Problem statement

In addition, the purpose of this study is to determine how different leadership styles affect the
performance of teachers working in colleges in Pakistan's Punjab, the province with the highest
population density. Even though a lot of research has been done to report this phenomenon from
a variety of points of view and in a variety of contexts, there hasn't been enough work done to
make the findings sufficiently anonymous. In the context of Pakistan, the relationship between
the leadership styles of principals and the performance of teachers has largely not been mapped
(Quraishi and Aziz, 2018; Maqbool et al., 2019; Yasmin and other, 2019; Saleem et al., 2020).
Particularly the government college instructors in numerous Pakistani cities, such as Faisalabad
in the Punjab. As a result, in regards to education in Pakistan, additional clarification is required
to ascertain whether teacher performance at the college level in Faisalabad is impacted positively
or negatively by the leadership style of principals

Research targets

These targets were created for this review:

1. To investigate the leadership styles utilized by college principals.

2. To investigate the connection between the performance of college teachers and a principal's
leadership style.

Questions for the study:

1. Whether the leadership style of a college principal matters?

2. Whether the leadership style of a principal influences how well teachers perform at the college
level?

The following are the study's hypotheses, which are based on a review of the existing literature
and previous studies:

H1: At the college level, the principal leadership style plays a significant role.

H2: The performance of college-level teachers and the leadership style of principals are
significantly correlated.

Review of the Literature

There is a lot of evidence in the literature about the leadership styles and leadership styles used
by different leaders in their organizations to improve employee performance. There are a number
of leadership theories and psychological theories, but only a few are more well-known. The
behavioral theory of leadership, for instance, looks at how leaders act and assumes that other
leaders can emulate these behaviors. This theory, which is sometimes referred to as the style
theory, proposes that leaders can be created through learnable behavior rather than being born
successful. The leader's actions are heavily emphasized in this leadership theory.

Contingency leadership, also known as situational theory, is the second type of leadership theory
that focuses on a leader's context. This theory examines the situational consequences of success
or failure. The situational context directly determines a leader's effectiveness. While a leader's
personality plays a small role in their success, the context and situation are more important.
According to this theory, effective leaders are able to adapt their leadership style to the
circumstances. Situational Theory, Evans and House Path-Goal Theory, and Fiedler's
Contingency Theory are all examples of contingency theories.

Another authority hypothesis is the extraordinary man hypothesis which is additionally called the
characteristic hypothesis which recommends great pioneers are conceived. They are great
because of their innate qualities and abilities, which cannot be learned or taught. According to
the trait theory, leaders are deserving of their positions because of their unique qualities.

Among others, the board hypothesis is an initiative hypothesis called conditional initiative and
spotlights on management, association, and gathering execution of the representatives.
Conditional initiative is an arrangement of remunerations and disciplines. Businesses frequently
employ transactional leadership, in which managers reward employees when they perform well.
The idea that people only do things for the sake of getting something is the basis for transactional
rewards and punishments.

Additionally, educational leaders employ the following leadership styles: Democratic, autocratic,
and lenient. In some industries, the participative leadership theory is less prevalent. It is referred
to as democratic leadership and advocates for employees to be directly involved in the
organization's decision-making process. The leader simply leads a conversation and decides the
best course of action after considering all of the suggestions. In this theory, the leader merely
assists in leading the charge, but everyone is heavily involved in making decisions for the team
and organization. Autocratic leadership is known for being the most power-wielding and
authoritative type of leadership. The autocratic leadership style that these types of leaders use in
an organization is well-known. This kind of leader only gives group members specific
instructions on how to complete tasks, and they don't open up any obvious channels of
communication between employees and subordinates. Additionally, these executives prevent
employees and other types of workers from participating in the formulation of organizational
policies (Smylie and Jack, 1990; 1992, Hoy and Miskel; John, 2002). Autocratic leaders do not
solicit suggestions or initiative from their followers. The autocratic leadership style has been
successful because it motivates leaders well. Because only one person makes decisions for the
entire group and keeps each conclusion to themselves until they feel it is necessary to share it
with the rest of the group, it allows for quick decision-making (Lewin et al., 1939).
A democratic leadership style is one in which both the leader and the followers contribute
equally to the work. Through the promotion of followers' interests and the practice of social
equality, this leadership style involves the leader sharing decision-making capabilities with
followers. This kind of leadership is referred to as shared leadership or participative leadership.
This kind of leadership can be beneficial to any business, including educational establishments.
According to Research Gate (2018), this method emphasizes the significance of all group
members participating in the decision-making process.

Laissez-faire leadership gives their subordinates complete authority to make decisions, set goals,
and resolve issues and obstacles. The decision-making process is delegated to the followers in
this style. According to Research Gate (2018), this style emphasizes not interfering with the
affairs of others. At the point when a pioneer is hands-off and permits devotees to simply decide,
this is known as the Free enterprise style of organization. In Laissez-faire, group goals,
procedures, and operational methods completely protect independence. These administrators
rarely get involved. Hackman and Johnson (2009) found that when employees are mature and
enthusiastic about their work, this style is the most realistic. The free enterprise administration
style considers total independence in collective choice making without the association of the
pioneers.

The assignment-based method is similar to the directive leadership style of principle in that the
leader gives teachers specific rules, standards, and instructions for organizing, sorting, and
completing tasks. These methods are thought to be appropriate when the subordinates' capacity is
low and the task at hand is baffling or ambiguous. According to Hoy and Miskel (2001),
employees are more satisfied when their boss gives them more instructions.

