See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/334478797

Leadership Style, Job Satisfaction and Employee Job Performance of

Managerial and Non Managerial Employees: a Case of Sumithra Group of
Companies

Thesis · January 2017

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.35405.18406

CITATIONS READS

0 228

1 author:

Viraj Goonewardena
Asia e University AeU
1 PUBLICATION   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Leadership Style, Job Satisfaction and Employee Job Performance of Managerial and Non Managerial Employees View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Viraj Goonewardena on 16 July 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Leadership Style, Job Satisfaction and Employee Job
Performance of Managerial and Non Managerial
Employees: a Case of Sumithra Group of Companies

Viraj Prasanna Goonewardena

(Data Removed)

This dissertation is submitted for the MBA programme of the

Faculty of Management Studies of the Rajarata University of Sri
Lanka in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Business Administration

Faculty of Management Studies

Rajarata University of Sri Lanka,
Mihinthale
2017
 DECLARATION

I hereby certify that the dissertation submitted by me for the degree of Master of
Business Administration (MBA) at the Faculty of Management Studies at Rajarata
University of Sri Lanka, Mihintale, is my own independent work and has not been
submitted by me for a degree at another University.

Viraj Prasanna Goonewardena

(Data Removed)
 RECOMMENDATION OF THE SUPERVISOR

I hereby recommend that the dissertation prepared under my supervision by Mr. Viraj
Prasanna Goonewardena, (Data Removed) on “Leadership Style, Job Satisfaction and
Employee Job Performance of Managerial and Non Managerial Employees: a Case of
Sumithra Group of Companies” to be accepted as partial fulfillment of the requirement
for the degree of Master Business Administration (MBA)

Dr. Aruna Shantha Gamage

Senior Lecturer,
Department of Human Resource Management
University of Sri Jayewardenepura

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I take this opportunity to thank the Rajarata University and the Vice Chancellor for
giving me the opportunity to follow the Master of Business Administration (MBA)
program. I have no words to express the knowledge I gained from this program. I thank
both my lecturers as well as the non-academic staff for helping me throughout the
program.

I would like to thank specially my supervisor Dr. Aruna S. Gamage, Senior Lecturer,
Department of Human Resource Management, University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Dr.
K. G. A. Udayakumara, Dean, Faculty of Management Studies, Rajarata University of
Sri Lanka and Mr. W.M.P.G.R Pushpakumara, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of
Management Studies, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka for allocating their valuable
time to make this research a success. Their kind guidance and patience made this study
a success.

I also take this opportunity to thank the panel of judges especially Dr. Sampath
Kappagoda, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Management Studies, Rajarata University of
Sri Lanka and Mrs. M. G. S. Pathmini, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Management
Studies, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka for the valuable advices, guidance and for
allocating time for me from their busy schedule to make this dissertation a success.

I thank Sumithra Group of Companies, Mr. Riza Farouk, Group General Manager and
Mr. Jafar Sattar, Managing Director for giving permission to conduct the research at
the Sumithra Group of Companies.

I further offer my gratitude to the employees of the Sumithra Group who extended their
co-operation by responding to the questionnaire despite their busy work schedule in the
organization. I thank the staff of the Information Technology department, Human
Resource department and the work-study department for providing me with the
necessary data on time.

iii
 ABSTRACT

Apparel sector is the highest income generator of the country; it brings in an income of
over USD 4.8 billion as per the Central Bank report, 2015. This is an industry that deals
with 15% of the country’s labour force. In the apparel sector amount of automated
processors are negligible therefore no matter what instruments, machinery and tools are
brought in, it is the humans who will work on these and they are the ones who use these
tools, machinery and instruments. As such performance of employees is one of the
critical factors that the apparel company focuses on. Owners of these factories spend
huge amount of time and money on machinery and tools to obtain maximum
performance. But very little focus is given for psychological factors such as job
satisfaction and behavioral factor such as leadership style. This research was done to
find out the relationship of job satisfaction and leadership style on employee job
performance of managerial and non-managerial employees at Sumithra Group of
Companies in Sri Lanka.

Five dimensions were selected for the Job Satisfaction namely works it-self, pay,
supervision, co-workers and working conditions. Autocratic, democratic and laissez-
faire were considered as the dimension of the leadership styles. The traits, behavior
and results were the dimensions of the employee job performance.

Out of the 4007 active employees at the time of the research 550 employees including
all managers, supervisors and worker level employee were taken into the sample and
455 have responded to the self-administrated questioner given. This study indicated that
52% of the employee job performance in Sumithra Group is explained by the job
satisfaction and the leadership style. The results showed that there is a positive
significant correlation between job satisfaction and the job performance as well as there
is a positive significant correlation between leadership style and job performance. The
results showed that job satisfaction of the employees has more influence towards job
performance than the leadership style. Findings of this study revealed that the
democratic leadership style had the highest positive correlation towards the job
performance than the other two leadership styles that were taken into this study.
Supervision, working condition and the pay had the highest correlation value toward
job performance out of the five dimensions of the Job satisfaction.

iv
 CONTENTS
DECLARATION i
RECOMMENDATION OF THE SUPERVISOR ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iii
ABSTRACT iv
LIST OF TABLES viii
LIST OF FIGURES ix
CHAPTER ONE - Introduction 1
1.1 Background of the Study 1
1.2 Research Problem 5
1.3 Problem Statement 6
1.4 Research Question 6
1.5 Objectives of the Study 6
1.6 Research Methodology 7
Target Population 7
Sampling 7
Sample Size, Sample Unit and Sampling Techniques 7
Data Collection Method 7
Data Analysis and Presentation 8
1.7 Significance of the Study 8
1.8 Scope of the Study 9
1.9 Limitations of the Study 9
1.10 Chapter Outline 10
CHAPTER TWO - Literature Review 11
2.1 Introduction 11
2.2 Employee Job Performance 11
2.3 Leadership style 13
2.3.1 Transformational and Transactional Leadership Style 14
2.3.2 Autocratic, democratic and leisure faire leadership 17
2.3.3 Empirical Evidence of the Relationship between Leadership Style and
Employee Job Performance 19
2.4 Job satisfaction 26
2.4.1 Theories of Job Satisfaction 26
2.4.2 Empirical Evidence of the Relationship between Job Satisfaction and
Employee Job Performance 34
2.5 Variables in the research Model 38

v
 2.5.1 Leadership style Types 38
2.5.2 Job satisfaction dimensions 39
2.6 Direction of the Model 40
2.6.1 Model for leadership style and Job performance 40
2.6.2 Model for relationship between Job satisfaction and Performance 42
2.7 Chapter summery 45
CHAPTER THREE - Research Methodology 46
3.1 Introduction 46
3.2 Conceptual Framework 46
3.3 Conceptualization 47
3.4 Operationalization 48
3.5 Population and Sampling 52
3.5.1 Target Population 52
3.5.2 Sampling 52
3.5.3 Sample Size, Sample Unit and Sampling Techniques 52
3.5.4 Unit of Measurement 56
3.6 Research Design 57
3.7 Data Collection Method 57
3.8 Research Instrument 58
3.9 Questionnaire Design 58
3.10 Questionnaire Administration 59
3.11 Data Processing 59
3.12 Hypotheses Accepted / Rejected Criteria 60
3.13 Construct Measurement 62
Nominal Scale 62
Ordinal Scale 62
Likert Scale 62
3.14 Data Analysis 62
Descriptive Analysis 62
Pearson’s Correlation Analysis 63
Multiple Regression Analysis 63
CHAPTER FOUR - Results and Discussion 64
4.1 Introduction 64
4.2 Sample Profile and Response Rate 64
4.3 Results of Sumithra Group 64
4.3.1 Reliability Test 66

vi
 4.3.2 Correlation Analysis 67
4.3.3 Regression Analysis 70
4.3.4 Hypotheses Test Results 71
CHAPTER FIVE - Conclusion and Recommendations 75
5.1 Introduction 75
5.2 Conclusions 75
5.3 Recommendations 77
5.4 Recommendations for Future Studies 77
REFERENCE 79
ANNEXURES 92

ANNEX I – Questionnaire
ANNEX II– Questionnaire (English translation)

vii
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1: Line Efficiency 5

Table 2.1: Variables and Dimensions of the Model 38

Table 3.1: Conceptualization 47

Table 3.2: Operationalization of the variables and dimensions 48

Table 3.3: Sample selected from each department - Wattala 53

Table 3.4: Sample selected from each department - Nittabuwa 53

Table 3.5: Sample selected from each department - Polgahawela 54

Table 3.6: Sample selected from each department - Hasalaka 55

Table 3.7: Sample selected from each department - Weerakatiya 56

Table 3.8: Criteria for Hypotheses Accept / Reject 60

Table 4.1: Response Rate 64

Table 4.2: Employee Category 65

Table 4.3: Employees’ Number of Years in Sumithra 65

Table 4.4: Employees’ Age 65

Table 4.5: Employees’ Education Level 66

Table 4.6: Employees’ Gender 66

Table 4.7: Reliability Test Results 67

Table 4.8: Correlation Matrix 67

Table 4.9: Statistic Summery 68

Table 4.10: Regression Value of the Model 70

Table 4.11: Coefficient Value of the Model 70

Table 4.12: Hypotheses – Accepted / Rejected 73

viii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3.1: Conceptual Framework 46

Figure 4.1: Demographic Data - Gender 66

ix
 CHAPTER ONE
Introduction
1.1 Background of the Study
Performance is the main aim of each and every organization. Organization is a social
unit of people that is structured and managed to meet a need or to pursue collective
goals. As such, organization is about people. The key factor that determines the culture
of an organization is the people. Also each individual’s performance as well as
performance of the group is directly related to the organization.

When Sri Lanka liberalized its economy in 1977, Sri Lankan Garment Industry took off
immediately. East Asian garment exporters were attracted by countries liberal trade
regime. They relocated their garments which were already established. Local
entrepreneurs were encouraged to start their own apparel businesses to exploit the
market guaranteed by quotas, assisted by liberal trade regime and incentives granted by
the Sri Lankan government.

In 1980s there was a rapid growth in garment exports. By 1986 almost 27% of all
exports were accounted from the garment industry. The BOI offered an attractive
incentive package to all garment manufacturers in 1992, to move into the rural areas of
Sri Lanka under 200 garment factory programs which is considered as the turning point
of the apparel industry. As a result the garment industry became the largest foreign
exchange earner in the country overtaking the tea industry. The BOI was able to set up
163 factories by 1995 under the 200 garment program.

As per the Central Bank statistics published in 2015, textile and garment industry was
the highest export income generator having an export value of UDS 4,820.2 million
2015. Therefore, apparel sector is a major contributor to the Sri Lankan economy. The
garment industry today has become the single largest industrial employer in Sri Lanka
and a significant contributor to foreign exchange earnings. (Weerakoon, Tennakoon,
2006). Apparel manufacturers comprise nearly 90% of the textile/apparel sector in Sri
Lanka. They produce a wide range of international branded clothing such as Victoria’s
Secret, Liz Claiborne, Pierre Cardin, Nike, Gap etc. Almost 90% of Sri Lanka’s total
garment export is BOI approved ventures.

Other important factor of apparel sector is that it is the highest industrial employment
generator. Majority of the direct employers in the apparel sector are women.
Originally, the industry commenced as a sewing operator (contracted Manufacturer)
dependent on textile quota offered by USA and EU and currently it has transformed
into a full apparel solution provider.

Sri Lanka has become a world class apparel manufacturer over the decade supplying
to global super brands. The industry upholds high ethical practices, eschews child and
forced labour thus being known to the world as a producer of Garments without Guilt.
Sri Lankan apparel sector can be categorized as Large scale , Medium scale and Small
scale. Most of the export oriented clothing factories are SMEs and they are scattered
across the Country.

According to the Export Development Board Web Site (srilankabusiness.com, 2016),

policy makers of Sri Lanka are looking to increase total apparel exports. By 2020 they
are aiming to increase it by five folds which consider as an ambitious goal. Therefore
individual performance of apparel organizations is really important to the whole
industry. On the other hand, organizations need highly performing individuals in order
to meet their goals to deliver the products that they specialized in and ultimately to
achieve competitive advantage. Performance is what the organization hires one to do,
and do well (Campbell ,1993).

Most major apparel manufactures have started their business in a small scale, as a
family owned business. The companies have grown to a great extent, but have they
changed the way they manage? Most Managers / Supervisors employed in the apparel
sector are those who started at junior level and have been in the same industry for
years. Some of them are in the same company throughout. This is the same scenario
with Sumithra, the work place of the researcher. The management always focus on
bringing in technology, high tech machinery. But the focus on people, especially the
worker level staff and the psychological factors that could lead to better performance is
somewhat low. Apparel manufactures spend millions to bring in high-tech machinery
to improve performance. The work study departments, study time and motion to see
how best they could increase efficiency. Are these tangible changes itself is enough? In
a competitive business environment, organizations rely on their leaders to facilitate the
changes and innovations required to maintain competitive advantage. Effective
leadership is helpful in ensuring organizational performance (Cummings and Schwab,
1973; Hellriegel, Jackson, Slocum, Staude, Amos, Klopper, Louw and Oosthuizen,
2004). Management style affects the attainment of organizational goals through
organizing, leading, controlling organizational resources (Daft, 1998). Hersey (2001)
2
believed that leadership influences individuals’ behavior based on both individuals’ and
organizational goals.

The study made by Bass (1990) shows that 45% to 65% of the total factors causing
success or failure of organization are determined by leaders. Leadership style has
influence on employees’ behavior, including their adoption of the firm’s strategy and
organizational value and has been linked to both organizational outcomes and employee
work performance (Ehrhart, 2004)

Every manager in their management and operations uses a particular leadership style
and this style is actually a set of his behavioral patterns. That behavioral pattern
frequently occurs during the constant organizational work and others know him by it.
As managers has a significant impact on staff morale. The staff morale will effect on
their performance (Shirzad,Kebriya , Zanganeh, 2011).

Leadership is a process of interaction between leaders and followers where the leader
attempts to influence followers to achieve a common goal (Northouse, 2010; Yukl,
2005). According to Chen and Chen (2008), previous studies on leadership have
identified different types of leadership styles which leaders adopt in managing
organizations (e.g., Davis, 2003; Spears & Lawrence, 2003; House, Hanges, Javidan,
Dorfman, & Gupta, 2004; Hirtz, Murray, & Riordam, 2007). Among the more
prominent leadership styles are Burns’ (1978) transactional and transformational
leadership styles. Transformational leaders emphasize followers’ intrinsic motivation
and personal development. They seek to align followers’ aspirations and needs with
desired organizational outcomes. In so doing, transformational leaders are able to foster
followers’ commitment to the organizations and inspire them to exceed their expected
performance (Sivanathan & Fekken, 2002; Miia, Nichole, Karlos, Jaakko, & Ali, 2006;
Bass & Riggio, 2006; Bass, 1985, 1998).

The autocratic leadership style is the one that has the maximum control on the group
members, exerting peak levels of authority. The sub-ordinates have nothing to share
with their leader and their opinions are not cared for. Just they are followers. The
laissez-fair leadership has the minimal or no authority on its group members, giving
full freedom to the group. The democratic leadership comes in between these two
exerting a balanced authority on its group members. It gives freedom to the group
members as well controls them too.

3
Some studies pointed out that the autocratic leadership style is more productive
compared to any other leadership style (Adepoju 1996; Bolarinwa, 2002) and under a
democratic leader although workers perform well their output but not the optimal
(Adeyemi, 2011) and the laissez-faire leadership yields the minimal results
(Oluwatoyin, 2003). While some studies reveal that leaders who are addicted to
democratic leadership style appeared more successful compared with managers that
adopted autocratic or laissez faire leadership style of management (Bowsers and
seashore, 1966). According to Nwachukwu (1988), the worst style of leadership is
autocratic and authoritarian leadership style which gives rise to high labour
management conflicts

According the literature study carried out by the researcher, found that there are
different types of leaders. Naming few transformational, transactional, Autocratic,
Democratic and Laissez-Faire. And most studies concluded that there is an impact of
Leadership Style on Employees Job performance.

The idea that job satisfaction leads to better performance is supported by Vroom's
(1964) work which is based on the notion that performance is natural product of
satisfying the needs of employees. The study relating to the relationship between job
satisfaction and job performance has now become a research tradition in industrial-
organizational psychology. The relationship between job satisfaction and job
performance has been described as the Holy Grail of industrial psychologists (Landy,
1989).
Job satisfaction plays an important role for an employee in terms of health and
wellbeing (Kornhaurser, 1965; Khaleque, 1981) and for an organization in terms of its
productivity, efficiency, employee relations, absenteeism and turnover (Vroom, 1964;
Locke, 1976; khaleque, 1984). Job satisfaction is a complex variable and influenced by
situational factors of the job as well as the dispositional characteristics of the individual
(Sharma & Ghosh, 2006).
Many organizational theories are based on the notion that organizations that are able to
make their employees happy will have more productive employees. Over the years,
scholars examined this idea that a happy worker is a productive worker; however,
evidence is not yet conclusive in this regard. Empirical studies have produced several
conflicting viewpoints on the relationship between job satisfaction and job
performance. Manjunath (2008) found job satisfaction of agricultural scientists

4
significantly correlated with their scientific productivity. Ravindran (2007) found that
job satisfaction is non-significantly correlated with job performance.
The fundamental factors influencing the effectiveness of an organization are leadership
style and job satisfaction (Fatima, Bushra, Usman, Naveed, 2011).According to the
above studies in summery some argue that job satisfaction has an impact on the
employees’ job performance.

On other hand If managers adopt their subordinates’ preferred style giving employees
the respect and fair treatment they deserve, then this is seen to lead to job satisfaction,
which in will affect the functioning of the organization (Spector, 1997). Satisfied
employees are absent less, show less job stress, stay at work longer, and make positive
contributions to their organizations (Griffin, 2002).

Sumithra Group of Companies, a leading apparel manufacturer, started as a family

owned business in a small scale. Today it has become a medium scale apparel
manufacturer in Sri Lanaka. Sumithra Group of companies has around 4007 employees
in multiple locations including four manufacturing plants, two embroidery plants,
Product Development Centre etc.

1.2 Research Problem

Plan to performance efficiency is one of the important factors in any organization. It is
not possible to meet 100% efficiency in the apparel sector; therefore the industry
accepted efficiency level is 70% for medium scale apparel companies. The table 1.1
shows the annual average line efficiency achievement of each factory of Sumithra’s

Table 1Table 1.1: Line Efficiency

Year Nittabuwa Polgahawela Hasalaka Weerakatiya

2013 36% 52% 63% 59%
2014 39% 56% 64% 59%
2015 46% 58% 64% 60%
2016 42% 48% 62% 54%

As per the above table 1.1 efficiency in each factory in each year is stands below the
industry standards. The lowest efficiency can be seen in the Nittabuwa factory among
the four manufacturing plants of Sumithra group. The efficiency is somewhat high in
Hasalaka factory when comparing with other plants , but still its efficiency is below the

5
industry standards. The table 1.1 clearly show that the Sumithra’s efficiency level is
below the industry standards while some factories show extremely low efficiency than
the other factories in the same group of companies. Therefore it is clear that there is a
problem in the employee performance of the Sumithra Group.

