Prof. Mrs. Goski Alabi

Alabi, J., & Alabi, G., Journal of Business Research (JBR), Vol. 4 Issues 1 & 2, 2010

FACTORS INFLUENCING QUALITY OF LEADERSHIP IN PUBLIC HIGHER

INSTITUTIONS OF LEARNING IN GHANA

Joshua Alabi *Goski Alabi

Institute of Professional Studies,

Legon, Ghana

[email protected]

*Correspondent Author

Abstract

The study investigates the quality of leadership in higher institutions of learning in Ghana using data from three (3) public universities. Using a mixed method, the study employed both exploratory

and causal design to investigate the dimensions of Quality of Leadership from the Ghanaian

perspective. The paper proceeded with an exploration into the definition and dimensions of quality

of leadership using both a theoretical and conceptual framework validated by qualitative views.

This was followed by a causal analysis of the factors influencing quality of leadership. Relevant

survey data was obtained from rectors, vice chancellors, deans of schools and administrative staff

of the three public institutions. The paper used Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) and Ordered Logit

and Probit regressions to assess the factors influencing Quality of Leadership in higher institutions

of learning. Controlling for demographic factors, the paper found that quality of vision had the

strongest impact on quality of leadership in higher institutions of learning. Personal factors and

situational factors are the next important dimension affecting Quality of Leadership. The impact of

personal factors and situational factors were statistically significant at 1%. Organizational factors

are the fourth important factor impacting Quality of Leadership. The coefficient is statistically

significant at 5% in the OLS regression but 1% in the OLOGIT and OPROBIT regressions. The

study recommends that improving Quality of Leadership in institutions of higher learning requires

clear identification of the vision, improved personal attributes of the leader and a tacit

understanding of the situational and organizational factors prevailing in the institution at the

particular time period.

Keywords: Quality of Leadership, Leadership effectiveness higher Institutions of learning

1. INTRODUCTION The foundation of every society‘s progress is found within the framework of its educational system, and quality of leadership within this educational framework sets the tone for this necessary

achievement. It is reckoned that higher education plays a major role in shaping the quality of

leadership in every society, but good quality leadership is also necessary for the attainment of

quality educational standards. The relevance of quality of leadership is seen in the works of Tichy

& Devanna, (1990), Hatch, (2009), Sergiovanni (1984), Deming et al, 1989; Kanji & Tambi, 2002

36

mailto:[email protected]


and Kamaruzaman, 2007. Tichy & Devanna, (1990) for instance, maintained that the leaders of an organization have the prime responsibility for the quality produced by that organization, which

should result in the success of the organization‘s mission. Hatch (2009), stated the relationship a

little more succinctly that quality of output in education is directly related to leadership.

Sergiovanni (1984) noted that differences exist among incompetent, competent and excellent

schools and their leaders. According to Sergivanni, schools managed by incompetent leaders simply

do not get the job done. Typically, such schools are noted to be characterized by confusion and

inefficiency in operation and malaise in the human climate. Students‘ achievements are also noted

to be lower in such schools and conflict may characterize interpersonal relationships among faculty

or between faculty and supervisors (Sergiovanni 1984). Furthermore Grandzol and Gershon

(1997, p. 46) argue that ‗any individual or organization that strives to achieve quality must begin

with an examination of the organization‘s leadership capability and culture‘. Juran et al., (1995, p. 128) also stated that ―attaining quality leadership requires that upper managers personally take

charge of the quality initiative‖. Undoubtedly, the attainment of quality depends on the quality of

leadership as aforementioned. The commitment and participation of leaders have therefore, long

been recognized as critical factors for successful organizations (Bloom, 2003). Astin and Astin

(2000) argued that if the next generation of citizen leaders are to be engaged and committed to

leading for common good, then the institutions that nurture them must be engaged in the work of

society and community, modelling effective leadership and problem solving skills and

demonstrating how to accomplish change for common good.

Recent growth in the demand for higher education and the proliferation of universities across

developing nations has raised concerns about the quality of tertiary education. Whiteley (2001), for

instance suggests that increased demand for higher education have resulted in lowering of standards

of higher education. This has resulted in a situation where generally higher education output is not

meeting expectations and requirements of society in general (Whiteley, 2001). In Ghana, there have

been several reports from government commissions and the Association of Ghanaian Industries

(AGI), which have indicated that as the universities strive to cope with the large number of

qualified applicants seeking admission, scarce logistics and financial resources for operations have

caused internal strains, which undermine quality of higher education in Ghana. This was

specifically contained in a report by the President‘s Committee on Review of Education Reforms in

Ghana, PCREFG, (2002). This problem is also believed to be quiet prominent though subtle in

higher institutions of learning in general but in particular public institutions of higher learning in

Ghana because of their peculiar governance system as public service institutions rather than

corporate entities. Additionally, the requirements for recruitment and promotion of leaders in higher

institutions of learning in Ghana also do not seem to take into consideration the quality of

leadership capability. The interest in the subject of quality of leadership in higher institutions of

learning in Ghana has arisen as a result of the numerous concerns that have been expressed about

quality of higher education in recent years (President Review of educational Reforms Report,

2003). Other reports have also specifically maintained that the lack of quality assurance

mechanisms have contributed largely to the problem though these report were not specific to Ghana

(QAA, 2004; Ssenkaba 2007, UNESCO 2006 and 2007). This brings into question the quality of

leadership that may be required for the sustainable and effective development of Higher Institutions

of Learning in Ghana. On the contrary, though the nature of leadership and types of leadership has

been extensively investigated, there seem to be little information on the perception of quality of

37


leadership and the factors which may influence the quality of leadership in a given context. The gap

in the knowledge of the factors that may influence the quality of leadership undermines ability to

consciously focus on the quality of the leadership efforts. This study therefore seeks to identify the

factors that influence quality of leadership in higher institutions of learning in Ghana.

