www.iaard.net
eISSN:2455-4464
International Association of Advances in Research and Development
International Journal of Economics
And Business Management
International Journal of Economics and Business Management, 2015, 1(2),32-47
An Assessment of Leadership Style in Fruits and Vegetable Cooperatives in Gamo
Goffa Zone, Snnpr, Ethiopia
1M.Karthikeyan
1
Department of Cooperatives, Institute of Cooperatives & Development Studies, Ambo University, P.O.Box-24, Ambo, Ethiopia,
E-mail: [email protected]
.........................................................................................................................................................................
Abstract : Cooperatives being voluntary and democratic grass-root organizations of people, leadership serves as
an instrument of group action and a catalyst agent. Cooperative Leadership enables the Leader to empower people
and maximize their own potential as well as their staff’s while creating a learning culture within the workplace of
people acting together whose efforts move them towards a shared vision for mutual benefit by using the
appropriate leadership style. Whether the cooperative staff is few or in hundreds, utilizing an appropriate
leadership principles/style provide businesses and individuals with a unique competitive advantage that will keep
them positioned on top and enable you to become a successful coach and leader. Leadership Style becomes the key
to the formulation and implementation of strategy and plays an important role in work-group members’ activity
and in team citizenship. The present study intended to assess leadership styles of cooperative leaders in selected
fruits and vegetable cooperatives in Gamo Goffa Zone in SNNP regional state. The objectives are: to describe the
leadership styles practiced by leaders of selected Cooperatives; to assess the effect of leadership style on the
functioning of selected cooperatives; and to examine the influence of factors on the leadership style of cooperative
leaders. Multi-stage sampling was adopted to select the cooperatives and respondents. Five fruits and vegetable
cooperatives were selected at the first stage; 33 cooperative leaders, 75 members, 11 employees and 15 experts
were selected at the second stage. Totally 134 respondents were selected for the study. The study was more of
qualitative in nature supplemented with quantitative data also. Descriptive statistics was used for the first two
objectives, and multiple linear regression analysis was employed to find the influence of factors on leadership
style. The leaders of fruits and vegetable cooperatives in Gama Gofa Zone preferred situational, democratic,
autocratic, and free-rein style of leadership. There is relationship between age, experience, education, and
leadership style of cooperative leaders and considerable change in the style based on the situations. There is both
positive and negative effect of leadership style on the functioning of cooperatives; but there is more positive effect.
The negative effect is due to the autocratic and free-rein style of leadership used by the leaders in cooperatives as
perceived by the members, employees, and experts. The regression result reveals that there is positive influence of
factors under leader related, follower related, and organization related variables category, whereas negative effect
of government interference and cooperative proclamation is found under external environment related variables. It
is recommended that the leaders must prefer and practice more of democratic style as they are cooperative leaders;
proper training programme and leadership development programme should be offered to make them aware of
leadership styles and skills, encouraging young members as leaders, and strong relationship between government
and cooperatives for mutual benefit; and thereby combined effect of leadership style on the functioning of
cooperatives can be improved.
Key words: Cooperative leadership, leadership style, democracy.
.........................................................................................................................................................................
member-based, member-driven and member-owned,
Introduction
Leadership is one of the earliest social
institutions which had profound appeal and powerful
influence in shaping the destiny of mankind and
directing the course of history. Leadership as a
phenomenon is relevant Leadership to political parties
as well as to non- political autonomous social groups
formed on the basis of cultural, social or economic
interest. In any human organization or situation, the
leadership plays an indispensable role and makes
stronger and deeper influence. In the new economic
policy regime, when the cooperatives have to rely more
on competitive ability rather than state support, the
leadership becomes strategic for the cooperatives in
order to establish an identity, which is akin to what a
genuine cooperatives should be [1]. Cooperatives being
voluntary and democratic grass-root organizations of
people, leadership serves as an instrument of group
action and a catalyst agent. Leadership in cooperatives
has multifarious functions: mobilizing people for joint
action, moulding the attitudes of members, integrating
the group, imparting values, making decisions
involving action commitment and evolving strategies
for implementing the decisions.
The role of Cooperative Leader is to see that
the cooperative not only succeeds in its economic
activity as a business enterprise but also functions in
accordance with Principles of Cooperation. If people
join hands to reach a common goal someone must take
M.Karthikeyan
Page No.32
International Journal of Economics and Business Management, 2015, 1(2),32-45
the initiative, assume responsibility, give advice and
direction and above all inspire others with the will to
achieve the result. In a cooperative enterprise there is
no sleeping member concept. Cooperative Leadership
enables the Leader to empower people and maximize
their own potential as well as their staff’s while creating
a learning culture within the workplace of people acting
together whose efforts move them towards a shared
vision for mutual benefit by using the appropriate
leadership style. This study utilized more of qualitative
approach to assess the leadership style of the
cooperative leaders and its effect on the functioning of
selected cooperatives. Further, the influence of factors
on the leadership style was also assessed.
Leadership Styles
The concept of leadership styles is somewhat
vague in that each individual’s style is as personal as
the individuals themselves. Leadership style refers to
the characteristics manner in which an individual leads
others. Early conceptualizations categorized leadership
styles as either autocratic, democratic, or laissez faire
[2]
. According to White and Lippitt, autocratic
leadership styles are exhibited by leaders who maintain
a high degree of control over the group, without
allowing much freedom for participation by group
members in decision-making. The autocratic leader sets
group goals and determines how the group will
accomplish those roles. In other words, the autocratic
leader possesses high goal and means control, and
utilizes low stimulation of group procedures. The
democratic leader, on the other hand, attempts to get the
group to develop the methods or procedures used to set
goals. Therefore, the democratic leader possesses low
goals and means control, and utilizes high stimulation
of group procedures. The Laissez-faire leadership style
is characterized by a “hands-off” approach to
leadership. Laissez-faire leaders both possess low goal
and means control, and utilize low stimulation of group
procedures.
Through their work with the situational
approach to leadership, Hersey and Blanchard created
their own leadership styles. They based their leadership
styles on the amount a task-behavior and relationshipbehavior the leader provided followers. In their initial
classification system, leaders could be classified as
having one of the four following styles: telling (high
task, low relationship), selling (high task, high
relationship), participating (low task, high relationship),
or delegating (low task, low relationship). A newer
version of Hersey and Blanchard’s situational
leadership model has been created [3]. In this version,
Situational Leadership II, there areas still four
classifications of leadership styles based on task and
relationship behavior, but leaders are said to have either
directing, coaching, supporting, or delegating
leadership styles.
As with trait theory, researchers became critical
of the styles approach, arguing that it paid little
attention to situational factors or to the complex and
often changing relationship between leaders and
followers. In a bid to overcome the limits of the styles
approach, many researchers began to explore the
situational factors that influence leader-follower
relations and group performance. Such approaches,
called collectively situational or contingent leadership
approaches, began from the position that the
effectiveness of any leadership style is situational
contingent, and hence that a range of styles will need to
be employed in order to be effective across a range of
situations. It was then the aim of leadership research to
identify several different leadership styles and the types
of situations in which they could be effectively adopted.
This ‘tool box’ type approach to leadership took a
number of forms. For example, Fiedler (1964)[4]
developed a ‘least preferred co-worker’ contingency
model, intended to indicate the leader’s motive
hierarchy and hence whether they will focus on, for
example, achievement of task objectives in preference
to supportive working relationships. This approach has
been criticized by Schriesheim and Kerr (1977)[5] as a
‘measure in search of a meaning’ and, indeed, Fiedler’s
explanation of the significance of the LPC score does
seem to have shifted over time.
