INFLUENCE OF LEADERSHIP STYLES ON JOB

PERFORMANCE AND SATISFACTION OF EMPLOYEES

OF TELANGANA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
CORPORATION

A Thesis submitted to
Ponnaiyah Ramajayam Institute of Science & Technology (PRIST)
for the award of the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
in
MANAGEMENT

Submitted by
BRAHMANANDA RAO PEDDIBOYINA

(Reg. No. 161711183)

Under the Guidance of

DR.K.G.SELVAN

CENTER FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Department of Management Studies

PONNAIYAH RAMAJAYAM INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

(PRIST)
(Institution Deemed to be University-U/s 3 of the UGC Act, 1956)
VALLAM, THANJAVUR – 613 403

August, 2021
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
DEDICATION



 
  к ,  
к ,   

!
 "# , $
# .

i
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, I am ever grateful to my Parents, Smt Nagamani Peddiboyina and
Sri Venkata Krishna Rao Peddiboyina, whose blessings have led me unfailingly through the
maze of this thesis.

The thesis in itself is an acknowledgement to the inspiration, drive and assistance

contributed by many individuals. I am fortunate to have found an abundance of such individuals
at every step. With immense gratitude, I acknowledge the following persons for their pivotal role
in helping me for the completion of the study.

Words fall inadequate to express my sense of gratitude and indebtedness, to Dr. K. G.

Selvan, M.Com., MBA., M.Phil., Ph.D., Associate Professor, PRIST School of Business,
Ponnaiyah Ramajayam Institute of Science & Technology (PRIST – Institution Deemed to be
University – U/s 3 of the UGC Act, 1956), Vallam, Thanjavur - 613 403, Tamil Nadu State, who
with his perceptive and discerning guidance enabled me to carry out this research study. His
profound knowledge, cheerful patience, unassuming and genuine concern have drawn great
admiration. His valuable guidance has helped me a lot.

At the outset, my most sincere thanks to Ponnaiyah Ramajayam Institute of Science &
Technology (PRIST – Institution Deemed to be University – U/s 3 of the UGC Act, 1956) for
having given me an opportunity to do PhD. I would always cherish this with gratitude.

I express my gratitude, also to the Respected Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor, the Director,

Centre for Research and Development and the Head and the Department, Members of the PRIST
School of Business.

I stand grateful for the profuse encouragement, pertinent suggestions and invaluable
comments made by Dr. Ashutosh Das, Director, Center for Research and Development,
Ponnaiyah Ramajayam Institute of Science & Technology (PRIST – Institution Deemed to be
University – U/s 3 of the UGC Act, 1956), Vallam, Thanjavur - 613 403, Tamil Nadu State,
during the course of this thesis which helped me to improve my work in many ways.

ii
 I am immensely thankful to Dr. R. Ganapathi, Assistant Professor, Directorate of
Distance Education, Alagappa University, Karaikudi, Kancheepuram District, Tamil Nadu – the
Research Advisory Member, for his valuable support.

I am thankful to Dr S.VENKATESH, MBA, MPM, MA, Ph.D., Associate Professor,

PRIST School of Business, for his invaluable guidance in complying with the Thesis submission.

I thank my Wife Aruna Peddiboyina, B.Sc., who has stood by me through all my
difficult times and tolerated my fits of temper and impatience. I thank her for her support and
encouragement. Along with her, I want to acknowledge my Son, Abhijith Yadav Peddiboyina,
and Daughter – in – Law, Nikhila Punyamurthy who have inspired me with their academic
achievements. My family has been wonderful and patient with me. I thank them profusely for
their understanding and support.

I sincerely thank all the respondents from Telangana State Road Transport Corporation
for their patient filling up of the questionnaire and answering all my queries. I particularly thank
Mr Padma Sekhar, Personal Secretary to Executive Director, who has helped me in
gathering and structuring the voluminous information.

Brahmananda Rao Peddiboyina

iii
DECLARATION
 PONNAIYAH RAMAJAYAM INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY (PRIST)
(Institution Deemed to be University-U/s 3 of the UGC Act, 1956)
Vallam, Thanjavur – 613 403
Tamilnadu, INDIA

Declaration

I do hereby declare that the work presented in the thesis entitled “INFLUENCE OF
LEADERSHIP STYLES ON JOB PERFORMANCE AND SATISFACTION OF
EMPLOYEES OF TELANGANA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION”,
submitted by me to the Ponnaiyah Ramajayam Institute of Science & Technology (PRIST),
Thanjavur – 613 403 for the award of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Research is a
original record of research work carried out by me under the supervision of “ Dr. K G Selvan,
Professor, PRIST School of Science and Management”. The contents of this thesis, in full or in
parts, have not been submitted to any other Institute or University for the award of any degree or
diploma, membership, fellowship, associateship etc., In keeping with the general practice in
reporting scientific observation, due acknowledgement has been made whenever the work
described is based on the findings of other investigators.

Place: Signature of the Research Scholar

Date:

iv
CERTIFICATE
 PONNAIYAH RAMAJAYAM INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY (PRIST)
(Institution Deemed to be University-U/s 3 of the UGC Act, 1956)
Vallam, Thanjavur – 613 403
Tamilnadu, INDIA

Dr K G Selvan,
Professor,
PRIST School of Science and Management,
PRIST University, Thanjavur.

Bona-fide Certificate

This is to certify that the thesis entitled “INFLUENCE OF LEADERSHIP STYLES ON JOB
PERFORMANCE AND SATISFACTION OF EMPLOYEES OF TELANGANA STATE
ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION”, submitted by “Brahmananda Rao Peddiboyina“
to the Ponnaiyah Ramajayam Institute of Science & Technology (PRIST), Thanjavur – 613
403 for the award of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Research is a bona-fide record of
research work carried out by him under my supervision. The contents of this thesis, in full or in
parts, have not been submitted to any other Institute or University for the award of any degree,
diploma, associateship, fellowship or any similar title and that it represents entirely an
independent work on the part of the candidate.

Place: Signature of Research Guide

Date:

v
ABSTRACT
 INFLUENCE OF LEADERSHIP STYLES ON JOB
PERFORMANCE AND SATISFACTION OF EMPLOYEES OF
TELANGANA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION

ABSTRACT
Leadership style is one of the most significant factors that affect the attitudes
and behavior of employees and leaders practices different styles while they are
leading employees in the organization. The selection of particular leadership style is
depending on personality and characteristics of leaders, acceptance of employees,
complexity of work and organizational features. Hence, leaders should have abilities
and skills to assess the internal and external environment of organization, find out
conditional factors and exercise a specific leadership style for the success of
organization. The leadership styles influence employees to contribute for the
achieving of preset objectives and goals. Therefore, leadership style is primary and
foremost the capability to encourage employees to perform job over the periods of
time using motivational methods. Since leadership style is a prime factor for
increasing job performance of employees and organization, the progress of
organization is depending highly on effectiveness of leadership styles in each and
every level of organization. An effective leadership style helps employees to change
their insufficiency into job satisfaction and increases job performance of employees
and organization.

The research problem chosen is to study influence of leadership styles on job

performance and satisfaction of employees of Telangana state road transport
corporation. Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (TSRTC) is selected for
the present study. There are three zones namely Karimnagar, Hyderabad and Greater
Hyderabad which are chosen for the study. The employees of TSRTC from these
zones are chosen by using multi stage random sampling method. The data are
collected from 406 employees of Telangana state road transport corporation pre-
tested and structured questionnaire. In order to accomplish the objectives,
percentages, mean, standard deviation, confirmatory factor analysis, exploratory
factor analysis, t-test, ANOVA test, Chi-square test, correlation analysis, multiple
regression and structural equation model are used.

vi
 Significant difference is there in autocratic leadership style among profile of
employees excluding gender, age category, type of family and residential area.
Significant difference is there in democratic leadership style among profile of
employees excluding gender, education, designation, work experience, type of
family, size of family and residential area. Significant difference is there in laissez-
faire leadership style among marital status, size of family and residential area of
employees. Significant difference is there in transformational leadership style among
work experience and monthly income of employees. Significant difference is there
in transactional leadership style among marital status of employees. Transactional
leadership is the most dominant leadership style in Telangana state road transport
corporation.

Significant difference is there in determinants of leadership styles among

profile of employees excluding education, designation, monthly income, marital
status, type of family, size of family and residential area. Significant association is
there in job performance among profile of employees excluding gender, age
category, designation, work experience, monthly income, marital status, type of
family and size of family. Transactional leadership, transformational leadership,
autocratic leadership and democratic leadership are positively and significantly
influencing job performance of employees of Telangana state road transport
corporation. Significant association is there in job satisfaction among profile of
employees excluding gender, designation, monthly income, type of family, size of
family and residential area.

Transactional leadership, transformational leadership, democratic leadership

and autocratic leadership are significantly and positively influencing job satisfaction
of employees of Telangana state road transport corporation. Capability, atmosphere,
adjustability, coordination and personality are positively and moderately related with
job satisfaction of employees of Telangana state road transport corporation.
Coordination, adjustability, personality, capability and atmosphere are directly and
positively influencing job performance of employees of Telangana state road
transport corporation, while, job performance is directly and positively influencing
job satisfaction of employees of Telangana state road transport corporation.

vii
 Telangana state road transport corporation must give adequate trainings to
leaders to use both styles of leadership and also for improving their knowledge,
skills, innovation, standards and competencies of leadership. In addition, leaders
should involve in teaching and training of employees. Telangana state road transport
corporation must design leadership development programmers in accordance with
personality of employees to make a highly effective leadership style. Leadership
styles should communicate objectives and values of Telangana state road transport
corporation to their employees thus, it can motivate them to perform better.

To increase job performance of employees, Telangana state road transport

corporation should give adequate trainings periodically to their employees to find
out the problems relating to their jobs and employees must be allowed to find the
solutions for them. To enhance the job satisfaction of employees, Telangana state
road transport corporation must give fair and adequate salaries and it should provide
better work culture to their employees. Besides, leaders must give due recognition
and rewards and appreciate their employees for best performance.

viii
PREAMBLE
 PREAMBLE
Leadership is the most studied, yet the least understood of all the subjects in Management. No
other topic in the behavioral sciences has been more studied and more written about than
leadership. There are many attempts to answer the question what is leadership, but the question
still evades an answer.

Civilizations have always dealt with the issue of Leadership. Nearly Four Hundred years before
Christ is born, Aristotle expressed that leadership is not about gaining power or prestige, but it is
about developing the followers to their full potential. Therefore, Leader, as per Aristotle, is the
one who has the ability to create a conducive atmosphere so that all his followers can develop
their innate capabilities to the full potential.

The ancient Chinese leadership theory, Taoism offered some insights on leadership thought.
Understanding others is the central theme of leadership in Taoism. Collaboration, Use of
minimal power, Guiding the followers, Self Analysis, and Empathy are some of the Leadership
Capabilities highlighted by Taoism.

According to Bhagavad Gita, doing one’s own duty is most important and the Leader should not
waver from doing his duty, even under most trying circumstances (as faced by the King Arjuna,
in killing his own kith and kin in the battlefield). The essential leadership qualities highlighted by
Gita are, being true to oneself and one’s own values, and wisdom combined with right action.

A review of the modern leadership literature reveals many schools of thought which have
evolved from “Great Man Theories” to “Trait Theories” and ‘Transformational Theory’.

While Great Man Theories assumed that Leaders are born with certain natural qualities, the Trait
Theories listed certain traits i.e., 1. Ambition and Energy, 2. The desire to direct, 3. Honor and
Integrity, 4. Self-confidence, 5. Intellegince, 6. Knowledge, as the requirements of leadership.
The theories looked for universal qualities which separated a leader from a non-leader. Those
who possess these traits lead, and those who do not, “will not lead”.

In contrast, the Behavioral Theorists concentrated on what leaders actually do to achieve their
goals, than on their personal qualities. Different patterns of behavior are detected among the
leaders and these patterns are categorized as “Styles of Leadership”. The Behavioral School

ix
based its approach on teaching these ‘styles of leadership’ through training, thus making leaders.
While Trait theories assumed that, Leaders are born, rather than made, Behavioral Theorists
firmly believed that leadership can be taught.

Situational Leadership assumes that each situation is unique and proposes for adopting different
leadership styles for different situations. For example, some situations may require an autocratic
style, but others may need a more participative approach.

Contingency Theory is a further refinement of the Situational Leadership and it has tried to
exactly match the type of leadership style with the situation, taking certain inputs from the
situation. But in practice, it has not yielded much result and mostly confined to theoretical
application.

Transactional leadership theories assume an exchange role between leaders and employees and
Transactional Leadership exchanges targets and rewards between organization and employees. A
transactional leader motivates his followers with rewards or punishments, strictly as per the
achievement of organizational goals.

The central concept of “Transformational Theory” is change and the role of leadership in
envisioning and implementing the transformation of organizational performance. The
transformational leader is an ante thesis of transactional leadership. He commands the obedience
of his followers not for the sake of rewards or for the fear of punishments but for a good cause or
a higher order goal, transcending the self-interest of the followers. James McGregor Burns has
put it succinctly, when he said “Clearly the leader who commands compelling causes has an
extraordinary potential influence over followers”.

Katz has rejected the idea of ‘Born Managers’ and posited that they can be developed through
proper training, by identifying the skills needed at various levels in the organization.

It is well established that the leadership style of the Chief Executive Officer of the organization
played a great role in the development or otherwise of the organization. The Strategic Vision,
Problem solving ability and the Behavioral skills of the leaders have shown to be playing great
role in the development of the Organization.

x
Therefore, for the Organizations which are in difficulties and not doing well on the financial
front, a proper leader with suitable leadership style to that organization is a good solution.

Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (TSRTC) is a large scale Public Transport
Corporation, catering to 92% of the travel needs of approximately 4 crores of Telangana citizens.
It has a large fleet of 10,462 buses and operates from 97 Depots. The Corporation buses operate
36 lakh kms per day and carries One Crore of passengers to their destinations every single day.
However, such a large and mammoth organization is facing financial difficulties, industrial
relations problems and is fighting for its existence.

Therefore, if the organization (TSRTC) can be studied for the existing leadership styles,
determinants of leadership, the job satisfaction levels of its employees, the job performance of
employees in relation to leadership style, then one may be in a position to recommend an
appropriate leadership style, which will improve the job performance and job satisfaction of the
employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

xi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE

Acknowledgement iii

Abstract vi – viii

Preamble ix – xi

Table of Contents xii

List of Tables xiii – xx

xxi
List of Figures
xxii
List of Abbreviations

CHAPTER TITLE

1 – 22
I. Introduction and Design of the Study

II. Review of Literature 1 – 23

III. Leadership Styles in Telangana State Road Transport Corporation 1 – 79

Job Performance and Satisfaction of Employees of Telangana State 1 – 47

IV.
Road Transport Corporation

V. Summary of Findings, Suggestions and Conclusion 1 – 16

xxiii –
References xxxix

Appendix – I (Questionnaire) xl – xlix

xii
LIST OF TABLES
 LIST OF TABLES

Table Page
Title Of The Table
No. No.
1.1 Sampling Distribution of the Employees 1-19

3.1 Gender of Employees 3-1

3.2 Age Category of Employees 3-2

3.3 Education of Employees 3-2

3.4 Designation of Employees 3-3

3.5 Work Experience of Employees 3-3

3.6 Monthly Income of Employees 3-4

3.7 Marital Status of Employees 3-4

3.8 Type of Family of Employees 3-5

3.9 Size of Family of Employees 3-5

3.10 Residential Area of Employees 3-6

Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Leadership Styles in

3.11 3-7
Telangana State Road Transport Corporation
Construct Reliability for Leadership Styles in Telangana State
3.12 3-8
Road Transport Corporation

3.13 Autocratic Leadership Style 3-8

Distribution of Employees on the Basis of Autocratic

3.14 3-10
Leadership Style

xiii
Table Page
Title Of The Table
No. No.
3.15 Gender and Autocratic Leadership Style 3-10

3.16 Age Category and Autocratic Leadership Style 3-11

3.17 Education and Autocratic Leadership Style 3-12

3.18 Designation and Autocratic Leadership Style 3-14

3.19 Work Experience and Autocratic Leadership Style 3-15

3.20 Monthly Income and Autocratic Leadership Style 3-17

3.21 Marital Status and Autocratic Leadership Style 3-18

3.22 Type of Family and Autocratic Leadership Style 3-19

3.23 Size of Family and Autocratic Leadership Style 3-20

3.24 Residential Area and Autocratic Leadership Style 3-21

3.25 Democratic Leadership Style 3-22

Distribution of Employees on the Basis of Democratic

3.26 3-24
Leadership Style

3.27 Gender and Democratic Leadership Style 3-24

3.28 Age Category and Democratic Leadership Style 3-26

3.29 Education and Democratic Leadership Style 3-27

3.30 Designation and Democratic Leadership Style 3-28

xiv
Table Page
Title Of The Table
No. No.
3.31 Work Experience and Democratic Leadership Style 3-30

3.32 Monthly Income and Democratic Leadership Style 3-31

3.33 Marital Status and Democratic Leadership Style 3-33

3.34 Type of Family and Democratic Leadership Style 3-34

3.35 Size of Family and Democratic Leadership Style 3-35

3.36 Residential Area and Democratic Leadership Style 3-36

3.37 Laissez-Faire Leadership Style 3-37

Distribution of Employees on the Basis of Laissez-Faire

3.38 3-38
Leadership Style

3.39 Gender and Laissez-Faire Leadership Style 3-39

3.40 Age Category and Laissez-Faire Leadership Style 3-40

3.41 Education and Laissez-Faire Leadership Style 3-41

3.42 Designation and Laissez-Faire Leadership Style 3-42

3.43 Work Experience and Laissez-Faire Leadership Style 3-44

3.44 Monthly Income and Laissez-Faire Leadership Style 3-45

3.45 Marital Status and Laissez-Faire Leadership Style 3-47

3.46 Type of Family and Laissez-Faire Leadership Style 3-48

xv
Table Page
Title Of The Table
No. No.
3.47 Size of Family and Laissez-Faire Leadership Style 3-49

3.48 Residential Area and Laissez-Faire Leadership Style 3-50

3.49 Transformational Leadership Style 3-51

Distribution of Employees on the Basis of Transformational

3.50 3-52
Leadership Style

3.51 Gender and Transformational Leadership Style 3-53

3.52 Age Category and Transformational Leadership Style 3-54

3.53 Education and Transformational Leadership Style 3-55

3.54 Designation and Transformational Leadership Style 3-56

3.55 Work Experience and Transformational Leadership Style 3-58

3.56 Monthly Income and Transformational Leadership Style 3-59

3.57 Marital Status and Transformational Leadership Style 3-61

3.58 Type of Family and Transformational Leadership Style 3-62

3.59 Size of Family and Transformational Leadership Style 3-63

3.60 Residential Area and Transformational Leadership Style 3-64

3.61 Transactional Leadership Style 3-65

Distribution of Employees on the Basis of Transactional

3.62 3-66
Leadership Style

xvi
Table Page
Title Of The Table
No. No.
3.63 Gender and Transactional Leadership Style 3-67

3.64 Age Category and Transactional Leadership Style 3-68

3.65 Education and Transactional Leadership Style 3-69

3.66 Designation and Transactional Leadership Style 3-70

3.67 Work Experience and Transactional Leadership Style 3-72

3.68 Monthly Income and Transactional Leadership Style 3-73

3.69 Marital Status and Transactional Leadership Style 3-75

3.70 Type of Family and Transactional Leadership Style 3-76

3.71 Size of Family and Transactional Leadership Style 3-77

3.72 Residential Area and Transactional Leadership Style 3-78

Assessment of Leadership Styles in Telangana State Road

3.73 3-79
Transport Corporation
Determinants of Leadership Styles in Telangana State Road
4.1 4-2
Transport Corporation
Distribution of Employees on the Basis of Determinants of
4.2 4-4
Leadership Styles

4.3 Gender and Determinants of Leadership Styles 4-4

4.4 Age Category and Determinants of Leadership Styles 4-5

4.5 Education and Determinants of Leadership Styles 4-7

xvii
Table Page
Title Of The Table
No. No.
4.6 Designation and Determinants of Leadership Styles 4-8

4.7 Work Experience and Determinants of Leadership Styles 4-10

4.8 Monthly Income and Determinants of Leadership Styles 4-11

4.9 Marital Status and Determinants of Leadership Styles 4-13

4.10 Type of Family and Determinants of Leadership Styles 4-14

4.11 Size of Family and Determinants of Leadership Styles 4-15

4.12 Residential Area and Determinants of Leadership Styles 4-16

4.13 Job Performance 4-17

4.14 Distribution of Employees on the Basis of Job Performance 4-18

4.15 Gender and Job Performance 4-19

4.16 Age Category and Job Performance 4-20

4.17 Education and Job Performance 4-21

4.18 Designation and Job Performance 4-22

4.19 Work Experience and Job Performance 4-23

4.20 Monthly Income and Job Performance 4-25

4.21 Marital Status and Job Performance 4-26

4.22 Type of Family and Job Performance 4-27

xviii
Table Page
Title Of The Table
No. No.
4.23 Size of Family and Job Performance 4-28

4.24 Residential Area and Job Performance 4-29

Influence of Leadership Styles on Job Performance of

4.25 4-30
Employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation

4.26 Job Satisfaction 4-31

4.27 Distribution of Employees on the Basis of Job Satisfaction 4-31

4.28 Gender and Job Satisfaction 4-32

4.29 Age Category and Job Satisfaction 4-33

4.30 Education and Job Satisfaction 4-34

4.31 Designation and Job Satisfaction 4-35

4.32 Work Experience and Job Satisfaction 4-37

4.33 Monthly Income and Job Satisfaction 4-38

4.34 Marital Status and Job Satisfaction 4-39

4.35 Type Of Family and Job Satisfaction 4-40

4.36 Size Of Family and Job Satisfaction 4-41

4.37 Residential Area and Job Satisfaction 4-42

Influence of Leadership Styles on Job Satisfaction of

4.38 4-43
Employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation

xix
Table Page
Title Of The Table
No. No.
Relation among Determinants of Leadership Styles and Job
4.39 Satisfaction of Employees of Telangana State Road Transport 4-44
Corporation

4.40 Standardized Structural Path Coefficients 4-45

4.41 Model Fit Parameters 4-46

xx
LIST OF FIGURES
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page
Title of the Figure
No. No.
1.1 Proposed Leadership Styles Influence on JP and JS Model 1-17

Path Diagram for Job Satisfaction of Employees of Telangana State Road

4.1 4-46
Transport Corporation

xxi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
 List of Abbreviations
AD: Adjustability

APSRTC: Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation

AT: Atmosphere

AVE: Average Variance Extracted.

CA: Capability

CFA: Confirmatory Factor Analysis.

CFI: Comparative Fit Index.

CO: Co-ordination

CR: Composite Reliability.

DV: Discriminant Validity.

GFI: Goodness of Fit Index .

JP: Job Performance

JS: Job Satisfaction

PE: Personality

RMR: Root Means Square Residual.

RMSEA: Root Mean Square Error of Approximation.

SD: Standard Deviation

TSRTC: Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

xxii
 CHAPTER – I

INTRODUCTION AND DESIGN OF THE

STUDY
 CHAPTER – I

INTRODUCTION AND DESIGN OF THE STUDY

1.1 INTRODUCTION

In the contemporary business environment, organizations of different

industries are undergoing a tremendous change, which is moving at a huge speed.
Thus, skills and realizing the internal strengths and flaw of the employees in the
organization is highly helpful for the success of leader and or organization.
Employees are valuable resources because they will generate values and set
standards for organizations. Therefore, organizations realize that encouraged, stable
and skilled employees can contribute to the success and survival of organizations
(Watson, 1994)1.

The growth of organization depends on certain key factors that increase

efficiency and effectiveness of employees for sustainability of the organization. The
enhancement in productivity leads to better behavior, values and goals that improve
organizational culture and commitment of employees. Organizations need leaders
who can lead employees and organizations competently and successfully. But each
leader is different in style of functioning and it relies on various situations and
inclinations. Leadership style is the type of thinking, acting and behavior that a leader
exercises to deal with the employees and circumstances.

Leadership style is one of the most significant factors that affect the attitudes
and behavior of employees and leaders practice different styles while they are
leading employees in the organization. The selection of particular leadership style is
dependent on personality and characteristics of leaders, acceptance of employees,

1
. Watson, T. (1994). Linking employee motivation and satisfaction to the bottom line. CMA
Magazine, 68(3), 1 - 7.
complexity of work and organizational features (House and Aditya, 1994)2. Hence,
leaders should have abilities and skills to assess the internal and external
environment of organization, find out conditional factors and exercise a specific
leadership style for the success of organization.

The leadership styles influence employees to contribute for the achieving of

preset objectives and goals. Therefore, leadership style is primarily the capability to
encourage employees to perform job over the periods of time using motivational
methods (Yammarino and Dubinsky, 1994)3. Since leadership style is a prime factor
for increasing job performance of employees and organization, the progress of
organization depends heavily on effectiveness of leadership styles in each and every
level of organization. An effective leadership style helps employees to change their
insufficiency into job satisfaction and increases job performance of employees and
organization.

Leadership styles have an effect on various work environments which

directly influences job satisfaction of employees. Besides, the level of compatibility
between employees and leadership styles is one of the most important aspects on job
dissatisfaction or satisfaction of employees in the organization. Having a specific
leadership style is the important component that affects the job satisfaction of
employees that guides the success of organization. In addition, job satisfaction of
employees is an indicator of effectiveness of a particular leadership style.

1.2 LEADERSHIP

Leadership is a process in which individual influences over other people

effectively to achieve preferred objectives (Burns, 1978)4. Leadership is the process

2
. House, R. J., & Aditya, R. N. (1994). What we know about leadership effectiveness and
personality. American Psychologist, 46(6), 491 - 499.

3
. Yammarino, F. J., & Dubinsky, A. J. (1994). Transformational Leadership theory: Using
levels of analysis to determine boundary condition. Personnel Psychology, 47, 787 - 811.

4
. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

2
of inspiring and directing employees to perform the work-oriented actions of the
group. Leadership is the skill of persuading people so that they will try hard readily
and passionately towards the attainment of goals of a group (Koontz and Weihrich,
1988)5.

Leadership is the action of influencing people to reach the objectives of a

group (Hersey and Blanchard, 1988)6. Leadership is the managing of human
resources in order to supervise their performance by stimulating them to work
enthusiastically (Dressler, 1997)7.

Leadership is an idea that influences members in a group to obligate

themselves liberally to the attainment of objectives or tasks of a group (Cole, 1997)8.
Leadership is the practice of promoting and assisting others to work passionately
towards goals through transforming the potentials of group in to actuality (Okumbe,
1999)9.

Hughes et al (1999)10 describe leadership as the method of influencing a

group for realizing its goals. Yukl (2002)11 defines leadership is the process of social
influence wherein one individual influences group of individuals or groups to form
the activities and relation in a group.

5
. Koontz, H., & Weihrich, H. (1988). Essentials of management. New York: McGraw-Hill.

6
. Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. (1988). Management of organizational behaviour. New
Jersey: Prentice Hall.

7
. Dressler, G. (1997). Human resource management. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

8
. Cole, G. A. (1997). Personnel management. London: Ashford Colocur Press.

9
. Okumbe, J. A. (1999). Educational management: Theory and practice. Nairobi: Nairobi
University Press.

10
. Hughes, H., Ginnett, M., & Curphy, R.. (1999). Leadership. Singapore: McGraw-Hill.

11
. Yukl, G. A. (2002). Leadership in organizations. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

3
 Leadership is the capability to influence the members of group for the
attainment of objectives (Dran, 2004)12. Leadership is the relation between leader
and her or his followers and as a collective arrangement of two or more members in
a group (Dubrin, 2007)13.

In sum, leadership must have followers and followers are ready to accept
directions and guidance from their leaders. Leadership distributes power and
authority equally among all the members in a group and lastly leadership has legal
right to give orders to their followers or members in a group. Leadership is not
essentially restricted to single person but can be shared among members of a group.

1.3 CHARACTERISTICS OF LEADERSHIP

Leadership must have the capacity to lead by model, in efforts to get the
esteem and trust among its followers or members in a group. Self-discipline will
allow leadership to keep others accountable for their activities (Drucker, 1996)14.
The most important characteristics of leadership are as follows.

- High level of personal ethics

- Adaptability

- Cooperative
- Dependable
- Decisive
- High vigor

12
. Dran, G. V. (2004). Leader - An earned title who. Website:
www.ffos.hr/lida/lida2004/ppt/subota/LIDA_2004_Gisela_von_Dran.ppt+leader+roles+in+
hrm%22ppt%22&hl=en&ie=Utf-8, 1 - 5.

13
. Dubrin, A. (2007). Leadership: Research findings, practice and skills. New York:
Houghton Mifflin.

14
. Drucker, P. (1996). Your leadership is unique. Christianity Today International
Leadership Journal. 18(4), 52 - 57.

4
- Work priorities
- Courage
- Assertive
- Knowledgeable
- Dedication and commitment
- Innovativeness
- Goal orientation
- Inspirational enthusiasm
- Confidence and cool under pressure
- Aspiration to help others

1.4 LEADERSHIP STYLES

Leadership is the capacity of a group to achieve general goals that would not
be achieved if leader was not there (Graham, 1997)15. Nowadays, organizations want
effective and efficient leadership style who clearly understands the problems and
complications of the swiftly changing environments. If the work is well described
and structured, leader has better relations with the employees, and they are highly
efficient. Leadership style is comparatively a constant pattern of behavior that
describes a leader. Leadership styles are the methods practiced to motivate
employees and leadership styles must be chosen and followed to fit individuals,
groups and organizations. Various leadership styles are at practice in different type
of organizations. The major leadership styles are:

1.4.1 AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE

Autocratic leadership styles is one in which the leader keeps as much

authority and decision making power as possible. The leader does not discuss with
the employees and will not permit employees to give any suggestions. Employees

15
. Graham, J. (1997). Outdoor leadership: Technique, common sense and self confidence.
Seattle: The Mountaineers.

5
are instructed to follow orders without any explanations. The motivational
atmosphere is done by generating well planned set of penalties and rewards (Robbin,
1994)16.

Autocratic leaders usually make options on the basis of their own thoughts
and judgments and hardly ever get advice from employees. Autocratic leadership
controls a group completely with authorization (Dicksona et al 2003)17. Autocratic
leadership style is characterized by dictating all methods, procedures and policies by
leader without consulting the employees and is marked by an absence of proper
communication between leader and employees (Edem, 1998)18. The advantage of
autocratic leadership is that, it is extremely effective and efficient. Decisions are
taken rapidly and the work to execute those decisions can start right away (Popa,
2012)19.

1.4.2 DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE

Democratic leaders take the final decisions, but allow members of team to
participate in the decision making and they promote creativity and members in team
are frequently and highly involved in activities and decisions (Ivancevich et al
2007)20. The democratic leader informs all the things to employees that affect their

16
. Robbin, S. P. (1994). Essentials of organizational behaviour. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

17
. Dicksona, M. W., Hartogb, D. N. D., & Mitchelsona, J. K. (2003). Research on
leadership in a cross-cultural context: Making progress and raising new questions. The
Leadership Quarterly, 14,729 - 738.

18
. Eden, D. A. (1998). Introduction to education administration in Nigeria. Ibadan:
Spectrum Books.

19
. Popa, B. M. (2012). The relationship between leadership effectiveness and organizational
performance. Journal of Defense Resources Management, 1, 123 - 127.

20
. Ivancevich, J., Konopaske, R., & Matteson, M. (2007). Organization behaviour and
management. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.

6
job, gets information from all the employees and shares problem solving and
decision making responsibilities (Choi, 2007)21.

Democratic leaders are employee oriented and permits their employees to

contribute to organizational success (Ghosh and Shejwal, 2006)22. Democratic
leadership can create high standards of work in terms of quantity and quality,
motivation, team spirit, cooperation, trust and high degree of morale. In addition,
democratic leaders permit employees to set up their own goals and assess their
performance and acknowledges and encourages achievement of employees
(Denhardt and Denhardt, 2003)23.

1.4.3 LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP STYLE

Laissez-faire leadership is also recognized as delegation oriented leadership,

is a kind of leadership style in which leaders are free and permit members in a group
to take decisions (Robbins et al 2007)24. Laissez-faire leadership gives very little
guidance to employees, full freedom for making decision, gives resources and
allows members of group to resolve their problems. Leader has less concern on
performance of their subordinates (Warrick, 1981)25.

21
. Choi, S. (2007). Democratic leadership: The lessons of exemplary models for democratic
governance. International Journal of Leadership Studies, 2(3), 243 - 262.

22
. Ghosh, S. K., & Shejwal, B. R. (2006). Relationship between perceived organizational
values and leadership styles. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 42(1), 57 - 72.

23
. Denhardt, J. V., & Denhardt, R. B. (2003). The new public service: Serving, not steering.
New York: Sharpe.

24
. Robbins, S. P., Judge, T. A., & Sanghi, S. (2007). Organizational behaviour. New Delhi:
Pearson-Prentice Hall.

25
. Warrick, D. D. (1981). Leadership styles and their consequences. Journal of Experiential
Learning and Simulation, 3(4), 155 - 172.

7
 An outcome of laissez-faire leadership is negative and very poor job
performance (Goodnight, 2004)26. Laissez-faire leaders are missing when they are
most needed, and generally they evade to take decisive actions. Laissez-faire
leadership can be successful in circumstance where group members are extremely
motivated, skilled and competent of working on their own. But, this leadership style
produces low level of job performance of employees and it creates negative
consequences for organization (Skogstand et al 2007)27.

1.4.4 TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE

Transformational leadership style is a leadership which redefines vision and

mission of employees, and is a restoration of commitment and changing procedure
for reaching objectives. Transformational leadership is the ability of a leader to
encourage employees to reach the objectives of organization rather than personal
interest of employees (Copland, 2003)28. It focuses on the growth of employees and
their requirements and it develops values, inspiration and morale of employees
(Ismai et al 2009)29.

Transformational leaders motivate employees to deal issues from different

perspectives, gives support and back-up, informs a vision and induces emotions and
recognition. It increases the level of motivation of employees, mediating and solving

26
. Goodnight, R. (2004). Laissez-faire leadership. The Economic Journal, 98(39),
755 - 771.

27
. Skogstad, A, Einarsen, S., Torsheim, T., Aasland, M. S., & Hetland, H. (2007). The
destructiveness of laissez-faire leadership behaviour. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology, 12, 80 - 92.

28
. Copland, M. A. (2003). Leadership of inquiry: Building and sustaining capacity for
school improvement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(4), 375 - 395.

29
. Ismail A., Halim F. A., Munna D. N., Abdullah A., Shminan A. S., & Muda A. L. (2009).
The mediating effect of empowerment in the relationship between transformational
leadership and service quality. Journal of Business Management, 4(4), 3 - 12.

8
the problems between groups and among group members. Transformational
leadership actively influences job performance and satisfaction of employees and
organizational performance also and it is highly associated with higher degree of
potency of group (Raja and Palanichamy, 2012)30.

Transformational leadership occurs when leader creates awareness and

acceptance of the aim and task of the group, thus, combining the employees to
demonstrate their interests for improvement of the group (Leithwood and Jantzi,
1999)31.

1.4.5 TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE

Transactional leadership is the type of leadership style in which

organizations provides benefits for hard work and submission of employees, so they
obey instructions of leaders when they find the job. Transactional leadership
concentrates on works in short periods (Lai et al 2011)32 and it gives rewards to
employees for their outstanding performance and it follows the principle of active
management (Bass, 2009)33.

Transactional leadership has an exchange role between leaders and

employees and it exchanges targets and rewards between organization and

30
. Raja, A. S., & Palanichamy, P. (2012). Effective leadership styles and organizational
effectiveness - A cross examination with chief executives and executives of public sector
enterprises. Prime Journal of Business Administration and Management, 2(3), 497 - 504.

31
. Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (1999). The effects of transformational leadership on
organizational conditions and students engagement with school. Journal of Educational
Administration, 38(2), 112 - 129.

32
. Lai, T. T., Luen, W. K., & Hong, N. M. (2011). School principal leadership styles and
teachers organizational commitment. A research agenda. Paper Presented in 2nd
International Conference on Business and Economic Research Proceeding, London,

33
. Bass, B. M. (2009). The bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial
applications. New York: Free Press.

9
employees (Howell and Avolio, 1993)34. It motivates employees through rewards,
recognition, curative actions and enforcement of rules. Transactional leadership
encourages employees to meet the specific objectives of organization or job
performance (Jen-Te, 2007)35 and it increases efficacy of group (Kahai et al 1997)36.

1.5 JOB PERFORMANCE

Job performance is the collection of activities which are associated with

objectives of organization (Ferris et al 2010)37. Employees are considered as the
most significant resource of organization and organization should place right
employees in right place in order to increase their job performance (Munir et al
2011)38. Job performance is the level to which an organization expects quantity and
quality of work from each and every employee in an excellent way.

Job performance is an important aspect that it links with the achievement and
result of the organization and the failure or success of organization is highly

34
. Howell J. M., & Avolio B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership, transactional
leadership, locus of control and support for innovation: Key predictors of consolidated -
business unit performance. Journal of Service Marketing, 16, 487 - 502.

35
. Yang Jen-Te. (2007). Knowledge sharing: Investigating appropriate leadership roles and
collaborative culture. Tourism Management, 28, 530 - 543.

36
. Kahai, S. S., Sosik, J. J., & Avolio, B. J. (1997). Effects of leadership style and problem
structure on work group process and outcomes in an electronic meeting system
environment. Personnel Psychology, 50, 1 - 14.

37
. Ferris, D. L., Lian, H., Brown, D. J., Pang, F. X. J., & Keeping, L. M. (2010). Self-
esteem and job performance: The moderating role of self-esteem contingencies. Personnel
Psychology, 63, 561 - 593.

38
. Munir, F., Yusoff, R. B. M., Azam, K., Khan, A., & Thukiman, K. (2011). Effect of on-
the-job coaching on management trainees performance: A post merger case study of Glaxo-
Smith-Klein (GSK) Pakistan. International Review of Business Research Papers, 7(3),
159 - 169.

10
dependent on job performance of employees. The objectives of the organization is a
significant factor that affects the job performance of employees and it is a positive
way used to encourage employees to reach job targets (Saetang et al 2010)39.

Furthermore, job performance is an output that includes the quantity, quality

and involvement in a job (Schermerhorn et al 2000)40. Job performance is the end
result of employee that includes efficiency, efficacy, and effectiveness (Hsu,
2005)41. Job performance is the outcome of quantity and quality after finishing of a
mission by an employee or a group.

Employees who achieve higher level of job performance are to be highly

valued than others, and the job performance of these employees will be recognized
and rewarded. Hence, employees can create an impact on others and on their leader
through achieving the higher level of job performance than expected (Yun et al
2007)42. The capability, readiness and chance to perform are affecting job
performance of employees. In addition, ability, knowledge, skill, motivation and job
role also influence job performance of employees.

39
. Saetang, J., Sulumnad, K., Thampitak, P., & Sungkaew, T. (2010). Factors affecting
perceived job performance among staff: A case study of ban karuna juvenile vocational
training centre for boys. The Journal of Behavioral Science, 5(1), 33 - 45.