1.3 Problem Statement

The intension of the researcher was to identify leadership Style and Job Satisfaction
that could affect the job performance of the Managerial and Non managerial employees
and to see whether the findings of similar research can be applied to Sri Lankan context,
especially at Sumithra Group of Companies.

Therefore the problem statement that this study aimed to address is ,

What is the relationship of employee job performance from leadership style and
job satisfaction in the Sumithra Group of Companies?

1.4 Research Question

The above problem statement leads to following Research question to be answered,

• Is there a significant relationship between leadership style and employee job

performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies?

• Is there a significant relationship between job satisfaction and employee job

performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies?

• What leadership style has significant relationship with employee job

performance of Sumithra Group of companies?

• What dimension of Job satisfaction has significant relationship with employee

Job performance of Sumithra Group of Companies?

• Is the leadership style has a higher impact than job satisfaction on employee job
performance of Sumithra group of companies?

1.5 Objectives of the Study

The researcher intends to find answers to the above research questions, therefore the
main objectives of this research are,

• To examine the probable significant relationship between leadership style and

the employee job performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

6
 • To examine the probable significant relationship between job satisfaction and
the employee job performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies
• To examine which leadership style has significant relationship with employee
job performance of Sumithra Group of companies.
• To examine which dimension of job satisfaction has significant relationship
with employee Job performance of Sumithra Group of Companies.
• To study whether the leadership style has a higher impact on employee job
performance than the job satisfaction

1.6 Research Methodology

Target Population
The target population was all supervisors, workers and managers of all manufacturing
plants and the head office of Sumithra group.

The population of the Sumithra Group has a total of 4007 employees.

Sampling
Identifying a sufficient sample size depends on the size of the population (Leedy and
Ormrod ,2005).

The total population of employees of Sumithra group is around 4007 employees, thus
the sample was targeted at 550 employees for sampling adequacy.

Sample Size, Sample Unit and Sampling Techniques

Stratified random sampling technique was used in this study. Employees were selected
covering all the departments of the Sumithra Group. All Supervisors, Managers and
Worker level employees were taken into the sample.

The sample unit will be both managerial and non-managerial employees of Sumithra
Group.

Data Collection Method

The data collection process involves making decisions regarding scales, the nature and
role of the Questionnaire and the conducting of interviews (Alberts, 2007). In this
study data collection method was a structured questionnaire consist of 4 sections. The
primary data and secondary data were collected. Primary data was collected through
the self-administrated questioner and the secondary data was taken from past literature
review and from MIS. In this study, the research instrument was a self-administrated
questionnaire taken from previous researches.

7
In this study, the research instrument was a self-administrated questionnaire taken from
previous researches.

Data Analysis and Presentation

The findings are presented in the form of tables, charts and graphs. Both inferential
statistics and descriptive statistics were used to analysis the data.

Statistical analysis software SPSS version 20 was used as the analysis tool for data
analysis of the study

1.7 Significance of the Study

Literature review has indicated that there are number of studies available on research
pertaining to the relationship between leadership style and employee job performance
as well as job satisfaction and employee job performance. But there are only few studies
done considering both job satisfaction and leadership style with employee job
performance. Some similar research done for different industries in other countries but
due to difference in the culture, beliefs and the management style, the findings of other
countries may not apply to Sri Lankan context.

There are only few studies done in the apparel sector in Sri Lanka, especially for
medium scale apparel sector. Sumithra Group of Companies has not done any research
on employee job performance. These are clear evidence of a research gap to conduct a
research in Sumithra Group of Companies.

Findings of these results directly help the management of the Sumithra Group to take
strategic done such decision would be their leadership style. Whether the existing
leadership style should be changed or continue with the same. Further the finding help
management to decide the most suitable management style for the organization. Decide
on whether to it is better to change culture, way of management thinking in order
introduces a standardized single management style across the whole group.
Management of the Sumithra Group can decide on ways and means to improve the job
satisfaction of employees, especially by focusing on the areas that employee’s
satisfaction is lacking behind.

Positive signs are already made for GSP+, which open avenues for new apparel sector
business to enter the industry and also it creates new opportunities for the existing
companies as well. Therefore, managers of other companies can apply the findings of
this study to improve performance of their organization and try to grab nest out of the
window of opportunity with low SMV values.
8
These findings helps to change directions and allow the owners and managers to come
out of traditional way of thinking on improving productivity and take the maximum for
the favorable trend that are likely to take place.

Further, it helps other researchers to conduct further studies in this area in the apparel
sector who is the highest foreign income generator for the county. Especially similar
research can be done for both large scale and small scale apparel sector organizations
in Sri Lanka.

Outcome of this study helps the policy makers to develop their strategies for the apparel
industry in different manner. Especially strategies which improve leadership qualities
in managers specially who are having only working experience. Thus, they can improve
performance of their subordinates as well as on their own.

Findings of this study encourage other researchers to conduct similar research on other
manufacturing sectors in Sri Lanka. Findings of this study motivate researches as well
as managers of other sectors to change management style and improve the level of
employees’ job satisfaction in order to improve productivity through their performance.

1.8 Scope of the Study

This study focused on the employees of the four manufacturing plants of the Sumithra
Group and the Head office in Wattala. Where the performance is measured in terms of
in quantity, quality and speed. This study was conducted in a live natural environment
and gave the employees to freely answer.

Worker level workers, supervisors and managers were taken for the sample.

Though there may be several variable which changes the employee job performance
researcher has taken only two variables, leadership Style and Job Satisfaction as
independent variables.

1.9 Limitations of the Study

This study was a perceptual research where the 100% accurate data from HR
department and work-study department were not taken in to consideration. This study
is limited to a single Group of companies in the medium scale apparel sector.

Due to time limitation, this study is limited to Work itself, Pay, Supervision, Co-
workers and the Working Conditions as dimensions of the Job Satisfaction. Further,
this study focused only on three types of leadership styles.

9
This study focused only on the impact made by the leadership style and employee job
Satisfaction on the Job Performance. Other intervening variables are not considered and
this study does not consider the relationship between the leadership styles on job
satisfaction.

Study findings was only limited to medium scale apparel organizations of Sri Lanka.

1.10 Chapter Outline

This study consists of five chapters. Chapter one of this Study covered the introduction,
the background of the study, the research problem, gap, the objective of this study, what
questions the researcher intended to find answers, hypotheses, the methodology,
significance, the scope and the limitations. Chapter 2 covers the literature review part
of this study and the direction of the model. Chapter 3 explains the conceptual
framework, conceptualization and operationalization, detail of the methodology, unit
of measurement, population and sampling, data collection method and data analysis
method etc. Chapter 4 of this study presents result and discusses the findings of the
study in individual location and the Group as a whole. Finally, the chapter 5 covers the
conclusion and the recommendations.

10
 CHAPTER TWO
Literature Review
2.1 Introduction
The aim of this chapter was to highlight the past studies done related to the research
topic and the several important findings of past studies related to this study. This chapter
contains empirical evidence related the variables selected, findings of similar studies
done in the past, definitions and direction of the model.

2.2 Employee Job Performance

Job performance of employees is an important issue for any organization and refers to
whether an employee does his job well or not. Job performance consists of behaviors
that employees do in their jobs that are relevant to the goals of the organization
(Campbell et al., 1993). Motowidlo (2003) define job performance as based on
employee behavior and the outcome is vital for the organizational success.

Muchinsky (2003) explained job performance as a combination of employee's

behaviors. Further he described that it can be monitored, measured and evaluated as
outcomes at employee level and linked with the organizational goals. Therefore, job
performance is a vital determinant for organizational success. Past studies have
indicated that performance is dynamic. It is changing over time.(Deadrick and
Madigan, 1990: Henry and Hullin, 1987). Researchers noted that although there is
nothing inherently causal about time, indeed some changes in any measure of job
performance may be attributed to effects approximated by temporal variables.
(Deadrick et al., 1997; Hofman et al., 1992, 1993).

Organizational performance refers to ability of an enterprise to achieve such objectives

as high profit, quality product, large market share, good financial results, and survival
at pre-determined time using relevant strategy for action. (Koontz and Donnell, 1993).
Individual performance is of high relevance for organizations and individuals alike.
Showing high performance when accomplishing tasks results in satisfaction, feelings
of self-efficacy and mastery (Kanfer et al, 2005). Moreover, high performing
individuals get promoted, awarded and honored. Career opportunities for individuals
who perform well are much better than those of moderate or low performing individuals
(Scotter et al., 2000).

11
Dimensions of Employee Job Performance

Researchers agree that performance has to be considered as a multi-dimensional

concept. On the most basic level one can distinguish between a process aspect (i.e.,
behavioral) and an outcome aspect of performance (Borman and Motowidlo, 1993; C
ampb ell, McCloy, Oppler, and Sager, 1993; Roe, 1999). The behavioral aspect refers
to what people do while at work, the action itself (Campbell, 1990). Borman and
Motowidlo (1993) identified two types of employee behavior that are necessary for
organizational effectiveness: task performance and contextual performance. Task
performance refers to behaviors that are directly involved in producing goods or
service, or activities that provide indirect support for the organization’s core technical
processes (Borman and Motowidlo, 1997; Werner, 2000). These behaviors directly
relate to the formal organization reward system. On the other hand, contextual
performance is defined as individual efforts that are not directly related to their main
task functions. However, these behaviors are important because they shape the
organizational, social, and psychological contexts serving as the critical catalyst for task
activities and processes (Werner, 2000).

Performance encompasses specific behavior (e.g., sales conversations with customers,

teaching statistics to undergraduate students, programming computer software,
assembling parts of a product). This conceptualization implies that only actions that can
be scaled (i.e., counted) are regarded as performance (Campbell et al., 1993). Moreover,
this performance concept explicitly only describes behavior which is goal-oriented, i.e.
behavior which the organization hires the employee to do well as performance
(Campbell et al., 1993). One of the most effective ways to increase business
performance and profit is to increase the performance of employees, from the lowest
levels of the organization to senior management
(http://www.quantisoft.com/index/html).

The dimensions of performance on which an employee is evaluated are called the

criteria of evaluation (Ivancevich, 1998). Opatha(2002) suggested that several criteria
becomes needed in order to evaluate job performance of an employee accurately. In the
view of Mathis & Jackson (2003), the data or information that managers receive on how
well employees are performing their jobs can be of three different types. a) Trait-
based information.

b) Behavior-based information.

12
c) Result based information.

Opatha (2002) indicated that trait-based information identifies a subjective character of

the employee such as attitude, initiative or creativity. Behavior-based evaluations of job
performance focus on what is included in the job itself (Mathis& Jackson, 2003).
Results are outcomes produced by the employee. Result based information consider
employee accomplishment. For jobs in which measurement is easy and obvious, a
results-based approach works well (Opatha, 2002). Performance improvement is not
only a result of well-functioning system but also depends on effective human resource
strategies that succeed in recruiting and maintaining a committed and motivated
workforce (Al-Ahmadi, 2009).

According to the literature review researcher has taken Traits, behavior and results as
dimensions of employee job performance to this study.

2.3 Leadership style

According to Obisi (1996), Organizations need qualified leader who evolve to perform
consistently within organizations. They must possess four key abilities to effect change.

1. Applying leadership styles appropriately

2. Communicating effectively

3. An aging performance regularly

4. Developing associate’s responsibilities.

When these keys applied skillfully managers will have opportunities to achieve
excellence in leadership.

The process of applying situational leadership style is a cycle that requires leaders to
diagnose, adapt and communicate. (Hersey, 2001). First, leader must determine what
objective needed to be achieved and to exert influence upon followers. Second, leaders
must affirm readiness levels for followers. Leader must apply the appropriate style of
leadership to communicate and obtain the desired results from followers. The fourth
phase or the assessment involves the analysis of the results from the leadership
behavior. The heal phase of application requires a follow up assessment of the overall
situation.

According to the study done by Travis (2007), today’s challenges calls for a
fundamental transformation of management style and culture. To accommodate this

13
transformation, leaders will need to develop new skills. The 21st century facilitative
leader must act as,

1. Coach: The new leader must make a conscious effort to hear and understand the
content, meaning, and feeling is related to what is said. He or she is must raise
employee's awareness of facts, issues, and implications and impact response to increase
individuals and corporate productivity.

2. Dreamer: The leader must be non-judgmental when looking at new ideas. Be

receptive to new visions, even if it may seem impractical or unrealistic at horst.

3. Innovator: The new leader must ignite a here within the staff or group, and keep it
well lit. The leader must establish organizational momentum and keep the pace. He or
she must generate and embrace change.

4. Explorer: The new leader must follow experimental trails in the Search for new
ground. Be adventurous, unconventional challenges your personal limits and takes
risks. '

5. Connector: The new leader must find similarities and commonalities where others
see only differences. He or she must be individual’s potential in forming teams and
assigning tasks. He or she must be flexible and open and observe with all sense.

6. Builder: The new leader must' be detailed, resourceful, focused, and inventive. He or
she is process-oriented and can visualize materials coming together to create a finished
product.

7. Praiser: The new leader should at every opportunity praise the effort ‘put forth, the
progress made and the result achieved. Praise well, praise often, praise specifically! All
of these skills and qualities must be developed in today's leader.

2.3.1 Transformational and Transactional Leadership Style

The difference between transformational and transactional leadership lies in the way of
motivating others. Transformational leader’s behavior originates in the personal values
and beliefs of the leader and motivates subordinates to do more than expected (Bass,
1985). Burns (1978), identified transformational leadership as a process where, one or
more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one
another to higher levels of motivation and morality.

14
For transformational leadership style, the follower feels trust, admiration, loyalty and
respect towards the leader, and is motivated to do more than what was originally
expected to do .(Bass, 1985; Katz & Kahn, 1978).

The transformational leader motivates by making follower more aware of the

importance of task outcomes, inducing them to transcend their own self-interest for the
sake of the organization or team and activating their higherorder needs. He encourages
followers to think critically and seek new ways to approach their jobs, resulting in
intellectual stimulation. (Bass et al., 1994). As a result, there is an increase in their level
of performance, satisfaction, and commitment to the goals of their organization
(Podsakoff et al., 1996).

Past research works indicates that leaders who exhibited transformational leadership
style had achieved their organizational goals over and above those with the
transactional leadership style when the above constructs are put into consideration.
Unlike the laissez faire leadership which is an indication of absence of leadership which
results of previous research endeavors did not support as subordinates were not satisfied
with their jobs and this had really impacted negatively on the success of organization
where it is used.

Transformational and transactional are different in their approaches to leadership and

motivation of subordinates towards discharging their duties as and when due.

Transformational leadership is famous with three main approaches:

1. By using reward and promises to induce subordinates towards discharging their

duties.

2. Supervising the activities of subordinates and taking corrective measures before

errors go beyond control

3. Sometimes manager may allow shortcomings of the subordinates to accumulate and

then reprimand him for errors that had never been corrected.

Managers who exhibit transformational leadership provide mentoring, coaching and

growth opportunities through intellectual stimulation and encourage innovative
approach to problem solving. Employees easily share their knowledge among
themselves when organization uses transformational leadership style. (Behery,2008,
Zafra, Retamero & Landa ,2008)

15
Transformational leadership has been favored by management practitioners due to its
innovative as well as productive and supportive nature. (Fatima & Ahmad & Usman,
2011).

Transactional leadership is based on the traditional, bureaucratic authority and

legitimacy where followers receive certain valued outcomes when they act according
to the leader’s wishes. The relationship is based on a series of exchanges or implicit
bargains between leader and follower, clarifying role expectations, assignments and
task oriented goals.

Transactional leaders thus focus their energies on task completion and compliance and
rely on organizational rewards and punishments to influence employee performance
.(Hartog & Van Muijen, 1997; Tepper & Percy, 1994; Tracey & Hinkin, 1998; Trott &
Windsor, 1999).

Today complex organizations and dynamic business environment, transformational

leaders are often seen as ideal agents of change who could lead followers in times of
uncertainties and high risk-taking. In contrast, transactional leaders gain legitimacy
through the use of rewards, praises and promises that would satisfy followers’
immediate needs .(Northouse, 2010).

Avolio, Bass, and Jung (1999) indentified four dimensions of transformational

leadership. These are idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual
stimulation and individualized consideration..

• Idealized influence
Idealized influence concerns the formulation and articulation of vision and challenging
goals and motivating followers to work beyond their self-interest in order to achieve
common goals. (Dionne, Yammarino, Atwater & Spangler, 2004).

In this dimension, leaders act as role models who are highly admired, respected and
trusted by their followers . (Bass & Riggio, 2006). According to Bass and Riggio
(2006),that leaders with great idealised influence are willing to take risks and are
consistent rather than arbitrary by demonstrating high standards of ethical and moral
conduct.

• Inspirational motivation
Refers to the way leaders motivate and inspire their followers to commit to the vision
of the organization. Leaders with inspirational motivation foster strong team spirit as a

16
means for leading team members towards achieving desired goals. (Antonakis, Avolio,
& Sivasurbramaniam, 2003; Bass & Riggio, 2006).

• Intellectual stimulation
This is concerned with the role of leaders in stimulating innovation and creativity in
their followers by questioning assumptions and approaching old situations in newways
(Bass & Riggio, 2006; Nicholason, 2007). They always encourage their followers to try
new approaches or methods to solve the old problems.

• Individualized consideration
Individualized consideration refers to leaders paying special attention to each individual
follower’s need for achievement and growth by acting as a coach or mentor (Bass &
Riggio, 2006; Nicholason, 2007).

Among the different styles of leadership, development-oriented and pragmatic-

oriented style has been most interest to researchers. Transformational-oriented
leadership and pragmatic oriented leadership are not two contradictory theories, rather
they are complementary ideologies as both are introduced the Supreme Leadership
forms .(Stone, 2004).

But the two concepts are some different with each other. While both pragmatic-oriented
and transformational-oriented leadership are emphasized on the influence and impacts,
pragmatic-oriented is achieved to this effect by non-traditional ways that is being in the
position to serve. Pragmatic- oriented leadership is greater emphasis on serving to
followers and also is shown more confidence and freedom to subordinates

2.3.2 Autocratic, democratic and leisure faire leadership

Leadership style is the pattern of behaviors engaged in by the leader when dealing with
employees. Lewin, Lippit and White (1939) identified three leadership styles which are

1. Autocratic

2. Democratic

3. Laissez-faire.

Autocratic (Authoritarian) Leadership

Authoritarian leaders, also known as autocratic leaders provide clear expectations for
what needs to be done, when it should be done, and how it should be done. There is

17
also a clear division between the leader and the followers. Authoritarian leaders make
decisions independently with little or no input from the rest of the group.

