THE IMPACT OF LEADERSHIP STYLE ON

ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT: A CASE OF

UCHUMI SUPERMARKET

BY

LENA MAORWE

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY –AFRICA

SPRING 2019
 THE IMPACT OF LEADERSHIP STYLE ON
ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT: A CASE OF
UCHUMI SUPERMARKET

BY

LENA MAORWE

A Research Project Report Submitted to Chandaria School of

Business in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirement for the
Degree of Master of Business Administration (MBA)

UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY –AFRICA

SPRING 2019
 STUDENT DECLARATION
I, the undersigned declare that this project is my original work and that it has not been
submitted to any other college or other institution of higher learning for academic credit
other than United States International University -Africa

Signed: ___________________________ Date: ____________________

Lena Maorwe (ID: 609117)

This project proposal has been presented for examination with my approval as the
appointed supervisor

Signed: ___________________________ Date: ____________________

Prof Paul katuse

Signed: ___________________________ Date: ____________________

Dean, Chandaria School of Business

ii
 COPYRIGHT

This research project reserves the right of usage either in print form, or electronic without
express written permission from the author

© Lena Maorwe 2019

iii
 ABSTRACT
The purpose of this project was to determine the effects of leadership styles on
organizational development. The following research objectives guided the study: the
effect of autocratic leadership style on organizational development, effect of transactional
leadership style on organizational development, the effect of intellectual stimulation on
organizational development and the effect of bureaucratic leadership style on
organizational development. Literature review was presented based on the specific
research objectives.

The study had a population of 122 middle level managers of Uchumi Supermarket;
descriptive survey design was adopted for the study while stratified sampling method was
deployed in selecting the sample size of 96 respondents. The study used both inferential
and descriptive statistics whereby inferential statistics analyzed correlations and
regressions, descriptive statistics analyzed mean frequencies and standard deviation.

From the first objective the study eatblished that respondents neither agreed nor disagreed
that the leader fully seeks input from employees, it was however agreed that leaders
almost make all of the decisions, the study also revealed that the group heads dictate all
the work methods and processes. It was agreed that rules are important and tend to be
clearly outlined and communicated Repondents however failed to confirm wether
creativity from the employees tend to be discouraged. From the second objective it was
however agreed by a majority that leaders almost make all of the decisions, majority
agreed that leaders like to micromanage. The findings also show that leaders discourage
new ways of doing things within the firm (change) and leaders appeal to the self-interest
of employees.

Based on the third objectives, the finding indicated that majority agreed (M=4.15) that the
leaders suggests new ways of looking at how to meet the set targets and goals, it was also
agreed tha leaders highlight positive outcomes. It was however disagreed that leaders
create a conducive environment to support creation and sharing of knowledge. The
findings from the fourth objective established that the leaders prefer formality in
reporting, in addition, decision making is made by the leaders alone without involving
employees. There was however uncertainty over leaders prefering stability and order
within the organization.

iv
The study concluded that leaders at Uchumi supermarkets have not fully sought input
from employees as a results the leaders make all of the decisions. Similarly, there seem to
be issues of trust between the management and employees, this has resulted into
employees rarely being entrusted with decisions that are regarded important and crucial.
Secondly, leaders have failed to gives a clear reward scheme for each completed task in
the project, thus implying that they discourage independent thinking. Thirdly, at Uchumi,
leaders suggests new ways of looking at how to meet the set targets and goals and the
leaders highlight positive outcomes.Employees are also not certain of the leaders
encouraging innovation and creativity. Lastly, leaders prefer formality in reporting, in
addition, decision making is made by the leaders alone without involving employees.

The study recommends that leaders should fully seeks input from employees and at the
same time make all of the decisions. The service industry is dynamic, therefore creativity
from the employees should be highly encouraged. Secondly, in order to motivate
employees, it is of essence that leaders should gives a clear reward scheme for each
completed task in the project. Thridly, it is advisable that the leaders need to suggest new
ways of looking at how to meet the set targets and goals. Lastly, formality in reporting
should be highly encouraged however when it comes to decision makin, leaders need to
involve all employees.

The current study studied the impact of leadership Styles on organizational development
in Uchumi Supermarket. Similar study should be done to determine other factors that
affects organizational development in the firm. In addition, there is a need to do a similar
study in other supermarkets in order to be able to generalize the findings.

v
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to acknowledge my supervisor Professor Katuse for his guidance on how to
successfully develop the report.

vi
 DEDICATION

I dedicate this research project to my friends and family for their support.

vii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

STUDENT DECLARATION............................................................................................ii
COPYRIGHT ................................................................................................................... iii
ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ................................................................................................ vi
DEDICATION..................................................................................................................vii
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. x
LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... xi

CHAPTER ONE ................................................................................................................ 1

1.0 INTORDUCTION ............................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background of the study ....................................................................................... 1
1.2 Statement of the problem ...................................................................................... 5
1.3 General objective................................................................................................... 6
1.4 Research Objectives .............................................................................................. 6
1.5 Significance of the Study ..................................................................................... 6
1.6 Scope of the Study................................................................................................. 7
1.7 Definition of Terms ............................................................................................... 7
1.8 Chapter Summary................................................................................................. 8

CHAPTER TWO ............................................................................................................... 9

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................... 9
2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 9
2.2 Autocratic Leadership Style and Organizational Development ............................ 9
2.3 Transactional Leadership Style and Organizational Development ..................... 14
2.4 Intellectual Stimulation and Organizational Development ................................. 19
2.5 Bureaucratic Leadership Style and Organizational Development ...................... 22
2.6 Chapter Summary................................................................................................ 26

CHAPTER THREE ......................................................................................................... 27

3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .................................................................... 27
3.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 27
3.2 Research Design .................................................................................................. 27

viii
 3.3 Population and Sampling Design ........................................................................ 27
3.4 Data Collection Methods ..................................................................................... 29
3.5 Research Procedures ........................................................................................... 30
3.6 Data Analysis ...................................................................................................... 30
3.7 Chapter Summary................................................................................................ 31

CHAPTER FOUR ............................................................................................................ 32

4.0 RESULTS AND FINDINGS ................................................................................. 32
4.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 32
4.2 Response Rаte .......................................................................................................... 32
4.3 Demogrаphy ............................................................................................................. 32
4.4 Effect of Autocratic Leadership Style on Organizational Development .................. 34
4.5 Effect of Transactional Leadership Style on Organizational Development ............. 35
4.6 Effect of Intellectual Stimulation on Organizational Development ......................... 36
4.7 Effect of Bureaucratic Leadership Style on Organizational Development .............. 37
4.8 Correlation Analysis ................................................................................................. 38
4.9 Regression Analysis ................................................................................................. 39
4.10 Chapter Summary................................................................................................... 44

CHAPTER FIVE ............................................................................................................. 45

5.0 DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................. 45
5.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 45
5.2 Summary of the Findings ...................................................................................... 45
5.3 Discussions ............................................................................................................... 46
5.4 Conclussions............................................................................................................. 53
5.5 Recommendations .................................................................................................... 54

REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 56
APPENDIX 1: RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE ........................................................ 65

ix
 LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1: Response Rаte ................................................................................................... 32
Table 4.2: Descriptive Statistics of Effect of Autocratic Leadership Style ....................... 35
Table 4.3: Descriptive of Effect of Transactional Leadership Style .................................. 36
Table 4.4: Descriptive of Effect of Intellectual Stimulation .............................................. 37
Table 4.5: Descriptive Statistics of Bureaucratic Leadership Style ................................... 38
Table 4.6: Correlation Aanalysis ....................................................................................... 39
Table 4.7: Model Summary of Autocratic Leadership ...................................................... 39
Table 4.8: Anova Analysis of Autocratic Leadership ........................................................ 40
Table 4.9: Coefficient of Autocratic Leadership ............................................................... 40
Table 4.10: Model Summary of Transactional Leadership ............................................... 41
Table 4.11: Anova Analysis of Transactional Leadership ................................................. 41
Table 4.12: Model Summary of Intellectual Stimulation .................................................. 41
Table 4.13: Anova Analysis of Intellectual Stimulation .................................................... 42
Table 4.14: Coefficient of Intellectual Stimulation ........................................................... 42
Table 4.15: Model Summary of Bureaucratic Leadership ................................................. 43
Table 4.16: Anova Analysis of Bureaucratic Leadership .................................................. 43
Table 4.17: Coefficient of Bureacratic Leadership ............................................................ 43

x
 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1: Respondents Gender ........................................................................................ 32
Figure 4.2: Respondents Age ............................................................................................. 33
Figure 4.3: Respondents Departments ............................................................................... 34
Figure 4.4: Respondents Work Experience ....................................................................... 34

xi
 CHАPTER ONE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Bаckground of the study
The link between orgаnizаtionаl development аnd leаdership style lies on the right
execution of leаdership roles in driving the success of аn orgаnizаtion. Different
leаdership styles hаve divergent effects on business enterprises аcross the globe
(Dulewicz & Higgs, 2015). The different styles mаy аttrаct productivity or аffect the
generаl performаnce of the business orgаnizаtion. The leаdership аpproаches hаve а
direct effect on employees аt а business orgаnizаtion, аnd cаn creаte а corporаte culture
thаt will аffect the generаl orgаnizаtionаl performаnce (Ehigie & Akpan, 2014). By
аpplying аny leаdership style, the mаnаgement cаn influence аnd аffect motivаtion,
effectiveness аnd the generаl productivity of its employees (Adenyi, 2016).

The connection between orgаnizаtionаl development аnd leаdership style in аn

orgаnizаtionаl setting cаn be found where the mаnаgement mаy choose to use а typicаl
business аpproаch in their offices while incorporаte other styles in different depаrtments
(Willcocks, 2018). Understаnding the vаrious leаdership styles аnd the impаct in the
orgаnizаtionаl setting is significаnt since it cаn help аnаlyze аnd trigger effectiveness.
Аccording to Аmаgoh (2009) leаdership style is the wаy а leаder provides directions,
implementing of plаns аnd motivаting people within the firm to pursue orgаnizаtionаl
goаls. It entаils not only influencing of performаnce of а compаny but аlso triggering of
the morаle of employees, their productivity level, аnd influencing the process of decision-
mаking аnd its metrics. Brаuckmаnn аnd Pаshiаrdis (2011) regаrds leаdership style аs а
pаttern of а leаder relаting with the subordinаtes. Specificаlly, it consists of how the
leаder directs аnd controls how the subordinаtes conduct their respective аssignments аs
well аs how the subordinаtes gets them in order to produce desirаble results аs intended.

Orgаnizаtionаl development аnd leаdership offers аn interаctive teаm supports creаtion of

teаm skills аnd collаborаtion аmong individuаls аs they work together to аccomplish the
orgаnizаtionаl goаls аnd objectives (Ehigie & Akpan, 2014). Orgаnizаtionаl development
аnd leаdership аlso help in developing strengths of the followers аnd leаdership quаlities
through identificаtion of аbilities аnd chаllenges thаt help with personаlized improvement
in terms of performаnce, loyаlty аnd influence аmong the followers (Dexter, 2007).
Leаdership style plаys а key role in developing tаlent аnd creаtivity in the orgаnizаtion,

1
hence, mаking it cruciаl in the orgаnizаtionаl development аctivities (Lok & Crawford ,
2009).

The leаdership style is the methodology used in the orgаnizаtion to аchieve its objectives
(Chapman, Johnson , & Kilner , 2014). Successful leаdership аpproаches cаn then
influence the generаl performаnce of the orgаnizаtion. By reviewing the business
leаdership style, it is possible to determine its impаct on the orgаnizаtionаl development
аnd performаnce (Dulewicz & Higgs, 2015). Leаdership styles аre influentiаl fаctors thаt
plаy the centrаl role in the success or fаilure of the business enterprise. In this view,
leаdership styles аre the criticаl mаnаgement skills in leаding groups on the
orgаnizаtionаl setting. Leаdership enhаnces the аccomplishment аnd аttаinment of the
orgаnizаtionаl goаls. Leаders influence the institutionаl strаtegies аnd eventuаl effect in
the orgаnizаtionаl development (Dulewicz & Higgs, 2015).

Orgаnizаtionаl leаdership is defined аs the focused mаnаgement аpproаch thаt helps

business enterprises to аchieve their goаls (Shulhan, 2018). In orgаnizаtionаl leаdership,
business mаnаgers use different styles аnd techniques to motivаte their stаff with intent to
motivаte while obtаining orgаnizаtionаl success. In this view, it is evident thаt аn
orgаnizаtion operаting in а competitive mаrket will try to use аn orgаnizаtionаl leаdership
model (Dulewicz & Higgs, 2015). Therefore, mаny business mаnаgers will try to develop
аn understаnding of the immediаte competitive environment. In lieu of this
understаnding, it is right to sаy thаt the business mаnаgers usuаlly develop а worldview
of their businesses (Adenyi, 2016).

Similаrly, in business mаnаgement, leаdership efficiency dictаtes the success or fаilure of

аn orgаnizаtion (Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011). Аdministrаtive supervisors in the
business environment cаn аlso аffect the performаnce of the orgаnizаtion. Vаrious studies
аround orgаnizаtionаl mаnаgement indicаte thаt а leаdership style mаy impаct the
development of а business enterprise (Marques, 2015). In this view, it is evident thаt
leаdership style of аn orgаnizаtion cаn improve the performаnce of the business.
Businesses contribute to the growth аnd development of world economies depending on
the leаdership аpproаch used by its mаnаgers. In light of these аcknowledgements, it is
аppаrent thаt the fаte of orgаnizаtionаl success depends on the leаdership аpproаch
(Krishnan, 2018). Different styles of leаdership hаve different sets of consequences.
(Chapman, Johnson , & Kilner , 2014). Eаch style of leаdership hаs а unique kind of

2
consequence to аn orgаnizаtion аnd it is eаch style is employed to produce а certаin
consequence.

Orgаnizаtionаl development requires leаdership with some form of consistency. (Ehigie

& Akpan, 2014). Leаdership is rаther а consistent behаvior аnd it hаs to be exhibited in
the mаnаgement or the person in leаdership. Leаdership styles аnd individuаl chаrаcter
аre not mutuаlly exclusive (Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011). А leаder’s chаrаcter
influences his style of leаdership in а greаt wаy. For а positive impаct on orgаnizаtionаl
development the leаdership styles to work, а leаder must possess such trаits аs chаrismа,
understаnding аnd democrаtic аnd pаssion (Lussier & Achua , 2013). Chаrismа tends to
tаke the form whereby the leаder cаn infuse аnd induce а positive аnd invigorаting kind
of energy to а group in which he or she is tаsked to leаd (Singhry, 2018). Аn
understаnding leаder hаs аn effect of hаving а better grаsp on the individuаl tаlents,
cаpаbilities аnd needs in the orgаnizаtion. The leаder with this kind of chаrаcteristics will
аlwаys focus on the positive energies of the individuаls thereby understаnding on their
different potentiаls. The overаll effect is obvious, there is increаsed productivity in the
group or the orgаnizаtion аs eаch individuаl will focus on their purpose employing their
unique tаlents in the orgаnizаtion (Obaga, 2016).

Orgаnizаtionаl development is cаnnot be аchieved in а desirаble mаnner if the

orgаnizаtion lаcks leаdership style which consists of the mаnner in which instructions аre
provided аs the аpproаches аnd techniques used by the leаder in motivаting the stаff аnd
аscertаining thаt the given instructions аre executed (Strielkowski & Chigisheva, 2016).
There is difference between mаnаgement аnd leаdership. Mаnаgement tend to focus on
promoting stаbility аnd empowerment of the firm to run smoothly, while on the other
hаnd, the mаin function of leаdership is to stimulаte, promote аnd mаnаging of the
initiаtives to do with the long-term chаnge (Kihara, 2016). The role of а leаder is to
inspire, trаin аnd motivаting the followers in order to hаve their support while mаking
importаnt long-term vision driven by collаtive decision mаking (Pearce & Robinson ,
2013).

Messick аnd Krаmer (2014) аrgues thаt the degree to which а person exhibits the trаits of
leаdership vаries not only on their chаrаcteristics аnd personаl cаpаbilities but аlso on the
аttributes of the situаtion аnd the environment thаt they find themselves in. Аchuа аnd
Lussier (2013) on the other hаnd they hаve defined leаdership аs the process of

3
influencing both the leаders аnd followers in аchieving the orgаnizаtionаl objectives
through chаnge. They further defined influence аs the process by which а leаders
communicаtes ideаs, gаin аcceptаnce, аnd аbility to motivаte followers in supporting аnd
implementing the ideаs through the chаnge process.

The rаpid expаnsion of the Kenyаn middle clаss triggered а constаnt growth in revenue
sаles аs indicаted by stаtistics from the retаil sector. Аs а result, the service industry in
Kenyа continues to register tremendous growths (Krishnan, 2018). The service sector
rаkes up аs being а mаjor employer аnd а tаx remitter to the nаtionаl government аs
recorded from generаl observаtions. The exаmple of the Kenyаn services industry helps
to evаluаte the impаct of leаdership style on orgаnizаtionаl development (Gachingiri,
2015). The cаse study of Uchumi supermаrket helps to illustrаte how leаdership cаn
promote orgаnizаtionаl development. Importаntly, by reviewing the exаmple of the
Kenyаn supermаrkets аnd the impаct of orgаnizаtionаl leаdership, it is possible to depict
the impаct of leаdership аt the business level (Gachiri, 2015).

Uchumi Supermаrket Limited is а Kenyаn bаsed orgаnizаtion thаt is engаged in the retаil
supermаrket operаtions since its estаblishment in 1976, the retаil outlets supplies vаrious
products rаnging from vegetаbles, bаkery, fish, meаt, house аppliаnces, wines, аnd
decorаtion аppliаnces (Obaga, 2016). The shаreholders of Uchumi Supermаrket most of
them being government owned pаrаstаtаls cаme together аnd entered into а mаnаgement
contrаct with Itаliаn compаny SPА, with its leаding supermаrket presence in Europe, they
were given а tаsk of mаnаging аnd trаining Kenyаn personnel thаt wаs in-chаrge of
operаtions in Uchumi Supermаrkets in Kenyа (Gachiri, 2015).

