1

TITLE PAGE

UNIVERSITY OF NIGERIA ENUGU CAMPUS FACULTY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT

A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE LEADERSHIP STYLE OF EXPATRIATE AND NIGERIAN MANAGERS:

(A CASE STUDY OF OIL COMPANIES IN NIGERIA)

BY

OGBAJE SUNDAY O PG/MBA/09/53792

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT, IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

(MBA) DEGREE IN MANAGEMENT

NOVEMBER, 2011.

2

CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that this research project titled: A

Comparative study of the Leadership Style of Expatriate and

Nigerian Managers: (A Case Study of Oil Companies in Nigeria),

written and presented by Ogbaje Sunday has been found worthy to

be accepted in partial fulfillment for the award of Masters Degree in

Business Administration in the Department of Management

University of Nigeria, Enugu Campus.

_______________________ _______________ Dr. E.K. Agbaeze Date Project Supervisor _______________________ __________________ Date Head of Department ______________________ _________________ External Examiner Date

3

DEDICATION

This work is dedicated to God Almighty who gives knowledge and

wisdom to all me.

4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Life is made more meaningful by interpersonal relationship.

This truism underscores the fact that no man is totally an isolated

entity. The last and most noble achievements many great men has

achieved had always been done in an atmosphere filled with

genuine love and understanding. Therefore, the successful

production of this work was a result of such enabling and

encouraging sorority.

My first note of appreciation goes to God Almighty whose

bountiful love and paternal care guided me throughout the writing

and compilation of this work. To Him be Glory in all ages Amen.

And also sincere gratitude goes to my parent Mr and Mrs D.A.

Ogbaje for the financial, moral, emotional and spiritual support.

I must not fail to acknowledge these very persons; Dr and Mrs

G.F.Abah, Iyke Obasi, Victor Igwe for their concern,care and

contribution.

My sincere gratitude also goes to the Dean of the Faculty of

Business Administration Prof. U.J.F. Ewurum, Dr. C. Ezigbo Head

Department of Management and Dr. V.A. Onodugo.

A very special and warmest gratitude goes to my able

supervisor, Dr E.K. Agbaeze, for his assistance, his free sharing of

his wealth of experience, and careful reading of every detail

throughout the process this research work despite his workload.

OGBAJE SUNDAY .O

PG/MBA/09/53792

5

ABSTRACT

The study investigated the practice of leadership style among

expatriate and Nigerian managers comparatively from the oil sector in

Nigeria. The sample size for this work was 199 respondents randomly

selected. Questionnaires prepared in three sets were administered.

The first set administered to all the selected respondents irrespective

of their levels of education and management hierarchy. The second set

was directed to managers at middle level, while the third set was

administered to highly educated managers, so to say. There were three

research questions and three hypotheses in this research work. Z-test

and chi-square were the statistical tools used in analyzing the

research questions and the hypotheses. The result showed that there

is significant difference between the proportion of expatriate managers

who practice autocratic leadership style and the proportion of Nigerian

managers who practice autocratic leadership styles. It also showed

that middle level-expatriate managers are less autocratic than their

Nigerian counterparts. That, there is no significant difference between

the proportion of highly educated Nigerian managers who practice

democratic leadership style. The major determinant of these

significant differences could be seen to be cultural variable. Lastly,

education seemed to be the dictator of the lack of significant difference

between the proportion of highly educated Nigerian and expatriate

managers that practice democratic leadership style. Based on the

above findings, some recommendations were made and the work has

implications for both expatriate managers and their Nigeria

counterparts and suggestion for further studies were made.

6

TABLE OF CONTENTS Pages Title Page - - - - - - - - - i Certification - - - - - - - - - ii Dedication - - - - - - - - - iii Acknowledgement - - - - - - - - iv Abstract - - - - - - - - - - v Table of Contents - - - - - - - - vi List of Tables - - - - - - - - - List of Figures - - - - - - - - - CHAPTER ONE 1.1 Background of the Study - - - - - - 1 1.2 Statement of the Problem - - - - - - 6 1.3 Objective of the Study - - - - - - 6 1.4 Research Questions - - - - - - - 7 1.5 The hypotheses of the Study - - - - - 8 1.6 Significance of the Study - - - - - - 8 1.7 Scope of the Study and Limitation of the Study - - 9 1.8 Definition of Terms - - - - - - - 9 References - - - - - - - - - 11 CHAPTER TWO 2.1 Leadership - - - - - - - - 12 2.3 Leadership Theory and Research - - - - 16 2.4 Styles of Leadership - - - - - - - 23 2.5 Employee Job Satisfaction - - - - - 34 2.6 Managerial Ability - - - - - - - 36 2.7 Leadership Styles of Male and Female Managers - 37 2.8 Summary - - - - - - - - - 43 References - - - - - - - - - 44 CHAPTER THREE 3.1 Research Design - - - - - - - 45 3.2 Area of Study - - - - - - - - 46 3.3 Population - - - - - - - - 46 3.4 Sampling and Sampling Techniques - - - - 46

7

3.5 Instrument for Data Collection - - - - - 46 3.6 Validation of the Instrument - - - - - 47 3.7 Reliability of the Instrument - - - - - 47 3.8 Procedure for Data Collection - - - - - 48 3.9 Method of Data Analysis - - - - - - 48 References - - - - - - - - - 50 CHAPTER FOUR 4.1 Analysis and Tabulation of Data - - - - 51 4.2 Hypothesis Testing - - - - - - - 61 4.2.1 Statement of hypothesis One - - - - 61 4.2.2 Research Question One - - - - - 62 4.2.3 Statistical Presentation - - - - - 62 4.2.4 Statement of Hypothesis Two - - - - 64 4.2.5 Research Question Two - - - - - 64 4.2.6 Statistical Presentation - - - - - 65 4.2.7 Statement of Hypothesis Three - - - - 66 4.2.8 Research Question Three - - - - - 66 4.2.9 Statistical Presentation - - - - - 67 4.3 Summary - - - - - - - - - 69 References - - - - - - - - - 70 CHAPTER FIVE 5.1 Research Findings - - - - - - - 71 5.2 Conclusion - - - - - - - - 74 5.3 Recommendations - - - - - - - 75 5.4 Suggestions for Further Studies - - - - 77 Appendix I - - - - - - - - - 78 Appendix II - - - - - - - - - 79 Appendix III - - - - - - - - - 80 Appendix IV - - - - - - - - - 81 Appendix V - - - - - - - - - 82 Bibliography - - - - - - - - - 85

8

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1: Sex Respondents - - - - - - 51

Table 4.2: Nationality of Respondents - - - - 51

Table 4.3: Positions of the Respondents - - - - 52

Table 4.4: Qualification of the Respondents - - - 53

Table 4.5: Respondents span of Control - - - - 53

Table 4.6 Reprimanding Subordinates - - - - 54

Table 4.7 Type of Control - - - - - - - 55

9

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Shows Likert’s Four Basic Leadership Styles or

Management Systems from Heavily Autocratic to Heavily

Democratic - - - - - - - 28

Figure 2: Argyris’s Immaturity – Maturity Continuum - 30

Figure 3: Concern for Production - - - - - 32

10

CHAPTER ONE

1.1 Background of the Study

Leadership is an art. It is a secular subject which is necessary

for both expatriate and Nigerian managers to understand. Without

the knowledge and skills of leadership your company organization

is going nowhere.

Whenever there is a good leader, you will notice a great deal of

development and you will notice prosperity. The absence of

leadership can be seen clearly in the two worlds. You will notice the

absence of leaders in the spiritual or church world. When there is

lack of good leadership in the organization or secular world, you will

notice poverty, lack of development of the organization, lack of

knowledge coming due to none teaching from those expected to

impact the knowledge.

Directing the human resources of an organization to achieve

organizational goals could be the most difficult functions of

management. In big organizations like Shell and Elf, different

people from all walk of life come together to make use of the

physical resources to achieve the companies plans. The fact that no

11

two human beings are the same makes leadership functions very

complex.

The leader as a human being comes into the organization with

a different aspiration, temperament and intellectuality. The way he

plays his role determines how other people perceive him. Leadership

has been subjected to many definitions. This means that there is no

general opinion regarding how the term “leadership” should be

defined. This lack of opinion is not really, an outcome of lack of

assets.

Many years of studies and researches have led to series of

theories and models. Supporting this, Nwachukwu (1998) states

that “many studies have been built-up creating more confusions”.

He also cited another scholar who shares the same view with

McCall, Jr., who states that “the growing mountain of research data

has produced an impressive mass of contradiction”.

There are almost as many definitions of leadership as there

are researchers who have studies the topic (and over 3000 empirical

studies of leadership have been carried out)” cited in Feldman and

Aronold (1983). Wexley and Yukl (1980) equally hold that,

12

“During the last few decades, hundreds of laboratories and field studies have been conducted to learn about the nature of leadership in organization. Most of the early studies of leadership were attempts to identify unique traits that are characteristic of successful leaders but not unsuccessful leaders or non-leaders”.

However, Nwachukwu in his book defines leadership as “a

social influencing process for attainment of goals”. He cited other

scholars-Alam and Robert who defined leadership as a process

where one person (or group of persons) exert(s) social influence over

the members of a group. Elaborating on this, he states further that

“a leader is the most influential person in an organization who

provides direction, guides group activities and ensures that group

objectives are attained”. A good leader, therefore, should be able to

persuade others to move willingly and interestingly towards the

achievement of group goals or objectives.

