Journal of Educational Sciences & Research Spring 2016, Volume 3 No.1 http://uos.edu.pk/
Leadership Practices and Organizational Commitment of University Teachers and Head of Departments 1
Riffat un Nisa Awan, 2Umaira Yasmin
[email protected]
Abstract The objective of the study was to investigate the relationship between leadership practices of department heads and organizational commitment of University teachers. The study has investigated the difference of leadership practices and organizational commitment with respect to demographic variables. Data were collected from 180 teachers and 37 head of departments from three public universities of the Punjab i.e. University of Education, University of Sargodha and Lahore College for Women University. Pearson correlation, independent sample t-test and one way ANOVA were used to answer the questions. Correlation analysis indicated that department heads engaged frequently in ‘Enabling others to act’ while less engaged ‘challenging the Process’. Organizational commitment level of department heads found to be higher than university teachers. Research study has identified significant differences only for one leadership practice i.e. ‘Modeling the Way’ based on years of employment. There were significant differences between ‘Challenging the Process’, ‘Inspiring a Shared Vision’ and ‘Modeling the Way’ based on educational qualification. The five leadership practices were significantly correlated with three forms of organizational commitment. There were no significant differences between organizational commitment of teachers based on demographic variables except for continuance commitment regarding current position and years of employment. Keywords: Leadership practices, organizational commitment Introduction Leadership has its roots from the time of
matters round the clock. We have the holy
creation of man and his first step on the
personality of HAZRAT MOHAMMAD
earth. ALLAH ALMIGHTY sent his holy
ﷺas the best leader in every field of life.
prophets to lead the people how to spend life
So, leadership is not restricted to one area or
in true sense and how to deal with daily
field although it is required in every walk of
1, 2.
University of Sargodha, Pakistan
Riffat & Umaira life. Leadership is an extensively researched
organizational direction. He also identified
area. Inquiry about leadership has become
that
fruitful with the evolution of social sciences
significance than specific skills, knowledge,
during 20
th
leadership
capability
hold
more
century. As a result many
or work experience (Collins, 2001). Kouzes
approaches to leadership have evolved
& Posner (2001) after in-depth research on
Leadership is one of the most important
best leadership practices used by people in
elements at school, college, and university.
organizations to accomplish extraordinary
Many researchers tried to visualize its real
things identified five Leadership practices.
pictures by exploring different distinct traits,
Modeling the Way
behaviors and specific characteristics of
Inspiring a Shared Vision
successful
and
Challenging the Process
organizations. Hellriegel, Jackson & Slocum
Enabling Others to Act
leaders
of
institutions,
(2005) defined leadership as “an influence
Encouraging the Heart (Kouzes &
relationship among leaders and followers
Posner,
who struggle for real change and outcomes
2001;2002;2003;2007;2010)
that reflect their shared purposes (p. 418)”.
Modeling the Way:
According to Kouzes and Posner (2002)
In leadership practice “Modeling the
leading is an activity and a relationship that
Way” a leaders has set up principles to
invigorate
treat the people (colleague, customers
an
development
organization and
and
a
etc.) and to achieve the desired the goals.
community. Managers and their leadership
Standards of excellence were created and
styles
are
organizational
improvement
bring to
crucial
for
achieving
the leader the set personal example to be
goals
and
objectives
followed (Kouzes
(Mclaggan, Bezuidenhout, & Botha 2013).
&
Posner, 2001;
Rowland, 2008).
There is a shift of paradigm in organizations
Inspiring a Shared Vision:
as Stone & Patterson (2005) stated that with
In this leadership practice leaders inspire a
the passage of time organizations have
shared vision by visualizing the future
changed
to
and enlisting others in common vision.
leadership
Leaders have a desire to change the things
styles where people are encouraged and
ever done, to do something better than
empowered (Stone & Patterson, 2005).
today and create something that no one
Strong
has
from
democratic,
authoritarian
transformational
organizations
place
style
a
greater
emphasis on hiring the right people than on
ever
produced.
