CHAPTER TWO

Literature Review

In this chapter, there is an overview of previous studies is mainly in the subject of leadership
style of communication in labour management to enhance organizational performance in private
sector, at the same time, the theoretical frame of reference for the study is presented. Here there
are theories and models that build the study's foundations for further discussions. Some models
presented here are taken from other studies. But there is also a self-constructed model that lifts
the core of leadership style that affect organizational performance.

2.1 Conceptual Framework

Leadership has been a topic of study for Human resource management for much of the twentieth
century, yet there has been no consensually agreed-upon definition of it (Jyoti & Bhau, 2015;
Sofi & Devanadhen, 2015; Xu & Wang, 2008; Bass, 1990). Many authors have studied this
phenomenon, and some have argued that there is no conscious definition of what leadership is,
no dominant paradigm for studying it, and little agreement regarding the best strategies for
developing and exercising it (Bennis, 2007; Hackman & Wageman, 2007; Vroom & Jago, 2007).
However, Ngodo (2008) views leadership as a form of direction in which a person can give to a
group of people he steers affairs in such a way that will influence the behavior of another
individual, or group. Ngodo (2008) perceives leadership to be a reciprocal process of social
influence, in which leaders and subordinates influence each other in order to achieve
organizational goals. Sun (2002) defines leadership as the process of influencing people so that
they make an effort by their own will and enthusiasm towards obtaining the group’s goals.

Leadership is a critical management skill, involving the ability to encourage a group of people
towards a common goal. Leadership focuses on the development of followers, their needs and
building their capacity (Klein et al., 2013). It is imperative for managers occupying leadership
positions to focus on the development of value system of employees, their motivational level and
moralities with the development of their skills (Uchenwamgbe, 2013; Ismail et al., 2009). This
approach will essentially help followers achieve their goals as they work in the organizational
setting. As posited by Khan et al. (2014), followers will be encouraged to be expressive and
adaptive to new and improved practices and changes in the environment.

According to Michael (2010) leadership has a direct cause-effect relationship upon organizations
and their success. Leaders determine values, culture, change tolerance and employee motivation.
They shape institutional strategies including their execution and effectiveness. It should be
stressed that leaders can be found at any level of an institution and are not exclusive to
management. Successful leaders do, however, have one thing in common. They influence those
around them in order to reap maximum benefit from the organization’s resources, including its
most vital and expensive human resources/capital. This success can only be achieved and
probably sustained in organizations where appropriate leadership style or styles are employed at
a given time. Leadership is also a process which involves the use of non-coercive influence to
shape a group or organizational goals, motivate behaviour towards achieving the goals as well as
define the group’s culture (Northouse, 2009).

Despite the variations in the definitions, there are at least three important implications of these
definitions. Firstly, leadership is a process engaged in by certain individuals (leaders). It is an
ongoing activity in an organization. Secondly, it involves other people in the form of
subordinates or employees who by their willingness are influenced by the leader. Therefore, the
subordinates formalize the leader’s authority by making leadership process possible. Thirdly, the
aim of leadership is the accomplishment of a goal and objectives. A seemingly endless variety of
definitions have been developed, and there is a common thread which runs through all the
definitions and that is the concept of influence. Leaders therefore influence others to help
accomplish group and organizational objectives. However, it should be noted that the use of
appropriate leadership style at a given time is a conduit for organizational success.

Labour Management

Labour management relations also known as industrial relations pay an imperative role in
improving and sustaining employees' performance. t serves as the nerves of industrial harmony.
Labour management relations usually began with the emergence of trade unionism following the
industrial revolution. This was when the large scale production system began. In the face of
irregularities in human behaviour, there was a need to effectively harness human effort towards
the optimum productive capability in the workplace. This is the relationship between the worker
and his organization. There are two categories of groups that exist in an organization namely;
labour and management. These groups formed the pilot upon which major organization actions
or activities revolve. Labour is made up of groups of individuals that come from different
backgrounds with different ideologies. Thapliyal (2019) Management, on the other hand, forms
the policies that hep in integrating and reducing the conflicting ideologies of labourers.

According to Hassan (2016), the process of combining resources and tasks to meet stated
organizations goals is known as management. Alan Flanders posits that 'the system of labour-
management relation may therefore be described as the study of institutional rule; and as a result,
labour-management relations can be regarded as a study of job-regulation institutions. Budd
(2018) on his part described labour management relation as the entirety of human interaction at
work that is based on and arises from employment.