Perhaps as a result of this, interest in the theory
has waned as more convincing contingency theories
have emerged. House’s (1971)[6] path-goal theory of
leadership sought to explain how leadership behaviours
influence subordinate satisfaction and performance
based on the ‘expectancy theory’ of motivation [7]. This
theory has also shown a propensity to evolve over time,
with the addition of more leader behaviour categories [8]
and different motivational concepts. The end result is
less coherent than the original, and extremely
complicated to apply. Hersey and Blanchard’s
situational leadership model (1984)[9] and John Adair’s
Action Centred Leadership (1973) offered alternative
approaches to situational leadership. The former relies
on an assessment of subordinates ability and readiness
(termed Skill and Will) for determining the appropriate
leadership style to adopt, with the effective style being
both person and task specific. This framework was
similar to an earlier model developed by Tannenbaum
and Schmidt (1958), who presented a continuum of
leadership styles from autocratic to democratic,
designed to be applied after consideration of the
developmental level of subordinates. Adair’s
framework called for a leader to focus on the
completion of the task, the wellbeing of the team and
the development of the individual, with the degree of
attention being given to each varying with the situation.
The 1980’s saw the continuation of research
into leadership styles and contingency, but also a return
to debates surrounding the innate abilities and qualities
of individual leaders in the guise of charismatic and
transformational leadership models [10, 11]. The argument
for reviving this approach, under the loose heading of
‘New Leadership’, was that whilst there are many
behaviours, skills and styles that can be learned and
M.Karthikeyan
Page No.33
International Journal of Economics and Business Management, 2015, 1(2),32-45
adopted by leaders, there remains something
unexplained about how certain kinds of people seem to
naturally emerge as effective leaders. The emphasis of
both transformational and charismatic leadership on the
articulation of a vision and the values which support it
reflected a new conception of leaders as ‘managers of
meaning’, replacing the previous depiction of
leadership as an influence process [12].
James MacGregor Burns (1978) put forward
the idea of ‘transforming leadership’ as a relationship
which bound both leaders and followers ‘in a mutual
and continuing pursuit of a higher purpose’ and
converted leaders into ‘moral agents’ [13]. At the same
time, he highlighted the contrast between the aspiration
and empowering nature of transformational leadership,
compared with the ‘rewards for compliance’ exchange
which underpins transactional leadership. The link
between transforming leadership and vision was made
explicit by those who built on Burns’ theme [14], at the
same time as they amended ‘transforming’ to
‘transformational’.
Vision was also central to the notion of
charismatic leadership, which was presented as an
antidote to widespread organizational downsizing and
the climate of demoralization and demotivation to
which it gave rise. In 1968, Weber had described the
charismatic leader as ‘one who enjoys loyalty and
authority by virtue of a mission believed to be
embodied in him’. In similar vein, Conger (1989) [15]
broke down charismatic leadership into a four-stage
process aimed at instigating organizational change. Key
to the process was a perceived need for change – and a
solution to that need - articulated and role-modelled by
the leader. A focus on very senior leaders, little
situational analysis and technical issues relating to the
direction of causality and of implicit leadership theories
(together with a number of high-profile corporate
scandals involving supposedly charismatic leaders), has
lead to a decline in confidence in this approach For
example, text on Charisma and Leadership in
Organizations, points out that most studies of charisma
tend to involve historical analyses of prominent
political and military leaders already famous for their
supposed charisma, leading to such methodological
criticisms as how one is meant to recognise and so
study charisma as an object of enquiry without treating
charisma as yet another trait. Others are critical of the
assumption that charisma necessarily resides within the
leader figure, arguing that charisma may be attributed
by followers, or produced through the relationship
between social actors [16]. This has led many to argue
that studies of charismatic leadership should focus on
leadership as a collective process rather than something
possessed by the individual.
In response to the above criticisms, and arising
from an increasing awareness of the importance of
social relations in the leadership contract [17], more
recent studies have tended concern themselves with the
notion of leadership as a distributed process. Referred
to also as informal, emergent or dispersed leadership,
these increasingly sophisticated models emphasize the
importance of follower participation, democratic
leadership, and organizational citizenship and argue for
a less formalized, hierarchical model of what leadership
is and where it resides. As such, it represents a marked
contrast to ‘New Leadership’ and its focus on senor
figures within the organization. Various strands exist
within this approach. A number of them – Sims and
Lorenzi’s (1992) ‘SuperLeadership’, Katzenbach and
Smith’s (1993) ‘real teams’, and Kouzes and Posner’s
(1993) ‘credible leaders’ – focus on the ability of
leaders to develop leadership capacity in others, and so
become less dependent on formal leadership. Sims and
Lorenzi refer to this as (1992) ‘leading others to lead
themselves’, while Katzenbach and Smith suggest that
this is done by building commitment and confidence,
creating opportunities and removing obstacles and by
operating as one of the team. For Kouzes and Posner,
credible leaders are ones who are able to (1993) ‘turn
their constituents into leaders’, rather than handing
down leadership from above [18].
Another expression of the turn towards distributed
leadership is an increased focus on leadership skills and
processes, and a recognition that these do not
necessarily reside in those who hold formally
designated leadership positions. This leads, for
example, Knights and Willmott (1992) to suggest that
more attention should be paid to leadership ‘practices’,
by which they mean to the way in which leadership is
constituted in organizational life[19].
In addition to what may be described as
‘mainstream leadership theory’, a range of critical
approaches in recent years have sought to characterise
leadership as an alienating social myth [20]. There is also
a growing body of work that suggests the study of
leadership itself might be fundamentally problematic in
that such studies merely serve to bolster the dominant
belief in patriarchal social structures that serve to
oppress under the guise of empowerment [21]. Finally,
there has been an observable drift, over the years, of
scientific thinking into management thinking,
beginning with the advent of Taylor’s Scientific
Management on the back of the scientific
Enlightenment of the 17th Century. Most recently, the
development of Quantum Theory and Chaos Theory –
dealing respectively with uncertainty and complexity in
the field of science – have lead to the promulgation of
systems thinking and organisational learning as
successors to leadership in the field of organisational
management, with Senge’s The Fifth Discipline (1992)
as a prime example.
In the last 20 years, a new paradigm of
leadership has emerged that shifted emphasis from the
traditional, or transactional, models of leadership
toward of the study of transformational leadership
styles. The concept of transformational leadership was
introduced by Burns (1978) and refined by Bass (1985).
According to Tichy and Devanna (1990),
M.Karthikeyan
Page No.34
International Journal of Economics and Business Management, 2015, 1(2),32-45
"transformational leaders are not dictators. They are
powerful yet sensitive of other people, and ultimately
they work toward the empowerment of others" (p.273).
The concept of transactional versus transformational
leadership style becomes an important aspect in the
overall study of leadership in that, according to Bass
(1985), “the leadership of great men (and great women)
of history has usually been transformational, not
transactional” (p. 26).
The Autocrat
Autocratic leaders make decisions without
consulting their teams. This is considered appropriate
when decisions genuinely need to be taken quickly,
when there's no need for input, and when team
agreement isn't necessary for a successful outcome. The
autocratic leader dominates team-members, using
unilateralism to achieve a singular objective. This
approach to leadership generally results in passive
resistance from team-members and requires continual
pressure and direction from the leader in order to get
things done. Generally, an authoritarian approach is not
a good way to get the best performance from a team.
