Influence of Principals’ Transformational Leadership Style on Organizational Climates of Primary Teachers Training Colleges in Lake Victoria Region of Kenya ()
1. Introduction
Previous researches show that organizational climates influence organizational behaviors (Berberoglu, 2018; Maamari & Messarra, 2012). This is supported by studies that investigated the relationship between the way in which employees describe their work environments, and the relative performance success of these environments (Wiley & Brooks, 2000). These studies revealed that environmental factors influence workers’ productivity and morale. An organizational climate that allows a high degree of autonomy and nurtures relationships among peers and supervisors creates more satisfied workers (Peek, 2003). According to Brown and Leigh (1996), organizations that are able to create environments that employees perceive as favorable and in which they are able to achieve their full potential are seen as a source of competitive advantage.
The role of a leader has always been highlighted as being a key driver of employee engagement. According to Xu and Cooper (2011), the engagement among the employees increases when they feel involved through a collaborative leadership style. According to Drucker (2001), any company’s success is due to employee job satisfaction and employee effective commitment. Leading effectively requires competence, skill and suitable leadership styles. Therefore, the employees’ behavior paths are most shaped by the way leaders give support to organizational members and provide a clear direction in regard to guidelines (Okibo & Shikanda, 2011).
In a PTTC, the principal is the leader who coordinates, keeps balance and ensures the harmonious development of the whole institution by molding traditions for organizational goal achievement. Tutors are key players in PTTCs, and it is through their involvement and commitment that PTTCs become successful. The relationship between a principal and tutors is interdependent in nature (Kerego & Mthupha, 1997), and both parties affect one another’s ability to achieve positive results. PTTCs’ principals should therefore provide and articulate leadership style which gears the colleges towards the integration of both the organization and personal goals.
1.1. Objectives of the Study
The objectives of study are to: 1) investigate whether individualized consideration dimension of transformational leadership is exhibited by principals of PTTCs in Victoria Region of Kenya; 2) investigate whether inspirational motivation leadership is exhibited by principals of PTTCs in Victoria Region of Kenya; 3) examine influence of principals’ use of individualized consideration leadership dimension of transformational leadership on organizational climates of PTTCs in Lake Victoria Region of Kenya; 4) examine influence of principals’ use of inspirational motivation dimension of transformational leadership on organizational climates of PTTCs in Lake Victoria Region of Kenya.
1.2. Research Question
The following four research questions were formulated to guide the research study:
1) Do principals of PTTCs in Lake Victoria Region of Kenya practice individualized consideration dimension of transformational leadership style?
2) Do principals of PTTCs in Lake Victoria Region of Kenya practice inspirational motivation dimension of transformational leadership style?
3) What is the influence of individualized consideration dimension of transformational leadership on the organizational climates of PTTCs?
4) What is the influence of inspirational dimension of transformational leadership on the organizational climates of PTTCs?
1.3. Significance of the Study
The findings of this study are meant to contribute to the existing body of knowledge on the appropriate leadership styles available for principals of PTTCs. Successful principals need multiple lenses and skills in strategizing—looking at old problems in a new light, as well as confronting new challenges with different tools and reactions. Findings of the study are to enrich the literature leadership styles employed by leaders for educational planners and administrators in Kenya.
1.4. Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework in Figure 1 was developed after review of existing literature to investigate the research questions at hand. The diagram underpins the interrelationships between three variables. Individualized consideration and inspirational motivation dimensions of transformational leadership formed the independent variables, while organizational climates focused on tutor job satisfaction and PTTCs performances in Primary Teachers Education examinations
![]()
Figure 1. Conceptual frameworks showing the influence of transformational leadership style on organizational climates of PTTCs. Source: Researcher constructed (2022).
formed the dependent variable. Tutors’ demographic characteristics, namely gender and age formed intervening variable.
2. Literature Review
2.1. Theories of Leadership
According to Hesselbein (2002), leadership is the art of getting people to do what they might not otherwise do, and like. It is authority, power and influence acquired by a leader to be capable of transforming an organization effectively through the human resources, who are the most vital organizational asset, thus leading to the achievement of desired organization goals. In a PTTC, the principal is the leader who coordinates, keeps balance and ensures the harmonious development of the whole institution by molding traditions for organizational goal achievement. Tutors are key players in PTTCs, and it is through their involvement and commitment that PTTCs become successful.
The term “style” is approximately equal to the way or manner in which a given leader affects his subordinates (Lunenburg & Ornstein, 2008). Leadership style is therefore, the approach used by a leader to exercise their mandate, or the way and manner in which a supervisor chooses to act towards his employees or subordinates (Mullins, 2000). There is no recipe for success when it comes to running an organization. Armstrong (2012) suggests that no one leadership style is better than another but that styles are dependent on certain factors which include organization type, nature of the task, characteristics of the individuals in the leader’s team, the group the leader leads as a whole and more importantly, the personality of the leaders.
