my thesis

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

In today's competitive business and academic world, leadership is a very significant phenomenon which is used to ensure the best performance out of the employees.  Effective leadership is one of the most important necessities for the success of groups, organizations and institutions in relation to the performance effectiveness of their members or employees.  Till date, many management experts have introduced many leadership styles which help us understand the concept of leadership in a better way (Rampur, 2000).  If the leader or the manager requires the employees to achieve the company's objectives, aims, and targets on time, he has to be equipped with effective leadership skills and maintain a good relationship with the employees and work along with them (Spears, 2000).  Thus, effective leadership style is needed to guarantee the best possible performance from the employees.  Effective leadership styles and performance, however, either in business environment or in the academe, require solid management and concrete implementation for which companies do not often provide adequate training.

Philippines, nowadays, is experiencing a disturbing crisis in leadership and management which result to the deterioration of the performance effectiveness of the employees of organizations.  Many studies have documented that disorientation and misunderstanding lead to chaotic situations which are apparent in all levels in society which start from the national government, the church, the schools, the local government, the families and other organizations.  Organizations are struggling to prove their prominence and strength in terms of leadership to the people they lead.  Nevertheless, it is apparent that they still need to concretize or strengthen their dominance and skills in relation to good governance and plausible leadership. In the absence of these qualities, disturbing decline in terms of the performance effectiveness of the employees or the people in the organization results.  Consequently, there is a need to polish, if not radically change, the leadership and management styles of the organizations which start with the government down to the lowest scale.

As cited by Ivancevich, et al. (2007), each organization has its own distinctive leadership style different from other organizations. This leadership style is either being practiced effectively by people who manage the organization or is present but is not being fully utilized. DMMA College of Southern Philippines is not an exception.  The managers and leaders of the institution, although effective in their own small clusters of organizations, need to concretize their leadership styles to ensure the performance effectiveness of their employees or subordinates.  The researcher believes that the spirit of unity in relation to the realization of the mission, vision and goals of the college is apparent, yet the difference in terms of how each manager employs a specific leadership style varies, thus the performance effectiveness of their subordinates in relation to the organization varies, too.

Determining the best leadership style in relation to the organization is imperative so as to bring about the best performance or to ensure the definitive performance effectiveness from the employees which serves as an effective vehicle for growth and development of the organization.  Within this context, this investigative research is anchored to find out whether the leadership styles practiced by the managers of DMMA College of Southern Philippines serve as the instrument in bringing out the best possible performance expected of their employees or subordinates which is significant in order for the organization to effectively achieve its vision, mission and goals.

Statement of the Problem

          This study investigated the leadership styles of managers and performance effectiveness of employees of DMMA College of Southern Philippines, Davao City.

          This study specifically sought to find answers to the following questions:

1.   What is the profile of the respondents in terms of:

                    a.  Gender;

                    b.  Educational attainment; and

c.   Employment category as to teaching or non-teaching        staff?

          2.   What is the level of the leadership styles ascribed by the managers of the college as perceived by the respondents in terms of:

                    a.  Autocratic leadership;

b.  Charismatic leadership;

c.  Participative leadership;

d.  Servant leadership;

e.  Situational leadership;

f.   Transactional leadership; and

g.  Transformational leadership?

          3.  What is the level of performance effectiveness of the employees in terms of:

                    a.  Employee development;

                    b.  Employee efficiency;

                    c.  Job satisfaction; and

                    d.  Stable policies and programs?

          4.  Is there a significant difference in the performance effectiveness of employees based on their employment category as teaching and non-teaching staff?

          5.  Is there a significant relationship between the leadership styles of the managers and the performance effectiveness of the employees?

          6.  Do the leadership styles of the managers influence the performance effectiveness of the employees?

Objectives of the Study

          This study aimed to determine the leadership styles practiced by the managers of DMMA College of Southern Philippines and the performance effectiveness of the employees.  By conducting the study, the researcher could determine whether the leadership styles practiced by the college are responsive to the needs for efficient management and whether the performance of the employees serves as an effective vehicle to achieve the vision, mission, and goals of the college in continuing its pursuit for growth and development.

Significance of the Study

          The findings of the study would be beneficial to the following:

          DMMA College of Southern Philippines Administration.  This investigative research would serve as a guide in making rational decisions on the aspects of planning, controlling, strategic human resource development and decision making.  This will prompt the administration to qualify leaders not only in terms of educational competency but also in terms of attitudes, behaviours and leadership skills that could affect human resource management.

          College Faculty and Staff.  This investigation would serve as a basis in designing classroom and office programs, activities and management in order to enhance the performance efficiency of the people within the organization and to produce future good leaders in the society.

          College Students and Leaders.  This research would serve as a guide in determining their social responsibility in the institution, specifically in the areas of leadership and performance, not only as clients but also as major contributors to the development of the overall studentry and the institution.

Academicians/Researchers.  This study would serve as a reference material for future studies in determining what leadership styles should be employed by managers that would guarantee the performance effectiveness of the employees in relation to their organizations.

          The Researcher.  This research would serve as her anchor in the performance of her tasks as a faculty member of the college bearing the knowledge of the rightful perspective as to the realization of the institution’s vision, mission, and goals.

Scope and Limitation of the Study

          This study, which was conducted during the second semester of SY 2010-2011, looked into the leadership styles of managers and performance effectiveness of employees of DMMA College of Southern Philippines with the use of questionnaires administered to respondents.  The respondents were the employees of the college which numbered to 134 of whom 91 are teaching staff and 43 are non-teaching staff.

Definition of Terms

          The following terms were defined operationally by the researcher as used in the study:

Autocratic Leadership refers to the type of leadership which can be said to be synonymous to dictatorship where only one person has the authority over the followers or workers.     

Charismatic Leadership refers to the type of leadership wherein the leader gathers followers through dint of personality and charm, rather than any form of external power or authority.

          Employee Development refers to the joint on-going effort on the part of the employees and the administration of the college to upgrade the employees’ knowledge, skills, and capabilities.

          Employee Efficiency refers to the employee characteristic and relates to the speed and accuracy of the employees of the college in doing their assigned tasks.

          Job Satisfaction refers to the sense of inner fulfilment and pride achieved by the employees of the college when performing a particular job or when accomplishing something having importance and value worthy of recognition.

Leadership Styles refers to the various styles of leaderships employed by the managers of the college.

Managers refers to the middle managers and does not include the senior managers.

Non-Teaching Staff refers to the employees or the subordinates who do not hold teaching positions and are assigned in various offices.

Participative Leadership refers to the leadership style that allows employees to give suggestions and take some of the crucial decisions along with their manager.

Performance Effectiveness refers to the measure of the level of the employee development, employee efficiency, employee satisfaction and how stable the policies and programs are in the college.

Servant Leadership refers to the leadership style wherein the primary motivation of the leader is to serve others rather than others serving him and putting the well-being of the followers before other goals. 

Situational Leadership refers to the leadership style that contends that managers must use different leadership styles depending on the situation.

Stable Policies and Programs refers to the principles or rules and regulations of the college to guide the employees in their tasks and decisions to achieve rational outcomes in relation to its mission, vision and goals.

Teaching Staff refers to the employees of the college who hold teaching positions.

Transactional Leadership refers to the leadership style that is based on contingency, in that reward or punishment is contingent upon performance.

Transformational Leadership refers to the leadership style wherein the leader seeks overtly to transform the organization.

Chapter 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

          This chapter presents the related literature and studies, theory base, conceptual framework, and research hypothesis of the study.  It also technically discusses the concepts on leadership, leadership styles, management, school leadership, performance, and factors affecting performance and performance effectiveness.

Related Literature and Studies

          This section presents related literature and studies on the topics of leadership and performance, specifically leadership styles, management, school leadership, performance effectiveness and the factors affecting performance in the organization.  This section also presents a brief background on DMMA College of Southern Philippines.

Leadership.  Leadership is a process by which a person influences others to accomplish an objective and directs the organization in a way that makes it more cohesive and coherent (Northouse, 2007).  Ogbonnia (2007) argued that effective leadership is the ability to successfully integrate and maximize available resources within the internal and external environment for the attainment of organizational or societal goals. Leveriza (1996) contended that leadership contributes significantly to the success or failure of the organization.  The leader has to exert all his efforts and must function according to the expected duties and responsibilities.  Successful leadership involves knowledge in dealing with human behaviour in order to gain support from subordinates.

          Secretan (1998) pointed out that leadership is not so much about technique and methods as it is about opening the heart.  It is about inspiration of oneself and of others.  Great leadership is about human experiences, not processes. It is not a formula or a program, it is a human activity that comes from the heart and considers the heart of others.  It is an attitude, not a routine.  More than anything else today, followers believe they are part of the system, a process that lacks heart. If there is one thing a leader can do to connect with followers at a human, or better still, a spiritual level, it is to become engaged with them fully, to share experiences and emotions, and to set aside the processes of leadership we have learned by rote.

          Sugars (2008) enumerated the principles of leadership namely:  Know yourself and seek self-improvement. In order to know yourself, you have to understand your "be", "know", and "do" attributes. This is possible by continually strengthening your attributes by reading and self-study;  Be technically proficient.  As a leader, you must know your job and have a solid familiarity with your employees' jobs; Seek responsibility and take responsibility for your actions.  Search for ways to guide your organization to new heights.  And when things go wrong, do not blame others; Make sound and timely decisions. Use good problem solving, decision-making, and planning tools;  Set the example. Be  a  good  role  model  for  your employees.   They will believe what they see - not what they hear;  Know your people and look out for their well-being. Know human nature and the importance of sincerely caring for your workers; Keep your people informed. Know how to communicate with your people, seniors, and other key people within the organization; Develop a sense of accountability, ownership and responsibility in your people. These traits will help them carry out their professional responsibilities; Ensure tasks are understood, supervised, and accomplished. Communication is the key to this responsibility; and  Train your people as a team. By developing team spirit, you will be able to employ your organization, department, section, etc. to its fullest capabilities.

Leadership Styles.  There are a number of different approaches, or styles to leadership and management that are based on different assumptions and theories.  The leadership styles which are discussed in this study were developed by psychologists and professionals namely Lewin in 1939 who introduced autocratic or authoritarian leadership and democratic or participative leadership, Greenleaf in 1977 who introduced servant leadership, Hersey and Blanchard in the early 1970s who introduced situational leadership, Weber in 1947 who introduced transactional leadership and charismatic leadership and Burns in 1978 who introduced transformational leadership. 

Autocratic Leadership. Autocratic leadership can be said to be synonymous to dictatorship where only one person has the authority over the followers or workers. Their decision has to be taken as the golden rule and should never be questioned. They plan out everything and order their subordinates to work according to their rules. The autocratic leader has full control of those around him and believes to have the complete authority to treat them as he wants.

