DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY AS A STRATEGIC TOOL

FOR MANAGEMENT EFFICIENCY

CASE STUDY (B.T.C INT’L, ROCK LEGACY AND
REHOBOTH SCHOOL OF EXCELLENCE)

FREDRICK DAVID NKEMKA

BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT

SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCES
INSTITUT SUPERIEUR BILINGUE LIBRE DU TOGO (IBLT)

2021/2022

1
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of Study

Management efficiency is prerequisite for the growth and development of a business; thus,

management efficiency is an organised way of running an organisation in a well-structured

manner in order to achieve the proposed target at a given period of time. Furthermore it

involves those steps taken towards gearing a business organisation to its desired level. In other

words, efficiency in management can also be said to be performing activities with minimum

wastage of resources which also refers the optimum utilization of resources to enable the

organisation make maximum profits. According to Spacey, (2018) "management efficiency is

the output a management team creates in relationship to the capital they direct and expenses

they incurred.

The above will aid the organisation to achieve its aim and objectives and also reduce the high

level of losses which can lead to liquidation or insolvency (excess liabilities over assets) or

unable to pay debts thereby leading to winding up.

From the above study let’s recast. Delegation of authority can improve efficiency by making

more employees accountable for their own work and activities, they will be less time spent in

monitoring and managing employees who are capable competent, furthermore your team

becomes capable to achieve high performance and results [Mehrotra (2021)]. According to

Williams, (2021) he said: "delegation of authority is a clear sign that you respect your

subordinate abilities and trust their discretion; in furtherance employees who feel trusted by

their bosses will put more commitment to the job which will thereby lead to job satisfaction.

From the above points this study aims to create awareness on the significance of delegation of

authority as a strategy for management efficiency. Furthermore in order to create a better

2
indicator introduction of leadership style will be used as variables because authority is

function of leadership, but if not properly delegated efficiency can never be achieved.

Based on the above arguments, this study examined the effects of Delegation of authority as a

strategic tool for management efficiency in three selected schools (B.T.C, Rock legacy and

Rehoboth School of excellence) using leadership style as a measuring tool.

1.2 Statement of Problem

In business organisations today it is difficult to assign task to subordinates because of

incompetency and nonchalant attitude portrayed by the employee towards the advancement of

the business. Another problem which can rise can be due to how the authority is delegated to

the subordinate; it can be through any of the leadership styles which are three in number, they

are as follows: authoritative, democratic and laissez faire. Lack of confidence can also be a

hindrance to delegation of authority. When they feel incapable and inferior they find it

difficult to handle tasks assigned to them. Unwillingness to take up the task assigned to them

by their superiors and lack of knowledge and skill of the type of task assigned can withhold

the free flow of authority from the superior to the subordinates. Another problem that may

arise is when different superiors assign different task to a particular subordinate which may

lead to confusion and can cause chaos between both managers.

In conclusion this study aims to examine how delegation of authority as a strategic tool can

influence management effectively.

1.3 Research Objectives

This study aims to investigate the effect of delegation of authority as a strategic tool for

management efficiency using the three selected schools as a case study.

The specific objectives are as follows:

3
 i. To examine the effect of authoritative leadership style on management efficiency

ii. To investigate the relationship between democratic leadership style and management

efficiency

iii. Find out the effect of laissez faire leadership style on management efficiency

1.4 ResearchQuestions

The relevant questions to this study are as follows:

i. What is the effect of authoritative leadership style on management efficiency?

ii. Is there any relationship between democratic leadership and management efficiency?

iii. Does laissez faire leadership style have effect on management efficiency?

1.5 ResearchHypothesis

H01: Autocraticleadership style does not have any significance on delegation of authority as a

tool for management efficiency.

HO2: Democratic style of leadership does not have significant relationship on management

efficiency

HO3: the laissez faire style of leadership does not significantly affect management efficiency

1.6 SignificanceofStudy

The findings from this study will enable these organisations (B.T.C, Rock legacy and

Rehoboth School of excellence) to discover the level of centralisation of authority and enable

them adopt a better way of delegating task, to recording high degree ofefficiency in

management and achieving the desired goals and objectives. It will aid the leaders of society

4
adopt a better way of delegating authority to their subordinates, researchers will also discover

the best way and the suitable leadership style to practice for management efficiency. This

study will also assist in achieving a high level of satisfaction for students, as also a reference

material for research.

1.7 Scope of the Study

This study examined delegation of authority as a strategic tool for management efficiency

using (B.T.C, Rock legacy and Rehoboth School of excellence); therefore the employees of the

above case study served as respondents.

1.8 Definition of Terms

i. Liquidation: this when a company sells its assets of a business as a process of

dissolving the business

ii. Insolvency: this is when the assets of a company are less than the liability. In other

words it is when the company is unable to pay its debts.

iii. Delegation: this is the organisation processes that enables the transfer of authority

from the superior to subordinate

iv. Prerequisite: something that seen as to be of necessity towards a particular thing.

v. Laissez faire:is a style of leadership that allows the subordinate to take decisions and

perform tasks the way he feels is right

vi. Democratic leadership style: this is when the superior and the subordinate reason

together on how task can be shared

vii. Autocratic style: this is when the superior imposes duties on subordinates.

5
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

Preamble

Delegation of authority is not a newly introduced factor in an organisation. It originated far

back in time, which enabled most superiors unveil the skills and abilities of most subordinates.

Even the Bible spoke about delegation of tasks in the book of Exodus; Moses delegated task

to some elders of the Israelites due to heavy burden on his shoulders. Our Lord Jesus Christ

delegated as well. Therefore delegation of authority is very vital for management efficiency

and the well – being of the superior; its aim is to ensure and enhance decentralisation.

2.1 Conceptual review

This section looks at views from different scholars based on their perception and research

relating to concepts of the study.

2.1.1 Management efficiency

Management efficiency is all about getting the most out of your resources. It means your

business or organisation is able to produce more with less money and less waste.

According to Spacey,( 2017); “it is how much output a business produces for a unit of input”.

In other words it is the level of results gotten at each little effort made by an organisation.

