TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title page. . . . . . . . . . i
Approval page. . . . . . . . . .ii
Certification. . . . . . . . . iv
Dedication . . . . . . . . . . v
Acknowledgement. . . . . . . . vi
Table of contents. . . . . . . . . vii
List of tables. . . . . . . . . ix
List of figures. . . . . . . . . xi
Abstract. . . . . . . . . . xii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION. . . . . 1
Background to the study. . . . . . . . 1
Statement of the problem. . . . . . . 8
Purpose of the study. . . . . . . . 9
Significance of the study. . . . . . . . 10
Research Questions. . . . . . . . 11
Scope of the study. . . . . . . . . 12
Hypotheses. . . . . . . . . . 13
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE. 14
Conceptual Framework . . . . . . 15
Theoretical Framework. . . . . . . . 31
Theoretical Framework for the study. . . . . . 31
Empirical Studies. . . . . . . . 52
Summary . . . . . . . . . . 63
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODS. . . . 66
Research Design . . . . . . . . 66
Population of the study. . . . . . . . 67
Sample of the Study. . . . . . . . 68
Instruments for data collection. . . . . . . 69
Validity of the instruments. . . . . . . 69
Reliability of the instruments. . . . . . . 70
Administration of the instruments. . . . . . 71
Methods of data analysis. . . . . . . . 71
CHAPTER FOUR: PRESENTATION OF RESULTS. . . 72
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATIONS,LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY AND SUGGESTIONS FURTHER STUDIES. . . . . . .111
Interpretation and discussion of findings . . . 111
Implications of the findings. . . . . . . 123
Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . 125
Recommendations. . . . . . . . . 126
Limitations of the study. . . . . . . . 127
Suggestions for further study. . . . . . . 127
Summary of the study. . . . . . . . 128
REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . 131
APPENDIXES. . . . . . . . . 141
APPENDIX I: Questionnaire (for the University Librarians). 141
APPENDIX II: Questionnaire (for the subordinates). . 145
APPENDIX III: Pre-Validated Instruments. . 150
APPENDIX IV: Validators comments. . . . 161
Comments made during proposal. . . . 163
Comments made during seminar presentation. . 164
APPENDIX V: Letter of introduction to respondents for testing The research instruments . . . . . 166
APPENDIX VI: Formula for Cronbach Alfa . . . . 166
APPENDIX VII: Computer printout on multiple regression
analysis and means. . . . . . 167
LIST OF TABLES
TABLES
1. Population of University libraries and Librarians. . . .68
2. Mean and SD of responses on autocratic leadership style. .73
3. Mean and SD of responses on democratic leadership style. .74
4. Mean and SD of responses on bureaucratic leadership style. .76
5. Mean and SD of responses on laissez-faire leadership style. .78
6. Mean of mean and SD of responses on leadership styles. . .79
7. Mean and SD of responses on influence of experience on
autocratic leadership style. . . . . . .80
8. Mean and SD of responses on influence of experience on
democratic leadership style. . . . . . .83
9. Mean and SD of responses on influence of experience on
bureaucratic leadership style. . . . . . .86
10. Mean and SD of responses on influence of experience on
laissez-faire leadership style. . . . . . .89
11. Mean of mean and SD of responses on influence of experience
on leadership styles. . . . . . . .92
12. Mean and SD of responses on influence of experience
on the job performance of professional librarians. . . .93
13. Mean and SD of responses on influence of university
ownership on autocratic leadership style. . . . .95
14. Mean and SD of responses on influence of university
ownership on democratic leadership style. . . . .96
15. Mean and SD of responses on influence of university
ownership on bureaucratic leadership style. . . . .98
16. Mean and SD of responses on influence of university
ownership on laissez-faire leadership style. . . . .99
17. Mean of mean and SD of responses on influence of
University ownership on leadership styles. . . . .100
18. Mean and SD of responses on influence of university ownership
on the job performance of professional librarians. . . .102
19. Mean and SD of responses on the level of performance
of professional librarians. . . . . . . .104
20. Mean and SD of responses on the influence of university
librarians’ leadership styles on the job performance of
professional librarians. . . . . . . .106
21. Regression of leadership styles, experience and ownership
on job performance. . . . . . . .108
LIST OF FIGURES
1. Dimensions of leadership…………………………….…………….35
2. The Hersey – Blanchard life cycle theory………….………………39
3. Leadership role path-goal approach…………………………..……43
4. Reddin’s basic leadership styles……………………………………45
5. Reddin’s effective and ineffective expression of leadership styles..46
6. One-dimensional
leadership styles…………………………………62
ABSTRACT