Researchers found that decision‐making was less creative under authoritarian

leadership. Lewin(1939) found that it is more difficult to move from an authoritarian
style to a democratic style than vice versa.
Abuse of this style is usually viewed as controlling, bossy, and dictatorial.
Authoritarian leadership is best applied to situations where there is little time for group
decision‐making or where the leader is the most knowledgeable member of the group.

Democratic (Participative) Leadership

Lewin (1939) found that participative leadership, also known as democratic leadership,
is generally the most effective leadership style. Democratic leaders offer guidance to
group Members, but they also participate in the group and allow input from other group
members.

In Lewin’s study, children in this group were less productive than the members of the
Authoritarian group, but their contributions were of a much higher quality. Participative
leaders encourage group members to participate, but retain the final say over the
decision‐making process. Group members feel engaged in the process and are more
motivated and creative.

Laissez‐Faire (Delegative) Leadership

Under delegative leadership, also known as laissez‐fair leadership, were the least
productive of all three groups. Delegative leaders offer little or no guidance to group
members and leave decision‐making up to group members. While this style can be
effective in situations where group members are highly qualified in an area of expertise,
it often leads to poorly defined roles and a lack of motivation.

Researchers have concluded that laissez-faire leadership style is indicative of an

absence of leadership. The laissez faire leader avoids decision-making, the provision of
rewards and the provision of positive/negative feedback to subordinates. (Bass &
Avolio, 1997; Hartog & Van Muijen, 1997).

According to the litriture study researcher has selected autocratic, democratic and
Laissez‐Faire leadership styles as dimensions of leadership style for this study.

18
2.3.3 Empirical Evidence of the Relationship between Leadership Style and
Employee Job Performance
There were several studies reported the effect of various leadership styles and
approaches on the subordinates and organizational performance. For example, The
study made by Bass (1990) shows that 45% to 65% of the total factors causing success
or failure of organization are determined by leaders.

Effective leadership is helpful in ensuring organizational performance (Cummings and

Schwab, 1973; Hellriegel, Jackson, Slocum, Staude, Amos, Klopper, Louw and
Oosthuizen, 2004).The leader thus identifies the future of the organization and pulls,
rather than pushes (Trott & Windsor, 1999), lifting individuals to focus their
commitment and energies towards the organization and its goals .(Barbuto, 1997).

Effective leadership is seen as a potent source of management development and

sustained competitive advantage for organizational performance improvement.
(Avolio, 1999; Lado, Boyd and Wright, 1992; Rowe, 2001). Other scholars have also
suggested that leaders and their leadership style influence both their subordinates and
organizational outcomes (Tarabishy, Solomon, Fernald, and Sashkin, 2005).

Several reasons indicate that there should be a relationship between leadership style and
organizational performance. The first is that today’s intensive and dynamic markets
feature innovation-based competition, price/performance rivalry, decreasing returns,
and the creative destruction of existing competencies (Santora et al., 1999;
Venkataraman, 1997). Studies have suggested that effective leadership behaviours can
facilitate the improvement of performance when organizations face these new
challenges. (McGrath , MacMillan( 2000); Teece, Pisano and Shuen, 1997).

According to Yousef (2000) that employees in the investigated organizations are highly
committed to their organizations, highly satisfied with their jobs, and their performance
is high, indicating that these employees perceive their superiors as adopting
consultative or participative leadership behavior.

Study on the importance of frontline customer-contact employees pointed out that they
directly relates with customers and provides the service needed cannot be disregarded.
High quality of frontline employees is integral to the excellence of firms because the
service provided by such employees reflects the image of the organization and affects
customer perceptions of service quality. Frontline employees are directly accountable

19
for face to face customer service, service quality, and customer satisfaction—all of
which are keys to strong performance. (Hartline, Wooldridge , and Jones 2003).

Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee (2002) demonstrated the link between the leadership
style and performance within an organization. While management by fear can create
tension that might produce the desired result in the short term, it is unlikely that success
will be sustained, whereas leaders who create a trusting open environment where
information is shared create an organization that can rise to any challenge.

Leadership style has influence on employees’ behavior, including their adoption of the
firm’s strategy and organizational value and has been linked to both organizational
outcomes and employee work performance . (Ehrhart, 2004).

Different styles are needed for different situations and each leader needs to know when
to exhibit a particular approach. No one leadership style is ideal for every situation,
since a leader may have knowledge and skills to act effectively in one situation but may
not emerge as effective in a different situation. (Rad and Yarmohammadian, 2006).

While differrent leadership styles have the ability to influence employees’ behavior in
differing ways, manager must be ready to adopt the appropriate leadership style. A good
number of empirical evidences have demonstrated that leadership behaviors influence
organizational performance that strong leaders outperform weak leaders and that
transformational leadership generates higher performance than transactional leadership.
(Burns 1978; Bass 1990; Hater and bass 1988; Howell and Avolio 1993).

Transformational leaders are said to be responsible for motivating employees to go

beyond ordinary expectations (Hater & Bass, 1998).

The transformational leader elicits this performance level by appealing to follower’s

higher order needs and moral values, generating the passion and commitment of
followers for the mission and values of the organization, instilling pride and faith in
followers, communicating personal respect, stimulating subordinates intellectually,
facilitating creative thinking and inspiring followers to willingly accept challenging
goals and a mission or vision of the future. (Carless, 1998; Hartog & Van Muijen, 1997;
Posdakoff, Mackenzie & Bommer, 1996; Tepper & Percy, 1994; Tracey & Hinkin,
1998; Trott & Windsor, 1999).

Rejas, Ponce, Almonte, & Ponce, (2006) indicated that there is a dominance of the
transactional leadership style over transformational and laissez faire styles. Personality

20
factors, agreeableness and conscientiousness are positively related to transactional
leadership which is moderated by perceived dynamic working atmosphere. For
instance, transactional leadership helps organizations achieve their current objectives
more efficiently by linking job performance to valued rewards and by ensuring that
employees have the resources needed to get the job done .(Zhu, Chew and Spengler,
2005).

Visionary leaders create a strategic vision of some future state, communicate that vision
through framing and use of metaphor, model the vision by acting consistently, and build
commitment towards the vision. (Avolio, 1999; McShane , Von Glinow, 2000). Some
scholars like Zhu et al. (2005), suggest that visionary leadership will result in high levels
of cohesion, commitment, trust, motivation, and hence performance in the new
organizational environments.

According to Wang et al. (2005) leadership is considered as a major factor which

influence on the performance of organizations, managers and employees. Leadership
style constitutes significant influence on the subordinates and organizational outcomes.
(Tarabishy, Solomon, Fernald and Sashkin 2005) Gadot (2007) noted that transactional
leadership style is relatively weakly associated with performance and is optimistically
related to perception of organizational politics.

Liu et al., (2008) studied how Organizational innovation capability under a suitable
leadership style leads to good innovation performance. 149 employees of listed and
OTC electronics information companies in Taiwan are chosen as sampling subject. The
findings are suggests the leadership style has a positive relationship on organizational
innovation performance and the leadership style moderates the relationship between
organizational innovation capability and organizational innovation performance.( Liu
et al., 2008)

Fenwick and Gayle (2008), in their study of the missing links in understanding the
relationship between leadership and organizational performance concluded that despite
a hypothesized leadership-performance relationship suggested by some researchers are
inconclusive and difficult to interpret. Lee,Chuang (2009), explain that the excellent
leader not only inspires subordinates potential to enhance efficiency but also meets their
requirements in the process of achieving organizational goals.

Yang and Ting (2010) suggested that project manager’s leadership style, teamwork,
and project performance are highly correlated. The findings also indicate that teamwork
21
dimensions may partially or fully mediate the relationships between leadership style
and project performance.

Timothy Okwu, Andy ,Akpa, Victoria, Nwankwere, Idowu. (2011), in their study
transformational and transactional leadership styles were considered. The result showed
that while transactional leadership style had significant positive effect on performance,
transformational leadership style had positive but insignificant effect on performance.
The study concluded that transactional leadership style was more appropriate in
inducing performance in small scale enterprises than transformational leadership style
and, therefore, recommended transactional leadership style for the small enterprises.
(Timothy ,Okwu, Andy ,Akpa, Victoria, Nwankwere, Idowu,2011)

To achieve organizational goals organizational managers strive to develop, harness and

utilize both material and human resources. (Etuk, 1990 cited in Ushie et al., 2010). This
also entails leading people, hence it has been argued by Ushie et al. (2010) and Obiwuru
et al. (2011) that organizational failure is tied to the quantity, quality and inappropriate
leadership style.

Leadership contributes significantly to the success and failure of an organization

(Jaskaran ,Guru, 2014). Nwokocha, Izidor, Iheriohanma(2015) suggested when
management styles are considered repugnant by the subordinates, they undermine
employees’ performance and investigate their propensity to quit the organization, and
vice versa. Study on the effect of leadership styles on organizational performance in
three selected small scale enterprises in Makurdi Metropolis of Benue State has shown
that charisma trait of transformational leadership style exerts positive but insignificant
effect on employee’s performance. (Saasongu,2015).

Therefore, according to the above empirical evidence the first hypothesis is,

H1: There is a significant relationship between Leadership Style and Employee

Job Performance in the Sumithra Group of Sri Lanka

Autocratic leadership style and Employee job Performance

Authoritarian leadership style breeds hostile attitude, conflicts, distorts and guards
communication, high turnover, absenteeism, low productivity, and affects work quality
(Gustainis, 2004). The autocratic style may show great results in a short time period.
However, excessive use of authority will distort productivity in the long term. People
22
either get bored and dissatisfied and leave or fall into a malaise of hum-drum repetitive
tasks without creativity and innovation and in short become demotivated. (Dawson
,2002)

Adair (2002) suggested that the autocratic leader has full control of those around him
and believes to have the complete authority to treat them as he wants. This is useful
when immediate and quick decision and performance is required. Kirega (2006) stated
that democratic leadership styles improve the performance in both short term and long
term and can be used for any type of work project. Debashis (2006) concluded
democratic leadership needs when organization needed creative problem solving,
conducting meetings for organization or department, training people for leadership
roles and performing the day to day organizational tasks. This style provides confidence
to employees who will help them for meeting deadlines, and departmental goals, to
provide efficient team inputs.

Authoritarian leadership style has in general a negative effect on business performance

of Croatian companies, while democratic leadership style has in general a positive
effect. Impact of laissez-faire leadership style was mostly neutral. (Miloza, 2012).

Therefore, with above literature support the next hypothesis is,

H1(a): There is a significant relationship between autocratic Leadership Style and

the Employee Job Performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

Democratic leadership styles and Employee job Performance

Heneman and Gresham (1999) suggested under the democratic style promote the
sharing of responsibility, the exercise of delegation and continual consultation. In this
style managers suggestions and recommendations on all major issues and decisions and
effectively delegate tasks to subordinates and give them full control and responsibility
for those tasks, and encourage others to become good leaders and involved in leadership
and employee development. That led to more commitment of employee to department
goals, performance to meeting deadlines.

Kirega (2006) evaluated worker’s views of their senior and top leadership as democratic
leadership and state that this style focuses on using the skills, experience, and ideas of
others. However, the final decision making power remains in the leader’s hand. The
leader will not make major decision without firstly getting the input from those that will
23
be affected, provide proper recognition, and delegate responsibilities. Democratic
leadership styles improve the performance in both short term and long term and can be
used for any type of work project.

Debashis et al.(2000) concluded that when organization need creative problem solving,
training people for leadership roles and performing the day to day organizational tasks
democratic leadership would be the ideal type. This style provides confidence to
employees who will help them for meeting deadlines, and departmental goals, to
provide efficient team inputs.

Therefore the next hypothesis developed in this study was ,

H1(b): There is a significant relationship between democratic leadership style and

the employee job performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

Laissez-faire leadership style and Employee job Performance

Kotur, Anbazhagan(2014) concentrated on the three interesting leadership styles that

are at the top, bottom and the middle of the leadership authority hierarchy, namely the
autocratic, the laissez-faire and democratic leadership styles. Upon study it has been
found that workers with autocratic leadership style give more performance against
others.

Okumbe (1998) identifies the advantages of Laissez – faire leadership as facilitating

easy acceptance of decisions and employees providing their own motivation. However
he points out that it is disadvantageous, since there is no control and chaos and conflict
arise due to unguided freedom. MacDonald's (1967) study of three styles of leadership
(laissez-faire, autocratic, and democratic) in the Job Corps found that laissez-faire
leadership was associated with the highest rates of truancy and delinquency and with
the slowest modifications in performance.

Above hypotheses supported the next hypotheses of this research that,

H1(c): There is a significant relationship between Laissez-faire Leadership Style

and the Employee Job Performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

24
Relationship of leadership style on employee job performance in Sri Lankan
context

In study done to find the impact of leadership styles on employees’ performance and
their attitudes such as satisfaction and commitment with the samples of 50 managers
and 205 subordinates in Sri Lankan banking suggested that degree of people orientation
of leadership has a positive relationship to the satisfaction and commitment whereas
task orientation correlated only with satisfaction. Further there is no relationship
between leadership styles and performance, even performance and attitudes are
correlated.(Velnampy ,2007)

Study done by Pushpanathan and Mangaleswaran(2008) explores the leadership style

and organizational performance in small scale manufacturing industries in Sri Lanka.
This study utilized data from 220 small scale manufacturing industries those who are
registered under the Chambers of Commerce in Sri Lanka. The relationship between
three leadership styles – task-oriented, relationship-oriented, and participative – and
firm performance were discussed through the moderating effect of environmental
factors (Industry technology, family and non-family controlled firm and firm
development stage), and mediating effect of decision making, employee turnover, and
employee morale. The hypotheses were tested through matched data set. The results
indicated that leadership styles were directly linked to firm performance. (Pushpanathan
and Mangaleswaran,2008)

There are some studies done in Sri Lankan context. Study done by Thissers(2013)
suggested that management should be aware on immediate superiors’ leadership and
their style of leading and make them more explicit while providing needed guidance,
training for them. By understanding and addressing these matters correctly harmonious
work relationships can be created among supervisors and subordinates.

Study on Impact of leadership development on employee performance a recent study

on large manufacturing industry on Sri Lanka by Henarathgoda(2016) studied the
impact of leadership development on employee performance in the large scale tyre
manufacturing industry in Sri Lanka. The results of the study supports a positive impact
between the independent and dependent variables. Study concluded that manager must
possess leadership skills to perform well and meet performance standards set by the
organization (Henarathgoda,2016).

25
2.4 Job satisfaction
Job satisfaction is described as the feelings of employees resulting from the assessment
of their job. It can be negative, positive, or moderate. Moser and Galais (2007)
highlighted that employee’s ability and opportunities aid to improve their satisfaction
of the job level.

Edwards, et al. (2008) refers to job satisfaction as an evaluative judgment about the
degree of pleasure an employee derives from his or her job that consists of both the
affective and cognitive components

Aamodt, (2009) defines job satisfaction as the attitude an employee has toward his job.
Herzberg

2.4.1 Theories of Job Satisfaction

The following content theories will be further discussed below: Maslow’s needs
hierarchy theory, Herzberg’s two factor theory, ERG theory, Two factor theory and
McClelland’s achievement and motivation theory. Process theories that will be attended
will involve: Value percept theory and Equity theory.

❖ Maslow’s needs hierarchy

Maslow’s (1954) theory explains that employees would be motivated and satisfied with
their jobs only when certain desires are met. He further explains five major types of
needs which are ordered hierarchically. According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs,
lower-level needs must be fulfilled first before an individual consider the next level of
needs (Robbins, 1989). There are five hierarchical levels which are explained below.

Physiological needs such as food, shelter, clothing and sexual satisfaction needs.
According to Maslow’s theory, individuals are worried first and foremost with
satisfying their basic needs such as food, shelter, water and clothing. An unemployed
person who does not have a shelter will be content with any job as long as it offers for
these basic needs (Maslow, 1954). This is a primary need and of importance to
individuals as it restores the dignity and pride of human beings.

Safety needs refers to the need to feel safe within the environment; it also refers to
physical safety. After physiological needs have been met, safety needs would follow as
employees focus more on meeting their safety needs. This is a secondary need prior to
the basic needs and is of importance to human beings as they should leave in a safe and
secured environment. People should feel comfortable and relaxed in the areas where

26
they stay and work. This means that employees will remain satisfied with their jobs
only if they believe the working environment is safe (Maslow, 1954).

Social needs. The need for love, friendship and belonging. Once the basic needs and
safety needs have been met, employees will stay satisfied with their jobs only when
their social needs have been addressed (Maslow, 1954). In a working environment it
involves working with others and feeling needed in the organization.

When people get along with each other, it will boost their morale, lead to higher
productivity and they will feel comfortable with each other and the organization.
Organizations strive to fulfill their employees’ social needs by procuring social
activities for example cafeterias, organizing sport programs and family events (Maslow,
1954).

Esteem needs. These needs comprise the need for self-respect, status, recognition and
achievement (Maslow, 1954). When employee’s social needs have been fulfilled, they
start to pay attention on meeting their esteem needs. According to Maslow (1954),
organizations can satisfy these needs through awards, promotions and salary increases.
Managers need to recognize the potential and effort made by employees at work in
order to create a conducive work environment where employees would feel as if it is
the best company to work for.

Self-actualization needs. The point of reaching one’s full potential. Maslow (1954)
describes self-actualization needs as the desire for growth, achieving one’s potential
and self-fulfillment. An employee who strives for self-actualization desires to meet
their full potential in everything they do. Therefore, employee’s desire the same task
for a substantial period might become bored which might result in job searching.
Managers need to study the environment and develop strategies to retain and develop
self-contentment of employees in their jobs. Employers need to provide the best training
courses, performance appraisal systems, job rotation methods and other ways to retain
and develop employees at work.

Maslow’s theory is broadly recognized even though it has been criticized. Robbins et
al. (2003) argues that certain reviews assume that needs are not necessarily structured
along these magnitudes as people simultaneously move through several levels in the
hierarchy of needs.

27
He further suggests that, because satisfied needs boosts a person to reach movement to
the next level, the employee will always have an energetic need, making long duration
job satisfaction which is unlikely in terms of this theory.

❖ ERG theory
Alderfer (1972) classified needs into only three groups of essential needs, such as,
existence, relatedness and growth.

The existence group is anxious with providing basic needs and includes items that
Maslow’s theory reflected as physiological and safety needs (Alderfer, 1969). The
second cluster of needs relates to sustaining important associations and the growth
needs refers to the longing for personal growth (Robbins, 1989; Robbins et al., 2003).

According to Aadmodt (2004), the main difference between Maslow’s theory and the
ERG theory is that the latter theory describes that movement to the next level need not
be fixed; an employee can jump. He further explains that people can be concurrently
motivated by needs at different levels. A person can focus on growth satisfaction
although existence and relatedness needs are not met.

Several studies supported the ERG theory as it removes some of the challenges with
Maslow’s theory (Robbins et al., 2003).

