Emmanuella, O., & Oluwasola, I. J. (2026). Leadership Styles and Employees’ Performance of Private Tertiary Institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State. International Journal of Research, 12(4), 559–588. https://doi.org/10.26643/ijr/2026/21
Corresponding Author
Achievers University Owo, Ondo State, Nigeria
Ibosiola Joseph Oluwasola
Achievers University Owo, Ondo State, Nigeria
Akeredolu Adebisi Gabriel
Rufus Giwa Polytechnic Owo, Ondo State, Nigeria
ABSTRACT
The study investigates the relationship between leadership style and employees’ performance of tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo state. Four (4) variables of leadership style were examined, autocratic leadership style, democratic leadership style, transformational leadership style and transactional leadership style in relationship with the dependent variable employees’ performance. Cross sectional survey research design was used for this study with population of 585 using stratified random probability sampling technique and a sampling size of 238 while 205 respondent’s questionnaire were retrieved for analysis. From the result of the analysis carried out using Robust Ordinary Least Square Regression (ROLS), it was discovered that Democratic Leadership Style (DELS) and Transformational Leadership Style (TFLS) were positively and significantly related to Employees’ Performance (EP) while, Autocratic Leadership Style (AULS) shows a positive but insignificant relationship with Employees’ performance (EP) and Transactional Leadership Style (TSLS) shows a negative and insignificant relationship with Employees’ Performance (EP) of private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo state. The study concludes transformational leadership style should be practiced because of its creativity as well as performance and supportive nature also, knowledge can easily be shared amongst employees when organizations are using a transformational leadership style and thus promoting organizational culture and improving overall performance.
Keywords: Autocratic Leadership Style, Democratic Leadership Style, Transformational Leadership Style and Transactional Leadership Style.
Introduction
Adekunle (2020) posited that leadership is an important factor in every human activity and the realization of human aims and objectives but, Zamin and Hussin (2021) argue that the adopted leadership style and work climate impact commitment levels of the employees and influence job performance. Anyaegbunam and Anekwe (2021) posited that the success or failure of any organization depends on the leadership and the styles. Different leadership styles contribute to improving organizational performance and the capacity to overcome leadership challenges encountered in organizations. These styles include autocratic, bureaucratic, charismatic, laissez-faire, participative, transformational and transactional leadership styles which allow a leader to connect employees’ or organizational performance (Onwuegbuna, 2022). Leadership style is the most important factor for the development of any private or governmental organization or any educational institution. Thereby creating influence, and motivation to lead employees to achieve pre-determined goals and objectives (Wase & Jeyaprabha, 2022).
1.1 Statement of the Problem
In today’s business world, the flow of life depends mostly on the effectiveness of leadership styles such as survival of the organization, development as well as effective performance. Though, the present global economy is driven by profitability, innovation and performance (NawoseIng’ollan & Roussel, 2017). The Nigerian university system has been overwhelmed with numerous challenges which have seen the nation’s universities being ranked below 100th worldwide. Also, despite all these challenges, administrative and leadership direction have continually gathered these challenges (Yusuf-Habeeb & Yusuf, 2017). Currently, most organizations stress creating the workflow and team to improve efficiency in their organizational performance (Al-Malki & Wang, 2018).
According to Agarwal (2020) Leadership style is an important area as it enables employees to work effectively and efficiently in an organization and leadership styles adopted by managers in an organization promote organizational objectives and goals. Although, there are progress and understanding of leadership styles in Nigeria and especially the impacts of democratic leadership style on employees’ performance at tertiary institutions in Nigeria and how some tertiary institutions are yet to realize goals due to challenges related to leadership style (Idowu, 2019; Manza, et al., 2020; Onwuegbuna, 2022). Though the issue leading to this study may be listed as rising from unsuitable applications of leadership styles responsible for a poor working relationship that ties employees and management of tertiary institutions. And most studies have been carried out as regards leadership style and employees’ performance in developed countries but in Africa especially Nigeria studies carried out are mostly in the area of banking, and companies but research carried out in Nigeria on tertiary institutions is not much.
Though, most researchers have worked on leadership style and employees performance in Nigeria such as Ajibade, et al., (2017); Orji, et al. (2017); Kalu and Okpokwasili (2018); Ekpenyong (2020); Amussah, et al. (2020); Nwagbala, et al. (2021); Adegboyega and Awolusi (2021); Akpoyibo (2022) and Onwuegbuna (2022). But few researchers have been able to work on tertiary institutions in Nigeria recently such few scholars are Yusuf-Habeeb and Yusuf (2017); Odunlami, et al. (2017); Kalu and Okpokwasili (2018); Idowu (2019); Manza, et al. (2020); Onwuegbuna (2022). It was observed that these researchers mainly used transformational, transactional, charismatic, participatory, and laissez-faire as components of leadership style while autocratic, and democratic amongst others were not used in measuring leadership style and employees’ performance of tertiary institutions in Nigeria. Another aspect is the methodology where the questionnaire was not measured based on a multi-factor leadership questionnaire. Therefore, this study made use of this scaling factor by Bass (1995) and Yousef (2000) scale of measuring employee performance. Also, the study emphasized an understanding of leadership style the underlying factors, issues and influence on employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria.
1.2 Research Questions
The study investigates the following
- What is the impact of autocratic leadership style on employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State?
- Does democratic leadership style influence employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State?
- What is the relationship between transformational leadership style and employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State?
- How does transactional leadership style impact employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State?
1.3 Research Hypotheses
To provide answers to the research questions derived from this study, the following hypotheses were formulated:
H01: There is no significant impact of autocratic leadership style on employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State.
H02: There is no significant influence of democratic leadership style on employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State.