Furthermore, efficiency measures how well a business converts inputs such as capital, labour

and material into output like revenue, products and services.

In furtherance (2018); “it is as the output a management team creates relative to the capital

they direct and expenses they expend.”

According to Reinaldo Abrahante (2017) “it relates to input that goes into production (what is

spent to produce measured in man’s hour) to output (what is produced measured in number of

6
gadgets made). Given this, it is obvious that management will strive to produce or sell as

much as possible while working, spending as little as possible.

2.1.1.1 Importance of Management efficiency

According to Bruce Brown (2017), the following are the major importance of management

efficiency.

i. Profit: when a job is done efficiently, there is excellent resource management and

information flow, analysis, forecasting and strategic communications align with

organisation efforts and management is happy.

ii. Social position: when management is happy stakeholders are made happy by liaisons.

A manager that can successfully defend his or her actions with evidence of cost –

cutting or revenue – increasing is a manager that opens door for promotion.

2.1.2 Delegation of authority

A manager alone can’t perform all the tasks assigned to him. In order to meet the targets, the

manager should delegate authority. This delegation of authority means division of authority

and power downward to subordinates. Delegation of authority is all about entrusting someone

else to do part of your job. In other words it is the subdivision and sub allocation of powers to

the subordinates to achieve effective results.

According to Maxwell (2021) in an article written by [Mehrotra (2021)] “if you want to do

few things right, do them yourself; if you want to great things and make big impact, learn to

delegate. Furthermore in the same article; delegation of authority refers to the division of

labour and decision making responsibility to an individual that reports to a leader or manager.

It is the organisational process of a manager dividing their own work among all their people.
7
According to Al-Jammal, et al (2015), employees who are engaged in their work and

committed to their organizations give the organization crucial competitive advantages

including higher productivity and lower employee turnover. Thus, it is not surprising that

most of today’s organizations find ways to make the employee to be committed by delegating

some managerial authority to them. Due to the competitive nature of business activities which

could be traced to globalization, the task of carrying the burden of the business activities

cannot be done by the business owner(s) or managers alone. Therefore, there is need for some

responsibilities to be shifted or assigned to the employees who will reduce the workload and

pressure of the business owner(s) or managers.

Past studies such as Al- Jammal et al, (2015), Kombo. Obonyo, & Oloko (2014) Kiiza &

Picho (2014) etc have demonstrated that application of delegation of authority will help

employee effectiveness to be enhanced, managers will be able to maintain their job position

and preserve the process of facilitating business affairs, employees’ loyalty, and achieving

performance efficiency .And it serves as a way to help manager in alleviating the burden of

running the affairs of the business.

2.1.2.1Components of Delegated Authority

There are three central elements involved in the delegation of authority.

i. Authority: in the context of a company, authority is the power and right of an

individual to use and allocate their resources efficiently. This includes the ability to

make decisions and give orders to achieve the organisational objectives and goals.

ii. Responsibility: this refers to the specifics and scope of the individuals to complete the task

assigned to them. Responsibility without adequate authority can lead to:

i. Discontent

ii. Dissatisfaction
8
 iii. Conflicts

iv. Frustration for the individual

iii. Accountability: unlike authority and responsibility accountability cannot be delegated.

Rather, it is inherent in the bestowment of responsibility itself. Anyone who sets out to

accomplish a task and take on a job in a company becomes accountable for the

outcome of their efforts. Accountability, in short, means being answerable for the end

result.

2.1.2.2 Importance of delegation

i. It increases the organisations income and overall efficiency

ii. It optimizes the performance of the group

iii. It empowers your team, builds trust and motivates

iv. For leaders, it helps you learn how to identify who is best suited to tackle tasks or

project.

2.1.2.3 How to delegate?

There are several ways you can transfer responsibilities to employees depending on the needs

of your work place. They include:

i. Departmentalisation

ii. Project segmentation

iii. Decision making/ employee involvement

iv. Analysis

v. Administrative process

2.1.2.4 Effective delegation in management

i. Plan and prepare

9
 ii. Discuss the task to be delegated

iii. Identify the deadline for completion

iv. Outline the level of authority

v. Build in check points or progress reports

vi. Conduct a final debriefing

2.1.3 Relationship between Delegation of authority and Management efficiency

Delegation of authority can also improve efficiency by making more employees accountable

for their own work and activities. Less time and energy is spent on monitoring employees

who are capable and competent. Your team becomes more capable and able to achieve higher

performance as a result.

2.1.4 Leadership styles

Leadership style refers to a leader’s characteristic behaviour when directing, guiding and

managing group of people. Great leaders can inspire political movement and social change.

They motivate others to perform, create, and innovate. This styles where propounded by a

scholar named Kurt Lewin in (1939) with his group who carried their research to identify

different types of leadership styles. They are the three major styles practiced in organisations

today. They include: autocratic style (authoritarian leadership), democratic style (participative

leadership) and laissez faire style (delegative leadership).

In Lewin’s study, school children were assigned to one of the three groups with an

authoritarian, democratic or laissez faire leader. The children were then led in an arts and

crafts project while researchers observed the behaviour of children in response to the different

style of leadership.

10
In other words it is the way a managerial leader applies his influence in getting work done

through his subordinates in order to achieve the organisational objectives. The main attitude

or belief that influences leadership style is the perceived role of the manager versus the role of

the subordinates. It depends upon the of the manager whether he likes to work more of

colleague, facilitator and decision maker and on the other hand the response of the

subordinates would determine the particular style to be in application.

2.1.4.1 Types of leadership style

As discussed above we have three major types of leadership styles. They include:

a. Authoritarian leadership: this style of leadership provides clear expectation of

what need to be done, when it should be done and how it should be done. This style

focuses on both command by the leader and control of the followers. The leaders

involved make decision independently, with little or no input from the rest of the

group. This leaders are classic "do as I say" types. It allows leaders to make decisions

alone without the input of others. Typically these leaders are inexperienced with

leadership trust upon them in form of a new position or assignment that involves

people management. An autocratic leader is in fact, no leader, he is merely the

formal head of the organisation and is generally disliked by the people.

