International Journal of Scientific Research in Education, OCTOBER 2018, Vol. 11(4), 756-782.

Effective Leadership Style as Correlate of Staff

Performance in Universities in Rivers State
Emmanuel Friday Bamsoni
Department of Educational Management
Faculty of Education
Ignatius Ajuru University of Education, Nigeria.

Nwachukwu Prince Ololubeii

Department of Educational Management
Faculty of Education
Ignatius Ajuru University of Education, Nigeria.
[email protected], [email protected]
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...

Abstract

This study evaluated the role leadership style play in staff job performance in tertiary institutions
in Rivers State. This study specifically sort answers to the purpose of the research in relation to the
research questions and hypotheses put forward in this study. This study is grounded in the Lawler
and Hall (1970) theory of leadership. A far-reaching literature review was carried out. This study
used quality creative writings especially from a developing economy framework to bring together
many approaches to achieving sustainable research on the relationship between leadership styles
on staff job performance. The study covered a lot of ground from both theoretical and empirical
information. The research design for this study is a survey design. The population of study is
5630, while the sample size is 300. The researcher‘s supervisors and four experts in education and
the social sciences ascertained the validity of the research instruments by reading through the
questionnaire and making corrections where necessary. The reliability of the research instrument
was statistically tested using SPSS version 23 and the result obtained was .888. The analysis of
data involved the use of the following procedures: Frequency, mean point value, percentages and
One-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). The findings of this study revealed the basic roles of
leadership style on staff job performance. Analysis of both literature and empirical results and
findings showed that there are significant relationships between leadership styles and staff job
performance. Study recommends that since leadership style play significant role in staff job
performance in tertiary institutions in Rivers State there is the need to enhance the way staff are
treated.

Keywords: Effective, Leadership Style, Staff Performance, Universities, Rivers State.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows:

Bamson, E. F., & Ololube, N. P. (2018). Effective Leadership Style as Correlate of Staff
Performance in Universities in Rivers State. International Journal of Scientific Research in
Education, 11(4), 756-782. Retrieved [DATE] from http://www.ijsre.com.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...
Copyright © 2018 IJSRE

756
INTRODUCTION

Over the years, it has been observed that poor attitude of some staff or employees to work in
Nigeria, has been causing serious setback to economic development. This is in fact the root cause
of impoverished economy all over the world. Hence, Managers and Leaders or Captains of
Industries/Organizations therefore have to contend with the serious task of how best to get
staff/employees committed to their work and put in their best towards the achievement of
organizational objectives.
However, what constitutes effective leadership has always been a topic for debate.
According to Ololube (2013), to many, leaders are not born, but made. It is increasingly
accepted, however, that in order to be a good leader, one must have the experience, knowledge,
commitment, patience and most importantly the skill to negotiate and work with others to
achieve desired goals. Good leaders are therefore made and not born because they are products
of a never ending process of self-study, education, training and the accumulation of relevant
experience (Base & Base in Ololube 2013).
Effective leadership is therefore predicated on strong characterization and selfless
devotion for self-actualization. Hence, from the perspective of the staff/employee, effective
leadership comprised of everything a leader does that affects the achievement of objectives and
the well-being of the staff and the organization (Abbasialiya, 2010). Hence, trustworthiness is the
key to the position of ‗effective leadership‘ because it‘s the foundation upon which every other
thing is built, whether in education, business, the military, religion, government, or international
organizations (Lamb & McKee, 2004; Ivancevich, Konopaske & Matteson, 2007).
The leadership style adopted by managers is therefore crucial because it could mar or
increase performance. Indeed, the success of a leader depends on the behavior or leadership style
possessed and adopted whether or not such behaviour or style is accepted by those being led. It is
the willingness of the people to follow that makes a person a leader (Agi & Adiele, 2015).
An effective leadership is perceived through the willingness and readiness of staff to
work to achieving higher performance. A leader must know that he is going to lead a diverse and
in some cases unpredictable group of individuals. Leadership here is often concerned with how
to increase the level of work behaviour and ensure that work goals are effectively and efficiently
achieved. A leader should therefore observe the psychological state of his subordinates so as to
know what should; and what should not influence staff to perform their tasks creditably.
The researchers in this work tried to understand and keep in touch with a combination of
leadership styles, situational factors and their relevance, either positively or negatively on
subordinates‘ level of performance. Therefore, leadership according to Agi and Adiele (2015) is
a process by which a person influences others by motivating and directing them to achieve group
goals, also helping them to face future challenges that may spring up in the organization. It is all
about directing, guiding and influencing people all in a bid to achieving group or the
organizational goals. It is also seen as the ability to secure desirable action from a group of
followers voluntarily without the use of force, and whereas for Cole (2002) leadership is a
dynamic process at work in a group whereby one individual over a particular period of time and
in a particular organizational context influences the other group members to commit themselves
freely to the achievement of the group tasks or goals. For Moorhead and Griffin in Agi and
Adiele (2015), leadership is both process and property. As a process, it is non-coercive influence
directed at coordinating the activities of group members towards goal achievement. As a product,

757
it influences others to achieve group goals. Lastly, an effective leader is seen as one who knows
the way, goes the way, and shows the way (Newman, 1997, p. 8).

Statement of the Problem

The concept of ―effective leadership‖ is not given due attention by most organizations in Nigeria
and other parts of the world. The compromising attitude of many leaders towards the welfare of
their subordinates had led to their ignorance of these things which motivate or do not motivate
their workers or staff.
Managers are placed in a leadership position in an organization to influence the
behaviour of their formal work group: the result is that workers are not adequately led and the
consequences have often been that their commitment to the organizational objective dwindles;
thereby failing to achieve the desired goals for the Organization.
Countless questions have been asked as to the causes, nature and relevance of these
indifferences on the part of the organization or supported leadership in those organizations
adopting the most suitable leadership styles that responds or conforms to the situation? Do the
leaders in an organization possess the required qualities of an effective leadership? Do the
behaviour and attitude of leaders encourage or motivate subordinates towards increased
performance? The answers to these questions lie with the leaders who are saddled with the
responsibility of bringing leadership to success through their effective utilization of the potentials
and resources available to them within the organization. Effective leadership indeed transforms
potentials and ideas into reality. This study therefore attempted to answer the above questions
and many other relevant questions on the relevance of effective leadership style on staff
performance in tertiary education in Rivers state.

Purpose of the Study

This study is designed to theoretically and empirically investigate the following research
objectives:

 To determine if autocratic leadership style has relationship with staff performance in

tertiary education.
 To evaluate if bureaucratic leadership style has relationship with staff performance in
tertiary education.
 To examine if charismatic leadership style has relationship with staff performance in
tertiary education.
 To determine if democratic leadership style has relationship with staff performance in
tertiary education.
 To examine if laissez-faire leadership style has relationship with staff performance in
tertiary education.
 To evaluate if transactional leadership style have relationship with staff performance in
tertiary education

Research Questions

The study is guided by the following research questions:

758
  What is the relationship between autocratic leadership style and staff performance in
tertiary education?
 What is the relationship between bureaucratic leadership style and staff performance in
tertiary education?
 What is the relationship between charismatic leadership style and staff performance in
tertiary education?
 What is the relationship between democratic leadership style and staff performance in
tertiary education?
 What is the relationship between laissez-faire leadership style and staff performance in
tertiary education?
 What is the relationship between transactional leadership style and staff performance in
tertiary education?

Hypotheses

The under listed hypotheses guided the study:

 There is no significant relationship between autocratic leadership style and staff

performance in tertiary education.
 There is no significant relationship between bureaucratic leadership style and staff
performance in tertiary education.
 There is no significant relationship between charismatic leadership style and staff
performance in tertiary education.
 There is no significant relationship between democratic leadership style and staff
performance in tertiary education.
 There is no significant relationship between laissez-faire leadership style and staff
performance in tertiary education.
 There is no significant relationship between transactional leadership style and staff
performance in tertiary education.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Leadership

Leadership is a ―must key‖ in the successful administration of any organizational system. It is a

product of motivation which is evidenced in the individual‘s attitude, actions and exemplary life
style. As a social system, the administration of schools require full co-operation of all stake
holders who are in constant interaction in the process of accomplishing the predetermined goals
and objectives of the institution. These people need direction and co-ordination, which can only
be made possible through a dynamic or effective leadership (Ukeje & Okorie in Agi & Adiele,
2015).
Hence, leadership according to Cole (2000) in Agi and Adiele (2015, p. 17) ―is a
dynamic process at work in a group whereby one individual over a particular period of time and
in a particular organizational context influences the other group members to consist themselves
freely to the achievement of group task or goals‖.

