ISSN: 2347-7474

International Journal Advances in Social Science and Humanities

Available online at: www.ijassh.com
REVIEW ARTICLE

Effective Leadership through BCE Model: A Rejoinder to Obi-Nwosu’s

BCE Leadership Paradigm
Chidozie Edwin Nwafor, Harry Obi-Nwosu*, Cynthia Onyejiaka

Department of Psychology, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka, Nigeria.

*Corresponding Author: E-mail: royaldioka@gmail.com

Abstract

Leadership is visible and manifest when it can move an organization forward hence, leadership is the key factor to
the survival of any organization. Analysis of successive university administrations which rated the Egboka’s
administration highly as articulated by Obi-Nwosu [1] shows that encoded in the acronym (BCE) is the secret of his
administrative success. These secrets are: Bridging communication gaps, Contingencies, and Evocative orientation.
These special skills were examined theoretically in juxta position with existing paradigms on effective leadership
and there were some resemblance, therefore the claims of the BCE leadership paradigm possess theoretical
validation. The paradigm should in like manner have positive effect on desirable organizational outcomes such as
low turnover intensions, absenteeism, OCB, and productivity. These are the assumptions that were discussed in the
present paper.

Keywords: BCE leadership paradigm, Effective leadership, organizational outcome.

Introduction
According to Barling, Christie, and Hoption [2]
leadership is a fascinating and controversial topic
about which much is known and much remains to
be learned. Authors such as [3,4] described
leadership as a process of interaction between
leaders and followers where by the leader
attempts to influence followers to achieve a
common goal. Leaders are persons in charge of
the following functions in an organization;
planning, organizing, staffing, directing,
coordinating, reporting and budgeting [5]. In
concordance with these functions of leaders
Barnard [6] defined leadership as the ability of a
superior (leader) to influence the behavior of
subordinates (followers) and persuade them to
follow a particular course of action in an attempt
to carry out their functions.
Generally, every organization need effective
leaders because it is the key factor in the life and
success of the organization [7].Effective
leadership transforms the organizational
potential into reality and proposes new paradigms
when old ones lose their effectiveness. In line with
this perspective, Obi-Nwosu [1] analyzed the
University administration of Professor Boniface
Chukwukadibia Egboka giving his success and
break through which took the University to the
height of being one of the best Universities in
Nigeria. He extracted the special leadership
attributes of the administration and examined
them with existing leadership styles and
paradigm in perspective. He further discovered
that the powerful attributes could be encoded in
the acronym B C E; where B implies Bridge of
Communication Gaps; C implies Contingencies;
and E implies Evocative Orientation.
The present paper is a rejoinder of the B C E
leadership paradigm and it proposes that B C E is
a potent mediating factor between the existing
effective leadership paradigm and many other
desirable organizational outcomes such as; job
satisfaction, reduced burnout, psychological
wellbeing /health and organizational citizenship
behavior (OCB). The paper is based on secondary
source whereby evidence to support the
assumptions were gathered from Journals,
textbooks and the basic existing leadership
theories.
The BCE is conceptualized by the present paper
to have a potent relationship with the existing
effective leadership styles (e.g. transformative
and contingency) and desirable organizational