Types of Autocratic

a. Strict autocrat: he is the one who influences the actions to the subordinates by
frightening, criticizing and imposing penalties

b. Benevolent autocrat: though he possesses authority and power, he influences the

actions of the subordinates by encouragement, inspiration and guidance

11
 c. Incompetent autocrat: he is the one who hides his incompetence, lack of skill and
knowledge by being very harsh with subordinates.

Benefits:

a. Faster decision making: this can be beneficial in some cases, such as when

decisions need to be made quickly without consulting with a large group of people.

Consequences

a. No role in decision making

b. Exploitation of employees

c. No opportunity for creativity

d. Frustration

e. Slavery attitude

b. Participative leadership: this style of leadership is typically the most effective style.

In this system leaders guide their members, but they also participate in the group and

allow input from other group members. The leaders allow members to participate in

decision making but have the final say at the end. In this system as well group

members feel motivated and creative. This approach values the perspective and

interest of individual group members while also contributing to team growth. It also

helps the employee feel more invested in decision outcomes and more committed to

the choices because they have a say in them.

Benefits:

12
 a. Creative urge

b. Improved morale

c. Nurturing leadership skill

d. Reduced resistance to change

e. Group members feel more involved

Consequences:

a. Delayed decision making

b. Indiscipline

c. Exploitation of employees

d. No accountability possible

c. Delegative leadership: in this system of leadership the members are left and not
supervised. They tend to do what they feel is right. Moreover in this style of leadership

they tend to deliver higher results, because workers tend to feel less concerned at times

which will lead to inefficiency. This style creates self confidence in the subordinates

and provides them an opportunity to develop their talents.

Benefits:

a. Morale and job satisfaction are increased to some extent

b. The talents of the followers is properly utilized

c. Opportunities to develop talent are increased

d. Leaders remain open to group members for consultation and feedback

Consequences:

13
 a. The leader does not care to motivate the members

b. The contribution of the leader is nothing

c. Leaders does not support the followers

d. No guidance is available to the former.

2.1.5 The Effect Leadership Style on Delegation of Authority as a Tool for Management

Efficiency

Delegation is the transfer of power by one body or person to another to act for him. It

empowers that other person to perform a task on behalf of the donor of the power (Nwagbara

2015). Thus, it is one of the modern trends that managers employed (Al-jammal et al, 2015) to

lighten the organizational burden of tasks and functions. Hashim, Ahmed and

Jaradat (2013) posited that delegation of authority makes an employee to feel valuable as part

of the organization and want to be effective in carrying out the authority confer on him. Thus,

employees will try to justify the authority delegated to them by showing positive attitude in

performing the tasks and functions via effective utilization of the available resources in the

organization. Kombo et al, (2014) opined that delegation of authority improves performance

in an organization. Hence,employee performance in this study is seen as the effectiveness of

employees in SMEs in performing the tasks and functions expected from them. Effectiveness

can be said to be the driving force behind organizations growth and profitability. Employee

effectiveness is the relationship between outputs of goods and services of employees and

input of resources employed in the production process (Anyadike, 2013). Employee

effectiveness is as the result of effective utilization of organizational resources. Employee

effectiveness is seen as the competency measured in terms of ability to handle the assigned

14
workload, completing the work in time with minimal errors, and ability to work largely

unsupervised; productivity measured in terms of time utilization.

Leadership style plays a vital role in delegating tasks to subordinates. Its effect is based on the

type of task to be delegated and the type of staff in the organisation. Looking at the previous

arguments on the three leadership styles, authoritative style of leadership is when the superior

uses commands on the subordinates, democratic style is when the subordinates are consulted

before tasks and decisions will be passed while in laissez faire the staffs are left to take

decisions on their own. Furthermore, leadership style can both have positive and negative

impact on management based on the structure of the organisation and the nature of the task

delegated.

2.2 Theoretical review

In this study we are going to be looking at different theories and quotes by scholars.

Management is the most important and essential body in a business organisation or it can be

said to be how an organisation is operated in order to achieve her aims and objectives. Here

are some theories highlighted for this study.

2.2.1 The Contingency Management Theory

This theory proposes that there are many external and internal constraints that alter what is the

best way to manage organisations in a given situation. In other words, it all depends on the

situation at hand as to what will be the best course of action for organisation.

The contingency management theory is an organisational theory that claims that there is no

best way to organise a corporation, to lead a company, or to make decision. Instead, the

15
optimal course of action is contingent (dependent) on the internal and external situation. Also

it states that leaders will be able to exert more influence if they are able to have good

relationships with employees.

2.2.2 Participative theory: this isn’t common in the corporate world. It is sometimes called

democratic leadership, and it suggests that employees be directly involved in decision making

in their organisation. It was traced in the academic literature to the post world war II writing

of the scholars, such as Kurt Lewin, Douglas McGregor, Chris Argyris, H. Igor Ansoff and

Michael Porter (Kaufma, 2001). It is a classical Hawthorne experiment of 1930’s. The

experiment represents that when a small group of workers feel their work environment is

supportive, gain more satisfaction and work better. Participative style is what employers use

as an attempt to satisfy employees and increase productivity (Yohe 2003).

2.2.3 The Communicative Theory

Communicative theory gives subordinate to exercise the freedom to think. From this theory,

delegation of authority as a form of empowerment is seen as a process through which a leader

or a manager tries to divide his or her power among subordinates. This theory sees

empowerment as the process of sharing power and authority among the personnel in

organizations which embodies authorization. The communicative theory explains that

empowerment via delegation of authority is a tool for giving freedom to employees so that

they can do what they think, without fear of being prevented by the managers. This theory

focuses on decentralization of powers in an organization. If powers are effectively

decentralized, it will enhance effective communication with the organization. According to

this theory, when power is being given to subordinate, such subordinates will possess the

required confident to be creative and discharge his duties efficiently and effectively.

16
NB: If you are an aspiring business leader attending school, it’s important to understand

leadership theories and how they impact you and your leadership styles.