40
. Schermerhorn, J. R., Hunt, J. G., & Osborn, R. N. (2000). Organizational behaviour.
New York: JohnWiley and Sons.

41
. Hsu, P. Y. (2005). The research of the influence of cross-cultural on the job
performance: The case on Philippine & Thailand labour in high-tech industry. An
Unpublished Master’s Thesis, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan.

42
. Yun, S., Takeuchi, R., & Liu, W. (2007). Employee self-enhancement motives and job
performance behaviors: Investigating the moderating effects of employee role ambiguity
and managerial perceptions of employee commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92,
(3), 745 - 756.

11
1.6 JOB SATISFACTION

Satisfaction is ascertained from multidimensional perspectives and the level

of satisfaction may be evaluated by means of particular qualitative features of job.
Furthermore, satisfaction may be appraised by using the theory of confirmation /
expectation in which expectation is evaluated against end results. Job satisfaction is
the emotional state of employees about their jobs, or where they are working (Lok
and Crawford, 2004)43 and it is also largely described as an extent to which they are
enjoying their jobs (Mester et al 2003)44.

Job satisfaction is created by attitude towards coworkers, working

environment, attitudes about education, financial gains and attitudes about guidance
and supervision (Price, 2001)45. Job satisfaction is an optimistic emotional reaction
from the evaluation of a job or specific feature of a job or likeness of employees
about their job (Hugnes et al 2006)46.

Employees job satisfaction is highly important for organization to achieve its

goals and job satisfaction also influences employees to stay or leave the organization
(Boseman, 2008)47. Job satisfaction of employees affects the productivity and
performance of both employees and organization and degree of competitiveness.

43
. Lok, P., & Crawford, J. (2004). The effects of organizational culture and leadership style
on job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Journal of Management Development,
23(4), 321 - 338.

44
. Mester, C., Visser, D., & Roodt, G. (2003). Leadership Style and its relation to employee
attitudes and behaviour. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 29(2), 72 - 82.

45
. Price, J. L. (2001). Reflections on the determinants of voluntary turnover. International
Journal of Manpower, 22(7), 600 - 624.

46
. Hugnes, R. L., Gonnett, R. C., & Curphy, G. J. (2006). Leadership, enhancing the lessons
of experience. New York: McGraw Hill.

47
. Boseman, G. (2008). Effective leadership in a changing world. Journal of Financial
Service Professionals, 62(3), 36 - 38.

12
 Job satisfaction is influenced by higher turnover, absenteeism and
involvement in decision making, grievance handing, and low level of morale. High
degree of job satisfaction is useful for employees to overcome obstacles and issues
for achievement of both personal and organizational goals.

1.7 TELANGANA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION

(TSRTC)

Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (TSRTC) is established in the

year 2015 after splitting of Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation
(APSRTC), which had a fleet strength of 10,400 in the year 2017-18 into TSRTC
and APSRTC. TSRTC provides bus services in Telangana State and to adjutant
states and it offers services to 95 lakh passengers and earns daily revenues of Rs.
9.52 crore. Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (TSRTC) is having three
zones viz., Karimnagar, Hyderabad and Greater Hyderabad and is covering 13
regions and it is functioning through 96 depots and 357 bus stations.

TSRTC provides different types of services for meeting needs of people

through linking villages, towns and cities and it has 3,687 routes. It provides
premium services namely Vajra, Vennela, Garuda Plus, Garuda and Rajadhani and it
offers mid level services of super luxury, deluxe and express. In addition, it also
gives entry level services to large segments of people. Telangana State Road
Transport Corporation also operates buses to adjutant States namely Karnataka,
Tamilnadu, Goa, Maharashtra, Chattisgarh and Odisha. TSRTC has 3,727 A/C
buses, 2,562 non A/C buses, 3,766 buses for rural areas and 3.862 buses for urban
areas. In addition, it provides special services to public on different festival
occasions.

TSRTC has Chairman followed by Managing Director. Under Managing

Director, there are Financial Advisor and Executive Directors for establishment, IT,
Operations and Administration. Under Executive Directors, there are Regional
Managers or Head of the Department for Personal, Traffic, Traffic (M & C) & Dir
(CP), Finance (A, T & S), Mechanical Engineer, Controller of Stores, Engineer (IT
& IE), Civil Engineer and Superintendents at corporate level.
13
 At division level, there are Divisional Managers / Senior Managers. At zonal
level, there are Execute Directors and at regional level, there are Regional Mangers.
At divisional level, there are Divisional Managers and at depot level, there are Depot
Managers or Junior Scale Officers and there are drivers, conductors, engineers,
mechanics, superintendents, assistants and other employees. There are 51,473
employees, working in Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

1.8 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

After the bifurcation of the state, the internal performance of TSRTC is

declining year by year resulting in a loss of Rs.928 Crores for the financial year
2018-19. Besides, the Industrial Relations problems have grown resulting in strikes
during festival seasons and high peak traffic days, thereby losing revenue.

Meanwhile the external threat of private buses has also gone up from 2145
buses at the time of division of state to 8665 buses by 2019-20. Most of these private
buses operate on the profitable routes of TSRTC thereby eroding the revenue of
TSRTC.

To counter these internal and external threats, TSRTC needs to revamp its
leadership style and bring in radical changes to meet the external and internal
challenges. The Job Performance of TSRTC employees need significant
improvement to counter these threats.

The job performance of employees is influenced by both internal and

external factors of organization and among them leadership style is the most
significant factor. Leadership styles exercised by leaders are highly important for an
organization including Transport Organizations and it has significant influence on
performance of organization and individual employees and their job satisfaction.

Identifying and practicing the proper leadership styles is highly important for
future leaders as it influences the job performance and satisfaction and productivity
of Transport Corporation. Therefore, it is imperative to study the influence of
leadership styles on job performance and satisfaction of employees of Telangana
State Road Transport Corporation

14
1.9 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The profile of employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation

would be useful to understand socio-economic status of employees. The assessment
of leadership styles in Telangana State Road Transport Corporation would be helpful
to identify the different leadership styles existing in Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation. The determinants of leadership styles in Telangana State Road
Transport Corporation would be useful to identity the key determinants which
influence type of leadership styles in Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.
The job performance of employees of Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation would be helpful to know the degree of job satisfaction of employees.
The job satisfaction of employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation
would be useful to understand the degree of job performance of employees.
The influence of leadership styles on job performance and satisfaction of
employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation would be helpful to
make out the direction and magnitude of effectiveness of leadership style on job
performance and satisfaction of employees. This study would assist Telangana State
Road Transport Corporation to identify dominant leadership style and develop and
practice strategies and methods to enhance effectiveness of leadership style that
would improve job performance and satisfaction of employees of Telangana State
Road Transport Corporation.

1.10 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The specific objectives of the study are:

1. To assess leadership styles in Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

2. To find determinants of leadership styles in Telangana State Road Transport

Corporation.

3. To examine job performance of employees of Telangana State Road Transport

Corporation.

15
4. To ascertain job satisfaction of employees of Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation.

5. To study influence of leadership styles on job performance and satisfaction of

employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

1.11 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The major purposes of this study is to (a) assess the leadership styles in
Telangana state road transport corporation b) job performance and satisfaction of
employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation and (c) influence of
leadership styles on job performance and satisfaction of employees of Telangana
state road transport corporation. This research would be useful to scrutinize the
existing leadership styles and make necessary adjustments in leadership methods
and practices to improve job performance and enhance job satisfaction of employees
of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation. The scope of study is limited to the
employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation Only.

1.12 HYPOTHESES

The hypotheses of the study are:

1. There is no significant difference amongst profile of employees and autocratic

leadership style.

2. There is no significant difference amongst profile of employees and democratic

leadership style.

3. There is no significant difference amongst profile of employees and laissez-faire

leadership style.

4. There is no significant difference amongst profile of employees and

transformational leadership style.

5. There is no significant difference amongst profile of employees and transactional

leadership style.

16
6. There is no significant difference amongst profile of employees and determinants
of leadership styles.

7. There is no significant association amongst profile of employees and job

performance.

8. There is no significant influence of leadership styles on job performance of

employees.

9. There is no significant association amongst profile of employees and job

satisfaction.

10. There is no significant influence of leadership styles on job satisfaction of

employees.

11. There is no significant relation among determinants of leadership styles and job
satisfaction of employees.

12. There is no significant structural relation among determinants of leadership

styles, job performance and satisfaction of employees.

Fig1.1: Proposed Leadership Styles Influence on JP and JS Model.

17
1.13 SELECTION OF THE STUDY AREA

Telangana is one of the important and young states in South India in

providing efficient transport services to the people. Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation provides different kinds of services to their people for their mobility
and other purposes. Telangana State Road Transport Corporation is a state
administrated transport corporation that spreads over the entire state of Telangana
and offers transport services to people in different places both within and outside of
the state. Therefore, Telangana State is chosen for the present study.

1.14 RESEARCH DESIGN

The descriptive research design is opted for the present study. It is selected to
understand influence of leadership styles on job performance and satisfaction of
employees and relation among determinants of leadership styles and job satisfaction
of employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

1.15 PILOT STUDY

The data are gathered from the primary source of employees of Telangana
State Road Transport Corporation through questionnaire which is constructed on the
basis of review of literature and opinion of experts. The pilot study is done for 41
employees (10% of the total sample size) through the questionnaire and personal
discussion methods.

1.16 SAMPLING PROCEDURE

Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (TSRTC) is selected for the

present study. There are three zones namely Karimnagar, Hyderabad and Greater
Hyderabad which are chosen for the study. The employees of TSRTC from these
zones are chosen by using multi stage random sampling method.

18
1.17 SAMPLE SIZE

The sample size for the present study is decided by using the following
formula:

n = [t2 x p (1 - p)] / m2

n = required sample size

t = confidence level at 95% (standard value of 1.96)

p = response from employees in pilot study

m = margin of error at 5% (standard value of 0.05)

Step - 1:

n = (1.96)2 x 0.4 (1 - 0.4) / (0.05)2 = 369.

Step - 2: Contingency

The sample is further increased by 10 % to account for contingencies viz.,

non-response or recording error.

n + 10% = 369 + 369 x 0.10 = 369 + 37 = 406.

Hence, the sample size for the present study is 406 employees of Telangana
State Road Transport Corporation. The sampling distribution of employees is
presented in Table 1.1.

TABLE 1.1

SAMPLING DISTRIBUTION OF THE EMPLOYEES

Sl. No. Name of the Zone Sample Size

1. Karimnagar 132

2. Hyderabad 139

3. Greater Hyderabad 135

Total 406

Source: www.tsrtc.telangana.gov.in

19
1.18 PERIOD OF STUDY

The study pertains to the period from April 2018 to February 2019, in which
the sample survey (including the pilot survey) is carried out in Telangana State.

1.19 TOOLS FOR DATA COLLECTION

The questionnaire is constructed based on prior research studies, views of

experts and pilot study. The questionnaire has five parts. A five point Likert scale is
used to measure the agreement levels of employees about leadership styles,
determinants of leadership styles, job performance and job satisfaction of employees
of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

1.20 STRUCTURE OF QUESTIONNAIRE

The questionnaire has the following parts.

PART – I: It includes profile of employees of Telangana State Road Transport

Corporation.

PART – II: It consists of leadership styles in Telangana State Road Transport

Corporation.

PART – III: It deals with determinants of leadership styles in Telangana State Road
Transport Corporation.

PART – IV: It comprises of job performance of employees of Telangana State Road

Transport Corporation.

PART – V: It contains job satisfaction of employees of Telangana State Road

Transport Corporation.

Cronbach’s Alpha value of the scale for the different components of

questionnaire is varying from 0.82 to 0.90 indicating that each measure is at
acceptable level of internal consistency.

20
1.21 FRAMEWORK OF ANALYSIS

Percentage analysis is done to understand profile of employees of Telangana

State Road Transport Corporation. Mean and standard deviation are computed for
leadership styles, job performance and satisfaction of employees of Telangana State
Road Transport Corporation. Confirmatory factor analysis is carried out for
leadership styles in Telangana State Road Transport Corporation. An exploratory
factor analysis is done to find determinants of leadership styles in Telangana State
Road Transport Corporation.

t-test and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test are used to examine

difference between profile of employees and autocratic leadership style, difference
between profile of employees and democratic leadership style, difference between
profile of employees and laissez-faire leadership style, difference between profile of
employees and transformational leadership style, difference between profile of
employees and transactional leadership style and difference between profile of
employees and determinants of leadership styles in Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation.

Chi-square test is done to study association between profile of employees

and job performance and association between profile of employees and job
satisfaction of employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation. Multiple
linear regressions are used to assess influence of leadership styles on job
performance of employees and influence of leadership styles on job satisfaction of
employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation. Correlation analysis is
carried out to study relation between determinants of leadership styles and job
satisfaction of employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation. Structural
Equation Model (SEM) is built to study structural relation between determinants of
leadership styles, job performance and satisfaction of employees of Telangana State
Road Transport Corporation.

21
1.22 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

The limitations of the study are:

1. The present study is done in Telangana State only.

2. The present study is based on primary data gathered from employees of

Telangana State Road Transport Corporation only.

3. The constraints and drawbacks of the field survey are applicable to the present
research.

4. The data gathered from the employees of Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation have recall bias.

1.23 CHAPTER SCHEME

The present research on, “Influence of Leadership Styles on Job

Performance and Satisfaction of Employees of Telangana State Road
Transport Corporation” is organized into five chapters.

The first chapter deals with introduction and design of the study.

The second chapter consists of review of literature that is related to the

present research.

The third chapter comprises of leadership styles in Telangana State Road

Transport Corporation.

The fourth chapter includes job performance and satisfaction of employees

of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

The last and fifth chapter presents summary of findings, suggestions and
conclusion.

22
 CHAPTER – II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE
 CHAPTER – II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 INTRODUCTION

Review of literature is the act of organizing earlier studies for the objective
of understanding significant aspects for present research and research methodology
on a specific area. The proper presentation of literature review is characterized by an
orderly demonstration of research studies with references, approved style of
referencing, excellent use of concepts and exact and complete information of the
previous research studies on the selected topic. Review of literature is carried out to
find the research gaps and researchable issues for the study.

2.2 REVIEWS ON EARLIER STUDIES

Kirkpatrick and Locke (1991)1 stated that efficient leaders were dissimilar
with other people because they had various traits namely, motivation, leadership
qualities, truthfulness, honesty, drive, cognitive capability and knowledge on
business activities. Besides, leaders to be efficient, they had to frame a vision,
objectives and role model for others.

Gebert and Steinkamp (1991)2 found that there was a close relation between
leadership style and economic achievement of the organization. McDonough and
Barczak (1991)3 mentioned that leadership style had impact on the pace of
development of product.

1
. Kirkpatrick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1991). Leadership: Do traits matter?”. The Executive,
5(2), 48 - 60.
2
. Gebert, D., & Steinkamp, T. (1991). Leadership style and economic success in Nigeria
and Taiwan. Management International Review, 31(2), 161 - 171.
3
. McDonough, E. F., & Barczak, G. (1991). Speeding up new product development: The
effects of leadership style and source of technology. Journal of Product Innovation
Management, 8(3), 203 - 211.
 Deluga (1992)4 concluded that transformational leadership increased
productivity, reduced the absenteeism and attrition and enhanced degree of job
satisfaction of employees.

Brockner et al (1992)5 revealed that an effective leadership was needed for

successful execution of strategies to get a competitive advantages and optimization
of human resources and also for increasing commitment of employees. The
commitment of employees towards organization is higher when leaders involve
employees in decision making, giving due respect, maintaining equality and
supporting employees.

Shamir et al (1993)6 indicated that transformational leaders influenced the

level of commitment of employees for organization through encouraging greater
degree of intrinsic values related with goal achievement, stressing the connection
between efforts and achievement of goal and generating a greater degree of personal
commitment to a general vision, mission and objectives of organization.

Bass and Avolio (1993)7 showed that the transformational leader inspired her
or his followers to exceed the actual expectations about job performance by
informing, insisting and leading them to achieve the objectives of organization
instinctively.

4
. Deluga, R. (1992). The relationship of leader-member exchanges with laissez-faire,
transactional, and transformational leadership in naval environments. In K. Clark, M. Clark,
& D. Campbell (Eds.), Impact of leadership, Greensboro: Center for Creative Leadership.

5
. Brockner, J., Tyler, T., & Scheneider. (1992). The influence of prior commitment to an
institution on reactions to perceived unfairness: The higher they are, the harder they fall.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 241 - 261.

6
. Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1993). The motivational effects of charismatic
leadership: A self-concept based theory. Organization Science, 4(4), 577 - 594.

7
. Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Improving organizational effectiveness through
transformational leadership. California: Sage Publication.

2
 Yukl (1994)8 found that activities in organizational unit, size of organization,
hierarchy, technologies, job features, interdependence, authority, life cycle of
organization, competency and job performance of employees were the determinants
of leadership style in an organization. Scott and Bruce (1994)9 stated that the role of
supervisor had a significant and positive impact on innovative behavior of his or her
subordinates.

Argyris (1995)10 mentioned that the failure or success of any organization

was highly dependent on the style of leadership. The traits of leadership and
behavior of top management influenced performance of an organization. Wilson
(1995)11 showed that leadership style had a significant influence on job
performance, job satisfaction and commitment of employees for an organization.

Fieldler (1996)12 stated that the performance of organization was largely

affected by leadership style and its effectiveness. Podsakoff et al (1996)13 indicated
that the behavior of leadership was positively influencing commitment of employees

8
. Yukl, G. A. (1994). Leadership in organizations. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

9
. Scott, S. G., & Burce, R. A. (1994). Determinates of innovative behavior: A path model of
individual innovation in the workplace. Academic Management Journal, 37(3), 580 - 607.

10
. Argyris, C. (1995). Some characteristics of successful executives. Personal Journal, 6,
50 - 63.

11
. Wilson, M. (1995). Leadership and organizational culture: In C. Dimmock, & A.
Walker(Eds), Educational leadership: Culture and diversity. London : Sage Publication.

12
. Fiedler F. E. (1996). Research on leadership selection and training: One view of the
future. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 241 - 250.

13
. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Bommer, W. H. (1996). Transformational leader
behaviors and substitutes for leadership as determinants of employee satisfaction,
commitment, trust and organizational citizenship behaviors. Journal of Management, 22(2),
259 - 298.

3
towards organization. Bass et al 1996)14 found that the transactional leadership style
was significantly influenced work performance of employees.

Teece et al (1997)15 found that behavior of leadership and style had increased
performance of employees while organizations were under new problems. Chemers
(1997)16 identified that democratic, autocratic, or laissez faire leadership styles were
existing in many organizations and these leadership styles had impact on
performance of organizations.

Alan and Berry (1998)17 concluded that there was a positive and significant
relation between transformation leadership style and goal orientation and
transactional leadership style and goal orientation. They also found that
transformational leadership style was strongly related with learning, whereas,
transactional leadership style was strongly associated with performance of
employees.

Bass (1998)18 showed that transformational leadership had positive and

significant influence on satisfaction of employees about their jobs, where as laissez-
faire leadership had negative and significant influence on satisfaction of
subordinates about their jobs.

14
. Bass, B., Avolio, B., & Atwater, L. (1996). The transformational and transactional
leadership of men and women. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 45, 5 - 34.

15
. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities & strategic
management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509 - 533.
16
. Chemers, M. M. (1997). An integrative theory of leadership. New Jersey: Erlbaum
Publication.
17
. Alan, F. C., & Berry, A. J. (1998). Transformational leadership and learning orientation.
Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 19(3), 164 - 172.
18
. Bass, B. M. (1998). Transformational leadership: Industry, military and educational
impact. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

4
 Avolio (1999)19 mentioned that an efficient leadership was essential for
development of organization and increasing competitive advantage of organization
and both were important for increasing performance of organization.

Brown and Dodd (1999)20 revealed that transactional leadership had a

significant negative relation with normative, affective and continuance commitment
of employees. Tierney et al (1999)21 indicated that the quality of relation between
leaders and their followers had significant and positive relation with innovative
performance of employees.

McShane and Glinow (2000)22 stated that visionary leaders made strategic
vision of organization, informing same through formulating and use of metaphor,
modeling the vision through actions constantly and created commitment for vision
of the organization through higher level of performance. Popper et al (2000)23 found
there was an association between transformational leadership style and attachment
and performance of employees in the organization.

19
. Avolio, B. J. (1999). Full leadership development: Building the vital forces in
organizations. California: Sage Publication.

20
. Brown, F. W., & Dodd, N. G. (1999). Rally the troops or make the trains run on time:
The relative importance and interaction of contingent reward and transformational
leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 20(6), 291 - 299.

21
. Tierney, P., Farmer, S. M., & Graen, G. B. (1999). An examination of leadership and
employee creativity: The relevance of traits and relationships. Personnel Psychology, 52,
591 - 620.

22
. McShane, S. L., & Von Glinow, M. A. (2000). Organizational Behavior. New York:
Irwin / McGraw-Hill.

23
. Popper, M., Mayseless, O., & Castelnovo, O. (2000). Transformational leadership and
attachment. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(2), 267 - 289.

5
 Dess and Picken (2000)24 concluded that participative, supportive,
democratic, visionary and collaborative leadership styles were influencing
innovation in the organization. Ogbonna and Harris (2000)25 claimed that
participative leadership was related with innovation and performance of employees.

Gaertner (2000)26 revealed that highly elastic and participatory management

leadership style was positively and highly influencing organizational commitment.
Leadership strategies should improve commitment of employees and not make
complaints about autocratic leadership style.

Maurik (2001)27 indicated that transactional leadership style had transactions

between leader and employees and these had higher degree of control and
domination that increased job performance of employees.

Eagly and Johannesen-Schmidt (2001)28 showed that the behaviors of

communal leadership were extended by means of transformational traits namely
rousing motivation and individual consideration and were effective. It was important
for generating favorable work environment and learning to develop subordinates
efficiently.

24
. Dess, G. G., & Picken, J. C. (2000). Changing roles: Leadership in the 21st century.
Organizational Dynamics, 29(4), 18 - 33.

25
. Ogbonna, E., & Harris, L. C. (2000). Leadership style, organizational culture and
performance: Empirical evidence from UK companies. International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 11(4), 766 - 788.

26
. Gaertner, S. (2000). Structural determinants of job satisfaction and organisational
commitment in turnover models. Human Resource Management Review, 9, 479 - 493.

27
. Maurik, J. V. (2001). Writers on leadership. London: Penguin Books.

28
. Eagly, A.H., & Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C. (2001). The leadership styles of men and
women. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 781 - 797.

6
 Sarros and Santora (2001)29 concluded that transactional leadership
functioned as per expectation through good management and received rewards for
employees for their outstanding performance. Japanese leaders chose partnering
attitude towards their followers and they considered autonomy was needed to attain
goals of organization, whereas, Russian leaders choose security and social stability.
There was a higher degree of relation between behavior of transformational
leadership and value orientation in the organization.

Nahavandi (2002)30 indicated that various kinds of leadership styles affected

performance or effectiveness of organization. No one style was considered as the
best one. Consequently, leaders exercised different styles in various circumstances,
hence, among different leadership styles, a situational leadership was preferred.

House et al (2002)31 found that practices and quality of leadership

differentiated cultures of different types of leadership styles and these cultural
differences improved behavior, practices and performance of organization.

Yeh and Hong (2002)32 revealed that leadership style was significantly and
positively affecting both organizational commitment and job performance of
employees. Meanwhile, organizational commitment had a mediating effect between
job performance and leadership style. Fry (2003)33 stated that leadership style
improved level of motivation of employees and to increase their potential for
prosperity.

29
. Sarros, J. C., & Santora, J. C. (2001). Leaders and values: A cross cultural study.
Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, 22(5), 243 - 248.

30
. Nahavandi, A. (2002). The art and science of leadership. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
31
. House, R., Javidan, M., Hanges, P.J., & Dorfman, P. (2002). Understanding cultures and
implicit theories across the globe: An introduction to project globe. Journal of World
Business, 37, 3 - 10.
32
. Hueryren Yeh, & Dachuan Hong. (2002). The mediating effect of organizational
commitment on leadership type and job performance. The Journal of Human Resource and
Adult Learning, 8(2), 50 - 59.
33
. Fry, L. W. (2003). Towards a theory of spiritual leadership. The Leadership Quarterly,
14, 693 - 727.

7
 Boehnke et al (2003)34 indicated that transformational leadership enhanced
performance of employees. Besides, it increased motivation, personal consideration,
stimulation and influence on employees to achieve higher level of performance.

Walumbwa and Lawler (2003)35 showed that transformational leaders

motivated employees to involve in their work, increase their performance and
commitment towards organization. They also encouraged their employees to deal the
issues in innovative ways to solve it.

Mehta et al (2003)36 stated that various kinds of leadership styles influenced

motivation of employees. They found that supportive, participative and directive
leadership styles had motivated employees highly that led to higher level of
performance of employees.

Messick and Kramer (2004)37 indicated that leadership style was depending
on personal capabilities, characters of individuals, circumstances and environment.
Lind and Stevens (2004)38 claimed that transformational leadership was the most

34
. Boehnke, K., Bontis, N., DiStefano, J., & DiStefano, C. (2003). Transformational
leadership: Examination of cross national differences and similarities. Leadership and
Organization Development Journal, 24(1), 5 - 15.

35
. Walumbwa, F. O., & Lawler, J. J. (2003). Building effective organizations:
transformational leadership, collectivist orientation, work-related attitudes and withdrawal
behaviors in three emerging economies. International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 14(7), 1083 - 1101.

36
. Mehta, R., Dubinski, A. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2003). Leadership style, motivation and
performance in international marketing channels: an empirical investigation of the USA,
Finland and Poland. European Journal of Marketing, 37(1 / 2), 50 - 85.

37
. Messick, D. M., & Kramer, R. M. (2004). The psychology of leadership: New
perspectives and research. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

38
. Lind, B., & Stevens, J. (2004). Match your merger integration strategy and leadership
style to your merger type. Strategic Leadership, 32(4), 10 - 16.

8
correct leadership style as it permitted unification of employees to achieve well
stated goals.

Thomas (2004)39 stated that current leaders in organization should have

commitment to develop their followers continuously and also support and develop
new leaders for organization through training, guiding, watching, evaluating and
increasing their performance.

Avolio and Bass (2004)40 found that autocratic leadership style and agentic
attributes had authority and command that were used by them to find strength of
individuals, made agreements with subordinates through giving explanation for
incentives, rewards and output that could be attained through higher level of job
performance.

Dulewicz and Higgs (2005)41 concluded that transformational leadership was

the predominant leadership style and assisted in developing individual employees
and their performance in the organization.

Eagly (2005)42 found that among different leadership styles, transformational

leadership style was beneficial to the employees for their growth and development in
a particular organization.

Zhu et al (2005)43 revealed that transformational leadership was significantly

and positively related to performance of organization and efficient human resource

39
. Thomas, N. (2004). The john adair handbook of management and leadership. London:
Thorogood.
40
. Avolio, B., & Bass, B. (2004). Multifactor leadership questionnaire, mind garden,
California: Menlo Park.
41
. Dulewicz, V., & Higgs, M. (2005). Assessing Leadership Styles and Organizational
Context” Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 20, No. 2, 105 - 123.
42
. Eagly, A. H., (2005), Achieving relational authenticity in leadership: Does gender
matter?. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 459 - 474.
43
. Zhu, W., Chew, I. K. H., & Spangler, W. D. (2005). CEO transformational leadership
and organizational outcomes: The mediating role of human capital enhancing human
resource management. Leadership Quarterly, 16, 39 - 52.

9
management was positively related with performance through higher level of
motivation, intellectual and enhanced commitment.

Mehra et al (2006)44 showed that effective leadership style helped employees

to achieve higher level performance in their jobs. Leadership style played an
important role in coping teams with their surroundings and coordinating group
activities. Moore and Rudd (2006)45 indicated that leadership style symbolized the
significant feature of leadership and it improved the outcomes of organization.

Yun et al (2006)46 revealed that task-oriented leadership style was highly

suitable where a job engaged psychologically immature or low experienced
employees, while, a relations-oriented leadership style was suitable where
employees had high level of experience and could be believed to work separately.

Rejas et al (2006)47 found that transformational leadership had a significant

and positive effect on performance, while, laissez-faire style and transactional
leadership had a significant negative effect on performance of employees.

Assunta and Agostino (2007)48 concluded that higher level of leadership

indices were not associated with prior performance but related to higher reputation
of organization and higher degree of performance. Meanwhile, leadership style had

44
. Mehra, A., Smith, B., Dixon, A., & Robertson, B. (2006). Distributed leadership in
teams: The network of leadership perceptions and team performance. Leadership Quarterly,
17, 232 - 245.
45
. Moore, L. L., & Rudd, R. D. (2006). Leadership styles of current extension leaders.
Journal of Agricultural Education, 47(1), 32 - 43.
46
. Yun, S., Cox, J., & Sims, H. P., Jr. (2006). The forgotten follower: A contingency model
of leadership and follower self-leadership. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21,
374 - 388.
47
. Rejas, L. P., Ponce, E. R., Almonte, M. D., & Ponce, J. R. (2006). Transformational and
transactional leadership: A study of their influence in small companies. Ingeniare Revista
Chilena De Ingeria, 14(2), 156 - 166.
48
. Barchiesi Maria Assunta, & La Bella Agostino. (2007). Leadership styles of world's most
admired companies:A holistic approach to measuring leadership effectiveness. Paper
Presented in International Conference on Management Science & Engineering, Paris.

10
greater influence on behavior and dynamics of leaders and also performance of
employees in the organization.

Moore (2007)49 found that there was a positive and significant relation
between revenue component of effectiveness of organization and transformational
leadership style.

Molero et al (2007)50 showed that transformational leadership style was highly

related to satisfaction of employees towards their jobs as compared to autocratic and
bureaucratic leadership styles. In addition, there was a higher level of job satisfaction of
employees in democratic leadership styles in comparison with bureaucratic leadership
style.

Brooke (2007)51 indicated that transformational leaders motivated their

employees highly in various phases to attain the goals of organization, whereas,
transactional leaders fixed goals to employees with some rewards or punishment as
an outcome of job.

Lee (2008)52 found that transformational leadership was positively and

significantly related with commitment of employees for organization. Hoy and
Miskel (2008)53 indicated that transformational leadership provided higher level of

49
. Moore, E. M. (2007). The impact of leadership style on organizational effectiveness:
leadership in action within united way of America, An Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Capella
University, New Jersey.

50
. Molero, F., & Navas, M. (2007). Relations and effects of transformational leadership.
The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 10, 358 - 368.

51
. Brooke, S. (2007). Leadership and job satisfaction. Journal of Academic Leadership,
4(1), 105 - 114.

52
. Lee, J. (2008). Effects of leadership and leader-member exchange on innovativeness.
Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(6), 670 - 687.

53
. Hoy, W .K., & Miskel .C. G. (2008). Education administration: theory, research and
practice. New York: McGraw-Hill.

11
performance and active leadership had favorable and higher degree of influence on
improvement of organization and satisfaction of employees.

Henderson and Tulloch (2008)54 concluded that improper leadership style

contributed to low level of satisfaction of employees towards their job. The
inappropriate leadership, insufficient supervision and poor management were the
reasons for low level of job satisfaction among employees.

Elpers et al (2008)55 revealed that dissatisfaction of employees about their

job occurred due to a difference between leadership styles and expectations of
employees. The degree of job satisfaction increased when difference between
expectation of employees and leadership style decreased.

Yiing et al (2009)56 mentioned that leadership style affected commitment of

employees towards their organizations and it influenced job performance of
employees and moderated the relation between job performance and leadership
style.

Yang (2009)57 found that transformational leadership style was significantly

and positively affected intrinsic job satisfaction of employees, while,

54
. Henderson, L., & Tulloch, J. (2008). Incentives for retaining and motivating health
workers in Pacific and Asian countries. Human Resource Health, 24( 2), 124 - 138.

55
. Elpers, Kathy ve Westhuis, & David. (2008). Organizational leadership and its impact on
social workers' job satisfaction: A national study. Administration in Social Work, 32(3),
26 - 43.

56
. Yiing, L. H., Zaman, K., & Ahmad, B. (2009). The Moderating effects of organizational
culture on the relationships between leadership behavior and organizational commitment
and between organizational commitment and job satisfaction and performance. Leadership
& Organization Development Journal, 30(1), 53 - 86.

57
. Yang, Y. F. (2009). An Investigation of group interaction functioning stimulated by
transformational leadership on employee intrinsic and extrinsic job satisfaction: an
extension of the resource-based theory perspective. Social Behavior and Personality, 37,
1259 - 1278.

12
transformational leadership style forecasted intrinsic job satisfaction well, as
compared to transactional leadership style.

Watson (2009)58 indicated that transformational leadership style had a

secured and flexible impact on their employees and gave a higher degree of job
satisfaction. In addition, transformational leadership style had innovative thoughts,
motivating employees and rewarding employees for their outstanding performance.

Jogulu (2010)59 revealed that there was significant difference between

cultural groups and leadership styles. Transactional leadership was highly associated
with the ratings of managers in Malaysia, while, transformational leadership related
with ratings of respondents in Australia.

Kieu (2010)60 showed that transformational leadership was significantly and

positively associated with performance of organization and it was a very strong
anticipator of job performance of employees, level of satisfaction of employees and
commitment of employees for organizations by providing power and autonomy and
requiring higher level of respect and confidence for leader.

Jogulu (2010)61 concluded that different leadership styles were existing in

various cultural groups and cultural differences highly affected choice of leadership
style. The transformational leadership style was chosen in Malaysia, while,
transactional leadership style was preferred in Australia.

58
. Watson, L. (2009). Leadership’s influence on job satisfaction. Journal of Radiologic
Technology, 80(4), 297 - 308.

59
. Uma D. Jogulu. (2010). Culturally-Linked Leadership Styles. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 31(8), 705 - 719.

60
. Kieu, H. (2010). Leadership Styles and Organizational Performance. East Eisenhower
Parkway: UMI Dissertation Publishing.

61
. Jogulu, U. D. (2010). Culturally-linked leadership style. Leadership and Organizational
Development Journal, 31(8), 705 - 719.

13
 Timothy et al (2011)62 found that transactional leadership style was
positively and significantly influencing job performance, while, transformational
leadership style was positively and insignificantly affecting job performance of
employees. The transactional leadership style was highly effective as compared to
transformational leadership style for increasing job performance of employees in
small scale industrial units.

Fatima et al (2011)63 indicated that transformational leadership style had

positive and significant effect on innovative practices, performance and job
satisfaction of employees. Employees shared their knowledge and experience
through transformational leadership style that made changes among organization and
employees and also commitment of employees.

Pradeep and Prabhu (2011)64 revealed that effective leadership style was
positively connected with the job performance of employees for both transactional
and transformational behavior of leaderships.

Voon (2011)65 found that besides autonomy, salary, security and job
flexibility, transformational leadership style had significant and positive impact on
job satisfaction of employee in public sector organizations.

62
. Obiwuru Timothy, C., Okwu, Andy, T., Akpa, Victoria, O., & Nwankwere, Idowu A.
(2011). Effects of leadership style on organizational performance: A survey of selected
small scale enterprises in Ikosi-Ketu council development area of Lagos State, Nigeria.
Australian Journal of Business and Management Research, 1(7),
100 - 111.

63
. Bushra Fatima, Usman, Ahmad ve Naveed, & Asvir. (2011). Effect of transformational
leadership on employees’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment in banking sector
of Lahore (Pakistan), International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2 (18),
261 - 267

64
. Pradeep, D. D. & Prabhu, N. R. V. (2011). The relationship between effective leadership
and employee performance. Paper Presented in International Conference on Advancements
in Information Technology with Workshop of ICBMG IPCSIT, IACSIT Press, Singapore.

14
 Kassim and Sulaiman (2011)66 stated that supportive leadership was
significantly associated with market orientation and this leadership style was also
related to constant improvement of performance of subordinates and motivate the
growth of market orientation. Meanwhile, task, achievement, relationship and
autocratic style leadership had insignificant relation with market orientation.

Koech and Namusonge (2012)67 concluded that the transformational

leadership was highly associated with performance of organization, whereas
transactional leadership was poorly related with performance of organization. The
laissez-faire leadership style was insignificantly associated with performance of
organization.

Paracha et al (2012)68 showed that transformational and transactional styles

of leadership were positively and significantly related with performance of
employees. But, transactional leadership was highly and significantly associated
with performance of employees as compared to transformational style of leadership.

65
. Voon, M. C. (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.

66
. Zorah Abu Kassim, & Mohamed Sulaiman. (2011). Market orientation and leadership
styles of managers in Malaysia. International Journal of Leadership Studies, 6(2),
230 - 245.

67
. Peris M. Koech, & Namusonge, G. S. (2012). The effect of leadership styles on
organizational performance at state corporations in Kenya. International Journal of
Business and Commerce, 2(1), 1 - 12.

68
. Paracha, M. U., Qamar, A. Mirza, A., & Waqas, I. (2012). Impact of leadership style
(transformational and transactional leadership) on employee performance and mediating
role of job satisfaction study of private school (Educator) in Pakistan. Global Journal of
Management and Business Research, 12(4), 98 - 119.

15
 Muterera (2012)69 indicated that the behaviors of transformational and
transactional leadership had significant and positive relation with performance of
organization. However, the behavior of transformational leadership was
significantly, highly and positively related to performance of organization as
compared to the behavior of transactional leadership.

Thamrin (2012)70 revealed that transformational leadership style had

significant and positive impact on organizational commitment and transformational
leadership had significant and positive impact on performance of employees and this
leadership style had no significant and positive significant impact on job
satisfaction.

Ejere and Abasilim (2013)71 found that transformational leadership style was
positively, strongly and significantly influencing performance of organization,
while, transactional leadership style was positively, weakly and significantly
influencing performance of organization. The combination of these two leadership
styles was the most effective leadership style to follow in all situations.

Ruggieri (2013)72 stated that there was no interface between self sacrifice of
leader and level of leadership in transformational leadership situation, but there was
a significant interface happened in transactional leadership situation. It showed that

69
. Muterera, J. (2012). Leadership behaviors and their impact on organizational
performance in Governmental entities. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 1,
19 - 24.

70
. Thamrin, H. M. (2012). The influence of transformational leadership and organizational
commitment on job satisfaction and employee performance. International Journal of
Innovation, Management and Technology, 3(5), 566 - 572.

71
. Emmanuel Iriemi Ejere, & Ugochukwu David Abasilim. (2013). Impact of transactional
and transformational leadership styles on organisational performance: Empirical evidence
from Nigeria. The Journal of Commerce, 5(1), 30 - 41.

72
. Stefano Ruggeri. (2013). Leadership style, self-sacrifice and team identification. Social
Behavior and Personality, 41(7), 1171 - 1178.

16
transactional leadership style was highly efficient as compared to transformational
leadership style.

Wart (2013)73 revealed that cultural, historical, political and economic

environments were the factors affecting the leadership styles in public sector
organizations. Besides, organizational factors were also influencing the leadership styles
in those organizations.

Shafie et al (2013)74 concluded that pragmatic and transformational

leadership styles had influence on performance of employees and organization and
among these styles, transformational leadership style was highly appropriate and
effective.

