INFLUENCE OF PRINCIPALS’ LEADERSHIP STYLES ON

TEACHER JOB SATISFACTION IN PUBLIC SECONDARY

SCHOOLS IN EMBAKASI SUB COUNTY, NAIROBI, KENYA

Anyinyo Norman Oyuga

A Research Project Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

for the award of the Degree of Master of Education in Educational

Administration

University of Nairobi

2023
 DECLARATION

This research project is my original work and has not been presented for the

award of any degree in any other university.

Anyinyo Norman Oyuga

E55/36099/2019

This research project has been submitted for examination with our approval as

university supervisors.

………………………………
Dr. Dorice Khatete.
Lecturer
Department of Educational Management, Policy and Curriculum Studies.
University of Nairobi.

Sr. Dr. Petronilla Kingi

Senior Lecturer
Department of Educational Management, Policy and Curriculum Studies.
University of Nairobi.

ii
 DEDICATION

To my best friend and wife Milcah N. Mutunga, sons Paul Israel and Elias

Oyuga, my heartiest thanks are due to you for without your patience and moral

support, this research project would not have been possible. My parents Justo

Anyinyo and Caroline Awino, you set me on this milestone since my early

life, thank you.

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Firstly, I thank the Almighty God for His grace and provision in my academic

journey. Secondly, it takes a lot of good and hardworking people to undertake

a research project. I wish to acknowledge with profound gratitude my

supervisors, Sr. Dr. Petronilla Mutinda Kingi and Dr. Dorice Lukoye Khatete

for their scholarly guidance, mentorship, recommendations and wise counsel

in ensuring the success of this research project. Also, I am deeply indebted to

the lecturers in the department of Educational Management, Policy and

Curriculum Studies- University of Nairobi for their immense scholarly

contribution, in particular, Prof. Jeremiah Kalai (Dean, Faculty of Education)

who encouraged me to venture into post-graduate studies. My appreciation

also goes to the Embakasi Sub County Education Officers, Principals and

Teachers from Embakasi Sub County Secondary Schools for their voluntary

participation and cooperation with me during the data collection process.

Finally, I thank my friends, colleagues and classmates for their encouragement

and support. Blessings to you all.

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION .............................................................................................. ii

DEDICATION ................................................................................................. iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ............................................................................... iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................v

APPENDICES ................................................................................................. ix

LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................x

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................ xii

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ...................................................... xiii

ABSTRACT ................................................................................................... xiv

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the Study..............................................................................1

1.2 Statement of the Problem .............................................................................8

1.3 Purpose of the Study ..................................................................................10

1.4 Objectives of the Study ..............................................................................11

1.5 Research Questions ....................................................................................11

1.6 Significance of the Study ...........................................................................12

1.7 Limitations of the Study.............................................................................13

1.8 Delimitations of the Study .........................................................................13

1.9 Basic Assumptions of the Study ................................................................15

v
1.10 Definition of Significant Terms ...............................................................15

1.11 Organization of the study .........................................................................16

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................18

2.2 Concept of Leadership Styles ....................................................................18

2.3 School Leadership ......................................................................................20

2.4 Principals‘ Coaching Leadership Style and Job Satisfaction .....................23

2.5 Principals‘ Affiliative Leadership Style and Job Satisfaction ...................25

2.6 Principals‘ Pacesetting Leadership Style and Job Satisfaction ..................26

2.7 Principals‘ Participative Leadership Style and Job Satisfaction ................28

2.8 Summary of Literature Review ..................................................................31

2.9 Theoretical Framework ..............................................................................33

2.10 Conceptual Framework ............................................................................34

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................38

3.2 Research Design.........................................................................................38

3.3 Target Population .......................................................................................38

3.4 Sample Size and Sampling Procedures ......................................................39

vi
 3.4.1 Sample Size .....................................................................................39

3.4.2 Sampling Procedure .........................................................................39

3.5 Research Instruments .................................................................................40

3.6 Pilot Study..................................................................................................41

3.7 Validity of Instruments ..............................................................................41

3.8 Reliability of Instruments ..........................................................................42

3.9 Data Collection Procedure .........................................................................43

3.10 Data Analysis Techniques........................................................................43

3.11 Ethical Considerations .............................................................................44

CHAPTER FOUR

DATA ANALYSIS, PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION OF

FINDINGS

4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................46

4.2 Response Rate and Demographic Information .........................................46

4.3 Reliability Analysis ....................................................................................51

4.4 Coaching Leadership Style and Teachers‘ Job Satisfaction ......................52

4.5 Affiliative Leadership Style and Teachers‘ Job Satisfaction .....................62

4.6 Participative Leadership Style and Teachers‘ Job Satisfaction .................71

4.7 Pacesetting Leadership Style and Teachers‘ Job Satisfaction ...................80

4.8 Teachers‘ Job Satisfaction .........................................................................89

vii
 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................99

5.2 Summary of the Findings ...........................................................................99

5.3 Conclusions ..............................................................................................101

5.4 Recommendations ....................................................................................102

5.5 Recommendation for Further Research ...................................................105

REFERENCES ..............................................................................................106

viii
APPENDICES

Appendix I: Letter of introduction .................................................................112

Appendix II: Questionnaire for Teachers and Principals ..............................113

Appendix III: Interview Schedule For Sub-County Education Officers (SCDE,

SCQASO, SCTSC, CSO). .............................................................................120

Appendix IV: NACOSTI Research Permit ....................................................122

Appendix V: Regional Director Of Education Research Authorization ........123

Appendix VI: Sub County Director Of Education Research Authorization ..124

Appendix VII: County Commissioner Research Authorization ...................125

ix
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 3. 1: Sample size ..................................................................................... 40

Table 4. 1: Response Rate ................................................................................. 46

Table 4. 2: Response Gender ............................................................................ 47

Table 4. 3: Respondents‘ Age Bracket ............................................................. 48

Table 4. 4: Respondents‘ Highest Academic Qualification .............................. 49

Table 4. 5: Responsibility Held in School ........................................................ 49

Table 4. 6: Number of Years Involved in the Present School .......................... 50

Table 4. 7: Reliability Statistics ........................................................................ 51

Table 4. 8: Principal‘s Leadership Behavior with Statements Related to

Coaching Leadership Style. .............................................................................. 52

Table 4. 9: Correlation Matrix for Coaching Leadership Style and Teachers‘

Job Satisfaction ................................................................................................. 55

Table 4. 10: Model Summary for Coaching Leadership Style and Teachers‘

Job Satisfaction ................................................................................................. 56

Table 4. 11: ANOVAa for Coaching Leadership Style and Teachers‘ Job

Satisfaction ........................................................................................................ 56

Table 4. 12: Regression Coefficientsa for Coaching Leadership and Teachers‘

Job Satisfaction ................................................................................................. 57

Table 4. 13: Principal‘s Leadership Behavior with Statements Related to

Affiliative Leadership Style .............................................................................. 62

Table 4. 14: Correlation Matrix for the Affiliative Leadership Style and

Teachers‘ Job Satisfaction ................................................................................ 66

x
Table 4. 15: Model Summary for the Affiliative Leadership Style and

Teachers‘ Job Satisfaction ................................................................................ 67

Table 4. 16: ANOVAa for the Affiliative Leadership Style and Teachers‘ Job

Satisfaction ........................................................................................................ 68

Table 4. 17: Regression Coefficientsa for the Affiliative Leadership Style and

Teachers‘ Job Satisfaction ................................................................................ 69

Table 4. 18: Principal‘s Leadership Behavior and Participative Leadership

Style .................................................................................................................. 71

Table 4. 19: Correlation Matrix for the Participative Leadership Style and

Teachers‘ Job Satisfaction ................................................................................ 75

Table 4. 20: Model Summary for the Participative Leadership Style and

Teachers‘ Job Satisfaction ................................................................................ 76

Table 4. 21: ANOVAa for the Participative Leadership Style and Teachers‘

Job Satisfaction ................................................................................................. 77

Table 4. 22: Regression Coefficientsa for the Participative Leadership Style

and Teachers‘ Job Satisfaction.......................................................................... 78

Table 4. 23: Principal‘s Leadership Behavior with Statements Related to

Pacesetting Leadership Style ............................................................................ 80

Table 4. 24: Correlation Matrix for the Pacesetting Leadership Style and

Teachers‘ Job Satisfaction ................................................................................ 84

Table 4. 25: Model Summary for the Pacesetting Leadership Style and

Teachers‘ Job Satisfaction ................................................................................ 85

Table 4. 27: Regression Coefficientsa for the Pacesetting Leadership Style and

Teachers‘ Job Satisfaction ................................................................................ 87

xi
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2. 1: Conceptual Framework ................................................................. 35

xii
 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

BOM Board of Management

CSO Curriculum Support Officer

DEO District Education Officer

KEMI Kenya Education Management Institute.

KCSE Kenya Certificate of Secondary Education

MOE Ministry of Education

QASO Quality Assurance and Standards Officers

SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

SCDE Sub-County Director of Education

STEM Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics

TSC Teachers Service Commission

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

WDR World Development Report

xiii
 ABSTRACT

The leadership styles of principals are crucial since they have the potential to
significantly impact teacher job satisfaction and the overall functioning of a school on
a daily basis. Although the Ministry of Education, through the TSC, has been hiring
skilled and experienced individuals as principals for public secondary schools, reports
of teacher job unhappiness have nonetheless surfaced. This study aimed to examine
the impact of principals' leadership styles on teachers' job satisfaction in public
secondary schools located in Embakasi Sub-County, Nairobi. The study aimed to
assess the impact of different leadership styles employed by principals on teachers'
job satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County. Specifically,
the study focused on the coaching, affiliative, participative, and pacesetting
leadership styles. The study utilized the Two Factor Theory formulated by Frederick
Herzberg. The study employed a descriptive survey design. The research focused on
7 principals, 210 teachers, and 14 education officers affiliated with the Embakasi Sub
County Office. The researchers used purposive sampling to select the Education
Officers, while they used a simple random sample technique to select the Teachers
and Principals. Data was collected through the use of questionnaires administered to
teachers and principals, as well as an interview guide for the Education Officer. The
quantitative data obtained from the objectives was analyzed using SPSS software,
which produced frequencies and percentages that are valuable for presenting the
findings. Tables were utilized to display the findings in this instance. The qualitative
data obtained from the objectives was classified based on themes and, whenever
feasible, provided through frequency tables and explanations within the text. When
teaching leadership, the principle continually assists others in achieving their
objectives. They periodically grant teachers uninterrupted autonomy, focusing the
comprehension of the staff's emotions, while adopting an affiliative approach.
Participative leadership involves the principal periodically engaging in transparent
communication and actively promoting introverted instructors to express their ideas.
The study highlights that in terms of pace-setting, the principle occasionally pressures
instructors to achieve certain goals, thereby maximizing the potential of each
individual teacher. The study found that coaching leadership style had the strongest
positive impact on teachers' job satisfaction (β=0.814, p=0.002<0.05), followed by
affiliative leadership style (β=0.843, p=0.005<0.05), and then pace-setting leadership
style (β=0.801, p=0.001<0.05). Participative leadership style had the least influence
on teachers' job satisfaction (β=0.700, p=0.004<0.05) in public secondary schools in
Embakasi Sub-County. The study's findings offer practical advantages to leaders and
organizations by providing insights into the favorable influence of school leaders'
coaching abilities on employees. Consequently, it is imperative for school leaders to
cultivate their coaching abilities. Principals should cultivate an environment
characterized by inclusivity and support, wherein teachers experience a sense of
belonging and are able to openly articulate their concerns. Promoting open and honest
communication is essential, which may be achieved through regular feedback
sessions and providing ways for instructors to express their ideas. The study indicates
that further research should be conducted in various counties and private schools with
diverse backgrounds to determine whether the impact of principals' leadership styles
on teacher job satisfaction remains consistent.

xiv
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the Study

Education is usually regarded as the most valuable asset that a community can

provide to a child. The primary issue examined in this paper centers on the

pivotal function of education in influencing the future of individuals and

civilizations. Recognized as a potent instrument for eliminating poverty and

promoting collective prosperity by the World Development Report (WDR,

2018), the effectiveness of education is greatly dependent on proficient

leadership within educational institutions. Principals, as crucial individuals in

school administration, have a central role in molding the educational

atmosphere and impacting teacher conduct. According to Fisher (as stated in

FM Wachira et al., 2017), the success of schools is directly linked to the

quality of leadership. The Teachers Service Commission (TSC) in Kenya is

responsible for selecting and assigning school administrators. According to the

TSC Act of 2012, the school principal is designated as the primary educator

and financial officer, emphasizing their crucial role in overseeing day-to-day

operations and educational planning.

John Gardner (2016) defines leadership as the act of persuading a group, either

by an individual or a leadership team, to pursue objectives that are either held

alone by the leader or shared by the leader and their followers. Leadership is

widely recognized as a crucial element that significantly impacts the success

and greatness of schools (Urick, 2016). Leadership style pertains to the

specific manner in which a leader behaves in order to inspire and motivate

1
subordinates towards accomplishing the organization's goals. The use of

leadership style in a school refers to the systematic manner in which a school

administrator exerts influence on a teacher or a group of teachers in order to

achieve educational objectives (Omolayo, 2015).

Coaching leadership is a method that focuses on enhancing the abilities and

potential of team members. Leaders that take this approach serve as mentors,

providing constructive criticism and assisting individuals in improving their

performance. The coaching leadership style has been strongly linked to

increased job satisfaction among employees. An important factor that

demonstrates this favorable relationship is the focus on ongoing education and

growth (Karlsen & Berg, 2020). This approach emphasizes the need of

ongoing learning, promoting individual and career development, which in turn

is associated with increased job satisfaction. Leaders that provide coaching

prioritize the independence and belief in one's own abilities of their team,

enabling them to assume responsibility for their tasks and make choices,

resulting in heightened contentment and a feeling of accomplishment (Berg,

2016). Pellitteri (2021) states that issues arise when there is a need for short-

term directed objectives that do not align with the longer-term professional

growth process in the use of this leadership style. Employees may feel

frustrated when their personal growth and development are not given priority.

Although affiliative leadership has favorable results, it sometimes encounters

difficulties. Leaders may place a higher importance on maintaining harmony

rather than taking the required steps to address and fix problems, which could

2
potentially impede progress in improving performance (Jarosz, 2021).

Affiliative leadership, characterized by its supportive attitude, has the potential

to create a reliance on the team, which might hinder individual development

and initiative (Chung & Van der Horst, 2020). Achieving a harmonious

equilibrium between promoting positivity and dealing with performance issues

presents a delicate problem that demands subtle management techniques (Dai,

2019). Affiliative leadership, which is distinguished by the establishment of

robust interpersonal connections, seeks to foster a favorable work atmosphere.

By placing importance on inclusivity and equality, affiliative leaders cultivate

trust and eradicate perceptions of hierarchy, so promoting justice and equity,

which ultimately enhances job satisfaction (Bashir & Khalil, 2017; Gambier &

Eclapier, 2023). Nevertheless, difficulties arise when the pursuit of harmony

obstructs essential measures for improvement, which may ultimately result in

a reliance on the team (Chung & Van der Horst, 2020). Affiliative leaders

must prioritize the equilibrium between innovation and performance to ensure

success (Bashir & Khalil, 2017). Furthermore, the challenges linked to

affiliative leadership arise when a group need direction, constructive feedback,

and the attainment of objectives. While it is important to prioritize

interpersonal relationships and pleasant interactions, leaders who only

concentrate on these aspects may encounter difficulties in accomplishing their

goals. This can result in a perception of overall organizational ineffectiveness

and unhappiness when objectives are not achieved. (Pellitteri, 2021).

Participative leadership entails the active engagement of the team in the

decision-making process, which can pose obstacles in terms of time

3
commitment and the possibility for difficulty in reaching a consensus (Lo &

Stark, 2021). Achieving a harmonious equilibrium between inclusivity and

efficiency is an ongoing and complex task, necessitating meticulous

examination of the decision-making dynamics within the team (Amedome,

2018). This leadership style enhances role clarity by ensuring team members

have a clear understanding of their tasks, which promotes a peaceful work

atmosphere (Naqshbandi & Tabche, 2018). Facilitating worker empowerment

through collaborative decision-making improves workplace happiness, as it

makes employees feel appreciated and important (Nazim & Mahmood, 2018).

An inherent limitation of this technique is its capacity to elicit discontentment

when the attainment of goals is excessively postponed or impeded by a dearth

of consensus, especially in cases where the educational establishment

necessitates swift and deliberate measures. (Pellitteri, 2021).

Pacesetting leadership, characterized by stringent criteria and an emphasis on

expeditious outcomes, has the potential to enhance productivity but may also

engender high-stress work situations. To prevent burnout and frustration

among team members, it is essential to strike a balance between expectations

and providing support and guidance (Anderson & Sun, 2017). The leadership

style in question could have an adverse effect on job satisfaction as it entails

the anticipation of immediate outcomes, which may result in stress and a

decline in overall well-being (Munir, 2016). In a pace-setting workplace, team

members who rely on additional support may experience reduced pleasure due

to the necessity of self-motivation (Muga, 2019).

4
The problem of teacher work satisfaction is complex and influenced by

multiple aspects, with good leadership playing a prominent role. Studies

indicate that the leadership approach employed by principals can significantly

influence the overall achievements of a school, as they mold, convey, and

maintain the school's objectives (Hallinger and Heck, 1998, as quoted in

Ertem, 2021). Teacher job satisfaction, an essential element of the educational

setting, is influenced by other elements beyond leadership styles. These factors

include a sense of efficacy, the perceived prestige and esteem linked to

teaching, relationships with colleagues, and working conditions. Crucially, job

satisfaction is closely linked to teachers' perceptions of their expectations and

actual experiences in the teaching profession. To effectively address teacher

job satisfaction, it is necessary to have a thorough comprehension of the

interrelated elements involved in order to establish a helpful and gratifying

work environment in the field of education. Goleman (2000) emphasizes that

educational leaders typically possess strong leadership styles that are

influenced by their personalities and experiences. Principals, while learning

about various leadership styles, sometimes find themselves relying on default

types, which research shows can have both positive and negative outcomes.

The job satisfaction of teachers is strongly linked to their inclination to engage

in capacity-building initiatives and adopt new technology when they are

satisfied. In contrast, a lack of job satisfaction results in adverse consequences

such as frequent absences, hostile behavior, intents to leave the job, less

dedication, and premature retirement, which adversely affect the stability of

the teaching workforce in the field (Young, 2018).

5
Research conducted by Sims (2018) on teacher data from the Teaching and

Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2013, demonstrates a clear and

positive relationship between student discipline, principals' collaboration, and

teacher job satisfaction across different countries. Various demographic

characteristics, such as gender, age, marital status, and education level, have

been found to have distinct effects on teachers' job satisfaction in studies

conducted in Malaysia, Ethiopia, and Pakistan (Ghavifekr et al., 2016;

Getahun et al., 2016; Nazim, 2018).

Job satisfaction is influenced by various organizational elements, such as

leadership styles, pay, workplace flexibility, job autonomy, job security, and

overall leadership (Fung et al., 2018). Establishing a favorable school

atmosphere, instigated by the principal's guidance, is essential for the well-

being of both students and staff. Retaining satisfied teachers is crucial,

particularly in STEM subjects, where hiring and keeping skilled teachers is

challenging (World Bank, 2006). Based on Sims' (2018) research, educators

who specialize in STEM fields, which include science, technology,

engineering, and mathematics, were less likely to transfer schools in the global

setting. Nevertheless, there was no apparent association found between the

STEM majors of teachers and their levels of job satisfaction.