Though autocratic leadership style is tyrannical, it has proved to be very efficient during certain situations and conditions. Autocratic leadership works positively during emergency and stressful situations. When such situations arise in a company or organization, most people are confused and are not able to reach a common solution. During such times, having an autocratic leader would be great as he would take the reins in his hand and would direct the workers or employees to move forward. Autocratic leadership may have its benefits; however, in most cases it is seen as something that is undesirable.  Although there have been cases where adopting an autocratic leadership style has led to the success of the company, it is very rare for such leaders to remain popular among the employees and workers (Kartha, 2010).

          Charismatic Leadership.  In charismatic leadership, as cited by Musser (1987), the leader gathers followers through dint of personality and charm, rather than any form of power or authority.  He is the one who provides an environment full of energy and positive reinforcement. Charismatic leaders inspire others and encourage them to be their best. Employees and group members want to impress a charismatic leader, so they work hard and strive to succeed. Under charismatic leadership, group members may view success in relation to their leader. A major problem with charismatic leadership is that group success tends to hinge on the leader. The charismatic leader is the glue that holds a group together. So if the leader steps down or transfers, normally, the group dynamic will fizzle and individual members will lose enthusiasm.

Conger & Kanungo (1998) described five behavioral attributes of charismatic leaders that indicate a more transformational viewpoint: Vision and articulation; Sensitivity to the environment; Sensitivity to member needs; Personal risk taking; and Performing unconventional behaviour.  Musser (1987) notes that charismatic leaders seek to instil both commitment to ideological goals and also devotion to themselves. The extent to which either of these two goals is dominant depends on the underlying motivations and needs of the leader.

          Participative Leadership.  The participative leadership style is also known as the “participative democratic leadership style”.  As cited by Rampur (2000),  it is a very essential factor in today's organizations, which does the job of creating and maintaining healthy relationships between the employees and their leaders. This is probably the best type of corporate leadership style that necessarily allows employees to give suggestions and take some of the crucial decisions, along with their manager. However, the final decision rests on the manager himself. As the name indicates, a participative leader enables the employees to play a major part in any decision-making process, which is needed to make the employees’ performance better. 

According to Cherry (1989), Lewin’s study found that participative leadership is generally the most effective leadership style. Democratic leaders offer guidance to group members, but they also participate in the group and allow input from other group members. Participative leaders encourage group members to participate, thus they feel engaged in the process and are more motivated and creative. 

          Servant Leadership. As cited by the Lincoln Leadership Community website in 2006, Greenleaf, the founder of servant leadership, argued that “True leadership emerges from those whose primary motivation is a deep desire to help others”, which is where servant leadership is anchored. Servant leadership is a very moral position, putting the well-being of the followers before other goals.  The servant leader serves others, rather than others serving the leader.           Servant leadership is a natural model for people working in the public sector. It requires more careful interpretation in the private sector lest the needs of the shareholders and customers and the rigors of market competition are lost.  A challenge to servant leadership is in the assumption of the leader that the followers want to change. It closely aligns with religious morals and has been adopted by several Christian organizations.

Some philosophers claimed that although Greenleaf had never fully defined servant leadership, it can still be defined as a management philosophy which implies a comprehensive view of the quality of people, work and community spirit. It requires a spiritual understanding of identity, mission, vision and environment. As a servant leader is someone who is a servant first, who has responsibility to be in the world, and so he contributes to the well-being of people and community. He places his main focus on people because only content and motivated people are able to reach their targets and fulfil the set expectations (Spears, 2002).

          Situational Leadership.  “Different situations call for different leadership styles”, this is the principle the situational leadership method from Blanchard and Hersey is anchored.  It holds that managers must use different leadership styles depending on the situation.  As cited by 12Manage E-learning Community Management website in 2007, the model allows you to analyze the needs of the situation you are in, and then use the most appropriate leadership style. Depending on employees’ competences in their task areas and commitment to their tasks, your leadership style should vary from one person to another. You may even lead the same person one way sometimes and another way at other times. 

The fundamental underpinning of the situational leadership theory is that there is no single "best" style of leadership.  Effective leadership is task-relevant and that the most successful leaders are those that adapt their leadership style to the maturity or the capacity of the individual or group they are attempting to lead or influence. It also emphasizes that effective leadership varies, not only with the person or group that is being influenced, but it will also depend on the task, job or function that needs to be accomplished.

Transactional Leadership. As cited in the article entitled “Transactional Leadership” published by Changing Minds.org in 2002, transactional leadership is based on contingency, in that reward or punishment is contingent upon performance.  Despite much research that highlights its limitations, transactional leadership is still a popular approach with many managers. The transactional style of leadership was first described by Weber in 1947 and then by Bass in 1981. It focuses on the basic management process of controlling, organizing, and short-term planning. It involves motivating and directing followers primarily through appealing to their own self-interest.

The power of transactional leaders comes from their formal authority and responsibility in the organization. The main goal of the follower is to obey the instructions of the leader. The leader believes in motivating through a system of rewards and punishment. If a subordinate does what is desired, a reward will follow, and if he does not go as per the wishes of the leader, a punishment will follow. Here, the exchange between leader and follower takes place to achieve routine performance goals.

Transformational Leadership. Transformational leadership is defined as a leadership approach that causes change in individuals and social systems. In its ideal form, it creates valuable and positive change in the followers with the end goal of developing followers into leaders. Enacted in its authentic form, transformational leadership enhances the motivation, morale and performance of his followers through a variety of mechanisms. These include connecting the follower's sense of identity and self to the mission and the collective identity of the organization; being a role model for followers that inspires them; challenging followers to take greater ownership for their work, and understanding the strengths and weaknesses of followers, so the leader can align followers with tasks that optimise their performance (Rampur, 2000). Transformational leadership may be found at all levels of the organization: teams, departments, divisions, and organization as a whole. Transformational leaders are visionary, inspiring, daring, risk-takers, and thoughtful thinkers.  As discussed by Bass (1990), while the transformational leader seeks overtly to transform the organization, there is also a tacit promise to followers that they also will be transformed in some way, perhaps to be more like their amazing leader. In some respects, then, the followers are the product of the transformation. One of the traps of transformational leadership, however, is that passion and confidence can easily be mistaken for truth and reality. While it is true that great things have been achieved through enthusiastic leadership, it is also true that many passionate people have led the charge right over the cliff and into a bottomless chasm. Just because someone believes they are right, it does not mean entirely that they are right. 

Finally, transformational leaders, by definition, seek to transform. When the organization does not need transforming and people are happy as they are, then such a leader will be frustrated. Paradoxically, the energy that gets people going can also cause them to give up. Transformational leaders often have large amounts of enthusiasm which, if relentlessly applied, can wear out their followers (Spears, 2002).        

Management.       Management in all business and organizational activities is the act of getting people together to accomplish desired goals and objectives using available resources efficiently and effectively. Management comprises planning, organizing, staffing, leading or directing, and controlling an organization, a group of one or more people or entities, or effort for the purpose of accomplishing a goal. Resourcing encompasses the deployment and manipulation of human resources, financial resources, technological resources, and natural resources (Gomez-Mejia, et al., 2008).

          According to Gomez-Mejia, et al. (2008), since organizations can be viewed as systems, management can also be defined as human action, including design to facilitate the production of useful outcomes from a system. This view opens the opportunity to manage oneself, a pre-requisite in attempting to manage others.

Chapman and O’neil (2000) defined management as keeping people productive, maintaining optimal working conditions, and making the best possible use of resources.  It is also anticipating problems and solving them before productivity declines.  It is holding things together as well as moving things forward, usually with the goal of utilizing resources in a cost effective manner.

          In managing organizations, attention should be focused on the analysis of what abilities or skills managers need in order to be effective (Kyad, et al, 1997).  It is vital that a manager should possess the competencies that enable him to perform effectively.    Furthermore, a manager needs a solid background of knowledge.  He should be guided with certain management principles regardless of the type of organization he works in.  Managers must be highly skilled in order to be successful in managing an organization.  All managers of professional organizations face the same challenge: to manage one's time, objectives, and resources in order to accomplish tasks and implement ideas (Waldron, 1994).

School Leadership.  School leadership is the concept that conveys dynamism and pro-activity. It is the process of recognizing and directing the talents and energies of teachers, students and parents toward achieving common educational objectives.  The principal or school head is commonly thought to be the school leader; however, school leadership may include other people, such as members of a formal leadership team and other people who contribute toward the aims of the school (Chance & Chance, 2002).

Education is an integral part of school leadership and development. Countries throughout the world, before effecting development and progress, have to educate their people first for it is difficult to teach people to do things necessary to uplift their living conditions and contribute something for their country if they are uneducated.  An educated citizenry is indispensable in many societies so that the people can participate intelligently in the discussion of vital issues and in moulding the public opinion necessary to the existence of any society (Guizo, 2002).

          School leadership has been emphasizing managerial or operational functions. Superintendent and principals were expected to serve as efficient managers, directing the day-to-day operations of the school.  Possessing positional and command authority, school leaders directed the operations at the school with business management techniques.  It is essential that leaders of school improvement link with others in the school and district and connect the school’s goals to the broader and deeper mission of providing high-quality learning for all students.  Leaders also must consider equity issues when developing and implementing change initiatives – asking themselves, for example, whether a proposed program will improve access to higher-order learning tasks for marginalized students (Senge, 1990).

Performance. Performance is the ability of an individual to function well in the organization where he operates (Ogbonnia, K., 2007).  It is the responsibility of the administrators of the organization to create a good working environment for the employees.  It is also expected that the managers perform well and effectively so that they would be emulated by their subordinates.

Factors That Affect Performance.  There are many factors that can affect the performance of employees in an organization as cited by Daniels (2006).  Some factors that affect the performance of the people in the organization are ability, effort, motivation, equity and expectation, task or role, perception, knowledge and skills, family, support from supervisors, adaptability, social values, health, workplace, ethics and environmental factors.  With the exception of the environmental factors, these factors can be controlled and improved by individuals, in that if they are properly controlled, stress can be avoided, thus performance will also improve. 

Environmental factors are the factors over which an individual has no control, for example, the job may have been completed under severe time constraints, with a lack of adequate resources, or by using obsolete equipment; there may have been conflicting priorities or information overload, such that the individual was confused and under stress; other staff and departments may have been less cooperative; the restrictive policies of the organisation may have prevented the individual from using his initiative and imagination to the extent that he wished; or the quality of the supervision exercised may have been defective. Some people need encouragement and support, whereas others like to be left to get on with the job.  The environmental factors cannot be used as excuses for poor performance, but they do have a modifying effect.