759
 Thus, leadership, according to Agi and Adiele (2015), is a process by which a person
influences the other by motivating and directing them to achieve group goals; also helping them
to face future challenges that may spring up in the organization.
Effective leadership is therefore a continuation of both the intrinsic and extrinsic
activities in an individual to motivate, direct, lead and provide sure shoulders to helping an
organization to accomplish its set tasks and targets or objectives using the available resources.
The ability of an individual or group of people to influence others towards the achievement of set
goals. According to Moorhead and Giffin (1995, p. 297 in Agi & Adiele, 2015), leadership is
done through a process of non-coercive influence directed at co-ordinating the activities of group
members towards goal achievement and as a product, influencing others towards achieving goals
of the group.
Effective leadership is one of the key functions of management. Nwana (1995) defined
leadership as the ability of a leader to influence his subordinates so that they strive willingly
towards the attainment of organizational goals. An effective leader is that person who performs
leadership activities and thus central in a group interaction. Owen (2004) noted that effective
leadership is essentially a reflection of a true personality of a manager. What a man is and brings
to the office in the form of a total personality largely determines what and how he does and what
degree of success he attains.
The above definitions shows that effective leadership involves making sure that the
subordinates are charged in the desired direction so that they can contribute effectively to the
attainment of the organizational goals. This is the essence of management which involves getting
things done through other people (Ololube, 2017). To Owen (2004), organizations need to work
with people of high morale, thus a leader must be able to motivate and inspire his subordinates.
An effective leader is expected to act as a linking pin between people in various organizational
levels (Ibekwe, 1984 in Ololube, 2017).
The importance of effective leadership cannot be overemphasized. Thus, in any social or
group environment, an effective leader is one particular agent who often had a disproportionate
impact on the staff. Thus, without an effective leadership, an organization is just but a muddle of
a man machines. Management activities such as planning, organizing and decision making will
be mere dormant cocoons until the leader triggers the power of motivation in people and guides
them towards goals achievement. Effective leadership is all about the transformation of ideas and
potentials into reality. It is the ultimate act which brings success to all the potentials that are
within the organization and its people.

Some Basic Leadership Styles

Ololube (2013) identified seven leadership styles namely; Coercive or Autocratic Leadership
Style, Bureaucratic Leadership Style, Charismatic Leadership Style, Democratic/Participative
Leadership Style, Laissez-faire or free reign Leadership Style and Transactional Leadership
Style.

Coercive or Autocratic Leadership Style

An autocratic leader makes all decisions. He is always very conscious of his position and has
little trust and faith in his subordinates. Close control and supervision of group and individual
characterizes an autocratic leadership style. Orders are usually issued to be carried out with

760
question allowed but no explanations given. The system tends to be repressive and with holds
information other than that which is absolutely necessary for doing the job.
Autocratic or coercive leadership is an extreme exercise of power over the subordinate
staff by the leader. It does not make room for suggestions from staff or team members even if the
input is in the best interest of the team or organization (Ololube, 2013). Agi and Adiele (2015)
characterized this leadership style as follows:

 Lack of collective decision making and consultation;

 Lack of subordinates‘ participation;
 A one way communication method from the top down to the bottom;
 Lack of motivation and conducive work environment;
 There is lack of relationship or a very low level leadership – subordinates‘ relationship;
 Little or no consideration for the work force;
 High emphasis on goal achievement;
 Strict adherence to work rules;
 Non-negotiate compliance;
 Reliance on position or authority power; and
 Reliance on reward and punishment to secure compliance.

The style may be good among unskilled workers to produce results. Though this leadership style
uses the carrot and stick method as a means of motivating his subordinate. To Ololube (2013) the
benefit of autocratic leadership is that it is incredibly efficient as decisions are quickly reached
since they often emanate from one man. Hence, it is devoid of the usual bureaucratic bottlenecks
in the public agencies which also makes the implementation faster. It is not staff centred and
most of the ―staff resent being dealt with‖ in such manner. It is however the best approach in
managing crisis, when decision must be made quickly and without dissent (Ololube, 2013).
There is also strict compliance to work schedules.

Bureaucratic leadership styles

Bureaucratic leaders like rules to be followed regimentally, as handed down. This leadership
style is apt and appropriate especially in a very risky work environment where safety is highly
adhered to such as working in a highly inflammable gaseous environment, working with
dangerous machinery, toxic substances, dangerous heights, enclosed environment etc. It is also
safer practice where employees or staff do routine tasks (Shaefer in Ololube, 2013). One major
setback of this kind of leadership style is that it does not aid flexibility, creativity and innovation
leading to ineffectiveness in team work.

Charismatic Leadership Style

Charismatic like transformational leadership style, elicits and inspires eagerness in the team
work and motivates staff/employees to move forward, which is an asset to performance and goal
achievement (Ololube, 2013). The shortfall here is that much emphasis or confidence is placed
on the leader rather than the staff. Hence any adverse effect on the leader could collapse the
entire organization. In some cases, charismatic leaders also assume wrong notions about

761
themselves, as people that cannot commit any wrong or mistake even when their misdeeds are
quite glaring (Ololube, 2013).

Democratic/Participative Leadership Style

In the democratic style of leadership, decision making is shared between leadership and the
group. Authority is decentralized and there is free flow of communication. When the leadership
is constrained to make decision alone, the reason is explained to the group. The leader permits a
climate of general control and supervision. This leadership style is suitable for skilled and
educated people, engineers, technicians and craftsmen.
Democratic or participative leadership as the name implies allows for staff/employees
input in decision making process. They encourage creativity and team participation; thereby
making team members to have high job satisfaction leading to high performance as well because
of their involvement in the decision making process. This style of leadership also help to develop
staff skills and expertise; helping them in decision making process and taking up leadership role.
It is also motivational as well as more financially rewarding.
However, it does not encourage speed especially during crisis. It is always difficult to
reach a quick decision; thereby leading to waste of valuable time and loss of man hour; trying to
gather input (Ololube, 2013) which sometimes may not be readily relevant to solving the issue at
hand.

Pseudo – Democratic leadership Style

This is a variant of the democratic style of leadership as Identified by Daft (2003). Here, the
leader simply makes the subordinates to make input which in most cases, may not be accepted;
but never made known to them. It is a quasi – autocratic leadership style put in place to ascertain
the intension of the team members merely to get their views or mind set concerning a particular
issue. It is often used to lure the staff to believing in the leader. This is however helpful in quick
decision making process since the leader does not have to rely on the inputs of the subordinates
(Agi & Adile, 2015). Hence, less dependency on subordinates for decision making.
One major shortfall here is that when the staff discover the leader‘s double dealing game,
it wanes and destroys their trust on the leader. This also affects their performance level as
emphasis will shift from common goals of the organization to individual goals (Agi & Adile,
2015). This can be quite discouraging.

Laissez-Faire Leadership Style

Etymologically, the above word is a French phrase for ―let it be‖, which when applied to
leadership style, describes a leader whose staff/employees work on their own with or without
minimal interference from the leader (Ololube, 2013) and allows a carefree attitude to work. This
is a leadership style where there are practically no rules in the organization. The leader set
objectives and grant complete freedom to groups or individual decision without his participation
or direction. There is a very minimal supervision because the staff are self-motivated. This style
may be good for professional people who seek independent, such as university professor and
research scientist. This style may also be disastrous if group members are unable to function well

762
since the needed minimal supervision could not be guaranteed (Flippo & Munsinger, 1982 in Agi
and Adiele, 2015).
Here the work team is only provided with resources and advice (if need be), but allowed
to set deadlines for themselves without the involvement of management or the leader. Mullins
(1996) in Agi and Adiele (2015) divided this leadership style into genuine laissez-faire and
faceless laissez-faire (non-style).