According to Dunlop, An industrial relations system is defined as "a set of actors,

circumstances, and an ideology that inks the system together, as well as a set of rules, developed
to regulate the players at the workplace and in the work community" at any point in its growth. t
refers to the regulation of employment relationships by all parties, labour, employer/management
and the state involved in the attainment and sustenance of increased productivity, industrial
harmony, and development of the workplace parties.
 The laws and policies that govern and organize employment, as wel as how they are formed
and implemented, and how they affect the demands and interests of employees and employers,
are referred to as labor management relations (LMR).Crane (2019)

Relationship between Leadership and Labour Management

The growth of any state or institution is a function of its leadership and leadership
influence. Leadership in this context is a process of influencing, directing and coordinating the
activities of other people in an institution with a particular style geared towards the achievement
of the institutional goals and objectives. The etymology for the style of leadership approach was
believe that effective leadership influence utilizes a particular style to lead individuals and the
nations towards attaining its basic tasks. Hence, leadership is absolutely essential for the survival
of group organizations [Johnson 2020], [Jackson 2021]. Leadership influence is a central element
of institutional management. It is one of the indispensable parts of management approach in
directing the members of that organization and utilizing their potentials towards the
accomplishments of institutional goals and objectives. The degree, to which organizational
memberships utilizes their aptitudes and abilities in the relationship, is predicated on how
institutional leadership and leadership influence appreciates the presence of various labour
unions and organizations in the institution thereby averting cases of industrial disputes and
strikes over wages and conditions of service [Divine 2023].

Hartnett [2021] asserts that participative leadership influence devoid of all kinds of
restrictions on grounds of race, sex and religion and co-operative labour management relations
enhances effective service delivery in public institution. Effective leadership influence in
institutional management emphasis the process of utilizing the potentials of workforce in an
efficient and effective manner. Silins [2020] observed that transformational leadership approach
facilitates collaboration among the groups and changes the structural processes of the institution
and thus contributes to the performance of the institution. This implies that institutional
leadership is concerned with structural relationship that brings about institutional coherence in a
systematic process that gains maximum cooperation and enhances participation between the
employer and workers in the organization. Ojonemi; Onechojon, & Attai[2021] opines that
labour unions representatives have lacked behind in the process of labour management relations
as it has failed to change itself into a dynamic and result oriented agents in public organizations.
This process of change can only be achieved by adopting good and result-oriented leadership
influence, identifying opportunities, setting strategic directions, and investing resources to
enhance human capabilities and improve institutional goals and objectives.

Notably, a plethora of studies on the nature of industrial relations system and trade
unionism exists [Akinbode 2020, [Adeyemi 2022], [Lanre 2023], [Joshua 2018], but this paper
argues that most trade unions in Nigeria public institutions has failed because of ineffective
leadership influence and management between the workers representatives and management
teams. This is because, the extant research movement on labour management relations
emphasizes the need to place greater attention on the principles that will sustain employee
involvement, harmonious employer - employee relations and mechanisms, and on practices that
stimulate their activities.

2.2 Theoretical Framework

Propander Theory

Kostamo (2018, 15) describes the general perception of leadership the following way:
“Leadership means that a leader decides and tells others what is done and how it is done”. This,
however, can be achieved in many different styles and in many different tones.

To mention a few, Kostamo (2023, 15) points out that at least the following methods are
recognized: telling, ordering, informing, stating, suggesting, requesting, wishing, imploring,
negotiating, discussing and even hinting. According to Kostamo, it is also possible that decision-
making includes also others and not only the leader. Kostamo (2022, 16) argues that a leader
deciding by himself is not essential for the concept of leadership. In his view, leadership is
pointing out the rough lines of direction, setting targets and goals and getting people involved.
Kostamo (2019, 39) shows reluctance in defining leadership with a single sentence, but gives a
short definition for leadership as “influencing people to accomplish the purpose of the
organization”.

In literature leadership and management are treated either as two separate matters or as two
different words with the same meaning, depending on the writer. Korpelainen (2023, 8) treats
them as near synonyms. In his view it is fair to say that all leaders have subordinates, which
makes them also managers. Hersey and Blanchard (2020, 5) have a different view. They note
that leadership and management are often considered to have the same meaning, but point out
that they have important differences.

Hersey and Blanchard (2020) consider leadership to be a far wider concept than
management. According to their description, leadership is influencing the behavior of others
(2022) and management is working with people or groups in order to reach the goals of the
organization. They also draw a conclusion that in order to succeed, the executives of an
organization must show skills in human interaction, and therefore management can be described
as reaching the goals of the organization through leadership (Hersey & Blanchard 2021).

