Anatomy of Leadership Styles in Public Tertiary Institutions in

Nigeria

MOHAMMED, Mubashiru Olayiwola (PhD)1

Phone Number: +2348033344750
Email:mubashiru.mohammed@lasu.edu.ng

SHITTU, Taofeek Olawale (PhD)2

Phone Number: +2348026297217
Email: fekkyranky@gmail.com

And

LAWAL, Shakirudeen Idowu3

Phone Number: +2348033096618
Email: lawallogistics59@gmail.com

Department of Educational Management, Lagos State University, Lagos, Nigeria 1,2&3

Abstract

This study examined leadership styles in public tertiary institutions in Nigeria. Leadership is an
essential element in any human organization. As management is the heart of formal
organizations, leadership is the soul of management. Every successful organization depends on
effective leadership. This study explored 20 leadership styles in Nigerian public tertiary
institutions and concluded that various leadership styles can be adopted depending on
leadership traits which include: Situational leadership style among the governing board
members; transformational leadership style for academicians and mid-level management, and
finally transactional leadership style for other workers who perform routine jobs. The findings
give an overall picture of how to identify the existence of leadership styles and its effects in
public tertiary institutions in Nigeria. The study concluded that there is no best leadership style
that can suit management and administration of public tertiary institutions. It therefore
recommended amongst others that tertiary institution leaders should adopt situational,
transformational and democratic leadership styles for effective and efficient management and
administration of their institutions.
Keywords: Anatomy, Leadership, Leadership Styles, Tertiary Education

1
Introduction

All over the world, leadership is an essential element in any human organization. As

management is the heart of formal organization, leadership is the soul of management. Every

successful organization depends on the leadership styles of its leaders. Leadership is the process

by which a superior person influences subordinate to work toward the actualization of

organizational goals and objectives. In Nigeria, most public tertiary institutions are bedeviled

with various leadership crises which most times lead to closure of schools. Tertiary institutions

are the highest level of educational system designed to produce high-level manpower and are

recognized as centers of knowledge where ideas are not only acquired, but also disseminated to

those who require it. Benedict (2016) opined that higher education is the education given after

secondary education in universities, colleges of education, polytechnics and monotechnics

including those institutions offering correspondence courses. Such institutions award academic

degrees, professional certificates and advanced/higher diploma; and as further step, Postgraduate

programmes such as Masters’ degrees and Doctorate degrees. Such institutions involve in

teaching, research and social (community) service activities.

The leaders of the tertiary institutions are essential for the achievement of organizational goals

because management is perceived as the heart of organization (Abari and Mohammed, 2006).

Leadership is soul to management. Leadership is the ability of a superior officer to influence the

behaviour of a follower or subordinate in order to accomplish educational goals and objectives.

According to Kamugisha (2013), leadership is a noteworthy manner by which one changes the

minds of followers and steer to achieve set objectives. Leadership style is therefore, the typical

way of behaviour exhibited by a leader. There are two categories of leadership styles which

2
include: the traditional leadership style and modern leadership style. The traditional leadership

styles include:

1. Autocratic;

2. Democratic and

3. Laissez-faire Leaderships styles.

The Modern leadership styles include:

1. Toxic;

2. Humble;

3. Servant;

4. Transformational;

5. Transactional;

6. Charismatic;

7. Situational;

8. Participative;

9. Distributed;

10. Collective;

11. Collaborative;

12. Adaptive;

13. Innovative;

14. Entrepreneurial;

15. Authentic and

16. Narcissistic leadership styles. More so, for every tertiary institution to deliver qualitative

services, in the areas of manpower development, capacity building, teaching, research

3
 and community services, effective and efficient–oriented leadership styles remains a sine-

qua-non.