Through
their
charisma and quiet influence, leaders 11
Journal of educational Sciences & Research Spring 2016, Volume 3 No.1
Leadership Practices and Organizational Commitment of University Teachers and Head of Departments
enlist others in their dreams (Kouzes &
In organizations accomplishing
Posner, 2001; 2003; Rowland, 2008)
extraordinary thing is a hard work. Leaders have to identify contributions to
Challenging the Process: A leader changes the status quo by
keep determination and hope alive.
looking for innovative ways to improve
Leaders should give a part in reward for
the organization. They take failures and
their efforts to people. They make people
mistakes that come while taking risk as a
feel like heroes (Kouzes & Posner, 2001).
learning opportunity as well as way to
In fact success of any nation, educational or
success .They learn from their failures as
non
well as their successes (Kouzes & Posner,
powerful
2001; 2002; Rowland, 2008). They also
commitment
create a climate to challenge the process
organizations
where they and others consider free to
Srithongrung
risk,
organizational commitment is a person’s
experiment,
fail,
and
change
(Rozeboom, 2008). Enabling Others to Act:
educational
organization
leadership. is
also
to
a
challenge its
(2011)
and
organizational
goals
in
Organizational
retain
identification
lies
employees.
stated
that
attachment due
for
to
to
internal
In this leadership practices leaders help
motivation stimulated by their leader. Meyer
create trusting climate because they know
and
that trust is at heart of cooperation. They
components of organizational commitment.
understand that mutual respect is what
Affective commitment:
endures extraordinary efforts. A leader’s
Affective commitment means to employee’s
expectations
he/she
emotional attachment to, identification with
encourage their people that they can do
and involvement in organization (Allen &
more than expectations. When leadership
Meyer,
is based on relationship people take risk,
commitment
make remarkable changes based on trust
formation of emotional attachment (2)
and confidence that a leader gives them.
identification with (3) and desire to maintain
A leader turns their followers into leaders
association with organization.
themselves by that relationship (Kouzes
Continuance Commitment:
exceed
when
Allen
(1991)
1990).
to
In
entails
Allen
identified
this
way
three
&
three
affective
aspects:
Meyer
(1)
& Posner 2002; 2007; Rowland, 2008).
According
(1990)
Encouraging the Heart:
continuance commitment is psychological attachment of an employee with organization 12
Journal of educational Sciences & Research Spring 2016, Volume 3 No.1
Riffat & Umaira in which employee is aware about the cost
because leadership is a vital factor that
associated with leaving the organization.
facilitates organizations to increase the
Therefore lack of employment alternatives
efficiency and achieve organizational goals
increases the price associated with quitting
and sustain competitive advantage because
the
organizations
organization
that
increases
the
achieve
and
sustain
continuance commitment of employee (Allen
competitive advantage through group of
& Meyer, 1990).
committed employees (Keskes, 2014).This is
Normative Commitment:
evident that leadership and commitment
In normative commitment employee has
have strong relationship
developed an obligation with organization
For any educational organization there is an
to continue employment (Laka-Mathebula,
ongoing challenge to have an effective
2004).
leadership that may raise it to high column
“Employees
with
a
strong
affective
of success.
So, there is daring need of
commitment stay because they want to,
research study in this area. Research studies
those with strong normative commitment
had (Srithongrung, 2011; Lo, etal, 2010)
stay because they feel they ought to, and
identified relationship between leadership
those with strong continuance commitment
(transformation
stay because they have to do (Meyer &
organizational commitment. Many research
Allen, 2004, p.2)”.
studies ( Nguni, Sleegers& Denessen, 2006;
and
transactional)
According to Juliet & Murugan (2014)
Srithongrung,
commitment is not just bound to submissive
Zaepernick-Rothe, 2010; Lo, etal, 2010;
devotion
Heroldetal,
2008)
between
leadership
(transformation
and
organizational
an
to an organization but it involves
energetic
attachment
to
with
the
2011;
Korek
identify
,Felfe
and
&
relationship
organization. Committed employees apply
transactional)
higher levels of effort that would contribute
commitment.
to effectiveness of organization and it is
concentrated on finding direct relationship
critical factor to organization success (Laka-
between measures of leadership and various
Mathebula,
Organizational
indicators of performance but in other
commitment is also an important factor to
research studies other certain variables
determine
identified as moderating the leadership
2004). the
organization’s
success
These
research
relationship
and
studies
Jassawalla & Sashittal (2003).