Harry Obi-Nwosu et. al. | June. 2014 | Vol.2 | Issue 6|01-05 1

 Available online at: www.ijassh.com
outcomes such as psychological wellbeing, OCB,
reduced burnout, and job satisfaction.
Conceptual Model
Fig. 1: Conceptual diagram of the mediating role
of BCE on effective leadership and desirable
organizational outcomes
Leadership Theories
This section is not meant to give a detailed
description of these theories but to highlight some
of the elements in the theories that are important
for the present paper. Researchers interested in
leadership have overtime proposed a number of
theories which include;
Trait theory
This generally assumes that leaders are different
from the average person in terms of personality
traits and some traits are particularly suited for
leadership such as intelligence, perseverance and
ambition [8,9].
Behavioral Theories
These generally assumed that leaders can be
made rather than born, and effective leadership is
based on definable, learnable behavior. It also
assumes that leaders exhibit two behaviors
“concern for people” and “concern for production”.
Participative Leadership Theory
The main assumption here is that follower’s
involvement in making decisions will improve
their understanding of the issues, policies and
tasks they are to carry out therefore, their
behavior or attitude towards work or the
organization. There are three Participatory
leadership styles: i. Autocratic leadership style;
here leaders make decisions without consulting
with others. ii. Democratic leadership styles; here
leaders involve the people or the representatives
of people in the decision making. iii. Laissez-Faire
Leadership style; leaders minimizes their
involvement in decision making.
Transactional Leadership Style
This style of leadership assumes that leadership
comprises three different behaviors [10] and they
Harry Obi-Nwosu et. al. | June. 2014 | Vol.2 | Issue 6|01-05
are; i, Laissez-Faire; this is where a leader avoids
and denies their responsibility and neglect to
take any action even in dire situations. ii.
Management-by exception; leaders of this kind
are either described as active management –by-
exception in which case leaders monitor and
focused vigorously on followers’ mistake and
failures to meet standards or passive
management –by-exception, in which case,
leaders focus on errors but do not monitor the
followers rather they wait until the mistakes are
such consequences that they can no longer
ignored and iii. Contingent reward, these are
leaders who set goals, provide feedback, and
ensure that followers’ behaviors have
consequences, both positive and negative.
Transformational Leadership Style
This theory was made popular by and works of
Burns [11] and Bass [12].Presently, it is accepted
that transformational leadership comprises of
four different behaviors to Barling, Christie, and
Hoption [2] and they are i. Idealized influence,
this is applicable when leaders choose to do what
is ethical or what is best for the organization
rather than what is expedient. It include behavior
such as providing a vision for the future and
creating a collective sense of mission; ii.
Inspirational motivation, these are leaders who
encourage their employees to achieve more than
what was once thought possible by setting high
but realistic standards and inspiring members to
surmount psychological setbacks and external
obstacle; iii. Intellectual stimulation, this is the
ability of a leader to encourage followers to think
for themselves, question their own commonly held
assumptions, reframe problems, and approach
matters in innovative ways and iv.
Individualized consideration, this characterizes
leaders who pay special attention to followers’
personal need for achievement and development
and act as mentors.
BCE Leadership Paradigm
According to Obi-Nwosu [1] the main components
of BCE model are B which implies Bridging
Communication Gaps between the leaders and the
subordinates. To achieve this end the chief
executive of the institution was participative
(democratic), the administrator has concern for
the people and concern for output. This enables
the administration to get direct feedbacks about
situations within the organization as well as gets
maximum inputs from the subordinates. This free
flow of communication also enhances the
identification and handling of threats and
reassures members of the organization that they
are very important and are not alienated [1].
2
 Available online at: www.ijassh.com
The C Component is Contingencies; the major
work on contingency theory of leadership was
done by Fiedler, 1967 and House & Mitchell 1974.
Fiedler’s Contingency theory categorizes leaders
as either task-motivated or relationship
motivated and effectiveness of these categorizes
depend on three basic situations; leader-follower
relations, performance goal clarity and formal