Anatomy of Leadership Styles in Public Tertiary Institutions

Leadership styles depend on how the leader uses the power to influence, direct, motivates and
control the followers. There are many leadership models and styles such as authoritarian
(autocratic), paternalistic, democratic, laissez-faire, transformational, transactional, servant,
situational, shared (participative), distributed, collective, collaborative, adaptive, innovative,
entrepreneurial, authentic, and narcissistic styles. Leadership style is simply a description of the
extent to which a leader can exhibit the trait of the various leadership thoughts. There are
basically the traditional styles: Autocratic, Democratic, Laissez-faire Leaderships; modern styles:
job-centered, employee-centered, job-employee-centered leadership; contingency styles:
Fielder’s model, path-goal model and Vroom-Yetton model (Kurfi, 2009). It is however
observed that both the modern and contingency approaches are descriptive in nature of situation
and relationship between a leader and follower in the organizational setting rather than the
character descriptive of traditional styles, that is, it (the traditional styles) describe rather
personal attitude of a leader in relation to his relationship with followers. The aim of any
leadership model or style is to solve the problems that face an organization and to take suitable
decisions to maintain and sustain the organization (Yacoub and Abdel-Aziz, 2016).

Leadership is relationship-oriented, when the leader focuses more on the relationships amongst

the group (Griffin and Ebert 2010). Each leader develops his/her unique style of leadership to fit

the talents, maturity, and abilities of his/her followers (Landis 2011). Leadership development

practices are similar across the private, public and not-for-profit sectors (Pinnington2011).

Leadership is a task-oriented when the leader focuses on the tasks that need to be performed in

order to meet a certain goal (Manktelow, 2012).

4
1. Toxic Leadership Styles: Toxic leadership endangers all the stakeholders within an

organization. Lipman (2005) described toxic leaders as those who violate, manipulate,

mistreat and disregard others, as well as lacking in integrity, being arrogant and guilty of

cowardice.

2. Autocratic Leadership Style: Under the autocratic leadership style, all decision-making

powers are concentrated in the authority of the leader, as with dictators. An authoritarian

style of leadership may create a climate of fear, where there is little or no room for

dialogue (Salin and hoel, 2011). Authoritarianism is a form of government characterized

by strong central power and limited political freedoms (Shorten 2012). Authoritarian

leaders are commonly referred to as autocratic leaders (Cherry 2016).

3. Democratic Leadership Style: Democratic leadership style is one of the most effective

forms of leadership and creates higher productivity, better contributions from group

members and increased group morale (Martindale 2011). Democratic leadership style is a

very open and collegial style of running a team. Democratic leadership is also known as,

participative leadership, where members of the group take more participative role in the

decision-making process (Ray and Ray 2012).

4. Laissez-faire Leadership Style: In laissez-faire or free rein leadership, decision-making

is given to the followers. The followers are given the right and power to solve problems

and make decisions. This style can be performed only when followers are highly skilled,

experienced, and educated; the leader will not provide regular feedback to their followers

(Malos, 2012). The laissez-faire leadership style is where all the rights and power to

make decisions is fully given to the worker (Hackman and Johnson, 2013). Laissez-faire

5
 leadership style provides little or no direction and gives employees as much freedom as

possible (Sharma and Singh, 2013).

5. Pseudo Democratic Leadership Style: Pseudo democratic leadership is a leadership

style that pretends to be democratic in nature but deceitful inwardly to the followers.

6. Paternalistic Leadership Style: A paternalistic leader works by acting as a father figure

and taking care of subordinates as a parent would. In this style of leadership, the leader

provides complete concern for his followers or workers. In return, he receives the

complete trust and loyalty of his people (Erben and Guneser, 2008). Paternalistic

leadership has three dimensions: authoritarianism, benevolence and morality (Niu et al.

2009). Paternalistic leaders, who promote followers’ professional and personal welfare

but still maintain their authority (Xu, 2011). Paternalistic leadership is characterized by a

totalitarian and authoritarian style of management (Afsar and Rehman, 2015). Many

scholars called this style Asian style.

7. Transformational Leadership Style: Transformational leadership is a leadership

approach that causes change in individuals and social systems (Damirch, et. al.

2011).Transformational leaders are described as holding positive expectations for

followers; it increases levels of motivation and morality (Johnson, 2015).

Transformational leadership is a style of leadership where the leader works with

employees to identify the needed change, creating a vision to guide the change, and

executing the change (Business Dictionary, 2016). Transformational leader’s main

objective is to work to change or transform his or her followers' needs and redirect their

thinking. It needs charismatic leadership with individualized consideration and

intellectual stimulation (Schultz and Schultz, 2016).