This study examined dimensions of transformational leadership styles: individualized consideration, inspirational motivation, idealized influence and intellectual stimulation, which leaders purposely or involuntarily portray.
2.2. Transformational Leadership Theory
Hancott (2005) and Pieterse et al. (2010) say that a transformational leader is one that transforms followers to rise above their self-interests by altering their morale, ideals, interests and values as well as motivating them to perform better than initially expected. Transformational leadership is one that motivates and empowers followers to work for transcendental goals, to increase their commitment to the organization and in so doing perform beyond the expectation that the followers have for themselves (Hancott, 2005). Transformational leaders are proactive, raise follower awareness for transcendent collective interests, and help followers achieve extraordinary goals. Transformational leaders give respect to and empower their followers to exude exceptionally high effort, high commitment and willingness to take risks (Zhu, Avolio, & Walumbwa, 2009).
A PTTC principal who exhibits individualized consideration assesses and integrates the needs of individual tutors through supportive relationships, such attending to individual tutors and caring for their needs (Shin et al., 2012). The aim of individualized consideration is to ensure that the needs of tutors are met and to help tutors enhance their potential (Brown & Arendt, 2011). PTTC principals can serve as coaches and advisors in assisting tutors to become fully actualized (Scott-Halsell et al., 2008).
Transformational leaders establish inspirational motivation in large part when leaders convey verbal eloquence that emotionally captures and inspires their followers, such as when the principals psyche tutors to galvanize commitment to a shared vision (Negussie & Demissie, 2013). An inspirational motivational principal challenges tutors with high expectations, communicates optimism about future goals of the PTTC, and communicates clear meaning for a task (Athalye, 2010). The hallmark of transformational leadership is thus the skill and ability to motivate staff in setting, developing, and achieving specific goals in the interest of tutors’ ultimate satisfaction.
2.3. Organizational Climate Theory
Different scholars have described organizational climate variously. According to Gerber (2003), organizational climate represents the sum of the perceptions and/or feelings of the organizational members towards the organization, whether or not this is an accurate description of reality. Organizational climate is the organization’s environment, which is created by the behaviors, policies and attitudes of all the members (including the leaders) and serves as the basis for interpreting an event, which in turn influences behavior and performance.
2.4. Job Satisfaction Theory
Job satisfaction is a combination of physiological, psychological, and environmental circumstances that cause a person to say that he is satisfied truthfully with his job (Wanjiku, 2018). Job satisfaction is a collection of a worker’s feelings in relation to the nature and conditions of work, in which workers might be satisfied with some parts of their jobs while simultaneously dissatisfied with others (McShane, 2004). Job satisfaction is the pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one’s job or job experience (Locke & Lathan, 1990). In this study the focus will be on four specific job satisfaction factors: cordial relations, working conditions, recognition and reward, and lastly professional development.
2.5. Organizational Performance Theory
Organizational performance assesses how an organization is able to meet its stated objectives over time. Organizational performance relates to how efficient, effective, relevant and viable an organization is. McNamara (2011) states that organizational performance involves recurring activities that establish organizational goals, monitors progress towards goals and makes adjustments to achieve the goals more effectively and efficiently. Effectiveness is the measure of the degree to which services offered by PTTCs meet expectations of tutors, students and other stakeholders. Efficiency is the utilization of the resources within appropriate cost structures; relevance is the ability to adapt to changing environments to satisfy stakeholders’ current needs, while viability is the ability to maintain sustainable operational base for meeting obligations as they fall (Luthans, 2000).
2.6. Demographic Characteristics
Bell (cited in Thakur, 2015) also defines demographic characteristics as personal statistics on information such as gender, age, education level, income level, marital status, occupation, religion, birth rate, death rate, average size of family, average age at marriage. Fletchl (2010) points out that the demographic characteristics have an influence on whether employees will be committed to their work or not. He observes that how well the employee performs, how many years they are ready to dedicate in service and how well they act in the best interest of the firm’s objectives heavily depends on how much the organizations take care of the needs that are related to their demographic characteristics. This study has been delimited to five demographic areas: gender and age only.
2.7. Influence of Transformational Leadership on Staff Job Satisfaction
In an empirical study, Castro and Martins (2010) investigated the relationship between organizational climate and job satisfaction in an information and communication technology (ICT) organization in South Africa. The findings of the research indicated that there was a strong positive correlation between the two variables (r = 0.813, n= 696, p = 0.000). The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients were also computed among the 11 dimensions. During the analysis of the items and factors, it was found that some dimensions had a personal or direct influence on the individual and others an indirect influence on the individual. The dimensions considered to have a personal influence on the individual included the following: personal growth and development; interpersonal belonging and fit; employee wellness; challenging and interesting work.
