1

Chapter I

Research Problem

In this chapter, an overview of the study is provided. This chapter starts off by

presenting the background of the study, followed by the statement of the problem that

will be answered on the following chapters of the study. This also includes the

presentation of the review of related literature and review of related studies as well as the

theoretical-conceptual framework of the study.

Background of the Study

Leadership is an element that greatly affects the operations of the organization

and eventually, its overall performance and productivity. According to Winston and

Patterson (2006), a leader is one or more people who selects, equips, trains, and

influences one or more followers, who have diverse gifts, abilities, and skills and focuses

the followers to the organization’s mission and objectives causing them to willingly and

enthusiastically expend spiritual, emotional, and physical energy in a concerted

coordinated effort to achieve collective goal. There are three major styles of leading,

namely transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership. Transformational

style of leadership, as studied by Bass (1990), consists of intellectual stimulation,

individualized consideration, inspirational motivation and idealized influence. The leader

 2

acts in ways that result in being a role model for the followers, provides meaning and

challenge that motivates and inspires the followers’ work, promotes their followers’

innovation and creativity, and attends to each follower’s need for achievement and

growth by acting as coach or mentor (Bass, 2000.) Another style is the transactional

leadership which, according to Burns (1978), focuses on exchanging benefits to satisfy

the needs of both side of followers and leaders. This style depends on people who work

well in a shaped and administered environment and leaders are focused to the tasks that

needs to be done and completed. Lastly, the laissez-faire leadership wherein leaders are

hands-off and allow group members to make decisions (Chowdhury, 2014.) They believe

that their employees will excel when they are left alone to respond to their responsibilities

in their own ways. However, laissez-faire proves to be beneficial only when the group

members are highly skilled, well-motivated and capable enough. The other variables

whose relationship with these three will be identified in this study are motivation and

commitment. Alexandra Usher (2012) describes motivation as the desire to do or achieve

something because one sees either the value of doing it or the value that comes from it,

while commitment, according to Eisenberger (2000), is a feeling of emotional or mental

attachment with a person, group, or organization. Kanter (1982), and Pavett and Lau

(1983), pointed out that an important component of successful management is the ability

to influence others. As such, committed and motivated employees are more dedicated

towards meeting and achieving organizational goals (Pfeffer, 1998). Managers or

supervisors must therefore be able to utilize the most appropriate leadership style in

leading the generation who will soon dominate the workforce, in order to be most

efficient and effective with the operations.

 3

A number of literature and studies give insights on leadership, motivation,

commitment, and their relation to group performance. As supported by

Nanjundeswaraswamy and Swamy (2014), different styles do affect organizational

operations, hence, effective leaders are high in demand. In a study of followers under

transformational leadership by (Song, 2016), participants expressed that they felt

motivated and inspired to achieve higher organizational goals under this style, and

described it as one that helps with the innovation of the entire organization, and has the

ability to promote staff goal and development. The transactional leadership style, as

studied by Syed et al. (2017), has a significant relationship with knowledge sharing

behaviour and similarly has a significant relationship with organizational creativity which

is believed to affect organizational performance. Studies on both styles exhibit positive

relationships with performance, however, studies on laissez-faire leadership tend to be

different. There is a high cost of doing nothing which demonstrates that subordinates may

be as sensitive to the reinforcement or discipline that they do not receive as they are to

the rewards and punishments that they do receive. Not seizing opportunities to provide

suitable consequences to employee conduct is one way laissez-faire leaders destroy

organizations (VonBergen, 2012). In addition, the study of Ozge and Hande (March,

2016) confirmed the negative effect of laissez-faire leadership on organizational trust

seems to support the arguments about the destructiveness of laissez-faire leadership. As

the researchers asserted, it seems that leaders fail to support the legitimate interests of

organizations and employees by ignoring the responsibilities and duties assigned to them

and showing little or no concern for employees’ well-being. Among the three, a

leadership study on learning organizations was also conducted by Bernard M. Bass in the
 4

year 2000. He concluded that the future leaders of learning organizations will be

transformational. Using motivation and commitment as the predictors for group success,

My Linh Nguyen concluded in her 2017 study that employee motivation plays a vital role

on it as an assertive contributor, and Mohamud et al.’s study during the same year also

concluded that there is a positive relationship between employee commitment and

organizational effectiveness.

Saint Paul School of Professional Studies is a learning institution that is able to

produce topnotch students and competitive workers in different fields. Providing quality

education and a conducive learning environment, its success stories continues to draw the

attention of the mass. An institution’s progress, such as this school, is highly inclined to

its operations which is run by its members, from the employers down to the employees.