6
8. Transactional Leadership Style: Transactional leadership is a style of leadership in

which the leader promotes compliance of his/her followers through both rewards and

punishments (Bass, 2008). They are more concerned with following existing rules than

with making changes to the organization (Malos, 2012). Transactional leadership means

the leaders lead primarily by using social behavior exchanges for maximum benefit at

low cost (Chaudhry and Javed, 2012). Transactional leadership style known as

managerial leadership, it focuses on the role of supervision, organization, and group

performance (Akhigbe et al. 2014). Transactional leadership is based on the principle of

exchange of rewards between leaders and subordinates (Mottoh, 2015).

9. Servant Leadership Style: The servant-leader shares power, responsibility and authority

with others, and puts the needs of others first and helps them to develop and perform

better. Servant leadership is a choice made by the individual to serve rather than occupy a

leadership position (Iyer, 2013). Servant leadership is a person’s ability to make social

relationships by persuasion, develop and serve others as the first priority in process of

achieving organization’s goal (Setiawan et al. 2014). Servant leader has a tendency to

prioritize the needs, interests and aspirations of the people they lead at the top (Rau, et. al.

2015). There are five dimensions in servant leadership: love, empowerment, trust,

humility and vision (Tomigolung, 2015). Servant leadership emphasizes the growth of

the follower as a way to achieve organizational objectives.

10. Situational Leadership Style: Fundamental underpinning of the situational leadership

theory is that there is no single best style of leadership. The theory behind situational

leadership is based on using the style needed to others to get up to speed by working

7
 closely with them (Cirstea and Constantinescu, 2012).Situational leadership theory

assumes that leaders behave according to situation (Parveen and Tariq, 2014).

11. Shared or Participative Leadership Style: The shared leadership style consists of the

leader sharing the decision-making with other members according to their interests and

by practices social equality. It is about collaborative, participatory leadership that takes

employees’ views and interests on board in decision-making and leadership process

(Nwagbara, 2011). Shared leadership includes shared vision, goals, power, resources, and

responsibilities (Morton and Brown, 2011).

12. Distributed Leadership Style: It focuses on the leadership of all team members

(Salahuddin, 2011). It implies that leadership is not held by one leader only, but

leadership roles are distributed among the rest of the school management team (Botha,

2014).

13. Collective Leadership Style: Collective leadership emerged through joint actions across

fields (Ritchie et al. 2007). It focuses on ‘we’ rather than ‘me’ (Johnson et al. 2012). It is

a collective engagement leadership by multiple individuals who shares multiple

leadership roles through both formal and informal relationships (Cullen and Yammarino,

2014).

14. Collaborative Leadership Style: The collaborative leadership depends on the ability of

leaders to engage and collaborate with the business, government and social sectors

(Lovegrove and Thomas, 2013). Collaborative leadership is defined as employees

interfere in different levels in the organization to identify problems, analyze situation, and

achieve solutions (ArbabiandMehdinezhad, 2016).Collaborative leadership is a

8
 management practice, which focuses on the leadership skills across functional and

organizational boundaries.

15. Adaptive Leadership Style: Adaptive leadership is the practice of mobilizing people to

tackle tough challenges. Flexible and adaptive leadership involves changing behaviour in

appropriate ways as the situation changes (Yukl and Mahsud, 2010). In adaptive

leadership, the expert providers must support frontline, in their efforts to develop high

quality and person-centered solutions (Corazzini and Anderson, 2014).

16. Innovative Leadership Style: Innovative leadership is a philosophy and technique that

combines different leadership styles to influence employees to produce creative ideas,

products, and services (Gliddon, 2006).Innovative leadership considers problems as a

challenge. Innovative leaders seek problems rather than waiting for problems to occur

(Othman and Abd Rahman, 2013).

17. Entrepreneurial Leadership Style: The role of entrepreneurial leadership is to develop

indigenous business enterprises and entrepreneurship (Mapunda, 2007). Entrepreneurial

leadership is based on the attitude that the leader is self-employed (Bremer,

2009).Entrepreneurial leaders themselves engage in opportunity-focused activities, and

they influence their followers, motivating and encouraging them to pursue

entrepreneurial opportunity-focused behaviours (Mokhber et al. 2015).