Lieutenant Colonel Vesa Nissinen of the Finnish Defense Forces, the developer of the Deep
Leadership model, also views management and leadership as separate concepts. He describes
management as a position that is granted, and leadership as a status that is earned (Nissinen
2019, 111). Although different opinions are found regarding whether leadership equals
management, it can be said that leadership aims for the reaching of goals that are common to
many (Kostamo 2019, 39; Hersey & Blanchard 2020, 5; Perkka-Jortikka 2018).
 Ristikangas and Ristikangas(2018, 22)also bring up the interactional nature of leadership.
They see leadership not as an absolute value, but rather as an instrument or means for
influencing and having an impact together with the ones that are led. This research studies
leadership in general, and also through the managerial point of view. In this research, all leaders
are presumed managers, and all managers are presumed leaders by default.

2.2.1 Preposition Theory

Ristikangas and Ristikangas (2020, 28) describe the necessity of leadership. In their view,
the absence of leadership would cause a status of being stationary, or being stopped. Leadership
is needed to ensure that groups move and transform, and that they are headed for the same
direction and build co-operation. Ristikangas have also found influencing others to be in the
heart of leadership.

Kostamo (2022) emphasizes the importance of a leader’s situational awareness. He sees

situational awareness as an enabling factor behind all decision, choices and plans that a leader
makes. Hellbom, Mauro and Salo (2019, 66) have also found the importance of awareness. They
draw an even straighter link between leadership and awareness, because according to them,
leadership is influencing, and one cannot influence without being aware of matters.

Situational awareness builds upon knowledge of the operational environment, the current
state of the organization and the factors affecting those two. This is very challenging partly
because of the amount of needed information, and partly because of the abundance of
information available. It is not easy to pick the bits that are significant, and at the same time seek
for the information not yet available but what is needed. (Kostamo 2022) .In practice, it is not
possible to gain optimum situational awareness because it is not possible to use infinite amount
of time for gathering and analyzing information. Organizations use a vast amount of resources
for gathering, optimizing and refining information, but a leader cannot be fully dependent on
such systems. A leader must still evaluate the expediency of the available information, and
sometimes even use one’s own intuition. (Kostamo 2022, 216-217.)

Ristikangas and Ristikangas (2022) have found that there is need to renew the leadership
behavior in organizations. The entry of new generations into work life changes leadership.
According to Ristikangas and Ristikangas, People born between 1980 and 2000 are called the Y-
generation, and they possess a different kind of view towards work than previous generations.
Hierarchies are questioned, work must be inspiring, leadership must be just and co-operation in
the office pleasant. This raises the need to put more focus on leadership. Hellbom, Mauro and
Salo share the opinion that leadership is in transformation. The increasing pace of changes and
the multifaceted nature of the world place new challenges on leadership. Today’s needs call for
leadership that fits many different types of situations. Hellbom, Mauro and Salo illustrate this
need by describing a simultaneous need for seeing far ahead while staying close to people. The
resources must be released to enable creativity and effectiveness. (Hellbom & Mauro & Salo,
2022)

2.2.2 Limitation

One limitation of the current research is the size of the population. There were 76 persons in
total who worked in the sample organization and 69 of them returned useful responses. The total
population is not really large although it is large enough for performing the current statistical
analyses. Future research could try a larger size of population.

Besides, the sample organization may have certain characteristics of the special context
in which it works, i.e. for the government, and it may to some extent be more traditional, and
emphasizing bureaucracy and collectivity; and the workers were committed to the governmental
work. Therefore the findings of the current study can only be interpreted as a result applicable to
the Larfarge Cement Ewekoro Ogun State organization instead of as a universal result. However,
for future research it could be interesting to examine the communication commitment
relationship indifferent kinds of organizations. Moreover, the result might also be different if the
sample is in a different group of age, total number of years worked, education level, ethnicity,
position, corporation and supervision situation, and time worked with the organization and
immediate superior.

Moreover, the social-emotional-oriented communication questionnaire could be tested

further since it was adapted by the researcher of the current study. The first two scales seem to
examine similar factors, while the third and fourth scales could be defined more precisely and
concretely. The second questionnaire was used to examine vertical communication. The current
study adapted it and added some horizontal factors in it but it probably is only able to test one
aspect of work-oriented communication. Although the organizational commitment questionnaire
is a classic measurement that is used most frequently, the continuance commitment measurement
appeared to be only moderately reliable. Although Meyer insists there is no problem, it still
could be interesting for further research to improve the measurement.