❖ Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory

Herzberg’s two-factor theory is one of the earliest theories of job satisfaction, the
factors being intrinsic factors and motivators (Cooper & Locke, 2000).

Herzberg et al., (1959) found that intrinsic factors such as achievement, responsibilities
and recognition were intensely related with satisfaction than extrinsic factors like
policies, benefits and working conditions. Job satisfaction is related to motivators or
intrinsic factors, while job dissatisfaction is related to hygiene or extrinsic factors.
Extrinsic or hygiene factors relate to pay, status, job security, working conditions,
fringe benefits, company policies and interpersonal relations. These factors are rewards
or sources of need satisfaction that stem from organisational context and are thus
somewhat divorced from the direct influence of the individual (Herzberg et al., 1959).

❖ McClelland’s Needs Theory

This theory emphasis on three needs, namely; achievement, power and affiliation
(Robbins et al., 2003). Employees who have the strong desire for achievement would
be fulfilled with jobs that are challenging and over which they can exercise some control

28
(Aadmodt, 2004). Subsequently employees with low achievement needs are satisfied
with minor challenges. Persons with a high need for affiliation would be pleased with
jobs that comprises of huge responsibilities and building work interpersonal
relationships (McClelland, 1969).

In conclusion, employees who want to take control have a desire to influence and
control others (McClelland, 1969). This theory emphasises that if you provide your
employees with interesting and challenging jobs, it gives them power and control over
their work which contributes to job satisfaction.

Locke, 1976 as quoted by Cooper & Locke (2000) argues that individual’s value would
determine what satisfied them on the job. Employees in organisations hold different
value system; therefore this will lead to different satisfaction levels. Human beings are
unique, what is regarded as value from one person might not entice another person. As
individuals we think, v Cooper and Locke (2000) state the potential problem with this
theory is that what people desire and what they consider important are likely to be
highly correlated. In theory these notions are discrete; however, in practice many people
will find it a challenge to differentiate the two. Despite this limitation, investigation on
this theory has been extremely supportive (Cooper & Locke: 2000). alue and do things
differently; therefore our value system will differ.

(Anderson, Ones, Sinangil & Viswesvaran, 2001) forecasts inconsistencies between

what is preferred and expected and believe that human beings become dissatisfied only
if the job facet is essential to the individual.

❖ Process Theories
Process theories attempt to clarify job satisfaction by considering at expectancies and
values (Gruneberg, 1979). These theories of job satisfaction advocate that worker’s
choose their behaviours in order to encounter their needs. Within this framework,
Adam’s (1963) and Vroom (1982) have become the most noticeable theorists. Goal
setting theory stems from

❖ Vroom’s Expectancy Theory

Vroom (1982) regarded Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Herzberg’s two factor theory
as too basic which resulted in putting forward a model that constituted the concepts of
valence (V), instrumentality (I) and expectancy (E). Vroom’s theory is referred to as
VIE theory.

29
Expectancy theory believes that people are inspired to behave in ways that produce
desired combinations of expected outcomes. This theory can be applied to forecast
behaviour in any circumstance in which a choice between two or more alternatives must
be made. For instance, it can be applied to see whether to remain in the job or quit,
whether to exercise significant or slight effort at a task, and whether to major in
management or accounting (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2002).

❖ Stacy Adam’s Equity Theory

This theory states that job satisfaction or motivation is a purpose of what employees
put into a job situation associated to the outcome (Cooper & Locke, 2000; Robbins,
2005). Therefore, the more an employee receives according to their efforts into a job
will lead to higher job satisfaction. In this theory it is believed that high job satisfaction
is motivated by the expectation of the employee based on the effort they put in
accomplishing a task. Three components are involved in this perception of fairness,
namely: inputs, outputs and

input/output ratio (Aamodt, 2004). Inputs refer to those fundamentals we put into our
jobs and comprise things such as effort, experience, education and competence
(Robbins, 2005).

According to Aamodt (2004), employees subconsciously compute an input/output ratio

by dividing output value by input value. Employees may strive on increasing their
outputs, for example, by asking for a salary raise. Conversely, they can decrease their
contributions by not working as hard as their usual way (Aamodt, 2004). Furthermore,
employees compare their input-outcome ratio with other employees and if they perceive
it as fair, it will lead to job satisfaction (Robbins, 2005). Conversely, if employees
perceive an inequity in their input outcome ratio compared to other employees, they
become disgruntled and discouraged.

❖ Goal Setting Theory

According to Heery & Noon (2001) goal setting theory stems from the impression that
the behaviour of employees can be changed by influencing their goals and targets.

Nel et al., (2004) emphasized the fact that employees are encouraged if they understand
the job concept in order to achieve a specific goal, irrespective of the challenges they
might encounter in doing so. This refers to management by objectives (MBO) technique
that inspires employee involvement in goal-setting, decision-making and feedback. It
is of good benefit to involve workers in decision making, brainstorming,
30
communication and adding innovative ideas as this might lead to the desired future state
of the organization.

Robbins (1998) suggested that employees will achieve better results when they receive
feedback on a continuous basis regarding their progress. Moreover he suggests that
continuous feedback will also assist in getting good result and rectifying discrepancies
that might hamper productivity. It is believed that if employees are involved in decision
making and preparation of their goals they would be more dedicated in achieving the
organizational goals.

Heery & Noon (2001) note four general principles to stimulate high performance and
increase motivation in terms of the goal setting theory: These general principles are;
goals should be challenging but attainable, goals should be specific rather than vague,
employees should be involved in the process of setting their own goals and goals should
be measurable and clearly understood by employees.

According to Weir (1976) and Syptak, Marsland & Ulmer (1999), the following factors
stood out as ‘strong determinants of job satisfaction’,.

Achievement: This requires helping and placing employees in position that use their
talents and not to set up for failure. It is achieved by setting clear, achievable goals and
standards for each position, and making sure employees know what those goals and
strategies are. Individuals should also receive regular, timely feedback on how they are
doing and feel they are adequately challenged in their jobs.

Recognition: Refers to the honor, favorable note or attention given to an employee for
a ‘job well done’ or an outstanding behavior. Individuals at all levels in the organization
want to be recognized for their achievement on the job. The individual’s success does
not have to be monumental before they deserve recognition. Employees should be
acknowledged for doing something well immediately after their good work. Publicly
appreciating them for finding solutions to a problem, writing a note of praise,
establishing a formal recognition program like ‘employee of the month or year’, making
periodic reports directly available to the employees themselves rather than to
management, are some of the ways of recognizing employees.

Work itself: This involves helping employees believe that the task they are doing is
important and meaningful. Setting goals and reminding and emphasizing that their
efforts lead to and contribute to positive outcomes and goal accomplishment is crucial.
Success stories and cases should be shared on how an employee’s actions made a real
31
difference in the organization. Also show employees how their work is essential to the
overall processes that make the practice succeed. Unnecessary tasks can be eliminated
or streamlined to bring about greater efficiency in the organization.

Responsibility: Responsibility is taken action for ones actions. Granting additional

authority to employees in their activity, giving them enough job freedom and power so
that they feel they ‘own’ the results are ways of giving them responsibility. As
employees grow, they can be provided opportunities for added responsibility by adding
challenging and meaningful work.

Opportunity for advancement or promotion: According to Friday & Friday (2003),

promotion satisfaction evaluates employee’s attitudes towards the organisation’s
promotion policies and practices. In addition to this Bajpai & Srivastava (2004)
suggested that promotion offers employees with opportunities for personal growth,
more responsibilities and also increased social status. Research specifies that employees
who recognize that promotion are made in a reasonable and just manner are most
expected to experience job satisfaction

Pay (salary): Spector (1997) argue that the relationship between the level of pay and
job satisfaction tends to be remarkably slight. They argue that pay in itself is not a strong
factor influencing job satisfaction, whereas Berkowitz (1987) records other
considerations, besides the complete value of one’s earnings impact attitudes towards
satisfaction with pay.

Spector (1996) emphasises that fairness of pay regulates pay satisfaction rather than the
definite level of pay itself.

Employees who perform the same duties should be paid equally in order to avoid
conflict which might lead to job dissatisfaction. Atchison (1999) believes that a rise in
pay is a short-term stimulus and therefore, management has to look at other ways to
increase the job satisfaction levels.

Supervision: According to Aamodt (2004) employees who appreciate working with

their superiors will be more satisfied with their jobs. Satisfaction with superiors is
associated to organizational and team commitment, which results to higher output,
lower turnover and a greater willingness to assist (Aamodt, 2004).

Luthans (1995) discussed three scopes of supervision that affect job satisfaction.

32
1. The degree to which managers are concerned with the welfare of their personnel.
Research shows that employee satisfaction is better improved if the immediate
supervisor gives full support to their personnel (Eagan & Kadshin, 2004; Robbins,
1989, as cited by Connolly & Myers, 2003).

2.Concerns the degree to which employees are involved in decisions that affect their
jobs. Grasso (1994) & Malka (1989) as cited by Egan & Kadushin (2004) found a
positive affiliation between managerial behavior that inspires involvement in decision-
making and job satisfaction. Robbins (2003) supports this view and maintains that
satisfaction is improved if the manager attends to employee’s inputs.

3.Supervision associated to job satisfaction is an employee’s opinion of whether they

matter to their supervisor and the organization (Luthans, 1995).

Working conditions: Working conditions are extrinsic factors that have an adequate
influence on an employee’s job satisfaction (Luthans, 1995). Working conditions state
to such features as temperature, lighting, noise and ventilation. Employees are anxious
with their work atmosphere for both individual comfort and for easing good job
performance. Studies have proved that employees prefer physical surroundings that are
secure, clean, comfortable and with a minimum standard of distraction (Robbins, 2005).

Co-workers-The degree to which associates are friendly, capable and helpful is another
dimension that influences job satisfaction (Robbins et al., 2003). Research shows that
personnel who have supportive colleagues will be more satisfied with their jobs
(Aamodt, 2004) since supportive co-workers serve as a source of support, security,
advice and support to the individual worker (Luthans, 1995). If there is a good
relationship, communication, support, encouragement and understanding between co-
workers leads to job satisfaction and can limit the chances of turnover in the
organization.

Research has also shown that employees perceive the levels of satisfaction of other
subordinates and then perfect these behaviors (Salancik & Pfeffer, 1997, as cited by
Aadmodt (2004). They believe that if an organisation’s veteran employees are hard
workers and communicate confidently about their jobs; new personnel will perfect this
behavior and become productive and satisfied. The opposite can also be true.

Company policies, administration and procedures: An organization’s policies,

administration and procedures can be a great source of frustration for employees if the
policies and procedures are unclear or unnecessary or if those to follow are selected. A
33
policy permits an employee to use his discretion and initiatives in the discharge of his
duties. Policies may not make employees satisfied and motivated but it can decrease
dissatisfaction by making policies fair and applicable to all. Policy issues should be
documented (manual) and distributed to employees, their inputs should be solicited for
while comparing policies to those of similar practices. Policies should also be reviewed
from time to time.

Therefore, the researcher considered the dimensions of Ulmer et al.(1999) for study Job
Satisfaction.

Work itself

Pay

Supervision

Co-workers

Working Conditions

Above dimensions were widely used for similar researches by other researchers.
Therefore these five dimension were taken for this study.

2.4.2 Empirical Evidence of the Relationship between Job Satisfaction and

Employee Job Performance
Robbins (2001) said when employees feel happy about their compensation they are
more motivated towards their work and the performance of the company also boosts.

Jha and Pathak (2003) in their study of the nature of differences in the levels of job
satisfaction among executives of four public and private sector organizations of Eastern
and Northern part of India found the differences in different aspects of job satisfaction,
viz., job itself, pay and security were felt by the executives. These aspects were found
to be significantly higher in the case of private sector organizations as compared to
public sector organizations.

Research done by Pushpakumar(2008) suggested that exists of positive correlation

between job satisfaction and performance of employees.

Brandt, Krawczyk & Kalinowski (2008) suggested that there exist a disagreement
among personal life and employees’ performance. Pugno, Depedri(2009) conducted a
study on Job performance and job satisfaction They found that Job performance is

34
found to be positively correlated with job satisfaction, whereas effort is assumed to be
a disutility in the theory.

Hussin(2011) tried to determine the level of job satisfaction & job performance and to
identify the relationship between job satisfaction components (which are pay,
promotion, the work itself, supervision, & co-workers) and job performance among
employees of Tradewinds Group of Companies. The study revealed that there was a
positive relationship between job satisfaction components which were promotion, work
itself, supervision (Hussin,2011).

Study in Sri Lankan Navy on Job satisfaction and performance suggested that the
satisfaction aspect on its own does necessarily lead to improved individual performance
and assumedly organizational effectiveness (Gamage,2012).

The employer can thus adopt other, more friendly actions, besides using incentives and
controls to enhance performance by employees (Qasim, Cheema, Syed, 2012)..

A study in apparel sector on job satisfaction reveals that job satisfaction has a significant
positive effect on job performance (Perera, Khatibi, Navaratna, Karuthan, 2014).Pugno
& Depedri (2009), conducted a study on Job performance and job satisfaction and found
that Job performance is positively correlated with job satisfaction.

Therefore researcher developed the following hypothesis with support of above

literature,

H2: There is a significant relationship between job satisfaction and employee job
Performance in the Sumithra Group of Sri Lanka

Empirical evidence of the Relationship of Job satisfaction dimensions and

Employee job performance.

Carlopio (1996) found that satisfaction with workplace is optimistically associated with
job accomplishment and it is indirectly connected with turnovers for better future. Ekere
(2012) investigated the impact of motivational factors (work itself, recognition,
advancement and responsibility) on librarians’ job satisfaction in university libraries in
Nigeria. The study revealed that librarians were not only motivated by these factors but
also the factors lead to job satisfaction, job performance and high productivity.

Therefore, the next hypothesis developed for this study was,

35
H2(a): There is a significant relationship between work itself and the employee job
performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

Frye (2004) found that there is a positive relationship between equity based
compensation and performance. Paying teachers more improves student achievement
through higher retention rates. (Hendricks, 2014) Relative and absolute levels of
teacher salaries exert an important influence on pupil performance. ( Dolton , Gutierrez,
2011)

Therefore the next hypothesis developed for this study was,

H2(b): There is a significant relationship between pay and the employee job
performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

The productivity and performance of subordinates can be improved with managerial

actions and supervision. The recognition of the achievements by the supervisors leads
toward job satisfaction and is useful to solve the problem. (Yen and McKinney, 1992).
Activities are required to monitor employees' performance because supervision
improves employee performance (Hinkin, 2000). Having clearly defined supervision
activities motivates employees to work toward their expected achievements. In turn,
employees are evaluated by managers based on completion of goals throughout the year
(Harris, 2007).

Therefore the next hypothesis developed for this study was,

H2(c): There is a significant relationship between supervision and the employee

job performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

Padilla-Velez (1993) argued that the performance can be improved and absenteeism
can be decreased with the help of socialization and interaction among employees. James
(1996) concluded that the working as a team has significant impact on the
satisfactionLevel of employees as it affects their performance. Factors like pay,
promotion and satisfaction with co-workers that influence the employee feeling towards
job satisfaction .(Schermerhorn et al., 2005).

36
Therefore, the next hypothesis developed for this study was,

H2(d): There is a significant relationship between co-workers and the employee

job performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

Haynes (2008) explained the behavioral office environment ,behavioral components of

the office environment that have the greatest impact on office productivity. As
suggested by Govindarajulu (2004), in the twenty-first century, businesses are taking a
more strategic approach to environmental management to enhance their productivity
through improving the performance level of the employees. James (1996) concluded
that the working as a team has significant impact on the satisfaction level of employees
as it affects their performance. It is essential to recognize to the significance of these
factors to boost the satisfaction level in the workforce. The researchers found the
factors like pay, promotion and satisfaction with co-workers that influence the
employee feeling towards job satisfaction (Schermerhorn et al., 2005)

Therefore, the next hypothesis developed for this study was,

H2(c): There is a significant relationship between working conditions and the

employee job performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

According to the literature review carried out by the researcher it is clear that there are
studies that highlights, the relationship of Leadership style and employee job
performance.(Cummings and Schwab, 1973; Hellriegel, Jackson, Slocum, Staude,
Amos, Klopper, Louw and Oosthuizen, 2004,Trott & Windsor, 1999,Barbuto, 1997).

There are some other researchers that highlights the relationship of Job satisfaction and
Job performance (Robbins (2001,Jha and Pathak ,2003,Pushpakumar, 2008,Brandt et
al. ,2008).Therefore researcher developed the final hypothesis with intention to find
which variable has the higher impact on employee job performance,

H3: Leadership style has a higher impact on the job performance than the job
satisfaction

37
2.5 Variables in the research Model
Researcher has used leadership style and Job satisfaction as independent variables.
Dependent variable in the research model is Job Performance. Dimensions of each
variables in the model as follow.

Table 2 Table 2.1: Variables and Dimensions of the Model

Variable Dimensions
Leadership style Autocratic, Democratic, Laissez fair
(Lewin,1993)
Job Satisfaction Work, pay, supervision, coworkers,
working condition(Syptak, Marsland &
Ulmer ,1999)
Job performance Traits, behavior, results(Cox &
Nkomo,1986)

2.5.1 Leadership style Types

Authoritarian Leadership (Autocratic)

Authoritarian leaders, also known as autocratic leaders provide clear expectations for
what needs to be done, when it should be done, and how it should be done. There is
also a clear division between the leader and the followers. Authoritarian leaders make
decisions independently with little or no input from the rest of the group.

Researchers found that decision‐making was less creative under authoritarian

leadership. Lewin (1939) found that it is more difficult to move from an authoritarian
style to a democratic style than vice versa.

Abuse of this style is usually viewed as controlling, bossy, and dictatorial.

Authoritarian leadership is best applied to situations where there is little time for group
decision‐making or where the leader is the most knowledgeable member of the group.

Democratic (Participative Leadership)

Lewin (1939) found that participative leadership, also known as democratic leadership,
is generally the most effective leadership style. Democratic leaders offer guidance to
group Members, but they also participate in the group and allow input from other group
members.

38
In Lewin’s study, children in this group were less productive than the members of the
Authoritarian group, but their contributions were of a much higher quality. Participative
leaders encourage group members to participate, but retain the final say over the
decision‐making process. Group members feel engaged in the process and are more
motivated and creative.

Laissez‐Faire (Delegative) Leadership

Under delegative leadership, also known as laissez‐fair leadership, were the least
productive of all three groups. Delegative leaders offer little or no guidance to group
members and leave decision‐making up to group members. While this style can be
effective in situations where group members are highly qualified in an area of expertise,
it often leads to poorly defined roles and a lack of motivation.

2.5.2 Job satisfaction dimensions

According to Syptak, Marsland & Ulmer (1999), the following factors stood out as
‘strong determinants of job satisfaction’. Researcher has used those for this research.