Bernard (1983) cited in Adag and Brief (1981) defined

leadership “as the ability of one person to influence the behavior of

another”. It is, therefore noteworthy to mention that the concept of

leadership involves the concept of influence that induces any

13

attempt directed at influencing the behavior of others for goals that

may or may not coincide with those of the organization.

This led us to realize that in any typical organization,

leadership exists in two forms-formal and informal. Somebody who

is elected, appointed or nominated to a position of authority is said

to exercise formal leadership. While informal leadership is exerted

by a person who emerges as influential over others as a result of

possessing special skills of resources which others do not have.

The influence a leader has helps him in obtaining and

maintaining a high level of employee-test motivation and willingness

to implement decisions. In addition to inducing subordinates,

leaders in organizations usually perform very many other important

functions. Such functions as ensuring the efficient organization of

the group to perform its tasks in the most desirable way, ensuring

that workers receive essential instruction and information, proper

and immediate conflict management among subordinates, and

maintenance of group cohesion and team work.

Leadership style indicates the pattern of leadership behaviour

that characterizes a certain leader. Rue and Byers (1983) comment

14

that studies conducted in the 1970’s by Kurt Levin, Ronald Hippit,

and Ralph K White concentrated on the manner or style of

leadership, these studies identified three basic leadership styles,

autocratic, Laissez-faire and democratic”. Generally, the democratic

leader guides and encourages the group to make and participate in

making decision. A lassiez-faire leader allows individuals to make all

decisions. And an autocratic leader makes all decisions for the

group. The choice of a leadership style can be said to be determined

by many factors which are leader’s motivational structure, that is,

whether he or she is primarily motivated by talk accomplishment,

by good inter-personal relationship, or cultural and educational

orientation.

Then it is against this background described that the

researcher wants to write to write on leadership styles of expatriate

and Nigerian managers, a case study of two companies in Nigeria.

15

1.2 Statement of the Problem

Tuckman (1998) emphasized that the problem of the study

should be stated clearly and unambiguously usually in a question

form. So, the researcher while handling the topic which is the

comparative study of the practice of leadership styles of expatriate

and Nigerian managers to be the following problems:

1. If there is any significant difference in the practice of

leadership between the expatriates and Nigerian managers?

2. If there is difference between the percentage of educated

Nigerian managers and percentage of educated expatriate

managers who practice democratic leadership?

3. If there is, is the difference significant?

4. Are middle level expatriate managers more autocratic than

their Nigerian counterparts?

1.3 The Objective of the Study

1. To investigate comparatively, the practice of leadership styles

among expatriates and Nigerian managers.

16

2. To determine whether there is no significant difference

between the percentage of educated Nigerian managers and

the percentage of educated expatriate managers who practice

democratic leadership style.

3. To determine whether the middle expatriate managers are

more autocratic than their indigenous counterparts.

1.4 Research Questions

The research questions needed to be answered in this research

so as to give the study necessary focus are as follows:

1. That any significant difference exists between the practice of

leadership among expatriates and Nigerian managers.

2. That any difference between the percentage of educated

Nigerian managers and the percentage of educated expatriate

managers who practice democratic leadership style.

3. That there are middle level expatriate managers more

autocratic than their Nigerian counterparts.

17

1.5 The Hypotheses of the Study

The following null hypotheses are formulated to guide this

study.

1. There is no significant difference in the practice of leadership

between expatriate and Nigerian managers.

2. There is no significant difference between the educated

Nigerian managers who practice democratic leadership style

and the percentage of educated expatriate managers, who

practice democratic leadership style:

3. Middle level expatriate managers are more autocratic than

their indigenous Nigerian counterparts.

1.6 Significance of the Study

This study will be useful to both private and public

organizations in the oil sector of the economy. The study will also be

useful to students of management and those who provide

information in organization like Shell and Agip Companies, in

making sound policy decisions.

18

1.7 Scope of the Study and Limitation of the Study

This study is aimed at investigating the practice of leadership

styles among expatriates and Nigeria managers in selected oil

companies like Shell and Elf.

A major area of limitation was the attitude of respondents,

most of which were non-chalant, non co-co-operative, and ignorant

about the subject oft the study.

Finally, this study was also constrained in terms of time,

money and logistics, and of which none came cheap.

1.9 Definition of Terms

For the purpose of ensuring a better understating of the study,

a clarification of some terms used in the study is provided as

follows:

1. Autocratic Leadership: Leadership approach that is practiced

by any leader who makes most of all the decision for a group

and has little concern for the human relationship of his

19

employees. The leader’s concern is only with task at hand,

high task, one person oriented leader.

2. Democratic Leadership: Leadership approach in which the

leader guides and encourages individuals within the group to

make decisions. The leaders concern is not only with task at

hand, but also with employees welfare, high-task, high person-

oriented.

3. Expatriates: Any person who is of foreign origin irrespective of

nationality.

4. Higher Education: The level of education in which one earns

a first degree certificate and above.

5. Influence: The ability of a person to alter the behaviour of

another person.

6. Laissez-Faire Leadership: Leadership approach in which the

leader allows the organization to make all decisions. The

leader is low-tasked and low person-oriented

20

REFERENCES

Aldag, R.J and Brief, A.P (1981); Managing Organization Behaviour U.S.A West Publishing Company.

Bernard (1983); Analysis of Good Leaders, Hope publication Ibadan.

Feldman, P.C. and Arnold, H.J (1983); Managing Individuals and

Group Behaviour in Organization Singapore Mc-Graw-Hill Book Coy.

Nwachukwu, C.C (1988); Management Theory and Practice Nigeria:

Fep Publishers Ltd. Reie, I.W and Byars, L.L (1983); Management: Theory and

Application 3rd ed. Illinois: Richard D. Irwin Inc. Tuckman (1998); The Role of Leadership, Oxford Press.

Wexley, K.N and Yukl, G.A (1980) Organizational Behaviour and Industrial Psychology Reading with commentary, Oxford University Press.

21

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Leadership

The great importance attached to leaders in all kinds of group

action suggests a good reason for the considerable volume of theory

and research that have been conducted in management Kont

(1999). As a concept, leadership involves a complex set of

interpersonal interaction. It is a catalyst that binds together all the

organizations and subordinates efforts. Undoubtedly effective

leadership is one of the most dynamic elements of organizational

life as it influences followers to high level of organizational

performance. In effect, the degree to which an organization is able

to achieve its goals, depend upon the quality of managerial

leadership, Oreshi (1986).

There are as many definitions of leadership as there are

researchers on the subject. This even becomes more complex when

it is realized that there is no single generally accepted definition of

the concept. However, many researchers have gone beyond mere

definitions. They have critically analyzed the concept and have

22

come up with theories broadly speaking can be placed in three main

classes viz: traditional, behavioural and situational Oreshi, (1986)

Behavioural scientists have researched deeply into styles of

leadership and its attendant effects on employee job satisfaction.

This phenomenon had continued to pose some questions among

management practitioners and scholars. As a result, practitioners

and writers have involved themselves in a search for one universal

“best” style of leadership, which will be applicable in all situations.

However, the evidence to data holds that there is no single all-

purpose style or leadership that is generally acceptable and

applicable in all situations.

In this chapter, a review of the works of various authors and

researchers on leadership is made.

Leadership is one of the topics that have probably been most

studies and written about than any other topic in organization

behavior, but yet, there is no clear consensus regarding exactly

what leadership is and how the term should be defined. There are

as many definitions of leadership as there researchers who have

studied the topic. Stogdill, (2000); House and Bertz, (1999), in its

simplest sense, leadership could be defined as the act of leading.

23

This definition has led to identification of four basic elements in the

relationship.

a. The leader characteristics, ability and resource is relevant to

goal attainment. Hollander and Julian, (1982).

b. The followers who also have relevant abilities, personality

characteristics and resources.

c. The situation within the relationship occurs.

d. The task with which the interacting individuals are confronted.

Definitions of leadership usually have a common denominator,

the assumption that it is a group phenomenon. Janda, (1960).

Specifically, Stogdill has stated that “leadership” is the process of

influencing group activities toward goal setting and goal

achievement. Louis (1994) defined leadership as the work a

manager performs to cause people to take effective action. He noted

five main activities that are associated with management leading.

These are:-

1. Management Communication: The work a manager performs

to create understanding

24

2. Management Decision Making: The work a manager

performs to arrive at conclusions and judgments.

3. Motivations: The work a manager performs to inspire and

encourage people to take required action.

4. Selection: The work a manager performs to choose people for

positions in an organization.

5. Developing People: The work a manager performs, to help

people improve their knowledge, attitudes and skills.

Nwachukwu (1998) defined leadership as a social influencing

process for the attainment of goals. A leader is the most influential

person in an organization who provides direction, guides group

activities and ensures that group objectives are attained. The

function of leadership pervades all organizations. A good leader

therefore is one who is capable of persuading others to move

organization and the individual so that the degree of satisfaction of

both is maximized.

Whatever the definition, researches and observations indicate

that leadership is a process of influence. It is concerned with the

means by which one person induces others to behave or not to

behave in a certain manner. Leadership role is a group important

25

role that managers should play in life of the commercial banking

industries.

2.3 LEADERSHIP THEORIES AND RESEARCH

The importance of leadership to group action and

organizational success probably suggests why a considerable

volume of theories and research of it has come into being since the

World War II. An investigation has revealed continuous increase of

research on this concept since 1930 to date (Koontz, O’Donnel,

1986).