Furthermore, the current study is a purely statistical research. It can find valid,
reliable and scientific results of the relationship between variables. Thus, it is good at answering
“yes “or “no”, but not good at interpreting the story behind it. It can also be interesting to follow
particular individuals to explore more concrete and profound causes and consequences of the
relationship between communication and commitment. According to the findings of the current
research, future research could apply interview or field study methods to explore why there is a
relationship. Knowing the reasons (why) that caused the relationships and the ways it develops
(how) helps understanding the whole picture and the details; hence the organization could apply
the most appropriate communication in a certain condition to achieve a certain purpose.
Moreover, experimental research could also be considered, for instance, the researcher could use
two groups of superiors, one asa control group, and then train the leaders in one of the groups
with special skills, and then compare the subordinates’ commitment level both before and after
the training. But this kind of research requires a long research period and continued collection of
data, which was impossible for the current study.

2.2.3 Linkage to Objective/Study

Rummukainen makes a clear distinction between supervising the execution and

supervising the results. According to Rummukainen, top leaders do not supervise how tasks are
performed by their employees–they focus on supervising the results, and by this they
communicate that they are interested in every individual in their staff. Top leaders give a great
deal of latitude to their employees on how they do their work, as long as they reach their
objectives. By giving a great deal of room for maneuvering, good leaders want to make it as easy
as possible for everyone to do their job. By giving a great deal of freedom, leaders show a great
amount of trust. Top leaders trust their employees and their professional competences, they trust
their high work morale and they trust them reaching their goals. (Rummukainen 2022)

Business dictionary.com defines effectiveness as “the degree to which objectives are

achieved and the extent to which targeted problems are solved.” The description of effectiveness
also puts weight on “doing the right things”, instead of focusing on “doing things right”. Perkka-
Jortikka (2022) has found that a leader is expected to be effective. Regardless of that expectation,
the effectiveness of leadership has not been given much attention despite the vast amount of
literature and articles concerning leadership. Over the past hundred years up until the past
decade, the expectations for being effective have mainly been associated with manual labor and
the people doing that effectiveness has been tightly connected to orders and control.

The work environment today requires more from people than only the use of their muscles.
Today, workers are increasingly expected to use their brain, different theories and abstract
concepts, thus making their effectiveness reflect differently to the progress of organization than it
did before. The expectation of effectiveness can be seen as being built-in in today’s requirements
for both leaders and employees. (Perkka-Jortikka 2018) Lehtinen (2019) has found a connection
between effectiveness and being a good leader. According to Lehtinen, a good leader sustains
know-how through effective leading. Lehtinen has also found that a good leader can effectively
control varying leadership situations with different kinds of people.

Rummukainen (2007) describes an effective leader as someone who is able to paint the
goal for his team and show the way to reaching it. Peeling (2022) uses the same description for
explaining the general meaning of leadership, In simple terms, a leader points the desired
direction and objectives to his subordinates and guides them to that destination (Peeling 2022).

A consistent behavior of a leader will make the employees adjust their behavior. According
to Peeling, a leader is also able to transfer his good qualities into his employees. Rummukainen
describes a similar phenomenon. According to Rummukainen, when a leader has energy he is
able to transfer that energy also to others. (Rummukainen 2018, Peeling 2022)The classic model
of leadership was originated in the early 20thcentury. It consists of three parts; Planning,
Execution and Supervision. The process of planning, executing and supervising is an evolving
system where the correct actions to take may change depending on changing conditions or
increased information. The classic model of leadership can be encapsulated to doing the right
things the right way. (Korpelainen 2023).

2.3 Empirical Review

Any organization which employs appropriate leadership style(s) couple with other factors
in its operation has a higher probability of achieving its organizational goals. An organizational
leadership style (s) goes a long way to influence the culture of the organization. This in turn
directly or otherwise influences the performance of the organization (Haque et al., 2015; Klein et
al., 2013). Leadership is the life blood of any organization and its importance cannot be
underestimated. According to Armstrong (2012), a leadership style is the approach used by
managers to exercise their leadership function. This is seen to be a particular behavior a leader in
an organization employs to motivate employees towards the achievement of a defined objective
of the organization (Haque et al., 2015; Igbaekemen & Odivwri, 2015; Ng’ethe et al., 2012).
Leadership style plays an important role in the organizations of today. As defined by Mullins
(2000), leadership style is the way and manner in which a manager or supervisor chooses to act
towards his employees or subordinates and the way the leadership function is being carried out
by them (Xenikou, 2017). Researchers in the area of leadership suggest that no one leadership
style is better than the other but that styles are dependent on some factors (Armstrong, 2012;
Adair, 2003). They indicate such factors to include the type of organization, nature of the task,
characteristics of the individuals in the leader’s team, the group the leader leads as a whole and
more importantly, the personality of the leader. To them therefore, there is not one leadership
style that is considered best at all times as a particular situation would demand one or a
combination of different leadership styles.

