headteachers' leadership styles and teachers' …

HEADTEACHERS' LEADERSHIP STYLES AND TEACHERS' ATTITUDE TO WORK

IN CALABAR MUNICIPALITY OF CROSS RIVER STATE, NIGERIA

BY

IMONA, MBANG EKONG (Ph.D)FACULTY OF EDUCATION

CROSS RIVER UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY(CRUTECH), [email protected]

08033831270

AND

UDEY, FRANCA UMBUZI (Ph.D)FACULTY OF EDUCATION,

CROSS RIVER UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY(CRUTECH), [email protected]

08030883518

AbstractThis study examined the relationship between the headteachers' leadership styles and teachers' attitude to work in Calabar Municipality of Cross River State, Nigeria. Specifically, the study examined the relationship between the autocratic, democratic and the laissez-faire leadership styles with teachers' attitude to work. Three null hypotheses were stated and a number of literature reviewed based on the variables used. The descriptive design was adopted for the study and a total of 200 participants were used. A 20 item researcher's made questionnaire name Leadership Styles and Teachers' Attitude to Work (LSTAW) was the instrument used for data collection. The statistical technique used in testing the data was Independent t-test Analysis. The hypotheses were tested at .05 level of significance with 198 degree of freedom. The results of the analyses showed a significant relationship between the headteachers' leadership styles and teachers' attitude to work. Based on the findings, it was concluded that methods of leadership adopted by the headteachers significantly relate with teacher's attitude to work. Therefore, it was recommended that the democratic leadership style which is more flexible and friendly should be adopted by the headteachers. Autocratic or dictatorship method of administration should be avoided so as to create a suitable atmosphere in the school system for effective attitude to work by the teachers.

INTRODUCTIONA leader is a person who asserts the influence and provides direction and energy

to a group. Franzoi (2000) asserts that a leader is someone who initiates action, gives orders, doles out rewards and punishments, settles disputes between fellow members and pushes and pulls the group towards organizational goals. In some organisations,

35

CONTEMPORARY JOURNAL OF ARTS AND SCIENCE . VOL.4 NO. 2 . PUBLISHED ONLINE NOVEMBER, 2015

COPYRIGHT © 2015 COJAS/RIN

there is only one leader, while in some, more than one leader may be found. In the primary school system in Nigeria, the public primary schools have more than one leader. The headteacher is normally assisted by the Assistant headteacher (Udey, 2015).

A good leader can help a group to pursue its goals, while a bad one can impede a group's functioning (Chamers, Watson & May, 2000). Effective leaders are found to be agreeable, emotionally stable, extroversive and conscientious. Other qualities of effective leaders includes being intelligent, success oriented flexible and having confident in their ability to lead. However people can be effective in another situation (Chemers, 2000).

Leadership involves management of flow of information, decision taking, brevity, positive exercise of authority and team spirit to reach a prescribed target (Asamonye, Ekeada & Osuagwu, 2005). Madumere (2013) points out that to lead is to show the way and to guide people to a destination. Therefore leadership entails vision, action, commitment and tolerance. There are numerous techniques that a person can use to persuade a group of people in an organisation to achieve their set goals.

An attitude is a particular feeling about something. It therefore involves a tendency to behave in a certain way in situations which involve that something, whether person, idea or object. It is partially rational and partially emotional, is acquired, not inherent, in an individual (Sorenson, 1977). However, Mangal (2012) defines attitude as a determining acquired tendency which prepares a person to behave in a certain way towards a specific object or a class of objects subject to the conditions prevailing in the environment. In this case, the headteachers' leadership styles may be the prevailing conditions in the school system which may lead the teachers to behave in a certain way. This is because attitude could be positive or negative (Frenzoi, 2000).

Consistently, leadership research focused on two main types of leaders which are task oriented leaders and person oriented leaders (Bernstein, Penner, Clarke-Stewart & Roy, 2006; Frenzoi, 2000). Task oriented leaders are those leaders who provide close supervision, lead by directives, and generally discourage group discussion. Their style may not endear them to group members. Person oriented leaders provide loose supervision, ask for group members ideas and are generally concerned with subordinates' feelings. They are usually liked by the group even when they must discipline someone (Taylor, Peplau & Sears, 2000).

