Research methodology
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 Introduction
This chapter discusses the literature related to the subject of study; it reviews previous research, articles on management styles and students’ academic performance according to research objectives.
2.1 Management Styles in Secondary Schools
Management style is the way in which an organization is administered, and how the management reactions and decisions affect those around them and their work (Croom, 2003). The examination of this concept involves many difficulties because of the large number of its definitions (Boris Groysberg, 2010). One theory that views the multidimensional nature of Management, and especially effective management, is the Natemeyer & Hersey’s, (2011) Classics of Organizational Behavior.
The education system in Uganda follows governance structures inherited from the colonial establishment. The World Bank, (2010) contends that the head teachers of pre-independence secondary schools were British and French ex-servicemen who had participated in the Second World War. Others were Christian Missionaries who submitted to authoritarian cannon laws. Head teachers of today’s schools were socialized in these schools from which they inherited the authoritarian style they use. The report further argued that the use of authoritarian style in a changed world with greater awareness about human rights and democracy makes schools and colleges prone to violent strikes. Most head teachers in developing countries catapult from classrooms to positions of leadership without proper leadership training. They depend on charisma and socialization from authoritarian cannon law and ex-servicemen-led-schools. Such a combination of head teacher characteristics is a recipe for authoritarianism in school administration. The professional sophistication of school teachers is another cause of strikes in schools. Benoît et al, (2011) contended that in organizations staffed with professionals, managers face a challenge of constructing an enabling working environment where professionals can perform with little interference from administrative control. Thus, the inherent school between administrative control and teachers’ search for independence in the school setting may not be easy to resolve.
According to Ssekamwa, (1997) the current education administration structure in Ugandan schools, presupposes a participatory approach to decision-making. In Uganda, school councils were introduced to enable students participate in school administration. In addition, Parents- Teachers Associations (PTA) brings together teachers, parents and administrators to plan for the school, and evaluate its performance. Similarly, in universities and tertiary institutions, students, academic staff and non-teaching staff all are represented on governing councils. All these developments facilitate participation in school management. However, participation has a potential to cause discrepancies in schools. For example, well intended students councils can lead to strikes when students’ representatives become pressure groups to influence management decisions. Chip et al, (2013) argue that participation and representative decision-making organs manifest benefits resulting from different points of view. In such a collaborative system, Henkin et al, (2009) noted, school leaders can no longer assume that it is desirable or possible to order the behaviour of staff and other stakeholders.
Three management styles are very common in schools and these include; democratic, autocratic and laisez faire among others as discussed below;
2.1.1 Democratic Management Style
Democratic management style is one of the more popular forms of management in most schools in today’s education sector. Democratic management style employs a system within an organization that allows the flow of free thought and the sharing of ideas between employees and managers as well as students. Democratic management style managers typically want feedback from employees and clients. They want input from other managers and the employees on various organizational policies and decisions. Democratic management style puts everyone in an order of equal importance. Often, employees are given tasks that lead to the overall betterment of the company and if there is disarray, everyone from managers to employees feels the sense of burden and responsibility. Democratic management style also gives the managers a chance to listen and act on employee ideas (Armstrong, 2008).
Scott, (2007) stated that a democratic manager delegates authority to his or her staff, giving them responsibility to complete the task given to them, suggests that Staff will complete the tasks using their own work methods. However, the task must be completed on time. However there is slow decision making because the staff needs to be consulted. Also some employees may take advantage of the fact that their manager is democratic by not working to their full potential and allowing other group members to ‘carry’ them. It is assumed that there is advocacy for cooperative, active and democratic active learning promoted in Gulu secondary school (MoES report, 2012). This study found out the management styles in Secondary Schools in Gulu district.
2.1.2 Autocratic Management Style
The premise of the autocratic management style is the belief that in most cases the worker cannot make a contribution to their own work, and that even if they could, they wouldn’t. McGregor (1960), called the belief system that leads to this mindset Theory X. Under Theory X workers have no interest in work in general, including the quality of their work.
