This document summarizes a research study that examined lecturers' experiences with moonlighting (holding multiple jobs) at the Ghana Institute of Management and Public Administration (GIMPA). The study found that moonlighting is common at GIMPA, with the institutional environment conducive to the practice. Lecturers engage in moonlighting primarily as a source of additional income to supplement their low salaries. However, lecturers also acknowledged negative effects of moonlighting such as impacts on teaching quality and student support. The lack of an institutional policy on moonlighting was cited as allowing lecturers to determine their own behavior in this regard. The study provided insights into moonlighting in Ghana's higher education sector but had a

1. Moonlighting in Ghana’s higher
education institutions: exploring
lecturers’ experiences at the Ghana
Institute of Management and Public
Administration (GIMPA)
Emmanuel Kojo Sakyi
Department of Public Administration and Health Services Management,
University of Ghana Business School, Accra, Ghana, and
Kingsley Senyo Agomor
Department of Governance and Leadership,
GIMPA School of Public Services and Governance, Accra, Ghana
Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to examine lecturers’ experiences of moonlighting in the Ghana Institute of
Management and Public Administration (GIMPA).
Design/methodology/approach – A qualitative approach was used. Data were collected through in-depth
semi-structured interviews with 18 purposively selected informants. Data were transcribed and analyzed
thematically.
Findings – The findings are that moonlighting is common at GIMPA, and the institutional environment is
conducive for the practice. Knowledge of the practice is unclear. However, moonlighting serves as a source of
additional income for lecturers, which a significant majority describe as enabling their continuing employment
at GIMPA, but many pointed out the negative effects as well. Lack of a policy to control the behavior has been
cited as a reason for the problem, which left lecturers to self-determine what to do. Moonlighting practice is
affecting the quality of teaching and support to students by the lecturers.
Research limitations/implications – The sample of the respondents who participated in the study is small
and limited to 18. Their views cannot be generalized to all higher education institutions. But, the results show
the seriousness of the problem and its implications.
Practical implications – Moonlighting is prevalent in GIMPA. It suggests that employees of other public
higher education institutions are no immune to it.
Originality/value – This study is the first of its kind to explore the practice of moonlighting in a quasi-public
higher education institution in Ghana. It has added to the empirical literature on the practice and the effects on
the institution.
Keywords Moonlighting, GIMPA, Lecturers, Motivations, Benefits, Implications
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
It is evident from the literature that moonlighting behavior is a pervasive phenomenon in the
publicsector and in higher education institutions in many countries (Ashmore and Gilson, 2015).
The behavior is known by different names and conceptions. According to Shishko and Rostker
(1976) and Baah-Boateng (2013), moonlighting is a situation whereby an individual keeps his or
her primary job and undertakes extra jobs or activities. Moonlighting in theuniversity context is
when a lecturer holds more than one teaching jobs in different universities or outside the
Exploring
lecturers’
experiences
(GIMPA)
This research project is funded by the University of Ghana Business School Conference and Research
Committee.
Conflict of interest statement: On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no
conflict of interest.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/2050-7003.htm
Received 10 January 2020
Revised 24 February 2020
Accepted 11 March 2020
Journal of Applied Research in
Higher Education
© Emerald Publishing Limited
2050-7003
DOI 10.1108/JARHE-01-2020-0006

2. university system. Lecturers moonlight with the aim to augment basic salaries, and they do it by
engaging in a wide range of academic and non-academic activities within and outside their
primary employment (Amde et al., 2018). How the behavior is viewed and judged varies. Many
recognize and understand the underlying reasons. A World Bank report points out, with wages
so low, it is difficult to condemn such behavior (World Bank, 2005).
Lecturers in public universities in Ghana are underpaid compared to the lecturers in the
private sector or employees with the same qualification in other sectors. Therefore, financial
needs, economic hardship and low salaries are mostly among the critical reasons why
lecturers at the university moonlight or hold multiple jobs or undertake informal activities
(Timothy and Nkwama, 2017). It is, therefore, arguable that moonlighting is an effort by
lecturers to maximize value with respect to salary and improve upon the working condition
as well as standard of living (Beynon et al., 2015, 2014; Timothy and Nkwama, 2017).
In contrast to this view, however, others such as Ascroft and Rayner (2011) have observed
that moonlighting is detrimental to the quality of teaching in tertiary institutions; they
emphasized that lecturer moonlighting is one of the more serious problems confronting
higher education in developing countries (World Bank, 2005). Also, there is the general
assumption that moonlighting undermines the already weak capacity of tertiary educational
institutions mandated to train future professionals, including lecturers in Africa. It is widely
believed that tertiary institutions in Sub-Saharan Africa lack the critical resources required to
fulfil their mandate of training the next generation of workforce, including lecturers
(Commission for Africa, 2005; Amde et al., 2018).
Aside the effects on the institutions, the individual lecturers suffer severally because of
moonlighting activities. Amini-Philips (2019) stated that many lecturers suffer illness and
burnout originating from extra work or moonlighting. The consequences of moonlighting are
many; it causes stress and sometimes affects the quality of teaching and student supervision
by lecturers. Lecturers who moonlight are more likely to be distracted at school (Champion,
2010). A lecturer who works long hours in a second job is much more likely to perform poorly
at the first teaching job. According to Hobbs and Stutz (2010), teachers agreed that the quality
of their instruction suffers when they moonlight.
But, most studies in Sub-Saharan Africa regarding lecturer moonlighting behavior in
higher education institutions seemed to be limited. Most often, studies involving
moonlighting have overly focus on health professionals, with more focus on the drivers,
impact and regulation of the activity (Amde et al., 2018). Also, studies on moonlighting in
Ghana have mainly centered on employment security and moonlighting behavior of workers
and the determinants of moonlighting (Baah-Boateng et al., 2013). In fact, it appears that the
phenomenon of lecturer moonlighting in higher educational institutions has received
relatively little or no attention. In fact, one is tempted to argue that lecturer moonlighting
behavior remained an unstudied phenomenon in Ghana. And, as a result of this gap, there
remained several unanswered questions regarding this behavior of lecturers in Ghanaian
higher education sector and institutions. For example, what is the effect of taking additional
job on the quality of work in the primary job, what is the effect on the individual and in which
ways is taking a second job affecting the organization or the employer? These and many other
related and very important questions require empirical investigation for answers. This study
is a modest attempt aimed at finding answers to some of these questions using the Ghana
Institute of Management and Public Administration (GIMPA) as a case study.
Study objectives
The study objectives are to:
(1) explore lecturer understanding and awareness of activities that qualify as
moonlighting;
JARHE