These employees, especially the teaching staff, are those who interact and influence the

students’ growth on a daily basis and are therefore, important factors in meeting, or even

surpassing the goals of and expectations from the school. Their individual productivity is

fueled by their level of motivation towards their work and commitment to the educational

institution that they belong to, and these two factors are assumed to be related to the

leadership style of their leader based on past studies in businesses organizations. Most

findings in leadership studies assert that transformational and transactional leadership are

highly effective in high levels of employee motivation and commitment, while the

opposite goes for laissez-faire. However, the teaching staff of a learning institution are

not simple employees who all throughout work would follow orders and accomplish it

the way the employer wants it to be accomplished. Although they are considered as

followers, they become the role models in front their students and must imbue great
 5

ideals and independence. This characteristic of teachers where they have to shift position,

from being a follower to a leader, generated the problem as to whether or not it their

supervisor’s leadership style has a relationship with their level of motivation and

commitment.

This descriptive study will be using structured questionnaires to gather

information, then the relationship between the variables will be identified. The concept of

leadership and its different styles have come to be and have been studied since ancient

times, but were mainly focused on business organizations and the likes. However, these

are not the only organizations who has a structure and a leadership style which affects its

overall performance. Learning institutions are also important organizations as they foster

the future of the society. Hence, it would be best to identify which leadership styles have

a positive relationship with employees’ motivation and commitment so that it can be

utilized and improved to contribute in enhancing the employees’ performance and the

eventually, the students’ as well. This study will determine if there is a relationship

between the different leadership styles and employees’ motivation and commitment,

particularly on the teachers of the Senior High School Department of a learning

institution - Saint Paul School of Professional Studies, as a predictor of group or

organizational performance. The results will greatly contribute in giving insights to the

leadership style dominantly expressed by the group’s head, and the level of motivation

towards work and commitment to the school that employees have, as well as the

relationship between the different leadership styles and the level of motivation and

commitment of the employees.

 6

Framework of the Study

Figure 1

The study will identify the relationship between the different major leadership

styles, namely transactional, transformational and laissez-faire leadership, on employees’

motivation and commitment because they are factors that significantly affect the

employees’ individual performance which ultimately leads to the organization’s. A

survey questionnaire will identify the leadership style of the employees’ leader or

supervisor, the level of motivation and commitment the employees’ have and the

relationship between these factors. Once identified and determined, the conclusion drawn
 7

from the results can help leaders utilize the leadership style that has a positive significant

relationship with motivation and commitment to enhance individual employee

performance and eventually, organizational performance as well.

Statement of the Problem

This study aims to determine the relationship between the different leadership styles

and employees’ motivation and commitment. Specifically, this aims to determine:

1. From among the different leadership styles - (1.1) transformational (1.2)

transactional, and (1.3) laissez-faire leadership, what leadership style is currently

most experienced by employees?

2. What is the level of motivation employees’ feel towards their work?

3. What is the level of commitment employees’ have towards their organization?

4. What is the relationship between employees’ motivation and the following

leadership styles:

4.1 Transformational

4.2 Transactional

4.3 Laissez-faire?

5. What is the relationship between employees’ commitment and the following

leadership styles:

5.1 Transformational

5.2 Transactional

5.3 Laissez-faire?
 8

Review of Related Literature

Organizations are more likely to be transformational and transactional if it is

ready, able, and willing to change (Bass, 1996). Transformational leaders are more likely

to be called quiet leaders for they lead by example. They are aware on the important

things, achievements and ideals. Transactional leaders promote compliance and they keep

their followers motivated. There is a need for leaders to appreciate the value of learning

as a solution for the learning organization’s sustainability.

Laissez-faire leadership is an approach wherein a leader physically occupies a

leadership position, but he or she more or less neglects the responsibilities and

obligations assigned to his or her position. These leaders who do nothing usually gives

the firm negative consequences since they would typically think that doing nothing will

not affect their organization’s performance. Moreover, having such leaders even

demotivate good performers and encourage poor workers. The probability of having

desired behavior decreases and the levels of undesired performance increases. The

inaction of these supervisors pays a very high price during the long run (VonBergen,

2012).

Employees can be motivated through proper leadership, as leadership refers to

doing things towards a certain goal using the best ways possible. In order to achieve these

goals, the leader should gain the employees’ trust and make them follow. Nevertheless, in

order to make them trust him and complete their tasks properly for the organization, the
 9

employees should be motivated. The leaders and the employees help one another to attain

high levels of morality and motivation (Baldoni, 2005).