The rest of this study is organized as follows: section two provides a brief review of relevant

literature on the factors influencing leadership qualities, section 3 and 4 presents the methodology

and analysis and discussion of major findings respectively. The last chapter concludes the paper.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Quality and Leadership

The importance of leadership as an integral part of quality management is well documented.

(Saraph, Benson & Schroeder, 1989, Anderson, Rungtusanatham, & Schroeder, 1994, Black &

Porter, 1996, Ahire, Golhar & Waller, 1996) Leadership, which includes management commitment,

is contained in virtually every definition of total quality and every prescriptive model on how to achieve it. (Grandzol & Gershon, 1997). Indeed ―any individual or organization that wishes to take their initial steps on their journey toward quality must begin with a near sighted examination of its

organization‘s leadership capability and culture‖ (Mauro & Mauro, 1999). Feigenbaum stated that

quality today has become the foundation for constant management innovation and leadership

(Feigenbaum, 2007). Deming stated in his book, Out of the Crisis, that to get out of the crisis there

is the need to focus on leadership (Deming, 1986). Juran stated that attaining quality leadership

requires that upper managers personally take charge of the quality initiative (Juran et al., 1995).

While quality and leadership are closely aligned, what defines Quality of Leadership is a question

that remains unresolved.

Defining Quality of Leadership

Leadership according to Eisenhower is the process of directing the behaviour of others toward the

accomplishment of some common objectives. Sadler (2003) captions leadership as involving the

influencing of people to get things done, willingly to a standard and quality above their norm. This

introduces another dimension to the concept of leadership considering that what ought to be accomplished by leaders in the case of leadership goes beyond mere management which is largely perceived in this case as sheer stewardship. In relation to the views of major leadership schools like

the contingency and path goal theories (Fiedler, 1969; Vroom, 2001), leadership is a complex

activity involving a process of influence of actors that involve both leaders and followers with a

range of possible outcomes – the achievement of goals, and also the commitment of individuals to

such goals, the enhancement of group cohesion and the reinforcement or change of organizational

culture. Houston and Dockstader (2002), defined Total Quality Leadership as the application of

quantitative methods and the knowledge of people to assess and improve, the materials and services

supplied to the organization, the significant processes within the organization, and last and yet not

least meeting the needs of the end-user, now and in the future. As Houston and Dockstader (2002),

the authors conceptualize quality of leadership as the ability to achieve a vision and continuously

improving the human, economic and social capital of the organization in a sustainable manner.

Every leader who wants to achieve quality in leadership must first have a vision, harness resources

to achieve that vision and use the resources prudently to achieve and improve upon what is

38


achieved (Zhu, Chew and Spangler, 2005). This view suggests that, effective management skills may

be a requirement for quality of leadership. This is contrary to views of an empirical work reported

by Owen (2005) who suggests management skills, planning and organization failed to register in a

list of leadership qualities mentioned by a group of 700 top leaders and followers interviewed.

Montgomery (2005) in defining quality leadership stressed nine other elements of leadership aside

visibility which included the need for a two-way trust, teamwork, clear objectives, equally clear

communication, self-belief, back-up with adequate resources, insistence on good performance,

humility, and controlled aggression towards the opposition. A quality or effective leader has to

communicate the vision clearly for members and stakeholders to buy into. To Montgomery (2005),

Vision, self-belief, results focus, courage, integrity, teamwork, communication, attentiveness, and

commitment cannot form a conclusive whole. But that the perfect blend can't be achieved without

visibility, which in the above definition is how a leader demonstrates his or her possession and

exercise of all the powers required over time. Additionally, Owen (2005), reported that key

behaviours expected of top leaders, include ability to motivate others, vision, honesty and integrity,

decisiveness and ability to handle crisis. However, all of these attributes are quality attributes of

leaders and do not necessarily describe conditions necessary for effective leadership. Quality of

Leadership, in this study, is therefore defined as ability to move people and achieve results in a

consistent manner. It must be argued here that quality or effectiveness of leadership may not

necessarily mean transformation though to a large extent so, since in some situations maintaining

the status qou or reinforcing certain value may be prudent.

Factors Influencing Quality of Leadership

The factors influencing leadership quality may be decomposed into four broad categories. These include, Quality of Vision, Leaders‘ Personal factors, Organizational factors as well as Situational factors. These are illustrated in figure 1.

Leader’s Personal factors

The view that personal factors influence quality of leadership is supported by the Great Man and

Trait Theories which suggest that leaders are exceptional people born with innate qualities, destined

to lead or that there are certain quality attributes or traits that are characteristic of great leadership

and can be learned (Stogdill 1974). However, after several years of research it has become apparent

that there are several traits associated with successful leadership though no consistent traits could

be identified (Owen 2003). Though some traits were found in several studies, the results were

however, inconclusive (Bolden, Gosling, Maturano and Dennison, 2003). Some leaders might

possess certain traits but the absence of them may not mean a person may not be a good leader in a

given situation. In order of importance, the four themes that appear regularly in literature called the

leadership virtues are: Integrity, Decisiveness, Competence, and Vision (Kouzes & Posner, 2002;

Lord, Foti, & DeVader, 1984). However, Adair (1988) argues that, using a study of top managers, it

became apparent that competence was not considered very important for effective leadership by

majority of respondent in their study. On the other hand, French & Raven, (1959) maintain that

expertise is needed for legitimacy and respect from the team. Credibility is also considered very

vital as a leader depends vitally on perceived integrity—keeping one‘s word, fulfilling one‘s

promises, not playing favourites, not taking advantage of one‘s situation. In times of crisis and

uncertainty, the most effective leaders make prompt decisions (Vroom & Jago, 1988; Yukl, 1998,).