3. (2) identify the motive(s) for engaging in moonlighting activities;
(3) examine lecturer perception of the positive and negative effects of moonlighting;
(4) examine the existence of institutional control mechanisms aimed to manage the
practice, and;
(5) explore popular opinion on use of moonlighting activities for promotion purposes.
Literature review
The concept of moonlighting has been variously defined by several authors. Some refer to the
behavior as simultaneous holding of two or more jobs at the same time by an individual (Nunoo
et al., 2018; Vermeeren, 2017). Moonlighting as an employee conduct is mostly done without the
knowledgeofthemainemployer(BinMdSabronetal.,2017).Moonlightingisknownbydifferent
names such as multiple job holding, dual job holding, second job, pluriactivity, extra income,
double work, plural employment, side job and supplementary income (Timothy and Nkwama,
2017). According to Betts (2006), moonlighting refers to an individual having a second job, often
part-time and a primary employment, which is usually full-time. Alam (2016) asserts that the
concept of moonlighting can be categorized into two types. The first type includes employees
who engage in moonlighting with the consent of the main employer, and the second type,
employees who do moonlighting illegally. Another view espoused by Boyd et al. (2016) is that
moonlighting is generally an individual performing more than one job at the same time. And, in
the performance of the job, the primary job is undertaken during the day, while the extra part-
time job is executed mostly during the evenings or nights. It is observed, however, that some
workers these days combine both primary and secondary jobs during the day on separate days
and at different times, and there are workers who hold two different jobs as full-time jobs, Boyd
et al. (2016) observed. Moonlighting in its widest connotation refers to a worker holding more
than one job at the same time either over a period (six months) or permanently. This view is
trustworthy because it helps one to exclude workers employed on transitional jobs.
Several motives have been identified in the literature to explain and justify why employees
moonlight. Studies by Amini-Philips (2019) and Sussman (1998) isolate two reasons why
lecturers moonlight in Ghana: financial reasons and non-financial reasons. A financial reason
is to pay off debts, acquire something new and special, future savings and other economic
reasons. The following are listed as the non-financial reasons: gain experience, build up new
business, enjoy second job. Also, Baah-Boateng et al. (2013) explained that lecturers
undertake multiple jobs to ensure their continuous employment either in the teaching
profession or work in general, minimizing financial constraints as well as skills and expertise
accumulation in different occupation. Likewise, Amini-Philips (2019), Amuedo-Dorantes and
Kimmel (2009) and Baah-Boateng et al. (2013) observed that lecturers will moonlight to
balance their job portfolio and supplement income under the condition of financial need.
Further, Amuedo-Dorantes and Kimmel (2009) explained that lecturers moonlight to stabilize
their family income when there is a fall in real wage and increase in unemployment rate.
Conway and Kimmel (1998) added that negative financial shock and job insecurity are the
reasons why university lecturers moonlight. According to Baah-Boateng (2013), a survey by
the International Labor Organization depicts that 18 percent of the employees in Ghana hold
multiple jobs in the period of 2005/2006, a decline from 30 percent in 1998–1999.
Study context: brief profile of the Ghana institute of management and public
administration (GIMPA)
GIMPA was established in 1961 by the joint Ghana Government/United Nation (UN) special
fund project. Originally, the school was named as the Institute of Public Administration and
was set up as one of the key strategic institutions to develop the public administrative system,
Exploring
lecturers’
experiences
(GIMPA)

