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.