performance
there
is
Leadership and organizational commitment
insufficient focus on these intervening
both are very vital for an organization
variables in previous studies. So, it is 13
Journal of educational Sciences & Research Spring 2016, Volume 3 No.1
Leadership Practices and Organizational Commitment of University Teachers and Head of Departments important to identify and incorporate these
research regarding leadership practices and
variables in future studies.( Bass et al., 2003)
organizational commitment especially at
Jing &Avery (2008) tried to fill the above
higher
mentioned gap and has identified
three
Pakistan. So, the current study aimed at
moderating variables trust, organizational
exploring leadership practices used by
climate and vision that moderate the
University department heads, level of their
leadership relations. Podsakoff et al also
organizational
(1990) proved trust as mediator variable
between
between
organizational commitment, differences of
leadership
and
organizational
education
level
particularly
commitment,
leadership
relationship
practices
leadership
Cummings and Bromily (1996) defined trust
commitment with respect to demographic
as an individual’s believe or common
variables
believe among group of persons that
qualification, gender of chairperson and
another individual or group make good
years
efforts to behave in harmony with any
University).
commitments, is honest and does not take
Objectives of the study were to:
opportunities
are
available.
(age,
of
and
and
citizenship behavior.
too much advantage of another even when
practices
in
organizational
gender,
experience
educational
within
current
1. explore the prevailing leadership
Leadership
practices
behavior affects employees trust in the
among
University
department heads.
organization (Pillai et al, 1999). Many
2. examine level of organizational
empirical researches has highlighted that
commitment of University teachers
leadership and trust (Pillai et al, 1999;
and Heads.
Barling et al, 2000; Arnold, et al 2001) were positively
related.
Also
trust
3. investigate leadership practices of
and
department
heads
organizational commitment (Aryee, et al
organizational
2002; Perry, 2004), and leadership and
university teachers with respect to
organizational commitment (Bycio, 1995;
demographic variables
Lee, 2005) were positively correlated.
commitment
and of
4. find out the relationship between
For any educational organization there is an
leadership practices of HOD’s and
ongoing challenge to have an effective
organizational
leadership that may raise it to high column
teachers.
of success.
So, there is daring need of
commitment
of
Method
research study in this area. There was little 14 Journal of educational Sciences & Research Spring 2016, Volume 3 No.1
Riffat & Umaira It was correlation research and data was
faculty
of
Social
Sciences
of
three
collected from 180 teachers (lecturers,
Universities i.e. University of Education,
assistant professors, associate professors and
University of Sargodha, & Lahore College
professors) & 37 heads of departments from
for Women University (LCWU).
Research model: Independent Variable
Dependent Variable
Leadership Practices Organizational commitment 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Challenging the Process Encouraging the heart Enabling others to act Modeling the way Inspiring a shared vision
1. 2. 3.
Affective commitment Normative commitment Continuance commitment
Instrumentation Questionnaire for the study comprised of
Model)
two instruments i.e. Kouzes & Posner
(Meyer & Allen, 1993, 2004) was used to
(2002)
measure organizational commitment. TCM
30
item
Leadership
Inventory
comprised
practices,
assessing
Practices
employee
of
leadership
measures
three
five
leadership
commitment;
commitment
forms
affective,
of
survey
employee
normative
and
practices; (a) modeling the way; (b)
continuance commitment (Meyer & Allen,
Inspiring a shared vision; (c) Enabling
2004).
others to act; (d) Encouraging the Heart ;
Data Analysis
(e) Challenging the process on a five point
Researcher
scale i.e.(1) Rarely or seldom; (2) once in a
correlation, independent sample t-test, One-
while; (3) sometimes; (4) fairly often; (5)
Way ANOVA to analyze the data by the use
very frequently. TCM (Three Component
of SPSS version 16.0.