In addition to the two leadership styles, researchers have identified two other leadership styles. They are transactional leaders and transformational or charismatic leaders (Eagly, Johannesen-Schimidt & van Engen, 2003). Transactional leaders are those whose leadership behaviour depends on the action of those they lead. They reward those who behave as the leader wishes and correct or punish the ones who behave otherwise. Transformational or charismatic leaders concentrate on creating a vision of the group's goals, inspiring others to pursue that vision and giving their followers reasons to respect and admire them.

This paper is focused on some other leadership styles commonly used by authors. They include autocratic or authoritative, democratic or participatory and laissez-faire or free rein. The autocratic or authoritarian style of leadership assumes that all decision making powers are centralised on the leader. Democratic or participative leaders allow shared leadership and promote interests of the members. The laissez-faire

36



or free rein leaders give free hand in decision making and are not bothered about problem solving in the organisation (Asumonye, Ekeada & Osuagwu, 2015).

All these leadership styles and philosophies should be taken as examples and not as for success or failure in leadership. None of these can be employed to the exclusion of all the others. A leader follows one style or another in obedience to the need of a particular situation. A leader follows one style or another in obedience to the need of a particular situation. A leader should be well versed in application of all the styles because the dynamics of a situation of the differing characteristics of the subordinates may make it essential for him to vary at times (Spears, 2002).

School administration in Nigeria has suffered several setbacks among which the need for effective leadership assumes a topmost priority (Mgbekem, 2006). Many schools have failed in its functions in meeting the goals of education in Nigeria as contained in the national Policy on Education. This is because the teachers as well as other staff have not been as motivated as to be putting up optimum efforts in their workplace.

Members of groups or organisation tend to hate the autocratic leaders, have affection and appreciation for democratic leaders and tend to lose respect for the laissez-faire leaders. A leader may apply any of them as a situation arises.

Denga (1990) observes that autocratic leadership style is one in which a high degree of direction and dictation from the leader are evidenced, with little or no participation or control on the part of the subordinates. Autocratic leaders believe that his subordinates are lazy and so should be made to work. The achievement of the organisation objectives is his primary concern.

According to Olagobye (2004) the following are facts associated with autocratic leadership style:

- Group members are denied due respect.

- Little or no consideration is accorded members' welfare as task performance is emphasized over every other thing.

- Group members are rarely involved in decision making, instead decisions are made exclusively by the leader and imposed in subordinates.

- Leadership responsibilities are never shared or delegated, rather tasks are imposed on group members.

- Individual/group initiatives and creativity are discouraged as the leader always gives orders and commands which he expects to be carried out automatically.

- Group members are distrusted and under constant suspicion by the leader.

Denga (1986) opines that an autocratic leader is feared rather than being respected. Hogan and Kaiser (2008) posit that autocratic leaders exhibit total lack of communication regarding what is going on in the organisation. They suffer from personal insecurity and inferiority complex and so behave in a defensive manner.A headteacher who uses the autocratic leadership style tends not to have total control over his teachers. Teachers fear him and do what he wants when is around. If he is not around, the teachers exhibit lack of commitment to work and behave in a nonchalant