18. Authentic Leadership Style: Authentic leadership is an approach that emphasizes

leader’s legitimacy through honest relationships with followers which value their input

and are built on an ethical foundation (Gardner et al. 2011); it is based on trust,

credibility, integrity and adherence to ethical and moral principles (Morales and

9
 Santaolalla, 2013). It is positively related to work attitudes and behaviors (Ozkan and

Ceylan, 2016).

19. Narcissistic Leadership Style: Narcissism is an attribute of many powerful leaders

(Rosenthal and Pittinsky, 2006). It is a leadership style in which the leader is only

interested in himself or herself.

20. Charismatic Leadership Style: Charismatic leaders are the people endowed with quality

and exemplary characters that stimulate the interest of many followers in their country.

Examples are: Dr. Nelson Mandela, Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, Dr.

Julius Nyerere etc.

However, public tertiary institutions in Nigeria can be categorized as federal or state public

tertiary institutions which include universities, polytechnics and colleges of education. There are

three stages of university education in Nigeria. The First level stage offers a Bachelor's degree

after a minimum of four years and a minimum of six years (e.g. in Medicine). The second stage

offers a Master's degree following one or two years of post-Bachelor's study and the third level

offers a Doctorate degree ranging from a minimum of three years to no maximum number.

However, there are two stages of polytechnic education in Nigeria. The First stage offers a

National Diploma (ND) of two years and the Second stage offers Higher National Diploma

(HND) of two years after one year Industrial Training (IT). To gain admission into the first level

of university, polytechnic and colleges of education, one has to pass the Universal Tertiary

Matriculation Examination (UTME) and Post (UTME).

The universities have governing councils headed by Pro-Chancellors appointed by the Proprietor

(President or Governor) of the state with some internal representatives of the institution as

10
members. However, the polytechnics and colleges of education have governing councils or board

headed by Chairmen appointed by the President or Governor of the state with some internal

representatives of the institution as members. These councils generally govern the affairs of the

public tertiary institutions on behalf of the government with various leadership styles. The

management of each institution is headed by a chief executive officer which is the vice-

chancellor in the universities, Rector in the polytechnic and Provost in the colleges of education.

The federal government has established supervisory and coordinating agencies for universities

which is the National Universities Commission, National Board for Technical Education for

polytechnics and National Commission for Colleges of Education.

Implication

By implication, this study suggests at least three leadership styles that can be suitable for

effective and efficient management and administration of public tertiary institutions in Nigeria.

These leadership styles include the Situational leadership style for the governing council/board

members, Transformational leadership style for academicians and democratic leadership style for

other workers who perform routine jobs. This position is in line with Nasereddin and Sharabati

(2016) that shared leadership style for upper management (governance board members),

transformational style for academicians and middle management level, and finally transactional

style for other employees.

11
Conclusion

In conclusion, even in a single organization, there is no specific style, which can be used for all

levels. Tertiary institutions leadership style depends on the leader concerned, the followers and

cultural values. For tertiary education particularly universities, polytechnics and colleges of

education, the most suitable leadership style depends on the level of followers’ education,

experience, integrity, discipline and cooperation. Based on these criteria, as it applies to tertiary

institutions, there are three different styles, which can be used as follows: situational leadership

style among the governing council members, transformational leadership style for academicians

and finally democratic leadership style for other categories of workers.

Recommendations

The study recommended the following:

1. The use of different styles based on leader, context, follower and culture.

2. Those tertiary institution authorities should use situational leadership style for upper

management (governing council members).

3. The transformational leadership style is suitable for academicians and middle

management level.

4. The democratic leadership style is the best for non-teaching staff.

5. The management of public tertiary institution should encourage cooperation among union

leaders.

6. The Deans and heads of departments can be more effective and efficient in satisfying

lecturers when they frequently demonstrate democratic style of leadership.

12
References

Abari, A. O., & Mohammed, M. O. B. (2014). Fundamentals of educational management (6th

ed.). Ibadan: His Lineage Publishing House, p 6.

Afsar, B., & Rehman, M. (2015).Investigating relationships among paternalistic leadership,

organizational commitment, organization citizenship behavior, psychological contract and
turnover intention: A case of Pakistani SMEs. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research,
23(8), 1699-1713.

