Analysis on Leadership Style in the Administration of Public Service in Nigeria (A Case Study of Kebbi State Universal Basic Education Board)
OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY
The objectives of the study are;
- To examine the leadership style prevalent in public service
- To identify the level of quality and quantity of services rendered by the leadership in public service
- To ascertain the relationship between leadership style and staff productivity
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
What is Leadership?
Leadership has always been the bane of development in Nigeria, therefore the underdevelopment of Nigeria have always been attributed to bad leadership, with its antecedent auxiliary; corruption. Though in some quarters, it is believed that followership has a problem of its own. Okeke (2002:297) assert that it is the leadership behaviour that determines the behaviour of the group that is being led. Muson (2001) sees leadership as the ability to handle men so as to achieve the most with the least function and the greatest cooperation. Bennise (1959) on the other hand saw leadership as the process by which an agent induces a subordinate to behave in a desired manner. Wash (2007) suggested that leadership implies influencing change in the conduct of people. The new staffs who are still lacking in sense of direction have a remarkable change in behaviour under the influence of a leader. Tead (1985) sees leadership as the activity of influencing people to cooperate toward goals which they came to find desirable. Massarik (2001) sees leadership as interpersonal influence exercised in a situation and directed through the communication process towards the attainment of a specific goal or goals. Hemphill (2007) is of the opinion that there is no absolute leader since successful leadership must always take into account the specific requirements of the nature of the group. Ohikhena and Anam (2004) assert that, in a situational approach it is assumed that the situations are unique and consequently each leader has to be studied in relation to his group
Styles of Leadership
Lewin (2008) in writing on leadership style identified and classified leaders into democratic, autocratic and laissez faire types. It is also concerned with the degree at which any type effect decision making. Abah (1997:97) identified four basic styles of leadership which he called management styles. He describe them as, Exploitative/Authoritarian. Here, the leader or manager is highly autocratic, has little trust in subordinates, motivates people through fear and punishment with occasional rewards, engages only in a downward communication and limits decision making to the top. The participative leader decentralizes managerial authority. His decisions are not unilateral as with the autocrat, but they arise from consultation with subordinates and participation by them. He brings the staff into his problems, by informing them about factors which affect their group job, thereby encouraging the staff with their suggestions and contribution of ideas. The free-rein (laizzes-faire) leader depends upon the group to establish its own goals and wok out its own problems. Staff members train themselves and provide their own motivation. The leader exists primarily as a contact man with outside persons to bring to his staff the information and resources it needs to accomplish its task. Okeke (2002:300) conceptualizes that leadership style is situational, that it is the situation at hand that determined the leadership style to be adopted. Jenkin (2001) writing on the situational theory, asserts that leadership is a specific to the particular situation under investigation. Fielder (2007) in his contingency model asserts that leadership 13 effectiveness depends on the appropriate matching up of the individual leadership style and the influence, which the group situation provide. Campbell (1957) opined that the situation seem to establish some boundaries at least of temporary nature within which a leader must work.
On function of leadership in relationship to group performance or staff productivity, Okeke (2002:306) states that a leader cannot be studied outside his group because leadership is a relational attribute which emphasizes the behaviour of the person leading in terms of the behaviour of the person led. Haplin (1956) sees leadership as the behaviour of a leader functioning vis-à-vis members of a group in an endeavour to facilitate the solution to group problem or organizational goal – productivity. Brown (1997) and Newell (2008) view leadership as a transaction, which is determined by both the leader and the led. Therefore, there is a strong relationship between leadership and staff productivity. For optimum productivity to occur leadership must create an enabling environment for followership to perform and produce. Mere occupancy of a position is no guarantee that its incumbent is an effective leader in the sense that he does things, initiates new programmes and actually leads his followers of staff. Leadership can only be understood in terms of what the leader does, not who the leader is or what kind of person he is. However, there are certain functions that seem to be commonly performed by leaders of various organizations or groups. Such functions include making of policies, execution of policies and performance of dual responsibility to the general public and to the internal operation of his organization. 14 Another function, is that for a leader to improve on staff productivity should adopt measures like shares relationship in the sector he is occupying. In adopting this measure, he is expected to provide proper guidance, motivation and help to his staff while on the other hand, he expects good quality work from his staff. Gross and Herriott (1965) in their studies on Executive Professional Leadership (EPL) Principles found out that leadership behaviour affect negatively or positively on organizational characteristics. Mitchel (1972) writing on a study to determine whether the complexity of persons in leadership positions influenced their groups performance on variety of tasks, and whether leaders with different levels of complexity utilized systematically different behaviours to obtain their respective performance level. Finding showed that staff productivity level is influenced by leadership style. Macgregor (1966) believe that leadership style was a determinant of staff behaviour. Schriesheim and Murphy (2008) writing on leadership style and productivity, found that when leaders perform optimally and relates well with staff, that staff productivity increases but when reverse is the case, the productivity of staff decreases. Katz and Khan (1978) corroborated the assertion by arguing that the function of staff if well articulated will increase productivity. For Okeke (2002:308) leadership in governmental administration is two-pronged.