37



manner. This can lead to nothing but poor attitude to work.Okon (2004) stipulates that democratic leadership style encourages subordinates involvement in management as the leader inspires and motivates his workers. He further asserts that people who work with democratic leaders easily accept responsibility and show commitment to work. They learn on their jobs and need no external control and threats to perform their duties.Mamonia and Gankar (2007) equally observed that a democratic leader ensures that decisions are taken after consultation with the subordinates and after their participation in the decision making process. He believes that their cooperation in the attainment of organisational goals can be enlisted only if they are committed to the organisation, and that commitment can ensured only by an honest and open communication of ideas with them and by the development of a team spirit.Obviously, when teachers feel that their ideas are important and being made use of, they feel considerably committed to their work. They derive job satisfaction in the accomplishment of their tasks. Based on this, they can take more responsibility than their job descriptions call for because of the pleasure they derive in teaching work.Mbipom (2000) describes a democratic leader as a person who achieves high productivity through the participation of his staff. He appreciates the spirit of team work and gives his subordinates some level of freedom. People's basic needs are satisfied.This means that the headteacher who adopts democratic leadership style is sensitive to the needs of his subordinates and utilize group discussion and meeting as an avenue for psychological relief. The staff are more relaxed and committed to the attainment of educational goals thereby strengthening the administrative effectiveness of the school headteacher and a positive attitude to work by the teachers.Laissez-faire is a French expression which literally means let people do what they like. Davis (1987) maintains that a laissez-faire leader avoids power and responsibility. He depends largely on the group to establish its own goals and work out its own problem. Geb (1998) observes that a laissez-faire leader is neither here nor there and he vacillates between two possible decisions. He is usually indifferent to happenings.Nwankwo and Jude (1981) point out that a laissez-faire leader takes a passive stance towards the problem of the group or the organisation. The leader is tolerant and the subordinates are free to do what they like. According to these researchers, the leader in this respect does not have authority because he is just a symbolic leader. In such an organisation, there is no hierarchy of authority, no defined code of regulations and so there is no way to determine whether someone is right or wrong in a given activity.A laissez-faire headteacher is one who consciously through his inefficiency and extreme care-free attitude transfer his powers into the hands of the teachers and other members of staff while retaining his status as a headteacher. This means that although the headteacher is present as a figure head, he does not bother about the attainment of group goals.In the school system, the headteacher may adopt any of the leadership styles to work with the teachers. Zinck (1992) points out that many of the headteachers do no adopt the appropriate leadership styles. This may affect the teachers' attitude to work. A teacher who does not obtain what he expects from the headteacher may be unhappy and change

38



his attitude to work.The need for effective interaction between the teachers and the headteacher in a school system cannot be overemphasized when one considers the fact that no school problem can be treated effectively without the involvement of all concerned. This study therefore seeks to investigate the relationship between the headteachers leadership styles and teachers attitude to work in Calabar Municipality of Cross River State, Nigeria.

Purpose of the studyThe main purpose of this study is to investigate the headteachers' leadership

styles and teachers' attitude to work in Calabar Municipality of Cross River State, Nigeria. Specifically therefore, the study seeks to find out if:

(1) Autocratic leadership style has any influence on the teachers' attitude to work.

(2) Democratic leadership style has any influence on the teachers' attitude to work.

(3) There exists any influence of the laissez-faire leadership style on teachers' attitude to work.

Research hypothesesThe following hypotheses stated in null form were meant to guide the study to a

conclusive end.(1) Autocratic leadership style has no significant influence on the teachers'

attitude to work.(2) Democratic leadership style has no significant influence on teachers'

attitude to work.(3) Laissez-faire leadership style has no significant influence on teachers'

attitude to work.

MethodologyThe research design adopted for this study was the survey-inferential design.

Survey inferential design is the study of a large population through a representative sample in order to find out and describe existing phenomena in the population. This method creates chance or room for equal representation of findings and accurately measure the characteristics which the researcher wishes to analyze.A total of 200 respondents were randomly selected for the study.

InstrumentationThe instrument used for data collection was a questionnaire titled Leadership

Styles and Teachers' Attitude to Work Questionnaire (LSTAWQ), constructed by the researcher. It was made up of 20 items to measure each of the variables. The instrument had a four-point Likert scale ranging from Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree.

Reliability of the instrumentThe reliability of the instrument was made possible through a test re-test method

39



which involved the use of 20 respondents drawn from the population which was not part of the sample. The reliability coefficient ranged from 0.74 to 0.87.

Data analysisThe statistical tool used to test the data for the study was Independent t-test Analysis.

ResultsEach of the hypotheses was tested at .05 level of significance. The results obtained are shown in the section that follows.

Hypothesis 1Autocratic leadership style has no significant influence on teachers' attitude to work.

Table 1Independent t-test Analysis of the influence of the autocratic leadership style and teachers' attitude to work.(N = 200)

Significant at .05, critical t = 3.944, df = 395

The results of the analysis in Table I show that the calculated t value of 7.24 is greater than the critical t-value of 3.944 at .05 level of significance with 395 degree of freedom. The null hypothesis is thus rejected. The result therefore implies that autocratic leadership style has a significant influence on teachers' attitude to work.