There are, however, some instances where an autocratic
style of leadership may not be inappropriate. Some
situations may call for urgent action, and in these cases
an autocratic style of leadership may be best. In
addition, most people are familiar with autocratic
leadership and therefore have less trouble adopting that
style. Furthermore, in some situations, sub-ordinates
may actually prefer an autocratic style.
The Laissez-Faire or Free-rein leadership
Laissez-faire leaders don't interfere; they allow
people within the team to make many of the decisions.
This works well when the team is highly capable and
motivated, and when it doesn't need close monitoring or
supervision. However, this style can arise because the
leader is lazy or distracted, and, here, this approach can
fail. The Laissez-Faire manager exercises little control
over his group, leaving them to sort out their roles and
tackle their work, without participating in this process
himself. In general, this approach leaves the team
floundering with little direction or motivation. Again,
there are situations where the Laissez-Faire approach
can be effective. The Laissez-Faire technique is usually
only appropriate when leading a team of highly
motivated and skilled people, who have produced
excellent work in the past. Once a leader has
established that his team is confident, capable and
motivated, it is often best to step back and let them get
on with the task, since interfering can generate
resentment and detract from their effectiveness. By
handing over ownership, a leader can empower his
group to achieve their goals.
The Democrat
Democratic leaders allow the team to provide
input before making a decision, although the degree of
input can vary from leader to leader. This type of style
is important when team agreement matters, but it can be
quite difficult to manage when there are lots of different
perspectives and ideas. The democratic leader makes
decisions by consulting his team, whilst still
maintaining control of the group. The democratic leader
allows his team to decide how the task will be tackled
and who will perform which task. The democratic
leader can be seen in two lights: A good democratic
leader encourages participation and delegates wisely,
but never loses sight of the fact that he bears the crucial
responsibility of leadership. He values group discussion
and input from his team and can be seen as drawing
from a pool of his team members' strong points in order
to obtain the best performance from his team. He
motivates his team by empowering them to direct
themselves, and guides them with a loose reign.
However, the democrat can also be seen as being so
unsure of himself and his relationship with his subordinates that everything is a matter for group
discussion and decision. Clearly, this type of "leader" is
not really leading at all.
Transformational leadership
People with this leadership style are true
leaders who inspire their teams constantly with a shared
vision of the future. While this leader's enthusiasm is
often passed onto the team, he or she can need to be
supported by "detail people." That's why, in many
organizations, both transactional and transformational
leadership are needed. The transactional leaders ensure
that routine work is done reliably, while the
transformational leaders look after initiatives that add
value. Transformational leaders have the ability to
inspire and motivate followers to achieve results that
exceed expectations.
This ability is generally based on three personality
characteristics—charisma; individual attention; and
intellectual stimulation—which are described as
follows:
i.
Charisma: The leader is able to instil a sense of
value, respect, and pride, and to articulate a
vision.
ii.
Individual attention: The leader pays attention
to followers’ needs and assigns meaningful
projects so followers grow personally and
professionally.
iii.
Intellectual stimulation: The leader helps
followers rethink rational ways to examine a
situation and encourages followers to be
creative.
What a Transformational Leader Does: 1. Search for
opportunities. 2. Experiment and take risks. 3. Develop
a vision. 4. Enlist others. 5. Foster collaboration. 6.
Strengthen others. 7. Set an example. 8. Plan small
wins. 9. Link rewards to performance. 10. Celebrate
accomplishments. The development of transformational
leadership evolved from a study by Bernard M. Bass,
entitled, Leadership Performance beyond Expectations,
in which Bass described three functions that
characterize transformational leaders:
M.Karthikeyan
Page No.35
International Journal of Economics and Business Management, 2015, 1(2),32-45
a. Transformational leaders increase subordinates’
awareness of the importance of their tasks and the
importance of performing well.
b. Transformational leaders make subordinates aware of
their needs for personal growth, development, and
accomplishment.
c. Transformational leaders motivate their subordinates
to work for the good of the organization rather than
exclusively for their own personal gain or benefit.
Situational Leadership
In 1958 Robert Tannenbaum and Warren H.
Schmidt proposed a continuum of leadership behaviour
in the decision-making process. Their model is much
like the original Michigan framework. However,
besides purely job-cantered behaviour (or "bosscantered" behaviour, as they termed it) and employeecantered (which they termed "subordinate cantered")
behaviour, they identified several intermediate
possibilities that a manager might consider. This
continuum of behaviour moves from the one extreme of
having the manager make the decision alone to the
other extreme of having the employees make the
decision with minimal guidance. Each point on the
continuum is influenced by factors relating manager,
subordinates, and situation.
Managerial factors include the manager's value
system, confidence in subordinates, personal
inclinations, and feelings of security. Subordinate
factors include: the subordinates' need for
independence, readiness to assume responsibility,
tolerance for ambiguity, interest in the problem, and
understanding of goals, knowledge, experience, and
expectations. Situational factors that affect the decision
making include: the type of organization, group
effectiveness, the problem itself, and time pressures.
Fiedler's situational theory identifies effective
leadership styles under changing situations [29]. These
can be either Relationship motivated or Task motivated.
A relationship-motivated leadership style relies
on good personal relations and group participation to
accomplish tasks. Leaders with this style perform most
effectively in modest control situations which present
mixed problems related to task, group members and
authority.
The relationship-motivated leader gets
cooperation from the group by being sensitive,
diplomatic and tactful. Task-motivated leaders prefer
clear guidelines and standardized or patterned work
methods to complete successfully the task they have
accepted, have strong task orientation and perform best
in high-control or low-control situations. The highcontrol situations are those where leaders get support
from group members and the tasks are clearly specified.
In addition, leaders have high authority, which enables
them to use their powers of reward and punishment
appropriately. Low-control situations - the opposite of
high control situations - are relatively difficult,
challenging and straining. It is noted that leaders not
only consider the likelihood of a follower accepting a
suggestion, but also the overall importance of getting
things done. Thus in critical situations, a leader is more
likely to be directive in style simply because of the
implications of failure.
Bureaucratic leadership
Bureaucratic leaders work "by the book." They
follow rules rigorously, and ensure that their staffs
follow procedures precisely. This is a very appropriate
style for work involving serious safety risks (such as
working with machinery, with toxic substances, or at
dangerous heights) or where large sums of money are
involved (such as handling cash).
Transactional Leadership
Burns (1978) viewed the two as a dimensional
construct in which transactional leadership was at
opposite ends of the same continuum. He characterized
transactional leadership as being based on interactions
between leaders and followers in which something of
value was exchanged, such as rewards for performance.
At the other end of the continuum, he characterized
transformational leadership as occurring when leaders
and followers interacted in such a way that the level of
motivation and morality in both the leader and the
follower were raised.
In contrast, Bass (1985) viewed the two as
complementary constructs, and as such, saw it possible,
in fact almost necessary, for the leader to engage in
both transactional and transformational leadership
behaviors. Transformational leadership is not a
substitute for transactional leadership, but rather tends
to add to its effectiveness [22]. Bass characterized the
transactional leader as someone who worked within the
existing organizational culture of the group to recognize
and clarify the roles and responsibilities of followers
such that desired outcomes were achieved. These
desired outcomes were achieved when the leader
negotiated with followers an exchange relationship of
reward for compliance. In other words, transactional
leaders explain to followers what is required of them
and then negotiate the compensation followers will
receive if they meet the requirements, either the
promise of reward for good performance or the threat
of punishment for poor performance identified four
characteristics of transactional leaders: (1) contingent
reward in which the leader provides rewards if
followers meet agreed upon performance and
designated goals; (2) active management-by-exception
in which the leader watches and searches for follower
mistakes such that corrective action can be taken; (3)
passive management-by-exception in which the leader
only intervenes in a followers work if performance
goals are not being met; and (4) laissez-faire leadership
in which the leader withdraws and avoids responsibility
and decision-making when performance goals are not
met. Laissez-faire leadership can actually be considered
a non-leadership factor as it represents the absence of
leadership [23].
