Key Features:

- No of Pages: 54

- No of Chapters: 5

- Well detailed

Buy Now

Introduction:

Abstract

This study examined the effect of labour turnover in an organizational efficiency in advice economic activities. The work was carried using Nigeria institution for palm research Benin City as a case study. In this project, data were obtained through primary and secondary source, primary data were collected by means of questionnaires and oral interview administered to the organization the frame work of understanding; labour turnover and its effect in Nigeria institutions for oil palm research (NIFOR).

Finally, the performer appraised should be them fail. Conducted every six month to keep employee on the appraisal distortion between high and low, performers will exist and management should therefore discourage tenor of low performers after to develop.



Table of Content

Title Page: ……………………………..……………………………………… i

Certification: ……………………….………………………………………… ii

Dedication: ……………………………...…………………………………….iii

Acknowledgements: ………………………………………...………………...iv

Abstract: ……………………………………………………………………….v

Table of contents…………………………………………………………….vi



CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study: ………………………………………………1

1.2 Statement of Problem: ………………………………………………….2

1.3 Research Questions:……………………………………………………..2

1.4 Objectives of the Study: ……………………………………………….2-3

1.5 Statement of Hypothesis (es): …………………………………………..3

1.6 Siygnificance of the Study: …………………………………………...3-4

1.7 Scope of the Study: ………………………………………………….4-5

1.8 Limitation of the Study: ……………………………………………..5-6

1.9 Definitions of Terms: ……………………………………………….6-7



CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

2.1 Introduction: ……………………………………………………………..8

2.2 Types of labour turnover ………………..............................................8-13

2.3 Causes of labour turnover…………………………………...………13-16

2.4 Labour turnover process……………………………………………..16-18

2.5 Consequences ……………………………………………………….18-26



CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHOD AND DESIGN

3.1 Introduction: ………………………………………………………….27

3.2 Research Design: ……………………………………………………..27

3.3 Description of Population of the Study: ……………………………...27

3.4 Sample Size: ………………………………………………………….27

3.5 Sampling Technique: ……………………………………………..27-28

3.6 Sources of Data Collection: …………………………………………….28

3.7 Method of Data Presentation: …………………………………………..28

3.8 Method of Data Analysis: ………………………………………………29



CHAPTER FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND HYPOTHESIS TESTING

4.1 Introduction: ………………………………………………………….30

4.2 Presentation of Data: ……………………..………………………30-35

4.3 Data Analysis: …………………………………………………………36

4.4 Hypothesis Testing: …………………………………………………37-38



CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction: ……………………………………………………………39

5.2 Summary of Findings: …………………………………………….39-40

5.3 Conclusion: ………………………………………………………….40-41

5.4 Recommendation: …………………………………………………...41-42

REFERENCES………………………………………………………43-44

APPENDIX……………………………………………………………..45

Appendix A……………………………………………………………46

Appendix B…………………………………………………………….46

Appendix C………………………………………………………….46-47

Introduction

Generally, all costs related to the leaving and replacement of employees can be considered to be cost of recruitment and selection. As early as 1960, turnover costs with as advertising, college recruiting, and applicants travel expenses, medical examinations and psychological testing recruitment awards for employees, and hotel entertainment.



The costs of these items can be accounted for, and the same roughly holds for the loss of sales because of vacancies and higher average pay due to extra overtime. More difficult to estimate are the extra expenditures for training and learning contextual skills, because these includes also the costs of coaching, supervision and the; loss of quality and product output.



Even more complicated is the accounting for items like the loss of team productivity. The loss of effectiveness of informal communication and co-ordination process and a decreased motivation of those employees who are left behind Mobley (1982).



Mitchell and Corbett (1998) estimated the costs of labour turnover to US companies “to be several billion dollars per year” of which 20 percent consists of direct turnover costs and 80 percent of costs than can be associated but are not directly visible.