H03: Transformational leadership style has no relationship with employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State.
H04: There is no significant impact of transactional leadership style on employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State.
1.4 Scope of the Study
The study investigated the relationship between leadership styles and employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State. The choice of Lead City University, Ibadan was conceived because of the closeness of the area to the researcher and the fact that it is one of the largest private universities in Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria. The population was based on the academic and non-academic staff of the school. The study used four (4) leadership style components (autocratic, democratic, transformational and transactional leadership styles) which serve as the independent variables and described their impact on employees’ performance which is the dependent variable. The study used a stratified random probability sampling technique in selecting the sampling size of the population while Robust Ordinary Least Square regression analysis was carried out in determining the significance level of each variable and the timeframe for the study was September 2023 to January, 2024.
2.0 Literature Review
2.1 Employees’ Performance
Employee performance is important for an organization as a measure of success in running any business, because the higher the performance, the higher the chance to achieve organizational goals (Pradana, et al., 2020). Though the company expects employees to have good performance given the importance of employee performance, it can be said that performance improvement is one of the important aspects of human resource management for the company which can be carried out if employees have good quality work so that employees can work competently and can complete work on time according to predetermined standards (Fakhri, et al., 2020). Organizations as well need to pay massive attention to their employees and their welfare, because happy and motivated employees are the sole channel through which organizations can become successful organization (Insan & Masmarulan, 2021). Furthermore, employee performance is focused on examining how well an individual employee performs at their job over a given period. Employee performance is also a critical review of the jobs that have been done and completed by an employee over some time by analyzing how the job is done either promptly or otherwise (Alheet, et al., 2021; Amegayibor, 2021).
Belete (2020) argued that leadership styles refer to the pattern of leaders’ behaviour that characterize a given leader or various patterns of behaviour favoured by the leader during the process of directing and influencing employees (Efendi & Graduate, 2020; Amussah, 2020). It is a style that invites and directs followers or employees to achieve common goals by creating a work environment that is more authoritative, controlled, effective and directed (Abadiyah, et al., 2020). Bastari, et al. (2020) stated that a leader’s influence is known to make improvements to employees in achieving company goals. while, leadership style is associated with the actions of a leader when leading and providing guidance (Rohman et al., 2020). Through leadership style, an effort can be formed to influence or direct employees or followers by mobilizing available human and material resources effectively and efficiently throughout the management process to achieve the desired objectives or goals (Purnomo et al., 2020). Leadership style in an organization is one of the factors that play a significant role in enhancing the interest and commitment of employees in the organization (Zamin & Hussin, 2021; Clinton & Ogbor, 2021). Leadership styles determine the level of employee participation in decision-making and the way an organization is run administratively (Akpa, et al., 2021; Wase & Jeyaprabha, 2022). For this study, autocratic, democratic, transformational and transactional leadership styles are used in measuring leadership style.
2.1.3 Autocratic Leadership Style
This type of leadership is often best used in situations where crisis arises when decisions must be made quickly and without dissent. It is valuable when organizations face a crisis or when an urgent problem arises that requires immediate attention (Al-Khajeh, 2018). This kind of style sometimes irreparably hinders organizational growth because there is a tendency to force their direct reports to perform tasks in a constricted manner (Belete, 2020). Also, in this leadership style, there is no collective vision and slight motivation among leaders and employees. Also, commitment, innovation and creativity are eliminated (Amussah, 2020; Wase & Jeyaprabha, 2022). Thus, the autocratic leadership style is a classical leadership approach, and the corporate equivalent of dictatorship or tyranny and which is marked by the leader having complete authority and the subordinates obeying the instructions of the leader without questioning and without receiving an explanation or rationale for such instructions (Khudhair, et al., 2022).
2.1.4 Democratic Leadership Style
According to Priarso, et al. (2018) in a democratic leadership style, leaders dynamically encourage and stimulate group decisions and group discussions. Some characteristics of the democratic leadership style are the fact that group members are encouraged to share ideas and opinions, even if the leader retains the final say over decisions, members of the group feel more engaged in the process and innovative ideas are welcome and encouraged as well as rewarded. And because it yields a lot of benefits, employees are encouraged to share their thoughts which can lead to better ideas and more innovative solutions to issues (Sadia & Aman, 2018). This type of leadership style is the opposite of the autocratic leadership style and in this leadership style, the leaders are generally more people-oriented and the feelings of their subordinates or employees (Derese, 2020). Democratic leadership style is a very open and collegial style of running a team and researchers have found that this learning style is usually one of the most effective and leads to higher performance (Belete, 2020; Saputra, & Mahaputra, 2022).
2.1.5 Transformational Leadership Style
Transformational leadership style according to Idowu (2019) is the process of influencing major changes in attitudes and assumptions of organizational members and building commitment to the organization’s mission or objectives (Eliyana, et al., 2019). Transformational leaders or managers do encourage their subordinates or employees to view the problem from a new point of view, provide support and encouragement communicate vision, and stimulate emotions and identification (Bastari, et al., 2020; Derese, 2020).
Amussah (2020) stated that transformational leaders motivate their followers in such a way that it goes beyond the usual rewards and monetary exchanges (Alheet, 2021; Patzelt, et al., 2021; Udin, 2021; Baig, et al., 2021). Osano (2022) opined that the importance of this leadership style, leaders in an organizational workplace cannot be over-emphasized as this set of leaders have the capacity and needed skills to solve problems, transform the organization and take the organization to greater heights to achieve better results for the organization (Dey et al., 2022). Thus, the transformational leadership style creates valuable and positive change in the followers with the end goal of developing followers into leaders (Wase & Jeyaprabha, 2022; Weber, et al., 2022).