4. to provide civil servants with administrative and professional competence and to plan and
administer national, regional and local services. In 1966, the joint sponsorship ended, and the
UN formally handed over the institute to the Government of Ghana. In 1969, the institute was
then re-designed as the GIMPA to reflect its expanded functions. For more than 50 years,
GIMPA’s activities have been guided by five successive mandates, beginning with the first
legislative instrument of 1961 to the current GIMPA Act, 2004 (Act 676). Each mandate
affirmed the status of the institute as the national management development institute to
provide for the study of public administration and management in Ghana.
By its latest mandate, GIMPA now offers courses in its areas of competence leading to the
award of certificates, diplomas and degrees up to the doctoral level. The areas of competence
are defined to include training and education in leadership, management, public
administration, technology business and law.
GIMPA is fully state-owned, but does not receive subvention from the state to discharge
its public service mandate. It operates in a competitive environment without state subvention.
This gives other public universities a higher leverage over GIMPA. It has to mobilize its own
financial resources to survive as a public organization. However, GIMPA has transformed
itself into the leading management development institute and is an independent public
tertiary institution with financial and operational autonomy. GIMPA’s mission is to maintain
its position as a center of excellence for training in public and business administration, by
continuously enhancing the capability of middle- and top-level executives in the public and
private sectors as well as non-government organizations (NGOs) both in Ghana and abroad to
manage their institutions and enterprises efficiently and effectively. The institute is
accredited by the National Accreditation Board. In addition to the institutional accreditation,
GIMPA’s academic programs are also accredited by the National Accreditation Board. The
institute is made up of six schools, namely, School of Public Service and Governance (SPSG),
Ghana Business School (GBS), School of Technology (SOT), Faculty of Law (FLAW), School
of Liberal Arts and Social Sciences (SOLASS) and School of Research and Graduate Studies
(SRGS). GIMPA has nearly 200 academic staff, many being PhD holders with varied
backgrounds in science, technology, law, business and public administration.
Method and data collection procedure
A qualitative approach was suitable for this research, which was intended to explore views
and opinions of lecturers’ awareness and understanding of what constitute moonlighting or
holding multiple job, motives for taking another job, the existence and implementation of
existing policy on taking a second job, the benefits and effects on performance on the primary
job and the effects on the individual lecturers and the institution. In that regard, a qualitative
single-case study technique with focus on lecturers from GIMPA was our main source of data.
In-depth interviews that were guided by nine questions were the main source of data
collected. Interviewees were asked about the type of jobs they do aside their primary teaching
work, for how long they have been engaged, their primary reason for taking this new job and
the benefits, the existence of a policy on taking additional jobs and if they support the idea of
legalizing taking outside job and whether such activities should be considered in the
promotion policy of the institution. Other question pursued included the effects of taking
additional job on the individual and implication for the institution. A purposive sampling
technique was used to select interviewees who had an in-depth understanding of
moonlighting behavior or taking a second job in addition to the primary job. In total, 18
in-depth interviews were conducted between October and December 2019. The sample
consisted of 17 lectures; of this number, 14 were PhD holders and two master’s degree holders.
Ten out of the 17 interviewees were senior lecturers, and seven lecturers and four of this
cohort were head of the departments in the institution. Male lecturers were predominant in
JARHE

5. the sample, constituting 15 of these 18 interviewees; this was appropriate as male lecturers
tend to be the majority in the category of university teachers nationally. An additional
interview was conducted with the human resource director who, by virtue of her position, has
insider information about the work schedules, job-related activities of all workers and
policies/statutes of the institution. All the interviews were conducted on the main GIMPA
campus in Accra with the 18 interviewees.
Written data in the form of transcribed interviews, field notes based on observations and
informal discussions with the lecturers were analyzed by the researcher to gain an in-depth
understanding of motives, benefits and impact of holding multiple job on lecturers’
performance in the primary job and implications for the employer. Interviews and field notes
based on the informal discussions during the interview sessions in GIMPA in October and
December 2019 captured views of lecturers concerning the phenomenon of moonlighting
activities. Thematic analysis based on the steps suggested by Braun and Clarke (2006) was
then followed, enabling systematic coding and the development of themes.
The study was exploratory, with an emphasis on understanding the motives and
institutional conditions that push lecturers into moonlighting and the potential effects on the
individual and the institution. In analyzing the qualitative data for this research, coding
entailed reading all 18 interview transcripts with a view to isolating words and phrases that
related to the main research question, namely, lecturers’ motives for moonlighting, the
benefits and implications for the individual and institution. The data obtained from the
interviews and secondary sources were organized and analyzed thematically with the themes
generated deductively from the key research questions, but inductively from the qualitative
data (Patton, 2002; Braun and Clark, 2006). Broadly, analytical and thematic headings were
derived from the research questions. For example, what would you say about accepting
additional job/consultancy/teaching assignment outside your primary university contract?
Also, interviewees were asked to state motives and benefits for moonlighting activities
and in which way, policies of the institution would be fashioned to support or regulate such
activities. Codes like “multiple job,” “financial needs,” “benefits and policy implementation,”
“impact” and “legalization” were highlighted because they related to the research question
that entailed an understanding of factors that push lecturers to moonlight. Subsequently, the
words and phrases were grouped into the themes upon which this research article is based.
All the interviewees who took part in the study gave their informed consent to the use of the
data they provided. Because of the fear of possible targeting by the institution, appropriate
actions were taken to ensure the anonymity of the interviewees. Majority of interviewees,
especially those below the senior lectureship rank, advice that the researcher use the term
“lecturer” for purposes of anonymity rather than mentioning their actual names in the report.
In addition to the interviews, library, archival and other secondary sources, which could
provide information pertaining to lecturer moonlighting activities, were consulted and
reviewed. These documents included legislation, journal articles, consultancy documents/
guidelines and university rules/laws and bulletins. This review of secondary data helped
acquired information to respond to the research questions that directly seek to understand
moonlighting behavior and activities. What follows is a presentation of the findings, based on
a thematic analysis of the data. The first part examines the level of awareness of what
constitutes the moonlighting behavior and the motivations to engage in it; it is followed by the
benefits, adverse effects, existence and use of institutional legislation and policy to manage
the effects of the phenomenon on individual lecturers and the institution.
The study findings
This section presents the findings based on the data gathered from the interviewees. The
study findings are presented according to the categories generated from the interviews. The
first section presents the biographic data (Table 1) on the participants. This is followed by
Exploring
lecturers’
experiences
(GIMPA)

