See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/348977091

Influence of Teacher-Perceived Transformational and Transactional School

Leadership on Teachers’ Job Satisfaction and Performance: A Case of Vietnam

Article in Leadership and Policy in Schools · February 2021

DOI: 10.1080/15700763.2020.1866020

CITATIONS READS

44 3,431

1 author:

Greeni Maheshwari
RMIT International University Vietnam
41 PUBLICATIONS 687 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Greeni Maheshwari on 06 February 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Leadership and Policy in Schools

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/nlps20

Influence of Teacher-Perceived Transformational

and Transactional School Leadership on Teachers’
Job Satisfaction and Performance: A Case of
Vietnam

Greeni Maheshwari

To cite this article: Greeni Maheshwari (2021): Influence of Teacher-Perceived Transformational

and Transactional School Leadership on Teachers’ Job Satisfaction and Performance: A Case of
Vietnam, Leadership and Policy in Schools, DOI: 10.1080/15700763.2020.1866020

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2020.1866020

Published online: 02 Feb 2021.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=nlps20
LEADERSHIP AND POLICY IN SCHOOLS
https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2020.1866020

Influence of Teacher-Perceived Transformational and Transactional

School Leadership on Teachers’ Job Satisfaction and Performance:
A Case of Vietnam
Greeni Maheshwari
Economics and Finance Department, RMIT University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
The influence of the principal’s transformational and transactional leadership Transformational leadership;
style on teachers’ job satisfaction and teachers’ performance has been Transactional leadership;
a widely researched topic in many countries. However, there is a dearth of Teachers’ performance;
Teachers’ satisfaction; High
research on this topic in Vietnam. This exploratory study has been conducted
schools; Vietnam
in public high schools in the southern region of Vietnam to understand the
influence of the transformational and transactional leadership style on tea­
chers’ job satisfaction and job performance. This quantitative study used
a two-stage cluster sampling method to collect the data from 18 public high
schools, which included 144 teachers. The factor analysis and path analysis
are used in this study to determine the direct and indirect effects of the
principal’s leadership on teachers’ job satisfaction and teachers’ perfor­
mance. The results show a positive relationship between transformational
leadership style and a negative relationship of transactional leadership style
on teachers’ job satisfaction and performance. The results further indicated
that job satisfaction acts as a mediator variable between the principal’s
leadership style and teachers’ performance. The findings of this study
would be useful for the Ministry of Education and Training (MOET) and
school leaders in Vietnam to bring required changes in the school environ­
ment and leadership practices to enhance teachers’ job satisfaction and their
performance.

Introduction
School leadership matters as the research indicate that it has a direct influence on the teachers’
satisfaction, performance, motivation, student’s performance, and school performance (Hariri et al.,
2016; Leithwood et al., 2008; Shila & Sevilla, 2015; Ward, 2013; Yeigh et al., 2019). Studying with
motivated teachers has a significant positive impact on the students’ performance and their learning
(Ho & Lin, 2015). School leaders have been and will continue to play a central role in enhancing the
performance of teachers and keeping them motivated (Wu, 2017). School principals’ leadership styles are
related to their decision-making styles which can significantly impact teachers’ performance, satisfaction,
and their motivation levels (Hariri et al., 2014). Effective leaders are the ones who can create a supportive
environment in the school and involve teachers in decision-making (Barnett & McCormick, 2003).
There are various leadership styles practiced by leaders in both non-education and educational
sectors consisting of traditional to modern leadership styles. Extensive research done in different
parts of the world suggest that transformational leadership has a significant impact on teachers’
performances, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment (Kirby et al., 1992; Koh et al., 1995;
Shila & Sevilla, 2015). Schooling in Asia and in emerging economies is a new frontier for building

CONTACT Greeni Maheshwari greeni.maheshwari@rmit.edu.vn Economics and Finance Department, RMIT University,
Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
© 2021 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 G. MAHESHWARI

the future capacities of the global workforce, yet we know little about the influence of leadership in
schools in Vietnam. There are various studies conducted in developed countries like Hong Kong
(Wong et al., 2010), Australia (Watson, 2009) and some in emerging economies like India (Khan
et al., 2009) and Nigeria (Imhangbe et al., 2019) to understand the influence of the school principal’s
transformational and transactional leadership style on teachers’ job satisfaction and their perfor­
mance but very few studies are conducted in Vietnam with the youthful workforce.
Transformational leadership is focused on increasing employees’ satisfaction and motivation while
the transactional leadership promotes employees’ performance by using rewards and punishments.
Different leadership styles are practiced in different countries based on their culture and other
factors. The participative leadership style as a component of transformational leadership style is
most popularly used in many parts of the world except in Eastern Europe, Middle East regions, and
most of Asia (Vo & Hannif, 2013).

Overview of culture and leadership in the Vietnamese education sector

Vietnam places a high value on normative cultural values and continue to prioritize the group, family
and community over individualism and self-interest (Nguyen & Clark, 2014; Quang & Vuong, 2002).
In line with East Asian cultural norms, in Vietnam, high level of authority is respected, and the
subordinates or junior family members show the high obedience and deference toward the seniors in
the organizations as well as in the family (Truong et al., 2017). Vietnamese generally avoid conflicts,
and if it arises, then they try to settle the conflict with a win-win situation. As per Quang and Vuong
(2002), the Vietnamese culture is about avoiding the uncertainties as this is considered as a threat at
the workplace. Hence to avoid the uncertainties, it is difficult in the Vietnamese work culture to accept
the innovative ideas and novel changes quite easily.
The development of the institutional context of education in Vietnam is influenced by the Soviet
Union’s education system, which was established post Second World War period, which consists of
a highly hierarchical system where the public school leaders are state civil servants and are considered
as a representative of the government as well as of the school (Hallinger et al., 2017). Unlike western
countries, the school leaders in Vietnam have two lines of authority; bureaucratic authority and
political authority (Hallinger et al., 2017). Bureaucratic authority is related to the Ministry of
Education and Training (MOET),1 and political authority relates to the political power in the
communist party. The hiring of school leaders is more based on political and cultural influences
rather than based on their skills and knowledge (Hallinger et al., 2017).
As Vietnam is influenced by communist culture, hence this heavily impacts the decision-making style
of Vietnamese school principals who are highly influenced by power distance and collectivism (Truong,
2017). The decision made by principals is what every school member has to follow and obey (Truong,
2017). Truong et al., (2016), in his study, mentioned that the Vietnamese culture is highly influenced by
the four leadership functions: exercising power, building relationships, making decision and conflict
solving. The study results further indicate that still in contemporary Vietnam, the juniors are expected to
respect the line of authority and hierarchy (Truong et al., 2016). The research done by Hallinger et al.
(2015), raised concern in their study that because of organizational, political and socio-cultural context,
the school leaders in Vietnam face the different challenges in their leadership as opposed to the school
leaders in other neighboring countries like Thailand, Malaysia, Hong Kong, and Singapore.
The research undertaken by Quang et al. (1998) was to understand the similarities and differences
between the leadership styles of international managers and Vietnamese managers. The similarities
between the international managers and Vietnamese managers were that both the leadership styles
placed emphasis on people orientation, long-term orientation, strategic vision, competitiveness but
there were differences in their leadership styles. The study results showed that Vietnamese managers
valued the leadership style which had more control over the subordinates and placed less value on
collaborative leadership. In contrast, the international managers valued the collaboration more
(Quang et al., 1998).
 LEADERSHIP AND POLICY IN SCHOOLS 3