Performance Effectiveness.  Performance effectiveness is essential to the success in any organization. In order to achieve increased and sustainable results, organizations need to execute strategy and engage the employees. To ensure performance effectiveness in the organization, leaders need to focus on aligning and engaging their people, the people management systems, and the structure and capabilities, including organizational culture, to the strategy.  An organization that can sustain such alignment will achieve increased positive results. The key element to achieve sustainable performance effectiveness is to align employees with the organization’s strategy by (1) helping them to understand the part they play in achieving success, and (2) engaging them in their tasks and with the organization. Strategy alignment is achieved through capable leadership and effective people systems and culture. Integrating efforts across these areas will lead to more highly engaged employees who are willing and capable of helping the organization achieve its goals (Right Management Inc., 2010).

          Employee Development.  Employee development, according to Reagan (2008) is a joint, on-going effort on the part of an employee and the organization to upgrade the employee's knowledge, skills, and abilities. Successful employee development requires a balance between an individual's career needs and goals and the organization's need to get work done.  Employee development programs make positive contributions to organizational performance. A more highly-skilled workforce can accomplish more and a supervisor's group can accomplish more as employees acquire experience, knowledge and skills.

          As cited by Reagan (2008), the supervisor has several roles to play, but providing information and support to facilitate the employee's development is what is most important.  There are a few basic roles for a supervisor in developing employees.  They include: Coaching employees to help them determine what they need for development; Providing both positive and corrective feedback; Offering organizational insight, information, and advice; Guiding the planning through goal setting and checking back over time; Allotting time and money for development experiences; and Ensuring opportunities for applications of new learning.

          It is very helpful for an employee to get an honest assessment of his work as well as access to others who may be able to provide information or coach the employee.  The successful supervisor will also respect every employee's learning curve. It takes time for anyone to learn new skills and be able to apply them well; this does not happen overnight. Building this development time into the application of a new skill set will make the employees more successful.

          Employee Efficiency. Employee efficiency is an employee characteristic and relate to the speed and accuracy of an employee at the job task. The concept relates to employee productivity - the more efficient they are the more productive they will be if managed correctly.  Employee efficiency and productivity represents another major area of concern to the administration. As a rule, it is the duty of each head of the department to require all employees under him to strictly follow the rules and regulations at work.  A performance evaluation system should be designed to continuously foster improvement of employee’s performance and efficiency and to enhance organizational effectiveness and productivity.  A manager’s task also includes the provision of tools and equipment to facilitate work activities, minimize backlog and improve the quality of work (Blake and Mouton, 1985).

Organizing the various and numerous details of specific jobs through task setting and control are potent tools in promoting job performance improvement and efficiency. They can be used to effectively reduce the most intricate and time consuming jobs into daily routines that are performed automatically.  At the start of the day, a list of tasks according to importance, accompanied by strategies for accomplishment, people involved, and resources needed to accomplish them can do a lot in minimizing time spent on doing unessential things. Employee productivity is a particularly important issue to managers and supervisors as the primary purpose of their job is to get the most out of the people they are responsible for (Reagan, 2008).

Job Satisfaction.  Saari & Judge (2004) contended that job satisfaction is one of the major perplexing problems that confront management.  Job satisfaction describes how content an individual is with his or her job. The happier people are within their job, the more satisfied they are said to be. Job satisfaction is not the same as motivation or aptitude, although they are clearly linked.  Job design aims to enhance job satisfaction and performance. Methods include job rotation, job enlargement, job enrichment and job re-engineering. Other influences on satisfaction include the management style and culture, employee involvement, empowerment and autonomous work position. Job satisfaction is a very important attribute which is frequently measured by organizations. The most common way of measurement is the use of rating scales where employees report their reactions to their jobs. Questions relate to rate of pay, work responsibilities, variety of tasks, promotional opportunities, the work itself and co-workers.

          Herzberg’s dual factor theory viewed two sets of motivators related to job satisfaction, namely extrinsic and intrinsic factors.  The extrinsic factors include:  pay or salary increase, technical supervision, company policy and administration, working conditions or physical surroundings and security on the job.  The intrinsic factors are:  achievement or completing task successfully, being singled out for praise, responsibility for ones own or others, and advancement or changing status through promotion.  Known as the “Two Factor Theory” or the “Motivational Hygiene Theory”, Herzberg describes the two sets of factors as motivators which influence behaviour on the job.

          Steers and Porter (1991) suggests the following implications of current theories of work motivation for managers: Managers must actively and intentionally motivate their subordinates; Managers should understand their own strengths and limitations before attempting to modify those of others; Managers must recognize that employees have different motives and abilities; Rewards should be related to performance, not to seniority or other non-merit based considerations; Jobs should be designed to offer challenge and variety.  Subordinates must clearly understand what is expected of them;  Management should foster an organizational culture oriented to performance; Managers should stay close to employees and remedy problems as they arise;  The active cooperation of employees should be sought in improving the organization’s output since employees, after all, are also stakeholders in the organization.

Stable Policies and Programs.  Policies and programs represent another major area of concern for the administration.  As cited by Steers & Porter (1991), policies are usually established formally and deliberately by top managers of the organization because: they feel it will improve the effectiveness of the organization; they want some aspect of the organization to reflect their personal values; or they need to clear up some conflict or confusion that has occurred in the lower level of the organization.

Programs are designed to meet particular objectives of the organization and are carried out through a host of projects or related activities with more specific objectives and targets.  More often, policies are carried out through programs which, in turn, embody specific responsibilities, rules, regulations, procedures, and standards affecting the parties involved.  The stability of policies and programs to a large degree influence the performance effectiveness of the organization.

A policy development process should be undertaken before program implementation. This helps agency personnel evaluate possible options and then select those that are best suited for a particular program. It is also important to develop policies that allow enough flexibility for future changes that may be needed.

It is crucial to include significant stakeholders in the program development process. At the least, agency administrative and line personnel need to be incorporated. Other important persons to involve will vary from one jurisdiction to another, but careful consideration must be given to including them in the planning process (Steers & Porter, 1991).

DMMA College of Southern Philippines.  Very few organizations throughout the world can claim to experience a truly stunning growth just a few years after its establishment.  Among these is the DCSP or DMMA College of Southern Philippines.

          The institution is a realization of a group of people’s dreams and vision for the future.  It was established in October 1993, and was formerly known as the Davao Merchant Marine Academy (DMMA).  Since its inception, the college has experienced a dramatic upward zoom that is clearly phenomenal. 

          Owned by seafarers and educators, the DMMA College of Southern Philippines is definitely biased towards the proper education of future seafarers so that they will not only be at par but also better skilled and more competent than their counterparts from most other Philippine maritime schools and from most other seafarer-producing countries of the world.  The establishment of the college was made with the foresight of making the Philippines the future global leader in the calculation of theoretical knowledge, practical training and sublime values of seafaring.

          To date, the DMMA College of Southern Philippines has acquired a solid reputation in the maritime industry.  Memorandum Order No. 34, dated November 12, 1999 of the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) lists down twenty-two (22) Philippine maritime schools offering BS Marine Transportation and another twenty (20) schools offering BS Marine Engineering as those which have “fully complied with STCW ’95 requirements for submission to the International Maritime Organization (IMO).”  It is the only Maritime School in Region XI found in both lists.  The world–class status of the college has been confirmed when the international accreditation body for maritime institutions, the Det Norske Veritas (DNV), stamped its seal of excellence to DCSP in July 1999, making DCSP the 11^th maritime school in the whole world to receive such accreditation.  And prior to that, the institution very satisfactorily passed the evaluation conducted by the Norwegian Maritime Directorate (NMD) in March 1999.

          The institution is presently a member of the Association of Accredited Marine Institutions (AAMI), the organization of Philippine maritime schools which were chosen by the CHED as having fully complied with STCW requirements.  It is also one of the seven Philippine maritime schools accredited by the Philippine Maritime Education and Training Foundation (PMETF), the Philippine counterpart of the UK-based International Maritime Training Trust (IMTT).

          The institution does not only offer courses and excel in maritime education.  From its BS Maritime Transportation, BS Marine Engineering and Seafarers Rating Course programs, other new courses were offered.  Since the school year 1994-1995 commenced, it has offered BS Customs Administration, Associate in Hotel and Restaurant Management and Nursing Aide courses.  In June 1997, the BS Hotel and Restaurant Management was added to the list of its allied courses.  And in the school year 2004-2005, the college has added another feather in its cap, as it finally opened its Bachelor of Science in Nursing program in order to address the demand for globally competitive and efficient nurses here and abroad.  This particular program boasts of state-of-the-art-facilities and competent human resources while adhering to the quality standard requirements of CHED and PRC in nursing laboratories.  Indeed, DMMA College of Southern Philippines will cease at nothing in order to further excel in the field of education and training (DCSP Student Handbook, 2010).

Theory Base

This research is anchored on the theory known as the path-goal theory, also known as the path-goal theory of leader effectiveness or the path-goal model, which is a leadership theory in the field of organizational studies developed by House in 1971 and was revised in 1996.  The theory states that a leader's behavior is contingent to the satisfaction, motivation and performance of his subordinates. The revised version also argues that the leader engages in behaviors that complement subordinate's abilities and compensate for deficiencies (House, 1996).

Another theory from which this research is anchored is the functional leadership theory introduced by McGrath in 1962. This is a particularly useful theory for addressing specific leader behaviors expected to contribute to organizational or unit effectiveness.  This theory argues that a leader can be said to have done his job well when he has contributed to group effectiveness and cohesion (Fleishman, et al., 1991).

Conceptual Framework

          The emphasis of this study is the leadership styles of the managers and performance effectiveness of the employees of DMMA College of Southern Philippines.  The study considers the various leadership styles which are autocratic leadership, charismatic leadership, participative leadership, servant leadership, situational leadership, transactional leadership, and transformational leadership.  Performance effectiveness specifically refers to employee development, employee efficiency, job satisfaction, and stable policies and programs.

          Figure 1 shows the theoretical framework of the study.  The diagram illustrates the relationship between the two variables.  The first box indicates the independent variables on leadership styles.  The point of interest in analysing the leadership styles of the organization is in understanding its relationship with the dependent variables in performance effectiveness which are indicated in the second box. 

This study tried to investigate whether the managers’ leadership styles influence performance effectiveness of employees in order to contribute to the realization of the organizational goals and objectives. 

         

 

                                                                                     

Figure 1.  Conceptual Framework of the Study

Research Hypothesis

          The study tested the following hypotheses:

1.       There is a significant difference in the performance effectiveness of the teaching and the non-teaching staff of DMMA College of Southern Philippines, Davao City;

2.       There is a significant relationship between the leadership styles of the managers and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college; and   

3.  The leadership styles of the managers influence the performance effectiveness of their employees.

Chapter 3

METHODOLOGY

          This chapter deals with the discussion of the method used, sources of data, data gathering instruments, sampling techniques, procedure of the study and the statistical treatment employed in the study.

