NIGERIAN' JOURNAL OF

MANAGEMENT AND
. SOCIAL SCIENCES
.r.

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1802366

153

"-

BUREAUCRACY AND ACCOUNTANCY EFFECTIVENESS OF TERTIARY

INSTITUTIONS'
ACCOUNTANTS IN CROSS RIVER STATE
'E.J. 0f(gye
'Department of .9/.ccountancy
7I/jtamcEiYlzikjllJe 'University, .9/.wkp

ABSTRACT
he

aim of this study was to investigate the

relationship
between
bureaucracy
and
effectiveness
of accountants
in tertiary
institutions of Cross River State. To achieve this
objective, two hypotheses
were formulated
and
tested. Two sets of questionnaire,
Bureaucracy
questionnaire (BO) and accountants' effectiveness
questionnaire (AAEO) were developed, validated,
and
administered
to
one
hundred
senior
accounting
officers including
the Bursars, and
three hundred other staff in the Accounts/Bursary
Departments
of these institutions
respectively,
which
were
drawn
using
stratified
random
sampling
method for one hundred
accounting
departments/units
of the tertiary institutions in the
state. The data obtained
was analyzed
using
contingency chi-square (X2) and Pearson product
moment
correlation
analysis
at .05 level of
significance. The major results showed that there
is a significant relationship between Bureaucracy
and Accountants'
effectiveness
in accountancy.
But no significant
relationship
exists between
bureaucracy
and
accountants'
overall
effectiveness.
Also, the accountant's
style of
performing
his jot: is not contingent
upon his
perceived
level of bureaucratic
control.
Some
recommendations
were made.

INTRODUCTION
Essentially, for any organization
to
attain its institutional goal. It may require
a good organizational structure. It is in the
realization of this fact that Webber (1997)
conceived of bureaucracy as a powerful
and efficient form of administration with
respect
to
stability,
control
and
predictability in outcomes. Over the years,
organizational
theorists
have
viewed
bureaucratic
structure from two stand
points. The first is to view bureaucracy as
a tool to facilitate the accomplishment of
institutional goais. The second view is to
view
bureaucracy
as a means
of
exercising power and control over person
(Eisenstadt,
1989) or as a system of
control, an hierarchical
organization
in
which
superiors
strictly
control
and

discipline the activities of subordinates

(Haralambos and Heald, 1985).
The practice of bureaucracy in tertiary
institutions' accountancy Departments in
Nigeria has not only created a system
that is so dependent on regulations and
directives,
which creates unnecessary
delays in implementation
of financial
decisions,
policies that are not quite
flexible and alterable in practice but also
buck-passing. The instances of the effect
of this bureaucratic practice is apparent in
delaying the disbursement of funds to pay
salaries and other benefits/allowances
and procurements of equipment, etc to
this end. Centre and- Black-Bourn, (1992)
opined that public schools suffer from the
effects
of
bureaucracy
based
on
paradigms
inappropriate
for the task
entrusted to them.
Tertiary
institutions
are
not
successfully carrying out their institutional
objectives of ensuring that their products
are effectively packaged and prepared for
gainful life in the society. On their own
part,
the
Accountants
blame
the
bureaucratic
system for the lapses in
execution
of financial
decisions
and
communication
etc. In line with the
second view of bureaucracy, this study is
embarked
upon to examine how the
bureaucratic
control
mechanisms
influence the work of the Accountants.
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Bureaucracy
as
a
management
control mechanism which the bosses use
to
regulate
the
functions
of
the
subordinates is sup.posed to result in the
effectiveness
of
tertiary
institutions
accountants.
This
same
control
mechanism
has generated
a lot of
complaints
from
tertiary
institutions'

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1802366

 ~11)~IIIII-;II~y

j\}ifjeJ'iclfl

I/I/d

154

..*1'1)/11/,7;1/7

I}IJ14J'nal

"6 jhanafjeH1ent

anJ SIJcial

Sciences

accountants in Cross River State. Their

complaints not only include over-control
that leaves them no room for financial
initiatives,
improper
supervision
and
communication lapses, but also improper
timing in their implementation of certain
policies and ineffective enforcement of
financial discipline on erring staff. This
study aims at examining
how these
prevailing problems influence the work of
the accountants,
and hence advance
possible solutions.
THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to
determine
if there is any significant
relationship existing between bureaucracy
and the accountant's
effectiveness
of
tertiary
institutions
accountants.
The
specific purpose of this study therefore is
to find out whether
decision-making,
financial
communication,
funds
disbursement, and accountancy style as
indices that reveal the effectiveness of the
accountant
has
any
significant
relationship with bureaucracy.
HYPOTHESES
In order to find solutions to the study
problem, the underlisted hypotheses were
formulated as a 'guide:
Hypothesis I. (Ho): There is no significant
relationship
between . the Accountant's
effectiveness
and perceived
level of
bureaucratic control. i.e.
a) Accountancy
effectiveness
of
tertiary institutions' accountants.
b) Accountant's
effectiveness
in the
communication
of
financial
information
c) Accountant's
effectiveness
in
motivation
d) Accountant's
effectiveness
in the
disbursement of funds.
e) Accountant's
effectiveness
in
decision-making.
Hypothesis II (Hi): There is no significant
relationship
between
the accountant's