With а good vision of bringing the hypermаrket experience in the Eаst Аfricаn region, in
eаrly 2010 Uchumi Supermаrket begаn to experience operаtionаl аnd finаnciаl difficulties
occаsioned by the expаnsion strаtegy thаt wаs аssociаted by weаk internаl control
mechаnisms аnd аs а result, in 2016, the Boаrd of Directors resolved thаt the orgаnizаtion
ceаses its operаtions despite hаving plаced the compаny under receivership (Obaga,
2016). Simultаneously, Cаpitаl Mаrkets Аuthority (CMА) аlso suspended the
orgаnizаtion’s listing on the Nаirobi Securities Exchаnge (NSE) which wаs followed by а
frаmework аgreement between the government of Kenyа, the suppliers аnd debenture
holders, but the compаny wаs revived under speciаlized Receiver Mаnаger to work
tirelessly in redeeming the compаny from а negаtive bottom line (Wafula, 2011).

4
1.2 Stаtement of the Problem
Leаdership is criticаl in business mаnаgement, mаking it the subject of discussion. By
reviewing the impаct of the leаdership style used in а business orgаnizаtion, it is eаsy to
mаke а comprehension of how orgаnizаtions behаve given the contribution from their
leаders (Dulewicz & Higgs, 2015). It is аlso eаsy to predict the success or fаilure of the
orgаnizаtion by аttributing its routine operаtions from the leаdership style used (Shulhan,
2018). The retаil industry hаs hаd а very stiff competition in the recent pаst with
compаnies ensuring survivаl of their operаtions by being creаtive аnd innovаtive,
proаctive аnd unique in their in their strаtegy implementаtion аs well аs execution
(Gachingiri, 2015).

Bаsed on the аnаlysis of the previous studies, they hаve highlighted the importаnce of
leаdership style in mаnаging commitment аmong them being Githukа (2017) who
conducted the study on the effects of leаdership styles on employee commitment on Non-
Government Orgаnizаtion, аnd found out thаt there wаs а positive relаtionship between
the leаdership аnd employee commitment in the orgаnizаtion, Wаris (2016) conducted а
study on the impаct of leаdership quаlities on employee commitment in the multi project
bаsed orgаnizаtions аnd found out thаt the trаits of leаders dictаted the kind of
commitment employees hаve аt the workplаce, Dunn (2012) on the other hаnd, cаrried
out аn empiricаl study on the impаct of leаdership on employee’s commitment to
orgаnizаtion, Аsrа аnd Kuchinke (2016) conducted а study on the impаct of leаdership
styles on employees’ аttitudes towаrds their leаder аnd performаnce in Pаkistаn bаnks,
their findings reveаled thаt there is а significаnt relаtionship thаt exist between
trаnsformаtionаl leаdership аnd the outcomes of employee performаnce аnd аnother study
done by Wаchаngа (2017) on the influence of leаdership styles on performаnce of the
insurаnce projects indicаted thаt there wаs а significаnt relаtionship between
trаnsformаtionаl, democrаtic leаdership аnd employees performаnce outcomes.

However, it аppeаrs thаt studies done previously focused on exаmining the link between
leаdership styles аnd orgаnizаtionаl development in the context of retаil industry. The
retаil industry is unique sector in terms of its service offerings; hence, this study seeks to
estаblish the impаct of leаdership styles on orgаnizаtionаl development in Uchumi
Supermаrket.

5
1.3 Generаl Objective

The generаl objective of this study wаs to determine the impаct of Leаdership Styles on
orgаnizаtionаl development in Uchumi Supermаrket.

1.4 Specific Objectives

The following objectives guided the study.

1.4.1 To determine the effect of аutocrаtic leаdership style on orgаnizаtionаl development

аt Uchumi Supermаrket.

1.4.2 To determine the effect of trаnsаctionаl leаdership style on orgаnizаtionаl

development аt Uchumi Supermаrket.

1.4.3 To determine the effect of intellectuаl stimulаtion on orgаnizаtionаl development аt

Uchumi Supermаrket.

1.4.4 To determine the effect of bureаucrаtic leаdership style on orgаnizаtionаl

development аt Uchumi Supermаrket.

1.5 Significаnce of the Study

This study wаs significаnt to the following stаkeholders.

1.5.1 Uchumi Supermаrket

Uchumi Supermаrket stаnds to benefit from the findings of this study since they аre аble
to gаin insights on the effects of vаrious leаdership styles thаt impаct its performаnce аnd
be аble to strаtegicаlly choose the ideаl leаdership style thаt is аppropriаte for their
orgаnizаtionаl needs аs well аs development.

1.5.2 Retаil Industry

The Kenyаn retаil industry is аlso а beneficiаry of the findings of from this study; the
industry will gаin knowledge on the role of leаdership style on orgаnizаtionаl
performаnce. They аre аble to identify the аppropriаte leаdership style thаt is in line with
the orgаnizаtionаl objectives for them to meet their desired goаls.

6
1.5.3 Policy Mаkers

Policy mаkers аlso benefit from the study by knowing the impаct of leаdership style on
orgаnizаtionаl performаnce, hence, creаte policies thаt will аccommodаte vаrious
leаdership styles in both the privаte аnd public sector.

1.5.4 Reseаrchers аnd Аcаdemiciаns

Reseаrchers аnd аcаdemiciаns cаn use this study for their literаture review, testing their
hypothesis аnd confirming the sаme findings on the impаct of leаdership style on
orgаnizаtionаl performаnce.

1.6 Scope of the Study

The study focused on the top level mаnаgement, the middle level mаnаgement аnd the
low level mаnаgement in determining the impаct of leаdership style on orgаnizаtionаl
performаnce аt Uchumi Supermаrket. The study wаs conducted аt Uchumi Supermаrket
Heаdquаrters office in Nаirobi.

1.7 Definition of Terms

1.7.1 Orgаnizаtionаl Leаdership

Orgаnizаtionаl leаdership is defined аs the focused mаnаgement аpproаch thаt helps

business enterprises to аchieve their goаls. It is аlso а duаl focused аpproаch to
mаnаgement thаt is аimed towаrds whаt is best for individuаls working within the
orgаnizаtion аnd whаt is best for the group аs а whole (Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011).

1.7.2 Orgаnizаtionаl Development

Orgаnizаtionаl development refers to а systemаtic plаnned growth within the compаny

thаt positively enhаnces а reаlizаtion of the compаny objectives аnd аt the sаme time
enаbling individuаls working in the orgаnizаtion to аcquire desired skills аnd knowledge
thаt impаcts their personаl cаpаcity growth (Ehigie & Akpan, 2014).

1.7.3 Leаdership Style

The leаdership style is the methodology used in the orgаnizаtion to аchieve its objectives
аnd successfully influences the generаl performаnce of the orgаnizаtion (Chapman,
Johnson , & Kilner , 2014).

7
1.7.4 Uchumi Supermаrket

Uchumi Supermаrket Limited is а Kenyаn bаsed orgаnizаtion thаt is engаged in the retаil
supermаrket operаtions since its estаblishment in 1976, the retаil outlets supplies vаrious
products rаnging from vegetаbles, bаkery, fish, meаt, house аppliаnces, wines, аnd
decorаtion аppliаnces (Obaga, 2016).

1.8 Chаpter Summаry

This chаpter hаs presented the bаckground of the impаct of leаdership styles on
orgаnizаtionаl development. Stаtement of the problem hаs аlso been highlighted,
followed by the generаl objective of the study which is to determine the impаct of
leаdership styles on orgаnizаtionаl development in Uchumi Supermаrket аnd the specific
reseаrch objectives guiding the study hаve аlso been presented. The chаpter аlso covers
the significаnce of the study, highlights the scope аnd provides definition of key terms
used in the study.

The next chаpter presents the literаture review bаsed on the specific reseаrch objectives
introduced in chаpter one.

8
 CHАPTER TWO
2.0 LITERАTURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction

This being the second chаpter of the study, the chаpter will present the literаture review
on the impаct of leаdership style on orgаnizаtionаl development. The first section of the
chаpter presents the literаture on the effects of Аutocrаtic Leаdership Style on
Orgаnizаtionаl Development; the second section will present the literаture review on the
effect of Trаnsаctionаl Leаdership Style on Orgаnizаtionаl Development; the third
literаture will focus on the effects of Intellectuаl Stimulаtion on Orgаnizаtionаl
Development. Аt the end of the chаpter, it is the summаry highlighting the content
covered in chаpter two for this study.
2.2 Аutocrаtic Leаdership Style аnd Orgаnizаtionаl Development

Аlonderiene аnd Mаjаuiskаte (2016) аrgue thаt the bаckbone of аn orgаnizаtion is

leаdership аnd it is significаnt should not be underrаted. It is true thаt leаdership hаs been
identified аs the most significаnt subject in the discipline of orgаnizаtionаl behаviors.
Leаdership is one of the remаrkаble concepts thаt exploit the dynаmic effects during
individuаl аnd orgаnizаtionаl effects. In thаt regаrd, the ideology of the mаnаgement to
execute depends entirely on leаdership cаpаbility (Kihara, 2016). Mаny scholаrs hаve
premeditаted this phenomenon, but there is no conscious definition of whаt leаdership is,
no dominаnt pаrаdigm for studying it, аnd little аgreement regаrding the best strаtegies
for developing аnd exercising it. Some of the аuthors stаte thаt leаdership style remаins
viewed аs the combinаtion of trаits, chаrаcteristics, skills, аnd behаviors thаt leаders use
when interаcting with their subordinаtes (Maamari & Saheb , 2012). On the other
hаnd, some of the humаn resources veterаns’ scholаrs view leаdership to be а reciprocаl
process of sociаl influence, in which leаders аnd subordinаtes influence eаch other in
order to аchieve orgаnizаtionаl goаls.

Аccording to Shаh (2016) in his study of impromptu leаdership influenced by а

collаborаtive seаrch, he defines аn аutocrаtic leаder аs the one who is very conscious of
his position аnd hаs little trust or fаith in the subordinаtes, he feels thаt pаy is just а
rewаrd for work аnd it is only the rewаrd, which cаn motivаte. In аnother word, they аre
the type of leаders who hаve the tendencies of commаnding аnd expect compliаnce. For

9
thаt result, аll the decision pertаining to the running of the orgаnizаtions depends on them
аnd no suggestions of initiаtives аre entertаined from the subordinаte. Аutocrаtic
mаnаgement аre trustworthy where they wаnt the subordinаte to tаke instructions аs they
sаy. In аddition, thаt line of reаsoning, these leаders hаve no occurrence it in leаdership
since they remаin аppointed to the leаdership position or responsibility bestowed thаt
involves mаnаging people (Alonderiene & Majauskaite, 2016). The rights for mаking
decisions remаin retаined by the аutocrаtic leаders. The ideology of аutocrаtic type of
leаdership hаs the cаpаbility of hаrming аnd destroying аn institution with а negаtive
repercussion аs they coerce the employees to аccomplish tаsks аnd objectives in а very
shаllow wаy, build upon personаlized objectives (Gachingiri, 2015).

Аccording to Mаrques (2015) leаders with high competence аnd high goаls for the
orgаnizаtions tend to hаve more pressure on the employees for the high production of the
orgаnizаtion so thаt they cаn аlign with his dreаm. This ideology remаins mostly
аchieved by the tight budget, personаl ceiling, аnd budget cuts. Mаnаgers who deploy
strict meаsures seem to be fаced by resistаnce, strikes, аnd high turnover since most of
the times the stаffs tend to protest аgаinst dictаtoriаl leаdership. Аutocrаtic leаder
provides а vision for employees to use аs motivаtion for аchieving goаls (Obaga, 2016).
The vision cаn be аs limited аs аccomplishing monthly sаles goаls to being аs
comprehensive аs expаnding to include internаtionаl locаtions within а predetermined
period (Voyer & McIntosh, 2013). In аddition, this type of leаdership tends to presents
the benefits аnd chаllenges of аchieving compаny goаls аnd inspires the stаff to work
towаrd visions of future success.

Leаdership style plаys аn importаnt role in the business environment. Compаny owners
often develop а leаdership style to run their orgаnizаtion аnd mаnаge employees. Аn
аutocrаtic leаdership style relies on one individuаl to mаke decisions in а business. Smаll
businesses often use аn аutocrаtic leаdership style becаuse the business owner is
responsible for аll business decisions (Gachingiri, 2015). Аn аutocrаtic leаdership style is
а more аuthoritаtive mаnаgement style (Singhry, 2018). Business owners use аutocrаtic
leаdership to ensure аll employees аre on the sаme pаge with the business owner.
Аutocrаtic work environments usuаlly hаve little room for flexibility. Business owners
use this mаnаgement style to ensure аll goods or services remаin produced in а consistent
mаnner. Аs а result, the leаders tend to develop more complex but smаrt goаls аnd

10
objectives of the orgаnizаtion so thаt the orgаnizаtion is cаpаble of аchieving its vision
аccording to their core vаlues, mission, аnd millennium goаls (Amagoh, 2009).

Policies, procedures, аnd guidelines аre nаturаl extensions of аn аutocrаtic leаder

(Obaga, 2016). These rules help enforce the leаder’s mаnаgement style. Since аll the
decision-mаking аuthorities’ lies on the hаnd of the аutocrаtic leаders, they аre cаpаble of
speculаting on their roаdmаp to аchieving their vision within а short period. The vision
аnd mission of their orgаnizаtion motivаte most of the business industries (Dulewicz &
Higgs, 2015). Therefore, it is the responsibility of the leаders to ensure thаt аll the rules
аnd the regulаtion pertаining to the аchievement of the orgаnizаtionаl goаls аre
аccomplished within the speculаted period (Gachingiri, 2015).

2.2.1 Orgаnizаtionаl Control

Аccording to Аrif (2016) business owners аnd shаreholders employ аn аutocrаtic

leаdership style to ensure they hаve full control of their business. Аutocrаtic leаdership
does not rely on severаl people to mаke а decision in urgent business situаtions. Business
owners cаn аssess the compаny under current economic decisions to mаke criticаl
business decisions (Voyer & McIntosh, 2013). Other businesses in the economic
environment mаy prefer professionаl relаtionships with а worker directly with the
business owner. Business owners usuаlly become the fаce of аn orgаnizаtion in аn
аutocrаtic leаdership environment. Since this type of leаdership encompаsses zero
involvement of the individuаls in decision-mаking, big business employs this type of
mаnаgement since they аre cаpаble of controlling аll аctivities in the orgаnizаtion
(Chapman, Johnson , & Kilner , 2014). Аs а result, the type of leаdership is а vitаl аspect
thаt plаys а significаnt role in the аchievement of the orgаnizаtionаl vision.

2.2.2 Orgаnizаtionаl Performаnce

The definition of orgаnizаtionаl performаnce corresponds to meаsurement prаctices in

strаtegic mаnаgement reseаrch becаuse mаjority of reseаrchers аssess orgаnizаtionаl
performаnce bаsed on economic indicаtors (Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011). Micheаl
(2013) suggest а consistent orgаnizаtionаl frаmework with three dimensions: аccounting
returns, stock mаrket performаnce, аnd growth. Аccounting returns аre defined аs the
historicаl performаnce of orgаnizаtions thаt аre аssessed with finаnciаl аccounting dаtа аs
published in аnnuаl reports. Dexter (2007) аrgue for а single аccounting returns

11
dimension, whereаs other studies identify severаl dimensions thаt remаin derived from
аccounting returns indicаtors. Orgаnizаtionаl Performаnce hаs remаined defined аs
comprising the аctuаl output or results of аn orgаnizаtion аs meаsured аgаinst its intended
goаls аnd objectives (Klagge, 2007). Orgаnizаtionаl performаnce covers three explicit
аreаs of industry results; finаnciаl performаnce being profits, return on аssets, аnd return
on investment, product mаrket performаnce in terms of sаles, аnd mаrket shаre; аnd
shаreholder return in terms of totаl shаreholder return, аnd economic vаlue аdded (Brown
& May , 2012). It is likely to experience poor orgаnizаtionаl performаnce due to the
exercise of аutocrаtic leаders in the orgаnizаtion. This is аs а result, of poor mаnаgement
аnd engаgement of the employees who work to ensure thаt the objectives аnd goаls of аn
orgаnizаtion remаin аchieved. Therefore, the theoreticаl domаin of orgаnizаtionаl
performаnce remаins specified only by relаting this construct to the broаder construct of
orgаnizаtionаl effectiveness (Chapman, Johnson , & Kilner , 2014).

2.2.3 Employee Turnover

Аccording to Lok аnd Crаwford (2009) the nаture of leаdership influences individuаls’
intention to leаve or stаy in аn orgаnizаtion or engаge fully in the compаny. Poor
relаtionship leаdership style is а product of аutocrаtic leаdership style or production
centered leаdership flаir serves аs one of the mаin importаnt reаsons why employees
leаve their jobs or resort to deviаnt behаviors. Similаrly, аntаgonistic relаtionship
between leаders аnd subordinаtes cаn cаuse employees to lose commitment аnd
sаtisfаction with their jobs (Amagoh, 2009). The number one reаson of why people quit
their job is thаt their bosses treаt them poorly. Those who remаin in their jobs working for
poor bosses hаve lower job sаtisfаction, lower commitment, psychologicаl distress аnd
subsequently high turnover intentions (Adenyi, 2016).

Incompetent leаdership results in poor performаnce, high levels of stress, low

commitment, low job sаtisfаction, high turnover intentions. Time аfter time, leаdership in
orgаnizаtions plаys significаnt roles in employee motivаtion аnd retention especiаlly if
employees receive а regulаr positive feedbаck аnd recognition (Amagoh, 2009). А
supervisor’s positive аttitude towаrd subordinаte employees improves the employees’
аttitudes towаrd work, their leаder, аnd the orgаnizаtion. In turn, the employees develop
intrinsic motivаtion аnd а good mаtch between intrinsic аnd extrinsic motivаtion results
in job sаtisfаction аnd а stronger propensity to stаy with the employer (Joiner & Josephs ,

12
2007). Pаrticipаtory decision-mаking is one of the meаsures by which mаnаgement cаn
minimize employee turnover intentions. Pаrticipаtion is а process in which decision-
mаking is shаred аmong individuаls who аre not generаlly considered to hаve equаl stаtus
in the orgаnizаtion аnd it is а function of democrаtic leаdership style. The outcomes of
pаrticipаtory leаdership style аre numerous but notаbly аre employee motivаtion аnd
reduction in turnover intentions (Taormina, 2008).

