The Effects of Organizational Culture and Organizational Leadership Styles on Organizational Performance and Success: A Case Study of Public Health Institutions in the Bono Region of Ghana

The Effects of Organizational Culture and Organizational Leadership Styles on Organizational Performance and Success: A Case Study of Public Health Institutions in the Bono Region of Ghana

*Domie, Godswill.¹ , Dodzi, Samuel.², Gawu, Paul Senyo³, Cardinal Newton⁴,

^1,2PhD Student. Graduate School of Business Management, Philippine Christian University, Manila- Philippines.

 ³Gawu. Ghana Health Service (GHS), Supply, Stores, & Drug Management (SSDM), Accra Ghana④

⁴PhD Student. Graduate School of Business Management, Philippine Christian University, Manila- Philippines.

Corresponding Author*

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.802082

Received: 08 February 2024; Revised: 17 February 2024; Accepted: 22 February 2024; Published: 12 March 2024

ABSTRACT

This study evaluated the degree to which the existence of and the application of various leadership styles and qualities impacts organizational success in public health institutions in the Bono and Ahafo region of Ghana. A cross-sectional research design with quantitative approach was used for this study. A total population of 700 junior and middle-level staff was considered out of which 281 were initially sampled via Slovin’s sample formula and used for the study. 240 copies of the questionnaires were finally received and were used in the data analysis. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire developed by modifying the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire MLQ of Bass and Avolio. Cronbach alpha was used to test the research instruments for reliability and to determine the internal consistency. An expert judgment method was employed to determine content validity. One sample t-test and a non-parametric test were conducted on the hypotheses. Pearson correlation analysis was conducted to establish the degree of relationship between the dependent variable and independent variables while general regression was used to determine how the independent variables affect the dependent variable. Significance level as pegged at p =0.05.  Data analysis was done with SPSS. Pearson’s correlation techniques were adopted and used to analyze the data at a 5% level of significance. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to present the results of the study and the findings and recommendations offered based on existing literature and field data. The results of the study showed that of all leadership styles, the existence of and the application of transformational and democratic (ethical) leadership qualities and organizational performance and success have a strong positive and significant correlation. The study concluded that although all leadership styles are critical success factors that can bring about radical positive changes in employees and health facilities, emphasis must be on transformational or ethical (democratic), or the combined effect of the two at the same time if much success is to be achieved. The study recommended that management at all levels within the health sector must endorse transformational and democratic leadership styles, offer good organizational development plans, and ensure stronger teamwork with sustained positive mindsets and interests among their employees to harness their full potential for maximum organizational performance and success.

Keywords: Organizational performance, Organizational Success, Transformational Leadership Style, Transactional Leadership Style, Autocratic Leadership Style, Charismatic Leadership Style, Democratic Leadership Style, Organizational Culture, Bono Region, Ghana.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

The hallmark of every healthcare system and healthcare organization is the delivery of efficient, safe, effective, and high-quality care. This requires effective and efficient leadership to spearhead and actualize the vision, goals, and objectives within the system and to reform and revitalize the system to deliver the needed expectations of stakeholders. The health sector is a very complex institution that shares leadership from across management and clinical perspectives and this arguably presents big internal challenges to the system (Counte & Newman, 2002; Garman & Scribner, 2011).   Among the numerous internal problems encountered by healthcare organizations that call for effective leadership include expectations for accountability and transparency, management of human and financial resources, and stakeholder interests inter alia (Liang et al., 2006; Stefl, 2008; Wallick & Stager, 2002). Healthcare organizations are also faced with problems that come from their external environments such as globalization, advancement in information technology, government policies and regulations, economic factors, demographic and population changes, outbreaks of epidemics, pandemics, and changing trends in the clinical and medical technologies, and these equally need strong, dynamic, and resilient leaders to be able to overcome (Leggat, 2007; Guo & Anderson, 2005; Gertner EJ, Sabino JN, Mahady E, Deitrick LM, Patton JR, Grim MK, et al., 2010).