2.1.6 Transactional Leadership Style
The transactional leadership styleentails the interchange process that results in the compliance of employees or subordinates. Though the leader made the request, it is unlikely to inspire excitement for or devotion to the mission’s goal and concentrates on having internal players complete the necessary duties to enter the organization’s desired outcomes (Idowu, 2019). Transactional leaders exhibit behaviours related to both corrective and constructive aspects where the constructive behaviour style is labelled contingent reward and the corrective style is labelled management by exception (Chang, 2019). Managers in this leadership style fulfil their obligations solely by creating good working conditions, without paying attention to meeting objectives or goals (Daniels et. al., 2019). Transactional leader work according to the principle of good performance and the employee will receive a sufficient reward (Aun, et al., 2019). The transactional leadership style involves an exchange relationship between managers and employees in the direction of establishing goals thereby clarifying the role and task required (Udovita, 2020). Transactional leaders focus mainly on maintaining the status quo and they are oriented to enhance the present way of doing things (Wahyuni, et al., 2020). Therefore, the transactional leadership style is the process whereby leaders can entice subordinates to perform and thereby achieve desired outcomes by promising rewards and benefits for the accomplishments of tasks and administering punishments when the task is not well accomplished (Kabiru & Bula, 2020; Holbert, et al., 2021).
| AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE |
| DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE |
| TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE |
| TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE |
| EMPLOYEES’ PERFORMANCE |
| LEADERSHIP STYLE |
2.4 Conceptual Framework
Figure 2.1: Conceptual Framework of the Study
(Researchers Computation, 2024)
Based on the review of available literature, a conceptual framework is shown in Figure 2.1. The focus of the framework is to investigate the relationship between leadership style and employees’ performance. Where leadership style is the independent variable which is measured with autocratic leadership style, democratic leadership style, transformational leadership style and transactional leadership style while the dependent variable is employees’ performance.
2.5 Theoretical Review
2.5.1 Transformational Leadership Theory
This theory (also known as relationship theory) focuses on the connections formed between leaders and followers (Bass & Avolio, 2000). This theory is premised on a leadership style that inspires followers to improve performance by focusing on the wants and needs of the organization as well as the personal concerns of its members (Munir & Aboidullah, 2018). Leadership effectiveness under this theory is dependent on individualized consideration, intellectual stimulation, inspirational motivation and idealized influence (Ewell, 2018; Getachew & Erhua, 2018). Idealized influence refers to when transformational leaders act as role models to their subordinates such that the followers identify themselves with a high level of morale and enthusiasm to fulfil the demands of leader whom they respect, admire and trust (Bass & Avolio, 2000). Leaders using this approach can motivate others, to want to change, improve and be led (Hall, 2002; Ewell, 2018) and possess high ethical and moral standards (Getachew & Erhua, 2018),
2.5.2 Path-Goal Theory
The path-goal theory was developed by Martin Evans in his 1970 paper, “The Effects of Supervisory Behaviour on the Path-Goal Relationship” and was refined by Robert House in his 1971 paper, “A Path-Goal Theory of Leader Effectiveness”. The theory is based on specifying a leader’s style or behaviour that best fits the employee and work environment to achieve a goal (Malik, 2013). Also, this theory can be explained as a leadership style whereby a leader exhibits certain contextual behaviours that align the follower’s goals with the organization’s goals and direct the followers to choose the best paths to achieve these goals (Malik, 2013). The goal of this leadership style is the improvement of employee productivity by focusing on employee satisfaction and motivation (House, 2015). The Path-Goal leadership theory is based on the Vroom expectancy theory in which an individual will act in a certain way based on the expectation that the act will be followed by a given outcome and on the attractiveness of that outcome to the individual (Ghiasi & Limoni, 2015). The Path-Goal theory posits that leaders may not only use varying behaviours with different subordinates but might use different behaviours with the same subordinates in different situations (Rego et al., 2012; Malik, 2013).
In relating this theory with leadership style, leaders that lead utilizing a Path-Goal leadership style reward and encourage their followers for goal achievement and also provide their followers with the necessary direction, clarity and assistance with the elimination of obstacles for them to attain their goals (Malik, 2013). House (2015) identified four leadership styles namely directive, supportive, participative and achievement-orientated leadership (Ewell, 2018). The directive leader is a type of leader that schedules the tasks of the followers and directive leaders also provide guidance to the followers and let them know exactly what is expected from them (Rohman et al., 2018). Achievement-oriented leaders expect their followers to perform at their highest level by setting goals for them to reach (House, 2015). Supportive leaders aim to show concern for the needs of the followers by employing friendly interaction and participative leaders use collective decision-making by consulting the followers and using their suggestions before making any decisions (Priyashantha, 2016). The theory posits that leaders may use different behaviours with subordinates in a similar situation and or employ varying behaviours with the same subordinate in different situations and this theory suggests that depending upon subordinates, and situations, different leadership behaviours will increase acceptance of leader by subordinates, level of satisfaction and motivation to improved performance (Ghiasi & Limoni, 2015).