Buble et al (2014)75 indicated that there was a significant relation between

leadership styles of manager and their motivation and the relation was stronger
between leadership style and intrinsic motivation as compared to relation between
leadership style and extrinsic motivation.

Igbaekemen (2014)76 found that participative and democratic leadership

styles enhanced effectiveness of organization. The democratic or participative
leadership style was the best because it increased performance of employees and
organization.

73
. Van Wart, M. (2013). Administrative leadership theory: A reassessment after 10 years.
Public Administration, 91(3), 521 - 543.

74
. Bizhan Shafie, Saeid Baghersalimi, & Vahid Barghi. (2013). The relationship between
leadership style and employee performance. Singaporean Journal of Business Economics
and Management Studies, 2(5), 21 - 29.

75
. Mario Buble, Ana Juras, & Ivan Matic. (2014). The relationship between managers’
leadership styles and motivation. Management, 19(1), 161 - 193.

76
. Goddy Osa Igbaekemen. (2014). Impact of leadership style on organisation performance:
A strategic literature review. Public Policy and Administration Research, 4(9), 126 - 135.

17
 Deveshwar and Aneja (2014)77 stated that transformational leadership style
was better as compared to transactional leadership style because transformational
leadership style improved performance of employees corporately higher than
transactional leadership style. Besides, the personality features were positively
related with leadership styles.

Shahab and Nisa (2014)78 concluded that leadership style had a significant
and positive impact on job satisfaction of employees and job satisfaction had a
positive and significant impact on job performance of employees. In addition,
leadership has significant impact on performance of employees.

Iqbal et al (2015)79 mentioned that autocratic leadership style was useful for
achieving goals in short periods, while, democratic style was helpful in all the time
periods. But, participative leadership style was meaningful in attaining goals in long
periods and positively affecting job performance of employees.

Jalal-Eddeen (2015)80 found that democratic and participative leadership

were dominant leadership styles in small and medium enterprises that influenced
performance of employees and kind of enterprise affected leadership styles.

77
. Aarti Deveshwar, & Indu Aneja. (2014). A study of transnational and transformation
leadership styles and factors affect the leadership style. International Journal of Business,
Economics and Management, 1(8), 176 - 185.

78
. Moh. Ali Shahab, & Inna Nisa. (2014). The influence of leadership and work attitudes
toward job satisfaction and performance of employee. International Journal of Managerial
Studies and Research, 2(5), 69 - 77.

79
. Iqbal, N., Anwar, S., & Haider, N. (2015). Effect of leadership style on employee
performance. Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 5(5), 127 - 138.

80
. Fadimatu Jalal-Eddeen (2015). An assessment of leadership styles and employee
performance in small and medium enterprises in Yola, Adamawa State, Nigeria.
International Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Sciences, 3(3), 319 - 324.

18
 Widayanti and Putranto (2015)81 revealed that transactional and
transformational leadership styles had positive and significant association with
performance of employees.

Babatunde and Emem (2015)82 concluded that there was a positive and
significant relation between performance of employees and leadership style for
attaining objectives of organization.

Rahmisyari (2015)83 found that leadership style had significant impact on

organizational culture and development of employees and job performance of
employees. Meanwhile, organizational culture and development of employees had
indirect influence on job performance of employees.

Khan and Nawaz (2016)84 stated that transactional and transformational

leadership styles had positive and significant influence on performance of
employees. If leaders used transformational leadership style, it did not mean that
they did not reward employees for their outstanding performance. Meanwhile, if
leaders practiced transactional leadership style, it did not mean that they did not
encourage and motivate employees. Therefore, combination of these two leadership
styles improved both organizational performance and job performance of
employees.

81
. Anindya Tiara Widayanti, & Nur Arief Rahmatsyah Putranto. (2015). Analyzing the
relationship between transformational and transactional leadership style on employee
performance in PT. TX Bandung. Journal of Business and Management, 4(5), 561 - 568.

82
. Osabiya Babatunde, & Ikenga, Emem. (2015). The impact of leadership style on
employee’s performance in an organization. Public Policy and Administration Research,
5(1), 193 - 205.

83
Rahmisyari. (2015). Effect of leadership styles, organizational culture, and employees
development on performance (Studies in PT. PG. Gorontalo of Tolangohula Unit).
International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 4(1), 85 - 91.

84
. Irfanullah Khan, & Allah Nawaz. (2016). The leadership styles and the employees
performance: A review. Gomal University Journal of Research, 32(2),144 - 150.

19
 Desderio et al (2016)85 found that transactional and transformational
leadership styles had significant and positive association with performance of
employees, but transactional leadership style had higher degree of association with
employee’s performance than transformational leadership style.

Orabi (2016)86 indicated that elements of transformational leadership style

such as inspiring motivation, intellectual stimulation and personal consideration had
significant and positive impact on performance of organization and employees.

Ukaidi (2016)87 concluded that democratic leadership style was significantly

influenced the performance of organization as compared to laissez faire style and
autocratic style of leadership and there was significant difference between leadership
styles and performance of organization.

Jiang et al (2017)88 revealed that transformational leadership had positive

and strong impact on performance of employees in comparison with task
performance. Besides, transformational leadership had positive influence on
organizational citizenship behavior and organizational citizenship behavior had
positive effect on performance of employees.

85
. Chavunduka M. Desderio, Nyemba Piason, & Thomas Bhebhe. (2016). Leadership style
and employee performance in Parastatals: A case of the transport sector. Journal of Business
Management Science, 2(1), 69 - 86.

86
. Tareq Ghaleb Abu Orabi. (2016). The impact of transformational leadership style on
organizational performance: Evidence from Jordan. International Journal of Human
Resource Studies, 6(2), 89 - 102.

87
. Chris U. Abeh Ukaidi. (2016). The influence of leadership styles on organizational
performance in Nigeria. Global Journal of Human Resource Management, 4(4), 25 - 34.

88
. Weiping Jiang, Xianbo Zhao, & Jiongbin Ni. (2017). The impact of transformational
leadership on employee sustainable performance: The mediating role of organizational
citizenship behavior. Sustainability, 9, 1 - 17.

20
 Mohiuddin (2017)89 found that transformational leadership style was highly
beneficial to both organization and employees as compared to transactional
leadership style. An autocratic leadership styles was the most suitable style when
employees were not informed properly and not aware of job description. The
democratic style was correct when organization needed innovative ways to solve the
problems for achieving objectives of organization and participative leadership style
was effective when organization had talented and experienced employees for
creative jobs.

Khan et al (2017)90 concluded that transformational leadership had a strong,

positive and significant relation with organizational commitment and employees
with higher level of job satisfaction had higher degree of organizational
commitment. Female employees had a higher level of organizational commitment as
compared to male employees.

Malcalm and Tamatey (2017)91 revealed that all type of leadership styles was
not affecting performance of employees, but they were guiding employees in the
right directions. At the same time, leaders showed a combination of features of
transactional and transformational leadership styles.

89
. Zaeema Asrar Mohiuddin. (2017). Influence of leadership style on employees
performance: Evidence from Literatures. Journal of Marketing and Management,
8(1), 18 - 30.

90
. Rao Shahzaib Khan, Bismah Rao, Khurram Usman, & Safia Afzal. (2017) The mediating
role of job satisfaction between transformational leadership and organizational commitment
within the SMEs of Karachi. International Journal of Applied Business and Management
Studies, 2(1), 46 - 55.

91
. Ebenezer Malcalm, & Stephen Tamatey.(2017). Examining leadership style on employee
performance in the public sector of Ghana. International Journal of Scientific and Research
Publications, 7(11), 343 – 361.

21
 Dolly and Nonyelum (2018)92 found that autocratic leadership style was
negatively impacting performance of employees and it restricted performance of
subordinates and it created job dissatisfaction among subordinates.

Hans et al (2018)93 concluded that democratic leadership style had moderate

relation with creativity of employees, while, free rein leadership style had negative
relation with creativity of employees. Autocratic leadership style had strong
association with creativity of employees.

Goren (2018)94 revealed that autocratic and democratic leadership styles had
positive and significant relation with productivity of employees. In addition, laissez-
faire leadership style had no significant relation with productivity of employees.

Kertiriasih et al (2018)95 found that leadership style had significant and

positive effect on job satisfaction of employees and it had no effect on engagement
of employees. Besides, leadership styles had no effect on performance of employees,
but it had positive and significant effect on work through mediation, engagement
satisfaction of employees.

92
. Kalu Dolly, C., & Okpokwasili Nonyelum, P., (2018). Impact of autocratic leadership
style on job performance of subordinates in academic libraries in Port Harcourt, Rivers
State, Nigeria. International Journal of Research - GRANTHAALAYAH ,6(10), 212 - 220.

93
. Arvind Hans, Soofi Asra Mubeen, & Azzan Khamis Mohamed Al- Subhi. (2018). A
study on leadership style and managerial creativity in select organizations in Sultanate of
Oman. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 20(2), 85 - 90.

94
. Paula Goren. (2018). Effect of leadership styles on employee productivity at South
Nyanza sugar company limited, Migori county. International Journal of Progressive
Sciences and Technologies, 6(2), 428 - 432.

95
. Nengah Rupadi Kertiriasih Ni., Wayan Sujana, I., & Nengah Suardika, I. (2018). The
effect of leadership style to job satisfaction, employee engagement and employee
performance (Study at PT. Interbat, Bali, Nusra, and Ambon). International Journal of
Contemporary Research and Review, 9(3), 20592 - 20600.

22
2.3 RESEARCH GAP

From the review of literature, the research gaps are identified and carried out
in the present study. The research gaps are leadership styles, determinants of
leadership styles, job performance and job satisfaction of employees of Telangana
state road transport corporation. On the basis of literature review, the objectives and
hypotheses are formulated for the present study.

2.4 CONCLUSION

With these settings, the present research is carried out to study “Influence of
Leadership Styles on Job Performance and Satisfaction of Employees of Telangana
State Road Transport Corporation”. From the review of literature, the research gaps
are identified and incorporated in the present study. The research framework,
development of questionnaire, research design, sampling procedure and data
analysis from the previous research studies are understood very clearly and suitable
methodology is chosen for the present research.

23
 CHAPTER - III

LEADERSHIP STYLES IN
TELANGANA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT CORPORATION
 CHAPTER – III
LEADERSHIP STYLES IN TELANGANA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT CORPORATION

3.1 INTRODUCTION
When organization develops and expands and is affected by the changes in
the business atmosphere, the strategic direction is very important and needed and it
is also an imperative for creating leaders and leaderships. In the current business
environment of continuous and growing speed of changes in technologies, markets,
competition and customers, each and every change needs a leader to be creative,
dynamic and effective.

To do this, organizations have leaders and leaderships at all levels to enhance

their opportunities of long run success. Organizations should concentrate on
enhancing leadership skills and have a leadership development agenda which
stresses the significance of a change, innovation, creativity, knowledge and
motivation. Organizations have to provide appropriate chances, appreciation and
encourage prospective leaders and minimizing the blockades for sustainable
development of leadership styles. Leadership style is considerably and highly
significant strategic component in each and every business organizations including
road transport corporations.

3.2 GENDER OF EMPLOYEES

The gender of employees is given in Table 3.1.

TABLE 3.1
GENDER OF EMPLOYEES
Sl. No. Gender Number of Employees Percentage
1. Male 311 76.60
2. Female 95 23.40
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data
 Among 406 employees, 76.60 per cent of them are males, while, 23.40 per
cent of them are females.

3.3 AGE CATEGORY OF EMPLOYEES

The age category of employees is given in Table 3.2.
TABLE 3.2
AGE CATEGORY OF EMPLOYEES
Sl. No. Age Category Number of Employees Percentage
1. 21 – 30 Years 20 4.93
2. 31 – 40 Years 78 19.21
3. 41– 50 Years 128 31.53
4. Above 50 Years 180 44.33
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data

Among 406 employees, 44.33 per cent of them are falling under age category
of above 50 years, while, 4.93 per cent of them are falling under age category of
21 – 30 years.

3.4 EDUCATION OF EMPLOYEES

The education of employees is given in Table 3.3.

TABLE 3.3
EDUCATION OF EMPLOYEES
Sl. No. Education Number of Employees Percentage
1. Diploma 54 13.30
2. Under Graduation 72 17.73
3. Post Graduation 165 40.64
4. Engineering 115 28.33
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data

Among 406 employees, 40.64 per cent of them are possessing post
graduation, while, 13.30 per cent of them are possessing diploma.

2
3.5 DESIGNATION OF EMPLOYEES
The designation of employees is given in Table 3.4.
TABLE 3.4
DESIGNATION OF EMPLOYEES
Sl. No. Designation Number of Employees Percentage
1. Executive Director 10 2.46
Head of the Department /
2. 44 10.84
Regional Manager
Divisional Manager /
3. 75 18.47
Senior Manager
Depot Manager / Junior
4. 71 17.49
Scale Officer
5. Assistant Engineer 83 20.44
6. Assistant Manager Traffic 123 30.30
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data

Among 406 employees, 30.30 per cent of them are assistant managers traffic,
while, 2.46 per cent of them are executive directors.

3.6 WORK EXPERIENCE OF EMPLOYEES

The work experience of employees is given in Table 3.5.

TABLE 3.5
WORK EXPERIENCE OF EMPLOYEES
Sl. No. Work Experience Number of Employees Percentage
1. 1 – 5 Years 16 3.94
2. 6 – 10 Years 46 11.33
3. 11 – 15 Years 94 23.15
4. 16 – 20 Years 112 27.59
5. 21 – 25 Years 138 33.99
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data

3
 Among 406 employees, 33.99 per cent of them are bearing 21 – 25 years of
work experience, while, 3.94 per cent of them are bearing 1 – 5 years of work
experience.

3.7 MONTHLY INCOME OF EMPLOYEES

The monthly income of employees is given in Table 3.6.

TABLE 3.6
MONTHLY INCOME OF EMPLOYEES
Sl. No. Monthly Income Number of Employees Percentage
1. Below Rs.50,000 17 4.19
2. Rs.50,001 – Rs.1,00,000 140 34.48
3. Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000 143 35.22
4. Rs.1,50,001– Rs.2,00,000 51 12.56
5. Above Rs.2,00,000 55 13.55
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data

Among 406 employees, 35.22 per cent of them are earning monthly income
of Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000, while, 4.19 per cent of them are earning monthly
income of below Rs.50,000.

3.8 MARITAL STATUS OF EMPLOYEES

The marital status of employees is given in Table 3.7.
TABLE 3.7
MARITAL STATUS OF EMPLOYEES
Sl. No. Marital Status Number of Employees Percentage
1. Married 369 90.89
2. Unmarried 37 9.11
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data

Among 406 employees, 90.89 per cent of them are married, while, 9.11 per
cent of them are unmarried.

4
3.9 TYPE OF FAMILY OF EMPLOYEES

The type of family of employees is given in Table 3.8.

TABLE 3.8
TYPE OF FAMILY OF EMPLOYEES
Sl. No. Type of Family Number of Employees Percentage
1. Nuclear Family 361 88.92
2. Joint Family 45 11.08
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data

Among 406 employees, 88.92 per cent of them are having nuclear family,
while, 11.08 per cent of them are having joint family

3.10 SIZE OF FAMILY OF EMPLOYEES

The size of family of employees is given in Table 3.9.
TABLE 3.9
SIZE OF FAMILY OF EMPLOYEES
Sl. No. Size of Family Number of Employees Percentage
1. 2 – 4 Members 329 81.03
2. 5 – 7 Members 60 14.78
3. Above 7 Members 17 4.19
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data

Among 406 employees, 81.03 per cent of them are having family size of
2 – 4 members, while, 4.19 per cent of them are having family size of above seven
members.

5
3.11 RESIDENTIAL AREA OF EMPLOYEES

The residential area of employees is given in Table 3.10.TABLE 3.10

RESIDENTIAL AREA OF EMPLOYEES
Sl. No. Residential Area Number of Employees Percentage
1. Urban 136 33.50
2. Semi – Urban 121 29.80
3. Rural 149 36.70
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data

Among 406 employees, 36.70 per cent are residing in rural area, while, 29.80
per cent are residing in semi – urban area.

3.12 LEADERSHIP STYLES IN TELANGANA STATE ROAD

TRANSPORT CORPORATION
The leadership styles in Telangana State Road Transport Corporation were
studied and the results are given as below.

3.12.1 CONFIRMATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS FOR

LEADERSHIP STYLES IN TELANGANA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT CORPORATION
The confirmatory factor analysis was done for leadership styles in Telangana

State Road Transport Corporation and the results are given in Table 3.11.

6
 TABLE 3.11
CONFIRMATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS FOR LEADERSHIP
STYLES IN TELANGANA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
CORPORATION
Chi-square
Sl. No. Leadership Styles P-Value GFI CFI RMR RMSEA
Value
1. Autocratic Leadership 4.726 0.464 0.97 0.96 0.13 0.10
2. Democratic Leadership 5.142 0.475 0.98 0.97 0.09 0.07
3. Laissez-Faire Leadership 4.954 0.438 0.97 0.96 0.10 0.08
Transformational
4. 5.460 0.542 0.99 0.98 0.06 0.04
Leadership
5. Transactional Leadership 5.235 0.526 0.98 0.97 0.08 0.06
Source: Primary Data

The Chi-Square values are not significant for leadership styles in Telangana
State Road Transport Corporation that exhibit an excellent fit. Goodness of Fit Index
(GFI) and Comparative Fit Index (CFI) are bigger than 0.90 and RMR and RMSEA
values are smaller than 0.1 that disclose an excellent fit.

3.12.2 CONVERGENT AND DISCRIMINANT VALIDITY FOR

LEADERSHIP STYLES IN TELANGANA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Moreover, the adequacy of the measurement model for leadership styles in
Telangana State Road Transport Corporation are assessed on the basis of Composite
Reliability (CR), Average Variance Extracted (AVE) and Discriminant Validity
(DV) of the constructs and the results are given in Table 3.12.

7
 TABLE 3.12
CONSTRUCT RELIABILITY FOR LEADERSHIP STYLES IN
TELANGANA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Sl. No. Leadership Styles CR AVE DV
1. Autocratic Leadership 0.73 0.64 0.62
2. Democratic Leadership 0.75 0.66 0.64
3. Laissez-Faire Leadership 0.74 0.65 0.63
4. Transformational Leadership 0.78 0.70 0.68
5. Transactional Leadership 0.76 0.68 0.65
Source: Primary Data

The composite reliability for leadership styles in Telangana State Road

Transport Corporation is higher than the value of 0.70, average variance extracted is
larger than the minimum value of 0.50 and discriminant validity is greater than 0.60
explaining that convergent validity is confirmed for leadership styles in Telangana
State Road Transport Corporation.

3.13 AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE

The autocratic leadership style in Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation was studied and the results are given in Table 3.13.TABLE 3.13
AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Standard
Sl. No. Autocratic Leadership Mean
Deviation
The ideas of employees are not taken in to
1. 3.71 1.19
consideration
Employees are informed about what and
2. 3.29 1.46
how to be done
Employees are directed not to make same
3. 3.69 1.16
mistakes again and again
New employees are not allowed to take any
4. 3.60 1.32
decisions without prior permission

8
 Leader creates a new procedure when
5. something is going wrong and it is 3.30 1.28
communicated to employees
Leader likes power and position that grips
6. 3.77 1.08
over subordinates
Employees are intimidated with
7. 3.65 1.27
punishment to attain the goals
Leader verifies whether employees perform
8. 3.75 1.11
well or not
9. The decision of the leader is final 3.85 1.10
10. Employees need safety and security 3.27 1.24
Source: Primary Data

The employees have agreed that the ideas of employees are not taken in to
consideration, employees are directed not to make same mistakes again and again,
new employees are not allowed to take any decisions without prior permission,
leader likes power and position that grips over subordinates, employees are
intimidated with punishment to attain the goals, leader verifies whether employees
perform well or not and the decision of the leader is final. They are neutral regarding
employees are informed about what and how to be done, whether leader creates a
new procedure when something is going wrong and whether it is communicated to
employees and whether the employees need safety and security.

3.14 PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES AND AUTOCRATIC

LEADERSHIP STYLE
The distribution of employees on the basis of autocratic leadership style was
studied and the results are given in Table 3.14. The response of employees for
autocratic leadership style is divided into low level, moderate level and high level
based on Mean ± SD (Mean = 35.88 ; SD = 6.88).

9
 TABLE 3.14
DISTRIBUTION OF EMPLOYEES ON THE BASIS OF
AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Autocratic Leadership Number of
Sl. No. Percentage
Style Employees
1. Low 68 16.75
2. Moderate 284 69.95
3. High 54 13.30
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data

Among 406 employees, 13.30 per cent of them viewed that the level of
autocratic leadership style is high, while, 16.75 per cent of them viewed that the
level of autocratic leadership style is low.

3.14.1 GENDER AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE

The relation among gender of employees and autocratic leadership style was
studied and the results are given in Table 3.15.
TABLE 3.15
GENDER AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Autocratic Leadership
Sl. No. Gender Style Total t-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
53 220 38 311
1. Male
(17.04) (70.74) (12.22) (76.60)
.672 .502
15 64 16 95
2. Female
(15.79) (67.37) (16.84) (23.40)
68 284 54 406
Total - -
(16.75) (69.95) (13.30) (100.00)
Eta
.010
Squared
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

10
 Among 311 male employees, 12.22 per cent of them viewed that the level of
autocratic leadership style is high, while, 17.04 per cent of them viewed that the
level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among 95 female employees, 16.84 per
cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 15.79
per cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low.
The t-value of 0.672 which is not significant statistically explaining no
significant difference exists in autocratic leadership style among gender of
employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.010 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

3.14.2 AGE CATEGORY AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP

STYLE

The relation among age category of employees and autocratic leadership

style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.16.
TABLE 3.16
AGE CATEGORY AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Autocratic Leadership
Sl. No. Age Category Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
1 13 6 20
1. 21 – 30 Years
(5.00) (65.00) (30.00) (4.93)
12 59 7 78
2. 31 – 40 Years
(15.39) (75.64) (8.97) (19.21)
2.396 .068
23 84 21 128
3. 41– 50 Years
(17.97) (65.62) (16.41) (31.53)
32 128 20 180
4. Above 50 Years
(17.78) (71.11) (11.11) (44.33)
68 284 54 406
Total - -
(16.75) (69.95) (13.30) (100.00)
Eta Squared .018
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

11
 Among 20 employees falling under age category of 21 – 30 years, 30.00 per
cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 5.00
per cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among
78 employees falling under age category of 31 – 40 years, 8.97 per cent of them
viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 15.39 per cent of
them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low.
Among 128 employees falling under age category of 41 – 50 years, 16.41 per
cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 17.97
per cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among
180 employees falling under age category of above 50 years, 11.11 per cent of them
viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 17.78 per cent of
them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low.

The F-value of 2.396 which is not significant statistically explaining no

significant difference exists in autocratic leadership style among age category of
employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.018 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

3.14.3 EDUCATION AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE

The relation among education of employees and autocratic leadership style
was studied and the results are given in Table 3.17.
TABLE 3.17
EDUCATION AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Autocratic Leadership
Sl. No. Education Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
5 40 9 54
1. Diploma
(9.26) (74.07) (16.67) (13.30)
18 51 3 72
2. Under Graduation 2.619 .051
(25.00) (70.83) (4.17) (17.73)
28 110 27 165
3. Post Graduation
(16.97) (66.67) (16.36) (40.64)

12
 17 83 15 115
4. Engineering
(14.78) (72.18) (13.04) (28.33)
68 284 54 406
Total - -
(16.75) (69.95) (13.30) (100.00)
Eta Squared .019
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 54 employees possessing diploma, 16.67 per cent of them viewed

that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 9.26 per cent of them
viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among 72 employees
possessing under graduation, 4.17 per cent of them viewed that the level of
autocratic leadership style is high, while, 25.00 per cent of them viewed that the
level of autocratic leadership style is low.
Among 165 employees possessing post graduation, 16.36 per cent of them
viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 16.97 per cent of
them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among 115
employees possessing engineering, 13.04 per cent of them viewed that the level of
autocratic leadership style is high, while, 14.78 per cent of them viewed that the
level of autocratic leadership style is low.
The F-value of 2.619 which is significant at five per cent level explaining
significant difference exists in autocratic leadership style among education of
employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta squared value is
0.019 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

3.14.4 DESIGNATION AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP

STYLE
The relation among designation of employees and autocratic leadership style
was studied and the results are given in Table 3.18.

13
 TABLE 3.18
DESIGNATION AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Autocratic
Sl. No. Designation Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
1 8 1 10
1. Executive Director
(10.00) (80.00) (10.00) (2.46)
Head of the
6 33 5 44
2. Department /
(13.64) (75.00) (11.36) (10.84)
Regional Manager
Divisional Manager 19 53 3 75
3.
/ Senior Manager (25.33) (70.67) (4.00) (18.47) 2.644 .023
Depot Manager / 8 51 12 71
4.
Junior Scale Officer (11.27) (71.83) (16.90) (17.49)
10 60 13 83
5. Assistant Engineer
(12.05) (72.29) (15.66) (20.44)
Assistant Manager 24 79 20 123
6.
Traffic (19.51) (64.23) (16.26) (30.30)
68 284 54 406
Total - -
(16.75) (69.95) (13.30) (100.00)
Eta Squared .032
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 10 employees who are executive directors, 10.00 per cent of them
viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 10.00 per cent of
them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among 44
employees who are heads of the department / regional managers, 11.36 per cent of
them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 13.64 per
cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low.

Among 75 employees who are divisional managers / senior managers, 4.00

per cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while,
25.33 per cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low.
Among 71 employees who are depot managers / junior scale officers, 16.90 per cent
of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 11.27 per
cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low.

Among 83 employees who are assistant engineers, 15.66 per cent of them
viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 12.05 per cent of

14
them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among 123
employees who are assistant managers traffic, 16.26 per cent of them viewed that the
level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 19.51 per cent of them viewed that
the level of autocratic leadership style is low.

The F-value of 2.644 which is significant at five per cent level explaining
significant difference exists in autocratic leadership style among designation of
employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta squared value is
0.032 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

3.14.5 WORK EXPERIENCE AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP

STYLE
The relation among work experience of employees and autocratic leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.19.
TABLE 3.19
WORK EXPERIENCE AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Autocratic Leadership
Work
Sl. No. Style Total F-Value Sig.
Experience
Low Moderate High
0 11 5 16
1. 1 – 5 Years
(0.00) (68.75) (31.25) (3.94)
9 31 6 46
2. 6 – 10 Years
(19.57) (67.39) (13.04) (11.33)
16 67 11 94
3. 11 – 15 Years 3.215 .013
(17.02) (71.28) (11.70) (23.15)
20 78 14 112
4. 16 – 20 Years
(17.86) (69.64) (12.50) (27.59)
23 97 18 138
5. 21 – 25 Years
(16.67) (70.29) (13.04) (33.99)
68 284 54 406
Total - -
(16.75) (69.95) (13.30) (100.00)
Eta Squared .031
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)
15
 Among 16 employees bearing 1 – 5 years of work experience, 31.25 per cent
of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, none of
them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among 46
employees bearing 6 – 10 years of work experience, 13.04 per cent of them viewed
that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 19.57 per cent of them
viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among 94 employees
bearing 11 – 15 years of work experience, 11.70 per cent of them viewed that the
level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 17.02 per cent of them viewed that
the level of autocratic leadership style is low.
Among 112 employees bearing 16 – 20 years of work experience, 12.50 per
cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 17.86
per cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among
138 employees bearing 21 – 25 years of work experience, 13.04 per cent of them
viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 16.67 per cent of
them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low.
The F-value of 3.215 which is significant at one per cent level explaining
significant difference exists in autocratic leadership style among work experience of
employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta squared value is
0.031 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

3.14.6 MONTHLY INCOME AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP

STYLE
The relation among monthly income of employees and autocratic leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.20.

16
 TABLE 3.20
MONTHLY INCOME AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Autocratic
F-
Leadership Style
Sl. No. Monthly Income Total Valu Sig.
Moder
Low High e
ate
0 12 5 17
1. Below Rs.50,000
(0.00) (70.59) (29.41) (4.19)
Rs.50,001 – 26 95 19 140
2.
Rs.1,00,000 (18.57) (67.86) (13.57) (34.48)
Rs.1,00,001– 22 100 21 143
3. 3.315 .011
Rs.1,50,000 (15.38) (69.93) (14.69) (35.22)
Rs.1,50,001– 12 36 3 51
4.
Rs.2,00,000 (23.53) (70.59) (5.88) (12.56)
Above 8 41 6 55
5.
Rs.2,00,000 (14.54) (74.55) (10.91) (13.55)
68 284 54 406
Total - -
(16.75) (69.95) (13.30) (100.00)
Eta Squared .032
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 17 employees earning monthly income of below Rs.50,000, 29.41

per cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while,
none of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among 140
employees earning monthly income of Rs.50,001 – Rs.1,00,000, 13.57 per cent of
them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 18.57 per
cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among 143
employees earning monthly income of Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000, 14.69 per cent of
them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 15.38 per
cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low.

Among 51 employees earning monthly income of Rs.1,50,001– Rs.2,00,000,

5.88 per cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high,
while, 23.53 per cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is

17
low. Among 55 employees earning monthly income of above Rs.2,00,000, 10.91 per
cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 14.54
per cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low.

The F-value of 3.315 which is significant at one per cent level explaining
significant difference exists in autocratic leadership style among monthly income of
employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta squared value is
0.032 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

3.14.7 MARITAL STATUS AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP

STYLE
The relation among marital status of employees and autocratic leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.21.
TABLE 3.21
MARITAL STATUS AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Autocratic Leadership
Marital
Sl. No. Style Total t-Value Sig.
Status
Low Moderate High
66 257 46 369
1. Married
(17.89) (69.65) (12.46) (90.89)
2.152 .032
2 27 8 37
2. Unmarried
(5.41) (72.97) (21.62) (9.11)
68 284 54 406
Total - -
(16.75) (69.95) (13.30) (100.00)
Eta Squared .014
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 369 married employees, 12.46 per cent of them viewed that the level
of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 17.89 per cent of them viewed that the
level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among 37 unmarried employees, 21.62
per cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while,
5.41 per cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low.

18
 The t-value of 2.152 which is significant at five per cent level explaining
significant difference exists in autocratic leadership style among marital status of
employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta squared value is
0.014 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

3.14.8 TYPE OF FAMILY AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP

STYLE
The relation among type of family of employees and autocratic leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.22.
TABLE 3.22
TYPE OF FAMILY AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Autocratic
Sl. No. Type of Family Leadership Style Total t-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
65 247 49 361
1. Nuclear Family
(18.01) (68.42) (13.57) (88.92)
1.854 .064
3 37 5 45
2. Joint Family
(6.67) (82.22) (11.11) (11.08)
68 284 54 406
Total - -
(16.75) (69.95) (13.30) (100.00)
Eta Squared .011
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 361 employees having nuclear family, 13.57 per cent of them viewed
that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 18.01 per cent of them
viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among 45 employees
having joint family, 11.11 per cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic
leadership style is high, while, 6.67 per cent of them viewed that the level of
autocratic leadership style is low.

The t-value of 1.854 which is not significant statistically explaining no

significant difference exists in autocratic leadership style among type of family of
employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is

19
0.010 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

3.14.9 SIZE OF FAMILY AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP

STYLE
The relation among size of family of employees and autocratic leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.23.
TABLE 3.23
SIZE OF FAMILY AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Autocratic
Sl. No. Size of Family Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
62 225 42 329
1. 2 – 4 Members
(18.84) (68.39) (12.77) (81.03)
4 45 11 60
2. 5 – 7 Members 3.620 .028
(6.67) (75.00) (16.93) (14.78)
2 14 1 17
3. Above 7 Members
(11.77) (82.35) (5.88) (4.19)
68 284 54 406
Total - -
(16.75) (69.95) (13.30) (100.00)
Eta Squared .018
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 329 employees having family size of 2 – 4 members, 12.77 per cent
of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 18.84 per
cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among 60
employees having family size of 5 – 7 members, 16.93 per cent of them viewed that
the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 6.67 per cent of them viewed
that the level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among 17 employees having
family size of above members, 5.88 per cent of them viewed that the level of
autocratic leadership style is high, while, 11.77 per cent of them viewed that the
level of autocratic leadership style is low.

20
 The F-value of 3.620 which is significant at five per cent level explaining
significant difference exists in autocratic leadership style among size of family of
employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta squared value is
0.018 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

3.14.10 RESIDENTIAL AREA AND AUTOCRATIC

LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among residential area of employees and autocratic leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.24.
TABLE 3.24
RESIDENTIAL AREA AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Autocratic
Residential
Sl. No. Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Area
Low Moderate High
17 102 17 136
1. Urban
(12.50) (75.00) (12.50) (33.50)
26 75 20 121
2. Semi – Urban 1.136 .322
(21.49) (61.98) (16.53) (29.80)
25 107 17 149
3. Rural
(16.78) (71.81) (11.41) (36.70)
68 284 54 406
Total - -
(16.75) (69.95) (13.30) (100.00)
Eta Squared .006
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 136 employees residing in urban area, 12.50 per cent of them viewed
that the level of autocratic leadership style is high, while, 12.50 per cent of them
viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among 121 employees
residing in semi – urban area, 16.53 per cent of them viewed that the level of
autocratic leadership style is high, while, 21.49 per cent of them viewed that the
level of autocratic leadership style is low. Among 149 employees residing in rural
area, 11.41 per cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership style is

21
high, while, 16.78 per cent of them viewed that the level of autocratic leadership
style is low.

The F-value of 1.136 which is not significant statistically explaining no

significant difference exists in autocratic leadership style among residential area of
employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.006 disclosing that the effect size is very small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is very small.

3.15 DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE

The democratic leadership style in Telangana state road transport corporation
was studied and the results are given in Table 3.25.
TABLE 3.25
DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Standard
Sl. No. Democratic Leadership Mean
Deviation
1. Leader requests ideas from employees for future plans 3.39 1.07
Employees are engaged in deciding what and how to
2. 3.37 1.12
be done
Leader conducts meeting to get suggestions from
3. employees to create a strategy to hold a process as per 3.87 1.09
plan when something is not right
Environment is created to allow employees to engage
4. in decision making and bear accountability for 3.89 0.96
activities
Leader considers vision of employees for their jobs
5. 3.34 1.09
and use it wherever applicable
Leader gives direction and advices to employees for
6. 3.90 1.05
prioritizing their goals
Leader solves differences in role anticipations of
7. 3.86 1.12
employees

22
 8. Leader utilizes his authority to help subordinates grow 3.72 1.17
Employees exercise self direction if they are
9. 3.76 1.16
committed to their objectives
Employees know how to utilize creativeness for
10. 3.73 1.06
solving issues
Source: Primary Data
The employees have agreed that the leader conducts meeting to get
suggestions from employees to create a strategy when something is not right,
environment is created to allow employees to engage in decision making and bear
accountability for activities, leader gives direction and advices to employees for
prioritizing their goals, leader solves differences in role anticipations of employees,
leader utilizes his authority to help subordinates grow, employees exercise self
direction if they are committed to their objectives and employees know how to
utilize creativeness for solving issues, while, they are neutral regarding leader
requests ideas from employees for future plans, employees are engaged in deciding
what and how to be done and leader considers vision of employees for their jobs and
use it wherever applicable.

3.16 PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES AND DEMOCRATIC

LEADERSHIP STYLE
The distribution of employees on the basis of democratic leadership style
was studied and the results are given in Table 3.26. The response of employees for
democratic leadership style is divided into low level, moderate level and high level
based on Mean ± SD (Mean = 36.84 ; SD = 5.21).

23
 TABLE 3.26
DISTRIBUTION OF EMPLOYEES ON THE BASIS OF
DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Democratic Number of
Sl. No. Percentage
Leadership Style Employees
1. Low 84 20.69
2. Moderate 264 65.02
3. High 58 14.29
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data

Among 406 employees, 14.29 per cent of them made clear that the level of
democratic leadership style is high, while, 20.69 per cent of them made clear that the
level of democratic leadership style is low.

3.16.1 GENDER AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE

The relation among gender of employees and democratic leadership style was
studied and the results are given in Table 3.27.
TABLE 3.27
GENDER AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Democratic Leadership
Sl. No. Gender Style Total t-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
66 201 44 311
1. Male
(21.22) (64.63) (14.15) (76.60)
.067 .947
18 63 14 95
2. Female
(18.95) (66.31) (14.74) (23.40)
84 264 58 406
Total - -
(20.69) (65.02) (14.29) (100.00)
Eta
.002
Squared
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

24
 Among 311 male employees, 14.15 per cent of them made clear that the level
of democratic leadership style is high, while, 21.22 per cent of them made clear that
the level of democratic leadership style is low. Among 95 female employees, 14.74
per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high,
while, 18.95 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership
style is low.

The t-value of 0.067 which is not significant statistically clarifying no

significant difference exists in democratic leadership style among gender of
employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.002 disclosing that the effect size is very small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is very small.

3.16.2 AGE CATEGORY AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP

STYLE

The relation among age category of employees and democratic leadership

style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.28.

25
 [

TABLE 3.28
AGE CATEGORY AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Democratic Leadership
Sl. No. Age Category Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
5 13 2 20
1. 21 – 30 Years
(25.00) (65.00) (10.00) (4.93)
15 51 12 78
2. 31 – 40 Years
(19.23) (65.38) (15.39) (19.21)
2.719 .044
32 85 11 128
3. 41– 50 Years
(25.00) (66.41) (8.59) (31.53)
32 115 33 180
4. Above 50 Years
(17.78) (63.89) (18.33) (44.33)
84 264 58 406
Total - -
(20.69) (65.02) (14.29) (100.00)
Eta Squared .020
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 20 employees falling under age category of 21 – 30 years, 10.00 per

cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while,
25.00 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is
low. Among 78 employees falling under age category of 31 – 40 years, 15.39 per
cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while,
19.23 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is
low.
Among 128 employees falling under age category of 41 – 50 years, 8.59 per
cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while,
25.00 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is
low. Among 180 employees falling under age category of above 50 years, 18.33 per
cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while,
17.78 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is
low.

26
 The F-value of 2.719 which is significant at five per cent level clarifying
significant difference exists in democratic leadership style among age category of
employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta squared value
is 0.019 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is small.

3.16.3 EDUCATION AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE

The relation among education of employees and democratic leadership style
was studied and the results are given in Table 3.29.
TABLE 3.29
EDUCATION AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Democratic Leadership
Sl. No. Education Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
14 31 9 54
1. Diploma
(25.92) (57.41) (16.67) (13.30)
14 53 5 72
2. Under Graduation
(19.44) (73.61) (6.95) (17.73)
.527 .664
33 109 23 165
3. Post Graduation
(20.00) (66.06) (13.94) (40.64)
23 71 21 115
4. Engineering
(20.00) (61.74) (18.26) (28.33)
84 264 58 406
Total - -
(20.69) (65.02) (14.29) (100.00)
Eta Squared .004
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 54 employees possessing diploma, 16.67 per cent of them made clear
that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while, 25.92 per cent of them
made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is low. Among 72 employees
possessing under graduation, 6.95 per cent of them made clear that the level of
democratic leadership style is high, while, 19.44 per cent of them made clear that the
level of democratic leadership style is low.