There is a dearth of studies on the influence of leadership on school teachers and students in Vietnam,
a large Southeast Asian country with a young and growing workforce and growing economy
(Maheshwari & Nayak, 2020). It will be informative and useful for education policymakers to confirm
the effect of transformational and transactional leadership style on school leaders in the Vietnamese
context. To the best of the knowledge, there are only three studies (Du, 2013; Truong et al., 2016; Truong
et al., 2017) conducted in Vietnam so far, with none focusing on the southern region of Vietnam. The
first study is conducted in the central region in Vietnam on three schools regarding how socio-cultural
values impact the leadership decisions (Truong et al., 2017). The second study in the northern part in
Vietnam with three schools to determine the influence of leadership practices on teachers’ organizational
commitment (Du, 2013); and a third study done again in the central region of Vietnam, which focused
on how cultural belief affects the leadership practices (Truong et al., 2016). The southern region of
Vietnam is an entirely unexplored area with no studies conducted to determine the effect of leadership
styles on teachers in Vietnam so far.

Theoretical framework and hypotheses development

The purpose of the study is to find the effect of transformational and transactional leadership styles of
school principals on teachers’ job satisfaction and their performance. To achieve this purpose, the
below two research questions are designed for this study.

RQ1: Does the transformational and transactional leadership style have a different impact on teachers’
job satisfaction in public high schools in Vietnam?

RQ2: Does the transformational and transactional leadership style have a positive or negative
influence on the performance of the teachers in public high schools in Vietnam?

Transformational and transactional leadership styles

Leadership style can be affected by both the organizational needs and the needs of an individual.
There are different leadership styles, which leaders might practice in the organization. The leader­
ship practices displayed by the leader add value to the performance and business of the organiza­
tion and, also on the organization’s strategy (Marx, 2015). In the 20th century, leadership theory
began with the Great Man or Trait-based theory which has been transformed to transformational
leadership theory in the 21st century (Denmark, 1993). In the past, the differentiation of leaders
from the non-leaders was based on individual differences in the personality traits, while later
developed leadership theories focused on leadership relations which promotes the collaborative
environment and includes the leaders, followers, and everyone in the organization in the decision-
making process (Denmark, 1993). The most commonly practiced old leadership style was
a transactional leadership style which mainly revolved around the leaders who took the decision
without involving the team members, but in contrast, transformation leadership is based on
working with the team instead of working alone (Judge & Piccolo, 2004).
Transformational leaders rely on Charismatic style and as per Conger (1989), in the charis­
matic style of leadership, the followers are drawn towards the leader due to the influential
personality of a leader. Charismatic leaders have the personality to bring transformations within
the organizations due to the charm and persuasiveness in their personality, and hence they are
also referred to as transformational leaders. The focus on the charismatic leader is not on the
process or structure of their leadership, but it is about their personality and actions and their
ability to engage with their subordinates (Yukl, 1999).
4 G. MAHESHWARI

The following four behavior dimensions (Four I’s) of transformational leadership are proposed by
Bass (1985), which suggests as to why the followers are better satisfied under the transformational
leader:

● Intellectual Stimulation: The extent to which leaders encourages the followers to think indepen­
dently and increase the follower’s understanding of the problems they face.
● Individualized Consideration: The extent to which the leaders understand and treat followers as
individuals and provides support by identifying the unique talents of each follower. Based on the
strength of every individual, the leader coaches and advises the followers toward their
developments.
● Idealized Influence: The extent to which the leaders show influence on the followers as role
models by engaging in high standards of ethical behavior and the followers have a deep trust on
the leaders.
● Inspirational Motivation: The extent to which the leaders motivates others to perform beyond
the expectation by showing the optimism toward the followers’ abilities.

Bass (1985) have highlighted four behavior dimensions of the transactional leaders as below, and
due to these behaviors, the leaders might not be able to create the supportive working environment.

● Contingent award: The extent to which the leader provides awards in exchange for the goal
accomplishment.
● Active management by exception: The extent to which the leader micromanages the followers,
closely monitor their performances, and keep track of their mistakes.
● Passive management by exception: The extent to which the leaders are unaware of the problem
till the time they are informed by others and fail to act until a serious problem occurs.
● Laissez-faire leadership: The extent to which the leaders avoid making decisions and are
unavailable to follow up on the requests.

Research on transformational leadership in schools was initiated by Leithwood and Jantzi (1990),
and then many studies reported the effect of transformational leadership on the school leaders and
found that transformational leadership have a high level of influence on teachers’ job satisfaction,
teachers’ organization commitment, and an overall improvement in the schools’ performance (Adhi
et al., 2013; Eliophotou-Menon & Ioannou, 2016; Eyal & Roth, 2011; Hauserman & Stick, 2013; Shila &
Sevilla, 2015).