2.6 Empirical Review
Clinton and Ogbor (2021) examined the impact of a strategic leadership approach on organizational performance. The findings reveal that democratic and laissez-faire leadership styles have a significant relationship with the performances of staff while the autocratic leadership style has no significant relationship with the performances of staff of GTB in Asaba. Anyaegbunam and Anekwe (2021) examined the effects of leadership styles on employee performance with particular reference to Life Breweries Plc, Onitsha. The study revealed among others that there is a positive and significant relationship between the leadership style in the organization and employees’ performance. Nwagbala, et al. (2021) examined the relationship that exists between transformational leadership style and participatory leadership style on employee performance in Stanel World, Awka, Anambra State. The findings were that there is a significant relationship between leadership style and employee performance by showing a positive relationship between participative leadership style and employee while showing a positive relationship between transformational leadership style and job satisfaction. Adegboye and Awolusi (2021) examined the effect of leadership style on employee productivity in the Nigerian oil and gas industry using Chevron Nigeria Limited as a case study. Results of the descriptive and regression analysis indicate that the autocratic leadership style is the most predominant in the Nigerian Oil and Gas followed by laissez-faire, bureaucratic, transactional, democratic and charismatic leadership styles. Udin (2021) provides new insights into uncovering the black box related to the relationship between transformational leadership and employee performance. Using a literature review from various previous studies in the last five years (2017-2021), the result of this study justifies that transformational leadership, in various organizational settings and sizes, has a significant effect on employee performance. Iman, et al. (2021) explained the influence of leadership and work motivation on employee performance at private universities within the province of Southeast Sulawesi which is mediated by knowledge-sharing behaviour. A survey approach and explanatory research method were used. The results obtained showed that leadership has a positive and significant effect on employee performance and knowledge-sharing behaviour. Negash, (2021) examined the effect of leadership styles such as transformational, transactional, laissez-faire, democratic and autocratic on employees’ performance at Debre Berhan wood processing PLC. Descriptive and explanatory research designs were applied to cross-sectional data collected from 202 sample respondents. Results revealed that transformational leadership exerted the highest positive influence on employee performance followed by democratic, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles respectively, while autocratic leadership style had a negative significant effect on employee performance. Amegayibor (2021) explored the association between leadership styles and employee performance in a family-owned manufacturing business. A quantitative approach and a correlational design were adopted with a census technique of sampling 400 employees, an interview schedule, multiple linear regression, and SPSS 16.0 version were carried out for analysis. The results revealed that autocratic, charismatic, and paternalistic leadership styles influence employees’ performance. Also, autocratic, charismatic and visionary leadership styles influence error reduction. Furthermore, paternalistic and visionary leadership styles influence employees’ quality of work. Osano (2022) investigated the influence of leadership style on employee performance in Kenya. A descriptive design and survey design were adopted for the study. The result indicated that the transformational leadership style influences employee performance, the transactional leadership style showed that it has a positive and significant influence on employee performance, the participatory leadership style influences employee performance and the autocratic leadership style influences employee performance. Wase and Jeyaprabha (2022) assessed the practices of leadership styles that influence employees’ job performance. The results of the research were mixed which revealed positive results and negative results. The result of the analysis carried out showed that transformational and servant leadership behaviours positively and significantly influence employees’ performance at the workplace. While autocratic and transactional leadership behaviours are not significant in influencing employees’ performance. Khudhair, et al. (2022) identified the impact of leadership style on employee performance using a sample size of 100 from one private organization in Selangor, Malaysia conducted with a convenience sampling technique. From the result, regression coefficient analysis shows that there is a significant and positive impact of democratic and laissez-faire leadership styles on employee performance. While autocratic leadership style shows a negative significant impact on employee performance. Imam and Sopiah (2022) explored a systematic literature review on the influence of leadership style on employee performance. The results of the study revealed that the leadership style of a leader is to solve the problem by approaching each employee to build an emotional approach so that the relationship between leaders and employees can run well.
Onwuegbuna (2022) examined the impact of the democratic leadership style on employees’
performance in selected private universities in Ota, Ogun State, Nigeria. The findings show that the democratic leadership style has an impact on employees’ performance in Nigerian private universities. Akpoyibo (2022) investigated leadership style and employees’ performance in the Nigerian banking industry with particular reference to GTB Plc. Survey design was carried out using both primary and secondary sources. It was resulted that the staff of GTB are familiar with different leadership styles of which several are practiced by management towards employees and that the leadership styles practiced at GTB include the participatory style, democratic as well as the charismatic leadership style that the team leaders GTB create a conducive work environment which that helps employees do their jobs also, that the management of GTB provides sufficient assistance to employees who go through hard times and that the type of leadership style adopted by top management at GTB motivates employees in performing their jobs.
2.7 Research Gap
Most studies have been carried out as regards leadership style and employees’ performance in developed countries but in Africa especially Nigeria studies carried out are mostly in the area of banking, and manufacturing companies but research carried out in Nigeria on tertiary institutions is not much. Though, most researchers have worked on leadership style and employees performance in Nigeria such as Ajibade, et al. (2017); Orji, et al. (2017); Kalu and Okpokwasili (2018); Ekpenyong (2020); Amusa, et al. (2020); Nwagbala, et al. (2021); Adegboyega and Awolusi (2021); Akpoyibo (2022) and Onwuegbuna (2022). But few researchers have been able to work on tertiary institutions in Nigeria recently such few scholars are Yusuf-Habeeb and Yusuf (2017); Odunlami, et al. (2017); Kalu and Okpokwasili (2018); Idowu (2019); Manza, et al. (2020); Onwuegbuna (2022). It was observed that these researchers mainly used transformational, transactional, charismatic, participatory, and laissez-faire as components of leadership style while autocratic, and democratic amongst others were not used in measuring leadership style and employees’ performance of tertiary institutions in Nigeria. Another aspect is the methodology where the questionnaire was not measured based on a multi-factor leadership questionnaire. Therefore, this study made use of this scaling factor by Bass (1995) and Yousef (2000) scale of measuring employee performance. Also, the study emphasized an understanding of leadership style the underlying factors, issues and influence on employees’ performance at tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria.