Commitment has been defined and measured in many different ways. One of

which is that it is a psychological attachment felt by the employee towards the

organization he or she belongs to. It also reflects the degree to which the individual

internalizes or adopts characteristics or perspectives of the organization. Moreover, it

supports the objectives of the organization as it is also an acceptance of and identification

with the organizational goals (Coetzee, 2005).

Review of Related Studies

According to Nanjundeswaraswamy and Swamy (2014), it is only possible to

achieve organizational goals productively with effective leadership as it affects employee

performance, and eventually the organizational operations. An effective leader influences

its followers in a desired manner to achieve the desired collective goal, hence, they

concluded in their study that leadership styles can affect the quality of work life.

The findings of the study conducted by Koech and Namusonge (2012) on laissez-

faire leadership are consistent with the observations and studies of previous

investigations. Avoidant leaders under this style choose not to intervene with the work

affairs, avoid responsibilities, and neglect building relationships with the subordinates

which has led to its association with dissatisfaction, unproductiveness, and

ineffectiveness. On the other hand, effective reward and recognition systems under the

second style, transactional leadership, has a medium positive correlation with

organizational performance. Lastly, the transformational leadership has a strong positive

 10

correlation with organizational performance, since the leaders are able to inspire their

subordinates, develop their capabilities and skills.

Transactional leadership is found out to be good for motivating employees by

giving them appropriate rewards such as bonuses and commission based on their

performance, and by clearing out a direction to achieve organizational goals. Both the

leaders and their followers work towards the objectives of group through knowledge

management during their exchanges which also creates organizational creativity. It was

concluded in the study of Hussain et al. (2017), that due to the knowledge management

present in transactional leadership, this style is effective for achieving organizational

success.

In addition, findings in Zhang’s 2016 study on transformational leadership

showed that leaders using this style might help develop a delightful work atmosphere for

workers’ fulfillment and satisfaction. The study has raised social awareness on the

significance of transformational leadership and its positive effect to organizational

outcomes. Hence, organizations were encouraged to apply the studied style to contribute

to its prosperity, its employees’, and even local economy.

The empirical results of the study conducted by Chowdhury (2014) on selected

organizations in corporate sectors supported the statements of Bass and Avolio (1994),

that both transformational and transactional leadership style boost the level of employee

commitment to their organization. However, the result for the laissez-faire leadership

behavior is different, as it has indicated a significant negative relationship to behavior and

affective commitment. The results of the study also clearly reveals the comparison

between transformational and transactional style, wherein both has a significant impact
 11

on employee motivation, but transformational style is more effective. The laissez-faire

style, in sync of its results with commitment, has a negative relationship with employee

motivation as well.

Motivation moves the people to act and continue their action already initiated. In

a group motivation heightens the desire of a person to work effectively and efficiently

according to the person’s position. The study conducted by Ozkan and Solmaz (2015),

reveals that the type of work and the promotion in the organization has a great effect on

the employees’ performance. Moreover, the relationship of the employer to their

subordinates, including the working conditions, salary, and appreciation they provide, has

a greater effect on the employees’ performance. Hence, there is a relationship between

employee motivation and employee performance.

Employee motivation plays an essential part on organizational effectiveness, it

helps organizations grow and be more productive correlating to their mission and goals.

In the study conducted by Manzoor (2011). He emphasized the factors affecting

employee motivation and the relationship between employee motivation and

organizational effectiveness. In this study he determined two factors affecting employee

motivation, which is recognition and empowerment. He implies that this factors helps in

accomplishing organizational task as it affects greatly on employee motivation. He also

concluded that employee motivation and organizational effectiveness has a positive

relationship that helps build a great relationship on employees and the organization. This

shows how organizations must work well on developing better rules and policies that

works well with enhancing employee motivation.

 12

According to Nguyen (2017), motivation of employees are important in an

organization’s effectiveness. In other words, every employer must be able to motivate

their employees to help maximize their job performance. The study also stated that this

employee motivation can be achieved through employee empowerment which may be

affected by the leadership style utilized by their supervisors. This includes the degree of

which the employees are involved in organizational activities such as decision-making

and more. Therefore, letting the employees work opportunities, listening to their ideas,

delegating them high responsibility tasks, and giving them freedom to make choices are

some ways to increase motivation level.

Employee motivation has always been a challenge for many leaders globally.

Researches on what motivates employees have already been done, but most, if not all are

really generalizations. Joshua Jensen’s study on employee motivation last 2018 points out

that leaders in organizations have the responsibility of determining what motivates their

employees and that what motivates them may differ from people to people. Through

regular touch points, leaders must spend time building relationships and getting to know

their employees on an intimate level to determine what motivates them. It will take time

and effort but it will all boil down to knowing the employees and being able to interact

and lead them in ways that will make and keep them motivated and satisfied with what

they do.