27
 Among 165 employees possessing post graduation, 13.94 per cent of them
made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while, 20.00 per cent
of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is low. Among 115
employees possessing engineering, 18.26 per cent of them made clear that the level
of democratic leadership style is high, while, 20.00 per cent of them made clear that
the level of democratic leadership style is low.
The F-value of 0.527 which is not significant statistically clarifying no
significant difference exists in democratic leadership style among education of
employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.004 disclosing that the effect size is very small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is very small.

3.16.4 DESIGNATION AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP

STYLE
The relation among designation of employees and democratic leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.30.
TABLE 3.30
DESIGNATION AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Democratic
Sl. No. Designation Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
1 5 4 10
1. Executive Director
(10.00) (50.00) (40.00) (2.46)
Head of the
7 27 10 44
2. Department /
(15.91) (61.36) (27.73) (10.84)
Regional Manager 1.228 .295
Divisional Manager 17 48 10 75
3.
/ Senior Manager (22.67) (64.00) (13.33) (18.47)
Depot Manager / 14 47 10 71
4.
Junior Scale Officer (19.72) (66.20) (14.08) (17.49)

28
 17 53 13 83
5. Assistant Engineer
(20.48) (63.86) (15.66) (20.44)
Assistant Manager 28 84 11 123
6.
Traffic (22.77) (68.29) (8.94) (30.30)
84 264 58 406
Total - -
(20.69) (65.02) (14.29) (100.00)
Eta Squared .015
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 10 employees who are executive directors, 40.00 per cent of them
made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while, 10.00 per cent
of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is low. Among 44
employees who are heads of the department / regional managers, 27.73 per cent of
them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while, 15.91
per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is low.

Among 75 employees who are divisional managers / senior managers, 13.33

per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high,
while, 22.67 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership
style is low. Among 71 employees who are depot managers / junior scale officers,
14.08 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is
high, while, 19.72 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic
leadership style is low.

Among 83 employees who are assistant engineers, 15.66 per cent of them
made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while, 20.48 per cent
of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is low. Among 123
employees who are assistant managers traffic, 8.94 per cent of them made clear that
the level of democratic leadership style is high, while, 22.77 per cent of them made
clear that the level of democratic leadership style is low.

The F-value of 1.228 which is not significant statistically clarifying no

significant difference exists in democratic leadership style among designation of
employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.015 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

29
3.16.5 WORK EXPERIENCE AND DEMOCRATIC
LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among work experience of employees and democratic
leadership style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.31.
TABLE 3.31
WORK EXPERIENCE AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Democratic Leadership
Work
Sl. No. Style Total F-Value Sig.
Experience
Low Moderate High
3 12 1 16
1. 1 – 5 Years
(18.75) (75.00) (6.25) (3.94)
10 31 5 46
2. 6 – 10 Years
(21.74) (67.39) (10.87) (11.33)
19 64 11 94
3. 11 – 15 Years 1.587 .177
(20.21) (68.09) (11.70) (23.15)
27 71 14 112
4. 16 – 20 Years
(24.11) (63.39) (12.50) (27.59)
25 86 27 138
5. 21 – 25 Years
(18.12) (62.32) (19.56) (33.99)
84 264 58 406
Total - -
(20.69) (65.02) (14.29) (100.00)
Eta Squared .016
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)
Among 16 employees bearing 1 – 5 years of work experience, 6.25 per cent
of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while, 18.75
per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is low.
Among 46 employees bearing 6 – 10 years of work experience, 10.87 per cent of
them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while, 21.74
per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is low.
Among 94 employees bearing 11 – 15 years of work experience, 11.70 per cent of
them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while, 20.21
per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is low.

30
 Among 112 employees bearing 16 – 20 years of work experience, 12.50 per
cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while,
24.11 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is
low. Among 138 employees bearing 21 – 25 years of work experience, 19.56 per
cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while,
18.12 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is
low.
The F-value of 1.587 which is not significant statistically clarifying no
significant difference exists in democratic leadership style among work experience
of employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value
is 0.016 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is small.

3.16.6 MONTHLY INCOME AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP

STYLE
The relation among monthly income of employees and democratic leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.32.
TABLE 3.32
MONTHLY INCOME AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Democratic
Sl. No. Monthly Income Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
4 13 0 17
1. Below Rs.50,000
(23.53) (76.47) (0.00) (4.19)
27 94 19 140
2. Rs.50,001 – Rs.1,00,000
(19.29) (67.14) (13.57) (34.48)
2.748 .028
35 91 17 143
3. Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000
(24.47) (63.64) (11.89) (35.22)
11 34 6 51
4. Rs.1,50,001– Rs.2,00,000
(21.57) (66.67) (11.76) (12.56)

31
 7 32 16 55
5. Above Rs.2,00,000
(12.73) (58.18) (29.09) (13.55)
84 264 58 406
Total - -
(20.69) (65.02) (14.29) (100.00)
Eta Squared .027
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)
Among 17 employees earning monthly income of below Rs.50,000, none of
them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while, 23.53
per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is low.
Among 140 employees earning monthly income of Rs.50,001 – Rs.1,00,000, 13.57
per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high,
while, 19.29 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership
style is low. Among 143 employees earning monthly income of Rs.1,00,001–
Rs.1,50,000, 11.89 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic
leadership style is high, while, 24.47 per cent of them made clear that the level of
democratic leadership style is low.

Among 51 employees earning monthly income of Rs.1,50,001– Rs.2,00,000,

11.76 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is
high, while, 21.57 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic
leadership style is low. Among 55 employees earning monthly income of above
Rs.2,00,000, 29.09 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic
leadership style is high, while, 12.73 per cent of them made clear that the level of
democratic leadership style is low.

The F-value of 2.748 which is significant at five per cent level clarifying
significant difference exists in democratic leadership style among monthly income
of employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta squared
value is 0.027 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is small.

32
3.16.7 MARITAL STATUS AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP
STYLE
The relation among marital status of employees and democratic leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.33.
TABLE 3.33
MARITAL STATUS AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Democratic Leadership
Marital
Sl. No. Style Total t-Value Sig.
Status
Low Moderate High
81 238 50 369
1. Married
(21.95) (64.50) (13.55) (90.89)
2.527 .012
3 26 8 37
2. Unmarried
(8.11) (70.27) (21.62) (9.11)
84 264 58 406
Total - -
(20.69) (65.02) (14.29) (100.00)
Eta Squared .021
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)
Among 369 married employees, 13.55 per cent of them made clear that the
level of democratic leadership style is high, while, 21.95 per cent of them made clear
that the level of democratic leadership style is low. Among 37 unmarried employees,
21.62 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is
high, while, 8.11 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership
style is low.
The t-value of 2.527 which is significant at one per cent level clarifying
significant difference exists in democratic leadership style among marital status of
employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta squared value
is 0.021 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is small.

33
3.16.8 TYPE OF FAMILY AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP
STYLE
The relation among type of family of employees and democratic leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.34.
TABLE 3.34
TYPE OF FAMILY AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Democratic
Sl. No. Type of Family Leadership Style Total t-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
77 228 56 361
1. Nuclear Family
(21.33) (63.16) (15.51) (88.92)
.543 .587
7 36 2 45
2. Joint Family
(15.56) (80.00) (4.44) (11.08)
84 264 58 406
Total - -
(20.69) (65.02) (14.29) (100.00)
Eta Squared .007
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 361 employees having nuclear family, 15.51 per cent of them made
clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while, 21.33 per cent of
them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is low. Among 45
employees having joint family, 4.44 per cent of them made clear that the level of
democratic leadership style is high, while, 15.56 per cent of them made clear that the
level of democratic leadership style is low.

The t-value of 0.543 which is not significant statistically clarifying no

significant difference exists in democratic leadership style among type of family of
employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.007 disclosing that the effect size is very small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is very small.

34
3.16.9 SIZE OF FAMILY AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP
STYLE
The relation among size of family of employees and democratic leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.35.
TABLE 3.35
SIZE OF FAMILY AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Democratic
Sl. No. Size of Family Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
68 208 53 329
1. 2 – 4 Members
(20.67) (63.22) (16.11) (81.03)
12 45 3 60
2. 5 – 7 Members .812 .445
(20.00) (75.00) (5.00) (14.78)
4 11 2 17
3. Above 7 Members
(23.53) (64.71) (11.76) (4.19)
84 264 58 406
Total - -
(20.69) (65.02) (14.29) (100.00)
Eta Squared .004
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)
Among 329 employees having family size of 2 – 4 members, 16.11 per cent
of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while, 20.67
per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is low.
Among 60 employees having family size of 5 – 7 members, 5.00 per cent of them
made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while, 20.00 per cent
of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is low. Among 17
employees having family size of above members, 11.76 per cent of them made clear
that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while, 23.53 per cent of them
made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is low.

The F-value of 0.812 which is not significant statistically clarifying no

significant difference exists in democratic leadership style among size of family of
employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is

35
0.004 disclosing that the effect size is very small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is very small.

3.16.10 RESIDENTIAL AREA AND DEMOCRATIC

LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among residential area of employees and democratic leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.36.
TABLE 3.36
RESIDENTIAL AREA AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Democratic
Residential
Sl. No. Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Area
Low Moderate High
28 85 23 136
1. Urban
(20.59) (62.50) (16.91) (33.50)
24 75 22 121
2. Semi – Urban 2.929 .055
(19.84) (61.98) (18.18) (29.80)
32 104 13 149
3. Rural
(21.48) (69.80) (8.72) (36.70)
84 264 58 406
Total - -
(20.69) (65.02) (14.29) (100.00)
Eta Squared .014
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 136 employees residing in urban area, 16.91 per cent of them made
clear that the level of democratic leadership style is high, while, 20.59 per cent of
them made clear that the level of democratic leadership style is low. Among 121
employees residing in semi – urban area, 18.18 per cent of them made clear that the
level of democratic leadership style is high, while, 19.84 per cent of them made clear
that the level of democratic leadership style is low. Among 149 employees residing
in rural area, 8.72 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic leadership
style is high, while, 21.48 per cent of them made clear that the level of democratic
leadership style is low.

36
 The F-value of 2.929 which is not significant statistically clarifying no
significant difference exists in democratic leadership style among residential area of
employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.014 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

3.17 LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP STYLE

The laissez-faire leadership style in Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation was studied and the results are given in Table 3.37.
TABLE 3.37
LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP STYLE
Standard
Sl. No. Laissez-Faire Leadership Mean
Deviation
Employees always vote whenever a key
1. 3.38 1.36
decision is to be made
The main decision should get endorsement
2. 3.83 1.14
from majority of employees
Employees are allowed to decide what and
3. 3.35 1.55
how to be done
Information are sent through e-mails,
4. 3.80 1.02
circulars and memos to employees for action
Leader allows employees to make decision
5. 3.92 0.97
about their job
Leader gives up activities to implement new
6. 3.40 1.47
methods
Employee is responsible for describing their
7. 3.36 1.53
job
Leader is keen to distribute power with
8. 3.33 1.50
subordinates
Employees have the rights to determine their
9. 3.78 1.18
objectives
10. Employees guide themselves as leader can 3.81 1.05
Source: Primary Data

37
 The employees have agreed that the main decision should get endorsement
from majority of employees, information are sent through e-mails, circulars and
memos to employees for action, leader allows employees to make decision about
their job, employees have the rights to determine their objectives and employees
guide themselves as leader can, while, they are neutral regarding employees always
vote whenever a key decision is to be made, employees are allowed to decide what
and how to be done, leader gives up activities to implement new methods, employee
is responsible for describing their job and leader is keen to distribute power with
subordinates.

3.18 PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE

LEADERSHIP STYLE
The distribution of employees on the basis of laissez-faire leadership style
was studied and the results are given in Table 3.38. The response of employees for
laissez-faire leadership style is divided into low level, moderate level and high level
based on Mean ± SD (Mean = 35.97 ; SD = 5.49).
TABLE 3.38
DISTRIBUTION OF EMPLOYEES ON THE BASIS OF
LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Laissez-Faire Number of
Sl. No. Percentage
Leadership Style Employees
1. Low 61 15.02
2. Moderate 290 71.43
3. High 55 13.55
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data

Among 406 employees, 13.55 per cent of them distinguished that the level of
laissez-faire leadership style is high, while, 15.02 per cent of them distinguished that
the level of laissez-faire leadership style is low.

38
3.18.1 GENDER AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among gender of employees and laissez-faire leadership style was
studied and the results are given in Table 3.39.
TABLE 3.39
GENDER AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Laissez-Faire
Sl. No. Gender Leadership Style Total t-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
49 222 40 311
1. Male
(15.76) (71.38) (12.86) (76.60)
.775 .439
12 68 15 95
2. Female
(12.63) (71.58) (15.79) (23.40)
61 290 55 406
Total - -
(15.02) (71.43) (13.55) (100.00)
Eta
.010
Squared
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)
Among 311 male employees, 12.86 per cent of them distinguished that the
level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while, 15.76 per cent of them
distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is low. Among 95 female
employees, 15.79 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire
leadership style is high, while, 12.63 per cent of them distinguished that the level of
laissez-faire leadership style is low.
The t-value of 0.775 which is not significant statistically elucidating no
significant difference exists in laissez-faire leadership style among gender of
employees. As on outcome, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.010 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

39
3.18.2 AGE CATEGORY AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP
STYLE
The relation among age category of employees and laissez-faire leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.40.
TABLE 3.40
AGE CATEGORY AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Laissez-Faire
Sl. No. Age Category Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
3 15 2 20
1. 21 – 30 Years
(15.00) (75.00) (10.00) (4.93)
9 61 8 78
2. 31 – 40 Years
(11.54) (78.21) (10.25) (19.21)
1.680 .171
19 89 20 128
3. 41– 50 Years
(14.84) (69.53) (15.63) (31.53)
30 125 25 180
4. Above 50 Years
(16.67) (69.44) (13.89) (44.33)
61 290 55 406
Total - -
(15.02) (71.43) (13.55) (100.00)
Eta Squared .012
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 20 employees falling under age category of 21 – 30 years, 10.00 per

cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high,
while, 15.00 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership
style is low. Among 78 employees falling under age category of 31 – 40 years,
10.25 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is
high, while, 11.54 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire
leadership style is low.

Among 128 employees falling under age category of 41 – 50 years, 15.63 per
cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high,
while, 14.84 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership
style is low. Among 180 employees falling under age category of above 50 years,
40
13.89 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is
high, while, 16.67 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire
leadership style is low.
The F-value of 1.680 which is not significant statistically elucidating no
significant difference exists in laissez-faire leadership style among age category of
employees. As on outcome, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.012 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

3.18.3 EDUCATION AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP

STYLE
The relation among education of employees and laissez-faire leadership style
was studied and the results are given in Table 3.41.
TABLE 3.41
EDUCATION AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Laissez-Faire
Sl. No. Education Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
7 37 10 54
1. Diploma
(12.96) (68.52) (18.52) (13.30)
11 54 7 72
2. Under Graduation
(15.28) (75.00) (9.72) (17.73)
.540 .655
28 111 26 165
3. Post Graduation
(16.97) (67.27) (15.76) (40.64)
15 88 12 115
4. Engineering
(13.04) (76.52) (10.44) (28.33)
61 290 55 406
Total - -
(15.02) (71.43) (13.55) (100.00)
Eta Squared .004
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

41
 Among 54 employees possessing diploma, 18.52 per cent of them
distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while, 12.96 per
cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is low.
Among 72 employees possessing under graduation, 9.72 per cent of them
distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while, 15.28 per
cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is low.
Among 165 employees possessing post graduation, 15.76 per cent of them
distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while, 16.97 per
cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is low.
Among 115 employees possessing engineering, 10.44 per cent of them distinguished
that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while, 13.04 per cent of them
distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is low.
The F-value of 0.540 which is not significant statistically elucidating no
significant difference exists in laissez-faire leadership style among education of
employees. As on outcome, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.004 disclosing that the effect size is very small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is very small.

3.18.4 DESIGNATION AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP

STYLE
The relation among designation of employees and laissez-faire leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.42.
TABLE 3.42
DESIGNATION AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Laissez-Faire
Sl. No. Designation Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
2 7 1 10
1. Executive Director
(20.00) (70.00) (10.00) (2.46)
Head of the
5 34 5 44
2. Department / 1.064 .380
(11.36) (77.28) (11.36) (10.84)
Regional Manager
Divisional Manager / 15 47 13 75
3.
Senior Manager (20.00) (62.67) (17.33) (18.47)

42
 Depot Manager / 10 51 10 71
4.
Junior Scale Officer (14.08) (71.84) (14.08) (17.49)
8 64 11 83
5. Assistant Engineer
(9.64) (77.11) (13.25) (20.44)
Assistant Manager 21 87 15 123
6.
Traffic (17.07) (70.73) (12.20) (30.30)
61 290 55 406
Total - -
(15.02) (71.43) (13.55) (100.00)
Eta Squared .013
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 10 employees who are executive directors, 10.00 per cent of them
distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while, 20.00 per
cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is low.
Among 44 employees who are heads of the department / regional managers, 11.36
per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high,
while, 11.36 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership
style is low.

Among 75 employees who are divisional managers / senior managers, 17.33

per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high,
while, 20.00 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership
style is low. Among 71 employees who are depot managers / junior scale officers,
14.08 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is
high, while, 14.08 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire
leadership style is low.
Among 83 employees who are assistant engineers, 13.25 per cent of them
distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while, 9.64 per
cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is low.
Among 123 employees who are assistant managers traffic, 12.20 per cent of them
distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while, 17.07 per
cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is low.

The F-value of 1.064 which is not significant statistically elucidating no

significant difference exists in laissez-faire leadership style among designation of
employees. As on outcome, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is

43
0.013 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

3.18.5 WORK EXPERIENCE AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE

LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among work experience of employees and laissez-faire
leadership style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.43.

TABLE 3.43
WORK EXPERIENCE AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Laissez-Faire
Work
Sl. No. Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Experience
Low Moderate High
3 11 2 16
1. 1 – 5 Years
(18.75) (68.75) (12.50) (3.94)
7 34 5 46
2. 6 – 10 Years
(15.22) (73.91) (10.87) (11.33)
11 73 10 94
3. 11 – 15 Years .630 .641
(11.70) (77.66) (10.64) (23.15)
21 72 19 112
4. 16 – 20 Years
(18.75) (64.29) (16.96) (27.59)
19 100 19 138
5. 21 – 25 Years
(13.77) (72.46) (13.77) (33.99)
61 290 55 406
Total - -
(15.02) (71.43) (13.55) (100.00)
Eta Squared .006
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 16 employees bearing 1 – 5 years of work experience, 12.50 per cent

of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while,
18.75 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is
low. Among 46 employees bearing 6 – 10 years of work experience, 10.87 per cent
of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while,
15.22 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is
low. Among 94 employees bearing 11 – 15 years of work experience, 10.64 per cent
of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while,

44
11.70 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is
low.
Among 112 employees bearing 16 – 20 years of work experience, 16.96 per
cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high,
while, 18.75 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership
style is low. Among 138 employees bearing 21 – 25 years of work experience,
13.77 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is
high, while, 13.77 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire
leadership style is low.
The F-value of 0.630 which is not significant statistically elucidating no
significant difference exists in laissez-faire leadership style among work experience
of employees. As on outcome, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value
is 0.006 disclosing that the effect size is very small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is very small.

3.18.6 MONTHLY INCOME AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE

LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among monthly income of employees and laissez-faire
leadership style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.44.
TABLE 3.44
MONTHLY INCOME AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Laissez-Faire
Sl. No. Monthly Income Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
3 13 1 17
1. Below Rs.50,000
(17.65) (76.47) (5.88) (4.19)
19 99 22 140
2. Rs.50,001 – Rs.1,00,000
(13.57) (70.71) (15.72) (34.48)
2.229 .065
26 101 16 143
3. Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000
(18.18) (70.63) (11.19) (35.22)
5 36 10 51
4. Rs.1,50,001– Rs.2,00,000
(9.80) (70.59) (19.61) (12.56)

45
 8 41 6 55
5. Above Rs.2,00,000
(14.55) (74.54) (10.91) (13.55)
61 290 55 406
Total - -
(15.02) (71.43) (13.55) (100.00)
Eta Squared .022
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 17 employees earning monthly income of below Rs.50,000, 5.88 per

cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high,
while, 17.65 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership
style is low. Among 140 employees earning monthly income of Rs.50,001 –
Rs.1,00,000, 15.72 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire
leadership style is high, while, 13.57 per cent of them distinguished that the level of
laissez-faire leadership style is low. Among 143 employees earning monthly
income of Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000, 11.19 per cent of them distinguished that the
level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while, 18.18 per cent of them
distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is low.
Among 51 employees earning monthly income of Rs.1,50,001– Rs.2,00,000,
19.61 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is
high, while, 9.80 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire
leadership style is low. Among 55 employees earning monthly income of above
Rs.2,00,000, 10.91 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire
leadership style is high, while, 14.55 per cent of them distinguished that the level of
laissez-faire leadership style is low.
The F-value of 2.229 which is not significant statistically elucidating no
significant difference exists in laissez-faire leadership style among monthly income
of employees. As on outcome, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value
is 0.022 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is small.

46
3.18.7 MARITAL STATUS AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP
STYLE
The relation among marital status of employees and laissez-faire leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.45.
TABLE 3.45
MARITAL STATUS AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Laissez-Faire
Marital
Sl. No. Leadership Style Total t-Value Sig.
Status
Low Moderate High
60 263 46 369
1. Married
(16.26) (71.27) (12.47) (90.89)
2.220 .027
1 27 9 37
2. Unmarried
(2.70) (72.97) (24.33) (9.11)
61 290 55 406
Total - -
(15.02) (71.43) (13.55) (100.00)
Eta Squared .024
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 369 married employees, 12.47 per cent of them distinguished that the
level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while, 16.26 per cent of them
distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is low. Among 37
unmarried employees, 24.33 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-
faire leadership style is high, while, 2.70 per cent of them distinguished that the level
of laissez-faire leadership style is low.
The t-value of 2.220 which is significant at five per cent level elucidating
significant difference exists in laissez-faire leadership style among marital status of
employees. As on outcome, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta squared
value is 0.024 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is small.

47
3.18.8 TYPE OF FAMILY AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP
STYLE
The relation among type of family of employees and laissez-faire leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.46.
TABLE 3.46
TYPE OF FAMILY AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Laissez-Faire
Sl. No. Type of Family Leadership Style Total t-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
55 257 49 361
1. Nuclear Family
(15.24) (71.19) (13.57) (88.92)
1.195 .233
6 33 6 45
2. Joint Family
(13.33) (73.34) (13.33) (11.08)
61 290 55 406
Total - -
(15.02) (71.43) (13.55) (100.00)
Eta Squared .011
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 361 employees having nuclear family, 13.57 per cent of them
distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while, 15.24 per
cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is low.
Among 45 employees having joint family, 13.33 per cent of them distinguished that
the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while, 13.33 per cent of them
distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is low.
The t-value of 1.195 which is not significant statistically elucidating no
significant difference exists in laissez-faire leadership style among type of family of
employees. As on outcome, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.011 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

48
3.18.9 SIZE OF FAMILY AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP
STYLE
The relation among size of family of employees and laissez-faire leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.47.
TABLE 3.47
SIZE OF FAMILY AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Laissez-Faire
Sl. No. Size of Family Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
48 235 46 329
1. 2 – 4 Members
(14.59) (71.43) (13.98) (81.03)
9 42 9 60
2. 5 – 7 Members 3.536 .030
(15.00) (70.00) (15.00) (14.78)
4 13 0 17
3. Above 7 Members
(23.53) (76.47) (0.00) (4.19)
61 290 55 406
Total - -
(15.02) (71.43) (13.55) (100.00)
Eta Squared .017
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 329 employees having family size of 2 – 4 members, 13.98 per cent
of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while,
14.59 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is
low. Among 60 employees having family size of 5 – 7 members, 15.00 per cent of
them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while,
15.00 per cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is
low. Among 17 employees having family size of above members, none of them
distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while, 23.53 per
cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is low.
The F-value of 3.536 which is significant at five per cent level elucidating
significant difference exists in laissez-faire leadership style among size of family of
employees. As on outcome, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta squared

49
value is 0.017 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is small.

3.18.10 RESIDENTIAL AREA AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE

LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among residential area of employees and laissez-faire leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.48.
TABLE 3.48
RESIDENTIAL AREA AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Laissez-Faire
Residential
Sl. No. Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Area
Low Moderate High
14 95 27 136
1. Urban
(10.30) (69.85) (19.85) (33.50)
17 90 14 121
2. Semi – Urban 8.464 .000
(14.05) (74.38) (11.57) (29.80)
30 105 14 149
3. Rural
(20.13) (70.47) (9.40) (36.70)
61 290 55 406
Total - -
(15.02) (71.43) (13.55) (100.00)
Eta Squared .040
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 136 employees residing in urban area, 19.85 per cent of them
distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while, 10.30 per
cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is low.
Among 121 employees residing in semi – urban area, 11.57 per cent of them
distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while, 14.05 per
cent of them distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is low.
Among 149 employees residing in rural area, 9.40 per cent of them distinguished
that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is high, while, 20.13 per cent of them
distinguished that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is low.

50
 The F-value of 8.464 which is significant at one per cent level elucidating
significant difference exists in laissez-faire leadership style among residential area
of employees. As on outcome, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta squared
value is 0.040 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is small.

3.19 TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE

The transformational leadership style in Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation was studied and the results are given in Table 3.49.
TABLE 3.49
TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE
Standard
Sl. No. Transformational Leadership Mean
Deviation
1. Leader encourages employees 4.26 0.48
2. Leader engages in training of employees 3.42 1.05
The moral values of employees are very much
3. 4.21 0.68
considered
Leader gives attentions to apprehensions of
4. 4.24 0.74
employees
5. Employees are encouraged to do their jobs well 3.95 0.85
6. Leader improves motivation level of employees 3.97 0.82
7. The innovation among employees is promoted 3.45 1.08
8. The high standards are fixed for employees 3.43 1.05
The values and objectives are precisely
9. 3.88 0.75
informed to employees
Leader provides due consideration for personal
10. 4.02 0.85
interests and self respect of employees
Source: Primary Data

The employees have agreed that the leader encourages employees, the moral
values of employees are very much considered, leader gives attentions to
apprehensions of employees, employees are encouraged to do their jobs well, leader
improves motivation level of employees, the values and objectives are precisely

51
informed to employees and leader provides due consideration for personal interests
and self respect of employees, while, they are neutral regarding leader engages in
training of employees, the innovation among employees is promoted and the high
standards are fixed for employees.

3.20 PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES AND TRANSFORMATIONAL

LEADERSHIP STYLE
The distribution of employees on the basis of transformational leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.50. The response of employees
for transformational leadership style is divided into low level, moderate level and
high level based on Mean ± SD (Mean = 38.81 ; SD = 4.36).
TABLE 3.50
DISTRIBUTION OF EMPLOYEES ON THE BASIS OF
TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Transformational Number of
Sl. No. Percentage
Leadership Style Employees
1. Low 63 15.52
2. Moderate 270 66.50
3. High 73 17.98
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data

Among 406 employees, 17.98 per cent of them recognized that the level of
transformational leadership style is high, while, 15.52 per cent of them recognized
that the level of transformational leadership style is low.

3.20.1 GENDER AND TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP

STYLE
The relation among gender of employees and transformational leadership style
was studied and the results are given in Table 3.51.

52
 TABLE 3.51
GENDER AND TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Transformational
Sl. No. Gender Leadership Style Total t-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
55 196 60 311
1. Male
(17.69) (63.02) (19.29) (76.60)
.068 .946
8 74 13 95
2. Female
(8.42) (77.90) (13.68) (23.40)
63 270 73 406
Total - -
(15.52) (66.50) (17.98) (100.00)
Eta
.003
Squared
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)
Among 311 male employees, 19.29 per cent of them recognized that the
level of transformational leadership style is high, while, 17.69 per cent of them
recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is low. Among 95
female employees, 13.68 per cent of them recognized that the level of
transformational leadership style is high, while, 8.42 per cent of them recognized
that the level of transformational leadership style is low.
The t-value of 0.068 which is not significant statistically demonstrating no
significant difference exists in transformational leadership style among gender of
employees. So, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is 0.003
disclosing that the effect size is very small and it implies that the actual difference in
mean values among groups is very small.

3.20.2 AGE CATEGORY AND TRANSFORMATIONAL

LEADERSHIP STYLE

The relation among age category of employees and transformational

leadership style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.52.

53
 TABLE 3.52
AGE CATEGORY AND TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
STYLE
Level of Transformational
Sl. No. Age Category Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
4 15 1 20
1. 21 – 30 Years
(20.00) (75.00) (5.00) (4.93)
9 48 21 78
2. 31 – 40 Years
(11.54) (61.54) (26.92) (19.21)
2.046 .107
17 91 20 128
3. 41– 50 Years
(13.28) (71.09) (15.63) (31.53)
33 116 31 180
4. Above 50 Years
(18.33) (64.45) (17.22) (44.33)
63 270 73 406
Total - -
(15.52) (66.50) (17.98) (100.00)
Eta Squared .015
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 20 employees falling under age category of 21 – 30 years, 5.00 per

cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is high,
while, 20.00 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational
leadership style is low. Among 78 employees falling under age category of 31 – 40
years, 26.92 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership
style is high, while, 11.54 per cent of them recognized that the level of
transformational leadership style is low.
Among 128 employees falling under age category of 41 – 50 years, 15.63 per
cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is high,
while, 13.28 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational
leadership style is low. Among 180 employees falling under age category of above
50 years, 17.22 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational
leadership style is high, while, 18.33 per cent of them recognized that the level of
transformational leadership style is low.

54
 The F-value of 2.046 which is not significant statistically demonstrating no
significant difference exists in transformational leadership style among age category
of employees. So, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is 0.015
disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference in
mean values among groups is small.

3.20.3 EDUCATION AND TRANSFORMATIONAL

LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among education of employees and transformational leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.53.
TABLE 3.53
EDUCATION AND TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Transformational
Sl. No. Education Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
9 34 11 54
1. Diploma
(16.67) (62.96) (20.37) (13.30)
13 51 8 72
2. Under Graduation
(18.06) (70.83) (11.11) (17.73)
2.223 .085
22 118 25 165
3. Post Graduation
(13.33) (71.52) (15.15) (40.64)
19 67 29 115
4. Engineering
(16.52) (58.26) (25.22) (28.33)
63 270 73 406
Total - -
(15.52) (66.50) (17.98) (100.00)
Eta Squared .016
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 54 employees possessing diploma, 20.37 per cent of them recognized

that the level of transformational leadership style is high, while, 16.67 per cent of
them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is low. Among 72
employees possessing under graduation, 11.11 per cent of them recognized that the

55
level of transformational leadership style is high, while, 18.06 per cent of them
recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is low.
Among 165 employees possessing post graduation, 15.15 per cent of them
recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is high, while, 13.33
per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is low.
Among 115 employees possessing engineering, 25.22 per cent of them recognized
that the level of transformational leadership style is high, while, 16.52 per cent of
them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is low.
The F-value of 2.223 which is not significant statistically demonstrating no
significant difference exists in transformational leadership style among education of
employees. So, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is 0.016
disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference in
mean values among groups is small.

3.20.4 DESIGNATION AND TRANSFORMATIONAL

LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among designation of employees and transformational
leadership style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.54.
TABLE 3.54
DESIGNATION AND TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Transformational
Sl. No. Designation Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
0 7 3 10
1. Executive Director
(0.00) (70.00) (30.00) (2.46)
Head of the
4 29 11 44
2. Department /
(9.09) (65.91) (25.00) (10.84)
Regional Manager
Divisional Manager / 12 52 11 75 1.944 .086
3.
Senior Manager (16.00) (69.33) (14.67) (18.47)
Depot Manager / 9 51 11 71
4.
Junior Scale Officer (12.68) (71.83) (15.49) (17.49)
17 49 17 83
5. Assistant Engineer
(20.48) (59.04) (20.48) (20.44)

56
 Assistant Manager 21 82 20 123
6.
Traffic (17.07) (66.67) (16.26) (30.30)
63 270 73 406
Total - -
(15.52) (66.50) (17.98) (100.00)
Eta Squared .024
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)
Among 10 employees who are executive directors, 30.00 per cent of them
recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is high, while, none of
them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is low. Among 44
employees who are heads of the department / regional managers, 25.00 per cent of
them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is high, while,
9.09 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is
low.

Among 75 employees who are divisional managers / senior managers, 14.67

per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is
high, while, 16.00 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational
leadership style is low. Among 71 employees who are depot managers / junior scale
officers, 15.49 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational
leadership style is high, while, 12.68 per cent of them recognized that the level of
transformational leadership style is low.

Among 83 employees who are assistant engineers, 20.48 per cent of them
recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is high, while, 20.48
per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is low.
Among 123 employees who are assistant managers traffic, 16.26 per cent of them
recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is high, while, 17.07
per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is low.

The F-value of 1.944 which is not significant statistically demonstrating no

significant difference exists in transformational leadership style among designation
of employees. So, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is 0.024
disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference in
mean values among groups is small.

57
3.20.5 WORK EXPERIENCE AND TRANSFORMATIONAL
LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among work experience of employees and transformational
leadership style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.55.
TABLE 3.55
WORK EXPERIENCE AND TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
STYLE
Level of Transformational
Work
Sl. No. Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Experience
Low Moderate High
3 11 2 16
1. 1 – 5 Years
(18.75) (68.75) (12.50) (3.94)
5 30 11 46
2. 6 – 10 Years
(10.87) (65.22) (23.91) (11.33)
14 66 14 94
3. 11 – 15 Years 3.907 .004
(14.89) (70.22) (14.89) (23.15)
24 73 15 112
4. 16 – 20 Years
(21.43) (65.18) (13.39) (27.59)
17 90 31 138
5. 21 – 25 Years
(12.32) (65.22) (22.46) (33.99)
63 270 73 406
Total - -
(15.52) (66.50) (17.98) (100.00)
Eta Squared .038
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 16 employees bearing 1 – 5 years of work experience, 12.50 per cent

of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is high, while,
18.75 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style
is low. Among 46 employees bearing 6 – 10 years of work experience, 23.91 per
cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is high,
while, 10.87 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational
leadership style is low. Among 94 employees bearing 11 – 15 years of work
experience, 14.89 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational
58
leadership style is high, while, 14.89 per cent of them recognized that the level of
transformational leadership style is low.

Among 112 employees bearing 16 – 20 years of work experience, 13.39 per

cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is high,
while, 21.43 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational
leadership style is low. Among 138 employees bearing 21 – 25 years of work
experience, 22.46 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational
leadership style is high, while, 12.32 per cent of them recognized that the level of
transformational leadership style is low.

The F-value of 3.907 which is significant at one per cent level demonstrating
significant difference exists in transformational leadership style among work
experience of employees. So, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta squared
value is 0.038 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is small.

3.20.6 MONTHLY INCOME AND TRANSFORMATIONAL

LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among monthly income of employees and transformational
leadership style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.56.
TABLE 3.56
MONTHLY INCOME AND TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
STYLE
Level of Transformational
Sl. No. Monthly Income Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
2 13 2 17
1. Below Rs.50,000
(11.77) (76.46) (11.77) (4.19)
24 85 31 140
2. Rs.50,001 – Rs.1,00,000
(17.14) (60.72) (22.14) (34.48)
3.182 .014
29 97 17 143
3. Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000
(20.28) (67.83) (11.89) (35.22)
4 38 9 51
4. Rs.1,50,001– Rs.2,00,000
(7.84) (74.51) (17.65) (12.56)

59
 4 37 14 55
5. Above Rs.2,00,000
(7.27) (67.27)
(25.46) (13.55)
63 270 73 406
Total - -
(15.52) (66.50)
(17.98) (100.00)
Eta Squared .031
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 17 employees earning monthly income of below Rs.50,000, 11.77

per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is
high, while, 11.77 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational
leadership style is low. Among 140 employees earning monthly income of
Rs.50,001 – Rs.1,00,000, 22.14 per cent of them recognized that the level of
transformational leadership style is high, while, 17.14 per cent of them recognized
that the level of transformational leadership style is low. Among 143 employees
earning monthly income of Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000, 11.89 per cent of them
recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is high, while, 20.28
per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is low.
Among 51 employees earning monthly income of Rs.1,50,001– Rs.2,00,000,
17.65 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style
is high, while, 7.84 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational
leadership style is low. Among 55 employees earning monthly income of above
Rs.2,00,000, 25.46 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational
leadership style is high, while, 7.27 per cent of them recognized that the level of
transformational leadership style is low.

The F-value of 3.182 which is significant at one per cent level demonstrating
significant difference exists in transformational leadership style among monthly
income of employees. So, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta squared value
is 0.031 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is small.

60
3.20.7 MARITAL STATUS AND TRANSFORMATIONAL
LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among marital status of employees and transformational
leadership style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.57.
TABLE 3.57
MARITAL STATUS AND TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
STYLE
Level of Transformational
Marital
Sl. No. Leadership Style Total t-Value Sig.
Status
Low Moderate High
55 248 66 369
1. Married
(14.91) (67.21) (17.89) (90.89)
.150 .881
8 22 7 37
2. Unmarried
(21.62) (59.46) (18.92) (9.11)
63 270 73 406
Total - -
(15.52) (66.50) (17.98) (100.00)
Eta Squared .010
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 369 married employees, 17.89 per cent of them recognized that the
level of transformational leadership style is high, while, 14.91 per cent of them
recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is low. Among 37
unmarried employees, 18.92 per cent of them recognized that the level of
transformational leadership style is high, while, 21.62 per cent of them recognized
that the level of transformational leadership style is low.
The t-value of 0.150 which is not significant statistically demonstrating no
significant difference exists in transformational leadership style among marital status
of employees. So, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is 0.010
disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference in
mean values among groups is small.

61
3.20.8 TYPE OF FAMILY AND TRANSFORMATIONAL
LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among type of family of employees and transformational
leadership style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.58.

TABLE 3.58
TYPE OF FAMILY AND TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
STYLE
Level of Transformational
Sl. No. Type of Family Leadership Style Total t-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
56 239 66 361
1. Nuclear Family
(15.51) (66.21) (18.28) (88.92)
1.060 .290
7 31 7 45
2. Joint Family
(15.56) (68.88) (15.56) (11.08)
63 270 73 406
Total - -
(15.52) (66.50) (17.98) (100.00)
Eta Squared .013
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 361 employees having nuclear family, 18.28 per cent of them
recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is high, while, 15.51
per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is low.
Among 45 employees having joint family, 15.56 per cent of them recognized that
the level of transformational leadership style is high, while, 15.56 per cent of them
recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is low.

The t-value of 1.060 which is not significant statistically demonstrating no

significant difference exists in transformational leadership style among type of
family of employees. So, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.013 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

62
3.20.9 SIZE OF FAMILY AND TRANSFORMATIONAL
LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among size of family of employees and transformational
leadership style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.59.