Method Used

          The correlational method of research was used in this study to measure relationship between different variables and gather information on existing groups without changing their experiences in any way.  According to Davis (1997), correlational research designs are founded on the assumptions that reality is best described as a network of interacting and mutually causal relationships.  Everything affects and is affected by everything else.  Thus, the dynamics of a system on how each part of the whole system affects each other is far more important than causality.  As a rule, correlational designs do not indicate causality.  However, some correlational designs such as path analysis and cross-lagged panel designs do not permit causal statements.   In general, a correlational study is a quantitative method of research in which you have two or more quantitative variables from the same group of subjects and you are trying to determine if there is a relationship (or covariation) between the two variables (Waters, 2008).

Sources of Data

          The sources of all the data were the subordinates and employees of DMMA College of Southern Philippines.  These respondents were asked to answer a survey questionnaire about the leadership style of their superiors or managers and about their perception on the performance effectiveness as employees of DMMA College of Southern Philippines.

Data Gathering Instrument

          Questionnaires were used by the researcher in the gathering of data.  This was constructed personally after thorough readings from previous researches, the internet, DMMA College of Southern Philippines’ Evaluation Questionnaires and other research materials.  The preliminary draft was shown to the adviser for corrections.  It was submitted to the panel of experts for validity and after their corrections and suggestions, the questionnaire was modified as to its present form.  

The questionnaire was divided into three parts.  The first part determined the demographic profile of the respondents as to their gender and educational attainment. It also identified the respondent’s employment category, as to whether he or she is a teaching or a non-teaching staff and the department or office where he or she belongs. 

The second part determined the leadership styles ascribed by the managers of DMMA College of Southern Philippines.  It contained five items for each type of leadership as authoritarian or autocratic leadership, charismatic leadership, participative leadership, servant leadership, situational leadership, transactional leadership and transformational leadership. 

The third part of the questionnaire determined the level of performance effectiveness of the employees of the college.  This part of the questionnaire was based on the evaluation questionnaires for both teaching and non-teaching staff used by the college.  However, necessary changes were considered in order to assimilate the two evaluation questionnaires and came up with an original one.  It contained five items for each of the dimensions of performance effectiveness as employee development, employee efficiency, job satisfaction, and stable policies and programs.

The degree of responses by the respondents to parts II and III was measured using a 5-point Likert scale.  The responses were categorized and interpreted as follows:

Part II.  Leadership Styles of the Managers

Range of Means              Level                     Interpretation

4.50 – 5.00                     Very High             If the measure described in                                                                the item is always                                                                              manifested by the managers                                                              as perceived by the                                                                              respondents.

3.50 – 4.49                     High                     If the measure described in                                                                the item is often manifested                                                              by the managers as                                                                            perceived by the                                                                                 respondents.

2.50 – 3.49                     Moderate              If the measure described in                                                                the item is sometimes                                                                        manifested by the managers                                                              as perceived                                                                                       by the respondents.

1.50 – 2.49                     Low                      If the measure described in                                                                the item is rarely manifested                                                             by the managers as                                                                            perceived by the                                                                                 respondents.

1.00 – 1.49                     Very Low              If the measure described in                                                                the item is never manifested                                                              by the managers as                                                                            perceived by the                                                                                 respondents.

Part III.  Performance Effectiveness of Employees

Range of Means              Level                     Interpretation

4.50 – 5.00               Very Effective              If the measure described in                                                                the item is always                                                                              manifested by the employees                                                             as perceived by the                                                                              respondents.

3.50 – 4.49                     Effective                If the measure described in                                                                the item is often manifested                                                              by the employees as                                                                            perceived by the                                                                                 respondents.

2.50 – 3.49           Moderately Effective       If the measure described in                                                                the item is sometimes                                                                        manifested by the employees                                                            as perceived by the                                                                              respondents.

1.50 – 2.49                     Less Effective        If the measure described in                                                                the item is rarely manifested                                                             by the employees as                                                                            perceived by the                                                                                 respondents.

1.00 – 1.49                     Not Effective          If the measure described in                                                                the item is never manifested                                                              by the employees as                                                                            perceived by the                                                                                 respondents.

                            

Sampling Technique

The researcher used the universal sampling technique in each type of respondents classified as teaching and non-teaching staff. The respondents were the employees of the college which numbered to 134 of whom 91 are teaching staff and 43 are non-teaching staff.

Procedures of the Study

         

The researcher submitted a letter of request to the school president asking for the approval of his office to conduct the study.  After the researcher received the approval, the questionnaires were then distributed to the staff and faculty members of the different offices and departments of the college.  The retrieval of the questionnaires was done three to five days after the distribution.  The responses to the questionnaire were collated, analyzed and interpreted as the study’s findings from which conclusions and recommendations are based. 

Statistical Treatment

          The following statistical tools were used by the researcher:

Frequencies and Percentages.  This was used by the researcher in determining the demographic profiles of the respondents.

Mean.  This was used to determine the levels of the leadership styles of the managers and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college.

T - Test.  This was used to determine the significance of the difference in the levels of the perception of the employees on the leadership styles ascribed by the managers and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college as perceived by the respondents.

ANOVA.  This was used to determine the significance of the difference in the performance effectiveness of the employees when grouped by teaching and non-teaching category.

          Pearson Product Moment Correlation.  This was used to identify the significant relationship between the two variables.

Regression Analysis.  This was used to identify whether the leadership styles of the manager influence the performance effectiveness of the employees.

          In accepting and rejecting the hypothesis, Alpha was set at 0.05 level of significance.

CHAPTER 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

          Presented in this chapter are the data, analysis and interpretation of the findings.  The discussion of the topics is arranged in the following subheadings:  Profile of the Respondents; Leadership Styles Ascribed by the Managers as Perceived by the Respondents; Performance Effectiveness of the Employees as Perceived by the Respondents; Significance of the Difference in the Performance Effectiveness of the Employees According to the Employee Category of Teaching and Non-Teaching Staff; Significance of the Relationship between the Leadership Styles of the Managers and the Performance Effectiveness of the Employees; and Significant Influence of the Leadership Styles of Managers to the Performance Effectiveness of the Employees.

Profile of the Respondents

Presented in Table 1 is the profile of the respondents according to gender, educational attainment and employee category.  There are a total of 134 respondents and 67 or 50.0 percent are male and 67 or 50.0 percent are female. The educational attainment of the respondents was categorized into five levels: BS Graduates, BS Graduates with MA Units, Master’s Degree Graduates, Master’s Degree Graduates with Doctorate Degree Units, and Doctorate Degree Graduates.  Bachelor’s Degree Graduates comprised 27.6 percent or 37 respondents, Bachelor’s Degree Graduates with MA units comprised 49.3 percent or a total of 66 respondents, Master’s Degree Graduates comprised 6.7 percent or 9 respondents, Master’s Degree Graduates with Doctorate Degree Units comprised 14.9 percent or 20 respondents and Doctorate Degree Graduates comprised 1.5 percent or 2 respondents with a total of 134 respondents or 100 percent.  As to their employee category, the respondents were categorized into two: Teaching and Non-teaching.  Those who are teaching comprised 67.9 percent or 91 respondents and those who are non-teaching comprised 32.1 percent or 43 respondents with a total of 134 or 100 percent.

Table 1.  Profile of the Respondents

Profile	Frequency	Percent
Gender
Male	67	50.0
Female	67	50.0
Educational Attainment
AB/BS Graduates	37	27.6
AB/BS Graduates with           MA/MS Units	66	49.3
MS/MA Graduates	9	6.7
MS/MA with Doctorate           Degree Units	20	14.9
Doctorate Graduates	2	1.5
Employee Category
Teaching	91	67.9
Non-teaching	43	32.1
Total	134	100

Level of Leadership Styles Ascribed by the Managers of the College      as Perceived by the Respondents

          Presented in this section is the level of leadership styles ascribed by the managers of the college as perceived by the respondents in terms of autocratic leadership, charismatic leadership, participative leadership, servant leadership, situational leadership, transactional leadership and transformational leadership.

Autocratic Leadership.  Presented in Table 2 is the level of leadership style ascribed by the managers of the college as perceived by the respondents in terms of autocratic leadership. 

The respondents manifested a varied level of perception on their managers’ leadership style as being autocratic.  They manifested a high level of perception to the first, second and fifth indicator which have the mean score of 3.56, 3.74 and 3.63 respectively.  However, they revealed a moderate level of perception on their managers’ leadership style as being autocratic in the third and fourth indicators which have the mean score of 3.22 and 3.34 respectively. 

The second indicator got the highest mean score of 3.74 which reveals that the managers often make the most decisions on institution matters over their employees or subordinates. 

The third indicator got the lowest mean score of 3.22 which reveals that the managers sometimes imposes personal decisions on institution matters without the knowledge of the employees or subordinates.

Table 2. Level of Leadership Style Ascribed by the Managers of the College as Perceived by the Respondents in terms of Autocratic Leadership

Autocratic Leadership	Mean	Descriptive Level
1.  Tells his/her subordinates/employees what is to be done and how they want it to be accomplished without getting the suggestions of his/her followers.	3.56	High
2.  Makes the most decisions on institution matters over the employees/subordinates.	3.74	High
3.  Imposes personal decisions on institution matters without the knowledge of the employees/subordinates.	3.22	Moderate
4.  Keeps most of the institution responsibilities in himself/herself rather than utilizes delegation to the employees/subordinates.	3.34	Moderate
5.  Manifests self-willed behaviour to the employees/subordinates he/she manages.	3.63	High
Overall Mean	3.50	High

          The overall mean score of the level of perception of the employees as to their manager’s leadership style in terms of autocratic leadership is 3.50.   This reveals that the measure described in the indicators are often manifested by the managers as perceived by the respondents.  This result may lead us to conclude that the managers of the college could manifest at times a high level of autocratic leadership in dealing with the employees and their subordinates.

          Charismatic Leadership.  Presented in Table 3 is the level of leadership style ascribed by the managers of the college as perceived by the respondents in terms of charismatic leadership which is defined by Max Weber as resting on devotion to the exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary character of an individual person.

          The respondents manifested varied levels of perception as to the managers’ leadership style as being charismatic.  They revealed a high level of perception to the second through fifth indicator as to whether their managers’ leadership style is charismatic with a mean score of 3.65, 3.51, 3.56 and 3.69 respectively, but they revealed a moderate level of perception to the first indicator with a mean score of 3.22.   