6. the key thematic areas, which included reasons and benefits for moonlighting, awareness of
policy governing such engagements and how they are being enforced and effects of
moonlighting on lecturers’ official work and implementation of institutional regulation and
policies on the practice.
Understanding activities that qualify as moonlighting
The finding on lecturers’ understanding and awareness of what constitutes the moonlighting
activity is mixed. The general opinion emerging from this study is that the participants
consider moonlighting as part of their condition of service. Most interviewees said:
Yes. It is part of our condition of service (Interview with Lecturer, November 2019).
There is high level of uncertainty among lecturers about which of their activities qualify as
moonlighting. One interviewee observed that:
What they do beside their university work does not constitute moonlighting. Accordingly, having
additional responsibility, even though it comes with additional pay or honorarium whether within or
outside the university does not constitute moonlighting or multiple jobs (Interview with Female
Lecturer, 2019).
When asked why they take additional jobs, majority of interviewees were uncertain or unsure
about what exactly constitute moonlighting. Some interviewees asked:
“Moonlighting in what sense”; when I accept to work for one of the regulatory agency, would you say
that constitute additional job? Or when I take additional periods within this university, would that
count as additional Job? (Interview with Lecturer/Senior Lecturers, November 2019).
When asked further whether they are paid or does he/she derive personal benefits from this
work, most of them answered:
Yes, but; I believe that cannot count as additional or multiple job.
Another interviewee added to the mixed views and said that:
No. Statements on benefits derived from moonlighting Frequency
1. Most specific is income and gain social capital 12
2. It also gives you exposure, as a lecturer aside from the classroom activities, you may not
know how to do something but these help you to do. It also helps with personal
development, some of these public speaking, when you are going to have them you need to
prepare. It gives you the opportunity to develop yourself
12
3. Serve as source of extra income, practical and working knowledge of various concepts 11
4. Exposure mainly because I train professionals who are experts in ethics own field of
endeavors so I set to learn from them
9
5. Diversified work environment, knowledge environment and experience other sector 9
6. It gives rich experience for teaching practical. Acquiring additional knowledge to share
with students
10
7. The recognition and respect that comes with it; thus you are member of this community,
you have educated and you are coming back to support the community. Within the
university, you are recognized as hard working, because you speak to students
8
8. You know as lecturer. I have three core mandate: research; render community service; and
to teach. Ensuring I satisfy these three areas, I render to the community service through
my Church and other areas
5
9. I will say that I feel fulfilled. For you are acknowledged as a learned person or an
academician for people to come and seek your knowledge in terms of your contribution to
society here and there. The fulfilment is not as monetary gain
3
Note(s): Field data, 2019
Table 1.
Summarized
statements from
interviewees on
motives/benefits/
drivers for
moonlighting
JARHE

7. As lecturers we have responsibility towards the community, to make our expertise available to
institutions for their development (Interview with Senior Lecturer, 2019).
Motivation to moonlighting or seeking multiple jobs
On the motive(s) for moonlighting, majority of respondents, 13 out of 18, mentioned financial
reason without any hesitation. The financial factor plays a critical role in determining
whether a faculty member will be interested in multiple or additional job. An interviewee
responded as follows: “Yes, I want more money.” Another interviewee added, “Financially you
are able to get something more.”
Another interviewee also said, “I am able to get extra income from it,” and “it helps augment
the meagre government salary which cannot carry you to month end” (Interview with
Lecturer, 2019).
When asked if what they are paid by the university is not enough for them, some
responded in the affirmative, while others reported that as human beings, they would always
want more, irrespective of the quantum of what they already have. As an interviewee noted:
I want more money because my responsibilities increase all the time. As the money comes in,
responsibilities also increase. And you know that as human beings we have insatiable needs. The
pressure for money. There is financial challenge. So, we do it for extra income (Interview with Senior
Lecturer, 2019).
Another interviewee and a senior officer in administration observed that:
Primarily I have not done any research, but I think it is to supplement income. I want to believe that it
is made for economic reasons. Because it is stressful jumping from one place to the other (Interview
with Senior Administrator, 2019).
Benefits of moonlighting to lecturers
Majority of the interviewees emphasized that moonlighting behavior has positive
experiences and benefits. According to the study participants, aside the financial reason,
they derive other benefits from moonlighting activities. These included:
Networking, gaining experience which impacts on their works, and making available their skills in
solving societal problems, pursuing excellence in academia and professional development (Interview
with Lecturers/Senior Lecturer, 2019).
Some reported that: “it provides them with opportunity to maximize their full potential”
(Interview with Lecturer, 2019).
Aside the financial motivation, a significant number (seven out of 18) of the interviewees
mentioned intrinsic benefits like recognition and opportunity for networking for purposes of
personal development as equally important attraction to moonlight. It also emerged from the
interviews that majority of lecturers perceive moonlighting as an activity inherent to, and the
principal advantage of, working in the university. As another interviewee observed:
I like the (University) teaching because it is flexible. One can do other things. Even without any
official authorization here at GIMPA (Senior Academic Staff Member, 2019).
One of the advantages of working at GIMPA is that you have the freedom . . . As long as I keep my
class schedule, and do my teaching well, no one is bothered about my where about . . . That is the
biggest advantage. The flexibility is the incentive. In case that is not there, it will be difficult for most
of us to stay here (Interview with Senior Lecturer, November 2019).
Another participant (a senior officer of the university) also made the following startling
observations about the pervasiveness of the phenomenon of moonlighting among lecturers.
According to him:
Exploring
lecturers’
experiences
(GIMPA)

