DISCUSSION OF RESEARCH FINDINGS
5.3 DISCUSSION OF RESEARCH FINDINGS
5.3.2 Theme 2: Organising practices of ECCD directors
Research question 2: How do the directors organise ECCD centre activities?
In addressing the second research question, the researcher explored how ECCD centre directors apply the organisation principles in their centres. The findings revealed that some directors succeeded in establishing governance structures and mobilising parents and committee members as critical resources to support their ECCD programmes. On the other hand, it also appears that some centres were yet to develop a mechanism to tap into available community resources for effective and efficient ECCD services delivery. The finding revealed that while only a few ECCD centres appeared to have advanced a sufficient system for mobilising resources to augment the government’s Capitation Grant, most centres seemed overly dependent on that grant, implying an insufficient resource mobilisation approach. Maintaining positive ECCD centre-community ties seemed to be a general problem facing some ECCD centres.
The above finding is consistent with the literature where Kwashabawa and Oduwaiye (2016) and Mustafa and Pranoto (2019) argue that establishing management structures can serve as an organising mechanism and, when applied effectively, can guarantee optimal use of community resources to achieve managerial effectiveness and efficiency. However, this view is only partly representative of the empirical findings from this study.
Based on the findings, the researcher argues that ECCD programme management is a resource- intensive venture and mobilisation of resources from the community is significant in complementing funding from the government. The researcher, therefore, contends that ECCD centre communities can serve as a source of ECCD management inputs in the form of social resources. ECCD directors must acquire the requisite skills and knowledge in resource mobilisation to tap into the community’s resources to achieve organisational efficiency and effectiveness. Furthermore, the researcher believes that mobilising critical ECCD centre management resources on time can be key enablers in implementing the ECCD improvement plan. The above findings correspond well with the study's theoretical framework elements.
Accordingly, the organisation of resources has been incorporated into the proposed contextual
155
framework of the management of ECCD centres at the management inputs and process stages of the framework.
In addition to mobilising resources, the study’s empirical findings indicated that one of the ECCD director’s organising functions includes providing distributed, instructional and administrative leadership. The following organising activities were reported to be practiced explicitly by the majority of ECCD directors: ECCD curriculum planning, organising in-service training for caregivers and teachers, procuring teaching and learning resources, allocating teachers to their various classes, vetting teachers’ learner plans, and delegating responsibilities by appointing ECCD programme level coordinators. Other organising activities involved monitoring teaching and learning, motivating staff, mentoring inexperienced teachers, and sharing the centre’s vision with staff and parents. The empirical findings further revealed that the most used organising activities were establishing administrative and management structures through parents’
associations, school management committees, and other internal committees.
The above findings align with those of Kabiru, Theuri, and Misiko (2018), who noted that the management function of organising is determining activities, dividing and grouping organisational activities, allocating duties, delegating authority and establishing responsibility, and harmonising authority and task relationships. The above findings also concur with those of Liberman (2014), who explains that organising is the process of utilising the planning function by putting together and allocating necessary human, financial, physical, and information resources to accomplish the organisation's mission and vision.
The previous findings imply that successful ECCD programme management organisation requires the effective use of Fayol’s administrative management principle of authority and responsibility, which ECCD directors can achieve by establishing ECCD centre governance structures. This corresponds with Kongnyuy (2020), who argues that when managers effectively use the management principle of authority and responsibility, they have the legal right to exercise authority by issuing orders, commands, and instructions that force personnel to execute a given task. In this case, both the superior and subordinate's responsibilities become the outcome of authority.
156
The empirical findings further indicated that Fayol’s management principle of the degree of centralisation had been utilised by some of the directors through the practice of distributed leadership, making it possible for the principle of decentralisation to fit into ECCD centre management practices properly. The findings showed that some ECCD directors usually identify leadership qualities in particular staff members and delegate control to them in various departments and sections. This finding corresponds with those of Cornito (2021) and Rini, Sukamto, Ridwan, and Hariri (2019), who argue that the distribution of authority promotes the decentralisation of the decision-making process at middle and lower levels of management as a way of striking a good balance in the organisation. The above findings are compatible with the elements of the theoretical framework of this study. Hence, Fayol’s management principle of the degree of centralisation has been integrated into the proposed contextual framework for the management of ECCD centres.
In addition, the empirical findings showed that most ECCD directors made good use of the management principle of division of work. This was evident in ECCD directors assigning roles and responsibilities to different categories of ECCD centre personnel, such as caregivers, teachers, and non-teaching staff, such as kitchen staff, and the school nurse, based on their specialisation. This means the division of labour helps to maximise ECCD service delivery. The finding concurs with that of Cornito (2021), who indicated that the management principle requires that employees specialise in different areas with different skills and expertise. The researcher, therefore, suggests that in addition to ensuring management efficiency, applying the management principle of division of labour can help ECCD directors support the personal and professional developments of staff and promote the efficiency of staff to increase improved ECCD service delivery. The empirical findings corresponded well with the elements of the theoretical framework of this study. Accordingly, the management principle of division of labour has been integrated into the proposed contextual framework. This implies that in implementing the proposed contextual framework for ECCD centre management, applying the principle of division of labour is necessary to achieve management effectiveness and efficiency.
Furthermore, the empirical findings suggest that most ECCD directors used the unity of command management principle by giving instructions and command to caregivers, teachers, and non-teaching staff. It was evident that ECCD directors’ job descriptions give them authority
157
to assign duties and responsibilities to staff and ensure such orders emanate from one source to avoid conflicting orders. In addition, it came to light that an organisational chart at some ECCD centres ensures unity of command and prevents disorder and conflicting directives. The finding seemed to suggest that the effective application of the management principle of unity of command in ECCD settings ensures that the ECCD centre runs under the supervision of the director. Furthermore, it ensures that children, caregivers, teachers, and non-teaching staff follow the director's direction to achieve quality ECCD outcomes.