3.0 METHODOLOGY
This study makes use of a cross-sectional survey research design to investigate the relationship between leadership style and employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo state. The main reason for this survey was to gather the proper information to provide insight into leadership style and employees’ performance of private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria. This study focused on Lead City University because it is one of the largest, most populated and most well-known private universities in Ibadan amongst other private universities. The population of this study consists of a staff of Lead City University in Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria. The total population for this study is 585 (five hundred and eighty-five). Table 3.1 illustrates the selected outcome alongside the number of staff of both academic and non-academic staff of the school.
3.1: Distribution of staff of selected branches
| S/N | ITEM | NUMBER OF STAFF |
| 1 | Academic Staff | 347 |
| 2 | Non-Academic Staff | 238 |
| TOTAL | 585 |
Source: Field Survey, 2023
The sample size for this study was approximately 238 using the Slovin’s formula which is illustrated below.
3.1 Reliability of Instrument
Table 1: Alpha Test for Reliability, Consistency and Validation
average
item-test item-rest interitem
Item | Obs Sign correlation correlation covariance alpha
————-+—————————————————————–
ep | 205 + 0.8515 0.6643 .0378527 0.3572
auls | 205 + 0.3328 0.0888 .128992 0.6684
dels | 205 + 0.7280 0.4746 .0649452 0.4972
tfls | 205 + 0.7827 0.5752 .0543015 0.4356
tsls | 205 – 0.2574 0.0327 .1368966 0.6802
————-+—————————————————————–
Test scale | .0845976 0.6139
——————————————————————————-
Source: Author Compilation from STATA 14
The table above shows Cronbach Alpha test for reliability, consistency and validity of the study instrument which is the questionnaire. The minimum acceptable value for Cronbach’s alpha is 0.50; Below this value the internal consistency of the common range is low. Meanwhile, the maximum expected value is 0.90; Above this value is perceived as redundancy or duplication. Alpha values between 0.55 and 0.90 is usually preferred. In this study, the Cronbach Alpha test results as seen from the table above shows a value of 0.61 which makes the instrument for this study reliable and valid.
3.2 Method of Data Analysis
The method of data analysis was of two parts. The first part consists of the frequencies, means and percentages which were used to describe the characteristics of the sample. The second part was the regression analysis used to infer meaning about the entire population from the sample findings. Also, analysis of variances, model summaries and regression coefficients were used to describe the characteristics of the population of study while STATA version 14 and Microsoft Excel were used as the principal data analysis tools.
3.3 Model of Specification
This comprises the elements used in measuring the independent variable (Leadership Style) which are Autocratic Leadership Style (AULS), Democratic Leadership Style (DELS), Transformational Leadership Style (TFLS) and Transactional Leadership Style (TSLS) on the dependent variable which is employees’ performance.
The model for the study is functionally stated below:
EP’= ƒ(AULS, DELS, TFLS, TSLS)’ ……………………………………… 3.1
The model is econometrically stated as:
EPⅈ = β0 + β1AULSⅈ + β2DELSⅈ + β3TFLSⅈ + β4TSLSⅈ + Ɛⅈ ………………… 3.2
Where:
EP = Employees’ Performance
AULS = Autocratic Leadership Style
DELS = Democratic Leadership Style
TFLS = Transformational Leadership Style
TSLS = Transactional Leadership Style
β0 = Intercept
β1 – β3 > 0 = Coefficient of AULS, DELS, TFLS and TSLS
Ɛⅈ = Error term
ⅈ = Samples of Lead City University Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria.
The a priori expectation for this study is stated:
β1, β2, β3, β4 > 0, the reason is that the variables used here are a process dimension
4.0 Data Presentation and Analysis
Particularly, a total of 240 questionnaire were sent out to the respondents for data generation as shown in the table below:
Table 1: Analysis of Questionnaire
| Questionnaires | Copies | Percentage |
| Retrieved | 205 | 85% |
| Un-retrieved | 35 | 15% |
| Sent copies | 240 | 100% |
Source: Author Compilation from field work, 2024
The result from the analysis of the retrieved questionnaire shows that out of the 240 questionnaire that were sent, 205 of them were retrieved. This represented 85% of the total questionnaire sent and this was the number that was used for analysis in the subsequent sections that will follow. 35 of the questionnaires could not be retrieved, representing 15% which is not significant.
4.1 Data Analysis
Correlation Analysis
In examining the association among the variables, we employed the Spearman Rank Correlation Coefficient (correlation matrix), and the results are presented in the table below.
Table 4.7: Correlation analysis
| ep auls dels tfls tsls
————-+———————————————
ep | 1.0000
auls | 0.1418 1.0000
dels | 0.5966 0.0306 1.0000
tfls | 0.6561 0.2370 0.4046 1.0000
tsls | -0.0431 -0.0089 -0.0701 0.0144 1.0000
Author’s computation (2024)
In the case of the correlation between leadership styles and employee performance, the above results show that there exists a positive and weak association between autocratic leadership style and employee performance (0.1418). There exists a positive and moderate association between democratic leadership style and employee performance (0.5966). There exists a positive and high association between transformative leadership style and employee performance (0.6561). There exists a negative and weak association between transactional leadership style and employee performance (-0.0431). However, to test our hypotheses a regression results will be needed since correlation test does not capture cause-effect relationship.
Regression Analysis
Particularly, to examine the cause-effect relationships between the dependent variables and independent variables as well as to test the formulated hypotheses, we used a robust regression analysis since our results reveal the presence of heteroskedasticity. The robust regression and the OLS results obtained is presented and discussed below.