According to Peter Drucker, management consultant once said: "efficiency is doing things

right; effectiveness is doing the right things." (Feb. 18, 2016). Furthermore he believed that

managers should, above all else, be leaders. Rather than setting strict hours and discouraging

innovation, he opted for a more flexible, collaborate approach. He placed high importance of

decentralization, knowledge work, and management by objectives (MBO) and a process

called SMART. (Mar. 15, 2018). From the above statement, the scholar was referring to

morals and ethics in business. Where morals serve as doing things right and ethics is doing the

right thing.

2.3 Empirical Review

In this study we are going to examine an already made similar work and findings by a

researcher relating to this field of study, using it as guideline for this study.

Joiner, et al.(2016) conducted a study on delegation, job satisfaction and subordinate

performance: The mediating effect of leader-member exchange. They adopted survey research

design where 260 questionnaires were administered to the Chinese subordinates working in

Hong Kong Transport Company. The path analysis of the regression results indicated that

delegation of authority is positively related with leader-member exchange (LMX) relationship.

Kiiza & Picho (2014) investigated an empirical study on delegation and staff commitment in

the School of Finance and Banking in Kigali, Rwanda: An Empirical Study. A cross-sectional

survey design was employed with sample size of 97. Stratified sampling and random

17
sampling were used as sampling techniques. Descriptive analysis and Pearson Product

Moment

Correlation Coefficient was the two adopted method of data analysis to analysis the data

obtained from the respondents. The results indicated that staff commitment is positively

correlated with delegation of authority

Al-Jamma et al (2015) examined the impact of the delegation of authority on employees’

performance at great Irbid municipality. They measured employee performance via efficiency,

effectiveness and empowerment. And the data obtained were analysed via mean, standard

deviation and T-test statistic. Their findings indicated that efficiency, effectiveness as well as

empowerment of employees are statistically significant to delegation of authority in Irbid

municipality

Effects of delegation on employee performance in savings and credit cooperative societies in

Kisii County, Kenya were investigated by Kombo, et al, (2014). T-test statistics, mean and

percentage were employed to analysis their data. And the result revealed that effective

delegation of authority in organization improves employee performance and organizational

performance at large

The study of Shekari, Naieh, & Nouri (2011) investigated relationship between delegation

authority process and rate of effectiveness: case study municipality regions of Mashhad.

Delegation of authority was measured by preparation, appreciation stage and effectiveness.

Correlation analysis was employed as method of data analysis. Findings of their studyshowed

that there is a significant relationship between delegation authority process, and rate of

effectiveness. And appreciation and preparation stage have greater effecton rate of

effectiveness.

Summarily, one would see that delegation of authority in those studies reviewed have positive

relationship with the employees’ performance. The extent this is so in SMEs in Lagos

18
State is the bone of contention in this study

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

19
3.1 Research design

The research design for this study is descriptive in nature because it explains the effects of

Delegation of authority as a strategic tool for management efficiency.

3.2 Population of the study

The population of the study comprised all employees in the three selected schools, based on

the information obtained from the selected organization; the population of the study is 120.

3.3 Study area

The three selected schools are located in the heart of Togo. It was established in the year 1999,

2009 and 2020 respectively. They are located at Hedzranawoe Lome. It was the vision of Mr.

Prince O. Uche, Mrs. Ijeagu Agbai and Mrs Gift Omile to give birth to B.T.C, Rehoboth and

Rock Legacy schools as an avenue for academic success and to train global giants who will

conquer their world. All through these years they have managed to secure a NECO Centre for

JSS promotional exams to SS department.

3.4 Sampling size and technique

Based on the population of the study, the sample size is determined through Krejcie and

Morgan, (1970) sample size determination at 95% confidence level and 0.5% rate of error.

Thus, the sample size for this study will be 92

The sampling technique for this study was purposive which was used to select the location of

the study while convenience was used in selecting the respondents.

3.5 Instrument of data collection

20
The method of data collection for this study is questionnaire which will be personally

developed by the researcher.

3.6 Validity and reliability of instrument

The questionnaire actually measures what it intends to measure; therefore the questionnaire

formulated for this study is valid. The items in the questionnaire are above 0.7; thus, they are

reliable.

3.7 Method of administering instrument

Since the questionnaire was developed by the researcher, he will go to the study area to

administer the instrument in order to enable valid response from respondents

3.8 Method of data analysis

Data collected from the study will be analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Also

hypothesis will be tested using regression and correlation analysis.

3.9 Ethical consideration

During this study, information obtained was strictly kept and used solely for academic

purpose; and respondents were employed based on availability and willingness.

CHAPTER FOUR

DATA ANALYSIS, PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION

21
 In this chapter, effort was made to present and analyze the facts gathered from the

respondents. The data presentation and description were guided by the research questions,

which were first stated, after which the data collected with regard to each of the questions

were descriptively analysed in a tabular format. Ninety (90) questionnaires were distributed to

the respondents but eighty (80) questionnaires were returned. These questionnaires were filled

and returned were used for the analysis of this study.

4.1 Socio-Demographic Characteristic of Respondents

Sex
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Male 35 43.8 43.8 43.8
Valid Female 45 56.3 56.3 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

Table above showed that according to sex, 35 representing (43.8%) of the respondents were

male while 45 representing (56.3%) were female. Analyses revealed that majority of the

respondents were female with 45 (56.3%).

Age
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
20 – 30 40 50.0 50.0 50.0
31 – 40 25 31.3 31.3 81.3
Valid
41 and above 15 18.8 18.8 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

Table above showed that according to age, 40 representing (50.0%) of the respondents were

between the ages of 20-30 years, 25 representing (31.3%) were between the ages of 31-40

years and 15 representing (18.8%) were 41 years and above. Analyses revealed that majority

of the respondents were between the ages of 20-30 with 40 (50.0%).

Marital Status
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent

22
 Single 60 75.0 75.0 75.0
Valid Married 20 25.0 25.0 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

Report on marital status proved that 60 representing (75%) of the respondents were single

while 20 representing (25.0%) of the respondents were married. Analyses revealed that

majority of the respondents were single with 60 (75.0%).