The results of a study conducted by Daily (2018) in the United States indicate

that 25% of teachers quit their professions before completing three years of

service owing to discontent, and almost 40% depart before completing five

years in the profession. If the principal does not provide strong support, the

6
teaching workload can become excessively burdensome and result in

unhappiness. An excessive number of lessons might adversely affect the

mental and physical well-being of the teacher. According to the 2017 Educator

Quality of Work Life Survey conducted by the American Federation of

Teachers in the USA, 61% of teachers reported that their work were frequently

or consistently stressful. As a consequence of that stress, 58% of the

participants reported experiencing subpar mental health.

A study conducted in Ibadan, Nigeria examined the dominant leadership styles

employed by principals in public secondary schools. The findings revealed

that the participative leadership style was the most common, accounting for

29.3% of the cases. Coaching leadership style was rated at 9.7%, while pace-

setting leadership style was reported at 6.9%.(Bakare and Oredein, 2021). This

aligns with a study conducted in Punjab, Pakistan by Ahmad and Dilshad

(2016), which discovered that democratic (participative) leadership styles are

widely favored and most effective in the realm of education. This aligns with a

study conducted in senior secondary schools in Ondo State, Nigeria, aimed at

determining the leadership style of principals and its impact on teachers' levels

of job satisfaction. The study revealed that the democratic leadership style is

the most frequently employed in that region, and the level of job satisfaction

among teachers is moderate. Adeyemi (quoted in FM Wachira et al.,2017).

Nevertheless, Okoji (2016) argued in his research that a combination of

leadership styles would significantly enhance the job performance and

productivity of Nigerian teachers in selected rural community schools in Ondo

State, Nigeria. According to Okafor (as cited in Eboka, 2016), the success or

7
failure of secondary school administration or other institutions in Nigeria is

greatly influenced by the leaders' impact on their subordinates.

A survey carried out by Emoja (2016) at secondary schools in Kakamega

Central District, Kenya, found that a significant proportion of teachers (47%)

expressed dissatisfaction and expressed strong intentions to leave their current

positions if presented with an alternative work opportunity. Merely 31%

expressed no want to evacuate. As reported by Oyaro (as stated in Emoja,

2016), Kenyan schools experienced a loss of 600 instructors in the first half of

2008 due to the attraction of higher-paying employment opportunities.

According to Onwonga (as cited in Emoja, 2016), around 6000 individuals

leave the teaching profession every year. Within the specific setting of

Embakasi Sub-County in Kenya, there is a notable level of unhappiness

among teachers, with a majority indicating a strong inclination to leave their

current positions. The Teaching Service Commission (TSC) is experiencing a

high annual attrition rate in the teaching profession as a result of teacher

unhappiness, which is causing them to leave for other professions (Emoja,

2016). The results emphasize the importance of promptly addressing teacher

work satisfaction, which is influenced by the leadership styles of principals.

1.2 Statement of the Problem

The principal, in their capacity as the school's leader, plays a crucial role in

providing guidance to both the institution and its broader community. The

influence of school leaders on teacher behavior has been thoroughly examined

by a range of stakeholders and scholars. The leadership styles utilized by

8
principals are crucial, as they have a significant impact on both teacher job

satisfaction and the daily functioning of the school. The discourse surrounding

the utilization of suitable leadership styles becomes important since it impacts

almost every aspect inside a school, potentially dictating the levels of job

contentment among instructors. Although the Ministry of Education, with the

assistance of the TSC, has been hiring competent and experienced individuals

as principals for different public secondary schools, there are ongoing

allegations of teacher discontentment, leading to below-average performance

and high rates of teacher turnover.

Even in the same school, where teachers experience identical circumstances

regarding wage scales, workloads, recognition, incentives, and rules and

regulations, there is variation in levels of satisfaction. Varying individual

perspectives arise even in seemingly equal circumstances, necessitating a

deeper examination of school management and operations. Significantly,

although the government has made attempts to provide standardized

workshops and seminars for principals and teachers from different schools

across the country, there has not been an equal attainment of job satisfaction.

This disparity highlights the necessity of investigating the ways in which these

centralized treatments impact different levels of satisfaction and

comprehending the fundamental processes that determine teacher happiness.

The adoption of multiple leadership styles becomes vital in attaining

objectives and influencing teacher attitudes due to the multifaceted tasks of

principals, which include assessing learner progress, supervising teachers, and

9
reviewing curriculum implementation. In order to guarantee increased levels

of job satisfaction among instructors, it is crucial that principals, in addition to

being well-informed and skilled, hold the necessary qualifications for their

positions. Equally crucial is the utilization of leadership abilities with the goal

of enhancing job happiness, since the influence of leadership styles on teacher

attitudes can have both favorable and unfavorable effects.

Although comparative research has extensively examined the leadership styles

of principals in various countries and their impact on teacher efficacy and

student academic achievement, there has been a notable neglect of the problem

of teachers' job happiness (Akiba & Liang, 2017). Although there has been

significant focus on the influence of principals' conduct, administrative skills,

and work environment on leadership roles, there is a noticeable lack of

scholarly research on the specific leadership styles—coaching, affiliative, and

pace-setting—exhibited by school principals in Public Secondary Schools in

Nairobi County. Thus, this study seeks to fill this void by examining the

impact of principals' leadership styles on teacher work satisfaction in

Embakasi Sub-county, Nairobi.

1.3 Purpose of the Study

This study aimed to examine the impact of principals' leadership styles on

teachers' job satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-

County, Nairobi.

10
1.4 Objectives of the Study

The study was guided by the following objectives:

i. Establish the extent to which coaching leadership style employed by

the principal influence teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary

schools in Embakasi Sub-County.

ii. Determine how affiliative leadership style employed by the principal

influences teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools in

Embakasi Sub-County.

iii. Establish the extent to which participative leadership style employed

by the principal influence teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary

schools in Embakasi Sub-County.

iv. Determine how pacesetting leadership style employed by the principal

influences teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools in

Embakasi Sub-County.

1.5 Research Questions

The study was guided by the following research questions:

i. To what extent does coaching leadership style employed by the

principal influence teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary

schools in Embakasi Sub-County?

ii. To what extent does affiliative leadership style employ by the principal

influence teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools in

Embakasi Sub-County?

11
 iii. To what extent does participative leadership style employed by the

principal influence teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary

schools in Embakasi Sub-County?

iv. To what extent does pacesetting leadership style employed by the

principal influence teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary

schools in Embakasi Sub-County?

1.6 Significance of the Study

This study aimed to investigate the often overlooked correlation between the

leadership style of administrators and the level of job satisfaction among

teachers. The semi-autonomous government agencies within the Ministry of

Education, such as the Teachers Service Commission (TSC), are expected to

gain valuable insights from this research. Specifically, the research findings

will provide recommendations on the most suitable leadership styles for

principals in schools. The Kenya Education Management Institute (KEMI)

should take into account the findings while creating content for teacher

management trainings.

Academic professionals may find the study results valuable for expanding the

existing information on leadership styles that are relevant and their influence

on teacher job satisfaction. This study could provide valuable insights for

principals and other subordinate administrators, such as deputy principals and

department heads. It would enhance their comprehension of the effectiveness

of different leadership styles and their impact on teachers, as well as identify

areas that require improvement. The findings may provide guidance to

12
educational field officers, such as Quality Assurance and Standards Officers

(QASOs), in advising on teacher management strategies.

1.7 Limitations of the Study

Given that most of the schools in the studied area are situated in low-income

areas or informal settlements, the research findings were cautiously

extrapolated to other schools in the sub-county. The survey was done mostly

at schools at the county and sub-county level, rather than at the national or

extra-county level. Therefore, it would be challenging to generalize the

findings to a different locality that includes schools at all levels. Although the

data collection instruments were intended to ensure both validity and

reliability, this was not fully achieved due to the fact that the principals, whose

leadership styles were being examined, were just a portion of the respondents.

As a result, the information provided by these principals may have been

biased. In order to address these concerns, the researcher provided reassurance

to the participants on the rigorous maintenance of anonymity and the ethical

conduct of the questioning process.

1.8 Delimitations of the Study

The research was carried out at Embakasi Sub County, located in Nairobi

County, inside the Republic of Kenya. The sub county possessed schools that

exhibited distinct variations in numerous aspects. Some schools were

coeducational, while others were single-sex for either boys or girls.

Additionally, some schools offered both day and boarding options. The study

focused exclusively on teaching staff members who hold permanent and

13
pensionable positions, including those employed by the Board of Management

(BOM) and those under government contractual terms. Support staff were

excluded from the research, as their satisfaction factors may differ from those

of teaching staff. These cadres exhibited variations in terms of compensation,

enjoyed rights, perception by the school's leadership, job stability, and other

factors. By doing research specifically targeting teaching personnel who are

on permanent and pensionable contracts, the researcher is more likely to

obtain comprehensive information and receive constructive comments. This is

because these individuals possess a well-informed viewpoint on the research

process.

Additionally, the study was limited to public schools due to potential

disparities in leadership styles and institutional atmosphere compared to

private schools. Private schools were excluded from this study due to their

scarcity, and if any were present, they were primarily located in informal

settlements. The teachers employed by these private institutions may not be

subject to the same issues that impact teacher job satisfaction as those at

public secondary schools. By focusing exclusively on public secondary

schools, the researcher increased the likelihood of obtaining more dependable

data. This approach allowed for the examination of institutions with similar

attributes, and public secondary schools, being government-owned, were

expected to be more open to participating in the research.

14
1.9 Basic Assumptions of the Study

The survey was done assuming that all respondents possessed a

comprehensive comprehension of the tasks, responsibilities, and leadership

approaches of a principal. In addition, the researcher used the assumption that

all respondents were cooperative. The study was done under the assumption

that the respondents provided unbiased information regarding the leadership

styles of the principals.

1.10 Definition of Significant Terms

The following are the significant terms that were used in the study:

Coaching leadership: this is a leadership type where the leader focuses on

identifying strengths and weaknesses of individuals with the aim of promoting

long term professional growth and development.

Affiliative leadership: refers to the leadership type in which the leader

encourages members of the organization to build positive relationships with

one another hence increases team morale, limited conflicts and trust.

Participative leadership: refers to the leadership type where the leader sought

to involve the employees of the organization, solicit their ideas and opinions

and take their suggestions into serious consideration before settling on a

decision.

Pacesetting leadership: is a leadership style in which a leader holds their

subordinates accountable for meeting expectations with an emphasis on

achievement and efficiency. Here leaders may also assign themselves work to

compensate for lapses in their team‘s performance.

15
Leadership: is a process of encouraging and helping others to work

enthusiastically towards objectives

Leadership style: is a classification of how one behaves when leading a

group.

Job satisfaction: is an individual‘s positive measurable judgment on his or

her working conditions and its aspects.

Job dissatisfaction: refers to a feeling of discontentment in a given job.

Principal: refers to the leader of the secondary school who is in charge of the

day today running of the school.

Subordinates: refers to the teachers working under the school principal.

1.11 Organization of the study

This study was organized into five chapters. Chapter one which was the

introduction of the study included background to the study, statement of the

problem, purpose of the study, research objectives, research questions,

significance of the study, limitations and delimitations of the study, basic

assumptions, definition of significant terms. Chapter two entailed review of

related literature in the concept of leadership and leadership styles like

coaching, affiliative, participative and pacesetting. Reference was made to

these leadership styles on the teachers‘ level of job satisfaction. Chapter three

described the methodology used in research. This included research design,

target population, sampling technique, sample size, research instrument,

validity and reliability, data collection procedure and data analysis techniques

and ethical considerations. Chapter four contained information on data

16
analysis, interpretation and discussed research findings. Being the last, chapter

five concentrated on the summary of research findings, conclusion, solutions,

recommendations and suggestions for further research.

17
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter encompasses a literature review that will be subdivided into

seven distinct subheadings. The subheadings encompassed the topics of

leadership styles, specifically school leadership styles, coaching leadership

style and its impact on job satisfaction, affiliative leadership style and its

impact on job satisfaction, participative leadership style and its impact on job

satisfaction, pacesetting leadership style and its impact on job satisfaction.

Additionally, the subheadings included a summary of the literature review, the

theoretical framework, and the conceptual framework.

2.2 Concept of Leadership Styles

Leadership is a complex concept that encompasses various dimensions,

making it difficult to provide a single, all-encompassing definition.

Alonderiene and Majauskaite (2016) define leadership as a strategic approach

to influencing individuals in order to achieve specified objectives or outcomes.

Prior research has suggested that leaders can play a role in cultivating,

molding, and maintaining a desired corporate culture, which in turn can

impact innovative work behavior by fostering new shared values (Naqshbandi

& Tabche, 2018).

Directive leadership and unpleasant leadership styles have been found to

hinder innovation. This phenomena arises due to the presence of leadership

styles that are marked by a strong emphasis on control, compliance, and

18
limited flexibility, resulting in reduced levels of innovation and adaptability

among employees (Naqshbandi & Tabche, 2018). A study conducted in

Pakistan by Nazim (2018) indicates that managers have a significant impact

on the working behavior of subordinates and play a crucial role in guiding

them towards achieving organizational objectives. According to Karabina

(2016), leadership style plays a crucial role in influencing the job happiness of

teachers. In the past, studies concentrated on three distinct leadership styles:

authoritarian, democratic, and laissez-faire. Nevertheless, contemporary

businesses have encountered obstacles that necessitate enhanced leadership

quality, resulting in the emergence of novel leadership models. Nazim and

Mahmood (2018) assert that the supervisor's behavior has the potential to

impact job satisfaction in either a favorable or negative manner. They assert

that this conduct is manifested either through spoken or non-spoken means.

Childress (2009, as referenced by Munir, 2016) found that the performance of

a leader in accomplishing organizational goals is heavily influenced by the

way they establish and nurture relationships. In recent years, several

leadership theories and models have been regarded as indicators of a leader's

effectiveness. Transformational and transactional leadership practices are

highly effective in fostering favorable impressions among employees, such as

job satisfaction and motivation. Callaghan (quoted in Munir, 2016).

Goleman (2017) outlines six distinct leadership styles in the situational

leadership theory: coaching, affiliative, participative, pacesetting,

authoritative, and visionary. Four styles were included in this study and their

19
definitions are as follows: Coaching is a leadership style focused on enhancing

an individual's personal growth and job-related abilities. Affiliative leadership,

on the other hand, is the use of praise to foster a sense of belonging among

employees. The participative leadership style involves the leader actively

involving employees in the decision-making process, while the pacesetting

leadership style entails the leader setting exceptionally high expectations for

employees and leading by personal example.

2.3 School Leadership

Maxwell (2016), an esteemed expert in the field of leadership, defines

leadership as the deliberate exertion of influence, without any further

elements. In an educational institution, leadership is seen as the principal's

capacity to exert influence on the instructors' actions in order to achieve

specific objectives and goals of the school. According to Welgemood (as

referenced by Muga, 2019), school leadership can be defined as the principal's

capacity to motivate teachers to engage in activities that they would not

typically undertake without the guidance of a leader. The TSC Career

Progression Guidelines for Teachers (2017) define the principle as the highest-

ranking executive of the institution. Mbwiria, as referenced by Muga (2019),

highlighted four concrete characteristics of teacher leadership. These

dimensions include the implementation of school improvement concepts in

individual classrooms and the participation of all teachers in the school's

transformation process. They collaborate with their colleagues in order to

achieve a shared objective. Furthermore, teachers play a mediating role by

offering the necessary skills and information to facilitate school reform.

20
Lastly, but as important, teacher leadership entails fostering harmonious

relationships with colleagues to benefit the students. Sims (2018) have

identified school leadership, career advancement prospects, and student

discipline as significant factors associated with teacher job satisfaction, based

on the TALIS 2013 data for England.

Lindblom (2018) defines educational leadership as the provision of extensive

support to both students and teachers, with a specific focus on equipping

teachers with the necessary resources and conducive environments to

efficiently fulfill their professional duties. Gaining knowledge, refining and

developing skills, and adopting appropriate methodologies all contribute to

effective leadership. Nwakpa (2017) emphasized that the leadership style of

the principal plays a crucial role in achieving effective management and

teacher satisfaction. The World Bank (2015) confirmed this perspective,

identifying the principal's leadership style as one of the primary determinants

influencing teacher job satisfaction. In a separate research, educators consider

the leadership style of their principal to be a primary factor in assessing their

degree of job [Link] citation is from Ch et al. (2017). Leaders

typically exhibit a unique leadership approach as they adeptly motivate and

inspire their followers. The term "leadership style" refers to the specific

approach that a leader takes in leading and interacting with their subordinates

(Northouse, 2021). This statement concerns the way in which a leader's

behaviors, attitudes, and actions affect and direct others who are under their

influence. The organizational or school culture can also impact the leadership

style of the principal. For example, if the employees are well-trained,

21
educated, and motivated, it is likely that the principle will adopt a liberal

leadership [Link] and Oredein (2021)

Financial security might be another factor that affects a leader's leadership

style. Employers who provide generous compensation to their employees from

the beginning effectively cultivate employee motivation. A leader who is

highly motivated by adequate compensation, leading to financial stability, will

exhibit a willingness to embrace and execute effective leadership approaches

to guide the firm towards success. This observation indicates that leaders who

are not experiencing financial pressure are more inclined to be motivated to

put out their utmost effort in order to achieve the aims and objectives of the

firm. They utilize strategies that align with their preferred style of leadership

(Bakare & Oredein, 2021). Conversely, a leader who experiences financial

insecurity may not possess the necessary psychological readiness to

effectively achieve educational goals and objectives. This issue arises from an

inherent burden and pressure that hinders the leader's cognitive abilities, hence

restricting their capacity to effectively carry out leadership, irrespective of the

selected leadership style. A considerable proportion of public school

administrators in Nigeria have been consistently missing from their designated

positions, as they prioritize alternate means of financial stability over fulfilling

their duties.

The function of leadership is crucial in determining the performance of

teachers (Andriani et al., 2018). An effective leader guides the team with

seamless efficiency. Hence, the leadership of a principle consistently has a

22
favorable impact on their subordinates. An effective school principal utilizes

teachers strategically to achieve superior student outcomes through strong

leadership abilities. In addition to the principal's leadership, the work

environment also plays a vital influence in the success of teachers. The studies

clearly demonstrate that the work environment has a substantial impact on the

performance of teachers (Kuncoro & Dardiri, 2017). According to Jonyo and

Jonyo (2017), certain instructors who choose to leave their jobs cite an

unpleasant and dissatisfying work environment caused by their superiors as

the reason for their departure.

2.4 Principals’ Coaching Leadership Style and Job Satisfaction

The coaching leadership style is based on the principles of optimism, self-

efficacy, positive emotions, and learning. The primary aim of coaching is to

maximize the potential of individuals, with the purpose of attaining both

personal and organizational objectives (Karlsen & Berg, 2020). According to

Dai (2019), the coaching leadership style fosters both innovative behavior and

job motivation among employees. The coaching leadership style, as discussed

in Berg's (2016) study, is seen as a strategic and enduring method to fostering

employee growth and fostering strong and consistent interactions within a

group. Moreover, the implementation of a coaching method has a favorable

impact on fostering a coaching culture, hence promoting employee well-being

and satisfaction (Jarosz, 2021).