The highest of all the indicators is the fifth one which says that the managers provide an environment full of energy and positive reinforcement which inspires the employees and subordinates more in doing their tasks well with a mean score of 3.69.      

The respondents indicated a moderate level of perception as to the managers’ leadership style as being charismatic in the first indicator which says that the managers gather followers through dint of personality and charm rather than any form of  power or authority.  This is also the indicator which has the lowest mean score of 3.22.  This reveals that the respondents have the perception that the managers utilize their authority in dealing with their employees or subordinates rather than just using their charisma or charm in terms of personality.

The overall mean score of the level of perception of the employees as to their manager’s leadership style in terms of charismatic leadership is 3.52.   This reveals that the measure described in the indicators are often manifested by the managers as perceived by the respondents.  This result may lead us to conclude that the managers of the college could manifest at times a high level of charismatic leadership in dealing with the employees and their subordinates.

Table 3. Level of Leadership Style Ascribed by the Managers of the College as Perceived by the Respondents in terms of Charismatic Leadership

Charismatic Leadership	Mean	Descriptive Level
1.  Gathers followers through dint of personality and charm rather than any form of external power or authority.	3.22	Moderate
2.  Inspires the employees/subordinates to be loyal to the organization.	3.65	High
3.  Stimulates unwavering loyalty and trust of employees/subordinates to the organization.	3.51	High
4.  Manifests the feeling of sympathy to the employees/subordinates.	3.56	High
5.  Provides an environment full of energy and positive reinforcement.	3.69	High
Overall Mean	3.52	High

          Participative Leadership.  Presented in Table 4 is the level of leadership style ascribed by the managers of the college as perceived by the respondents in terms of participative or democratic leadership.  

The respondents manifested the same high level of perception on the manager’s leadership style as being participative or democratic in all the indicators with a mean score of 3.64, 3.66, 3.72, 3.69 and 3.70 respectively. 

The highest of all the indicators is the third one with a mean score of 3.72 which states that the managers encourage their subordinates or employees to develop their potentials in the organization. 

The lowest is the first indicator with a mean score of 3.64 which states that the managers respect the decision of the employees or subordinates on matters affecting them.

Table 4. Level of Leadership Style Ascribed by the Managers of the College as Perceived by the Respondents in terms of Participative Leadership

Participative Leadership	Mean	Descriptive Level
1.  Respects the decision of the employees/subordinates on matters affecting them.	3.64	High
2. Consults the employees/subordinates on matters that require their decision.	3.66	High
3.  Encourages the subordinates/employees to develop their potentials in the organization.	3.72	High
4.  Delegates some responsibilities to the subordinates/employees rather than taking them by himself/herself.	3.69	High
5.  Recognizes subordinates/employees’ important participation for the advancement of the organization.	3.70	High
Overall Mean	3.68	High

          The overall mean score of the level of perception of the employees as to their manager’s leadership style in terms of participative or democratic leadership is 3.68.   This reveals that the measure described in all the indicators are often manifested by the managers as perceived by the respondents.  This result may lead us to conclude that the managers of the college could manifest at times a high level of participative or democratic leadership in dealing with the employees and their subordinates. As recalled, participative leadership is a style of leadership in which the leader involves subordinates in goal setting, problem solving, team building, etc., but retains the final decision making authority (Rampur, 2000).

Servant Leadership.  Presented in Table 5 is the level of leadership style ascribed by the managers of the college as perceived by the respondents in terms of servant leadership.  

The respondents manifested the same high level of perception on the manager’s leadership style as servant leadership in all the indicators with a mean score of 3.88, 3.66, 3.69, 3.59 and 3.66 respectively. 

The highest of all the indicators is the first one with a mean score of 3.88 which states that the managers give high regard on the value of morality and sanctity of their profession which is a thing worthy of emulation.  The lowest of all the indicators is the fourth one with a mean score of 3.59 which states that the managers serve the employees or subordinates without anticipating any material return. 

The overall mean score of the level of perception of the employees as to their manager’s leadership style in terms of servant leadership is 3.70.   This reveals that the measure described in all the indicators are often manifested by the managers as perceived by the respondents.  This result may lead us to conclude that the managers of the college could manifest at times a high level of servant leadership in dealing with the employees and their subordinates.  

Table 5. Level of Leadership Style Ascribed by the Managers of the College as Perceived by the Respondents in terms of Servant Leadership

Servant Leadership	Mean	Descriptive Level
1.  Gives high regard on the value of morality and sanctity of his profession.	3.88	High
2. Stresses the essential value of service to the organization.	3.66	High
3.  Leads the organization by exemplifying himself in action.	3.69	High
4.  Serves the employees/subordinates without anticipating any material return.	3.59	High
5.  Esteems the profession of servitude as worthy of emulation.	3.66	High
Overall Mean	3.70	High

As recalled, servant leadership, as discussed in chapter 2, is not a concept or a principle. It is an inner standard of living which requires a spiritual understanding of identity, mission, vision and environment.  If the employees and subordinates realize that their managers have values associated with servant leadership, they would also be inspired to do their assigned tasks diligently.  This supports what Secretan (1998) had pointed out that leadership is about inspiration of oneself and of others. 

Situational Leadership.  Presented in Table 6 is the level of leadership style ascribed by the managers of the college as perceived by the respondents in terms of situational leadership.  

          The respondents manifested varied levels of perception as to the managers’ leadership style as situational leadership.  They manifested a high level of perception to the first, second, third and fifth indicator as to whether their managers’ leadership style is situational leadership with a mean score of 3.77, 3.81, 3.86 and 3.65 respectively, but they revealed a moderate level of perception to the fourth indicator with a mean score of 3.40.  

The highest of all the indicators is the third one which says that the managers’ leadership style varies from one person to another with a mean score of 3.86.

The lowest of all the indicators is the fourth one which reveals the respondents’ moderate level of perception as to the managers’ leadership style as situational leadership which says that the managers lead the same person one way sometimes and another way at other times with a mean score of 3.40 which could speak of the management’s consistency in dealing with their employees. 

The overall mean score of the level of perception of the employees as to their manager’s leadership style in terms of situational leadership is 3.70.   This reveals that the measure described in the indicators are often manifested by the managers as perceived by the respondents.  This result may lead us to conclude that the managers of the college could manifest at times a high level of situational leadership in dealing with the employees and their subordinates.      

Table 6. Level of Leadership Style Ascribed by the Managers of the College as Perceived by the Respondents in terms of Situational Leadership

Situational Leadership	Mean	Descriptive Level
1.  Uses the most appropriate leadership style depending on the situation.	3.77	High
2. Analyzes the needs of the situation he/she is in.	3.81	High
3.  Leadership style varies from one person to another.	3.86	High
4.  Leads the same person one way sometimes and another way at other times.	3.40	Moderate
5.  Adapt his/her leadership style to follower ‘maturity’, based on how ready and willing the follower is to perform required tasks.	3.65	High
Overall Mean	3.70	High

 “Different situations call for different leadership styles”, as recalled, is the principle that the situational leadership method from Kenneth Blanchard and Paul Hersey is anchored (12Manage E-learning Community Management website, 2007).  It holds that managers must use different leadership styles depending on the situation. 

          Transactional Leadership.  Presented in Table 7 is the level of leadership style ascribed by the managers of the college as perceived by the respondents in terms of transactional leadership.

          The respondents manifested varied levels of perception as to the managers’ leadership style as transactional leadership.  They manifested a high level of perception on the second through the fifth indicator as to whether their managers’ leadership style is situational leadership with a mean score of 3.60, 3.83, 3.50 and 3.67 respectively, but they revealed a moderate level of perception to the first indicator with a mean score of 3.46.   The highest of all the indicators is the third one which says that the managers motivate followers by setting goals for desired performance with a mean score of 3.83.

          The lowest indicator is the first one which reveals the respondents’ moderate level of perception as to the managers’ leadership style as transactional leadership which says that the managers’ leadership is based in contingency, in that reward or punishment is contingent upon performance with a mean score of 3.46. 

The overall mean score of the level of perception of the employees as to their manager’s leadership style in terms of transactional leadership is 3.61.   This reveals that the measure described in the indicators are often manifested by the managers as perceived by the respondents.  This result may lead us to conclude that the managers of the college could manifest at times a high level of transactional leadership in dealing with the employees and their subordinates.

Table 7. Level of Leadership Style Ascribed by the Managers of the College as Perceived by the Respondents in terms of Transactional Leadership

Transactional Leadership	Mean	Descriptive Level
1.  Leadership is based in contingency, in that reward or punishment is contingent upon performance.	3.46	Moderate
2.  Is responsive and his/her basic orientation is dealing with present issues.	3.60	High
3.  Motivates followers by setting goals for desired performance.	3.83	High
4.  Relies on standard forms of inducement, reward, punishment and sanction to control followers.	3.50	High
5.  Leadership depends on the leader’s power to reinforce subordinates for their successful completion of the bargain.	3.67	High
Overall Mean	3.61	High

Transformational Leadership.  Presented in Table 8 is the level of leadership style practiced by the managers of the college as perceived by the respondents in terms of transformational leadership.  

The respondents manifested the same high level of perception as to the managers’ leadership style in terms of transformational leadership.  They manifested a high level of perception in all the indicators as to whether their managers’ leadership style is transformational leadership with a mean score of 3.56, 3.62, 3.74, 3.71 and 3.66 respectively.  

The highest of all the indicators is the third one which says that the managers motivate followers to work for goals that go beyond self-interest.  The lowest is the first indicator with a mean score of 3.56 which states that the managers seek overtly to transform the organization.

The overall mean score of the level of perception of the employees as to their manager’s leadership style in terms of transformational leadership is 3.66.   This reveals that the measure described in the indicators are often manifested by the managers as perceived by the respondents.  This result may lead us to conclude that the managers of the college could manifest at times a high level of transformational leadership in dealing with the employees and their subordinates. 

According to Bass (2006), transformational leadership approach causes change in individuals and social systems. In its ideal form, it creates valuable and positive change in the followers with the end goal of developing followers into leaders.

Table 8. Level of Leadership Style Ascribed by the Managers of the College as Perceived by the Respondents in terms of Transformational Leadership

Transformational Leadership	Mean	Descriptive Level
1.  Seeks overtly to transform the organization.	3.56	High
2.  Displays large amounts of enthusiasm.	3.62	High
3.  Motivates followers to work for goals that go beyond self-interest.	3.74	High
4.  Creates learning opportunities for his/her followers.	3.71	High
5.  Possesses good management skills to develop strong emotional bonds with followers.	3.66	High
Overall Mean	3.66	High

Summary. Presented in Table 9 is the summary of the level of perception of the employees as to their managers’ leadership styles.   It shows that among the seven leadership styles, both the servant leadership and the situational leadership have the highest weighted mean score of 3.70 followed by participative leadership, transformational leadership, transactional leadership, charismatic leadership and autocratic leadership which have the weighted mean score of 3.68, 3.66, 3.61, 3.52 and 3.50 respectively. 