Table 2: Regression Result
| EP Model (OLS) | EP Model (Robust Regression) | |
| CON | 0.42 {0.549} | 0.86 {0.239} |
| AULS | 0.10 {0.452} | 0.18 {0.216} |
| DELS | 0.44 {0.000} *** | 0.40 {0.000} *** |
| TFLS | 0.50 {0.000} *** | 0.44 {0.000} *** |
| TSLS | -0.01 {0.945} | -0.09 {0.536} |
| F-statistics Wald Statistics | 20.32 (0.00) *** | 14.95 (0.00) *** |
| R- Squared | 0.53 | 0.53 |
| VIF Test | 1.14 | |
| Heteroscedasticity Test | 5.62 (0.0177) ** |
Note: (1) bracket {} are p-values
(2) **, ***, implies statistical significance at 5% and 1% levels respectively
In the table above, we observed from the OLS pooled regression that the R-squared value of 0.53 shows that about 53% of the systematic variations in employee performance for the period of interest was jointly explained by the independent variables in the model. This implies that employee performance cannot be 100 percent explained by the leadership style variables. The unexplained part of employee performance can be attributed to the exclusion of other independent variables that can impact on employee performance but were excluded because they are outside the scope of this study. However, there are captured in the error term. The F-statistic value of 20.32 and its associated P-value of 0.00 shows that the OLS regression model on the overall is statistically significant at 1% level, this means that the regression model is valid and can be used for statistical inference.
Test of Hypotheses
Following the above, the discussion of the robust regression results became imperative in testing our hypotheses. The below is a specific analysis for each of the independent variables using the robust regression for the models.
Hypotheses 1: There is no significant impact of autocratic leadership style on employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State.
The results obtained from the robust regression reveals that the variable of autocratic leadership {0.18 (0.216)} as an independent variable to employee performance appears to have a positive insignificant impact on employee performance. This therefore means we should accept the null hypothesis and reject the alternate hypothesis. Hence, there is no significant impact of autocratic leadership style on employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State. This implies that autocratic leadership style insignificantly improves employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State during the period under study.
Hypotheses 2: There is no significant influence of democratic leadership style on employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State.
The results obtained from the robust regression reveals that the variable of democratic leadership style {0.40 (0.000)} as an independent variable to employee performance appears to have a positive significant influence on employee performance. This therefore means we should reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternate hypothesis. Hence, there is no significant influence of democratic leadership style on employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo state. This implies that democratic leadership style significantly improves employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo state during the period under study.
Hypotheses 3: Transformational leadership style has no relationship with employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State.
The results obtained from the robust regression reveals that the variable of transformational leadership style {0.44 (0.000)} as an independent variable to employee performance appears to have a positive significant impact on employee performance. This therefore means we should reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternate hypothesis. Hence, transformational leadership style has no relationship with employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State. This implies that transformational leadership style significantly improves employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State during the period under study.
Hypotheses 4: There is no significant impact of transactional leadership style on employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State.
The results obtained from the robust regression reveals that the variable of transactional leadership style {-0.09 (0.536)} as an independent variable to employee performance appears to have a negative insignificant effect on employee performance. This therefore means we should accept the null hypothesis and reject the alternate hypothesis. Hence, there is no significant relationship of transactional leadership style on employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State. This implies that transactional leadership style insignificantly decreases employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State during the period under study.
5.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The managing style of a leader is essential to the success of teamwork which leads to organizational growth. In many cases, leaders are not aware of the essential wants and needs of their employees or subordinates, or they fail to understand the difference between the individuals involved in the team. A successful organization is a reflection of excellent leadership. Hence, we investigate the relationship between leadership styles on employees’ performance in private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State. Based on the findings of the study, we conclude that autocratic leadership style insignificantly improves employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State during the period under study. However, we also conclude that democratic leadership and transformation leadership style significantly improves employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State during the period under study. Finally, we conclude that transactional leadership style insignificantly decreases employees’ performance at private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo State during the period under study.
5.3 Recommendations
This study has sufficiently established different positions on the impact of leadership styles on employees’ performance in private tertiary institutions in Ibadan, Oyo state. Based on the findings of this study, we carefully recommend that:
- Transformational leaders as well as democratic set of leaders have the capacity and needed skills to solve problems, transform the organization and take the organization to greater heights to achieve better results for the organization.
REFERENCES
Abadiyah, R., Eliyana, A., & Sridadi, A. R. (2020). Motivation, leadership, supply chain management toward employee green behavior with organizational culture as a mediator variable. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 9(3), 981-989.
Adegboye, O., & Awolusi, O. D. (2021). The effect of leadership styles on employee’s productivity in the Nigerian Oil and Gas Industry. Information Management and Business Review, 13(1), 47-64.
Adekunle, O. A. (2020) The effects of leadership styles on organizational behavior and
performance in some selected organizations in Nigeria. Journal of Public Affairs, 7(3), 45-57.
Ajibade, O. E., Ajayi, T. O., & Shobowale, O. (2017). Leadership style and employees’ performance in Nigerian Federal Polytechnics: a study of Federal Polytechnic, Ilaro, Ogun State. Journal of Public Administration, Finance and Law, 11, 17-30.
Akpa, V. O., Asikhia, O. U. & Okusanya, A. O. (2021). Leadership styles and organisational performance in Nigeria: qualitative perspective. International Journal of Engineering and Management Research, 11(1), 46-53.
Akpoyibo, A. G. (2022). Leadership style and employee performance in Guaranty Trust Bank Plc, Abraka, Delta State, Nigeria. International Journal of Business and Law Research, 10(4), 47-56.
Alheet, A., Adwan, A., Areiqat, A., Zamil, A., & Saleh, M. (2021). The effect of leadership styles on employees’ innovative work behavior. Management Science Letters, 11(1), 239-246.
Al Khajeh, E. H. (2018). Impact of leadership styles on organizational performance. Journal of Human Resources Management Research, 2(1) 20-26.