The coaching leadership style is encompassed under several leadership

behavior approaches, including transformational, transactional, laissez-faire,

23
and servant leadership. These leadership behaviors have included several

coaching ways to assist people in advancing their careers, acquiring new

skills, changing negative attitudes towards work, and adopting more effective

strategies for managing difficult work [Link] citation is from Ismail et al.

(2023). Based on the current scholarly research, coaching leadership functions

within a dyadic relationship framework where leaders utilize two distinct

styles: guidance, which entails learning through observation, and facilitation,

which involves learning through practical application. Leaders proficient in

continuously adopting these tactics can significantly enhance staff

performance by bolstering their confidence in performing job obligations and

raising job satisfaction (Hui et al., 2023).

Ismail et al. (2023) suggests that previous research on various job settings

supports the notion that employees' confidence in their abilities to perform

duties serves as a clear sign of the implementation of coaching leadership

style. Jonyo & Jonyo (2017) suggest that fostering leadership skills through

coaching can facilitate succession planning and provide career opportunities

for teachers, hence enhancing retention rates.

Kruse (2019) posits that the coaching leadership style perceives individuals

and their talents as entities that necessitate nurturing and growth.

Consequently, leaders who practice coaching aim to discover the inherent

qualities and undiscovered capabilities of individuals. People have the belief

that every individual possesses valuable contributions and are willing to make

adjustments for others. In addition, they serve as mentors and facilitators,

24
assisting individuals in uncovering and establishing a connection with their

inherent talents, enabling them to achieve their maximum capabilities. The

coach's leadership style is often regarded as highly beneficial for both

managers and employees, owing to its myriad perks and advantages. Despite

being commonly neglected because to its greater time investment in

comparison to other styles of leadership. If any organization implements it, it

showcases enduring sustainability.

2.5 Principals’ Affiliative Leadership Style and Job Satisfaction

Goleman (2000) is the primary authority responsible for developing numerous

leadership styles, including the affiliative style (Bashir & Khalil, 2017). His

insights have influenced corporations and educational procedures,

emphasizing that the guiding principle of "people come first" is what

motivates affiliative leaders. According to him, an affiliative leader is

someone who has faith in others and enhances their abilities based on the

principle that people are the top priority. He asserts that implementing this

leadership approach can effectively enhance morale, particularly when utilized

by the principal in a school amongst challenging circumstances where

personnel may be encountering diminished job contentment.

Henderson (2015) argues that principals employing this approach not only

influence the school environment but also have an effect on the community

and other individuals or groups with a vested interest in the school. However,

this strategy can have a detrimental effect on schools since it emphasizes

praise, perhaps resulting in mediocrity and unaddressed underperformance

25
(Goleman, 2000). He asserts that if the principal adopts this leadership style,

they may prioritize maintaining positive relationships above providing

constructive comments. Teachers may also experience uncertainty over how to

improve due to a lack of feedback. Given its singular emphasis on

commendation, it is advisable not to rely solely on this approach, as it may

lead staff to believe that the leader endorses mediocrity and tolerates

substandard performance. This approach is suitable when the leader is focused

on fostering team cohesion, enhancing employee motivation, striving for

enhanced communication, and restoring trust among those who have been

wronged (Goleman, 2000). As per Kruse (2019), successful school leadership

necessitates embracing love as a guiding principle. Scientific studies and

personal experience indicate that fear-based leadership, although commonly

observed and seemingly capable of motivating people, ultimately hampers

creativity and hinders effective communication. Fear is a contributing

component to the emergence of stress and the phenomenon of work attrition.

2.6 Principals’ Pacesetting Leadership Style and Job Satisfaction

This leadership style involves the leader establishing elevated standards for the

institution they represent (Goleman, 2000). According to him, a leader of this

kind becomes fixated on improving and accelerating tasks, while identifying

areas of inadequate performance. Goleman further contended that this

leadership style detrimentally impacts the overall atmosphere, as many

employees become overwhelmed by the leaders' insistence on achieving

excellence. The leaders exhibit the chores they are handling and thereafter

request their subordinates to do the same (Bashir & Khalil, 2017). They assert

26
that if employees are unable to reach the established targets, they are

subsequently substituted with individuals who are capable of doing so. Pal

(2022) states that the advantages of the pace-setting leadership style are that

the supervisor promptly addresses problems to prevent them from escalating,

takes swift action to ensure continuous progress on a task until the problem is

resolved, and enables the utilization of each team member's skills and abilities.

Moreover, the stringent timeframes linked to this approach render it well-

suited for immediate and delicate objectives.

A study done in India by Rani and Prasad (2017) found that the pace-setting

leadership style of teachers did not have a significant impact on teacher

efficiency. The study also shown that the age of the instructors influenced the

relationship between the pace-setting leadership style and teacher

effectiveness. Specifically, the pace-setting leadership style was found to have

a negative correlation with teacher effectiveness. The teachers experienced a

sense of being overwhelmed by the leaders' expectations for high performance

and were displeased with his inclination to exert excessive control, which in

turn had a negative impact on the overall atmosphere and levels of

contentment within the school (Goleman, 2000).

The pace-setting leadership style possesses some drawbacks. It induces

feelings of being overwhelmed, demotivated, and agitated among employees

due to its emphasis on high speed and outcome orientation. Additionally, it

fosters ego-centrism by exerting control over subordinates and maintaining

constant surveillance, which can undermine trust. Additionally, there is a lack

27
of employee involvement due to the absence of emphasis on relationships and

morale. Instead, the focus is solely on completing duties hastily, resulting in a

lack of commitment among individuals (Pal, 2022). The pace-setting

leadership style possesses distinct traits. Pace-setting leaders establish highly

ambitious objectives and performance benchmarks, anticipating their

followers to emulate them. Pace-setting leaders exemplify the ideal behaviors

and work ethic for their followers, acting as role models (Goleman et al.,

2013).

2.7 Principals’ Participative Leadership Style and Job Satisfaction

Participative leadership, commonly referred to as the democratic style of

leadership, involves the active engagement of team members in the process of

setting goals and devising strategies to achieve them. Goleman (2000)

elucidated that a democratic leader generates agreement by encouraging active

engagement. This leadership style promotes active involvement in the

decision-making process, either through formal channels such as feedback or

informally through interactions (Bashir & Khalil, 2017). Participative

leadership involves delegating responsibilities to subordinates by engaging

them in the process of planning, decision-making, and ultimate execution.

Amedome (2018) asserts that this leadership style has favorable impacts on

the overall atmosphere of the school and the level of job contentment among

teachers. According to him, this strategy is highly beneficial when the

principal is uncertain about the optimal course of action, as it enables

instructors to provide innovative and unrestricted suggestions.

28
Goleman (2000) contends that by employing this approach, principals may

cultivate adaptability, accountability, and innovation by granting teachers

autonomy in the decision-making process. In contrast, he asserts that if left

unchecked, this approach might result in stagnation caused by never-ending

deliberations that bewilder teachers. According to Brown, as referenced in

Akpoviroro et al. (2018), including subordinates in decision-making processes

regarding their work can lead to psychological motivation, hence enhancing

employee morale and productivity. Participative leadership is a highly

essential style of leadership behavior due to its significant connection and

correlation with employee work performance. A study conducted by Dalluay

and Jalagat (2016) revealed that this particular leadership style exerts a

significant impact on both job satisfaction and overall productivity. This aligns

with the findings of Yang & Lim (2016), who discovered a robust correlation

between followers and participative leaders, resulting in elevated levels of

employee work performance and job satisfaction.

According to many ideas, participative leadership has distinct and notable

impacts on employees. The social exchange theory posits that participative

leadership has an impact on employees by fostering their workplace well-

being and encouraging their cooperative behavior (Usman et al., 2021). The

conservation of resources theory posits that participative leadership induces a

shift in employee behavior by augmenting their workload and enhancing

organizational [Link] citation for the study is Peng et al., 2021. The

social cognitive theory posits that the use of a participative leadership style

enhances employees' self-efficacy and psychological security, hence

29
influencing employee innovation and performance (Zou et al., 2020). The

social information processing theory suggests that cultural factors can

influence the impact of participative leadership on employee behavior.

Additionally, the implicit leadership theory explains that participative

leadership promotes information sharing, which in turn enhances employee

job performance (Lam et al., 2015).

Avolio & Bass, as referenced by Bwalya (2023), identified multiple attributes

of participative leadership. Firstly, participative leadership enables inclusive

decision-making by recognizing the significance of several perspectives and

actively including team members in the decision-making process. They

endorse the promotion of open discussions, engage in attentive listening to

diverse perspectives, and meticulously examine alternate opinions prior to

arriving at definitive conclusions. Additionally, participative leaders involve

team members in the decision-making process to establish the organization's

course, while promoting the creation of a collective vision and shared

objectives. This fosters the cultivation of a feeling of possession and

dedication among team members. Supportive communication is a significant

component of participative leadership since it involves promoting open and

transparent lines of communication between leaders and their team members.

The individuals in question adopt a proactive stance by soliciting input,

delivering regular updates, and ensuring that the necessary information

pertinent to their specific responsibilities is readily available to all relevant

parties. Furthermore, the participative leadership style promotes the

empowerment and autonomy of team members, enabling them to proactively

30
take charge, exercise their decision-making power, and actively contribute to

problem-solving endeavors. Autonomy in an organizational setting has been

demonstrated to enhance employee motivation and foster a heightened sense

of accountability towards achieving the organization's objectives. Ultimately,

participative leaders foster an environment characterized by trust and respect,

where they highly appreciate the input of each team member. This cultivates a

favorable and collaborative work environment where team members perceive

themselves as being esteemed and are incentivized to articulate their thoughts.

2.8 Summary of Literature Review

The literature study analyzed the impact of principals' leadership styles on

teacher work satisfaction. Coaching leadership style fosters a mentorship

culture, resulting in improved employee well-being and happiness (Jarosz,

2021). Bashir and Khalil (2017) argue that employing an affiliative leadership

style, particularly by the principal in a school, might enhance morale,

particularly during challenging periods when staff may be suffering

diminished job satisfaction. Research findings from a different study suggest

that this approach can have a detrimental effect on schools since it emphasizes

praise, which can result in average performance and unaddressed

underachievement (Goleman, 2000). A study conducted in India by Rani and

Prasad (2017) found that administrators who exhibited a pacesetting

leadership style caused teachers to feel overwhelmed by their demands for

perfection and resentful of their tendency to dominate, resulting in a negative

impact on the school climate and levels of satisfaction. Amedome (2018)

asserts that the utilization of a participative leadership style yields favorable

31
outcomes in terms of school atmosphere and teacher job satisfaction.

However, his claim contradicts a previous discovery made by Goleman (2000)

that states if not controlled, this approach can result in a lack of progress

owing to never-ending conversations that confuse teachers.

In contrast to this study, which focuses solely on Embakasi, a previous study

conducted by Kasinga (2010) extrapolated its findings to Nairobi as a whole.

Other studies, on the other hand, were undertaken in rural areas like as

Kiambu and Meru. Furthermore, the independent variables being examined in

this study are distinct from the ones previously analyzed. Given the

contradictions mentioned above, it is necessary to do additional research to

examine the impact of principals' leadership styles on teachers' job

satisfaction. An efficient leadership style can significantly improve staff

morale, leading to enhanced organizational performance and the successful

attainment of organizational objectives. Conversely, an inefficient leadership

style has a detrimental impact on employee opinions and performance. The

correlation between leadership style and organizational performance has

prompted extensive research on leadership, resulting in the development of

various leadership theories. Each theory suggests a unique leadership style,

often a combination of styles, to enhance job satisfaction and performance.

The reference is from Hussain and Hassan's work published in 2016.

Goleman (2000) suggests that the appropriate combination of leadership

qualities should be determined based on the current circumstances. He

contended that in times of crisis, effective leaders must insist on compliance

32
through coercive leadership, rally individuals with an authoritative approach,

foster harmony and emotional connections through an affiliative style,

establish consensus through participatory (democratic) methods, set ambitious

performance standards with a pace-setting style, and cultivate individuals for

future growth through coaching leadership. A study conducted in Canada by

Saxena et al. (2017) examined the use of Goleman's leadership styles in

medical educational settings. The study included a sample of 42 administrators

from three different levels of authority within the hierarchy. The prevailing

approach at the lowest tier of governance (characterized by relatively limited

authority) was democratic, involving active participation. Mid-level

administrators predominantly employed coaching strategies, whereas senior

administrators employed a diverse range of approaches, with no single style

emerging as dominant.

2.9 Theoretical Framework

The study was conducted based on the Two Factor Theory proposed by

Frederick Herzberg (as mentioned in Okumbe, 2007). According to the notion,

job satisfaction and dissatisfaction are caused by distinct and separate

variables, namely motivation and hygienic issues. He hypothesized that the

elements contributing to satisfaction were distinct from those causing

discontent and then formulated the motivation-hygiene hypothesis to elucidate

these impacts. Herzberg referred to the factors that bring satisfaction as

motivators, and the factors that cause dissatisfaction as hygiene. The drivers of

job satisfaction that he found included recognition, achievement, the nature of

the work, responsibility, advancement, and personal growth. Among these

33
factors that provide satisfaction, work itself, responsibility, and advancement

stood up as the most prominent, while achievement and recognition had a role

in determining the level of responsibility and the nature of the work itself. The

hygiene considerations are based on the necessity to prevent discomfort and

encompass elements such as salary, supervision, working conditions,

regulations and administration, and interpersonal connections. The relevance

of Herzberg's theory to this study lies in its recognition of teachers' dual sets of

demands, which necessitate addressing both.

2.10 Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework posits that the leadership style of the principal

(independent variable) influences teacher job satisfaction (dependent variable).

Additional confounding factors may also be involved and impact job

satisfaction. The framework demonstrates that irrespective of the

circumstances, leadership style has a significant impact on the job satisfaction

of teachers, either in a favorable or negative manner. This study aims to

determine the impact of the aforementioned leadership styles on the job

satisfaction of teachers at public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub County,

Nairobi.

The study aimed to examine the leadership styles of principals that impact

teachers' job satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-

County, Nairobi. The independent variable, the leadership styles of principals,

encompassed many components such as coaching, pacesetting, participatory,

and affiliative approaches. The variable measuring teachers' job satisfaction

34
 was evaluated based on several factors, including salary and advancement

opportunities, working conditions, interpersonal interactions at work,

acknowledgment of achievements, level of responsibility, utilization of talents

and abilities, staff turnover, and organizational policies and administration.

Independent Variable
Dependent Variable

Coaching Leadership
style
 Learning
 Retention of staff
 Self-efficacy
 Consistency at work

Pacesetting Leadership
Style
 Instant results
 Self-motivation
 High targets Job Satisfaction

Leadership  Pay and promotion

 Working conditions
Participative leadership Styles  Work relationships
style  Recognition
 Collaboration  Responsibility
 Role clarity  Use of skills and
 Collective decisions abilities
 Staff empowerment  Staff turn-over
 Policies and
administration
Affiliative leadership style
 Equality across cadres
 Openness
 Flexibility in role
completion
 Excellent
communication

Figure 2. 1: Conceptual Framework

35
Coaching leadership style was measured using learning, retention of staff, self-

efficacy, and consistency at work. Learning can be used to increase job

satisfaction through proper application of skills and abilities. The construct of

self-efficacy has been shown to improve both job performance and job

satisfaction. Consistent behavior creates clear expectations, certainty, and

trust. Retention increases the employees‘ loyalty and can lead to promotion.

The assessment of the pacesetting leadership style was based on immediate

outcomes, intrinsic motivation, and ambitious objectives. Imposing a

requirement for immediate outcomes might cause a decrease in employee

morale and result in employee turnover. Self-motivation enhances professional

connections, whereas excessively demanding goals impose undue stress on

employees, resulting in staff turnover.

The indicators employed to assess the participative leadership style encompass

the following: collaboration, which enhances work satisfaction by fostering

positive work relationships; role clarity, which facilitates the effective

utilization of employees' skills and abilities; collective decision-making, which

fosters a sense of belonging and contributes to a more fulfilling work

environment; and staff empowerment, which results in improved

communication of the school's policies and facilitates promotion and

recognition.

The affiliative leadership style was evaluated based on the following

indicators: equality among different levels of employees, which demonstrates

recognition and fosters positive work relationships; openness, which enhances

36
working conditions and the overall organizational climate; flexibility in

completing roles, which reduces pressure and leads to lower attrition rates; and

effective communication, which enhances policy implementation and

administration.

37
 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

The chapter was partitioned into seven subsections. The study encompassed

various components, namely research design, target population, sample size

and sampling procedures, research instruments, validity and reliability of the

research instruments, data collection procedure, and data analysis

methodologies.

3.2 Research Design

This study utilized a descriptive survey approach. Descriptive survey designs

are employed when the researcher aims to investigate phenomena in their

natural state, without any deliberate intervention or manipulation of variables.

Furthermore, the data collected by the researcher may take the form of

narratives or numerical values (Ravid, 2019). According to Mugenda (as cited

in Musa et al., 2017), surveys are used to collect data from a population in

order to assess the current state of that population in relation to one or more

variables. Therefore, this study aligns with the descriptive survey research

design.

3.3 Target Population

The target population refers to the specific demographic that a researcher aims

to apply the findings of the study to, as mentioned by Oso and Onen (as cited

in Kambwambwa et al., 2019). The study focused on the target population of

231 individuals, including 7 principals, 210 teachers, and at least 14 Sub-

38
county Education Officers. These individuals were selected from the 7 public

secondary schools in the four constituencies that make up Embakasi Sub

County. The intended demographic was anticipated to have served in their

assigned location for a minimum duration of one year, allowing ample time

for them to become acquainted with one another. The target population is

suitable for the study since it consists of 7 public secondary schools, each led

by a principal, inside Embakasi Sub-county. The total number of teachers in

this population is 210. There are a total of 14 officers employed at the sub-

county education office.

3.4 Sample Size and Sampling Procedures

3.4.1 Sample Size

Ravid (2019) defines a sample as a limited set of observations chosen from the

entire population. Sampling is crucial since it facilitates the examination of the

attributes of a larger group by investigating a smaller representative selection.

Mugenda and Mugenda (2003) suggest that a sample size ranging from 10% to

30% is appropriate for conducting a descriptive survey. A sample size of 76

was obtained by calculating 30% of the total number of teachers, resulting in a

sample size of 70 teachers. 30% of the total number of principals corresponds

to 2 principals, while 30% of the education officers corresponds to 4 education

officers.

3.4.2 Sampling Procedure

Sampling is the act of selecting representative elements to enable the

researcher to get information about the entire population. Teachers and

39
principals utilized the basic random sampling technique to select teachers.

This was a lottery procedure in which every individual in the population was

given a distinct number that was placed into a container. The researcher

selected a chit at random from the box in order to obtain a random sample.

This was done to ensure that each individual has an equitable chance of being

included in a sample that represents the entire population. The researchers

used purposive sampling technique to select education officers for this study.

This decision was based on the fact that only a small number of officers had

contributions that were relevant to the study.