Teachers’ job satisfaction and performance

The school leaders being in the highest-ranked administrative position plays a vital role in shaping the
school culture, which influences the teachers and the students (Kurland et al., 2010). In the past, the
role of the school leaders was to manage the administrative work in the school including teachers and
school activities, but in recent days the role of the school leaders has shifted from a manager to the
academic leader where higher emphasis is paid on their leadership and the impact of their leadership
on the school community (Karunanayake, 2012). The school leader’s currnet role is not only limited to
managing the administrative tasks within the school but also to developing the strategic plans to
improve school performance, increase teachers productivity, keep the teachers motivated and increase
the retention rate, and to play a central role within the school community (Draina, 2006).
The research done by Short et al. (1999) suggested that teachers feel more confident and empow­
ered when the school leaders display suitable leadership styles and keep the teachers involved in the
decision-making process and create a collaborative and professional environment, which is built upon
trusting and respecting the teachers. The transformational leadership style of a school leader can
impact the teachers’ job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and job performance. Many
 LEADERSHIP AND POLICY IN SCHOOLS 5

research studies (Abdul Wahab et al., 2014; Eyal & Roth, 2011; Griffith, 2004; Menon, 2014; Nguni
et al., 2006; Sayadi, 2016) suggested that the school leaders who follow the transformational leadership
style give enough power and authority to the teachers in an effort to help the teachers realize their self-
role in the school and in turn the highly-motivated teachers show better engagement in their job,
resulting in better performance and job satisfaction. The study conducted by Eslamieh and Amir
Hossein (2016) found that the school leaders’ leadership style has a positive relationship with teachers’
organizational commitment and a negative relationship with teachers’ burnout. The study further
indicated that the pressure from the leaders is one of the major causes of teachers’ burnout and
quitting the job. In contrast, the effective leader has the most prominent role in improving job
satisfaction, organizational commitment of the teachers, and further improving the school productiv­
ity (Eslamieh & Amir Hossein, 2016).
Hence, while several studies from other countries (Adhi et al., 2013; Eliophotou-Menon & Ioannou,
2016; Eyal & Roth, 2011; Hauserman & Stick, 2013; Shila & Sevilla, 2015) address leadership effect on
teachers, there are only three small-scale studies from Vietnam (Du, 2013; Truong, 2016; Truong et al.,
2017) that investigated the influence of socio-cultural factors on leadership and the relation between
leadership and teachers commitment to the organization. No study till date considers the leadership
styles and their impact on teacher satisfaction and performance in Vietnam. Thus, this study aims to
fill this gap by including the entirely missing region of Vietnam and an unexplored area of transfor­
mational and transactional leadership impact on teachers in public high schools in Vietnam. The
findings from this study would be useful for MOET and the school leaders to promote supportive
school environment and to understand as what leadership practices enhances the teachers’ job
satisfaction and their performance.
Based on the above theoretical notions and the findings from the various studies as discussed in this
section, the below four hypotheses are established to test the two research questions designed for this
study:

H1: There is a relationship between teacher-perceived principal’s leadership style (transformational/

transactional) on the job satisfaction of teachers in public high schools.

H2: There is a relationship between teacher-perceived principal’s leadership style (transformational/

transactional) on the teachers’ performance in public high schools.

H3: Job satisfaction of teachers affect their performance in the school.

H4: Job satisfaction acts as a mediator between the principal’s leadership style and teachers’
performance.

The hypothesized theoretical model of this study is represented in Figure 1, which is established based
on the relationship found from the literature between the principal’s leadership style, teachers’ job
satisfaction, and teachers’ performance. In this study the three observed variables included are: leadership
styles (explanatory variable), teachers’ job satisfaction (mediator variable), and teachers job performance
(response variable) to understand as to how the leadership styles can impact the teachers’ performance
and their job satisfaction. Factor analysis and path analysis have been used in this study, and the model of
this study is tested using AMOS software, version 25 and is discussed further in this study.

Research methodology
Sample
The data were collected from teachers teaching in public schools (run by the government) at higher
secondary level (grade 11 and grade 12) in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. In this quantitative study, the
6 G. MAHESHWARI

Principal’s
Leadership style

H1 H2

H4
Teachers’ Job Teachers
Satisfaction Performance
H3
Figure 1. Hypothesized Theoretical framework.

two-stage cluster sampling method was used for data collection. During the first-stage cluster
sampling, the schools were divided as per the geographic location according to different districts in
Ho Chi Minh City like district 1, district 2, district 3, and so on as there are total of 18 districts in Ho
Chi Minh City. The first-stage clusters were districts, and second-stage clusters were schools in each
district. Once the clusters were formed, the random sampling method was used to collect the data from
each cluster. Cluster sampling method was chosen for this study as Ho Chi Minh City is wide-spread
and to cover the entire sampling frame, this is the best method suggested to collect the samples from
the large population (Engel & Schutt, 2014). The total responses received in this study were from 162
teachers from 18 public high schools (1 school from each district) in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. The
final data contained the responses from 144 teachers out of 162 teachers as some of the data were
missing, and due to this, the data from 18 teachers were removed during the data cleaning process. The
participants included 52% of females and 48% of male teachers with most of the teachers (70%) having
the Bachelor qualification, and the rest of them had a Master or a Doctorate degree.

Instruments
A quantitative questionnaire using 5 point Likert scale was provided to teachers which contained three
sections adapted from different instruments from various studies. The instrument used for teacher-
perceived principal leadership styles was adapted from the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire
(MLQ-5X) developed by Avolio and Bass (2004). The next instrument used in this study was to
measure teachers’ job satisfaction which was adapted from Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS) as developed
by Spector (1985). The instruments were tested for reliability by Avolio and Bass (2004) and Spector
(1985) using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients. The reliability scores of MLQ instrument and JSS instru­
ments were higher as compared to normally accepted value of α = 0.7 (Cronbach, 2012). These
instruments were considered valid and reliable as it has been used for several years and being tested by
other researchers in their study as well (Tsounis & Sarafis, 2018; Zahari & Shurbagi, 2012).
The questionnaire consisted of three sections; section A with questions regarding general informa­
tion on demographics. The questions in section B were related to job satisfaction using JSS instrument,
and in the same section the last question was related to teachers’ teaching scores in a given year
measured out of 10 points, which was used as a measure of their performance. Section C was about the
teachers-perceived principal’s leadership style based on MLQ-5X instrument.
The sample of items for the questionnaire can be seen in Table 1.
The study done by Al-Mahdy et al. (2016) used JSS in their study to find the relationship between
servant leadership and job satisfaction. Their analysis was based on Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA)
to identify the factors, and none of the fit indices used in this study were used in their study (Al-Mahdy
 LEADERSHIP AND POLICY IN SCHOOLS 7

Table 1. Selected items from the questionnaire.