Academic Qualifications
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
NCE/OND 20 25.0 25.0 25.0
HND/ B.Sc. 45 56.3 56.3 81.3
Post graduate/ Masters 5 6.3 6.3 87.5
Valid
Other professional
10 12.5 12.5 100.0
qualification
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

Analyses from academic qualification showed that 20 representing (25.0%) of the respondents

were holders of SSCE, NCE and OND certificates, 45 representing (56.3%) of the

respondents were HND and B.Sc certificate holders, 5 representing (6.3%) of the respondents

were holders of post graduate certificates and 10 representing (12.5%) of the respondents

were holders of other professional certificates. Finding revealed that majority of the

respondents were holders of HND/B.Sc certificates with 45 (56.3%).

Department
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Administrative 10 12.5 12.5 12.5
Teaching staff 65 81.3 81.3 93.8
Valid
Non-teaching staff 5 6.3 6.3 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

23
Report on Department showed that 10 representing (12.5&) of the respondents were

administrative staff, 65 representing (81.3%) of the respondents were teaching staff and 5

representing (6.3%) of the respondents were non-teaching staff. Finding revealed that

majority of the respondents were teaching staff with 65 (81.3%).

Level of Staff
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Junior Staff 40 50.0 50.0 50.0
Middle level Staff 27 33.8 33.8 83.8
Valid Senior Staff 10 12.5 12.5 96.3
Management Staff 3 3.8 3.8 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

Analyses from level of staff showed that 40 representing (50.0%) of the respondents were

junior staff, 27 representing (33.8%) of the respondents were middle level staff, 10

representing (12.5%) of the respondents were senior staff and 3 representing (3.8%) of the

respondents were management staff. Analyses showed that majority of the respondents were

junior staff with 40 (50.0%).

Length of Service
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Less than 2 years 10 12.5 12.5 12.5
3 – 5 years 35 43.8 43.8 56.3
Valid 6 – 10 years 25 31.3 31.3 87.5
11 years and above 10 12.5 12.5 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

24
Report on length of service showed that 10 representing (12.5%) of the respondents have

spent less than 2 years in their respective schools, 35 representing (43.8%) of the respondents

have spent between 3-5 years, 25 representing (31.3%) of the respondents have spent 6-10

years and 10 representing (12.5%) of the respondents have spent 11 years and above in their

various schools. Analyses revealed that majority of the respondents have spent between 3-5

years in their schools with 35 (43.8%).

4.2: Data Presentation and Interpretation

4.2.1: Research Question One:What is the effect of authoritative leadership style on

management efficiency?

Strict environment comports staff’s attitude and decreases nonchalant behaviour

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Neutral 15 18.8 18.8 18.8
Agree 5 6.3 6.3 25.0
Valid
Strongly Agree 60 75.0 75.0 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

Responses gathered showed that 15 representing (18.8%) of the respondents were neutral in

responding to if strict environment comports staff’s attitude and decreases nonchalant

behaviour, 5 representing (6.3%) of the respondents agree and 60 representing (75.0%) of the

respondents strongly agree that strict environment comports staff’s attitude and decreases

nonchalant behaviour. Finding revealed that majority of the respondents were of the view that

strict environment comports staff’s attitude and decreases nonchalant behaviour with 60

(75.0%).

I would be very happy to work under a very strict boss

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Disagree 60 75.0 75.0 75.0
Neutral 5 6.3 6.3 81.3
Valid
Agree 15 18.8 18.8 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)
25
Report from the above table revealed that 60 representing (75.0%) of the respondents declined

and disagree to work under a strict boss, 5 representing (6.3%) were neutral and 15

respondents representing (18.8%) agreed. Finding revealed that majority of the respondents

disagreed to work with a strict boss with 60 (74.0%).

Working under strict conditions make a better performer

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Neutral 5 6.3 6.3 6.3
Valid Strongly Agree 75 93.8 93.8 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

Result from the table above showed that 5 representing (6.3%) of the respondents were

neutral that working under strict conditions makes them better performers while 75

representing (93.8%) of the respondents. Finding revealed that majority of the respondents

claimed that working under strict conditions make a better performer with 75 (93.8%).

Centralising authority is prerequisite for management efficiency

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Strongly Disagree 50 62.5 62.5 62.5
Disagree 20 25.0 25.0 87.5
Valid
Agree 10 12.5 12.5 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

Result from the table above showed that 50 representing (62.5%) of the respondents strongly

disagreed that centralising authority is prerequisite for management efficiency, 20

representing (25.0%) of the respondents also disagree and 10 respondents representing (12.5%)

of the respondents agreed. Finding revealed that majority of the respondents strongly

disagreed that centralising authority is prerequisite for management efficiency is a

prerequisite for management efficiency with 50 (62.5%).

26
 Solid decisions are made and implemented under strict working environment
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Disagree 30 37.5 37.5 37.5
Neutral 15 18.8 18.8 56.3
Valid Agree 10 12.5 12.5 68.8
Strongly Agree 25 31.3 31.3 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

Result from the above table showed that 30 representing (37.3%) disagreed that solid

decisions are made and implemented under strict working environment, 15 representing

(18.8%) of the respondents were neutral, 10 representing (12.5%) of the respondents agreed

and 25 representing (31.3%) of the respondents strongly agreed. Finding revealed that

majority of the respondents disagreed that solid decisions are made and implemented under

strict working environment with 30 (37.5%).

4.2.2: Is there any relationship between democratic leadership and management efficiency?

Participative environment boosts subordinate’s morale

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Agree 20 25.0 25.0 25.0
Valid Strongly Agree 60 75.0 75.0 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

Result from the table above showed that 20 representing (25.0%) of the respondents agreed

that participative environment boosts subordinates morale and 60 representing (75.0%) of the

respondents strongly agreed too. Finding revealed that majority of the respondents strongly

agreed that participative environment boosts subordinates morale with 60 (75.0%).

27
 I feel is necessary to be part of decision makers in an organisation
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Strongly Disagree 16 20.0 20.0 20.0
Disagree 25 31.3 31.3 51.3
Neutral 5 6.3 6.3 57.5
Valid
Agree 29 36.3 36.3 93.8
Strongly Agree 5 6.3 6.3 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

Result from the table above showed that 16 representing (20.0%) of the respondents strongly

disagreed that they feel it is necessary to be part of decision makers in an organisation, 25

representing (31.3%) of the respondents also disagree, 5 representing (6.3%) of the

respondents were neutral, 29 representing (36.3%) of the respondents agreed and 5

representing (6.3%) of the respondents strongly agree. Finding revealed that majority of the

respondents agreed that they feel it is necessary to be a part of decision makes in the

organisation with 25 (31.3%).