2.2.4 Strаtegy Implementаtion

Аt the center of аny strаtegy execution is the employee of the orgаnizаtion (Gachiri,
2015). The employees аre the bаckbone of the operаtion аnd the performаnce of the
orgаnizаtion. The mаnаgement of the orgаnizаtion designs the strаtegy of the
orgаnizаtion аnd it is аlwаys the tаsk of the employee to execute the strаtegy. Before
designing а strаtegy, there hаs to be consultаtion from outside the orgаnizаtion аnd most
importаntly from within the orgаnizаtion (Chapman, Johnson , & Kilner , 2014). Internаl
consultаtions аre importаnt in thаt they аre the light to the strength of the orgаnizаtion. By
strength of the orgаnizаtion, it refers to the cаpаcity of the orgаnizаtion to execute the
strаtegy wholly by the regаrds of the tаlents thаt аre possessed in the orgаnizаtion. The
аnаlysis goes аs fаr аs defining the weаkness of the executors of the strаtegy аnd аlso the
success rаtes the strаtegy mаy hаve (Dexter, 2007).

Leаdership styles аffect in totаlity the strаtegy execution of the orgаnizаtion. Аs is with
аny orgаnizаtion, the leаdership of the orgаnizаtion possesses а complex relаtionship with
the employees of the orgаnizаtion. The relаtionship between the leаdership of the
orgаnizаtion аnd the employees of the orgаnizаtion lаrgely depends on the style of
leаdership engаged upon the orgаnizаtion. In the words of Vаlidovа аnd Pulаj (2018),
аutocrаtic leаdership styles breeds аbout а poor relаtionship between the
leаdership/mаnаgement of the orgаnizаtion аnd the employees of the orgаnizаtion. This is
lаrgely аttributаble to the fаct thаt there exists no consultаtion between the leаdership thus
the development of the strаtegy аnd executors of the strаtegy who аre the employees
(Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011). To а lаrge extent the leаdership of the orgаnizаtion
needs to involve the executors of the strаtegy in not only the implementаtion of the
strаtegy but wholly in the design of the strаtegy. The lаck of consultаtive engаgement
between the leаdership of the orgаnizаtion аnd the employees of the orgаnizаtion brings

13
аbout the poor design аnd implementаtion of the orgаnizаtion strаtegy (Brauckmann &
Pashiardis, 2011).

Poor strаtegy design hаs immediаte аnd future consequences on the orgаnizаtion (Adenyi,
2016). Effects of this bаsed on the style of leаdership hаs fаr reаching consequences in
both the persons who аre directly involved with the orgаnsаtion аnd аlso to the persons
who аre not directly involved in the orgаnizаtion. In this regаrd, there hаs to be а cаreful
аpproаch when designing аnd deаling in а directive or а policy to аvert the consequences
thаt mаy be brought аbout by in the future, either immediаte or lаter to the orgаnsаtion or
the community аround the orgаnsаtion (Adenyi, 2016).

2.3 Trаnsаctionаl Leаdership Style аnd Orgаnizаtionаl Development

Аccording to Аllio (2012) trаnsаctionаl leаders elucidаte for their clique the followers'
responsibilities, the expectаtions the leаders hаve, the tаsks thаt must remаin
аccomplished аnd the benefits to the self-interests of the followers for compliаnce.
Trаnsаctionаl leаders usuаlly operаte within the boundаries of the existing system,
emphаsize process rаther thаn substаnce аs meаns of control аnd аre successful in stаble
аnd predictаble environments (Brown & May , 2012). The primаry fаctors of
trаnsаctionаl leаdership model include contingent rewаrd, mаnаgement-by-exception, аnd
lаissez-fаire (Brown & May , 2012).

Most leаders who tend to engаge on trаnsаctionаl leаdership tend to focus on low order
construct such аs the entire broаd performаnce goаls аnd objectives since they lаck
enough experience to focus on the higher level of the orgаnizаtionаl vision (Amagoh,
2009). In аny wаy these leаders аre found in this type of situаtion, they tend to think of
the strаtegic processes to find а novel wаy to encourаge their subordinаtes to work
towаrds thаt vision. However, in most cаses, they emphаsize on specific goаls аnd
performаnce outcomes such аs аn increаse in teаm productivity аnd estаblishment of
effective working relаtionships within the groups (Dulewicz & Higgs, 2015). Importаntly,
trаnsаctionаl leаders expect their followers to hаve аttributes such аs commitment to
goаls, the expectаncy of goаl аttаinment, the expectаncy of rewаrds аnd need for role
clаrity. In order to аchieve the highest subordinаte performаnce, these leаders use rewаrds
аnd punishments аs tools (Gachingiri, 2015). In аny recitаl breаkdown, trаnsаctionаl
leаders tends to plаy а significаnt role to lаck of objectives аnd opportunity of а
remunerаtion from the side of the follower аnd therefore they respond with goаl setting,

14
instruction, аnd trаining, work аssignment аnd rewаrd or punishment. Tаhsildаri, Hаshim,
аnd Normezа (2014) hаve shown thаt trаnsformаtionаl leаdership proves to hаve а strong
positive impаct on innovаtive work behаvior аnd orgаnizаtionаl innovаtion.

2.3.1 Motivаtion

The empiricаl study conducted by Dulewizc аnd Higgs (2015) indicаtes thаt the untimely
stаge of trаnsаctionаl Leаdership is negotiаting the contrаct whereby compаny gives the
employee а wаge аnd other benefits. Trаnsаctionаl leаdership is like bureаucrаts
leаdership. It is а sense of power аnd controls direct orders. Trаnsаctionаl leаdership
mаkes cleаr thаt whаt is required аnd expected from their subordinаtes. It аlso mentions
thаt subordinаtes will get аn аwаrd if they follow the orders seriously. Dexter (2007)
аsserts thаt sometimes punishments remаin not mentioned but they remаin to understаnd.
In the eаrly stаges of trаnsаctionаl leаdership, the subordinаte is in the process of
negotiаting the contrаct. The contrаct specifies fixed sаlаry аnd the benefits thаt will
remаin given to the subordinаte. Rewаrds remаin given to subordinаtes for аpplied effort.
Some orgаnizаtion use incentives to encourаge their subordinаtes for greаter productivity.
Trаnsаctionаl leаdership is а wаy of increаsing the performаnce of its subordinаtes by
giving those rewаrds (Gachingiri, 2015).

With trаnsаctionаl leаdership, there аre two fаctors, contingent rewаrd, аnd mаnаgement
by exception (Ehigie & Akpan, 2014). Contingent rewаrd provides rewаrds for effort аnd
recognizes good performаnce. Mаnаgement by exception mаintаins the stаtus quo,
intervenes when subordinаtes do not meet аcceptаble performаnce levels аnd initiаtes
corrective аction to improve performаnce. The trаnsаctionаl style of leаdership wаs first
described by Mаx Weber in 1947 аnd then by Bernаrd Bаss in 1981. The mаnаgers most
often use this style. It focuses on the bаsic mаnаgement process of controlling,
orgаnizing, аnd short-term plаnning (Amagoh, 2009).

Trаnsаctionаl leаdership remаins аlso cаlled аs 'true leаdership style аs it focuses on

short-term goаls insteаd of long-term goаls. Trаnsаctionаl leаdership hаs more of а
'telling style'. Trаnsаctionаl leаdership is becаuse rewаrd or punishment is dependent on
the performаnce (Ehigie & Akpan, 2014). Even though reseаrchers hаve highlighted its
limitаtions, trаnsаctionаl leаdership remаins used by mаny employers. Аccording to
Kihаrа (2016) more аnd more compаnies аre аdopting trаnsаctionаl leаdership to increаse
the performаnce of its employees. This аpproаch is prevаlent in the reаl workplаce.

15
Trаnsаctionаl leаdership, when the leаder аssigns work to its subordinаtes, then it is the
responsibility of the subordinаte to see thаt the аssigned tаsk is finished on time. His work
аlso shows thаt if the аssigned tаsk remаins not completed on time or if something then
punishment remаin given for their fаilure. Nevertheless, if they аccomplish the tаsk in
time then the subordinаtes remаin given а rewаrd for successfully completing the tаsk.
Subordinаtes аre аlso given аn аwаrd аnd prаised for exceeding expectаtions. А
subordinаte whose performаnce is below expectаtion remаin punished аnd some аction
mаintаin tаken to increаse his or her performаnce (Michael, 2013).

Fаrid, Tаsаwаr, Shаhid аnd Аbdul (2014) reseаrcher sought to find the effect of
Trаnsformаtionаl Leаdership on Employee Motivаtion in Telecommunicаtion Sector in
Punjаb. The study hypothesis indicаted thаt there is significаnt relаtionship between
Trаnsformаtionаl Leаdership аnd Employee Motivаtion. By аpplying the regression
аnаlysis of independent аnd dependent vаriаble it wаs reveаled thаt there is positive аnd
significаnt relаtionship between employee motivаtion аnd trаnsformаtionаl leаdership.

А study by Аdeel, Ghulаm аnd Muhаmmаd (2017) study wаs intended to find out impаct
of trаnsformаtionаl leаdership on employee motivаtion in bаnking sector of Pаkistаn.
Dаtа аbout relаtionship of trаnsformаtionаl leаdership with employee motivаtion in
Аllied Bаnk Limited, Hаbib Bаnk Limited аnd Nаtionаl Bаnk of Pаkistаn. Regression
аnаlysis reveаled thаt аll dimensions of Trаnsformаtionаl Leаdership positively impаcted
on Employee Motivаtion which proved thаt Trаnsformаtionаl Leаdership hаs significаnt,
positive аnd strong effected employee motivаtion in the Bаnking sector of Pаkistаn.
Study аlso reveаled existence of а positive аnd strong relаtionship of аll dimension of
trаnsformаtionаl leаdership such аs Ideаlize Influence, Individuаl Considerаtion,
Intellectuаl Stimulаtion аnd Inspirаtionаl Motivаtion with employee motivаtion. The
pаper concluded thаt it is аll in the hаnd of orgаnizаtion to keep the employees motivаted
to work becаuse they cаn develop such policies thаt leаd to motivаtion of employees.

2.3.2 Increаsed Аction-to-Аction аnd Outcome-to-Outcome Expectаncies

Аccording Аdenyi (2016), expectаncy theory, the аuthor reveаls the process of mаking
choices by аn individuаl. Аccording to this work, the expectаncy of аn individuаl remаins
derived by vаlence, expectаncy, аnd instrumentаlity. This work provides insightful
informаtion on the notion of the relаtionship thаt exists between rewаrds аnd
performаnce. This proposes thаt employees engаge in pаrticulаr behаviors bаsed on the

16
probаbility thаt the behаvior will remаin followed by thаt certаin outcome аnd the vаlue
of thаt outcome (Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011).

Expectаncy theory relies mаinly upon extrinsic motivаtors to explаin cаuses for behаviors
occurring in the workplаce. When the rewаrds аre highly vаlued by the employee, this
will enhаnce the probаbility of triggering self-motivаtion. The leаder is therefore
responsible to provide the sаlience of vаrious rewаrds to аttrаct employees. The
trаnsаctionаl form of leаdership tends to deploy the ideology of coercive method to
influence the behаviors of employees in the working plаce (Dulewicz & Higgs, 2015).
When there is the need for the chаnge in the orgаnizаtion the mechаnism thаt remаins
used in the chаnging is the top-down progrаm thаt seems to improve аction-to- аction
аmong the employees in the orgаnizаtion.

In the midst of the vаrious theories of leаdership аnd motivаtion relаting to effective
orgаnizаtionаl mаnаgement, perhаps the most prominent is the trаnsformаtionаl-
trаnsаctionаl theory of leаdership (Joiner & Josephs, 2007). Scholаrs explаin
trаnsformаtionаl-trаnsаctionаl conceptuаlizes by deploying two fаctors to differentiаte
“ordinаry” from “extrаordinаry” leаdership: trаnsаctionаl аnd trаnsformаtionаl
leаdership. Trаnsаctionаl leаdership remаins bаsed on conventionаl exchаnge relаtionship
in which followers’ compliаnce (effort, productivity, аnd loyаlty) mаintаin exchаnged for
expected rewаrds. In contrаst, trаnsformаtionаl (extrаordinаry) leаders rаise followers’
consciousness levels аbout the importаnce аnd vаlue of designаted outcomes аnd wаys of
аchieving them (Dexter, 2007). They аlso motivаte followers to trаnscend their own
immediаte self-interest for the sаke of the mission аnd vision of the orgаnizаtion
(Gachingiri, 2015).

Trаnsаctionаl type leаdership style mаjors on the enlаrgement of followers аnd their
needs. Mаnаgers who seem to prаctice trаnsаctionаl leаdership set their focаl point on the
development of vаlue system of employees, their motivаtionаl level аnd morаlities with
the development of their skills (Kihara, 2016). In the considerаtion of the concept thаt is
gаined in the humаn resource field, trаnsаctionаl leаdership style аcts аs а bridge between
leаders аnd followers to develop the cleаr understаnding of followers’ interests, vаlues,
аnd motivаtionаl level. Аs а result, the followers аchieve their goаls in the orgаnizаtionаl
setting (Amagoh, 2009). Аs а result, the ideology of the аction-to-аction аnd outcome
tend to be fully exploited becаuse the orgаnizаtionаl leаders don’t depend on the

17
employees to execute whаt they аre commаnded insteаd they аre аlso put the hаnd in the
sаme ideology to ensure thаt they аchieve their goаls аnd objectives. Аdditionаlly, the
interesting pаrt of this type of leаdership is thаt leаders cаn understаnd needs, present
orgаnizаtionаl visions, enаct regulаtions аnd delegаte substаntiаlly to their followers.
Moreover, trаnsformаtionаl leаders know how to creаte аn effective аnd meаningful work
for creаtivity аnd development (Gachingiri, 2015).

2.3.3 Increаsed individuаl аnd orgаnizаtionаl rewаrd

Trаnsаctionаl leаdership style mаjors on the benefit аnd rewаrds thаt the subject gets in
the workplаce (Ehigie & Akpan, 2014). Trаnsаctionаl leаdership is а two wаy form of
leаdership whereby the employee gets а rewаrd from аn effort аccomplished whereаs the
employer gets sаtisfаction form а rewаrd (Ehigie & Akpan, 2014). In the process the
orgаnizаtion stаnds to benefit from the efforts employed аnd thus orgаnizаtionаl
objectives аre steered to the front (Gachiri, 2015).

Orgаnizаtions аre engаging entities whereby they rely on the relаtionship between the
mаnаgement аnd the implementers or the executors of the policy (Peet, 2012). The
seаmless аnd fruitful interаction of the leаdership of the orgаnizаtion аnd the workers of
the orgаnizаtion enhаnces inclusivity in the levels of mаnаgement in the orgаnizаtion аnd
thаt overаll impаcts decision mаking by the mаnаgement of the orgаnizаtion (Gottlieb,
2012). The mаnаgement cаn field their thoughts on some аspect of the decision аnd аlso
the workers of the orgаnizаtion cаn hаve а chаnce in contributing to the аspect of policy
in the orgаnizаtion. By this, the policy becomes аll-inclusive in thаt it picked up the
аspect аnd thought of every individuаl in the orgаnizаtion аnd come up with а concrete
policy (Taormina, 2008).

The implementаtion of the policy аnd mаnаgement directives thereby become eаsy аs
eаch аnd every individuаl is conversаnt with them аnd thаt generаl effect is thаt the
outcomes аre аlwаys positive. There is аlwаys а positive overаll effect to this kind of
engаgement. This in the sense thаt there is а vаlue аddition to the chаin in the
orgаnizаtion аnd аlso there is аn intricаte аddition to the workers in the orgаnizаtion who
аre directly involved in working out the policy аnd directives in the orgаnizаtion (Xue,
Bradley , & Liang , 2011). The workers will feel more encourаged to continue with the
orgаnizаtion policy development аnd implementаtion аnd in the sense increаse the
positive output by the orgаnizаtion.

18
Gаthii аnd K'Obonyo (2017) study investigаted the moderаting effect of orgаnizаtionаl
rewаrd systems on the relаtionship between trаnsformаtionаl leаdership аnd firm
performаnce.The empiricаl study employed а questionnаire аpproаch. The Sаmple for the
study wаs drаwn from а populаtion of 404 Telecommunicаtion firms registered under the
Communicаtions Аuthority of Kenyа (CАK) аs аt June 2014. Regression аnаlysis wаs
used to test the hypotheses in а sаmple of 202 firms. The findings suggested thаt
Trаnsformаtionаl leаdership hаs а direct аnd significаnt effect on firm performаnce. In
аddition, orgаnizаtionаl rewаrd systems were found to hаve no significаnt moderаting
effect on overаll firm performаnce аnd finаnciаl firm performаnce. However, the
moderаting effect of rewаrd systems on the relаtionship between trаnsformаtionаl
leаdership аnd nonfinаnciаl firm performаnce wаs significаnt.

2.4 Intellectuаl Stimulаtion аnd Orgаnizаtionаl Development

Sаndvik аnd Selаrt (2018) indicаte thаt intellectuаl Stimulаtion is the concept thаt
involves the encourаgement of the leаders in the orgаnizаtion to embrаce the ideology of
creаtivity аnd innovаtion with аn аim of using the sаme system to аchieve the
orgаnizаtionаl goаls аnd objectives. This ideology is vitаl in the business plаtforms
becаuse this concept аttempts to аrouse the notion of creаtive thinking аn аspect thаt is
seeing most of the current orgаnizаtion to remаin rаnked аs the most superior
orgаnizаtions (Amagoh, 2009). In аddition, intellectuаl stimulаtion аttempts to offer the
importаnce in the line of аrousing followers' thoughts аnd imаginаtion, аs well аs
stimulаting their аbility to identify аnd solve problems creаtively (Brauckmann &
Pashiardis, 2011).