Genuine laissez-faire
Here the staff work under minimal supervision or observation of the leader. The essence is
actually to allow workers perform their best without direct interference from the top. It helps to
ascertain their skill and ability in the performance of their duties with minimal supervision.
However, managers adopting this method are always readily available where help is needed (Agi
& Adiele 2015).

Faceless (non-style) laissez-faire

Here, the work team is given complete free hand to decide how best and time to deliver without
the involvement of the leader. Hence the team members take decisions and initiate problem
solving, which should have been the lot of the leader; Mullins in Agi and Adiele (2015)
described it as ―abdication‖. Managers/leaders who adopt this attitude are carefree with the
direction and control of their organization and duties of their subordinates which often leads to
absenteeism, non-commitment and negligence in duty, indiscipline etc. Yet the leader tries as
much as possible to get the best out of his employees and increase performance under the
prevailing circumstances (Igboeli, 1990). It is most common when managers do not have
sufficient control over their staff or in-depth knowledge of the job he is supposed to do or each
team is supposed to do at a given time.

Transactional leadership style

This simply implies that your acceptance of the contract is an indication of your obedience to the
leader. The ―transaction‖ simply involves the payment of the team members by the organization
for their effort and compliance (Ololube, 2013). The manager or leader has right to punish,
accept or reject a work when performed poorly by a team member. Hence, your continuous stay
or retainer ship is depended on your continuous effort and compliance, which will ensure your
continuous payment.

Role Expectations of Leadership Positions

Ifeanacho and Egbue (1990) suggested that leaders should play the following roles which they
see as crucial in order to facilitate the accomplishment of the set objectives:

 Arbitrating- conflict is unavoidable in any organizational set up. A leader should

therefore be able to resolve conflict and any unhealthy competition that could impede
organizational activities amicably.

763
  Suggesting- A leader should not be power drunk or be lord over his subordinates. He
should allow his subordinates to make suggestions and have a sense of involvement in
organizational activities.
 Catalyzing- A leader should be able to facilitate the attainment of organizational goals.
 Providing security- A leader should know how to maintain positive and optimistic
attitude in the face of adversities.
 Refreshing- A leader is a mirror through which organization‘s image is seen. He should
be the mouth piece and represent the interest of the members of the Organization.
 Inspiring and Praising- a leader should give honor to which it‘s due. This is a way of
motivating them to perform better and according them due recognition of their
contributions to the organization‘s welfare either intrinsically or extrinsically.

Leadership Effectiveness

One of the most widely discussed theories of leadership in recent years is Fieldlers theory of
leadership effectiveness (1967). In his research, Fieldler asked respondents on his questionnaire
to describe the person with whom he or she could work least effectively and person with whom
he or she could work most effectively.
The leader that describes his least, preferred co-workers in (LPC) negatively behaves
different from the leader who describes a least preferred co-worker in relatively favored terms
and is presumably a relationship motivated leader. In contrast, a leader who rejects a co-worker
with whom he has difficulties with is presumably a task related leader. Fieldler calls the former a
―high LPC leader and the latter a low LPC leader‖. The high LPC leader tends to be relatively
democratic, permissive, supportive and generally concerned about people and their feelings. The
low LPC leader is autocratic, task oriented, controlling and does not show much concern about
employee and their feelings. In summary, Fieldler pointed three situations that affect a leadership
style. They are:

 Task structure: Here, fieldler has in mind the way task can be clearly divided and people
are held responsible for them in contrast to situations where task are vague and not well
structured. He believes that there are task which are lean, the quality performance can be
easily controlled than where task are ambiguous.
 Position power: this is the rate at which the power of a position can be distinguished from
sources of power. Fieldler pointed out that a leader with clear and considerable position is
in a better position to have better followers than without such followers.
 Leader-member Relation: In Fieldler‘s opinion, much regards are given to this dimension
since position, power and much task structure may be largely under the control of an
organization, has source of relationship to which group members like and trust a leader
and are willing to follow him.

Igboeli (1990) mentioned two possible implications for organizational effectiveness of Fieldlers‘
contingency theory, the first is to attempt through training, to change a manager leadership style
since low LPC and high LPC may be a matter of attitude or motivational disposition. Secondly, it
is also possible to train leaders to identify their task situation and adopt strategies that capitalize
on their particular leadership style. For example, a low LPC leader facing unstructured task will
somehow try to structure it so as to firm his leadership style.

764
Tannebuam and Schmidt Leadership Continum

One criticism of early work on leadership style is that they looked at styles too much in black
and white terms. The autocratic and democratic styles or task oriented and relationship-oriented
styles which they described are extremes, whereas in practice the behavior of many, perhaps
most leaders in business will be somehow between the two. Contingency theorists Tannebuam
and Schimdt suggested the idea that leadership behavior varies along a continuum and that as
one moves from the autocratic extreme the amount of surbodinate participation and involvement
in decision making increases. Their framework identified a continuum of possible leadership
style ranging from the one that is highly ―boss centered‖ to one that offers tremendous freedom
to surbordinates to exercise control in their areas of operation, between the two extremes are
many possible combination of leader-follower influence sharing as shown below (Tannabuam &
Schimdt, 1958).

Continuum of leadership behaviour

Boss Subordinate
Centered Centered
Leadership Leadership

The authors argue that the variables on the organizational setting which largely influence
leadership styles are:

 Forces in the leadership

 Forces in the subordinates
 Forces in the environment

However five forces were identified as determinants of leadership style. They are:

 Value system
 Confidence on subordinate
 Leadership inclination
 Feeling of securing in an uncertain situation
 Forces in the subordinate

Participative leadership is likely to be effective where the subordinate exhibits the following
characteristics:

 Subordinates have relatively high need for independence

 Subordinates have the readiness to assume responsibility for decision making
 They have a relatively high tolerance for ambiguity
 They are interested in the problem and feel that its important
 They have the necessary knowledge and experience to deal with the problems
 They understand and identify with the goals of the organization.
 They have learned to expect to share in decision making.

765
In a situation where these features are not significant, leadership however will likely show
indications towards autocratic style. A successful evaluation of these predominant features in his
subordinate will provide opportunities for them to develop and tap these potentials optimally for
their own benefits and of the organization (Tannabuam & Schimdt, 1958).

Forces in the environment

Forces in the organizational environment also influence the style of leadership and these forces
are:
 Type and nature of organization (mass productin forms, process or unit or technology
firm):
 Size of the firm (small or large complex organization)
 How effectively subordinates work together as a team
 The nature of problem the organization will contend with
 The pressure of time for the decision etc.

Tannabuam and Schimdt (1958) have explicitly stated that the best style of leadership is the one
that recognizes the three variables forces in the leader, forces in then subordinates and forces on
the situation, thus; ―A successful leader is one who is keenly aware of these forces which are
most relevant to his behavior at any point in time.‖ He accurately understands himself, the
individual and the group he is dealing with, and the company and broad social environment in
which he operates. A successful leader is one who is able to behave appropriately in the height of
those perceptions. If direction is in order, he is able to provide such freedom.

Performance

A simple mathematical formula for performance is ratio of output to input. Hence, we can
increase performance by keeping inputs, or increasing output by decreasing inputs
simultaneously. This simple formula, however, can be misleading, as no all of the important
factors that affect performance are easily quantified. There are closely-linked technical,
psychological and cultural dimensions to performance. Failure to examine these dimension in
any performance analysis will more than likely lead to the failure of performance improvement
efforts.
Performance is a parameter that is observed, evaluated and measured for every employee
and by every employer, even though it remains the most vaguely defined criterion. How an
employer benchmarks an employee‘s performance is as vast a canvass as the history of
employer-employee relationship and to date it remains under the shadow of ambiguity.
Okenwa (1999) said performance is the level workers output measures against the
background of inputs. It is the resultant level that output can vary e.g., low, moderate or high
depending on workers efforts in their work place.
Chinemelu (1997) defined performance as a technological process by which some
quantities of input materials are processed in known devices using known techniques so as to
obtain some quantities of outputs.
Igboeli (1995) stated that performance is higher than previously obtained level of output
without depreciating in quality, reduction in quantity, and increase in cost and time duration.