More complex is the fact that the nature of health systems management and service delivery comes with issues such as fragmentation and duplication of services, lack of integration across the health continuum, emphasis on curative rather than preventive care, and meeting the needs of the public with more advanced models of care. Leadership therefore cannot be reduced in importance in surmounting the momentous problems confronting the healthcare industry (Bawontuo, 2022). Consequently, dynamic leadership has been identified as instrumental in developing, influencing, and revolutionizing organizational culture and reforms and spearheading the execution and implementation of reforms in the healthcare sector (Ayeleke et al., 2018). Leadership itself is a process of leading or influencing a group of people or an organization to achieve its set goals and objectives or a shared vision (Cummings et al., 2010; Business Dictionary, 2019). Leadership styles explain the manner in which people/leaders exert influence on their teams /followers and come in different forms (Appelbaum, 2015), including autocratic, democratic, and laissez-faire styles, transactional and transformational leadership styles, and bureaucratic, charismatic and ethical/ servant leadership styles among others (Amanchukwu et al., 2015; Mihelič, 2010; Al Sawai, 2013).  While it is easy to assume that any leadership style can be applied within the health sector to realize maximum cooperation and performance, the opposite is true because as a human institution characterized with dynamism and diverse interests, not all styles of leadership can work to perfection. The main aim of this research is to determine the effect of organizational culture and the various leadership styles (autocratic, democratic, transactional, transformational, charismatic and bureaucratic) on organizational performance and success. To achieve this objective, two research hypotheses were tested: (Ho1):  There is no significant relationship between organizational leadership styles and organizational performance and success and Ho_2: Organizational culture does not influence Leadership Styles, employee behavior, organizational performance, and organizational success.

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Conceptualization of Leadership

Leadership, jointly as a field of research and as an area of practical proficiency, includes the ability of an individual, group, or organization to lead, influence, or guide other individuals, followers, teams, or entire organization toward achieving set goals and objectives. Thus, the word or term leadership often gets regarded as a contested term (Grint, Keith. 2005; Western, Simon. 2013). In literature, leadership is generally intellectualized as a process that stimulates influence within a context for achieving goals through the sharing of a common vision (Cummings et al., 2010). Because leadership is a complex terminology involving many different disciplines, it has been variously defined. Stogdill (1974) maintained that just as the dresses we wear and the differences in man’s physical formation, there are also many different definitions of leadership just as the number of people who are interested in and have tried to define the concept of leadership given rise to several definitions. Of these definitions, two of them make a lot of sense and explain in more detail what exactly leadership was all about at the time they were proposed, even now, and going into the future. Yukl (2006, p.8) define leadership as “the process of influencing others to understand and agree about what needs to be done and how to do it, and the process of facilitating individual and collective efforts to accomplish shared objectives” and Northouse (2010, p.3) define leadership as “a process whereby an individual influence a group of individuals to achieve a common goal”. Yukl and Northouse’s definitions of leadership unearth several significant elements of fundamental importance to the concept of leadership. Key among them include: (a) Leadership is a process, (b) leadership involves influencing others, (c) leadership happens within the context of a group, (d) leadership involves goal attainment, and (e) these goals are shared by leaders and their followers (Yukl, 2006; Northouse, 2010)

 The table below provides further explanation of the key components included in Gary and Northouse’s definitions of leadership.

Leadership Styles

Lewin K. et al. (1939) first developed the idea of leadership styles within organizations by identifying the Authoritarian (Autocratic), Participative (Democratic), and Delegative (Laissez-Faire) leadership styles. Burns J.M (1978), while studying political leaders like Roosevelt and Kennedy, came out with additional two different styles of leadership and first coined the terms transforming and transactional leadership styles in his 1978 book which was later refined by Bass (1985) in his work Leadership and Performance beyond Expectations, where he used the term ‘transformational leadership’ instead of ‘transforming leadership’. Bass argued, “Transactional leaders work within the organizational culture as it exists; the transformational leader changes the organizational culture.” Since then, these leadership styles Authoritarian (Autocratic), Participative (Democratic), Delegative (Laissez-Faire), Transformational, and Transactional have engaged the attention of academia and industry as a way of deepening managerial governance and business performance.