In Kenya, Kainyu (2018) conducted a study to establish whether transformational leadership style had significant effect on teachers’ job satisfaction in public and private schools in Nakuru Town. The specific objectives were to determine the effect of autocratic, participative and transformational leadership styles on teachers’ job satisfaction. The sample size comprised 28 primary schools with a total sample size of 348 teachers. The results showed transformational leadership had a significant, positive relationship with job satisfaction (r = 0.491, p = 0.000). This showed job satisfaction increased when the school Head Teachers used transformational leadership. The model summary of multiple regression analysis showed that leadership styles accounted for 30.3% of the variance in teachers job satisfaction (R2 = 0.303). The standardized beta coefficients showed transformational leadership (β = 0.373, p < 0.05) was significant positive predictor of teachers job satisfaction. The positive beta coefficient for transformational leadership (inspirational motivation and individualized consideration) suggests that teacher job satisfaction is high when their leader uses transformational leadership style.
However, the finding contradicts the finding of Katie (2013) which reported that inspirational motivation was the highest contributing factor of transformational leadership style while idealized attributes was the least contributing factor.
2.8. Influence of Transformation Leadership on Organizational Performance
A study by Wang, Shieh and Tang (2010) examined the relationships among the leadership style, organizational performance and the human resource management strategy in south Taiwan. The study sample was 246 corporate owners, executors and operators of Kaohsiung’s Nanzi Export Processing Zone. It was found that transformational leadership style was positively related to the organizational performance. As for β-value of standardized regressive coefficient and its significant condition, it is found that interactions of “transformational leadership and development strategy” (β = 0.706**), had a significantly positive effect on the financial performance of organizational performance. After inputting interaction between the leadership style and the human resource management strategy, R2 was 0.537, and significant F-value was 0.007. In addition, F-value of the overall regression analysis is 2.959. It can be seen that the effect of the leadership style on organizational effectiveness is moderated by partial factors of the human resource management strategy.
In Kenya, a study by Awino (2015) investigated the effect of on employees’ performance of employees at Bank of Africa, Kenya. A sample of 300 respondents including 25 branch managers and 275 employees who are tellers, banking officers, retail officers and customer service staff was used. The findings showed that transformational leadership style was the most exhibited style at the bank. The coefficients results showed that transformational leadership positively predicted employee performance, standardized B = 0.618 (p < 0.01). These results suggest that performance of employees whose immediate supervisor exhibited transformational leadership characteristics increased significantly by 61.8 percent. Overall, scores in transformational leadership style were found to be strongly correlated with both measures of employee performance.
2.9. Influence of Gender on Job Satisfaction
Al-Ajmi (cited in Tadesse & Muriithi, 2017) investigated the consequences of gender disparities on job satisfaction in Kuwait, and concluded that there are no important disparities based on gender. Another study conducted by Koyuncu et al. (2006) investigated men and women faculty members’ work experience and job satisfaction in Turkey, and they also concluded that there was no meaningful gender-based discrepancy in job satisfaction (Koyuncu et al., 2006). Nevertheless, females showed slightly higher levels of job satisfaction than males. Other studies also concluded that female employees experience extremely high levels of job satisfaction (Bender et al., 2005; Ishitani, 2010; Okpara et al., 2005). In a study by Saif et al. (2016) factors which contributed to female job satisfaction included job security, participation in decision making, promotional opportunities, recognition for good work, peer relationships, creativity and innovation, proper reward system, benefits from services, flexible working hours, attitude of leaders, specific time for family, social status, and available leave facilities. This is despite their lower payment and limited chances for advancement. In addition, they experience career failure, spend a longer time at lower career levels with lack of training opportunities and have higher probabilities of not getting social security. Further they suffer job segregation and feel more tension than males in the workplace (Kim, 2005; Sousa-Poza & Sousa-Poza, 2003).
On the other hand, some studies found that males experience higher levels of satisfaction than females (Aydin et al., 2013; Chiu, 1998; Sousa-Poza & Sousa-Poza, 2003). A study by Bonte & Krabel (2014) identified factors contributing to male job satisfaction as high income, good career opportunities, having leadership function, possibility to apply own ideas, challenging tasks at work, and interesting work content.