Akhigbe et al. (2014). Transactional leadership style and employee satisfaction in Nigerian
banking sector. European Journal of Business and Management, 6(26), 14-23.

Arbabi, A., & Mehdinezhad, V. (2016). School principals’ collaborative leadership style and
relation it to teachers’ self-efficacy. International Journal of Research Studies in
Education, 5(3), 3-12.

Bass, B. (2008). Bass and Stogdill's Handbook of Leadership: Theory, research & managerial
applications (4th ed.). New York, NY: The Free Press.

Benedict, O. E. (2016). Managing higher education in Africa for quality, quantity and
functionality.Bilingual Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 1(1), 1-17.

Botha, R. J. (2014). The place and role of distributed leadership in functional and effective South
African schools: Towards school improvement. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences,
5(20), 1225-1232.

Bremer, I. (2009). Common Factors between Swedish and Chinese entrepreneurial leadership
styles. Business Intelligence Journal, 2(1), 9-41.

Business Dictionary (2016). Transformational leadership. London: Bullying and harassment in

the workplace Taylor & Francis.
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/transformational-leadership.html

Chaudhry, A. Q., & Javed, H. (2012). Impact of transactional and laissez faire leadership style on
motivation. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(7), 258-264.

Cherry, K. (2016). Lewin's leadership styles. Cited on 19, March 2016.

http://psychology.about.com/od/leadership/

Cirstea, C., & Constantinescu, D. (2012). Debating about situational leadership. Management &
Marketing, X(1), 53-58.

13
Corazzini, K. N., & Anderson, R. A. (2014). Adaptive leadership and person-centered care: A
new approach to solving problems. North Carolina Institute of Medicine Journal, 75(5),
352-354.

Cullen, K., & Yammarino, F. J. (2014). Special issue on collective and network approaches to
leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 180–181.

Damirch et al. (2011). Transformational leadership style and innovative behavior on innovative
climate at Smes in Iran. Kuwait Chapter. Arabian Journal of Business and Management
Review, 1(4), 119-127.

Erben, S. G., & Guneser, A. B. (2008). "The relationship between paternalistic leadership and
organizational commitment: Investigating the role of climate regarding ethics". Journal of
Business Ethics, 82(4), 955–968.

Gardner et al. (2011). Authentic leadership: A review of the literature and research agenda.
Leadership Quarterly, 22, 1120-1145.

Gliddon, D. G. (2006). Forecasting a competency model for innovation leaders using a modified
Delphi Technique. (Doctoral dissertation).

Griffin, R. J., & Ebert, R. W. (2010). Business Essentials (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall. p. 135-136.

Hackman, M. Z. & Johnson, C. E. (2013). Leadership, a communication perspective (6 ed.).

USA: Waveland Press.

Iyer, R. D. (2013). Servant leadership: The leadership style for teachers. International Journal of
Computational Engineering & Management, 16(2), 39-42.

Johnson, C. E. (2015). Meeting the ethical challenges of leadership (5th ed.). Normative
leadership theories. U.K: Sage Publishing. P. 45

Johnson et al. (2012). Collective leadership: A case study of the all blacks. Asia-Pacific
Management and Business Application, 1(1), 53-67.

Kamugisha, S. (2013). The Effects of change management in an organization: A case study of

National University of Rwanda. (Published PhD thesis).

Landis, E. A. (2011). 21st Century leadership issues as they pertain to a small private Liberal
Arts University. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 12(3), 108-111.

Lipman-Blumen, J. (2005). The allure of toxic leaders: Why we follow destructive bosses and
corrupt politicians-and how we can survive them, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

14
Lovegrove, N., & Thomas, M. (2013). Why the world needs Tri-Sector leaders.
http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2013/02/why_the_world_needs_tri-sector.html

Malos, R. (2012). Annals of EftimieMurgu university resita, Economic Studies Fascicle, II, 421-
426.

Manktelow, J. (2012). Leadership style: Mind tools. Retrieved 2 November, 2012.

Mapunda, G. (2007). Entrepreneurial leadership and indigenous enterprise d evelopment.

Journal of Asia Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Refereed Material, III(3), 1-28.