According to Al Khajeh (2018) and Harris et al., (2007), Leadership style is the modus in which leaders direct their followers to achieve organizational goals and objectives and they identified transformational, transactional, autocratic, charismatic, bureaucratic, and democratic leadership styles as the major ones commonly used in organizations. Leadership style again is considered by Mitonga-Monga & Coetzee (2012) as an amalgamation of various characteristics, traits, and behaviors adopted by leaders to interact with their subordinates. Mitonga-Monga and Coetzee (2012) thus contemplate leadership as that which is connected to managerial behavior, whose goal is to combine the organizational and personal interests for the achievement of specific objectives.  Xu & Wang (2008) maintained the indispensability of leadership in an organization because they create a vision and mission, determine and develop objectives, and design strategies, policies, and methods to achieve organizational goals through guiding and harmonizing the efforts and organizational activities. Harris, et al. (2007) earlier noted that the mere existence of leadership without quality is hopeless if organizations are to achieve their mission and vision and effectively adjust to the developments in the external environment.

Transformational leadership style concentrates on developing the followers and bearing in mind their needs by concentrating predominantly on the development of the complete value system of employees, their moralities, skills, and motivation level as well as providing a platform for bringing leaders and followers together to better understand employees’ values, interest, and motivational needs (Al Khajeh, 2018). Bass and Avolio (1994) and Bass (1999), identified four main elements of transformational leadership. These are Idealized influence (II), Inspirational motivation (IM), Intellectual stimulation (IS), and Individual consideration (IC).

Various scholars have identified stacks of ingredients associated with Idealized Influence as a component of transformational leadership style. Stone et al. (2003) considered it as the charismatic dimension of transformational leadership because it assists in inspiring a vision by making followers trust and stimulate their leader’s behaviors, embrace their values, and commit to accomplishing the leader’s vision which ultimately increases follower self-confidence and the sense of participating with the leader. According to Yukl (2006), Idealized influence actions act as magnetic fields that attract strong successive sentiments and identification with the leader. Bass and Riggio (2006) and Bass and Avolio (2002), also maintained that leaders who exhibit strong qualities of idealized influence are consistent rather than arbitrary. They take well taught through calculated risks and are very ethical, and as Banjeri and Krishnan (2000) noted, followers are always happy and enthusiastic about tasks because Idealized Influenced leaders create an atmosphere of mutual respect and imbibe a sense of we are all in it together which is a panacea for mission and vision determine by all and accomplish by all. As Bawontuo (2022) espoused in his lecture to Master of Public Health (MPH) students at the Catholic University in Ghana, Idealized influence as a component of the transformational leadership style makes leaders to be recognized as role models who must provide vision and uphold the principles that maintain and further the organizational mission. They must create valuable and positive change in the followers with the end goal of developing followers into leaders and inspiring people to achieve unexpected or remarkable results. Such leaders must give workers autonomy over specific jobs, as well as the authority to make decisions and streamline or change things that no longer work. They must inspire and motivate workers and understand how to form them into integral units that work well with others. According to Bawontuo, idealized influence calls for leaders to practice what they preach by walking their talk and must not be consistently inconsistent. They must act as role models that followers seek to emulate and always win the trust and respect of the followers through their actions by placing the follower’s needs over their own and sacrificing their gains for them by demonstrating high standards of ethical conduct

Inspirational motivation demands that transformational leaders act in a way that inspires and encourages their followers to do what they would not have willingly done and even do it better than expected. Such leaders must demonstrate strong zeal and self-confidence in their control mechanisms to instill a positive orientation in their followers to impose the fellow feeling (esprit de corps) that will instigate followers to recognize that in whatever they say and do, their visions cannot sway others, but allow them to flow as individual elements and also as collective constituents of the system (Bass & Riggio, 2006). Banjeri and Krishnan (2000) noted that Inspirational Motivation has more to do with ethical or moralistic behaviors such that when leaders are more concerned about successive organizational vision and motivation, they are bound to make virtuous decisions. Bawontuo (2022) also noted that with inspirational motivation, leaders are expected to promote a consistent vision, mission, and a set of values to followers and guide them by providing a sense of meaning and challenge. They must also foster the spirit of teamwork and commitment and challenge followers to come out freely with their talents, innovations, and creativities through the recognition and reward of brilliance and intellect.