A leader matching the appropriate leadership
style is vital to manage perishable and seasonal
products like Fruit and Vegetable and also to exercise
M.Karthikeyan
Page No.36
International Journal of Economics and Business Management, 2015, 1(2),32-45
the principles of cooperatives as well. One leader may
feel comfortable using a participative style, in which
the group makes the decisions. This leader would
involve campers in decisions as full members of a
group. Another leader may not feel comfortable with
extensive group involvement and would prefer to exert
a bit more control. Neither of these approaches is better
than the other. Most people who study leadership
believe that choosing an appropriate leadership style
depends on several factors, including the leader, the
group, and the situation.
Leaders' maturity, knowledge, previous
experiences, biases, and skills have a strong impact on
the styles of leadership they are comfortable using. The
group's size, maturity, and purposes, and the group
members' experience levels and ages, combine with
other factors to influence leadership style. The
situation, which includes the task, time constraints,
environment, politics, Technology, and other external
forces, also influences leadership style [24].
It is important to understand the appropriate
styles to situation in cooperative. Often, activities are
not successful if the style mismatch with a leadership
style and participant needs. How then, does a leader
know which style is appropriate? While there certainly
are individual comfort levels in using particular
leadership styles over others? Indeed, understanding
and being able to use all types of leadership styles is
necessary. It is important to bear in mind that not all
styles are equally effective with all people. As with
leaders, participants are more comfortable with, and
have a better response to, certain types of leadership.
Conceptual Framework
The independent variables like: Leader related
variables, Follower Related Variables, Organization
related variables and External environment variables
like Legal, Social, cultural and Technological factors
has identified in the literature as factors that may
influence the leadership styles. A conceptual model, for
this study depicting the relationship between selected
variables/factors and influencing leadership styles of
cooperative leaders is given hereunder.
Dependent Variable
Independent Variables
Leader Related Variables
 Age
 Gender
 Education
 Experience as leader
Follower Related Variables
 Attitude
 Acceptance
 Follower Size
 Confidence
Organization Related Variables
 Work environment
 Production control
 Distribution system
External Environment Variables
 Coop. Proclamation
 Government interference
 Technology
 Social
 Cultural
Leadership Style
Source: Researcher’s own sketch
Problem Statement
In the past regime, cooperatives continued to
experience top dawn management, government
intervention in internal affairs of cooperatives in the
form of giving directives etc especially at the grass root
level, corruption by the leadership and weak and
submissive management. Federal Cooperative Agency
also attributes weak performance of cooperative to the
ineffectiveness of their leadership [25, 26]. The word of
Canadian co-operators stated as “In every flourishing
cooperative, giving good services over the longer
period of years; there is always loyal band of devoted
men and women giving leadership,” reveal the
contribution of leaders to the success of cooperative
organization.
Nowadays in Gamo Goffa too,
cooperative members don’t trust leaders. This is found
to be the main cause for lack of cohesiveness among
cooperative communities.
The role of Cooperative Leader is to see that
the cooperative not only succeeds in its economic
activity as a business enterprise but also functions in
accordance with Principles of Cooperation. But these
leaders could not manage the cooperatives properly if
they have no enough knowhow on the area of the
leadership style. Otherwise, they have been become
damage cooperative values, team sprite and the overall
objectives. After organizing a cooperative, if there is no
a good management and organizational control the
M.Karthikeyan
Page No.37
International Journal of Economics and Business Management, 2015, 1(2),32-45
cooperation doesn’t bringing a good result. And this
influences on the development of cooperatives in our
country. Another problem that we can see even now is,
the managers/leaders are illiterate and they work based
on part time. Due to lack of skill and unclear
leadership position, responsibility and authority the
leaders can not apply well the appropriate leadership
style in the cooperatives. In addition Cooperatives may
not concerned to hire/ assign a skilled leader to their
cooperative by electing one of a member as a chairman
to be leader and Board member without enough
leadership training and skill instead of hiring. So it
cannot rule the cooperatives with in free market to be
success an organizational goal of the cooperatives.
Although there are some cooperatives managed by
haired workers, they do not follow clear job
description, as result they are not effective. That means
lack of skills and experience is another
Cooperatives’ in many developing countries are
considered as instruments to implement the policies of
the State. For this purpose, the state provides aid and
assistance to cooperatives. And, with this aid comes the
Government nominee. These were happened in the
cooperatives which were established based on the
proclamation of 138/1975, in which the cooperative
management from the cooperatives was assigned by the
party. In this case the managers/leaders were working
from their party, not for cooperative movement. For
obvious reasons, such official leadership could not lead
the cooperative to any substantial progress or
achievement. This official leadership suffers from a
continuous diminution of authority and prestige, against
the growing power and presage of politicians and other
non-official leaders.
Indeed, Members’ direct participation or
exercising democracy is not flourished in many
cooperatives yet [27]. If the leaders do not understand
the appropriate leadership styles to manage their
cooperative it may lead cooperatives into conflict rather
than satisfying members to contribute their parts to
their cooperatives. If it is true, leaders will get accesses
to abuse their power and miss use the property of the
cooperative. One factor in becoming a successful
leader is choosing the right leadership style for a given
situation. To all these or to becoming a good leader, it
needs to know leadership styles and also know when to
use a certain leadership style for a given situation. A
Problem may exist if executive leaders is unfamiliar
with the leadership styles and fails to pick the
appropriate leadership style to favourably resolve the
conflict [28].
In this context, this study was undertaken to
describe different leadership styles preferred and used
by cooperative leaders, the effect of leadership style on
the functioning of cooperatives and the influence of
factors on leadership style of cooperative leaders.
Research Focus
Empirical studies on Leadership Styles
Numerous studies have been conducted in the
field of leadership that has addressed the influence of
selected characteristics of individuals on their
leadership style. Some studies have focused on the
influence of the characteristics on the self-perceived
leadership style of the individual, others have focused
on the perceptions of followers related to an
individual’s leadership style and the influence of these
characteristics, and still others have involved the
perceptions of both the leaders and their followers. It is
noted that demographic characteristics do exert
considerable influence on the leadership styles of top
managers. It was proposed that demographic traits such
as age, tenure in an organization, functional area
background, educational background, and degree of
formal management training are all important aspects of
leadership that influence organizational success. The
study compared the influence of the demographic
factors such as age, gender, marital, education,
experience, occupation and skill (knowledge about
product). On his findings revealed that both men and
women leaders achieved their position through election.
The average age range was 40-49 years for both men
and women leaders. All but one male leader was
married while a small percentage of men leaders were
widowers. More men leaders were educated than
uneducated while women’s organizations faced as
many educated women leaders as uneducated leaders.
The Human Patterns instrument was used to
measure five leadership behaviors based on the work of
Kouzes and Posner (1987) [29]. The five leadership
behaviors were: appreciating and recognizing others,
challenging and pushing others, coaching and enabling
others, inspiring others, and serving as a role model.