The overall mean score of the level of perception of the employees as to their managers’  leadership style is 3.62 which means that all of the seven variables have the high level of manifestation of the leadership styles practiced by the managers of the college as perceived by the respondents. The lowest of all the indicators is their perception on the managers’ leadership style in terms of autocratic leadership with a mean score of 3.50 which implies that based on the respondents’ perception, their managers and school leaders do not ascribe autocratic or authoritarian leadership. 

Notably, the study revealed that the managers of the college mostly employ both the servant leadership and situational leadership in dealing with their employees and subordinates wherein servant leadership is anchored on the idealism on servant hood (Spears, 2002), while situational leadership, a leadership method introduced by Blanchard and Hersey in the early 1970s, on the other hand, proposes that leaders choose the best course of action or decision based upon situational variables (12Manage E-learning Community Management website, 2007). 

Table 9. Summary on the Level of Leadership Styles Ascribed by the Managers of the College as Perceived by the Respondents

Indicator	Mean	Descriptive Level
Autocratic Leadership	3.50	High
Charismatic Leadership	3.52	High
Participative Leadership	3.68	High
Servant Leadership	3.70	High
Situational Leadership	3.70	High
Transactional Leadership	3.61	High
Transformational Leadership	3.66	High

Finally, this result may lead us to conclude that the managers of the college could manifest at times high levels of various leadership styles in dealing with the employees and their subordinates. This supports the statement cited by Northouse (2007) which says that managers deal with their employees in different ways in different situations and that whatever approach is predominately used it will be vital to the success of the business.   

Level of Performance Effectiveness of the Employees of the College     as Perceived by the Respondents

          Presented in this section is the level of performance effectiveness of the employees of the college in terms of employee development, employee efficiency, job satisfaction and stable policies and programs as perceived by the respondents.

Employee Development. Presented in Table 10 is the level of performance effectiveness of the employees of the college as perceived by the respondents in terms of employee development.

          The respondents manifested varied levels of perception as to the employees’ performance effectiveness in terms of employee development.  They revealed a high level of perception on the first, second, third and fifth indicator with a mean score of 3.80, 3.64, 3.70 and 3.54 respectively, but they revealed a moderate level of perception on the fourth indicator with a mean score of 3.13.  

The highest of all the indicators is the first one which says that employees receive professional trainings such as seminars, workshops, etc. for the development of their skills and knowledge with a mean score of 3.80.  However, they manifested a moderate level of perception as to the employees’ performance effectiveness in terms of employee development in the fourth indicator, which is also the lowest indicator, with a mean score of 3.13.  This reveals that the respondents perceive that the employees are not given enough opportunities for educational travels or grants.  The management of the college may have to focus or give more attention to this specific area since this affects the performance effectiveness of the employees in the organization.

Table 10. Level of Performance Effectiveness of the Employees of the College as Perceived by the Respondents in terms of Employee Development

Employee Development	Mean	Descriptive Level
1.  Employees receive professional trainings – seminars, workshops, etc. for the development of their skills and knowledge.	3.80	Often
2.  Employees have opportunities for advanced education.	3.64	Often
3.  Employees are provided with professional reading resources, such as library office, subscription of newspapers, magazines, etc. to enable employees keep abreast with current organizational trends and issues.	3.70	Often
4.  Employees are given opportunities for educational travels/grants.	3.13	Sometimes
5.  Employees are given the chance to develop their talents and abilities for possible future positions.	3.54	Often
Overall Mean	3.56	Often

         

The overall mean score of the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college as perceived by the respondents in terms of employee development is 3.56.  This reveals that the measure described in the indicators are often manifested by the employees of the college as perceived by the respondents.  This result may lead us to conclude that the employees manifest satisfaction in terms of the employee development of the college.

This supports one of the principles of effective leadership introduced by Sugars (2008) which says that the leaders must know their people and look out for their subordinates’ well-being and must also recognize the importance of sincerely caring for their workers.

          Employee Efficiency. Presented in Table 11 is the level of performance effectiveness of the employees of the college as perceived by the respondents in terms of employee efficiency.

The respondents manifested the same high level of perception as to the employees’ performance effectiveness in terms of employee efficiency through the first to the fifth indicator with a mean score of 3.91, 3.90, 3.78, 3.71 and 3.79 respectively.   The highest of all the indicators is the first one with a mean score of 3.91 which states that the employees display excellent quality of work which is expected of employees. 

The lowest of all the indicators is the fourth one which states that the employees have adequate resources to facilitate work activities with a mean score of 3.71.  Though the description of the fourth indicator could still be classified as high, the management of the college may still have to look into this specific area as this also affects the performance effectiveness of the employees.  As Ogbonnia (2007) argued, effective leadership is the ability to successfully integrate and maximize available resources within the internal and external environment for the attainment of organizational or societal goals.  To facilitate successful employee performance, it is important to understand and accurately measure leadership performance of the leaders  and managers (Campbell, 1990).

Table 11. Level of Performance Effectiveness of the Employees of the College as Perceived by the Respondents in terms of Employee Efficiency

Employee Efficiency	Mean	Descriptive Level
1.  Employees display excellent quality of work.	3.91	Often
2.  Employees adhere to his/her established work schedule.	3.90	Often
3.  Employees submit completed work objective on or before the set or agreed upon deadline.	3.78	Often
4.   Employees have adequate resources to facilitate work activities.	3.71	Often
5.  Employees submit their required work outputs on time.	3.79	Often
Overall Mean	3.82	Often

          Job Satisfaction. Presented in Table 12 is the level of performance effectiveness of the employees of the college as perceived by the respondents in terms of job satisfaction.  The respondents manifested varied levels of perception as to the employees’ performance effectiveness in terms of job satisfaction.  They manifested a high level of perception on the first, third, fourth and fifth indicator with a mean score of 3.62, 3.69, 3.75 and 3.63 respectively, but they revealed a moderate level of perception on the second indicator with a mean score of 3.37.            

The highest of all the indicators is the fourth one which says that the management provides environment that promotes harmonious relationships among peers and between subordinates and superiors with a mean score of 3.75. 

However, they manifested a moderate level of perception as to the employees’ performance effectiveness in terms of job satisfaction in the second indicator, which is also the lowest indicator, with a mean score of 3.37.  This reveals that the respondents perceive that the management does not offer enough incentives to deserving and competent employees.  The management of the college may have to focus or give more attention to this specific area since this affects the performance effectiveness of the employees in the organization. 

The overall mean score of the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college as perceived by the respondents in terms of job satisfaction is 3.61.   This reveals that the measure described in the indicators are often manifested by the employees of the college as perceived by the respondents.  This result may lead us to conclude that the employees manifest effective performance in terms of job satisfaction.

Table 12. Level of Performance Effectiveness of the Employees of the College as Perceived by the Respondents in terms of Job Satisfaction

Job Satisfaction	Mean	Descriptive Level
1.  Management offers adequate and equitable compensation.	3.62	Often
2.  Management offers incentive to deserving and competent employees.	3.37	Sometimes
3. Management actions and decisions are in conformity with existing policies and programs.	3.69	Often
4.  Management provides environment that promote harmonious relationship among peers and between subordinates and superiors.	3.75	Often
5.  Management provides working environment that promote good disposition of employees.	3.63	Often
Overall Mean	3.61	Often

         

Leaders and managers must follow one of the principles of effective leadership introduced by Sugars (2008) which says that leaders and managers must develop a sense of accountability, ownership and responsibility in their people which will help them carry out their professional responsibilities.  Another leadership principle introduced by Sugars (2008) states that leaders and managers must know their people and look out for their well being and that they must sincerely care for their workers.

Stable Policies and Programs. Presented in Table 13 is the level of performance effectiveness of the employees of the college as perceived by the respondents in terms of stable policies and programs.

          The respondents manifested the same high level of perception as to the employees’ performance effectiveness in terms of stable policies and programs through the first to the fifth indicator with a mean score of 3.93, 3.98, 4.06, 3.73 and 3.70 respectively. 

The highest of all the indicators is the third one with a mean score of 4.06 which states that the employees are knowledgeable of the policies and guidelines to be followed for the office or college operations. 

The lowest of all the indicators is the fifth one which reveals that the employees perceive that they are not given enough opportunities to report or communicate with appropriate authorities for issues and problems that cannot be resolved in the department level with a mean score of 3.70.  The management of the college may have to focus or give more attention to this specific area since this affects the performance effectiveness of the employees in the organization. 

The overall mean score of the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college as perceived by the respondents in terms of stable policies and programs is 3.88.   This reveals that the measure described in the indicators are often manifested by the employees of the college as perceived by the respondents.  This result may lead us to conclude that the employees revealed satisfaction and trust to the administration in terms of the stable policies and programs of the college.

Table 13. Level of Performance Effectiveness of the Employees of the College as Perceived by the Respondents in terms of Stable Policies and Programs

Stable Policies and Programs	Mean	Descriptive Level
1.  Employees are knowledgeable on the organizational mission, vision and goals.	3.93	Often
2.  Employees keep documents on programs and projects provided for by the college as contained in the development program plans, manuals, brochures, circulars, memorandums and publications.	3.98	Often
3.  Employees are knowledgeable of the policies and guidelines to be followed for the office or college operations.	4.06	Often
4.  Employees have their seminars or meetings on a regular basis to discuss and evaluate employee assignments.	3.73	Often
5.  Employees are given opportunities to report or communicate with appropriate authorities for issues and problems that cannot be resolved in the department level.	3.70	Often
Overall Mean	3.88	Often

Knowing how to communicate with your people, seniors, and other key people within the organization is an important key to effective leadership (Sugars, 2008).

Summary. Presented in Table 14 is the summary on the levels of performance effectiveness of the employees of the college as perceived by the respondents. It shows that among the four indicators, the item stable policies and programs got the highest weighted mean of 3.88 followed by employee efficiency with a weighted mean of 3.82, job satisfaction with a weighted mean of 3.61 and employee development a weighted mean of 3.56 respectively.  All of the four indicators for performance effectiveness show high level of description.  It reveals that all of the four variables have the high level of manifestation of the performance effectiveness. 

Furthermore, as the fourth indicator got the highest mean score of 3.88, it reveals that the employees are confident that the college has stable policies and programs while the first indicator got the lowest mean score of 3.56 which reveals that the employees are not so confident in the area of employee development of the college. The lowest of all the indicators is the first one which is about employee development with a mean score of 3.56.