Intellectual Stimulation:

Bass and Riggio (2006) and Avoio and Bass (2002) opined that Intellectual Stimulation manifests when transformational leaders encourage the determination of followers to be innovative and creative and encourage them to come up with challenging assumptions, rethink problems, and substitute old fashions with new approaches. Bass and Riggio, (2006) further stated that in Intellectual stimulation, a follower’s creativity and innovativeness abilities are encouraged by the leader without open criticism. Bawontuo (2022) explained that Intellectual Stimulation demands that leaders should encourage followers to be more innovative and creative without fear or favor and must be prepared to accept new ideas from followers and never criticize them publicly for the mistakes committed. They should not focus on the blame game but should also not hesitate to discard old practice if it is found ineffective by always trying to change the way followers think

Individualized consideration:

Individualized Consideration is the extent to which a leader offers support, reassurance, and tutoring to followers Gary (2006), in a compassionate manner Renjith et al. (2015), embraces diversity by identifying individual dissimilarities concerning their needs and wants, and considering each individual separately Bass and Riggio (2006) and Avoio and Bass (2002). To be an Individual Considerate leader, Bawontuo (2022) maintained that leaders must act as mentors to their followers and reward their creativity and innovation. They must also be mindful that followers have individual peculiarities and limitations and treat them differently according to their talents and knowledge. Every individual must be empowered to make decisions and should be offered the needed support to implement them. The Individual Considerate leader should be able to take responsibility for their team’s shortfalls and always be there for them and should be the hawk that will always scare the chickens.

Charismatic Leadership involves leaders developing great visions for their teams to just follow and execute. Innovation and creativity which are associated with the Charismatic leadership style make it more appealing and motivational to followers (employees). However, the negatives of this style of leadership are that it is purely leader-dependent. Followers over-rely on the leader, and once the leader exits the scene, followers become clueless or directionless.  The issue becomes even more complicated because the charismatic leadership style has no succession plan since charismatic leaders do not train their followers to succeed or take over from them. Pundits say the Charismatic leadership style only breeds happy followers, but few future leaders and this creates potential long-term adverse consequences for organizational performance and success (Germano, 2010).

According to Jaqua and Jaqua (2021), Transactional leadership otherwise known as managerial leadership explores a style that concentrates on roles, group performance, and supervision within organizations. Simply put, it is all about performing tasks to meet objectives. Characteristically, transactional leaders assign tasks to their employees and offer rewards and punishments as peps to motivate employees to perform the tasks for the achievement of individual and corporate objectives. The orientation of transactional leaders is on short-term goals, procedures, and policies which are very rigid and structured, surrounded by mechanistic controls for ensuring that things are done right, rules and commands are strictly observed, and there is opposition to command structures. Ojokuku, et al. (2012) explained that transactional leadership applies in an organizational environment where there are exchanges of targets and rewards between the management and the employees. A leader is therefore considered a transactional leader if he/she is always willing to trade something in return for performance (Uchenwamgbe, 2013). Although transactional leadership and its style stimulate employees to struggle for excellence and work hard to meet individual and organizational goals because of the reward system, its greatest pitfall is extrinsic expectancy, motives, and financial and material incentives, and unlike transformational leadership systems, it is only when people anticipate good rewards that they will strive to achieve their targets (Baškarada et al., 2017).