TABLE 3.59
SIZE OF FAMILY AND TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
STYLE
Level of Transformational
Sl. No. Size of Family Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
49 216 64 329
1. 2 – 4 Members
(14.90) (65.65) (19.45) (81.03)
10 45 5 60
2. 5 – 7 Members 2.092 .125
(16.67) (75.00) (8.33) (14.78)
4 9 4 17
3. Above 7 Members
(23.53) (52.94) (23.53) (4.19)
63 270 73 406
Total - -
(15.52) (66.50) (17.98) (100.00)
Eta Squared .010
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 329 employees having family size of 2 – 4 members, 19.45 per cent
of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is high, while,
14.90 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style
is low. Among 60 employees having family size of 5 – 7 members, 8.33 per cent of
them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is high, while,
16.67 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style
is low. Among 17 employees having family size of above members, 23.53 per cent
of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is high, while,
23.53 per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style
is low.

63
 The F-value of 2.092 which is not significant statistically demonstrating no
significant difference exists in transformational leadership style among size of
family of employees. So, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.010 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.
3.20.10 RESIDENTIAL AREA AND TRANSFORMATIONAL
LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among residential area of employees and transformational
leadership style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.60.
TABLE 3.60
RESIDENTIAL AREA AND TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP
STYLE
Level of Transformational
Residential
Sl. No. Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Area
Low Moderate High
17 98 21 136
1. Urban
(12.50) (72.06) (15.44) (33.50)
17 80 24 121
2. Semi – Urban .484 .617
(14.05) (66.12) (19.83) (29.80)
29 92 28 149
3. Rural
(19.46) (61.75) (18.79) (36.70)
63 270 73 406
Total - -
(15.52) (66.50) (17.98) (100.00)
Eta Squared .002
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 136 employees residing in urban area, 15.44 per cent of them
recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is high, while, 12.50
per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is low.
Among 121 employees residing in semi – urban area, 19.83 per cent of them
recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is high, while, 14.05
per cent of them recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is low.

64
Among 149 employees residing in rural area, 18.79 per cent of them recognized that
the level of transformational leadership style is high, while, 19.46 per cent of them
recognized that the level of transformational leadership style is low.
The F-value of 0.484 which is not significant statistically demonstrating no
significant difference exists in transformational leadership style among residential
area of employees. So, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.002 disclosing that the effect size is very small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is very small.

3.21 TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE

The transactional leadership style in Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation was studied and the results are given in Table 3.61.
TABLE 3.61
TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE
Standard
Sl. No. Transactional Leadership Mean
Deviation
1. Leader creates explicit expectations 3.89 1.02
2. Actions are made before issues are rigorous 3.99 0.98
3. Leader communicates standards to carry jobs 4.12 0.85
4. Leader and employees have cordial relation 4.16 0.82
5. Leader follows track records of employees 4.14 0.82
Leader has better personal relations with
6. 4.19 0.53
employees
7. Leader is behaved well with employees 4.30 0.65
Ideas are exchanged between leader and
8. 4.06 0.58
employees effectively
Leader and employees have discussion about
9. 3.92 1.01
requirement of resources to meet objectives
Leader stresses on setting of goals for
10. 4.10 0.62
employees
Source: Primary Data

65
 The employees have agreed that the leader creates explicit expectations,
actions are made before issues are rigorous, leader communicates standards to carry
jobs, leader and employees have cordial relation, leader follows track records of
employees, leader has better personal relations with employees, leader is behaved
well with employees, ideas are exchanged between leader and employees
effectively, leader and employees have discussion about requirement of resources to
meet objectives and leader stresses on setting of goals for employees.

3.22 PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES AND TRANSACTIONAL

LEADERSHIP STYLE
The distribution of employees on the basis of transactional leadership style
was studied and the results are given in Table 3.62. The response of employees for
transactional leadership style is divided into low level, moderate level and high level
based on Mean ± SD (Mean = 40.86 ; SD = 3.91).
TABLE 3.62
DISTRIBUTION OF EMPLOYEES ON THE BASIS OF
TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Transactional Number of
Sl. No. Percentage
Leadership Style Employees
1. Low 69 16.99
2. Moderate 239 58.87
3. High 98 24.14
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data

Among 406 employees, 24.14 per cent of them realized that the level of
transactional leadership style is high, while, 16.99 per cent of them realized that the
level of transactional leadership style is low.

3.22.1 GENDER AND TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE

The relation among gender of employees and transactional leadership style

was studied and the results are given in Table 3.63.

66
 TABLE 3.63
GENDER AND TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Transactional
Sl. No. Gender Leadership Style Total t-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
56 180 75 311
1. Male
(18.01) (57.88) (24.11) (76.60)
.603 .547
13 59 23 95
2. Female
(13.68) (62.11) (24.21) (23.40)
69 239 98 406
Total - -
(16.99) (58.87) (24.14) (100.00)
Eta
.011
Squared
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 311 male employees, 24.11 per cent of them realized that the level of
transactional leadership style is high, while, 18.01 per cent of them realized that the
level of transactional leadership style is low. Among 95 female employees, 24.21
per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high,
while, 13.68 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style
is low.
The t-value of 0.603 which is not significant statistically explicating no
significant difference exists in transactional leadership style among gender of
employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.011 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

3.22.2 AGE CATEGORY AND TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP

STYLE

The relation among age category of employees and transactional leadership

style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.64.

67
 TABLE 3.64
AGE CATEGORY AND TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Transactional
Sl. No. Age Category Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
2 13 5 20
1. 21 – 30 Years
(10.00) (65.00) (25.00) (4.93)
12 48 18 78
2. 31 – 40 Years
(15.38) (61.54) (23.08) (19.21)
.308 .820
24 69 35 128
3. 41– 50 Years
(18.75) (53.91) (27.34) (31.53)
31 109 40 180
4. Above 50 Years
(17.22) (60.56) (22.22) (44.33)
69 239 98 406
Total - -
(16.99) (58.87) (24.14) (100.00)
Eta Squared .002
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 20 employees falling under age category of 21 – 30 years, 25.00 per

cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while,
10.00 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low.
Among 78 employees falling under age category of 31 – 40 years, 23.08 per cent of
them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 15.38 per
cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low.

Among 128 employees falling under age category of 41 – 50 years, 27.34 per
cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while,
18.75 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low.
Among 180 employees falling under age category of above 50 years, 22.22 per cent
of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 17.22
per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low.

The F-value of 0.308 which is not significant statistically explicating no

significant difference exists in transactional leadership style among age category of

68
employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.002 disclosing that the effect size is very small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is very small.

3.22.3 EDUCATION AND TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP

STYLE
The relation among education of employees and transactional leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.65.
TABLE 3.65
EDUCATION AND TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Transactional
Sl. No. Education Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
12 32 10 54
1. Diploma
(22.22) (59.26) (18.52) (13.30)
11 40 21 72
2. Under Graduation
(15.28) (55.55) (29.17) (17.73)
.670 .571
33 93 39 165
3. Post Graduation
(20.00) (56.36) (23.64) (40.64)
13 74 28 115
4. Engineering
(11.30) (64.35) (24.35) (28.33)
69 239 98 406
Total - -
(16.99) (58.87) (24.14) (100.00)
Eta Squared .005
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 54 employees possessing diploma, 18.52 per cent of them realized

that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 22.22 per cent of them
realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low. Among 72 employees
possessing under graduation, 29.17 per cent of them realized that the level of
transactional leadership style is high, while, 15.28 per cent of them realized that the
level of transactional leadership style is low.

69
 Among 165 employees possessing post graduation, 23.64 per cent of them
realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 20.00 per cent
of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low. Among 115
employees possessing engineering, 24.35 per cent of them realized that the level of
transactional leadership style is high, while, 11.30 per cent of them realized that the
level of transactional leadership style is low.

The F-value of 0.670 which is not significant statistically explicating no

significant difference exists in transactional leadership style among education of
employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.005 disclosing that the effect size is very small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is very small.

3.22.4 DESIGNATION AND TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP

STYLE
The relation among designation of employees and transactional leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.66.
TABLE 3.66
DESIGNATION AND TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Transactional
Sl. No. Designation Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
1 4 5 10
1. Executive Director
(10.00) (40.00) (50.00) (2.46)
Head of the Department 3 32 9 44
2.
/ Regional Manager (6.82) (72.73) (20.45) (10.84)
1.456 .203
Divisional Manager / 13 44 18 75
3.
Senior Manager (17.33) (58.67) (24.00) (18.47)
Depot Manager / Junior 12 38 21 71
4.
Scale Officer (16.90) (53.52) (29.58) (17.49)

70
 13 49 21 83
5. Assistant Engineer
(15.66) (59.04)
(25.30) (20.44)
Assistant Manager 27 72 24 123
6.
Traffic (21.95) (58.54)
(19.51) (30.30)
69 239 98 406
Total - -
(16.99) (58.87)
(24.14) (100.00)
Eta Squared .018
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)
Among 10 employees who are executive directors, 50.00 per cent of them
realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 10.00 per cent
of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low. Among 44
employees who are heads of the department / regional managers, 20.45 per cent of
them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 6.82 per
cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low.

Among 75 employees who are divisional managers / senior managers, 24.00

per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high,
while, 17.33 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style
is low. Among 71 employees who are depot managers / junior scale officers, 29.58
per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high,
while, 16.90 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style
is low.

Among 83 employees who are assistant engineers, 25.30 per cent of them
realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 15.66 per cent
of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low. Among 123
employees who are assistant managers traffic, 19.51 per cent of them realized that
the level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 21.95 per cent of them
realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low.

The F-value of 1.456 which is not significant statistically explicating no

significant difference exists in transactional leadership style among designation of
employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.018 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

71
3.22.5 WORK EXPERIENCE AND TRANSACTIONAL
LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among work experience of employees and transactional
leadership style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.67.
TABLE 3.67
WORK EXPERIENCE AND TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP
STYLE
Level of Transactional
Work
Sl. No. Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Experience
Low Moderate High
2 9 5 16
1. 1 – 5 Years
(12.50) (56.25) (31.25) (3.94)
6 30 10 46
2. 6 – 10 Years
(13.04) (65.22) (21.74) (11.33)
18 54 22 94
3. 11 – 15 Years 1.835 .121
(19.15) (57.45) (23.40) (23.15)
25 60 27 112
4. 16 – 20 Years
(22.32) (53.57) (24.11) (27.59)
18 86 34 138
5. 21 – 25 Years
(13.04) (62.32) (24.64) (33.99)
69 239 98 406
Total - -
(16.99) (58.87) (24.14) (100.00)
Eta Squared .019
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 16 employees bearing 1 – 5 years of work experience, 31.25 per cent

of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 12.50
per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low.
Among 46 employees bearing 6 – 10 years of work experience, 21.74 per cent of
them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 13.04 per
cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low. Among
94 employees bearing 11 – 15 years of work experience, 23.40 per cent of them

72
realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 19.15 per cent
of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low.

Among 112 employees bearing 16 – 20 years of work experience, 24.11 per

cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while,
22.32 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low.
Among 138 employees bearing 21 – 25 years of work experience, 24.64 per cent of
them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 13.04 per
cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low.

The F-value of 1.835 which is not significant statistically explicating no

significant difference exists in transactional leadership style among work experience
of employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.019 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

3.22.6 MONTHLY INCOME AND TRANSACTIONAL

LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among monthly income of employees and transactional
leadership style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.68.
TABLE 3.68
MONTHLY INCOME AND TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP
STYLE
Level of Transactional
Sl. No. Monthly Income Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
1 13 3 17
1. Below Rs.50,000
(5.88) (76.47) (17.65) (4.19)
29 76 35 140
2. Rs.50,001 – Rs.1,00,000
(20.71) (54.29) (25.00) (34.48)
2.334 .055
28 81 34 143
3. Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000
(19.58) (56.64) (23.78) (35.22)
8 31 12 51
4. Rs.1,50,001– Rs.2,00,000
(15.69) (60.78) (23.53) (12.56)

73
 3 38 14 55
5. Above Rs.2,00,000
(5.45) (69.09)
(25.46) (13.55)
69 239 98 406
Total - -
(16.99) (58.87)
(24.14) (100.00)
Eta Squared .023
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 17 employees earning monthly income of below Rs.50,000, 17.65

per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high,
while, 5.88 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is
low. Among 140 employees earning monthly income of Rs.50,001 – Rs.1,00,000,
25.00 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high,
while, 20.71 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style
is low. Among 143 employees earning monthly income of Rs.1,00,001–
Rs.1,50,000, 23.78 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership
style is high, while, 19.58 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional
leadership style is low.

Among 51 employees earning monthly income of Rs.1,50,001– Rs.2,00,000,

23.53 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high,
while, 15.69 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style
is low. Among 55 employees earning monthly income of above Rs.2,00,000, 25.46
per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high,
while, 5.45 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is
low.

The F-value of 2.334 which is not significant statistically explicating no

significant difference exists in transactional leadership style among monthly income
of employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.023 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

3.22.7 MARITAL STATUS AND TRANSACTIONAL

LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among marital status of employees and transactional leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.69.

74
 TABLE 3.69
MARITAL STATUS AND TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Transactional
Marital
Sl. No. Leadership Style Total t-Value Sig.
Status
Low Moderate High
64 221 84 369
1. Married
(17.34) (59.89) (22.77) (90.89)
1.993 .047
5 18 14 37
2. Unmarried
(13.51) (48.65) (37.84) (9.11)
69 239 98 406
Total - -
(16.99) (58.87) (24.14) (100.00)
Eta Squared .014
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 369 married employees, 22.77 per cent of them realized that the level
of transactional leadership style is high, while, 17.34 per cent of them realized that
the level of transactional leadership style is low. Among 37 unmarried employees,
37.84 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high,
while, 13.51 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style
is low.

The t-value of 1.993 which is significant at five per cent level explicating
significant difference exists in transactional leadership style among marital status of
employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta squared value
is 0.014 disclosing that the effect size is small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is small.

3.22.8 TYPE OF FAMILY AND TRANSACTIONAL

LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among type of family of employees and transactional leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.70.

75
 TABLE 3.70
TYPE OF FAMILY AND TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Transactional
Sl. No. Type of Family Leadership Style Total t-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
62 209 90 361
1. Nuclear Family
(17.17) (57.90) (24.93) (88.92)
1.007 .314
7 30 8 45
2. Joint Family
(15.55) (66.67) (17.78) (11.08)
69 239 98 406
Total - -
(16.99) (58.87) (24.14) (100.00)
Eta Squared .009
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 361 employees having nuclear family, 24.93 per cent of them
realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 17.17 per cent
of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low. Among 45
employees having joint family, 17.78 per cent of them realized that the level of
transactional leadership style is high, while, 15.55 per cent of them realized that the
level of transactional leadership style is low.

The t-value of 1.007 which is not significant statistically explicating no

significant difference exists in transactional leadership style among type of family of
employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.009 disclosing that the effect size is very small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is very small.

3.22.9 SIZE OF FAMILY AND TRANSACTIONAL

LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among size of family of employees and transactional leadership
style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.71.

76
 TABLE 3.71
SIZE OF FAMILY AND TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE
Level of Transactional
Sl. No. Size of Family Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
55 189 85 329
1. 2 – 4 Members
(16.72) (57.45) (25.83) (81.03)
11 38 11 60
2. 5 – 7 Members 1.266 .283
(18.33) (63.34) (18.33) (14.78)
3 12 2 17
3. Above 7 Members
(17.65) (70.59) (11.76) (4.19)
69 239 98 406
Total - -
(16.99) (58.87) (24.14) (100.00)
Eta Squared .006
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 329 employees having family size of 2 – 4 members, 25.83 per cent
of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 16.72
per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low.
Among 60 employees having family size of 5 – 7 members, 18.33 per cent of them
realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 18.33 per cent
of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low. Among 17
employees having family size of above members, 11.76 per cent of them realized
that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 17.65 per cent of them
realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low.

The F-value of 1.266 which is not significant statistically explicating no

significant difference exists in transactional leadership style among size of family of
employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.006 disclosing that the effect size is very small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is very small.

77
3.22.10 RESIDENTIAL AREA AND TRANSACTIONAL
LEADERSHIP STYLE
The relation among residential area of employees and transactional
leadership style was studied and the results are given in Table 3.72.
TABLE 3.72
RESIDENTIAL AREA AND TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP
STYLE
Level of Transactional
Residential
Sl. No. Leadership Style Total F-Value Sig.
Area
Low Moderate High
18 80 38 136
1. Urban
(13.24) (58.82) (27.94) (33.50)
23 70 28 121
2. Semi – Urban 1.527 .218
(19.01) (57.85) (23.14) (29.80)
28 89 32 149
3. Rural
(18.79) (59.73) (21.48) (36.70)
69 239 98 406
Total - -
(16.99) (58.87) (24.14) (100.00)
Eta Squared .008
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 136 employees residing in urban area, 27.94 per cent of them
realized that the level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 13.24 per cent
of them realized that the level of transactional leadership style is low. Among 121
employees residing in semi – urban area, 23.14 per cent of them realized that the
level of transactional leadership style is high, while, 19.01 per cent of them realized
that the level of transactional leadership style is low. Among 149 employees residing
in rural area, 21.48 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional leadership
style is high, while, 18.79 per cent of them realized that the level of transactional
leadership style is low.

The F-value of 1.527 which is not significant statistically explicating no

significant difference exists in transactional leadership style among residential area
of employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.008 disclosing that the effect size is very small and it implies that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is very small.
78
3.23 ASSESSMENT OF LEADERSHIP STYLES IN TELANGANA
STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
The leadership styles in Telangana State Road Transport Corporation were
assessed and the results are given in Table 3.73.

TABLE 3.73
ASSESSMENT OF LEADERSHIP STYLES IN TELANGANA STATE
ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Sl. No. Leadership Styles Mean Rank
1. Autocratic Leadership 35.88 V
2. Democratic Leadership 36.84 III
3. Laissez-Faire Leadership 35.97 IV
4. Transformational Leadership 38.81 II
5. Transactional Leadership 40.86 I
Source: Primary Data

Transactional leadership is the most dominant leadership style in Telangana

state road transport corporation, while, autocratic leadership is the least dominant
leadership style in Telangana state road transport corporation.

3.24 CONCLUSION
Significant difference is there in autocratic leadership style among profile of
employees excluding gender, age category, type of family and residential area.
Significant difference is there in democratic leadership style among profile of
employees excluding gender, education, designation, work experience, type of
family, size of family and residential area.

Significant difference is there in laissez-faire leadership style among marital

status, size of family and residential area of employees. Significant difference is
there in transformational leadership style among work experience and monthly
income of employees. Significant difference is there in transactional leadership style
among marital status of employees. Transactional leadership is the most
dominant leadership style in Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

79
 CHAPTER – IV

JOB PERFORMANCE AND

SATISFACTION OF EMPLOYEES OF
TELANGANA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT CORPORATION
 CHAPTER – IV

JOB PERFORMANCE AND SATISFACTION OF

EMPLOYEES OF TELANGANA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT CORPORATION

4.1 INTRODUCTION
Leadership is an influential practice which differentiates a leader by his or
her activities and also motivates a group of employees towards general or shared
objectives of any organization. In organization, leadership style is a managerial
function and its main purpose is to give direction and guidance to the employees for
attunement of their work objectives. In modern day business environment, the
performance of organization is highly depending on its leadership style.

In addition, leadership style affects the prosperity of employees and their

needs and desires. Leadership style also impacts job performance and efficiency of
employees and profit and market share of organizations. Leadership style is a
significant forecaster of job satisfaction. Employees who have good leadership style
are enthusiastic, happy and highly productive and have high degree of job
satisfaction.

4.2 DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP STYLES IN

TELANGANA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
To find determinants of leadership styles in Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation, an exploratory factor analysis is carried out and the results are given in
Table 4.1. Value of KMO (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin) test for measuring sampling
adequacy is 0.822 and Chi-square value of Bartlett’s test of Sphericity is 0.0068
which is significant at one per cent level and these values disclose that the method of
factor analysis is apt. Five determinants accounted for 77.00 per cent of variations
on variables and each of it has 19.72 per cent, 16.18 per cent, 15.51 per cent, 14.99
per cent and 10.60 per cent of variation in that order.
 TABLE 4.1
DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP STYLES IN TELANGANA
STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Rotated
Eigen % of Determinant
Determinant Variables Factor
Value Variation Name
Loadings
Experience 0.72
Knowledge 0.84
Negotiation 0.86 7.53 19.72 Capability
I
Communication 0.74
Competency 0.75
Cultural
0.78
environment
Social environment 0.84
Organizational
II 0.66 3.56 16.18 Atmosphere
environment
Political
0.68
environment
Legal environment 0.86
Flexibility 0.85
Adaptableness 0.78
III 1.96 15.51 Adjustability
Decision making 0.71
Timeliness 0.83
Dependability 0.81
IV Team work 0.81 1.23 14.99 Coordination
Conduct 0.70
Self motivation 0.77
V Self confidence 0.60 1.12 10.60 Personality
Personal value 0.66
Cumulative % of
- - 77.00 -
Variation
Cronbach’s Alpha - - - 0.88
Source: Primary Data
Principal Component Analysis Method
Varimax Rotation.
Converged in 12th iterations.

2
Determinant - I consists of experience, knowledge, negotiation, communication and
competency. This determinant is stated as Capability.

Determinant - II includes cultural environment, social environment, organizational

environment, political environment and legal environment. This determinant is
named as Atmosphere.

Determinant - III comprises of flexibility, adaptableness, decision making and

timeliness. This determinant is described as Adjustability.

Determinant - IV encompasses dependability, team work and conduct. This

determinant is labeled as Coordination.

Determinant - V contains self motivation, self confidence and personal value. This
determinant is denoted as Personality.

Cronbach’s Alpha value of the scale is 0.88 disclosing

each measure is at acceptable level of internal consistency. Capability, atmosphere,
adjustability, coordination and personality are the determinants of leadership styles
in Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

4.3 PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES AND DETERMINANTS OF

LEADERSHIP STYLES
The distribution of employees on the basis of determinants of leadership
styles was studied and the results are given in Table 4.2. The response of employees
for determinants of leadership styles is segmented into low, moderate and high
levels based on Mean ± SD (Mean = 77.03; SD = 13.63).

3
 TABLE 4.2
DISTRIBUTION OF EMPLOYEES ON THE BASIS OF
DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP STYLES
Level of Determinants of Number of
Sl. No. Percentage
Leadership Styles Employees
1. Low 93 22.91
2. Moderate 181 44.58
3. High 132 32.51
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data

Among 406 employees, 32.51 per cent of them made clear that the level of
determinants of leadership styles is high, while, 22.91per cent of them made clear
that the level of determinants of leadership styles is low.

4.3.1 GENDER AND DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP

STYLES

The relation among gender of employees and determinants of leadership styles

was studied and the results are given in Table 4.3.

TABLE 4.3
GENDER AND DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP STYLES
Level of Determinants of
Sl. t-
Gender Leadership Styles Total Sig.
No. Value
Low Moderate High
72 128 111 311
1. Male
(23.15) (41.16) (35.69) (76.60)
2.029 .043
21 53 21 95
2. Female
(22.11) (55.78) (22.11) (23.40)
93 181 132 406
Total - -
(22.91) (44.58) (32.51) (100.00)
Eta Squared .017
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

4
 Among 311 male employees, 35.69 per cent of them made clear that the level
of determinants of leadership styles is high, while, 23.15 per cent of them made clear
that the level of determinants of leadership styles is low. Among 95 female
employees, 22.11 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of
leadership styles is high, while, 22.11 per cent of them made clear that the level of
determinants of leadership styles is low.
The t-value of 2.029 which is significant at five per cent level clarifying
significant difference exists in determinants of leadership styles among gender of
employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta squared value
is 0.017 illustrating that the effect size is small and it reveals that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is small.

4.3.2 AGE CATEGORY AND DETERMINANTS OF

LEADERSHIP STYLES

The relation among age category of employees and determinants of

leadership styles was studied and the results are given in Table 4.4.

TABLE 4.4
AGE CATEGORY AND DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP
STYLES
Level of Determinants of
Sl. No. Age Category Leadership Styles Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
3 13 4 20
1. 21 – 30 Years
(15.00) (65.00) (20.00) (4.93)
26 35 17 78
2. 31 – 40 Years 4.747 .003
(33.33) (44.87) (21.80) (19.21)
34 46 48 128
3. 41– 50 Years
(26.56) (35.94) (37.50) (31.53)

5
 30 87 63 180
4. Above 50 Years
(16.67) (48.33) (35.00) (44.33)
93 181 132
Total 406 (100.00) - -
(22.91) (44.58) (32.51)
Eta Squared .034
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 20 employees falling under age category of 21 – 30 years, 20.00 per

cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high,
while, 15.00 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership
styles is low. Among 78 employees falling under age category of 31 – 40 years,
21.80 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles
is high, while, 33.33 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of
leadership styles is low.
Among 128 employees falling under age category of 41 – 50 years, 37.50 per
cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high,
while, 26.56 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership
styles is low. Among 180 employees falling under age category of above 50 years,
35.00 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles
is high, while, 16.67 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of
leadership styles is low.

The F-value of 4.747 which is significant at one per cent level clarifying
significant difference exists in determinants of leadership styles among age category
of employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta squared
value is 0.034 illustrating that the effect size is small and it reveals that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is small.

4.3.3 EDUCATION AND DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP

STYLES
The relation among education of employees and determinants of leadership
styles was studied and the results are given in Table 4.5.

6
 TABLE 4.5
EDUCATION AND DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP STYLES
Level of Determinants of
Sl. No. Education Leadership Styles Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
14 19 21 54
1. Diploma
(25.93) (35.18) (38.89) (13.30)
18 17 37 72
2. Under Graduation
(25.00) (23.61) (51.39) (17.73)
1.008 .389
34 87 44 165
3. Post Graduation
(20.60) (52.73) (26.67) (40.64)
27 58 30 115
4. Engineering
(23.48) (50.43) (26.09) (28.33)
93 181 132 406
Total - -
(22.91) (44.58) (32.51) (100.00)
Eta Squared .007
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 54 employees possessing diploma, 38.89 per cent of them made clear
that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high, while, 25.93 per cent of
them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is low. Among 72
employees possessing under graduation, 51.39 per cent of them made clear that the
level of determinants of leadership styles is high, while, 25.00 per cent of them made
clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is low.

Among 165 employees possessing post graduation, 26.67 per cent of them
made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high, while, 20.60
per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is low.
Among 115 employees possessing engineering, 26.09 per cent of them made clear
that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high, while, 23.48 per cent of
them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is low.

The F-value of 1.008 which is not significant statistically clarifying no

significant difference exists in determinants of leadership styles among education of
employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.007 illustrating that the effect size is very small and it reveals that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is very small.

7
4.3.4 DESIGNATION AND DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP
STYLES
The relation among designation of employees and determinants of leadership
styles was studied and the results are given in Table 4.6.
TABLE 4.6
DESIGNATION AND DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP STYLES
Level of Determinants of
Sl. No. Designation Leadership Styles Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
Executive 1 8 1 10
1.
Director (10.00) (80.00) (10.00) (2.46)
Head of the
Department / 14 20 10 44
2.
Regional (31.82) (45.45) (22.73) (10.84)
Manager
Divisional
16 34 25 75
3. Manager / Senior
(21.33) (45.34) (33.33) (18.47) 1.948 .085
Manager
Depot Manager /
15 31 25 71
4. Junior Scale
(21.13) (43.66) (35.21) (17.49)
Officer
Assistant 21 38 24 83
5.
Engineer (25.30) (45.78) (28.92) (20.44)
Assistant 26 50 47 123
6.
Manager Traffic (21.14) (40.65) (38.21) (30.30)
93 181 132 406
Total - -
(22.91) (44.58) (32.51) (100.00)
Eta Squared .024
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 10 employees who are executive directors, 10.00 per cent of them
made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high, while, 10.00
per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is low.
Among 44 employees who are heads of the department / regional managers, 22.73
per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is
high, while, 31.82 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of
leadership styles is low.

8
 Among 75 employees who are divisional managers / senior managers, 33.33
per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is
high, while, 21.33 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of
leadership styles is low. Among 71 employees who are depot managers / junior
scale officers, 35.21 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of
leadership styles is high, while, 21.13 per cent of them made clear that the level of
determinants of leadership styles is low.

Among 83 employees who are assistant engineers, 28.92 per cent of them
made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high, while, 25.30
per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is low.
Among 123 employees who are assistant managers traffic, 38.21 per cent of them
made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high, while, 21.14
per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is low.

The F-value of 1.948 which is not significant statistically clarifying no

significant difference exists in determinants of leadership styles among designation
of employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared value is
0.024 illustrating that the effect size is small and it reveals that the actual difference
in mean values among groups is small.

4.3.5 WORK EXPERIENCE AND DETERMINANTS OF

LEADERSHIP STYLES
The relation among work experience of employees and determinants of
leadership styles was studied and the results are given in Table 4.7.

9
 TABLE 4.7
WORK EXPERIENCE AND DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP
STYLES
Level of Determinants of
Work
Sl. No. Leadership Styles Total F-Value Sig.
Experience
Low Moderate High
1 12 3 16
1. 1 – 5 Years
(6.25) (75.00) (18.75) (3.94)
13 23 10 46
2. 6 – 10 Years
(28.26) (50.00) (21.74) (11.33)
31 38 25 94
3. 11 – 15 Years 3.176 .014
(32.98) (40.43) (26.59) (23.15)
17 53 42 112
4. 16 – 20 Years
(15.18) (47.32) (37.50) (27.59)
31 55 52 138
5. 21 – 25 Years
(22.46) (39.86) (37.68) (33.99)
93 181 132 406
Total - -
(22.91) (44.58) (32.51) (100.00)
Eta Squared .031
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 16 employees bearing 1 – 5 years of work experience, 18.75 per cent

of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high, while,
6.25 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is
low. Among 46 employees bearing 6 – 10 years of work experience, 21.74 per cent
of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high, while,
28.26 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles
is low. Among 94 employees bearing 11 – 15 years of work experience, 26.59 per
cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high,
while, 32.98 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership
styles is low.

Among 112 employees bearing 16 – 20 years of work experience, 37.50 per

cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high,

10
while, 15.18 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership
styles is low. Among 138 employees bearing 21 – 25 years of work experience,
37.68 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles
is high, while, 22.46 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of
leadership styles is low.

The F-value of 3.176 which is significant at one per cent level clarifying
significant difference exists in determinants of leadership styles among work
experience of employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is not accepted. The eta
squared value is 0.031 illustrating that the effect size is small and it reveals that the
actual difference in mean values among groups is small.

4.3.6 MONTHLY INCOME AND DETERMINANTS OF

LEADERSHIP STYLES
The relation among monthly income of employees and determinants of
leadership styles was studied and the results are given in Table 4.8.

TABLE 4.8
MONTHLY INCOME AND DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP
STYLES
Level of Determinants of F-
Sl. No. Monthly Income Leadership Styles Total Valu Sig.
Low Moderate High e
3 13 1 17
1. Below Rs.50,000
(17.65) (76.47) (5.88) (4.19)
Rs.50,001 – 34 61 45 140
2.
Rs.1,00,000 (24.29) (43.57) (32.14) (34.48)
Rs.1,00,001– 32 59 52 143
3. 1.932 .104
Rs.1,50,000 (22.38) (41.26) (36.36) (35.22)
Rs.1,50,001– 10 19 22 51
4.
Rs.2,00,000 (19.61) (37.25) (43.14) (12.56)
Above 14 29 12 55
5.
Rs.2,00,000 (25.45) (52.73) (21.82) (13.55)
406
93 181 132
Total (100.00 - -
(22.91) (44.58) (32.51)
)
Eta Squared .019
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

11
 Among 17 employees earning monthly income of below Rs.50,000, 5.88 per
cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high,
while, 17.65 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership
styles is low. Among 140 employees earning monthly income of Rs.50,001 –
Rs.1,00,000, 32.14 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of
leadership styles is high, while, 24.29 per cent of them made clear that the level of
determinants of leadership styles is low. Among 143 employees earning monthly
income of Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000, 36.36 per cent of them made clear that the
level of determinants of leadership styles is high, while, 22.38 per cent of them made
clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is low.

Among 51 employees earning monthly income of Rs.1,50,001– Rs.2,00,000,

43.14 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles
is high, while, 19.61 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of
leadership styles is low. Among 55 employees earning monthly income of above
Rs.2,00,000, 21.82 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of
leadership styles is high, while, 25.45 per cent of them made clear that the level of
determinants of leadership styles is low.

The F-value of 1.932 which is not significant statistically clarifying no

significant difference exists in determinants of leadership styles among monthly
income of employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared
value is 0.019 illustrating that the effect size is small and it reveals that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is small.

4.3.7 MARITAL STATUS AND DETERMINANTS OF

LEADERSHIP STYLES
The relation among marital status of employees and determinants of
leadership styles was studied and the results are given in Table 4.9.

12
 TABLE 4.9
MARITAL STATUS AND DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP
STYLES
Level of Determinants of
Marital
Sl. No. Leadership Styles Total t-Value Sig.
Status
Low Moderate High
73 168 128 369
1. Married
(19.78) (45.53) (34.69) (90.89)
.389 .697
20 13 4 37
2. Unmarried
(54.05) (35.14) (10.81) (9.11)
93 181 132 406
Total - -
(22.91) (44.58) (32.51) (100.00)
Eta Squared .011
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 369 married employees, 34.69 per cent of them made clear that the
level of determinants of leadership styles is high, while, 19.78 per cent of them made
clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is low. Among 37 unmarried
employees, 10.81 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of
leadership styles is high, while, 54.05 per cent of them made clear that the level of
determinants of leadership styles is low.

The t-value of 0.389 which is not significant statistically clarifying no

significant difference exists in determinants of leadership styles among marital
status of employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared
value is 0.011 illustrating that the effect size is small and it reveals that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is small.

4.3.8 TYPE OF FAMILY AND DETERMINANTS OF

LEADERSHIP STYLES
The relation among type of family of employees and determinants of
leadership styles was studied and the results are given in Table 4.10.

13
 TABLE 4.10
TYPE OF FAMILY AND DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP
STYLES
Level of Determinants of
Sl. No. Type of Family Leadership Styles Total t-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
84 156 121 361
1. Nuclear Family
(23.27) (43.21) (33.52) (88.92)
1.235 .218
9 25 11 45
2. Joint Family
(20.00) (55.56) (24.44) (11.08)
93 181 132 406
Total - -
(22.91) (44.58) (32.51) (100.00)
Eta Squared .013
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 361 employees having nuclear family, 33.52 per cent of them made
clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high, while, 23.27 per cent
of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is low. Among
45 employees having joint family, 24.44 per cent of them made clear that the level
of determinants of leadership styles is high, while, 20.00 per cent of them made clear
that the level of determinants of leadership styles is low.

The t-value of 1.235 which is not significant statistically clarifying no

significant difference exists in determinants of leadership styles among type of
family of employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared
value is 0.013 illustrating that the effect size is small and it reveals that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is small.

4.3.9 SIZE OF FAMILY AND DETERMINANTS OF

LEADERSHIP STYLES
The relation among size of family of employees and determinants of
leadership styles was studied and the results are given in Table 4.11.

14
 TABLE 4.11
SIZE OF FAMILY AND DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP
STYLES
Level of Determinants of
Sl. No. Size of Family Leadership Styles Total F-Value Sig.
Low Moderate High
78 141 110 329
1. 2 – 4 Members
(23.71) (42.86) (33.43) (81.03)
8 35 17 60
2. 5 – 7 Members .466 .628
(13.33) (58.34) (28.33) (14.78)
7 5 5 17
3. Above 7 Members
(41.18) (29.41) (29.41) (4.19)
93 181 132 406
Total - -
(22.91) (44.58) (32.51) (100.00)
Eta Squared .002
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 329 employees having family size of 2 – 4 members, 33.43 per cent
of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high, while,
23.71 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles
is low. Among 60 employees having family size of 5 – 7 members, 28.33 per cent of
them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high, while,
13.33 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles
is low. Among 17 employees having family size of above members, 29.41 per cent
of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high, while,
41.18 per cent of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles
is low.

The F-value of 0.466 which is not significant statistically clarifying no

significant difference exists in determinants of leadership styles among size of
family of employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared
value is 0.002 illustrating that the effect size is very small and it reveals that the
actual difference in mean values among groups is very small.

15
4.3.10 RESIDENTIAL AREA AND DETERMINANTS OF
LEADERSHIP STYLES
The relation among residential area of employees and determinants of
leadership styles was studied and the results are given in Table 4.12.

TABLE 4.12
RESIDENTIAL AREA AND DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP
STYLES
Level of Determinants of
Residential
Sl. No. Leadership Styles Total F-Value Sig.
Area
Low Moderate High
30 69 37 136
1. Urban
(22.06) (50.73) (27.21) (33.50)
25 53 43 121
2. Semi – Urban 2.428 .089
(20.66) (43.80) (35.54) (29.80)
38 59 52 149
3. Rural
(25.50) (39.60) (34.90) (36.70)
93 181 132 406
Total - -
(22.91) (44.58) (32.51) (100.00)
Eta Squared .012
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 136 employees residing in urban area, 27.21 per cent of them made
clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is high, while, 22.06 per cent
of them made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is low. Among
121 employees residing in semi – urban area, 35.54 per cent of them made clear that
the level of determinants of leadership styles is high, while, 20.66 per cent of them
made clear that the level of determinants of leadership styles is low. Among 149
employees residing in rural area, 34.90 per cent of them made clear that the level of
determinants of leadership styles is high, while, 25.50 per cent of them made clear
that the level of determinants of leadership styles is low.
The F-value of 2.428 which is not significant statistically clarifying no
significant difference exists in determinants of leadership styles among residential

16
area of employees. Accordingly, the null hypothesis is accepted. The eta squared
value is 0.012 illustrating that the effect size is small and it reveals that the actual
difference in mean values among groups is small.

4.4 JOB PERFORMANCE

The job performance of employees of Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation was studied and the results are given in Table 4.13.
TABLE 4.13
JOB PERFORMANCE
Standard
Sl. No. Job Performance Mean
Deviation
1. I am cheerful with my job 4.08 0.83
2. I am trained well to do my job 4.03 0.90
3. I know my job responsibilities 4.09 0.71
4. I meet needs of my job 4.06 0.90
5. I identify problems in my job 3.33 1.35
6. I find solutions for problems in my job 3.26 1.39
7. I set job priorities 3.81 1.01
8. I utilize time efficiently 3.83 1.10
9. I accept my faults 3.85 1.12
Superiors encourage me for carrying out
10. 3.80 1.16
my job in innovative ways
Source: Primary Data

The employees have agreed that they are cheerful with their job, they are
trained well to do their job, they know their job responsibilities, they meet needs of
their job, they set job priorities, they utilize time efficiently, they accept their faults
and superiors encourage them for carrying out their job in innovative ways, while,
they are neutral regarding identifying problems in their job and finding solutions for
problems in their job.

17
4.5 PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES AND JOB PERFORMANCE
The distribution of employees on the basis of job performance was studied
and the results are given in Table 4.14. The response of employees for job
performance is segmented into low, moderate and high levels based on Mean ± SD
(Mean = 38.14; SD = 6.39).
TABLE 4.14
DISTRIBUTION OF EMPLOYEES ON THE BASIS OF JOB
PERFORMANCE
Number of
Sl. No. Level of Job Performance Percentage
Employees
1. Low 78 19.21
2. Moderate 265 65.27
3. High 63 15.52
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data

Among 406 employees, 15.52 per cent of them viewed that the level of job
performance is high, while, 19.21 per cent of them viewed that the level of job
performance is low.