accountancy
effectiveness
and
their
perceived level of bureaucratic control.
METHODOLOGY
The Research Design and Study Area
The research design used in this study
was causal comparative (ex-post facto)
defined by Kerlinger (1973,379) as:
-----a systematic empirical inquiry in
which the scientist does not have
direct control of independent variables
because their manipulations have
already occurred or because they are
inherently not manipulable. Inferences
about relationship among variables
are made without directintervention
from
concomitant
variation. of
independent
and
dependent
variables.

The study covered six campuses of

tertiary institutions in Cross River State of
Nigeria
Namely:
Crutech
- Calabar,
Akamkpa, Obubra and Ogoja. Otheres
are Unical, Calabar and FCE, Obudu.
THE POPULATION OF THE STUDY
The
population
for
the
study
comprised one hundred and forty seven
(147) accountants
and two thousand
seven hundred and fifty two (2,752)
others in one hundred and forty seven
(147)
Accounting
Department/Units,
across the six campuses of the tertiary
institutions in Cross River State.
THE SAMPLING PROCEDURE AND
SAMPLE
Since some of the tertiary institutions
are ether owned by the state Government
or the Federal Government in the State, a
simple percentage sampling method was
used to draw upa 10% sample size out of
the total number of accounting staff from
each of the six campuses. Three senior
accounting
staff
each
per
campus
representing 3% were further randomly
sampled there from.
In order to do this, a list of other
accounting staff who have spent at least 3
years under their senior accountants were
compiled. Using the staff disposition, and
using the sampling method, three staff
that met the criteria was selected per

,J.

155
Pearson products moment Correlation
Coefficient Analyses of the
Relationship between Bureaucracy
and Accountant's Effectiveness in Five
(5) Variables
N 100

sampled
area.
Thus,
100
senior
accounting staff and 300 other accounting
staff on the whole served as the sample
for this study.
. THE RESEARCH INSTRUMENT
Two sets of the questionnaire,
the
Bureaucracy Questionnaire (BQ) and the
accountant's Accountancy
Effectiveness
Questionnaire
(AAEQ)
were used to
collect relevant, data for this study after
being developed
and validated.
The
instruments were properly scrutinized and
re-tested by statisticians, and necessary
corrections
were effected
from their
suggestions. The reliability coefficient was
determined
thus;
Bureaucracy
.68,
Accountancy effectiveness .72, Motivation
.60, Communication
.57, Decision
making
.63,
Disbursement
.61 and
Accounting style .56,

Variables
Bureaucracy (Xl
Accountancy
Effectiveness (V,)
Motivation (V 2)
Communication
(V,)
DecisionMaking
(V,)
Disbursement
of
Funds (Vs)

LX

LX

LXV

)y

L.:/.

r-Value

1,398
1,426

19,788
20,636

19,975

0.1458

1.329
1,405

17,903
19,915

18,693
19,693

0.2872'
0.2475'

1,324

17,840

18,553

0.1580

1,397

19,845

19,563

0.1198

Decision

..

*P < .05; df = 98, Critical -r = 0.1946

Given the unstated r-values of their
respective variables, the null hypotheses
were retained because these are less
than the critical r - value of 0.1946 for 98
degree
of freedom
at .05 level of
confidence.
While for the stared r - values for their
respective variables, the null hypotheses
were rejected as these are greater than
the critical r-value of 0.1946 for 98
degrees of freedom
at .05 level of
confidence.
HPYOTHESIS II (H1): There
is
no
significant
relationship
between
the
Accountant's
accountancy
effectiveness
and their perceived level of bureaucratic
control.

FINDINGS
Hypothesis
(Ho): There is significant
relationship
between
Accountant's
accountancy
effectiveness
and
their
perceived level of bureaucratic control.

Table I

TABLE 2
Chi-square
(X2) Analysis of Contingency of Accountant's Accountancy
Effectiveness on Perceived Level of Bureaucratic Control
Democratic Transaction Autocratic
of

fe

of

Ie

Of

fe

Total

Cal X2

Value
High
Moderate

21

Low
Total

16

13
50

18.5
11.5
20

6
7

10

23

8.51
5.29
9.2

10
3
14

27

9.99

Critical
X2 Value

Decision

37

6.21

23

10.8

40
100

5.304

9.49

NS
Donat
Reject

H02

P < .05, df = 4, critical XL value - 9.49

Hypothesis
2
stated
that
the
analysis on table 2 (5.304) < the critical
Accountant's Accountancy
effectiveness
X2 value of 9.49 for 4 degrees of freedom
is not contingent upon his perceived level,
at ,as level of confidence.
The null
of bureaucratic control. The value of X2
hypothesis was therefore not rejected.