But decisiveness is also important under normal conditions. Mintzberg (1973) observed that

39


managers are involved in decision making all day long, and the quality of their decisions

accumulates. In a study of the relationship between personality and leadership, Judge et al. (2002)

conducted a meta-analysis in which they examined 78 studies of the relationship between

personality and leadership. They organized personality in terms of the generally accepted taxonomy

of reputation called the Five-Factor Model (Wiggins, 1996); this is a taxonomy of the bright side of

personality. The dimensions of the model include extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness,

emotional stability, and openness. Emotional stability and conscientiousness reflect the first

element of the domain model that is intrapersonal skills; extraversion and agreeableness is concern

with the second domain which is interpersonal skills; and openness, which is related to vision and

anchors the fourth domain, are leadership skills. Amongst the key elements of personal factors that

can influence Quality of Leadership identified from literature and conceptualized for testing in this

study are competence, confidence, credibility, and integrity, decisiveness, creativity/problem

solving skills, values or core and working mission of the leader, intrapersonal skills, interpersonal

skills or people skills, extra personal skills, leaders social capital and ability to learn and unlearn.

In this case competence does not connote academic qualification but management and leadership

competence as well as technical competence.

Quality of Vision Literature identifies vision as an essential feature of great leadership (Owen, 2005). Vision normally emanates from the leader and must be carried out in a way that will allow members to share in the leader‘s vision. Every good vision must be aligned with the mission of the organization,

be documented, communicated, and accepted by the members. The vision must thrive to achieve

stated goals of the organization. The authors put forward that without a vision one only manages,

whereas leadership begins with a shared vision. Several authors have identified vision as a key

element of effective leadership. Owen (2005) identified five dimensions of successful senior leaders

and these included ability to motivate others, Vision, Honesty and Integrity, Decisiveness and

ability to handle Crisis. However, the authors of this paper believe that having a mere vision is not

enough for effective leadership but the quality of a leader‘s vision is critical to effectiveness of

leadership. Arguably, without vision (both personal and organizational), a position of authority is

synonymous to management, whereas vision propels the journey of leadership. Quality of vision

may be defined by, achievability of the vision, communication and ownership of the vision, quality

of documentation of the vision and alignment with organizational mission and values.

Organizational Factors

Ultimately, leadership in organizations is manifested through individuals. Within the organizational

context of leadership, people should provide leadership at all levels in a way that is mindful of the

organization‘s needs as well as the individuals‘ needs. Effective organizational leadership must

ensure prudent use of available resources and must be able to harness required resources at all

levels of the organizational structure through empowerment of members and commitment to the

goals and aspirations of the organization (Zhu et al., 2005). Harnessing the required resources may

be important but an additional strand to organizational leadership is worth considering. It includes

taking action to improve, redefine and re-engineer the context itself. In managing performance

within the organization, organizational structure and management systems are required for people,

process and result control (Wim Van De Stede, 2003).

40


Key organizational factors that this study postulates can influence quality of leadership include, the Organizational values and norms, nature and availability of documentation of management systems

including the organizational structure, management control, availability of resources, competence

and commitment of members, organizational networking, organizational learning, and

organizational management system.

Situational factors Three (3) factors have been described in leadership theory, under the contingency leadership theory

to influence leadership style and by implication, quality of leadership. These factors are the Task

structure or nature of the job, Positional power and the group cohesion or Leader member

exchanges. Together, these three situational factors determine the "favourableness" of various

situations in organizations. Situations that are rated "most favourable" are those having good leader-

follower relations, defined tasks, and strong leader position power. Situations that are "least

favourable" have poor leader-follower relations, unstructured tasks, and weak leader position power.

Situations that are rated "moderately favourable" fall in between these two extremes. In this study,

situational factors are defined to include national governance context and the relationship between

leaders (Rectors and Vice Chancellors) and Board or Council Members.

41


Figure 1: Conceptualised Quality of Leadership Framework

4. SITUATIONAL FACTORS

Task structure

Positional power

Leader-Member Exchanges

Task to be performed

External environmental

factors

1. QUALITY VISION

Vision existence

Clarity of Objectives and goals

Documentation of Vision Acceptability and awareness

Achievability

Communication

Quality of Leadership:

visibility, the need for a two-way

trust, teamwork, clear objectives,

clear communication, self-belief,

adequate resources, insistence on

good performance, humility, and

controlled aggression towards the

opposition

3. ORGANIZATIONAL FACTORS

Values and Norms

Availability of resource

Organizational culture

Competence of members

Organizational learning

Commitment of members

Organizational

Management Systems

2. PERSONAL FACTORS

Competence

Confidence

Creativity

Problem solving skills

Values

Trust

Social Capital

Integrity and credibility

People skills

Core and Working mission

Intrapersonal, Interpersonal

and extra-personal skills

Source: Authors Construction & Partly Adapted from Montgomery (2005)

42


Hypotheses

H1: Quality of Vision has a significant influence on Quality of leadership

H2: Personal Factors has a significant influence on Quality of Leadership

H3: Situational Factors have significant influence on Quality of Leadership

H4: Organizational Factors have significant influence on Quality of leadership

3. METHODOLOGY

Research Design This study uses a mixed method in descriptive and causal designs; cross-sectional study combining both qualitative and quantitative techniques to achieve its stated objectives. The

qualitative technique was based on views, perceptions and opinions respondents and/or

interviewees held about what they perceive as Quality of Leadership and the factors that

influenced the quality of leadership in higher institutions of learning in Ghana. The quantitative

technique was used to test whether the four dimensions identified in the conceptual framework

have significant influences on QoL, and which of dimensions is had the strongest impact on quality of leadership.