Studies on leadership have usually fallen under one of the

three general heading: trait theory, behavioural theories and

contingency model. Each of these seems to contain some elements

of truth but has always in the final analyses failed to explain

enough of the difference between effective and ineffective leadership

to be generally useful in a variety of situations (Handy, 1983). The

following pages will attempts to discuss and review these theories

Trait Theory

The trait theory rests in the assumption that the individual is

more important than the situation; that there are certain

26

distinguishing characteristics or traits, which differentiate

successful from unsuccessful leaders.

Bird (1990) examined exhaustively the research on leader

traits conducted up to 1990, to determine the University of Trait,

revealed in individual studies. He found that only about five percent

of the “discovered leadership traits” were common to four or more

investigations. Similar results were yield in the study by Stogdill

(2000) which revealed that only the traits of intelligence,

scholarship, dependability and responsibility differentiate between

leaders and non leaders. Gliselli (2001) and his associates suggest

the intelligence, supervisory ability, initiative self assurance, and

individual are significantly related to both a managers level and

rating of their performance.

Other studies mention that successful leaders appear to have

good health, have above average height, or well below it, courageous

decisive and energetic (Baridam, 1999).

In general, the study of trait has not been a very fruitful

approach to explaining leadership. Not all leaders possess all the

traits and many non-leaders may possess mot or all of them. Also

the trait approach gives no guide to how much, of any trait a person

27

should have. Furthermore, there is no uniformity among the

research in identifying the traits of leaders. As a psychologist,

Eugene E. Jenning rightly puts it, research has produced such a

variegated list of traits presumably to describe leadership that for

all practical purposes it describe nothing. Approximately fifty years

of studying have failed to produce one personality trait or set of

qualities that can be used to discriminate between leaders and non-

leaders.

Behavioural

The behavioural approach of the study leadership believes that

leaders may be best characterized by bahaviour pattern rather than

by individual traits. Unlike the trait approach that attempts to

explain leadership on the basis of what leaders are, the behavior

theories attempt to explain leadership on the basis of what leaders

do.

There are three main schools of research identified with the

above theatrical orientation. They will be discussed briefly and the

major substantive problems will also review.

Bales’ research at Harvard has emphasized that leadership

behavior may be performed by any group member yet early in the

28

life of a group, certain persons engage in such behavior to a greater

degree than others, Bales and Slater, (1995). By means of a detailed

observation system Bales observed the behaviour of newly, formed

laboratory groups and discovered what the felt were three facets of

leadership behaviour; activity, task ability, and like ability (Scott

and Mitchell, (1986) Bales (1993) posited that the individual who is

both the best ideal person and the best liked number is the best

leader (i.e. has better performance).

Shartle, et al (1992) at Ohio State University took a different

approach. Their studies identified two relatively independent

dimensions of behavior along which leaders differ. One of these is

consideration, that is, any action, which the leader takes to perceive

the human needs of subordinates and to support subordinates in

their own attempt to satisfy their needs. This may involve the

establishment of mutual trust, rapport and communication with

subordinates.

The second cluster is initiation of structure which is a variety

of actions taken by the leader to “get the work out”. Such actions

may involve organizing, defining relationships, setting goals,

emphasizing dead lines, giving directions, and so on.

29

The third school or research includes the work of Likert and

his colleagues at Michigan and is similar to that of the Ohio State

group. They identified two main categories of leader behavior- job

centered and employee-centered. According to them, employee-

supervisors and managers tend to have higher productivity. The

relationship between these two dimensions of leader behaviour and

subordinate performance or productivity cannot be summed up so

easily. (Organ and Hammer, (1998). Korman (1996) found no

accurate way to predict group performance from measures of leader

consideration and initiating structure. The extent to which these

leader behaviours, affect subordinate performance is either

(a) negligible or

(b) very much dependent on the situation (a statement which, in

itself tells us little). Korman 1996, cited in Organ and

Hummer, (1982).

It is reasonable to believe that no organization can achieve

high consideration at the expense of initiating structure in long run,

neither can it achieve high structure at the expense of

consideration. Intuitively therefore, one would regard the high

consideration-high structure combination as the optimal blend of

30

leader behavior. The above assumptions formed the basis of the

managerial grid, a management development programme that

Robert Blake and Jane Mouton (2004) developed (Baridam (1999).

Contingency Model

The first situational theory to be advanced was the

contingency model of leader effectiveness, developed by Fre E.

Fiedler and associates at the University of Illinois and the University

of Washington. This model suggests that an effective leader must

match his style with the demands of the situation. Leadership style

as defined in the model is the extent to which a manager is “task-

oriented” versus “relationship (again, corresponding roughly to

initiating structure and consideration), task oriented versus

relationship styles are measured by means of the least preferred co-

worker scores (LPC). A leader who describes in favourable terms,

the co-workers with whom he has been least able to work is

“relationship oriented, while one whose least preferred co-workers

are described critically is “task-oriented”.

Situational favourableness, according to fielder, is the extent

to which the situation itself provides that leader with power and

31

influence over the behavior of subordinates. Specifically, situation

favourableness depends upon whether:

1. The leader was liked trusted by the group.

2. The task to be performed was clear laid down and well defined

3. The power of the leader in the respect to the group is high that

is the reward and punish that had organizational backing.

After looking at leadership situations in different field and

laboratory setting he came up with following conclusions.

1. Task oriented leaders perform best in situations that are very

favourable or unfavorable; while relationship-oriented leaders

perform best in situations of intermediate favourableness.

2. Neither formal leadership training nor leadership experience

contributes greatly to effectiveness in the leadership role.

Because of the difficulty in changing the leaders’ behaviour,

leadership effectiveness can best be improved by changing the

favourableness of the situation.

There have been a number of criticisms of the contingency

model. Critics of the model contend that the LPC measure remains

something of a mystery. Little evidence exists that it accurately

reflects a person’s predisposition towards any particular leadership

32

style, either in terms of participativeness or initiating structure and

consideration levels (Organ and Hammer, (1982). Other critics have

dealt with methods logical concerns (Foa et al. (1991), and

alternative interpretations of the favourability dimension ‘O’ Brien,

(1999). The critic argue that Fielder used inappropriate statistical

analysis to support his proposition and the sample sizes employed

for any given test of the theory were usually small, and the

differences obtained were often statistically insignificant. The critics

further argued that laboratory studies designed to test the theory

provide little or no support for the validity of the model (Baridam

(1999).

In conclusion, the contingency approach to leadership is

useful. Apart from any thing else, it is good to be reminded of the

situations on which a structuring style is effective (Handy, 1983).

However, its usefulness for the practices of management is limited

until more is known about the LPC measures.

2.4 STYLES OF LEADERSHIP

A review of leadership as a subject readily reveals the difficulty

involved in separating theories of leadership from leadership styles

33

Pollar, (1993). They are interrelated and interwoven in each other.

Most researchers have concentrated on behavior of leaders in their

assumption that ability to lead and willingness to follow are based

on leadership styles.

Different styles of leadership will be extensively discussed. The

most common leadership styles are autocratic, democratic and

laissez-faire.

Styles Based on use of Authority

Some earlier explanations of leadership styles classified them

on the basis of how leaders use their authority. Koontz ‘O’ Donnel,

(1986). Leader, were seen as applying three basic styles. The

autocratic leader was seen as one who commands and expects

compliance. Who is dogmatic and positive and who leads by ability

to withhold and give rewards and punishment. The democratic or

participated leader consults with subordinates on proposed action

and decisions and encourages participation from them. This type of

leader was perceived to be on a spectrum ranging from the person

who does not take action without subordinates before doing so.

The third type of leader uses his or her power very little, if at

all, giving subordinates a high degree of independence or “free rein”

34

in their operations. Such leaders depend largely on subordinates to

set their own goals and the means on achieving them. They perceive

their role as one facilitating the operations of followers by

furnishing them information and acting primarily as a contact or

interface with group’s external environment.

There are a number of variations from this simple

classification of leadership styles. Some autocratic leaders are seen

as “benevolent autocrats”. Although they listen considerably to their

followers, opinions before making a decision, the decision is their

own. They may be willing to hear and consider subordinates idea

and concerns, but when a decision is to be made they may be more

autocratic then benevolent. A variation of participate leader is the

person who is supportive leaders in this category may look upon

their task as not only consulting with followers and considering

carefully their opinions but also all they can be support

subordinates in accomplishing their duties. As will be seen below,

this is the cornerstone of Likerts approach to leadership and

management.

Those who subscribe to these three styles of leadership are

likely to recognize that the use of any style depends on the

35

situation. A manager may be highly autocratic in an emergency, one

can hardly imagine a fire chief meeting with his crew to considerate

the best way of fighting a fighting a fire. Managers may also be

autocratic when alone the answer has certain questions.

A leader may gain considerable knowledge and a better

commitment on the part of a person involved by consulting with

subordinate.

Likert’s System of Management

Rensis Likerts (1997) and his associates at the university of

Michigan developed certain concepts and approaches of importance

to understanding leadership behavior. He is a proponent of

participative management and is oriented to subordinates relying

on communication to keep all parties working as a unit. All

members of the group, including the manager or leader adopt a

supportive relationship in which they feel a genuine common

interest in terms of needs, value, aspirations, goals and

expectations, since it appeals to human motivation. Likert see this

approach as the most effective way to lead a group.

A guideline for research and for clarification of his concept,

Likert postulated four system of management.

36

System 1: management is described as “exploitative authoritative”.

These managers are highly autocratic. They have little trust in

subordinates, motivate people through fear and punishment with

occasional rewards, engage in downward communication, and limit

decision making to the top and display similar characteristics.

System 2: Management is called “benevolent – authoritative”. These

managers have a condescending confidence and trust in

subordinates, motivate with rewards and some fear as punishment

permits, some upward communication, solicit some ideas and

opinions from subordinates and allow some delegation of decision

making but with close policy control.