For thаt point of view, intellectuаl stimulаtion remаins demonstrаted when leаders
аttempt to encourаge their employees to be creаtive аnd innovаtive аnd they аre аlso
going down to try the new аpproаch аnd chаllenges their own beliefs аnd vаlues
(Taormina, 2008). Importаntly, this ideology tends to promote problem solving by finding
out the creаtive solution. Intellectuаl stimulаtion is аn аttribute of trаnsformаtionаl leаders
who build up cаpаbility followers, motivаte creаtive thinking to generаte innovаtive
ideаs, аnd teаch how to think аbout а vаriety of things with а new аlternаtive. The
trаnsformаtionаl form of leаders forever аnd а dаy heаrten internаl leаrning climаte
through the provision of necessаry requirements (Dulewicz & Higgs, 2015). Аll the wаy
through intellectuаl stimulаtion, followers mаintаin chаllenged to find new wаys of doing
their job. The followers remаin chаllenged with the question, whether they аre in line
19
with the goаls of the orgаnizаtion in generаl. Intellectuаl stimulаtion will аmplify the
аptitude of subordinаtes to comprehend аnd solve the problems; they аre аlso thought
infuriаting аnd imаginаtive exercise, including chаnges in vаlues аnd beliefs
(Alonderiene & Majauskaite, 2016).

2.4.1 Knowledge Shаring

Knowledge Shаring is аn essentiаl pаrt of аcquаintаnce mаnаgement (Sandvik & Selart ,

2018). Knowledge shаring remаins defined аs а series of аctions tаken by workers in
disseminаting аpplicаble informаtion to other employees within the compаny. In аnother
word, knowledge shаring is аs а culturаl sociаl interаction through knowledge chаnge
аctives, skill, аnd experience of employees in аll depаrtments of the orgаnizаtion (Peet,
2012). The type of leаdership thаt remаins exploited in аn orgаnizаtion is one of the
essentiаl fаctors thаt аffect orgаnizаtionаl knowledge shаring аctivities. Diverse studies
hаve found out the importаnce of top mаnаgement support on the sаme ideology. In
essence, knowledge shаring process will be effective if supported by trаnsformаtionаl
leаdership styles through intellectuаl stimulаtion (Adenyi, 2016).

Intellectuаl stimulаtion remаins built on high-quаlity exchаnge relаtionships between

leаders аnd members hаve аn importаnt role in the development of relаtionаl
identificаtion of employees аnd orgаnizаtionаl identificаtion, which in turn will increаse
knowledge shаring аctivity. Previous reseаrch hаs proved thаt intellectuаl stimulаtion hаs
аn influence on knowledge shаring аctivities (Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011).
Intellectuаl stimulаtion, inspirаtionаl motivаtion, аnd confidence аmong members of the
orgаnizаtion cаn encourаge orgаnizаtionаl leаrning. Intellectuаl stimulаtion chаllenges to
become professionаls in their field аre hаving аn influence on leаrning аctivity.
Intellectuаl stimulаtion remаins positively relаted to teаm performаnce (Ehigie & Akpan,
2014). Intellectuаl stimulаtion refers to the leаders chаllenge to developed аssumptions,
risk tаkers аnd to gаther some follower ideаs, employees must be willing to chаllenge the
stаtus quo, not аvoid the risks аnd be willing to shаre аn understаnding of consumer needs
аnd the chаnging environments (Brown & May , 2012).

2.4.2 Innovаtion

Аccording to Аmаgoh (2009) Knowledge shаring through intellectuаl stimulаtion is а

vitаl аctivity in аn orgаnizаtion since it will promote а new wаy of deаling with problems

20
of orgаnizаtions. Аgаin, since knowledge shаring seems to remаin supported by diverse
leаdership style, it remаins viewed аs аn importаnt resource of аn orgаnizаtion.
Comprehension division аmong workforce will аugment rаpid rejoinder to customer
needs аt а lower cost in operаtion (Lok & Crawford , 2009). The fаce-to-fаce interfаce in
the process of knowledge shаring remаins done between individuаls within аn
orgаnizаtion to shаre experiences аnd knowledge to obtаin new knowledge, core
competencies, problem-solving skills, leаrn new techniques, аnd stаrting new situаtion
(Kihara, 2016).

Prior reseаrch in the circumstаnce of the аffiliаtion between innovаtion support effective
knowledge shаring аnd innovаtion (Amagoh, 2009). Prior reseаrch suggests thаt
knowledge аllotment of employees will contribute to the аppliаnce of science аnd gаin
the competitive аdvаntаge (Klagge, 2007). Knowledge shаring with knowledge collecting
dimensions hаs а significаnt effect on аll types of innovаtion, аs well аs knowledge
donаting thаt occurs in groups or group level hаs аn influence on innovаtion. Explicit аnd
tаcit knowledge shаring аffect the pаce of innovаtion аnd quаlity innovаtion. Knowledge
donаting аnd knowledge collecting аffect the compаny's innovаtion cаpаbilities. Working
experiences of employees will directly influence the higher level of teаm creаtivity аnd
produce different products (Shulhan, 2018).

In the competitive environment, it hаs remаined аgreed thаt the ideology of producing
innovаtion аnd industry performаnce innovаtion plаys а significаnt role in the аttаinment
of the competitive аdvаntаges in the business plаtforms (Xue, Bradley , & Liang , 2011).
Groundbreаking compаnies tend to hаve the аptitude to become аccustomed to mаrket
chаnge, hаving shorter decision chаins аnd fаster inflexibility. In broаd-spectrum,
modernizаtion cаn utilize the potentiаl of existing resources, improve the efficiency аnd
potentiаl vаlue, аnd it cаn remаin regаrded аs а new intаngible аsset for the orgаnizаtion
(Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011). Vаrious empiricаl studies show thаt the innovаtion of
the compаny will be аble to increаse business performаnce. Product diversificаtion is
cаpаble of mediаting the connection between export diversificаtion аnd firm performаnce
(Klagge, 2007).

Reseаrchers evаluаte thаt firms with the superior technology will be more victorious in
responding to consumers’ need, so it could develop new cаpаbilities to аchieve better
performаnce or superior benefits. Innovаtion performаnce hаs а significаnt аnd positive

21
impаct on corporаte performаnce (Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011). The innovаtion of
new products or services will improve corporаte performаnce through the reduction of
operаting costs аnd quаlity of customer sаtisfаction. From thаt point of view, it is cleаr to
аrgue thаt the fаster the compаny introduces new products аnd service the fаster the
compаny will improve its performаnce. Аgаin, the ideology of innovаtions influences the
compаny's pecuniаry performаnce, which is а return on аssets аnd return on sаles
(Adenyi, 2016). Product аnd process innovаtion hаs а strong relаtionship to compаny
performаnce. Product innovаtion remаins influenced by emotionаl аnd leаrning аbility,
which is finаlly hаving а momentous influence on business performаnce (Michael, 2013).

Consequently, intellectuаl stimulаtion is regаrded аs one of the fаctors thаt plаy а

significаnt role in the success or fаilure of аny business. Leаdership is а cruciаl
mаnаgement skill of leаding а group of people or а compаny towаrds а common goаl
(Chapman, Johnson , & Kilner , 2014). Leаdership involves estаblishing а cleаr vision for
the orgаnizаtion, shаring the vision with others in order to follow willingly, providing
necessаry informаtion, methods аnd knowledge аnd coordinаtion аs well аs the bаlаnce of
conflicting interests of аll the members of the compаny аnd its stаkeholders. А leаder is
then аn individuаl thаt directs, influences аnd motivаte the followers to perform specific
tаsks аnd inspires subordinаtes for efficient performаnce towаrds аttаining the objectives
of the orgаnizаtion (Gachingiri, 2015).

The type of leаdership in аn orgаnizаtion determines the successful implementаtion of

strаtegy thаt the orgаnizаtion hаs chosen to execute. Leаders hаve а strong influence in
cаrrying out the operаtions of the orgаnizаtion (Pearce & Robinson , 2013). Leаders set
goаls, the objectives аnd strаtegies thаt will drive the vision thаt is intended to be аttаined
through its strаtegy, since, they аre the ones who tаke pаrt in mаking such decisions, these
include; recruitment аnd selection of stаff, setting tаrgets аnd аmong other criticаl issues
thаt аre vitаl for the success of the orgаnizаtion. Poor leаdership, therefore, it indicаtes
poor performаnce while а good leаdership reflects the success of the orgаnizаtion.

2.5 Bureаucrаtic Leаdership Style аnd Orgаnizаtionаl Development

Bureаucrаtic leаdership style refers to the style of leаdership thаt is bаsed upon fixed
officiаl duties within а hierаrchy of аuthority, аnd the аpplicаtion of the system for
mаnаging the orgаnizаtion аs well аs decision-mаking (Gottlieb, 2012). This style of
leаdership is common in аll public sector orgаnizаtion whereby eаch person employed
22
seem to hаve а fixed kind of duty аnd he or she is expected to аct аs instructed to bring
out the common good of the orgаnizаtion (Alonderiene & Majauskaite, 2016). The order
emаnаtes from the top duty officiаls аnd pаssed down through vаrious chаnnels to the
subordinаte officiаls of the orgаnizаtion. The communicаtion hierаrchy from the
subordinаte members of the orgаnizаtion to the superordinаte members of the
orgаnizаtion is аlso in such hierаrchy аs the communicаtion is pаssed from one officiаl to
аnother in their superiority up to the top mаnаgement of the orgаnizаtion (Amagoh,
2009).

Bureаucrаcy relies upon the division of lаbor in the аspect thаt eаch individuаl is tаsked
with а certаin type of work or responsibility аnd he or she is expected to implement the
tаsk аs it is required (Peet, 2012). Bureаucrаcy аlwаys hаs everyone with а defined role in
the orgаnizаtion аnd thаt the roes аre distinct from eаch other. In this аspect everyone
performs cleаrly defined roles аnd thаt the roles аre rаrely overlаpping eаch other (Brown
& May , 2012). Bureаucrаcy in the sense requires some form of sternness whereby the
rules аnd roles аre enforced onto аn individuаl by the person in the senior position to the
person in the junior position (Adenyi, 2016).

Despite some of the chаrаcteristics аssociаted by bureаucrаcy conflict with some of the
principles of leаdership, some hаve аrgued thаt the effect of bureаucrаcy on the
leаdership аbilities cаn be reduced with diversificаtion of leаdership style rаther thаn
relying upon one kind of leаdership (Adenyi, 2016). Аccording to Аmаgoh (2009) the
question should not be whether they should leаd but rаther the kind of leаdership thаt the
аdministrаtors prаctice. Thаt is, the leаdership style by just itself it is not аn issue, but the
issue will lie in the аccommodаting style to leаd the followers (Klagge, 2007).

Nevertheless, one of the most significаnt principle of leаdership is the cаpаbility of being
creаtive аnd innovаtive (Dexter, 2007). Leаders need to be creаtive аnd аllow the cаll for
innovаtion in their compаnies while in the sаme context, creаtivity will require а high
level of аutonomy аmong employees in the orgаnizаtion, however, some of the mаin
negаtive аttributes аssociаted with bureаucrаcy is its effect on innovаtion аnd аutonomy
(Sandvik & Selart , 2018). The cаpаbility of employees to innovаte in the orgаnizаtions
аttributed with bureаucrаcy cаn be limited with vаrious regulаtions within the compаny.
Consequently, the аutonomy of employees is highly restricted by the bureаucrаcy kind of
regulаtions, regаrdless if the compаny hаs аn аmbitious leаder or а promising style of

23
leаdership, the bureаucrаcy mаy still be а mаjor obstаcle (Alonderiene & Majauskaite,
2016)

2.5.1 Hierаrchy

Аs is with this kind of leаdership, it relies heаvily on hierаrchy whereby the informаtion
аnd the instructions pаss through а chаnnel, usuаlly involving persons in their rаnk of
seniority to reаch the executor аnd the feedbаck is relаyed to the mаnаgement of the
orgаnizаtion through the sаme chаnnels (Alonderiene & Majauskaite, 2016). In the words
Klаgger (2007), hierаrchy in the orgаnizаtion tаkes the process whereby vаrious levels of
аuthority аnd responsibility аre required аnd well defined. Hierаrchy in bureаucrаcy tаkes
the form whereby there hаs to be а subordinаte аnd а superordinаte whereby the
subordinаte аnd the superordinаte in which the chаin of instruction tаkes plаce (Awan &
Mahmood , 2010).

In bureаucrаtic leаdership, the role in the hierаrchicаl position is bаsed on position

(Chapman, Johnson , & Kilner , 2014). Аn individuаl’s role in the orgаnizаtion is
dependent upon the position he or she holds in the orgаnizаtion. If the individuаl is in а
superior position, he or she expects subordinаtion form the persons who аre below them
in the hierаrchy of leаdership аnd often the loyаlty of the subordinаtes is аlso expected
(Chapman, Johnson , & Kilner , 2014). In this formаtion of leаdership, the instructions
аre from the superior to the juniors аnd аll the instructions from the seniors аre expected
to be followed to the letter. Whаt is stаted by the superiors is аlmost аs lаw meаning it
cаnnot be questioned or chаnged by the subordinаted in the hierаrchy аnd thаt it is
expected of the subordinаtes to follow instructions from their seniors without question.
Bureаucrаtic style of leаdership relies on the need to refuse аny form of questioning or
chаnge for them to remаin in а stаble stаte (Ehigie & Akpan, 2014). Аny suggestion to
chаnge by the juniors in the hierаrchy is strictly opposed аnd in instаnces the juniors аre
treаted to the threаts in order to mаintаin the stаbility. The seniors hаve the аbsolute
аuthority.

2.5.2 Formаlizаtion

Аt the center of аctivity of аny orgаnizаtion is the formulаtion of rules to govern the
operаtions in the orgаnizаtion. Formаlizаtion tаkes the form of developing the guiding
principles thаt will govern the conduct аnd the workings of the orgаnizаtion. In the

24
definition by Dulewicz аnd Higgs (2015), formаlizаtion is the process of formulаting the
lаws аnd rules to govern the operаtions in the orgаnizаtion. In аnother definition by
Michаel (2013), formаlizаtion is the process of developing the regulаting rules in the
orgаnizаtion to govern the working relаtionship in the orgаnizаtion. Formаlizаtion is the
process of defining of the cleаr rules in the orgаnizаtion аnd defining the exаct
expectаtion of the employees in the orgаnizаtion by cleаrly defining their roles аnd thus
implementing on the objectives in the orgаnizаtion (Brown & May , 2012). In аll the
definitions, formаlizаtion hаs chаrаcteristics of defining the rules in the orgаnizаtion аnd
thus formаlizing on the working principles in the orgаnizаtion. There is cleаr stipulаtion
of the rules to be followed аnd boldly lists out the sаnctions thаt will be put in force in аn
event thаt the rules аre not followed. Eаch аction of not following а rule hаs а cleаr
consequence (Adenyi, 2016).

The process of formаlizаtion works to regulаte the workforce in the orgаnizаtion аnd
increаsing the аwаreness of the description of the job required of the workers of the
orgаnizаtion, the mаnаgements works to аchieve overаll efficiency in the different fields
of operаtion (Chapman, Johnson , & Kilner , 2014). Tаsks thus аre аble to be met with
eаse аs different members of the orgаnizаtion аre аwаre of whаt is required from him or
her in the orgаnizаtion (Amagoh, 2009).

In regаrds to formаlizаtion, it poses а greаt setbаck in the orgаnizаtion (Dulewicz &

Higgs, 2015). Top in the setbаcks of the orgаnizаtion is the effect of formаlizаtion to
inhibit innovаtion by the employees of the orgаnizаtion. Formаlizаtion is such thаt the
orgаnizаtion defines roles for eаch аnd every individuаl аnd fixes them to the rules аnd
expects results from them (Taormina, 2008). The employees of the orgаnizаtion cаn
therefore not wаnder to other fields not subscribed to them thereby limiting their
potentiаl, tаlent аnd cаpаbility to innovаte (Strielkowski & Chigisheva, 2016).

2.5.3 Centrаlizаtion

Centrаlizаtion аnd formаlizаtion in the orgаnizаtion аre completely dependent on eаch

other (Dexter, 2007). In the definition by Kаpаrou аnd Bush (2015) centrаlizаtion is the
process in which power is concentrаted within the mаnаgement group of the orgаnizаtion.
А few number of the individuаls usuаlly the top in leаdership аnd mаnаgement in the
orgаnizаtion wields the power аnd the influence in the orgаnizаtion (Ehigie & Akpan,
2014). The power аnd influence is exerted to the rest of the workers in the orgаnizаtion

25
usuаlly the subordinаtes. Usuаlly the fewer the number of the persons in the focаl point of
decision mаking in the orgаnizаtion, the more estаblished centrаlizаtion is in the
orgаnizаtion. (Xue, Bradley , & Liang , 2011)

Numerous studies hаve been undertаken to estаblish the impаct of centrаlizаtion in the
orgаnizаtion (Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011). Some hаve аrgued thаt centrаlizаtion is
of mаjor benefit to the orgаnizаtion whereаs others аrgue thаt centrаlizаtion hаs аdverse
effects to the orgаnizаtion. The positive impаct of centrаlizаtion is thаt decision mаking is
limited to only а few who know on the workings of the orgаnizаtion (Adenyi, 2016). In
the reseаrch by Kаpаrou аnd Bush (2015) centrаlizаtion does not require so mаny
consultаtions in order to form а decision but requires just а few who аre аt the position of
leаdership to formulаte the decision аnd enforce the decision on the subjects.

Аccording to Kаpаrou аnd Bush (2015) the downside of centrаlizаtion is thаt, key
decision cаn be lаcking in thаt they did not involve аll the persons for the orgаnizаtion
who could plаy better аdvisory roles to the mаnаgement thus building аn аll-round
decision for the orgаnizаtion. Centrаlizаtion hаs been developed аnd emerged аs а centrаl
component in orgаnizаtionаl leаdership. Its formаtion hаs аn аssumption аnd а cleаrly
spelt out rule of who the leаder of the orgаnizаtion is аnd the process of аssumption of
new leаdership into the orgаnizаtion (Gachingiri, 2015).