Population and Sample As at 2009, there were10 Public Higher Institutions of learning (university status) in Ghana; six of these were traditional universities and four specialised and professional Institutions. Three (3) of the institutions were purposively selected; these were made up of one (1) traditional university,

one specialised and one professional. The purpose of selecting equal number of tertiary

institutions is to help identify variations in Quality of Leadership across the various categories of

higher institutions of learning sector.

Data Acquisition

The survey method was used to collect data from four categories of employees in the sampled

institutions: Heads of Department (HODs), Deans, lecturers and Rectors. A simple random

sampling technique was used to select HODs, Deans, lecturers. In each institution, 50% of HODs

and Deans were selected for the survey while all sitting Rectors and Vice Chancellors were

selected. The survey was preceded by the development and validation of the quality of leadership

construct through interviews of Two (2) Rectors and two (2) Deans from two other public tertiary

institutions.

43


i i i

Data Analysis The study uses both descriptive and inferential statistical techniques, using measures of central

tendencies (averages) and dispersions (standard deviations) in analysing responses and the times

data. Inferential statistics as multivariate regression is used to identify the factors impacting the

quality of leadership in Higher Institutions of learning.

Model Specification

This study models the relationship between Quality of Leadership and a vector of determinant as

follows:

y x ' E( i ) 0

Where yi represents the ith

respondent perception of the QOL, X is a vector of determinants of

quality of leadership including quality of vision, situational factors, organizational factors and

personal factors and other control variables. The control variables include respondents‘ age,

gender, and educational status. β is a vector of coefficients and ε is the random error term. A

more specific regression model of the relationship between QOL and the vector of determinants is

specified as follows:

QoLi 0 1 Agei 2 Genderi 3 Edui 4 QVi 5 PFi 6 SFi 7 OFi

i

Where QoL represents Quality of Leadership and is measured as the simple average of responses

to proxy variables of Quality of Leadership:

QoLi

x x ... x

1i ,LQ 2i, LQ ki, LQ , k is the number of proxy variables and i is the cross section

k unit.

Demographic factors include Age , Gender and Educational Status; the definitions of the

relevant variables are as follows:

QV = Quality of Vision PF = Leaders Personal Factors

OF = Organisational factors

SF = Situational factors

Like LQ, QV, PF, OF and SF are composite variables, with the components shown in Table 1. A

set of questions (measurements) are combined to form each construct. The relevant variables for

this study was developed using the formulae

44


QVi

x x ... x

1i ,QV 2i ,,QV ki ,,QV

k

PF

i

x x ... x

1i , PF 2i , PF ki , PF

k x x ... x

SF 1i ,SF 2i ,SF ki ,SF

x x ... x OF

1i ,OF 2i ,OF ki ,OF i

k i

k Where;

Where x represents a particular proxy variable

Reliability and Validity The reliability of the constructs is performed using the inter item reliability test using the Cronbach‘s alpha. The results of the reliability test are reported in Table 1.

Table 1 Scales, Reliability Items Categorical variable # of variables Scale reliability test Average interim covariance Quality of Leadership 10 0.886474 0.265799 Personal Factors 8 0.841581 0.273163 Quality Vision 7 0.751997 0.426093 Situational Factors 5 0.706492 0.234682 Organizational Factors 7 0.855324 0.461647 Source: Authors‘ Computation

The leadership questionnaire contains 10 items that define unique component of Quality of

Leadership. These 10 measurements were adopted from Montgomery (2005) who identified 10

key qualities of a leader to include visibility, the need for a two-way trust, teamwork, clear

objectives, equally clear communication, self-belief, back-up with adequate resources, insistence

on good performance, humility, and controlled aggression towards the opposition. On a scale of 1

to 5, respondents were asked to indicate the extent to which they agree or disagree with 10

distinctly identified aspects of the Quality of Leadership in institutions of higher learning. A

unique variable representing Quality of Leadership was generated using the Cronbach‘s analysis

(see appendix one). Table one (1) reports the Cronbach‘s alpha measuring the average reliability

of the items used as a proxy for the construct. The table shows the number of variables or items

constituting the new variable, the scale reliability coefficient and average interim covariance and

the tables in appendix one show the extent to which each item is correlated with the generated

variable. A high alpha (greater than 0.7) interim correlation coefficient was obtained between

each of the items and the new variable generated as shown in column 5 of table 1 in appendix

one. The overall alpha of 0.886474 indicates that the items are strongly reliable in representing

the construct.

The paper tests the reliability of 8, 7, 5, and 7 measurements representing personal factors, quality

of vision, situational factors and organizational factors respectively using the Cronbach Alpha.

The measurements representing these four constructs are shown in Table 1. Column 3 of Table 1

45


reports overall Cronbach‘s Alpha for all items representing each of the four constructs; it shows

high overall reliability scores. Apart from testing the reliability of the measurements, the factor

analysis also helps check over-parameterization and multicollinearity. Over-parameterization (the

inclusion of several variables), though improves the goodness of fit, it reduces the degrees of

freedom (df) and hence inefficient estimates, Woodridge (2005). It further increases the

likelihood of type one error and multicollinearity.