System 3: Management is referred to as “consultative”. These

managers have substantial but not complete confidence and trust

in subordinates, usually try to make constructive use of

subordinate’s ideas and occasional punishment. Engage in

communication flow both down and up, make broad policies and

general decisions at the top and act consultatively with the other

ways.

Likert Saw System 4: Management as the most participative of all

and referred to it as “participative groups”. System 4 managers have

37

complete trust in subordinates. Always get ideas and opinions from

subordinates and constructively use them. They give economic

rewards on the basis of group participation and involvement in

such areas as setting goals and appraising progress towards goals,

engage in much communication both down and up an with peer,

engage decision making throughout the organization and otherwise

operate with themselves and their subordinates as a group.

Figure 1: Shows Likert’s Four Basic Leadership Styles or

Management Systems from Heavily Autocratic to Heavily

Democratic

Leadership

variable

System 1

(exploitative

autocratic)

System 2

(benevolent/a

utocratic)

System

(consultative

democratic)

System

(participative

democratic )

Degree to which

superior has

confidence and

trust in the

subordinates

No confidence

and trust

Very little

confidence and

trust

Substantial

confidence and

trust

Complete

confidence and

trust

Degree to which

subordinates

feel important to

job matters with

their superior

None of all Very little A good deal Feels

completely free

Degree to which

superior

subordinates and

opinions in the

solution of job

problem

Seldom uses

subordinates

ideas and

opinions

Sometimes

uses

subordinates

ideas and

opinions

Usually get

subordinates

ideas and

opinions and

tries to use them

constructively

Always gets

subordinates

ideas and

opinions and

always tries to

use them

constructively

38

Adapted from: Rensis Likert, The Human Organization (New York:

McGraw-Hill Book Company, (1987),

In general, Likert found that those managers who applied the

system 4 approach to their operations had greatest success as

leader. Moreover, he found that departments and organizations

managed by system 4 approach were most effective setting goals

and achieving them, and were generally more productive. He

described this mainly to the extent of participative in management

and the extent to which, the practice of supportive relations is

maintained.

Argyris Immaturity – Maturity Continuum Similar in some

respect to Likert system of management is the immaturity –

maturity continuum model of Chris Argyris (1997) of Yale and

Harad. His research has been focused primarily on the problem of

co-existence of individual and organizational needs. He agrees with

other behavioural scientists that people have strong self-

actualization needs, leaves the employee feeling submissive and

dependent. Argyris asserts that the operational techniques

employed in large-scale enterprises often ignore the social and

egoistic needs of the employee, paired with this assumption is the

39

second that maintain the ability of one motivate another. Having

what Argyris call “psychological energy” subordinates will attach top

priority to satisfaction of their own needs. The greater the disparity

between individual needs and organization, the more an employee is

like to reflect dissatisfaction, apathy, conflict, tension and

subversion. In this concept, the techniques of achieving motivation

would involve offering job challenge and opportunity to employees

who may need training to take advantage of changed environment.

From this point Argyris argues that the effective leader or

manager will help people move from a set of immaturity or

dependence to a state of maturity. His position is that if an

organization does not provide people with opportunities for maturity

and for being treated like mature individuals, they will become

frustrated and anxious and will act inconsistently with

organizational goals.

40

Figure 2: ARGYRIS’S IMMATURITY – MATURITY CONTINUUM

Immaturity Characteristics Maturity Characteristics

Passivity - Activity

Dependence - Independence

Capable of behaving - Capable of behaving

In few ways - In many ways

Shallow interests - Deep interest

Short-term perspective - Long-term perspective

Subordinate position - Subordinate position

Lack of self-awareness - Self-awareness and control

Source: Management: A System and Contingency Analysis of

Managerial Function (Mcgraw-Hill, Kogakusha, 1987).

The Managerial Grid

The managerial grid was developed by Robert Blake and Jane

Mouton (2004). Blake and Mouton expressed leadership style in

terms of concern for people and concern for production

corresponding roughly to consideration and initiating structure.

Concern for each can be represented as varying from (very low) to 9

(very high) (see figure 3) A 1, 9 leader place more emphasis on

people and little on production; a 9, 1 leader is more concerned

with production at the expense of feelings of subordinates. A 5, 5

leader is more of a compromiser. This is because he places

moderate emphasis on both people and production. The 9, 9 leader

places maximum emphasis on both production and people. Such a

41

leader prefers freedom of choices to enforced compliance, active

participation in problem solving and decision making over

unilateral action, and set direction guided by goal setting over

external control (Williams, 1988). A 1, 1 leader places low emphasis

on people and production. The impoverished (1, 1) leader style

might well be associated with high group performance and

satisfaction provided that the members of the group were ‘mature’

(for example, experienced and competent achievement-oriented

deriving intrinsic gratification from interesting jobs) (Organ and

Hammer, 1982). Heresy and Blanchard’s lie cycle theory of

leadership (1992) suggest that, with such a group, the low profile

leadership is the appropriate one.

Figure 3: CONCERN FOR PRODUCTION

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

Country club management (1,9)

production is incident to lack of

conflict and “Good fellowship”

Team Management (9,9)

production is from integrated of

task and human requirement

Dampened pendulum (5,5)

(middle of the road) push for

production but don’t go all out.

Give some but not all: “be fair

But firm

Impoverished management (1,1) effective

production is unobtainable because people

are lazy, apathetic and indifferent.

Relationships are different to achieve

because (human nature being what it is)

Conflict is inevitable

Task management (9, 1) Men are

a commodity just as machines. A

manager’s responsibility is to

plan, direct and control the work

of those subordinate to him.

42

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Source: From Blake, R. and Mouton, J. (2004), The Managerial

Grid, Gulf.

Although there are some minor disagreements about specific

behaviours, the three groups of researchers seem to agree that

there are two styles of leadership. Task orientation and

interpersonal orientation.

There are however, two major problems with the behavior

approach. First, the different schools of thought have used different

source to assess the leader behavior, leader, member, and

observers. Some investigators have found that there is little

agreement among different raters of an individual’s behavior (Scott

and Mitchell, 1986). Therefore, it is hard to tell whether it is more

important to know what the leader thinks he or she is doing, how

the members perceive his behavior and how non-participating

observers categories his act (Mitchell, 1986)

The second limitation of the behvaioural approach is the lack

of agreement about what sort of style is most effect (Korman’s

1998). No one seems to know whether being interpersonally

oriented or task-oriented is related to the notion that the 9,9 blend

43

represents the ultimate leadership style for which every manager

should strive (Baridam, 1999).

2.5 EMPLOYEE JOB SATISFACTION

Since the pioneering efforts of Happock (1995) and House

(1985) Research and theory on the correlates of job satisfaction

have multiplied

Job satisfaction could be defined as the amount of overall

positive effect (or feeling) that individuals have towards their jobs.

when one says an individual has high satisfaction, we mean that

the individual likes and values the job highly and feels positively

towards it (Feldman, Arnold 1996).

Basically, job satisfaction is largely determined by the

discrepancy between individual expect to get out of their jobs and

what the jobs can usually offer (Locker, 1986). Workers attitude to

their job with the extent to which they are satisfied with their job

and their held favourable attitude towards their jobs or be satisfied

with the jobs if they provide them with rewards or other outcomes

which satisfy their need (Gilmer, Deci, 1977).

44

A large number of studies in job satisfaction are correlational

in nature. We cannot infer from these studies that high outcome

cause satisfaction, only that the two variables are related. Others

prominently the work of Morse and Reimer (1956:42) have

demonstrated a cause relationship between qualities of desired

outcome and job satisfaction. Autonomy and work variety which are

provided by work enlargement has also been advocated of pasts

researches prominently the work of walker (1990) as influencing job

satisfaction.

The index of an employee satisfaction if sometime measured

by the different between the reward people expect and the rewards

which they get. If their ideal expectation is met, they are satisfied. If

the rewards fall short of their expectation they are highly

dissatisfied. In this system, greater rewards produce greater

satisfaction. However, the level of satisfaction is not readily

predictable from the amount of reward; rather it is predicted from

the actual level minus the expected level (Locke 1996, Katzeli 1994).

There is no gain saying that democratic leadership will have

very positive effect on satisfaction of the employees where it is well

applied. For example, people, report higher satisfaction when they

45

have greater opportunity to participate in formulating policies for

their department of organization.

2.6 MANAGERIAL ABILITY

The ability to manage human materials resources effectively

and efficiently to achieve organizational goals is a vital determinant

factor for leadership success or failure.

Griffins (1984) define management as the process of planning

organizing, leading and controlling an organization’s human,

financial, physical and information resources to achieve

organizational goals in an effective and efficient manner.

Stoner (1988) also define management as the process of

planning, organizing, leading and controlling the efforts of

organizational members and use of other organization resource in

order to achieve stated organizational goals.

Therefore, the female leader ability to manage is the extent to

which she can co-ordinate the human and material resources at her

disposal to achieve her leadership goals. The ability is restricted by

the sophistication of operating methods she can employ Bariuam

46

(1989). This in turn is affected by her level of education and work

experience.