Democratic leadership style encourages relationship between staff and superiors

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Valid Strongly Agree 80 100.0 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

Result from the above table revealed that all the respondents agreed that democratic

leadership style encourages relationship between staff and superiors. Finding revealed that all

respondents strongly agreed that democratic leadership style encourages relationship between

staff and superiors with 80 (100.0%).

Decentralising authority is prerequisite for management efficiency

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Agree 20 25.0 25.0 25.0
Valid Strongly Agree 60 75.0 75.0 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

28
Result from the above table revealed that 20 representing (25.0%) of the respondents agreed

that decentralising authority is prerequisite for management efficiency and 60 representing

(75.0%) of the respondents strongly agreed. Finding revealed that majority of the respondents

strongly agreed that decentralising authority is prerequisite for management efficiency with

60 (75.0%).

Participative environment promotes job performance leading to efficient

management
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Agree 30 37.5 37.5 37.5
Valid Strongly Agree 50 62.5 62.5 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

Result from the above table revealed that 30 representing (37.5%) of the respondents agreed

that participative environment promotes job performance leading to efficient management and

50 representing (62.5%) of the respondents strongly agreed. Finding revealed that majority of

the respondents strongly agreed that participative environment promotes job performance

leading to efficient management with 50 (62.5%).

4.2.3: Does laissez faire leadership style have effect on management efficiency?

A less concerned boss can promote efficiency in management

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Strongly Disagree 75 93.8 93.8 93.8
Valid Disagree 5 6.3 6.3 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

Result from the above table revealed that 75 representing (93.8%) of the respondents

disagreed that a less concerned boss can promote efficiency in management and 5

representing (6.3%) of the respondents alsodisagreed. Finding revealed that majority of the

respondents strongly disagreed that a less concerned boss can promote efficiency in

management with 75 (93.8%).

29
 Taking decisions on my own as a staff has positive impact on management
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Strongly Disagree 49 61.3 61.3 61.3
Disagree 11 13.8 13.8 75.0
Valid
Agree 20 25.0 25.0 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

Result from the above table revealed that 49 representing (61.3%) of the respondents strongly

disagreed that taking decisions on their own as a staff has positive impact on management,11

representing (13.8%) of the respondents also disagreed and 20 representing (25.0%) of the

respondents agreed. Finding revealed that majority of the respondents strongly disagreed that

taking decisions on their own as a staff has positive impact on management with 49 (61.3%).

Laissez faire style should be practiced in our era to promote efficiency in management
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Strongly Disagree 75 93.8 93.8 93.8
Valid Disagree 5 6.3 6.3 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

Result from the table above revealed that 75 representing (93.8%) of the respondents strongly

disagreed that laissez faire style should be practiced in our era to promote efficiency in

management and 5 representing (6.3%) of the respondents also disagreed. Finding revealed

that majority of the respondents were of the opinion that laissez faire style should be practiced

in our era to promote efficiency in management with 75 (93.8%).

Unsupervised tasks can lead to efficiency in management.

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Strongly Disagree 78 97.5 97.5 97.5
Valid Disagree 2 2.5 2.5 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

30
Result from the table above revealed that 78 representing (97.5%) of the respondents strongly

disagreed that unsupervised tasks can lead to efficiency in management and 2 representing

(2.5%) of the respondents also disagreed. Finding revealed that majority of the respondents

were of the opinion that unsupervised tasks can lead to efficiency in management with 78

(97.5%).

This style of leadership helps to raise prospect managers thereby leading to efficiency
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent
Strongly Disagree 50 62.5 62.5 62.5
Valid Disagree 30 37.5 37.5 100.0
Total 80 100.0 100.0
Source: Field Work, (2022)

Result from the table above revealed that 50 representing (62.5%) of the respondents strongly

disagreed that leissez faire style of leadership helps to raise prospect managers thereby

leading to efficiency and 30 representing (37.5%) of the respondents also disagreed. Finding

revealed that majority of the respondents were of the opinion that leissez style of leadership

cannot helps to raise prospect managers thereby leading to efficiency with 50 (62.5%).

4.3 Testing of Hypotheses with Correlation and Regression Techniques

4.3.1 Hypothesis One

H01: Autocratic leadership style does not have any significance on delegation of authority as

a tool for management efficiency.

4.3.1: Model Summary of regression analysis on the Effect of Autocratic leadership Style on
Managerial Efficiency.
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
1 .393 a
.154 .143 .734
a. Predictors: (Constant), Autocratic Leadership Style

The above table reflected that there is a connection at R= .393 between autocratic leadership

style and managerial efficiency. Report from the above table disclosed that R square =.328;

which insinuated and suggested that autocratic leadership style only account for 39.9%

31
variations in managerial efficiency. Consequently, autocratic leadership style has positive but

very weak significant effect on delegation of authority as a tool for management efficiency.

Table 4.3.2: ANOVA of Regression Analysis on the Effect of Autocratic Leadership Style on
delegation of Authority
Model Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares
Regression 7.656 1 7.656 14.208 .000b
1 Residual 42.031 78 .539
Total 49.688 79
a. Dependent Variable: Delegation of Authority
b. Predictors: (Constant), Autocratic Leadership Style

Table 4.3.2 exposed that the F-value is the Mean Square Regression (7.656) divided by the

Mean Square Residual (42.031), yielding F=14.208. The model in this table displayed that the

independent variable which is autocratic leadership style is statistically significant at (Sig

=.000) and has positive but a very weak effect on delegation of authority as a tool for

managerial efficiency.