The major purpose of this study was to determine the influence of University librarians’ leadership styles on the job performance of professional librarians in university libraries in North Central Zone of Nigeria. In carrying out this study, 5 research questions were posed and 4 null hypotheses was formulated and tested. The entire population which consisted of all the 78 professional librarians and all the 9 university librarians in the 9 (4 federal and 5 state) university libraries in North Central Zone of Nigeria were used because of the smallness of the population size. Two sets of instrument which include: University Librarians’ Leadership Styles Questionnaire (ULLSQ) and Job Performance of Professional Librarians Questionnaire (JPPLQ) were used. The research questions were answered using mean. The Hypotheses was tested at 0.05 level of significance using Multiple Regression Analysis. The major findings of the study showed that: The university librarians in North Central Zone of Nigeria adopted more of democratic leadership style. This is followed by the bureaucratic leadership style less laissez-faire leadership style and far less autocratic leadership style. University librarians’ leadership styles do not significantly influence the job performance of professional librarians. Experience of the university librarians do not significantly influence the job performance of professional librarians. Ownership of university significantly influenced job performance of professional librarians with Federal university professional librarians performing better than their State counterpart. The level of job performance of professional librarians was low. The joint influence of leadership styles, experience and ownership on performance of the professional librarians was significant. Based on the above findings, it was recommended that university librarians should be supervised and closely monitored by the university authorities to ensure that the autocratic and laissez-faire ones among them are checked. That university authorities should through seminars and workshops encourage the usage of democratic leadership style in the administration of university libraries. Appointment of university librarians should not be on the basis of their experience alone but on the basis of their attainment of high academic qualifications. That State Government owned universities should endeavour to provide better conditions of service for their professional librarians.
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Background to the Study
The University Librarians are the pivots around which all major and important university library functions revolve. This means that the approach they adopt in directing, guiding and controlling the staff under them determine the pace of progress in their libraries. That is if the University Librarians control, direct or guide the staff under them properly by adopting ideal leadership style, staff will show greater commitment to their duty.
But unfortunately some university librarians are no longer effective and committed to their duties. Staff on their part become nonchalant about library work which invariably have negative impact on their job performance. According to Adamaechi and Romaine (2002) leadership is very essential in any kind of group or organization and it can mean the difference between success or failure of any group or joint activity. Hence for enterprise to achieve its goals the leadership position of such enterprise must be occupied by competent leaders.
Leadership as a concept has been defined by so many writers Ngoka (2002) defined it as the process of influencing others towards organizational performance and achievement of goals. According to Igbo (2002) leadership is a process of influencing group activity towards goal achievement. It is the behaviour of an individual when he is directixng and guiding the activities of the group towards a common goal. His success or failure in attaining the goals of the organization depends largely on his ability to effectively organize and manipulate the human and material resources available to him. This in turn depends on his leadership styles.
Scholl (2000) refers to leadership style as the pattern of behaviour used by a leader in attempting to influence group members and make decision regarding the mission strategy and operation of group activities. Clark (2000) perceived leadership style as the manner and approach of providing direction, implementing plans and motivating people. Ukeje, Akabogu and Ndu (1992) opined that job performance has to do with the employees strength and weaknesses in his effort to accomplish task. Rhode (1989) defined job performance as an act of performing a job either well or badly.
University Librarians should ensure effective leadership style that will lead to maximum job performance. Ram (2001), Mgbodile (2004), Melling and Little (2004) described autocratic, democratic and laissez-faire leadership styles extensively. According to them an autocratic leader is a leader who is high-handed in his administration. He is the centre of all the activities that go on in the establishment where he is a leader. A prime determinant of action, all authority emanated from him and ends with him. He monopolizes the decision-making process and takes decisions all alone. He believes his ideas and thoughts to be superior to those of his subordinates and considers involving them in decision-making as a waste of time. The interest and welfare of the worker is not taken into consideration as the leader regards him just as a mere tool for production. As part of his non-consideration for worker’s welfare he resorts to commands, harsh and abusive language to induce compliance. He uses threats and intimidation as a means of ensuring absolute obedience and dependence on him. He does not take opposition kindly as he tends to regard those with opposing views as enemies of his administration. He clamps down on opposition with some ruthlessness and strives for conformity of all to his directives.
Workers under an autocratic leader may be seen as working under pressure and fear most of the time and often show dissatisfaction to this form of leadership by various means such as indulging in eye service, lateness to work, reduction of work output, sabotaging the work, seeking transfer or voluntarily resigning from the establishment. The autocratic leader finds it difficult to get genuine love, support and cooperation from subordinates who regard his administration as a “one man show”.