There is a widely held belief that female leaders are deficient in

managerial ability. The reason being that female is irrational,

emotional temperamental, Lirtzman et al (1973:83). In this same

respect Olayinl Alice posit that, I thought of the need to have a

woman as the president of this country since they are less corrupt

and straight forward in their dealing, but some people will say that

a woman is too emotional to handle the complex task of the

presidency and again out culture and tradition do not allow women

to be in charge, controlling men, women are weak by nature and

rigid by attitude, which do not make them cope with intricacies of

power and conflict resolution. That people said the rigid nature of

women is bad for leadership (governance). Guardian Sunday

September, 1, 2002. Vol.1 While William (1995) in affirmation states

that there is considerable research evidence to support that fact

that female leaders psychologically are not significantly different

from their male counterpart and that they passes even superior

attributes and skills in some area related to management

effectiveness.

47

2.7 LEADERSHIP STYLES OF MALE AND FEMALE MANAGERS

According to Susan Vinnicombe, Director of the Centre for

Developing Women Business Leaders says that Women do have

different leadership styles from men. As Body shop founder Anita

Roddick says: “run my company according to feminine principles of

caring, making intuitive decisions, not getting hung up on

hierarchy, having a sense of work as being part of your life, not

separate from it; putting your labour where your love is, being

responsible to the world in how you use your profits; recognizing

the bottom line should stay at the bottom”.

The problem with actually mapping these differences is that

the successful male managerial stereotype is so strongly embedded

in organizational life that female managers are pressured to

conform to it, thereby confusing research results. Interest in the

impact of gender on leadership is relatively new. The first studies

were conducted in the US in the early 1970s when male managers

at nine insurance companies were asked to characterize “women in

general” and “successful managers”. Successful managers were

overwhelmingly identified exclusively with male traits. Many similar

studies have been carried out since that time and all have

48

demonstrated that the successful managerial stereotype remains

male.

Women managers’ perceptions of the successful manager are

only slightly less conclusive. Unlike the women managers in the

1970s and 1980s not all female managers today sex-type the

successful manager as male; however, no one, male or female, ever

identifies the successful manager as feminine. Male, and only to a

slightly lesser extent, female managers continue to describe

successful managers as possessing masculine traits, such as self

confidence, competitiveness, decisiveness, aggressiveness and

independence Susan (1999)

Many managers, both male and female, agree that the

differences in management style do exist. Interestingly both

describe women’s differences in positive terms. Yet when

researchers ask managers to describe their own management styles

they usually find no significant differences between genders. Does

this mean no difference exists? No. what these finding reveals is the

extent to which individuals characterize themselves in terms of

dominant managerial values, in this case masculine behavior. At

the same time manager describe themselves in terms that fit with

49

the prevailing rhetoric of good management practice, now strongly

associated with a consultative style and a high level of interpersonal

skills Susan (1999).

Our research shows that many female managers are

uncomfortable with the imposed leadership style and this, in turn

can lead to sever stress. Most senior female managers have no

children, believing that the combination of a career and a family is

untenable. This is in stark contrast to the majority of senior them.

Today’s culture of long working hours is exacerbating the problems.

Many senior women managers are simply voting with their feet, as

Brenda Barnes, President and CEO of Pepsi Cola North America,

did to spend more time her children. This is not an isolated

example. A few years ago the management of Deloitte & Touche in

the US realized that 90% of the women had gone by partnership

time Vinnicombe (1999)

Style Matters

Time after time in management development programmes at

Cranfield, women managers demonstrate their different working

styles. Myers Briggs (1990) noted that male managers consistently

come out predominantly as Traditionalist (a mix of ‘sensing’ and

50

‘judgemental’). In contrast, female managers emerge as significantly

more ‘intuitive’, combined with either ‘thinking’ as visionaries of

‘feeling’ as catalysts. The natural strength of the visionary is being

strategic, while that of the catalyst is fostering higher productivity

by personally motivating people. The problem with letting males

dominate organizations, as we do, that leadership style is narrowly

defined.

Whilst women constitute 41% of the European workforce, they

occupy only 10% of management positions and represent a more

1% of executive board members. Yet a recent survey on the most

admired boards of Britain’s top 100 companies showed that they

have large boards, more women, more executive directors, their

directors have more international experience and are better

educated. This is a powerful business argument for greater diversity

in leadership. Briggs (1998).

According to Andrew (1998), professor of International

Management Development; there is a myth about gender and

leadership capabilities. This holds that women are better tem

players than men; more open and mature in the way they handle

sensitive issues; and more conscious of their impact on others and

51

hence better managers than men. But the myth is false. An

international survey by Cranfield comparing top male and female

managers in the private and public sector clearly showed that

women are no better or worse than men in the practice of

management and leadership. It all depends on the man or women

in question, and the organization for which they work.

Factors Affecting Performance

Gender is a red herring. The factors that do significantly

influence people’s performance, however, are the length of tenure in

the job and organization, the age of the manager and their attitude.

In essence, the longer the manager has been in the job and been

held to account for their performance, the more positive, outward-

looking and mature they are both in attitude and years; and the

more responsible they are to the demands of customers, the better

they are as manager.

Countless studies of men and women at work have highlighted

the difference they display. The question remains, what is the

relevance of such differences to managerial and leadership

performance? Gender is but one demographic and, according to our

survey, not a significant differentiation of performance. However,

52

context the culture of the company, the leadership style of the boss

and the attitude in the office- does play a powerful role. Men and

women occupying comparable jobs but in different organizations

are likely to react differently, not because of difference of

personality, or gender, but because of contextual pressures

Kababase et al (1999)

2.8 SUMMARY

In this chapter, I have made a review of selected past

researches on the concept of leadership. Leadership definitions are

wide and varied, since most writers on the subject have come up

with their own definitions. In its simplest sense, however, it could

be defined as the act of leading. In discussing the roles of identified

leadership 1 and three viz: trait, behavior and contingency model

approach.

Finally, I discussed my leadership styles based on the use of

authority. Here I identified the autocratic style, the democratic style

and the free-rein style. Likerts systems of management, Argyris

Immaturity-maturity continuum and the managerial grid were also

considered necessary.

53

REFERENCES

Akerele, O: (1982), “Tomorrow’s Leadership Style and Training Requirements” Management in Nigeria.

Awujo, A.C. (1997), Elements of Management. Oliverson. Owerri,

Nigeria. Buchele, R.B., (1977), The Management of Business and Public

Organization. USA McGraw-Hill, Inc. Baridam Don. M., (1999), Management and Organization Theory

Fredsbary. Bori, Nigeria. Fiedler, F.C. et al, (1977), Improving Leadership Effectiveness. New

Delhi, John wisely and sons Ghiseli, E.E., (2001), Management Talent, American Psychologist

Vol. 16, No.10 Glimmer, H., Deci E., Industrial and Organizational Psychology New

York, McGraw-Hill Book Company Koontz, H.O’ Dannel, C. (1986), Management: A System and

Contigency Analysis of Management Functions. Kogakudha, McGraw-Hill.

Likert, R., (1997), New Patterns of Management and Human

Organization New York, McGraw-Hill Book Coy. Nwachukwu C.C., (1998), Management: Theory and Practice Africana Fep. Onitsha. Nigeria. Metcalfe, A., (1982), “Leadership: Extrapolating From Theory and

research to Practical Skill Training”, Journal of Management, Vol. 19, No.3.

Osuala, E.C., (1981), “JU” Survey of Leadership Styles with

Implications for Nigeria manager” Gem Vol. 2, No. 11.

54

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHOD

In this chapter, the research delves into the research design,

area of study, population, sample and sampling techniques, the

instrument for data collection, validation of the instrument,

reliability of the instrument, procedure for data collection and

method of data analysis.

3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN

According to Baridam (2001) research design is see as a

framework or plan that is used as a guide in collecting and

analyzing the data for a study while Nachmia (1996) sees it as a

model of proof that allows the researcher to draw inference

concerning causal relationship among variable under investigation

for this study, the research design is comparative survey design

because the study is comparative in nature, comparing leadership

styles among expatriate and the Nigerian manager in oil sector in

Nigeria.

55

3.2 AREA OF STUDY

The area of study covers the selected oil companies Nigeria,

mostly Shell and Elf.

3.3 POPULATION

The population of this study as contained in the sampling

frame that is the workers of the oil companies in Nigeria and their

administrators, made up of senior, middle and lower managers.

3.4 SAMPLING AD SAMPLING TECHIQUES

The sample size for this study consists of 202 (two hundred

and two) expatriate and Nigeria managers randomly selected by

simple random procedure.

3.5 INSTRUMENT FOR DATA COLLECTION

Primary data on the variables of the research were obtained

from a cross survey on which intention for several units is obtained

on some variable at a particular point in time. The principal

instrument for data collection was the questionnaire administration

which as doe personally by the researcher to the respondents

totaling 202, who were chosen by the simple random sampling

56

procedure. The questionnaire comprises of three sections. Set I is

about personal data of the respondents, set II is for middle level

managers, and set II is for managers with Bsc. and other higher

qualifications.

3.6 VALIDATION OF THE INSTRUMENT

According to Baridem (2002) validity is defined as the extent to

which a test measures what is supposed to be measured. For the

face and content validity of the instruments, copies were given to

the project supervisor who scrutinized and made contributions for

the upgrading of the instrument. Hence, confirmed that it was

capable of measuring what it was supposed to measure.

3.7 RELIABILITY OF THE INSTRUMENT

Reliability denotes the consistency with which an instrument

measures the intended variable over space ad time. The reliability of

the instrument for measuring leadership styles of expatriate and

Nigerian managers in oil companies was determined through a

test/retest method. Copies of the instrument were administered to a

randomly drawn sample of 10 employees. There was a retest of the

57

same instrument on the same sample after one week interval. The

initial ad retest scores of the sample were correlated using person

product moment. A reliability of 0.074 was obtained. The value is

high enough to permit the use of the instrument for this study.