Results showed that the female CEDs in her study
showed a strong preference for inspiring others and
challenging others while male CEDs preferred the
leadership behaviors of inspiring others, coaching
others, and appreciating others.
Several studies examining the relationship
between age and leadership style have been conducted
organizations other than Extension. Older managers
within an organization may have a greater commitment
to maintaining the status quo than younger managers
and less favorable attitudes towards taking risks and it
was proposed that younger managers were more
inclined to take risks than older managers [30]. Taking
risks rather than maintaining the status quo is one of the
characteristics of leaders who engage in the leadership
practice challenging the Process identified by Kouzes
and Posner (1987).
A study conducted on the self-perceived
leadership practices and behaviors of agricultural
education department executive officers in which
demographic variables, including age, tenure, and
formal leadership training and/or education, were
analyzed in relation to the leadership practices
measured by the LPI [31]. In the study, 28 of 49
participants were below the age of 50 and 21 were
M.Karthikeyan
Page No.38
International Journal of Economics and Business Management, 2015, 1(2),32-45
above the age of 50. When grouped according to age,
below 50 and above 50, findings of the study indicated
no significant differences in leadership style. Within the
Leadership system, Sykes (1995) found that the age of
a CED did not significantly influence her behavior as a
manager or a leader. She did find, however, that
younger CEDs, 45 years old and younger, perceived
themselves to demonstrate more leader behaviors [32].
Holder (1990) reported that age was not significantly
related to the preferred leadership style of Extension
faculty and middle managers [33]. Similarly, Haynes
(1997) reported that age did not affect participants'
demonstrated
strength
in
the
15
supervisory/management competencies included in his
study [34]. The Spotanski and Carter (1993) study that
included age as a demographic variable also included a
comparison between leadership styles and the number
of years in which a participant had served as a
department executive officer. The authors reported no
significant difference between leadership styles of the
study participants when compared to years of
experience as a department executive officer. In his
study of Directors of Student Athletic Support Services
at NCAA Division I Institutions, Rochelle (1999)
reported that the number of years respondents reported
working in the primary leadership role was significantly
correlated with the Encouraging the Heart leadership
practice of the LPI [35]. Shearon (1969) introduced the
concept of Administrative Professional Leadership
(APL) in Extension that he defined as a leader's efforts
to coordinate and influence the performance of
Extension agents [36]. In his study involving County
Extension Chairmen (CEC) and cooperative agents in
the North Carolina Agricultural Extension Service, he
found that the more tenure a CEC had in Extension, the
lower their APL scores indicating decreased leadership
effectiveness.
Educational background and promotion path
are variables that have received considerably less
attention than other demographic variables within the
literature. Shearon (1969) found no relationship
between undergraduate major, which he classified as
either oriented more to the social sciences or to
agricultural technology, and the APL of the CECs in his
study. Findings of the study conducted by Sykes (1995)
suggested that program discipline from which CEDs
came from significantly influenced their selfperceptions related to transformational leadership
styles. Sykes reported that CEDs from home economics
and 4-H program backgrounds perceived themselves to
demonstrate more leadership behaviors than CEDs
from agricultural program backgrounds. Sykes also
reported that the type of degree, beyond a bachelor’s
degree, had no significant influence on the self-perceive
leadership styles of the CEDs in her study. However, in
terms of leadership effectiveness, Cobb (1989) reported
no significant difference in the leadership effectiveness
of CEDs as a function of their previous program
discipline [37].
Haynes (1997) reported that participants in his
study who demonstrated above average strength in
leadership tended not to be from the family and
consumer science, 4-H youth development, or
community/economic development program areas.
Similarly, those who demonstrated above average
strength in development of coworkers tended not to
come from the agriculture/natural resources, 4-H youth
development, or community/economic development
programs and those who demonstrated above average
strength in behavioral flexibility tended not to come
from the community/economic development program
area. The remaining competencies were not affected by
previous program area. Although there has been little
study into the influence of educational background and
promotion path, it is an area of great importance as the
leaders of Extension are almost always promoted from
within the organization based on their performance in
their subject matter discipline or previous Extension
positions [38]. In many cases, leaders tend to want to
surround and replace themselves with people who are
like them in terms of their background and experiences
[39]
. Thus, it is logical to believe that individuals trained
in a bench science disciple would seek to promote
individuals with training in a bench science. However,
it is to the benefit of top management teams within an
organization to be composed of diverse individuals with
dissimilar types of curricula backgrounds.
Studies on leadership and leadership style in
cooperatives are very few and assessment of leadership
style in cooperatives of Ethiopia in general and fruits
and vegetable cooperatives in particular is absent. It is
the high time to have research studies on cooperative
leadership and styles in Ethiopian context.
Objectives of the Study
The general objective of this research was to
assess the leadership styles of leaders of selected Fruit
and vegetable cooperatives.
Specific objectives
This research addressed the following specific
objectives:
1. To describe the leadership styles practiced by
leaders of selected Cooperatives;
2. To assess the effect of leadership style on the
functioning of selected cooperatives.
3. To examine the influence of factors on the
leadership style of cooperative leaders.
Methodology of Research
In Gamo Goffa Zone there are 36 fruit and
vegetable cooperatives are registered as legal entity.
The most product in the area are Banana, Mango, and
Apple and the like. Chencha Highland Fruits Marketing
Cooperative (CHFMC) (client), Kale Heywet Church,
Target Business Consultants Plc., Tadex IT Solutions,
Ethiopian Television Cooperation (ETC), Lante Fruits
and Vegetables Marketing Cooperative (LFVMC)
(client), Etfruit Sco, Elfora Sco, regional and Addis
traders, AfricaJUICE plc, Gamo Gofa farmers union,
Bafana Bafana Consultancy and Training Organisation
M.Karthikeyan
Page No.39
International Journal of Economics and Business Management, 2015, 1(2),32-45
and Arbaminch Zuria Woreda Agriculture and Rural
Development Office (SNV Netherlands Development
Organization 2 Case Studies 2009).
Sampling Procedure
In this study multi-stage sampling technique
was employed. In the first stage, fruits and vegetable
cooperative society were selected from Gamo Goffa
Zone by using purposive sampling technique. Because
Gamo Goffa is very rich in production of fruits like
mango, Apple, Banana and the like and well known
nationally and internationally as well.
In the second stage, out of 36 fruits and
vegetable cooperatives, the researcher adopted
purposive sampling technique and identified the five
fruit and vegetable cooperatives were selected for the
study. Cooperatives which have employees were
selected considering the reason that to incorporate the
opinion of employees in addition to members and
cooperative experts to make the study to be more
realistic.
In the third stage, the researcher adopted census
survey method and selected all Board of directors as
leaders of five cooperatives (33), employees numbering
11 from selected cooperatives. Census survey was
employed with the reason that it is manageable to the
researcher and also to avoid the limitations of sampling
and sampling techniques. As for members the
systematic sampling technique was employed based on
the numbers of members 13, 15, 10, 15 & 22 Shelle,
Genta, Shara , Lante, and Chencha respectively. From
these five cooperatives 75 member respondents were
chosen. And also 15 cooperative experts who are
working closely with cooperatives were also selected.
Totally 134 respondents were selected for the study.
The sample size comprises of 33 leaders, 75 members,
11 employees and 15 experts.