4.5.1 GENDER AND JOB PERFORMANCE

The relation among gender of employees and job performance was studied and
the results are given in Table 4.15.

18
 TABLE 4.15
GENDER AND JOB PERFORMANCE
Level of Job Performance Chi-
Sl. No. Gender Total square Sig.
Low Moderate High
Value
311
1. Male 58 202 51
(18.65) (64.95) (16.40) (76.60)
.905 .636
95
2. Female 20 63 12
(21.05) (66.32) (12.63) (23.40)
78 265 63 406
Total - -
(19.21) (65.27) (15.52) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)
Among 311 male employees, 16.40 per cent of them viewed that the level of
job performance is high, while, 18.65 per cent of them viewed that the level of job
performance is low. Among 95 female employees, 12.63 per cent of them viewed
that the level of job performance is high, while, 21.05 per cent of them viewed that
the level of job performance is low.
The Chi-square value of 0.905 which is not significant statistically
explaining no significant association exists in job performance among gender of
employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.5.2 AGE CATEGORY AND JOB PERFORMANCE

The relation among age category of employees and job performance was
studied and the results are given in Table 4.16.

19
 TABLE 4.16
AGE CATEGORY AND JOB PERFORMANCE
Level of Job Performance Chi-
Sl. No. Age Category Total square Sig.
Low Moderate High
Value
20
1. 21 – 30 Years 7 11 2
(35.00) (55.00) (10.00) (4.93)
78
2. 31 – 40 Years 21 46 11
(26.92) (58.98) (14.10) (19.21)
11.665 .070
128
3. 41– 50 Years 27 83 18
(21.10) (64.84) (14.06) (31.53)
180
4. Above 50 Years 23 125 32
(12.78) (69.44) (17.78) (44.33)
78 265 63 406
Total - -
(19.21) (65.27) (15.52) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 20 employees falling under age category of 21 – 30 years, 10.00 per

cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is high, while, 35.00 per cent
of them viewed that the level of job performance is low. Among 78 employees
falling under age category of 31 – 40 years, 14.10 per cent of them viewed that the
level of job performance is high, while, 26.92 per cent of them viewed that the level
of job performance is low.

Among 128 employees falling under age category of 41 – 50 years, 14.06 per
cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is high, while, 21.10 per cent
of them viewed that the level of job performance is low. Among 180 employees
falling under age category of above 50 years, 17.78 per cent of them viewed that the
level of job performance is high, while, 12.78 per cent of them viewed that the level
of job performance is low.

The Chi-square value of 11.665 which is not significant statistically

explaining no significant association exists in job performance among age category
of employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is accepted.

20
4.5.3 EDUCATION AND JOB PERFORMANCE
The relation among education of employees and job performance was
studied and the results are given in Table 4.17.
TABLE 4.17
EDUCATION AND JOB PERFORMANCE
Level of Job Performance Chi-
Sl. No. Education Total square Sig.
Low Moderate High
Value
54
1. Diploma 4 31 19
(7.41) (57.41) (35.18) (13.30)
72
2. Under Graduation 19 48 5
(26.39) (66.67) (6.94) (17.73)
24.044 .001
165
3. Post Graduation 34 108 23
(20.61) (65.45) (13.94) (40.64)
115
4. Engineering 21 78 16
(18.26) (67.83) (13.91) (28.33)
78 265 63 406
Total - -
(19.21) (65.27) (15.52) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)
Among 54 employees possessing diploma, 35.18 per cent of them viewed
that the level of job performance is high, while, 7.41 per cent of them viewed that
the level of job performance is low. Among 72 employees possessing under
graduation, 6.94 per cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is high,
while, 26.39 per cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is low.

Among 165 employees possessing post graduation, 13.94 per cent of them
viewed that the level of job performance is high, while, 20.61 per cent of them
viewed that the level of job performance is low. Among 115 employees possessing
engineering, 13.91 per cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is high,
while, 18.26 per cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is low.

The Chi-square value of 24.044 which is significant at one per cent level
explaining significant association exists in job performance among education of
employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is not accepted.
21
4.5.4 DESIGNATION AND JOB PERFORMANCE
The relation among designation of employees and job performance was
studied and the results are given in Table 4.18.
TABLE 4.18
DESIGNATION AND JOB PERFORMANCE
Level of Job Performance Chi-
Sl. No. Designation Total square Sig.
Low Moderate High
Value
Executive 0 8 2 10
1.
Director (0.00) (80.00) (20.00) (2.46)
Head of the
Department / 8 31 5 44
2.
Regional (18.18) (70.46) (11.36) (10.84)
Manager
Divisional
14 49 12 75
3. Manager / Senior
(18.67) (65.33) (16.00) (18.47) 5.603 .847
Manager
Depot Manager /
16 42 13 71
4. Junior Scale
(22.54) (59.15) (18.31) (17.49)
Officer
Assistant 14 54 15 83
5.
Engineer (16.87) (65.06) (18.07) (20.44)
Assistant 26 81 16 123
6.
Manager Traffic (21.14) (65.85) (13.01) (30.30)
78 265 63 406
Total - -
(19.21) (65.27) (15.52) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 10 employees who are executive directors, 20.00 per cent of them
viewed that the level of job performance is high, while, none of them viewed that the
level of job performance is low. Among 44 employees who are heads of the
department / regional managers, 11.36 per cent of them viewed that the level of job
performance is high, while, 18.18 per cent of them viewed that the level of job
performance is low.

Among 75 employees who are divisional managers / senior managers, 16.00

per cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is high, while, 18.67 per
cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is low. Among 71 employees

22
who are depot managers / junior scale officers, 18.31 per cent of them viewed that
the level of job performance is high, while, 22.54 per cent of them viewed that the
level of job performance is low.
Among 83 employees who are assistant engineers, 18.07 per cent of them
viewed that the level of job performance is high, while, 16.87 per cent of them
viewed that the level of job performance is low. Among 123 employees who are
assistant managers traffic, 13.01 per cent of them viewed that the level of job
performance is high, while, 21.14 per cent of them viewed that the level of job
performance is low.

The Chi-square value of 5.603 which is not significant statistically

explaining no significant association exists in job performance among designation of
employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.5.5 WORK EXPERIENCE AND JOB PERFORMANCE

The relation among work experience of employees and job performance was
studied and the results are given in Table 4.19.
TABLE 4.19
WORK EXPERIENCE AND JOB PERFORMANCE
Level of Job Performance Chi-
Work
Sl. No. Moderat Total square Sig.
Experience Low High
e Value
16
1. 1 – 5 Years 4 10 2
(25.00) (62.50) (12.50) (3.94)
46
2. 6 – 10 Years 11 28 7
(23.91) (60.87) (15.22) (11.33)
9.466 .305
94
3. 11 – 15 Years 20 60 14
(21.28) (63.83) (14.89) (23.15)
112
4. 16 – 20 Years 26 74 12
(23.21) (66.07) (10.72) (27.59)

23
 138
5. 21 – 25 Years 17 93 28
(12.32) (67.39) (20.29) (33.99)
78 265 63 406
Total - -
(19.21) (65.27) (15.52) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 16 employees bearing 1 – 5 years of work experience, 12.50 per cent

of them viewed that the level of job performance is high, while, 25.00 per cent of
them viewed that the level of job performance is low. Among 46 employees bearing
6 – 10 years of work experience, 15.22 per cent of them viewed that the level of job
performance is high, while, 23.91 per cent of them viewed that the level of job
performance is low. Among 94 employees bearing 11 – 15 years of work
experience, 14.89 per cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is high,
while, 21.28 per cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is low.

Among 112 employees bearing 16 – 20 years of work experience, 10.72 per

cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is high, while, 23.21 per cent
of them viewed that the level of job performance is low. Among 138 employees
bearing 21 – 25 years of work experience, 20.29 per cent of them viewed that the
level of job performance is high, while, 12.32 per cent of them viewed that the level
of job performance is low.

The Chi-square value of 9.466 which is not significant statistically

explaining no significant association exists in job performance among work
experience of employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.5.6 MONTHLY INCOME AND JOB PERFORMANCE

The relation among monthly income of employees and job performance was
studied and the results are given in Table 4.20.

24
 TABLE 4.20
MONTHLY INCOME AND JOB PERFORMANCE
Level of Job Performance Chi-
Sl. No. Monthly Income Total square Sig.
Low Moderate High
Value
17
1. Below Rs.50,000 3 13 1
(17.65) (76.47) (5.88) (4.19)
140
2. Rs.50,001 – Rs.1,00,000 30 88 22
(21.43) (62.86) (15.71) (34.48)
143
3. Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000 30 93 20 6.185 .626
(20.98) (65.03) (13.99) (35.22)
51
4. Rs.1,50,001– Rs.2,00,000 7 32 12
(13.73) (62.74) (23.53) (12.56)
55
5. Above Rs.2,00,000 8 39 8
(14.54) (70.92) (14.54) (13.55)
78 265 63 406
Total - -
(19.21) (65.27) (15.52) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 17 employees earning monthly income of below Rs.50,000, 5.88 per

cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is high, while, 17.65 per cent
of them viewed that the level of job performance is low. Among 140 employees
earning monthly income of Rs.50,001 – Rs.1,00,000, 15.71 per cent of them viewed
that the level of job performance is high, while, 21.43 per cent of them viewed that
the level of job performance is low. Among 143 employees earning monthly income
of Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000, 13.99 per cent of them viewed that the level of job
performance is high, while, 20.98 per cent of them viewed that the level of job
performance is low.

Among 51 employees earning monthly income of Rs.1,50,001– Rs.2,00,000,

23.53 per cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is high, while, 13.73
per cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is low. Among 55
employees earning monthly income of above Rs.2,00,000, 14.54 per cent of them

25
viewed that the level of job performance is high, while, 14.54 per cent of them
viewed that the level of job performance is low.

The Chi-square value of 6.185 which is not significant statistically

explaining no significant association exists in job performance among monthly
income of employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.5.7 MARITAL STATUS AND JOB PERFORMANCE

The relation among marital status of employees and job performance was
studied and the results are given in Table 4.21.

TABLE 4.21
MARITAL STATUS AND JOB PERFORMANCE
Level of Job Performance Chi-
Marital
Sl. No. Total square Sig.
Status Low Moderate High
Value
369
1. Married 68 240 61
(18.43) (65.04) (16.53) (90.89)
4.010 .135
37
2. Unmarried 10 25 2
(27.03) (67.57) (5.40) (9.11)
78 265 63 406
Total - -
(19.21) (65.27) (15.52) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)
Among 369 married employees, 16.53 per cent of them viewed that the level
of job performance is high, while, 18.43 per cent of them viewed that the level of job
performance is low. Among 37 unmarried employees, 5.40 per cent of them viewed
that the level of job performance is high, while, 27.03 per cent of them viewed that
the level of job performance is low.

The Chi-square value of 4.010 which is not significant statistically

explaining no significant association exists in job performance among marital status
of employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is accepted.

26
4.5.8 TYPE OF FAMILY AND JOB PERFORMANCE
The relation among type of family of employees and job performance was
studied and the results are given in Table 4.22.
TABLE 4.22
TYPE OF FAMILY AND JOB PERFORMANCE
Level of Job Performance Chi-
Sl. No. Type of Family Total square Sig.
Low Moderate High
Value
361
1. Nuclear Family 66 234 61
(18.28) (64.82) (16.90) (88.92)
5.564 .062
45
2. Joint Family 12 31 2
(26.67) (68.89) (4.44) (11.08)
78 265 63 406
Total - -
(19.21) (65.27) (15.52) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 361 employees having nuclear family, 16.90 per cent of them viewed
that the level of job performance is high, while, 18.28 per cent of them viewed that
the level of job performance is low. Among 45 employees having joint family, 4.44
per cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is high, while, 26.67 per
cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is low.

The Chi-square value of 5.564 which is not significant statistically

explaining no significant association exists in job performance among type of family
of employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.5.9 SIZE OF FAMILY AND JOB PERFORMANCE

The relation among size of family of employees and job performance was
studied and the results are given in Table 4.23.

27
 TABLE 4.23
SIZE OF FAMILY AND JOB PERFORMANCE
Level of Job Performance Chi-
Sl. No. Size of Family Total square Sig.
Low Moderate High
Value
329
1. 2 – 4 Members 61 214 54
(18.54) (65.05) (16.41) (81.03)
60
2. 5 – 7 Members 12 40 8 2.410 .661
(20.00) (66.67) (13.33) (14.78)
17
3. Above 7 Members 5 11 1
(29.41) (64.71) (5.88) (4.19)
78 265 63 406
Total - -
(19.21) (65.27) (15.52) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 329 employees having family size of 2 – 4 members, 16.41 per cent
of them viewed that the level of job performance is high, while, 18.54 per cent of
them viewed that the level of job performance is low. Among 60 employees having
family size of 5 – 7 members, 13.33 per cent of them viewed that the level of job
performance is high, while, 20.00 per cent of them viewed that the level of job
performance is low. Among 17 employees having family size of above members,
5.88 per cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is high, while, 29.41
per cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is low.

The Chi-square value of 2.410 which is not significant statistically

explaining no significant association exists in job performance among size of family
of employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.5.10 RESIDENTIAL AREA AND JOB PERFORMANCE

The relation among residential area of employees and job performance was
studied and the results are given in Table 4.24.

28
 TABLE 4.24
RESIDENTIAL AREA AND JOB PERFORMANCE
Level of Job Performance Chi-
Residential
Sl. No. Total square Sig.
Area Low Moderate High
Value
136
1. Urban 17 101 18
(12.50) (74.26) (13.24) (33.50)
121
2. Semi – Urban 20 78 23 13.452 .009
(16.53) (64.46) (19.01) (29.80)
149
3. Rural 41 86 22
(27.52) (57.72) (14.76) (36.70)
78 265 63 406
Total - -
(19.21) (65.27) (15.52) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 136 employees residing in urban area, 13.24 per cent of them viewed
that the level of job performance is high, while, 12.50 per cent of them viewed that
the level of job performance is low. Among 121 employees residing in semi – urban
area, 19.01 per cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is high, while,
16.53 per cent of them viewed that the level of job performance is low. Among 149
employees residing in rural area, 14.76 per cent of them viewed that the level of job
performance is high, while, 27.52 per cent of them viewed that the level of job
performance is low.

The Chi-square value of 13.452 which is significant at one per cent level
explaining significant association exists in job performance among residential area
of employees. As a result, the null hypothesis is not accepted.

4.6 INFLUENCE OF LEADERSHIP STYLES ON JOB

PERFORMANCE OF EMPLOYEES OF TELANGANA STATE
ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
To study influence of leadership styles on job performance of employees of
Telangana State Road Transport Corporation, multiple linear regression is carried
out and the results are given in Table 4.25. R2 is 0.58 and adjusted R2 is 0.56 and

29
these values reveal the regression model has good fit and 56.00 per cent of the
variation in dependent variable is shared by independent variables. The F-value of
9.824 is significant at one per cent level implying that the regression model is
significant.

TABLE 4.25
INFLUENCE OF LEADERSHIP STYLES ON JOB PERFORMANCE
OF EMPLOYEES OF TELANGANA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
CORPORATION
Regression
Leadership Styles t-Value Sig.
Co-efficients
Intercept 5.322 ** 19.895 .000
Autocratic Leadership (X1) .185** 5.158 .000
Democratic Leadership (X2) .160** 4.792 .000
Laissez-Faire Leadership (X3) .096 1.637 .102
Transformational Leadership (X4) .203** 5.606 .000
Transactional Leadership (X5) .299** 6.191 .000
R2 0.58 - -
Adjusted R2 0.56 - -
F 9.824 - .000
Source: Primary Data (** Significance at one per cent level)

Transactional leadership, transformational leadership, autocratic leadership

and democratic leadership are positively and significantly influencing job
performance of employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation at one
per cent level. So, the null hypothesis is not accepted.

4.7 JOB SATISFACTION

The job satisfaction of employees of Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation was studied and the results are given in Table 4.26.

30
 TABLE 4.26
JOB SATISFACTION
Sl. No. Job Satisfaction Mean Standard Deviation
1. Salary 3.38 1.33
2. Promotion 3.71 1.24
3. Work culture 3.21 1.11
4. Job security 3.99 0.97
5. Support from seniors 3.96 1.02
6. Bonus and incentives 3.91 1.03
7. Leave facilities 3.89 1.10
8. Rewards and recognition 3.29 1.44
9. Availability of resources 3.79 1.13
10. Interpersonal relations with colleagues 3.74 1.03
Source: Primary Data

The employees have agreed that they are satisfied with promotion, job
security, support from seniors, bonus and incentives, leave facilities, availability of
resources and interpersonal relations with colleagues, while, they are neutral
regarding satisfied with salary, work culture and rewards and recognition.

4.8 PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES AND JOB SATISFACTION

The distribution of employees on the basis of job satisfaction was studied
and the results are given in Table 4.27. The response of employees for job
satisfaction is segmented into low, moderate and high levels based on Mean ± SD
(Mean = 36.87; SD = 6.73).
TABLE 4.27
DISTRIBUTION OF EMPLOYEES ON THE BASIS OF JOB
SATISFACTION
Sl. No. Level of Job Satisfaction Number of Employees Percentage
1. Low 82 20.20
2. Moderate 281 69.21
3. High 43 10.59
Total 406 100.00
Source: Primary Data

31
 Among 406 employees, 10.59 per cent of them realized that the level of job
satisfaction is high, while, 20.20 per cent of them realized that the level of job
satisfaction is low.

4.8.1 GENDER AND JOB SATISFACTION

The relation among gender of employees and job satisfaction was studied and
the results are given in Table 4.28.
TABLE 4.28
GENDER AND JOB SATISFACTION
Level of Job Satisfaction Chi-
Sl. No. Gender Total square Sig.
Low Moderate High
Value
311
1. Male 59 219 33
(18.97) (70.42) (10.61) (76.60)
1.269 .530
95
2. Female 23 62 10
(24.21) (65.26) (10.53) (23.40)
82 281 43 406
Total - -
(20.20) (69.21) (10.59) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 311 male employees, 10.61 per cent of them realized that the level
of job satisfaction is high, while, 18.97 per cent of them realized that the level of job
satisfaction is low. Among 95 female employees, 10.53 per cent of them realized
that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 24.21 per cent of them realized that
the level of job satisfaction is low.

The Chi-square value of 1.269 which is not significant statistically disclosing

no significant association exists in job satisfaction among gender of employees.
Consequently, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.8.2 AGE CATEGORY AND JOB SATISFACTION

The relation among age category of employees and job satisfaction was
studied and the results are given in Table 4.29.

32
 TABLE 4.29
AGE CATEGORY AND JOB SATISFACTION
Level of Job Satisfaction Chi-
Sl. No. Age Category Total square Sig.
Low Moderate High
Value
20
1. 21 – 30 Years 5 10 5
(25.00) (50.00) (25.00) (4.93)
78
2. 31 – 40 Years 25 45 8
(32.05) (57.69) (10.26) (19.21)
21.660 .001
128
3. 41– 50 Years 30 84 14
(23.44) (65.62) (10.94) (31.53)
180
4. Above 50 Years 22 142 16
(12.22) (78.89) (8.89) (44.33)
82 281 43 406
Total - -
(20.20) (69.21) (10.59) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 20 employees falling under age category of 21 – 30 years, 25.00 per

cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 25.00 per cent
of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is low. Among 78 employees
falling under age category of 31 – 40 years, 10.26 per cent of them realized that the
level of job satisfaction is high, while, 32.05 per cent of them realized that the level
of job satisfaction is low.

Among 128 employees falling under age category of 41 – 50 years, 10.94 per
cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 23.44 per cent
of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is low. Among 180 employees
falling under age category of above 50 years, 8.89 per cent of them realized that the
level of job satisfaction is high, while, 12.22 per cent of them realized that the level
of job satisfaction is low.

The Chi-square value of 21.660 which is significant at one per cent level
disclosing significant association exists in job satisfaction among age category of
employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is not accepted.

33
4.8.3 EDUCATION AND JOB SATISFACTION
The relation among education of employees and job satisfaction was studied
and the results are given in Table 4.30.

TABLE 4.30
EDUCATION AND JOB SATISFACTION
Level of Job Satisfaction Chi-
Sl. No. Education Total square Sig.
Low Moderate High
Value
54
1. Diploma 13 29 12
(24.08) (53.70) (22.22) (13.30)
72
2. Under Graduation 21 49 2
(29.17) (68.05) (2.78) (17.73)
18.491 .005
165
3. Post Graduation 26 121 18
(15.76) (73.33) (10.91) (40.64)
115
4. Engineering 22 82 11
(19.13) (71.30) (9.57) (28.33)
82 281 43 406
Total - -
(20.20) (69.21) (10.59) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 54 employees possessing diploma, 22.22 per cent of them realized

that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 24.08 per cent of them realized that
the level of job satisfaction is low. Among 72 employees possessing under
graduation, 2.78 per cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is high,
while, 29.17 per cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is low.

Among 165 employees possessing post graduation, 10.91 per cent of them
realized that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 15.76 per cent of them
realized that the level of job satisfaction is low. Among 115 employees possessing
engineering, 9.57 per cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is high,
while, 19.13 per cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is low.

34
 The Chi-square value of 18.491 which is significant at one per cent level
disclosing significant association exists in job satisfaction among education of
employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is not accepted.

4.8.4 DESIGNATION AND JOB SATISFACTION

The relation among designation of employees and job satisfaction was
studied and the results are given in Table 4.31.
TABLE 4.31
DESIGNATION AND JOB SATISFACTION
Level of Job Satisfaction Chi-
Sl. No. Designation Total square Sig.
Low Moderate High
Value
10
1. Executive Director 0 9 1
(0.00) (90.00) (10.00) (2.46)
Head of the
44
2. Department / 11 32 1
(25.00) (72.73) (2.27) (10.84)
Regional Manager
Divisional Manager 75
3. 11 58 6
/ Senior Manager (14.67) (77.33) (8.00) (18.47) 13.436 .200
Depot Manager / 71
4. 19 42 10
Junior Scale Officer (26.76) (59.15) (14.09) (17.49)
83
5. Assistant Engineer 19 53 11
(22.89) (63.86) (13.25) (20.44)
Assistant Manager 123
6. 22 87 14
Traffic (17.89) (70.73) (11.38) (30.30)
82 281 43 406
Total - -
(20.20) (69.21) (10.59) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 10 employees who are executive directors, 10.00 per cent of them
realized that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, none of them realized that
the level of job satisfaction is low. Among 44 employees who are heads of the
department / regional managers, 2.27 per cent of them realized that the level of job

35
satisfaction is high, while, 25.00 per cent of them realized that the level of job
satisfaction is low.

Among 75 employees who are divisional managers / senior managers, 8.00

per cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 14.67 per
cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is low. Among 71 employees
who are depot managers / junior scale officers, 14.09 per cent of them realized that
the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 26.76 per cent of them realized that the
level of job satisfaction is low.

Among 83 employees who are assistant engineers, 13.25 per cent of them
realized that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 22.89 per cent of them
realized that the level of job satisfaction is low. Among 123 employees who are
assistant managers traffic, 11.38 per cent of them realized that the level of job
satisfaction is high, while, 17.89 per cent of them realized that the level of job
satisfaction is low.

The Chi-square value of 13.436 which is not significant statistically

disclosing no significant association exists in job satisfaction among designation of
employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.8.5 WORK EXPERIENCE AND JOB SATISFACTION

The relation among work experience of employees and job satisfaction was
studied and the results are given in Table 4.32.

36
 TABLE 4.32
WORK EXPERIENCE AND JOB SATISFACTION
Level of Job Satisfaction Chi-
Work
Sl. No. Total square Sig.
Experience Low Moderate High
Value
16
1. 1 – 5 Years 0 11 5
(0.00) (68.75) (31.25) (3.94)
46
2. 6 – 10 Years 14 26 6
(30.44) (56.52) (13.04) (11.33)
94
3. 11 – 15 Years 23 62 9 16.342 .038
(24.47) (65.96) (9.57) (23.15)
112
4. 16 – 20 Years 22 80 10
(19.64) (71.43) (8.93) (27.59)
138
5. 21 – 25 Years 23 102 13
(16.67) (73.91) (9.42) (33.99)
82 281 43 406
Total - -
(20.20) (69.21) (10.59) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 16 employees bearing 1 – 5 years of work experience, 31.25 per cent

of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, none of them
realized that the level of job satisfaction is low. Among 46 employees bearing
6 – 10 years of work experience, 13.04 per cent of them realized that the level of job
satisfaction is high, while, 30.44 per cent of them realized that the level of job
satisfaction is low. Among 94 employees bearing 11 – 15 years of work experience,
9.57 per cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 24.47
per cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is low.

Among 112 employees bearing 16 – 20 years of work experience, 8.93 per

cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 19.64 per cent
of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is low. Among 138 employees
bearing 21 – 25 years of work experience, 9.42 per cent of them realized that the
level of job satisfaction is high, while, 16.67 per cent of them realized that the level
of job satisfaction is low.

37
 The Chi-square value of 16.342 which is significant at five per cent level
disclosing significant association exists in job satisfaction among work experience
of employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is not accepted.

4.8.6 MONTHLY INCOME AND JOB SATISFACTION

The relation among monthly income of employees and job satisfaction was
studied and the results are given in Table 4.33.

TABLE 4.33
MONTHLY INCOME AND JOB SATISFACTION
Level of Job Satisfaction Chi-
Sl. No. Monthly Income Total square Sig.
Low Moderate High
Value
4 9 4 17
1. Below Rs.50,000
(23.53) (52.94) (23.53) (4.19)
24 96 20 140
2. Rs.50,001 – Rs.1,00,000
(17.14) (68.57) (14.29) (34.48)
36 97 10 143
3. Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000 11.981 .152
(25.18) (67.83) (6.99) (35.22)
8 37 6 51
4. Rs.1,50,001– Rs.2,00,000
(15.69) (72.55) (11.76) (12.56)
10 42 3 55
5. Above Rs.2,00,000
(18.18) (76.36) (5.46) (13.55)
82 281 43 406
Total - -
(20.20) (69.21) (10.59) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 17 employees earning monthly income of below Rs.50,000, 23.53

per cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 23.53 per
cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is low. Among 140 employees
earning monthly income of Rs.50,001 – Rs.1,00,000, 14.29 per cent of them realized
that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 17.14 per cent of them realized that
the level of job satisfaction is low. Among 143 employees earning monthly income
of Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000, 6.99 per cent of them realized that the level of job
satisfaction is high, while, 25.18 per cent of them realized that the level of job
satisfaction is low.

38
 Among 51 employees earning monthly income of Rs.1,50,001– Rs.2,00,000,
11.76 per cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 15.69
per cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is low. Among 55
employees earning monthly income of above Rs.2,00,000, 5.46 per cent of them
realized that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 18.18 per cent of them
realized that the level of job satisfaction is low.

The Chi-square value of 11.981 which is not significant statistically

disclosing no significant association exists in job satisfaction among monthly
income of employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.8.7 MARITAL STATUS AND JOB SATISFACTION

The relation among marital status of employees and job satisfaction was
studied and the results are given in Table 4.34.
TABLE 4.34
MARITAL STATUS AND JOB SATISFACTION
Level of Job Satisfaction Chi-
Marital
Sl. No. Total square Sig.
Status Low Moderate High
Value
369
1. Married 78 257 34
(21.14) (69.65) (9.21) (90.89)
9.136 .010
37
2. Unmarried 4 24 9
(10.81) (64.87) (24.32) (9.11)
82 281 43 406
Total - -
(20.20) (69.21) (10.59) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 369 married employees, 9.21 per cent of them realized that the level
of job satisfaction is high, while, 21.14 per cent of them realized that the level of job
satisfaction is low. Among 37 unmarried employees, 24.32 per cent of them realized
that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 10.81 per cent of them realized that
the level of job satisfaction is low.

39
 The Chi-square value of 9.136 which is significant at one per cent level
disclosing significant association exists in job satisfaction among marital status of
employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is not accepted.

4.8.8 TYPE OF FAMILY AND JOB SATISFACTION

The relation among type of family of employees and job satisfaction was
studied and the results are given in Table 4.35.
TABLE 4.35
TYPE OF FAMILY AND JOB SATISFACTION
Level of Job Satisfaction Chi-
Sl. No. Type of Family Total square Sig.
Low Moderate High
Value
361
1. Nuclear Family 75 247 39
(20.78) (68.42) (10.80) (88.92)
.973 .615
45
2. Joint Family 7 34 4
(15.56) (75.55) (8.89) (11.08)
82 281 43 406
Total - -
(20.20) (69.21) (10.59) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 361 employees having nuclear family, 10.80 per cent of them
realized that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 20.78 per cent of them
realized that the level of job satisfaction is low. Among 45 employees having joint
family, 8.89 per cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is high, while,
15.56 per cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is low.

The Chi-square value of 0.973 which is not significant statistically disclosing

no significant association exists in job satisfaction among type of family of
employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.8.9 SIZE OF FAMILY AND JOB SATISFACTION

The relation among size of family of employees and job satisfaction was
studied and the results are given in Table 4.36.

40
 TABLE 4.36
SIZE OF FAMILY AND JOB SATISFACTION
Level of Job Satisfaction Chi-
Sl. No. Size of Family Total square Sig.
Low Moderate High
Value
329
1. 2 – 4 Members 72 220 37
(21.88) (66.87) (11.25) (81.03)
60
2. 5 – 7 Members 7 47 6 6.040 .196
(11.67) (78.33) (10.00) (14.78)
17
3. Above 7 Members 3 14 0
(17.65) (82.35) (0.00) (4.19)
82 281 43 406
Total - -
(20.20) (69.21) (10.59) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 329 employees having family size of 2 – 4 members, 11.25 per cent
of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 21.88 per cent of
them realized that the level of job satisfaction is low. Among 60 employees having
family size of 5 – 7 members, 10.00 per cent of them realized that the level of job
satisfaction is high, while, 11.67 per cent of them realized that the level of job
satisfaction is low. Among 17 employees having family size of above members,
none of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 17.65 per cent
of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is low.

The Chi-square value of 6.040 which is not significant statistically disclosing

no significant association exists in job satisfaction among size of family of
employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.8.10 RESIDENTIAL AREA AND JOB SATISFACTION

The relation among residential area of employees and job satisfaction was
studied and the results are given in Table 4.37.

41
 TABLE 4.37
RESIDENTIAL AREA AND JOB SATISFACTION
Level of Job Satisfaction Chi-
Residential
Sl. No. Total square Sig.
Area Low Moderate High
Value
136
1. Urban 28 93 15
(20.59) (68.38) (11.03) (33.50)
121
2. Semi – Urban 19 89 13 2.595 .628
(15.70) (73.55) (10.75) (29.80)
149
3. Rural 35 99 15
(23.49) (66.44) (10.07) (36.70)
82 281 43 406
Total - -
(20.20) (69.21) (10.59) (100.00)
Source: Primary Data (The figures in the parentheses are per cent to total)

Among 136 employees residing in urban area, 11.03 per cent of them
realized that the level of job satisfaction is high, while, 20.59 per cent of them
realized that the level of job satisfaction is low. Among 121 employees residing in
semi – urban area, 10.75 per cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is
high, while, 15.70 per cent of them realized that the level of job satisfaction is low.
Among 149 employees residing in rural area, 10.07 per cent of them realized that the
level of job satisfaction is high, while, 23.49 per cent of them realized that the level
of job satisfaction is low.

The Chi-square value of 2.595 which is not significant statistically disclosing

no significant association exists in job satisfaction among residential area of
employees. Consequently, the null hypothesis is accepted.

4.9 INFLUENCE OF LEADERSHIP STYLES ON JOB

SATISFACTION OF EMPLOYEES OF TELANGANA STATE
ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
To examine influence of leadership styles on job satisfaction of employees of
Telangana State Road Transport Corporation, multiple linear regression is used and

42
the results are given in Table 4.38. R2 is 0.55 and adjusted R2 is 0.53 and these
values explain the regression model has good fit and 53.00 per cent of the variation
in dependent variable is contributed by independent variables. The F-value of 8.088
is significant at one per cent level disclosing that the regression model is significant.

TABLE 4.38
INFLUENCE OF LEADERSHIP STYLES ON JOB SATISFACTION
OF EMPLOYEES OF TELANGANA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
CORPORATION
Regression
Leadership Styles t-Value Sig.
Co-efficients
Intercept 2.852 ** 16.151 .000
Autocratic Leadership (X1) .164** 4.384 .000
Democratic Leadership (X2) .175** 4.730 .000
Laissez-Faire Leadership (X3) .077 1.190 .235
Transformational Leadership (X4) .206** 5.502 .000
Transactional Leadership (X5) .229** 6.308 .000
R2 0.55 - -
Adjusted R2 0.53 - -
F 8.088 - .000
Source: Primary Data (** Significance at one per cent level)

Transactional leadership, transformational leadership, democratic leadership

and autocratic leadership are positively and significantly influencing job satisfaction
of employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation at one per cent level.
As an outcome, the null hypothesis is not accepted.

4.10 RELATION AMONG DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP

STYLES AND JOB SATISFACTION OF EMPLOYEES OF
TELANGANA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
To study relation among determinants of leadership styles and job
satisfaction of employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation,
correlation analysis is done and the results are given in Table 4.39.

43
 TABLE 4.39
RELATION AMONG DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP STYLES
AND JOB SATISFACTION OF EMPLOYEES OF TELANGANA
STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
Job
Particulars Capability Atmosphere Adjustability Coordination
Personality Satisfaction
Capability 1.00
Atmosphere 0.57 ** 1.00
**
Adjustability 0.62 0.73 ** 1.00
** **
Coordination 0.50 0.72 0.56** 1.00
** ** **
Personality 0.49 0.62 0.68 0.64 ** 1.00
Job ** ** ** ** 0.45 **
0.41 0.42 0.46 0.43 1.00
Satisfaction
Source: Primary Data (Note: ** Significance at one per cent level)

The correlation coefficient between capability and job satisfaction of

employees is 0.41, which is positively and moderately associated with each other at
one per cent level of significance. The atmosphere and job satisfaction of employees
is positively and moderately correlated with each other with the value of 0.42, which
is significant at one per cent level.

The correlation coefficient between adjustability and job satisfaction of

employees is 0.46, which is positively and moderately associated with each other at
one per cent level of significance. The coordination and job satisfaction of
employees is positively and moderately correlated with each other with the value of
0.43, which is significant at one per cent level. The correlation coefficient between
personality and job satisfaction of employees is 0.45, which is positively and
moderately associated with each other at one per cent level of significance.
Consequently, the null hypothesis is not accepted.

44
4.11 STRUCTURAL RELATION AMONG DETERMINANTS OF
LEADERSHIP STYLES, JOB PERFORMANCE AND
SATISFACTION OF EMPLOYEES OF TELANGANA STATE
ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION

To study structural relation among determinants of leadership styles, job

performance and satisfaction of employees of Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation, Structural Equation Model (SEM) is built and the results are given in
Table 4.40.

TABLE 4.40
STANDARDIZED STRUCTURAL PATH CO-EFFICIENTS
Standardized
Path CR P-Value
Co-efficients
JP ← AD .402 6.260 ***
JP ← CA .249 4.853 ***
JP ← AT .223 4.467 ***
JP ← PE .356 5.914 ***
JP ← CO .441 6.706 ***
JS ← JP .527 8.498 ***
Source: Primary Data (*** indicates significant at one per cent level)

The standardized coefficient for Job Performance (JP) against Adjustability

(AD) is 0.402, the standardized coefficient for Job Performance (JP) against
Capability (CA) is 0.249, the standardized coefficient for Job Performance (JP)
against Atmosphere (AT) is 0.223, the standardized coefficient for Job Performance
(JP) against Personality (PE) is 0.356 and the standardized coefficient for Job
Performance (JP) against Coordination (CO) is 0.441 and these co-efficients are
significant at one per cent level. Hence, coordination, adjustability, personality,
capability and atmosphere are directly and positively influencing job performance of
employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

Meanwhile, the standardized coefficient for Job Satisfaction (JS) against Job
Performance (JP) is 0.527 which is significant at one per cent level. Thus, job

45
performance is directly and positively influencing job satisfaction of employees of
Telangana State Road Transport Corporation. So, the null hypothesis is rejected.
The path diagram for job satisfaction of employees of Telangana State Road
Transport Corporation is shown in Figure 4.1.

FIGURE 4.1
PATH DIAGRAM FOR JOB SATISFACTION OF EMPLOYEES OF
TELANGANA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION

18.63 33.41 40.88

CA e1 e2
11.07 20.24
.25
1 1
7.85 AT
.22
9.56 8.51
4.97 .53
.40 JP JS
4.66 7.37 AD

6.19 5.23 .44

3.73
4.41 CO .36
4.14 4.94

PE

The model fit parameters are given in Table 4.41.

TABLE 4.41
MODEL FIT PARAMETERS
Chi-square Value P-Value GFI CFI RMR RMSEA
5.146 0.712 0.97 0.96 0.08 0.05

Source: Primary Data

The Chi-Square value of 5.146 is not statistically significant implying the

model has an excellent fit. Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) is 0.97 and Comparative Fit
Index (CFI) is 0.96. These GFI and CFI are showing perfect fit. The standardized
Root Mean Residual (RMR) is 0.08 and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation
(RMSEA) is 0.05 revealing an excellent fit.

46
4.12 CONCLUSION
Significant difference is there in determinants of leadership styles among
profile of employees excluding education, designation, monthly income, marital
status, type of family, size of family and residential area. Significant association is
there in job performance among profile of employees excluding gender, age
category, designation, work experience, monthly income, marital status, type of
family and size of family.

Transactional leadership, transformational leadership, autocratic leadership

and democratic leadership are positively and significantly influencing job
performance of employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.
Significant association is there in job satisfaction among profile of
employees excluding gender, designation, monthly income, type of family, size of
family and residential area.

Transactional leadership, transformational leadership, democratic leadership

and autocratic leadership are significantly and positively influencing job satisfaction
of employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.
Capability, atmosphere, adjustability, coordination and personality are
positively and moderately related with job satisfaction of employees of Telangana
State Road Transport Corporation.

Coordination, adjustability, personality, capability and atmosphere are

directly and positively influencing job performance of employees of Telangana State
Road Transport Corporation, while, job performance is directly and positively
influencing job satisfaction of employees of Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation.

47
 CHAPTER – V

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS,
SUGGESTIONS AND CONCLUSION
 CHAPTER – V
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, SUGGESTIONS AND
CONCLUSION

5.1 INTRODUCTION

The business environments are changing considerably because of social

behaviour, awareness of stakeholders, expectation of employees and
competitiveness that are generating new and dynamic behaviour and problems for
organization in order to toll its performance. Leadership style is an imperative
element of management which aids to maximizing performance and attaining
objectives of all types of organization. Effective leadership style is needed for proper
management of resources, inspiring and motivating employees and attaining higher
level of performance and it also influences financial performance and
competitiveness of organization.

