committee l
Qualification Experience Effectiveness
Strongly Agree 37.50 45.00 42.50 28.00
Agree 26.00 38.00 24.00 32.50
Undecided 12.00 12.00 18.00 17.30
Disagree 12.00 7.00 13.00 14.00
Strongly Disagree 6.00 4.00 3.00 8.00
Source: Author’s computation (see appendix)

4.2 DATA ANALYSIS

The Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation (PPMC) technique is used to analyse

the data. The output of the analysis is shown below alongside the results,

interpretation and discussion.

Table 4.2 Correlation Matrix for All Variables

SZE QLF EXP EFF

Pearson Correlation 1 .974** .966** .874

SZE Sig. (2-tailed) .005 .007 .053

N 5 5 5 5
Pearson Correlation .974 **
1 .911 *
.939*
QLF Sig. (2-tailed) .005 .031 .018
N 5 5 5 5
Pearson Correlation .966 **
.911 *
1 .811
EXP Sig. (2-tailed) .007 .031 .096
N 5 5 5 5
Pearson Correlation .874 .939 *
.811 1

EFF Sig. (2-tailed) .053 .018 .096

N 5 5 5 5

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Source: SPSS Version 25.

The results in the table (4.2) above show that audit committee qualification, audit

committee members experience and organisational effectiveness have strong,

linear, and positive effect on audit committee size as demonstrated by the Pearson

correlation of 0.974, 0.966 and 0.874 respectively. In the same vein, audit

committee size, audit committee members experience and organisational

effectiveness are seen to have positive, linear, and strong influence on audit

committee members’ qualification. This is reflected in the Pearson correlations of

0.974, 0.911 and 0.939 respectively.

Similarly, audit committee members experience, audit committee members’

qualification and organisational effectiveness all have strong and positive effect on

the qualification of audit committee members as shown in the pearson correlations

of 0.966, 0.911 and 0.811. This is consistent with the manner that audit committee

size, audit committee members’ qualification and audit committee (members’)

experience affect organisational effectiveness which is seen to be strong and

positive as reflected by the Pearson correlations of 0.874, 0.939 and 0.811.

Test of Hypothesis One

HO There is no significant effect of audit committee size on organisational

effectiveness of PHEDC.

HA There is significant effect of audit committee size on organisational

effectiveness of PHEDC.

The output in Table 4.3 below is used to decide on the hypothesis.

Table 4.3 Correlations for Audit Committee Size and Organisational Effectiveness

SZE EFF

Pearson Correlation 1 .874

SZE Sig. (2-tailed) .053

N 5 5
Pearson Correlation .874 1

EFF Sig. (2-tailed) .053

N 5 5

Source: SPSS Version 20.

The results show that the p-value is 0.053 which is higher than the 0.05 a priori

significant level, therefore, a comparison of both indicates an insignificant effect of

audit committee size on organsational effectiveness. Therefore, the null hypothesis

is not rejected, but accepted. Thus, there is no significant effect of audit committee

size on organisational effectiveness in PHEDC.

Test of Hypothesis Two

HO There is no significant effect of audit committee members’ qualification on

organisational effectiveness of PHEDC.

HA There is significant effect of audit committee members’ qualification on

organisational effectiveness of PHEDC.

The output in Table 4.4 below is used to decide on the hypothesis.

Table 4.4 Correlation for Committee Members’ Qualification and Organisational Effectiveness

EFF QLF

Pearson Correlation 1 .939*

EFF Sig. (2-tailed) .018

N 5 5
Pearson Correlation .939*
1

QLF Sig. (2-tailed) .018

N 5 5

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Source: SPSS Version 20.

The result in table 4.4 above shows that audit committee members’ qualification

has a positive, linear and strong effect on organisational effectiveness, especially in

PHEDC. The table also shows a significant level of 0.018, which is less than the

0.05 a priori significant level, therefore, a comparison of both indicates a

significant effect of committee members’ qualification on organisational

effectiveness. Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected, while the alternate is

accepted, thus there is significant effect of audit committee members’ qualification

on organisational effectiveness.

Test of Hypothesis Three

HO There is no significant effect of audit committee members’ experience on

organisational effectiveness of PHEDC.

HA There is significant effect of audit committee members’ experience on

organisational effectiveness of PHEDC.

Table 4.5 Correlation for Committee Members Experience and Organisational

Effectiveness

EFF EXP

Pearson Correlation 1 .811

EFF Sig. (2-tailed) .096

N 5 5
Pearson Correlation .811 1

EXP Sig. (2-tailed) .096

N 5 5

Source: SPSS Version 20.

It is also seen that the result in table 4.5 above shows that audit committee

members’ experience has positive, linear and strong influence on organisational

effectiveness. The output also provides evidence of an insignificant effect as the p-

value is 0.096 which is greater than the 0.05 a priori significant level, Therefore, a

comparison of both indicates an insignificant effect of audit committee members’

experience on organisational effectiveness in PHEDC. Therefore, the null

hypothesis is not rejected, but accepted.