authority or power [13].Similarly, Path goal
leadership theory by House & Mitchell [14]
explores the behaviors of effective leaders and the
situational contingencies that modify those
behaviors.
House and Mitchell [14] identify four categories of
leadership behaviors that motivate followers to
achieve their goals these include; participative
leadership behavior, directive path-goal clarifying
behavior, supportive behavior and achievement-
oriented behavior. House and Mitchell [14] also
noted that the effectiveness of these leadership
behaviors might depend on some situational
factors such as organizational environment, job
design and follower characteristics.
Obi-Nwosu’s analysis captures some blends of
these basic contingency theories especially path-
goal leadership theory. Prof B.C Ebgoka’s
administration showed participative leadership
behavior by involving followers in decision
making and soliciting followers’ feedback. It
showed directive path-goal clarifying leadership
behavior through motivation of workers,
providing task structure, feedback and procedures
that reduce role ambiguity; it also links workers
effort to performance and goal attainment and
communicates the rewards contingent on
performance.
In the aspect of supportive leadership behavior,
the administration demonstrated its concern for
the needs and best interests of workers and
therefore removes some of the potential obstacles
that may prevent followers from obtaining their
goals. The administration also showed an
achievement-oriented leadership behavior
through creation of challenging and high standard
performance goals and expresses confidence in
workers’ abilities to meet such challenges. These
attributes undeniably motivated workers to
respond with greater self-efficacy and make more
effort toward common goal attainment.
Evocative Orientation
Generally, an evocative leader uses his/her special
skill to summon, inspire, or educe qualities
critical for sustainable team cohesion and
productivity in the organization. An evocative
Harry Obi-Nwosu et. al. | June. 2014 | Vol.2 | Issue 6|01-05
leader leads by inspiration and example and they
draw forth the best from those they interact with
as well as evoke some higher consciousness
needed to address the volatile, complex and
ambiguous issues faced by the organization.
Evocative leaders achieve leadership effectiveness
through the following attributes;
 Inspire and generate creative approaches
 Empower trusting relationship and
environments
 Focus on bringing individual and organizational
action into alignment with a large sense of
purpose and contribution for the greater
achievement of goals.
 Support and maintain self-organizing and high
performing teams.
 Maintain a holistic perspective amid complex
interdependencies.
 Foster collaboration and learning among diverse
groups and tradition.
 Nurture important initiatives into their full
expression.
 Anticipate, welcome and adapt to change with
agility.
 Coordinate people masterfully to make vision
real.
 Discern right action and make courageous
decisions.
 Effectively ensure that all perspectives are
heard.
 Inspire workers enthusiasm to act with integrity
and take a stand for what is life-affirming.
 Effective resolution of conflict.
 Cultivate personal discipline through a daily
reflective practice.
 Change undesirable behavior by changing
identified underlying factors.
[15,16,1]
Effective Leadership and Desirable
Organizational Outcomes
Many empirical literatures have shown that
effective leadership will lead to many desirable
organizational outcomes, therefore creating some
possible supports that BCE (which is proposed to
be an effective leadership paradigm) will have a
positive significant link with other effective
leadership styles; desirable organizational
outcomes and positive mediatory effect on the
relationship between other effective leadership
style and desirable organizational outcomes as
proposed in the conceptual model (fig. 1).
Studies by Arnold, Turner, Barling, Kelloway &
Mckee [17]and Mckee, Driscoll, Kelloway & Kelley
[17] showed that effective leadership
(transformational) is linked to employee health
3
 Available online at: www.ijassh.com
and psychological wellbeing. In another study on
effective leadership and job satisfaction on team
citizenship, Yun, Cox, & Sims [18] found that
effective leadership (transformational) is
positively linked with job satisfaction and team
citizenship. Yet in another study on leadership
behavior and burnout, Rad and Gohalenoei [19]
found that a significant relationship existed
between leadership style of coaches and burnout
among athletes, whereby effective leadership style
(participative) was negatively related to burnout.
Since BCE paradigm not only contains some
already identified attributes of effective
leadership, but presents succinct positive