Autocratic managers attempt to control work to the maximum extent possible. A major threat to control is complexity; complex jobs are more difficult to learn and workers who master such jobs are scarce and possess a certain amount of control over how the job is done. Thus, autocratic managers attempt to simplify work to gain maximum control. Planning of work, including quality planning, is centralized. This in agreement with the common sense view, that leaders are essential and have an impact on the performance of the School, Olsen, (2010).
In contrast to the above an autocratic manager dictates orders to their staff and makes decisions without any consultation. The leader likes to control the situation they are in. Decisions are quick because staffs are not consulted and work is usually completed on time. However this type of management style can decrease motivation and increase staff turnover because staff are not consulted and do not feel valued. The concept of management held here is that management must change (Grant, 2009). This study established the relationship between management styles and students’ academic performance in secondary school in Gulu district?
2.1.3 Laissez-Faire
Morgan, (2012) asserts that a laissez faire manager sets the tasks and gives staff complete freedom to complete the task as they see fit. There is minimal involvement from the manager. The manager however does not sit idle and watch them work! He or she is there to coach or answer questions, supply information if required. There are benefits; staffs develop to take responsibility which may lead to improve motivation. However with little direct guidance from the manager staff may begin to feel lost and not reach the goals originally set within the time frame.
Nsubuga, (2010) indicated that there is a very negative correlation between the laissez faire management style and the school performance in secondary schools. He established that head teachers who used the laissez faire leadership style tend to fail to follow up those they have delegated tasks to and consequently performance decline. They leave everything to the mercy of their subordinates, some of whom may lack the necessary skills and competence to execute the work. Others may simply not like to do the work unless they are supervised. Laissez faire style is not the best leadership style to use in the school’s organization because complete delegation without follow-up mechanisms may create performance problems, which are likely to affect the school’s effectiveness. This is in agreement with Cordón-Pozo,. (2007) study of laissez-faire management shows that it is associated with the highest rates of truancy and delinquency and with the slowest modifications in performance which lead to unproductive attitudes and disempowerment of subordinates.
2.2 Management Styles and Students’ Academic Performance
It is apparent that management plays a very critical role in galvanizing all the other factors in the school together. However, in spite of the importance of management, its contribution to improved school performance will not be maximized, unless management is distributed and shared with the significant others. The researcher agrees with the school of thought that the concept of management must change, as Grant, (2009) argues that a different understanding of management is needed; a shift from management as headship to distributed form of tasks in teams .There is increasing evidence that management makes a difference in schools. A few scholars have made sustained contributions to the question of how formal management managers affects a variety of school outcomes, but many others have contributed to the accumulation of evidence that mangers do, in fact, make a difference (Heck et al, 2009).
Cordón-Pozo,. (2007) conducted a study on classroom management and the teachers’ leadership on student performance. From their research they summarized that disciplinary problems in the class intervene with learning and disables the teacher from delivering lessons in an appropriate manner. The manager, who is unable to control the disciplinary problem, neglect the lessons and failed to prompt students with proper learning and feedback. Monitoring in the school and specifically class also becomes a difficult task for teachers on a regular basis. In contrast they found that a strong and consistent school management with skill in controlling disciplinary problems has a significant impact on student achievement. Nsubuga et al, (2008) felt that an orderly task oriented approach to teaching and learning has the best effect on both the conduct and content management of the student.
Chung, E. (2010), from his study found that a flexible manager (teacher or head teacher) providing them with fun during lesson dissemination and enabling them with unlimited choice are able to develop student growth and control the classrooms. Bentley, (2008) found that effective classroom or school management is directly influential in bringing about high academic achievement among students in schools.
Rick et al, (2007), found that managers’ inability to effectively manage for instance a teacher in the classroom often contributes low achievement in academics. The studies found that disproportionate ratio between the teacher and students in a class often results in low academic performance among students. Stewart, (2007) from his studies on classroom behavior of students concluded that teachers who produce high quality students invariably use pro-active approaches to discipline. They also inferred that there are three important issues in classrooms:
Classroom will have to engage the students with active participation, teachers who are capable of making the students comply with their instructions are successful in controlling problem behaviours and graded as high quality academic performers. They also indicated that this will be enabled only when the school management help the teachers’ have a structured administrative capacity. The third issue of good governance in the classroom depended on the social interactions between the teacher and the student and between the peer group in small group settings. Downer finally added that these findings taken together contribute to a scientific understanding of how teachers can regulate student classroom behavior which positively influences the performance of learners in the school (Stewart, 2007).