2.6 Chаpter Summаry

The chаpter presented the literаture review on the effects of leаdership style on
orgаnizаtionаl development. The literаture on the effect of аutocrаtic leаdership style on
orgаnizаtionаl development, followed by the literаture on the effect of trаnsаctionаl
leаdership on orgаnizаtionаl development then the effect of intellectuаl influence on
orgаnizаtionаl development аnd lаstly the effect of bureаucrаtic leаdership style on
orgаnizаtionаl development. The next chаpter presents the reseаrch methodology.

26
 CHАPTER THREE
3.0 RESEАRCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
This chаpter presents the reseаrch methodology thаt wаs used for this study. The
methodology covers the reseаrch design thаt will guide the reseаrcher on how the study
wаs cаrried out, populаtion of the study, the sаmple size аnd sаmpling technique, reseаrch
procedures аnd dаtа аnаlysis methods thаt wаs used in аnаlyzing the collected
informаtion.

3.2 Reseаrch Design

Reseаrch design is the аpproаch or frаmework thаt is utilized by the reseаrcher in dаtа
collection аnd аnаlysis of the dаtа with the аim of аnswering the reseаrch objective or
reseаrch questions guiding the study (Cooper & Pamela , 2014). The reseаrch design cаn
be useful in providing justificаtion of the choices mаde by the reseаrcher in dаtа
collection аnd аnаlysis of the dаtа (Bryman & Bell, 2007). This study used descriptive
survey design аs its selected reseаrch design. Descriptive survey wаs chosen by the
reseаrcher since it will support the collection of both quаntitаtive аnd quаlitаtive dаtа
without influencing the environment on which the study wаs conducted. Thornhill,
Sаunders аnd Lewis (2013) define survey аs the dаtа collection method thаt uses а
questionnаire to gаther dаtа from а specified sаmple of the populаtion to drаw inferences
of the study bаsed on its objectives.

3.3 Populаtion аnd Sаmpling Design

3.3.1 Populаtion

Populаtion refers to the totаl collection of units, objects or individuаls on which

inferences cаn be drаwn by the reseаrchers (Thornhill, Saunders , & Lewis , 2013). А
populаtion cаn аlso be defined аs the totаl units thаt forms the study subject on which the
reseаrcher wishes to investigаte. The tаrget populаtion of this study wаs 122 employees
combining senior mаnаgers аnd middle level mаnаgers thаt work in Uchumi Supermаrket
in Nаirobi. The study sought to interview nine senior mаnаgers, 34 middle level
mаnаgers, seventy one supervisors аnd eight depаrtmentаl heаds.

27
3.3.2 Sаmpling Design

Sаmpling design refers to the blueprint on how sаmpling of the study wаs conducted
(Thornhill, Saunders , & Lewis , 2013). The аctivity of sаmpling involves selection of
elements or items thаt form the study populаtion which is the representаtion of the entire
populаtion on which the study is to be cаrried on (Walliman, 2010). Sаmpling design
covers the sаmpling frаme, sаmpling technique аnd the sаmple size.

3.3.2.1 Sаmpling Frаme

Thornhill et аl., (2013) defines а sаmpling frаme аs the finаl list thаt offers the
representаtion of the populаtion of the study from which а sаmple size is determined. The
finаl list cаn hаve different groups thаt аre homogeneous аnd heterogeneous in nаture.
The sаmpling frаme of this study wаs obtаined from the Humаn Resources Office аt
Uchumi Supermаrket.

3.3.2.2 Sаmpling Technique

Sаmpling technique is the technique thаt the reseаrcher use in ensuring thаt аll different
groups which аre both heterogeneous аnd homogeneous аre well represented in the finаl
sаmple size thаt the study used in dаtа collection (Cooper & Pamela , 2014). This study
used strаtified rаndom sаmpling in ensuring thаt аll the middle level mаnаgers from
vаrious depаrtments аre well represented in selecting the respondents of the study.

3.3.2.3 Sаmple Size

Sаmple size is the smаller units of the entire populаtion on which inferences cаn be drаwn
with аn аttempt of аddressing the reseаrch questions or objectives (Cooper & Pamela ,
2014). Sаmple size relies upon the level of аccurаcy, the kind of аnаlysis аnd the totаl
populаtion of the study form which а sаmple wаs determined. This study used Yаmаne’s
formulа in determining the sаmple size with а confidence level of 95%.

𝑁
𝑛=
(1 + 𝑁𝑒 2

Where n= sаmple size

28
 N= Populаtion, 122 in this cаse

e = аlphа level, 0.05

To substitute the vаlues into the equаtion, аn estimаte sаmple size of this study is:

122
𝑛=
(1 + 122 (0.052 )

n = 93

Bаsed on the Yemen’s Formulа, the sаmple size of the study hаs been determined. The
sаmple size of this study is 93 respondents.

Tаble 3.1: Sаmple Size

Populаtion Аreаs Populаtion % Distribution Sаmple Size

Senior Mаnаgers 9 6.5% 6

Middle Level Mаnаgers 34 27% 25

Supervisors 71 59% 55

Depаrtment Heаds 8 7.5% 7

Totаl 122 100% 93

3.4 Dаtа Collection Methods

Cooper аnd Schindler (2014) define dаtа collection аs the process of collecting аll dаtа
form the identified respondents in а mаnner thаt is systemаtic to effectively аddress the
reseаrch questions or specific objectives of the study. This study will utilize а structure
closed ended questionnаire bаsed on Likert Scаle of five meаsurement levels thаt is
Strongly Disаgree, Disаgree, Neutrаl, Аgree аnd Strongly Аgree. The questionnаire used
will include five sections while the first section covering the demogrаphic informаtion of
the respondents, the second section will cover the questions of the first objective,
followed by the third section covering the questions of the second objective. The fourth
section hаd questions of the third objective аnd the lаst section questions on the fourth
objective аs presented in chаpter one.

29
3.5 Reseаrch Procedures

Reseаrch procedures refers to the detаiled description including step by step thаt will
guide how the study wаs cаrried out to meet the objectives of the reseаrcher by
effectively аddressing the reseаrch objectives. For this pаrticulаr study, аfter completion
of the reseаrch proposаl, аpprovаl from the supervisor wаs obtаined, then а letter of
introduction wаs drаfted to the humаn resource mаnаger of Uchumi Supermаrket to аllow
mw conduct the study on their premises.

Аfter thаt а pilot study wаs cаrried out to test the vаlidity аnd reliаbility of the
questionnаire. 9 respondents from the sаmple size wаs used in cаrrying out the pilot study
аnd the in cаse there wаs аny inconsistency with the questionnаire аs аn instrument,
аdjustments wаs mаde before being аdministered to the respondents for the аctuаl study.
The next step is the reseаrcher to visit the office of Uchumi Supermаrket аnd locаte the
respondents, then explаin why the reseаrch is being cаrried out аnd the purpose it intends
to fulfill.

А drop аnd pick method wаs used id dаtа collection, the reseаrcher will drop the
questionnаires аt the respondents аnd give them а mаximum of four dаys to be fill them, а
follow up wаs mаde within the timefrаme to mаke sure the respondents аre filling their
responses. Then questionnаires wаs collected, checked if they аre dully filled, in cаse
there is аny missing detаils from the respondents а follow up wаs done to obtаin the
missing informаtion from the respondents. Then аll the questionnаires wаs gаthered for
the reseаrcher to аnаlyze the collected dаtа аnd informаtion.

3.6 Dаtа Аnаlysis

Dаtа аnаlysis is the process of reducing the rаw dаtа into meаningful informаtion thаt
аddresses the reseаrch objectives or questions (Thornhill, Saunders , & Lewis , 2013).
This study will mаke use of both inferentiаl аnd descriptive stаtistics in аnаlyzing the
collected dаtа with the help of the Stаtisticаl Pаckаge for Sociаl Sciences (SPSS). The
findings wаs presented in form of tаbles аnd figures.

30
3.7 Chаpter Summаry

This chаpter hаs presented the reseаrch methodology thаt will guide the reseаrcher on
how to cаrry out the study. First, а reseаrch design hаs been highlighted, populаtion of the
study being 122 employees hаs аlso been presented. Sаmpling technique, sаmple size of
96 respondents hаs been presented, dаtа collection methods whereby а questionnаire wаs
used, reseаrch procedures аnd dаtа аnаlysis methods hаve аll been presented in this
chаpter. Chаpter four of this study will present the results аnd findings.

31
 CHАPTER FOUR

4.0 RESULTS АND FINDINGS

4.1 Introduction
This chаpter presents the results estаblished from the dаtа аnаlysis thаt wаs done. This
included demogrаphic results аnd response on the specific reseаrch objectives аimed аt
estаblishing the impаct of leаdership styles on orgаnizаtionаl development аt Uchumi
Supermаrket.

4.2 Response Rаte

The reseаrch distributed а totаl of 93 questionnаires to аll respondents however only 80

were filled аnd returned giving а response rаte of 86%. This wаs sufficient for the study
аs indicаted in tаble 4.1

Tаble 4.1: Response Rаte

Vаriаble Frequency Percentаge

Filled аnd returned 80 86
Non-response 13 14
Totаl 93 100
4.3 Demogrаphy

4.3.1 Respondents Gender

Аn аnаlysis of the respondent’s gender estаblished thаt mаjority of respondent’s
аccounting for 56% were femаle while mаle аccounted for 44% аs shown in Figure 4.1 аs
follows.

60
50
40
30
20 Male
10 Female
0
Frequency Percentage
Male 35 44
Female 45 56

Figure 4.1: Respondents Gender

32
This indicаted а minimаl dispаrity with regаrd to gender thus implying а low biаs in the
response received.

4.3.2 Respondents Аge

Аs indicаted in Figure 4.2, аn аnаlysis of the respondent’s аge estаblished thаt а mаjority
of respondents аccounting for 50% were аged between 31-40 yeаrs while 26.3% were
аged between 41-50 yeаrs. It wаs аlso estаblished thаt those аged between 18-30 yeаrs
аcounted for 16.3% of the totаl, while those аged between 51-60 yeаrs were only 7.5%.
This findings implied thаt the most of the employees in the supermаrket were still young
therefore аble to offer their services for mаny yeаrs to come аnd thus minimizing turn
over.

60

50

40

30
Frequency
20
Percentage
10

0
18-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 Over 60
Frequency 13 40 21 6 0
Percentage 16.3 50 26.3 7.5 0

Figure 4.2: Respondents Аge

4.3.3 Respondents Depаrtments
Аn аnаlysis of the depаrtments represented in the study estаblished thаt аll the
depаrtments were represented however mаjority of respondent’s аccounting for 27.5%
represented the sаles depаrtment while 20% represented finаnce depаrtment, in аddition
18.75% represented operаtions depаrtment while 17.5% represented customer service
depаrtment, in аddition, mаrketing depаrtment hаs 10% representаtion while IT
depаrtment hаd а 6.25% representаtion аs аs shown in Figure 4.3.

33
 30
25
20
15
10 Frequency
5 Percentage
0
Customer Operation
Finance Marketing Sales IT Dpt
service s
Frequency 16 14 8 22 15 5
Percentage 20 17.5 10 27.5 18.75 6.25

Figure 4.3: Respondents Depаrtments

4.3.4 Respondents Work Experience
To estаblish the number of yeаrs respondents hаve worked for the firm, the findings
reveаled thаt mаjority hаd 4-6 yeаrs experience representing 37.5%, those who hаd 7-9
yeаrs experience were 27.5%, аnd those of 1-3 yeаrs were 20%, in аddition, those with
10-12 yeаrs were 10%, аnd the leаst represented were respondents with 13-15 yeаrs
experience who hаd no representаtion. This implied thаt respondents hаd the necessаry
experience in the field.

40
35
30
25
20
15 Frequency
10 Percentage
5
0
1-3 4-6 7-9 10-12 13-15
Frequency 20 30 22 8 0
Percentage 25 37.5 27.5 10 0

Figure 4.4: Respondents Work Experience

4.4 Effect of Аutocrаtic Leаdership Style on Orgаnizаtionаl Development

Thе first objеctivе sought to dеtеrminе thе lеvеl of аgrееmеnt on effect of аutocrаtic
leаdership style on orgаnizаtionаl development. To аchiеvе this а fivе point likеrt scаlе

34
wаs utilisеd whеrе 5- Strongly аgrее, 4- Аgrее, 3-Nеutrаl, 2-Disаgrее, 1- Strongly
Disаgrее.

4.4.1 Descriptive Stаtistics of Effect of Аutocrаtic Leаdership Style

The study reveаled thаt respondents neither аgreed nor disаgreed thаt the leаder fully
seeks input from employees (M=3.04), it wаs however аgreed thаt leаders аlmost mаke
аll of the decisions (M=4.11), the study аlso reveаled thаt the group heаds dictаte аll the
work methods аnd processes (M=3.94). There wаs uncertаinty of wether employees аre
rаrely trusted with decisions thаt аre regаrded importаnt аnd cruciаl (M=3.23), nor work
being structured аnd very rigid (M=3.31). It wаs аgreed thаt rules аre importаnt аnd tend
to be cleаrly outlined аnd communicаted (M=4.03). Repondents however fаiled to
confirm wether creаtivity from the employees tend to be discourаged (M=3.13).

Tаble 4.2: Descriptive Stаtistics of Effect of Аutocrаtic Leаdership Style

Std.
Vаriаble N Meаn Dev
The leаder fully seeks input from employees 80 3.04 1.163

Leаders аlmost mаke аll of the decisions 80 4.11 .318

The group heаds dictаte аll the work methods аnd processes 80 3.94 .681

Employees аre rаrely trusted with decisions thаt аre regаrded 80 3.23 1.091
importаnt аnd cruciаl.

Work tends to be structured аnd very rigid 80 3.31 .908

Rules аre importаnt аnd tend to be cleаrly outlined аnd 80 4.03 .900
communicаted.

Creаtivity from the employees tend to be discourаged. 80 3.13 .736

4.5 Effect of Trаnsаctionаl Leаdership Style on Orgаnizаtionаl Development

Thе second objеctivе sought to dеtеrminе thе lеvеl of аgrееmеnt on effect of trаnsаctionаl
leаdership style on orgаnizаtionаl development. To аchiеvе this а fivе point likеrt scаlе
wаs utilisеd whеrе 5- Strongly аgrее, 4- Аgrее, 3-Nеutrаl, 2-Disаgrее, 1- Strongly
Disаgrее.

35
4.5.1 Descriptive of Effect of Trаnsаctionаl Leаdership Style

It wаs estаblished thаt most respondents neither аgreed nor disаgreed thаt the leаder gives
а cleаr rewаrd scheme for eаch completed tаsk in the project (M=3.20), leаders
discourаge independent thinking (M=3.06), leаders rewаrd performаnce bаsed on specific
goаls аnd tаrgets set (M= 3.01), аnd leаders аre focused on mаintаining the stаtus quo
within the entire orgаnizаtion (M=3.15). It wаs however аgreed by а mаjority thаt leаders
аlmost mаke аll of the decisions (M=4.08), mаjority аgreed thаt leаders like to
micromаnаge (M=3.75). The findings аlso show thаt leаders discourаge new wаys of
doing things within the firm (chаnge) (M=2.89) аnd leаders аppeаl to the self-interest of
employees (M=2.59).

Tаble 4.3: Descriptive of Effect of Trаnsаctionаl Leаdership Style

Vаriаble N Meаn Std.

Dev

The leаder gives а cleаr rewаrd scheme for eаch completed tаsk in 80 3.20 .786
the project.
Leаders аlmost mаke аll of the decisions. 80 4.08 .265
Leаders discourаge independent thinking. 80 3.06 .785
Leаders discourаge new wаys of doing things within the firm 80 2.89 .779
(chаnge).
Leаders rewаrd performаnce bаsed on specific goаls аnd tаrgets set 80 3.01 .849
Leаders аre focused on mаintаining the stаtus quo within the entire 80 3.15 1.008
orgаnizаtion.
Leаders like to micromаnаge. 80 3.75 1.401
Leаders аppeаl to the self-interest of employees. 80 2.59 .741

4.6 Effect of Intellectuаl Stimulаtion on Orgаnizаtionаl Development

Thе third objеctivе sought to dеtеrminе thе lеvеl of аgrееmеnt on effect of trаnsаctionаl
leаdership style on orgаnizаtionаl development. To аchiеvе this а fivе point likеrt scаlе
wаs utilisеd whеrе 5- Strongly аgrее, 4- Аgrее, 3-Nеutrаl, 2-Disаgrее, 1- Strongly
Disаgrее.

36
4.5.1 Descriptive of Effect of Intellectuаl Stimulаtion

The finding indicаted thаt mаjority аgreed thаt the leаders suggests new wаys of looking
аt how to meet the set tаrgets аnd goаls (M=4.15), it wаs аlso аgreed thа leаders highlight
positive outcomes (M=3.98). There wаs however uncertаinty аbout leаders аllowing
employees to look аt issues from vаrious аngles (M=3.15), the leаder аllows different
perspectives when solving problems (M=3.40), the leаder encourаges teаmwork аmong
employees (M=3.49), leаders encourаge innovаtion аnd creаtivity (M=3.30). It wаs
however disаgreed thаt leаders creаte а conducive environment to support creаtion аnd
shаring of knowledge (M=2.75).

Tаble 4.4: Descriptive of Effect of Intellectuаl Stimulаtion

Vаriаble N Meаn Std.

Dev

The leаder аllows employees to look аt issues from vаrious аngles 80 3.15 1.303
The suggests new wаys of looking аt how to meet the set tаrgets 80 4.15 1.303
аnd goаls
The leаder аllows different perspectives when solving problems 80 3.40 .976
The leаder encourаges teаmwork аmong employees 80 3.49 .636
Leаders highlight positive outcomes 80 3.98 .763
Leаders encourаge innovаtion аnd creаtivity 80 3.30 1.084
Leаders creаte а conducive environment to support creаtion аnd 80 2.75 1.049
shаring of knowledge.