766
 Ebebe (1998) said that there are two important concept that are associated with
performance; they are efficiency and effectiveness, leadership effectiveness is the extent to
which they achieve anything, While efficiency is seen as the ratio of actual output to inputs.
Nwachukwu (1989) stated that efficiency has to do with the number of outputs obtained
per unit application. It shows how well resources are being utilized. In other words, when
resources are applied optimally, it will lead to efficiency.
Ibekwe (1984) in Ololube (2017), maintained that to improve our effectivesness in
producing goods and services, we need better management especially the conceptual and human
dimensions modern management.

Leadership as a Tool for Improved Performance

A leader is otherwise seen as a coach. This is due to his motivating, directing, authority,
discipline, etc. He exhibits all these with a sole aim of ensuring a sustained performance in the
organization. It's based on the hands-on experience and on-the-job knowledge of you, the
manager, not textbook or theoretical training conducted by training professionals.
Unlike training professionals, you must be focused on the company's business objectives.
As a coach, you need to make sure that employees receive on-target training relevant to those
objectives. You are also accountable for the performance of employees being trained. Thus, for
you it is results that count, not the training activity. Not training just for training sake. Coaching
also means breaking up training into small units that last only a few hours. This eliminates
launching a tidal wave of information at employees that they forget as soon as they step out of
the classroom. But coaching isn't just about training. It's also about developing the full potential
of employees, helping to identify and grow the personality and performance strengths that will
make them better employees.
For many managers, training and coaching employees is just another task to be added to
their already overflowing agenda. For this reason most organizations view employee
development as an activity irrelevant to the job they must accomplish. They see it as an
investment of their time with no return. This way of thinking is wrong. Because coaching will
create employees who are confident and ambitious, and this will give you a tremendous return on
your investment, which will in turn get results.
In traditional organizations that were part of the Industrial Age, professional trainers were
people skilled in learning theory, program design, delivery, and were responsible for training.
But in the new organizations of the Information Age, managers are ultimately accountable for
employee performance, performance, and the training of employees. Successful coaching begins
with performing the task of the manager-trainer better. To do this, managers must have both
knowledge and experience in the subject they are teaching. You have to convince employees that
you know what you're talking about. And employees want to know that what they're learning
comes from real-life situations, not books or company reports.
To learn, employees must pay attention to what is being taught. One of the most effective
ways to keep employee's attention is by using diversionary methods such as games or exercises.
Employees are thus learning without making any special effort to concentrate on the learning
process. Always conduct your training in plain, intelligent, and understandable language.
Training must be tied to a frame of reference that employees can understand. The new material
must be associated to something the employee is familiar with, such as an experience, a related

767
topic, or a mastered process. The material must be applicable to the job, and the employee must
know how to apply it for training to be truly effective.
The best learning process challenges employees to study for themselves. Don't just hand
information over. Make the material exciting enough to stimulate employees to seek out,
understand, and master the information. The acquired material will then be more memorable than
if it is simply received on a platter. Review the material to make sure that employees fully
understand it, and know how to apply it to their jobs. At the end of the training, both the trainer
and the employees should be evaluated. Different evaluations should measure how much
employees learned, their attitudes toward training as a result of the training sessions they just
had, and the impact of the training on employee performance and organizational objectives.
The primary purpose of coaching or leading in this regard is to help employees consider
alternatives and make decisions regarding their careers. While this is clearly beneficial to the
employee, coaching also helps the organization by getting the right person in the right job. It
prevents organizations from investing too much time and money in employees who are not suited
for certain jobs or responsibilities. Through effective leadership skill, a leader is able to identify
deficiencies in employees and find strategies to help them overcome these deficiencies, through
training, reading, and research. It also highlights advancement possibilities for employees,
encouraging them to stay with the organization.
To be a successful coach, employees must be willing to confide in you. There must be an
atmosphere of open communication between you and your employees. It is only in this type of
scenario that employees will speak fearlessly and comfortably about issues affecting their jobs
and careers. But, a positive communication work environment has to do with more than saying
"my door is always open" lip service. Employees have to believe that you are sincerely
concerned over their well-being. Once you've created an open environment, the stage is set for
you to have a good coaching program in place. Now is the time to call on your interpersonal
communication skills such as, showing empathy, understanding, and creating trust in
staffer/employees etc. You have to be an active listener; be more interested in what employees
have to say than in hearing your own voice, and questioning to clarify employee‘s comments,
and not getting into the driver‘s seat.
One of the most important parts of coaching is creating a mentoring relationship with
your staff/employees. Mentoring allows you to share your experiences with your employees and
help them achieve the same level of success as you. As they benefit from your experience, they
avoid the mistakes that can set back or ruin their careers. To become a good mentor you have to
create a network of contacts with various departments and hierarchical levels. This will provide
you with knowledge about the organization's history, philosophy, and strategic direction that you
need to give to your staff. You also have to allow freedom so that your staff/mployees are
exposed to different values, beliefs, and goals that are necessary to help them grow. Give your
employees the freedom of choice, while making sure the chosen mentor has the necessary
qualifications.

METHODS

Research Design

This study adopted a survey design, which is a framework that is used as a guide in collecting
and analyzing the data for the study. The survey approach was used to enable the researcher to

768
evaluate the leadership effectiveness that could lead to employee‘s high performance and as well
as the nature of and type of required solution for effective leadership on performance of
employees.

Data Source and Method of Collection

In conducting this study, secondary data and information will be used. The data will be sourced
from secondary material (secondary source) like text books, magazines, journals and other
published materials from the internet and the staff of tertiary institutions in Rivers State. Primary
data will also be used in areas of distribution of questionnaires to respondents, as such; first-hand
information will be derived. The researcher will use the following methods (instrument) in the
collection of data:

The Questionnaire

Questionnaire is a term used for almost any kind of instrument that has questions or items to
which individuals respond. Although the term is used interchangeably with ―schedule‖, it seems
to be associated more with self-administered instruments that have items of the closed or fixed-
alternative type (Kerlinger, 1973, p. 487). The questionnaire is in no small measure the most
frequently used instrument in educational research. Its popularity is demonstrated by the number
of published studies. The one I used in this research is a structured or fixed response
questionnaire as against the unstructured or open-ended questionnaire.
Nworgu‘s (1991, pp. 93-94) characteristics of a good questionnaire was applied in
designing the questionnaire for this study. The characteristics are: relevance, consistency,
usability, clarity, quantifiability and legibility. As a result, a questionnaire was designed with the
help of the researcher‘s supervisor to elicit information from the respondents that helped gather
information on effective leadership in relation to performance.
A suitable design was structured along a four-point Likert-type scale (summated) of
strongly agree (4), agree (3), disagree (2) and strongly disagree (1). The simplicity of the
questionnaire was adopted because of the different categories of people that comprise the
respondents thereby necessitating a simplified questionnaire.

Section A of the Questionnaire (Contents)

Section ―A‖ of the questionnaire focused on items such as gender, age, status, length of service
and academic qualifications.

Section B of the Questionnaire (Contents)

Section ―B‖ consist of 37 items and it focused on possible leadership styles and competencies,
which may or may not be perceived as being capable of improving employees‘ job effectiveness
for increased performance. The questionnaire questions were designed to investigate the
relationship between leadership style and staff job performance in tertiary institutions in Rivers
State.

769
Population of the Study

The population of this study comprised of all 5,630 staff of the three (3) selected institutions in
Rivers state, which is categorized into target and accessible population. A target population is
classified as all the members of a given group to which end the investigation is related, whereas
the accessible population is looked at in terms of those elements in the target population within
the reach of the researcher (Pole & Lampard, 2002). The population comprised management
staff, directors, heads of departments, and lecturers of universities in Rivers State. The
universities are:

1. University of Port Harcourt

2. Rivers State University
3. Ignatius Ajuru University of Education

Sample and Sampling Techniques

A sample of 300 was drawn randomly to ensure representation of the population and the sample
is drawn in the ratio of number of employees in each category of the workforce in the institutions
selected for this study. Thus:

1. University of Port Harcourt (80 respondents)

2. Rivers State University (100 respondents)
3. Ignatius Ajuru University of Education (120 respondents)

Validity of the Instrument

The instrument used in this research is valid because the researcher took time to comply with the
formalities and procedures adopted in framing a research questionnaire. To validate the
instrument, the questionnaire was given to the researcher‘s supervisor and other experts who
read through and made necessary corrections.