Bowers, (2010), found that it is the responsibility of the school management to develop a conducive academic creative best learning environment possible. Economically disadvantaged schools with children hailing from poor social strata are subjected to teacher inability to manage effectively both the subject and students. This condition mostly, leads to low student achievement (Clotfelte et al, 2007). The probable reason quoted for this condition is employing new teachers with less exposure and less capability in economically disadvantaged schools, where students are equally disadvantaged. According to Palmer et al, (2008) classroom management is directly related to student involvement in learning and performance.
In the study of Mokhlis,, (2009) it was found that high quality management strongly correlated with student achievement. The sample was large consisting of elementary, 7 middle and 7 high schools. The sample reflected a diverse range of student population. The study was elaborate and the socio-economic status of the student was also considered.
Freiberg et al, (2009) made use of a program which emphasized preventing indiscipline in School prior to developing and improving student behavior. From their study they concluded that it is most important to have consistency in classroom management styles and cooperative discipline with an understanding of teacher- student participation in the class.
Higgins et al, (2009) did a study on comparison of urban school teachers and students and noted that when teachers claim strong emotional attachments, strict guidelines and consistency in following rules and regulations, the students felt safe and comfortable. It, according to them yielded high academic turnovers. Researchers therefore concluded that a teacher has to be assertive and aggressive sometimes if they are concerned about performance but these trickle from the school management.
Unal, (2009) studied the three approaches to classroom management in the school, namely, non-interventionist, interventionist and interactionist teachers in the United States. They revealed that while the non-interventionist approach was student-centered, the interventionist was teacher-centered. They found that both had advantages and disadvantages, while a non-interventionist teacher gave freedom to the students for self-correction of inappropriate behaviours, the interventionist teachers identified and helped them to correct inappropriate behavior. The students in the first category become self-made and manage their own behaviours, whereas, the students belonging to the second category were dependent on somebody for directions. The interactionist teacher is found to the best among the three.
Walker, (2009) from his study found out that authoritative style of management in the class allows teachers teaching excellence in influencing the students’ academic and social dimensions. Students in an authoritative classroom were mostly high in their achievement. They also indicated that such teachers can even reduce the percentage of dropout.
In one of the interesting studies conducted by Poulou , (2009), it was revealed that management will be facilitated by teacher-student interpersonal relationships such as mutual respect, inspiring attention and commitment. Recent researches in management styles and their impact on student outcomes have found student-cantered classrooms to be more effective in providing overall development among the students than teacher-centered classroom management styles (Freiberg et al, 2009).
Milner et al, (2010) from their studies found that when students hail from multiple cultures consisting of diverse languages, religions and ethnicities, management becomes highly difficult. Implementation of discipline and regulations of the school will be highly stressful unless the teacher is capable of a contingent classroom management. But Milner et al, (2010) also felt that this kind of classroom management will require a great deal of support from the school administration.
A study conducted by Weiner et al, (2010) to understand the issues related to management in urban schools specifically, he found that the teachers need to put in enormous efforts and commitment to enable the students be successful in their academic skills and social skills as urban classroom situation poses more problems due to the great number, especially when the urban schools are placed in high poverty neighbor hoods. The high poverty areas present problems of indiscipline more than the middle class and upper class schools. Agba et al, (2010) correlated teacher management styles in the classroom with student academic performance. In line with many studies and researches Agba et al, (2010) found that management style has a significant positive correlation to student academic performance. They found the relationship between student-student, student-teacher also equally contribute to either positive or negative performance in academics. Allen et al, (2010) found that management especially in class is an essential factor in bringing about academic success in students and emphasized the need for training teachers on strong classroom management practices. According to them, a highly qualified head teacher and teacher would have attained mastery in school management practices, taking into consideration the time, the space, the size and the material to be delivered to the students. This study will establish the relationship between management styles and students’ academic performance in Gulu secondary Schools clearly indicating the gaps.