3.8 PROCEDURE FOR DATA COLLECTION

The researcher sent copies of the questionnaires to both

expatriate and Nigerian managers the oil companies mentioned in

the study.

3.9 METHOD OF DATA ANALYSIS

The data was analyzed using Z-test ad Chi-square test (x2).

Z-test formula is given as:

Z = P1, - P2

P (1-p) + (1-p) n1 n2 P = x1 + x2

n2 + n2

Where,

X = P1 is the population of the first sample

58

P2 = is the population of the second sample

n1 = is the size of the first sample

n2 = is the size of the second sample

P = is the weighted mea of the two sample proportions

x1 = is the umber of highly educated Nigerian managers who

practice democratic leadership style

x2 = is the umber of educated expatriate managers who

practice democratic leadership style.

Hypothesis is analyzed using chi-square, denoted by:

X2 = (fo – fe)2 fe Where,

fo = Observed frequencies

fe = Expected frequencies

59

REFERECES

Baridam, D. M. (1995), Research Methods in Administrative Sciences, 2nd Ed., University of Port Harcourt Publishing House, Choba Port Harcourt

John, E. F. and Frank J. W. (1983), Modern Business Statistics: A

Pitman International Text, 2nd Ed., New York Leonard, J. K. (1984), Business Statistics, Schism’s Outline Series

in Business, Me Graw –Hill Book Company. Oswala, E. C. (1984), Introduction to Research Methodology,

Africana FEP Publishers Ltd. Cameroon Who Makes What I Nigeria (1981), A Publication of the

Manufacturers’ Association of Nigeria

60

CHAPTER FOUR

DATA ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION

4.1 Analysis and Tabulation of Data

Table 4.1 Sex of Respondents

Expatriate Proportion Indigenous Proportion Total

Male 56 0.92 77 0.84 133

Female 5 0.08 15 0.84 20

Total 61 1.00 92 1.00 153

Table 1 above shows the sex of respondents out of the

expatriate managers were 5 with a male with a proportion of 0.92.

The female expatiate managers were 5 with a proportion of 0.08. On

the other hand, the male indigenous managers were 77 with a

proportion of 0.84, while the female were 15 with a proportion of

0.16.

Table 4.2 Nationality of Respondents

Nationality No of Managers Response Proportion

Expatriate 81 61 0.75

Indigenous 118 92 0.78

Total 199 153 1.53

61

The table above shows the sample size with respect to

nationality, total response and proportion of response. Out of the 81

expatriate managers given questionnaires, 61 responded,

representing proportion of 0.75. 92 respondents out of the 118

indigenous managers given questionnaire, which represent a

proportion of 0.78, responded.

Table 4.3 Positions of the Respondents

Management

Level

Indigenous Proportion Expatriate Proportion Total

General

manager

15 0.16 13 0.21 28

And above 42 0.46 33 0.54 70

Middle level 35 0.38 15 0.25 50

Total 92 1.00 61 00 153

The table above indicates the position of the respondents.

Amongst the 92 indigenous managers who responded, 15 were at

least general managers with a proportion of 0.16.42 were middle-

level managers with a proportion of 0.46 while 35 were at the

supervisory level, a proportion of 0.21,33 middle- managers with a

proportion of 0.54 and 15 supervisory level manager with a

proportion of 0.25.

62

Table 4.4 Qualifications of the Respondents

Qualifications Indigenous Proportion Expatriate Proportion Total

B.Sc and

above

72 0.78 43 0.70 115

Lower than

B.Sc

20 0.22 18 0.30 38

Total 92 1.00 61 1.00 153

In the table above, out of the 92 indigenous managers, 72

were holding bachelor degree with or without other higher

qualification while 20 were holding qualifications lower than B.Sc

each of these records a proportion of 0.78 and 0.22 respectively. 43

of the expatriate hold B.Sc and above while the remaining 18

manager did not possess at least a B.Sc degree. The proportion was

0.7 and 0.3 respectively.

Table 4.5 Respondents Span of Control

No of

Subordinate

Expatriate Proportion Indigenous Proportion Total

1-10 19 0.31 28 0.30 47

11-20 17 0.28 39 0.40 56

More than 20 25 0.41 25 0.30 50

Total 61 1.00 92 1.00 153

63

From the table above, it was observed that 19 of the expatriate

managers were having between 1 and 10 subordinates, representing

a proportion of 0.31. 17 managers and 25 managers, all expatriates,

were controlling 11-20 and above 20 subordinates respectively.

Each has a proportion of 0.28 has between 11-20 while 25 have

above 20 subordinates. The proportions were 0.3, 0.4 and 0.3 in

that order.

Table 4.6 Reprimanding Subordinates

Expatriate Proportion Indigenous Proportion Total

Yes 26 0.43 65 0.68 86

No 35 0.57 29 0.32 64

Total 61 1.00 61 1.00 153

In the table above, the proportion of expatriate managers that

reprimand subordinate was 0.43 while the proportion of those that

do not reprimand subordinates was 0.57. This indicates that more

expatriate managers do not reprimand subordinates for low

productivity. On the other hand, 0.68 of the indigenous managers

reprimand while 0.32 do not reprimand. This is not similar to the

response obtained from the expatriate managers.

64

Table 4.7 Type of Control

Controlling practices were determined in this study, from an

examination of the frequency of checks on employees, the level of

intolerance for workers mistakes, emphasis in punctuality,

emphasis on efficiency and degree of adherence to rules. A manager

high on all these variables is considered rigid.

The proportion of expatriates and indigenous managers who

were rigid are 0.74 and 0.21 respectively. While the proportion of

expatriate and indigenous managers who were flexible are 0.26 and

o.79. This result indicates that expatriate managers are more

flexible.

Expatriate Proportion Indigenous Proportion Total

Yes 26 0.75 19 0.21 64

No 16 0.25 73 0.79 89

Total 61 1.00 92 1.00 153

65

Table 4.8 Types of Delegation

Expatriate Proportion Indigenous Proportion Total

Low 14 0.23 69 0.75 83

High 47 0.77 23 0.25 70

Total 61 1.00 92 1.00 153

The delegation practices were tagged high or low. Low

delegation implies a tendency to centralize organization structures

while a high delegation implies decentralization. From that table

above, 0.23 of the expatriate managers and 0.75 of the indigenous

managers were low in delegation. 0.77 of the expatriate and 0.25 of

the indigenous were high in delegation. This shows that expatriate

managers delegate more than their indigenous counterparts.

Table 4.9 Key Managerial Functions Taking More Time

Expatriate Proportion Indigenous Proportion Total

Planning 17 0.28 36 0.39 53

Coordinating 6 0.10 7 0.08 13

Directing 10 0.16 13 0.14 23

Controlling 14 0.23 21 0.23 35

Communicating 8 0.13 10 0.11 18

Motivating 6 0.10 5 0.05 11

Total 61 1.00 92 1.00 153

66

From the table above, it can be observed that the proportion of

expatriate managers are more on planning than in the other

functions and is the highest with 0.28 proportion. This is closely

followed by controlling with a proportion of 0.23. also, the

proportion of indigenous managers doing more of planning than

other function is the highest with a proportion of 0.39 this is an

indication that managers, irrespective of their nationalities, level of

education, and level of hierarchy of authority engage in planning

more than any other functions.

Table 4.10 Variables Responsible for Choice of Leadership Style

Expatriate Proportion Indigenous Proportion Total

Educational 7 0.12 9 0.10 16

Cultural 19 0.31 51 0.55 70

Training/

Professional

14 0.23 12 0.13 26

Situational 21 0.34 20 0.22 41

Total 61 1.00 92 1.00 153

The table above shows the variables managers consider in the

choice of their leadership styles. Proportionally, 0.34 of the

expatriate managers consider situational variables while 01.31

considers cultural variables. On the other hand, 0.22 of the

67

indigenous managers consider situational while 0.55 consider

cultural variables. These two variables were closely followed by

training/professional variables in the case of both the expatriates

and indigenous managers. The expatriate managers recoded a

proportion of 0.23 while the indigenous recorded a proportion of

0.13. Educational variables recorded least proportion in the two

cases- expatriate 0.12. While indigenous managers recorded the

population of 0.10

Table 4.11 Adoption of Leadership Style

Expatriate Proportion Indigenous Proportion Total

Lassiez-faire - - - - -

Democratic 41 0.67 13 0.14 54

Autocratic 20 0.53 79 0.86 99

Total 61 1.00 92 1.00 153

The table above shows the number of indigenous and

expatriate managers practicing various leadership styles. Among

the expatriate managers, democratic is the highest with a

proportion of 0.67. This was contrary to the automatic which

recorded a proportion of 0.86 among indigenous. This is an

68

indication that expatriate managers tend to be democratic than

their indigenous counterparts.

Table 4.12 Preference for Autocratic Style among Middle

Level Managers

Expatriate Proportion Indigenous Proportion Total

Yes 7 0.21 31 0.74 38

No 26 0.79 12 0.26 37

Total 33 1.00 42 1.00 75

Table 12 above indicates the total of the expatriate and

indigenous mangers at the middle- level that preferred autocratic

style to democratic style. Out of all 33 expatriate respondents, only

7 preferred automatic while 26 indicated their non-preference for

autocratic.

Those who do prefer autocratic recorded the highest proportion of

0.79. On the other hand, the indigenous manager who prefer

autocratic were 31 in number with a proportion of 0.74 this

supports the finding in table 11.