As employee commitment is now seen as a natural factor for effective

performance and an essential activity for a group’s success. The findings of Mohamud et

al. (2018) on organizational effectiveness showed a weak positive relationship between it

 13

and employee commitment, and that job involvement, intrinsic motivation, and job

satisfaction are factors that contributes positively to organizational effectiveness.

However, the study of Ajay Garg and Dillen Ramjee (2013) showed that there is

an insignificant relationship between transactional leadership and affective commitment

or the persons’ emotional attachment, identification with and involvement in the

organization, while both transactional and laissez-faire leadership has no significant

relationship with continuance commitment which is related to the costs associated with

leaving the organization the individual currently belongs to. Employees with a strong

continuance commitment remain with the organization because it provides them with

desirable personal outcomes and benefits that they are unwilling to sacrifice. And

although there is a relationship between transformational leadership and commitment, it

is positively weak.

Another study of Dr. Bassam Al-Daibat (2017) on the impact of leadership styles

in organizational commitment, transformational and transactional leadership showed a

statistically significant effect on organizational commitment, while there is no

statistically significant effect for laissez-faire leadership style on organizational

commitment at Jordanian banks. Between transformational and transactional,

transformational leadership was found out to be more effective. The leaders were

recommended to focus on applying transformational leadership style because it motivates

workers capacities and gives meaning to their work by empowering them to achieve

current commitments towards work and completion of the tasks while helping them to

achieve future hopes and aspirations.

 14

Hypotheses

H01 : There is no significant relationship between transformational leadership style and

employees’ motivation

H11 : There is a significant relationship between transformational leadership style and

employees’ motivation

H02 : There is no significant relationship between transactional leadership style and

employees’ motivation

H12 : There is a significant relationship between transactional leadership style and

employees’ motivation

H03 : There is no significant relationship between laissez-faire leadership style and

employees’ motivation
 15

H13: There is a significant relationship between laissez-faire leadership style and

employees’ motivation

H04 : There is no significant relationship between transformational leadership style and

employees’ commitment

H14 : There is a significant relationship between transformational leadership style and

employees’ commitment

H05 : There is no significant relationship between transactional leadership style and

employees’ commitment

H15 : There is a significant relationship between transactional leadership style and

employees’ commitment

H06 : There is no significant relationship between laissez-faire leadership style and

employees’ commitment

H16 : There is a significant relationship between laissez-faire leadership style and

employees’ commitment
 16

Chapter II

Research Methodology

This chapter gives an outline of the research methods that were followed in the

study. It provides information on the participants, as well as the criteria of their inclusion

in the study. The researchers also described the how the variables were measured and

what research design and procedures were utilized for the purpose of the study. The

instrument for data collection is included and the definition of terms is also presented.

Measurement of Variables

The study computed for the mean of variables and their correlation coefficients

based on the data of the ordinal scale of the questionnaire to determine the relationship of
 17

the different leadership styles and employee motivation and commitment. The results will

be utilized to determine and analyze their level of motivation and commitment depending

on their supervisor’s leadership style.

Respondents of the Study

The respondents of the study are the teaching staff of the Senior High School

Department of Saint Paul School of Professional Studies, Palo, Leyte. The respondents

are certified employees of the school, teaching senior high school students. The

researchers asked for the official list of the Senior High School teachers from the Human

Resource Head to identify all the respondents who were to partake in the study. However,

it should be noted that a small portion of the population did not participate in the study

for various personal reasons.

Research Instrument

The study will use structured questionnaires with three sections to gather the

needed information. The first section is the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ)

Rater Form developed by Bass and Avolio, adapted from Chowhury’s leadership study. It

contains relevant statements that will identify the leadership style of the employees’

supervisor based on their observations. The second section is the Work Motivation Scale.

The items were designed by Chowhury to cover Clayton Alderfer’s Existence,

Relatedness, and Growth Theory highlighting dimensions of job satisfaction, sense of

accomplishment, work environment and recognition to determine the level of the

employees’ motivation. Lastly, the third section is the Organizational Commitment

Questionnaire (OCQ) developed by Porter to measure the level of the employees’

 18

commitment to the organization. A 5-point Likert scale was marked by the respondents

for the first section and a 6-point Likert scale for the second and third section depending

on their answer.

