Results and Findings on Participatory Leadership Style and Employee Performance
The third objective the study was to determine how participatory leadership style affects employee
performance and the average mean for this was 3.063 and a standard deviation of 1.039 indicating
respondents agreeing with most of the statements. The study established that leader ask for
information and insights that will improve the quality of their responsibility of their employees a
mean of 3.365 and a standard deviation of 1.126, provide guidance without pressure is the key to
being a good leader a mean of 3.257 and a standard deviation of 0.882 and that employees are
given and trusted with appropriate information regarding company matters affecting the
organization with a mean of 3.162 and a standard deviation of 1.218. Leadership may result in
communication failure and uncompleted projects where a mean of 3.095 and a standard deviation of
0.921, it is the most effective style of leadership characterized by increased employee morale with a
mean of 3.027 and a standard deviation of 1.267, participative leadership is inappropriate
because they are focused on productivity a mean of 3.020 and a standard deviation of 1.053,
leaders should constantly communicate and show support to employees a mean of 2.797 and a
standard deviation of 0.888, it is proper for subordinates to share ideas and opinions, as well as
partake in decision-making processes a mean of 2.966 and a standard deviation of 1.026 and that
it is appropriate for leaders to inspire their subordinates, as well as stimulate their intellect and a
mean of 2.878 and a standard deviation of 0.975. The findings of the study on participatory
leadership style and employee performance are shown in the Table 4.11 below.
Table 4.11: Participatory Leadership Style and Employee Performance
N Mean
Std. Dev
It is appropriate for leaders to inspire their subordinates, as well as
stimulate their intellect
148
2.878
0.975
It is proper for subordinates to share ideas and opinions, as well as
partake in decision-making processes
148
2.966
1.026
Providing guidance without pressure is key to being good leader
148
3.257
0.882
Leaders should constantly communicate and show support to
employees
148
2.797
0.888
Employees are given and trusted with appropriate information
regarding company matters affecting the organization
148
3.162
1.218
Participative leadership is inappropriate because they are focused
on productivity.
148
3.020
1.053
Leadership is the most effective style of leadership characterized
by increased employee morale
148
3.027
1.267
Leadership may result in communication failure and uncompleted
projects.
148
3.095
0.921
Leader asks for information and insights that will improve the
quality of their responsibility of their employees
148
3.365
1.126
Average
148
3.063
1.039
4.5.1 Correlation Analysis between Participatory Leadership Style and Employee
Performance
A Pearson Correlation was performed, and the result of the Pearson correlation test as presented
in Table 4.12 show a correlation (r (148) = 0.735; p<0.05) between participatory leadership
style influence employee performance. The findings imply that participatory leadership style is
positively correlated to employee performance.
Table 4.12: Correlation Analysis between Participatory Leadership Style and Employee
Performance
Participatory
Employee
Leadership Style Performance
Participatory Leadership Pearson Correlation
1
.735
**
Style
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
N
148 148
Employee Performance Pearson Correlation
.735
**
1
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
N
148 148
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
4.5.2 Regression Analysis between Participatory Leadership Style and Employee
Performance
The findings of the coefficient of determination are as shown in Table 4.13. The study
established that coefficient of correlation R was 0.735 an indication of strong positive
correlation with the study variable. The study further established that adjusted R2 was 0.540
which translates to 54.0%. Therefore, 54.0% changes in employee performance are caused by
participatory leadership style in member associations. The residual of 46% can be explained by
other factors beyond the scope of the current study.
Table 4.13: Model Summary between Participatory Leadership Style and
Employee Performance
Std. Error of the
Model
R
R Square Adjusted R Square
Estimate
1
.735
a
.540 .537
.50749
a. Predictors: (Constant), Participatory Leadership Style
The researcher conducted a regression model at 95% significance level. The findings of F-Calculated
and F-Critical is as shown in Table 4.14. The study found out that F-Calculated was 171.409
44
and F-Critical (1, 148) is 3.7987; hence F-Calculated > F-Critical, therefore the overall regression
model was significant. The findings further established that the study had a p value of 0.000.
Table 4.14: ANOVA between Participatory Leadership Style and Employee Performance
Model
Sum of Squares
Df Mean Square F
Sig.
1 Regression
44.145 1
44.145 171.409
.000
b
Residual
37.602 146
.258
Total
81.747 147
a. Dependent Variable: Employee Performance
b. Predictors: (Constant), Participatory Leadership Style
To establish the individual influence of the variables on employee performance, the researcher
carried out regression coefficient. The findings are shown in Table 4.15. The findings revealed
that when all the variables were held constant to zero, employee performance would be at
1.101. A unit increase in participatory leadership style by 0.553 increases the employee
performance of the member associations by the same number of units of 0.553.
The fitted equation is as shown below: Y= 1.692 + 0.553X1 that is
Employee Performance = 1.692 + 0.553 Participatory Leadership Style
Table 4.15: Coefficient between Participatory Leadership Style and
Employee Performance
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error
Beta
t Sig.
1 (Constant) 1.692
.171
9.905 .000
Participatory .553
.042 .735
13.092 .000
Leadership Style
a. Dependent Variable: Employee Performance