Reliability of the Instrument

The strength of the instrument that was used in this research was reliable because it was able to
elicit the required information concerning leadership style and staff performance. A quantitative
analysis of the inquiry was performed using the statistical package for the social sciences (SPSS)
version 23 of a computer program to statistically test the reliability of the research instrument. In
research statistics when a research instrument‘s reliability has been assured it gives the bases for
continuity. The reliability of the variables in this study was termed to be reliable because it
varies between 0 and 1 and the nearer the result is to 1, and preferably at or over .8- the more
internally reliable is the scale (Bryman & Cramer, 2010, p. 63). Thus a reliability estimate of
.888 was achieved, which makes the instrument very reliable.

Data Analysis Techniques

In method literature, there is no one single right way or most appropriate way to analyze
quantitative data. Analysis implies and indeed requires a principal choice. For this study, the

770
analyses involved the use of simple percentages, mean and standard deviation to answer the
research question. The criterion mean to accept or reject the research questions is
4+3+2+1=10÷4=2.50. One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) set at p < .05 to test the
hypotheses was used. Any hypothesis that is equal or less than .05 level of significant was
rejected and any hypothesis greater than .05 was accepted.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Descriptive Statistic of Respondents Demographic Variables

Information on the age shows that respondents who are aged between 25-35 years were
10(3.3%), those between 36-45 years were 90(30.0%), 46-55 years were 160(53.3%),
respondents who are above 55 years were 40(13.0%). Data on gender revealed that male
respondents were 180(60.0%), while female were 120(40.0%). Information on qualification
revealed that those with Bachelor‘s degree were 70(23.0%), those who hold Master‘s degree
were 150(50.0%), those with Doctorate degree were 70(23.0%), and respondents‘ with other type
of degrees were 10(3.3%). For status, lecturer 11 were 20(6.7%), lecturer 1 80(26.7%), senior
lecturers were 60(20.0%), Deans were 10(3.3%) and respondents who are non-academic staff
were 130(43.3%). Information on respondent‘s length of service revealed that those who have
worked for less than 10 years were 120(40.0%), 10-20 years were 90(30.0%), and those who
have worked above 31 years were 10(3.3%).

Table 1: Descriptive Statistic of Respondents Demographic Variables

Respondents Demographic Variables Frequency Percentage

Age 25 – 35 years 10 3.3
36 – 45 years 90 30.0
46 – 55 years 160 53.3
Above 55 years 40 13.3
Gender Male 180 60.0
Female 120 40.0
Qualification Bachelor‘s Degree 70 23.3
Master‘s Degree 150 50.0
PhD. 70 23.3
Other 10 3.3
Status Lecturer 11 20 6.7
Lecturer 1 80 26.7
Senior Lecturer 60 20.0
Dean 10 3.3
Non-academic Staff 130 43.3
Length of Service Less Than 10 Years 120 40.0
10 - 20 years 90 30.0
21 - 30 Years 80 26.7
Above 31 Years 10 3.3

Research Question One/Hypothesis One: Autocratic Leadership Style and Staff

Performance

The data existing in Table 2a summarized respondents mean scores and ANOVA analyses of the
six key items on autocratic leadership style and staff job performance in Nigerian tertiary
771
institutions. The table revealed that respondents agree that autocratic leadership style places high
emphasis on goal achievement, as such it improves staff performance (Mean= 2.5667,
SD=.80445). Respondents exposed to view that autocratic leadership style places strict
adherence to work rules, as such improves staff performance (Mean=2.5457, SD=.83739). Also,
respondents are of the opinion that autocratic leadership style places reliance on reward and
punishment (ie., the carrot and stick technique) to secure compliance, as such it improves staff
performance (Mean=2.5333, SD=.84732). Respondents also hold the view that autocratic
leadership style portrays lack of relationship or a very low level leadership – subordinates‘
relationship (Mean=3.4000, SD=.71299). The same applies to respondents‘ view that
coercive/autocratic leadership style tends to be repressive and with holds information other than
that which is absolutely necessary for doing the job (Mean=3.3667, SD=.65853). They
maintained that autocratic leadership style does not give room for suggestions from staff or team
members even if the input is in the best interest of the team or organization (Mean=3.3333,
SD=.74660). The results in table 2a all the mean scores are above 2.5, and the results in ANOVA
analysis in Table 2b shows that significant relationship (F=16.928, p. < .000) exist between
coercive leadership style and staff job performance in tertiary institutions in Rivers state. Thus,
hypothesis 1 was rejected.

Table 2a: Mean and standard deviation of answers to coercive / autocratic leadership style and
staff performance

s/n Items Mean Std. dev. Remark

1 Coercive/autocratic leadership style places high emphasis on 2.5667 .80445 Accepted
goal achievement, as such it improves staff performance.
2 Coercive/autocratic leadership style places strict adherence to 2.5457 .83739 Accepted
work rules, as such improves staff performance.
3 Coercive/autocratic leadership style places reliance on reward 2.5333 .84732 Accepted
and punishment to secure compliance, as such it improves staff
performance.
4 Coercive/autocratic leadership style portrays lack of 3.4000 .71299 Accepted
relationship or a very low level leadership – subordinates‘
relationship.
5 Coercive/autocratic leadership style tends to be repressive and 3.3667 .65853 Accepted
with holds information other than that which is absolutely
necessary for doing the job.
6 Coercive/autocratic leadership style does not give room for 3.3333 .74660 Accepted
suggestions from staff or team members even if the input is in
the best interest of the team or organization.

Table 2b: ANOVA result for answers to coercive / autocratic leadership style and staff
performance

Sum of df. Mean F Sig.

Squares Square
Coercive / autocratic Between Groups 19.792 3 6.597 16.928 .000
leadership style and staff Within Groups 281.875 296 .952
performance Total 301.667 299

772
Research Question Two/Hypothesis Two: Bureaucratic Leadership Style and Staff
Performance

The information in Table 3a (items 7-12) summarised respondents rating of bureaucratic

leadership style and staff job performance. Respondents‘ opinion depicts that staff performance
are influenced by bureaucratic leadership style (Mean=2.9667, SD=.70750). They are of the
view that bureaucratic leaders like rules to be followed regimentally as handed down without
recourse to staff performance (Mean=3.2000, SD=.65429). Respondents are of the belief that
bureaucratic leadership style does not create room for individual differences as such staff
performances are affected (Mean=2.8667, SD=.76431). Likewise, hold that bureaucratic
leadership style portrays setback that does not support flexibility, creativity and innovation as
such staff performance is influenced (Mean=3.1000, SD=.74735). To the respondents,
bureaucratic leadership style is dependent on hierarchy of authority as such does not encourage
staff initiatives for utmost performance (Mean=2.9667, SD=.91379). Nonetheless, they equally
agree that under bureaucratic leadership style employment is based on professional competences
and expertise, as such it influence staff performance (Mean=3.2333, SD=.61657). The results in
Table 3a revealed that all the mean scores are above 2.5, and the ANOVA analysis results in
Table 3b shows that significant relationship (F=10.347, p. < .001) exist in all the items between
bureaucratic leadership style and staff job performance. As a result, hypothesis 2 was rejected.

Table 3a: Mean and standard deviation of answers to bureaucratic leadership style and staff
performance

s/n Items Mean Std. dev. Remark

7 Staff performance are influenced by bureaucratic leadership 2.9667 .70750 Accepted
style
8 Bureaucratic leaders like rules to be followed regimentally as 3.2000 .65429 Accepted
handed down without recourse to staff performance.
9 Bureaucratic leadership style does not create room for 2.8667 .76431 Accepted
individual differences as such staff performances are affected.
10 Bureaucratic leadership style portrays setback that does not 3.1000 .74735 Accepted
support flexibility, creativity and innovation as such staff
performance is influenced.
11 Bureaucratic leadership style is dependent on hierarchy of 2.9667 .91379 Accepted
authority as such does not encourage staff initiatives for utmost
performance.
12 Bureaucratic leadership style employment is based on 3.2333 .61657 Accepted
professional competences and expertise, as such it influence
staff performance.

Table 3b: ANOVA result for answers to bureaucratic leadership style and staff performance

Sum of df. Mean F Sig.