The researcher used descriptive research survey design in building up this project work the choice of this research design was considered appropriate because of its advantages of identifying attributes of a large population from a group of individuals. The design was suitable for the study as the study sought to analysis on leadership style in the administration of public service in Nigeria( A case study of kebbi State Universal basic education Board).
Sources of data collection
Data were collected from two main sources namely:
(i)Primary source and
These are materials of statistical investigation which were collected by the research for a particular purpose. They can be obtained through a survey, observation questionnaire or as experiment; the researcher has adopted the questionnaire method for this study.
These are data from textbook Journal handset etc. they arise as byproducts of the same other purposes. Example administration, various other unpublished works and write ups were also used.
Population of the study
Population of a study is a group of persons or aggregate items, things the researcher is interested in getting information on analysis on leadership style in the administration of public service in Nigeria. 200 staff of universal basic education in Kebbi state were randomly by the researcher as the population of the study.
PRESENTATION ANALYSIS INTERPRETATION OF DATA
Efforts will be made at this stage to present, analyze and interpret the data collected during the field survey. This presentation will be based on the responses from the completed questionnaires. The result of this exercise will be summarized in tabular forms for easy references and analysis. It will also show answers to questions relating to the research questions for this research study. The researcher employed simple percentage in the analysis.
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
It is important to ascertain that the objective of this study was to ascertain analysis on leadership style in the administration of public service in Nigeria. In the preceding chapter, the relevant data collected for this study were presented, critically analyzed and appropriate interpretation given. In this chapter, certain recommendations made which in the opinion of the researcher will be of benefits in addressing the challenges of leadership style in the administration of public service in Nigeria
This study was on analysis on leadership style in the administration of public service in Nigeria. Three objectives were raised which included: To examine the leadership style prevalent in public service, to identify the level of quality and quantity of services rendered by the leadership in public service and to ascertain the relationship between leadership style and staff productivity. In line with these objectives, two research hypotheses were formulated and two null hypotheses were posited. The total population for the study is 200 staff of universal basic education in Kebbi state. The researcher used questionnaires as the instrument for the data collection. Descriptive Survey research design was adopted for this study. A total of 133 respondents made directors, secretaries, senior staff and junior officers were used for the study. The data collected were presented in tables and analyzed using simple percentages and frequencies
Nigeria is a great country, with the abundant availability of human and natural resource, she stands the chance of making a grand stride in the comity of nations. It is true that leadership has been the bane of development in Nigeria, but with the crop of leaders we have today under the able control of the president, there is every hope that the productive status of every facet of Nigeria life will improve. Unlike in the past, today we have agencies like EFCC, ICPC, with visionary leader who is ready to show corrupt leader the door. We believe that if the council leadership, private and public leaderships will adhere and consider the recommendations that will be made, the council and the whole nation, private and public will change for good
There should be citizen’s control because they are the consumers of the delivery service at universal basic education; there should be room for constructive criticism, report of any shortcomings to the higher authority.
Universal basic education administrative patterns/styles should be adequately designed to guild the conduct of the leaders/heads at the local governments’ level.
There should be a means to checkmate leadership styles at this level
- Adebayo, A (2004), Principles and Practice of Public Administration; Ibadan, Nigeria Spectrum bookshop limited.
- Adair J (2005) Not bosses but leaders; How to lead the way to success. MPG Book Limited.
- Ajayi Kunle. (2010), “Local Government Autonomy in Nigeria: Polities and Challenges of the 1999 Constitution”, International Journal of Advanced Local Studies and Governance Vol.1. No.1
- Ananti, M. O. Onykwelu, P.U & Madubueze, M.C (2015), Caretaker Committee system and Democratic Governance in Nigeria local Government system; 2003-2004 in Anambra State; Global Journal of Management and Business Research Vol.XV, Issue1pp 33-38
- Bittel, L. R. & Newstrom, J.W.1990. What every supervisor should know. 6th Edition. New York. McGraw – Hill Publishing Company
- Dawson C (2002) Research Made Easy; Lesson for Research student, Chicago, USA Goleman, D. 2000. Leadership that gets results. Harvard Business Review, March – April: 78-90.
- Graver K. & Austin S. (1995) Additional evidence on insensitive plans and income Management; Journal of Accounting and Economics 19; 3-38.
- Kirega VPG (2006) Kampala City handbook, Gava associated services, Kampala Uganda Matshabaphala, M.D. (2013) Leadership in Public Service Delivery; Retrieved http;//www.dp sa.gov.2a/bathopele/docs/ a fripusbar day/A PSD%2 OMDJ% 2 Matshabach ala% 20wits.pdf
- Mullins J (2002) Management and Organisational behavior: Library of Congress cataloguing in Publication data, United Kingdom.