The overall mean score of the level of perception of the employees as to their performance effectiveness as perceived by the respondents is 3.72.   This result may lead us to conclude that the employees of the college manifest effectiveness and satisfaction in their respective positions or designations in terms of performance effectiveness.

Table 14. Summary on the Level of Performance Effectiveness of the Employees of the College as Perceived by the Respondents

Indicator	Mean	Descriptive Level
Employee Development	3.56	Often
Employee Efficiency	3.82	Often
Job Satisfaction	3.61	Often
Stable Policies and Programs	3.88	Often

Significance of the Difference in the Performance Effectiveness of      the Employees When Grouped by the Employee Category of     Teaching and Non-teaching Staff

         

Presented in Table 15 is the significance of the difference in the performance effectiveness of the employees when grouped according to employee category of teaching and the non-teaching staff. 

In terms of employee development, the computed t value is 1.915 with the p value of .058 which is higher than 0.05 level of significance.  It reveals that there is no significant difference in the performance effectiveness of the employees in terms of employee development when grouped by employee category of the teaching and the non-teaching staff.   Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted.

In terms of employee efficiency, the computed t value is .422 with the p value of .674 which is higher than 0.05 level of significance.  It reveals that there is no significant difference in the performance effectiveness of the employees in terms of employee efficiency when grouped by employee category of the teaching and the non-teaching staff.   Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted.

In terms of job satisfaction, the computed t value is 1.243 with the p value of .216 which is higher than 0.05 level of significance.  It reveals that there is no significant difference in the performance effectiveness of the employees in terms of job satisfaction when grouped by the employee category of the teaching and the non-teaching staff.   Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted.

In terms of stable policies and programs, the computed t value is 1.869 with the p value of .064 which is higher than 0.05 level of significance.  It reveals that there is no significant difference in the performance effectiveness of the employees in terms of stable policies and programs when grouped by the employee category of the teaching and the non-teaching staff.   Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted.

Table 15. Significance of the Difference in the Performance Effectiveness of the Employees When Grouped by their Category

Performance Effectiveness	Employee Category		t-value	p-value	Decision on Ho	Interpretation
	Teaching	Non-teaching
Employee Development	3.46	3.78	1.915	.058	Accept	Not Significant
Employee Efficiency	3.80	3.86	.422	.674	Accept	Not Significant
Job Satisfaction	3.54	3.76	1.243	.216	Accept	Not Significant
Stable Policies and Programs	3.78	4.08	1.869	.064	Accept	Not Significant
Overall	3.65	3.87	1.608	.110	Accept	Not Significant

Significant at .05 level of significance.

The overall computed t value is 1.608 with the p value of .110 which is greater than 0.05 level of significance.  It reveals that there is no significant difference in the performance effectiveness of the employees when grouped by the employee category of the teaching and the non-teaching staff.   Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted.

The result reveals that there is no significant difference in the performance of the employees of the college when grouped according to the employee category of teaching and non-teaching staff.  Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted.

Significance of the Relationship between the Leadership Styles of       Managers and the Performance Effectiveness of the   Employees of the College

Presented in this section is the significance of the relationship between the leadership styles of managers and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college. 

Autocratic Leadership.  Presented in Table 16 is the significance of the relationship between autocratic leadership and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college.  As Kartha cited (2010), autocratic leadership may have its benefits; however, in most cases it is seen as something that is undesirable.  Studies show that if autocratic leadership is dominantly used, employees resist and therefore their performance is affected.

          The table shows the non-significance of the relationship between autocratic leadership and three of the variables in the performance effectiveness of employees. The computed r values were -.025 for employee development;   -.120 for employee efficiency;   -.114   for job satisfaction and -.225 for stable policies and programs respectively. The p value .778 for employee development; .166 for employee efficiency; .190 for job satisfaction are greater than 0.05 level of significance which implies that there is no significant relationship between autocratic leadership and the first three variables of the performance effectiveness namely employee development, employee efficiency and job satisfaction.  Therefore, considering the three variables, the null hypothesis is accepted.  However, in the variable stable policies and programs, the p value .009 is lesser than .01 level of significance.  In the variable stable policies and programs, therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected which implies that there is a significant relationship between autocratic leadership and in this specific variable on stable policies and programs.  Furthermore, since the indicator stable policies and programs is -.225, this implies that as the level of the variable autocratic leadership increases, the level of the performance effectiveness in terms of stable policies and programs decreases; otherwise, or if the level of the variable autocratic leadership decreases, the level of the performance effectiveness in terms of stable policies and programs increases.

          Charismatic Leadership.  Also presented in the same table is the significance of the relationship between charismatic leadership and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college.  As recalled, charismatic leaders inspire others and encourage them to be their best and in return,  employees  want  to impress a charismatic leader (Musser, 1987).   

          The table shows the significant relationship between charismatic leadership and all the variables in performance effectiveness of employees. The computed r values were .667 for employee development; .494 for employee efficiency; .606 for job satisfaction; and .650 for stable policies and programs.  The p value of all the variables is .000 which is lesser than .01 level of significance.  Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected.  It reveals that there is a significant relationship between the charismatic leadership and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college.         

Participative Leadership.  Presented in the same table is the significance of the relationship between participative leadership and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college.

          The table shows the significant relationship between participative leadership and all the variables in performance effectiveness of employees. The computed r values were .658 for employee development; .507 for employee efficiency; .624 for job satisfaction; and .700 for stable policies and programs.  The p value of all the variables is .000 which is lesser than .01 level of significance.  Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected.  It reveals that there is a significant relationship between participative leadership and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college.   

As cited by Cherry (1989), Lewin’s study found that participative leadership is generally the most effective leadership style.  It enables the employees to play a major part in any decision-making process, which is needed to make the employee performance better (Spears, 2002).  In this type of leadership, employees are given the liberty to suggest their views and opinions to decide on some specific aspects; thus, it can render motivation to the employees, with the employees’ thinking that the management is seriously considering their suggestions as well.  And this certainly has a very positive impact on teamwork and employee performance. In addition, it also contributes to a good, productive work environment (Rampur, 2000). 

          Servant Leadership.      Presented in the same table is the significance of the relationship between servant leadership and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college.

          The table shows the significant relationship between servant leadership and all the variables in performance effectiveness of employees. The computed r values were .635 for employee development; .494 for employee efficiency; .619 for job satisfaction; and .594 for stable policies and programs.  The p value of all the variables is .000 which is lesser than .01 level of significance.  Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected.  It reveals that there is a significant relationship between servant leadership and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college.

          Situational Leadership.  Presented in the same table is the significance of the relationship between situational leadership and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college.

Situational leadership is based on situational theory introduced by Spencer in1884.  This theory assumes that different situations call for different characteristics. According to the theory, "what an individual actually does when acting as a leader is in large part dependent upon characteristics of the situation in which he functions.”

          The table shows the significant relationship between situational leadership and all the variables in the performance effectiveness of employees. The computed r values were .602 for employee development; .624 for employee efficiency; .654 for job satisfaction; and .688 for stable policies and programs.  The p value of all the variables is .000 which is lesser than .01 level of significance.  Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected.  It reveals that there is a significant relationship between situational leadership and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college.  

Transactional Leadership.  Presented in the same table is the significance of the relationship between transactional leadership and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college.  This leadership style is based on transactional leadership theory.  The theory emphasizes the reciprocity behavior between the leader and the followers (Bass, 1990).

The table shows the significant relationship between transactional leadership and all the variables in the performance effectiveness of employees. The computed r values were .519 for employee development; .579 for employee efficiency; .547 for job satisfaction; and .538 for stable policies and programs.  The p value of all the variables is .000 which is lesser than .01 level of significance.  Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected.  It reveals that there is a significant relationship between transactional leadership and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college.  

Transformational Leadership.  Presented in the same table is the significance of the relationship between transformational leadership and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college.

          The table shows the significant relationship between transformational leadership and all the variables in performance effectiveness of employees. The computed r values were .657 for employee development; .618 for employee efficiency; .658 for job satisfaction; and .658 for stable policies and programs.  The p value of all the variables is .000 which is lesser than .01 level of significance.  Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected.  It reveals that there is a significant relationship between transformational leadership and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college.   

This supports the study by Kennedy (2002) that the effect of transformational leadership style on performance is significant.  Furthermore, according to Burns as cited by Rampur (2000), the transforming approach creates significant change in the life of people and organizations. It redesigns perceptions and values, and changes expectations and aspirations of employees.

Overall Result.   Presented in the same table is the overall result on the significance of the relationship between the leadership styles and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college as perceived by the respondents.

          The table shows the significant relationship between the leadership styles of the managers and the performance effectiveness of the employees. The computed r values were .726 for employee development; .618 for employee efficiency; .701 for job satisfaction; and .706 for stable policies and programs.  The p value of all the variables is .000 which is lesser than .01 level of significance.  Therefore, the null hypothesis is rejected. It reveals that there is a significant relationship between the leadership styles of the managers and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college.   

Table 16.  Significance of the Relationship between the Leadership Styles of Managers and the Performance Effectiveness of the Employees of the College

Leadership Styles	Performance Effectiveness
	Employee Development	Employee Efficiency	Job Satisfaction	Stable Policies and Programs
Autocratic Leadership (p – value)	-.025 (.778)	-.120 (.166)	-.114 (.190)	-.225** (.009)
Charismatic Leadership (p – value)	.667** (.000)	.494** (.000)	.606** (.000)	.650** (.000)
Participative Leadership (p – value)	.658** (.000)	.507** (.000)	.624** (.000)	.700** (.000)
Servant Leadership (p – value)	.635** (.000)	.494** (.000)	.619** (.000)	.594** (.000)
Situational Leadership (p – value)	.602** (.000)	.624** (.000)	.654** (.000)	.688** (.000)
Transactional Leadership (p – value)	.519** (.000)	.579** (.000)	.547** (.000)	.538** (.000)
Transformational Leadership (p – value)	.657** (.000)	.618** (.000)	.658** (.000)	.658** (.000)
Overall (p – value)	.726** (.000)	.618** (.000)	.701** (.000)	.706** (.000)

** Significant at .01

           

The results presented in this section prove the path-goal theory developed by House in 1971 and revised in 1996 as well as the functional leadership theory introduced by McGrath in 1962, the theories from which this research is anchored.  Path-goal theory is a leadership theory in the field of organizational studies which states that a leader's behavior is contingent to the satisfaction, motivation and performance of his subordinates.  The revised version also argues that the leader engages in behaviors that complement subordinates’ abilities and compensate for deficiencies (House, 1996).  Functional leadership theory, on the other hand, is a particularly useful theory for addressing specific leader behaviors expected to contribute to organizational or unit effectiveness.  This theory argues that a leader can be said to have done his job well when he has contributed to group effectiveness and cohesion (Fleishman et al., 1991).