2.10. Influence of Age on Job Satisfaction
Regarding age and job satisfaction, one is expected to be energetic and enthusiastic at an early age of their employment (Adio, 2010). Clark et al. (1996) pointed out that a U-shape relationship exists between age and job satisfaction. This is attributed to higher morale shown by younger workers, lower job satisfaction of middle-age workers (who often perceive less opportunities and have unmet expectations) and higher job satisfaction of older workers who have accepted the realities of their jobs and roles. In general, job satisfaction increases with age, the least job satisfaction being reported by the youngest workers (Mack, 2000; Ting, 1997). Schultz and Shultz (2010) concurred with this position that an increase in job satisfaction with age is reliable only until about the age of sixty at which point the evidence becomes less conclusive. The more one gets older the less likely one is to quit the job. They argue that as workers get older, they have fewer alternative job opportunity and they are less likely to resign because the longer tenure tends to provide them with higher wage rates, longer paid vacations and benefits that are more attractive.
Johnson (2018) has given key reasons for job dissatisfaction and poor employee performance among the youth. First is being underpaid in which younger employees are more affected. Underpaid workers often must stretch their little money further even for basic necessities. At times they lack health insurance cover, and meet the cost of housing, utilities and food. Secondly, is lack of career growth and advancement; young employees feel stuck in their job positions. Workers feel valued when employers include them in their long term plans and show their appreciations through promotions. Young employees need more responsibilities so that they gain experience. Thirdly, is a lack of interest in the work; young employees want to perform job duties that are engaging and challenging. Routine which is monotonous causes boredom making them feel unfulfilled in their jobs. Fourth, having leaders with poor leadership skills who tend to offer little feedback on employees’ performances. Others micromanage and dictate on employees instead of motivating them. Fifth, is not being heard. Communication is key to employee satisfaction, but young employees say their bosses don’t listen to them. They are given opportunity to speak their minds, and the few who speak have their ideas ignored.
2.11. Influence of Gender on Organizational Performance
According to Jackson (2009), there are many stereotypes in existence concerning the differences in abilities between men and women in many organizations. t is observed that while women are good in obeying rules and following instructions, men on the other hand are more aggressive and aim at seeing the results quickly. The differences are however minor and might not be universally adopted as an explanation as to why men and women attain different performance standards (Murray & Atkinson, 1981). Further Murray & Atkinson (1981) added that there are a number of possible explanations to this. Firstly, women are granted a longer maternity leave compared to their male counterparts who just get a few days and sometimes denied depending on the policies of the organizations they are working for. From a cultural context, women are more responsible to immediate family matters such as looking after children more than their male counterparts.
In one study, Thakur (2015) sought to determine the influence of demographic characteristics on performance of academic employees at Kenyatta University in Kenya. Data was collected from the academic staff (Full Professor, Associate Professor, Senior lecturer, lecturer and Tutorial fellows) at Kenyatta University. From the study findings, majority (65%) of the academic staff were male while 35% were female. The finding confirmed that gender plays a critical role in employee’s performance. From the above results however, this has not yet been fully achieved given the identified gap between the male and female performance.
2.12. Influence of Age on Employee Performance
The decline of mental abilities from early adulthood is a universal phenomenon. A large body of evidence supports the notion that cognitive abilities decline from some stage in adulthood (Skirbekk, 2003). Physical abilities, mental abilities, education and job experience form an individual’s productivity potential. Combined with organization’s characteristics, these factors determine job performance. Productivity reductions at older ages are particularly strong for work tasks where problem solving, learning and speed are needed, while in jobs where experience and verbal abilities are important, older individuals’ maintain a relatively high productivity level (Skirbekk, 2003).
A study by Thakur (2015) of the academic staff at Kenyatta University found that most (47%) of the respondents were aged between 40 - 64 years, 43% were 39 years and below while 10% were aged between 65 - 78 years, implying that majority of the academic staff at Kenyatta University were aged between 40 - 64 years. The result also established that the age category of 31 to 40 that performs the best also constitutes the highest population per age category among the employees working at Kenyatta University. This indicates that the university is aware of the age factor in as far as productivity is concerned. Although several writers dispute the idea of age as a determinant of productivity, this research proved otherwise. From results above, age is a key determinant of employee performance.
3. Research Methodology
This study adopted the survey research design. Survey design provides a quantitative or numeric description of trends, attitudes or opinions of a population by studying a sample of that population. From sample results, the researcher generalized or made claims about the population (Creswell, 2018). It entailed collection of data on more than one case and at a single point in time in order to collect a body of quantitative or quantifiable data in connection with two or more variables which are examined to detect patterns of association (Bryman, 2008). The research design enabled the researcher to collect data on the influence of principals’ leadership style on organizational climate as moderated by tutors’ demographic characteristics.