Martindale, N. (2011). Leadership styles: How to handle the different personas. Strategic
Communication Management, 15(8), 32–35.

Mokhber et al. (2015). Enhancing organization demand for innovation through entrepreneurial
leadership and social networks .Journal of Advanced Research Design, 12(1), 1-12.

Morales, S. S., & Santaolalla, V. H. (2013). Identity, politics and authentic leadership. Spanish
Youngsters’ Perceptions of J. L. Rodriguez Zapatero and M. Rajoy. Estudosem
Comunicacao, 13, 107-134.

Morton, L. W., & Brown, S. S. (2011). Pathways for getting to better water quality: The citizen
effect. London New York: Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg.

Mottoh, S. N. (2015). The Influence of transformational and transactional leadership style on

employee performance (Case Study: DinasKesehatan Manado) Journal BerkalaIlmiah
Efisiensi, 15(4), 436-446.

Nasereddin, Y. A., & Sharabati, A. A. (2016). Universities’ leadership style in the light of
governance principles. International Review of Management and Business Research, 5(3),
1092-1114.

Niu et al. (2009). Effectiveness of a moral and benevolent leader: Probing the interactions of the
dimensions of paternalistic leadership. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 12, 32-3.

Nwagbara, U. (2011). Rethinking labour turnover: Prospecting for shared leadership. Petroleum-
Gas University of Ploiesti Bulletin, LXIII(4),1-10.

Othman, A. & AbdRahman, H. (2013). Innovative Leadership: Learning from Change

Management among Malaysian Secondary School Principals. World Applied Sciences
Journal, 23(2), 167-177.

Ozkan, S., & Ceylan, A. (2016). Collective efficacy as a mediator of the relationship between
authentic leadership and well-being at work. International Business Research, 9(6), 17-30.

Parveen, S., & Tariq, A. (2014). Leadership style, gender and job satisfaction: A situational
leadership approach. International Journal of Science and Research, 3(12), 1-6.
15
Pinnington, A. H. (2011). Leadership development: Applying the same leadership theories and
development practices to different contexts? Leadership, 7(3), 335-365.

Rau et al. (2015). Analysis of servant and transformational leadership on corporate social
reponsibility at GerejaKalvariPentakostaMissi Di Indonesia. Journal of EMBA, 3(1), 760-
768.

Ray, S. A., & Ray, I. A. (2012). Understanding democratic leadership: Some key issues and
perception with reference to India’s freedom movement. Afro Asian Journal of Social
Sciences, 3(3.1), 1-26.
,
Ritchie et al. (2007). Transforming an academy through the enactment of collective curriculum
leadership. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 39(2), 151-175.

Rosenthal, S. A., & Pittinsky, T. L. (2006). Narcissistic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly,
17, 617–633.

Salahuddin, A. M. (2011). Distributed leadership in secondary schools: Possibilities and

impediments in Bangladesh. The Arts Faculty Journal, 19-32.

Salin, D., & Hoel, H. (2011). Organizational causes of workplace bullying. Bullying and
harassment in the workplace: Developments in Theory, Research and Practice. 227-243.

Schultz, D., & Schultz, S. E. (2016). Psychology and work today. New York: Routledge.

Setiawan et al. (2014). Description of servant leadership on public official in Bekasi

Government. International Conference on Economics, Education and Humanities, 10(11),
56-60.

Sharma, L. J. K., & Singh, S. K. (2013). Characteristics of laissez-faire leaderships style: A case
study. International Journal of Research in Commerce & Management, 4(3), 29-31.

Shorten, R. (2012). Modernism and totalitarianism: Rethinking the intellectual sources of nazism
and stalinism. U.K: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 256. eBook.

Tomigolung, H. N. (2015). The effects of servant leadership on employee performance at

regional government office Southeast Minahasa. Journal EMBA, 3(1), 163-172.

Xu, S. (2011). Paternalistic leadership and followers’ outcomes: An attachment theoretical

perspective. Workshop on research advances in organizational behavior and human
resources management Paris Dauphine, May 17-19, 2011, Conference Proceedings: 253-
266.

16
Yukl, G., & Mahsud, R. (2010). Why flexible and adaptive leadership is essential. Consulting
Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 62(2), 81-93.

17