Types and Sources of the data
Both qualitative and quantitative data were
collected. The primary and secondary data sources
were utilized for the study. The primary data was
obtained from leaders, members, employees, and
experts from cooperative bureau. Secondary data was
collected from Zone and Woreda cooperative offices,
and other relevant sources which are published and
unpublished as well.
Method of data collection
Semi structured interview schedule was
administered among from the leaders, employees,
members and cooperative promotion experts to elicit
the required information for the study. The interview
questions were pretested to manage the clarity. The
information related to leadership styles, effect of
leadership on the functioning of cooperatives in terms
of membership position, financial status, members’
participation and satisfaction, conflict resolution and
the like, and factors influencing leadership style. The
researcher with the help of 2 enumerators collected data
from the respondents of the study.
Method of data analysis
Analysis was made by compiling and summarizing the
data collected from the field and cooperatives. The first
and second objectives were realized with help of
descriptive statistics. The profile of cooperative leaders,
leadership style preferred and used by leaders, and the
effect of leadership style on the functioning of
cooperatives was assessed through the opinion of
members, employees, and experts. The effect was
measured with scales like increase, constant and
decrease for membership position, excellent, very good,
good, poor and very poor for financial status, members’
participation, and conflict resolution, and five point
rating scale for perception on the leadership style. To
analyze factors influencing leadership style, multiple
linear regression analysis was used. The multiple linear
regression model with non-random and unobservable
(dummy) variable was used to know the influence of
factors on the dependent variables. The Variables,
derived as an output of the model, are described as
follow:
Y=α β1X2 +β2X2+ β3X3+β4X4 + β5X5+ β6X6+ β5X5+
β7X7+ β7X7 . . . + β19X19.
Where Y = Leadership style (Dependent variable)
a is intercept
The main independent variables for role of leadership
for cooperative development include:
X1= age
X2= Gender
X3= Education
X4= Experience as leader
X5= Occupation
X6=Monthly income
X7=Attitude
X8=Acceptance
X9= Follower size
X10= Confidence level
X11 = Work environment
X12= Production control
X13= Distribution
X14= Cooperative Proclamation
X15= Government interference
X16= Technology
X17= Social
X18= Cultural
Multiple Linear Regression was employed to know the
relationship between dependent and independent
variables. Nineteen independent variables were
statistically related to the leadership style as dependent
variable. Regression analysis conveys how variables
change and move together in the same direction.
Regression coefficients summarize the intensity and
direction of these movements.
The multiple regression equation takes the form:
Y= α+β1X1+ β2X2+ β3X3 + ···· βkXk..
The β are the regression coefficient, representing the
amount the dependent variable Y changes when the
corresponding independent changes by 1 unit. The α is
the constant, where the regression line intercepts the Y
axis, representing the amount the dependent variable Y
M.Karthikeyan
Page No.40
International Journal of Economics and Business Management, 2015, 1(2),32-45
would be equal to when all the independent variables
are 0.
Results of Research
The findings are derived from the analysis made in
terms of profile of cooperative leaders, various
leadership styles used by the leaders, the effect of
leadership style on the functioning of cooperatives by
considering the perception of the members, employees
and experts who involved in those selected
cooperatives; and from the regression analysis made to
find out the significant effect of influencing factors on
leadership styles used by the cooperative leaders.
Summary of findings
Profile of Cooperative leaders
• As for age, majority (66.7%) of the leaders are
coming under the middle age group followed by
young age (21.2%) group.
• As for sex and marital status of cooperative leaders,
all the leaders are male and married.
• 11 (33%) leaders had educational status at the high
school level followed by 8 (24.2%) at the
secondary level. There were 3 (9.1%) leaders who
do not have any formal education as illiterates.
• As for occupation, 32 (97%) leaders are engaged
in agriculture as their occupation, and only 1 (3 %)
leader is engaged in both agriculture and merchant
as his occupation.
• 20 (60.6%) leaders are coming under the low
income group category followed by 11 (33.3%)
leaders under middle income group. Only two
leaders are in the high income group.
• As for experience as leader in cooperatives, 15
(45.5%) leaders have 3 years experience, 6 leaders
have 4 years and another 6 leaders have 2 years
experience as leaders in cooperatives.
Assessment of the
cooperative leaders
Leadership
Style
of
Most preferred Leadership Style of leaders
• On an average the most of the leaders (42.4%)
preferred situational leadership style. Seven
(21.2%) of the leaders preferred to use autocratic
and another 7 (21.2%) democratic style. Only 5
(15.2%) preferred to use free-rein as their style. No
one preferred bureaucratic and transformational
styles.
Perception of the leaders on different leadership
styles
• The leaders are with high level of perception
towards democratic style of leadership followed by
situational style. They responded with medium and
low level of perception on the statements related to
other styles of leadership.
Leadership style and Age
• Leaders with old age tend to autocratic or free
rein/laisser-faire. 85.7% of young age leaders are
situational. The middle age leaders they tend to
situational (36.4%), followed by autocratic
(27.3%). Majority (50%) of old age leaders are
free-rein, and fifty-fifty for autocratic and
democratic. It can be inferred that an increase in the
age may lead to a change in the leadership style.
Leadership Style and Education
• Majority (66.7%) illiterate leaders follow free-rein
style followed by 33.3% follow democratic
leadership style. The majority of leaders under
primary (66.7%), secondary (50.0%) and high
school (36.4%) category follow situational
leadership style, whereas majority (50.0%) of the
leaders under preparatory follow situational
followed by 33.3% follow autocratic style. The
leaders under the category of diploma & above
follow fifty-fifty autocratic and situational style of
leadership. It can be inferred that the increase in the
educational status may lead to situational and
autocratic style of leadership among leaders.
Leadership Style and Experience
• Leaders with less experience tend to be democratic
and situational. This tendency remains until four
years and slowly leaders become autocratic or free
in after four years of experience as leaders. It can
be stated that an increase in the experience may
lead to change in the style of leadership.
Leadership style and Occupation
• Majority (40.6%) of leaders engaged in agriculture
practice situational style, autocratic (21.9%) and
democratic (21.9%). The leader engaged in
business practice situational style. It can be inferred
that most of the leaders irrespective of their
occupation they practice situational style.
Leadership style and income
• It can be seen that 50% of leaders from high
income and low income category practice
situational style. Among high income group
another 50% of leaders practice autocratic style of
leadership. Majority (45.5%) of middle income
group leaders practice free-rein style followed by
27.3% leaders practice situational style.
The Effect of Leadership style on the
functioning of Cooperatives – An analysis of
members, employees and experts opinion
The effect of leadership style was assessed through the
opinion of the followers and experts in terms of
perception on the leadership style of their leaders,
leadership effect on the membership position, financial
status, members’ participation, members’ satisfaction,
and conflict resolution.
Profile of the members, employees and experts
• As for age, majority (70.7%) of members and 5
experts (53.3%) are coming under middle age
category, and 63.6% of employees are under young
age category. Nearly 94.7% members are male,
73.3% experts and 72.7% employees are males and
female are insignificant in all category.