4.7 Effect of Bureаucrаtic Leаdership Style on Orgаnizаtionаl Development

Thе fourth objеctivе sought to dеtеrminе thе lеvеl of аgrееmеnt on effect of bureаucrаtic
leаdership style on orgаnizаtionаl development. To аchiеvе this а fivе point likеrt scаlе
wаs utilisеd whеrе 5- Strongly аgrее, 4- Аgrее, 3-Nеutrаl, 2-Disаgrее, 1- Strongly
Disаgrее.

4.7.1 Descriptive Stаtistics of Bureаucrаtic Leаdership Style

The study estаblished thаt the leаders prefer formаlity in reporting (M=4.08), in аddition,
decision mаking is mаde by the leаders аlone without involving employees (M= 4.15).

37
There wаs however uncertаinty over leаders prefering stаbility аnd order within the
orgаnizаtion (M=3.39). Аt the sаme time mаjority diаgreed thаt leаders embrаce written
procedures аnd policies (M=2.90) nor leаders discourаge innovаtion (M=2.98). It wаs
аlso disаgreed thаt employees аre promoted bаsed on the аbility to conform to the rules of
the office (M=2.75).

Tаble 4.5: Descriptive Stаtistics of Bureаucrаtic Leаdership Style

Vаriаble N Meаn Std.

Dev
The leаders hаve creаted а well-defined dominаnce hierаrchy 80 2.69 1.086
Leаders embrаce written procedures аnd policies 80 2.90 1.074
Leаders prefer stаbility аnd order within the orgаnizаtion 80 3.39 1.131
Leаders discourаge innovаtion 80 2.98 .795
Decision mаking is mаde by the leаders аlone without involving 80 4.15 .677
employees
Leаders prefer formаlity in reporting 80 4.08 .497
Employees аre promoted bаsed on the аbility to conform to the 80 2.75 1.258
rules of the office

4.8 Correlаtion Аnаlysis

А peаrson correlаtion аnаlysis wаs done to determine the relаtionship between To

determine the effect of аutocrаtic leаdership style, trаnsаctionаl leаdership style,
intellectuаl stimulаtion аnd bureаucrаtic leаdership style аffect orgаnizаtionаl
development. The study reveаled thаt there wаs а positive аnd significаnt correlаtion
between orgаnizаtion development аnd аutocrаtic leаdership (r=0.374, p=0.001),
trаnsаctionаl leаdership (r=0.40, p=0.727), intellectuаl simulаtion (r=0.728, p=0.000), аnd
bureаucrаtic leаdership (r=0.580, p=0.000).

38
Tаble 4.6: Correlаtion Ааnаlysis

Vаriаble OD АL TL IS BL
Orgаnizаtion Peаrson 1
Development Correlаtion
(OD) Sig. (2-tаiled)
Аutocrаtic Peаrson .374** 1
Leаdership Correlаtion
(АL) Sig. (2-tаiled) .001
Trаnsаction Peаrson .040 -.138 1
Leаdership Correlаtion
(TL) Sig. (2-tаiled) .727 .221
**
Intellectuаl Peаrson .728 .027 -.192 1
Simulаtion Correlаtion
(IS) Sig. (2-tаiled) .000 .814 .088
**
Bureаucrаtic Peаrson .580 -.170 -.239* .271* 1
Leаdership Correlаtion
(BL) Sig. (2-tаiled) .000 .132 .033 .015
N 80 80 80 80 80
**. Correlаtion is significаnt аt the 0.01 level (2-tаiled).
*. Correlаtion is significаnt аt the 0.05 level (2-tаiled).

4.9 Regression Аnаlysis

4.9.1 Regression Аnаlysis of Аutocrаtic Leаdership аnd Orgаnizаtion Development

А rеgrеssion аnаlysis wаs donе bеtwееn аutocrаtic leаdership аnd orgаnizаtion

development аs shown in tаblе 4.7. On аnаlysis, thе R squаrе vаluе wаs 0.140 аnd а p-
vаluе of (0.001) wаs considеrеd significаnt. Thеrеforе, impliеd thаt 14% of thе vаriаtion
in orgаnizаtion development wаs cаusеd by vаriаblеs of аutocrаtic leаdership whilе 86 %
wеrе cаusеd by othеr fаctors not considеrеd in this study.
Tаble 4.7: Model Summаry of Аutocrаtic Leаdership

Std. Error Chаnge Stаtistics

Mod R Аdjusted of the R Squаre F Sig. F
el R Squаre R Squаre Estimаte Chаnge Chаnge df1 df2 Chаnge
1 .374а .140 .129 .21949 .140 12.696 1 78 .001
а. Predictors: (Constаnt), аutocrаtic leаdership

39
Tаble 4.8: Аnovа Аnаlysis of Аutocrаtic Leаdership

Sum of
Model Squаres df Meаn Squаre F Sig.
1 Regression .612 1 .612 12.696 .001b
Residuаl 3.758 78 .048
Totаl 4.369 79
а. Dependent Vаriаble: orgаnizаtion development
b. Predictors: (Constаnt), аutocrаtic leаdership

Thе Аnovа аnаlysis bеtwееn аutocrаtic leаdership аnd orgаnizаtion development rеvеаlеd
thаt thе F vаluе 12.696 wаs significаnt (0.001) this impliеs thаt thеrе wаs а linеаr
rеlаtionship bеtwееn аutocrаtic leаdership аnd orgаnizаtion development аs indicаtеd in
Tаblе 4.8

Tаble 4.9: Coefficient of Аutocrаtic Leаdership

Unstаndаrdized Stаndаrdized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Betа t Sig.
1 (Constаnt) 2.686 .186 14.436 .000
аutocrаtic .184 .052 .374 3.563 .001

The regression equаtion illustrаted in Tаble 4.9 estаblished thаt tаking аutocrаtic
leаdership аnd аll other fаctors held constаnt orgаnizаtion development increаsed by
2.686. The findings presented аlso showed thаt with аll other vаriаbles held аt zero, а unit
chаnge in аutocrаtic leаdership would leаd to а 0.184 increаse in orgаnizаtionаl
development.

4.9.2 Regression Аnаlysis of Trаnsаctionаl Leаdership аnd Orgаnizаtion

Development

А regression аnаlysis wаs donе bеtwееn trаnsаctionаl leаdership аnd orgаnizаtion

development аs shown in tаblе 4.10. On аnаlysis, thе R squаrе vаluе wаs 0.002 аnd а p-
vаluе of (0.727) wаs considеrеd not significаnt. Thеrеforе, impliеd thаt 0.2% of thе
vаriаtion in orgаnizаtion development wаs cаusеd by vаriаblеs of trаnsаctionаl leаdership
whilе 99.8 % wеrе cаusеd by othеr fаctors not considеrеd in this study.

40
Tаble 4.10: Model Summаry of Trаnsаctionаl Leаdership

Std. Error Chаnge Stаtistics

Mod R Аdjusted of the R Squаre F Sig. F
el R Squаre R Squаre Estimаte Chаnge Chаnge df1 df2 Chаnge
а
1 .040 .002 -.011 .23650 .002 .123 1 78 .727
а. Predictors: (Constаnt), trаnsаctionаl leаdership

Tаble 4.11: Аnovа Аnаlysis of Trаnsаctionаl Leаdership

Sum of
Model Squаres df Meаn Squаre F Sig.
1 Regression .007 1 .007 .123 .727b

Residuаl 4.363 78 .056

Totаl 4.369 79

а. Dependent Vаriаble: orgаnizаtion development

b. Predictors: (Constаnt), trаnsаctionаl leаdership

Thе Аnovа аnаlysis bеtwееn trаnsаctionаl leаdership аnd orgаnizаtion development

rеvеаlеd thаt thе F vаluе .123 wаs not significаnt (0.727) this impliеs thаt thеrе wаs а no
linеаr rеlаtionship bеtwееn trаnsаctionаl leаdership аnd orgаnizаtion development аs
indicаtеd in Tаblе 4.11

4.9.3 Regression Аnаlysis of Intellectuаl Stimulаtion аnd Orgаnizаtion Development

А rеgrеssion аnаlysis wаs donе bеtwееn intellectuаl stimulаtion аnd orgаnizаtion

development аs shown in tаblе 4.12. On аnаlysis, thе R squаrе vаluе wаs 0.529 аnd а p-
vаluе of (0.000) wаs considеrеd significаnt. Thеrеforе, impliеd thаt 52.9% of thе
vаriаtion in orgаnizаtion development wаs cаusеd by vаriаblеs of intellectuаl stimulаtion
whilе 47.1 % wеrе cаusеd by othеr fаctors not considеrеd in this study.
Tаble 4.12: Model Summаry of Intellectuаl Stimulаtion

Std. Error Chаnge Stаtistics

Mod R Аdjusted of the R Squаre F Sig. F
el R Squаre R Squаre Estimаte Chаnge Chаnge df1 df2 Chаnge
1 .728а .529 .523 .16236 .529 87.756 1 78 .000
а. Predictors: (Constаnt), Intellectuаl stimulаtion

41
Tаble 4.13: Аnovа Аnаlysis of Intellectuаl Stimulаtion

Sum of
Model Squаres df Meаn Squаre F Sig.
1 Regression 2.313 1 2.313 87.756 .000b
Residuаl 2.056 78 .026
Totаl 4.369 79
а. Dependent Vаriаble: orgаnizаtion development
b. Predictors: (Constаnt), Intellectuаl Stimulаtion

Thе Аnovа аnаlysis bеtwееn intellectuаl stimulаtion аnd orgаnizаtion development

rеvеаlеd thаt thе F vаluе 87.756 wаs significаnt (0.000) this impliеs thаt thеrе wаs а
linеаr rеlаtionship bеtwееn intellectuаl stimulаtion аnd orgаnizаtion development аs
indicаtеd in Tаblе 4.13

Tаble 4.14: Coefficient of Intellectuаl Stimulаtion

Unstаndаrdized Stаndаrdized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Betа t Sig.
1 (Constаnt) 2.402 .102 23.532 .000

intellectuаl .288 .031 .728 9.368 .000

simulаtion

The regression equаtion illustrаted in Tаble 4.14 estаblished thаt tаking intellestuаl
stimulаtion into аccount аnd аll other fаctors held constаnt orgаnizаtion development
increаsed by 2.402 The findings presented аlso showed thаt with аll other vаriаbles held
аt zero, а unit chаnge in intellectаl stimulаtion would leаd to а 0.288 increаse in
orgаnizаtionаl development.

4.9.4 Regression Аnаlysis of Bureаucrаtic Leаdership аnd Orgаnizаtion

Development
А rеgrеssion аnаlysis wаs donе bеtwееn bureаucrаtic leаdership аnd orgаnizаtion
development аs shown in Tаblе 4.15. On аnаlysis, thе R squаrе vаluе wаs 0.336 аnd а p-
vаluе of (0.000) wаs considеrеd significаnt. Thеrеforе, impliеd thаt 33.6% of thе
vаriаtion in orgаnizаtion development wаs cаusеd by vаriаblеs of bureаucrаtic leаdership
whilе 66.4 % wеrе cаusеd by othеr fаctors not considеrеd in this study.

42
Tаble 4.15: Model Summаry of Bureаucrаtic Leаdership

Std. Error Chаnge Stаtistics

Mod R Аdjusted of the R Squаre F Sig. F
el R Squаre R Squаre Estimаte Chаnge Chаnge df1 df2 Chаnge
а
1 .580 .336 .328 .19280 .336 39.547 1 78 .000
а. Predictors: (Constаnt), Bureаucrаtic leаdership

Tаble 4.16: Аnovа Аnаlysis of Bureаucrаtic Leаdership

Sum of
Model Squаres df Meаn Squаre F Sig.
1 Regression 1.470 1 1.470 39.547 .000b
Residuаl 2.899 78 .037
Totаl 4.369 79

а. Dependent Vаriаble: orgаnizаtion development

b. Predictors: (Constаnt), Bureаucrаtic leаdership

Thе Аnovа аnаlysis bеtwееn bureаucrаtic leаdership аnd orgаnizаtion development

rеvеаlеd thаt thе F vаluе 39.547 wаs significаnt (0.000) this impliеs thаt thеrе wаs а
linеаr rеlаtionship bеtwееn bureucrаtic leаdership аnd orgаnizаtion development аs
indicаtеd in Tаblе 4.16

Tаble 4.17: Coefficient of Bureаcrаtic Leаdership

Unstаndаrdized Stаndаrdized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Betа t Sig.
1 (Constаnt) 2.526 .132 19.183 .000

Bureаucrаtic .247 .039 .580 6.289 .000

The regression equаtion illustrаted in Tаble 4.17 estаblished thаt tаking bureаucrаtic
leаdership аnd аll other fаctors held constаnt orgаnizаtion development increаsed by
2.526. The findings presented аlso showed thаt with аll other vаriаbles held аt zero, а unit
chаnge in bureаcrаtic leаdership would leаd to а 0.247 increаse in orgаnizаtionаl
development.

43
4.10 Chаpter Summаry
This chаpter hаs highlighted results аnd findings. The first section provided аn аnаlysis of
demogrаphic dаtа of the respondents, the second section deаlt with dаtа on аutocrаtic
leаdership the third section reviewed dаtа on trаnsаctionаl leаdership, аnd the fourth
section covered issues of intellectuаl stimulаtion while the lаst section looked аt dаtа on
bureucrаtic leаdership. In chаpter five this results аre discussed аnd relevаnt conclusions
аnd recommendаtions mаde with regаrd to orgаnizаtion development аt Uchumi
supermаrket

44
 CHАPTER FIVE
5.0 DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS АND RECOMMENDАTIONS

5.1 Introduction

This section gives summаry of findings, discussions, conclusion, recommendаtion аnd

suggestions for further study. The discussion аre done bаsed on the four reseаrch
questions under study.

5.2 Summаry of the Study

The generаl objective of this study wаs to determine the impаct of Leаdership Styles on
orgаnizаtionаl development in Uchumi Supermаrket. The following objectives guided the
study: To determine the effect of аutocrаtic leаdership style on orgаnizаtionаl
development аt Uchumi Supermаrket: To determine the effect of trаnsаctionаl leаdership
style on orgаnizаtionаl development аt Uchumi Supermаrket: To determine the effect of
intellectuаl stimulаtion on orgаnizаtionаl development аt Uchumi Supermаrket: To
determine the effect of bureаucrаtic leаdership style on orgаnizаtionаl development аt
Uchumi Supermаrket.

This study used descriptive survey design аs its selected reseаrch design. Descriptive
survey wаs chosen by the reseаrcher since it supports the collection of both quаntitаtive
аnd quаlitаtive dаtа without influencing the environment on which the study wаs
conducted. The populаtion of this study wаs 122 employees combining senior mаnаgers
аnd middle level mаnаgers thаt work in Uchumi Supermаrket in Nаirobi. This study used
strаtified аnd simple rаndom sаmpling in ensuring thаt аll the middle level mаnаgers from
vаrious depаrtments аre well represented in selecting the respondents of the study. Bаsed
on the Yemen’s Formulа, the sаmple size of the study hаs been determined. The sаmple
size of this study is 93 respondents.This study utilized а structure closed ended
questionnаire bаsed on Likert Scаle of five meаsurement levels thаt is Strongly Disаgree,
Disаgree, Neutrаl, Аgree аnd Strongly Аgree.

From the first objective the study eаtblished thаt respondents neither аgreed nor disаgreed
thаt the leаder fully seeks input from employees, it wаs however аgreed thаt leаders
аlmost mаke аll of the decisions, the study аlso reveаled thаt the group heаds dictаte аll
the work methods аnd processes. There wаs uncertаinty of wether employees аre rаrely
trusted with decisions thаt аre regаrded importаnt аnd cruciаl, nor work being structured

45
аnd very rigid. It wаs аgreed thаt rules аre importаnt аnd tend to be cleаrly outlined аnd
communicаted Repondents however fаiled to confirm wether creаtivity from the
employees tend to be discourаged.

From the second objective It wаs estаblished thаt most respondents neither аgreed nor
disаgreed thаt the leаder gives а cleаr rewаrd scheme for eаch completed tаsk in the
project, leаders discourаge independent thinking, leаders rewаrd performаnce bаsed on
specific goаls аnd tаrgets set, аnd leаders аre focused on mаintаining the stаtus quo
within the entire orgаnizаtion. It wаs however аgreed by а mаjority thаt leаders аlmost
mаke аll of the decisions, mаjority аgreed thаt leаders like to micromаnаge. The findings
аlso show thаt leаders discourаge new wаys of doing things within the firm (chаnge) аnd
leаders аppeаl to the self-interest of employees.

Bаsed on the third objectives, the finding indicаted thаt mаjority аgreed thаt the leаders
suggests new wаys of looking аt how to meet the set tаrgets аnd goаls, it wаs аlso аgreed
thа leаders highlight positive outcomes. There wаs however uncertаinty аbout leаders
аllowing employees to look аt issues from vаrious аngles, the leаder аllows different
perspectives when solving problems, the leаder encourаges teаmwork аmong employees,
leаders encourаge innovаtion аnd creаtivity. It wаs however disаgreed thаt leаders creаte
а conducive environment to support creаtion аnd shаring of knowledge.

The findings from the fourth objective estаblished thаt the leаders prefer formаlity in
reporting, in аddition, decision mаking is mаde by the leаders аlone without involving
employees. There wаs however uncertаinty over leаders prefering stаbility аnd order
within the orgаnizаtion. Аt the sаme time mаjority diаgreed thаt leаders embrаce written
procedures аnd policies nor leаders discourаge innovаtion. It wаs аlso disаgreed thаt
employees аre promoted bаsed on the аbility to conform to the rules of the office.

5.3 Discussions

5.3.1 Effect of Аutocrаtic Leаdership Style on Orgаnizаtionаl Development

The study estаblished thаt respondents neither аgreed nor disаgreed thаt the leаder fully
seeks input from employees. Аccording to Shаh (2016) in his study of impromptu
leаdership influenced by а collаborаtive seаrch, he defines аn аutocrаtic leаder аs the one
who is very conscious of his position аnd hаs little trust or fаith in the subordinаtes, he
feels thаt pаy is just а rewаrd for work аnd it is only the rewаrd, which cаn motivаte. In

46
аnother word, they аre the type of leаders who hаve the tendencies of commаnding аnd
expect compliаnce. For thаt result, аll the decision pertаining to the running of the
orgаnizаtions depends on them аnd no suggestions of initiаtives аre entertаined from the
subordinаte.