69

Table 4.13 Adoption of Leadership Style among Highly

Educated Respondents

Expatriate Proportion Indigenous Proportion Total

Lassiez-

faire

- - - - -

Democratic 27 0.63 0.13 0.18 40

Autocratic 16 0.37 0.59 0.82 7

Total 43 1.00 72 1.00 115

In the table above are the totals of the highly educated

indicated indigenous and expatriate managers that adopted the

various leadership styles. 27 out of the highly educated expatriate

managers practice democratic style, while 13 out of the highly

educated Nigerian manager practice democratic.

Table 4.14 Identification of Leadership Qualities

Expatriate Proportion Indigenous Proportion Total

Traits 8 0.13 13 0.14 21

Behavior 19 0.31 23 0.25 42

Both

Traits/

Behavior

34 0.56 56 0.61 90

Others - - - - -

Total 33 1.00 92 1.00 153

70

The table above shows what managers consider in identifying

leadership qualities in subordinates. A high proportion of

expatriates and indigenous manager- 0.56 and 0.61 respectively,

indicated traits/behavior. From this result, one can conclude that

trait or behaviour alone is not a popular means of identifying

leadership qualities in the subordinates.

4.2 Hypothesis Testing

The test shall be conducted as follows:

i. Statement of research hypothesis

ii. Identification of test hypothesis

iii. Specification decision rule

iv. Report

4.2.1 Statement of Hypothesis One

H0: There is no significant difference between the proportion of

expatriate managers who practice autocratic leadership style

and the proportion of Nigerian managers who practice

autocratic leadership style.

71

4.2.2 Research Question One

Does any significant difference exist between the practice of

leadership among expatriates and Nigerian managers?

4.2.3 Statistical Presentation

Since the research is out to determine whether two

proportions differ significantly from each, therefore, the critical ratio

Z was used in testing the hypothesis.

The Decision Rule

The hypothesis tested with 0.05 level of significant and is two

tailed. The null (H0) hypothesis will be accepted if the computed Z

value falls within the region of between ± 1.96. The alternative (H1)

hypothesis is accepted if the computed Z value falls out of the

region of between ± 1.96.

The Test Formulae

Critical ratio Z = P1 – P2_______________

p(1-p) + p(1-p) n1 n2

72

Where:

P1 is the proportion of the first sample

P2 is the proportion of the second sample

N1 is the size of the first sample

N2 is the size of the second sample

P is the weighted means of the two samples

Proportion computed by:

P = X1 x X2

n1 n2

Where:

X1 is the number of expatriate manager who practice autocratic

leadership style

X2 is the number of Nigerian manager who practice leadership

style.

73

Report of Computation

Using the data in table 4.2 above, the calculated Z will be:

Z = 7.46 (see appendix II for computation)

Decision

At a 0.05 level significant for two tailed test, the alternative

hypothesis is accepted as the computed value, -7.46 falls outside

region between +1.96

4.2.4 Statement of Hypothesis Two

H0: Middle-level expatriate managers are more autocratic than

their Nigerian counterparts.

4.2.5 Research Question Two

Is there any difference between the percentage of educated

Nigerian managers and the percentage of educated expatriate

managers who practice democratic leadership style?

74

4.2.6 Statistical Presentation

Since the aim here is to determine how well the observed set of

date fits the expected set, then chi-square (X2) test was used in

testing the hypothesis.

The Decision Rule

The hypothesis was tested with 0.05 level of significance with

degree of freedom 1, the null (H0) hypothesis will be accepted if the

critical value of chi-square is greater than computed chi-square.

The alternative (H1) hypothesis is accepted if the critical value of

chi-square is less than the computed chi-square.

Test Formulae

Critical X2 = ∑(fo - fe)2

fe

where:

fo = Observed frequencies

fe = Expected frequencies

75

Report Computation

Using the data in table 4.12, the computed X2 will be: X2 =

20.5. (See appendix III for computation)

Decision

At a level of significance (with degree of freedom 1), the null

(H0) hypothesis is rejected, as the computed X2 value of 20.5 is

higher than the critical X2 value of 3.84.

4.2.7 Statement of Hypothesis Three

H0: There is a significant difference between the proportion of

highly educated Nigerian managers who practice democratic

leadership style and the proportion of highly educated

expatriate managers who practice democratic leadership style.

4.2.8 Research Question Three

Are middles level expatriate managers more autocratic than

their Nigerian counterparts?

76

4.2.9 Statistical Presentation

Since the aim is to determine whether two proportions differ

significantly from other, therefore, the critical ratio Z was used in

testing the hypothesis.

The Decision Rule

The hypothesis is tested with 0.05 level of significant and is

two-tailed. The null (H0) hypothesis will be accepted if the computed

Z value falls within the region between + 1.96.

The alternative (HA) is accepted if the computed Z values falls

outside the region of between + 1.96.

The Test Formulae

Critical ratio Z = P1 – P2_______________

p(1-p) + p(1-p) n1 n2 Where:

P1 is the proportion of the first sample

P2 is the proportion of the second sample

N1 is the size of the first sample

77

N2 is the size of the second sample

P is the weighted mean of the two sample proportions

computed by

P = X1 + X2

n1 + n2 Where X1, is the number of highly educated Nigerian managers who

practice democratic leadership style X2 is the number of highly

educated expatriate managers who practice democratic leadership

style.

Report of Computation

Using the date in table 4.13 above, the calculated ratio z will

be: z = 15 (See Appendix IV for Computation)

Decision

At a 0.05 level of significance for two tailed test, the alternative

hypothesis is accepted as the computed z value, -5 falls outside the

region between ± 1.96.

78

4.3 Summary

This chapter has dealt with the analysis of the primary data

collected and he testing of hypothesis. From the analysis it was

seen that expatriates managers are more democratic than their

Nigerian counterparts. Two of the hypotheses were tested by using z

while the remaining one was tested using X2 test. In the tested

hypothesis, it was seen that there is a significant between the

proportions of expatriate managers who practice autocratic

leadership style. It was also that middle-level expatriate managers

are less autocratic than their Nigerian counterparts.

And lastly, that there is no significant difference between the

proportion of high educated Nigerian managers who practice

democratic leadership style and the proportion of highly educated

expatriate managers who practice democratic leadership style.

79

REFERENCES

Baridan, D.M (1995), Research Method Publisher, Port Harcourt Harper, W., (1982), ‘Statistics’ Mac Donald and Evans Hard Work

Series, Great Britain Osuala, E. C., (1984), “Introduction to Research Methodology;

African Rep Publishers Ltd, Cameroon

80

CHAPTER FIVE

FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Research Findings

1. It was found out that there is a significant difference between

the proportion of expatriate managers who practice autocratic

leadership style and the proportion of Nigerian manager who

practice autocratic leadership style. Nigerian managers were

seen to be more autocratic than their expatriate counterparts

culture is one of the possible explanation for this finding.

Nigerian managers, irrespective of education standard have

been raised under autocratic tradition. A consequence of this

up brining is that they love to acquire and retain power or

authority. It is a common practice in the purely indigenous

organization. (Such as public corporations) to postpone

decision on very urgent matter just because the incumbent

official is very and no one else is to act for him. Therefore, as

litter or nothing is delegated (as is obvious from the finding

that 0.25 of the Nigerian managers indulge in high delegation

81

while 0.75 indulge is low delegation) to subordinates the need

for close supervision or control is minimal.

2. It is thus, not surprising that Nigerian managers employ

flexible control (as is obvious from the finding that 0.21 of the

Nigerian managers indulge in rigid control while 0.79 indulge

in flexible control). The expatriate managers have brought up

under democratic traditions in which the subordinate’s

opinions are sought before a leader makes decision. That is

also called participative leadership.

3. Expatriate managers come from societies where delegation is

culturally desirable it is not surprising that they delegated

more than their Nigerian counterparts. Since more is delegated

to subordinates, the need for lose supervisor or rigid control is

high. Thus, it is not surprising that expatriate manager

irrespective of their nationalities, level of education and level of

management, employ rigid control more than flexible control.

Rigid control as has been pointed out implies frequent checks

on operating units, a high level of intolerance to rules,

emphasis on efficiency in the use of resources. While a flexible

control, on the other hand, is one that emphasis the meeting

82

of standard or dealing without necessary stifling employees

initiative in the process. This lack of emphasis on punctuality

especially, has been given a phrase “Africa time” as a form of

comic relief by Nigerians. It was also find out that middle-level

expatriate managers are less autocratic than their Nigerian

counterparts. This could also be explained from the cultural

background point of view.

4. Lastly, it was seen that there is no significant difference

between the proportion of highly educated Nigerian managers

who practice democratic leadership style and the proportion of

highly educated expatriate managers who practice democratic

style.

This lack of significant difference can be as a result of the fact

that majority of the highly educated Nigerian manager received their

education in the foreign countries and as such are trying imbibe the

cultural practice of the expatriate as per leadership style.

83

5.2 Conclusion

The difference in the practice leadership among the expatriate

and Nigerian managers in selected companies in Port Harcourt have

been highlighted.

Although by manner of the evidence that emerge from the

style, one can categorically conclude that, in general, there appear

to be a significant difference between the proportion of expatriate

managers who practice autocratic leadership style. The middle-

level expatriate managers are less autocratic than their Nigerian

colleagues. And that there is no significant difference between the

proportion of highly educated indigenous managers who practice

democratic leadership style.

Based on the foregoing, it could be seen that cultural variable

is the major determinant of these significant differences. Further,

education seems to be the dictator of the lack of significant

differences between the proportion of highly educated expatriate

and Nigerian managers that practice democratic leadership style.