Related to Transformational Leadership
● My leader goes beyond self-interest for the good of the group.
● My leader helps others to develop their strengths.
Related to Transactional Leadership
● My leader avoids making decisions.
Related to School culture (Policies and procedures)
● I often feel that I know what is going on within the school.
● The goals of this school are clear to me.
● Many of our rules and procedures make doing a job efficiently.
Related to Job Perception
● I like doing the things I do at work.
● I feel a sense of pride in doing my job.
Related to Benefits and Rewards
● The benefits we receive are as good as most other schools offer.
● I am satisfied with the benefits I receive.

et al., 2016). The research conducted by Hamidifar (2010) used JSS survey and MLQ-5X and the
purpose of using these instruments was to explore the relationship between leadership styles and non-
teaching team members’ satisfaction; the multiple regression analysis was used for analyzing the
results in the study. The study done by Alshahrani and Baig (2016) also used JSS and MLQ-5X and
conducted the analysis using multiple regression to determine the effect of the leadership style of head
nurses on job satisfaction of staff nurses. Various studies have used the similar questionnaires used in
this study, but the research questions and analysis approach used were different in rest of the studies as
compared to this study.

Data analysis
Dimension of teachers’ job satisfaction
In the section regarding teachers’ job satisfaction (JSS) consisting of 36 items, principal component
analysis with varimax rotation was performed to determine the factors. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin
(KMO) test was performed, and the value for KMO was 0.896, which was sufficiently higher than
the suggested value of 0.6 (Glen, 2016). Factor analysis is performed in order to understand the
correlations between different variables and to find the joint observed variables (Akaike, 1987). The
factor analysis resulted in 3 factors containing 18 items, and the rest of the items were deleted due to
loadings less than 0.5. The first factor contained 13 items, where the loadings ranged from 0.61 to 0.79.
The second factor contained two items with factor loadings of 0.7 and 0.8. The third factor contained
three items with loadings of 0.8, 0.79, and 0.79. The three factors explained 63.5% of the total variation.
The eigenvalue of factor 1, factor 2, and factor 3 was respectively 7.73, 2.32, and 1.37.
Factor 1 was related to the questions regarding the job satisfaction amongst teachers regarding
school culture (policies and procedures), factor 2 was related to their job perception, factor 3 was
related to the rewards and benefits they receive at the school. To check the reliability of these factors,
Cronbach’s Alpha was tested for each factor. The value of Cronbach’s Alpha for three factors was,
respectively, 0.93, 0.8, and 0.61 which is enough than the desired Cronbach’s Alpha value of 0.7
(Brown, 2002) except for the one with a value of 0.61.

Dimension of leadership styles (transformational and transactional)

Principal component analysis with varimax rotation was performed on a section of the questionnaire
developed from MLQ-5X questionnaire designed for the teacher-perceived principal’s leadership style,
which consisted of 9 items. The factor analysis resulted in 2 factors. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO)
test was performed, and the value for KMO was 0.671, which was higher than the suggested value of
0.6 (Glen, 2016). The first factor contained four items, where the loadings ranged from 0.7 to 0.84.
8 G. MAHESHWARI

The second factor included two items with factor loading of 0.89 and 0.9, and both these factors
explained 69.3% of the total variation. The eigenvalue of factor 1 and factor 2 was, respectively, 2.36
and 1.8. Out of 9 items of the questionnaire, three items were deleted while doing the analysis. Factor 1
was related to the questions regarding transformational leadership, and factor 2 was related to
transactional leadership. The reliability for this dimension was also tested using Cronbach’s Alpha,
which resulted in the values of 0.75 and 0.81, respectively, for factor 1 and factor 2 which is higher than
the acceptable value of 0.7 (Brown, 2002). Hence, both these factors were used for the analysis further.

Path analysis
After determining the factors from factor analysis on two variables, path analysis was conducted
further on the identified factors. The first variable on leadership styles consisted of two factors;
transformational and transactional leadership style. The next variable on teachers’ job satisfaction
consisted of three factors; school culture (policies and procedures), teachers’ job perception and
rewards and benefits provided. The last variable was teachers’ performance, and the teaching scores
were used to measure this variable. After this, the path analysis was conducted in this study (Figure 2)
using these three observed variables to answer the research questions and to test the designed
hypotheses of this study. Path analysis allows testing for the direct and indirect effects of the variables
used in the study (Land, 1969). The Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) model is illustrated in Figure
2, which was tested using AMOS version 25.
The model fit was tested using various goodness and badness of fit measures. The model had
a sample size of 144, where the p-value = 0.25 > 0.05. The model shows a good fit as per Table 2.

Results
After performing the path analysis, the results of the model were analyzed. The results are displayed in
Tables 3 and Tables 4.
The first hypothesis (H1) for this study was to test whether there is relationship between the
principal’s leadership style on the job satisfaction of teachers. The results from path analysis suggested
that transformational leadership style is significant and has a positive impact on teachers’ job
perception and their salary and rewards; while transactional leadership has a significant and negative
effect on school culture and teachers’ job perception (which is the part of teachers’ job satisfaction).

0.22**

Transformational 0.14
Leadership Style School Culture
0.15*
0.42***
0.37***

Job Perception Teaching Scores

0.14*
-0.51***
-0.58*** 0.19**
Transactional
Leadership Style Rewards and Benefits
-0.04

-0.25*

*p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001

Figure 2. Path analysis CFA model.

 LEADERSHIP AND POLICY IN SCHOOLS 9

Table 2. Model fit indices.