Table 4.3.3: Coefficients of regression analysis on the effect of Autocratic Leadership Style
on delegation of Authority
Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized t Sig.
Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) 1.906 .192 9.904 .000
1
Autocratic B .437 .116 .393 3.769 .000

32
 a. Dependent Variable: Delegation of Authority

Tables 4.3.1, 4.3.2 and 4.3.3 presented the result of the linear regression that was calculated

in predicting autocratic leadership style based on delegation of authorityas a component of

managerial efficiency. The table revealedthat a significant regression coefficient was found (F

(14.208.) = 9.904, p=.000), with R2of 154. This presumes that 15.4% variation in delegation

of authority was as a result of autocratic leadership style.

Evidence in table 4.3.3, also is the beta value under the standardized coefficients which

showed that autocratic leadership style equivalently contributes to the change in the

dependent variable (delegation of authority) (β=.393, p=.000). Therefore, the null hypothesis

was rejected because results displayed that, autocratic leadership style significantly has an

effect on delegation of authority which is an indicator for managerial efficiency but this effect

is very weak.

4.3.2: Hypothesis Two

H02: Democratic style of leadership does not have significant relationship on management

efficiency.

Table 4.3.4: Correlation analysis on the Relationship between Democratic style of leadership
and management efficiency
Democratic Managerial Efficiency
Leadership Style
Pearson Correlation 1 .745**
Democratic
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Leadership
N 80 80
Pearson Correlation .745 **
1
Managerial
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Efficiency
N 80 80
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

33
The above correlation table reflected that there exists a very strong, positive and significant

nexus between Democratic style of leadershipand managerial efficiency with (r=0.745, p-

value<0.05). This indicated and inferred that a significant association and connection exists

between democratic leadership style and managerial efficiency. Therefore, the null

hypothesis was rejected because results communicated that democratic leadership style has a

significant relationship with delegation of authority which is an indicator of managerial

efficiency.

H03: the laissez faire style of leadership does not significantly affect management efficiency

4.3.3: Hypothesis Three

4.3.5:Model Summary of regression analysis on the Effect of Autocratic leadership Style on

Managerial Efficiency
Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate
1 .745a .556 .550 .327
a. Predictors: (Constant), Leissez Faire

The above table reflected that there is a connection at R= .745 between autocratic leadership

style and managerial efficiency. Report from the above table disclosed that R square =.556;

which insinuated and suggested that leissez faire leadership style only account for 55.6%

variations in managerial efficiency. Consequently, leissez faire leadership style has positive

but moderate significant effect on delegation of authority as a tool for management efficiency.

Table 4.3.5: ANOVA of Regression Analysis on the Effect of Leissez Leadership

Style on delegation of Authority
Model Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares
Regression 10.417 1 10.417 97.500 .000b
1 Residual 8.333 78 .107
Total 18.750 79
a. Dependent Variable: Managerial Efficiency
b. Predictors: (Constant), Leissez Faire Leadership Style

Table 4.3.5 exposed that the F-value is the Mean Square Regression (10.417) divided by the

Mean Square Residual (97.500), yielding F=10.417. The model in this table displayed that the

independent variable which is leissez faire leadership style is statistically significant at (Sig
34
=.000) and has positive but a very weak effect on delegation of authority as a tool for

managerial efficiency.

Table 4.3.6: Coefficients of regression analysis on the effect of Leissez Faire Leadership
Style on delegation of Authority
Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized t Sig.
Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) .167 .152 1.095 .000
1
A .833 .084 .745 9.874 .000
a. Dependent Variable: Managerial Efficiency

Tables 4.3.4, 4.3.5 and 4.3.6 presented the result of the linear regression that was calculated in

predicting autocratic leadership style based on delegation of authority as a component of

managerial efficiency. The table revealed that a significant regression coefficient was found

(F (14.208.) = 9.904, p=.000), with R2 of 556. This presumes that 55.6% variation in

delegation of authority was as a result of leissez faire leadership style.

Evidence in table 4.3.6, also is the beta value under the standardized coefficients which

showed that leissez faire leadership style equivalently contributes to the change in the

dependent variable (delegation of authority) (β=.393, p=.000). Therefore, the null hypothesis

was rejected because results displayed that, leissez faire leadership style significantly has an

effect on delegation of authority which is an indicator for managerial efficiency but this effect

is moderate.

4.4 Discussion of Findings

This study assessed leadership styles on delegation of authority. The first hypothesis stated

that autocratic leadership styles affect managerial efficiency but this effect is very weak. The

second hypothesis revealed that democratic leadership style has a positive and strong

significant relationship on managerial efficiency. The last hypothesis stated that laissez-faire

leadership style has significant effect on managerial efficiency but on a moderate level.

35
Finding from this study revealed that among the leadership styles, the democratic style of

leadership is the most potent and effective for ensuring managerial efficiency.

36
 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Preamble
Delegation of authority is prerequisite for efficiency in managerial aspect, thus leading to
efficiency. Every organization always has the intention of achieving their set objectives and
maximizing profits and wealth of their shareholders. Therefore the need to share task from
superior to subordinates are very essential.

5.2 Summary and findings

1. The researcher helps to discover the best way do delegate tasks from superior to
subordinate
2. The findings enabled the researcher to understand the best working environment for
subordinates
3. The findings enabled the researcher to know, if working under centralized authority
can bring about positive effect on efficiency
4. The researcher findings helps to unveil the effect of decentralized authority in
management efficiency
5. The findings from this research unveiled the best style of leadership that must be
practiced for efficiency in management
6. The finds showed that the three leadership style are to be adopted but to an extent;
apart from the democratic leadership style which has a very strong significance on
managerial efficiency

5.2.1 Discussion

This study assessed leadership styles on delegation of authority. The first hypothesis stated

that autocratic leadership styles affect managerial efficiency but this effect is very weak. The

second hypothesis revealed that democratic leadership style has a positive and strong

significant relationship on managerial efficiency. The last hypothesis stated that laissez-faire

leadership style has significant effect on managerial efficiency but on a moderate level.

Finding from this study revealed that among the leadership styles, the democratic style of

leadership is the most potent and effective for ensuring managerial efficiency.