Estimation Procedure

Let yi be an ordered response taking on the values {1, 2, 3, 4, and 5} with description as follows

1

2

yi 3 4

StronglyDisagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

5 Strongly Agree

When the response variable is ordered, OLS residuals are heteroskedastic and serially correlated.

The appropriate choice is the Ordered Logit or Ordered Probit models (Cameron and Trivedi, 2002). The choice between the ordered logit and probit is based on the assumption of the residual ɛ . Ordered Probit model for y conditioned on x is derived from a latent model with the latent variable y*. Assume the latent variable is determined by

y x x ~ Normal(0, 1)

Let 1 <

2 <

3 <

4 <

5 be the unknown cut points (or the threshold parameters)

and define

1

2

yi 3

if y 1

if y* 2

if 2 y* 3

4 if 3

y* 4

5 if 4 y* 5

The parameters α and β can be estimated by maximum likelihood estimator. The log likelihood

for each i (cross sectional unit) is given by:

46


li ( , ) 1[ yi 0] log[ (1 xi )] 1[ yi 1] log[ ( 2 x ) (1 xi

)]

... 1[ yi 5] log[ (1 ( 5 xi )]

Replacing with the Logit function, ˄ gives the ordered Logit model. The choice between the

ordered Logit and Probit is based on the assumption about the error term. The Probit regression

assumes a normal distribution whiles the Logistic regression assumes a Logistic distribution.

4. RESULTS

Definition of Quality of Leadership and Qualitative Analysis In order to identify the definition of Quality of Leadership (QoL) and the proxy variables relevant to QoL, personal interviews of key leaders (Two (2) Rectors and two (2) Deans) who have expert

knowledge in leadership in higher institutions of learning in Ghana were conducted. A content

analysis of the results are shown in appendix one. One of the Deans of the institutions

interviewed noted, ―Quality of leadership is the ability of the individual concern to have a vision

and that vision must be buttressed by the individual‟s goals, values, conception and quality of

what he wants to achieve”. This pre-supposes that vision is vital in determining quality of

leadership. He stressed that although vision was essential ingredient in quality of leadership,

merely having a vision would not suffice; what is important is the quality of vision. However, he

note that, ―a quality vision without the appropriate tools (availability of resources) to work with

is meaningless”. In his view the availability of resources limits the attainment of goals and

consequently, the quality of leadership.

Exploring further the notion of availability of resources, one rector noted, ‗public resources are

almost always woefully inadequate. However, an effective leader should be able to harness and

mobilize resources to achieve his vision. This is what determines the quality of leader‟s capability

for effective leadership‟. The position that resources must be made available by someone else in

public institutions seems to undermine the concept of the leader‘s ability to harness and make

resources available for the achievement of vision. This study suggests that ability to mobilize

resources towards the achievement of goals is a measure of the quality of leadership.

When it came to the task structure which is a variable under situational factors, one rector said,

―It is one major flaw in leadership theory, when you allow the task to determine your leadership

qualities”. The rector argues that, ―the task structure theory only allows you to be modelled to fit

into a situation and the status-quo, which makes you a manager and not to leader. The rector

added, ‗positional power which is another variable under situational factors normally brings coercion and not consensus building and every leader who exercises authority and power must

consider the “human touch” of the people.”

47


Another interviewee defined quality of leadership as, ―a symbiotic relationship between leaders and followers in order to achieve the goals of the organisation”. This implies that the

relationship between the leader and followers becomes a key determining factor of the quality of

leadership. This respondent opined that ―the biggest challenge of quality of leadership is how to

moderate the relationship with the people”. He again explained that, ―the elements of quality of

leadership are the leader‟s personality, the followers and the situation of the leadership or the

context of leadership”. He added that „the context is not only different but dynamic and the latter

is very important in determining the quality of leadership under any given set of conditions”.

The fourth interviewee also defined quality of leadership as ―the process of communicating a

clear vision to members and making them to be committed to the vision and a good human

relation mechanism that counts”. Supporting his view, he added that it is the vision that drives

the institution. Explaining further he noted that, ―there is suppose to be a clear vision, it must be

communicated and understood by members in order for them to be committed to the vision”.

Furthermore, the interviewee added, ―there are rules and regulations given to you by the State

and when you circumvent them, then be ready for the consequences”. To this respondent, quality

of leadership should not be judged merely by results, but by the legitimacy of the results

considering whether the processes used to arrive at the results followed due process. Responding

to a question on task structure and positional power the interviewee further noted, ―As a leader

you have to define how you succeed base on the statutory rules and regulations at play; otherwise

you are not a strong leader”. From this perspective, organizational citizenship in respect of the

‗Compliance Factor‘ should be an important factor for Quality of Leadership. The fourth

interviewee, aside personal factors, believed that organizational factors characterized by the

ability to mobilization resources is key to quality of leadership and this is in his opinion a test of a

leader‘s social capital or network, the links to peers outside one‘s institution and ability to

influence the forces to harness resources and pursue one‘s vision. The outcomes of these

interviews validated the conceptual framework for QoL developed from theory for empirical

testing. The results of the empirical tests are provided in the econometric analysis in the next

section.