Index Value Acceptable range Reference
Cmin/df 1.322 <3 Meydan and Sesen (2015)
NFI 0.992 >0.9 Hooper et al. (2008)
CFI 0.998 >0.9 Quintana and Maxwell (1999)
RMSEA 0.047 <0.06 Hu and Bentler (1999)

Table 3. Coefficients and hypothesis testing results.

Hypotheses Path Standardized Coefficient Result
H1 TFL → TJP .153* Supported
TSL → TJP −.583***
TSL → SC −.514***
TFL → S&R .374***
H2 TFL → TP .223** Supported
TSL → TP −.247*
H3 SC → TP −.417*** Supported
*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.
TFL: Transformational Leaders; TSL: Transactional Leadership; TJP: Teachers Job Perception; SC:
School Culture; S&R: Salary and Rewards; TP: Teachers’ performance.

Table 4. Direct, indirect and total effects.

Direct Indirect Total effect Sobel Test Statistics
H4 TFL →TP .223 .252 1.331
TFL → TJP →TP .029 P-value < 0.1 (supported)

This indicated that teachers were happier under the transformational leadership style as opposed to
transactional leadership style.
The second hypothesis (H2) for this study was to test if there is a relationship between the
principal’s leadership style on the teachers’ performance. The analysis suggested that there is
a significant positive impact of transformational leadership style on teachers’ performance while
there was a negative impact on teachers’ performance if the leaders follow the transactional leadership
style. This also supports that transformational leadership style brings a positive impact on teachers.
The third hypothesis (H3) for this study was to understand whether the job satisfaction of teachers
affects their performance in the school. One of the factors of job satisfaction (School culture) was
found to have a significant impact on teachers’ performance. This effect was found to be negative as
most of the teachers mentioned that they were not informed about the changes in advance and were
not clear on the expectations of policies and procedures. This kind of school culture impacted their
performance. Rest of the two factors of job satisfaction; job perception and rewards and benefits were
not found to be significant to impact the teachers’ performance. The impact of different variables with
coefficients on the teachers’ performance is discussed in the next paragraph.
The findings suggested that transactional leadership negatively impacted the satisfaction of teachers
with policies and procedures (β = −0.514, p < .01). The teachers perceived their job positively under
transformational leadership style (β = 0.153, p < .05) as opposed to transactional leadership style
(β = −0.583, p < .01) where the effect was negative. There was also an impact on teachers’ performance
based on these two types of leadership styles. The teachers had shown better performance when leader
followed the transformational leadership style (β = 0.223, p < .05) as compared to a leader following
the transactional leadership style (β = −0.247, p < .05). The teachers felt that they had better chance of
receiving rewards and benefits when they worked under the leaders who follow the transformational
leadership style (β = 0.374, p < .01). The school culture related to unclear policies and procedures
negatively impacted the teachers’ performance (β = −0.417, p < .05), implying that job satisfaction does
have an impact on teachers’ performance.
10 G. MAHESHWARI

The fourth hypothesis (H4) for this study was to test whether the job satisfaction variable acts as
a mediator between the principal’s leadership style and teachers’ performance. It was found that one of
the factors of job satisfaction, i.e. Job perception was acting as a mediator between the principal’s
leadership style and teachers’ job performance, as demonstrated in Table 4. The direct effect of
transformation leadership style on teachers’ performance was 0.223, while the total effect was 0.252
due to indirect effect (0.029) of teacher’s job perception added to it. Even though the effect was not that
high; however, it still supports the fourth hypothesis of this study. All these four supported hypothesis
are displayed in Figure 3.

Conclusion and discussion

The purpose of this study was to explore the effect of transformational and transactional leadership
styles on teachers’ job satisfaction and their performance in public high schools in Ho Chi Minh City,
Vietnam. The data contained the responses from 144 teachers from 18 public high schools on three
variables: leadership styles, teachers’ job satisfaction and teachers’ performance. The first variable
consisted of two factors: transformational leadership style and transactional leadership style.
The second variable on job satisfaction had three factors; school culture (policies and procedures),
job perceptions of teachers and the benefits and rewards they receive at a school. The last variable was
about teachers’ performance which was measured using their teaching scores collected at the end of
the school year. The results suggested that all the four designed hypotheses were supported as
discussed in the previous section of the paper, and the same has been displayed again as per designed
theoretical framework of the study in Figure 3.
The findings from Hypotheses 1 and 2 of this study was supported (as discussed in results section)
and suggested that the teachers have a positive effect on their job performance and job satisfaction
under the transformational leadership style. This finding is in line with past studies (Nguni et al., 2006;
Riaz & Haider, 2010) which also suggested that there is a positive impact on teachers’ satisfaction and
performance when the leader follows the transformational leadership style as compared to aleader
following the transactional leadership style. The employees are highly motivated and committed
toward the organization if the leaders follow the transformational leadership style.
The findings from Hypothesis 3 (supported as can be seen in results section) further suggested that
the job satisfaction of teachers depends on school culture (how flexible the policies and procedures are
implemented at work), the rewards and benefits they receive, and finally as to whether they perceive
the job as enjoyable or not. This finding is also consistent to previous studies conducted in different
organizations (Mathieu et al., 1993; Mertler, 2002; Zhu et al., 2014). School culture, in terms of clear

Principal’s
Leadership style

H1- Supported H2 - Supported

H4 - Supported
Teachers’ Job Teachers
Satisfaction Performance

H3- Supported

Figure 3. Theoretical framework.