84

5.3 Recommendations

From what has been written so far, it is indisputable that two

major leadership styles are commonly practiced autocratic and

democratic. To be effective each of these styles must be used

competently and appropriately. It is therefore recommended that

manager using each of the styles should consider the following

requirements. Autocratic or task focused leadership required:

1. Clear standard of goals. Clearly understood by all concerned.

This will create sense of direction and awareness of what is

required of all concerned.

2. Clear instructions. This create awareness as regards what is to

be done, how it is to be done, when it is to be done why it is to

be done.

3. Good training for present responsibilities. Each employee

should be well developed, so to carry out assigned task

effectively.

4. Skilled and effective one way communication.

5. Keep subordinates informed of their performance and that of

the organization in general.

85

6. There should be great effort to ensure that basic need and job

security needs are looked after

Democratic or relationship focused leadership requires:

1. Lots of two-way communications that will ensure proper

dissemination of instructions in subordinates and proper

receipt of feedback on subordinate performance for control

purposes.

2. More frequent contacts and friendly interaction with

subordinates.

3. More friendly supportive encouragement

4. More concern for worker’s welfare

5. More listening to subordinates grievances

6. Building a feeling of moral and good spirits

Further, it is recommended that the two styles-autocratic and

democratic could be combined based on the following requirements:

1. More two-way problem solving communications.

2. More setting of joint targets and objectives

86

3. More carefully, jointly working out how the job should be

done.

4. More building of team work

5. More teaching to the subordinates how to follow-up and

measure their own work.

5.4 Suggestions for Further Studies

Some of the limitations of the studies already been stated and

far reaching generalization cannot be made due to those limitations.

It is therefore suggested that further empirical investigation in to

the study should be extended to include different towns in other

states in Nigeria. The prospective researcher(s) should also study

the situation from within by keeping records of observations.

87

9-9 MANAGEMENT WORK ACCOMPLISHED US FROM COMMITTED PEOPLE WITH INTERDEPENDENCE THROUGH A COMMON STAKE IN ORGANIZATION PURPOSE

1-9 MANAGEMENT THOUGHTFUL ATTENTION TO NEEDS OF PEOPLE, LEADS TO A FRIENDLY AND COMFORTABLE ORGANIZATION ATMOSPHERE AND WORK TEMPO

5-5 MANAGEMENT ADEQUATE PERFORMANCE THROUGH BALANCE OF WORK REQUIREMENTS AND MAINTAINING SATISFACTORY MORALE

1-1 MANAGEMENT EXERTION OF MINIMUM EFFORTS REQUIRED TO GET WORK DONE AND SUSTAIN ORGANIZATION MORALE

9-1 MANAGEMENT EFFICIENCY RESULTS FROM ARRANGING WORK IN SUCH A WAY THAT HUMAN ELEMENTS HAVE LITTLE EFFECT

APPENDIX I

CONCERN FOR PRODUCTION

1. THE MANAGERIAL GRID

Koontz, H et al, Management. McGraw-Hill Book Coy. Japan,

1980, P675.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

88

APPENDIX II

X1 = 20, n1 = 61

X2 = 79, n2 = 92

P1 = X1 = 20 = 0.33 n1 61 P2 = X2 = 76 = 0.86 n2 92 P = X1 = X2 = 20 + 76 = 99 = 0.65 n1 n2 61 92 153

Z = P1 – P2 0.33-0.86 √P(1-P) + P(1-P) = √0.65(1-0.65) (1-0.65) n1 n2 61 92

0.33-086 = -0.53 √0.003 + 0.002 0.071 = -7.46

89

APPENDIX III

Expatriate Indigenous Total

Yes 7(16.72) 31(21.28) 38

No 26(16.28) 11(20.72) 37

Total 33 42 75

Because the frequency table is 2 x 2, a continuity correction method

of chi-square test will be used to test the Hypothesis with the

formula.

X2 = (fo-fe-0.5)2

fe X2 = (7-16.72-0.5)2 + (26-16.28-0.5)2 + (31-21.28-0.5)2 + (11-20.72-0.5)2

16.7 16.28 21.28 20.72 X2 = 6.25 + 5.22 + 3.99 + 5.04 X2 = 20.5 df = (2-1)(2-1) = 1 Level of significance = 0.05

Critical X2 = 3.84

∑

90

APPENDIX IV

X1 = 13, n1 = 72 X2 = 27, n2 = 43 P1 = X1 = 13 = 0.18 n1 72 P2 = X2 = 27 = 0.63 n2 43 P = X1 + X2 13+27 = 40 = 0.35 n1 + n2 72 + 43 115 Z = P1 – P2 = 0.18-0.63

1-P 1-P 1-0.35 1-0.35 n2 n2 72 43

= -0.45_________ √ 0.003 + 0.005 = - 5

P P + 0.35 + 0.35

91

APPENDIX V

QUESTIONNAIRE

Dear Respondent,

This questionnaire is meant for a research being undertaken as

part of the requirement for the award of MBA degree in

Management. The title of the research is “COMPARATIVE STUDY

OF THE LEADERSHIP STYLES OF EXPATRIATE AND NIGERIAN

MANAGERS”: A Study of Selected Oil Service Companies in Nigeria.

We hope you would do your best in answering the questions as

appropriate as possible. You are best assured that the answers you

give are confidential and will be used strictly for academic purpose.

Thanks.

OGBAJE SUNDAY O PG/MBA/09/53792

92

SECTION 1

1. Sex: _______________________________________________________

2. Nationality: ________________________________________________

3. Position in organization: ____________________________________

4. Qualification:________________________________________________

5. Name and location of the organization (optional)

_____________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________

6. How many subordinates report directly to you?

[ ] 1-10, [ ] 11-20, [ ] more than 20

7. How can you define your subordinates’ attitude to work?

[ ] Not encouraging, [ ] very encouraging,

[ ] Encouraging, Others (Please specify) ____________________

8. Is there a set productivity standard in the company

[ ] Yes, [ ] No

9. Do you reprimand your subordinate when productivity falls

below standard?

[ ] Yes, [ ] No

10. What type of control do you adopt? (e.g Rigid or Flexible)

[ ] Rigid, [ ] Flexible.

11. What type of delegation do you adopt? (e.g Low or high)

[ ] Low, [ ] High

12. On which of these key functions do you spend much of

your time? (Planning, coordinating, directing, controlling,

communicating and motivation).

[ ] Planning, [ ] Coordinating, [ ] Directing,

[ ] Communicating, [ ] Motivating

93

13. What is responsible for your choice of leadership style?

[ ] Education, [ ] Cultural, [ ] Nature of work,

[ ] Professional background, [ ] Subordinates’ attitude

Others (please specify) ____________________________________

14. Which leadership style do you adopt most

[ ] Authoritarian, [ ] Democratic, [ ] Laissez-faire

SECTION II

FOR MIDDLE-LEVEL MANAGERS ONLY

15. Would you personally pay more attention to improvement

of workers’ welfare facilities?

[ ] Yes, [ ] No, [ ] Don’t care

16. Would you prefer autocratic approach to democratic

approach?

[ ] Yes, [ ] No

SECTION III

For mangers with B.S.c and /or other higher qualification

17. Which leadership style do you adopt in dealing with

subordinate?

[ ] Authoritarian, [ ] Democratic,

[ ] Laissez-faire

18. How do you identify leadership qualities amongst your

subordinates?

[ ] By trait, [ ] by behavior,

[ ] by both trait and behavior

Others (specify) _____________________________________________

94

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Akerele, O (1982), “Tomorrow’s Leadership style and Training Requirements” Management in Nigeria.

Alag, R.J and Brief, A.P (1981), Managing Organization Behaviour

U.S.A West Publishing Company. Awujo, A.C. (1997), Elements of Management. Oliverson. Owerri,

Nigeria. Baridam Don. M., (1999), Management and Organization Theory

Fredsbary. Bori, Nigeria. Baridam, D.M (1995), Research Method Publisher, Port Harcourt Baridam, D.M. (1995), Research Methods in Administrative Sciences,

2nd Ed. University of Port Harcourt Publishing House, Choba Port Harcourt.

Buchele, R.B., (1977), The Management of Business and Public

Organization. USA McGraw-Hill, Inc. Feldman, P.C. and Arnold, H.J (1983), Managing Individuals and

Group Behaviour in Organization Singapore Mc-Graw-Hill Book Coy.

Fiedler, F.C. et al, (1977), Improving Leadership Effectiveness. New

Delhi, John Wisely and Sons Inc. Ghiseli, E.E., (2001), “Managerial Talent”, American Psychologist

Vol. 16, No. 10. Gilmer, H., Deci E., Industrial and Organizational Psychology New

York, McGraw-Hill Book Coy. Harper, W.M., (1982), Statistics. Mac Donald and Evans hand work

series, great Britain.

95

John, E.F, and Frank, J.W. (1993), Modern Business Statistics: A Pitman International Text, 2nd Ed

Koontz, H.O’ Dannel, C. (1986), Management: A System and Contingency Analysis of Management Functions. Kogakudha, McGraw-Hill.

Leonard, J.K, (1984), Business Statistics, Schism’s Outline Series in

Business, McGraw-Hill Book Copany. Likert, R., (1997), New Patterns of Management and Human

Organization New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company. Nwachukwu C.C., (1998) Management: Theory and Practice.

Africana Fep. Onitsha. Nigeria. Nwachukwu C.C., (1988) Management Theory and Practice Nigeria:

Fep Publishers Ltd. Osuala, E.C., (1984), Introduction to Research Methodology,

Africana- Fep. Publishers., Ltd Cameroon.