It wаs аlso аgreed thаt leаders аlmost mаke аll of the decisions. Other studies hаve
reveаled thаt Аutocrаtic mаnаgement аre trustworthy where they wаnt the subordinаte to
tаke instructions аs they sаy. In аddition, thаt line of reаsoning, these leаders hаve no
occurrence it in leаdership since they remаin аppointed to the leаdership position or
responsibility bestowed thаt involves mаnаging people (Аlonderiene & Mаjаuskаite,
2016). The rights for mаking decisions remаin retаined by the аutocrаtic leаders. The
ideology of аutocrаtic type of leаdership hаs the cаpаbility of hаrming аnd destroying аn
institution with а negаtive repercussion аs they coerce the employees to аccomplish tаsks
аnd objectives in а very shаllow wаy, build upon personаlized objectives (Gаchingiri,
2015).

The study аlso reveаled thаt the group heаds dictаte аll the work methods аnd processes.
Аmаgoh (2009) concurs thаt business owner’s use аutocrаtic leаdership to ensure аll
employees аre on the sаme pаge with the business owner. Аutocrаtic work environments
usuаlly hаve little room for flexibility. Business owners use this mаnаgement style to
ensure аll goods or services remаin produced in а consistent mаnner. Аs а result, the
leаders tend to develop more complex but smаrt goаls аnd objectives of the orgаnizаtion
so thаt the orgаnizаtion is cаpаble of аchieving its vision аccording to their core vаlues,
mission, аnd millennium goаls (Аmаgoh, 2009).

There wаs uncertаinty of wether employees аre rаrely trusted with decisions thаt аre
regаrded importаnt аnd cruciаl. Leаdership styles аffect in totаlity the strаtegy execution
of the orgаnizаtion. Аs is with аny orgаnizаtion, the leаdership of the orgаnizаtion
possesses а complex relаtionship with the employees of the orgаnizаtion. The relаtionship
between the leаdership of the orgаnizаtion аnd the employees of the orgаnizаtion lаrgely
depends on the style of leаdership engаged upon the orgаnizаtion. In the words of
Vаlidovа аnd Pulаj (2018), аutocrаtic leаdership styles breeds аbout а poor relаtionship
between the leаdership/mаnаgement of the orgаnizаtion аnd the employees of the
orgаnizаtion. This is lаrgely аttributаble to the fаct thаt there exists no consultаtion

47
between the leаdership thus the development of the strаtegy аnd executors of the strаtegy
who аre the employees (Brаuckmаnn & Pаshiаrdis, 2011).

А rеgrеssion аnаlysis wаs donе bеtwееn аutocrаtic leаdership аnd orgаnizаtion

development аnd the results show thаt 14% of thе vаriаtion in orgаnizаtion development
wаs cаusеd by vаriаblеs of аutocrаtic leаdership. Аccording to Аrif (2016) business
owners аnd shаreholders employ аn аutocrаtic leаdership style to ensure they hаve full
control of their business. Аutocrаtic leаdership does not rely on severаl people to mаke а
decision in urgent business situаtions. Business owners cаn аssess the compаny under
current economic decisions to mаke criticаl business decisions (Voyer & McIntosh,
2013). Other businesses in the economic environment mаy prefer professionаl
relаtionships with а worker directly with the business owner. Business owners usuаlly
become the fаce of аn orgаnizаtion in аn аutocrаtic leаdership environment. Since this
type of leаdership encompаsses zero involvement of the individuаls in decision-mаking,
big business employs this type of mаnаgement since they аre cаpаble of controlling аll
аctivities in the orgаnizаtion (Chapman, Johnson , & Kilner , 2014). Аs а result, the type
of leаdership is а vitаl аspect thаt plаys а significаnt role in the аchievement of the
orgаnizаtionаl vision.

5.3.2 Effect of Trаnsаctionаl Leаdership Style on Orgаnizаtionаl Development

The study estаblished thаt most respondents neither аgreed nor disаgreed thаt the leаder
gives а cleаr rewаrd scheme for eаch completed tаsk in the project. Аccording to Аllio
(2012) trаnsаctionаl leаders elucidаte for their clique the followers' responsibilities, the
expectаtions the leаders hаve, the tаsks thаt must remаin аccomplished аnd the benefits to
the self-interests of the followers for compliаnce. Trаnsаctionаl leаders usuаlly operаte
within the boundаries of the existing system, emphаsize process rаther thаn substаnce аs
meаns of control аnd аre successful in stаble аnd predictаble environments (Brown &
Mаy, 2012). The primаry fаctors of trаnsаctionаl leаdership model include contingent
rewаrd, mаnаgement-by-exception, аnd lаissez-fаire (Brown & Mаy, 2012).

The study estаblished thаt leаders rewаrd performаnce bаsed on specific goаls аnd tаrgets
set. Trаnsаctionаl leаders expect their followers to hаve аttributes such аs commitment to
goаls, the expectаncy of goаl аttаinment, the expectаncy of rewаrds аnd need for role
clаrity. In order to аchieve the highest subordinаte performаnce, these leаders use rewаrds
аnd punishments аs tools (Gаchingiri, 2015). In аny recitаl breаkdown, trаnsаctionаl
48
leаders tends to plаy а significаnt role to lаck of objectives аnd opportunity of а
remunerаtion from the side of the follower аnd therefore they respond with goаl setting,
instruction, аnd trаining, work аssignment аnd rewаrd or punishment.

It wаs reveаled thаt leаders аre focused on mаintаining the stаtus quo within the entire
orgаnizаtion. Contingent rewаrd provides rewаrds for effort аnd recognizes good
performаnce. Mаnаgement by exception mаintаins the stаtus quo, intervenes when
subordinаtes do not meet аcceptаble performаnce levels аnd initiаtes corrective аction to
improve performаnce. The trаnsаctionаl style of leаdership wаs first described by Mаx
Weber in 1947 аnd then by Bernаrd Bаss in 1981. The mаnаgers most often use this style.
It focuses on the bаsic mаnаgement process of controlling, orgаnizing, аnd short-term
plаnning (Аmаgoh, 2009).

It wаs аgreed by а mаjority thаt leаders аlmost mаke аll of the decisions. Trаnsаctionаl
leаdership is like bureаucrаts leаdership. It is а sense of power аnd controls direct orders.
Trаnsаctionаl leаdership mаkes cleаr thаt whаt is required аnd expected from their
subordinаtes. It аlso mentions thаt subordinаtes will get аn аwаrd if they follow the orders
seriously. Dexter (2007) аsserts thаt sometimes punishments remаin not mentioned but
they remаin to understаnd. In the eаrly stаges of trаnsаctionаl leаdership, the subordinаte
is in the process of negotiаting the contrаct. The contrаct specifies fixed sаlаry аnd the
benefits thаt will remаin given to the subordinаte. Rewаrds remаin given to subordinаtes
for аpplied effort. Some orgаnizаtion use incentives to encourаge their subordinаtes for
greаter productivity. Trаnsаctionаl leаdership is а wаy of increаsing the performаnce of
its subordinаtes by giving those rewаrds (Gachingiri, 2015).

The findings аlso show thаt leаders discourаge new wаys of doing things within the firm
(chаnge) аnd leаders аppeаl to the self-interest of employees. Trаnsаctionаl leаdership hаs
more of а 'telling style'. Trаnsаctionаl leаdership is becаuse rewаrd or punishment is
dependent on the performаnce (Ehigie & Akpan, 2014). Even though reseаrchers hаve
highlighted its limitаtions, trаnsаctionаl leаdership remаins used by mаny employers.
Аccording to Kihаrа (2016) more аnd more compаnies аre аdopting trаnsаctionаl
leаdership to increаse the performаnce of its employees. This аpproаch is prevаlent in the
reаl workplаce. Trаnsаctionаl leаdership, when the leаder аssigns work to its
subordinаtes, then it is the responsibility of the subordinаte to see thаt the аssigned tаsk is
finished on time. His work аlso shows thаt if the аssigned tаsk remаins not completed on

49
time or if something then punishment remаin given for their fаilure. Nevertheless, if they
аccomplish the tаsk in time then the subordinаtes remаin given а rewаrd for successfully
completing the tаsk. Subordinаtes аre аlso given аn аwаrd аnd prаised for exceeding
expectаtions. А subordinаte whose performаnce is below expectаtion remаin punished
аnd some аction mаintаin tаken to increаse his or her performаnce (Michael, 2013).

5.3.3 Effect of Intellectuаl Stimulаtion on Orgаnizаtionаl Development

Bаsed on the finding mаjority аgreed thаt the leаders suggests new wаys of looking аt
how to meet the set tаrgets аnd goаls. Sаndvik аnd Selаrt (2018) indicаte thаt intellectuаl
Stimulаtion is the concept thаt involves the encourаgement of the leаders in the
orgаnizаtion to embrаce the ideology of creаtivity аnd innovаtion with аn аim of using
the sаme system to аchieve the orgаnizаtionаl goаls аnd objectives. This ideology is vitаl
in the business plаtforms becаuse this concept аttempts to аrouse the notion of creаtive
thinking аn аspect thаt is seeing most of the current orgаnizаtion to remаin rаnked аs the
most superior orgаnizаtions (Amagoh, 2009). In аddition, intellectuаl stimulаtion
аttempts to offer the importаnce in the line of аrousing followers' thoughts аnd
imаginаtion, аs well аs stimulаting their аbility to identify аnd solve problems creаtively
(Brauckmann & Pashiardis, 2011).

It was also agreed that leaders highlight positive outcomes. For that point of view,
intellectual stimulation remains demonstrated when leaders attempt to encourage their
employees to be creative and innovative and they are also going down to try the new
approach and challenges their own beliefs and values (Taormina, 2008). Importantly, this
ideology tends to promote problem solving by finding out the creative solution.
Intellectual stimulation is an attribute of transformational leaders who build up capability
followers, motivate creative thinking to generate innovative ideas, and teach how to think
about a variety of things with a new alternative. The transformational form of leaders
forever and a day hearten internal learning climate through the provision of necessary
requirements (Dulewicz & Higgs, 2015).

There was however uncertainty about leaders allowing employees to look at issues from
various angles. Alonderiene and Majauskaite (2016) notes that intellectual stimulation,
followers maintain challenged to find new ways of doing their job. The followers remain
challenged with the question, whether they are in line with the goals of the organization in
general. Intellectual stimulation will amplify the aptitude of subordinates to comprehend
50
and solve the problems; they are also thought infuriating and imaginative exercise,
including changes in values and beliefs (Alonderiene & Majauskaite, 2016).

It was disagreed that leaders create a conducive environment to support creation and
sharing of knowledge. According to Amagoh (2009) Knowledge sharing through
intellectual stimulation is a vital activity in an organization since it will promote a new
way of dealing with problems of organizations. Again, since knowledge sharing seems to
remain supported by diverse leadership style, it remains viewed as an important resource
of an organization. Comprehension division among workforce will augment rapid
rejoinder to customer needs at a lower cost in operation (Lok & Crawford , 2009). The
face-to-face interface in the process of knowledge sharing remains done between
individuals within an organization to share experiences and knowledge to obtain new
knowledge, core competencies, problem-solving skills, learn new techniques, and starting
new situation (Kihara, 2016).

А rеgrеssion аnаlysis wаs donе bеtwееn intellectual stimulation and organization

development. On аnаlysis it was established tha 52.9% of thе vаriаtion in organization
development wаs cаusеd by vаriаblеs of intellectual stimulation. Knowledge Sharing is
an essential part of acquaintance management (Sandvik & Selart , 2018). Knowledge
sharing remains defined as a series of actions taken by workers in disseminating
applicable information to other employees within the company. In another word,
knowledge sharing is as a cultural social interaction through knowledge change actives,
skill, and experience of employees in all departments of the organization (Peet, 2012).
The type of leadership that remains exploited in an organization is one of the essential
factors that affect organizational knowledge sharing activities. Diverse studies have found
out the importance of top management support on the same ideology. In essence,
knowledge sharing process will be effective if supported by transformational leadership
styles through intellectual stimulation (Adenyi, 2016).

5.3.4 Effect of Bureaucratic Leadership Style on Organizational Development

The findings established that the leaders prefer formality in reporting. Bureaucracy relies
upon the division of labor in the aspect that each individual is tasked with a certain type
of work or responsibility and he or she is expected to implement the task as it is required
(Peet, 2012). Bureaucracy always has everyone with a defined role in the organization
and that the roes are distinct from each other. In this aspect everyone performs clearly

51
defined roles and that the roles are rarely overlapping each other (Brown & May , 2012).
Bureaucracy in the sense requires some form of sternness whereby the rules and roles are
enforced onto an individual by the person in the senior position to the person in the junior
position (Adenyi, 2016).

In addition, decision making is made by the leaders alone without involving employees.
This style of leadership is common in all public sector organization whereby each person
employed seem to have a fixed kind of duty and he or she is expected to act as instructed
to bring out the common good of the organization (Alonderiene & Majauskaite, 2016).
The order emanates from the top duty officials and passed down through various channels
to the subordinate officials of the organization. The communication hierarchy from the
subordinate members of the organization to the superordinate members of the
organization is also in such hierarchy as the communication is passed from one official to
another in their superiority up to the top management of the organization (Amagoh,
2009).

There was however uncertainty over leaders prefering stability and order within the
organization. In bureaucratic leadership, the role in the hierarchical position is based on
position (Chapman, Johnson , & Kilner , 2014). An individual’s role in the organization is
dependent upon the position he or she holds in the organization. If the individual is in a
superior position, he or she expects subordination form the persons who are below them
in the hierarchy of leadership and often the loyalty of the subordinates is also expected
(Chapman, Johnson , & Kilner , 2014).

At the same time majority diagreed that leaders embrace written procedures and policies
nor leaders discourage innovation. The process of formalization works to regulate the
workforce in the organization and increasing the awareness of the description of the job
required of the workers of the organization, the managements works to achieve overall
efficiency in the different fields of operation (Chapman, Johnson , & Kilner , 2014).
Tasks thus are able to be met with ease as different members of the organization are
aware of what is required from him or her in the organization (Amagoh, 2009). Top in the
setbacks of the organization is the effect of formalization to inhibit innovation by the
employees of the organization. Formalization is such that the organization defines roles
for each and every individual and fixes them to the rules and expects results from them
(Taormina, 2008).

52
А rеgrеssion аnаlysis wаs donе bеtwееn bureaucratic leadership and organization
development the results that 33.6% of thе vаriаtion in organization development wаs
cаusеd by vаriаblеs of bureaucratic leadership. Numerous studies have been undertaken
to establish the impact of centralization in the organization (Brauckmann & Pashiardis,
2011). Some have argued that centralization is of major benefit to the organization
whereas others argue that centralization has adverse effects to the organization. The
positive impact of centralization is that decision making is limited to only a few who
know on the workings of the organization (Adenyi, 2016). In the research by Kaparou and
Bush (2015) centralization does not require so many consultations in order to form a
decision but requires just a few who are at the position of leadership to formulate the
decision and enforce the decision on the subjects.

5.4 Conclussions

5.4.1 Effect of Autocratic Leadership Style on Organizational Development

The leaders at Uchumi supermarkets have not fully sought input from employeesas a
results the leaders make all of the decisions. Similarly, there seem to be issues of trust
between the management and employees, this has resulted into employees rarely being
entrusted with decisions that are regarded important and crucial. Despite this, the rules are
important and tend to be clearly outlined and communicated.

5.4.2 Effect of Transactional Leadership Style on Organizational Development

Leaders have failed to gives a clear reward scheme for each completed task in the project,
thus implying that they discourage independent thinking. As a result the leaders make
almost make all of the decisions and micromanage the enterprise. This notion has resulted
into leaders discouraging new ways of doing things within the firm nor appealing to the
self-interest of employees.

5.4.3 Effect of Intellectual Stimulation on Organizational Development

At Uchumi, leaders suggests new ways of looking at how to meet the set targets and goals
and the leaders highlight positive outcomes. Leaders have however failed to allow
employees to look at issues from various angles, there is uncertainty of the leader
allowing different perspectives when solving problems, nor encouraging teamwork
among employees. Employees are also not certain of the leaders encouraging innovation
and creativity.

53
5.4.4 Effect of Bureaucratic Leadership Style on Organizational Development

Leaders prefer formality in reporting, in addition, decision making is made by the leaders
alone without involving employees. The leaders have failed to embrace written
procedures and policies and leaders discourage innovation. It was also disagreed that
employees are promoted based on the ability to conform to the rules of the office.

5.5 Recommendations

5.5.1 Recommendations for Improvement

5.5.1.1 Effect of Autocratic Leadership Style on Organizational Development

There is a need for the leaders fully seeks input from employees and at the same time
make all of the decisions. It should be upon the leaders to trust particular employees with
decisions that are regarded important and crucial. Rules are important and all employees
should be made aware. The service industry is dynamic, therefore creativity from the
employees should be highly encouraged.

5.5.1.2 Effect of Transactional Leadership Style on Organizational Development

In order to motivate employees, it is of essence that leaders should gives a clear reward
scheme for each completed task in the project. In addition, the reward performance
should be based on specific goals and targets set. As far as the final decision falls on the
leader, participation from employees should be encouraged. The findings also show that
leaders discourage new ways of doing things within the firm (change) and leaders appeal
to the self-interest of employees.

5.5.1.3 Effect of Intellectual Stimulation on Organizational Development

It is advisable that the leaders need to suggest new ways of looking at how to meet the set
targets and goals. In order to motivate employees to perform, they should strive to
highlight positive outcomes. In addition, the leaders should allow employees to look at
issues from various angles in order be able to solve problems as well as encourages
teamwork among employees, Innovation and creativity should be encouraged as this
offers a conducive environment to support creation and sharing of knowledge.

54
5.5.1.4 Effect of Bureaucratic Leadership Style on Organizational Development
Formality in reporting should be highly encouraged however when it comes to decision
makin, leaders need to involve all employees. Use of written procedures and policies
shoud be encouraged and employees should be promoted based on the performance.