To enhance the performance of organization, leadership style should have

capability to encourage innovation, creativeness and stimulate employees to set
standards and values and also to increase the individual performance of employees.
Generally, leaders practice various types of leadership styles in the organization
according to situations and needs, but style followed by leader must be favourable to
the interest and expectations of their employees whose behaviour and feelings
decide the attainment of pre defined goals of the organization. Various kinds of
leadership styles have significant influence on motivation, attitude, creativeness and
job performance of employees.

Leadership styles are responsible for giving guidance and direction and
exchange information and knowledge to employees for improving their job
performance and maintaining standards of both job and organization and it also
motivates their morale, values and efficiency on their job role. Meanwhile, job
satisfaction of employees is also an important component of job and positive feeling
about a job makes employees highly satisfied that is greatly influenced by leadership
styles in the organization. When employees are happy and satisfied, they can
contribute significantly to the success of Organization.

Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (TSRTC) is one of the

important public transport sectors in Telangana which provides quality transport
service to people and nearly 0.60 lakh employees are working in different wings for
operation and administration of TSRTC. Since, TSRTC is one of the significant
public sector organizations, it requires an effective and dynamic leadership to
enhance job performance and satisfaction of employees and also to improve its
operational efficiency, therefore, it is chosen for the study.

The data are gathered from 406 employees by using multi stage random
sampling method through structured questionnaire. In order to study objectives and
testing hypotheses, percentages, mean, standard deviation, t-test, Analysis of
Variance (ANOVA) test, Chi-square test, exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory
factor analysis, multiple correlation, multiple regression and Structural Equation
Model (SEM) are used.

5.2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

5.2.1 PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES

More than three fourth of (76.60 per cent) employees are males and more
than two fifth of (44.33 per cent) employees are belonging to age category of above
50 years. More than two fifth of (40.64 per cent) employees are having post
graduation and more than one fourth of (30.30 per cent) employees are assistant
managers traffic. More than one third of (33.99 per cent) employees are holding
21 – 25 years of work experience and more than one third of (35.22 per cent)
employees are earning monthly income of Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000. More than
nine tenth of (90.89 per cent) employees are married and nearly nine tenth of (88.92
per cent) employees are possessing nuclear family. More than four fifth of (81.03
per cent) employees are owning family size of 2 – 4 members and more than one
third of (36.70 per cent) employees are residing in rural area.

2
5.2.2 PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES AND AUTOCRATIC LEADERSHIP
STYLE

The findings demonstrate that 69.95 per cent of employees opined that the
level of autocratic leadership style is at moderate level. Significant difference is
there among autocratic leadership style and profile of employees except for gender,
age category, type of family and residential area.

5.2.3 PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES AND DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP

STYLE

The findings exhibit that 65.02 per cent of employees opined that the level of
democratic leadership style is at moderate level. Significant difference is there
among democratic leadership style and profile of employees except for gender,
education, designation, work experience, type of family, size of family and
residential area.

5.2.4 PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES AND LAISSEZ-FAIRE

LEADERSHIP STYLE

The findings display that 71.43 per cent of employees opined that the level of
laissez-faire leadership style is at moderate level. Significant difference is there
among laissez-faire leadership style and marital status, size of family and residential
area of employees.

5.2.5 PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES AND TRANSFORMATIONAL

LEADERSHIP STYLE

The findings explain that 66.50 per cent of employees opined that the level
of transformational leadership style is at moderate level. Significant difference is
there among transformational leadership style and work experience and monthly
income of employees.

3
5.2.6 PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES AND TRANSACTIONAL
LEADERSHIP STYLE

The findings elucidate that 58.87 per cent of employees opined that the level
of transactional leadership style is at moderate level. Significant difference is there
among transactional leadership style and marital status of employees.

5.2.7 ASSESSMENT OF LEADERSHIP STYLES

Transactional leadership is the most dominant leadership style in Telangana
State Road Transport Corporation.

5.2.8 DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP STYLES IN TELANGANA

STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION

Capability, atmosphere, adjustability, coordination and personality

determinants of leadership styles in Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

5.2.9 PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES AND DETERMINANTS OF

LEADERSHIP STYLES

The findings expose that 44.58 per cent of employees viewed that the level
of determinants of leadership styles is at moderate level. Significant difference is
there among determinants of leadership styles and profile of employees excluding
education, designation, monthly income, marital status, type of family, size of
family and residential area.

5.2.10 PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES AND JOB PERFORMANCE

The findings explicate that 65.27 per cent of employees viewed that the level
of job performance is at moderate level. Significant association is there among job
performance and profile of employees excluding gender, age category, designation,
work experience, monthly income, marital status, type of family and size of family.

4
5.2.11 INFLUENCE OF LEADERSHIP STYLES ON JOB
PERFORMANCE OF EMPLOYEES

Transactional leadership, transformational leadership, autocratic leadership

and democratic leadership are having positive and significant influence on job
performance of employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

5.2.12 PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES AND JOB SATISFACTION

The findings clarify that 69.21 per cent of employees viewed that the level of
job satisfaction is at moderate level. Significant association is there among job
satisfaction and profile of employees excluding gender, designation, monthly
income, type of family, size of family and residential area.

5.2.13 INFLUENCE OF LEADERSHIP STYLES ON JOB

SATISFACTION OF EMPLOYEES

Transactional leadership, transformational leadership, democratic leadership

and autocratic leadership are having positive and significant influence on job
satisfaction of employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

5.2.14 RELATION AMONG DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP

STYLES AND JOB SATISFACTION OF EMPLOYEES

Capability, atmosphere, adjustability, coordination and personality are

positively and moderately related with job satisfaction of employees of Telangana
State Road Transport Corporation.

5.2.15 STRUCTURAL RELATION AMONG DETERMINANTS OF

LEADERSHIP STYLES, JOB PERFORMANCE AND SATISFACTION
OF EMPLOYEES

Coordination, adjustability, personality, capability and atmosphere are

directly and positively influencing job performance of employees, while, job
performance is directly and positively influencing job satisfaction of employees of
Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

5
5.3 SUGGESTIONS
As per the Assessment of Leadership Styles in Telangana State Road
Transport Corporation, Transactional leadership is the most dominant leadership
style with a mean of 40.86 and Autocratic Leadership Style is the least dominant
leadership style with a mean of 35.88 in Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation.

As Transactional leadership style is predominant in TSRTC, the managers

should be trained properly to make them aware of the facts that

a) managers who use reward behaviors more than punishments will be

more effective and they improve their unit’s (be it Depot or Division
or Region) performance and they will elicit more satisfaction from
their followers.
b) when Rewards and Punishments are awarded based on certain
criterion, and when arbitrariness is avoided, then they will be more
effective and improves group’s morale and performance.
c) similarly, when rewards and punishments are awarded
in a non-contingent fashion, i.e., without any relation to performance
or parameters, then they will be ineffective and contributes to group
inefficiency and lowers the group productivity.

During the course of gathering information, it is observed that TSRTC

managers use punishments more often to regulate the behavior of the workmen and
many a times these punishments are non contingent upon the default committed by
the worker. It is observed that on an average a Depot Manager gives 250 – 300
punishments to the employees, be them increment stoppages or loss recoveries or
simple penalties. These numbers show that indiscriminate punishments exist in
TSRTC. Hence, it is suggested to use more reward behaviors than punishment
behaviors. For example if a reward is given to the Driver who has saved more fuel
by driving the bus carefully, then it becomes a contingent reward and the behavior to
get good fuel efficiency will develop among workmen to get the reward. Similar will
be the case when a Conductor who gets good earnings per bus gets rewarded.

6
 Hence all the TSRTC managers shall be trained to use proper and established
methods and identifying the beneficiaries for the rewards in various schemes like
‘best fuel efficiency’, ‘safety awards’, ‘incentive for higher earnings’, ‘best tire life
awards’ etc., Such use of contingent rewards will increase the performance and
productivity of TSRTC.

Further, there is demonstrable evidence in the research suggesting that there

is a positive relationship between Leader Member Exchange and the Leader’s use of
contingent punishment (Stepina, Perrewe, Hassell, Harris, & Mayfield, 1991) which
avoids role ambiguity. Therefore, even when punishments have to be used, it is
suggested that they should be contingent upon the crime committed by the employee
and arbitrary punishments shall be avoided.

However, as a long term strategy, transactional leadership may fail because

of resource crunch, which is very common in organizations, especially public sector
organizations. Hence TSRTC leadership may use the contingent rewards to achieve
the lower order objectives, but to achieve the higher order objectives, the style of
leadership in TSRTC should change, as the style of the leader in achieving the
organizational goals is paramount. Many researchers have suggested that to achieve
organizational goals effectively, transformational leadership has more benefits and is
more effective when compared to traditional leadership style like transactional
leadership. Transformational leaders align the values, goals and expectations of the
organization with that of the followers and they implement change through the
articulation of vision, individualized consideration and intellectual simulation which
encourages the acceptance of organization’s vision and mission.

Hence there is a need to adopt the style of Transformational Leadership in

TSRTC. It is associated with highly successful organizations. It is required where
organization has to adapt to radical changes happening in the business environment,
when disruptive innovations occur and when people have to be developed to their
full potential. As TSRTC is facing stiff competition from Private Operators and
facing a radical shift in the way bus operations are made due to changes in the Motor
Vehicles Act, proposed by the Central Government, adopting Transformational
Leadership Style is a must.

7
 In order to implement such leadership style, the TSRTC managers should
recognize the different needs of their followers and support them. They have to
identify the unique capabilities of the followers and utilize them to achieve the
organization’s goals. When they understand the individual needs of the followers
and recognize the individual capabilities, it also results in better Organizational
Citizenship Behavior from the employees. Such managers will be perceived as polite
and respectful and will be given highest regard by the employees. However, TSRTC
managers should be aware of the two important notions:

1. The behavior of the manager should be such that the subordinate at

an individual level should feel that he is treated with respect and
politeness.
2. Similarly the group as a whole should feel that they are treated fairly
viewed from ethical and moral standards.

One way to achieve this is to develop respect for the individual irrespective
of his position. The managers should be made aware that everybody should be
treated equally irrespective of his designation in the Corporation. A Mechanic, or
Helper or Conductor or Driver coming for help shall be treated with due respect. The
fact that they are working at the bottom of the pyramid shall not evoke any
disrespect from the managers. Then the individual feels that he is treated
respectfully. Their needs should be given a sympathetic hearing and as far as
possible shall be taken care of by the manager. This develops the feeling that the
leader is exhibiting Individualized Consideration which gives better job satisfaction
to the TSRTC employees.

Similarly even at a group level, everybody shall be treated fairly and the
group shall be rewarded as per the organization’s norms and policies so that
everybody recognizes the manager as having treated the group in a correct way,
ethically and morally.

Intellectual Simulation is required to develop followers to think about old

problems in new ways and try to solve by applying new methods. As a consequence
of practicing Intellectual Simulation, followers develop the ability to recognize and
solve the problems. This may ultimately give them the confidence to deal with the
8
future problems without any direct involvement of the leader. By this process of
Intellectual Simulation, followers become effective problem solvers, thereby giving
them the fortitude and determination to challenge the status-quo and introduce
creative methods in fulfilling organization goals.

One way to achieve this is TSRTC managers should involve their

subordinates more into the decision making process. Nearly 41% of the Managers
have responded that they are not fully involved in decision making process. Hence,
individuals shall be made in-charge of specific tasks and they should be encouraged
to complete the task on their own, without any help from the leader. For example, if
a supervisor is having an industrial relation problem with his group, the manager
should not immediately step in to solve the problem. He should allow the supervisor
to take his own decisions and guide him to solve the issue on his own. If a
Supervisor is having a problem in coping up with the target, the manager should not
jump into the conclusion that he is unfit and take punitive action. The manager
should help him analyze the performance on his own, identify where his weak points
are and also identify his strong points so that he will chalk out his own individual
plan to improve his performance. Such intellectual simulation shall be practiced by
TSRTC managers to enhance the problem solving abilities of their supervisors and
to give them confidence to attempt at the higher targets of the Corporation and
achieve them.

Transformational leaders articulate a strong vision, emotionally, and get

good response from their subordinates to achieve that vision. A good articulation of
vision usually makes the follower identify with the organization and they become
attached to it. Therefore, we can say the core responsibility of a Transformational
leader is to articulate the organization’s vision, mission, strategy and goal in a very
strong manner. They should actively and strategically propagate the organizational
goals and buy-in the followers to implement these strategic goals. The strategic goal
implementation depends on how well the organization’s goal is divided and
distributed to the constituent units. The Transformational leader should encourage an
open learning environment so that it will help and guide the followers to learn what
is essential to implement the vision and mission at their level. Therefore, the
managers in TSRTC should develop the skill of articulating the organization’s

9
vision, mission, strategy and goals very strongly and emotionally. They should be
able to divide these goals into smaller achievable goals and also as per the units
working under them. For example, if achieving Rs 100 Lakhs per annum profit is the
goal of a division in TSRTC, then the Divisional Manager should be able to
articulate this goal with a strategy to achieve it. At the same time he should be able
to divide the goal and attach it to the Depots under him. Let us say if there are 5
depots working under him, he can divide the goal as per the potential of the depot
like say, Rs.30 Lakhs for 1st depot, 20L for 2nd Depot, 10L for 3rd Depot, 25L for 4th
Depot and 15L for 5th Depot. Then, he has to exhibit this mission in all the depots
where the employees see it, internalize it and work toward the goal. Whatever is
required to achieve the goal, like better fuel saving techniques, better earning
generation techniques, safety measures shall be distributed in the form of training
material, pamphlets, class room teaching so that an open learning atmosphere is
created and employees learn what is essential to achieve the goal of Rs.100lakhs
profit per annum for the division.

However, such successful articulation and implementation of organization’s

vision depends on the oral communication skills of the leader. The transformational
leaders should be able to paint a verbal picture to the followers on what they can
achieve and how each of them can achieve and contribute to the strategic mission of
the organization. Therefore, the managers in TSRTC should hone their
communication skills to better communicate the strategic vision. They should
practice their communication skills, by frequently conducting the gate meetings and
small group meetings and articulate the organization’s strategic goals. This will not
only improve the communication between the leader and the followers but also
improves the alignment of the followers to the mission and goals of the organization.
It helps the leaders to educate their followers to learn the organization’s goals and
build a good identification between the TSRTC employee and TSRTC’s strategic
goals.

Transformational leaders are more proactive than reactive. They do not react
to the happenings but they anticipate the future and proactively strategize their
actions. Instead of taking corrective actions, after a default is committed, they expect
the deviations and take action not to allow deviations. This avoids punishment and

10
hence Transformational leadership is far more effective than the traditional
transactional leadership in achieving higher performance duly motivating the
followers. Hence the managers of TSRTC should be proactive in anticipating
performance deficiencies, deviations from established procedures and take
corrective action before hand so that they can minimize the punishments. This will
give great job satisfaction to the employees and results in a motivated workforce
which will achieve higher performance. For example, to achieve earnings target, if it
is observed that certain routes are falling behind due to unforeseen circumstances,
the manager can proactively increase the number of buses on high earnings yielding
routes so that the target will be met and no punishments need be given to lower
earning conductors. Such proactive measures improve team spirit and motivation
and result in higher job satisfaction to the employees.

Trust is another important element of Transformational leadership. Trusted

leaders evoke a feeling among the followers that the leaders are concerned about the
interests of the followers and organization. A form of measuring trust between the
leader and follower is by the way of looking at the amount of interest shown by the
followers in seeking work related information from the leader. Usually followers of
a Transformational leader seek more work related information than the followers of
a Transactional leader. When followers trust their leader, they accept more
information from him without any resistance which helps in faster dissemination of
strategic goals. Hence, the managers of TSRTC should develop trust among their
followers by being fair, impartial, and honest with the workforce. This will
encourage the workforce to proactively seek information from the managers and the
workforce will soon learn the organization’s strategic goals. Once this clarity comes,
the workforce will eventually achieve it by putting up a motivated effort. Hence
building trust with the workforce is most important. Trust can be achieved by
treating all the employees of all unions equally. Trust is generated when all the
employees are treated with due respect and fairly irrespective of their caste, creed
and beliefs.

As we have seen that transactional leadership and transformational

leadership styles have higher degree of positive influence on job performance and
satisfaction of employees, it is suggested that Telangana state road transport

11
corporation should use combination of both styles of leadership as their managerial
strategy to improve job performance and job satisfaction of employees. However,
TSRTC should proactively encourage transformational leadership style so that it
increases the motivation, optimism and effort among subordinates, which should
lead to higher performance and goal achievement.

To summarize the suggestions,

i. Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (TSRTC) should

use combination of Transactional and Transformational
Leadership styles, proactively encouraging Transformational
Leadership style.
ii. TSRTC managers should use reward behaviors more than
punishment behaviors.
iii. TSRTC managers should use contingent punishments and
rewards and avoid non –contingent rewards and arbitrary
punishments.
iv. TSRTC managers should involve their employees more in the
decision making process so as to provide intellectual
simulation for the employees which will motivate them to be
their own leaders.
v. TSRTC managers should develop the skill of articulating the
organization’s vision, mission, strategy and goals very
strongly and emotionally so as to align the employees with the
organization’s strategic goals implementation.
vi. TSRTC managers should hone their communication skills to
better communicate the strategic vision and they should be
able to break down the goal into achievable goals to the
component units.
vii. TSRTC managers should work proactively rather than
reacting to the deviations. A proactive culture shall be
established wherein the problems or deviations are anticipated
and corrective actions are taken before some damage is done
to the organization.

12
 viii. TSRTC managers should build ‘trust’ with their employees by
treating them fairly, impartially and with due respect.
ix. Telangana State Road Transport Corporation must give
adequate trainings to the managers and employees for
improving their knowledge, skills, innovation, standards and
competencies of leadership. In addition, leaders should
involve in teaching and training of employees.
x. Telangana State Road Transport Corporation must design
leadership development programs in accordance with
personality of employees to make a highly effective
leadership style.
xi. To increase job performance of employees, Telangana State
Road Transport Corporation should give adequate trainings
periodically to their employees and also find out the problems
relating to their jobs and employees must be allowed to find
the solutions for them.
xii. Leaders must give due recognition and rewards and appreciate
their employees for best performance. Further, leaders must
create new and innovative ideas engaging their employees in
decision making which will increase job satisfaction of
employees that will improve performance of employees of
Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

5.4 SCOPE FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

1. The present study is carried out on leadership styles and their influence on job
performance and satisfaction of employees of Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation. Thus, this study may be extended at division levels in Telangana.

2. The study on influence of styles of leadership on performance of Telangana State

Road Transport Corporation may be considered for future research work.

3. The influence of leadership styles on organizational innovativeness in Telangana

State Road Transport Corporation may be studied as further research work.

13
4. The study on effect of leadership styles on employee engagement in Telangana
State Road Transport Corporation may be investigated as a separate study in future.

5. The future study may be done to understand the effectiveness of styles of

leadership on commitment of employees towards Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation.
6. A Study may be conducted in a profitable Transport Organization in future to
understand what leadership determinants or leadership styles have contributed
towards profits.

5.5 CONCLUSION

More than two third of employees viewed that the level of autocratic
leadership style is at moderate level. Nearly two third of employees viewed that the
level of democratic leadership style is at moderate level. More than two third of
employees viewed that the level of laissez-faire leadership style is at moderate level.

Two third of employees viewed that the level of transformational leadership

style is at moderate level. Nearly three fifth of employees viewed that the level of
transactional leadership style is at moderate level. Transactional leadership is the
predominant leadership style in Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

Capability, atmosphere, adjustability, coordination and personality

determinants of leadership styles in Telangana State Road Transport Corporation,
More than two fifth of employees viewed that the level of determinants of leadership
styles is at moderate level.

Nearly two third of employees viewed that the level of job performance is at
moderate level. Transactional leadership, transformational leadership, autocratic
leadership and democratic leadership have positive and significant influence on job
performance of employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

More than two third of employees viewed that the level of job satisfaction is
at moderate level. Transactional leadership, transformational leadership, democratic
leadership and autocratic leadership have positive and significant influence on job
satisfaction of employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

14
 Capability, atmosphere, adjustability, coordination and personality have
positive and moderate relation with job satisfaction of employees of Telangana State
Road Transport Corporation.

Coordination, adjustability, personality, capability and atmosphere have

direct and positive influence on job performance of employees, while, job
performance has direct and positive influence on job satisfaction of employees of
Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.

5.6 MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY

The findings of this study are highly useful to leaders and employees of
Telangana State Road Transport Corporation and Government of Telangana. This
study is very much helpful to Telangana State Road Transport Corporation to assess
and recognize different features of leadership styles, concerns of employees and
qualities of leadership that influence job performance and job satisfaction of
employees.

The results of this study can help management of Telangana State Road
Transport Corporation for better understanding of uniqueness of different leadership
styles, functioning of leaders, and effectiveness of leadership styles and perception
of employees towards leadership styles. On the basis of this, Telangana State Road
Transport Corporation can encourage a particular leadership style and arrange
training programmes to improve skills and qualities of leaders for motivating and
increasing job performance of employees.

The findings of this study can suggest Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation to meet the expectations of employees and to provide facilities for
enhancing job satisfaction of employees. The outcomes of this study can help
Telangana State Road Transport Corporation for developing and executing effective
leadership development strategies and measures to improve job performance and job
satisfaction of employees.

15
5.7 CONTRIBUTION OF THE STUDY
This study purely focuses leadership styles, determinants of leadership styles
and influence of different leadership styles on job performance and job satisfaction
of employees of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation. This study provides
an important information and new knowledge for adoption of effective leadership
styles in transport sector especially in Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.
It provides a very good research and analytical frameworks for policy makers,
academicians and research scholars to study the different types of leadership styles
in transport sector.

This study also gives empirical rationalization for influence of various

leadership styles on performance and satisfaction of employees for their jobs and
structural relation between determinants of leadership styles, employees’
performance and satisfaction about their jobs in Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation. Further, this study has higher degree of creditability for generalization
of outcomes because of only very little quantitative research in the existing
literatures and this study also generates new options to scholars for doing research in
this area in future and discovering new attributes and methodology.

16
REFERENCES
 References

Aarti Deveshwar, & Indu Aneja. (2014). A study of transnational and transformation
leadership styles and factors affect the leadership style. International Journal of
Business, Economics and Management, 1(8), 176 - 185.

Alan, F. C., & Berry, A. J. (1998). Transformational leadership and learning

orientation. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 19(3), 164 - 172.

Anindya Tiara Widayanti, & Nur Arief Rahmatsyah Putranto. (2015). Analyzing the
relationship between transformational and transactional leadership style on
employee performance in PT. TX Bandung. Journal of Business and Management,
4(5), 561 - 568.

Argyris, C. (1995). Some characteristics of successful executives. Personal Journal,

6, 50 - 63.

Arvind Hans, Soofi Asra Mubeen, & Azzan Khamis Mohamed Al- Subhi. (2018).
A study on leadership style and managerial creativity in select organizations in
Sultanate of Oman. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 20(2), 85 - 90.

Avolio, B. J. (1999). Full leadership development: Building the vital forces in

organizations. California: Sage Publication.

Avolio, B., & Bass, B. (2004). Multifactor leadership questionnaire, mind garden,
California: Menlo Park.

Barchiesi Maria Assunta, & La Bella Agostino. (2007). Leadership styles of world's
most admired companies:A holistic approach to measuring leadership effectiveness.
Paper Presented in International Conference on Management Science &
Engineering, Paris.

Bass, B. M. (1998). Transformational leadership: Industry, military and educational

impact. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

xxiii
Bass, B. M. (2009). The bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and
managerial applications. New York: Free Press.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1990). The implications of transactional and

transformational leadership for individual, team, organizational development.
Research in Organizational Change and Development, Volume 4, 231–272.

Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1993). Improving organizational effectiveness through

transformational leadership. California: Sage Publication.

Bass, B., Avolio, B., & Atwater, L. (1996). The transformational and transactional
leadership of men and women. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 45,
5 - 34.

Bizhan Shafie, Saeid Baghersalimi, & Vahid Barghi. (2013). The relationship
between leadership style and employee performance. Singaporean Journal of
Business Economics and Management Studies, 2(5), 21 - 29.

Boehnke, K., Bontis, N., DiStefano, J., & DiStefano, C. (2003). Transformational
leadership: Examination of cross national differences and similarities. Leadership
and Organization Development Journal, 24(1), 5 - 15.

Boseman, G. (2008). Effective leadership in a changing world. Journal of Financial

Service Professionals, 62(3), 36 - 38.

Brockner, J., Tyler, T., & Scheneider. (1992). The influence of prior commitment to
an institution on reactions to perceived unfairness: The higher they are, the harder
they fall. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 241 - 261.

Brooke, S. (2007). Leadership and job satisfaction. Journal of Academic Leadership,

4(1), 105 - 114.

xxiv
Brown, F. W., & Dodd, N. G. (1999). Rally the troops or make the trains run on
time: The relative importance and interaction of contingent reward and
transformational leadership. Leadership & Organization Development Journal,
20(6), 291 - 299.

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

Bushra Fatima, Usman, Ahmad ve Naveed, & Asvir. (2011). Effect of

transformational leadership on employees’ job satisfaction and organizational
commitment in banking sector of Lahore (Pakistan), International Journal of
Business and Social Science, 2 (18), 261 – 267

Chavunduka M. Desderio, Nyemba Piason, & Thomas Bhebhe. (2016). Leadership

style and employee performance in Parastatals: A case of the transport sector.
Journal of Business Management Science, 2(1), 69 - 86.

Chemers, M. M. (1997). An integrative theory of leadership. New Jersey: Erlbaum

Publication.

Choi, S. (2007). Democratic leadership: The lessons of exemplary models for

democratic governance. International Journal of Leadership Studies, 2(3),
243 - 262.

Chris U. Abeh Ukaidi. (2016). The influence of leadership styles on organizational

performance in Nigeria. Global Journal of Human Resource Management, 4(4),
25 - 34.

Cole, G. A. (1997). Personnel management. London: Ashford Colocur Press.

Copland, M. A. (2003). Leadership of inquiry: Building and sustaining capacity for

school improvement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(4), 375 - 395.

Deluga, R. (1992). The relationship of leader-member exchanges with laissez-faire,

transactional, and transformational leadership in naval environments. In K. Clark,

xxv
M. Clark, & D. Campbell (Eds.), Impact of leadership, Greensboro: Center for
Creative Leadership.

Denhardt, J. V., & Denhardt, R. B. (2003). The new public service: Serving, not
steering. New York: Sharpe.

Dess, G. G., & Picken, J. C. (2000). Changing roles: Leadership in the 21 st century.
Organizational Dynamics, 29(4), 18 - 33.

Dicksona, M. W., Hartogb, D. N. D., & Mitchelsona, J. K. (2003). Research on

leadership in a cross-cultural context: Making progress and raising new questions.
The Leadership Quarterly, 14,729 - 738.

Dran, G. V. (2004). Leader - An earned title who. Website:

www.ffos.hr/lida/lida2004/ppt/subota/LIDA_2004_Gisela_von_Dran.ppt+leader+rol
es+in+hrm%22ppt%22&hl=en&ie=Utf-8, pp. 1 - 5.

Dressler, G. (1997). Human resource management. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Drucker, P. (1996). Your leadership is unique. Christianity Today International

Leadership Journal. 18(4), 52 - 57.

Dubrin, A. (2007). Leadership: Research findings, practice and skills. New York:
Houghton Mifflin.

Dulewicz, V., & Higgs, M. (2005). Assessing Leadership Styles and Organizational
Context, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20(2), 105 - 123.

Eagly, A. H., (2005), Achieving relational authenticity in leadership: Does gender

matter?. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 459 - 474.

Eagly, A. H., & Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C. (2001). The leadership styles of men

and women. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 781 - 797.

xxvi
Ebenezer Malcalm, & Stephen Tamatey. (2017). Examining leadership style on
employee performance in the public sector of Ghana. International Journal of
Scientific and Research Publications, 7(11), 343 – 361.

Eden, D. A. (1998). Introduction to education administration in Nigeria. Ibadan:

Spectrum Books.

Elpers, Kathy ve Westhuis, & David. (2008). Organizational leadership and its
impact on social workers' job satisfaction: A national study. Administration in Social
Work, 32(3), 26 - 43.

Emmanuel Iriemi Ejere, & Ugochukwu David Abasilim. (2013). Impact of

transactional and transformational leadership styles on organisational performance:
Empirical evidence from Nigeria. The Journal of Commerce, 5(1), 30 - 41.

Fadimatu Jalal-Eddeen (2015). An assessment of leadership styles and employee

performance in small and medium enterprises in Yola, Adamawa State, Nigeria.
International Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Sciences, 3(3),
319 - 324.

Ferris, D. L., Lian, H., Brown, D. J., Pang, F. X. J., & Keeping, L. M. (2010). Self-
esteem and job performance: The moderating role of self-esteem contingencies.
Personnel Psychology, 63, 561 - 593.

Fiedler F. E. (1996). Research on leadership selection and training: One view of the
future. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 241 - 250.

Fry, L. W. (2003). Towards a theory of spiritual leadership. The Leadership

Quarterly, 14, 693 - 727.

xxvii
Gaertner, S. (2000). Structural determinants of job satisfaction and organisational
commitment in turnover models. Human Resource Management Review, 9,
479 - 493.

Gebert, D., & Steinkamp, T. (1991). Leadership style and economic success in
Nigeria and Taiwan. Management International Review, 31(2), 161 - 171.

Ghosh, S. K., & Shejwal, B. R. (2006). Relationship between perceived

organizational values and leadership styles. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations,
42(1), 57 - 72.

Goddy Osa Igbaekemen. (2014). Impact of leadership style on organisation

performance: A strategic literature review. Public Policy and Administration
Research, 4(9), 126 - 135.

Goodnight, R. (2004). Laissez-faire leadership. The Economic Journal, 98(39),

755 - 771.

Graham, J. (1997). Outdoor leadership: Technique, common sense and self

confidence. Seattle: The Mountaineers.

Henderson, L., & Tulloch, J. (2008). Incentives for retaining and motivating health
workers in Pacific and Asian countries. Human Resource Health, 24(2), 124 - 138.

Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. (1988). Management of organizational behaviour. New

Jersey: Prentice Hall.

House, R. J., & Aditya, R. N. (1994). What we know about leadership effectiveness
and personality. American Psychologist, 46(6), 491 - 499.

House, R., Javidan, M., Hanges, P.J., & Dorfman, P. (2002). Understanding cultures
and implicit theories across the globe: An introduction to project globe. Journal of
World Business, 37, 3 - 10.

xxviii
Howell J. M., & Avolio B. J. (1993). Transformational leadership, transactional
leadership, locus of control and support for innovation: Key predictors of
consolidated -business unit performance. Journal of Service Marketing, 16,
487 - 502.

Hoy, W. K., & Miskel .C. G. (2008). Education administration: theory, research
and practice. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Hsu, P. Y. (2005). The research of the influence of cross-cultural on the job

performance: The case on Philippine & Thailand labour in high-tech industry. An
Unpublished Master’s Thesis, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan.

Hueryren Yeh, & Dachuan Hong. (2002). The mediating effect of organizational
commitment on leadership type and job performance. The Journal of Human
Resource and Adult Learning, 8(2), 50 - 59.

Hughes, H., Ginnett, M., & Curphy, R.. (1999). Leadership. Singapore: McGraw-
Hill.

Hugnes, R. L., Gonnett, R. C., & Curphy, G. J. (2006). Leadership, enhancing the
lessons of experience. New York: McGraw Hill.

Iqbal, N., Anwar, S., & Haider, N. (2015). Effect of leadership style on employee
performance. Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 5(5),
127 - 138.

Irfanullah Khan, & Allah Nawaz. (2016). The leadership styles and the employees
performance: A review. Gomal University Journal of Research, 32(2), 144 - 150.

Ismail A., Halim F. A., Munna D. N., Abdullah A., Shminan A. S., & Muda A. L.
(2009). The mediating effect of empowerment in the relationship between
transformational leadership and service quality. Journal of Business Management,
4(4), 3 - 12.

xxix
Ivancevich, J., Konopaske, R., & Matteson, M. (2007). Organization behaviour and
management. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.

Jogulu, U. D. (2010). Culturally-linked leadership style. Leadership and

Organizational Development Journal, 31(8), 705 - 719.

Kahai, S. S., Sosik, J. J., & Avolio, B. J. (1997). Effects of leadership style and
problem structure on work group process and outcomes in an electronic meeting
system environment. Personnel Psychology, 50, 1 - 14.

Kalu Dolly, C., & Okpokwasili Nonyelum, P. (2018). Impact of autocratic

leadership style on job performance of subordinates in academic libraries in Port
Harcourt, Rivers State, Nigeria. International Journal of Research -
GRANTHAALAYAH ,6(10), 212 - 220.

Kieu, H. (2010). Leadership Styles and Organizational Performance. East

Eisenhower Parkway: UMI Dissertation Publishing.

Kirkpatrick, S. A., & Locke, E. A. (1991). Leadership: Do traits matter?. The

Executive, 5(2), 48 - 60.

Koontz, H., & Weihrich, H. (1988). Essentials of management. New York:

McGraw-Hill.

Lai, T. T., Luen, W. K., & Hong, N. M. (2011). School principal leadership styles
and teachers organizational commitment. A research agenda. Paper Presented in 2 nd
International Conference on Business and Economic Research Proceeding, London,

Lee, J. (2008). Effects of leadership and leader-member exchange on

innovativeness. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(6), 670 - 687.

xxx
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (1999). The effects of transformational leadership on
organizational conditions and students engagement with school. Journal of
Educational Administration, 38(2), 112 - 129.

Lind, B., & Stevens, J. (2004). Match your merger integration strategy and
leadership style to your merger type. Strategic Leadership, 32(4), 10 - 16.

Lok, P., & Crawford, J. (2004). The effects of organizational culture and leadership
style on job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Journal of Management
Development, 23(4), 321 - 338.

Mario Buble, Ana Juras, & Ivan Matic. (2014). The relationship between managers’
leadership styles and motivation. Management, 19(1), 161 - 193.

Maurik, J. V. (2001). Writers on leadership. London: Penguin Books.

McDonough, E. F., & Barczak, G. (1991). Speeding up new product development:

The effects of leadership style and source of technology. Journal of Product
Innovation Management, 8(3), 203 - 211.

McShane, S. L., & Von Glinow, M. A. (2000). Organizational Behaviour. New

York: Irwin / McGraw-Hill.

Mehra, A., Smith, B., Dixon, A., & Robertson, B. (2006). Distributed leadership in
teams: The network of leadership perceptions and team performance. Leadership
Quarterly, 17, 232 - 245.

Mehta, R., Dubinski, A. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2003). Leadership style, motivation
and performance in international marketing channels: an empirical investigation of
the USA, Finland and Poland. European Journal of Marketing, 37(1 / 2), 50 - 85.

Messick, D. M., & Kramer, R. M. (2004). The psychology of leadership: New

perspectives and research. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.

xxxi
Mester, C., Visser, D., & Roodt, G. (2003). Leadership Style and its relation to
employee attitudes and behaviour. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 29(2),
72 - 82.

Moh. Ali Shahab, & Inna Nisa. (2014). The influence of leadership and work
attitudes toward job satisfaction and performance of employee. International
Journal of Managerial Studies and Research, 2(5), 69 - 77.

Molero, F., & Navas, M. (2007). Relations and effects of transformational

leadership. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 10, 358 - 368.

Moore, E. M. (2007). The impact of leadership style on organizational effectiveness:

leadership in action within united way of America, An Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis,
Capella University, New Jersey.

Moore, L. L., & Rudd, R. D. (2006). Leadership styles of current extension leaders.
Journal of Agricultural Education, 47(1), 32 - 43.

Munir, F., Yusoff, R. B. M., Azam, K., Khan, A., & Thukiman, K. (2011). Effect of
on-the-job coaching on management trainees performance: A post merger case study
of Glaxo-Smith-Klein (GSK) Pakistan. International Review of Business Research
Papers, 7(3), 159 - 169.

Muterera, J. (2012). Leadership behaviours and their impact on organizational

performance in Governmental entities. International Journal of Sustainable
Development, 1, 19 - 24.

Nahavandi, A. (2002). The art and science of leadership. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

xxxii
Nengah Rupadi Kertiriasih Ni., Wayan Sujana, I., & Nengah Suardika, I. (2018).
The effect of leadership style to job satisfaction, employee engagement and
employee performance (Study at PT. Interbat, Bali, Nusra, and Ambon).
International Journal of Contemporary Research and Review, 9(3), 20592 - 20600.

Obiwuru Timothy, C., Okwu, Andy, T., Akpa, Victoria, O., & Nwankwere, Idowu
A. (2011). Effects of leadership style on organizational performance: A survey of
selected small scale enterprises in Ikosi-Ketu council development area of Lagos
State, Nigeria. Australian Journal of Business and Management Research, 1(7),
100 - 111.

Ogbonna, E., & Harris, L. C. (2000). Leadership style, organizational culture and
performance: Empirical evidence from UK companies. International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 11(4), 766 - 788.

Okumbe, J. A. (1999). Educational management: Theory and practice. Nairobi:

Nairobi University Press.

Osabiya Babatunde, & Ikenga, Emem. (2015). The impact of leadership style on
employee’s performance in an organization. Public Policy and Administration
Research, 5(1), 193 - 205.

Paracha, M. U., Qamar, A. Mirza, A., & Waqas, I. (2012). Impact of leadership style
(transformational and transactional leadership) on employee performance and
mediating role of job satisfaction study of private school (Educator) in Pakistan.
Global Journal of Management and Business Research, 12(4), 98 - 119.

Paula Goren. (2018). Effect of leadership styles on employee productivity at South

Nyanza sugar company limited, Migori county. International Journal of Progressive
Sciences and Technologies, 6(2), 428 - 432.

xxxiii
Peris M. Koech, & Namusonge, G. S. (2012). The effect of leadership styles on
organizational performance at state corporations in Kenya. International Journal of
Business and Commerce, 2(1), 1 - 12.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Bommer, W. H. (1996). Transformational

leader behaviours and substitutes for leadership as determinants of employee
satisfaction, commitment, trust and organizational citizenship behaviours. Journal of
Management, 22(2), 259 - 298.

Popa, B. M. (2012). The relationship between leadership effectiveness and

organizational performance. Journal of Defense Resources Management, 1,
123 - 127.

Popper, M., Mayseless, O., & Castelnovo, O. (2000). Transformational leadership

and attachment. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(2), 267 - 289.

Pradeep, D. D. & Prabhu, N. R. V. (2011). The relationship between effective

leadership and employee performance. Paper Presented in International Conference
on Advancements in Information Technology with Workshop of ICBMG IPCSIT,
IACSIT Press, Singapore.

Price, J. L. (2001). Reflections on the determinants of voluntary turnover.

International Journal of Manpower, 22(7), 600 - 624.

Rahmisyari. (2015). Effect of leadership styles, organizational culture, and

employees development on performance (Studies in PT. PG. Gorontalo of
Tolangohula Unit). International Journal of Business and Management Invention,
4(1), 85 - 91.