8. Apart from the economic reasons too, people have additional time on their hands . . . They are not
engaged to the maximum . . . For lack of better word, they have excess energy. So, I think it is
economic reasons and the fact that people have time on their hands that they can put it to other
beneficial . . . It can build your CV. If you want other opportunities to share experience, other
opportunity to contribute to other organizations (Interview with Senior Administrator, 2019).
Awareness of policy on faculty moonlighting
Public higher education institutions are known to have rules, laws and policies that guide the
conduct and activities of lecturers and other employees. It is, therefore, expected that lecturers
will be aware of policies that guide their behavior regarding taking assignments in addition to
teaching, which their primary job is. An overwhelming majority (13 out of 18) of interviewees
reported that they are unaware of any policy of the institution that deals with lecturers taking
jobs in addition to their primary teaching job. A few who said they are aware of such a policy
could not tell the source of their information.
Another participant made the following submissions that:
. . . Though such a policy exist it is not organized and collated into a single document. . . she said. She
added that, we have the policy. The policy is in the. . .. In fact, every appointment letter that we issue
that you are a full-time worker of the institute, whether lecturer, administrative staff, junior staff, it is
stated clearly that you are a full-time permanent staff of the institute and because you are a full time
staff, you are not expected to take another full-time job anywhere except with the permission of the
Rector. Because as a government employee one cannot be on two payrolls at the same time (Interview
with Senior Administrator, November 2019).
Further, she said we are government organization:
So, if you have to work somewhere then you need the permission of the Rector, and again it should be
clear that that is not a full-time job you are taking again. So, it is possible for a staff of GIMPA to be
doing part-time in another institution. But it has to be with permission. The institute would have to
be aware. Because we need to be able to manage it (Interview with Senior Administrator,
November 2019).
When asked whether any staff has ever written to seek permission from the rector to engage
in multiple jobs, she answered in the affirmative:
Yes, I know of a couple who have written. But that is, I will say a very insignificant number because
informally we are aware that others are doing things. . .
When asked whether she is sure that the staff are aware of this policy, she reported as follows:
Yes, I would expect that they know. But at the same time, I can understand if they do not know. I
expect them they know because when you apply for a job and you are given the appointment letter,
the terms and conditions are stated in the letter. It is your duty to familiarize yourself with the terms
and conditions so that you are not found in breach at any time. And so, when . . . If there is a situation
where you are in breach, you cannot claim ignorant, you cannot say you were not informed. When we
give you the appointment letter, we also state, the last paragraph says that these are the conditions
that have been stated. If you accept on the terms and conditions that have been stated, you should
accept in writing. So, we get the written acceptance from every person that is employed into GIMPA,
which means these and all the other clauses that are in your appointment letter you know, and so you
have accepted. So that I expect them they should know (Interview with Senior Administrator,
November 2019).
Moonlighting as a regular practice
The study asked interviewees whether they consider taking multiple jobs is a regular practice
and part of their work program. An overwhelming majority, i.e. all interviewees, answered
yes. An interviewee answered:
JARHE

9. Yes. It is a regular practice. I have been doing it in the U.S before coming to Ghana. We used to teach
qualitative research online. Besides, faculty policy allows you to go part-time (Interview with Senior
Lecturer, December 2019).
Another interviewee said:
First it was not, but right now I think almost everyone is engaged in teaching outside, teaching in
other universities.
Another interviewee also said, “yes, added, it is part of our job. We have 5% of extension service”
(Interview with Senior Lecturer, December 2019).
Again, the human resource manager (HRM) also answered yes. On the question of how the
institution gets to know that people engage in multiple jobs, she observed:
Ooh, but there are times when National Accreditation Board goes somewhere and they found your
staff’s name there, they write to the institution to find out if this person is a permanent and full-time
staff or an adjunct. So those are some of the instances that we get to find out if the staff are working
somewhere (Interview with Senior Administrator, November 2019).
Implementation of moonlight policy
Participants were asked whether the policy on moonlighting is being enforced strictly or
leniently. Majority reported that they are unaware of the existence of any policy. And again, it
is instructive to note that the HRM unequivocally admitted that:
. . . enforcement of the policy is weak, though they are very much aware that many of the faculty
members engage in multiple job, she observed (Interview with Senior Administrator, 2019).
Promoting and legalizing moonlighting/multiple jobs by GIMPA
Responding to the contentious question of whether the institution should encourage
moonlighting behavior through legislation and incorporation into the institutions promotion
policy, interviewees strongly disagree. A significant number of interviewees said that:
. . . it is the individual’s choice, and no one should be compelled by any legislation to do it. They noted
further that it should be left opened so that those who want to do it can and those who do not want to
can all be satisfied (Interview with Senior Lecturer, 2019).
Incorporation of moonlight into the lecturers’ promotion policy
Interviewees were asked if they would suggest or recommend that moonlighting activities be
counted or incorporated into the faculty promotion policy of the institution. Majority of
interviewees rejected this view. They consider it as unnecessary to do that.
An interviewee states: “it is not necessary,” and another noted: “I do not think so” (interview
with Lecturer/Senior Lecturer).
Effects of moonlighting on classroom work of lecturers
The research enquires from interviewees the positive and negative effects of moonlighting on
the lecturer. All interviewees agreed in principle that moonlighting has both positive and
negative effects on lecturers. According to the research participants, moonlighting has the
following positive effects:
It improves quality of life because of the additional financial benefit (Interview with Lecturer,
November 2019).
Exploring
lecturers’
experiences
(GIMPA)