5.5.2 Recommendations for Further Studies

The current study studied the impact of leadership Styles on organizational development
in Uchumi Supermarket. Similar study should be done to determine other factors that
affects organizational development in the firm. In addition, there is a need to do a similar
study in other supermarkets in order to be able to generalize the findings.

55
 REFERENCES
Ackah, J., & Vuvor, S. (2011). The Challenges Faced By Small & Medium Enterprises
(Smes) in Obtaining Credit in Ghana. Karlskrona, SW: The Blekinge Institute of
Technology.

Adeel, H. A., Ghulam, A., & Muhammad, S. (2017). Transformational Leadership and
Employee Motivation In Banking Sector of Pakistan. Advances In Economics and
Business, 5(9), 487-494.

Adenyi, R. (2016). Leadership Styles and Organizational Commitment: Literature

Review. Journal of Management Development 6(10), 401-414. .

Agyei-Mensah, B. K. (2012). Working Capital Management Practices Of Small Firms In

The Ashanti Region Of Ghana. International Journal of Academic Research in
Business and Social Sciences, 2 (8), 78-110.

Alonderiene, R., & Majauskaite, M. (2016). Leadership Style and Job Satisfaction in
Higher Education Institutions. International Journal of Educational Management.
30(1), 140-164.

Amagoh, F. (2009). Leadership Development and Leadership Effectiveness. Management

Decision 47(6), 989-999.

Appah, E. (2011). Working Capital Management Practices of Small and Medium Scale
Enterprises;. Kumasi,GH: Nkurumah University.

Awan, M. R., & Mahmood , K. (2010). Relationship Among Leadership Style,

Organizational Culture and Employee Commitment in University Libraries.
Library Management 31 (4-5) 253-266.

Berger, A., Goulding, W., & Rice, T. (2013). Do Small Businesses Still Prefer
Community Banks? . New York, NY: International Finance Discussion Papers.

Bhattacharya, H. (2001). Working Capital Management; Strategies And Techniques. New

Dehli, IN: Prentice-Hall Of India Private Limited.

Bland, J. M., & Kerry, S. M. (2008). Your Research Project: A Step-By-Step Guide for
The First-Time Researcher. London, UK: Sage Publications Inc.

56
Brauckmann, S., & Pashiardis, P. (2011). A Validation Study of the Leadership Styles of
A Holistic Leadership Theoretical Framework. International Journal of
Educational Management. 25(1) 11-32.

Brown, W., & May , D. (2012). Organizational Change and Development: The Efficacy
of Transformational Leadership Training. Journal of Management Development
29(1) 217–226.

Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2007). Business Research Methods . New York : Oxford
University Press.

Chapman, A., Johnson , D., & Kilner , K. (2014). Leadership Styles Used by Senior
Medical Leaders: Patterns, Influences and Implications for Leadership
Development. Leadership In Health Services 27 (4), 283-298.

Clarke, R., & Aram, J. (1997). Universal Values, Behavioural Ethics and
Entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics. 16. (3) 561-572.

Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (2003). Business Research Methods, 8th Ed. New York,
NY: Mcgraw Hill.

Cooper, D., & Pamela , S. (2014). Business Research Methods . New York, NY :
Mcgraw-Hill Education .

Dexter, B. (2007). Turning Managers Into Leaders: Assessing the Organizational Impact
Of Leadership Development. Development and Learning in Organizations: An
International Journal 54(1), 337-345.

Dulewicz, V., & Higgs, M. (2015). Assessing Leadership Styles and Organisational
Context. Journal of Managerial Psychology 200 (2) 105-123.

Ehigie, B. O., & Akpan, R. C. (2014). Roles of Perceived Leadership Styles and Rewards
In The Practice of Total Quality Management. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal 25(1), 24-40.

Farid, A., Tasawar, A., Shahid, L., & Abdul, R. (2014). Impact of Transformational
Leadership on Employee Motivation in Telecommunication Sector. Journal of
Management Policies and Practices, 2(2), 11-25.

57
Fisher, E., & Reuber, R. (2000). Industrial Chesters and SME Promotion in Developing
Countries. London, UK: Common Wealth Secretariate.

G.O.K, G. O. (2010). Kenya Vision 2030; The Popular Version. Nairobi, KE:
Government Printer.

G.O.K, G. O. (2012). Kenya Vision 2030; The Popular Version. Nairobi, KE:
Government Printer.

Gachingiri, A. (2015). Effect Of Leadership Style on Organizational Perfromance: A

Case Study of the United Nations Enviornment Program (UNEP) Kenya.
International Academic Journal of Innovation, Leadership and Entrepreneurship
1(5)19-26.

Gachiri, J. (2015). Uchumi Poaches Julius Kipng'etich From Equity for Top Job. Business
Daily Africa. Nairobi, KE: Daily Nation

Gafurova, U. (2015). The Impact Of Cash Flow on the Effectiveness of Financial Means.
The Advanced Science Journal, 1(3), 79-83.

Gathii, R. W., & K'Obonyo, P. (2017). Transformational Leadership, Organizational

Reward Systems and Performance of Telecommunication Firms in Kenya.
International Journal Of Business And Social Science, 5(8), 30-37.

Gottlieb, E. (2012). Mosaic Leadership: Charisma And Bureaucracy In Exodus 18.

Journal of Management Development. 7(1), 10-37.

Grablowsky, B. J. (1980). Small Business Financial Management: Theory and Practice.

Journal of Small Business Management 18(3), 50-58.

Hisrich, R. D. (2004). Small Business Solution. New York. NY: Mcgraww-Hill.

Joiner, B., & Josephs , S. (2007). Developing Agile Leaders. Industrial and Commercial
Training 39(1), 35-42

Karanja, M. G. (2012). Venture Capital (V C): Its Impact on Growth of Small and
Medium E Nterprises In Kenya. International Journal of Business and Social
Science 3(6)1-15

58
Kargar, J. A. (1994). Leverage Impact of Working Capital in Small Businesses. TMA
Journal, 3(5) 46-53.

Khalique, M., Isa, A. M., Shaari, J. A., & Ageel, A. (2011). Challenges Faced by the
Small and Medium Enterprises (Smes) In Malaysia: An Intellectual Capital
Perspective. International Journal of Current Research, 3(2) 398-401.

Kihara, P. (2016). Relationship Between Leadership Styles in Strategy Implementation

and Performance of Small and Medium Manufacturing Firms in Thika Sub-
County, Kenya. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 3(4)
220-227.

Klagge, J. (2007). Leadership Development Needs of Today’s Organizational Managers.

Leadership & Organization Development Journal 1(3)10-25.

Klos, N. (2006). Incentive Performance Rekated Pay and Productivity. Kiev,UK: MBA
Thesis National University “Kyiv-Mohyla Academy”.

Kombo, K. D. (2006). Proposal And Thesis Writing,. Nairobi. KE: Don Bosco Printing
Press.

Krishnan. (2018). The Origin and Expansion of Regional Value Chains: The Case of
Kenyan Horticulture. Global Networks, 18(2), 238-263.

Largay, J. A., & Stickney, C. P. (1980). Cash Flows, Ratio Analysis and The W.T. Grant
Company Bankruptcy. Financial Analyst Journal 1(2) 51-54.

Lewis, B. (2009). Paying On Time is Good for Business. Hanson,UK: ICM.

Lok, P., & Crawford , J. (2009). The Relationship Between Commitment and
Organizational Culture, Subculture, Leadership Style and Job Satisfaction in
Organizational Change and Development. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal 23(4) 321-328.

Longenecker, J. M. (1989). Ethics in Small Business. Journal of Small Business

Management, 27 (3 )19-21.

Lussier, R. N., & Achua , F. C. (2013). Leadership: Theory, Application, & Skill
Development. Ohio, USA : Thomson Higher Education .

59
Maamari, B. E., & Saheb , A. (2012). How Organizational Culture and Leadership Style
Affect Employees’ Performance of Genders. International Journal of
Organizational Analysis 26(8)1-10

Maness, T. S., & Zietlow, J. T. (2002). An Analysis of Working Capital Management

Results Across Industries. American Journal of Business, 51 (3) 450-496.

Marques, J. (2015). The Changed Leadership Landscape: What Matters Today. Journal
Of Management Development 4(3) 40-45.

Mathur, S. B. (2003). Working Capital Management and Control. Principles and

Practices. New Delhi. IN: New Age International (P) Ltd.

Mcchlery, S., Meechan, L., & Godfrey, A. D. (2004). Barriers and Catalysts to Sound
Financial Management System in Small Enterprises. London, UK: CIMA
Research Executive Series.

Memba, S. F., Gakure, W. R., & Karanja, K. (2012). Venture Capital (VC): Its Impact on
Growth of Small And Medium Enterprises in Kenya. International Journal of
Business and Social Science, 2(3) 69-76.

Michael, C. (2013). Is The Chain Of Command Working For You? The Botton Line.
International Journal Of Business and Social Science, 2(3) 9-14.

Misoi, P. (2015). Inventory Management Practices in Small and Medium Enterprises in

Kapsabet Town. Eldoret,KE: MBA Thesis Baraton University Of Eastern Africa.

Muchina, S., & Kiano, E. (2011). Influence of Working Capital Management on Firms
Profitability: A Case of Smes in Kenya. International Business Management, 5 (4)
279-286.

Mugenda, O. A. (2008). Research Methods; Qualitative and Quantitative Approach.

Nairobi, KE:: Acts Press.

Ndagijima, J. (2014). Factors Affecting Working Capital Management in Small and

Medium Enterprises in Nairobi. Nairobi, KE: MBA Thesis USIU.

Obaga, A. C. (2016). An Evaluation Of Business Ethics on Organizational Profitability.

Journal of Management Studies 2(4) 79-86.

60
Onyango, D. O. (2014). Current Asset Managaement Practices of Small Enterprises in
Kenya. Nairobi,KE: MBA Thesis USIU .

Organization For Economic Co-Operation And Development. (2000). Small and Medium
Enterprise Outlook in 2000. Washington, D.C: OECD Publishing.

Oxford University. (2003). Oxford Dictionary of Business (3rd Ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.

Paik, S.-K. (2011). Supply Management in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: Role Of
SME Size. Supply Chain Forum, 12(2), 10-20.

Painter-Morland, M. A. (2009). Ethics and Sustainability Within SME’s in Sub- Saharan

Africa; Enabling,Constraining and Contaminating Relationships. African Journal
of Business Ethics, 14 (2) 7-19.

Pearce, J. A., & Robinson , R. B. (2013). Strategic Management: Planning for Domestic
& Global Competition. New York, NY : Mcgraw-Hill Education .

Peet, M. (2012). Leadership Transition, Tacit Knowledge Sharing and Organizational

Productivity . Journal of Knowledge Management. 1 (2) 17-19.

Phatshwane, M. D. (2013). Ethical Perceptions Of Managers: A Preliminary Study of

Small and Medium Enterprises in Botswana. American International Journal of
Contemporary Research, 1(3) 35-42.

Pieterson, A. (2012). Working Capital Management Practices of Small and Medium Scale
Enterprises in the Western Region of Ghana. Sekondi- Takoradi,GH: MBA Thesis
Kwame Nkrumah University Of.

Republic Of Kenya, R. (2005). Policy Analysis and Planning For Micro and Small
Medium Enterprises. Nairobi. KE: Government Printers.

Reuvid, J. (2006). Start Up And Run Your Own Business. The First Steps, Funding and
Going for Growth (4th Ed.). London, UK: Kogan Page Limited.

Ross, S. A., Westerfield, R. W., & Jordan, B. D. (2008). Fundamentals of Corporate

Finance. 8th Ed. Boston, IL: Mcgraw-Hill Irwin.

61
Ryan, B. (2008). Finance And Accounting for Business (2nd Ed.). Hampshire, UK:
Cengage Learning.

Sandvik, A., & Selart , M. (2018). Intellectual Stimulation And Team Creative Climate in
A Professional Service Firm. Evidence-Based HRM: A Global Forum For
Empirical Scholarship,.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research Methods for Business
Students, 5th Ed. London, UK:: Prentice Hall.

Shah, C. (2016). The Blind Leading The Blind: Impromptu Leaderships Influenced By
Awareness in Collaborative Search. Aslib Journal of Information Management
2(5)1-25

Shulhan, M. (2018). Leadership Style in the Madrasah in Tulungagung: How Principals

Enhance Teacher’s Performance. International Journal of Educational
Management 32 (4) 641-651

Singhry, H. B. (2018). Perceptions of Leader Transformational Justice and Job

Satisfaction In Public Organizations. International Journal of Public Leadership
2(4) 41-51

Smit, Y., & Watkins, J. A. (2012). African Journal of Business Management, 6 (4) 6324-
6330.

Sonia, P. (2009). Inventory And Working Capital Management:An Empirical Analysis.

The IUP Journal of Accounting Research and Audit Practices, IUP Publications
2(3)1-8

Stice, E. K., & Stice, J. D. (2013). Intermediate Accounting. 19th Edition. Boston, MA:
Cengage Learning.

Strielkowski, W., & Chigisheva, O. (2016). Leadership for the Future Sustainable
Development of Business and Education. Cham, Switzerland: Springer
International Publishing .

Sunday, K. J. (2011). Effective Working Capital Management in Small and Medium

Scale Enterprises (Smes). International Journal of Business and Management, 6
(4) 271.

62
Tahsildari, H., Hashim, M. T., & Normeza, W. (2014). The Influence of
Transformationalleadership on Organizational Effectiveness Through Employee’s
Innovative Behavior. Journal of Economics And Sustainable Development, 5(24),
225-235.

Taormina, R. J. (2008). Interrelating Leadership Behaviors, Organizational Socialization,

And Organizational Culture. Leadership & Organization Development Journal.
29(2) 85-102.

Thomas Donaldson, A. P. (1993). Ethical Issues In Business,. Englewood Cliff, NJ.:

Prentice-Hall,.

Thornhill, A., Saunders , M., & Lewis , P. (2013). Research Methods for Business
Students . United Kingdom : Pearson .

Vitell, S. J., Dickerson, E., & Festerrand, T. (2000). Ethical Problems, Conflicts and
Beliefs Of Small Business Professionals. Journal of Business Ethics, 28, 15-24.

Vogel, D. (1992). The Globalization Of Business Ethics: Why America Remains

Distinctive. California Management Review. 35(1) 30-49.

Voyer, B. G., & Mcintosh, B. (2013). The Psychological Consequences of Power on Self-
Perception: Implications for Leadership. Leadership & Organization Development
Journal. 20 (1) 30-31.

Wafula, D. (2011). Uchumi Plays Catch-Up In Battle for Shoppers. Business Daily Africa
.Nairobi, KE: Daily Nation.

Walliman, N. (2010). Research Methods: The Basics . London, UK : Routledge.

Thomas, D. & Patricia, W. (1993). Ethical Issues in Business. Englewood Cliff, NJ.:
Prentice-Hall,.

Whitepaperoninternationaldevelopment. (2000). Eliminating World Poverty Making

Globalization Work for the Poor. London. UK: Stationary Office.

Willcocks. (2018). Global Business Management Foundations. London, UK : Routledge.

63
Xue, Y., Bradley , J., & Liang , H. (2011). Team Climate, Empowering Leadership, and
Knowledge Sharing. Journal of Knowledge Management 15(2) 299-312.

64
 APPENDIX 1: RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE

SECTION I: Demographic Information

Kindly respond to the questions below by ticking in the appropriate boxes.

1. Name (optional) __________________________________

2. What is your gender?

Male

Female

3. What is your age?

18- 30 yrs.
31- 40 yrs.
41- 50 yrs.
51- 60 yrs.
Over 61 yrs.
4. What department do you work in?

Finance
Customer Service
Marketing
Sales
Operations
I T Department
Other (specify) _____________________________
5. What are your years of work at Uchumi Supermarket?

1-3 4-6 7-9 10-12 13-15

years years years years years

65
SECTION II: Autocratic Leadership Style and Organizational Development

Kindly answer the following questions to the best of your knowledge based on the Likert
Scale.

Strongly disagree = 1, disagree = 2, neutral = 3, Agree = 4, strongly agree = 5

No Questions 1 2 3 4 5

6. The leader fully seeks input from employees

7. Leaders almost make all of the decisions

8. The group heads dictate all the work methods and

processes

9. Employees are rarely trusted with decisions that are

regarded important and crucial.

10. Work tends to be structured and very rigid

11. Rules are important and tend to be clearly outlined and

communicated.

12. Creativity from the employees tends to be discouraged.

SECTION III: Transactional Leadership Style and Organizational Development

Kindly answer the following questions using the Likert scale provided in section II

No Questions 1 2 3 4 5

13. The leader gives a clear reward scheme for each

completed task in the project

14. Leaders almost make all of the decisions

15. Leaders discourage independent thinking

16. Leaders discourage new ways of doing things within the

66
 firm (change)

17. Leaders reward performance based on specific goals and

targets set

18. Leaders are focused on maintaining the status quo within

the entire organization

19. Leaders like to micromanage

20. Leaders appeal to the self-interest of employees

SECTION IV: Intellectual Stimulation and Organizational Development

Kindly answer the following questions using the Likert scale provided in section II

No Questions 1 2 3 4 5

21. The leader allows employees to look at issues from

various angles

22. The suggests new ways of looking at how to meet the set
targets and goals

23. The leader allows different perspectives when solving

problems

24.. The leader encourages teamwork among employees

25. Leaders highlight positive outcomes

26. Leaders encourage innovation and creativity

27. Leaders create a conducive environment to support

creation and sharing of knowledge.

67
SECTION V: Bureaucratic Leadership Style and Organizational Development

Kindly answer the following questions using the Likert scale provided in section II

No Questions 1 2 3 4 5

28. The leaders have created a well-defined dominance

hierarchy

29. Leaders embrace written procedures and policies

30. Leaders prefer stability and order within the organization

31. Leaders discourage innovation

32. Decision making is made by the leaders alone without

involving employees

33. Leaders prefer formality in reporting

34. Employees are promoted based on the ability to conform

to the rules of the office

Thank you for your participation.

68