Al-Malki, M., & Wang, J. (2018). Leadership styles and job performance: a literature review. Journal of International Business Research and Marketing, 3(3), 40-49. DOI: 10.18775/jibrm.1849-8558.2015.33.3004
Amussah, A. (2020). Leadership styles and its impact on employee performance. (Published Master’s Thesis), Graduate School of Social Sciences Business Administration Program, Near East University, Nicosia, Cyprus.
Amegayibor, G. K. (2021). Leadership styles and employees’ performance: a case of family- owned manufacturing company, Cape Coast. International Journal of Financial, Accounting, and Management, 3(2), 149-164.
Anyaegbunam, C. E., & Anekwe, E. A. (2021). Investigate the effect of leadership style on employee’s performance. International Academy Journal of Management, Marketing and Entrepreneurial Studies, 8(2), 175-184. Retrieved from: asasubmitpaper@gmail.com
Aun, I. I., Olota, O. O., Ajayi, O., & Sanusi, S. I. (2019). Effect of leadership styles on employees’ performance: a study of seven-up Plc. Global Management Review, 13(1), 10-23. Doi:10.34155/GMR.19.1301.02
Baig, S. A., Iqbal, S., Abrar, M., Baig, I. A., Amjad, F., Zia-ur-Rehman, M., & Awan,
M. U. (2021). Impact of leadership styles on employees’ performance with moderating role of positive psychological capital. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 32(9-10), 1085-1105.
Bass, B.M. (1995). Theory of transformational leadership redux. The Leadership Quarterly, 6, 463-478. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(95)90021-7
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2000). MLQ Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Redwood City: Mind Garden.
Bastari, A., Eliyana, A., & Wijayanti, T. (2020). Effects of transformational leadership styles
on job performance with job motivation as mediation: a study in a state-owned enterprise. Management Science Letters, 10(12), 2883-2888.
Belete, J. (2020). The effects of leadership style on employee’s performance in case of Kaffa Zone Government Offices, South West Ethiopia. International Journal of Engineering Science and Computing, 10(7), 26756-26773.
Clinton, E., & Ogbor, J. O. (2021). Strategic leadership approach and employee performance in the banking sector in Nigeria. International Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15(1), 265-284. Retrieved from https://ijeponline.org/index.php/journal/article/view/46
Chang, H. (2019). Does leadership matter: study of leadership style, job performance and job satisfaction. Business Economics, 11(2), 1-28. doi: 10.5937/poseko12-16191
Derese, S. (2020). The impact of leadership style on employee performance: the case of EPUC. International Journal of Academic Multidisciplinary Research, 4(8), 49-69.
Dey, M., Bhattacharjee, S., Mahmood, M., Uddin, M. A., & Biswas, S. R. (2022). Ethical leadership for better sustainable performance: the role of employee values, ethical behavior and climate. Journal of Net Production, 337(1), 130527. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130527
Efendi, M. N. R. S. R., & Graduate. (2020). The performance of employees influenced by leadership styles and compensation. International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding, 292-299.
Ekpenyong, J. N. (2020). The impact of leadership style on employees performance in a business organization: a case study of Guarantee Trust Bank Plc, Abuja. (Master’s Thesis), Department of Human Resource Management, National College of Ireland, Ireland.
Ewell, J. (2018). Revitalizing a student organization by applying transformational leadership. Journal of Leadership Education, 17(3), 208-218.
Fakhri, M., Pradana, M., Syarifuddin, S., & Suhendra, Y. (2020). Leadership style and its impact on employee performance at Indonesian national electricity company. The Open Psychology Journal, 13(1), 321-325.
Getachew, D. S., & Erhua, Z. (2018). The influences of transformational leadership on collective efficacy: the moderating role of perceived organizational support. International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 10(4), 7-15.
Ghiasi, M., & Limoni, S. T. 2015. Investigating the factors affecting the level of job satisfaction among the librarians at central library of Islamic Azad University of District 3. Library Philosophy and Practice, 1350, 1-3.
Holbert, J., Madhakomala, R., Saparuddin, S., & Timotius, E. (2021). The influence of
leadership styles on employees’ job satisfaction in public sector organizations in
Indonesia. Management Science Letters, 11(4), 1393-1398.
House, R. J. (1971). A path-goal theory of leader effectiveness. Journal of Administrative Science Quarterly, 16(1), 321-338.
House, J. (2015). Leadership Styles. Encyclopedia of Educational Leadership and Administration. California: Sage Publications.
Idowu, S. A. (2019). Impact of leadership styles on employees’ work performance in some south-western Nigerian private universities. Economics Insights-Trends and Challenges. 8(4), 27-46.
Imam, S., & Sopiah, A. (2022). The influence of leadership style on employee performance: systematic literature review. International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research, 4(6), 1-13.
Iman, N., Nurwati, Hatani, L., & Juharsah. (2021). Effect of leadership and work motivation on employee performance through knowledge sharing behavior. Archives of Business Research, 9(11), 34-50.
Insan, A., & Masmarulan, R. (2021). Effects of leader-member exchange and organizational culture on work engagement and employee performance. Management Science Letters, 11(3), 879-886.
Kabiru G. K., & Bula, H. (2020). Influence of transactional leadership style on employee performance at selected commercial banks in Nairobi city county, Kenya. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 4(9), 520-524.
Kalu, D. C., & Okpokwasili, N. P. (2018). Impact of autocratic leadership style on job performance of subordinates in academic libraries in Port-Harcour, Rivers state, Nigeria. International Journal of Research – Granthaalayah, 6(10), 212-220. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1486215.