The democratic leadership style is also called the participatory leadership signifying its recognition of the need for staff participation in the affairs of the organization. Decision-making and communication are based on consultation and deliberation among the group. This permits self-expression, creativity and group interaction. The democratic leader maintains good human relations while regarding human beings as the most important asset of the organization. He is quick at praising work done and refrains from blaming workers for making mistakes, believing that valuable knowledge can be gained from mistakes so that errors can be avoided in the future. He does not believe in flagrant or exaggerated show of authority and avoids the use of threats; queries or intimidation believing that authority should be felt rather than seen. He does not demonstrate or wield his authority merely for the fun of it. Under the democratic style of leadership, workers enjoy a better work climate and feel a sense of belonging to the organization. They feel they are part of the organization and consequently show greater cooperation and commitment to the achievement of organizational goals. There is greater love and sincerity shown to the leader and work proceeds in the same way in the presence or absence of the boss. This signifies that there is the absence of eye-service or sycophancy on the part of workers. All are interested in working towards the success of the leader, and consequently towards the success of the organization.
The laissez-faire leadership style is a middle-of-the-road leadership style. The laissez-faire style of leadership which is sometimes called the loose rein leadership can be described as the detached leadership style. The word “laissez-faire” is taken from French language meaning “let things go their way”, is used to describe the leader who allows his workers to go about their work the way they want. The laissez-faire leader does not believe in exercising any degree of control over the conduct of the workers under him. He is guided by the belief that workers tend to perform better when left on their own. In line with this belief the laissez-faire leader exercises minimum control over the worker and his work operation. Workers are left to perform their work the way they please, to develop their own standard in their own time and to learn from their experiences without interference from the leader by way of control. This style of leadership is considered unsatisfactory because it signifies the absence of visible leadership which often leads to a number of undesirable behaviours among workers leading to poor work performance. Discipline might become a problem among the staff and a prevailing atmosphere of chaos might ensure. Some workers might pay less attention to their work while others might completely abandon their work or perform below expectation.
Bureaucratic leadership style has been discussed by Onwubiko (2004), Ogbe, Aga and Ebeibi (2005) as a highly elaborate hierarchy of authority in the organization with each low officer under the control and supervision of a higher one superimposed on a highly elaborate division of labour. Onwubiko (2004) citing Max Webber (1975) stated that for many people bureaucratic leadership style encourages personnel decisions to be made on a rational and consistent basis. In doing so, it seeks to avoid the influence of nepotism, personal judgement, prejudices, and the “cult of personality” or subjective influences that may affect an employee’s welfare. Bureaucratic leadership style in all its ramifications encourages disinterestedness and the adoption of the principle of due process in the discharge of organizational responsibilities by both management and subordinates.
The choice of one or two or even more of these styles at a particular time or yet the performance of one style over the other may depend on a lot of variables such as the gender of workers, work location and the working experiences of both the leader and the led. Ikeme (2000) found that leaders with fairly long and sustained administrative experience were to be more hardworking and committed to goal oriented administration. A leader with long years of experience will decide to change his style of leadership based on the failure of other styles he had earlier used. Koffi (1986) found in his study that more experienced workers are higher performer than their younger colleagues in the same occupation. Uba (1990) noted that some personal variables such as sex and experience of the leader can affect to a great extent the worker’s performance and his attachment to the job he does.
As the University Librarian carries out his functions, he exhibits his leadership style and his subordinates perceive this behaviour. It is this style or behaviour that invariably influences their action. It is therefore the duty of the University Librarian to exercise positive leadership styles that would carry the subordinates along in achieving the organizational goal. Regrettably, some University Librarians are ill-prepared for the demanding position they occupy. Some of these University Librarians merely bear the title but lack the technical knowledge and initiative to adapt to the ever-changing environment in the university libraries they are meant to lead.
In University libraries in North Central Zone of Nigeria, one should reasonably assume that the leadership styles of University Librarians will have a direct impact on the productivity of professional Librarians under them. But the researcher’s interview with some professional Librarians at the Benue State University Library, Makurdi and Francis Idachaba Library, University of Agriculture, Makurdi showed a general prevailing climate characterized by tension. The researcher was worried about the non-application of motivational leadership techniques to make professional Librarians perform their duties efficiently. The incessant open clashes and lack of co-operation between the professional librarians and the university librarians are very glaring. The researcher therefore became interested in this topic in order to make an in depth study on the extent University Librarians’ leadership styles influence job performance of professional Librarians in university libraries in North Central Zone of Nigeria.