Regression Estimates of the Factors Influencing Quality of Leadership

This study performed an econometric analysis of the determinants of Quality of Leadership using

survey data from three (3) institutions of higher learning in Ghana. The results of the ordered

Logit and Probit regressions are reported in Table 2. Regression 1 is the OLS regression output

on the influence of demographic factors, personal factors, quality vision, situational factors and

organizational factors on Quality of leadership. Regressions 2 and 3 are the results from the

Ordered Logit and Probit Models.

The paper used Ordinary Least Squares (OLS), Ordered Logit and Probit regressions to assess

how the factors identified influence Quality of Leadership in higher institutions of learning in

48


Ghana. Controlling for demographic factors, the paper found that quality of vision was the

strongest factor impacting Quality of Leadership in higher institutions of learning in Ghana. This

is shown by the size of the coefficient of quality of vision. The coefficient of quality of vision is positive and statistically significant at 1%. The existence of vision, clearly stated objectives and

goals, proper documentation, acceptability, achievability of these objectives, communication of

goals succinctly and democratically to all employees will foster high quality of leadership in

institutions of higher learning in Ghana.

Personal factors and organizational factors are the next significant factors affecting quality of

leadership. The impact of personal factors and organizational factors were statistically significant

at 1%. Both variables had positive influences on Quality of Leadership. Situational factors are the

fourth determinant of Quality of Leadership based on the size of the coefficient. The coefficient is

statistically significant at 5% in the OLS regression but 1% in the OLOGIT and OPROBIT

regressions. The impact of personal factors is significant at 1% in all regressions. This suggest

that people skills, creativity, problem solving skills, personal values, core and working mission of

the individual, integrity and credibility of leader has important implication for quality of

Leadership in higher institutions of learning in Ghana.

The impact of situational factors and organizational factors are positive and significant at 1% and

5% respectively. The values and norms of an organization, organizational culture, availability of

resources, competence of members, commitment of members, management structure and governance system are essential ingredients in ensuring high quality leadership in institutions of

higher learning in Ghana.

Table 2: Econometric Determinants of Quality of Leadership

(1) (2) (3) OLS OLOGIT OPROBIT

Quality of Leadership Age 0.6200

** 0.7358** 1.4245

** (2.09) (2.24) (2.01)

Gender -0.3368* -0.3632** -0.9247

**

(-1.99) (-2.01) (-2.33) Experience -0.3378

*** -0.3682*** -0.7630

***

(-3.69) (-2.86) (-3.06) Personal Factors 0.8449

*** 0.9639*** 0.7875

***

(5.02) (5.50) (5.74) Quality Vision 1.2193

*** 1.2619*** 1.5694

***

(3.75) (3.85) (3.00) Situational Factors 0.2594

** 0.2519*** 0.3896

***

(2.43) (2.79) (2.92) Organizational Factors 0.6801

* 0.8110** 0.4521

**

(1.77) (2.06) (2.06) Constant 0.0286**

49


(2.41)

cut1: Constant 2.9718 4.5172 (1.31) (1.16)

cut2: Constant 3.9432* 6.2258

(1.74) (1.60) cut3: Constant 4.5620

** 7.3415*

(2.01) (1.88) cut4: Constant 6.1614

*** 10.1204**

(2.61) (2.46) Observations 30 30 30 Ll -39.7706 -35.9087 -35.8331 r2_p 0.1681 0.1698 chi2 (F) 18394 14.5100 14.6612 P 0.0298 0.0428 0.0406 z statistics in parentheses *

p < 0.10, **

p < 0.05, ***

p < 0.01

5. DISCUSSION The results supported and confirmed Montgomery (2005) definition and dimension of quality of leadership which stressed visibility, two-way trust, teamwork, clear objectives, equally clear

communication, self-belief, back-up with adequate resources, insistence on good performance,

humility, and controlled aggression towards the opposition. The result of the study was consistent

with most of the theories, and observations of earlier researchers cited in the theoretical

framework. The results for examples supported arguments posed by Grandzol and Gershon

(1997), that quality leadership requires a critical examination of the organization‘s leadership

capability and culture which are elements of organizational factors in the framework tested and

were found to be significant at 1% and 5% respectively. The effect of organizational factors is

further buttressed in the works of Juran et al., 1995, Bloom (2003) and Astin and Astin 2000.

Juran et al., 1995 for instance stated that attainment of quality leadership requires that upper

management collectively take charge of the quality initiative aimed at instilling commitment

towards goal achievement. Bloom (2003) on the other hand emphasized the importance of

commitment and participation of leaders as critical factors for successful organizations. The

results also supports the observation of Owen (2005) study which identified five dimensions of

successful senior leaders which included vision, integrity, honesty, decisiveness and ability to

handle crisis.

Though organizational networking was not catered for in the quantitative analysis, the qualitative

analysis suggested that organizational network is an important organizational factor in Higher

Institutions of Learning in Ghana, particularly with the move towards global quality assurance

schemes and the wind of harmonization of educational practices blowing across the globe. The

50


study observed from the qualitative analysis that though most of the literature reviewed

mentioned availability of resources, this study stresses that resource mobilization rather than

resource availability is a key test of a leader‘s organizational abilities. Additionally, the

qualitative analysis emphasize that the quality of a leader‘s achievement does not lie in the

volume of achievement but legitimacy of the outcomes as demonstrated by adherence to due

process, though due process should not be a barrier to the achievement of goals.

The fact that quality of vision was the most significant factor suggests that quality of leadership is

pivoted on the quality of vision, ability to see and create opportunities that may not exist and

make them happen, is essential in the determination of quality of leadership at any given time.