Raja, A. S., & Palanichamy, P. (2012). Effective leadership styles and organizational
effectiveness - A cross examination with chief executives and executives of public
sector enterprises. Prime Journal of Business Administration and Management, 2(3),
497 - 504.

xxxiv
Rao Shahzaib Khan, Bismah Rao, Khurram Usman, & Safia Afzal. (2017) The
mediating role of job satisfaction between transformational leadership and
organizational commitment within the SMEs of Karachi. International Journal of
Applied Business and Management Studies, 2(1), 46 - 55.

Rejas, L. P., Ponce, E. R., Almonte, M. D., & Ponce, J. R. (2006). Transformational
and transactional leadership: A study of their influence in small companies.
Ingeniare Revista Chilena De Ingeria, 14(2), 156 - 166.

Robbin, S. P. (1994). Essentials of organizational behaviour. New Jersey: Prentice

Hall.

Robbins, S. P., Judge, T. A., & Sanghi, S. (2007). Organizational behaviour. New
Delhi: Pearson-Prentice Hall.

Saetang, J., Sulumnad, K., Thampitak, P., & Sungkaew, T. (2010). Factors affecting
perceived job performance among staff: A case study of ban karuna juvenile
vocational training centre for boys. The Journal of Behavioral Science, 5(1), 33 - 45.

Sarros, J. C., & Santora, J. C. (2001). Leaders and values: A cross cultural study.
Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, 22(5), 243 - 248.

Schermerhorn, J. R., Hunt, J. G., & Osborn, R. N. (2000). Organizational

behaviour. New York: JohnWiley and Sons.

Scott, S. G., & Burce, R. A. (1994). Determinates of innovative behaviour: A path

model of individual innovation in the workplace. Academic Management Journal,
37(3), 580 - 607.

Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1993). The motivational effects of
charismatic leadership: A self-concept based theory. Organization Science, 4(4),
577 - 594.

xxxv
Skogstad, A, Einarsen, S., Torsheim, T., Aasland, M. S., & Hetland, H. (2007). The
destructiveness of laissez-faire leadership behaviour. Journal of Occupational
Health Psychology, 12, 80 - 92.

Stefano Ruggeri. (2013). Leadership style, self-sacrifice and team identification.

Social Behaviour and Personality, 41(7), 1171 - 1178.

Stepina. L., Perrewe, P., Hassell, B., Harris, J., & Mayfield. C. (1991). A
comparative test of the independent effects of interpersonal, task, and reward
domains on personal and organizational outcomes. Journul of Social Behavior and
Personality, 6( 1). 93-104.

Tareq Ghaleb Abu Orabi. (2016). The impact of transformational leadership style on
organizational performance: Evidence from Jordan. International Journal of Human
Resource Studies, 6(2), 89 - 102.

Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities & strategic
management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509 - 533.

Thamrin, H. M. (2012). The influence of transformational leadership and

organizational commitment on job satisfaction and employee performance.
International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 3(5), 566 - 572.

Thomas, N. (2004). The john adair handbook of management and leadership.

London: Thorogood.

Tierney, P., Farmer, S. M., & Graen, G. B. (1999). An examination of leadership

and employee creativity: The relevance of traits and relationships. Personnel
Psychology, 52, 591 - 620.

Uma D. Jogulu. (2010). Culturally-Linked Leadership Styles. Leadership &

Organization Development Journal, 31(8), 705 - 719.

xxxvi
Van Wart, M. (2013). Administrative leadership theory: A reassessment after 10
years. Public Administration, 91(3), 521 - 543.

Voon, M. C. (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.

Walumbwa, F. O., & Lawler, J. J. (2003). Building effective organizations:

transformational leadership, collectivist orientation, work-related attitudes and
withdrawal behaviours in three emerging economies. International Journal of
Human Resource Management, 14(7), 1083 - 1101.

Warrick, D. D. (1981). Leadership styles and their consequences. Journal of

Experiential Learning and Simulation, 3(4), 155 - 172.

Watson, L. (2009). Leadership’s influence on job satisfaction. Journal of Radiologic

Technology, 80(4), 297 - 308.

Watson, T. (1994). Linking employee motivation and satisfaction to the bottom line.
CMA Magazine, 68(3), 1 - 7.

Weiping Jiang, Xianbo Zhao, & Jiongbin Ni. (2017). The impact of transformational
leadership on employee sustainable performance: The mediating role of
organizational citizenship behaviour. Sustainability, 9, 1 - 17.

Wilson, M. (1995). Leadership and organizational culture: In C. Dimmock, & A.

Walker(Eds), Educational leadership: Culture and diversity. London: Sage
Publication.

Yammarino, F. J., & Dubinsky, A. J. (1994). Transformational Leadership theory:

Using levels of analysis to determine boundary condition. Personnel Psychology, 47,
787 - 811.

xxxvii
Yang Jen-Te. (2007). Knowledge sharing: Investigating appropriate leadership roles
and collaborative culture. Tourism Management, 28, 530 - 543.

Yang, Y. F. (2009). An Investigation of group interaction functioning stimulated by

transformational leadership on employee intrinsic and extrinsic job satisfaction: an
extension of the resource-based theory perspective. Social Behaviour and
Personality, 37, 1259 - 1278.

Yiing, L. H., Zaman, K., & Ahmad, B. (2009). The Moderating effects of
organizational culture on the relationships between leadership behaviour and
organizational commitment and between organizational commitment and job
satisfaction and performance. Leadership & Organization Development Journal,
30(1), 53 - 86.

Yukl, G. A. (1994). Leadership in organizations. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Yukl, G. A. (2002). Leadership in organizations. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Yun, S., Cox, J., & Sims, H. P., Jr. (2006). The forgotten follower: A contingency
model of leadership and follower self-leadership. Journal of Managerial
Psychology, 21, 374 - 388.

Yun, S., Takeuchi, R., & Liu, W. (2007). Employee self-enhancement motives and
job performance behaviors: Investigating the moderating effects of employee role
ambiguity and managerial perceptions of employee commitment. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 92, (3), 745 - 756.

Zaeema Asrar Mohiuddin. (2017). Influence of leadership style on employees

performance: Evidence from Literatures. Journal of Marketing and Management,
8(1), 18 - 30.

xxxviii
Zhu, W., Chew, I. K. H., & Spangler, W. D. (2005). CEO transformational
leadership and organizational outcomes: The mediating role of human capital
enhancing human resource management. Leadership Quarterly, 16, 39 - 52.

Zorah Abu Kassim, & Mohamed Sulaiman. (2011). Market orientation and
leadership styles of managers in Malaysia. International Journal of Leadership
Studies, 6(2), 230 - 245.

xxxix
 APPENDI X – I

QUESTIONNAIRE
 APPENDIX – I

INFLUENCE OF LEADERSHIP STYLES ON JOB

PERFORMANCE AND SATISFACTION OF EMPLOYEES OF
TELANGANA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION

QUESTIONNAIRE

I. PROFILE OF EMPLOYEES

1. Name of the Employee :

2. Gender :

a) Male b) Female

3. Age Category :

a) 21 – 30 Years b) 31 – 40 Years
c) 41– 50 Years d) Above 50 Years

4. Education :

a) Diploma b) Under Graduation

c) Post Graduation d) Engineering

xl
5. Designation :

a) Executive Director
b) Head of the Department / Regional Manager
c) Divisional Manager / Senior Manager
d) Depot Manager / Junior Scale Officer
e) Assistant Engineer
f) Assistant Manager Traffic

6. Work Experience :

a) 1 – 5 Years b) 6 – 10 Years c) 11 – 15 Years

d) 16 – 20 Years e) 21 – 25 Years

7. Monthly Income :

a) Below Rs.50,000 b) Rs.50,001 – Rs.1,00,000

c) Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000 d) Rs.1,50,001– Rs.2,00,000
f) Above Rs.2,00,000

8. Marital Status :

a) Married b) Unmarried

9. Type of Family :

a) Nuclear Family b) Joint Family

10. Size of Family :

a) 2 – 4 Members b) 5 – 7 Members
c) Above 7 Members

11. Residential Area :

a) Urban b) Semi – Urban c) Rural

xli
II. KINDLY INDICATE YOUR LEVEL OF AGREEMENT FOR
LEADERSHIP STYLES IN TELANGANA STATE ROAD
TRANSPORT CORPORATION
SA = Strongly Agree A = Agree N = Neutral
DA= Disagree SDA = Strongly Disagree

Level of Agreement
Sl. No. Leadership Style
SA A N DA SDA
Autocratic Leadership

The ideas of employees are not taken in

1.
to consideration
Employees are informed about what
2.
and how to be done
Employees are directed not to make
3.
same mistakes again and again
New employees are not allowed to take
4.
any decisions without prior permission
Leader creates a new procedure when
5. something is going wrong and it is
communicated to employees
Leader likes power and position that
6.
grips over subordinates
Employees are intimidated with
7.
punishment to attain the goals
Leader verifies whether employees
8.
perform well or not
9. The decision of the leader is final

10. Employees need safety and security

xlii
 Level of Agreement
Sl. No. Leadership Style
SA A N DA SDA
Democratic Leadership
Leader requests ideas from employees
1.
for future plans
Employees are engaged in deciding
2.
what and how to be done
Leader conducts meeting to get
suggestions from employees to create a
3.
strategy to hold a process as per plan
when something is not right
Environment is created to allow
employees to engage in decision
4.
making and bear accountability for
activities
Leader considers vision of employees
5. for their jobs and use it wherever
applicable
Leader gives direction and advices to
6.
employees for prioritizing their goals
Leader solves differences in role
7.
anticipations of employees
Leader utilizes his authority to help
8.
subordinates grow
Employees exercise self direction if
9.
they are committed to their objectives
Employees know how to utilize
10.
creativeness for solving issues

xliii
 Level of Agreement
Sl. No. Leadership Style
SA A N DA SDA
Laissez-Faire Leadership
Employees always vote whenever a
1.
key decision is to be made
The main decision should get
2. endorsement from majority of
employees
Employees are allowed to decide what
3.
and how to be done
Information are sent through e-mails,
4. circulars and memos to employees for
action
Leader allows employees to make
5.
decision about their job
Leader gives up activities to implement
6.
new methods
Employee is responsible for describing
7.
their job
Leader is keen to distribute power with
8.
subordinates
Employees have the rights to determine
9.
their objectives
Employees guide themselves as leader
10.
can

xliv
 Level of Agreement
Sl. No. Leadership Styles
SA A N DA SDA
Transformational Leadership
1. Leader encourages employees
Leader engages in training of
2.
employees
The moral values of employees are
3.
very much considered
Leader gives attentions to
4.
apprehensions of employees
Employees are encouraged to do their
5.
jobs well
Leader improves motivation level of
6.
employees
The innovation among employees is
7.
promoted
The high standards are fixed for
8.
employees
The values and objectives are precisely
9.
informed to employees
Leader provides due consideration for
10. personal interests and self respect of
employees

xlv
 Level of Agreement
Sl. No. Leadership Styles
SA A N DA SDA
Transactional Leadership
1. Leader creates explicit expectations
Actions are made before issues are
2.
rigorous
Leader communicates standards to
3.
carry jobs
Leader and employees have cordial
4.
relation
Leader follows track records of
5.
employees
Leader has better personal relations
6.
with employees
7. Leader is behaved well with employees
Ideas are exchanged between leader
8.
and employees effectively
Leader and employees have discussion
9. about requirement of resources to meet
objectives
Leader stresses on setting of goals for
10.
employees

xlvi
III. KINDLY INDICATE YOUR LEVEL OF AGREEMENT FOR
DETERMINANTS OF LEADERSHIP STYLES OF YOUR
SUPERIOR IN TELANGANA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
CORPORATION

SA = Strongly Agree A = Agree N = Neutral

DA= Disagree SDA = Strongly Disagree

Level of Agreement
Sl. No. Determinants
SA A N DA SDA
1. Experience
2. Flexibility
3. Knowledge
4. Negotiation
5. Cultural environment
6. Adaptableness
7. Self motivation
8. Decision making
9. Social environment
10. Dependability
11. Organizational environment
12. Communication
13. Political environment
14. Competency
15. Team work
16. Self confidence
17. Legal environment
18 Timeliness
19. Conduct
20. Personal value

xlvii
IV. KINDLY INDICATE YOUR LEVEL OF AGREEMENT FOR
JOB PERFORMANCE

SA = Strongly Agree A = Agree N = Neutral

DA = Disagree SDA = Strongly Disagree

Level of Agreement
Sl. No. Job Performance
SA A N DA SDA
1. I am cheerful with my job
2. I am trained well to do my job
3. I know my job responsibilities
4. I meet needs of my job
5. I identify problems in my job
6. I find solutions for problems in my job
7. I set job priorities
8. I utilize time efficiently
9. I accept my faults
Superiors encourage me for carrying out
10.
my job in innovative ways

xlviii
V. KINDLY INDICATE YOUR LEVEL OF AGREEMENT FOR
JOB SATISFACTION

SA = Strongly Agree A = Agree N = Neutral

DA = Disagree SDA = Strongly Disagree

Level of Agreement
Sl. No. Job Satisfaction
SA A N DA SDA
1. Salary
2. Promotion
3. Work culture
4. Job security
5. Support from seniors
6. Bonus and incentives
7. Leave facilities
8. Rewards and recognition
9. Availability of resources
Inter personal relations with my
10.
colleagues

Place :
Date : Signature of the Employee

xlix
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS
 Publication Details
Sl Title Author Name Name of theVolume, Publishing Scopus
No and Affiliation Journal Issue Status
and
Year
1 Performance on 1.Brahmananda International Volume Published ISSN:2278-
Impact of Rao Journal of - 8, 3075
Transformational Peddiboyina, Innovative Issue -
Leadership Style Ph.D Research Technology 7S, May
on Job Scholar, PRIST and 2019
Performance of School of Exploring
Employees in Business, PRIST Engineering
Telangana State University, (IJITEE)
Road Transport Thanjavur,
Corporation TamilNadu,
India. 2. Dr
K.G. Selvan,
Profesor, PRIST
School of
Business, PRIST
University,
Thanjavur,
Tamil Nadu,
India.
2 A Research on 1.Brahmananda International Volume Published ISSN:2277-
Transactional Rao Journal of - 8, 3878
Leadership Style Peddiboyina, Recent Issue -
and Job Ph.D Research Technology 1S4,
Satisfaction of Scholar, PRIST and June
Employees in School of Engineering 2019
Telangana State Business PRIST (IJRTE)
Road Transport University,
Corporation. Thanjavur,
TamilNadu,
India. 2. Dr
K.G.Selvan,
Profesor, PRIST
School of
Business, PRIST
University,
Thanjavur,
Tamil Nadu,
India.

l
 International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering (IJITEE)
Performance on Impact of Transformational
Leadership Style on Job Performance of
Employees in Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation
Brahmananda Rao Peddiboyina, K.G. Selvan
Abstract: Leadership style is one of the most imperative
organizational characteristics that influence feelings, thoughts
and actions of employees and leaders follows various styles while
they are guiding employees in the organization. The various
leadership styles have different types and levels of impact on
employees in order to attain their well defined objectives. Hence,
the leadership style is highly essential to encourage and motivate
employees to perform better in their jobs. The findings show that
idealized influence, inspiration motivation, intellectual
stimulation and individualized consideration are dimensions of
transformational leadership style in Telangana state road
transport corporation Significant difference is prevailing among
transformational leadership style and demographic profile of
employees in Telangana state road transport corporation
Inspiration motivation, idealized influence, individualized
consideration and intellectual stimulation have significant and
positive impact on job performance of employees in Telangana
state road transport corporation. To improve performance of
employees, Telangana state road transport corporation make
their employees very happy to work with their superior. Superior
must address old issues in innovative means and superior should
provide new ideas to employees for carrying out their jobs.
Keywords: Employees, Job Performance, Transformational
Leadership Style
I. INTRODUCTION
Leadership is a thought that impacts members in a group
to make them to achieve the objectives or jobs of a group
freely (Cole, 1997). Leadership is the process of
encouraging and facilitating others to work keenly towards
objectives by means of making over of potentiality of group
in to reality (Okumbe, 1999). Job performance is a
significant feature that it makes linkage between
achievement and outcome of organization (Yahaya et al
2011) and the breakdown or triumph of organization is
largely depending on job performance of employees. The
vision and goals of organization are very important factors
that impact job performance of employees and it is a
positive way to motivate employees to achieve targets in
their jobs (Saetang et al 2010).
Revised Manuscript Received on May 05, 2019.
Brahmananda Rao Peddiboyina, Ph.D Research Scholar, PRIST
School of Business, PRIST University, Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu, India
K.G. Selvan, Professor, PRIST School of Business, PRIST University,
Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu, India
Retrieval Number: G10150587S19/19©BEIESP
ISSN: 2278-3075, Volume-8, Issue-7S, May 2019
Leadership style is one of the most imperative
organizational characteristics that influence feelings,
thoughts and actions of employees and leaders follows
various styles while they are guiding employees in the
organization(Dess and Picken, 2000). The various
leadership styles have different types and levels of impact
on employees in order to attain their well defined objectives
(Jalal-Eddeen, 2015). Hence, the leadership style is highly
essential to encourage and motivate employees to perform
better in their jobs (Yammarino and Dubinsky, 1994). An
efficient leadership style assists employees to transform
their deficiency into efficiency and improves job
performance of employees. Hence, it is essential to study
impact of transformational leadership style on job
performance of employees in Telangana state road transport
corporation.
II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Fatima et al (2011) found that indicated that
transformational leadership style was significantly and
positively influencing innovation and job performance of
employees. Paracha et al (2012) concluded that
transformational style of leadership had positive and
significant association to job performance of employees.
Shafie et al (2013) revealed that transformational
leadership style was influencing job performance of
employees positively and significantly. Deveshwar and
Aneja (2014) showed that transformational leadership style
was superior in comparison with transactional leadership
style which increased job performance of employees
significantly.
Widayanti and Putranto (2015) indicated that
transformational leadership was positively and significantly
relating to performance of employees in their jobs. Desderio
et al (2016) found that transformational leadership style was
significantly and positively associated with job performance
of employees.
Jiang et al (2017) concluded that transformational
leadership was positively and strongly impacting job
performance of employees. Goren (2018) revealed that
transformational leadership had no significant impact on
performance of employees.
Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
71 & Sciences Publication
 Performance on Impact of Transformational Leadership Style on Job Performance of Employees in Telangana
State Road Transport Corporation
III. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY and mean and standard deviation are worked out for
dimesions of transformational leadership style. t-test and F-
1. To study dimesions of transformational leadership style in
test are done to scrutinize difference among demographic
Telangana state road transport corporation.
profile of employees and transformational leadership style.
2. To scrutinize difference among demographic profile of
Multiple regression analysis is used to assess impact of
employees and transformational leadership style in
transformational leadership style on job performance of
Telangana state road transport corporation.
employees in Telangana state road transport corporation.
3. To assess impact of transformational leadership style on
job performance of employees in Telangana state road
VI. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
transport corporation.
Demographic Profile of Employees
IV. HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY The demographic profile of employees in Telangana state
1. There is no significant difference in transformational road transport corporation is given in Table-1. The findings
leadership style among demographic profile of employees in clarify that 77.33 per cent of employees are males, while,
Telangana state road transport corporation. 22.67 per cent of them are females and 47.33 per cent of
2. There is no significant impact of transformational them are falling under age category of 41– 50 years, while,
leadership style on job performance of employees in 14.67 per cent of them are falling under age category of 21 –
Telangana state road transport corporation. 30 years. The findings disclose that 42.67 per cent of them
are post graduates, while, 18.33 per cent of them are
V. METHODOLOGY diploma holders and 47.00 per cent them are assistant
manager, while, 19.00 per cent of them are regional
The present study is done in Telangana state. Employees managers. The findings explain that 39.33 per cent of them
of Telangana state road transport corporation are chosen by are bearing 11 – 15 years of working experience, while,
using simple random sampling method and questionnaire 24.67 per cent of them are bearing 1 – 5 years working
method is used to gather data from 300 employees of experience and 43.66 per cent of them are earning monthly
Telangana state road transport corporation. Percentages are salary of Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000, while, 19.67 per cent of
calculated to understand demographic profile of employees them are earning monthly salary of below Rs.50,000.
Table. 1 Demographic Profile of Employees
Demographic Profile Number of Employees Percentage
Gender
Male 232 77.33
Female 68 22.67
Age Category
21 – 30 Years 44 14.67
31 – 40 Years 114 38.00
41– 50 Years 142 47.33
Education
Diploma 55 18.33
Under Graduation 117 39.00
Post Graduation 128 42.67
Designation
Regional Manager 57 19.00
Senior Manager 102 34.00
Assistant Manager 141 47.00
Working Experience
1 – 5 Years 74 24.67
6 – 10 Years 108 36.00
11 – 15 Years 118 39.33
Monthly Salary
Below Rs.50,000 59 19.67
Rs.50,001 – Rs.1,00,000 110 36.67
Rs.1,00,001– Rs.1,50,000 131 43.66
Transformational Leadership Style Idealized Influence
The view of employees on dimesions of transformational The view of employees on idealized influence is given in
leadership style in Telangana state road transport Table-2.
corporation are given as below.

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
Retrieval Number: G10150587S19/19©BEIESP 72 & Sciences Publication
 International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering (IJITEE)
ISSN: 2278-3075, Volume-8, Issue-7S, May 2019

Table. 2 Idealized Influence Table. 4 Intellectual Stimulation

Standard Standard
Idealized Influence Mean Intellectual Stimulation Mean
Deviation Deviation
I think better being around my My superior addresses old issues
3.98 0.97 3.36 1.16
superior in innovative means
I have full confidence on my My superior provides new ideas
4.02 0.90 3.40 1.08
superior to carry our jobs
I am very happy to work with my My superior deals problems in
3.42 1.02 3.32 1.22
superior different angles
The employees are agreed with they think better being The employees are neutral with their superior addresses
around their superior and they have full confidence on their old issues in innovative means, their superior provides new
superior, while, they are neutral with they are very happy to ideas to carry their jobs and their superior deals problems in
work with their superior. different angles.
Inspiration Motivation Individualized Consideration
The view of employees on inspiration motivation is given The view of employees on individualized consideration is
in Table-3. given in Table-5.
Table. 3 Inspiration Motivation Table. 5 Individualized Consideration
Standard Standard
Inspiration Motivation Mean Individualized Consideration Mean
Deviation Deviation
My superior is positive towards My superior concentrates highly
4.14 0.85 3.82 0.95
future on development of subordinates
My superior regularly inform
3.95 0.89 My superior gives due respect to
about what has to be done 3.39 1.15
My superior constantly explains subordinates
3.86 0.96 My superior provides personal
future vision and goals 3.76 1.03
attention to subordinates
The employees are agreed with their superior is positive
towards future, their superior regularly inform about what The employees are agreed with their superior concentrates
has to be done and their superior constantly explains future highly on development of subordinates and their superior
vision and goals. provides personal attention to subordinates, while, they are
Intellectual Stimulation neutral with their superior gives due respect to subordinates.
The view of employees on intellectual stimulation is Demographic Profile of Employees and
given in Table-4. Transformational Leadership Style
To scrutinize difference among demographic profile of
employees and transformational leadership style in
Telangana state road transport corporation, t-test and
ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) test are used and the results
are given inTable-6.
Table. 6 Difference among Demographic Profile of Employees and Transformational Leadership Style
Particulars t-Value / F-Value Sig.
**
Gender and Transformational Leadership Style 4.415 (t-value) .000
Age Category and Transformational Leadership Style 4.906**(F-Value) .000
**
Education and Transformational Leadership Style 5.530 (F-Value) .000
**
Designation and Transformational Leadership Style 5.682 (F-Value) .000
**
Working Experience and Transformational Leadership Style 4.874 (F-Value) .000
**
Monthly Salary and Transformational Leadership Style 5.128 (F-Value) .000
**
Significant at 1 % level

The t-value and F-values are elucidating significant

difference exits in transformational leadership style in
Telangana state road transport corporation among
demographic profile of employees at one cent level.

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
Retrieval Number: G10150587S19/19©BEIESP 73 & Sciences Publication
 Performance on Impact of Transformational Leadership Style on Job Performance of Employees in Telangana
State Road Transport Corporation
Impact of Transformational Leadership Style on Job
Performance of Employees
To assess impact of transformational leadership style on
job performance of employees in Telangana state road
transport corporation, multiple regression analysis is carried
out and the results are given inTable-7. R2 and adjusted R2
Table. 7 Impact of Transformational Leadership Style on Job Performance of Employees
Dimensions of Transformational Leadership Style Regression
Intercept 1.012**
Idealized Influence (X1) .324**
Inspiration Motivation (X2) .356**
Intellectual Stimulation (X3) .265**
Individualized Consideration (X4) .290**
R2 0.54
Adjusted R2 0.52
F 17.864
**
Significant at 1 % level
The findings demonstrate that inspiration motivation,
idealized influence, individualized consideration and
intellectual stimulation have positive and significant impact
on job performance of employees in Telangana state road
transport corporation at one per cent level.
VII. CONCLUSION
The findings of this study explicate that idealized
influence, inspiration motivation, intellectual stimulation
and individualized consideration are dimensions of
transformational leadership style in Telangana state road
transport corporation Significant difference is prevailing
among transformational leadership style and demographic
profile of employees in Telangana state road transport
corporation Inspiration motivation, idealized influence,
individualized consideration and intellectual stimulation
have significant and positive impact on job performance of
employees in Telangana state road transport corporation. To
improve performance of employees, Telangana state road
transport corporation make their employees very happy to
work with their superior. Superior must address old issues in
innovative means and superior should provide new ideas to
employees for carrying out their jobs. Additionally, superior
must deal problems in different angles and superior should
give due respect to subordinates. Thus, it is concluded that
practice of transformational leadership style increases job
performance of employees in Telangana state road transport
corporation.
REFEERENCES
1. Aarti Deveshwar, & Indu Aneja. (2014). A study of transnational and
transformation leadership styles and factors affect the leadership style.
International Journal of Business, Economics and Management, 1(8),
176 - 185.
2. Anindya Tiara Widayanti, & Nur Arief Rahmatsyah Putranto. (2015).
Analyzing the relationship between transformational and transactional
leadership style on employee performance in PT. TX Bandung. Journal
of Business and Management, 4(5), 561-568.
3. Bizhan Shafie, Saeid Baghersalimi, & Vahid Barghi. (2013). The
relationship between leadership style and employee performance.
Singaporean Journal of Business Economics and Management Studies,
2(5), 21 - 29.
Retrieval Number: G10150587S19/19©BEIESP 74
are 0.54 and 0.52 correspondingly which imply the
regression model has good fit and 52 per cent of variation in
dependent variable is shared by independent variables. The
F-value of 17.864 is revealing the model is significant at one
per cent level.
Co-efficients t-Value Sig.
11.184 .000
6.775 .000
7.290 .000
5.668 .000
6.152 .000
- -
- -
- .000
4. Bushra Fatima, Usman, Ahmad ve Naveed, & Asvir. (2011). Effect of
transformational leadership on employees’ job satisfaction and
organizational commitment in banking sector of Lahore (Pakistan),
International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2 (18), 261 - 267
5. Chavunduka M. Desderio, Nyemba Piason, & Thomas Bhebhe. (2016).
Leadership style and employee performance in Parastatals: A case of
the transport sector. Journal of Business Management Science, 2(1), 69
- 86.
6. Cole, G.A. (1997). Personnel management. London: Ashford Colocur
Press.
7. Dess, G. G., & Picken, J. C. (2000). Changing roles: Leadership in the
21st century. Organizational Dynamics, 29(4),18-33.
8. Fadimatu Jalal-Eddeen. (2015). An assessment of leadership styles and
employee performance in small and medium enterprises in Yola,
Adamawa State, Nigeria. International Journal of Economics, Finance
and Management Sciences, 3(3), 319 - 324.
9. Okumbe, J. A. (1999). Educational management: Theory and practice.
Nairobi: Nairobi University Press.
10. Paracha, M. U., Qamar, A. Mirza, A., & Waqas, I. (2012). Impact of
leadership style (transformational and transactional leadership) on
employee performance and mediating role of job satisfaction study of
private school (Educator) in Pakistan. Global Journal of Management
and Business Research, 12(4), 98 - 119.
11. Paula Goren. (2018). Effect of leadership styles on employee
productivity at South Nyanza sugar company limited, Migori county.
International Journal of Progressive Sciences and Technologies, 6(2),
428 - 432.
12. Saetang, J., Sulumnad, K., Thampitak, P., & Sungkaew, T. (2010).
Factors affecting perceived job performance among staff: A case study
of Ban Karuna juvenile vocational training centre for boys. The
Journal of Behavioral Science, 5(1), 33 - 45.
13. Weiping Jiang, Xianbo Zhao, & Jiongbin Ni. (2017). The impact of
transformational leadership on employee sustainable performance: The
mediating role of organizational citizenship behaviour. Sustainability,
9, 1 - 17.
14. Yahaya, A., Yahaya, N., Bon, A. T., Ismail, S. & Ing, T. C. (2011).
Stress level and its influencing factors among employees in a plastic
manufacturing and the implication towards work performance. Elixir
Psychology, 41, 5932 - 5941.
15. Yammarino, F. J., & Dubinsky, A. J. (1994). Transformational
leadership theory: Using levels of analysis to determine boundary
condition. Personnel Psychology, 47, 787 - 811.
Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
& Sciences Publication
 International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE)
A Research on Transactional Leadership
Style and Job Satisfaction of Employees in
Telangana State Road Transport Corporation
Brahmananda Rao Peddiboyina, K.G. Selvan
ABSTRACT--- In present day vibrant work environment,
leadership style is having greater influence on progress of
organization and job performance and satisfaction of employees.
Contingent rewards, management by exception (active) and
management by exception (passive) are key dimensions of
transactional leadership styles in Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation Significant difference is prevailing among transactional
leadership styles and socio-demographics of employees in Telangana
State Road Transport Corporation Contingent rewards,
aforementioned parameters have noteworthy and optimistic relation
with job satisfaction of employees in Telangana State Road
Transport Corporation. It is recommended that practicing
transactional leadership styles improve the job satisfaction.
Keywords—Employees, Job Satisfaction, Transactional
Leadership Style.
1. INTRODUCTION
Leadership is the continuous course of action where an
employee persuades a group of others for attaining general
objectives. Leadership is an act of exercising strategy that
gives inspiration and motivation to employees in order to
improve their potentiality and also for their overall
development. Leadership is highly essential for managing
organization and employees effectively and leaders have
practiced different styles according to nature of business
operations and situations. Leadership style is the method of
giving guidance, execution of plans and encouraging
employees to meet their goals (Northouse, 2015).
Job satisfaction among employees is exciting and positive
condition which is attainted by them in their job activities
and it is depending upon their emotions, faiths and
behaviours. Job satisfaction is emotional response of
employees on their jobs as they aspired are attained and it
decides performance of organization. Efficient leadership
style gives proper direction and assistance for employees to
attain their job objectives and satisfaction and is capable of
retaining them with organization.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
Voon (2011) found that income, security, flexibility,
power and transactional leaderships were positively
influencing job satisfaction. Thamrin (2012) concluded that
transformational leadership was not influencing job
satisfaction of employee.
Revised Manuscript Received on June 10, 2019.
BrahmanandaRaoPeddiboyina,Ph.D Research Scholar, PRIST School of
Business PRIST University, Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu, India.
Dr K.G. Selvan, Professor, PRIST School of Business, PRIST
University, Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu, India.
Retrieval Number: A11960681S419/19©BEIESP
ISSN: 2277-3878, Volume-8, Issue-1S4, June 2019
Ruggieri (2013) revealed that transactional leadership was
having positive effect on job satisfaction and happiness
among employees significantly.
3. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
1. To study dimensions of transactional leadership style
in Telangana State Road Transport Corporation
2. To inspect difference among socio-demographics of
employees and transactional leadership style in
Telangana State Road Transport Corporation
3. To study relation among transactional leadership
styles and job satisfaction of employees in Telangana
State Road Transport Corporation.
4. HYPOTHESES OF THE STUDY
1. There is no noteworthy alteration in transactional
leadership style among socio-demographics of
employees in Telangana State Road Transport
Corporation
2. There are no noteworthy relations among transactional
leadership style and job satisfaction of employees in
Telangana State Road Transport Corporation.
5. METHODOLOGY
The present research is conducted in Telangana state.
Employees of Telangana state road transport corporation are
chosen by adopting simple random sampling method and
questionnaire is administrated to get data from 250employees
of Telangana State Road Transport Corporation Percentages
are computed to know socio-demographics of employees and
mean and standard deviation are calculated to understand
dimensions of transactional leadership style. t-test and F-test
are applied to inspect difference among socio-demographics
of employees and transactional leadership style. Correlation
analysis is done to study relation among these two
parameters.
6. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
6.1. SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS OF EMPLOYEES
The socio-demographics of employees of Telangana state
road transport corporationis given in Table-1. The findings
make clear that 78.80 per cent of employees are males, whilst,
21.20 per cent of them are females and 48.00 per cent of them
are coming under age group of 41 to 50 years, whilst, 15.60
Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
1052 & Sciences Publication
A RESEARCH ON TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE AND JOB SATISFACTION OF EMPLOYEES IN
TELANGANA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
per cent of them are coming under age group of 21 to 30 The employees are agreed with their superior recognizes
years. The findings explicate that 44.80 per cent of them are their achievement in job, their superior gives rewards for
under graduates, whilst, 16.00 per cent of them are diploma their achievement and their superior helps them to do their
holders and 49.60 per cent them are assistant manager, whilst, job well.
12.40 per cent of them are regional managers.
6.2.2. Management by Exception (Active)
The findings demonstrate that 46.00 per cent of them are
bearing 11 to 15 years of working experience, whilst, 15.20 Table-3.Management by Exception (Active)
per cent of them are bearing 1 to 5 years working experience Management-by-Exception Mean Standard
and 42.80 per cent of them possess monthly income of (Active) Deviation
Rs.50001 to Rs.100000, whilst, 23.60 per cent of them My superior usually concentrates
possess monthly income of below Rs.50000. And 88.40 per on my failures 3.78 1.05
cent of them are married, whist, 11.60 per cent of them are My superior at all times tracks my
unmarried. mistakes 3.33 1.14
My superior puts efforts on failures
Table-1. Socio-Demographics of Employees
to meet up standards 3.72 1.09
Socio-Demographics Number of Percentage
Employees
The employees are agreed with their superior usually
Gender
concentrates on their failures and their superior puts efforts
Male 197 78.80 on failures to meet up standards, whilst, they are neutral
Female 53 21.20 with superior at all times tracks their mistakes.
AgeCategory
21 – 30 Years 39 15.60 6.2.3. Management by Exception (Passive)
31 – 40 Years 91 36.40 Table-4.Management by Exception (Passive)
41– 50 Years 120 48.00 Mean Standard
Management-by-Exception (Passive)
Education Deviation
Diploma 40 16.00 My superior takes action if things are
Under Graduation 112 44.80 going wrong 3.39 1.18
Post Graduation 98 39.20 My superior normally looks for
Designation disparity from anticipated performance 3.75 1.03
Regional Manager 31 12.40 My superior provide feedback for
Senior Manager 95 38.00 correcting disparity in norms 3.79 0.98
Assistant Manager 124 49.60
Working Experience The employees are agreed with their superior normally
1 – 5 Years 38 15.20 looks for disparity from anticipated performance and their
6 – 10 Years 97 38.80 superior provide feedback for correcting disparity in norms,
11 – 15 Years 115 46.00 whilst, they are neutral with their superior takes action if
Monthly Income things are going wrong.
Below Rs.50000 59 23.60 6.3. SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHICS OF EMPLOYEES AND
Rs.50001 – Rs.100000 107 42.80 TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE
Rs.100001– Rs.150000 84 33.60 To inspect difference among socio-demographics of
Marital Status employees and transactional leadership style in Telangana
Married 221 88.40 state road transport corporation, t-test and ANOVA test are
Unmarried 29 11.60 applied and the results are given inTable-5.
6.2. TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP STYLE
Table-5.Difference among Socio-demographics of
The opinion of employees on dimensions of transactional Employees and Transactional Leadership Style
leadership style in Telangana state road transport Particulars t-Value / Sig
corporationare given as below. F-Value
6.2.1. Contingent Reward Gender and Transactional 3.924** .000
The opinion of employees on contingent rewardis given Leadership Style (t-value)
in Table-2. AgeCategory and Transactional 4.875**
.000
Table-2.Contingent Reward Leadership Style (F-Value)
Contingent Reward Mean Standard Deviation Education and Transactional 4.736**
.000
My superior recognizes my Leadership Style (F-Value)
achievement in job 3.92 1.01 Designation and Transactional 5.020**
.000
My superior gives rewards Leadership Style (F-Value)
for my achievement 3.84 1.12
My superior helps me to do
my job well 3.90 1.04

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
Retrieval Number: A11960681S419/19©BEIESP 1053 & Sciences Publication
 International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE)
ISSN: 2277-3878, Volume-8, Issue-1S4, June 2019

Working Experience and 4.642** 3. Thamrin, H. M. (2012). The influence of transformational

.000 leadership and organizational commitment on job satisfaction
Transactional Leadership Style (F-Value)
and employee performance. International Journal of
Monthly Income and 4.905** Innovation, Management and Technology, 3(5), 566 - 572.
.000
Transactional Leadership Style (F-Value) 4. Voon, M. C. (2011). The influence of leadership styles on
Marital Status and Transactional 3.838** .000 employees’ job satisfaction in public sector organizations in
Leadership Style (t-value) Malaysia. International Journal of Business, Management and
**
Significant at 1 % level Social Sciences, 2(1), 24 - 32.

The t-value and F-values are explaining significant

difference exits in transactional leadership style in
Telangana state road transport corporation among socio-
demographics of employees at one cent level.
6.4. RELATION AMONG TRANSACTIONAL
LEADERSHIP STYLE AND JOB SATISFACTION OF
EMPLOYEES
The correlation analysis is carried out and the results are
given inTable-6.

Table-6.Relation among Transactional Leadership Style

and Job Satisfaction of Employees
Manage Manageme
Contingen ment-by- nt-by- Job
Particulars
t Reward Exceptio Exception Satisfaction
n (Active) (Passive)
Contingent
1.00
Reward
Management-
by-Exception 0.50** 1.00
(Active)
Management-
by-Exception 0.47** 0.48** 1.00
(Passive)
Job
0.64** 0.55** 0.52** 1.00
Satisfaction
**
Significant at 1 % level

The correlation coefficient among contingent rewards and

job satisfactions of employees is 0.64, which is positively
and highly associated with each other at one per cent level
of significance. The two parameters are positively and
moderately correlated with each other with the value of
0.55, which is significant at one per cent level.

7. CONCLUSION
Thus, Telangana state road transport corporation should
track mistakes of employees at all times carefully and
support them to avoid such mistakes in future and it must
take action if things are going wrong for improving their job
performance and satisfactions. It is recommended that
practicing transactional leadership style improves levels of
job satisfactions of employee in Telangana State Road
Transport Corporation

REFEERENCES
1. Northouse, P. G. (2015). Leadership: Theory and practice.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.
2. Stefano Ruggeri. (2013). Leadership style, self-sacrifice and
team identification. Social Behaviour and Personality,
41(7),1171 - 1178.

Published By:
Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering
Retrieval Number: A11960681S419/19©BEIESP 1054 & Sciences Publication