 LEADERSHIP AND POLICY IN SCHOOLS 11

policies and procedures implemented at work, impacted not only the teachers performance but also
had an impact on teachers’ job perception (Wynn et al., 2007). This study found that unclear policies
and procedures had a negative impact on teachers’ performance and their job perception. Policies and
procedures are negatively related to transactional leadership, suggesting that transformational leader­
ship might bring positive changes if practiced at work, which is also found in the study done by
Sharma (2017).
The next finding from Hypothesis 4 of this study (supported as can be seen in results section)
found that the job satisfaction of teachers acted as a mediating variable between transformational
leadership style and teachers’ performance and had a positive impact on the teachers. When the
teachers perceive their job enjoyable, they seemed to be performing better. This finding is similar to
the study done by (Alessandri et al., 2017), where it was found that the various factors related to
teachers’ job perception contribute to teachers’ job satisfaction, which further contributes to their
performance.
Two research questions guided this study wherein the first question was to understand the effect of
transformational and transactional leadership style on teachers’ job satisfaction, while the second ques­
tion was to determine the effect of these leadership styles on teachers’ performance. The findings of this
study from hypotheses 1 and 2 suggest that leadership style (transformational / transactional) has a direct
effect on teachers’ job satisfaction and their performance. Hypothesis 3 is not directly related to the
leadership style, but it is related to the school policies and procedures, and the school leaders are the one
who creates the school culture. Unclear policies and procedures had a negative impact on teachers’
performance and satisfaction. Finally, hypothesis 4 also supports that job satisfaction of teachers are
affected by the principal’s leadership style, which in turn affect the teachers’ performance. Hence, this
study identified that the impact on teachers’ satisfaction and their performance are positive if transfor­
mational leadership is practiced at work as opposed to transactional leadership style, which can bring
a negative effect. These findings are similar to the previous research done as per above discussion in
different countries, and it is also interesting to see that the impact is the same in Vietnam too, even
though the culture of Vietnam is different as compared to other countries.
The findings of this study suggest that transformational leadership has a positive relationship with
teachers’ job satisfaction and performance, but despite this transformational leadership is not much
practiced in Vietnam. The study done by Quang and Vuong (2002) in Vietnam found that staff have
a very low level of participation in decision making and as an employee, they have a very low
expectation that they should be involved in the decision making process. The decision making of
school leaders in Vietnam is influenced by Confucian culture and the influence of political-
bureaucratic features in the education system. As the Vietnam public school leaders have both the
bureaucratic and political authority, the leaders are highly influenced by power distance, and hence
teachers have a minimal role in the decision-making process (Hallinger et al., 2017). Hence, to be
successful, the school leaders in Vietnam are expected to navigate between these dual responsibilities
along with maintaining the cultural credibility as a leader with the teachers and the students and hence
their leadership is influenced by power distance (Truong et al., 2017). The study done by Truong et al.
(2017) suggested that teachers think that the principal’s decision is the highest and everyone must
follow and execute as what the principal has decided as it is believed that the principal has the most
power in the school. A positive influence on teachers has been identified under transformational
leadership in this study. Thus, now based on this study’s findings, it is up to the school leaders to
decide whether they shouldchange their leadership styles to transformational leadership to enhance a
positive environment in the school.
This study will be a useful contribution to this field as to the best of the knowledge, none of the
studies focused on public high schools in the southern region of Vietnam to determine the influence of
leadership styles on teachers’ performance, and job satisfaction. Hence, the findings of this study will
be useful in contributing towards adding the knowledge to this missing part in the literature with
various other studies done in different parts of the world.
12 G. MAHESHWARI

Implications and limitations

This study has several implications regarding theoretical and empirical contributions. This study is
contributing to the growing body of literature with respect to theoretical contributions, especially in
developing country like Vietnam, wherein the limited research has been carried out in public high
schools with no research conducted in southern Vietnam. Empirically, this study is useful in under­
standing the factors which impact the teachers’ performance and their job satisfaction in public
schools in Vietnam. This study has few implications for school management and MOET.
First, management might work on improving school culture by providing clear policies and
procedures to the teachers as it is found that policies and procedures have a significant effect on
teachers’ satisfaction level. Second, transformational leadership has a positive impact, and hence the
leaders can be encouraged to practice this leadership style, which will enhance teachers’ job satisfac­
tion and performance. The study done by Ingham and Dias (2015) on various schools in England
suggested that providing increased autonomy helps the leaders in improving the school overall. So, if
the leaders in public schools in Vietnam are also given more freedom, it might result in better
performance of teachers and the school. Third, introducing more training programs for leaders to
understand as to how they can implement and practice transformational leadership may be beneficial
for the teachers and the entire school. Finally, this study might be useful for other countries that follow
similar cultures like Vietnam and would like to understand as what can be the ways to improve the
teachers satisfaction and the school performance.
This study at present is only conducted in public high schools in Vietnam, but in future, this study
might be extended to international schools in Vietnam. It will be interesting to see whether the
influence of leadership styles is the same on teachers in a different working environment: international
and public schools. Next, in future, the comparative research can be conducted in schools located in
urban and rural areas of Vietnam. Lastly, it might be useful to conduct a comparative study on the
leadership style of men and women leaders to see whether the impact on teachers is different or is the
same if the leader is a male or a female.

Note
1. The government ministry, Ministry of Education and Training (MOET) is responsible for the governance of
general academic quality and regulations at schools and higher education institutions in Vietnam.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

References
Abdul Wahab, J., Mohd Fuad, C. F., Ismail, H., & Majid, S. (2014). Headmasters’ Transformational Leadership and Their
Relationship with Teachers’ Job Satisfaction and Teachers’ Commitments. International Education Studies, 7(13).
https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v7n13p40
Adhi, S., Hardienata, S., & Sunaryo, W. (2013). The effect of organizational culture, transformational leadership and
work motivation toward teacher performance. Indian Journal of Positive Psychology, 4(4), 537.
Akaike, H. (1987). Factor analysis and AIC. Psychometrika, 52(3), 317–332. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02294359
Alessandri, G., Borgogni, L., & Latham, G. P. (2017). A dynamic model of the longitudinal relationship between job
satisfaction and supervisor-rated job performance. Applied Psychology, 66(2), 207–232. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.
12091
Al-Mahdy, Y. F., Al-Harthi, A. S., & Salah El-Din, N. S. (2016). Perceptions of school principals’ servant leadership and
their teachers’ job satisfaction in Oman. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 15(4), 543–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/
15700763.2015.1047032
Alshahrani, F. M. M., & Baig, L. A. (2016). Effect of leadership styles on job satisfaction among critical care nurses in
Aseer, Saudi Arabia. Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan, 26(5), 366–370. https://doi.org/2316
 LEADERSHIP AND POLICY IN SCHOOLS 13