2.3 Challenges of executing management styles
According to Smythe, (2007), there is lack of clear definition and understanding of management goals. Active debate ensures all stakeholders are aware of the management goals and they work towards them but when there is little debate, goals are not clearly defined and each manager may work towards achieving personal goals which are not in line with organizational goals. In such a case, organizational performance is likely to be adversely affected. This is common with autocratic management style where debate is common and the managers act independently.
There is opposition to implementation of management strategies Kroeger, (2010). In many cases, employees oppose organizational change since they are unsure of the effects it will have on their careers. Unless they are involved in change through dialog and communication, they are likely to oppose change. Strategic management involves organizational change. With little debate between senior employees, strategic management goals are likely not to be met due to opposition from staff.
According to Amy, (2011) while it is important that management allows employees to participate in decision making and encourages involvement in the organization’s direction, managers must be cognizant of the potential for employees to spend more time formulating suggestions and less time completing their work. Upper-level management will not support a participative management program if they believe employees are not meeting their daily or weekly goals. Some suggestions for overcoming this potential problem are to set aside a particular time each week for workers to meet with management in order to share their ideas or to allow them to work on their ideas during less busy times of the day or week. Another idea that works for some managers is to allow employees to set up individual appointments to discuss ideas or suggestions.
Managers should remember that participative management is not always the appropriate way to handle a given situation. Employees often respect a manager that uses his or her authority and makes decisions when it is necessary. There are times when, as a manager, it is important to be in charge, make a decision, and then accept the responsibility for the choices made. For example, participative management is probably not appropriate when disciplinary action is needed (Amy, 2012). When managers look upon their own jobs as a privilege instead of as a responsibility, they will fail at making participative management work. They will be less willing to turn over some of the decision-making responsibility to subordinates. Another reason that participative management fails is that managers do not realize it is not the same as delegating or simply shifting responsibility. Participation alone has no value; it is only an effective tool if it is used to solve problems and meet goals. Some managers believe that inviting employees to join in meetings and form committees will create a successful participative management program. However, these measures are only successful when employees’ ideas are accepted by management and implemented.
According to Cosmato, (2011) the more people who are involved in a decision process, the more difficult it is to reach a consensus. There may be sessions that turn into nothing more than lengthy debates and conjecture with no forward progress towards resolution. Opinions may or may not be founded in facts but be based on emotions. In addition, the goals of the organization and the way that a proposed move affects those goals must be considered. It can be difficult to get employees to focus on the welfare of the company as opposed to their own (e.g. proposed layoffs) or the welfare of the company over the welfare of their respective departments (e.g. proposed outsourcing of the marketing department).
There is a danger of a democratic style of management being adopted only in name and not in practice. If a company claims that it has a democratic leadership style but makes decisions autocratically either before or after employee consultation that company will likely experience greater employee dissatisfaction and discontent that it would if it had stated the case accurately (Cosmato, 2011).
McDonough, (2013) found out that one of the greatest challenges of the democratic style of leadership is emerging from the bottom: the “people’s choice”. If the consensus of the group goes against that of management, those individuals must be willing to adopt the consensus. If they override the group’s decision, it is likely that the group will assume that management is only pretending to participate in a democratic leadership style and the company will experience the same consequences as those of pseudo-participation.
According to Brick, (2008) autocratic style of management leads to work getting done on time because there are less people involved in the decision making process. The problem with this type of management style is that the staff are going to eventually lost motivation working in an environment where they have no say and employee turnover is likely to run high as they move on to other opportunities where they can have an impact.
In Laissez Faire Management Style the team is given the freedom to complete the job or tasks in any way they deem it should be done. It is a hand off approach at the management level in terms of direction, but the manager is there to answer questions and provide guidance as needed. This is a good way to help develop individual contributors into leaders which is only going to serve to make your team stronger in the long run. On the flip side, it can lead to conflict on the team if some employees try to assume the role as a leader in the interim or to dictate to others how their work should be done (Brick, 2008).