3.1. Target Population
The target population was 245 tutors teaching in nine selected PTTCs. The respondents held professional certification from universities and other educational institutions recognized by the Kenya government. Tutors in public PTTCs were employed by the Teachers Service Commission (TSC) while those in private contracted locally by the Boards of Management (BoMs) of those PTTCs. The PTTCs were preferred because they have defined administrative structures. Also, they offered the same Primary 1 (P1) course and had legal mandate to operate given by the government of Kenya. Their top leadership structures are almost similar and they are likely to exhibit elaborate relationships between the study variables.
3.2. Sample Size and Sampling Procedure
225 respondents were sampled from the nine PTTCs in Lake Victoria region of Kenya, using Yamane (1967) statistical formula:
where:
n = the required sample size,
N = target population, and,
e = the level of precision or sampling error (0.05% or 5%).
Its advantage is that PTTCs with a smaller number of tutors were all selected, and those PTTCs with a large number of tutors had an appropriate number sampled.
3.3. Sampling Procedure
The study employed a multistage sampling procedure. The researcher first used cluster sampling (Creswell, 2018) to get the nine PTTCs from the four counties of Lake Victoria Region. Five public and four private PTTCs were selected for the study. Gender was also considered to ensure both male and female tutors were selected. Purposive non-random sampling, also described as “judgmental” sampling (Mason & Griffin, 2002) was also employed in which participants were chosen on the basis that they exhibited particular features or experiences that enabled detailed understanding of the central themes and puzzles the researcher wished to study.
3.4. Instruments for Data Collection
Data was collected through a self-report, paper-based questionnaire, using closed-ended structured questions. Principals’ leadership styles were measured using a researcher-adapted version of Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) Form 5X developed by Bass and Avolio (2004); tutor job satisfaction was measured using an adapted version of Job Satisfaction Survey (JSQ) research instrument developed by Spector (1985); while organizational performance was measured using an adapted version of Organizational Performance Survey Tool (OPST) developed by William and Anderson (1991). All the variables were measured using a Likert-scale with five alternatives ranging from (1) Strongly Disagree, (2) Disagree, (3) Undecided, (4) Agree, and (5) Strongly Agree.
3.5. Validity and Reliability of Research Instruments
To determine the validity of the items in the research instruments, a pilot study was conducted to the respondents from each category of the subjects. Cronbach’s alpha for all the variables were above 0.7 which is acceptable. The values were interpreted using the following criteria: α > 0.9 excellent, 0.9 > α > 0.8 good, 0.8 > α > 0.7 acceptable, 0.7 > α > 0.6 questionable, and 0.6 > α > 0.5 poor (George & Mallery, 2010). Results for transformational leadership combined was (α = 0.798) which was good. However, results for inspirational motivation (α = 0.742) and individualized consideration (α = 0.736) leadership styles indicated acceptable reliabilities.
3.6. Data Analysis
Descriptive analysis was used because the researcher wanted to compare the responses of different groups (Creswell, 2018) and the data were mainly in terms of numbers. Tabulation was a part of the technical procedure wherein the classified data were put in the form of tables (Kothari, 2004). The study presented the means, frequencies, percentages, and standard deviations of participants that belonged to specific categories including gender, age, education level, teaching experience, years of stay in current PTTC, current rank and category of PTTC.
3.7. Ethical Considerations
Several moral principles were applied while interacting with respondents including being respectful, fair and promoting healthy relationships. The researcher explained and clarified all issues pertaining to the study. There was openness to and honesty with the research participants. The researcher explained to participants the purpose of the study and other information they needed. The researcher maintained confidentiality and also explained the benefits which participants could derive from the research. The researcher obtained “informed consent” letter from the university. Respondents’ anonymities were preserved to avoid possible embarrassment for providing certain information (Jonser, 2002).
4. Research Findings and Discussions
In Table 1, the findings show that from all tutors who participated in this survey the majority were males tutors 53.9%, majority 32.6% tutors belonged to age bracket 41 - 50 years, 54.4% tutors had bachelor degree educational level with teaching experiences category of 18 and above years comprising 37.3%. Lastly, years of stay in current PTTC 0 - 5 years were the majority 53.8%.
4.1. Results for Dimensions of Transformational Leadership Style
In Table 2, the results revealed that in a 1 - 5 Likert scale, inspirational motivation leadership (M = 3.77, SD = 0.740) was strongly exhibited, while individualized consideration leadership (M = 3.36, SD = 0.887) was moderately exhibited by principals of PTTCs in Lake Victoria Region of Kenya.
4.2. Finding for Organizational Climate
Similarly, in Table 3, the results reveal that organizational climate had a moderate mean (M = 3.44; SD = 0.679) and an acceptable standard deviation.