Table 3. 1: Sample size

Study Target Sample % Sampling Data

population population size method collection
Principals 7 2 30 Simple random Questionnaire
sampling & Interview

Education 14 4 30 Purposive Interview

Officers sampling schedule.
Teachers 210 70 30 Simple random Questionnaire
sampling
technique
Total 231 76

3.5 Research Instruments

A research instrument is a specialized tool utilized to systematically gather

and compile data in order to address specific research inquiries. The primary

objective of the study was to ascertain the impact of principals' leadership

style on teachers' job satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi

Sub-County, Nairobi. The researcher's primary focus was on gathering data

40
regarding individuals' perspectives, beliefs, understandings, and inclinations,

as well as any other information obtained through the administration of

questionnaires and interview schedules. Two questionnaires were employed in

this study, one for the principal and another for the teachers. The surveys

consisted of both closed and open-ended questions and were divided into three

pieces. Section one aimed to collect background information about the

respondents, while section two focused on inquiries regarding job satisfaction.

A structured interview protocol consisting of open-ended questions was

administered to the sub county director of education, curriculum support

officer, quality assurance and standards officer, and sub county teachers

service commission officer.

3.6 Pilot Study

A pilot study is a limited-scale investigation that assesses the practicality of a

research procedure (Hildebrand and Ott, 2011). The pilot study assessed the

efficacy of methodologies, interviews, and questionnaires to ensure that the

study is not impeded. The researcher employed a sampling technique that

involved utilizing 10% of the total population, as advised by Mugenda &

Mugenda (2003). The outcome was one principal, 21 teachers, and one

education officer.

3.7 Validity of Instruments

Ravid (2019) defines validity as the extent to which an instrument accurately

measures its intended construct and the suitability of the inferences and

interpretations derived from the test scores. In this study, the researcher made

41
sure that the instrument satisfies the requirements for assessing content

validity. Content validity refers to the extent to which instruments accurately

measure a representative sample of behaviors and content domains from which

inferences can be drawn, as described by Ravid (2019). In order to improve

the accuracy of the findings, the researcher conducted a preliminary

investigation, but did not include the entire population in the final research.

The purpose of the pilot study was to discover any items in the questionnaire

that were misunderstood and thereafter eliminate or alter them as necessary.

3.8 Reliability of Instruments

Reliability refers to the degree to which a measurement of a phenomenon

yields a consistent and stable outcome, as stated by Carmines and Zeller (as

referenced in Taherdoost, 2016). To evaluate the reliability of the research

instrument, a pilot study was conducted in two schools that were excluded

from the primary study. Selected teachers from all schools were administered

questionnaires. The measure of reliability is quantified by a correlation

coefficient. Orodho (2005) contends that the Pearson Product Moment

Correlation measures the degree to which the instrument consistently elicits

the same responses each time it is administered, hence indicating the

instrument's content consistency. In this study, the researcher utilized the

Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient Formula to calculate the

correlation coefficient (r) between the two sets of scores.

42
Mugenda and Mugenda (2003) said that a dependability coefficient of +0.70

or above is considered adequate.

3.9 Data Collection Procedure

Following the University of Nairobi's clearance, the researcher requested

license from the National Council for Science, Technology and Innovation

(NACOSTI) to carry out the study. Subsequently, the study permission was

utilized to acquire approval from the Regional Director of Education (RDE)

office and the County Commissioners Office. The researcher sought

authorization from the Sub County Director of Education (SCDE), Embakasi,

as well as the principals of the schools involved. Subsequently, a preliminary

visit was carried out to the schools involved in the study to introduce the

research and allocate time for the administration of the instruments.

Subsequently, the questionnaires were distributed to both the principal and

teachers on the same day. The researcher provided guidance on how to

complete the questionnaires and scheduled a time to collect them. The

researcher conducted in-person interviews with the Sub County Director of

Education (SCDE), TSC Sub County Director (TSCSCD), Sub County

Curriculum Support Officer (SCCSO), and Sub County Quality Assurance

Officer (SCQASO).

3.10 Data Analysis Techniques

Following the University of Nairobi's clearance, the researcher requested

license from the National Council for Science, Technology and Innovation

(NACOSTI) to carry out the study. Subsequently, the study permission was

43
utilized to acquire approval from the Regional Director of Education (RDE)

office and the County Commissioners Office. The researcher sought

authorization from the Sub County Director of Education (SCDE), Embakasi,

as well as the principals of the schools involved. Subsequently, a preliminary

visit was carried out to the schools involved in the study to introduce the

research and allocate time for the administration of the instruments.

Subsequently, the questionnaires were distributed to both the principal and

teachers on the same day. The researcher provided guidance on how to

complete the questionnaires and scheduled a time to collect them. The

researcher conducted in-person interviews with the Sub County Director of

Education (SCDE), TSC Sub County Director (TSCSCD), Sub County

Curriculum Support Officer (SCCSO), and Sub County Quality Assurance

Officer (SCQASO).

3.11 Ethical Considerations

The anonymity and secrecy of respondents were rigorously upheld to comply

with the principle of non-disclosure and prevent ascribing any perspective to

an individual. Prior to completing the questionnaires, the respondents were

gained informed and willing consent. The researcher took measures to

guarantee the impartiality and complete independence of the study process,

ensuring that the findings were not affected in any way to align with the

researcher's opinion. The researcher elucidated the significance of the

investigation and thereafter requested their participation by providing pertinent

information for the study. The research findings were securely stored in a

44
computer that required a password for access, with the intention of using them

solely for academic purposes.

Permission to carry out the study was requested from the University of

Nairobi's college of education. The researcher obtained approval from the

National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI),

the County Commissioner, and the Regional Director of Education.

Additionally, permission was sought from the Embakasi SCDE to carry out

the study in the specified region.

45
 CHAPTER FOUR

DATA ANALYSIS, PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION OF

FINDINGS

4.1 Introduction

This chapter examined, deliberated, and showcased the findings of the study,

with the primary objective of determining how the leadership styles of

principals impact the job satisfaction of teachers at public secondary schools

in Embakasi Sub-County, Nairobi.

4.2 Response Rate and Demographic Information

This chapter examined, deliberated, and showcased the findings of the study,

with the primary objective of determining how the leadership styles of

principals impact the job satisfaction of teachers at public secondary schools

in Embakasi Sub-County, Nairobi.

Table 4. 1: Response Rate

Frequency Percent

Response 62 80.5

Non-response 15 19.5

Total 77 100.0

The study additionally collected data on the diverse demographics of the

participants. The demographics taken into account encompassed gender, age

46
range, greatest educational attainment, years of experience in teaching, and

level of responsibility held within the institution.

4.2.1 Respondents' Gender

The study aimed to determine the gender of the participants included in the

research. The participants were thereafter requested to specify their gender.

The objective was to determine the gender distribution of the participants in

the study. Their responses are displayed in Table 4.2.

Table 4. 2: Response Gender

Gender Frequency Percent

Female 37 59.4

Male 25 40.6

Total 62 100.0

The results indicated that the majority of the participants, specifically 37

individuals, were female, accounting for 59.4% of the total. The remaining 25

participants were male, representing 40.6%. This indicates that the researcher

included all the respondents, regardless of their gender, in order to gather

dependable and precise information regarding the subject being studied. The

findings also indicated that the majority of the respondents were female.

4.2.2 Respondents’ Age Bracket

The study additionally aimed to determine the age range of the respondents.

Consequently, the participants were asked to specify their age ranges. Their

discoveries were documented in Table 4.3.

47
Table 4. 3: Respondents’ Age Bracket

Age bracket Frequency Percent

20-30 years 9 14.3

31-40 years 23 37.7

41-50 years 19 31.2

51 years and above 10 16.9

Total 62 100.0

From the results, 37.7% of the respondents were aged between 31-40 years,

31.2% were aged between 41-50 years, 16.9% were 51 years and above and

14.3% were aged between 20-30 years. This implies that most of the

respondents who filled questionnaires were mature enough to give reliable

data on the subject matter.

4.2.3 Respondents’ Highest Academic Qualification

The study further sought to establish the highest level of education of the

respondents who had taken part in the study. Hence the respondents were

required in the questionnaire to indicate their highest level of education. This

was very important for the study as it implicated how the respondents would

respond to questions and how well they understood principals‘ leadership

styles. The responses were summarized in Table 4.4.

48
Table 4. 4: Respondents’ Highest Academic Qualification

Qualification Frequency Percent

Diploma 2 2.8

Bachelor‘s degree 46 74.5

Masters 14 22.7

Total 62 100.0

The findings reveal that most of the respondents as represented by 74.5% had

reached the Bachelor‘s Degree level, 22.7% had reached the Masters level,

while 2.7% had reached the Diploma level. This implies that the respondents

had enough basic education to comprehend and give reliable information

about the subject under study.

4.2.4 Responsibility Held in School

The respondents were required to indicate the responsibilities they hold in

school. This was done to ensure that all the respondents were involved in

school activities. The findings were presented on Table 4.5.

Table 4. 5: Responsibility Held in School

Responsibility Frequency Percent

Class teacher 22 35.5
Head of Department 13 21.0
Principal 7 11.3
Deputy Principal 9 14.5
Senior Master 11 17.7

Total 62 100.0

49
The findings showed that 35.5% of the respondents indicated that they were

class teachers, 21.0% were head of departments, 17.7% were senior masters,

and 14.5% were deputy principals while 11.3% were principals. This implied

all respondents held responsibilities in school and hence could give reliable

data regarding the subject matter.

4.2.5 Number of Years Involved in the Present School

The respondents were required to indicate the number of years involved in the

present school. This was done to show the experience that the respondents had

in the institutions. The responses were as shown in Table 4.6.

Table 4. 6: Number of Years Involved in the Present School

Frequency Percent

Below 2 years 12 19.5

2-5 years 23 36.6

6- 10years 27 43.9

Total 62 100.0

The findings revealed that 43.9% of the respondents have been in operation

for 6- 10 years in their present school, 36.6% indicated that they have been in

operation for 2-5 years and 19.5% indicated that they have been in operation

for below 2 years. This implies that majority of the respondents present school

had been involved in the present school for more than 5 years and hence could

understand and give reliable information being sought by the study.

50
4.3 Reliability Analysis

A pilot study was carried out to determine reliability of the questionnaires.

Reliability analysis was subsequently done using Cronbach‘s Alpha which

measures the internal consistency by establishing if certain items within a

scale measure the same construct. Table 4.7 displays the results.

Table 4. 7: Reliability Statistics

Items Cronbach's Decision

Alpha

Coaching leadership style employed by the .772 Reliable

principal

Affiliative leadership style employed by .809 Reliable

the principal

Participative leadership style employed by .849 Reliable

the principal

Pacesetting leadership style employed by .782 Reliable

the principal

Teachers‘ job satisfaction .763 Reliable

As shown in Table 4.7, participative leadership style employed by the

principal had an alpha value of 0.849, affiliative leadership style employed by

the principal had an alpha value of 0.809, pacesetting leadership style

employed by the principal had an alpha value of 0.782, coaching leadership

style employed by the principal had an alpha value of 0.772 while teachers‘

job satisfaction had an alpha value of 0.763. All alphas were above 0.70 and

51
therefore the factors were all reflective because their indicators were highly

correlated and are largely interchangeable.

4.4 Coaching Leadership Style and Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

The study sought to determine the extent to which coaching leadership style

employed by the principal influences teachers‘ job satisfaction in public

secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County. The researcher required to know

the principal‘s leadership behavior with statements related to coaching

leadership style employed by the principal. The results were as displayed on

Table 4.8.

Table 4. 8: Principal’s Leadership Behavior with Statements Related to

Coaching Leadership Style.
Statement A O S R N Mean Std.
F% F% F% F% F% Dev.
He helps teachers plan 4.583 0.495
36 58.3 26 41.7 --- --- ---
for the future
Patient with the 4.479 0.525
subordinates and allows 30 49.1 31 49.7 1 1.2 --- ---
for growth
Rewards the staff 3.252 0.283
8 12.9 27 42.9 10 16.6 7 11.7 10 16.0
Is flexible and adjusts to 3.074 0.215
4 6.7 26 42.3 11 17.2 12 19.0 9 14.7
the needs of others
Organizes for the staff 3.160 0.138
2 3.1 32 51.5 10 16.6 10 16.0 8 12.9
workshops and seminars
Provides guidance when 4.577 0.496
36 57.7 26 42.3 --- --- ---
needed
Focuses on helping 4.589 0.494
others achieve their 37 58.9 25 41.1 --- --- ---
goals.
Is reflective and helps 3.055 0.218
others learn from their 2 3.7 30 47.9 10 16.6 9 14.1 11 17.8
mistakes.
Treats each and every 4.571 0.497
individual member 35 57.1 27 42.9 --- --- ---
differently
Emphasizes honesty and 2.930 0.879
helping others see the 1 1.8 29 47.2 10 16.0 8 13.5 13 21.5
truth
Total Mean= 3.827

Legend: A= Always, O= Often, S=Sometimes, R=Rarely, N=Never.

52
As per Table 4.8, 37(58.9%) of the respondents indicated that the principal

always focuses on helping others achieve their goals while 25(41.1%) of the

respondents indicated that the principal often focuses on helping others

achieve their goals. On the principal helping teachers plan for the future,

36(58.3%) of the respondents indicated that they always do while 26(41.7%)

indicated that they often do. On providing guidance when needed, 36(57.7%)

of the respondents indicated that the principals always did while 26(42.3%)

indicated that they often did. On treating each and every individual member

differently, 35(57.1%) of the respondents indicated that the principals always

while 27(42.9%) indicated that the principals often did. On being patient with

the subordinates and allowing for growth, 31(49.7%) of the respondents

indicated that the principals were often patient while 30(49.1%) indicated that

they were always patient.

Regarding rewarding the staff, 27(42.9%) of the respondents indicated that the

principals often did, 10(16.0%) indicated that the principals never while

10(16.6%) indicated that the principals sometimes did. On organizing for the

staff workshops and seminars, 32(51.5%) of the respondents indicated that the

principals often did the organizing, 10(16.0%) indicated rarely while 8(12.9%)

indicated that the principals never. On being flexible and adjusting to the

needs of others, 26(42.3%) indicated that the principals were often flexible

and adjusting, 12(19.0%) indicated rarely while 9(14.7%) indicated never.

Moreover, on being reflective and helping others learn from their mistakes,

30(47.9%) indicated the principals were often reflective and helped others

learn from their mistakes, 11(17.8%) indicated never while 10(16.6%)

53
indicated sometimes. Further, on emphasizing honesty and helping others see

the truth, 29(47.2%) indicated that the principals often emphasized honesty

and helped others see the truth, 13(21.5%) indicated never while 8(13.5%)

indicated rarely.

Table 4.8 further shows computed means of each item, the highest (mean

=4.589) for focusing on helping others achieve their goals. The results indicate

high response (mean=4.577) for providing guidance when needed. The

analysis also shows (mean=4.583) for helping teachers in planning for the

future. Further, the findings indicated (mean=4.571) for treating each and

every individual member differently. Conversely, the results show

(mean=2.930) for emphasizing honesty and helping others see the truth.

Consequently, the total cumulative mean scores (Mean= 3.827) could be

interpreted to imply that principals behaviours were more likely inclined to

coaching leadership styles.

4.4.1 Correlation Analysis for the Coaching Leadership Style and

Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

To test the correlation between coaching leadership style employed by the

principal and the teachers‘ job satisfaction, the study used Pearson‘s

correlation analysis. The findings are as shown in Table 4.9.

54
Table 4. 9: Correlation Matrix for Coaching Leadership Style and

Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

Teachers’
job
satisfaction
Teachers‘ job satisfaction Pearson Correlation 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .
N 62
Coaching leadership style employed by Pearson Correlation . 789
the principal
Sig. (2-tailed) .023
N 62

The study established that there is a positive relationship between teachers‘

job satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County and

coaching leadership style employed by the principal as shown by coefficient

of 0.789. Moreover, the p-value was 0.023<0.05 implying that the study

rejected the hypothesis that there is no significant relationship between

coaching leadership style employed by the principal and teachers‘ job

satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County.

4.4.2 Regression Analysis for Coaching Leadership Style and Teachers’

Job Satisfaction

The model summary in Table 4.10 provides an overview of the key statistics

and performance metrics of the regression model. It includes important

information about the model's goodness of fit, its ability to explain the

variance in the dependent variable, and the significance of the predictor

variables.

55
Table 4. 10: Model Summary for Coaching Leadership Style and

Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

Adjusted R

Model R R Square Square Std. Error

1 .789 .622 .616 .346

The findings in Table 4.10 shows that r=0.789. This indicates that coaching

leadership style employed by the principal has a very strong relationship with

teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-

County. In addition, R2 was 0.622 which indicated that coaching leadership

style employed by the principal explains 62.2 of the variations in the teachers‘

job satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County.

The ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) in Table 4.11 is a critical component in

statistical analysis, particularly in assessing the significance of the predictor

variables in a regression model. This table is instrumental in assessing the

overall model fit and the individual contributions of each predictor variable.

Table 4. 11: ANOVAa for Coaching Leadership Style and Teachers’ Job

Satisfaction

Sum of Mean

Model Squares df Square F Sig.

1 Regression 11.838 1 11.838 98.746 2.71E-14

Residual 7.193 60 0.120

Total 19.031 61

56
The overall F statistics, (F = 98.746, p=2.71E-14<0.05), indicated that there

was a very statistical significant relationship between coaching leadership

style employed by the principal and teachers‘ job satisfaction in public

secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County. The null hypothesis was

therefore rejected and it was concluded that there is a significant relationship

between coaching leadership style employed by the principal and teachers‘ job

satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County.

Table 4.12 shows the regression coefficient that estimates coefficients of the

predictor variables in the regression model. These coefficients provide insights

into the strength and direction of the relationships between the predictors and

the dependent variable.

Table 4. 12: Regression Coefficientsa for Coaching Leadership and

Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

Unstandardized Standardized t Sig.

Coefficients Coefficients

Std.

Model B Error Beta

1 (Constant) 2.652 0.714 3.714 0.000

Coaching leadership 0.814 0.25 0.789 3.256 0.002

style employed by the

principal

The results on test of significance also indicate that coaching leadership style

employed by the principal (β=0.814, p=0.002) was significant at p<0.05 and

57
95 confidence level. Using the coefficients findings in Table 4.12, the

regression model can be substituted as follows:

Y= 2.652 + 0.814X1

Where;

Y = Teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools in

Embakasi Sub-County

X1= Coaching leadership style employed by the principal

From the interviews, the interviewees were asked to indicate how they

believed in principals capacity-building their members of staff. Majority of

them indicated that when members of staff are empowered, then work is done

in a more professional manner and from time to time members are able to

coordinate among themselves and relevant departments with or without the

immediate supervisors around. They added that capacity building makes the

principals‘ work easier since he/she will stick to the mission and vision of the

school. Capacity building also helps to address short falls & short comings.

The interviewees indicated that constant retooling enables them acquire new

skills to cope with ever changing job worked. Interviewee P3 stated,

Members of staff need to be built because the principal is also a

teacher and he should give room for teachers to take up more
challenging tasks like himself/herself. Also when teachers are
capacity-built, they can also challenge the principal on best teaching
methods and outcomes.

Interviewee P4 said,

Because teacher need to be updated now and again since the world is
evolving and new education systems such as the CBC is too

58
 demanding. Capacity building helps the learner to get informed about
the emerging issues which do affect leaners negatively.

