The impact of the leadership of the head of department on administrative Staffs performance in Malaysian Premier Education University

Suzyanty Mohd Shokory

QR Code Link :
Type :	article
Subject :	H Social Sciences
Main Author :	Suzyanty Mohd Shokory
Additional Authors :	Suriani Abdul Hamid Marinah Awang Norlaile Salleh Hudin
Title :	The impact of the leadership of the head of department on administrative Staffs performance in Malaysian Premier Education University

Place of Production :	Tanjong Malim
Publisher :	Fakulti Pengurusan dan Ekonomi
Year of Publication :	2019
Corporate Name :	Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris

Abstract : Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris

The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of the leadership style of the head in department through the three types of leadership styles practiced which were transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership on the performance of administrative staff in one of the premier education universities in Malaysia. In addition, this study also sought to identify which leadership style of the head in department was a more dominant predictor on the performance of the administrative staff when the leadership styles (transformational, transactional and laissez-faire) were analyzed simultaneously. The quantitative approach was utilized in this study. The sample survey method was carried out involving 234 administrative staff as the respondents of the study. The sample was selected by using the simple random sampling technique and the data was collected using questionnaires. The data analysis was conducted using the Statistical Packages for Social Science (SPSS) involving descriptive analysis (frequency and percentage). Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) version 7 software was used to perform multi-level analysis as the nature of the study data involved various levels of individual data nested (groups) in the organization. The analysis showed that transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership of the head in department was a positive significant with the in-role and extra-role performance of the administrative staff when analyzed separately. However, when the transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership of the head in department were analyzed simultaneously, they clearly showed that all these three leadership styles did not influence the in-role performance of the administrative staff. Interestingly in this study, only transformational leadership of the head of department proved a dominant influence on the extra-role performance of administrative staff compared to transactional and laissez-faire leadership. The findings of this study provided empirical evidence that although transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership of head of department could improve the in-role and extra-role performance of the administrative staff, this study proved that transformational leadership of the head of department could move to extra-role performance compared to other leadership styles.

References

1. Ahsan, N., Abdullah, Z., Fie, D.Y.G., & Alam, S. S. (2009). A study of job stress on job satisfaction among university staff in Malaysia : Empirical study. European Journal of Social Sciences, 8(1), 121–131.

2. Avolio, B. J., & Yammarino, F. J. (2002). Transformational and charismatic leadership. The road ahead. Monographs in Leadership and Management. (Vol. 2). St. Louis. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479- 3571(2013)0000005005

3. Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. (2000). Technical report, leader form, rater form and scoring key for the MLQ f\Form 5X-short. Redwood City, CA.

4. Bass, B., & Avolio, B. (1995). Multifactor leadership questionnaire technical report. Redwood City, CA.

5. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.

6. Bass, B., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

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

8. Dumdum, U.R., Lowe, K.B., & Avolio, B. J. (2002). A meta-analysis of transformational and transactional leadership correlates of effectiveness and satisfaction: An update and extension. Transformational and Charismatic Leadership: The Road Ahead, 2(35–66).

9. Eagly, A.C., 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(4), 569–591. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.4.569

10. Egan, R., Sarros, J., & Santora, J. (1995). Putting transactional and transformational leadership into practice. Journal of Leadership Studies, 2(3), 100–123. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/107179199500200309

11. Ejimabo, N. O. (2015). An approach to understanding leadership decision making in organisation. European Scientific Journal, 11(11), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja00032a032

12. Fry, L. W. (2003). Toward a theory of spiritual leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 14(6), 693–727. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.09.001

13. Goodman, S. A., & Svyantek, D. J. (1999). Person- organization fit and contextual performance : Do shared values matter 1, 275, 254–275.

14. Gottfredson, R. K., & Aguinis, H. (2017). Leadership behaviors and follower performance: Deductive and inductive examination of theoretical rationales and underlying mechanisms. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(4), 558–591. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2152

15. Hirtz, P. D., Murray, S. L., & Riordan, C. A. (2007). The effects of leadership on quality. EMJ - Engineering Management Journal, 19(1), 22–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/10429247.2007.11431718

16. Kreft, I.G., & De Leeuw, J. (1998). Introducing multilevel modeling. Sage.

17. Long, C.S., & Thean, L. Y. (2011). Relationship between leadership style, job satisfaction and employees’ turnover intention: A literature review. Research Journal of Business Management, 5, 91–100.

18. Koech P.M., & Namusonge, G.S. (2012). The effect of leadership styles on organizational performance at state corporations in Kenya. International Journal of Business and Commerce, 2(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1109/IECON.2009.5414689

19. Maas, C. J., & Hox, J. (2005). Sufficient sample sizes for multilevel modeling. Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 1, 86–92. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614- 1881.1.3.86

20. Mathieu, J.E., & Taylor, S. R. (2007). A framework for testing meso-mediational relationships in organizational behavior. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 28(2), 141–172.

21. Motowidlo, S. J., & Van Scotter, J. R. (1994). Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(4), 475–480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.4.475

22. Northouse, P. G. (2010). Leadership, theory and practice (5 th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

23. Obiwuru, T., Okwu, A., & Akpa, V. (2011). Effects of leadership style on organizational performance: A survey of selected small scale enterprises in Ikosi-Ketu council development area of Lagos state, Nigeria. Australian Journal of Business and Management Research, 1(7), 100–111.

24. Piccolo, R.F., & Colquitt, J. A. (2006). Transformational leadership and job behaviors: The mediating role of core job characteristics. Academy of Management Journal, 49(2), 327–340.

25. Posdakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (1994). Organizational citizenship behaviors and sales unit effectiveness. Journal of Marketing Research, 31(3), 351–363. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630002600307

26. Raudenbush, S., Bryk, A., & Congdon, R. (2005). HLM: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling (Version 6.04). Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.

27. Raudenbush, S.W., Bryk, A.S., Cheong, Y.F., Congdon, R.,& Du Toit, M. (2011). HLM 5177: Hierarchical linear & nonlinear modeling. Lincolnwood: Scientific Software International, Inc.

28. Raudenbush, S.W., Bryk, A.S., Cheong, Y.F., & Congdon, R. (2004). HLM6.01: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling [software]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.

29. Sabharwal, M., & Corley, E. A. (2009). Faculty job satisfaction across gender and discipline. Social Science Journal, 46(3), 539–556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2009.04.015

30. Tetteh, E. N., & Brenyah, R. S. (2016). Organizational leadership styles and their impact on employees’ job satisfaction: Evidence from the mobile telecommunications sector of Ghana. Global Journal of Human Resource Management, 4(4), 12–24.

31. Thacker, R.A., & Holl, K. B. (2008). The impact of transformational leadership on organizational and leadership effectiveness. Journal of Management Development, 27(7), 708–726. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621710810883616

32. Tyssen, A. K., Wald, A., & Heidenreich, S. (2014). Leadership in the context of temporary organizations: A study on the effects of transactional and transformational leadership on followers’ commitment in projects. Project Management Journal, 21(3), 376–393. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051813502086

33. Walumbwa, F. O., & Hartnell, C. A. (2011). Understanding transformational leadership-employee performance links: The role of relational identification and self-efficacy. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 84(1), 153–172. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317910X485818

34. Yammarino, F. J., & Dansereau, F. (2008). Multi-level nature of and multi-level approaches to leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 19(2), 135–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.01.001

35. Yang, L.-R., Wu, K.-S., & Huang, C.-F. (2013). Validation of a model measuring the effect of a project manager’s leadership style on project performance. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 17(2), 271–280. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-013-1489-0

This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials.
You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research.

Back to previous page