4.3. Influence of Principals’ Transformational Leadership Style on Organizational Climates of PTTCs
Table 4 illustrates that transformational leadershiphas a strong and positive correlation with organizational climate (R = 0.704, p = 0.000 < 0.05) and was statistically significant p < 0.05 at the significance level (α = 0.05, 2-taied) test. Individually, individualized consideration (R = 0.659, p = 0.000 < 0.05) and inspirational motivation (R = 0.538, p = 0.000 < 0.05) leadership styles both had strong and positive correlation with organizational climate.
4.4. Regression Result for Transformational Leadership Style and Organizational Climate
The regression results of the models are presented in Table 5, result for a combination of both individualized consideration and inspirational motivation leadership styles was R = 0.709 (R2 = 0.497) indicating 49.7% increase in organizational climate. Individually, R = 0.659 (R2 = 0.431) shows individualized consideration leadership account for 43.1%, while inspirational motivation leadership 28.5% increases in organizational climates.
![]()
Table 1. Demographic characteristics data of respondents.
Source: Survey data, 2022.
![]()
Table 2. Summary of leadership styles.
Source: Survey data (2022).
![]()
Table 3. Summary of organizational climate.
Source: Survey data (2022).
![]()
Table 4. Correlations for transformational leadership and organizational climates of PTTCs.
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
![]()
Table 5. Models summary for transformational leadership style and organizational climate of PTTCs.
a1. Predictors: (Constant), Individualized consideration leadership, Inspirational motivation leadership styles; a2. Predictors: (Constant), Individualized consideration leadership; a3. Predictors: (Constant), Inspirational motivation leadership; b. Dependent Variable: Organizational climate. Source: SPSS output, 2022.
The full model containing all predictors was statistically significant because the p-value of 0.000 for both dimensions of transformational leadership is less than the significant level of 0.05. Also, according to Field (2013), Durbin-Watson values less than 1 or more than 3 are a cause of concern. Thus, Durbin values 1.942 and 2.162 suggest that there is no auto-correlation in our model.
4.5. ANOVA Results for Leadership Styles and Organizational Performance
Table 6 presents the analysis of variance (ANOVA) or model fit results. (F(2, 190) = 95.776; p = 0.000 < 0.05) meaning the model has power to predict organizational climate significantly from individualized consideration and inspirational motivation leadership scores. The regression sum (44.476) and residual sum (44.115) are almost equal indicating that the model explains almost half of the variation in the organizational climate.
![]()
Table 6. ANOVA result for dimensions of transformational leadership style and organizational climate.
a1. Predictors: (Constant), Individualized consideration, inspirational motivation leaderships; a2. Predictors: (Constant), Individualized consideration leadership; a3. Predictors: (Constant), Inspirational motivation leadership; b. Dependent Variable: Organizational climate. Source: SPSS output, 2019.
Individually, (F(1, 191) = 146.364; p = 0.000 < 0.05) means the model has power to predict organizational climate significantly from individualized consideration leadership scores. However, the low regression sum (38.435) as compared to the high residual sum (50.156) indicates that the model does not explain most of the variation in the organizational climate.
Similarly, (F(1, 191) = 77.640; p = 0.000 < 0.05) meaning the model has power to predict organizational climate significantly from inspirational motivation leadership scores. However, the low regression sum (25.604) as compared to the high residual sum (62.987) indicates that the model does not explain most of the variation in the organizational climate.
4.6. Results for Coefficients for Leadership Styles and Organizational Climate
The general form of the equation to predict organizational climate from principals’ use of dimensions of transformational leadership is as follows:
where:
Y = The predicted value for organizational climate;
Β0 = The y-intercept of regression line (the level of organizational climate in the absence of leadership styles) (1.082);
Β1 = The slope of the regression line of individualized consideration leadership (the regression line is increasing) (0.398);
Β2 = The slope of the regression line of inspirational motivation leadership (the regression line is increasing) (0.271);
X1 = Individualized considerationleadership (0.521);
X2 = Inspirational motivation leadership (0.295);
Ε = Error term (0.189 + 0.044+ 0.053 = 0.286);
Y = β0 + β1X1 + β2X2 + ε;
Y = 1.082 + (0.398 × 0.521) + (0.271 × 0.295) + 0.286;
Y = 1.082 + 0.207 + 0.080 + 0.286;
Y = 1.655.