To fully understand the entirety and the purpose of the study, the following terms

were defined:

Leadership. This refers to creating ways that will mold and help people to contribute

in the accomplishment of a task

Transactional leadership. A leadership style which focus on motivating followers by

setting goals and promising rewards for desired performance

Transformational leadership. A leadership style that motivate followers by appealing

to their own interest which create and innovate ideas to solve problems

Laissez-faire leadership. A leadership wherein leaders give their employees freedom

to make their own decision in doing the task given

Motivation. The condition of being eager to work hard to achieve goals

Commitment. The attitude of being dedicated and loyal to the organization the

person belongs to

Research Design and Procedure

The independent variables of the study are the leadership styles and the dependent

variables are employees’ motivation and commitment. This quantitative research will be

using descriptive design to determine the relationship between the different leadership

styles and employees’ motivation and commitment. These variables were measured first

using the survey questionnaire, then processed after.

 19

Data Processing

The data gathered was analyzed by computing the mean of the variables, then

Pearson’s correlation was applied to draw logical conclusion. The analysis was done

using Statistical Package of Social Sciences (SPSS). The hypotheses were tested at α =

0.05. The p-value must be less than the alpha to be considered as significant. Once the

relationship is identified as significant, the strength and direction of the correlation values

are interpreted wherein -1 is considered perfectly negative, -0.8 is strongly negative, -0.5

is moderately negative, -0.2 is weakly negative, +0.2 is weakly positive, +0.5 is

moderately positive, +0.8 is strongly positive, and +1 is perfectly positive.

 20

Chapter III

Results and Discussion

This chapter contains the interpretation of results from the gathered data, including

its discussions which provides an explanation of the results to bring out the essence of the

study. This also includes the summary of the findings, as well as meaningful conclusions

and recommendations based on the results of the study.

Interpretation of Results
Table 1
Transformational leadership as experienced by the respondents

f
Statement Mean Interpretation
N=30
Instills pride in me for being associated with him/her 113 3.77 Fairly Often
 21

Go beyond self-interest for the good of the group 120 4.00 Fairly Often
Act in ways that build others respect for him/her 121 4.03 Fairly Often
Provides feedback so that I will know how I am doing 114 3.80 Fairly Often
Talk about his/her most important values and beliefs 102 3.40 Sometimes
Specify the importance of having a strong sense of purpose 115 3.83 Fairly Often
Consider the moral and ethical consequences of decisions 117 3.90 Fairly Often
Emphasize the importance of having a collective sense of 125 4.17 Fairly Often
mission
Provides challenges that fosters growth 121 4.03 Fairly Often
Talks enthusiastically about what needs to be accomplished 122 4.07 Fairly Often

As shown in the table from the previous page, most of the statements relevant to

transformational leadership are fairly often observed. Emphasizing the importance of

having a collective sense of mission which is fairly often observed has the highest mean

at 4.17 while talking about his/her most important values and beliefs which is sometimes

observed has the lowest mean at 3.40.

Table 2
Transactional leadership as experienced by the respondents

f
Statement Mean Interpretation
N=30
Makes clear expectations 114 3.80 Fairly Often
Sets a standard for carrying out a job 124 4.13 Fairly Often
Provides incentives and well earned recognition 113 3.77 Fairly Often
Spend time mentoring and coaching subordinates 117 3.90 Fairly Often
Provides assistance in exchange for efforts 107 3.57 Fairly Often
Concentrates his/her full attention on dealing with mistakes, 109 3.63 Fairly Often
complaints and failures
Values order and structure 106 3.53 Fairly Often
Discuss in specific terms who is responsible for achieving 114 3.80 Fairly Often
performance targets
Make clear what one can expect to receive when performance 112 3.73 Fairly Often
goals are achieved
 22

Express satisfaction when expectations are met 116 3.87 Fairly Often

As shown in the table above, all of the statements relevant to transactional leadership

are fairly often observed. Setting a standard for carrying out a job which is fairly often

observed has the highest mean at 4.13 while valuing order and structure which is also

fairly often observed has the lowest mean at 3.53.

Table 3
Laissez-faire leadership as experienced by the respondents

f
Statement Mean Interpretation
N=30
Avoids getting involved when important issues arise 64 2.13 Once in a while
He/she is absent when needed 54 1.80 Once in a while
Avoids making decisions 61 2.03 Once in a while
Delay responding to urgent questions 64 2.13 Once in a while
Lets me work complex problems out on my own 65 2.17 Once in a while
Stays out of the way as I work 72 2.40 Once in a while
Gives complete freedom in choosing ways to finish the job 102 3.4 Sometimes
Does not work with employees to meet goals 52 1.73 Once in a while
Believes that it is best to leave employees alone 75 2.5 Sometimes
Provides little to no guidance 54 1.8 Once in a while

As shown in the table above, most of the statements relevant to laissez-faire

leadership are observed once in a while. Giving complete freedom in choosing ways to

finish the job which is sometimes observed has the highest mean at 3.4 while not working
 23

with the employees to meet goals which is observed once in a while has the lowest mean

at 1.73.