behaviors, this paper also assumes that like other
effective leadership style it will enhance desirable
organizational outcomes and possibly mediate the
effect of other leadership styles on the desirable
organizational outcomes.
Conclusion
It is obvious that to institute a paradigm is a
difficult task starting from conceptualization to
theory formation and empirical testing of the
References
1. Obi-Nwosu H (2014) Psychological Health,
Leadership and the BCE Leadership Paradigm.
Paper Presented at Symposium Organized by
Department of Psychology Nnamdi Azikiwe
University Awka ( 4th April).
2. Barling J, Christie A, Hption A (2010) Leadership.
In S. zedeck et.al (Ed). Handbook of Industrial and
Organizational Psychology (pp. 183-240).
Washington DC: American Psychological
Association.
3. Yukl GA (2005) Leadership in organizations (6th
ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
4. Northouse PG (2010) Leadership, theory and
practice (5th ed.). Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA
5. Gulick L (1937) Notes on the theory of
organization. In L. Gulick & L. Urwick (Eds.),
Papers on the Science of Administration(pp. 1-‐
46). New York: Institute of
Public Administration.
6. Barnard CI (1938) The function of executive.
Harvard University Press: Cambridge, M.A.,
Thirtieth Anniversary Edition.
7. Voon ML, Lo MC, Ngui1 KS, Ayob NB (2011) The
influence of leadership styles on employees’ job
satisfaction in public sector organizations in
Malaysia International Journal of Business,
Management and Social Sciences, 2(1): 24-32.
8. Judge TA, Cable DM (2004) The effect of physical
height on work place success and income:
preliminary test of a theoretical model. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 89: 428-441.
Harry Obi-Nwosu et. al. | June. 2014 | Vol.2 | Issue 6|01-05
theory over time to ensure consistency. Obi-
Nwosu [1] initiated the BCE paradigm after a
careful analysis of successive administrations of a
university.
Mostovicz [20] stated that every good paradigm on
leadership must have three components [21-23].
They are “What” which represents the goals that
the leader hopes to attain and these are found in
the evocative orientation. “How” which explains
the way the leader reaches the goals and these
are found in the bridging communication gap and
contingencies. “Why” which explains the reasons
behind selecting the leadership method for
attaining the goals, and this is explained by the
benefits of the interaction among B+C+E = why.
Indeed, the BCE paradigm is promising because
the concept is measurable and can be learned
through training. It will not likely cause harm to
an organization and since it shows that leaders
can have positive influence in the organization,
the BCE paradigm enhances desirable
organizational outcomes.
9. Judge TA, Colbert AE, Ilies R (2004) Intelligence
and leadership. A quantitative review and test of
theoretical propositions. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 89:542-552.
10. Bass BM, Riggio RE (2006) Transformational
leadership(2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. Burns J (1978) Leadership. New York: Harper.
12. Bass BM (1985) Leadership and performance
beyond expectations. New York: Free Press.
13. Fiedler FE (1967) A Theory of Leadership
Effectiveness, New York: McGraw-Hill
14. House RJ, Mitchell TR (1974) Path-goal theory of
leadership. Journal of Contemporary Business,
3:81-97.
15. Ehama Institute (2013) Activating the Skill of
Evocative Leadership Mastery. Evocative
Leadership Mastery Retreat Lotus Heart Centre,
Brighton Toronto Ontario.
16. Nevis EC (1983) Evocative and Provocative modes
of Influence in the Implementation of Change.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge.
17. McKee MC, Driscoll C, Kelloway EK , Elizabeth
Kelley E (2011) Exploring linkages among
transformational leadership, workplace spirituality
and well-being in health care workers. Journal of
Management, Spirituality & Religion, 8(3):233-255.
18. Yun S, Cox J, Sims HP (2007) Leadership and
Teamwork: The Effects of Leadership and Job
Satisfaction on Team Citizenship. International
Journal of Leadership Studies, 2(3): 171-193.
4
 Available online at: www.ijassh.com

19. Rad LS, Ghalenoei M (2013) The relationship 21. Arnold, KA, Turner N, Barling J, Kelloway EK,
between leadership behavior and burnout among McKee MC (2007).
coaches and athletes. European Journal of
22. Transformational Leadership and Psychological
Experimental Biology, 3(3):195-205.
Well-Being: The Mediating Role of
20. Mostovicz EI (2008) Understanding of Consumers’
23. Meaningful Work. Journal of Occupational Health
Needs for Luxury: The Mechanism of Interpretation
Psychology 12(3):193-203.
and its Role in Knowledge Creation, Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Northampton,
UK.

Harry Obi-Nwosu et. al. | June. 2014 | Vol.2 | Issue 6|01-05 5