Quality of vision can then be seen as the foundation for quality leadership. However, the mere

existence of a vision would not suffice, but rather the communication and ownership of the vision

by community members and the effective deployment of the vision are the qualities of a vision

required for quality of leadership. Personal factors demonstrated by competence, confidence,

trust, honesty, creativity, problem solving skills, people and personal skills are next to the quality

of vision. The results of personal factors also laid emphasis on the leader‘s social capital or social

networks in addition to the personal and people skills.

While the results reveal that situational variables do impact quality of leadership, this is to a

lesser extent as compared to the other three factors (quality of vision, personal factors and

organizational factors). This suggests that a leader with a realistic and well communicated vision,

good problem-solving skills, and people skills should also have a good personal skill, be resilient

and learn how to navigate the situation well enough to achieve desired goals. As one Rector puts

it, the concept of situational leadership or contingency leadership theory is a major flaw in

leadership theory, which makes the leader a subject of the prevailing circumstances not a leader

of the situation.

6. CONCLUSION AND POLICY IMPLICATION The study investigated the quality of leadership in higher institutions of learning in Ghana using data from three (3) public universities. Using a mixed method, exploratory and causal design, the

study investigated the dimensions of Quality of Leadership from the Ghanaian perspective and

how the factors influence quality of leadership. The study proceeded with an exploration into the

appropriate definition and indicators of quality of leadership; followed by a causal analysis of

how the factors impact quality of leadership. Relevant survey data was obtained from rectors,

deans of schools, HODs and lecturers of the three public institutions. The study used Ordinary

Least Squares (OLS) and Ordered Logit and Probit regressions to assess the factors influencing

Quality of Leadership in higher institutions of learning. Controlling for demographic factors, the

study found that quality of vision was the most important factor impacting Quality of Leadership

in higher institutions of learning in Ghana. Personal and situational factors are the next important

factors affecting quality of leadership. The impacts of personal and situational factors were

51


statistically significant at 1%. Organizational factors are the fourth important factor impacting

Quality of Leadership. The coefficient is statistically significant at 5% in the OLS regression but

1% in the OLOGIT and OPROBIT regressions.

Policy makers and heads of institutions are encouraged to critically consider these factors in

ensuring quality of leadership in their institutions because the study suggests that these factors

contribute significantly to the quality of leadership in higher institutions of learning in Ghana.

Again, the study stresses the need for leaders to make conscious effort to exploit alternative

sources of financing and harness other relevant resources without necessarily over depending on

public and donor funding as is the status quo.

7. AREAS FOR FURTHER STUDIES One area that might need further investigation would be the significance of competence of the

leader versus confidence of the leader in higher institutions of learning in Ghana. This should be

intended to test observations of Adair (1988), whose work suggest that competence was less

significant to senior managers and ....views which suggest that competence of the leader is not

key for quality of leadership by senior managers in the corporate world. For organizational

factors, the results of study suggest that ability to shape the culture of the institution by re-

enforcing existing values or nurturing a new set of desired values is paramount. Additionally, the

study distinguished between resource availability and resource mobilization.

52


REFERENCES Adair, J. (1988). Effective leadership. London. Pan Books.

Albritton, R. L. (1998). A new paradigm of leader effectiveness for academic libraries: An

empirical study of the Bass (1985) model of transformational leadership.

Bass, B.M., & Avolio, B.J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through

transformational leadership: Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Bass, B. M. (1985) Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectation: New York: Free Press

Beck, D. E., & Cowan, C. C. (1996). Spiral dynamics: Mastering values, leadership, and change.

Cambridge: MA7 Blackwell

Bennis, W., & Nannus, B. (1985). Leaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge. NY: New York.

Bloom, P J. (2003). Leadership in action: How effective directors get things done, Lake Forest:

New Horizons. Bolden R., Gosling J., Marturano A., and Dennisson P., (2003), A Review of Leadership Theory

and Competency Framework, ed. Centre for Leadership Studies, Exeter University Press,

Dunsford Hill UK.

Brennan, J., DeVries, P., & Williams, R. (1997). Standards and Quality in Higher Education:

London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Dale, B.G. (1999). Managing Quality (3rd ed.): Blackwell: Oxford

Drath, W. (2001). The deep blue sea: Rethinking the source of leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-

Bass.

Eisenhower, D. D. http://www.rapid-business-intelligence-success.com/famous-leadership-

quotes.html

Fiedler, F. E., & Garcia, J. E. (1987). New Approaches to Effective Leadership: New York: John

Wiley.

Fieldler, F.E. (1967). A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness: McGraw-Hill, New York

53

http://www.rapid-business-intelligence-success.com/famous-leadership-quotes.html

http://www.rapid-business-intelligence-success.com/famous-leadership-quotes.html


Grandzol, J.R. & Gershon, M. (1997) ―Which TQM practices really matter: an empirical

investigation. Quality Management Journal, 4(4), 43-59.

Green, F. (1988). Leaders for a New Era: Strategies for Higher Education. New York:

Macmillan.

Horner, M. (1997). Leadership theory: past, present and future: Team Performance Management,

3(4), 270-287.

Houston A. and Dockstader S. L., (2002). Total Quality Leadership: A Primer. TQLO Publication

Number 97-02

Juran, J.M., Bigliazzi, M., Mirandola, R., Spaans, C., & Dunuad, M. (1995). A history of

managing for quality. Quality Progress Journal, 28(8), 125-129.

Kamaruzaman, J. (2007). Research Leadership: Innovation and Policy from the Perspective of a

Research University. Selangor: Malaysia. p.13.