4.4 Discussion of Findings

The study empirically investigates the effect of audit committee quality on

organisational effectiveness by using audit committee size, audit committee

members’ qualification and audit committee members’ experience as measures of

audit committee quality, while organisational effectiveness is operationalised with

a collection of elements that are vital to its conceptualisation. The results show

strong and significant effect of audit committee members’ qualification on

organisational effectiveness, while audit committee size and audit committee

members’ experience is seen to have insignificant effect on organisational

effectiveness.

First, that all independent variables show strong and positive effect or influence on

organisational effectiveness is in tandem with conventional or anecdotal reasoning

and conceptualisation as internal control and auditing practice and procedures are

enhanced, external auditor(s) correspondences such as complains, queries,

observations, remunerations, etc. are given adequate attention; and the entire gamut
of financial reporting frameworks is given close attention to ensure adaptation of

the organisational reporting methods to changes in the framework. This will in no

small measure make the organisation attain its objectives and become more

effective by extension.

Second, the positive effect of audit committee size on organisational effectiveness

implies that having the right board size goes a long way in strengthening the

organisation to achieve its goals. Besides, the members’ possession of the requisite

qualification is vital in the achievement of such goals. This is not complex as the

regulatory framework stipulates that at least a member of the audit committee

should have the necessary knowledge and experience in financial matters.

 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY OF FINDING, CONCLUSION AND

RECOMMMENDATIONS

5.1 Summary of Findings

From the analysis above, the following findings were made:

(1) There is positive and insignificant effect of audit committee size on

organisational effectiveness.

(2) There is a positive and significant effect of audit committee members’

qualification on organisational effectiveness.

(3) There is a positive and insignificant effect of audit committee members’

experience on organisational effectiveness.

5.2 Conclusion
This research work was aimed at establishing how the quality of audit committee

affects the effectiveness of private business organisations in Nigeria. Generally, the

results present evidence of mixed effect of audit committee quality on

organisational effectiveness. Besides, given that all the independent variables show

evidence of strong effect on organisational effectiveness, it can also be inferred

categorically that there is a strong, but mixed effect of audit committee quality on

organisational effectiveness in Nigeria.

5.3 Recommendations
Sequel to the findings and deductions from this study, the following

recommendations are suggested:

(1) The stipulations of Financial Reporting Council Act, as regards audit

committee size should be considered in setting the benchmark for

audit committee size.

(2) Having the requisite financial knowledge should be accorded top

priority in setting an audit committee.

(3) Individuals who have served in similar capacity should be considered

and appointed into audit committees.

[5/17, 12:23 PM] +234 812 663 8586:

Bowling & Beehr 2006

Einarsen, 2000

Syed et al 2011

Chia & Kee 2018

Weziak-Bialowolski & Mcneely 2020

Mcdonald, Brown & Smith 2018

Jani, Mutsuddi, Das & Momotaj 2020

Tag-Eldeen, Barakat & Dar 2017

Ngwane 2018

Pandey 2020

Paul & Kee 2020

Tangem 2017

Isaiah, Ojiabo & Alagha 2017

Okongwu 2017

Ajayi 2018

Legbeti, Balogun & Okorie 2017

Acosta et al 2012

Mahar, Shah & Hussain 2021

Acosta et al 2010

Heather 2004

Einarsen & Raknes 1997

ILO 2018

Scott-Lennon & Considine, 2008

Dollard et al., 2016

Rayner et al., 2002

Hoel & Cooper, 2000

Einarsen 1999
Leymann 1996

Saunders et al., 2007

Owoyemi 2010

Fajana, Owoyemi, Shadare, Elegbede & Gbajumo-Sheriff 2011

Owoyemi & Akintayo 2019

Owoyemi & Sheehan 2011

Einarsen 2000

Wilson 1991

Leymann 1990

Einarsen et al., 1994

Baillien & De Witte 2009

Morenzo-Jimenez et al., 2009

Baillien et al., 2008

Hauge et al., 2007

Brodsky 1976

Neyens et al 2007

Hoel, Giga and Davidson 2007

Hoel et al 2001

Tepper et al 2006

Beale & Hoel 2011

Crowley, 2014

Neuberger 1996, 2006

Salin 2003

Baron et al 1974

Bailey, Dollard & Tuckey, 2014

Warr 1998

Kaushik & Walsh 2019

Johnson & Onwuegbuzie 2004

Onwuegbuzie & Johnson 2006

Teddlie & Tashakkori 2009

Einarsen 2009

Williams & Anderson 1991

Alade 2016

Bell & Bryman 2019

Daly 2002

Cresswell 2003