The interviews also sought the opinions of interviewees on if the principal

should treat members of staff differently. Majority of the interviewees

indicated that the principals do not treat the members of staff differently since

all of them contribute to the wellbeing and achievement of the institutions

goals in one way or another. Another indicated that teamwork demand that all

members are treated the same and that different treatment would negate

teamwork and hamper institutional growth. Others indicated that leaders on

holds can be given special attention or facilities because of the nature of their

roles which may be more demanding than others but they should not be treated

differently, and he or she is a symbol of unity, also supposed to be a role

model and it will be against the T.S.C code of regulations for teachers. An

interviewee however indicated that some principals treat the members of staff

differently. Interviewee P1 indicated,

Yes, because all members have their own unique characteristics and
treating these personalities using same leadership approaches may
prove to be counter-productive.

The interviewers sought why principals should assist the teachers in achieving

their goals. The interviewees indicated that a teacher‘s achievement is a

schools achievement, when goals are achieved, credit is heaped on the leader

even before the other members of staff are acknowledged. The concept of

collegiality dictates that members of staff work in a complimentary manner for

the general good of the institution. They also indicated that the principals

59
should assist the teachers because when all members of staff achieve their

goals the school will benefit from their unique contribution, to enhance

performance since some teachers score below expectations and if they are not

assisted then they will not meet expectations and ultimately the entire school

will be failing, and so that they can grow in their career. Interviewee P2 said,

Principals themselves are teachers. Teachers are future principal.

Teachers should be assisted to achieve their goals because they are
future leader. The achievement of the teachers will be seen as the
achievement of the principal.

The interviews required the interviewees to give their views on how the

coaching leadership style influenced the teacher job satisfaction. They

indicated that it promotes close contact between the principal and the

individual teachers and in this way, teachers take corrections positively having

in mind the fact that the principal is working for the general good of the

school. Also, when the principal leads as a coach, he becomes flexible to

teachers and because of his patience, teachers will find working in a free

atmosphere enjoyable. The interviewees indicated that coaching leadership

style is objective as it allows room for the application of SWOT Analysis.

Teachers are able to understand their strength, weakness, opportunities and

threats without a feeling of victimization. Moreover, coaching enables each

member exploit their full potential and it will make them feel that they are part

and parcel of the institution. It will also make them work with minimum

supervision, it is also a way of motivating. Interviewer P3 stated,

This style is very important in helping newly employed teachers to get

at per with the rest of the staff. When they are coached on the best

60
 methodology of teaching, they become more comfortable and satisfied
instead of being confused.

4.4.3 Discussion for Coaching Leadership Style and Teachers’ Job

Satisfaction

The study revealed that the principal consistently prioritizes assisting others in

attaining their objectives, aids teachers in strategizing for the future, offers

direction as necessary, and treats each individual member distinctively. The

study also found that the principal frequently demonstrates patience towards

subordinates and fosters their professional development. The findings support

the perspective of Dai (2019) that coaching leadership style fosters innovative

behavior and job motivation among employees. Coaching aims to maximize

the potential of individuals in order to attain both personal and organizational

objectives (Karlsen & Berg, 2020).

The survey furthermore revealed that the principal occasionally incentivizes

the staff, arranges workshops and seminars for them, demonstrates

adaptability by accommodating the demands of others, engages in self-

reflection and facilitates learning from mistakes, and places a strong emphasis

on honesty and assisting others in perceiving the truth. The findings

contradicted Berg's (2016) assertion that coaching leadership style is a long-

term focused method aimed at fostering employee growth and fostering strong

and consistent interactions within a group. Moreover, the implementation of a

coaching method has a favorable impact on fostering a coaching culture,

which in turn promotes employee well-being and happiness (Jarosz, 2021).

61
4.5 Affiliative Leadership Style and Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

The research aimed to determine how affiliative leadership style employed by

the principal influences teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools

in Embakasi Sub-County. The respondents were required to indicate the

principal‘s leadership behavior with statements related to affiliative leadership

style employed by the principal. The responses were as presented on Table

4.13.

Table 4. 13: Principal’s Leadership Behavior with Statements Related to

Affiliative Leadership Style
Statement A O S R N Mean Std.
F% F% F% F% F% Dev.
Regards teachers as 36 26 4.583 0.495
--- --- ---
most important 58.3 41.7
Gives members 3.712 0.115
43 17
positive feedback 2 2.5 1 0.6 1 0.6
68.7 27.6
frequently
Strives to know the 28 12 2.976 0.116
--- 12 20.2 9 14.7
feelings of my staff 46.0 20.2
Allows teachers to go 3.055 0.223
30 10 11
about their roles 2 3.7 9 14.1
47.9 16.6 17.8
uninterrupted
Schedules the work to 15 38 2.215 0.713
1 1.8 4 6.1 3 5.5
be done 24.5 62.0
Gives advance notice 41 10 4.337 0.728
3 5.5 5 7.4 3 4.3
of changes. 66.9 16.0
Permits members to 4.233 0.813
31 23
use their own 3 4.9 2 3.1 3 4.9
49.7 37.4
judgement
Encourages equality 3.902 0.920
33
among teachers and 9 14.1 6 9.8 8 12.3 6 9.8
54.0
cadres
Allows flexible 3.982 0.942
37
timelines for 6 10.4 6 10.4 5 8.0 7 11.7
59.5
completing tasks
Communicates 29 3.651 0.826
8 13.5 9 14.7 7 11.0 9 14.7
empathetically 46.0
Total cumulative Mean= 3.665
Legend: A= Always, O= Often, S=Sometimes, R=Rarely, N=Never.

62
As per Table 4.13, 36(58.3%) of the respondents indicated that the principals

always regards teachers as most important while 26(41.7%) indicated often.

Moreover, on giving advance notice of changes, 41(66.9%) of the respondents

indicated that the principals always gave advance notice of changes, while

10(16.0%) indicated sometimes. Further, 31(49.7%) of the respondents

indicated that the principals always permits members to use their own

judgment while 23(37.4%) indicated often. Also, on allowing flexible

timelines for completing tasks, 37(59.5%) of the respondents indicated that the

principals always allowed flexible timelines for completing tasks, 6(10.4%)

indicated often while 7(11.7%) indicated never.

On encouraging equality among teachers and cadres, 33(54.0%) of the

respondents indicated that principals always encouraged equality among

teachers and cadres, 9(14.1%) indicated often, while 8(12.3%) indicated

rarely. On giving members positive feedback frequently, 43(68.7%) of the

respondents indicated that principals often gave members positive feedback

while 17(27.6%) indicated sometimes. Moreover, the respondents 29(46.0%)

indicated that the principals always communicated with empathy, 9(14.7%)

indicated sometimes while 9(14.7%) indicated never.

Further, on allowing teachers to go about their roles uninterrupted, 30(47.9%)

of the respondents indicated that the principals often allowed teachers to go

about their roles uninterrupted, 11(17.8%) indicated never, while 10(16.6%)

indicated sometimes. On striving to know the feelings of my staff, 29(46.0%)

of the respondents indicated that the principals often strives to know the

63
feelings of their staff, 12(20.2%) indicated sometimes while 12(20.2%)

indicated rarely. Moreover, the respondents 38(62.0%) indicated that the

principals never scheduled the work to be done, while 15(24.5%) indicated

always.

Table 4.13 further shows calculated means of each item, the highest (mean

=4.583) for teachers regarded as most important in a school setting. The

results also indicate high response (mean=4.337) for giving prior notice of

changes. The inquiry also indicate (mean=4.233) for permission given to

teachers to use their own judgment. Additionally, the outcomes showed

(mean=3.982) for flexible timelines to complete tasks. On the contrary, the

results show (mean=2.215) for principal scheduling work to be done and

(mean= 2.976) for seeking to know the feelings of the teachers. Thus, the total

cumulative (Mean= 3.665) could be interpreted to imply that principals

portrayed some level of affiliative leadership style.

As per the interviews, the interviewees were asked whether the principals

should regard teachers as the most important factor in learning within the

school. They indicated that teachers are able to instill discipline without which

leaning would be impossible. Again, the principal is not present in every class

and room so it is the teachers who are ever there is guide learning. The

Interviewer P1 said,

Teachers are just part of the actors in a learning institution and

therefore cannot be regarded as the most important. They are only
most important as far as curriculum delivery is concerned. Having
said that, learners do not only learn from the teachers but also through

64
 discovery, from peers, from the surrounding community and so on.
Other stakeholders like learners, the board of management, the
parents and the government officers are also important.

The interviewees were also asked to indicate their agreement with whether it is

necessary for the principal to know the feelings of their teachers. They

indicated that teachers have different temperaments and not all of them are

emotionally same. Knowing their feelings is important as it will help the

principal to understand how to communicate to them and handle them without

being offensive. They also indicated that unless the room is express feelings is

allowed, teachers will be withdrawn and the principal will think teachers are

fighting him/her.

The interviewees were also asked to indicate whether it is necessary to

promote equality across various cadres of teachers within the school. They

indicated that equality goes hard with responsibility whereas the Deputy

Principal or HOD is not equal to the assistant teacher, they need fair treatment

with respect is their responsibility. e.g. distribution of subjects can‘t be equal

but is done based on the designation. Interviewer P4 noted,

Various cadres should be treated equitably but not equally. This is

because there are certain privileges, for instance, that can only be
accessed by virtue of the responsibility or office that a teacher holds. A
boarding master or deputy principal can secure accommodation within
the school courtesy of their responsibility before others.

The interviewees were asked to give their own views on how affiliative

leadership style influenced teacher job satisfaction. They indicated that new

teachers in the career may find difficulty in expressing feelings and setting

65
down. The principal can implement TIMEC (teacher induction, mentorship

and coaching) program to help mentor teachers at work and help them take

off. Interviewer P2 said,

Since this leadership style opens room for much interaction, the
teachers end up enjoying work with little or almost no supervision at
the expense of performance. Teachers will also feel very important and
love work due to constant appreciation from the principal.

4.5.1 Correlation Analysis for the Affiliative Leadership Style and

Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

To test the correlation between affiliative leadership style employed by the

principal and the teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools in

Embakasi Sub-County, the study used Pearson‘s correlation analysis. The

findings are as shown in Table 4.14.

Table 4. 14: Correlation Matrix for the Affiliative Leadership Style and

Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

Teachers’
job
satisfaction
Teachers‘ job satisfaction Pearson Correlation 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .
N 62
Affiliative leadership style Pearson Correlation .743
employed by the principal Sig. (2-tailed) .027
N 62

The study revealed that there is a positive relationship between teachers‘ job

satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County and

66
affiliative leadership style employed by the principal as shown by coefficient

of 0.743. Moreover, the p-value was 0.027<0.05 implying that the study

rejected the hypothesis that there is no significant relationship between

affiliative leadership style employed by the principal and the teachers‘ job

satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County.

4.5.2 Regression Analysis for the Affiliative Leadership Style and

Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

The model summary in Table 4.15 provides an overview of the key statistics

and performance metrics of the regression model to test the relationship

between affiliative leadership style employed by the principal and teachers‘

job satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County. It

includes important information about the model's goodness of fit, its ability to

explain the variance in the dependent variable, and the significance of the

predictor variables.

Table 4. 15: Model Summary for the Affiliative Leadership Style and

Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

Adjusted R

Model R R Square Square Std. Error

1 0.743 0.551 0.544 0.377

The findings in Table 4.15 revealed that r=0.743. This indicated that affiliative

leadership style employed by the principal has a very strong relationship with

teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-

67
County. In addition, R2 was 0.551 which indicated that affiliative leadership

style employed by the principal explains 55.1 of the variations in the teachers‘

job satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County.

The ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) in Table 4.16 is a critical component in

statistical analysis, particularly in assessing the significance of the predictor

variables in a regression model. This table is instrumental in assessing the

overall model fit and the individual contributions of each predictor variable.

Table 4. 16: ANOVAa for the Affiliative Leadership Style and Teachers’

Job Satisfaction

ANOVAa
Mean
Model Sum of Squares df Square F Sig.
1 Regression 10.496 1 10.496 73.777 4.87E-12
Residual 8.536 60 0.142
Total 19.032 61

The overall F statistics, (F = 73.777, p=4.87E-12<0.05), indicated that there

was a very statistical significant relationship between affiliative leadership

style employed by the principal and teachers‘ job satisfaction in public

secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County. The null hypothesis was hence

rejected and it was concluded that there is a significant relationship between

affiliative leadership style employed by the principal and teachers‘ job

satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County.

Table 4.17 shows the regression coefficient that estimates coefficients of the

predictor variables in the regression model. These coefficients provide insights

68
into the strength and direction of the relationships between the predictors and

the dependent variable.

Table 4. 17: Regression Coefficientsa for the Affiliative Leadership Style

and Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

Unstandardized Standardized t Sig.

Coefficients Coefficients

Std.

Model B Error Beta

1 (Constant) 2.435 0.799 3.048 0.003

Affiliative leadership 0.843 0.295 0.743 2.858 0.005

style employed by

the principal

The results indicate that affiliative leadership style employed by the principal

(β=0.843, p=0.005) was significant at p<0.05 and 95 confidence level. Using

the statistical findings in Table 4.17, the regression model can be substituted

as follows:

Y= 2.435 + 0.843X2

Where;

Y = Teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools in

Embakasi Sub-County

X2= Affiliative leadership style employed by the principal

69
4.5.3 Discussion for Affiliative Leadership Style and Teachers’ Job

Satisfaction

The study found that the principal always regards teachers as most important.

The study also found that the principal often gives advance notice of changes,

permits members to use their own judgement, allows flexible timelines for

completing tasks, encourages equality among teachers and cadres, gives

members positive feedback frequently and communicates empathetically. The

results concur with Goleman (2000) who states that an affiliative leader

believes in people and improves their capacity upon the belief that people

come first and adds that this leadership style can help boost the morale

especially when employed by the principal in a school during difficult times

when employees could be experiencing low levels of job satisfaction.

The research further found that the principal sometimes allows teachers to go

about their roles uninterrupted, and strives to know the feelings of their staff.

Moreover, the research found that the principal rarely schedules the work to be

done. Henderson (2015) differ that principals using this style not only impact

the school environment but also the community and other stakeholders. This

style can however have a negative impact in schools due to focus on praise

which may lead to mediocrity and uncorrected poor performance (Goleman,

2000). He adds that the principal may focus on good relations at the expense

of constructive feedback if they use this leadership style. Teachers may also

feel uncertain about how to do better for lack of feedback.

70
4.6 Participative Leadership Style and Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

The study sought to establish how participative leadership style employed by

the principal influences the teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary

schools in Embakasi Sub-County. The respondents were asked to indicate

their principal‘s leadership behavior with statements related to participative

leadership style employed by the principal on a five point scale whereby 5

represents Always, 4 = Often, 3 = Sometimes, 2 = Rarely and 1 = Never.

Table 4.18 displays their responses.

Table 4. 18: Principal’s Leadership Behavior and Participative

Leadership Style
Statement A O S R N Mean Std.
F% F% F% F% F% Dev.
Friendly and easy to 31 50.3 6 9.8 12 19.0 6 9.8 7 11.0 3.785 0.930
dialogue with
Expresses confidence 32 52.1 1 1.8 26 42.3 1 1.8 1 1.8 4.006 0.591
in staff despite
disagreements
Is accommodative of 41 65.6 4 6.1 6 9.8 5 8.6 6 9.8 4.092 0.909
other teachers‘
opinions
Encourages staff to 43 69.9 4 6.1 4 6.1 7 11.7 4 6.1 4.221 0.819
expressly give their
opinions
Shows understanding 2 2.5 43 68.7 17 27.6 1 0.6 1 0.6 3.718 0.550
towards staff despite
holding divergent
opinions with them
Genuinely shares 1 1.2 30 49.1 13 20.9 10 16.0 8 12.9 3.098 0.601
information with staff
members
Clarifies roles to staff 27 44.2 24 38.7 2 3.7 4 6.1 5 7.4 4.061 0.680
members
Ensures equal chance 35 55.8 27 44.2 --- --- --- 4.558 0.998
of members
spearheading tasks
Encourages teamwork 34 55.2 28 44.8 --- --- --- 4.552 0.999
among teachers
Reaches out to 1 1.2 27 42.9 12 19.0 10 16.0 13 20.9 2.791 0.512
introverted teachers to
speak out
Total cumulative (Mean= 3.888)
Legend: A= Always, O= Often, S=Sometimes, R=Rarely, N=Never.

71
As per Table 4.18, 35(55.8%) of the respondents indicated that the principals

always ensured equal chance of members spearheading tasks while 27(44.2%)

indicated often. On encouraging teamwork among teachers, 34(55.2%) of the

respondents indicated that the principals always encouraged teamwork among

teachers, while 28(44.8%) indicated often. Further, on encouraging staff to

expressly give their opinions, 43(69.9%) of the respondents indicated that the

principals always encouraged staff to expressly give their opinions, and

7(11.7%) indicated rarely. On being accommodative of other teachers‘

opinions, 41(65.6%) of the respondents indicated that the principals were

always accommodative of other teachers‘ opinions, 6(9.8%) indicated

sometimes, and 6(9.8%) indicated never.

On clarifying roles to staff members, 27(44.2%) of the respondents indicated

that the principals always clarified roles to staff members, and 24(38.7%)

indicated often. Further, on expressing confidence in staff despite

disagreements, 32(52.1%) indicated that the principals always expressed

confidence in staff despite disagreements and 26(42.3%) indicated sometimes.

On being friendly and easy to dialogue, 31(50.3%) of the respondents

indicated that the principals were always friendly and easy to dialogue,

12(19.0%) indicated sometimes while 7(11.0%) indicated never. On showing

understanding towards staff despite holding divergent opinions, 43(68.7%) of

the respondents indicated that the principals often showed understanding

towards staff despite holding divergent opinions, and 17(27.6%) indicated

sometimes. Further, on genuinely sharing information with staff members,

30(49.1%) of the respondents indicated that the principals often genuinely

72
shared information with staff members, 13(20.9%) indicated sometimes, and

10(16.0%) indicated rarely. Moreover, 27(42.9%) of the respondents indicated

that the principals often reached out to introverted teachers to speak out,

13(20.9%) indicated never, while 12(19.0%) indicated sometimes.

Table 4.18 further shows computed means of each item, the highest (mean

=4.558) for ensuring equal chances of members spearheading tasks. The

results also indicate high response (mean=4.552) for encouraging teamwork.

The analysis also indicate (mean=4.221) for giving opinions freely. Moreover,

the outcomes showed (mean=4.092) for accommodating opinions. On the

contrary, the results show (mean=2.791) for principal reaching out to

introverted teachers. Thus, the total cumulative (Mean= 3.888) could be

interpreted to imply that principals used participative leadership style often.

From the interviews, the interviewees were asked to indicate when the

principal should promote participative leadership style in schools. They stated

that when delegating or re-assigning role and responsibilities, when he needs

assignments to be done with clarity and to avoid instance when failure would

repent as a result of ―one-man-show‖ leadership in the past. Moreover, they

indicated that when introducing new programs and projects, it helps the

principal get regular feedback from teachers, leaners and even parents hence a

more satisfied school, and it is the way of preparing teachers for leadership.

Interviewer P2 noted,

The principal can promote this style in a cosmopolitan area like

Nairobi in order to promote a sense of inclusivity, to give chance to
every teacher to exploit their potential. Again, when he realizes that a
section of the teachers are introverted, he can promote this style to
help them open up.

73
The interviewees were also asked whether each member of staff should be

given a chance to spearhead tasks. They indicated that it is only possible to

know teachers abilities when they are given a chance, sometimes credentials

may give false impression of teachers only to be disproved only when they are

assigned a task. They also indicated that people should be tested because each

one has skills and talent e.g. a poor communicator is only known when they

are assigned a role to speak in public, and it‘s only possible to understand the

capability of teachers by assigning the tasks. Otherwise, the principal may

judge members wrongly without testing them. They also indicated that it is

because each member is gifted differently and is also a way of promoting

teamwork.