 -/JIIJrl'lllr)(lr;j

11111'/.

1..:!rm1l,1#t"7

j\JifJetian !}cutnal c.6jUanafJement an~Scdal

156

SdeneeJ

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
The low positive correlation between
Bureaucracy
and
Accountancy
effectiveness of the accountants showed
in this study means that Bureaucracy
does not necessarily ensure Accountancy
effectiveness of the Accountants on their
jobs. To control the resource allocation
and also dish out rules on how the
Accountant should perform his work and
attain efficiency is very laudable but such
rules must remember changes that do
occur in the school system such as
slackness
in fee payment,
incessant
closure of schools, with academic staff
drifting out of the system
etc. the
mechanism of control must not be too
rigid so that it does not give the
Accountant the flexibility he requires to
meet the challenges of his work as a
result of such changes as highlighted
above. In line with this result, the findings
of Peterson (1984), Morris, Crowson and
Porte-Gehrie
(1981) shows that some
Accounting tasks to the Accountant are
constrained
by rules, procedures
and
directives.
There
was a significant
positive
relationship
between bureaucracy
and
Accountant
effectiveness.
This implies
that
an
efficient
accountant
can
adequately motivate his other staff using
the
available
resources
while
still
operating within the limits of the rules
governing his job.
The significant
positive
correlation
between bureaucracy and Accountant's
communication effectiveness shows that
the Accountant's
function
as a link
between their bosses and the campus is
enhanced by the established channel of
communication.!
this positive conclusion
coincides with the works of Etuk (1989)
and Dale (1985) that, communication that
is devoid
of rigidity
motivates
the
Accountant
to
improve
on
his
performance
and
that
Accountant's
effectiveness depends on the ability of
their bosses to hear them.

The outcome of this study reveals no

significant
relationship
between
bureaucracy
and
the
Accountant's
effectiveness
in decision making. This
study result was in line with the work of
Peterson
(1984)
and
Newman
and
Wallender (1978) that Accountants were
extensively constrained in decisions over
the amount of flow of input to the schools.
CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION
The conclusion from this study is that
bureaucratic control over the work of the
accountant
does
not
guarantee
Accountancy effectiveness of accountants
particularly
in the areas of decision
making and timely disbursement of funds.
While
the
rules
governing
the
accountant's work facilitate effectiveness
in
motivation
and
financial
communication. It was recommended that
the governing councils of the various
institutions and professional accounting
bodies that formulate policies regarding
the role and sphere of influence of
Accountants in tertiary institutions should
strive to ensure an appropriate balance
between
bureaucratic
controls
over
Accountants and the autonomy granted
them that will optimize
Accountant's
Accountancy effectiveness with a view to
achieving organizational goals.
REFERENCES
Centre,
D.B &
Blackbourn,
J.M. (1992).
Monopolistic Educational Bureaucracy (MEB);
the Dis-Ease Destroying Public Education. Ericdigest, 33 (66), 571-599
Dale, S.B. (1985): Managing People at work:
Reading in Personnel. New York: Macmillan
Publishers Co. Inc.
Eisenstadt,
N.
(1989):
Bureaucracy,
Bureaucratization
and
Debureaucratization.
Administrative Science Quarterly. 4,302-320
Etuk, E.J. (1989): Management Communication in
the Context of Human Relations, Motivations
and Productivity in Public Management. Journal
of the Cross River Public Service. 1(20,23-25
Haralambos, M. & Heald R.M. (1985): Sociology:
Themes and Perspectives. 2nd ed. London:
Urwin Human Ltd.
Kellinger, F.N. (1973): Foundations of Behavioural
Research. New York. Holt, Rinehart and Wiston

157
Morris, V.C., Crowson, R.L., Hurwitz, E. & PoterGerhrie,
C. (1981):
The
Urban
Principal:
Discretionary Organization.
Final Report to the
National Institute of Education.
Washington D.
C., 29 (10),573 - 97.
Newman, W. H. & Waiiender,
H. W. (1978):
Managing-not-for
Profit Enterprises. Academy of
Management Review, 3.24-31

Peterson,
K.D.
(1984):
Mechanisms
of
Administrative
Control
over
Managers
in
Education. Administrative
Science Quarterly.29
(10), 573-597.
Webber, M. (1997): The Theory of Social and
Economic Organizations.
New York: Free Press.