Hypothesis 2Democratic leadership style has no significant influence on teachers' attitude to work.

Table 2Independent t-test Analysis of the influence of the democratic leadership style and teachers' attitude to work.(N = 200)

Variables �& �"

ഥ

�� −��

Autocratic leadership style

200 172 36.32

7.24 Teachers’ attitude to work

200 156 14.92

Variables �& �"

ഥ �� −��

Democratic leadership style

200

172

29.24

4.56

Teachers’ attitude to work

200 160 30.56


40



The result of the analysis in Table 2 reveals that the calculated t-value of 4.56 is greater than the critical t-value of 3.944 at .05 level of significance with 395 degree of freedom. The null hypothesis is thus rejected. The result implies that democratic leadership style significantly influences teachers' attitude to work.

Hypothesis 3Laissez-faire leadership style has no significant influence on teachers' attitude to work.

Table 3Independent t-test Analysis of the influence of the laissez-faire leadership style and teachers' attitude to work.(N = 200)


The result of the analysis in Table 3 shows that the calculated t-value of 10.96 is greater than the critical t-value of 3.944 at .05 level of significance with 395 degree of freedom. The null hypothesis is therefore rejected. This implies that the laissez-faire leadership style significantly influence teachers' attitude to work.

Discussion of findingsThe result of hypothesis one revealed that autocratic leadership style

significantly influence teachers' attitude to work. The finding is in line with Hogan & Kaiser (2008) who posit that autocratic leaders exhibit total lack of communication regarding what is going to in the organisation. They suffer from personal insecurity and inferiority complex and so, behave in a defensive manner.

Denga (1990) observes that autocratic leadership style is one in which a high degree of direction and dictation from the leader are evidenced, with little or no participation or control on the part of the subordinates. Autocratic leaders believe that their subordinates are lazy and so should be made to work. The achievement of the organisation is their primary concern.

A headteacher who uses the autocratic leadership style tends not to have total control over his teachers. Teachers fear him and show commitment to work when he is around. If he is not around, the teachers exhibit lack of commitment to work and behave in a nonchalant manner. This can lead to nothing but poor attitude to work.

The result of hypothesis two revealed that democratic leadership style significantly influence teachers' attitude to work. The result of this hypothesis in line with the assertion of Asumonye, Ekeada and Osuagwu (2015) who stated that

Variables �& �"

ഥ

�� −��

Laissez-faire leadership style

200 58 11.24

10.96 Teachers’ attitude to work

200 150 9.3

41



democratic leaders allow shared leadership and promote interests of the members. Okon (2004) stipulated that democratic leadership style encourages subordinates involvement in management as the leader inspires and motivates his workers. He further asserted that people who work with democratic leaders easily accept responsibility and show commitment to work.

Mamoria and Gankar (2007) equally observed that a democratic leader ensures that decisions are taken after due consultation with the subordinates and after their participation in the decision making process. He believes that their cooperation in the attainment of organisational goals can be enlisted only if they are committed to the organisation, and that commitment can be ensured only by an honest and open communication of ideas with them and by the development of a team spirit.

Obviously, when a teacher feels that his ideas are important and is being made use of, he will definitely feel a sense of belonging and will be more committed to his work.

The headteacher who adopts a democratic leadership style is sensitive to the needs of his subordinates and utilize group discussion and meeting as an avenue for psychological relief. The staff are more relaxed and committed to the attainment of educational goals, thereby strengthening the administrative effectiveness of the school headteacher and a positive attitude to work by the teachers.

The findings of third hypothesis indicated that laissez-faire leadership style has a significant influence on teachers' attitude to work. The findings of this result are in line with Geb (1998) who observed that a laissez-faire leader is neither here nor there. He shuttles between two possible decisions and is usually indifferent to happenings.

Nwankwo and Jude (1981) noted that in laissez-faire leadership style, the leader takes passive stance towards the problems of the group/organisation. They further described such a leader to be a symbolic one who does not have authority over his subordinates. There is no hierarchy of authority, no defined code of regulation and there is no way to determine whether someone is right or wrong in performing a given activity. The group is like a sheep without a shepherd.