Autocratic Leadership Style

Lewin K. et al. (1939) were the first to have provided an explanation of leadership styles including the Autocratic Leadership style otherwise known as the authoritarian leadership style. Cheng et al. (2004) and Wang et al. (2019) labeled the autocratic/authoritarian leadership style as a leadership behavior that asserts absolute authority and control over subordinates and demands unquestionable obedience from subordinates. Autocratic leadership style is classic and characterized by bossiness with the leader retaining all decision-making powers and taking little or no input at all from the followers (Obiwuru et al., 2011). Characteristically, autocratic leaders compel followers to accomplish tasks according to very strict ways. Because this type of leadership is centered on power domination by the leader with absolutely no consideration of the views and opinions of followers, it is on record to have negative correlations with employees or followers, especially about their attitudes, feelings, and opinions, when it comes to team building and organizational loyalty, job satisfaction, and implicit knowledge-sharing abilities (Cheng & Wang, 2015; Chen et al., 2018). Autocratic leadership usually affects employee retention and organizational fairness (Pellegrini & Scandura 2008; Schaubroeck et al., 2017). To a large extent, an autocratic leadership style kills employee’s creativity and innovation and reduces overall performance (Chan et al., 2013; Schaubroeck et al., 2017; Shen et al., 2019; Wu et al., 2012)

Democratic leadership style

Tannenbaum and Schmidt (1958) defined democratic leadership as leadership that ensures that organizational decision-making is decentralized and shared by all the group members. Thus, under the Democratic leadership style, decision-making obligation is the responsibility of all the followers and the leader. Although democratic leaders enthusiastically are involved in discussions, they still maintain overall authority and make sure they listen to the views of others but are finally accountable for the group’s decisions. Such inclusiveness breeds positive, all-encompassing, and collective work environments that can elicit group creativity. However, due to the flexibility in decision-making, the possibilities for weak execution are very high. There is also the tendency to assume that everyone within the group has an equal stake in the decision-making process with a shared level of expertise. Nevertheless, democratic leadership is known to have inspired employees to give their maximum best, as their views, perceptions, and opinions are valued (Rukmani et al., 2010).

Organizational Culture

Organizational culture connotes the values, norms, beliefs, rules, and philosophy of an organization that exists, share, and govern the way things are done within the organization (Colquitt et al., 2014; McShane & von Glinow, 2000; Schein & Schein, 2017). It is also considered as values, beliefs, and norms of behavior that are understood, accepted, and shared by members of the organization which forms the reference and serves as the basis for organizational behavior (Nurman & Rauf, 2023). According to Luthans (2011), who identified six dimensions of organizational culture, one important aspect of organizational culture is that it provides a set of rules that serve as a framework and guidelines for all employees in the organization. Different cultures are known to exist and are implemented by the leadership of organizations. These include the normative, pragmatic, club, baseball, fortress, academy, constructive, and purpose organizational cultures and they all have their strengths and weaknesses when it comes to dealing with employees and organizational performance (Indeed Editorial Team, 2022). While some organizational leaders come to meet these cultures, others as a result of organizational transformation introduced them to wipe away existing cultures they met.

Organizational Performance and Success

Ion and Criveanu (2016) admitted that due to the polysemantic nature of the term organizational performance, defining the concept is difficult making its definition in absolute terms too broad, specific, vague, or even abstract. In the estimation of Didier Noyé (2002), performance connotes achieving the goals that were given to you in the convergence of enterprise orientations. Lebas (1995) considered performance as future-oriented, designed to reflect particularities of each organization or individual and is based on a causal model linking components and products. He opined that performance is a function of a measured result, higher than that provided for or arising from the previous results, and noted that performance can either be positive or negative depending on the measured result. Whooley (1996) alluded to the fact that performance is not a static reality that can be obtained but a socially constructed imagination of the mindset assuming that in reality exits. To Lebas (1995) and Whooley (1996), performance is anecdotal and explanatory surrounded by a multiplicity of factors that subject its definition to a lot of ambiguities. Rolstadas (1998) believes that performance cannot just be presumed but must be measured against what he considered the seven performance criteria namely; effectiveness, efficiency, quality, productivity, quality of work, innovation, and profitability. It is therefore clear that to measure organizational performance, there must be a benchmark or baseline against which the current performance should be evaluated. Al Khajeh (2018) noted that while some leadership styles such as democratic, transformational, bureaucratic, and autocratic provide some positive influences on organizational performance, others like charismatic and transactional leadership have demonstrated negative effects on organizational performance because they do not as it where offer opportunities and freedom to employees to operate.