Significant Influence of the Leadership Styles of the Managers

to the Performance Effectiveness of the Employees

         

Presented in Table 17 is the significant influence of the leadership styles of the managers of the college to the performance effectiveness of the employees.  The r² value of .638 explains that 63.8 percent can be explained by the model. This means further that autocratic leadership, charismatic leadership, participative leadership, servant leadership, situational leadership, transactional leadership and transformational leadership can explain 63.8 percent of the performance effectiveness of the employees.  The remaining 36.2 percent can be explained by other factors which are not included in this study. 

Table 17.  Significant Influence of the Leadership Styles of the Managers to the Performance Effectiveness of the Employees

Model	R	R Square	Adjusted R Square	Std. Error of the Estimate
1	.799	.638	.618	.46345

Chapter 5

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

          In this chapter, the researcher presents the summary, conclusions and recommendations.         

Summary

          This study is all about the leadership styles and performance effectiveness of DMMA College of Southern Philippines, Davao City. It specifically aimed to determine the leadership styles ascribed by the managers of the college as perceived by the respondents and the level of performance effectiveness of the employees in terms of: employee development; employee efficiency; job satisfaction; and stable policies and programs. This study likewise determined the respondents’ demographic profile and whether there is a significant difference in the performance effectiveness of the teaching and the non-teaching staff of the college.  It also aimed to know if there is a significant relationship between the leadership styles of the managers and the performance effectiveness of the employees and whether the leadership styles of the managers influence the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college.

This research is anchored on the theory known as the path-goal theory which is a leadership theory in the field of organizational studies developed by House in 1971 and was revised in 1996 and on the functional leadership theory introduced by McGrath in 1962.

Furthermore, this research focused on the seven types of leadership styles developed by various scholars and professionals namely Lewin in 1939, Greenleaf in 1977, Hersey in early 1970s, Blanchard in early 1970s, Weber in 1947 and Burns in 1978. 

          The correlational research method or quantitative research method was used in this study to measure the relationship between different variables and to gather information on existing groups.  Mean, frequency counts and percentages, T-test, ANOVA, Pearson Product Moment Correlation and Regression Analysis were the statistical tools used for the analysis of the data.

          The findings of the study are summarized as follows:

          There is an equal number of respondents in terms of gender, most of them are BS graduates with Master’s Degree units and most are among the employee category of teaching staff.

The study revealed that the respondents’ perception on their managers’ leadership styles are both servant leadership and situational leadership which have the highest weighted mean score among the seven leadership styles.  It also shows that among the four indicators in the performance effectiveness of the employees, the item stable policies and programs got the highest weighted mean score.

The study also revealed that there is no significant difference in the performance effectiveness of the employees when grouped according to the employee category of teaching and non-teaching staff.  Furthermore, it indicated that there is a significant relationship between the leadership styles ascribed by the managers and the performance effectiveness of the employees of DMMA College of Southern Philippines.  Finally, it confirmed that the leadership styles of the managers influence the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college. 

Conclusions

          Based on the findings of the study, the researcher concludes that based on their perception, the respondents revealed that the managers of the college ascribe both the servant leadership and situational leadership in dealing with their employees and subordinates.     

The research also confirms that among the four indicators in the performance effectiveness of the employees, the item stable policies and programs got the highest weighted mean which reveals that the employees are confident that the college has stable policies and programs. 

The study also reveals that there is no significant difference in the performance of the employees of the college when grouped according to the employee category of teaching and non-teaching staff. 

It reveals that there is a significant relationship between the leadership styles ascribed by the managers and the performance effectiveness of the employees of DMMA College of Southern Philippines. 

          Furthermore, it reveals that the leadership styles of the managers influence the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college. 

Finally, the study reveals that the leaderships styles that are mostly ascribed by the managers of the college results to the favorable performance effectiveness of the employees since the respondents perceive that the employees of the college receive professional trainings such as seminars, workshops, and forums for the development of their skills and knowledge; they perceive that the employees of the college display excellent quality of work; they perceive that the employees are knowledgeable of the policies and guidelines to be followed for the office or college operations; and that the management provides environment that promotes harmonious relationship among peers and between subordinates and superiors.  

Recommendations

          Based on the findings and conclusions of this study, the following recommendations are forwarded:

1.  That DMMA College of Southern Philippines administration maintain and sustain their encouraging performance regarding their leadership styles and management skills in dealing with their employees and subordinates and that the managers of the college continue their trust, support and confidence in their employees and subordinates;

2.  That DMMA College of Southern Philippines administration qualify leaders not only in terms of educational attainment and competency but also in terms of attitudes, behaviors and leadership skills that could affect the performance effectiveness of the employees or of the students.

3.  That the faculty members and staff of the college maintain and sustain their high level of performance effectiveness in doing their assigned tasks and that they would further upgrade their knowledge, skills and capabilities and enhance their performance efficiency within the organization to produce good future leaders in the society.

4.  That the student leaders and the entire studentry maintain and sustain their high performance effectiveness in doing their social responsibility in the institution specifically in the areas of leadership and performance.

5.  That a further study regarding the relationship between the leadership styles of the managers and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the college be conducted in the future; and finally,

6.   That a comparative study on the leadership styles of the managers and the performance effectiveness of the employees of the different colleges and universities here in Davao City be undertaken in the future.

REFERENCES

12Manage E-learning Community Management. Situational Leadership.                  Copyrighted 2007.  Retrieved September 14, 2011.

Balanced Scorecard Designer Website. Management Tools to Enhance                                      Employee    Efficiency.  Copyrighted 2000.  Retrieved                           September 15, 2011.

Bass, B. M. (1990). From Transactional to Transformational Leadership:                    Learning to Share the Vision. Organizational Dynamics.  New York:                     Free Press.

Bass, B. M. &  R. E. Riggio (2006). Transformational        Leadership, 2^nd.ed.                    Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Blake, R. R. and J. S. Mouton (1985).  Managerial Grid III.         Houston: Gulf                   Publishing Company.

Campbell, J. (1990). An Overview of the Army Selection and Classification                   Project. Personnel Psychology.

Chance, P.L. & Chance, E.W. (2002). Introduction to Educational Leadership

        & Organizational Behavior: Theory Into Practice. New York.

Changing Minds.org. Transactional Leadership. Copyrighted 2002.                           Retrieved    September 16, 2011.

Chapman, E. & O’Neil, S. L. (2000) Develop Your Freedom to Lead.  In                    Leadership:      Essential Steps Every Manager Needs to Grow (3^rd ed.)                      New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Cherry,  K. (1989). Participative Leadership Style. Retrieved from About.com.                       Retrieved August 10, 2011.

Conger, J. A. and R. N. Kanungo (1998).  Charismatic Leadership in                         Organizations.  Thousand Oaks, CA:  Sage Publications.

Daniels, A. C. (2006). Performance Management: Changing Behavior That                     Drives Organizational Effectiveness, 4th ed., Performance                     Management    Publications.

Davis, J. (1997) Correlational Research Methods. Department of Psychology,           Metropolitan State College of Denver.

DMMA College of Southern Philippines Student Handbook, Revision 9,           May31,     2010. 

Fleishman, E. A. (2000). Leadership Skills for a Changing World: Solving                         Complex   Social Problems. The Leadership Quarterly, 11, 11-35.

Gomez-Mejia, L. R.; D. B. Balkin and R. L. Cardy (2008).  Management:          People,     Performance, Change. 3rd ed. New York, USA.

Guizo, J. (2002). Community Extension Services of the University of    Mindanao.          Davao City.

House, R. J. (1996). "Path-goal Theory of Leadership: Lessons, Legacy, and    a             Reformulated Theory". Leadership Quarterly.  Retrieved from       Wikipedia. September 12, 2011.

Ivancevich, J., Konopaske, R., Matteson, M. (2007). Organizational Behavior and          Management. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.

Judge, T.A., Bono, J.E., Ilies, R., & Gerhardt, M.W. (2002). Personality and               Leadership: A Qualitative and Quantitative Review. Journal of Applied               Psychology, 87, 765-780.

Kartha, D. (2010).  Autocratic Leadership Style.  Retrieved from Buzzle.com.                 September 14, 2011.  

Kyad, L. et al. (1997). Professional Development for Educational Management.               Great Britain:  Open University Press.

Leveriza, J. P. (1996).  The Art and Skills of Leadership, The Filipino Educator,              Vol.X.2, p.76.

Lincoln Leadership Community Website. Servant Leadership.  Copyrighted              2002.  Retrieved September 15, 2011.

McColl-Kennedy, J.  Impact of Leadership Style and Emotions on Subordinate             Performance. UQ Business School, The University of          Queensland,             Brisbane, Australia. (2002)

Musser, S. J. (1987).  The Determination of Positive and Negative Charismatic            Leadership. Granthan. PA:  Messiah College.

Northouse, G. (2007). Leadership Theory and Practice. (3rd ed.) Thousand     Oak,            London, New Delhe, Sage Publications, Inc.

Ogbonnia, K. (2007). Political Parties and Effective Leadership: A Contingency            Approach.

Rampur, S. (2000). Participative Leadership Style.  Retrieved from       Buzzle.com.  September 14, 2011.

Reagan, P. (2008). Employee Development. Office of Human Resources.                 Regents of the University of Minnesota.

Right Management  Inc. (2010) Organizational Effectiveness. Philadelphia,    USA.

Saari, L. M., & Judge, T. A. (2004). Employee Attitudes and Job Satisfaction.               Human Resource Management.

Secretan, L. (1998).  Motivational Well Being.com. Leadership Quotes.                      Copyrighted 2011.  Retrieved September 16, 2011.

Senge, P. (1990). Learning Organization. New York, Doubleday/Currency.

Spears, L. C. (2002). Tracing the Past, Present, and Future of Servant- Leadership. In   Focus On Leadership: Servant-leadership for the          Twenty-first Century (pp. 1-10).          New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons,     Inc.

Steers, R. M. and L. W. Porter (1991).  Motivation and Work Behavior, 3^rd ed.                  New York: McGraw Hill. Lincoln.

Sugars, B.  Ten Principles of Leadership. ActionCoach Network Site. May       28,                2008.  Retrieved September 14, 2011.

Waldron, M.W. (1994b). Management and Supervision. In D. Blackburn (ed.),                Extension Handbook: Processes and Practices. Toronto: Thompson                 Educational Publishing.

Waters, J. (2008).  Correlational Research.  Psychology.  Capilano University.                 2055 Purcell Way, North Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

**********

For clarifications, Please contact:

Ann Cervales, MPA

Mobile:  09197656217 & 09224688098

Skype:  ann_cervales

Yahoo Messenger:  ann_cervales

E-mail:  ann_cervales@yahoo.com