From the findings of this analysis, the headteachers who adopt laissez-faire method of leadership allow their teachers to operate the way they like in the school. Punctuality to work is not emphasized. Staff adopt nonchalant attitude towards work. This will invariably affect the productivity level of the school system.

Conclusion and recommendationsBased on the findings of this study, it was concluded that headteachers'

leadership styles have significant influence on teachers' attitude to work. The following recommendations were made based on the findings.

1. Headteachers should avoid being autocratic in their leadership style because this will create unfavourable atmosphere in the school and eventually lead to teachers' poor attitude to work. Dictatorship is not the best way of moving an organisation forward.

2. To create a suitable atmosphere in the school environment, the headteacher should adopt a democratic leadership style in the school administration where

42



the teachers are involved in the day to day running of the school.3. The laissez-faire method of leadership brings about inconsistency in decision

making and lack of commitment to work by the teachers and so the headteacher should avoid it.

4. To achieve the set goals in the school environment the headteacher may be strict at sometimes and also be flexible at other times so as to make the working environment more friendly.

References

Asamonye, C. C., Ekeada, C., & Osuagwu, L. (2015). Leadership and management of resources in early childhood education. African Education Indices, 8, (1), 285-297.

thBernstein, D. A., Penner, L. A., Clarke-Stewart, A. & Roy, E. J. (2006). Psychology (7

ed.). New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Chemers, M. M. (2000). Leadership research and theory. A functional Integration Group Dynamics, 4, 27-43.

Chemers, M. M., Watson, C. B., & May, S. T. (2000). Dispositional affect and leadership effectiveness: A comparison of self-esteem, optimism and efficacy. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 267-277.

Davis, K. (1987). Human behaviour at work: Organisation behaviour. New Delhi: McGraw Hill Inc Limited.

Denga, D. I. (1986). Managerial psychology in work organisation. Lagos: Orit Egwu Limited.

Denga, D. I. (1990). Managerial psychology in Business and Educational Administration. Calabar: Rapid Educational Publishers.

Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & van Engen, M. L. (2003). Transformational transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta analysis comparing women and men. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 569-591.

ndFrenzoi, S. L. (2000). Social psychology (2 ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.

Geb, P. (1998). Educational Administration. Enugu: Fourth Dimension.

Hogan, R. & Kaiser, R. (2008). Leadership fellowship and evolution. New York: McGraw Hill.

Madumere, E. (2013). Tenets of true leadership. Owerri: CINORYZ Production.

43



Mamoria, C. B. & Gankar, S. V. (2007). Personnel management. Mumbai: Himalaya Publishing House.

Mangal, S. K. (2012). Essentials of Educational Psychology. New Delhi: PHI Learning Private Limited.

Mbipom, G. & Bassey, U. (2006). Students' perception of educational degradation policy in South Eastern Nigerian Federal Universities. Calabar: University of Calabar Press.

Mbipom, G. (2000). Educational Administration and Planning. Calabar: University of Calabar Press.

Mgbekem, A. (2006). Educational Administration and Planning. Nsukka: Optimal Computer Solutions.

Nwankwo, K. & Jude, T. (1981). Educational Administration and Supervision. AGG material production project. Ilorin: Heinemann Educational Books, Nig. Ltd.

Okon, J. E. (2004). Understanding administrative behaviour in educational organisation. Calabar: Calomanial Publishers.

Olagobye, A. A. (2004). Introduction to educational management in Nigeria. Ibadan: Daily Graphics Nigeria Limited.

Spears, L. G. (2002). Servant leadership for the twenty first century. New York: John Wiley and Sons Inc.

thTaylor, S., Peplau, A., Sears, R. (2000). Social Psychology (10 ed.). Upper Saddle, NJ:

Prentice Hall.

Udey, F. U. (2015). Administration in Primary Education. In D. O. Effiom & E. U. Apebende (Eds.). Perspectives in Childhood Education, 149-162.

Zinck, B. (1992). Teachers working condition. Washington D.C. United States Department of Education.

44



headteachers' leadership styles and teachers' …

Documents