used
Frequencies,
Pearson
Table 1: Mean and Standard Deviation of Leadership Practices Inventory (N=180) Leadership Practices
Mean
Std. Deviation
Challenges the process
19.20
5.497
Inspiring a shared vision
19.89
5.358
Enabling others to act
21.06
5.478
Modeling the way
20.61
5.488
Encouraging the heart
20.72
5.747
15 Journal of educational Sciences & Research Spring 2016, Volume 3 No.1
Leadership Practices and Organizational Commitment of University Teachers and Head of Departments Data in the table showed that mean score of leadership practices as perceived by the teachers “Enabling others to act” was perceived to be most frequently used leadership practice by department heads (M=21.06, SD=5.478) .While encouraging the heart (M=20.72, SD=5.747), Modeling the way (M=20.61, SD=5.488) and inspiring a shared vision (M=19.89, SD=5.358) were moderately used leadership practices. However Challenging the process (M=19.20, SD=5.497) is least used leadership practice among department heads. Table 2: Mean & Standard Deviation of Organizational Commitment of Teachers and Heads (Teachers=180, Heads=37) Organizational commitment
Mean
Standard Deviation
Teacher
Head
Teacher
Head
Affective commitment
22.10
25.29
5.20
2.98
Continuance commitment
19.71
23.75
4.00
2.78
Normative commitment
21.22
25.35
4.22
2.48
It was evident from data that mean value for affective commitment was high (M=22.10) for teachers while continuance commitment was ranked as lowest (M=19.71).Whereas heads’ affective and normative commitment were high as compare to continuance commitment (M=23.75). Table 3: Pearson r, of Leadership Practices & Affective, Continuance and Normative commitment of teachers (N=180) Leadership Practice Challenging the Process Inspiring a Shared Vision Enabling others to Act Modeling the Way Encouraging the Heart
Commitment scores Affective Commitment
Normative Commitment
Continuance Commitment
.367** .338** .451** .377** .382**
.319** .353** .254** .271** .256**
.363** .342** .391** .357** .324**
** 0.01 level of significant.
Data in the above table revealed a significant positive correlation between all five leadership practices and three forms of organizational commitment. Table 4: Gender Difference in Leadership Practices of Department Heads (N=37) Challenging the Process Inspiring a Shared Vision Enabling others to Act Modeling the Way Encouraging the Heart
Gender Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female
N 23 14 23 14 23 14 23 14 23 14
Mean 20.48 19.57 25.22 25.22 25.04 26.21 25.52 25.43 25.22 25.57
SD 2.45 3.20 2.66 2.66 2.46 2.20 2.81 2.44 2.61 1.80
t .958
Df 35
Sig. .345
1.217
35
.232
-1.447
35
.157
.103
35
.919
-.442
35
.661
16 Journal of educational Sciences & Research Spring 2016, Volume 3 No.1
Riffat & Umaira Table showed the results for gender differences that exist in the use of leadership practices by university department heads. The t-test indicated that difference between two groups was not statistically significant. So, the results showed that male and female HOD’s equally practice each leadership practice. Table 5: One-Way ANOVA of AGE and Leadership Practices of Department Heads (N=37) Variable Challenging the Process Inspiring a Shared Vision Enabling others to Act
Modeling the Way
Encouraging the Heart
Between Groups Within Groups Total Between Groups Within Groups Total Between Groups Within Groups Total Between Groups Within Groups Total Between Groups Within Groups Total
Sum of Squares 17.908 262.417 280.324 33.676 214.000 247.676 2.889 208.354 211.243 24.493 226.750 251.243 13.328 183.104 196.432
Df 3 33 36 3 33 36 3 33 36 3 33 36 3 33 36
Mean Square 5.969 7.952
F
Sig.
.751
.530
11.225 6.485
1.731
.180
.963 6.314
.153
.927
8.164 6.871
1.188
.329
4.443 5.549
.801
.502
Data in the table revealed that there were no significant differences between the groups in the use of leadership practices (p>.05). So it can be concluded that the leadership practices of HOD’s were not dependent on their Age. Table 6: One way ANOVA of Educational Qualification and Leadership Practices of department Heads (N=37) Variable Challenging the Process
Between Groups Within Groups Total Inspiring a Shared Between Groups Vision Within Groups Total Enabling others to Between Groups Act Within Groups Total Modeling the Way Between Groups Within Groups Total Encouraging the Between Groups Heart Within Groups Total
Sum of Squares 48.458 231.867 280.324 42.576 205.100 247.676 2.977 208.267 211.243 62.977 188.267 251.243 22.932 173.500 196.432
df 2 34 36 2 34 36 2 34 36 2 34 36 2 34 36
Mean Square F 24.229 3.553 6.820
Sig. .040
21.288 6.032
3.529
.040
1.488 6.125
.243
.786
31.488 5.537
5.687
.007
11.466 5.103
2.247
.121
Statistics in the table indicated that there were significant differences between the groups in the use of only three leadership practices “Challenging the Process”, F (2, 34) =3.553, 17 Journal of educational Sciences & Research Spring 2016, Volume 3 No.1
Leadership Practices and Organizational Commitment of University Teachers and Head of Departments p=.040(p