10. Moonlighting helps individual gain practical experiences. It enhances teaching. One positive benefit
is it encourages cross fertilization of knowledge. You can learn something from the other places
(Interview with Lecturer, December 2019).
It also gives opportunity for networking because you are going outside of your locality so you would
meet other people there which can lead to collaborations, professional collaboration (Interview with
Senior Lecturer/Head of Department, November 2019).
It adds to your CV in terms of institutions you have worked in. It also gives you more opportunities if
you are really passionate about your job and mentoring or contributing to the wider more
opportunity to do that (Interview with Senior Lecturer, December 2019).
Despite the above claims by majority of lecturers that moonlighting was beneficial, some
interviewees hold a contrary view and reported the negative effects on the lecturer. A
respondent stated that:
Moonlighting has serious effect on the individual lecturer, some examples of the effects included: it
over burdens lecturers’ workload which tends to have negative effect on productivity; Doing multiple
jobs have the tendency to limit your output at your institution (Interview with Senior Lecturer,
November 2019).
Another significant number of seven observed that:
The over-liberalised environment at GIMPA, and the availability of teaching opportunities in the
private tertiary education sector only distract lecturers from teaching and research responsibilities
(Interview with Lecturer/Senior Lecturer, November 2019).
Majority of the participants said moonlighting activities affect the individual in several ways.
Some of the negative effects mentioned were:
It leads to divided attention. It also leads to stress, and it can be very time consuming. It is very tiring
and exhausting therefore make lecturers call to reschedule lectures or go off sick especially those
who overdo it. You see there is no rest, you get really tired and would go off sick. It reduces
productivity level and delays in delivery of assignments (Interview with Senior Lecturer,
December 2019).
Another interviewee and a very senior professor bewailed as follows:
The negative thing is your health. Okay, we have the younger ones moving from one place to the
other. I am just scared about that. The publication. Everything you do here is about your publication.
And whether you are able to do everything and able to publish at the same time is another thing
(Interview with Senior Lecturer, December 2019).
Again, the HRM added the following observations:
Also, it does not give the individual time to fit into the organization that is GIMPA. There is
something referred to as organizational citizenship where you get immersed in the things of GIMPA.
May be there is a durbar and you are not around because you are at somewhere. For people like that it
is like they are just passing through (Interview with HRM, December 2019).
Discussion and recommendation
This study contributes to the body of literature on moonlighting behavior involving lecturers
in tertiary institutions. It highlights the complexnature of the phenomenon involving lecturers
and employers. Lecturer moonlighting outside the institution has multiplex drivers, evokes
contentious understanding of its impact on lecturers work and raises very serious concerns
about the viability of institutional and administrative arrangements to regulate the behavior.
The study has shown that moonlighting is a common and known behavior among
lecturers of GIMPA. It has been an ongoing, longstanding and ubiquitous phenomenon in the
JARHE

11. institution. The findings from the GIMPA case study illuminate the various motivations and
aspects of the behavior. The study also locates lecturers in the institutional and local realities
in which they work and, this was found to help understand the nature and pervasiveness of
the phenomenon in the larger Ghanaian higher education sector. The Ghana tertiary
education sector, including GIMPA, has been experiencing massive transformation, which
have resulted in the accreditation of many new private university colleges, introduction of
new schools, departments and new programs and courses. These changes have brought in its
trail a massive growth in the number of student enrolment into tertiary education institutions
but with little or no improvement in the salary and incentive packages aimed at attracting
qualified staff. This condition among others has created an opportunity for the drive to look
and obtain a second job in addition to the primary job.
Perception regarding lecturers’ involvement in moonlighting behavior varies (teaching,
consultancy, National Accreditation Board, external examination/dissertation examination
and research work). The study reveals a positive sentiment toward moonlighting in
relation to the additional income it offers lecturers, which some credited as the reason they
see it as part of their daily work program. This finding finds support in the work of Nunno
et al. (2016). Furthermore, some lecturers highlight the benefit of promoting the profile of
lectures and the institutions, improving curriculum vitae, networking and cross-
fertilization of ideas. This is affirmed by Adebisi’ study of moonlighting in Ekiti state,
Nigeria (Adebisi, 2019).
One of the important findings of the research is revelation that lecturers are motivated to
moonlight because of financial benefits. This is supported by Ara and Akba (2016) who
submitted in their study that moonlighting occurs among lecturers for their desire for
additional income. But, interviewees disagree to legalizing the practice or making it an
integral part of promotion policy. The study also exposed the internal institutional anatomy,
which encourages the flourishing of moonlighting behavior at GIMPA. The study unearthed
a high level of tolerance that lecturers enjoy in regard to working outside their primary job,
and this seems to be linked to the general believe that: working conditions and salaries in the
institution are poor and the institution does not have or does not enforce the rules for the fear
of losing staff to other tertiary institutions.
Also, lecturers were unanimous that moonlighting has both positive and negative effects
on the individual and the employer. Improvement in the quality of teaching and professional
experience were some of the benefits mentioned. This is supported by earlier works of
Wisniewski and Kleine (1984) and Panos et al. (2011). This finding is also supported by the
research works of Champion (2010) and Hobbs and Stutz (2010) that moonlighting affects the
preparation, quality of teaching and performance of lecturers. Lecturer availability for
teaching, thesis supervision and individual research work; general academic work suffers.
This finding agrees with the observation made in the studies of Chevaillier (2000) and Mario
et al. (2003). The participants recommended that the practice needs to be controlled by the
management of the university because the potential debilitating effects on the institution may
be high.
Further, the study pointed out that the institutional and administrative arrangements in
the institution afford lecturers the freedom and time to engage in moonlighting. This finding
supports two studies conducted earlier in Ghana and Cameroun by Baah-Boateng et al. (2013)
and Benjamin and Bikoue (2016). Also, the study revealed that moonlighting is prevalent at
GIMPA, but there is a general misunderstanding regarding which activities qualify as
moonlighting. It also suggests that this level of relative ignorance and misconception about
the phenomenon stems from the institutional context within which the lecturer works.
Interviewees’ inability to disaggregate the various activities that qualify as moonlighting and
those that require permission to accept is worrying and may be blamed on the unavailability
and invisibility of the policy on the practice of taking a second job in addition to one’s primary
Exploring
lecturers’
experiences
(GIMPA)