Leaders should be able to know how their leadership skills influence their followers as it has an
impact on the followers being supportive of them or not (Saleem, 2015; Sethuraman & Suresh,
2014). This can have an impact on employee behaviour to support their leaders; followers or
employees who do not have support for their leaders can be prone to dissatisfaction which could
arouse an intention of an employee to leave. Some authors have argued that leadership styles can
affect an employee’s job satisfaction level and job satisfaction is an outcome of leadership style.
This can negatively be associated with the intention of the employee to leave the organization
(Khan et al., 2014; Welty Peachey et al., 2014). This suggests that leadership style or behaviour
has an impact on job satisfaction and an employee’s desire and intention to leave an organization
or otherwise. As indicated by Vandenberghe & Bentein (2009), before an employee considers
leaving an organization, such an employee will first assess (Tummers & Knies, 2016) the
position of his/her relationship with the organization, among other factors. It is noteworthy to
stress that appropriate leadership style employed in a given time regardless of low remuneration
could still motivate an employee to put up his/her best in the organization. This assessment
according to Welty Peachey et al. (2014) could include the level of attachment of the employee
to the organization and the leader. In the case where this relationship is lessened or negatively
affected, the employee has the tendency to leave such an organization. Leadership style reflects
what leaders “do” and how they “behave”. There are many dimensions to leadership and many
possible ways of describing leadership styles such as dictatorial, unitary, bureaucratic,
charismatic, consultative and participative. However, a collection of some leadership styles in
contemporary businesses which are still pervasive in contemporary times are classified as
follows.

2.3.1 Autocratic Leadership

An autocratic leader is seen as the one who is very conscious of his position and has
little trust or faith in the subordinates (Luftman, 2004). Autocratic leaders are classic and bossy
in nature. Such leaders desire that their subordinates work according to what they dictate (Al
Khajeh, 2018). Basically, autocratic leaders retain the decision-making rights with them
(Obiwuru et al., 2011).

An autocratic leader feels that remuneration advanced to employees for work done is a just
reward and it is only the reward that can motivate an employee. This style of leadership is
characterized by individual control over all decisions and little input from group members. A
study conducted indicates that an autocratic/authoritarian leader is characterized as being
arbitrary, controlling, power-oriented, coercive, legitimate, and punitive and with a closed mind
(Al Khajeh, 2018; Iqbal et al., 2015; Bass & Bass 2009). Such leaders stress loyalty and
obedience and are defined as those who make decisions alone and demand strict adherence to
rules. The decision-making process is centralized; autocratic leaders take full responsibility for
decisions and control of their followers’ performance. Praise and criticism of followers play a
significant role in autocratic leadership. Autocratic leaders typically make choices based on their
own ideas and judgments and rarely accept advice from followers. Autocratic leadership
involves absolute, authoritarian control over a group. Other characteristics of autocratic
leadership include: little or no input from group members, leaders make the decisions, group
leaders dictate all the work methods and processes and group members are rarely trusted with
decisions or important tasks.

Armstrong (2012) suggests that autocratic leadership may be useful in situations of emergency,
in cases where homogenous work force is involved and where the leader is wise, just and has
considerable understanding of the followers. In such circumstances, special action may be
needed to avert a potential mishap. Among some shortcomings of autocratic leadership is the
inability of the subordinates to develop pride of accomplishment, denial of personal development
or satisfaction from self-actualization, and it also antagonizes human beings and wipes the
organization of lasting loyalty and co-operation. Indeed, the autocratic style is characterized by
an “I tell” philosophy. That is, an autocratic leader tells staff members what to do. Even though
this approach can give a business a clear direction, however, it may also lead managers to
undervalue or ignore input from team members (Obiwuru et al., 2011). Nonetheless, an
autocratic approach is appropriate in some situations. It is valuable when the business faces a
crisis or when an urgent problem arises that requires an immediate response (Bhargavi &
Yaseen, 2016). There is no shared vision and little motivation beyond coercion. Commitment,
creativity and innovation are typically eliminated by autocratic leadership (Al Khajeh, 2018). In
fact, most followers of autocratic leaders can be described as bidding their time, waiting for the
inevitable failure this leadership produces and the removal of the leader that follows (Iqbal et al.,
2015; Michael, 2010.