The interviewees were asked to indicate if schools should create an

atmosphere for introverted teachers to speak out. They indicated that an open

atmosphere ensures that every teacher, vocal and otherwise is accommodated,

it promotes a sense of belonging among all teachers, and for them to fee part

and part of the school system, as a way of coaching then and as a way of

affiliating them into the school system.

The interviewees were asked their views on how participative leadership style

influences teacher job satisfaction. They indicated that this leadership style

motivates teachers since they know that all their opinions count regardless of

whether it will be applied or not and encourages members to work as a team.

They also indicated that participating leads to innovation because teachers

fond themselves accomplishing or attempting tasks they never knew they

74
would attempt, through participation, teachers get is acknowledge that there is

no job without a challenge, it enhances employees‘ self-efficiency and

psychological security, this leadership style gives room for free interaction and

teachers find it easy to freely choose who to lead them in various tasks without

a feeling of discrimination or favoritism, and it will enable and make them

speak out their minds, comment and state out their challenges and give out

their ideas on leadership of the school.

4.6.1 Correlation Analysis for Participative Leadership Style and

Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

To test the correlation between participative leadership style employed by the

principal and the teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools in

Embakasi Sub-County, the study used Pearson‘s correlation analysis. The

findings are as shown in Table 4.19.

Table 4. 19: Correlation Matrix for the Participative Leadership Style

and Teachers’ Job Satisfaction
Teachers’
job
satisfaction
Teachers‘ job satisfaction Pearson Correlation 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .
N 62
Participative leadership style employed Pearson Correlation .603
by the principal Sig. (2-tailed) .028
N 62

The study there is a positive relationship between teachers‘ job satisfaction in

public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County and participative

75
leadership style employed by the principal as expressed by coefficient of

0.603. Moreover, the p-value was 0.028<0.05 implying that the study rejected

the hypothesis that there is no significant relationship between participative

leadership style employed by the principal and the teachers‘ job satisfaction in

public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County.

4.6.2 Regression Analysis for the Participative Leadership and Teachers’

Job Satisfaction

The model summary in Table 4.20 provides an overview of the key statistics

and performance metrics of the regression model to test the relationship

between participative leadership style employed by the principal and teachers‘

job satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County.

Table 4. 20: Model Summary for the Participative Leadership Style and

Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

Adjusted R

Model R R Square Square Std. Error

1 0.603 0.363 0.323 1.075

The findings in Table 4.20 shows that r=0.603. This indicated that

participative leadership style employed by the principal has a positive

relationship with teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools in

Embakasi Sub-County. In addition, R2 was 0.363 which indicated that

participative leadership style employed by the principal explains 36.3 of the

variations in the teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools in

Embakasi Sub-County.

76
The ANOVA in Table 4.21 is a critical component in statistical analysis,

particularly in assessing the significance of the predictor variables in a

regression model. This table is instrumental in assessing the overall model fit

and the individual contributions of each predictor variable.

Table 4. 21: ANOVAa for the Participative Leadership Style and

Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

Sum of Mean

Model Squares df Square F Sig.

1 Regression 10.542 1 10.542 34.211 2.19E-07

Residual 18.489 60 0.308

Total 29.031 61

The overall F statistics, (F=34.211, p=2.19E-07<0.05), indicated that there

was a very statistical significant relationship between participative leadership

style employed by the principal and teachers‘ job satisfaction in public

secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County. The null hypothesis was hence

rejected and it was concluded that there is a significant relationship between

participative leadership style employed by the principal and teachers‘ job

satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County.

Table 4.22 shows the regression coefficient that estimates coefficients of the

predictor variables in the regression model. These coefficients provide insights

into the strength and direction of the relationships between the predictors and

the dependent variable.

77
Table 4. 22: Regression Coefficientsa for the Participative Leadership

Style and Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

Unstandardized Standardized t Sig.

Coefficients Coefficients

Model B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 2.604 1.162 2.241 0.028

Participative 0.7 0.238 0.603 2.941 0.004

leadership style

employed by the

principal

The results on test of significance also indicate that participative leadership

style employed by the principal (β=0.700, p=0.004) was significant at p<0.05

and 95 confidence level. Using the statistical findings in Table 4.22, the

regression model can be substituted as follows:

Y= 2.604 + 0.700X3

Where;

Y = Teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools in

Embakasi Sub-County

X3 = Participative leadership style employed by the principal.

4.6.3 Discussion for Participative Leadership Style and Teachers’ Job

Satisfaction

The research discovered that the principle consistently guarantees an equitable

opportunity for all members to take the lead in assignments and fosters a

78
culture of collaboration among teachers. The study additionally revealed that

the principal frequently fosters an environment where staff members are

encouraged to openly express their opinions. The principal is also receptive to

the viewpoints of other teachers, provides clear guidance on staff roles,

demonstrates confidence in the staff even in the face of disagreements,

maintains a friendly and approachable demeanor for dialogue, and displays

understanding towards staff members despite holding differing opinions.

These findings align with Goleman's (2000) explanation that a democratic

leader establishes consensus by involving others in the decision-making

process. The leader promotes active involvement in the decision-making

process, either through formal channels like as feedback or informally through

interactions (Bashir & Khalil, 2017).

The study revealed that the principal occasionally authentically disseminates

information to staff members and proactively engages introverted teachers to

express their thoughts. The findings contradict Amedome's (2018) assertion

that this leadership style has beneficial impacts on school atmosphere and

teacher job satisfaction. According to him, this strategy is highly beneficial

when the principal is uncertain about the optimal course of action, as it enables

instructors to provide innovative and unrestricted suggestions. Goleman

(2000) contends that by employing this approach, principals may cultivate

adaptability, accountability, and innovation by granting teachers autonomy in

the decision-making process. In contrast, he argues that if left uncontrolled,

this approach might result in stagnation caused by never-ending deliberations

that bewilder teachers.

79
4.7 Pacesetting Leadership Style and Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

The study sought to examine how pacesetting leadership style employed by

the principal influences teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools

in Embakasi Sub-County. The respondents were asked to indicate their

principal‘s leadership behavior with statements related to pacesetting

leadership style employed by the principal. The results were as shown in Table

4.23.

Table 4. 23: Principal’s Leadership Behavior with Statements Related to

Pacesetting Leadership Style

Statement A O S R N Mean Std.

F% F% F% F% F% Dev.
Demands instant results 19 30.1 18 28.8 10 16.0 9 14.1 7 11.0 3.528 0.844
from assigned tasks
Encourage self-motivation 38 61.3 24 38.7 --- --- --- 4.614 0.988
among members of staff
Makes decisions for 33 52.8 29 46.0 1 1.2 --- - -- 4.515 0.525
teachers
Utilizes the abilities of 1 1.8 29 47.2 10 16.0 8 13.5 13 21.5 2.945 0.744
every teacher to the
maximum
Compels teachers to meet --- 30 47.9 11 17.8 11 17.2 11 17.2 2.963 0.659
the set targets
Keeps revising targets to be 57 91.4 2 3.1 1 1.8 1 0.6 2 3.1 4.791 0.814
met by teachers
Leads by example 21 33.7 23 36.8 8 12.9 5 8.0 5 8.6 3.791 0.735
Gives strict deadlines of 27 44.2 16 25.2 6 10.4 6 10.4 6 9.8 3.834 0.853
task completion
Communicates regularly 35 55.8 27 42.9 1 1.2 --- --- 4.546 0.524
Only uses skilled teachers 44 71.5 16 26.2 1 2.3 --- --- 4.663 0.902
for specific tasks
Total cumulative (Mean= 4.019)
Legend: A= Always, O= Often, S=Sometimes, R=Rarely, N=Never.

According to Table 4.23, 57(91.4%) of the respondents indicated that the

principals always kept revising targets to be met by teachers. On only using

skilled teachers for specific tasks, 44(71.5%) of the respondents indicated that

the principals always used skilled teachers for specific tasks, and 16(26.2%)

indicated often. On encouraging self-motivation among members of staff,

80
38(61.3%) of the respondents indicated that the principals always encouraged

self-motivation among members of staff, and 24(38.7%) indicated often. On

communicating regularly, 35(55.8%) of the respondents indicated that the

principals always communicated regularly, and 2(42.9%) indicated often. On

making decisions for teachers, 33(52.8%) of the respondents indicated that the

principals always made decisions for teachers, and 29(46.0%) indicated often.

Further, on giving strict deadlines of task completion, 27(44.2%) of the

respondents indicated that the principals always gave strict deadlines of task

completion, 16(25.2%) indicated often, 6(10.4%) indicated sometimes, and

6(10.4%) indicated rarely. On leading by example, 23(36.8%) of the

respondents indicated that the principals often lead by example, 21(33.7%)

indicated always, and 8(12.9%) indicated sometimes. On demanding instant

results from assigned tasks, 19(30.1%) of the respondents indicated that the

principals always demanded instant results from assigned tasks, 18(28.8%)

indicated often, and 10(16.0%) indicated sometimes. Further, on compelling

teachers to meet the set targets, 30(47.9%) of the respondents indicated that

the principals often compelled teachers to meet the set targets, and 11(17.8%)

indicated sometimes. On utilizing the abilities of every teacher to the

maximum, 29(47.2%) of the respondents indicated that the principals often

utilized the abilities of every teacher to the maximum, 13(21.5%) indicated

never, and 10(16.0%) indicated sometimes. Table 4.23 further shows

computed means of each item, the highest (mean =4.791) for continuous

revision of targets. The results also indicate high response (mean=4.663) for

restricted use of skilled teachers for certain tasks. The study also indicate

81
(mean=4.614) for encouraging self-motivation among staff. On the contrary,

the results show (mean=2.945) for maximizing the utilization of teachers

ability and (mean=2.963) for compelling teachers to meet set targets. Thus, the

total cumulative (Mean= 4.019) could be interpreted to imply that principals

extensively (often) applied pace-setting leadership style

The interviewees were asked to indicate how much time principals give should

their teachers to realize results in their given assignments. They indicated that

the amount of time allowed for accomplishment should be dependent on

factors such as nature of responsibility, scope of the task, the other tasks done

by same officer etc., and the principal should always give realistic deadlines

for teachers to work with or else they will not give impressive result.

Interviewer P4 said,

If the target is SMART, then the principal needs to be realistic so that

the target is achieved. Time allowed should also depend on the nature
of assignment and resources availed e.g. an assignment that is not
supported with resources cannot be done in time.

As per the interviews, the interviewees were asked to indicate when principals

should make decisions for teachers. They indicated that when regulations have

been pronounced by the government, when the buck stops with the head of

school, and when disseminating sensitive information that only the principal is

allowed to handle. Moreover, they indicated that the principal should avoid

making decision for teachers since they will feel he is employing dictatorship

and they may end up rebelling, when a teacher has failed to perform his/her

82
duties as per the T.S.C code of regulations, and when a teacher has failed to

report to school for more than a week. Interviewer P1 indicated,

Matters touching on government policy which may be in form of

directives or circulars, acts of parliament require implementation as
they are pronounced hence the principal may implement without
consulting teachers. As the lead educator and supervisor, the principal
may also make decisions regarding placement of teachers, inductions,
trainings and workshops based on his know-how and experience which
teachers may not have. In addition, when he has no time to consult he
ends up deciding for the teachers.

The interviews sought whether the deadlines set by the principals for teachers

should be strict or flexible. The interviewers indicated that this is based on the

urgency of the assignment, nature of assignment, available time, and whether

deadlines can be strict or flexible. The interviewees were asked to give their

views on how pace-setting leadership style influences teacher job satisfaction.

They indicated that in this style, only skilled teachers are acknowledged and

this demotivates most of the teachers who don‘t meet targets. Also, teachers

detest being compelled to produce instant results for goals not set by

themselves. Others indicated that it is one way in which people will go an

extra-mile to exploit their potential, e.g. the best teacher will still work hard

because of a pacesetter.

4.7.1 Correlation Analysis for the Pacesetting Leadership Style and

Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

To test the correlation between pacesetting leadership style employed by the

principal has a positive effect on the teachers‘ job satisfaction in public

83
secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County. The findings are as shown in

Table 4.24.

Table 4. 24: Correlation Matrix for the Pacesetting Leadership Style and

Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

Teachers’
job
satisfaction
Teachers‘ job satisfaction Pearson Correlation 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .
N 62
Pacesetting leadership style employed Pearson Correlation .741
by the principal Sig. (2-tailed) .008
N 62

The study there is a positive relationship between teachers‘ job satisfaction in

public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County and pacesetting leadership

style employed by the principal as expressed by coefficient of 0.741.

Moreover, the p-value was 0.008<0.05 implying that the study rejected the

hypothesis that there is no significant relationship between pacesetting

leadership style employed by the principal and the teachers‘ job satisfaction in

public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County.

4.7.2 Regression Analysis for the Pacesetting Leadership Style and

Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

The model summary in Table 4.25 provides an overview of the key statistics

and performance metrics of the regression model to test the relationship

84
between pacesetting leadership style employed by the principal and teachers‘

job satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County.

Table 4. 25: Model Summary for the Pacesetting Leadership Style and

Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

Adjusted R

Model R R Square Square Std. Error

1 0.741 0.549 0.542 0.378

The findings in Table 4.25 shows that r=0.741. This indicates that level

pacesetting leadership style employed by the principal has a very strong

relationship with teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools in

Embakasi Sub-County. In addition, R2 was 0.549 which indicate that level

pacesetting leadership style employed by the principal explains 54.9 of the

variations in the teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools in

Embakasi Sub-County.

The ANOVA in Table 4.26 is a critical component in statistical analysis,

particularly in assessing the significance of the predictor variables in a

regression model. This table is instrumental in assessing the overall model fit

and the individual contributions of each predictor variable.

85
Table 4.26: ANOVAa for the Pacesetting Leadership Style and Teachers’

Job Satisfaction

Sum of Mean

Model Squares df Square F Sig.

1 Regression 10.455 1 10.455 73.146 5.63E-12

Residual 8.576 60 0.143

Total 19.031 61

The overall F statistics, (F =73.146, p=5.63E-12<0.05), indicated that there

was a very statistical significant relationship between level pacesetting

leadership style employed by the principal and teachers‘ job satisfaction in

public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County. The null hypothesis was

hence rejected and it was concluded that there is a significant relationship

between pacesetting leadership style employed by the principal and teachers‘

job satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County.

Table 4.27 shows the regression coefficient that estimates coefficients of the

predictor variables in the regression model. These coefficients provide insights

into the strength and direction of the relationships between the predictors and

the dependent variable.

86
Table 4. 26: Regression Coefficientsa for the Pacesetting Leadership Style

and Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

Unstandardized Standardized

Coefficients Coefficients

Std.

Model B Error Beta t Sig.

1 (Constant) 1.131 0.642 1.762 0.082

Pacesetting 0.801 0.236 0.741 3.394 0.001

leadership style

employed by

the principal

The results on test of significance also indicate that level pacesetting

leadership style employed by the principal (β=0.801, p=0.001) was significant

at p<0.05 and 95 confidence level. Using the statistical findings in Table 4.27,

the regression model can be substituted as follows:

Y= 1.131 + 0.801X4

Where;

Y = Teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools in

Embakasi Sub-County

X4 = Pacesetting leadership style employed by the principal

87
4.7.3 Discussion for Pacesetting Leadership Style and Teachers’ Job

Satisfaction

The study revealed that the principal consistently modifies the goals that

teachers are expected to achieve, selectively assigns proficient teachers to

particular duties, fosters self-motivation among staff members, maintains

frequent communication, and assumes decision-making authority for teachers.

The study additionally revealed that the principle frequently imposes stringent

deadlines for work completion, sets a leading example, and expects immediate

outcomes from allocated duties. This leadership style involves the leader

establishing elevated expectations for the group they represent (Goleman,

2000). The leaders exhibit the tasks they are managing and subsequently want

their subordinates to do the same (Bashir & Khalil, 2017). They assert that if

staff are unable to fulfill the established targets, they are subsequently replaced

with individuals who are capable of doing so.

The study revealed that the principle occasionally coerces teachers to achieve

the established objectives and optimizes the capabilities of each teacher. This

conclusion contradicts the findings of Rani and Prasad (2017), who

demonstrated that the pacesetting leadership style of teachers did not have a

substantial impact on teacher efficiency. The study also revealed that the age

of the instructors influenced the relationship between pacesetting leadership

style and teacher effectiveness. Specifically, it found that pacesetting

leadership style is inversely associated with teacher effectiveness. These

instructors experienced a sense of being overwhelmed by the leader's high

expectations and disliked his inclination to assert authority, which in turn

88
affected the overall atmosphere and levels of contentment inside the school

(Goleman, 2000).

4.8 Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

The respondents were asked to indicate their level of job satisfaction with

statements related to teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools in

Embakasi Sub-County. The results were as shown in Table 4.28.

Table 4.28: Level of Teachers’ job satisfaction in Public Secondary

Schools in Embakasi Sub-County

Statement VS S U SS NS Mean Std.

F% F% F% F% F% Dev.
Working conditions
Amount of 15 23.9 37 4 6.7 3 5.5 2 3.7 3.951 0.928
workload per 60.1
week
Availability of 29 47.2 26 --- --- 7 11.0 4.143 0.663
staff housing 41.7
within school
Special services 11 17.2 37 5 7.4 6 9.2 4 6.7 3.712 0.570
e.g. free lunch 59.5
provided by
school
Extent of 27 44.2 18 8 12.9 5 8.0 3 5.5 3.988 0.681
provision with 29.4
teaching
equipment
The pupil to 18 29.4 39 1 1.8 2 2.5 2 3.1 4.135 0.820
teacher ratio in 63.2
the classrooms
Availability of 27 44.2 23 9 14.1 1 1.8 2 3.1 4.172 0.953
transport services 36.8
by the school
Elaboration of 46 74.8 13 2 2.5 1 0.6 1 1.8 4.656 0.732
job description 20.2
by the principal
Pay and promotion
Adequate salary. 9 14.1 26 8 12.9 8 12.9 11 17.8 3.221 0.838
42.3
Availability of 36 58.3 26 --- --- --- 4.583 0.995
promotion 41.7
opportunities
Other benefits 38 61.3 24 --- --- --- 4.614 0.988
insurance etc. 38.7

89
Job security and 27 43.6 22 4 6.1 3 5.5 6 9.8 3.969 0.769
permanence 35.0
Work relationships
Relationship 1 1.8 29 10 8 13.5 13 21.5 2.919 0.965
with other 47.2 16.0
teachers
Relationship 3.686 0.989
with the 12 19.2 32 8 12.1 8 12.6 3 4.7
principal. 51.4
Relationship 23 36.8 8 12.3 10 8 12.3 14 22.1 3.279 0.928
with 16.6
subordinates.
Recognition
The way your 19 30.7 25 6 9.8 5 8.6 7 11.0 3.686 0.528
job performance 39.9
is
acknowledged.
The way your 6 10.3 12 9 14 20 2.523 0.985
views are taken 20.1 14.0 22.9 32.7
by the principal.
Your 4 6.1 29 9 15.3 9 14.1 11 18.4 3.070 0.970
involvement in 46.0
decision making
on school
matters.
Your 12 33 9 6 9.8 2 2.8 3.779 0.982
involvement in 20.1 52.8 14.5
choosing
incentives to be
given.
Responsibility
Variety of job 4 6.1 29 9 15.3 9 14.1 11 18.4 3.076 0.509
responsibilities 46.0
you are given
The degree of 26 26 8 2 3.7 --- 4.215 0.817
challenge you 42.1 42.1 12.1
derive from your
job.
The authority 31 49.7 25 2 3.7 2 3.7 2 3.1 4.291 0.822
you are given to 39.9
perform tasks.
The extent to 3 5.5 31 8 12.3 11 17.2 9 15.3 3.127 0.795
which you are 49.7
allowed to make
decisions
The amount of 38 62.0 24 --- --- --- 4.620 0.978
satisfaction you 38.0
derive from your
role.
Administration and Supervision
The type of 8 12.9 27 10 7 11.7 10 16.0 3.233 0.808
feedback you 42.9 16.6

90
receive from the
principal
Supervisory --- 30 11 11 17.2 11 17.2 2.965 0.901
strategies used 47.9 17.8
by the principal
to assess you.
Appraisal 1 1.2 27 12 10 16.0 13 20.9 2.884 0.841
procedures 42.9 19.0
employed by the
principal
Provision of --- 2 2.8 8 18 34 1.907 0.544
chance to lead. 13.6 29.0 54.7
Adequate 21 29 6 5 7.5 1 2.3 4.023 0.801
opportunity for 33.6 46.7 9.8
change in duties

Use of skills and abilities

Opportunity to --- 29 13 12 19.0 9 14.7 2.975 0.858
learn new skills. 46.0 20.2
Support for 32 52.3 23 5 7.9 2 2.8 --- 4.392 0.755
additional 36.9
training in skills.
Information 35 57.1 27 --- --- --- 4.570 0.521
availed by 42.9
principal on
existing
trainings.
Willingness of 19 26 12 4 6.1 1 0.9 3.975 0.959
the principal to 31.3 42.5 19.2
secure study
leave.