Leaders (Principals) with a supportive leadership style are well-known for their relationship-
oriented style, which emphasizes camaraderie and accessibility to all company employees. This
kind of leader is always worried about the problems and worries of their workers and coworkers.
These leaders work to make the lives of their employees better while also creating a welcoming
atmosphere for their subordinates. According to Hoy and Miskel (2001), it is a potent strategy
for assistants who require self-assurance, wish to chip away at unpleasant or upsetting
responsibilities, or do not feel fulfilled at work.

In their administration, leaders (Principals) who practice consultative leadership have a lot of
confidence. These pioneers are liberal, yet they need certainty and good faith in their workers.
Although they include their subordinates and seek their input on the issue before establishing any
policy within the college, these leaders typically make their final decisions independently.
Positive attitudes are held by employees toward their jobs, administrations, and employers.
When employees believe that not enough interviews have been conducted, they freely accept the
chief's orders; however, they occasionally secretly oppose the request through opposition,
especially when the director decides on a larger portion of the runs guideline (Owens, 1981). The
organization's leadership is in charge. To keep lower-level employees under control, center
administration typically assigns tasks to them. The evaluation, administration, and examination
are all finished. Subordinates view control as a means of upholding a high standard (Ukeje,
1998).

Leaders (Principals) who approach management from an achievement-focused perspective are

extremely intelligent and present their staff with a variety of challenges that they can overcome.
These standards include educators in accomplishing the association's objectives and goals and
give prizes for the effective fulfillment of an errand. These leaders have strong personalities that
support and direct. They assist their followers in solving their issues and finding a solution. This
strategy is extremely effective when the company has employees who value achievement.
According to Lussier and Achua (2001), the administrator who incorporates this strategy into
their style of leadership will have no trouble achieving the specified goals and objectives.

The manners and communication styles of leaders with their followers—teachers—are crucial to
the success of any educational establishment. Oxford (2005) asserts that communication is a
specific method for exchanging any kind of information with another person. Communication,
according to Hannagan (2002), is the process of passing on information about the viability of
particular work methods and is thought to involve multiple aspects. It can be made a
requirement, for instance, by defining the procedures that must be followed; motivating in the
sense that it inspires greater effort; and error-correction, in the sense that it reveals the level of
error that was made. Whatever the case may be, the significance of communication has long
been overlooked in educational institutions, particularly colleges. Hannagan (2002) went on to
say that improved and appropriate communication can help us achieve higher levels of
performance.

Participation of the followers—teachers—in the principal's decision-making process can boost

confidence and performance. Okumbe (1998) says that the principal and teachers work together
on a specific issue or topic and look into ways to control how the school works to get teachers
more involved in decision-making. People who take initiative frequently involve themselves in
decision-making; however, leaders who do not involve themselves in leadership are associated
with autocratic administrations, open innovation is represented, and leaders may reluctantly
involve employees in decision-making.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) claims that
teachers' lack of participation in decision-making processes has a negative impact on their
performance. “Educators are finally joined as unchallengeable decisions, frequently separated as
of their everyday state” (UNESCO, 2006). There are significant sensations of distance from
regional and national-level judgments. Due to a lack of adequate interactions or conversations,
educators lose confidence in their ability to achieve good results and, in some cases, feel
alienated and more incompetent in their personalities. Ndu and Anagbogu (2007), on the other
hand, asserted that educators become outsiders in the college setting if they lack administrative
connections. Subsequently, most teachers don't do the best that they can with it to have a total
feeling of obligation and devotion to the school.

Yasmin and co. 2019) found that teachers' performance has been negatively impacted by
transactional and transformational guidance styles. They argued that the schools' and colleges'
transformational and transactional leadership styles, for example, have not supported teacher
performance improvement in the short term.

Saleem and others 2020) discovered that the supportive and achievement-oriented leadership
styles had the greatest impact on teacher job performance in the schools they studied. On the
other hand, despite the fact that participative leadership was found to be a significant predictor,
teacher job performance was not found to be influenced in a favorable way by it.

Lee and others Transformational leadership—not transactional leadership—was found to be

associated with higher levels of supervisory coaching and performance feedback, and these job
resources served as a mediator between transformational leadership and work engagement.
Additionally, the findings demonstrated that work engagement acts as a mediator between
supervisory coaching and performance feedback and turnover intention. In general, Asian leaders
can effectively facilitate some aspects of human resource development (HRD) by engaging in
development-focused behaviors that act as job resources to increase employee engagement at
work and reduce the likelihood of employee turnover.

As principals give teachers equally diverse responsibilities, their performance rises. Delegation,
as defined by Oxford (2005), is the process of handing over authority, rights, and responsibilities
to subordinates. The act of working together with the authorities to accomplish something else,
according to Webster (2002). In a similar vein, Okumu (2006) discovered that teachers'
performance is influenced by compelling assignments. Although the results were fascinating and
instructive, they did not reveal how assigning responsibilities can improve educator performance
across all colleges. According to the findings of a study conducted by Healthfield (2004), in
order for a project to be successful, the principal needs to choose who will carry out specific
tasks, identify expert errands, and identify designated locations. According to Chapman (2005),
leaders' followers perform better when they involve them in decision-making and equally
delegate their responsibilities. According to McNamara (2010), the boss and subordinate must
agree on when the assigned task must be finished or whether it is a continuing obligation, when
the survey dates are and when the reports are due, and what assistance the manager can provide
if the project is unpredictable. According to McNamara (2010), subordinates performed better
when leaders assigned responsible tasks to them.