Discussion
The analysis results showed that autocratic leadership style was commonly employed by the majority of the principals of secondary schools in private sector in the district of Lahore. While the principals of secondary schools in private sector sometimes practiced democratic and laissez-faire leadership style as well in the district. Consequently, it was clear that the mainstream of the principals preferred autocratic leadership in secondary schools in private sector in Lahore district. But, this finding is contradictory than the research finding of Imhangbe et al. (2018), who founded that the democratic style of the leadership was most frequently used by the secondary schools’ principals in the studied area. While, Imhangbe et al. (2018) carried out their investigation in secondary schools in public sector in Edo Central Senatorial District, Nigeria, African continent. While this research work was done in private sector secondary schools in Lahore district, Pakistan, subcontinent of Asia. Hence, unlike location and dissimilar sector of secondary schools are throwing the light on the salient and important point or argument that must be made about the finding was that often these principals tended to believe and commonly employed polar leadership styles in different contexts, work settings and locations. In simple words, both the studies were catering the evidence that there was dissimilarity in principals’ leadership style in different contexts, working settings and locations.
Nevertheless, this outcome of the study is too aligned with the submission of Duze (2012), which asserted that the most dominant leadership style of principals was the autocratic leadership style in secondary schools in Delta State of Nigeria. Similarly, this verdict repeated the submission of Kozaala (2012), who noted autocratic leadership as the principals’ most practiced style of leadership in secondary schools private sector in Kamuli District, Uganda and the usage of directive language by the principals while talking to the teachers and the principals were making decisions solely as well were also observed in the district.
However, the study of Adeyemi (2010) was in divergent that senior secondary schools’ principals had catchy accustom of democratic leadership style in Ondo State, Nigeria and Ch, Ahmad, Malik, and Batool (2017) had a same point about the custom of the leadership style.
Moreover, the analysis results show the significant relationship between the leadership style of principals and job performance of the teachers in Lahore district. In simple words, the principals’ leadership style has influence or impact either directly or indirectly alternatively negatively or positively on teachers’ job performance in the surveyed area. This finding is in line with the piece of research work of Werang and Lena (2014), who noted that there is a significant relationship between the leadership style of principals and job performance of the teachers in State Senior High Schools in Merauke regency, Papua, Indonesia. Also, in the agreement with the investigation finding of Okoji (2016), which showed the significant relationship between autocratic leadership style and job performance of the teachers and democratic style of leadership was too found significant relationship with teachers’ job performance. Based on the findings, it was recommended by Okoji that in a school administration spheres a principal should imbibe a mixture of autocratic leadership style and democratic leadership style.
It means that in certain situation or context autocratic leadership and in some occasions democratic leadership to evoke the improvement in teachers’ job performance. However, in the argument with the scholarly finding of Imhangbe et al. (2018), who too found that there is statistically positive impact of democratic and laissez-faire style of leadership on teachers’ job performance. On the other hand, it was found that job performance of the teachers was negatively influenced due to autocratic leadership. Their suggestion was based on the findings that the studied area principals should sustain the usage of democratic leadership style and the prospective principals should be prepared to use distributed or democratic style of leadership effectively for spur job performance of the teachers.
But the results of hypothesis 1 of our research were different; there was a positive influence of autocratic and democratic leadership style of leadership on teachers’ job performance. While laissez-faire style of leadership was negatively informed teachers’ job performance in secondary schools in private sector in Lahore district. It means that it provided enough evidence to prove the research gap of our study that there was divergence or disparity or diversity in terms of impact leadership style of principal on job performance of the teachers in different state of affairs, contexts, and work settings.
Furthermore, the outcomes of hypothesis 2 exhibited the strong and statically significant correlation between the autocratic leadership and teachers’ job performance of in secondary schools in private sector in district Lahore. It was showing autocratic style of leadership (independent variable) was impacting the major portion of job performance of the teachers (dependent variable) in studied area. This key finding is in line with the submission of Adeyemi (2010), which disclosed the significantly strong and positive correlation between the leadership style and job performance of the teachers in the studied area. These results were in contradiction with the submission of Yusuf (2012), who made known that autocratic leadership had negative influence on academic achievements of the students and the job performance of their teachers. On the other hand, the conducted research of Duze (2012) had exposed that autocratic leadership style had a significantly positive correlation with the performance of teachers.
It is therefore coherent that the most probably autocratic style of leadership principally throws a positive and constructive impression or impact on teacher’s performance because it helps principals and administration to have a good control over working conditions especially significantly helpful in enforcing teachers who lack enthusiasm, causing students not to learn well, to perform their duties and finish complex job targets timely for the success of the schools and their students. This striking finding of our study strongly corroborated the significant point of Mwangi (2013), who stated that the autocratic style of leadership was a significant tool to do and finish the job responsibilities by the teachers.
From hypothesis 3, it unveiled that principals’ democratic leadership had a significant, positive but weak correlation with job performance of the teachers in secondary school in private sector in Lahore district. Here, the strength of the democratic leadership was quite low or weak, the most probably it is because of frequency the occurrence of the instance was comparatively low. It means that sometimes or in some situations the principals listen to the suggestions or ideas of the teachers. In simple words, the democratic style of leadership influences the job performance of the teachers either directly or indirectly in secondary schools in private sector in Lahore district. This argument or coherent was somehow affirmed in the suggestions of the submission of Okoji (2016) that a blend of democratic and autocratic leadership styles contribute to the better job performance in miscellaneous work settings and Kiboss and Jemiryott (2014), who noted with other things that principal’s democratic leadership style had a pretty good impact on a school working atmosphere.
The outcomes of hypothesis 4 exhibited that there was a significant correlation between principals’ laissez-faire leadership style and job performance of the teachers in secondary schools in private sector in Lahore district. It’s been further noticed that the laissez-faire had moderate but inverse relationship with job performance of the teachers. In simple words, in the presence of principals’ laissez-faire leadership style, there was a negative impact or influence of leadership style of the principal on job performance of the teachers in the schools surveyed. Although this finding was somewhat in line with the investigation of Imhangbe et al. (2018), who founded the significant and positive correlation between the laissez-faire leadership style and job performance of the teachers in Edo Central Sentorial district. Their submission showed another compliment that laissez-faire leadership has positive and negative impacts that on contingent situation. While the negativity impacts the relationship quality aggravatingly. In this contention there was semblance and sameness in this present study. However, Ozuruoke, Ordu, and Abdulkarim (2011) observed counter finding that the job performance of the teacher was fine in schools with leaders operating autocratic style of leadership over those schools which were using laissez-faire leadership styles in studied schools.