Table 4
Leadership styles as experienced by the respondents

Leadership Styles Mean Interpretation

Transformational 3.77 Fairly Often
Transactional 3.77 Fairly Often
Laissez-faire 2.21 Once in a while

This is the result on the most currently experienced leadership style by the

respondents of the study. Among the three leadership styles, transformational and

transactional leadership which are both fairly often observed has the highest means at

3.77 while laissez-faire leadership which is observed once in a while has the lowest mean

at 2.21. Emphasizing the importance of having a collective sense of mission, a behavior

under transformational leadership, is mostly observed by the employees with the highest

mean of 4.17 and not working with the employees to meet goals, a behavior under

laissez-faire leadership, is least observed by the employees with the lowest mean of 1.73.

Table 5
Respondents’ level of motivation towards work

f
Statement Mean Interpretation
N=30
Has managers and leaders who are helpful and fair 166 5.30 Agree
Gives you status and prestige 144 4.80 Agree
Provides satisfactory material rewards 131 4.37 Somewhat Agree
Allows you to reach and develop your full potential 142 4.73 Agree
Means working in pleasant and helpful 141 4.70 Agree
environment
Is a secure one 144 4.80 Agree
 24

Provides good physical working conditions 153 5.10 Agree

Is a challenging and exciting job 144 4.80 Agree
Is one where your good work and hard efforts are 138 4.60 Agree
appreciated
Taken all round and considering all its aspects, is a 140 4.67 Agree
very good one

This table shows the mean of the statements that will determine the respondents’

level of motivation towards their work. Most statements are agreed upon by the

respondents, indicating that they more or less are motivated by their job as faculty

members or teachers of the senior high school students.

Table 6
Respondents’ level of commitment to the organization

f
Statement Mean Interpretation
N=30
I am willing to put a great deal of effort beyond 160 5.33 Agree
that normally expected in order to help this
organization be successful
I talk high about this organization to my friends as 151 5.03 Agree
a great organization to work for
I feel very little loyalty to this organization 156 5.20 Agree
I would accept almost any type of job assignment 148 4.93 Agree
in order to keep working for this organization
I find that my values and organization‘s values are 149 4.97 Agree
very similar
I am proud to tell others that I am part of this 177 5.90 Strongly Agree
organization
I could just as well be working for a different 108 3.60 Somewhat Agree
organization as long as the type of work was
similar
This organization really inspires the very best in 153 5.10 Agree
 25

me in the way of job performance

It would take very little changes in my present 92 3.07 Somewhat Disagree
circumstances to cause me to leave this
organization
I am extremely glad that I choose this organization 156 5.20 Agree
to work for over other ,I was considering at the
time I joined
There is too much to be gained by sticking to this 144 4.80 Agree
organization indefinitely
I find it easy to agree with this organization‘s 147 4.90 Agree
policies on important matters relating to its
employees
I really care about the fate of this organization 143 4.77 Agree
For me, this is the best of all possible organizations 138 4.60 Agree
for which to work
Deciding to work for this organization was a right 145 4.83 Agree
decision on my part

The table from the previous page shows the mean of the statements that will

determine the respondents’ level of commitment to the organization. Most statements are

agreed upon by the respondents, indicating that they more or less are committed to the

educational institution that they belong to.

Table 7
Respondents’ level of motivation and commitment

Dependent Variables Mean Interpretation

Motivation 4.79 High
Commitment 4.82 High

This table determines the employees’ level of motivation towards their work and

their level of commitment to the organization. This table shows the mean of the

respondents’ level of motivation and commitment based on the previous tables. As

 26

observed from the previous tables (tables 5 and 6) and presented in the table above (table

7), the respondents have high levels of motivation towards work at 4.79 and high levels

of commitment towards the organization at 4.82.