Squares Square
Bureaucratic leadership Between Groups 10.778 3 3.593 10.347 .001
style and staff Within Groups 198.889 296 .672
performance Total 209.667 299

773
Research Question Three/Hypothesis Three: Charismatic Leadership Style and Staff
Performance

The statistical representation in table 4.4a summarised respondents view on effect of charismatic
leadership style on staff job performance. Respondents were of the judgment that charismatic
leadership style elicits and inspires eagerness in team work and stimulates staff performance
(Mean=3.3667, SD=.83739). Charismatic leadership style places much emphasis or confidence
on the leader rather than the staff performance. They were also of the view that charismatic
leadership style places much emphasis or confidence on the leader rather than the staff
performance (Mean=2.9667, SD=.65853). They hold that any adverse effect on a charismatic
leader could collapse the entire organization and staff performance (Mean=2.9333, SD=.77301).
They were confident that charismatic leaders assume wrong notions about themselves, as people
that cannot commit any wrong or mistake even when their misdeeds are quite glaring, as such
staff performance if influenced (Mean=2.6313, SD=.66861). Similarly, the respondents agree
that charismatic leaders see themselves as the sole source of inspiration and take the whole glory
on excellent job performance (Mean=2.5333, SD=.84732). Correspondingly, they are of the view
that charismatic leaders are asset to staff performance and goal achievement (Mean=3.1333,
SD=.61927). the results presented in Table 4.4a revealed that all the mean scores are above 2.5,
and the ANOVA results shows that significant relationship (F=18.576, p. < .000) exist between
charismatic leadership style and staff job performance. Agreeably, hypothesis 3 was rejected.

Table 4a: Mean and standard deviation of answers to charismatic leadership style and staff
performance

s/n Items Mean Std. dev. Remark

13 Charismatic leadership style elicits and inspires eagerness in 3.3667 .83739 Accepted
team work and stimulates staff performance.
14 Charismatic leadership style places much emphasis or 2.9667 .65853 Accepted
confidence on the leader rather than the staff performance.
15 Any adverse effect on a charismatic leader could collapse the 2.9333 .77301 Accepted
entire organization and staff performance.
16 Charismatic leaders assume wrong notions about themselves, 2.6313 .66861 Accepted
as people that cannot commit any wrong or mistake even when
their misdeeds are quite glaring, as such staff performance if
influenced.
17 Charismatic leaders see themselves as the sole source of 2.5333 .84732 Accepted
inspiration and take the whole glory on excellent job
performance.
18 Charismatic leaders are asset to staff performance and goal 3.1333 .61927 Accepted
achievement.

Table 4b: ANOVA result for answers to charismatic leadership style and staff performance

Sum of df. Mean F Sig.

Squares Square
Charismatic leadership Between Groups 17.167 3 5.722 18.576 .000
style and staff Within Groups 197.500 296 .667
performance Total 214.667 299

774
Research Question Four/Hypothesis Four: Democratic / Participative Leadership Style and
Staff Performance

Information in Table 5a abridged the ratings of the effect of democratic and participative
leadership style on staff job performance. Respondents opine that democratic style of leadership
encourages team decision making, as such improves staff performance (Mean=3.9000,
SD=.30050). They hold that democratic leadership style is suitable for skilled and educated
people, and professionals (Mean=3.3333, SD=.65087). Also, they belief that democratic leader
permits a climate of general control and supervision that enhances staff performance
(Mean=3.4000, SD=.55470). Respondents are of the view that democratic leadership encourages
creativity and team participation; thereby making team members to have high job satisfaction
leading to high performance (Mean=3.5667, SD=.49636). To the respondents, they hold that
Democratic leadership helps to develop staff‘s performance, skills and expertise (Mean=3.3667,
SD=.70750). Similarly, they agree that democratic leadership does not encourage speed
especially during crisis. It is always difficult to reach a quick decision and performance
(Mean=2.8000, SD=.87324). The results in Table 5a revealed that all the mean scores are above
2.5, and all the results in the ANOVA analysis (Table 5b) shows that significant relationship
(F=36.732, p. < .000) exist between democratic and participative leadership style and staff job
performance. Accordingly, hypothesis 4 was rejected.

Table 5a: Mean and standard deviation of answers to democratic leadership style and staff
performance

s/n Items Mean Std. dev. Remark

19 Democratic style of leadership, encourages team decision 3.9000 .30050 Accepted
making, as such improves staff performance.
20 Democratic leadership style is suitable for skilled and educated 3.3333 .65087 Accepted
people, and professionals.
21 Democratic leader permits a climate of general control and 3.4000 .55470 Accepted
supervision that enhances staff performance.
22 Democratic leadership encourages creativity and team 3.5667 .49636 Accepted
participation; thereby making team members to have high job
satisfaction leading to high performance.
23 Democratic leadership helps to develop staff‘s performance, 3.3667 .70750 Accepted
skills and expertise.
24 Democratic leadership does not encourage speed especially 2.8000 .87324 Accepted
during crisis. It is always difficult to reach a quick decision and
performance.

Table 5b: ANOVA result for answers to democratic leadership style and staff performance

Sum of df. Mean F Sig.

Squares Square
Democratic leadership Between Groups 41.236 3 13.745 36.732 .000
style and staff Within Groups 110.764 296 .374
performance Total 152.000 299

Research Question Five/Hypothesis Five: Laissez-Faire Leadership Style and Staff

Performance

775
The data in Table 6a summarised respondents rating of the effect of laissez-faire leadership style
and staff performance. Respondents were of the understanding that laissez-Faire describes a
leader whose staff work on their own with or without minimal interference from the leader
(Mean=3.2667, SD=.62998). Also, they belief that laissez-Faire leadership style encourages
staff‘s job performance in the work environment (Mean=2.7667, SD=.85518). They are also of
the opinion that laissez-Faire leadership style encourages staff‘s job performance in the work
environment (Mean=2.7217, SD=.71689). Respondents agree that laissez-Faire leadership style
does not encourage team work staff‘s job performance in the work environment (Mean=2.8333,
SD=.77947). Similarly, the agreed that laissez-Faire leadership style allows for carefree attitude
to work, as such does not encourage effective job performance (Mean=3.2333, SD=.80481).
furthermore, respondents were of the view that laissez-Faire leadership style may be good for
professional people who seek independence to enhance performance, such as university
professor and research scientist (Mean=2.7667, SD=.80481). The respondents also hold that
laissez-Faire leadership style may be disastrous if staff are unable to function effectively because
the needed minimal supervision could not be guaranteed for excellent performance
(Mean=3.2667, SD=.51293). the results presented in Table 6a shows that all the mean scores are
above 2.5, and the results in the ANOVA analysis displayed (Table 6b) that significant
relationship (F=44.480, p. < .000) exist between laissez-faire leadership style and staff job
performance. As a result, hypothesis 5 was rejected.

Table 6a: Mean and standard deviation of answers to laissez-faire leadership style and staff
performance

s/n Items Mean Std. dev. Remark

25 Laissez-Faire describes a leader whose staff work on their own 3.2667 .62998 Accepted
with or without minimal interference from the leader.
26 Laissez-Faire leadership style encourages staff‘s job 2.7667 .85518 Accepted
performance in the work environment.
27 Laissez-Faire leadership style does not encourage staff‘s job 2.7217 .71689 Accepted
performance in the work environment.
28 Laissez-Faire leadership style does not encourage team work 2.8333 .77947 Accepted
staff‘s job performance in the work environment.
29 Laissez-Faire leadership style allows for carefree attitude to 3.2333 .80481 Accepted
work, as such does not encourage effective job performance.
30 Laissez-Faire leadership style may be good for professional 2.7667 .80481 Accepted
people who seek independence to enhance performance, such
as university professor and research scientist.
31 Laissez-Faire leadership style may be disastrous if staff are 3.2667 .51293 Accepted
unable to function effectively because the needed minimal
supervision could not be guaranteed for excellent performance.

Table 6b: ANOVA result for answers to laissez-faire leadership style and staff performance

Sum of df. Mean F Sig.