2.3.2 Democratic Leadership.

Democratic leadership, also referred to as participative leadership, is a type of leadership

style in which members of the group take a more participative role in the decision-making
process. This style of leadership dwells on performance and people (Bhargavi & Yaseen, 2016;
Puni et al., 2014). Democratic leadership style encourages employees to participate in the
decision making process of the organization (Nwokocha & Iheriohanma, 2015). According to
Puni et al. (2014), decision making in a democratic system is not centralized and high
performance is recognized and rewarded. Nwokocha & Iheriohanma (2015) on the other hand
suggest that there is potential for poor decisions to be made by the subordinates as a result of the
leader depending on the contributions made by the employees or subordinates. This can be said
to have a negative impact on the organization and can also instigate turnover intention in
employees. It is therefore expected that brainstorming of ideas and collective decisions are
arrived at by all concerned.

The democratic leadership sounds good in theory but it is often bogged down in its slow decision
making process and the results which could seem workable would always require a lot of time
and effort (Nwokocha & Iheriohanma, 2015). The democratic leader allows for decision making
to be shared by the leader and the group. Criticisms and praises are objectively given and a
feeling of responsibility is developed within the group. Kotter (1995) argued that this form of
leadership is claimed to be earliest amongst all other leadership style. The leader discusses with
subordinates before he issues general or broad orders from which subordinates feel free to act on
(Bhargavi & Yaseen, 2016). The superior allows the subordinates opportunity to use their
initiative and make contributions. The leaders also offer support to the subordinates in
accomplishing task. Characteristics of democratic leadership include: the fact that group
members are encouraged to share ideas and opinions, even though the leader retains the final say
over decisions, members of the group feel more engaged in the process and creativity is
encouraged and rewarded. Democratic leadership yields a lot of benefits. Subordinates are
encouraged to share their thoughts; it can lead to better ideas and more creative solutions to
problems (Sadia & Aman, 2018). Employees also feel more involved and committed to projects,
making them more likely to care about the end results. It is perceived that democratic leadership
style leads to higher productivity among group members. There are however some downsides of
democratic leadership. In situations where roles are unclear or time is of the essence, democratic
leadership can lead to communication failures and uncompleted projects. In some cases, group
members may not have the necessary knowledge or expertise to make quality contributions to the
decision-making process. Democratic leadership works best in situations where group members
are skilled and eager to share their knowledge. It is also important to have plenty of time to allow
people to contribute, develop a plan and then vote on the best course of action.

2.3.3. Laissez-Faire Style of Leadership.

Laissez faire is a French phrase which means “let it be” and it is also known as the
“hands off style” (Nwokocha & Iheriohanma, 2015: p. 194). According to Gill (2014), it means
leaving subordinates to complete tasks and jobs in the way they choose without adherence to any
strict policies or procedures. Bass (1985) describes the laissez faire leadership style as one in
which the leader has no belief in his own ability to supervise. He further states that the leader has
no clear set goals towards how they may work, does not help the group in making decisions and
so leaves too much responsibility with subordinates. According to Puni et al. (2014), the laissez-
faire leader avoids controlling his employees and so only relies on the few available employees
who are loyal to get a task done.

It is argued that laissez faire leaders do not believe in employee development as they believe that
employees can take care of themselves (Puni et al., 2014). This leadership style cannot be said to
be operational in the banking sector or Non-Governmental Organizations which require that both
the leader and subordinates have an input in the decision making process and completion of tasks
to ensure the success of the organization. This is defined as a style of leadership where leaders
refuse to make decisions, are not available when needed, and choose to take no responsibility for
their lack of leadership ability. Laissez-faire leaders do not use their authority and avoid taking
actions. It is considered a passive and ineffective form of leadership. This style favors the
installation of a relaxed working atmosphere; it brings down morale and reduces efficiency of the
group. With this type of leadership style, leaders attempt to pass the responsibility of decision
making process to the group. The group is loosely structured as the leader has no confidence in
his leadership ability. A laissez-faire leader may either not intervene in the work affairs of
subordinates or may completely avoid responsibilities as a superior and is unlikely to put in
effort to build a relationship with them. Laissez-faire style is associated with dissatisfaction,
unproductiveness and ineffectiveness (Deluga, 1992). This however, is debatable. Decision
making under this style of leadership is performed by whoever that is willing to accept it.