12. job. In addition, the study reveals that, despite the fact that institutional appointment letters
contained statements regarding the practice of keeping additional jobs, there is no official
policy document that serves as a guide for workers. This lack of institutional policy and
administrative arrangements have left the issue to individual discretion without coordinated
institutional regulation within an appropriate framework. Further, the study pointed that
lecturer ignorance and concomitant confusion that exist among lecturers on the practice is
largely due to the absence of a policy document on the issue. Related to this, is the observation
that the absence of a policy on moonlighting is a plausible reason why both managers and
workers do not consider it a serious human resource issue.
The findings of this research reflect the diversity of perception and experience of lecturers
about various forms of moonlighting at GIMPA. However, the findings have limitations and
cannot be generalized to other public higher education institutions in Ghana. Future research
should focus on understanding the magnitude and its effects and implication for GIMPA and
other higher education institutions in Ghana.
Conclusion and implications
This paper has sought to explore the nature, scope, motivations and benefits of moonlighting
in a Ghanaian public higher education institution. The findings reported here seem to
resonate clearly with the results of similar studies in the literature. It emerged that
moonlighting practice is pervasive at GIMPA. It is a complex behavior that is perceived by
lecturers as part of their everyday work program because of the drastic and uncontrolled
continuous changing local and global economic and social conditions of the country. The
factors that motivate lecturers to moonlight are not only diverse but complex and interlinked
with socio-economic and cultural context of the lecturer and, therefore, is marked by a lack of
consensus on which activity qualifies as moonlighting. Also, there is no agreement on its
nature and scope and the impact on the individual lecturer and the institution. In the context
of GIMPA, the institutional environment is itself fertile and encourages moonlighting
behavior. The effects on the individual lecturer regarding the quality of teaching, supervision
and research are many. Similar effects on the institution are numerous and should not be
taken for granted. In the absence of a known policy that describes the activity and sets limits
for its practice, the behavior is entrenched and is being perpetuated by almost all lecturers. As
the practice is prevalent and pervasive, there is the need for open dialogue, and the institution
should come up with a policy to manage the behavior. There is also the need to launch an in-
depth study of the behavior, with a view to ascertaining the enormity of the phenomenon and
the effects on teaching.
Lastly, GIMPA would have to be open, pragmatic and passionate in discussing this critical
human resource management challenge emanating from the local environment of their
employees. Any policy aimed at regulating and managing moonlighting or multiple job
holdings would have to consider the internal factors and be proactive in responding to the
peculiar needs and situations of both the employees.
Suggestion for further studies
A significant number of issues came up during the field work, and most of these were not
addressed in this exploratory study. Therefore, it is suggested that further research should
look at questions on: (1) what is the effect of moonlighting on quality assurance practices, (2)
how does moonlighting affect teaching, student supervision and performance and (3) what is
the effect of moonlighting on quality assurance standards in the university? If possible,
mixed-methods approach of both qualitative and quantitative techniques should be used for
the data collection and data analyses.
JARHE

13. References
Alam, S. (2016), “Moonlighting: factors affecting job performance among staff at Klang valley public
hospital”, (Unpublished manuscript).
Amde, W.K., Sanders, D., Chilundo, B., Rugigana, E., Haile Mariam, D. and Lehmann, U. (2018),
“Exploring multiple job holding practices of academics in public health training institutions
from three sub-Saharan Africa countries: drivers, impact, and regulation”, Global Health Action,
Vol. 11 No. 1, p. 1491119.
Amini-Philips, C. (2019), “Moonlighting activities and lecturers’ wellbeing in Nigerian universities”,
Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, Vol. 6 No. 7, pp. 339-346.
Amu
edo-Dorantes, C. and Kimmel, J. (2009), “Moonlighting over the business cycle”, Economic Inquiry,
Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 754-765.
Ara, K. and Akbar, A. (2016), “A study of impact of moonlighting practices on job satisfaction of the
university teachers”, Bulletin of Education and Research, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 101-116.
Ascroft, K. and Rayner, P. (2011), An Analysis of the Stsrengths and Weaknesses of Ethiopian Higher
Education (Internet), World Education News Reviews, New York, NY, available at: Http:
//wenr.wes.org/2011/08/wenr-julyaugust-2011an-analysis-of-the-strenbths-and-weaknesses-of
ethiopian-highereducation/ (accessed November 2019).
Ashmore, J. and Gilson, L. (2015), “Conceptualizing the impact of dual practice on retention on the
retention of public sector specialist-evidence from South Africa”, Human Resource Health,
No. 13, pp. 1-9.
Baah-Boateng, W. (2013), “Determinants of unemployment in Ghana”, African Development Review,
Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 385-399.
Baah-Boateng, W., Adjei, P. and Oduro, A.D. (2013), “Determinants of moonlighting in Ghana: an
empirical investigation”, African Review of Economics and Finance, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 176-202.
Benjamin, Y.A.M.B. and Bikoue, M. (2019) “Multiple jobs holding and management of lecturers in
Cameroonian state universities”, Journal of Economic and Social Thought, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 93-114.
Betts, S.C. (2006), “The decision to moonlight or quit: incorporating multiple jobholding into a model of
turnover”, Journal of Organizational Culture Communication Conflict, No. 10, pp. 63-78.
Beynon, M.J., Jones, P., Pickernell, D. and Packham, G. (2015), “Investigating the impact of training
influence on employeeo retention in small and medium enterprises’: a regression-type
classification and ranking believe simplex analysis on sparse data”, Expert Systems, Vol. 32
No. 1, pp. 141-154.
Bin Md Sabron, M,Z., Binti Abn Hassin, A. and Bin Ahmad, Y. (2017), “The moderating effects of
moonlighting on the relationship between self-efficacy and job-performance among female staff
at Klang Valley Public Hospitals”, International Journal for Studies on Children, Women, Elderly
and Disabled, Vol. 2 (June), pp. 100-107.
Boyd, E.M., Sliter, M.T. and Chatfield, S. (2016), “Double trouble: work–family conflict and well-being
for second job holders”, Community, Work and Family, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 462-480.
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006), “Using thematic analysis in psychology”, Qualitative Research in
Psychology, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 77-101.
Champion, S. (2010), ‘Increased Accountability’, Teachers’ Effort and Moonlighting, Stanford
University Graduate School of Business, Stanford.
Chevaillier, T. (2000), The Changing Conditions of Higher Education Teaching Personnel, Sectoral
Activities Programme, Report No. 161, Geneva, available at: http://www.num.edu.mn/files/
ZHSHUA/1.2.higheduc.ILO.pdf accessed.
Commission for Africa (2005), “2005 report”, available at: http://www.commissionforafrica.info/2005-
reportNovember2019.
Conway, K.S. and Kimmel, J. (1998), “Male labor supply estimates and the decision to moonlight”,
Labour Economics, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 135-166.
Exploring
lecturers’
experiences
(GIMPA)