Table 8
Leadership styles and employees’ motivation correlation

Sample 1 Sample 2 Correlation 95% CI for ρ P-Value

Motivation Transformational 0.379 (0.021, 0.650) *0.039
Motivation Transactional 0.475 (0.138, 0.713) *0.008
Motivation Laissez-faire -0.197 (-0.520, 0.176) 0.297
Note: * correlation is significant at α = 0.05

These are the results on the relationship of the three major leadership styles-

transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership, and employees’

motivation. The table above shows the results of the Pearson’s correlation statistical

treatment on the data on the different leadership styles and employees’ motivation from

the survey. At α = 0.05, p-value below the alpha level is considered significant and its

strength and direction is measured through its corresponding correlation coefficient. As

observed from the table, transformational leadership with the p-value of 0.0.39 and

transactional leadership with the p-value of 0.008, both have a significant relationship

with the employees’ high level of motivation, while laissez-faire leadership with the p-

value of 0.297 shows no significant relationship with employees’ high levels of

motivation. Transformational and transactional leadership with the respective correlation

coefficients of 0.379 and 0.475 have a weak positive relationship with employees’

motivation.

Table 9
 27

Leadership styles and employees’ commitment correlation

Sample 1 Sample 2 Correlation 95% CI for ρ P-Value

Commitment Transformational 0.287 (-0.082, 0.586) 0.125
Commitment Transactional 0.288 (-0.080, 0.587) 0.123
Commitment Laissez-faire -0.210 (-0.531, 0.162) 0.264
Note: * correlation is significant at α = 0.05

These are the results on the relationship of the three major leadership styles-

transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership, and employees’

commitment. The table above shows the results of the Pearson’s correlation statistical

treatment on the different leadership styles and employees’ commitment from the survey

data. Like the previous table, at α = 0.05, p-value below the alpha level is considered

significant and its strength and direction is measured through its corresponding

correlation coefficient. As observed from the table, all the leadership styles-

transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership with the corresponding p-

values of 0.125, 0.123, and 0.264, show no significant relationship with the employees’

high level of commitment.

Discussions

From the results of the survey, it is found out that employees fairly often observe

transformational leadership from their direct supervisor. Emphasizing the importance of

having a collective sense of mission has the highest mean at 4.17 and the behavior under

transformational leadership most often observed. On the other hand, talking about his/her

most important values and beliefs has the lowest mean at 3.40 and the behavior under

transformational leadership least observed. This suggests that the supervisor of the
 28

faculty members transform the needs, aspirations, and values of followers from a focus

on self-interest to a focus on collective interest. The supervisor practice trust building,

generate emotion, energy, and excitement that cause followers to make significant

personal sacrifices in the interest of the mission, and to perform above and beyond the

call of duty (Lussier and Achua, 2008).

Transactional leadership behavior is also fairly often observed by the employees.

Setting a standard for carrying out a job has the highest mean at 4.13 and the behavior

under transactional leadership most often observed, while valuing order and structure has

the lowest mean at 3.53 and the behavior under transactional leadership least observed.

As a transactional leader, the supervisor tend to focus on the clarification of task

requirements and the specification of contingent rewards (Bass, 1990).

Lastly, laissez-faire leadership is observed once in a while. Giving complete freedom

in choosing ways to finish the job which is sometimes observed has the highest mean at

3.4 and the behavior under laissez-faire leadership most often observed, while not

working with the employees to meet goals which is observed once in a while has the

lowest mean at 1.73 and the behavior under laissez-faire leadership least observed. This

indicates that the supervisor is not one to neglect duties and pass the heavy

responsibilities to the subordinates.

Among the three leadership styles, transformational and transactional leadership

which are both fairly often observed has the highest means, both at 3.77 while laissez-

faire leadership which is observed once in a while has the lowest mean at 2.21.

Emphasizing the importance of having a collective sense of mission, a behavior under

transformational leadership, is mostly observed by the employees with the highest mean
 29

of 4.17 and not working with the employees to meet goals, a behavior under laissez-faire

leadership, is least observed by the employees with the lowest mean of 1.73

The survey also determined the level of motivation and commitment of the

respondents. They have high levels of motivation towards work at 4.79 and high levels of

commitment towards the organization at 4.82.

The results of the Pearson’s correlation statistical treatment on the data determined

the relationship between the different leadership styles and employees’ motivation from

the survey data. At α = 0.05, p-value below the alpha level is considered significant and

its strength and direction is measured through its corresponding correlation coefficient.

As observed from the table, transformational leadership with the p-value of 0.0.39 and

transactional leadership with the p-value of 0.008, both have a significant relationship

with the employees’ high level of motivation, while laissez-faire leadership with the p-

value of 0.297 shows no significant relationship with employees’ high levels of

motivation. Transformational and transactional leadership with the respective correlation

coefficients of 0.379 and 0.475 have a weak positive relationship with employees’

motivation. These two leadership styles can positively but not greatly affect the level of

motivation of the employees. However, laissez-faire leadership, whether or not utilized

by the supervisor, will not be able to affect their level of motivation towards their work.