2.3.4. Leadership Styles and Organizational Performance.

It is considered that an organization’s leadership undoubtedly has a strong bearing on its

performance, employee job satisfaction and employee commitment. Some researchers have
argued that leaders motivate and help their employees to be competitive by using effective
leadership styles (Bhargavi & Yaseen, 2016; Bass & Riggio, 2006; Luftman, 2004). Relationship
between leadership style and organizational performance has been topical in recent times.
Research shows that leadership style has a significant relationship with organizational
performance, and different leadership styles may have a positive correlation or negative
correlation with the organizational performance, depending on the variables used by researchers
(Wang et al., 2010). Therefore, the leader’s use of effective leadership style(s) is imperative to
promoting standards of excellence in the professional development of the members of the
organization.

McGrath & MacMillan (2000) contend that there is significant relationship between leadership
styles and organizational performance. Effective leadership style is seen as a potent source of
managing development and sustained competitive advantage (Al Khajeh, 2018). Leadership style
helps the organization to achieve its current objectives more efficiently by linking job
performance to valued rewards and by ensuring that employees have the resources needed to get
the job done. Sun (2002) compared leadership style with leadership performance in schools and
enterprises and found that leadership style had a significantly positive correlation with the
organizational performance in both schools and enterprises. According to Kotter (1995), without
leadership, the probability of mistakes occurring increases and the opportunities for success
become more and more reduced. In this way, leadership, together with stimulants and incentives,
promotes people’s motivation towards achieving common goals, having a relevant role in the
processes of forming, transmitting and changing organizational culture (Senge, 1990).

Assuming the essence of leadership is influence, leadership could broadly be defined as the art of
mobilizing others to want to struggle for shared aspirations (Druskat et al., 2003). However, it
could be argued this “influence, mobilization and struggle” are of little value in an organizational
context unless the effects ultimately yield an outcome in line with the “shared aspiration” for
leadership to be deemed successful. Leadership is all about results. Creating results in today’s
ever changing and increasingly competitive world requires a very different kind of leadership
from what was studied in the past (Haque et al., 2015). While leaders in the past managed
perhaps complex organizations, this was in a world of relative stability and predictability. In
today’s globalized world, with organizations coping with rapidly changing environments, leaders
face a new reality. Working in flexible contexts and connected by real-time electronic
communication, increasingly mobile employees have themselves become the critical resource of
their organizations (Wang et al., 2010). What is now needed are leaders who simultaneously can
be agents of change and centers of gravity, keep internal focus and enable people and
organization to adapt and be successful (Jyoti & Bhau, 2015; Sofi & Devanadhen, 2015).

Most researchers evaluate the effectiveness of leadership based on the consequences of

leaders’ actions for their followers and other components within the organization. The most
widely used measurement is how far the organizational unit of leaders succeeds in accomplishing
tasks of achieving its goals, both objectively and subjectively. The selection of appropriate
criteria also depends on the purpose and the values made by the person conducting the
evaluation, while everyone has different values (Yukl, 2009).Michigan Leadership Study
proposed effective leadership behaviors which was different from those previous studies.
Employees view their supervisors’ behavior mainly based on two categories, one of which
related to task purposes and the other related to interpersonal relationships.

Task-oriented behavior: Effective managers use their time and efforts to concentrate on task or
job-oriented functions different from their employees, such as planning and coordinating their
employees’ activities, helping their employees to set high but realistic performance goals.

Relationship oriented behavior: For effective managers, task-oriented behavior does not mean
sacrificing attention to human relationships. The leaders’ behaviors supporting this idea, among
others are, showing trust and credibility, acting friendly and caring, seeking to understand the
employees’ issues, showing appreciation of the employees’ ideas, and giving recognition to their
contributions and achievements. In large organizations, the effectiveness of managers depends
on the strength of their influence on the leaders and colleagues and their employees. That means,
influencing is the essence of leadership. Various leadership functions can be run by different
people who give influence on what groups do, how to do it, and how group members relate to
one another. This interactive process, of course, involves many people influencing each other.
The problem is not just who uses the influence, but also the kind of influence used and what the
outcomes are. There are conflicting points of view, in which the definition of leadership is
limited using influence resulting in high commitment from employees regardless of discontent or
unwillingness to obey the leadership. Another contradictory view is that one who uses control
over rewards and punishments for manipulating or forcing followers is not really "leading" them
and unethical because it is an abuse of power. Thus, the first view can eliminate some of the
influencing processes which are important to understand why a manager is effective or not in
certain situations. The same kind of influence can give different results depending on the nature
of the situation, and the same leadership outcomes can be achieved by different influencing
methods.