Work itself: This involves helping employees believe that the task they are doing is
important and meaningful. Setting goals and reminding and emphasizing that their
efforts lead to and contribute to positive outcomes and goal accomplishment is crucial.
Success stories and cases should be shared on how an employee’s actions made a real
difference in the organization. Also show employees how their work is essential to the
overall processes that make the practice succeed. Unnecessary tasks can be eliminated
or streamlined to bring about greater efficiency in the organization.

Pay (salary): Organizations, they say, ‘pay get what they pay for’. Salary is a
contractual agreement between the employer and the employee. It not a motivator for
them but do want to be paid fairly and when due. If an employee perceives that he is
not fairly compensated, he will not be happy and so slow the pace of performance.
Comparable salaries and benefits, clear policies relating to salaries, increments, bonuses
and benefits must be clearly indicated to avoid dissatisfaction

Supervision: This involves technical and general supervision in the organization. Wise
decisions should be taken when it comes to appointing someone to the role of
supervising. This role is difficult and requires good leadership skills and the ability to
treat all employees fairly. There should also be positive feedback and a set means of
evaluating or appraising employees.

39
Working conditions: The environment under which employees work has a tremendous
effect on their level of pride for themselves and for the work they do. The provision of
modern equipment and facilities, quality furniture, well ventilated offices, well-spaced
offices, secured, well-spaced staff quarters, and so on are some of the conditions that
are required to prevent job dissatisfaction in the organization.

Coworkers: The degree to which associates are friendly, capable and helpful is another
dimension that influences job satisfaction (Robbins et al., 2003). Research shows that
personnel who have supportive colleagues will be more satisfied with their jobs
(Aamodt, 2004) since supportive co-workers serve as a source of support, security,
advice and support to the individual worker (Luthans, 1995). If there is a good
relationship, communication, support, encouragement and understanding between co-
workers leads to job satisfaction and can limit the chances of turnover in the
organization.

2.6 Direction of the Model

2.6.1 Model for leadership style and Job performance
According to the above literature review researcher has taken Leadership style as the
dependent variable. Researcher wanted to find whether there is the relationship between
Leadership style and performance. Following literature will again give the direction for
the research model.

Leadership is considered as a major factor which influence on the performance of

organizations, managers and employees (Wang. 2005).

Leadership style constitutes significant influence on the subordinates and

organizational outcomes. (Tarabishy, Solomon, Fernald and Sashkin 2005)

Gadot (2007) noted that transactional leadership style is relatively weakly associated
with performance and is optimistically related to perception of organizational politics.
Liu et al. (2008) studied how Organizational innovation capability under a suitable
leadership style leads to good innovation performance. 149 employees of listed and
OTC electronics information companies in Taiwan are chosen as sampling subject. The
findings are suggests the leadership style has a positive relationship on organizational
innovation performance and the leadership style moderates the relationship between
organizational innovation capability and organizational innovation performance. (Liu
et al., 2008)

40
Fenwick and Gayle (2008) in their study of the missing links in understanding the
relationship between leadership and organizational performance concluded that despite
a hypothesized leadership-performance relationship suggested by some researchers are
inconclusive and difficult to interpret. Lee,Chuang (2009) explained that the excellent
leader not only inspires subordinates potential to enhance efficiency but also meets their
requirements in the process of achieving organizational goals.

Yang and Ting (2010) suggested that project manager’s leadership style, teamwork,
and project performance are highly correlated. The findings also indicate that teamwork
dimensions may partially or fully mediate the relationships between leadership style
and project performance.

To achieve organizational goals organizational managers strive to develop, harness and

utilize both material and human resources. (Etuk, 1990 cited in Ushie et al., 2010).

This also entails leading people, hence it has been argued by Ushie et al., (2010) and
Obiwuru et al. (2011) that organizational failure is tied to the quantity, quality and
inappropriate leadership style. Leadership contributes significantly to the success and
failure of an organization (Jaskaran ,Guru, 2014)

Further, researcher selected a three leadership styles as dimensions of leadership style.

According to the following literatures researcher needs to find whether there is a
relationship between each leadership style and Performance.

Authoritarian leadership style has in general a negative effect on business performance

of Croatian companies, while democratic leadership style has in general a positive
effect. Impact of laissez-faire leadership style was mostly neutral. (Miloza, 2012)

Kotur, Anbazhagan(2014) concentrated on the three interesting leadership styles that

are at the top, bottom and the middle of the leadership authority hierarchy, namely the
autocratic, the laissez-faire and democratic leadership styles. Upon study it has been
found that workers with autocratic leadership style give more performance against
others.

Study on Influence of Autocratic Leadership Style on the Job Performance of Academic

Librarians in Benue State by Akor(2014) suggested that the Librarian Managers in
Benue State adopted more of democratic leadership style. This is followed by the
bureaucratic leadership style than laissez-faire leadership style and lastly autocratic

41
leadership style. Autocratic leadership style does not significantly influence the job
performance of academic librarians.

It was found that managers with democratic inclinations account for more variance in
performance than autocratic and laissez faire. (Ukaidi,2016) .

According to above literatures researcher intended to find whether there is a

relationship between Autocratic, democratic and leisser fair leadership and Job
performance in Sumithra group.

2.6.2 Model for relationship between Job satisfaction and Performance

When employees feel happy about their compensation they are more motivated

Research done by Pushpakumar(2008) suggested that exists of positive correlation

between job satisfaction and performance of employees.

Brandt, Krawczyk & Kalinowski (2008) suggested that there exist a disagreement
among personal life and employees’ performance. Pugno, Depedri(2009) conducted a
study on Job performance and job satisfaction They found that Job performance is
found to be positively correlated with job satisfaction, whereas effort is assumed to be
a disutility in the theory.

Harteret al. (2002) found positive correlations between employee satisfaction-

engagement and the organisational performance. When employees act diligently and
have outstanding performance, the organisational performance will be superior Gould-
Williams (2003).

Schneider et al. (2003) found out that higher return on assets (ROA) and higher earnings
per share were positively correlated with higher job satisfaction.

According to the study done by Syptak, Marsland & Ulmer (1999), few factors stood
out as ‘strong determinants of job satisfaction’. Therefore, the researcher considered
the following dimensions for Job Satisfaction based on Syptak et al., (1999)

• Work itself
• Pay
• Supervision
• Co-workers
• Working Conditions

42
Job satisfaction is an outcome of different factors like pay, promotion, the work itself,
supervision, relationships with co-workers and opportunities for promotions(Opkara,
2002).

• Work and performance

Carlopio (1996) found that satisfaction with workplace is optimistically associated with
job accomplishment and it is indirectly connected with turnovers for better future.

The current workplace environment job insecurity, work intensity, greater stress, and
dissatisfaction with working hours have increased in the US and in Germany, and they
significantly explain the decline of job satisfaction (Green & Tsitsianis 2005)

According to Rainey (1997) how people feel about their jobs and different aspects of
their work is the extent to which people like or dislike their work (Spector, 1997).

Therefore, researcher wanted to find whether there is a relationship between work itself
and performance.

• Pay and performance

Frye (2004) found that there is a positive relationship between equity based
compensation and performance.

Paying teachers more improves student achievement through higher retention rates.
(Hendricks, 2014)

Relative and absolute levels of teacher salaries exert an important influence on pupil
performance (Dolton , Gutierrez, 2011)

DeHoratius and Raman (2006) analyze the relationship between incentives provided to
store managers and monthly sales and shrinkage across a chain of stores. They control
for store fixed effects, inventory, and advertising expenditures and found find a positive
and significant relationship between inventory and sales at the store level.

Therefore, researcher intended to find whether there is the relationship between salary
and performance of employees.

• Supervision and performance

Brunetto and Farr-Wharton (2002) concluded that supervision of the immediate
manager increases the level of job satisfaction in the public sector employees.

43
The productivity and performance of subordinates can be improved with managerial
actions and supervision. The recognition of the achievements by the supervisors leads
toward job satisfaction and is useful to solve the problem (Yen and McKinney, 1992).

Okpara (2004) conducted the study of IT managers and found that job satisfaction
among managers can be increased with the help of supervision.

It was differently found that social relation, supervisor’s relationship has little influence
on job satisfaction at workplace (Brown and Mcintosh, 2003).

It was further found that job satisfaction is not the result of satisfaction with supervisors
(Roelen et al., 2008).

The recognition of the subordinate attainment by the supervisors enhances their job
satisfaction level and also useful for solving the day to day problems. The productivity
and performance of the subordinates is significant toward the managerial actions and
supervision of the workers (Yen and McKinney, 1992).

With the support of the above literatures researcher intended to find the relationship
between supervision and performance.

• Co-workers and performance

Padilla-Velez (1993) argued that the performance can be improved and absenteeism
can be decreased with the help of socialization and interaction among employees.

James (1996) concluded that the working as a team has significant impact on the
satisfaction level of employees as it affects their performance.

Factors like pay, promotion and satisfaction with co-workers that influence the
employee feeling towards job satisfaction (Schermerhorn et al., 2005).

According to the support of above literatures researcher intended to find whether there
is a relationship between coworkers and performance.

• Working Condition and performance

Work environment is an important determinant of job satisfaction of employees
(Herzberg, 1968; Spector, 2008).

Haynes (2008) explains the behavioral office environment, behavioral components of

the office environment that have the greatest impact on office productivity.

44
As suggested by Govindarajulu (2004), in the twenty-first century, businesses are
taking a more strategic approach to environmental management to enhance their
productivity through improving the performance level of the employees.

Therefore, in the research model researcher intended to find whether there is a

relationship between working condition and performance of employees.

2.7 Chapter summery

This chapter described the past studies done on the selected independent variables
namely job satisfaction and the leadership style and its dimension autocratic,
democratic and laissez-fair which were taken as the dimensions of the leadership style
and work-itself, pay, supervision corking condition and the co-workers which were
selected as the dimensions of the job satisfaction.

Further this chapter discussed about the dependent variable of this research, employee
job performance and its relationship with leadership style and job satisfaction

45
 CHAPTER THREE
Research Methodology
3.1 Introduction
The conceptual framework, conceptualization and the operationalization of this
research is discussed in this chapter. Further, sampling, data collection methods,
questioner design, questioner administration, research instruments, criteria to accept or
reject hypothesis etc. are also discussed in Chapter.

3.2 Conceptual Framework

Leadership Style and Job satisfaction are taken as the two independent variables of this
study. Employee Job performance was taken as the dependent variable. Three
leadership styles of Lewin (1993) were taken as the dimensions of the Leadership style.
Syptak et al. (1999) Job satisfaction dimensions were selected as the Job Satisfaction
dimensions. Traits, Behavior and Results (cox and Nokomo,1986) were selected as the
Employee Job performance dimensions.

Leadership Style H1

Autocratic
H1(a)
Democratic H1(b)
Laissez-faire H1(c)

Employee Job
Performance
Performance
Traits
H2
Job Satisfaction Behavior
H2(a)

H2(b) Results
Work itself

Pay H2(c)

Supervision H2(d)

Co-workers H2(e)

Working
Conditions

Figure 1 Figure 3.1: Conceptual Framework

46
3.3 Conceptualization
Table 3Table 4Table 3.1: Conceptualization

Variable / Definition Source

Dimension
Leadership “Leadership as the process of influencing and Arms
Style supporting others to work enthusiastically towards trong
achieving the objectives” (2002
)
Autocratic “autocratic style is embedded in leaders who have Kavanaugh
full organizational power and authority for decision and
making without sharing it with their subordinates” Ninemeier
(2001)
Democratic “democratic style implies that leaders share their Kavanaugh
authority of decision making with employees and and Ninemeier
delegate” (2001)
Laissez-Faire “where leaders give their employees most of the Kavanaugh
authority over decision making” and Ninemeier
(2001)
Job Satisfaction ““a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting Locke (1976)
from one’s job or job experiences”
Working- “employees prefer physical surroundings that are Robbins
Condition secure, clean, comfortable and with a minimum (2005)
standard of distraction”
Responsibility Granting additional authority to employees in their Robbins
activity, giving them enough job freedom and power (2005)
so that they feel they ‘own’ the results are ways of
giving them responsibility
Work it-self employees believe that the task they are doing is Robbins
important, meaningful and how their work is (2005)
essential to the overall processes
Recognition Timely, informal or formal acknowledgementof a Harrison
persons or teams’ behavior, effort or business results (2011)
that support the organization’s goals and values

47
 Pay The payment or compensation received for the www.investop
service rendered or employment edia.com/terms
/r/remuneration
.aspx
Performance “The effectiveness of employees’ behavior that Motowidlo
effects to achieve the organizational objectives” (2003)

3.4 Operationalization
Table 5Table 3.2: Operationalization of the variables and dimensions

Variable Dimension Indicators Source Question

No.
Employee Traits Prioritize tasks in a critical order Cox & 1
job Nkomo(1986)
Performance Achieving all organizational goals Cox & 2
and objectives Nkomo(1986)

Consider the resource availability Cox & 3

and attempt to gather resource before Nkomo(1986)
work is started
Ability to plan work to achieve the Cox & 4
target ahead Nkomo(1986)
Punctuality Cox & 5
Nkomo(1986)
Updating knowledge and skills Cox & 6
Nkomo(1986)
Task Peers support in achieving Cox & 7
organizational goals Nkomo(1986)

Participate with peers in problem Cox & 8

solving Nkomo(1986)
Adherence to rules and procedures of Cox & 9
the organization Nkomo(1986)

Relationships with the managers of Cox & 10

other divisions in the organization Nkomo(1986)

48
 Additional educational/ training Cox & 11
courses related to work Nkomo(1986)
Ability to suppress feelings during Cox & 12
conflict Nkomo(1986)
Behavior Get into moods that will affect Cox & 13
factory work Nkomo(1986)
Personal problems affecting work Cox & 14
Nkomo(1986)
Problems with peers Cox & 15
Nkomo(1986)
Delegation of authority to peers Cox & 16
Nkomo(1986)
Flexing rules and procedures Cox & 17
situational for the betterment of Nkomo(1986)
people and the organization

Job Work itself Heavy work load Weiss et 1

Satisfaction al.(1967)
Ability to try new methods doing the Weiss et 2
work al.(1967)

Supervisor’s practices an open Weiss et 3

communication system al.(1967)

Expressing views Weiss et 4

al.(1967)
Level of communication with the Weiss et 5
supervisor al.(1967)

Pay Pay on performance Weiss et 6

al.(1967)
Equal salary scheme Weiss et 7
al.(1967)

49
 Salary and cost of living Weiss et 8
al.(1967)
Paying bonus Weiss et 9
al.(1967)

Supervision Handling subordinates Weiss et 10

al.(1967)

Helps on solving problems in the Weiss et 11

working area al.(1967)

Trust on capability and performance Weiss et 12

al.(1967)

Ability to communicate with the Weiss et 13

supervisor when needed al.(1967)

Co-worker Helping others to do the work Weiss et 14

al.(1967)

Working in a friendly environment Weiss et 15

al.(1967)

Pointing out others’ mistake Weiss et 16

al.(1967)

Pointing out mistakes by others Weiss et 17

al.(1967)

Liking the organization due to the Weiss et 18

co-workers al.(1967)

Working The way company policies are put Weiss et 19

condition into practice al.(1967)

Maintains the factory ordinance Weiss et 20

requirements al.(1967)

All machines are adequately guarded Weiss et 21

al.(1967)

Working condition system in the Weiss et 22

organization al.(1967)

50
Leadership Autocratic Level of supervision www.cdph.ca.gov 1
Style
Employees’ commitment www.cdph.ca.gov 4

Motivation www.cdph.ca.gov 7

Employees ability to work www.cdph.ca.gov 10

independently
Judgment of achievement www.cdph.ca.gov 13

Execution of work www.cdph.ca.gov 16

Democratic Employees contribution in www.cdph.ca.gov 2

decision making

Guidance and pressure www.cdph.ca.gov 5

Communication www.cdph.ca.gov 8

Guidance for responsibility and www.cdph.ca.gov 11

completion of work

Helping subordinates to find their www.cdph.ca.gov 14

passion

laissez- Solving complex issues by www.cdph.ca.gov 3

faire employees them self

Interfering with work www.cdph.ca.gov 6

51
 Self-appraisals www.cdph.ca.gov 9

Freedom given to solve problems www.cdph.ca.gov 12

on their own

Input from leaders expected www.cdph.ca.gov 15

Level of freedom www.cdph.ca.gov 18

3.5 Population and Sampling

3.5.1 Target Population
The target population was all supervisors, workers and managers of all manufacturing
plants and the head office of Sumithra group.

The population of the Sumithra Group has a total of 4007 employees.

However, the researcher was able to construct statistical analysis with the data received
from the responses.

3.5.2 Sampling
Sampling is a process of selecting/ drawing data from many sources, i.e. from a variety
of people, objects, textual materials, audio-visual and electronic records (Leedy and
Ormrod, 2005). It can also obtain a representative set of data and information, which
can be extrapolated to the total population. The selection of participants is done
randomly.

Identifying a sufficient sample size depends on the size of the population (Leedy and
Ormrod ,2005).

The total population of employees of Sumithra group is 4007, thus the sample was
targeted at 550 employees for sampling adequacy.

3.5.3 Sample Size, Sample Unit and Sampling Techniques

The sample unit will be both managerial and non-managerial employees of Sumithra
Group.