37
5.3 Conclusion

This study investigated how tasks or authority can be delegated using the three style of

leadership; autocratic, democratic and laissez faire style of leadership. The study evaluated

the each objectives factor and established how tasks should be delegated. Thus from the

findings democratic style of leadership is a prerequisite for management efficiency, because

most subordinates or staff have what it takes to contribute to the well – being of the

organisation. Moreover two good heads are better than one; one idea from a subordinate can

push the organisation to achieving their goals and objectives.

5.4 Recommendation

Below are some recommendations which will go a long way in managing an organisation

efficiently and effectively enabling them meet their set target:

1. Managers need to adopt democratic style of leadership which will pave way for ideas

from staffs.

2. Managers need to make working environment strict to avoid nonchalant attitude from

subordinate

3. Managers need to know the style of leadership that suits every working environment

4. Opinions from staffs need to be taken and evaluated by the management

38
Reference

Ali, R. &Moussawi, S (2001). Functions contemporary management panoramic overview.

Amman: Warraq Foundation Publishing Spacey (2017) management efficiency

Al-Jammal, I., Al-Khasawneh, J.A & Hamadat, A.M (2015). The impact of the delegation

of authority on employees’ performance at great IRBID municipality: Case study.

International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 5(3), 61-72

Al-Sheikh, S., Makhamreh, M., Al-Dahan, O & Ramadan, Z (2009). Modern management

concepts, (9th ed.). Amman: Jordan Books Center,

Anyadike, N. O (2013). Human resource planning and employee productivity in Nigerian

public organization.Global Journal of Human Resource Management, 1(4), 56-68,

Bruce Brown (2017) management efficiency and delegation of authority

Dessler, G (2006). Management principles and practices for tomorrow’s leaders. Florida

International University: Prentice Hall

Hashim, T., Ahmed, A & Jaradat, N (2013). The impact of structural empowerment in

achieving psychological empowerment in the Jordanian public organizations. Journal of

Hebron University for Research, 8(1), 44-56.

John Spacey (2018) managementefficiencyand its examples

Joiner, T.A., Bakalis, S & Choy, J (2016). Delegation, job satisfaction and subordinate

performance: The mediatingeffect of leader-member exchange.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2683434

Kaufma (2001)

Kiiza, P & Picho, E.O (2015). Delegation and staff commitment in the school of finance and

banking in Kigali,

Rwanda: An empirical study. Global Journal of Commerce and Management Perspective,

4(3), 50-54

39
Kombo, B.W., Obonyo, G. O & Oloko, M (2014).Effects of delegation on employee

performance in savings and credit cooperative societies in Kisii County, Kenya. The

International Journal of Business and Management, 2(7), 22-31

Koontz, H., O Donnell, C. & Weihrich, H (1983). Management (7th ed.). New York:

McGraw-Hill Inc.

Krejcie and Morgan (1970) sampling size and techniques

Kurt Lewin (1939) leadership style

Peter Drucker (Feb. 18, 2016, March, 15 2018)

Maxwell (2021) 6 steps of delegation of authority

Mehrotra (2021) delegation of authority and how to delegate

Nwagbara (2015)

Reinaldo Abrahante (2017) management efficiency

Williams (2021) delegation of authority and how to delegate

Yohe (2003)

40
 APPENDIX

INSTITUT SUPERIEURE BILINGUE LIBRE DU TOGO

SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT

Dear Respondent,

I am an undergraduate student in the Department of Business Administration and

Management, Institut Superieur Bilingue Libre du Togo. I am required to conduct a research
on the topic: "Delegation of Authority as a strategic tool for Management Efficiency with
respect to the three selected schools, Hedzranawoe Lome, Togo." This is in partial
fulfilment of the award of B.Sc. in Business Administration and Management.

You are hereby required to be as objective as possible in ticking the right answers to the
questions asked.

Thanks in anticipation of your favourable response.

Yours faithfully

Researcher: Fredrick David Nkemka

IBLT990371/BScBUSAD2019

SECTION A

INSTRUCTION:

Please answer all the questions honestly and exhaustively by putting a tick (√) or numbers in
the appropriate box that closely matches your view or alternatively writing in the space
provided where necessary.

SOCIO DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF RESPONDENTS

1 Sex Male [ ]
Female [ ]
2 Age 20 – 30 [ ]
31 – 40 [ ]
41 and above [ ]
3 Marital status Single [ ]
Married [ ]
Divorced [ ]
Widowed [ ]
4 Qualification NCE/OND [ ]
HND/ B.Sc. [ ]
Post graduate/ Masters [ ]

41
 Other professional [ ]
qualification
5 Department Administrative [ ]
Teaching staff [ ]
Non-teaching staff [ ]
6 Religion Christian [ ]
Islam [ ]
Others [ ]
7 Level of staff Junior level [ ]
Middle level [ ]
Senior level [ ]
Management level [ ]
8 Length of service Less than 2 years [ ]
3 – 5 years [ ]
6 – 10 years [ ]
11 years and above [ ]
9 School Name B.T.C [ ]
Rehoboth [ ]
Rock Legacy [ ]

SECTION B

Research Question One: What is the effect of authoritative leadership style on management
efficiency?

S/N STATEMENTS SD D N A SA
1 Strict environment comports staff’s attitude and
decreases nonchalant behaviour
2 I would be very happy to work under a very strict boss
3 Working under strict conditions make a better
performer
4 Centralising authority is prerequisite for management
efficiency
5 Solid decisions are made and implemented under strict
working environment
Research Question Two: Is there any relationship between democratic leadership and

S/N STATEMENTS SD D N A SA
6 Participative environment boosts subordinate’s morale
7 I feel is necessary to be part of decision makers in an
organisation
8 Democratic leadership style encourages relationship
between staff and superiors
9 Decentralising authority is prerequisite for
management efficiency
10 Participative environment promotes job performance
leading to efficient management
management efficiency?

42
Research Question Three: Does laissez faire leadership style have effect on management
efficiency?

S/N STATEMENTS SD D N A SA
11 A less concerned boss can promote efficiency in
management
12 Taking decisions on my own as a staff has positive
impact on management
13 Laissez faire leadership style has a positive effect on
efficiency
14 Unsupervised tasks can lead to efficiency in
management.
15 This style of leadership helps to raise prospect
managers thereby leading to efficiency

43