Legend: VS= Very Satisfied, S= Satisfied, U= Undecided, SS= Somewhat

Satisfied, NS=Not Satisfied at all.

As per the Table 4.28, on elaborating of job description by the principal,

46(74.8%) of the respondents were very satisfied, and 13(20.2%) were

satisfied. On other benefits (insurance etc.), 38(61.3%) of the respondents

were very satisfied, and 24(38.7%) were satisfied. Further, 36(58.3%) of the

respondents were very satisfied and 26(41.7%) were satisfied with the

availability of promotion opportunities. Also, on the availability of transport

services by the school, 27(44.2%) of the respondents were very satisfied, and

91
23(36.8%) were satisfied. On availability of staff housing within school,

29(47.2%) of the respondents were very satisfied, and 26(41.7%) were

satisfied. On pupil-to-teacher ratio in the classrooms, 39(63.2%) of the

respondents were satisfied, and 18(29.4%) were very satisfied.

Regarding the extent of provision with teaching equipment, 27(44.2%) of the

respondents were very satisfied, while 18(29.4%) were satisfied. On job

security and permanence, 27(43.6%) of the respondents were very satisfied,

while 22(35.0%) were satisfied. Moreover, on the amount of workload per

week, 37(60.1%) of the respondents were satisfied, and 15(23.9%) were very

satisfied. On the special services e.g. free lunch provided by school,

37(59.5%) of the respondents were satisfied and 11(17.2%) were very

satisfied. On adequate salary, 26(42.3%) of the respondents were satisfied

while 11(17.8%) were not satisfied.

In line with work relationships, 32(51.4%) of the respondents were satisfied

and 12(19.2%) were very satisfied with their relationship with the principal.

On the relationship with subordinates, 23(36.8%) of the respondents were very

satisfied, while 14(22.1%) were not satisfied and 10(16.6%) were undecided.

On the relationship with other teachers, 29(47.2%) of the respondents were

satisfied, 13(21.5%) were not satisfied, and 10(16.0%) were undecided.

As per the recognition, 33(52.8%) of the respondents were satisfied, and

12(20.1%) were very satisfied with their involvement in choosing incentives

to be given. On the way their job performance is acknowledged, 25(39.9%) of

the respondents were satisfied and 19(30.7%) were very satisfied. However,

92
11(18.4%) of the respondents were not satisfied, 9(15.3%) were somewhat

satisfied while 9(14.1%) were undecided on whether their involvement in

decision making on school matters. While, 20(32.7%) of the respondents were

not satisfied, 14(22.9%) were somewhat satisfied, and 9(14.0%) were

undecided on the way their views are taken by the principal.

In regards to responsibility, 38(62.0%) of the respondents were very satisfied,

and 24(38.0%) were satisfied with their role. On the authority they are given

to perform tasks, 31(49.7%) of the respondents were very satisfied, and

25(39.9%) were satisfied. On the degree of challenge they derive from their

job, 26(42.1%) of the respondents were very satisfied, and 26(42.1%) were

satisfied. However, on the extent to which they are allowed to make decisions,

11(17.2%) of the respondents were somewhat satisfied, 9(15.3%) were not

satisfied, while 8(12.3%) were undecided. On the variety of job

responsibilities they are given, 11(18.4%) of the respondents were not

satisfied, 9(15.3%) were somewhat satisfied, and 9(14.1%) were somewhat

satisfied.

As per administration and supervision, 29(46.7%) the respondents were

satisfied, and 21(33.6%) were very satisfied with adequate opportunity for

change in duties. However, on the type of feedback they received from the

principal, 10(16.6%) of the respondents were undecided, 10(16.0%) were not

satisfied and 7(11.7%) were somewhat satisfied. On supervisory strategies

used by the principal to assess them, 11(17.8%) of the respondents were

undecided, 11(17.2%) were somewhat satisfied, and 11(17.2%) were not

93
satisfied. On the appraisal procedures employed by the principal, 13(20.9%) of

the respondents were not satisfied, 12(19.0%) were undecided, and 10(16.0%)

were somewhat satisfied. Moreover, on their provision of chance to lead,

34(54.7%) of the respondents were not satisfied, 18(29.0%) were somewhat

satisfied, and 8(13.6%) were undecided.

On the use of skills and abilities, 35(57.1%) of the respondents were very

satisfied, and 27(42.9%) were satisfied with the information availed by

principal on existing trainings. On the support for additional training in skills,

32(52.3%) of the respondents were very satisfied, and 23(36.9%) were

satisfied. On the willingness of the principal to secure study leave, 26(42.5%)

of the respondents were satisfied, and 19(31.3%) were very satisfied.

However, on the opportunity to learn new skills, 13(20.2%) of the respondents

were undecided, 12(19.0%) were somewhat satisfied, and 9(14.7%) were not

satisfied.

Therefore, Table 4.28 reveals that the highest satisfaction (Mean= 4.656) is

derived from elaboration of job description by the principal, (Mean= 4.62) for

satisfaction derived from role, (Mean= 4.583) for availability of promotion

opportunities and (Mean= 4.656) for information given by the principal on the

existing training opportunities. Nevertheless, teachers derived least

satisfaction from being provided with a chance to lead (Mean= 1.907), the way

their views are taken by the principal (Mean= 2.523) and the appraisal

mechanism applied by the principal (Mean= 4.656).

94
From the interviews, the education officers were required to state the

indicators that showed that the teachers in the sub county were not satisfied.

They indicated that this could be seen with constant complaining of poor

remuneration in comparison to other professions forgetting the profession that

enjoy courtesy of the teaching profession that other don‘t enjoy, negative or no

feedback, and low performance is a pointer that teachers are dissatisfied. Also,

failure to work under deadlines may be a sign that they are demotivated,

teachers tend to defy rules e.g. lateness or half-heartedly done work, and not

attending to learners as expected for example, going to class late and leaving

earlier, not co-operative, not attending for five days, divisions amongst them,

gossiping about the principal. Interviewer P3 noted,

Whenever teachers are dissatisfied, they send numerous transfer

requests from their schools, many are found with disciplinary cases
especially absconding work and the outcome in national exams is
always low.
The interviewees were asked to indicate how they mitigate teacher job

dissatisfaction. They indicated that through conducting regular unplanned

visits to schools to monitor what happens there, through job evaluation to

helped remunerate teachers based on their contribution in the learning process

or by considering their skills and critical services they offer e.g. SNE teachers

get an allowance because of the nature of their work, through collaborative

leadership involving all in discussion making, through dialoguing with the

teachers by asking them to give feedback and also enquiring on areas that need

improvement, and treating them equally in capacity building, and assigning

duties to perform.

95
The interviewer asked about the style of leadership the principals should put in

place to promote teacher job satisfaction in public secondary schools in

Embakasi sub-county. The interviewees indicated that principals should

embrace multiple leadership styles and apply them based on the prevailing

circumstance. Some indicated that a mix of style given the situation at hand

e.g. when conducting staff meeting employ participative, when receiving a

new member of staff employ coaching, when communicating government

policy, use autocratic. Moreover, most of them indicated that they adopt

participative leadership that ensures all teachers are involved, and the staff the

freedom of choice.

The interviewees were asked to state whether they think it would be advisable

for principals to use more than one leadership style. They indicated that

different circumstances arise that call for unique leadership styles and

therefore one leadership style is not sufficient to address all circumstances that

take place or may emerge in a school set up.

4.8.1 Discussion for Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

The study revealed that they expressed contentment with their active

participation in selecting incentives to be provided, as well as with the

recognition of their job success. Berg (2016) found that as employees develop

a stronger belief in their skills and become more independent, their job

satisfaction typically increases. This is because they have a better sense of

autonomy and accomplishment in their positions. Leaders that use a coaching

approach prioritize the development of their team members by providing

96
direction and support to help them acquire new skills and knowledge (Karlsen

& Berg, 2020). The emphasis on learning not only provides employees with

the necessary skills to succeed in their positions, but also cultivates a feeling

of individual and career development, resulting in higher levels of job

contentment.

The investigation additionally confirmed that there was uncertainty over their

satisfaction with the input they received from the principal. The findings

contradict Nwakpa's (2017) assertion that job satisfaction may decline among

employees who perceive a lack of support or struggle to reach the

continuously lofty goals established by their leader. Essentially, although

pacesetting leadership can be helpful in some situations, it necessitates

thoughtful deliberation on its influence on employee welfare and job

contentment, as well as the equilibrium between exacting requirements and the

necessary assistance for people to flourish. The ongoing feedback and

assistance offered by coaching leaders foster a sense of affiliation and

commitment to the organization, hence diminishing the probability of

employee attrition (Jarosz, 2021).

The survey revealed that they expressed contentment with the provision of

support for further enhancement of their skills through training. Young (2018)

found that teachers who experience job satisfaction actively engage in capacity

building initiatives and readily adopt innovative technology and software to

enhance their professional performance. In contrast, experiencing low job

satisfaction leads to regular absences, hostility, intents to leave the job, lack of

97
dedication, and early retirement. The style of leadership plays a crucial role in

determining whether the teaching staff stays in their profession or seeks

employment elsewhere.

98
 CHAPTER FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction

This chapter gives that summary of the data findings, discussion of the data

findings, conclusion drawn from the findings highlighted and recommendation

made there-to. The conclusions and recommendations drawn are focused on

addressing the objective of the study. The objective of this study was to

establish the principals‘ leadership styles influencing teachers‘ job satisfaction

in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County, Nairobi.

5.2 Summary of the Findings

5.2.1: Coaching Leadership Style and Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

The study sought to determine the extent to which coaching leadership style

employed by the principal influences teachers‘ job satisfaction in public

secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County. The study found that the

principal always focuses on helping others achieve their goals, helps teachers

plan for the future, provides guidance when needed, and treats each and every

individual member differently. The research also established that the principal

often is patient with the subordinates and allows for growth. The study further

found that the principal sometimes: rewards the staff, organizes for the staff

workshops and seminars, is flexible and adjusts to the needs of others, is

reflective and helps others learn from their mistakes, and emphasizes honesty

and helping others see the truth.

99
5.2.2: Affiliative Leadership Style and Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

The research aimed to determine how affiliative leadership style employed by

the principal influences teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools

in Embakasi Sub-County. The study found that the principal always regards

teachers as most important. The study also found that the principal often gives

advance notice of changes, permits members to use their own judgment,

allows flexible timelines for completing tasks, encourages equality among

teachers and cadres, gives members positive feedback frequently and

communicates empathetically. The research further found that the principal

sometimes allows teachers to go about their roles uninterrupted, and strives to

know the feelings of their staff. Moreover, the research found that the

principal rarely: schedules the work to be done.

5.2.3: Participative Leadership Style and Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

The study sought to establish how participative leadership style employed by

the principal influences the teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary

schools in Embakasi Sub-County. The research found that the principal

always: ensures equal chance of members spearheading tasks, and encourages

teamwork among teachers. The study also found that the principal often:

encourages staff to expressly give their opinions, is accommodative of other

teachers‘ opinions, clarifies roles to staff members, expresses confidence in

staff despite disagreements, friendly and easy to dialogue with, and shows

understanding towards staff despite holding divergent opinions with them. The

research found that the principal sometimes: genuinely shares information

with staff members, and reaches out to introverted teachers to speak out.

100
5.2.4: Pacesetting Leadership Style and Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

The study sought to examine how pacesetting leadership style employed by

the principal influences teachers‘ job satisfaction in public secondary schools

in Embakasi Sub-County. The study found that the principal always: keeps

revising targets to be met by teachers, only uses skilled teachers for specific

tasks, encourage self-motivation among members of staff, communicates

regularly, and makes decisions for teachers. The study also found that the

principal often: gives strict deadlines of task completion, leads by example,

and demands instant results from assigned tasks. The study found that the

principal sometimes: compels teachers to meet the set targets, and utilizes the

abilities of every teacher to the maximum.

5.3 Conclusions

As per the findings, it can be concluded that the coaching leadership style

employed by the principal in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-

County has a significant positive influence on teachers' job satisfaction

(β=0.814, p=0.002<0.05). The research concluded that teachers who have

experienced coaching leadership tend to be more satisfied with their work,

possibly due to the guidance, support, and professional development

opportunities provided by their principals.

The research deduced that the affiliative leadership style used by principals in

public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County positively influences

teachers' job satisfaction (β=0.843, p=0.005<0.05). The study concluded that

principals who foster a sense of belonging, open communication, and a

101
supportive atmosphere tend to have more satisfied teachers. This style creates

a positive work environment where teachers feel valued and supported.

Based on the findings, it can be concluded that the participative leadership

style employed by principals has a notable impact on teachers' job satisfaction

in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County (β=0.700,

p=0.004<0.05). The study concluded that when teachers are involved in

decision-making processes and their input is valued, they tend to experience

higher levels of job satisfaction, as they perceive their work environment as

more inclusive and collaborative.

The research established that the pacesetting leadership style employed by

principals in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County may have a

mixed influence on teachers' job satisfaction (β=0.801, p=0.001<0.05). The

study also concluded that while this style can set high performance standards

and drive excellence, it may also create stress and dissatisfaction among

teachers if expectations are consistently unattainable. Therefore, the impact of

pacesetting leadership on job satisfaction may vary depending on how it is

executed and balanced with other leadership styles.

5.4 Recommendations

From a practical perspective, the study‘s findings provide potential benefits to

leaders and organizations through insights into the positive impact of school

leaders‘ coaching skills on employees. Therefore, school leaders should

develop coaching skills such as: creating good relationships with employees,

excellent communication and active listening, respect and empathy, and

102
continuous feedback. The study recommends that principals should receive

training in coaching skills to effectively support their teachers' professional

development. This includes active listening, providing constructive feedback,

and setting clear goals.

Principals should foster a culture of inclusivity and support where teachers

feel they belong and can express their concerns openly. Open and transparent

communication should be encouraged, with regular feedback sessions and

channels for teachers to voice their opinions. The study recommends that

principals should recognize and appreciate the efforts of their teachers, both

publicly and privately, to reinforce the sense of being valued. Further,

principals should balance high expectations with a realistic understanding of

teacher workloads and capabilities. Moreover, the study recommends that the

schools should communicate performance expectations clearly and provide

necessary resources and support to help teachers meet these expectations.

Public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County should adjust leadership

approaches as needed to continuously evaluate the impact of the pacesetting

style on teacher well-being and job satisfaction.

The study recommends that the head teacher needs to play the role of a coach

and a mentor at the same time to his/her subordinate. Adoption of leadership

strategies by the schools‘ heads such as a participative style of leadership

creates a conducive environment which will help in improving teachers‘ job

satisfaction

103
There is a need for leaders in learning institutions to contribute not only in

terms of knowledge or ideas but also in making the right decisions and

respond to changes. The school principals' role is to promote academic

performance. The success of what is done in the school is attributed to the

principal. He or she is the pivot around which many aspects of the school

revolve, being the person in charge of every detail of running the school,

whether academic or administrative.

School authorities based on Regional Education office and District Education

office need to develop strategies to deal with the needs of those teachers who

experience less job satisfaction. Proactive attention to this should demonstrate

preparedness on side of school administrators to address teachers and thereby

reduce ineffectiveness among teachers.

Principals should get involved in decision making, as key stakeholders, in

formulating school vision, mission and strategic plans, so that there could be

ownership and shared understanding of the school developed missions and

plans.

School principals should endeavor to adopt leadership behaviors that will

create an enabling environment for teacher job satisfaction to maximize

academic results. Trainers, for example, Kenya Education Staff Institute

should consider introduction of courses for training principals to the

understand relationship between academic results and teacher job satisfaction.

104
5.5 Recommendation for Further Research

The study was confined to principals‘ leadership styles influencing teachers‘

job satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi Sub-County, Nairobi,

thus the study recommends that other forms of principals‘ leadership styles in

other schools could be put into considerations. Moreover, there is need to find

out whether the influence of principals‘ leadership styles on teachers‘ job

satisfaction in public secondary schools is similar in other counties. Further

studies could also be conducted using private institutions from a wider variety

of backgrounds. Yet another area that demands attention is leadership and

academic performance or student outcomes. It is expected that high levels of

satisfaction will exert on student learning and raise academic performance. In

this sense studies on assessing leadership impact on student performance

would be invaluable.

105
 REFERENCES

Ahmad, M., & Dilshad, M. (2016). Leadership styles of public schools' heads
in Punjab: A teachers' perspective [Article]. Pakistan Journal of
Social Sciences, 36(2), 907-916.

Akiba, M., Howard, C., & Liang, G. (2019). Comparative research on teacher
learning communities in a global context. The Sage handbook of
comparative studies in education, 419-444.

Akpoviroro, K. S., Kadiri, B., & Owotutu, S. O. (2018). Effect of participative

leadership style on employee‘s productivity. International Journal of
Economic Behavior (IJEB), 8(1), 47-60.

Alonderiene, R., Majauskaite, M. (2016). Leadership style and job satisfaction

in higher education institutions. International Journal of Educational
Management, 30(1), 140–164.

Amedome, S. N. (2018). The influence of leadership on school climate: A case

of senior high schools in Hohoe municipality of Ghana. Academy of
Educational Leadership Journal, 22(2).

Anderson, M. H., & Sun, P. Y. (2017). Reviewing leadership styles: Overlaps

and the need for a new ‗full‐range‘theory. International Journal of
Management Reviews, 19(1), 76-96.

Andriani, S., Kesumawati, N., & Kristiawan, M. (2018). The Influence of the
Transformational Leadership and Work Motivation On Teachers
Performance. International Journal of Scientific & Technology
Research, 7(7).