• As for educational status, 44.0% of the members
completed primary education followed by 28.0% as
illiterates, and the rest completed their high school
and preparatory level. Nearly about 72.7% of the
M.Karthikeyan
Page No.41
International Journal of Economics and Business Management, 2015, 1(2),32-45
employees completed diploma in various subjects,
observed that the leaders were not using
18.2% completed their high school. Regarding
appropriate style in different situation.
experts, 80.0% of them completed diploma and the The effect of Leadership style on Financial Status of
rest completed their first degree.
their cooperatives
• The members’ experience in their occupation • Majority of members, employees and experts
ranges from 4 years to 8 years; employees
opined that the financial status of their cooperatives
experience ranges from one year to 21 years; and
is good and excellent. It is evident that the
experts’ experience ranges from 4 years to 26
researcher’s investigation from the records of (audit
years. As for monthly income, 78.9% of the
reports and the other minutes) cooperatives except
members come under upto Birr.500; 72.7% of the
two cooperatives about which some respondents
employees come under Birr.500 – Birr.1000
opined that the financial status of their cooperatives
category; and all experts are coming under the
is poor and very poor.
income category of above Birr.1000.
The effect of Leadership style on Conflict resolution
Perception of member, employees and experts on
• Majority of the members, employees, and experts
Leadership Style of their leaders
opined that the performance of leaders in conflict
• 26 (34.7%) members perceived their leaders style
resolution is above the scale of good. A few of the
as democratic style followed by 16 (21.3%) as
respondents opined that the performance of leaders
situational. Moreover, 3 (4.0%) members perceived
in conflict resolution is poor and very poor.
their leaders style as bureaucratic style, and 21.4% The influence of factors on the Leadership style
members perceived that their leaders have no clear of Cooperative Leaders
style. As for employees, 27.2% employees The regression was employed among different category
perceived their leaders style as situational followed of respondents of the study namely leaders, members,
by 18.2% and another 18.2% as democratic and employees and experts. For the analysis, the
autocratic respectively. As for experts, 20.1% of respondents were categorized into three groups such as,
experts perceived their leaders style as free-rein leaders, members, and paid employees (employees and
followed by 13.3% each perceived as autocratic, experts). The results of multiple linear regression
democratic, situational and transformational; and analysis show that there are 19 independent variables.
26.7% perceived that there is no clear style for their Out of these 19 variables, seven variables were
leaders. Members and employees perceived their significantly influencing the leadership style among
leaders style as bureaucratic (4.0% and 9.1% leaders, three variables among members, 9 variables
respectively), employees and experts as among employees and experts.
transformational style (9.1% and 13.3% • As for influence of factors on leadership style
respectively).
perceived among leaders, the variables education
The effect of Leadership style on Membership
and experience as leader under leader related
position
variables had positive effect as influence on the
• The membership status of selected cooperatives is
leadership style at 5 % significance level; attitude
being constant as opined by the members,
had a positive effect at 1% significance level and
employees, and experts. It is found that the
acceptance of the followers at 5% significance level
leadership style does not have any effect on
under follower related variables. Under organization
membership position. It is also evident from the
related variables, work environment had a positive
records of the cooperatives.
effect at 5% significance level; and under external
The effect of Leadership style on Members’
environment
related
variables,
cooperative
Participation
proclamation and government interference had
• The result shows that majority of members,
negative effect at 5% and 1% significance level. The
employees, and experts opined above the scale of
overall effect of independent variables over
good (good, very good and excellent) regarding
dependent variable among leaders category is
members’ participation in the affairs of their
explained with R2 value of 0.458 (45.8%).
cooperatives.
• As for influence of factors on leadership style
The effect of Leadership style on Satisfaction
perceived among members, the variables attitude
• The result shows that majority of members (78.7%)
had a positive effect at 5% significance level and
and employees (72.7%), opined satisfied regarding
acceptance of the followers at and confidence at 5%
satisfaction in their cooperatives, and majority of
significance level under follower related variables.
the experts (53.3%) were not satisfied. The reason
The overall effect of independent variables over
is that majority of members and employees
dependent variable among members category is
perceived their leaders’ style as democratic,
explained with R2 value of 0.586 (58.6%).
situational and free-rein. The experts might have
M.Karthikeyan
Page No.42
International Journal of Economics and Business Management, 2015, 1(2),32-45
Table: Multiple Linear Regression Model – Influence of factors on the leadership style
Independent variables
Leaders
Members
Employees
/experts
1.061
1.969**
2.005**
0.123
1.355
-
1.097
-1.278
-0.135
2.252**
0.652
-1.082
2.121*
2.345**
0.058
1.210
1.997**
2.598*
0.815
3.001*
3.014*
2.977*
1.992**
0.982
1.998**
1.247
-0.125
0.897
1.089
-0.972
3.821*
1.034
2.937*
-2.064**
-3.787*
0.552
1.411
-0.578
26.904
0.458
33
1.865
-1.953
0.910
-0.286
0.769
21.087
0.586
75
-3.043*
-2.264**
0.148
2.429**
-0.789
18.352
0.493
26
Leader related variables:
Age
Gender
Education
Experience as leader
Occupation
Monthly income
Followers related variables:
Attitude
Acceptance
Followers size
Confidence level
Organization related variables:
Work environment
Production control
Distribution
External Environment related variables:
Coop. proclamation
Govt. Interference
Technology
Social
Cultural
Constant
R²
N
Source computed from field survey data, 2012.
•
As for influence of factors on leadership style
perceived among employees and experts, the
variable experience as leader under leader related
variables had positive effect as influence on the
leadership style at 5 % significance level; attitude
and acceptance had a positive effect at 1%
significance level and follower size at 5%
significance level under follower related variables.
Under organization related variables, work
environment and distribution had a positive effect
at 1% significance level; and under external
environment
related variables,
cooperative
proclamation and government interference had a
negative effect at 1% and 5% significance level
respectively, and social factor had a positive effect
at 5% significance level. The overall effect of
independent variables over dependent variable
among employees and experts category is explained
with R2 value of 0.493 (49.3%).
Conclusion
Cooperatives being voluntary and democratic grass-root
organizations of people, leadership serves as an
instrument of group action and a catalyst agent.
Leadership in cooperatives has multifarious functions:
mobilizing people for joint action, molding the attitudes
of members, integrating the group, imparting values,
making decisions involving action commitment and
evolving strategies for implementing the decisions. The
main cause for the success of cooperatives is proper
leadership and one of the reasons proper leadership is
prevalence of genuine democracy. In a wider sense
cooperative leadership means all those who influence,
instrument and inspire cooperative ideals, ideology,
policies and programmes, physical growth and
expansion, structure and working of individual in
organisations at various levels. Cooperative Leadership
enables the Leader to empower people and maximize
their own potential as well as their staff’s while creating
a learning culture within the workplace of people acting
together whose efforts move them towards a shared
vision for mutual benefit by using the appropriate
leadership style.
The Cooperative Leadership model delivers
incredible results, such as an increase in profitability,
performance and productivity as well as a decrease in
internal conflicts, problems and attrition (slowly
distraction). Whether the cooperative staff is few or one
hundred, utilizing an appropriated leadership
principles/style provide businesses and individuals with
a unique competitive advantage that will keep them
positioned on top and enable you to become a
successful coach and leader. Leadership Style becomes
the key to the formulation and implementation of
strategy and plays an important role in work-group
members’ activity and in team citizenship. Little doubt
exists that the way (style) in which leaders influence
work-group members can make a difference in their
M.Karthikeyan
Page No.43
International Journal of Economics and Business Management, 2015, 1(2),32-45
own and their people’s performance (Jerald Greenberg
(ed.), Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1994). Matching the
appropriate leadership style is vital to the type of Fruit
and Vegetable Cooperatives to manage their perishable
and seasonal products and also to exercise the
principles of cooperatives as well.
To conclude, the leaders of fruits and vegetable
cooperatives in Gama Gofa Zone preferred more of
situational, democratic, and free-rein style of
leadership, and less of autocratic style of leadership.