Avolio, B. J., & Bass, B. M. (2004). Multifactor leadership questionnaire: Third edition manual and sampler set. Mind
Garden. http://www.statisticssolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/wp-post-to-pdf-enhanced-cache/1/multifactor-
leadership-questionnaire-mlq.pdf
Barnett, K., & McCormick, J. (2003). Vision, relationships and teacher motivation: A case study. Journal of Educational
Administration, 41(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578230310457439
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. Free Press, Collier Macmillan.
Brown, J. D. (2002). The Cronbach alpha reliability estimate. JALT Testing & Evaluation SIG Newsletter, 6(1). Retrieved
November, 21, 2020, from http://hosted.jalt.org/test/bro_13.htm.
Conger, J. A. (1989). The charismatic leader: Behind the mystique of exceptional leadership. Jossey-Bass.
Cronbach, L. J. (2012). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychomerika, 16(3), 297–334. https://doi.
org/10.1007/BF02310555
Denmark, F. L. (1993). Women, leadership, and empowerment. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 17(3), 343–356. https://
doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1993.tb00491.x
Draina, L. (2006). The Art of School Leadership [Review of The Art of School Leadership]. CHOICE: Current Reviews for
Academic Libraries, 43(9), 1650. American Library Association CHOICE.
Du, N. N. (2013). The influence of distributed leadership on teacher organisational commitment: Initial evidence from
Vietnam. Annual Review of Education, Communication, and Language Sciences (ARECLS), 10, 69–90.
Eliophotou-Menon, M., & Ioannou, A. (2016). The link between transformational leadership and teachers’ job
statisfaction, commitment, motivation to learn, and trust in the leader. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal,
20(3), 12–22.
Engel, R. J., & Schutt, R. K. (2014). Fundamentals of social work research. Sage Publications.
Eslamieh, F., & Amir Hossein, M. D. (2016). An analysis of the relationship between managers’ ethical leadership style
with teachers’ organizational commitment and job burnout. International Journal of Organizational Leadership, 5(4),
380–392. https://doi.org/10.33844/ijol.2016.60398
Eyal, O., & Roth, G. (2011). School leaderss’ leadership and teachers’ motivation. Journal of Educational Administration,
49(3), 256–275. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231111129055
Glen, S. (2016). Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test for sampling adequacy. Retrieved from http://stats.stackexchange.com/
questions/92791/why-does-sphericity-diagnosed-by-bartletts-test-mean-a-pca-is-inappropriateon20thNovember
Griffith, J. (2004). Relation of principal transformational leadership to school staff job satisfaction, staff turnover, and
school performance. Journal of Educational Administration, 42(3), 333–356. https://doi.org/10.1108/
09578230410534667
Hallinger, P., Walker, A., Nguyen, D. T. H., Truong, T., & Nguyen, T. T. (2017). Perspectives on school leader’s
instructional leadership in Vietnam: A preliminary model. Journal of Educational Administration, 55(2), 222–239.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-11-2015-0106
Hallinger, P., Walker, A., & Trung, G. T. (2015). Making sense of images of fact and fiction. Journal of Educational
Administration, 53(4), 445–466. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-05-2014-0060
Hamidifar, F. (2010). A study of the relationship between leadership styles and employee job satisfaction at IAU in
Tehran, Iran. Au-GSB e-Journal, 3(1).
Hariri, H., Monypenny, R., & Prideaux, M. (2014). Leadership styles and decision-making styles in an Indonesian school
context. School Leadership & Management, 34(3), 284–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2013.849678
Hariri, H., Monypenny, R., & Prideaux, M. (2016). Teacher-perceived principal leadership styles, decision-making styles
and job satisfaction: How congruent are data from Indonesia with the Anglophile and Western literature? School
Leadership & Management, 36(1), 41–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2016.1160210
Hauserman, C. P., & Stick, S. L. (2013). The leadership teachers want from school leaderss: Transformational. Canadian
Journal of Education, 36(3), 184–203. https://search-proquest-com.ezp-02.lirn.net/docview/1540744756?accountid=
143980
Ho, W., & Lin, K. (2015). The effect of teacher’s leadership style on the outcome of early childhood education.
International Journal of Organizational Innovation (Online), 8(1), 77–86.
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit.
Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6, 53–60.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria
versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.
1080/10705519909540118
Imhangbe, O. S., Okecha, R. E., & Obozuwa, J. (2019). Principals’ leadership styles and teachers’ job performance:
Evidence from Edo State, Nigeria. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 47(6), 909–924. https://
doi.org/10.1177/1741143218764178
Ingham, A., & Dias, M. C. N. (2015). The development of school leadership in England: Possible options for Brazil. São
Paulo, Brazil: Itaú Social Foundation & The British Council. Retrieved November, 25, 2017.
Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative
validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 755. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.755
14 G. MAHESHWARI