Another management principle presented in the finding was the principle of unity of direction.
Directors’ use of this principle was evident when the centre’s programmes were grouped into departments such as crèche, nursery, kindergarten, kitchen unit, finance, and administration. The findings seemed to suggest that ECCD directors create these departments with the sole aim of effective management to achieve the overall mission and vision of the ECCD programme effectively and efficiently. The above empirical findings are consistent with those of Bacud (2020), who argues that the management principle of unity of command requires that to avoid confusion as a result of conflicting orders from more than one superior, staff must be answerable to one superior, and the application of this principle helps to trace sources of mistakes easily.
The above findings also align with Tanzeh's (2019) claim that the management principle of unity of command ensures employees’ attention and unison.
The researcher proposes that the effective utilisation of the principle of unity of command is necessary when implementing the proposed contextual framework for the management of ECCD centres for efficient and effective management. This is because its application can ensure that all ECCD personnel direct their efforts towards the planned ECCD goals and activities as a team.
The findings seemed to imply that ECCD directors are required to be responsible for planning and monitoring the progress of implementing the ECCD’s improvement plan and coordinating personnel’s activities.
In addition, the empirical findings revealed evidence to suggest that directors effectively utilised the management principle of order in the organising function of mobilising human, instructional material, and financial resources. This was evident when some directors acquired teaching and learning materials such as markers, curriculum materials, and syllabi. Furthermore, the
158
management principle of order was effectively used by some directors through recruiting qualified ECCD personnel for the effective implementation of the ECCD curriculum. This finding aligns with Gupta (2014) and Lussier (2021), who argue that the principle of order emphasised that it is the responsibility of managers to provide required resources to staff and ensure that the work environment is not only safe but tidy and clean so that staff can perform at their optimal level. The finding seemed to imply that directors' effective use of the management principle of order can facilitate achieving ECCD outcomes.
Furthermore, the empirical finding showed that Fayol’s management principle of discipline was recognised as a significant ECCD centre organising element, and it was effectively utilised through the development and use of codes of conduct for ECCD centre personnel and rules and regulations for children to regulate behaviour, as well as train children. The above finding concurs with that of Shakir (2014), who claimed that Fayol’s administrative management principle of discipline is about compliance with the organisation’s core values, mission and vision statements, rules and regulations, and code of conduct, which encourage good conduct and respectful interactions of staff as necessary for the smooth running of organisations. Based on the findings, the researcher argues that the management principle of discipline is a key component of ECCD directors organising activities. Therefore, directors need to ensure that discipline prevails at all times to enable the smooth implementation of the ECCD curriculum.
Furthermore, it was revealed in the literature review that collaboration with family and community members ensures continued support for ECCD programme planning and implementation (Ololube, Ingiabuna & Agbor, 2014). However, the findings indicated that in most ECCD centres, social and personal connections with families and communities appeared to be tenuous. The findings implied that implementing ECCD improvement programmes may be harder to sustain in some community contexts. It also suggested that many ECCD centres’ needs remain high and pressing. The above finding is inconsistent with Ali's (2019), who argues that stakeholder involvement in managing educational institutions, such as involving local community members in management, is a source of organisational strength.
Similarly, the researcher believes that the social capital of a neighbourhood can be a significant resource for improving ECCD outcomes. From the preceding discussions, the researcher proposes that the capacity of some centres to sustain developing the essential ECCD centre-
159
community support appeared to have fallen by the wayside. This may be attributed to the lack of knowledge and skills in applying Fayol’s management principle of initiative effectively.
Furthermore, encouraging employees’ initiative can help ECCD stakeholders express new ideas that can encourage their interest and involvement.
The empirical findings also suggest that providing an appropriate temporal environment to facilitate personal care routines, such as meals/snacks, toileting/diapering, and safety practices that promote children’s personal care practices, appeared insufficiently organised by most ECCD centres. The findings seemed to indicate that the application of Fayol’s management principle of order appeared not to be in effective use. Fayol argued that managers are responsible for providing the required resources to staff and ensuring that the work environment is safe, tidy, and clean so that staff can perform optimally (Mezieobi, Nzokurum & Mezieobi, 2014). The findings seemed to imply that the management principle of order is relevant because in ECCD settings, recruiting qualified ECCD personnel and making available sufficient instructional resources are key management responsibilities of directors for the effective implementation of the ECCD curriculum. However, the above view is only partly representative of the empirical findings from this study.
In summary, the findings proved that the management function of organising is one of the elements of administrative management theory that ECCD directors carry out once an improvement plan of action is designed. The empirical findings discussed in this section revealed that the findings broadly agree with findings in the existing literature and correspond with the elements of the classical management theory, specifically, the administrative theory, which is the theoretical framework of this study. The findings suggest that the organising function of the ECCD director helps implement the centre’s improvement plan through resource mobilisation and making them available in the correct quantity at the right time. Furthermore, the findings showed that in order to perform the organising function effectively, directors need to focus on providing everything necessary to carry out the ECCD improvement plan, identify and establish responsibilities for each stakeholder and departments, and specify the ECCD centre’s organisational structure to guide the chain of command and governance structure. Furthermore, the study brought to light the fact that the majority of ECCD directors appeared to lack adequate knowledge and skills in applying Fayol’s administrative management principles of authority and
160
responsibility, degree of centralisation, division of work, unity of command, and unity of direction when organising their ECCD activities. This means that the above management principles should serve as guiding principles for directors to perform their management function of organising. Accordingly, the aforementioned management principles have become prerequisites for achieving effective and efficient ECCD programme management when using the proposed contextual framework for managing ECCD centres.