52
Reports from MIS were used to identify the number of employees in each department
in each location. Stratified random sampling technique was used in this study. Ten
percent (10%) or more employees were selected from all the departments of the
Sumithra Group covering all Managers, Supervisors and workers were taken into the
sample. The details of the number of employees selected is given bellow

Table 6Table 3.3: Sample selected from each department - Wattala

Dept. Name No for Emp. Sample %

Accounts 14 5 36%
Central Ware House 16 6 38%
Commercial 10 4 40%
Drivers - Head Office 7 3 43%
Embroider Plant 6 3 50%
Human Resource 1 1 100%
I.T. 8 8 100%
Main Stores - Head Office 14 6 43%
Maintenance 3 1 33%
Manager 9 4 44%
Merchandizing 28 11 39%
Office Assistant 6 2 33%
Planning 1 1 100%
Product Development Center 63 21 33%
Purchasing 2 2 100%
Quality Assurance 3 1 33%
Receptionist/Secretary 1 1 100%
Total 192 80 42%
Source: Researcher, 2016

Table 7 Table 3.4: Sample selected from each department - Nittabuwa

Dept. Name No. of Emp. Sample %

Training Line 26 3 12%
Packing 13 2 15%
Transport 4 1 25%
Production 496 50 10%

53
 Stores 18 3 17%
Building Maintenance 25 4 16%
Work Study 7 3 43%
Cutting 53 6 11%
Planning & Coordination 7 1 14%
Central Processing 35 4 11%
Management 13 2 15%
HR & Administration 7 1 14%
Machinery Maintenance 10 1 10%
Garment Engineering 7 1 14%
Quality Assurance 9 1 11%
Finishing 113 11 10%
Jumpers 17 2 12%
Health & Safety 2 1 50%
Ironing 31 3 10%
893 100 11%
Total
Source: Researcher, 2016

Table 8 Table 3.5: Sample selected from each department - Polgahawela

Dept. Name No. of Emp Sample %

Training Line 5 2 40%
Packing 76 8 11%
Transport 6 2 33%
Quality Assuarence 70 8 11%
Production 525 55 10%
Stores 18 2 11%
Building Maintenance 21 2 10%
Work Study 9 2 22%
Machinery Maintenance 9 1 11%
Cutting 53 6 11%
Canteen 5 1 20%
Planning & Coordination 3 3 100%
Embroider Plant 63 7 11%

54
 Management 12 2 17%
HR & Administration 5 2 40%
Garment Engineering 11 2 18%
Finishing 47 5 11%
Jumpers 30 4 13%
IT 2 1 50%
Health & Safety 3 2 67%
Ironing 23 3 13%
Total 996 120 12%
Source: Researcher, 2016

Table 9 Table 3.6: Sample selected from each department - Hasalaka

Dept. Name No. of Emp. Sample

Packing 22 3 14%
Transport 8 1 13%
Production 320 50 16%
Stores 18 3 17%
Building Maintenance 18 3 17%
Work Study 5 1 20%
Cutting 50 8 16%
Canteen 2 1 50%
Planning & Coordination 5 1 20%
Management 8 2 25%
HR & Administration 4 1 25%
Machinery Maintenance 8 2 25%
Garment Engineering 4 1 25%
Quality Assurance 4 1 25%
Finishing 110 13 12%
Jumpers 15 3 20%
Health & Safety 2 1 50%
Ironing 35 5 14%
Total 638 100 16%
Source: Researcher, 2016

55
Table 10Table 3.7: Sample selected from each department - Weerakatiya

Dept. Name No. of Emp Sample

Building Maintenance 8 2 25%
Canteen 6 1 17%
Central Processing 52 5 10%
Cutting 70 8 11%
Finishing 151 16 11%
Garment Engineering 11 2 18%
Health & Safety 3 1 33%
HR & Administration 7 1 14%
IT Department 2 2 100%
Ironing 24 3 13%
Jumpers 24 3 13%
Machinery Maintenance 11 2 18%
Management 11 2 18%
Packing 107 11 10%
Planning & Coordination 7 2 29%
Quality Assurance 16 2 13%
Recorders 6 1 17%
Stores 19 3 16%
Production 680 75 11%
Training-Line 57 6 11%
Transport 6 1 17%
Workstudy 10 1 10%
Total 1288 150 12%
Source: Researcher, 2016

3.5.4 Unit of Measurement

The unit of measurement of this study is Individual Employees of Sumithra Group of
Companies

56
3.6 Research Design
A research design indicates the type of study undertaken and provides acceptable
answers to the research problem. If the research design is adequately planned and
implemented it can assist in permitting the researcher to rely on both his/her
observations and draw a conclusion (Martin, 2007).

This Study is a case study with reference to Sumithra Group of companies. The
characteristics of this research design are,

• It falls within the quantitative research paradigm

• It is based on primary data and Secondary data
• It is a perceptual research
The quantitative research approach was selected for this study. This research approach
was selected mainly due to the need to address given and already determined
hypotheses from which causal relationships could be established from the large
population size selected.

3.7 Data Collection Method

The data collection process involves making decisions regarding scales, the nature and
role of the Questionnaire and the conducting of interviews (Alberts, 2007).

There are many ways in collecting data. Data can be categorized into two categories,
which are primary data and secondary data. For this study, it was conducted mainly on
both primary and secondary approaches. Both primary data and secondary data were
help to find out the relevant information about all the variables that have significant
relationship with employee Job performance.

Primary Data
Primary data is an original research where the data being collected and designed
specifically to answer the research questions. In this study, researcher will use self-
administered questionnaires to gather the information needed. The advantages of
questionnaire are it can be collected easily, more quickly and more economically
compared to other data collection method.

The questionnaire used for this study was taken from several related research journals
and those are highly recognized by relevant field. By doing so it could ensure higher
validity of the questions used to ask the targeted respondents, compared to constructing
own questionnaire.

57
Secondary Data
Secondary data can be obtained through existing sources such as books, media and
census data (Cavanaugh et al., 2000). Secondary data is easier to be obtained in a faster
way, and less expensive compared to obtaining primary data. The secondary data in this
study was obtained via the Internet, Online Journals and related websites

The data collection method of this study is self-administrated 5 point likert scale
questionnaire.

3.8 Research Instrument

In this study, the research instrument was the self-administrated questionnaire taken
from previous researches. Self-administered questionnaires required respondent to take
the responsibility to read and answer all the questions in the questionnaire. The
questionnaire was distributed directly to the selected employees.

3.9 Questionnaire Design

The layout of the questionnaire was simple form. Questioner was translated to Sinhala
as the native language of 99% of the employees is Sinhalese. Therefore, respondents
were able to understand and answer them without taking much time. Questions selected
from previous research translated to Sinhala languages for easiness of understanding.
A pilot study was conducted using twenty employee and ten managers test the
reliability of the questionnaire.

The questionnaire comprised of four sections namely Section A, Section B and Section
C and D.

• Section A collected the respondent’s demographic data which consists of

gender, age, ethnicity, marital status, highest education background, monthly income
level, working duration and the duration that respondent has worked in Sumithra.

• Section B contained questions capture the leadership style shown by their direct
supervisors and/or Manager

• Section C contained questions to captures the dimension of the job satisfaction

• Section D contained questions with regard to their performance covering the

areas namely Traits, behavior and results

The researcher used Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient to test the correlation between
variables and a regression analysis for the variables.

58
The instruments used for the study are standered questionnaire tested and used by
previous researchers, but the researcher conducted reliability test to confirm the
reliability. Questioner was a 5 point Likert Scale questionnaire

3.10 Questionnaire Administration

Permission was taken from the Group general manager at Sumithra Group. Sumithra
Group of companies which had a work force of 4007 staff in its all factories and the
Head office. 550 worker level employees, supervisors and managers were taken in to
this study covering all five locations.

MIS report was taken to identify the number of employees in each department in each
location. The researcher personally visited each location and selected employees from
each department covering 10% or more.

Researcher approached the worker level and the supervisory level staff during their free
time (lunch and tea time) in batches. The managers were met individually to explain
about the research and the purpose of the study. Researcher collected the responses on
the same day and personally giving a sealed box for them to put their filled
questionnaires. The researcher had to visit same department / same factory more than
once as lunch and break time are different from group to group even in the same
department.

All these boxes were sealed and carefully transported to the researcher’s residence.
Researcher personally opened, counted, and placed his initials on each filled
questionnaire. All the data were entered in to a Spread sheets and later imported to
SPSS for analytical purposes. Spread sheets and the computer used by the researcher
for this purpose was secured by the pass word and username .All the answered
questionnaire were kept under lock and key until all of its data had been entered in to
the spread sheet and to the SPSS tool.

3.11 Data Processing

Data processing is the processing the data into useful information. Data processing
consists of organizing and manipulating data which it is usually in large amounts of
numeric data and converting the data into usable information. In data processing
includes data checking, data editing, data coding, data transcribing and data cleaning.

Data checking ensures whether all the questionnaires are completely constructed. After
completing the questionnaires, early detection of problems were taking into account.

59
Collected data can be used as input for reliability tests. The reliability test is to ensure
the measurements are reliable and consistent.

The second step is data editing by reviewing the questionnaires to identify the
incomplete, inconsistent, ambiguous answers that made by interviewer or respondent.
Data editing process is conducted to ensure that the information provided is accurate,
complete, and consistent which will be discarded instead of filling in missing value to
minimize response bias in the questionnaire.

For completion of this study, the SPSS software used for data coding and for the final
step,

The final step is where the coded data from the questionnaires are inserted directly into
computers and transcribed into SPSS version 20 software for data analysis.

3.12 Hypotheses Accepted / Rejected Criteria

Correlation testing is used to accept or reject hypothesis in this study. The table 3.8
shows the criteria the researcher used to accept or reject hypothesis

Table 11Table 3.8: Criteria for Hypotheses Accept / Reject

Hypotheses Accepted Criteria Rejected Criteria

H1: There is a significant If Correlation Value If Correlation
relationship between leadership style Greater than or equal Value between
and employee job performance in to +0.1 or -0.09 to +0.09
the Sumithra Group of Sri Lanka Less than equal to -0.1
H1(a): There is a significant If Correlation Value If Correlation
relationship between autocratic Greater than or equal Value between
leadership style and the employee job to +0.1 or -0.09 to +0.09
performance of the Sumithra Group Less than equal to -0.1
of Companies
H1(b): There is a significant If Correlation Value If Correlation
relationship between democratic Greater than or equal Value between
leadership style and the employee job to +0.1 or -0.09 to +0.09
performance of the Sumithra Group Less than equal to -0.1
of Companies
H1(c): There is a significant If Correlation Value If Correlation
relationship between laissez-faire Value between

60
 leadership style and the employee job Greater than or equal -0.09 to +0.09
performance of the Sumithra Group to +0.1 or
of Companies Less than equal to -0.1
H2: There is a significant If Correlation Value If Correlation
relationship between job satisfaction Greater than or equal Value between
and employee job Performance in to +0.1 or -0.09 to +0.09
the Sumithra Group of Sri Lanka Less than equal to -0.1
H2(a): There is a significant If Correlation Value If Correlation
relationship between work itself and Greater than or equal Value between
the employee job performance of the to +0.1 or -0.09 to +0.09
Sumithra Group of Companies Less than equal to -0.1
H2(b): There is a significant If Correlation Value If Correlation
relationship between pay and the Greater than or equal Value between
employee job performance of the to +0.1 or -0.09 to +0.09
Sumithra Group of Companies Less than equal to -0.1
H2(c): There is a significant If Correlation Value If Correlation
relationship between supervision Greater than or equal Value between
and the employee job performance to +0.1 or -0.09 to +0.09
of the Sumithra Group of Less than equal to -0.1
Companies
H2(d): There is a significant If Correlation Value If Correlation
relationship between co-workers and Greater than or equal Value between
the employee job performance of the to +0.1 or -0.09 to +0.09
Sumithra Group of Companies Less than equal to -0.1
H2(e): There is a significant If Correlation Value If Correlation
relationship between working Greater than or equal Value between
conditions and the employee job to +0.1 or -0.09 to +0.09
performance of the Sumithra Group Less than equal to -0.1
of Companies
H3: Leadership style has a higher If the “t” value of the If the “t” value of
impact on the job performance than leadership style is the job satisfaction
the job satisfaction higher than “t” value of is higher than “t”
job satisfaction value of leadership
style
Source: Researcher, 2016
61
3.13 Construct Measurement
According to Zikmund (2003), a scale is defined as any series of items that are arranged
accordingly to value or magnitude. The measurement of scales such as ordinal scale,
nominal scale, ratio scale and interval scale will influence the accuracy of data analysis.

Nominal Scale
According to Zikmund (2003), nominal scale is the numbers or letters assigned to
objects that are served as labels identification or classification.

Ordinal Scale
An ordinal scale is a ranking scale that does not tell the value of the internal between
rankings. Besides, ordinal scale allows entities to be placed into groups that are in order

Likert Scale
Likert scales are often used in psychology questions and typically involved offering a
response that ranges from strongly disagrees to strongly agree.

The researcher used 5 point likert scale to capture the response for this study

3.14 Data Analysis

Data analysis is an application where all data that have been collected through
questionnaires will be interpreted into useful information (Zikmund, 2003). The data
collected from the questionnaire analyzed statistically using the SPSS.

In this study, SPSS software used to investigate the relationship between the
independent variables, dimensions of the independent variable and dependent variables
using Pearson Correlation analysis and Multiple Regression analysis. Hypotheses
findings of this study evaluated using above tests to determine whether the hypotheses
in our research are supported.

Descriptive Analysis
Descriptive analysis is an analysis where raw data are transformed in an easier form for
the researchers understanding. Measurements such as mean, mode, standard deviation
and range are forms of descriptive analysis that are used in describing the sample data
matrix in such a way as to portray the typical respondent and to show the general
patterns of responses (Burns & Bush, 2006).

Mean values for each variable / dimension were analyzed using the following
quantinum,

62
Level of variation, 1.00 to 2.33 Poor

2.34 to 3.67 Average

3.68 to 5.00 Good

Pearson’s Correlation Analysis

A correlation coefficient (r) indicates the strength and direction of the relationship. It
ranges from -1.00 to +1.00, with 0 representing absolutely no linear relationship
between two variables while -1.00 or +1.00 is possible and represents a perfect
association between two variables (Hair et al., 2007).

The larger the correlation coefficient means the stronger the linkage or the level of
association. Hair et al. (2007) proposed Rules of thumb about coefficient range and
strength of association as given below:

Coefficient range Strength of Association

• ±0.91 to ±1.00 Very strong

• ±0.71 to ±0.90 High
• ±0.41 to ±0.70 Moderate
• ±0.21 to ±0.40 Small but definite relationship
• ±0.01 to ±0.20 Slight, almost negligible
Source: Hair, Money, Samouel. (2007). Research Methods for Business. West Sussex,
John Wiley Sons.

Multiple Regression Analysis

Multiple linear regression analysis is defined as an extension of bivariate regression
analysis that allows simultaneous investigation of the effect of two or more independent
variables on a single interval scaled dependent variables (Zikmund et al, 2010).
According to the R square value, ANOVA table the Model equation was decided for
this study.

63
 CHAPTER FOUR
Results and discussion
4.1 Introduction
In this chapter finding & results is discussed. How the samples were taken, the response
rate, the regression, correlation tests and accepting or rejecting of hypothesis are also
presented in this chapter

Sumithra as a Group had 4,007 active carder as at November 1st, 2016. As per the
payroll system of the MIS at Sumithra Group. 550 questionnaire were distributed
covering not less than ten percent (10%) from each department. The researcher was
able to collect 455 answered questionnaires. The response rate was around 83%. The
summery of the questionnaire distributed and the number of respondents are given in
the table 4.1

4.2 Sample Profile and Response Rate

Table 12Table 4.1: Response Rate

Location No. of Active No. Employees Number of Response

Employees as at considered for Respondents Rate
1st November the Sample
2016
Wattala 192 80 67 84%
Nittabuwa 893 100 90 90%
Polgahawela 996 120 93 78%
Hasalaka 638 100 78 78%
Weerakatiya 1,288 150 127 85%
Total 4,007 550 455 83%
Source: Researcher, 2016

4.3 Results of Sumithra Group

For the sampling purpose researcher distributed 550 questionnaire covering Sumithra’s
all location. Out of 550 questionnaires 455 questionnaires were collected and therefore
the Respondent Rate was 83%.

When considering the table 4.2 sample has 77.1% of worker level staff, 16.5% of
supervisors , 6.4% of managerial staff.

64
Table 13Table 4.2: Employee Category

Worker Category Frequency Percentage

Worker Data Removed Data Removed
Supervisor Data Removed Data Removed
Manager Data Removed Data Removed
Total Data Removed Data Removed
Source: Survey Data, 2016

Table 4.3 describes the working experience of workers.45% were more than 3 years of
experience and 25% were 1-3years of experience .Rest of the sample is less than 1 year.

Table 14Table 4.3: Employees’ Number of Years in Sumithra

Duration Frequency Percentage

Less than 6months Data Removed Data Removed
6months to 1 year Data Removed Data Removed
1year to 3 years Data Removed Data Removed
more than 3 years Data Removed Data Removed
Total Data Removed Data Removed
Source: Survey Data, 2016
Table 15Table 4.4: Employees’ Age

Age Frequency Percent

Less than 18 Data Removed Data Removed
18yrs to 21yrs Data Removed Data Removed
21yrs to 25yrs Data Removed Data Removed
25yrs to 30yrs Data Removed Data Removed
More than 30yrs Data Removed Data Removed
Total Data Removed Data Removed
Source: Survey Data, 2016
Table 4.4 describes the age differences exists between employees. Majority were more
than 30 years of age. The next highest category which has 29.9% of the sample was 21-
25 years old group. 25 – 30 years employees were 22.9%..

65
Table 16Table 4.5: Employees’ Education Level

Education Level Frequency Percent

Up to O/L Data Removed Data Removed
Up to A/L Data Removed Data Removed
A/L Pass Data Removed Data Removed
Diploma Holder Data Removed Data Removed
Graduate Data Removed Data Removed
Total Data Removed Data Removed
Source: Survey Data, 2016
When considering qualifications most the employees have up to O/L education
qualification. The percentage of up to O/L category was 38%. 34% were A/L passed
employees of the total sample. Graduate or diploma holders percentage was 9%

Table 17Table 4.6: Employees’ Gender

Gender Frequency Percent

Female Data Removed Data Removed
Male Data Removed Data Removed
Total Data Removed Data Removed
Source: Survey Data, 2016
Gender wise Majority were female. Males were only 28%. Most of the employees
were female in the Sumithra Group.

Figure 2 Figure 4.1: Demographic Data - Gender

4.3.1 Reliability Test
Following results were found from the pilot study carried out to test the reliability of
the questionnaire. According to Sekaran and Bougie (2010), if Corn Batch Alpha is
closer to 1, the reliability of the measures is higher. Corn Batch Alpha of 0.6 is
Considered poor, 0.7 is acceptable and 0.8 is categorized as good (Sekaran & Bougie,
2010).
66
 Table 18Table 4.7: Reliability Test Results

Section Number of Question Cronbach Alpha Value

B – Leadership style 18 0.782
C – Employee Job 17 0.865
performance
D –Job Satisfaction 22 0.879
According to Sekaran and Bougie (2010) the Cronbach alpha values above 0.7 is
acceptable. The table 4.7 confirms the reliability of the questionnaire

4.3.2 Correlation Analysis

Table 19Table 4.8: Correlation Matrix
performance
Job

Autocratic

Job 1
Democratic

performance
Laissez-fair

Autocratic .407 1

Democratic .556 .503 1

Work

.344 .215 .277 1

Laissez-fair
Supervision

Work .296 .132 .330 .164 1

Pay

Pay .404 .200 .310 .166 .173 1

Co-worker

Work condition

Supervision .570 .267 .453 .231 .444 .495 1

Job satisfaction

Co-worker .460 .155 .330 .219 .110 .207 .420 1

Leadership style

Work .488 .250 .349 .285 .206 .549 .617 .326 1

condition
Job .629 .290 .500 .300 .516 .750 .854 .545 .797 1
satisfaction
Leadership .585 .744 .789 .699 .281 .301 .425 .318 .398 .489 1
style

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

67
Table 20Table 4.9: Statistic Summery

Relationship towards Emp. JP Descriptive Statistics

Variable
Correlation (r) Significance Mean ( x̅ ) St. Deviation

Emp. JP 1 - 2.141 0.0803

Leadership style 0.585 .000 3.101 0.27792
Autocratic 0.407 .000 3.427 0.12179
Democratic 0.556 .000 3.279 0.37078
Laissez-fair 0.344 .000 2.597 0.44225
Job satisfaction 0.629 .000 3.012 0.1917
Work 0.296 .002 3.563 0.70605
Pay 0.404 .000 2.592 0.04376
Supervision 0.57 .000 2.245 0.86855
Co-worker 0.46 .000 3.845 0.66481
Work condition 0.488 .000 2.817 0.58565

Leadership Style and Employee Job Performance

According to the table 4.9 Leadership style and Job performance shows a correlation
value of 0.585 which is a positive and a significant moderate correlation between the
two variables. This result confirms that leadership style of Sumithra Group has a
positive relationship towards job performance of the employees of the Sumithra Group.