Pearson’s correlation statistical treatment was also used to determine the relationship

between the different leadership styles and employees’ commitment from the survey data.

Like the previous treatment, at α = 0.05, p-value below the alpha level is considered

significant and its strength and direction is measured through its corresponding

correlation coefficient. The results show that all the leadership styles- transformational,
 30

transactional, and laissez-faire leadership with the corresponding p-values of 0.125,

0.123, and 0.264, show no significant relationship with the employees’ high level of

commitment. Whether or not the supervisor of the department utilize any of the three

leadership styles, it does not affect the level of commitment the respondents have towards

the organization.

Summary of Findings

After all the processing, from data collection to treatment, the study reveals a number

of findings:

1. Results show that transformational and transactional leadership are the leadership

styles most often experienced by the employees from their supervisors;

2. These teachers of the Saint Paul School of Professional Studies - Senior High

School Department who were the respondents of the study possess high levels of

motivation towards work;

3. The same teachers who participated in the study also possess high levels of

commitment towards their organization;

4. Transformational and transactional leadership have a weakly positive significant

relationship with employees’ motivation at 0.379 and 0.475 respectively,

suggesting that the two can contribute in helping the employees have an

optimistic perspective towards their work. Laissez-faire leadership, on the other

hand, has no significant relationship with employees’ motivation, suggesting that

whether or not it is observed from their leader or direct supervisor, it will not

affect their level of motivation towards work;

 31

5. Lastly, the findings revealed that the three leadership styles, transformational,

transactional, and laissez-faire, have no significant relationship with employees’

commitment. Utilization of any of the three does not guarantee improvement on

the level of commitment the members have for their organization.

Conclusions

For an organization to be productive and successful, improving the members’

motivation and commitment is a must. Hence, variables that can enhance the level of

motivation towards work and the level of commitment a member have for his/her

organization should be identified. One of the most often variable used by business

organizations is the leadership style of the head. This variable is used by the researchers

in the study to determine if it has a relationship with employees’ motivation and

commitment in an educational institution. After the analyzing the results and interpreting

the data from the survey, it can be concluded that:

1. Among the three major leadership styles, namely transformational,

transactional, and laissez-faire leadership, majority of the teachers from the Senior

High School Department of Saint Paul School of Professional Studies experience

transformational and transactional leadership from their direct supervisor;

2. The teachers from the Senior High School Department of Saint Paul School of

Professional Studies are highly motivated towards their work as faculty members;

3. The teachers from the Senior High School Department of Saint Paul School of

Professional Studies are also highly committed to the educational institution;

 32

4.1. There is a significant relationship between transformational leadership style and

employees’ motivation. The style has a weakly positive connection with the

teachers’ motivation towards work, making transformational leadership a contributor

for having this high level of motivation;

4.2. There is a significant relationship between transactional leadership style and

employees’ motivation. The style has a weakly positive connection with the

teachers’ motivation towards work, making transactional leadership a contributor for

having this high level of motivation;

4.3. There is no significant relationship between laissez-faire leadership style and

employees’ motivation. Teachers experiencing laissez-faire leadership, may or may

not have a strong motivation towards work;

5.1. There is no significant relationship between transformational leadership style

and employees’ commitment. Teachers experiencing transformational leadership,

may or may not have a strong commitment towards their organization or department;

5.2. There is no significant relationship between transactional leadership style and

employees’ commitment. Teachers experiencing transactional leadership, may or

may not have a strong commitment towards their organization or department;

5.3. There is no significant relationship between laissez-faire leadership style and

employees’ commitment. Teachers experiencing laissez-faire leadership, may or may

not have a strong commitment towards their organization or department.

Recommendations
 33

From the results and conclusion, the researchers suggest the following strategies that

may help educational institutions, especially faculty heads, in increasing their work

productivity through high levels of employee motivation and commitment. The survey

conducted also raised several hypotheses worthy of further research on the variables

leadership style, employees’ motivation, and employees’ commitment. In particular, the

researchers recommend the following:

1. Utilize and enhance transformational and transactional leadership styles to

positively affect employee motivation;

2. Perform researches that will identify the major contributors of the employees’ high

levels of commitment towards the educational institution and why they are so;

3. Examine the effectiveness of the different leadership styles in motivating the

teachers to work beyond what is expected from them for the welfare of the students

and of the organization;

4. Conduct further researches regarding the leadership style of different generations,

from which is most effective to least in terms of heightening organizational

productivity;

5. Identify other factors that can directly affect organizational productivity and

determine its relationship with the three major leadership styles.

34