Squares Square
Laissez-faire leadership Between Groups 40.292 3 13.431 44.480 .000
style and staff Within Groups 89.375 296 .302
performance Total 129.667 299

776
Research Question Six/Hypothesis Six: Transactional Leadership Style and Staff
Performance

The data presented in Table 7a summarised respondents rating of the effect of transactional
leadership style on staff job performance. They were of the view that transactional leadership
style simply implies that your acceptance of the contract is an indication of your obedience to the
leader, as such improves job performance (Mean=2.7647, SD=.71689). Item 33 reports that
transactional leadership style simply involves the payment of team members based on their
performance, effort and compliance (Mean=2.8487, SD=.61927). Respondents belief that a
leader has the right to punish, accept or reject a work when performed poorly by a team member
(Mean=3.0000, SD=.36576). They also hold that team member continuous stay or retainer ship is
depended on performance, effort and compliance, which guarantees continuous payment
(Mean=3.1000, SD=.59821). Same is true of their view that Transactional leader‘s guarantees
sense of responsibility in work. They help develop good character traits that will help team
members to carry out the professional responsibilities effectively (Mean=3.0333, SD=.54762).
Similarly, they were of the opinion that in transactional leadership, communication is important.
Leaders ensure that contracts are communicated effectively to team members to enhance job
performance (Mean=3.2000, SD=.40067). Data in Table 7a revealed that all the mean scores are
greater than 2.5, and the results in the ANOVA analysis (Table 7b) show that significant
relationship (F=13.031, p. < .000) exist between transactional leadership style and staff
performance. Consequently, hypothesis 6 was rejected.

Table 7a: Mean and standard deviation of answers to transactional leadership style and staff
performance

s/n Items Mean Std. dev. Remark

32 Transactional leadership style simply implies that your acceptance of 2.7647 .71689 Accepted
the contract is an indication of your obedience to the leader, as such
improves job performance.
33 Transactional leadership style simply involves the payment of team 2.8487 .61927 Accepted
members based on their performance, effort and compliance.
34 The leader has the right to punish, accept or reject a work when 3.0000 .36576 Accepted
performed poorly by a team member.
35 Team member continuous stay or retainership is depended on 3.1000 .59821 Accepted
performance, effort and compliance, which guarantees continuous
payment.
36 Transactional leader‘s guarantees sense of responsibility in work. 3.0333 .54762 Accepted
They help develop good character traits that will help team members
to carry out the professional responsibilities effectively.
37 In transactional leadership, communication is important. They ensure 3.2000 .40067 Accepted
that contracts are communicated effectively to team members to
enhance job performance.

Table 7b: ANOVA result for answers to transactional leadership style and staff performance

Sum of df. Mean F Sig.

Squares Square
Transactional leadership Between Groups 19.444 3 6.481 13.031 .000
style and staff Within Groups 147.222 296 .497
performance Total 166.667 299

777
DISCUSSION

This study evaluated effective leadership as a correlate of staff performance in tertiary

institutions in Rivers State. The study revealed that autocratic leader makes all decisions. An
autocratic leader is always very conscious of his/her position and has little trust and faith in his
subordinates. An autocratic leadership exercise too much power over the subordinate. It does not
make room for suggestions from staff or team members even if the input is in the best interest of
the team or organization (Ololube, 2013).
According to Agi and Adiele (2015) this leadership style may be good among unskilled
workers to produce results. According to Ololube (2013), the benefit of autocratic leadership is
that it is incredibly efficient as decisions are quickly reached since they often emanate from one
man. Hence, it is devoid of the usual bureaucratic bottlenecks in the public agencies which also
makes the implementation faster.
It is not staff centred and most of the staff resent being dealt with in such manner. It is
however the best approach in managing crisis, when decision must be made quickly and without
dissent (Ololube, 2017). There is also strict compliance to work schedules. However, autocratic
leadership has its merits and demerits.
On bureaucratic leadership style, rules are followed regimentally, as handed down. Staff
performances are influence by bureaucratic leadership style. This leadership style is apt and
appropriate especially in a very risky work environment where safety is highly adhered to such
as working in a highly inflammable gaseous environment, working with dangerous machinery,
toxic substances, dangerous heights, enclosed environment etc. It is also safer practice where
employees or staff do routine tasks (Ololube, 2013). One major setback of this kind of leadership
style is that it does not aid flexibility, creativity and innovation, thereby leading to
ineffectiveness in team work.
The results on charismatic leadership style and staff job performance revealed that
relationship exist between this style of leadership and staff performance. This leadership style
elicits and inspires eagerness in the team work and motivates staff/employees to move forward
which is an asset to performance and goal achievement (Ololube, 2013). The shortfall here is that
much emphasis or confidence is placed on the leader rather than the staff. Hence any adverse
effect on the leader could collapse the entire organization. In some cases, charismatic leaders
also assume wrong notions about themselves, as people that cannot commit any wrong or
mistake even when their misdeeds are quite glaring (Agi & Adiele, 2015).
The findings on democratic style of leadership revealed relationship with staff job
performance because decision making is shared between leadership and the group. Authority is
decentralized and there is free flow of communication. When the leadership is constrained to
make decision alone, the reason is explained to the group. The leader permits a climate of
general control and supervision. This leadership style is suitable for skilled and educated people,
engineers, technicians and craftsmen (Lamb, 2013). Democratic or participative leadership is
motivational as well as more financially rewarding. However, it does not encourage speed
especially during crisis. It is always difficult to reach a quick decision; thereby leading to waste
of valuable time and loss of man hour; trying to gather input (Ololube, 2013) which sometimes
may not be readily relevant to solving the issue at hand.
In laissez-faire leadership style there are practically no rules in the organization. The
leader set objectives and grant complete freedom to groups or individual decision without his
participation or direction. As such, this leadership style has influence job performance and staff

778
are self-motivated. This style may be good for professional people who seek independent, such
as university professor and research scientist. This style may also be disastrous if group members
are unable to function well since the needed minimal supervision could not be guaranteed
(Flippo & Munsinger, 1982 in Agi & Adiele, 2015).
The results from transactional leadership style simply imply that your acceptance of the
contract is an indication of your obedience to the leader. The ―transaction‖ simply involves the
payment of the team members by the organization for their effort and compliance (Ololube,
2013). The manager or leader has right to punish, accept or reject a work when performed poorly
by a team member. Hence, your continuous stay or retainer ship is depended on your continuous
effort and compliance, which will ensure your continuous payment.
In all, the study revealed that leadership style influences staff job performances in tertiary
education institutions in Rivers State.

CONCLUSION

In today‘s world, leaders are looking for attention and they engage in positive or even negative
behaviour to achieve goals. It is important that leaders recognize the worth of their staff on a
constant basis. Staff should feel their importance and be appreciated to contribute in decision
making activities. To this end, leadership should not just dole out commendation over any
minimal achievement or use the same leadership style for every situation.
Staff have their responsibilities to perform on their job if the leadership style used is
appropriate. However, many staff become incredibly frustrated when the leadership style is
inappropriate and have difficulty coping with the leadership style used. The struggle to cope with
the frustration they encounter as a result of the leadership style they are faced with, often leave
staff feeling disgruntled, disappointed and irritated. All of this might affect their ability to
perform effectively. A number of staff/employees are confused about where they fit in, and often
struggle with the confusion and skills needed to maintain positive job performance. Leaders must
acknowledge their staff abilities as well as their needs and reorganize their strength and
limitations so that they can be better prepared for their job. However, leaders who are at the core
of staff development must aim to strengthen their academic abilities and encourage these abilities
while also supporting their staff where the need comes within and outside their work place. To do
all these, leaders must have the openings to tap the full potentials of their staff. Failure on their
part to tap into their staff potentials through their leadership style might result in grave
consequences like under performance and negligence.
Leaders should be able to design, organize themselves and better improve their leadership
style, which is based upon a detailed knowledge of the staff skills and their abilities. Leaders are
to use appropriate, effective leadership practices to create and manage a great and dynamic work
environment. Leaders should demonstrate strong communication skills and employ qualified
staff.
Finally, no leader should see themselves as a repertoire of knowledge or indispensable, as all,
both the leader and the subordinate staff form an integral part of the system that makes the
organization or the institution whole and functional.

Recommendations

This study recommends that:

779
  Autocratic leadership style should be used to the extent that it reinforces staff
performance in tertiary education.
 Bureaucratic leadership style should be used to the extent that it reinforces staff
performance in tertiary education.
 Charismatic leadership style should be applied to the level that it reinforces staff
performance in tertiary education.
 Democratic/participative leadership style with all its advantages should be used to the
extent that it supports staff performance in tertiary education.
 Laissez-faire leadership style with all its disadvantages should be used to the level that it
reinforces staff performance in tertiary education.
 Transactional leadership style should be applied to the extent that it reinforces staff
performance in tertiary education.