There is both positive and negative effect of leadership
style on the functioning of cooperatives; but there is
more positive effect. The negative effect is due to the
autocratic and free-rein style of leadership used by the
leaders in cooperatives as perceived by the members,
employees, and experts. Cooperative leaders are
expected to practice appropriate leadership style in
different situations by considering the influencing
factors to have a positive effect on the performance of
followers and cooperatives as well.
•
•
•
Recommendations
Research studies are undertaken to identify
problems and offering solutions to solve such problems.
Based on the analysis made and observation done by
the researcher, the following recommendations are
forwarded to practice proper and appropriate leadership
style for better performance and results in the selected
cooperatives.
• Only 21. 2% of leaders preferred democratic
leadership style. But they have a high level of
perception towards democratic style of leadership
followed by situational style. Being cooperative
leaders, the leaders should prefer and practice more
of democratic leadership style than other styles.
• Leaders with old age tend to autocratic or free
rein/laisser-faire. Cooperative should develop
second line leaders for the future. Young leaders
should be encouraged to assume leadership position
in cooperatives.
• Out of 75 members, 21.4% members perceived that
their leaders have no clear style. As for experts,
26.7% perceived that there is no clear style for their
leaders. The leaders should practice appropriate
style in different situations and they should be clear
about leadership style.
For this leadership
development programs must be organized to make
the leaders clear about different styles and
appropriate styles to be used in different situations
for better results.
• The financial status of two cooperatives namely
Shara and Chencha is poor. It is due to free-rein
and autocratic style practiced by the leaders. They
should change their style into democratic and
situational thereby they can extract more work from
employee and encourage members to improve the
performance of their cooperatives and financial
status.
• Based on the observation made, training is totally
absent for the leaders of selected cooperatives. The
•
leaders should be given proper training in the field
of business skills, problem solving skills and
decision making skills. It was observed during the
data collection process though leadership skill is
not included in the study. Based on the observation
leaders lack skills required and they should be
given such skill training.
Though the influence of factors on leadership style
perceived among leaders evident of positive effect
with some variables, the overall effect of
independent variables over dependent variable
among leaders category is explained with R2 value
of 0.458 (45.8%). Still the leaders are required to
practice situational and democratic style of
leadership to improve the results.
The relationship between government and
cooperatives must be strengthened and government
should encourage cooperative leaders to practice
democracy by adhering to the cooperative
proclamation and principles.
It is recommended that the leaders of cooperative
should be democrats rather than autocrats and
bureaucrats.
By observation it is noted that leaders are not aware
of cooperative ideology and philosophy. It is
recommended that leadership training programmes
covering basics of cooperative concept, leadership
skills and styles, leadership role and qualities must
be offered to encourage and make the leaders as
cooperative leaders.
References
1. Taimni.K. (1998). Cooperative in new Environment
2. White, R. K., & Lippitt, R. (1960). Autocracy and
democracy. New York: Harper & Brothers.
3. Blanchard, K., Zigarmi, D., & Zigarmi, P. (1985).
Leadership and the one minute manager. New
York: William Morrow and Co.
4. Fiedler, F. (1964). A contingency model of
leadership effectiveness. Advances in experimental
social psychology. L. Berkowitz. New York,
Academic Press: 149-190.
5. Schriesheim, C. and S. Kerr (1977). R.I.P. LPC: A
response to Fiedler. Leadership: The cutting edge.
J. Hunt and L. Larson. Carbondale, Southern
Illinois University Press.
6. House, R. "A path-goal theory of leader
effectiveness." Administrative Science Quarterly
321-339. 16, 1971
7. Vroom, V. (1964). Work and motivation. New
York, John Wiley.
8. House, R. and T. Mitchell (1974). "Path-goal
theory of leadership." Contemporary Business 3:
81-98.
9. Hersey, P. and K. Blanchard (1984). The
management
of
organizational
behavior.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall.
10. Conger, J. and R. Kanungo., Academy of
Management Review 637-647, 12, 1987
M.Karthikeyan
Page No.44
International Journal of Economics and Business Management, 2015, 1(2),32-45
11.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and
performance beyond expectations. New York:
Free Press.
12. Smirchich, L. and G. Morgan Journal of
Applied Behavioural Science 257-73, 18(2),
1982
13. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York:
Harper & Row Publishers.
14. Tichy, N. and M. Devanna (1986). The
Transformational Leader. New York, Wiley.
15. Conger, J. (1989). The Charismatic Leader:
Behind the Mystique of Exceptional
Leadership. San Fransisco, Jossey-Bass.
16. Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and leadership in
organizations. London: Sage Publishers.
17. Bolden, R. (2004). What is Leadership? Exeter,
Leadership South West, University of Exeter.
18. Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1993). The
leadership challenge: How to keep getting
extraordinary things done in organizations
(2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
19. Knights, D. and H. Wilmott Journal of
Management Studies 760-782, 29(6),1992.
20. Gemmill, G. and J. Oakley., Human Relations
113. 45(2),1992
21. Sievers, B. (1993). Work, Death and Life Itself:
Essays on Management and Organization. New
York, de Gruyter.
22. Bass, B. M. American Psychologist, 52(2), 130139, 1997
23. Northouse, P. G. (2001). Leadership: Theory
and practice (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications, Inc.
24. Davis .P. (2004). Human Resource
management in Cooperatives, International
Labour office, Genaeva
25. FCA, 2006, Cooperative Magazine, Federal
Cooperative Agency, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
26. FCA, 2008, Cooperative Magazine, Federal
Cooperative Agency, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
27. SNNPR, 2003, SNNPR Workshop Report,
Ethiopia.
28. Vera& Crossen, (2004). New Perspective on
Leadership.
29. Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (1987).
Leadership
Practices
Inventory
(LPI):
Facilitator's Guide (2nd ed.). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass Pfeiffer.
30. Vroom, V., & Pahl, B. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 55, 399-405, 1971
31. Spotanski, D. R., & Carter, R. I. Journal of
Agricultural Education, 17-25, 34(3), 1993
32.
Sykes, W. D. (1995). County Extension
directors' perceived behavior as a manager or
leader as compared to county Extension agents'
perceptions of CEDs' behavior. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State
University, Raleigh.
33. Holder, S. L. (1990). Leadership style and
leadership behavior preferences of cooperative
Extension faculty. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, New Mexico State University, Las
Cruces.
34. Haynes, B. R. (1997). Factors affecting
supervisory and management competencies of
participants in Extension assessment centers.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio
State University, Columbus.
35. Rochelle, S. (1999). Leadership practices of
directors of student athlete support services at
NCAA Division I institutions according to
ethnicity, gender, tenure, and educational level.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(03A),
841.
36. Shearon, R. W. (1969). Staff leadership in the
North Carolina agricultural Extension service.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, North
Carolina State University, Raleigh.
37. Cobb, D. W. (1989). Leadership effectiveness of
county Extension directors: A comparison of
perceptions between county Extension agents
and county Extension directors within the
North Carolina agricultural Extension service.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, North
Carolina State University, Raleigh.
38. Pittman, J. D., & Bruny, L. (1986). Journal of
Extension, 24(2), Retrieved May 8, 2002 from
http://www.joe.org/joe/1986summer/a6.html
39. Sorcher, M., & Brant, J. Are you picking the
right leaders? Harvard Business Review, 78-85,
80(2), 2002
M.Karthikeyan
Page No.45