Mean value of Leadership style is 2.141 which indicates level of leadership in Sumithra
group is average.

Democratic Leadership Style and Employee Job Performance

The highest correlation exists between democratic leadership style and the job
performance, the correlation value is 0.556 which is a positive significant correlation.
Mean value of democratic leadership style is 3.279 which indicates average level of
democratic leadership in Sumithra group of companies.

Autocratic Leadership Style and Employee Job Performance

The correlation value of autocratic leadership style towards job performance is 0.407
which is a positive and significant correlation. Mean value for autocratic leadership
style is 3.427. Level of Autocratic leadership style in Sumithra group is average.

68
Laissez-fair Leadership Style and Employee Job Performance

Laissez-fair leadership style shows a correlation value of 0.344 which is positive and
significant. Mean value of Laissez-fair leadership is 2.597 indicates average level of
Laissez-fair leadership style in Sumithra group of companies.

As per the above results it is clear that the democratic leadership style has better
correlation towards job performance.

Job Satisfaction and Employee Job Performance

According to the Correlation analysis results Job Satisfaction and Employee job
performance shows 0.629 correlation value, which indicates the positive significant and
moderate correlation between two variables. Mean value of leadership style is 3.012,
therefore level of job satisfaction in the Sumithra group is in average level.

Work and Employee Job Performance

The correlation value of Work and Employee Job Performance was 0.296. Which is a
positive weak but a significant correlation. Mean value of work itself is 3.563 which
indicate the level of work itself is average.

Pay and Employee Job Performance

Pay had positive and significant correlation value of 0.404 towards Employee Job
Performance. This is the third highest correlation value out of the five dimensions of
the job satisfaction. Mean value of pay in the organization is 2.592 which describes the
average level of pay in Sumithra group.

Supervision and Employee job performance

Supervision had positive and significant correlation value of 0.57 towards Employee
Job Performance. It indicates positive significant moderate correlation between two
variables. Supervision has a high positive correlation towards employee job
performance than the other four dimensions in the Job Satisfaction. This could mean
that proper supervision could lead to better performance. Mean value of supervision in
the organization is 2.245 which describe the low level of Supervision in Sumithra
group.

69
Coworkers and Employee job performance

Coworkers had positive and significant correlation value of 0.46 towards Employee
Job Performance. It indicates positive significant moderate correlation between two
variables. Mean value of coworkers in the organization is 3.845 which describes the
higher level of coworkers in Sumithra group.

Work condition and Employee job performance

Work condition had positive and significant correlation value of 0.488 towards
Employee Job Performance. It indicates positive significant moderate correlation
between two variables. Mean value of work condition in the organization is 2.817
which describe the average level of work condition in Sumithra group. Another
important finding of this study is that the second highest correlation toward Job
Performance exists for working condition. Better working condition could lead to
better results

4.3.3 Regression Analysis

Table 21Table 4.10: Regression Value of the Model

R R Square Adjusted R Square

.721a .519 .511
a: Dependent variable: Employee job performance

According to Regression Analysis 52% of the employee Job performance explained

by the Leadership style and Job Satisfaction.

Table 22Table 4.11: Coefficient Value of the Model

B value Coefficient β t value Sig.

Constant 0.698
Job Satisfaction 0.518 0.451 11.761 0.000
Leadership Style 0.432 0.366 9.547 0.000

70
4.3.4 Hypotheses Test Results
H1: There is a significant relationship between leadership style and employee job
performance in the Sumithra Group of Sri Lanka

The correlation value between leadership style and employee job performance was
0.585 which is a significant positive moderate correlation

The regression analysis shows a significant value of 0.000 which is <0.005

H1(a): There is a significant relationship between autocratic leadership style and

the employee job performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

The correlation value between autocratic style and employee job performance was
0.407 which is a significant positive moderate correlation

The regression analysis shows a significant value of 0.000 which is <0.005

H1(b): There is a significant relationship between democratic leadership style and

the employee job performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

The correlation value between democratic leadership style and employee job
performance was 0.556 which is a significant positive moderate correlation

The regression analysis shows a significant value of 0.000 which is <0.005

H1(c): There is a significant relationship between laissez-faire leadership style and

the employee job performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

The correlation value between laissez-fair leadership style and employee job
performance was 0.344 which is a positive weak but significant correlation

The regression analysis shows a significant value of 0.000 which is <0.005

H2: There is a significant relationship between job satisfaction and employee job
Performance in the Sumithra Group of Sri Lanka

The correlation value between autocratic job satisfaction and employee job
performance was 0.629 which is a significant positive moderate correlation

The regression analysis shows a significant value of 0.000 which is <0.005

H2(a): There is a significant relationship between work itself and the employee job
performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

71
The correlation value between work it-self and employee job performance was 0.296
which is a positive weak but significant correlation

The regression analysis shows a significant value of 0.002 which is <0.005

H2(b): There is a significant relationship between pay and the employee job
performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

The correlation value between pay and employee job performance was 0.404 which is
a significant positive moderate correlation

The regression analysis shows a significant value of 0.000 which is <0.005

H2(c): There is a significant relationship between supervision and the employee

job performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

The correlation value between supervision and employee job performance was 0.570
which is a significant positive moderate correlation

The regression analysis shows a significant value of 0.000 which is <0.005

H2(d): There is a significant relationship between co-workers and the employee

job performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

The correlation value between co-workers and employee job performance was 0.460
which is a significant positive moderate correlation

The regression analysis shows a significant value of 0.000 which is <0.005

H2(e): There is a significant relationship between working conditions and the

employee job performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

The correlation value between working conditions and employee job performance was
0.488 which is a significant positive moderate correlation

The regression analysis shows a significant value of 0.000 which is <0.005

H3: Leadership style has a higher impact on the job performance than the job
satisfaction

The significant value of job satisfaction is 0.000 which is less than 0.005

The significant value of the leadership style is also 0.000 which is less than 0.005

72
This indicates that both the independent variables are significant but the ‘t’ value of the
job satisfaction was 11.76 while the ‘t’ value for the leadership style was 9.54. This
indicates that job satisfaction has a higher impact on job performance than the
leadership style.

The R2 value of the model is 0.519, which means 52% of the employee job performance
of the of the Sumithra Group is explained by the leadership style and the job
satisfaction.

As per the above results accepting or rejecting hypotheses are summarized in table 4.13,

Table 23Table 4.12: Hypotheses – Accepted / Rejected

Hypotheses Accepted /
Rejected
H1: There is a significant relationship between leadership style and Accepted
employee job performance in the Sumithra Group of Sri Lanka
H1(a): There is a significant relationship between autocratic Accepted
leadership style and the employee job performance of the Sumithra
Group of Companies
H1(b): There is a significant relationship between democratic Accepted
leadership style and the employee job performance of the Sumithra
Group of Companies
H1(c): There is a significant relationship between laissez-faire Accepted
leadership style and the employee job performance of the Sumithra
Group of Companies
H2: There is a significant relationship between job satisfaction and Accepted
employee job Performance in the Sumithra Group of Sri Lanka
H2(a): There is a significant relationship between work itself and the Accepted
employee job performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies
H2(b): There is a significant relationship between pay and the Accepted
employee job performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies
H2(c): There is a significant relationship between supervision and Accepted
the employee job performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies
H2(d): There is a significant relationship between co-workers and Accepted
the employee job performance of the Sumithra Group of Companies

73
 H2(e): There is a significant relationship between working Accepted
conditions and the employee job performance of the Sumithra Group
of Companies
H3: Leadership style has a higher impact on the job performance Rejected
than the job satisfaction
Source: Researcher 2016

74
.

CHAPTER FIVE
Conclusion and Recommendations
5.1 Introduction
This chapter gives the conclusion of the researcher based on the findings. Further the
researcher’s recommendation for further studies is also given in this chapter.

5.2 Conclusions
This study was done to study the probable relationship between Leadership and
Employee Job Performance, Job satisfaction and Job Performance. This study was done
in the Sumithra Group of Companies covering 455 respondents form its all the five
locations.

A positive significant relationship was found between job satisfaction and employee
job performance. This fining was consistent with prior research. Gamage (2012) found
that the satisfaction aspect on its own does necessarily lead to improved individual
performance and assumedly organizational effectiveness. The researcher’s findings are
consistent with all of the above findings. As cited by Pushpakumari, M. D. (2008),
Carroll, Keflas and Watson (1964) found that satisfaction and productivity are crucial
relationship in which each affects the other.

Further this study revealed that all five dimensions of job satisfaction also have a
significant positive relationship towards employee job performance. The highest
correlation toward employee job performance exists between supervision and the
employee job performance. Further the next highest correlation value was between
working condition and employee job performance. These findings are consistent with
prior research findings.

Hettiarachchi (2014) found that the work it-self has a significant and positive
correlation with job performance of the IT professionals in Sri Lanka. Robbins (2001)
said when employees feel happy about their compensation they are more motivated
towards their work and the performance of the company also boosts. Hussin (2011)
found that there was a positive relationship between job satisfaction components which
were promotion, work itself, supervision. Naharuddin & Sadegi (2013) suggested that
Employees Job Performance level will be depending on the factor of the workplace
environment. Boyce, Veith, Newsham, Myer & Humnter (2013) concluded that

75
Workplace environment factors such as lighting, noise, communication and psychology
support are say to have significant impact on employee moral in which may affect their
work performance

Level of job satisfaction in the Sumithra Group is in average level. level of coworkers
shows a higher level in the organization and level of supervision is low. All other
dimensions had average level in the Sumithra group.

The level of leadership style in the Sumithra group is average level. Results of this study
indicate that there is a positive significant relationship between leadership style and
employee job performance. This finding is consistent with the earlier studies done by
the following researchers. Leadership is considered as a major factor which influence
on the performance of organizations, managers and employees (Wang. 2005).
Goleman, Boyatzis, & McKee (2002) demonstrated the link between the leadership
style and performance within an organization. Effective leadership is helpful in
ensuring organizational performance (Cummings and Schwab, 1973; Hellriegel,
Jackson, Slocum, Staude, Amos, Klopper, Louw and Oosthuizen, 2004). Leadership
style has influence on employees’ behavior, including their adoption of the firm’s
strategy and organizational value and has been linked to both organizational outcomes
and employee work performance. (Ehrhart, 2004). According to Wang et al. (2005),
leadership is considered as a major factor which influence on the performance of
organizations, managers and employees

The democratic leadership style had the highest relationship towards employee job
performance. This is consist with the findings of the Lewin (1939) who found that
participative leadership, also known as democratic leadership, is generally the most
effective leadership style. While autocratic leadership style had the next highest
relationship towards employee job performance, the laissez-faire showed the lowest
relationship towards the employee job performance. This is consistent with the findings
of Lewin (1939) that Under delegative leadership, also known as laissez‐fair leadership,
were the least productive of all three groups. Delegative leaders offer little or no
guidance to group members and leave decision‐making up to group members.
As per the study the 52% of the employee job performance is explained by job
satisfaction and the leadership style.

76
5.3 Recommendations
It is recommended that the Management of Sumithra Group encourages its Managers
and Supervisors to practice more on Democratic leadership style and help managers
and supervisors who are more on to Autocratic and Laissez-fire to transform their
leadership style on to Democratic.

It is recommended that the HR department should conduct trainings and seminars for
managers and the supervisory level staff to identify their leadership style and make
them understand the importance of democratic leadership style in order to improve
performance.

The Management of the Sumithra Group should further improve on Work Environment
such as lighting, noise level etc. to increase Job performance of the employees of
Sumithra Group as the work condition shows a significant positive correlation towards
employee job performance.

Management of the Sumithra Group should focus on making the salary schemes, and
increments more transparent as Pay has a significant relationship towards Employee
Job Performance.

Sumithra group should increase supervisors the confidence level towards the workers
and build trust among workers and supervisors. Outbound trainings and leadership
training will help Sumithra to build confidence and trust.

The Management could further improve conflict management and co-worker

cohesiveness to increase their Performance. Outbound trainings, simple get to gathers,
building a culture where team members wish for special occasion such as birthdays,
help peers in difficult situation will further improve the job satisfaction level.

In a nutshell by practicing democratic leadership style and improving job satisfaction

Sumithra could overcome the performance issues found.

5.4 Recommendations for Future Studies

This study is based on one medium scale apparel sector organization. Where future
research could be done covering several medium scale apparel sector organization.
Large scale and small scale apparel sector organizations also could be considered for
future studies

77
This study focused on Autocratic, Democratic and Laissez-Fair leadership styles where
as another study could be done on other type of leadership styles such as
transformational and transactional.

This study was perceptual base, it would be more accurate if the actual figures such as
attendance, conflicts, warning letters issues, actual performance (output), defects rate
etc. can be taken in to consideration for future studies.

This study had only five dimensions for Job Satisfaction where further research could
be done considering other dimensions or more dimensions of job satisfaction.

This study did not consider any intermediate variables, where the finding could vary.

It is recommended that researches could conduct similar studies for other industries as
well as consider different districts and regions.

This study considered only leadership style and job satisfaction which explains 52% of
the employee job satisfaction of the Sumithra Group. Where some other research could
be done by considering other factors which could explain 48% of the employee job
performance.

78
 REFERENCE

Aamodt, M. (2009). Industrial/ Organizational Psychology. Belmont, CA: Cengage

Aamodt, M. G. (2004). Law enforcement selection: Research summaries. Police

Executive

Aamodt, M. G. (2004). Special issue on using MMPI-2 special scale configurations to

predict supervisor ratings of police officer performance. Applied H.R.M. Research,
9(2), 41-52.

Akor ,P.U.(2014).Influence of Autocratic Leadership Style on the Job Performance of

Academic Librarians in Benue State. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 4(7).

Al-Ahmadi,H. (2009), Factors Affecting Performance of Hospital Nurses in Riyadh

Alderfer ,C.P.(1969) An empirical test of a new theory of human needs.Organizational
Behavior and Human Performance , 4( 2) , 142-175

Alderfer, C. P. (1972). Existence, relatedness, and growth. New York: Free Press.

Alderfer,C.P.(1972) Existance , relatedness and growth: Human needs in organizational

settings. New york,The press.

Anderson, J. C. and Davi Gerbing (1982). Some Methods for Re Specifying

Measurement Models to Obtain Unidimensional Construct Measurement. Journal of
Marketing Research.19 .453–460

Anderson,N., Ones, D., Sinangil, H. K. , Viswesvaran, C. (2001).Handbook of

industrial, work and organizational psychology. Uk,sage publication.

Antonakis,J.,Avolio,B.,Sivasubramanium,N.(2003).Context and leadership: an

examination of the nine-factor full-range leadership theory using the Multifactor
Leadership Questionnaire. The Leadership Quarterly, 14( 3), 261–295

Atchison T (1999). The Myths of Employee Satisfaction. Health. 14 (2),18- 23.

Avolio, B. J., Bass, B. M., & Jung, D. I. (1999). Re-examining the components of
transformational and transactional leadership using the Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 72, 441–462.

Bagozzi, R.P.(1980).Causal Models in Marketing, New York: Wiley

79
Bajpai ,N. & Srivastava, D. (2004). Sectorial comparison factors influencing job
satisfaction in India banking Sector. Singapure Management
Review.http//:www.AllBusiness.com/humanres

Barbuto, J.E.(1997). Taking the Charisma Out of Transformational Leadership Journal

of Social Behavior and Personality, 12( 3),689-697

Bass, B. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share

the vision, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 18, 19-31.

Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). Mahwah,

Behery, M. H. (2008), Retracted: Leadership behaviors that really count in an

organization's performance in the middle east: The case of Dubai. Journal of Ledrship
Studies, 2: 6–21.

Belonio, J.R. (2012). The Effect of Leadership Style on Employee Satisfaction and
Performance of Bank Employees In Bangkok. AU-GSB E-Journal .5 ( 2) . 111- 116

Berkowitz ,M.(1987) .The Influence of Shape on Product Preferences. Advances in

Consumer Research.14, 559.

Binfor,F., Boateng,S.K., Osei,A., Swanzy,K.M. and Garbrah,T.F.( 2013). The effect of

leadership styles and motivation on employee performance in public institution:
evidence from Ghana.International Journal of Current Research. 5( 09). 2667-2670.

Bolman, L. G. & Deal, T. E. (2003). Leadership and management effectiveness: A

multi-frame, multi-sector analysis, Human Resource Management.30(4), 509-534.

Brandt, J., Krawczyk, R., & Kalinowski, J. (2011). Personal And Work-Related
Predictors Of Organizational Commitment And Life Satisfaction Of Slovak Women In
Higher Education. College Teaching Methods & Styles Journal (CTMS), 4(2), 7-14.

Brodbeck, F. C., Hanges, P. J., Dickson, M. W., Gupta, V., & Dorfman, P. W. (2004).
Culture, leadership and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 countries. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Brunetto,Y.,Wharton, R.(2002) .Using social identity theory to explain the job

satisfaction of public sector employees. International Journal of Public Sector
Management, 15 Issue(7),534-551

Burns, J.M. (1978) Leadership. New York. Harper & Row.

80
Bushra ,F., Usman,A. & Naveed,A.(2011). Effect of Transformational Leadership on
Employees’ Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment in Banking Sector of
Lahore. International Journal of Business and Social Science ,2 (18), 261.

Bushra, A.,F., Usman, Naveed ,A.(2011).Effect of transformational leadership on

employees’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment in banking sector of
Lahore.International Journal of Business and Social Science. 2 (18) . 261-267

Campbell, J. (1993). A therory of performance. In Personnel Selection in Organisation,

35-75.

Carlopio, J.R. (1996) Construct validity of a physical work environment satisfaction

questionnaire. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1(3), 330–344.

Certo, S.C. (1997).Management and diversity, Modern Management: Diversity,

quality, ethics, and the global environment. Prentice-Hall International, New Jersey,
564-587.

Cooper, L. & E. A. Locke (2000). Industrial and organizational psychology: Linking

theory with practice,166–198 .Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Cummings, L.,L., & Schwab, D.,P.(1973).Performance in Organisations: Determinants

And Appraisal. Foresman and Company, Glenview.

Daft, R.L. (1998). Organization Theory and Design.Ohio,South Western College press

David, J.,Amy ,S.,Pisano,G.(1997) .Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management.

Strategic Management Journal. 18( 7). 509-533.

Davis, B. (2003). Developing leaders for self-managing schools: The role of a

principalcenter in accreditation and professional learning. Netherlands: Swets &
Zeitlinger.