Suggestion for Further Studies

 Many works remain to be done in the understanding of the impact of leadership on staff
job performance. This unique study in the area of leadership and job performance has
implications that can soften the progress in the understanding of the issues surrounding
the theme of this study.
 The major implication of this study is that issues surrounding leadership styles and staff
job performances have been identified. The study complements stakeholders
understanding of the role of leadership style in staff job performance in tertiary
institutions. Researcher can leverage on the theme of this study to direct the future of
research globally on leadership and staff job performance.
 This study has produced a developing body of pragmatic evidence that can be used for
decision making on the role of leadership style on job performance both in the public and
private institutions of higher learning. This is not saying that this research is an end in
itself. However, the study can be useful in several ways to solving part of our
misunderstanding of staff job performance. This research provides many other major
implications by providing new knowledge base for institutional management. That is, we
can use the process of this research effort and not just its intellectual contents to improve
job performance strategies in tertiary institutions.
 Other studies should be made to ascertain who really needs close supervision between the
junior lecturers/ junior non-teaching staff and their senior counterparts.
 Or why are most tertiary institutions not performing at their peak? Is it a problem of
leadership or the led?

REFERENCES
Abbasialiya, A. (2010). The Concept of Leadership. Retrieved from
http://expertscolumn.com/content/concept-leadership.
Adaire, J. (1973). Action – Centred Leadership, New – York, MacGraw – Hill.
Agi, U. K., & Adiele, E. E. (2015). Educational Management. Port Harcourt: Harey
Publications.
Bryman, A., & Cramer, D. (2010). Quantitative Data Analysis with SPSS Release 21 for
Windows: A Guide for Social Scientists. Philadelphia: Routledge: Taylor and Francis
Group.

780
Charry, K. (2012). Leadership Theories—8 Major Leadership Theories. Retrieved from
http://psychology.about.com/od/leadership/p/leadtheories.htm
Cherry, K. (2011). What is a theory? Retrieved from
http://psychology.about.com/od/tindex/f/theory.htm
Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making Sense of Quantitative Data. Complementary
Research Strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Saga.
Cole, G. A. (2000). Personnel management: theory and practice. London: ELST.
Cole, G. A. (2002). Personnel and human resource management: The tower building. London:
ELST.
Daft, R. L. (2003). Management. Australia: Thomson South Western.
Ifeancho, C., & Egbue, A. (1990). A practical approach to personal management. London: Mac.
Igboeli, G. N. (1990). Management: A functional approach. Onitsha: Model Academic
Publisher.
Ivancevich, J., Konopaske, R., & Matteson, M. (2007). Organization Behaviour and
Management. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Kerlinger, F. N. (1973). Foundation of Behavioral Research. New York; Holt Rienehart and
Winston. N. Y.
Kerlinger, F. N. (1986). Foundation of Behavioral Research. New York; Holt Rienehart and
Winston. N. Y.
Koontz, H., & O‘Donnel, C. (1976). Principles of Management. New York: MacGraw-Hill.
Lamb, L. F., & McKee, K. B. (2004). Applied Public Relations: Cases in Stakeholder
Management. Mahwah, New Jersey: Routledge.
Lamb, L. F., & McKee, K. B. (2004). Applied Public Relations: Cases in Stakeholer
Management. Mahwah, NJ: Routledge.
Lamb, R. (2013). How can managers use participative leadership effectively? Retrieved from
http://www.task.fm/participative-leadership.
Lawler, E. E., & Hall, D. T. (1970). Relationship of job characteristics to job involvement,
satisfaction, and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 54(4), 305-312.
Lawler, E. E. (1968). A correlational-causal analysis of the relationship between expectancy
attitudes and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 52(6, Pt.1), 462-468.
McMurrage, H. (1958). 1958 Census of Business: Wholesale Trade. Minnesota. Retrieved from
https://books.google.com.ng/bookid=nMMjfUBoz-QC.
Moorhead, G. & Griffin, R. W. (1995) (4th Edition). Organizational Behaviour: Managing
People and Organization. Boston: Houghton Mufflin Company.
Naylor, J. (1999). Management. Harlow, England: Prentice Hall.
Newman, B. (1997). 10 Laws of leadership: leading to succeed in a changing world. Benin City:
Marvelous Publication.
Nworgu, B. G. (1991). Educational Research: Basic issues and methodology. Ibadan: Wisdom
Publishers.
Okenwa, I. O. (1999). Impact of Motivation on Productivity of Radiographers. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/...
Ololube, N. P. (2013). Educational management, planning and supervision: model for effective
implementation. Owerri, Nigeria: SpringField Publishers.
Ololube, N. P. (2017a). Educational management, planning and supervision: model for effective
implementation (2nd Edition) Port Harcourt, Nigeria: Pearl Publishers.

781
Ololube, N. P. (2017b). Is the character of institutional leadership central to the quality of higher
education (HE) management? International Journal of Strategic Decision Sciences, 8(1),
46-64.
Owen, R. G. (2004). Organizational Behaviour in Education: Adaptive Leadership and School
Reform, (8th Edition). Boston: Pearson Education.
Pole, C., & Lampard, R. (2002). Practical Social Investigation. Qualitative and Quantitative
Methods in Social Research. Harlow: Printice Hall.
Sarangi, S. (2002). Discourse Practitioners as a Community of Interprofessional Practice: Some
Insights from Health Communication Research. In C. Candlin (Ed.), Research and
Practice in Professional Discourse. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press.
Tannebaum, R., & Schmidt, W. (1958). How to Choose a Leadership Pattern. Havard Business
Review, 36(2), 95-101.
© JSRE
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
i
Emmanuel Friday Bamson is a postgraduate student in the Department of Educational Foundations, Faculty of
Education, Ignatius Ajuru University of Education, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria. He has published in a
number of international journals and attended a number of conferences.
ii
Dr. Nwachukwu Prince Ololube, is a Fellow of the Chattered Institute of Administration of Nigeria and a
Lecturer in the Department of Educational Management, Faculty of Education, Ignatius Ajuru University of
Education, Port Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria. He holds a Ph.D. in Education and Teacher Education with focus in
Educational Management and Planning/Curriculum Studies from the University of Helsinki, Finland. In addition,
he holds a Postgraduate Diploma in Human Resources Management, Masters of Education in Educational
Management and Planning, and a Bachelors of Science Education in Political Science. Dr. Ololube‘s research
focuses on organizational culture, justice and change, school business administration/management, institutional
management and leadership in higher education, ICT in higher education, education effectiveness, instructional
effectiveness and quality improvement, early childhood education, and research methodologies. Wherever Dr.
Ololube finds himself and have always been, he always displayed the same enthusiasm and dynamism toward
inspiring and motivating his students. He challenges them to think critically and independently. Dr. Ololube enjoys
teaching as much as he is motivated to do research. He has published over 60 articles in refereed journals, 7
textbooks, edited 6 books, presented at various local and international conferences and published in conference
proceedings. Dr. Ololube has contributed 32 chapters to a number of books and encyclopedia. In all, Dr. Ololube has
authored and/or co-authored more than one hundred and forty (140) publications. His professional contributions to
the academic community include: Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Scientific Research in Education
(IJSRE); Editor, Online Journal of Education Research (OJER); Editorial Board Member, International Journal of
Economics Education and Development (IJEED). International Editorial Review Board Member: International
Journal of Management in Education (IJMIE); International Journal of Information and Communications
Technology Education (IJICTE); Editorial Board Member: Journal of Information Systems Education (JISE),
Academic Editor: British Journal of Education, Society & Behavioural Science (BJESBS), and many more. Dr.
Ololube was ranked among the very best 100 of the top 800 scientists in Nigeria institutions of higher education and
the best scientist in Ignatius Ajuru University of Education from October 2015—till date, according to Webometrics
Ranking of World Universities, Spain: Ranking of scientists in Nigeria institutions according to Google Scholar
Citations public profiles. http://www.webometrics.info/en/node/99. A selection of Dr. Ololube‘s publications and
profile are available online at www.ololube.com.ng.

782