Kanji, G.K., & Tambi, A.M. (2002). Business Excellence in Higher Education: Chichester

Kouzes, J.M., & Posner, B.Z. (2002). The Leadership Challenge.

Kotter, J. P. (1990). What leaders really do: Harvard business review, 68(3), 103-111.

Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard business Review,

23(3), 59-67.

Kotlyar, I., & Karakowsky, L. (2007). Falling Over Ourselves to Follow the Leader: Journal of

Leadership & Organizational Studies, 14(1), 38-49.

Lee, T.H., & Gharajedaghi, J. (1998). Leadership in TQM: What does it mean? Center for

Quality of Management Journal, 7(1), 19-30.

Luria, G. (2008). Controlling for quality: climate, leadership and behavior: Quality Management

Journal, 15(1), 27-40.

Mauro, J.A., & Mauro, N.J (1999). The Deming leadership method: A behavioral and technical

approach, Cross cultural management: an international journal, 6(4), 37-44.

Montgomery V. W., (2005). Dynamics of Leadership in Public Service: Theory and Practice. M.

E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY

54


Merchant, K. A. and`1 Wim A. V. S., (2003). Management Control Systems: Performance

Measurement, Evaluation, and Incentives. 1st

Edition, London: Prentice Hall

Owen Jo, (2005), How to Lead, what you Actually need to Do to Manage, Lead and Succeed,

Pearson, Prentice Hill Business, UK.

Puffer, S.M., & McCarthy, D.J. (1996). A framework for leadership in a TQM context: Journal of

Quality Management, 1(1), 109-130.

Sadler, P. (2003). Leadership. 2nd

Edition, Kogan Page

Saraph, J.V., Benson, G.P., & Schroeder, R.G. (1989). An instrument for measuring the critical

factors of quality management: Decision Sciences Journal, 20(4), 810-829.

Stogdill, R.M. (1974). Handbook of Leadership: Free Press, New York

Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with leadership: A survey of the literature.

Journal of Psychology, 4(5): 35-71.

Vroom, V. H., & Jago, A. G. (1988). The new leadership: Managing participation in

organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Vroom, V. H. (2001). Leadership Style: Managing the Decision Making Process; in Rimar S.

(ed), The Yale Management Guide for Physicians, Wiley, pp.143-161.

Winder, R. E., & Draeger, J. (2006). Resilient leadership: integrating stability and agility in the

five dimension leadership model: ASQ World Conference on Quality and Improvement, pp1-14.

Wooldridge J., M. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data, The MIT Press

Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England. 2002.

Zhu, W., Chew, I.K.H. and Spangler, W.D. (2005) CEO transformational leadership & organizational

outcomes: The mediating role of human-capital-enhancing human resource management. The Leadership

Quarterly, 16(1): 39-52.

55


Define quality of leadership

Frequency

Percent

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent

1. Ability to factor in all the elements for the

accomplishment of both individual and

organisational goals

1

2.0

2.0

6.0

2. Ability to meet or exceed expectations in a

given endeavour effectively and sustainably

1

2.0

2.0

8.0

3. Achieve organisation mission and vision

1

2.0

2.0

10.0

4. Clear mission, commited to vision and human

relation

1

2.0

2.0

12.0

5. Commitment, ability to judge fairly, take blame

as well as success and firmness

1

2.0

2.0

14.0

6. Communication of vision and relationship with

other staff

1

2.0

2.0

16.0

7. Direction to achieve goal or role exhibited to

manage group of people

3

6.0

6.0

22.0

8. Discharges responsibility effectively and

efficiently

1

2.0

2.0

24.0

9. Has vision and able influence & set good

examples

1

2.0

2.0

26.0

10. Honesty, commitment, credibility, courageous

and self respect

1

2.0

2.0

28.0

11. Influence and win support of followers

1

2.0

2.0

30.0

12. Influence followers to achieve vision

1

2.0

2.0

32.0

13. Influence over resources needed to achieve

goals and objectives

27

54.0

54.0

86.0

14. Integrity and humble

6 1

2.0

2.0

88.0

15. Obtaining highest productivity with highly

motivated employee

1

2.0

2.0

90.0

Define quality of leadership

Valid

Percent

Cumulative

Percent Frequency Percent

1. Ability to factor in all the elements for the

accomplishment of both individual and

organisational goals

1 2.0 2.0 6.0

2. Ability to meet or exceed expectations in a

given endeavour effectively and sustainably

1 2.0 2.0 8.0

3. Achieve organisation mission and vision 1 2.0 2.0 10.0

4. Clear mission, commited to vision and human

relation

1 2.0 2.0 12.0

5. Commitment, ability to judge fairly, take blame

as well as success and firmness

1 2.0 2.0 14.0

6. Communication of vision and relationship with

other staff

1 2.0 2.0 16.0

7. Direction to achieve goal or role exhibited to

manage group of people

3 6.0 6.0 22.0

8. Discharges responsibility effectively and

efficiently

1 2.0 2.0 24.0

9. Has vision and able influence & set good

examples

1 2.0 2.0 26.0

10. Honesty, commitment, credibility, courageous

and self respect

1 2.0 2.0 28.0

11. Influence and win support of followers

12. Influence followers to achieve vision

1 2.0 2.0 30.0

1 2.0 2.0 32.0

13. Influence over resources needed to achieve

goals and objectives

27 54.0 54.0 86.0

14. Integrity and humble 1 2.0 2.0 88.0

15. Obtaining highest productivity with highly

motivated employee

1 2.0 2.0 90.0

AAPPPPEENNDDIIXX

5


Prof. Mrs. Goski Alabi

Documents