14. Ghana (2004), Republic of Ghana, GIMPA Act, 2004 (Act 676), Ghana Publishing Corporation, Accra.
Ghana Institute of Management and Public Admiration (GIMPA) (2019), 19th Congregation, Ghana
Institute of Management and Public Administration, Accra.
Hobbs and Stutz (2010), Survey: 4 in 10 Texas Teachers Moonlight to Make Ends Meet,
DallasNews.com, Dallas, available at: https://www.dallasnews.com/news/education/2016/09/
21/living-paycheck-to-paycheck-these-teachers-moonlight-to-make-ends-meet/ (accessed
November 2019).
Mario, M., Fry, P., Levey, L.A. and Chilundo, A. (2003), Higher Education in Mozambique: A Case
Study, With Partnership for Higher Education in Africa, James Currey Ltd, Oxford.
Nunoo, J., Darfor, K.N., Koomson, I. and Arthur, A. (2016), African Governance and Development
Institute, Working Paper, No. 18.
Nunoo, J., Darfor, K.N., Koomson, I. and Arthur, A. (2018), “Employment security and workers’
moonlighting behavior in Ghana”, Journal of Economic Studies, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 144-155.
Panos, G.A., Pouliakas, K. and Zangelidis, A. (2011), “Multiple job holding as a strategy for skills
diversification and labour market mobility”, University of Essex Business School CER Working
Paper, No. 4, Essex, available at: www.essex.ac.uk/ebs/research/cer.
Patton, M.Q. (2002), “Two decades of developments in qualitative inquiry’: a personal, experiential
perspective”, Qualitative Social Work, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 261-283.
Shishko, R. and Rostker, B. (1976), “The economics of multiple job holding”, The American Economic
Review, Vol. 66 No. 3, pp. 298-308.
Sussman, D. (1998), “Moonlighting: a growing way of life”, Perspectives on Labour and Income, Vol. 10
No. 2, pp. 24-31.
Timothy, V.L. and Nkwama, S. (2017), “Moonlighting among teachers in urban Tanzania’: a survey of
public primary schools in Ilala district”, Cogent Education, Vol. 4 No. 1, p. 1334434.
Vermeeren, B. (2017), “Multiple job holding in the public sector context: motivations, outcomes and
implications”, Gedrag and Organisatie, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 263-285.
Wisniewski, R. and Kleine, P. (1984), “Teacher moonlighting: an unstudied phenomenon”, The Phi
Delta Kappan, Vol. 65 No. 8, pp. 553-555.
World Bank (2005), “Wages and salaries workers”, available at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/
SL.EMP.WORK.MA.ZS?View5chart (accessed 23 November 2019).
Further reading
Betts, S.C. (2004), “Gender differences in multiple jobholding: moonlighting among teachers”, Journal
of Business and Economics Research (JBER), Vol. 2 No. 8, pp. 43-65.
Creswell, J.W. (2017), Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches, Sage
Publication, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Dickey, H., Watson, V. and Zangelidis, A. (2011) “‘Is it all about money’? An examination of the
motives behind moonlighting”, Applied Economics, Vol. 43 No. 26, pp. 3767-3774.
O’connell, J.F. (1979), “Multiple job holding and marginal tax rates”, National Tax Journal, Vol. 32
No. 1, pp. 73-76.
JARHE

15. Appendix
Corresponding author
Emmanuel Kojo Sakyi can be contacted at: eksakyi@ug.edu.gh
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Background characteristics
Frequency
(n 5 18) (%)
Age group
20–30 0 0
31–40 2 11.1
41–50 13 72.2
51–60 3 16.7
Marital status
Single 1 5.6
Married 17 94.4
Divorced 0 0
Cohabitation 0 0
Gender
Male 15 83.3
Female 3 16.7
Educational level
Bachelor 0 0
Masters 3 16.7
PhD 15 83.3
Position
Professor 0 0
Assistant professor 0 0
Senior lecturer 11 61.1
Lecturer 7 38.9
Assistant lecturer 0 0
Rank
Pro. VC 0 0
Provost 0 0
Dean 0 0
Directors 1 5.6
Source(s): Field data, 2019
Table A1.
Socio-demographic
characteristics
Exploring
lecturers’
experiences
(GIMPA)