Karunanayake, S. (2012). Shifting the school leaders’s role as manager to that of an academic leader: Case of Sri Lanka.
International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 2(5), 405-n/a. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJSSH.2012.V2.135
Khan, S. H., Saeed, M., & Fatima, K. (2009). Assessing the performance of secondary school headteachers: A survey study
based on teachers’ views in Punjab. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 37(6), 766–783. https://
doi.org/10.1177/1741143209345572
Kirby, P. C., Paradise, L. V., & King, M. I. (1992). Extraordinary leaders in education: Understanding transformational
leadership. The Journal of Educational Research, 85(5), 303–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1992.9941130
Koh, W. L., Steers, R. M., & Terborg, J. R. (1995). The effects of transformational leadership on teacher attitudes and
student performance in Singapore. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16(4), 319–333. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.
4030160404
Kurland, H., Peretz, H., & Hertz-Lazarowitz, R. (2010). Leadership style and organizational learning: The mediate effect
of school vision. Journal of Educational Administration, 48(1), 7–30. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231011015395
Land, K. C. (1969). Principles of path analysis. Sociological Methodology, 1, 3–37. https://doi.org/10.2307/270879
Leithwood, K., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2008). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership. School
Leadership and Management, 28(1), 27–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632430701800060
Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (1990). Transformational leadership: How principals can help reform school cultures. School
Effectiveness and School Improvement, 1(4), 249–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/0924345900010402
Maheshwari, G., & Nayak, R. (2020). Women leadership in Vietnamese higher education institutions: An exploratory
study on barriers and enablers for career enhancement. Educational Management, Administration & Leadership,
174114322094570. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220945700
Marx, T. G. (2015). The impact of business strategy on leadership. Journal of Strategy and Management, 8(2), 110–126.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JSMA-06-2014-0042
Mathieu, J. E., Hofmann, D. A., & Farr, J. L. (1993). Job perception–job satisfaction relations: An empirical comparison
of three competing theories. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 56(3), 370–387. https://doi.org/
10.1006/obhd.1993.1060
Menon, M. E. (2014). The relationship between transformational leadership, perceived leader effectiveness and teachers’
job satisfaction. Journal of Educational Administration, 52(4), 509–528. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-01-2013-0014
Mertler, C. A. (2002). Job satisfaction and perception of motivation among middle and high school teachers. American
Secondary Education, 31(1), 43–53.
Meydan, C. H., & Sesen, H. (2015). Yapisalesitlikmodellemesi, Amos uygulamalari [Structural equation modeling, AMOS
applications]. Detay.
Nguni, S., Sleegers, P., & Denessen, E. (2006). Transformational and transactional leadership effects on teachers’ job
satisfaction, organizational commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior in primary schools: The Tanzanian
case. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17(2), 145–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243450600565746
Nguyen, A. B., & Clark, T. T. (2014). The role of acculturation and collectivism in cancer screening for Vietnamese
American women. Health Care for Women International, 35(10), 1162–1180. https://doi.org/10.1080/07399332.2013.
863317
Quang, T., Swierczek, F. W., & Chi, D. T. K. (1998). Effective leadership in joint ventures in Vietnam: A cross-cultural
perspective. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 11(4), 357–372. https://doi.org/10.1108/
09534819810225904
Quang, T., & Vuong, N. T. (2002). Management styles and organisational effectiveness in Vietnam. Research and
Practice in Human Resource Management, 10(2), 36–55.
Quintana, S. M., & Maxwell, S. E. (1999). Implications of recent developments in structural equation modeling for
counseling psychology. The Counseling Psychologist, 27(4), 485–527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000099274002
Riaz, A., & Haider, M. H. (2010). Role of transformational and transactional leadership on job satisfaction and career
satisfaction. Business and Economic Horizons, 1(1), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.15208/beh.2010.05
Sayadi, Y. (2016). The effect of dimensions of transformational, transactional, and non-leadership on the job satisfaction
and organizational commitment of teachers in Iran. Management in Education, 30(2), 57–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0892020615625363
Sharma, P. (2017). Organizational culture as a predictor of job satisfaction: The role of age and gender. Management-
Journal of Contemporary Management Issues, 22(1), 35–48. https://doi.org/10.30924/mjcmi/2017.22.1.35
Shila, J., & Sevilla, A. (2015). The impact of the principals' leadership style on teachers' job satisfaction and organizational
commitment: An Indian perspective. International Journal of Education and Management Studies, 5(1), 1.
Short, P. M., Rinehart, J. S., & Eckley, M. (1999). The relationship of teacher empowerment and school leaders leadership
orientation. Educational Research Quarterly, 22(4), 45.
Spector, P. E. (1985). Measurement of human service staff satisfaction: Development of the Job Satisfaction Survey.
American Journal of Community Psychology, 13(6), 693–713. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00929796
Truong, Thang Dinh, Hallinger, Philip, & Sanga, Kabini. (2016). Confucian values and school leadership in Vietnam
Educational Management, Administration & Leadership. 45(1), 77–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143215607877
Truong, T. D., Hallinger, P., & Sanga, K. (2016). Confucian values and school leadership in Vietnam. Educational
Management, Administration & Leadership, 45(1), 77–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143215607877
 LEADERSHIP AND POLICY IN SCHOOLS 15

Truong, T. D., Hallinger, P., & Sanga, K. (2017). Confucian values and school leadership in Vietnam: Exploring the
influence of culture on principal decision making. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 45(1),
77–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143215607877
Tsounis, A., & Sarafis, P. (2018). Validity and reliability of the Greek translation of the Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS).
BMC Psychology, 6(1), 27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-018-0241-4
Vo, A., & Hannif, Z. N. (2013). The reception of Anglo leadership styles in a transforming society: The case of American
companies in Vietnam. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(18), 3534–3551. https://doi.
org/10.1080/09585192.2011.616526
Ward, C. J. (2013). Why Leadership Matters: One School’s Journey to Success. Educational Leadership and
Administration: Teaching and Program Development, 24, 62–74.
Watson, L. (2009). Issues in reinventing school leadership: Reviewing the OECD report on improving school leadership
from an Australian perspective. Leading and Managing, 15(1), 1.
Wong, C. S., Wong, P. M., & Peng, K. Z. (2010). Effect of middle-level leader and teacher emotional intelligence on
school teachers’ job satisfaction: The case of Hong Kong. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 38
(1), 59–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143209351831
Wu, M. (2017). An investigating the crucial factors of teachers’ efficacy from the Taiwanese school member’s perspective.
International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 7(2), 140–147. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2017.7.2.
856
Wynn, S. R., Carboni, L. W., & Patall, E. A. (2007). Beginning teachers’ perceptions of mentoring, climate, and
leadership: Promoting retention through a learning communities perspective. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 6
(3), 209–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700760701263790
Yeigh, T., Lynch, D., Turner, D., Provost, S. C., Smith, R., & Willis, R. L. (2019). School leadership and school
improvement: An examination of school readiness factors. School Leadership & Management, 39(5), 434–456.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2018.1505718
Yukl, G. (1999). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic leadership theories. The
Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 285–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00013-2
Zahari, I. B., & Shurbagi, A. M. A. (2012). The effect of organizational culture and the relationship between transforma­
tional leadership and job satisfaction in petroleum sector of Libya. International Business Research, 5(9), 89. https://
doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v5n9p89
Zhu, C., Devos, G., & Tondeur, J. (2014). Examining school culture in Flemish and Chinese primary schools. Educational
Management Administration & Leadership, 42(4), 557–575. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143213502190

View publication stats