The attainment of the vision, mission, and business objectives set out by the organizations can be seen as organizational success (McKinney, 2016). Achieving organizational success comes from the effective and efficient combination of financial and technical resources, logistics, technology, and human resources (Gozukara, 2016). Bylahalli (2017) maintained that organizations need leaders with extraordinary characteristics to ensure they achieve positive outcomes. He proposed that leaders should concentrate on the 4Cs: customer focus, culture, credibility, and core competency. This in essence means that organizational leaders should implement more flexible but goal-oriented styles such as transformational, democratic, and bureaucratic to effectively harness the full potential of the 4Cs for higher organizational performance and success.

Impact of Organizational Culture on leadership styles and vice versa

Organizational culture can impact and be impacted by organizational leadership.  Organizational leadership styles evolve fundamentally from organizational cultures because the culture defines the mission and vision of the organization and also sets rules of engagement that can achieve set targets (Tsai, 2011). Since organizational culture is a set of values that defines a company, leaders are made to exemplify and reinforce those values by defining the behaviors and actions company employees are expected to take by the culture so they can create a positive environment by helping the business succeed. Organizational leaders, therefore, are not expected to do things anyhow but in line with the culture of the organization. Their style of management automatically becomes that which the culture prescribes (Herrity, 2022). Leaders also exert tremendous influence on company culture by setting the agenda, prioritizing work, managing, leading, and delegating, and also through the provision of a sense of vision, purpose, mentorship, and inspiration to those they lead (Tanner, 2019). Organizational leaders can also influence the organization’s culture by making sure that employees align with its mission, purpose, and vision, inspiring confidence in the face of difficulties, leveraging employee mistakes and shortfalls as a source of learning, and engaging in effective organizational communication using the 6Cs: Compassion, Clarity, Conciseness, Connection, Conviction, and Courage (Cote, 2023). Organizational leaders create the atmosphere that sets the tone and identify values and behaviors that drive performance and ensure success which are essential elements for building the preferred culture (Fergusson, 2022)

The Influence of Organizational Culture on Organizational Performance and Success

Organizational Culture is key in determining the level of employee (individual) and organizational (collective) performance within an organization which is a driver of the success or failure of the organization. The culture of an organization can makes its employees become motivated or demotivated and this translates into performance (Munteanu & Păun, 2017). While from a cultural standpoint, there are both internal and external dimensions to organizational culture (Munteanu and Păun 2017), the focus here is on the internal aspect which is the culture associated with the internal environment of an organization. The internal culture of an organization plays several important roles in shaping its productive discourse including, integrating employees of the company, preserving and transmitting organizational traditions, ensuring community protection against environmental threats, and serving as a cultural source for strategic competitive advantage and these factors can exert ginormous impacts on the management process and organizational performance (Ganescu, 2011; State, 2004, p.56). Organizational culture affects the internal, external, formal, and informal expectations of employees on how they interrelate with one another in terms of anticipated or unacceptable behaviors rules, and regulations such as the business itself, leadership, management practices, and the social, formal, and informal factors sanctioned by the prevailing culture (Ganescu, 2011, p. 139). Care must be taken because variances in cultural norms, values, and beliefs reproduce varied understandings concerning employer-employee relations which can translate into different analyses and understandings of what best practices should be (Munteanu & Păun, 2017). Munteanu and Păun (2017) further admitted that organizational culture serves as an indispensable prognosticator of organizational performance and success because it defines and contributes to the adaptation of employees to their internal and external organizational environments, ensuring their internal integration, compliance with strategic objectives, and esprit de corps to facilitate the efficient functioning of the organization. Organizational leaders must therefore be aware that not all organizational cultures fit every mission, vision, and objective of organizations.  Adapting to and applying the best fit organizational culture would result in smooth functioning, effective communication, socialization of new members, and establishing trust and common means within the organization to improve performance and achieve set goals and objectives to make the organization more successful.