2.3.5 Communication

Good communication in organization has a variety of important roles. First,

communication is the key to efforts to coordinate activities within the organization. Second,
communication plays a role to share information in putting forward facts, data, instructions,
direction between units within the organization. Third, communication is essential for
developing friendships and building trust and acceptance of the message receivers. In this case,
their role deals with building social relationships within the organization. What people say and
how to say it can have an impact on others. Therefore, in order to create a pleasant interpersonal
atmosphere in the workplace, the organization members should pay attention to the
communication factors. Eventually, the role which is much more important, especially for a
leader as a communicator, is the role of communication in decision-making.

Every individual has differences in his/her communication styles, which is not only
influenced by his/her personal communication styles, but also by gender and cross-cultural
differences. It is important to understand that all these styles can be learned and applied. Each
style has its strengths and weaknesses, there is no single style that works best among others.
Generally, individuals tend to use one style. Effective communication begins by recognizing
one-self’s communication style and then that of others. Therefore, when someone meets and
interacts with others, it is better to try to understand and then, as much as possible, to adjust the
other person's style.

Men and women, one another, are often misconstrued because they use different ways of
communicating. It is the difference that makes them address the problem differently. Men tend to
be good speakers, emphasizing and strengthening their status when speaking, unlike women do.
While women focus on creating positive social relationships, tending to listen to others, and
being more emotional. It would be wise for a manager or leader to appreciate and accept the
differences. Getting a better understanding that everyone has a different way of speaking in
terms of putting forward meanings, it is more likely to gain benefits from a variety of potential
employees with different communication styles.

Communication within groups or organizations has 4 main functions (Halim & Razak,
2014), namely:

Control: Through communication, a leader can determine whether an employee is doing the job
according to the organizations’ needs, or whether a problem related to his job occurs.

Motivation: Communication becomes a motivation through an explanation of what role an

employee should play, what achievement they have done so far, and what can be done to
improve it.

Emotional expression: For some employees, work-group is a major source of social interaction.
Communication provides a freedom to express feelingsand fulfillment of social needs.

Information: Each member of an organization needs information to make decision by identifying

and evaluating alternative options. With the competitive pressures faced by the organization
today, strategy formulation, decision making, motivation, team building, and negotiation then
require a leader’s abilities to communicate effectively.

2.3.6 Communication Skills

Communication is defined as a process by which a sender conveys various types of

information to a receiver. Everyone can be a communicator or run a communication process.
However, the quality of communication can vary depending on how good a communicator is
able to communicate effectively. Not only is delivered, accepted, understood by the recipient of
the message, but also effectively achieving the communication purposes, punctual and
situational, and on target.
 Individuals who are competent in communication are not only seen from how far the
message communicated reaches its goal, but not less important is, how it is done properly. From
the internal side of the individual concerned, his/her communication skills are constructs
including the elements of knowledge, motivation, skills, behavior, and effectiveness (Berman &
Hellweg, 1989). Communicative individuals have abilities to use communicative resources (such
as gestures, language, and voice) effectively in achieving social goals (Stohl, 1985). Then
Larson, Backlund, Redmond, and Barbour (1978) stated that communication skill is an
individual ability to demonstrate knowledge about appropriate communication behavior in
certain situations. This statement is reaffirmed by Mc Croskey (1982), saying that the point is the
proper communicative behavior, whereas from the subject side, competent communicators are
those who are effective in achieving their goals or maximizing the goals’ accomplishment
through communication.

2.3.7 Gap of the Literature

Additionally, given the time limitation the current research as a communication study
only focused on the direct role of communication in the process. But apparently, there are other
factors which may also be influential in the process, for instance, like the literature suggested,
interpersonal relationships, cohesion, leadership style, communication climate, and so on.
Moreover, other organizational outcomes such as work performance, job satisfaction,
communication satisfaction, intention to leave, and so on, could also be included. Future research
could test more variables and do a deeper statistical analysis to investigate the possibilities of
mediator, interaction effects, and so on.

Lastly, the current study is a one-way research. The opposite causal direction may reveal an
interesting finding as well. That is to say, it could be interesting to investigate the possibility that
the employees with high levels of commitment have better perceptions of communication with
others in the organization. Thus, it can be investigated whether communication is not simply a
predictor of commitment but more of a consequence.