The findings presented in Table 7 show that taking all other independent variables at zero, a unit increase in dimensions of transformationalleadership will lead to a 1.082 unit increase in organizational climates, a unit increase in individualized consideration leadership will lead to a 0.398 units increase, while a unit increase in inspirational motivation leadership will lead to a 0.271 units increase in organizational climates of PTTCs. The p-values show that both individualized consideration (p = 0.000 < 0.05) and inspirational motivation leadership styles (p = 0.000 < 0.05) are positively and significantly correlated with organizational climates. Principals’ use of individualized consideration and inspirational motivation dimensions of transformational leadership style have added 0.571 units to 1.082 which was the point of interception. Principals’ use of the dimensions of transformational leadership has influenced the organizational climates of PTTCs in Lake Victoria Region of Kenya.
4.7. Performance of PTTCs in PTE Examination between 2016-2019
Table 8 shows the performances of the nine PTTCs in PTE Examinations between
![]()
Table 7. Results for coefficients for dimensions of transformational leadership style and organizational climate.
a. Dependent Variable: Organizational climates.
![]()
Table 8. Performance of colleges in PTE examination between 2016-2019.
Source: Field data (2019).
2016 and 2019. The performances were examined using an 8-point scale in which 1 meant excellent while 9 indicated the worst performance. Scores 1 and 2 were Distinctions; 3, 4 and 5 Credit passes; 6 and 7 Weak Passes, while score 8 meant Fail. The PTTCs performed as follows: First position was PTTC-01 with a mean grade of 4.98; second was PTTC-05 with a mean grade of 5.11; third was PTTC-09 with a mean grade of 5.28; fourth was PTTC-04 with a mean grade of 5.37; fifth was PTTC-03 with a mean grade of 5.39, sixth was PTTC-06 with a mean grade of 5.44, seventh was PTTC-02 with a mean grade of 5.52, eighth was PTTC-07 with a mean grade of 5.54, ninth was PTTC-08 with a mean grade of 5.65. Overall, public PTTCs performed better with an average mean of 5.27 than private PTTCs with an average mean of 5.65.
These results were in agreement with the findings in quantitative analysis. Transformational leadership combined explained 49.7% increase in organizational climate, which was average.
The staff under a principal practicing inspirational motivation leadership is expected to talk very optimistically about the future of the institution, articulate a compelling vision of the future, paint an interesting picture of the importance of achieving goals, and always be enthusiastic about goals and objectives. The principal should be ready to recommend tutors for further training. Similarly, a principal who practices individualized consideration always considers individuals’ special needs, abilities and aspirations. He commonly helps staff to develop their abilities and skills, treats tutors as individuals rather than just members of groups, and regularly spends time teaching and coaching staff. These attributes came up, but not strongly enough, which resulted in an average performance by the PTTCs.
It was expected that a high level of agreement to exist between the transformational principal and tutors on how things are done. The principals were expected to make positive efforts to keep their staff well informed on important issues affecting them. The principal’s expectations from the tutors ought to be realistic. Only under those conditions would the PTTCs record impressive academic performances, since staff members would experience job satisfaction. Students would be of high discipline. Their principals would be responsive to students’ welfare including health problems. Students would be provided with quality and quantity meals. The PTTCs scores would be high in organizational performance.
Previous studies conducted in educational and non-educational contexts support the positive influence of transformational leadership on job satisfaction (Bogler, 2001; Nguni et al., 2006). In South Africa, Eustace (2013) researched on the role of leadership in shaping organizational climate in Fast-Moving Consumer Goods industry. Their finding showed a strong positive relationship between transformational leadership and organizational climate (0.88). Mohammad et al. (2011), in their study showed a statistically significant positive relationship existing between the five transformational leadership styles and job satisfactions.
A previous study by Ngaithe, K’ao, Lewa and Ndwiga (2016) on the effect of transformational leadership on staff performance in state owned enterprises in Kenya found that transformational leadership explained a significant proportion of variance in staff performance, R2 = 0.80, F(1, 145) = 43.4, p < 0.01. This finding corroborated Juma and Ndisya’s (2016) that the changes in the transformational leadership style had significant changes in employee performance in Safaricom Limited. Also, Mbithi’s (2014) study on leader-member relations and performance of universities in Kenya showed a positive and statistically significant relationship between the five dimensions of transformational leadership and performance of universities in Kenya (R = 0.679, R2 = 0.461, F = 30.767, T value = 5.547, p < 0.001). Despite the moderate correlation between transformational leadership and performance (R = 0.679), the results of this study show a positive and statistically significant support for the effect of transformational leadership on performance of universities in Kenya.
4.8. Influence of Demographic Factors on Organizational Performance
Table 9 illustrates that demographic factors (gender and age)had negligible and negative correlations with organizational climates. Gender (R = −0.093, p = 0.200 > 0.05) and age (R = −0.050, p = 0.491 > 0.05) were both statistically insignificant correlations with organizational climates of PTTCs, at the significance level (α = 0.05, 2-taied) test.