Bakare, E. B., & Oredeın, A. O. (2021). Comparative study of leadership

styles in public and private secondary schools in ido local government
area of ibadan, oyo state. International Journal of Research-
GRANTHAALAYAH, 9(5), 227-239.

Bashir, I. S., & Khalil, U. D. (2017). Instructional leadership at university

level in Pakistan: A multi-variable based comparative study of
leadership styles of heads of academic departments. Bulletin of
Education & Research, 39(1), 175-186.

Berg, M.E., Karlsen, J.T. (2016) A study of coaching leadership style practice
in projects. Management Research Review. Vol. 39 No. 9, 2016.
P1122–1142.

Bwalya, A. (2023). Leadership Styles. Global Scientific Journal, 11(8).

106
Ch, A. H., Ahmad, S., Malik, M., & Batool, A. (2017). Principals' Leadership
Styles and Teachers' Job Satisfaction: A Correlation Study at
Secondary Level. Bulletin of Education and Research, 39(3), 45-56.

Chung, H., & Van der Horst, M. (2020). Flexible working and unpaid
overtime in the UK: The role of gender, parental and occupational
status. Social Indicators Research, 151(2), 495-520.

Dai, Y. (2019, December). Coaching leadership, job motivation and employee

innovation behavior. In 5th Annual International Conference on Social
Science and Contemporary Humanity Development (SSCHD
2019) (pp. 592-597). Atlantis Press.

Daily, A. (2018). Teacher Job Satisfaction and Principal Leadership Styles: A

Qualitative Case Study (Doctoral dissertation, Northcentral
University).

Eboka, O. C. (2016). Principals Leadership Styles and Gender Influence on

Teachers Morale in Public Secondary Schools. Journal of Education
and Practice, 7(15), 25-32.

Emoja, M. M. (2016). Job satisfaction and teacher turnover intention in

secondary schools in Kakamega Central District, Kenya. International
Journal of Education and Research, 4(3), 85-100.

Ertem, H. Y. (2021). Relationship of School Leadership with School

Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis Study. International Education
Studies, 14(5).

Fung, F., Tan, C. Y., & Chen, G. (2018). Student engagement and
mathematics achievement: Unraveling main and interactive effects.
Psychology in the Schools, 55(7), 815-831.

Gambier, S., & Eclapier, M. (2023). Business Leadership Culture in France

and Japan: Studying Differences and Similarities between France and
Japan Business Leadership Culture.

Gardner, John W. (2016); ―On Leadership‖, New York: The Free Press a
Division of

Getahun, T., Tefera, B. F., & Burichew, A. H. (2016). Teacher's job

satisfaction and its relationship with organizational commitment in
Ethiopian primary schools: Focus on primary schools of bonga town.
European Scientific Journal, 12(13).

Ghavifekr, S., & Pillai, N. S. (2016). The relationship between school‘s

organizational climate and teacher‘s job satisfaction: Malaysian
experience. Asia Pacific Education Review, 17(1), 87-106.

107
Goleman, D. (2000). Leadership that gets results. Harvard Business Review,
March-April, 2000.

Goleman, D. (2017). Leadership that gets results. In Leadership

Perspectives (pp. 85-96). Routledge.

Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2013). Primal leadership:

Unleashing the power of emotional intelligence. Harvard Business
Press.

Henderson, G. H. (2015). Leadership experiences of African American male

secondary urban principals: The impact of beliefs, values, and
experiences on school leadership practices. Journal of African
American Males in Education, 6(2), 38-54.

Hildebrand, [Link] Ott, V. (2011) Qualitative Research in Information Systems

(Eds). London

Hui, R. T. Y., Sue‐Chan, C., & Wood, R. E. (2013). The contrasting effects of
coaching style on task performance: The mediating roles of subjective
task complexity and self‐set goal. Human Resource Development
Quarterly, 24(4), 429-458.

Hussain, M., & Hassan, H. (2016). Leader‘s self-efficacy and effectiveness of

leadership styles. Abasyn University Journal of Social Sciences, 9(1),
86-102.

Ismail, A., Ahmad, N. N., Sanusi, S., Ibrahim, N. S., & Tunca, M. Z. (2023).
Keeping Up Job Satisfaction: Relationship between Coaching Style
Leadership and Employees‘ Belief in Their Abilities to Handle Job.
International Journal of Organizational Leadership, 12(3), 295-310.

Jarosz, J. (2021). The impact of coaching on well-being and performance of

managers and their teams during pandemic. International Journal of
Evidence Based Coaching & Mentoring. Vol. 19(1), P.4–27.

Jonyo, D. O., & Jonyo, B. O. (2017). Teacher Management: Emerging Issues

in Kenya. European Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(1), 18-41.

Kambwambwa, S., Nguni, L., Mukumbi, R. C., Mundia, M., & Walubita, M.
(2019). The impact of social media on face to face interaction among
students: A case study of University of Lusaka (UNILUS).

Karabina, M. (2016). The Impact of Leadership Style to The Teachers‘ job

Satisfaction. European Journal of Education Studies.

Karlsen, J. T., & Berg, M. E. (2020). Coaching leadership style: A learning

process. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning, 13(4), 356-
368.

108
Karlsen, J. T., & Berg, M. E. (2020). Coaching leadership style:A learning
process. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning, 13(4), 3.

Kasinga, S. K. (2010). Influence of principals' leadership styles on public

secondary schoolteachers' levels of job satisfaction in Nairobi
province, Kenya (Doctoral dissertation, University of Nairobi).

Kenya, L. O. (2013). The constitution of Kenya: 2010. Chief Registrar of the

Judiciary.

Kombo, D. K., & Tromp, D. L. (2006). Proposal and thesis writing: An

introduction. Nairobi: Paulines Publications Africa, 5(1), 814-30.

Kruse, K. (2019). Great leaders have no rules: Contrarian leadership principles

to transform your team and business. Rodale Books.

Kuncoro, T., & Dardiri, A. (2017). Teacher performance and work

environment in the instructional process in vocational school. Paper
presented at the AIP Conference Proceedings.

Lam, C. K., Huang, X., & Chan, S. C. (2015). The threshold effect of
participative leadership and the role of leader information sharing.
Academy of Management Journal, 58(3), 836-855.

Lindblom, K. (2018). What does leadership in Education mean National

Council of Teachers of English (NCTE). Extract from online
[Link] org> blog.

Lo, P., & Stark, A. (2021). An examination of participative leadership

amongst national library directors worldwide. Library Hi Tech, 39(1),
101-125.

Macmilan, Inc., pp. 1.

Maxwell, J. C. (2016). What Successful People Know about Leadership:

Advice from America's# 1 Leadership Authority. Hachette UK.

Muga, O. P. (2019). Principals‘ Leadership Styles and their Relationship with

Teachers‘ Job Satisfaction in Siaya, Kisumu and Kajiado Counties in
Kenya (Doctoral dissertation, Kenyatta University).

Mugenda, O.M and Mugenda, A.G (2003). Research Methods: Quantitative

and Qualitative Approaches. ACTS Press, Nairobi, Kenya.

Munir, F., & Khalil, U. (2016). Secondary School Teachers' Perceptions of

Their Principals' Leadership Behaviors and Their Academic
Performance at Secondary School Level. Bulletin of Education and
Research, 38(1), 41-55.

109
Musa, A., Musa, A. U., & Sa‘ad, A. U. (2017). Selection and Acquisition of
Reserve Collection for Under-Graduate Studies in University Libraries
of North Central States of Nigeria. Samaru Journal of Information
Studies, 17(2), 111-129.

Naqshbandi, M. M., Tabche, I. (2018). The interplay of leadership, absorptive

capacity, and organizational learning culture in open innovation:
Testing a moderated mediation model. Technological Forecasting and
Social Change, 133, 156–167.

Nazim, F., & Mahmood, A. (2018). A study of relationship between

leadership style and job satisfaction. Journal of Research in Social
Sciences, 6(1), 165-181.

Northouse, P. G. (2021). Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications.

Nwakpa, P., & Uzoma, A. O. (2017). Management of diversification at the

senior secondary education level in Nigeria by the school
administrators. Educational Research, 8(1), 1-5.

Okoji, O. O. (2016). Relationship between secondary school principals‘

leadership style and teachers‘ job performance in selected rural
communities of Ondo State, Nigeria. Annals of Modern Education,
8(1), 27-36.

Okumbe, J.A. (2007). Educational Management Theory and Practice. Nairobi:

Nairobi University Press.

Omolayo, B. (2015), Effect of Leadership Style on Job-Related Tension and

Psychological Sese of Community in Work Organizations: A Case
Study of Four Organizations in Lagos State, Nigeria, Bangladesh e-
Journal of Sociology, 4(2).

Orodho, J. A. (2005). Elements of Education and Social Science Research

Methods. Nairobi.

Pal, R. K. Leadership: An Introductory Overview. Journal homepage: www.

ijrpr. com ISSN, 2582, 7421.

Pellitteri, J. (2021). Emotional Intelligence and Leadership Styles in

Education. Psychology & its Contexts/Psychologie a Její Kontexty,
12(2).

Ravid, R. (2019). Practical statistics for educators. Rowman & Littlefield

Publishers.

Saxena, A., Desanghere, L., Stobart, K., & Walker, K. (2017). Goleman‘s
leadership styles at different hierarchical levels in medical education.
BMC medical education, 17(1), 1-9.

110
Sims, S. (2018). Essays on the recruitment and retention of teachers (Doctoral
dissertation, UCL (University College London)).

Taherdoost, H. (2016). Validity and reliability of the research instrument; how

to test the validation of a questionnaire/survey in a research.

Teachers Service Commission (2017). Career Progressive Guidelines for

Teachers 2017. Nairobi. Government Printer.

Urick, A. (2016). Examining US principal perception of multiple leadership

styles used to practice shared instructional leadership. Journal of
Educational Administration, 54(2), 152-172.

Usman, M., Ghani, U., Cheng, J., Farid, T., & Iqbal, S. (2021). Does
participative leadership matters in employees‘ outcomes during
COVID-19? Role of leader behavioral integrity. Frontiers in
Psychology, 12, 646442.

Wachira, F. M., Gitumu, M., & Mbugua, Z. (2017). Effect of principals‘

leadership styles on teachers‘ job performance in public secondary
schools in Kieni West Sub-County.

Weingarten, R., Johnson, L., & Ricker, M. C. (2017). Educator quality of

work life survey. American Federation of Teachers.

World Bank. (2015). Are teachers satisfied. Education for Global

Development.

World Development Report 2018: Learning to Realize Education's Promise.

(2017). United States: World Bank Publications.

Young, S. (2018). Teacher retention and student achievement: How to hire and
retain effective teachers. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 84(3), 16-21.

Zou, Y. C., Peng, J., & Hou, N. (2020). Participative leadership and creative
performance: a moderated dual path model. J. Manag. Sci, 33, 39-51.

111
 APPENDICES

Appendix I: LETTER OF INTRODUCTION

University of Nairobi

Department of Education, Policy and Curriculum Studies

P.O Box 92, Kikuyu.

10th July 2023.

Dear Principal,

RE: PERMISSION TO CONDUCT RESEARCH IN YOUR

INSTITUTION.

I am a student at the University of Nairobi carrying out a research on the

Influence of Principals’ Leadership Styles on Teacher Job Satisfaction in

Embakasi Sub County, Nairobi. I kindly request you to allow me to collect

data from your school by completing the questionnaire provided. I promise

that your identity will be treated as confidential and that the data was used for

the purpose of this research only.

Your cooperation will be highly appreciated.

Thank you.

Yours faithfully,

Norman Oyuga Anyinyo.

E55/36099/2019.

112
 Appendix II: Questionnaire for Teachers and Principals

This questionnaire is to collect data purely for academic purposes. The study

sought to investigate the Influence of the Principal‘s Leadership Styles on

Teacher‘s Level of Job Satisfaction in Embakasi Sub County, Nairobi, Kenya.

You have been identified as a respondent. All information will be treated with

strict confidentiality. Do not insert your name or your school in this

questionnaire. Please respond to all the questions as correctly as possible by

ticking or filling in. Tick (√) where applicable.

SECTION A: GENERAL INFORMATION OF THE RESPONDENT.

1. What is your gender? Male……………. Female………….

2. What is your age bracket?

20-30 years ( ) 31-40 years ( ) 41-50 years ( ) 51 years

and above ( )

3. What is your highest academic qualification?

Masters ( ) Bachelor‘s Degree ( ) Diploma( ) Any other ( )

4. How many years have you been teaching in your present school?

Below 2 years ( ) 2-5 years ( ) 6- 10 years ( ) Over 10

years ( )

5. What responsibility do you hold in school?

Class Teacher ( ) Games Teacher ( ) Head of Department ( )

Senior Master ( ) Deputy Principal ( ) Principal ( )

113
PERCEPTION OF PRINCIPAL’S LEADERSHIP STYLE

Please indicate by inserting a tick (√) in the appropriate column that applies to

your principal‘s leadership behavior. Use the 5-point Likert scale where 5 =

Always, 4 = Often, 3 = Sometimes, 2 = Rarely and 1 = Never.

SECTION B

6. Coaching leadership style employed by the 5 4 3 2 1

principal.

i. He helps teachers plan for the future.

ii. Patient with the subordinates and allows for

growth.

iii. Rewards the staff.

iv. Is flexible and adjusts to the needs of others.

v. Organizes for the staff workshops and

seminars

vi. Provides guidance when needed.

vii. Focuses on helping others achieve their

goals.

viii. Is reflective and helps others learn from their

mistakes.

ix. Treats each and every individual member

differently.

x. Emphasizes honesty and helping others see

the truth.

114
 SECTION C

7. Affiliative leadership style employed by the 5 4 3 2 1

principal

i. Regards teachers as most important.

ii. Gives members positive feedback frequently.

iii. Strives to know the feelings of my staff.

iv. Allows teachers to go about their roles

uninterrupted.

v. Schedules the work to be done

vi. Gives advance notice of changes.

vii. Permits members to use their own

judgement.

viii. Encourages equality among teachers and

cadres.

ix. Allows flexible timelines for completing

tasks

x. Communicates empathetically.

SECTION D

8. Participative leadership style employed by the 5 4 3 2 1

principal

i. Friendly and easy to dialogue with.

ii. Expresses confidence in staff despite

disagreements.

115
 iii. Is accommodative of other teachers‘ opinions

iv. Encourages staff to expressly give their

opinions.

v. Shows understanding towards staff despite

holding divergent opinions with them

vi. Genuinely shares information with staff

members.

vii. Clarifies roles to staff members.

viii. Ensures equal chance of members

spearheading tasks.

ix. Encourages teamwork among teachers.

x. Reaches out to introverted teachers to speak

out.

SECTION E

9. Pace-setting leadership style employed by the 5 4 3 2 1

principal

i. Demands instant results from assigned tasks.

ii. Encourage self-motivation among members

of staff.

iii. Makes decisions for teachers.

iv. Utilizes the abilities of every teacher to the

maximum.

v. Compels teachers to meet the set targets.

116
 vi. Keeps revising targets to be met by teachers.

vii. Leads by example.

viii. Gives strict deadlines of task completion

ix. Communicates regularly.

x. Only uses skilled teachers for specific tasks.

SECTION F: JOB SATISFACTION SURVEY.

10. Please read each statement carefully and honestly and give your opinion

about your level of job satisfaction. Please tick (√) to show the most

appropriate response. Use the 5-point Likert scale where 5 = Very satisfied, 4

=satisfied, 3 =Undecided, 2 =Somewhat Satisfied and 1=Not Satisfied at all.

Statements 5 4 3 2 1

Working conditions
i. Amount of workload per week.
ii. Availability of staff housing within school.
iii. Special services e.g. free lunch provided by
school.
iv. Extent of provision with teaching
equipment.
v. The pupil to teacher ratio in the classrooms.
vi. Availability of transport services by the
school.
vii. Elaboration of job description by the
principal.
Pay and promotion 5 4 3 2 1
viii. Adequate salary
ix. Availability of promotion opportunities

117
 x. Other benefits (insurance etc.)
xi. Job security and permanence
Work relationships 5 4 3 2 1
xii. Relationship with other teachers
xiii. Relationship with the principal.
xiv. Relationship with subordinates.
Recognition 5 4 3 2 1
xv. The way your job performance is
acknowledged.
xvi. The way your views are taken by the
principal.
xvii. Your involvement in decision making on
school matters.
xviii. Your involvement in choosing incentives to
be given.
Responsibility 5 4 3 2 1
xix. Variety of job responsibilities you are given
xx. The degree of challenge you derive from
your job.
xxi. The authority you are given to perform
tasks.
xxii. The extent to which you are allowed to
make decisions
xxiii. The amount of satisfaction you derive from
your role.
Administration and Supervision 5 4 3 2 1
xxiv. The type of feedback you receive from the
principal
xxv. Supervisory strategies used by the principal
to assess you.

118
 xxvi. Appraisal procedures employed by the
principal
xxvii. Provision of chance to lead.

xxviii. Adequate opportunity for change in duties

Use of skills and abilities 5 4 3 2 1

xxix. Opportunity to learn new skills.

xxx. Support for additional training in skills.

xxxi. Information availed by principal on existing

trainings.
xxxii. Willingness of the principal to secure study
leave.
Thank you very much for your co-operation and assistance

119
 Appendix III: Interview Schedule For Sub-County Education Officers

(SCDE, SCQASO, SCTSC, CSO).

Thank you for accepting to take part in this interview.

The purpose of this interview is to collect data on the Influence of Principals

Leadership Styles on Teacher Job Satisfaction in Embakasi Sub-County,

Nairobi. I wish to assure you that your responses will remain confidential.

1. a) Do you believe in principals capacity-building their members of

staff? If yes, why?

b) In your opinion, should the principal treat members of staff

differently?

c) Why should principals assist the teachers in achieving their

goals?

d) In your view, how does coaching leadership style influence

teacher job satisfaction?

2. a) Should the principals regard teachers as the most important factor in

learning within the school? Explain.

b) It is necessary for the principal to know the feelings of their teachers.

Do you agree or disagree?

c) It is necessary to promote equality across various cadres of teachers

within the school? Please explain your view.

d) In your own view, how does affiliative leadership style influence

teacher job satisfaction?

3. a) When should the principal promote participative leadership style in

schools?

120
 b) Explain whether each member of staff be given a chance to spearhead

tasks.

c) Should schools create an atmosphere for introverted teachers to speak

out?

d) In your view, how does participative leadership style influence teacher

job satisfaction?

4 a) How much time should principals give their teachers to realize

results in their given assignments?

b) When should principals make decisions for teachers in your opinion?

c) Should the deadlines set by the principals for teachers be strict or

flexible?

d) In your view, how does pace-setting leadership style influence teacher

job satisfaction?

5. As an education officer, what are the indicators that the teachers in your sub

county are not satisfied?

6. How do you mitigate teacher job dissatisfaction?

7. What style of leadership do you think principals should put in place to

promote teacher job satisfaction in public secondary schools in Embakasi sub-

county and why?

8. Do you think it would be advisable for principals to use more than one

leadership style? Give reasons for your response.

Thank you very much for your co-operation and assistance

121
Appendix IV: NACOSTI Research Permit

122
Appendix V: Regional Director Of Education Research Authorization

123
Appendix VI: Sub County Director Of Education Research Authorization

124
Appendix VII: County Commissioner Research Authorization

125