Khudhair, F. S., Rahman, R. A., Adnan, A. A. B. Z., & Anmar, A. K. (2022). Impact of leadership style on employee performance: a case study on a private organization in Iraq. Texas Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 13(2), 15-32. Retrieved from: https://zienjournals.com
Malik, S. H. (2013). Relationship between leader behaviors and employees’ job satisfaction: a path-goal approach. Pakistan Journal of Commerce & Social Sciences, 7(1), 209- 222.
Mamza, I. Y., Abdullahi, S., & Usman, M. (2020). Effect of leadership styles on employees’ performance in Nigeria Institute for Trypanosomiasis Research, Kaduna State. African Scholar Journal of Management Science and Entrepreneurship, 18(7), 23-44.
Munir, F., & Aboidullah M. (2018). Gender differences in transformational leadership behaviors of school principals and teachers’ academic effectiveness. Bulletin of Education & Research, 40(1), 99-113.
NawoseIng’ollan, D., & Roussel, J. (2017). Influence of leadership styles on employees’ performance: a study of Turkana County, Kenya. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 8(7), 82-98.
Negash, B. W. (2021). Effect of leadership style on employees’ performance: the case of Debre Berhan wood processing Plc. (Doctoral Thesis), Department of Management, college of Business and Economics, Debre Birhan University, Ethiopia.
Nwagbala, S. C., Ifureze, P. C., & Agbo, S. (2021). An assessment on leadership styles and employee performance in Stanel World, Awka, Anambra State. International Journal of Business and Management Research, 2(3), 1-17.
Odunlami, S. A., Awosusi, O. O., & Awolusi, O. D. (2017). The influence of leadership styles on employees’ performance: a study of selected private universities in Ogun State, Nigeria. Global Journal of Commerce and Management Perspective, 3(2), 26-32.
Onwuegbuna, G. N. (2022). Democratic leadership style and employees’ performance in the Nigerian educational sector: a study of Bells University of Technologsy, Ota and Crawford University, Igbesa, Ogun State, Nigeria. International Journal of Management, Social Sciences, Peace and Conflict Studies, 5(1), 155-164.
Orji, M. G., Olowu, D. M., Boma, S. A., & Akhimien, E. (2017). Leadership styles and employee performance in Nigerian higher educational institutions. American Journal of Environmental and Resource Economics, 2(1), 12-21. doi: 10.11648/j.ajere.20170201.12
Osano, M. P. (2022). Influence of leadership style on employee performance: a case of membership associations in Kenya. (Master’s Thesis), Chandaria School of Business, United States International University, Africa. South Africa.
Patzelt, H., Gartzia, L., Wolfe, M. T., & Shepherd, D. A. (2021). Managing negative emotions from failed entrepreneurial projects: when and how can supportive leadership help employees. Journal of Business Venturing, 36(5), 106129. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2021.106129
Pradana, M., Pérez-Luño, A., & Fuentes-Blasco, M. (2020). Innovation as the key to gain performance from absorptive capacity and human capital. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 32(7), 822-834.
Priarso, M. T., Diatmono, P., & Mariam, S. (2018). The effect of transformational leadership style, work motivation, and work environment on employee performance that in mediation by job satisfaction variables in Pt. Gynura Consulindo. Business and Entrepreneurial Review, 18(2), 165-176.
Priyashantha, K. G. (2016). The impact of leadership styles on employee performance: analysis of the intervening effect of employee retention to the relationship of leadership styles and employee performance. (Published MBA Thesis), Faculty of Management and Finance, University of Ruhuna, Matara, Sri Lanka. Retrieved: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359420981
Purnomo, B. R., Eliyana, A., & Pramesti, E. D. (2020). The effect of leadership style, organizational culture and job satisfaction on employee performance with organizational commitment as the intervening variable. Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy, 11(10), 446- 458.
Rego, A., Sousa, F., Marques, C., & Cunha, M. (2012). Authentic leadership promoting
employees’ psychological capital and creativity. Journal of Business Research, 65(1), 429-437.
Rohman, A., Eliyana, A., Purwana, D., & Hamidah. (2020). Individual and organizational factors’ effect on knowledge sharing behavior. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 8(1), 38-48.
Sadia, A., & Aman, A. (2018). Transformational leadership and organizational performance; the mediating role of organizational innovation. SEISENSE Journal of Management, 1, 59-75.
Saputra, F., & Mahaputra, M. R. (2022). Effect of job satisfaction, employee loyalty and employee commitment on leadership style: human resource literature study. Dinasti International Journal of Management Science, 3(4), 762-772.
Udin, U. (2021). Transformational leadership and employee performance inside the black box. International Journal of Management Studies and Social Science Research, 3(6), 82-87.
Udovita, V. (2020). Conceptual review on impact of leadership style on employee
performance. International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 9(9), 16- 23.
Wase, D. M., & Jeyaprabha, R. B. (2022). The influence of leadership styles on employees performance in Bole sub city education sectors Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. International Journal of Innovative Research in Engineering and Management, 9(4), 109-113. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.55524/ijirem.2022.9.4.18
Weber, E., Buttgen, M., & Bartsch, S. (2022). How to take employees on a digital transformation journey: an experimental study of complementary leadership behaviors in managing organizational change. Journal of Business Research, 143(1), 225-238. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.01.036
Yousef, D. (2000). Organizational commitment: a mediator of the relationships of leadership behavior with job satisfaction and performance in a non-western country. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 15(1), 6-24.
Yusuf-Habeeb, M., & Yusuf, I. (2017). Effects of leadership style on employee performance in Nigerian Universities. Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 17(7), 26-33.
Zamin, S. A., & Hussin, F. (2021). Effect of leadership styles and work climate on job
performance: a mediating role of organizational commitment among university lecturers in Pakistan. Ilkogretim Online, 20(2), 24-31.
International Journal of Research (IJR) 