4.9. Regression Result for Demographic Factors on Organizational Climates of PTTCs
In Table 10, a summary of multiple linear regression results of the model for the demographic factors are presented. The R2 = 0.001 shows that demographic factors account for only 0.1% variation in organizational climate. Also, Durbin value of 1.854 suggests that there is no auto-correlation in our model.
4.10. ANOVA Results for Demographic Factors on Staff Organizational Performance
Table 11 presents the analysis of variance (ANOVA) or model fit results. For
![]()
Table 9. Correlations for demographic factors and organizational climate of PTTCs.
![]()
Table 10. Model summary for demographic factors on organizational climate.
a. Predictors: (Constant), Age in years, Gender; b. Dependent Variable: Organizational climate. Source: Field data, 2022.
![]()
Table 11. ANOVA for demographic factors on organizational performance.
a. Dependent Variable: Organizational climate; b. Predictors: (Constant), Age in years, Gender.
demographic factors (F(2, 190) = 1.098; p = 0.338 > 0.05) means the model does not have power to predict organizational climate significantly from gender and age scores. Also, the very low regression sum (1.012) as compared to the very high residual sum (87.579) indicates that the model does not explain the variation in the organizational climate.
4.11. Coefficients Results for Demographic Factors on Organizational Climate
The model to be tested was
where:
Y2 = the predicted value for organizational climate;
Β0 = the y-intercept of regression line (the level of organizational climate in the absence of demographic factors) (3.717);
Β1 = the slope of the regression line of gender (the regression line is decreasing) (−0.129);
Β2 = the slope of the regression line age (the regression line is decreasing) (−0.018);
X1 = Gender (−0.095);
X2 = Age (−0.053);
ε = (0.196 + 0.098 + 0.024 = 0.318);
Y2 = β0 + β1X1 + β2X2+ β3X3 + β4X4 + β5X5 + ε;
Y2 = 3.717 − (0.129 × 0.095) − (0.018 × 0.053) + 0.318;
Y2 = 3.717 − 0.012 − 0.001 + 0.318;
Y2 = 4.022.
The findings presented in Table 12 show that taking all other independent variables at zero, a unit increase in demographic characteristics will lead to a
![]()
Table 12. Coefficients for intervening variables and organizational climate.
a. Dependent Variable: Organizational climate. Source: Fiend data, 2019.
3.717 unit increase in organizational climate, a unit increase in gender will lead to a −0.129 units decrease, while a unit increase in age will lead to a −0.018 units decrease organizational climates of PTTCs. The p-values show that both gender (p = 0.192 > 0.05) and age (p = 0.462 > 0.05) are negatively and insignificantly correlated with organizational climate. Principals’ gender and age have added 0.205 units to 3.717 units which was the point of interception. Principals’ gender and age have influenced negatively and insignificantly the organizational climates of PTTCs in Lake Victoria Region of Kenya.
5. Summary of the Findings
The results revealed that on a Likert scale of 1 - 5, inspirational motivation (M = 3.77) was strongly exhibited, while individualized consideration (M = 3.36, SD = 0. 887) was moderately exhibited by principals of PTTCs in Lake Victoria Region of Kenya (see Table 2).
The results also show that individualized consideration (r = 0.659) and inspirational motivation (r = 0.538) both had strong and positive correlations with organizational climate. This means that one unit increase in individualized consideration leadership was associated with 43.4% increase, while inspirational motivation was associated with 28.5% increase in organizational climates of PTTCs in Lake Victoria Region of Kenya (Table 4 and Table 5). The p-value (p = 0.000) for both the dimensions of transformational leadership at 0.05 significance level indicates a statistically significant correlation between principals’ use of individualized consideration and inspirational motivation leadership styles and the organizational climates of PTTCs.
On the other hand, the two demographic characteristics (gender and age) that were studied, explained only 0.1% of organizational climate of PTTCs in Lake Victoria Region of Kenya (Table 9 and Table 10). This was negligible; other factors not studied in this research explained 99.9%. Also the model was found to be statistically insignificant (p = 0.336 > 0.05). Therefore, the results of the demographics: gender and age cannot be generalized to be a true reflection at the national level. In summary, increase in the four dimensions of transformational leadership styles is beneficial to the organizational climate of the PTTCs in Lake Victoria Region of Kenya.
Recommendations
This study recommends that principals of PTTCs should use more of individualized consideration and inspirational motivation dimensions of transformational leadership style since both have positive influence on the organizational climates of PTTCs. Demographic characteristics do not play a critical role in organizational climates of PTTCs and therefore should not be over-emphasized when appointing tutors to be principals of PTTCs.