Deadrick, D. L., & Madigan, R. M. (1990). Dynamic criteria revisited: A longitudinal

study of performance stability and predictive validity. Personnel Psychology, 43, 717–
744.

DeHoratius, N., Mersereau, A., & Schrage., L. (2005). Retail inventory management
when records are inaccurate. Working paper, Graduate School of Business, University
of Chicago, Chicago, IL.

81
Dionne,S., Yammarino,F.J, Atwater,L.E, Spangler,W. (2004) Transformational
leadership and team performance. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 17
(2), 177-193

Dolton, P, and Gutierrez,O.( 2010). "If you pay peanuts do you get monkeys? A cross
country analysis of teacher pay and pupil performance." Mimeo. London: Royal
Holloway College, University of London.

Edwards, B. D., Bell, S. T., Arthur, W. & Decuir, A. D. (2008). Relationships between
facets job satisfaction, task, and contextual performance. Applied Psychology, An
International Review, 57(3), 441-465.

Egan, M., & Kadushan, G. (2004). Job satisfaction of home health social workers in the
environment of cost containment. Health and Social Work ,29 (4) , 287-295.

Egan,M., Kadushin,G.(2004). Job Satisfaction of Home Health Social Workers in the

Environment of Cost Containment. Health Social Work 29 (4), 287-296

Erhart, M. (2004). Leadership and procedural justice climate as antecedants of unit level
organisation citizenship behavior. personnel psychology, 61-94.

Evans, J. R., & Jack, E. P. (2003). Validating key results linkages in the Baldrige
Performance Excellence Model. The Quality Management Journal, 10, 7–24.

Fenwick,F.J.& Gayle,C.A.(2008). Missing Links inUnderstanding the Relationship

between Leadership and Organisational Performance. International Business &
Economics Research Journal, 7.

Friday, S.S & Friday, E. (2003). Racioethnic perceptions of Job characteristics and Job
satisfaction. Journal of Management Development, 22(5), 426-442.

Frye, M.B. (2004). Equity‐based compensation for employees: firm performance and
determinants. Journal of Financial Research, 27(1), 31-54

Gadot, V.E. (2006). Compulsory Citizenship Behavior: Theorizing Some Dark Sides
of the Good Soldier Syndrome in Organizations. Journal for the Theory of Social
Behaviour, 36(1), 77-93

Goleman, D ., Boyatzis , R ., McKee,A.( 2002). The New Leaders: Transforming the

Art of Leadership into the Scienceof Results, Little Brown, London.

82
Govindarajulu,N., Bonnie F. D.(2004).Motivating employees for environmental
improvement. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 104 ( 4), 364-372.

Grasso, A.J. (1994). Management style, job satisfaction, and service effectiveness.

Green , F., Tsitsianis ,N.(2005). An Investigation of National Trends in Job Satisfaction

in Britain and Germany.British Journal of Industrial Relations,43( 3), 401-429

Griffin ,M.A.(2002).Developing a theory of performance for human resource

management.Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 37 , 44-59.

Gruneberg, M.M. (1979). Understanding Job Satisfaction, Great Britain: the Macmillan
Press Ltd.

Hartline, M. D., Wooldridge, B. R., & Jones, K. C. (2003). Guest Perceptions of Hotel
Quality Determining Which Employee Groups Count Most. Cornell Hospitality
Quarterly, 44(1), 43-52. 1016/S0010-8804(03)90045-0

Hartog, D.N. & Muijen, J. (1997). Transactional versus transformational leadership:

An analysis of the MLQ. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 70
(1), 19- 3

Heery, E. & Noon, M. (2001). A dictionary of human relations. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Hellriegel, D., Jackson ,S.,E., Slocum ,J., Staude, G., Amos, T., Klopper, H .,B.,, Louw,
L.,& Oosthuizen, T.( 2004).Management: Second South African Edition. Cape Town:
Oxford University Press.

Hellriegel, D., Jackson, S.E., Slocum, J., Staude, G., Amos, T., Klopper, H.B., Louw,
L. & Oosthuizen, T.( 2004.). Management (2nd SA ed.), Cape Town, Oxford University
Press

Henarathgoda, h.g.a.s.s.j.(2016).impact of leadership development on employee

performance: a study on large tyre manufacturing industry in sri lanka. International
Journal of Arts and Commerce .5 (4 )5

Henry, R. A., & Hulin, C. L. (1987). Stability of skilled performance across time: Some
generalizations andlimitations on utilities. Journal of Applied Psychology,72,457–462.

Hersey, P., Blanchard, K., & Johnson, D. (2001). Management of Organizational

Behavior. Leading Human Resources (8thed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

83
Hersey, P.,Blanchard, K. and Johnson, D.E. (2001). Management of Organizational
Behavior. New Jersey,Englewood.

Herzberg, Frederick; Mausner, Bernard, S., Barbara B. (1959). The Motivation to Work
(2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley.

Hettiarachchi, H., (2014). Factors affecting to customer adoption of internet banking.

Kelaniya Journal of Management. 2(2), pp.68–87.

Hoy, W.K. & Miskel, C.G. (2008). Educational administration: Theory, research and
practice, 6th edition. Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Hussin, A.( 2011). The relationship between job satisfaction and job performance
among employees in trade winds group of companies. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Open
University Malaysia.

Jaskaran, S.D. and Guru, G.S. ( 2014). Challenges of Organizational Behaviour.

Jha, P. and Pathak, G.W.( 2003). A Comparative study of job satisfaction in the post-
liberalization scenario among executives of private and public sectororganizations.
Indian Management Studies Journal, Vol. 7, 21-31.

Keaveney,S.M. & Nelson, J.E. (1993). Coping with organizational role stress: Intrinsic
motivational orientation, perceived role benefits, and psychological withdrawal,
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science.21.113-124.

Koontz, H. & Donnell, C. (1993). Introduction to Management. McGraw-Hill Inc., New

York.

Kottawatta , K.H.H. (2007 ). Impact of Attitudinal Factors on Job Performance of

Executives and Non-Executive Employees in Apparel Industry in Sri Lanka . Asian
journal of Human Resource, 1(1).

Kotur, B.R. & Anbazhagan, S. (2014). The Influence of age and gender on the
leadership styles. IOSR Journal of Business and Management (IOSR-JBM), 16(1), 30‒
36.

Landy, F., J. (1989). Psychology of work behavior. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Lee and Chuang (2009). The Impact of Leadership Styles on Job Stress and Turnover
Intention: Taiwan Insurance Industry as an Example. [email protected]

84
Leedy, P. ,& Ormrod, J. (2005). Practical research: Planning and design (8th ed). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications

Lewin,K., Lippit,R. and White ,W.(1939).Patterns of aggressive behavior in

experimentaly created spcial climate.Journal of social psychology,10(2).

Linton, B.,J.,(2003). An Examination Of The Relationships Between Leadership Style,

Quality and Employee Satisfaction In R&D Environments, IEEE

Locke, E. A., Kirkpatrick, S., Wheeler, J. K., Schneider, J.,Niles, K., Goldstein, H.,
Welsh, & Chah, D. O. (1991).The essence of leadership. New York: Lexington Books

Long,L.,& Mao, M.(2008,October).Impact of Leadership Style on Organizational

Change: An Empirical Study in China.Paper presented at the International Conference
on Wireless Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing.IEEE.

Luthans, F. (1995) Organizational behavior. 7th ed. McGraw-Hill

Maslow, A. H. (1954).The Instinctoid Nature of Basic Needs. Journal of Personality,

22: 326–347.

Mathis,R.L and Jackson,J.H.(2003), Individual Performance and Retention. Human

McClelland, D.C. (1985).How motives, skills, and values determine what people Do.
American Psychologist, 40(.7), 812-825.

McGrath, R., G. and MacMillan, I. C. ( 2000). Assessing technology projects using

Real Options Reasoning. Research-Technology Management journal .43(4). 35-49

Moser, K. & Galais, N. (2007). Self-Monitoring and Job Performance: The Moderating
Role of Tenure. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15(1), 83-93.

Moser, K., & Gallais, N. (2007). Self-monitoring and job performance: The moderating
role of tenure. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15 (1), 83-93.

Motowidlo, S. J. (2003). Job performance. In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen, & Klimoski

, R. J. (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: 12. Industrial and organizational psychology
.39-53. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Muchinsky, P.M. (2003). Psychology Applied to Work. 7th ed. Belmont, C.A:

Nel, P.S., Dyk, van P.S., Haasbroek, G.D., Schultz, H.B., Sono, T.J. and Werner, A.
(2004). Human Resource Management. (6 th ed.). Cape Town: Oxford.

85
Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks:
SAGE.

Obisi, C. (1996). Industrial Relations. Ibadan: Freeman Productions.

Obiwuru .T, Okwu. A, Akpa. V & Nwankere .I (2011). Effects of leadership style on
organiszational performance: A survey of selected small scale enterprises in Ikosi –
Ketu Council development area of Lagos State, Nigeria. Australian journal of business
and management research 1(7).

Ogunola, A.A., Kalejaiye, P.O., Abrifor.C.A.(2013). Management style as a correlate

of job performance of employees of selected Nigerian brewing industries.African
Journal of Business Management .7 (36). 3714

Okpara , J.O. (2004). Personal characteristics as predictors of jobsatisfaction. An

exploratory study of IT managers in a developingeconomy. Inform. Technol. People,
17(3): 327-338.

Opatha,H.H.D.N.P.(2002), Performance Evaluation of Human Resource, 1st

Edition,.2-12,170-183, Colombo, Sri Lanka: the Author publication
Padilla-Velez, D. (1993). Job satisfaction of vocational teachers in Puerto Rico.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, Columbus.

Perera, G. .D. N, Navarathne, N. & Chinna, K. (2014). Job satisfaction and job
performance among factory employees in apparal sector. Asian journal of management
science and education, 3(1).

Podsakoff,P.M., MacKenzie, S.B, Bommer,W.H(1996). Transformational Leader

Behaviors and Substitutes for Leadership as Determinants of Employee Satisfaction,
Commitment, Trust, and Organizational Citizenship Behaviors.Journal of
management.2(2).

Prasanga, A.P.A., and Gamage, A.S. (2012).Job Satisfaction and Job Performance of
The Sailors in Rapid Action Boat Squadron of Sri Lanka Navy. Sri Lankan Journal of
Human Resource Management , 49-57.

Pugno, M., Depedri, S. (2009). Job performance and job satisfaction: An integrated
survey. Working paper, Universita’ di Trento.

86
Pushpakumari,M.D.(2008).The impact of job satisfaction on Job Performance: An
Empirical Analysis. Retrieved from
http://wwwbiz.meijou.ac.jp/SEBM/ronso/no9_1/08_PUSHPAKUMARI.pdf.

Pushpanathan, A., Mangaleswaran, T., and Lin, Z.,(2008). Leadership Style and
Organizational Performance in Family Owned Small Scale Manufacturing Industries in
Sri Lanka, A Paper Presented in Fifth International Conference on Business
Management, University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Sri Lanka, March, 27.

Putterill, M. S. and Rohrer ,T. C .(1995), A causal model of employee commitment in

a manufacturing setting. International Journal of Manpower, 16 (5/6),. 56-69.

Qasim, S., Cheema, F. E. A., & Syed, N. A. (2012). Exploring Factors Affecting
Employees' Job Satisfaction at Work. Journal of Management and Social Sciences, 8
(1), 31-39.

Rad,A.M., Yarmohammadian, M.H.,(2009). A study of relationship between managers

leadership style and employees job satisfaction. Leadership in Health Service. 19(2).11-
28. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13660750610665008

Rainey, H.G. (1997). Understanding and Managing Public Organizations, 2nd ed.,
Jossey-Bass, San Francisco,CA.

Rejas, L. P., Ponce, E. R., Almonte, M. D., and Ponce, J. R. (2006). Transformational
and Transactional Leadership: A Study of Their Influence in Small Companies.
Ingeniare-Revista Chilena De Ingeria, 14 (2):156-166.

Richard ,F. and Liu,A.( 2008). Research methods for construction: Oxford : Wiley-
Blackwel

Robbins, S.P. (1989). Organisational Behaviour: Concepts, Controversies and

Applications. (4th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Robbins, S.P. (2003). Organisational Behaviour: Concepts, Controversies and

Applications. 8th Edition. London: Prentice Hall.

Robbins, S.P. (2003). Organisational Behaviour: Concepts, Controversies and

Applications. 8th Edition. London: Prentice Hall.

Rosenberg, M. K. and Daly, B. H. (1993). Foundation of behavioral research.United

State
87
Saasongu ,N.(2015). Effects of Leadership Style on Organizational Performance

Santora, J.,C.,Sarros, J.C., Tanewski, G.A., Winter, R.,P. & Densten, I.,L. (2002).Work
Alienation and organizational leadership. British Journal of Management. 13(4), 285-
304.

Schermerhorn, J.R. Hunt, J.R and Osborn, N.R.(2005).Organizational Behaviour, 9th

Ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Shafie, B., Baghersalimi, S. & Barghi, V. (2013). The relationship between leadership
style and employee performance, case study of real estate registration organisation of
Tehran province. Singaporean Journal of Business Economics and Management
Studies. 2(5). 21-29.

Sharma, M. & Ghosh, A. (2006).Perception of Organizational Climate and Job

Satisfaction in Nursing Staff Personnel. Indian Journal of Social Work.67(3),263-74.

Sharma, V., Sharma. J.(2015). Job Satisfaction and Job Performance:Linkages in Real
World Journal of Management Engineering and Information Technology . 2(2)

Shirzad, K. B., Zanganeh, S.(2011).The relationship between leadership style of senior

managers. Educational Administration Research Quarterly, 105-124.

Siegel, Jacob P., Bowen, Donald.(1971). Journal of Vocational Behavior. 1(3). 263-
269.

Sivanathan, N., & Fekken, G. C. (2002). Emotional intelligence, moral reasoning and
transformational leadership. Leadership and Organization Development Journal.
73,198-204.

Spears, L. C., & Lawrence , M.. (2003). Focus on leadership: Servant leadership for
the 21st century. New York : John Wiley & Sons.

Spector,P.E.(1997).Job Satisfaction: Application,Assesment,Causes and

Consequences.south florida, Saga Publication.

Stone, A.G. (2004). Transformational versus Servant Leadership: A differences in

leader focus. The leadership and Organization Development Journal, 349-361.

Storey, J.(2004).Leadership in Organizations: Current Issues and

KeyTrends.Newyork,Psychology Press.

88
Tarabishy, A., Solomon, G., Fernald ,L.W. & Sashkin, M. (2005). The Entrepreneurial
Leader‟s Impact on the Organization‟s Performance in Dynamic Markets. Journal of
Private Equity, 8(4), 20-29.

Teece, J., Pisano, G. , Shuen, A.( 1997D.ynamic Capabilities and Strategic

Management. Strategic Management Journal, 18 (7) , 509-533.

Timothy, Obiwuru., Andy, Okwu., Victoria, Akpa., Idowu, Nwankwere. (2011). Effect
of Leadership Style on Organizational Performance: A Survey of Selected Small Scale
Enterprises in Ikosi-Ketu Council Development Area of Lagos State, Nigeria.
Australian Journal of Business and Management Research,1, 100-111

Tracey, J. B., & Hinkin, T. (1998). Transformational leadership or effective managerial

practices?

Travis,B. (2007). A New Vision of Leadership, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.

Trott, M.C. & Windsor, K. (1999). Leadership effectiveness: How do you measure up?
NursingEconomics, 17 (3), 127-130

Ulmer D. ,Syptak, J.M., Marsland, D.W. (1999). Job satisfacion: Putting theory into
practice. Family Practice Management, 6(9),26-30.

Ushie, E. M., AGba, A. M. O., Agba, M. S. & Best, E.G. (2010). Supplementary
livelihood strategies among workers in Nigeria: implications for organizational growth
and effectiveness. International Journal of Business and Management Studies, 5(3),
146-154.

Ushie, M. A., Onongha, G. I., Owolabi, E. O. & Emeka, J. O. (2012) Influence of

Family Structure on Students Academic Performance in Agege Local Government
Area, Lagos State, Nigeria. Article in Press, European Journal of Educational Studies,
Turkey.

Velnampy, T. (2006).Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment on the Impact of

Performance, 10th Annual International Symposium; Growth and Challenges for 21st
century. 338

Vroom, V., H. (1964). Work and motivation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Vroom, V.H.(1983). Management and Motivation,.Deci, E.L., Penguin

89
Wang D., Xue H. , Xu J.,(2009). The Mechanism of Leadership Styles Affecting Team
Innovation in the PRC, IEEE.

Weerakoon, D., & Tennakoon, J. (2006). Myth of free trade. The south Asian Free
Trade Agreement.

Weir, d. (1976).Radical managerialism: middle managers‘ perceptions of collective

bargaining. British journal of industrial relations, 14,324–338

Werner, J. M. (2000) Implications of OCB and contextual performance for human

resource management. Human Resource Management Review, 10(1), 245-261.
Xue ,H. , Xu ,J.(2009). The Mechanism of Leadership Styles Affecting Team
Innovation in the PRC, IEEE

Yahaya,A., Talib,A., Ismail, S. and Noor,N.M.(2012). The relationship between big

five personality with work motivation,competitiveness and job satisfaction.Elixir
International Journal. 44 .7454-7461

Yang,L & Chan, Y.(2010,August). Project Manager's Leadership Style Linked with
Schedule and Cost Performance.Paper presented at the International Conference on
Management and Service Science ,Wuhan, China.Retrieved from
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5577222/

Yen, T., & McKinney, W. (1992). The relationship between compensation satisfaction
and job characteristic: A comparative study of public and private leisure service
professionals.Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, (10)4, 15-36.

Yousuf,A.(2000). Organizational Commitment as a Mediator of the Relationship

between Islamic Work Ethic and Attitudes toward Organizational Change.Sage
journal.Retrieved from
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0018726700534003

Yousuf,D.,A.(2000) .Organizational commitment: a mediator of the relationships of

leadership behavior with job satisfaction and performance in a non‐western country.
Journal of Managerial Psychology. 15.6-24.

Yuki(2005).Leadership in Organizations (8th Ed.). Boston. University of Albany.

Zafra, E., Retamero,G., and Landa, J. M. A. (2008). The role of transformational

leadership, emotional intelligence, and group cohesiveness on leadership emergence.
Journal of Ledrship Studies. 2: 37–49.
90
Zhu, W., Chew, I. K. h. & Spangler, W. D. (2005). CEO Transformational Leadership
& Organizational Outcomes: The Mediating Role of Human Capital Enhancing Human
Resource Management. The Leadership Quarterly.6( 1,), 39-52.

Zikmund, W.G. (2003) Business Research Methods. 7th Edition, Thomson South
Western, Ohio.

91
ANNEXURES

92
ANNEX I – Questionnaire
 ANNEX II– Questionnaire (English translation)

View publication stats