Nexus between Leadership Styles and Organizational Performance and Success

Empirical Literature supports the fact that significant impacts exist between the various leadership styles and organizational performance and success and that organizational culture and performance are directly proportional to the type of leadership style that exists within an organization (Klien et al., 2013; Al Khajeh, 2018). A study conducted by Dim and Nzube (2020) in Anambra State, Nigeria found that while autocratic leadership style negatively impacts organizational output and its eventual success, Laissez-faire, democratic, and transformational leadership styles have positive effects on organizational performance. Muzaffar and Devanadhen (2015) conducted a study on the banking sector in India and discovered that all other leadership styles have insignificant impacts on performance except the transformational leadership style which has a positive impact on employee performance. In their study on the Influence of Leadership Style on Organizational Performance, Akparep et al. (2019) found that reliance on the democratic leadership style yielded strong positive results and improves performance. A banking sector study conducted on Asanteman Rural Bank in Ghana revealed that the bank enjoyed consistent performance and growth because it adopted the transformational leadership style (Beakana, 2017).

Conceptual Framework

This study proposed a conceptual framework that connects the dependent variable “Organizational Performance and Success to five Independent variables (Autocratic, Democratic, Charismatic, Transactional, and Transformational) leadership styles based on the assumption that these two extremes may be impacted by the organizational culture which is a mediating variable.  While organizational performance and success depend on and are directly proportional to the style of leadership being implemented within the organization, the culture of the organization may provide other dimensions that shape both the style of leadership and overall performance. Based on the literature review and discussions, the framework is conceptualized in the following figure.

Figure 1.  Conceptual Framework

METHODS

The study was conducted in the Bono Region of Ghana. Bono region is one of the 16 administrative regions of Ghana and shares a border at the north with the Savannah Region, to the west by Ghana-Cote d’Ivoire international border, on the east by Bono East Region, and the south by Ahafo Region. Bono Region has a population of about 1,208,649 according to the Ghana Population and Housing Census (GSS, 2021). Bono Region has 12 Municipal/District Health Directorates. The region has a total of 461 health facilities made up of 366 GHS facilities, 62 private health facilities, 25 Christian Health Association of Ghana (CHAG) institutions, and 8 quasi-government facilities (Ghana Health Service [GHS], n.d). A cross-sectional research design with a quantitative approach has been utilized in this study (Creswell, 2014). This is because data for the study was collected once and the objective was to determine the relationship between the dependent variable (organizational performance and success) and the independent variable leadership styles (Kumar, 2005). Data was collected from a cross-section of employees (junior and middle staff members) with a five-point Likert scale where the frequency of performance was distributed into Not at all, Once in a while, Sometimes, Fairly often, and Frequently, if not always adapted from Bass and Avolio (1994) with a modified questionnaire of the original Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire MLQ of Bass and Avolio (1994).  Slovin’s sample formula: n = N / (1 + Ne²), where: n = sample size, N = population size, e = acceptable margin of error (in this case 0.05) was used to sample a study population of 700 which yielded a sample size of 255. The researchers added 10% to the calculated sample size to cater for nonresponse and voluntary withdrawals resulting in a sample of 281 participants for the study.  240 answered questionnaires (85%) were retrieved and analyzed.  Cronbach alpha was used to test the instruments for reliability and the credibility of the scale (Cronbach, 1951). The overall reliability alpha value for the instrument that measures the independent variables (leadership styles was 0.965. That of organizational culture was 0.922 and for organizational performance and success, 0.863 which is considered reliable. (See the table 5 below for more details on the reliability and validity tests). Pearson’s correlation techniques were used to determine the relationships between the dependent and independent variables at a 5% level of significance. Data analysis was done with Statistical Packages for Social Science (SPSS version 25). Pearson’s correlation techniques were used to analyze the data at a 5% level of significance. Descriptive and inferential statistics are used to present the results of the study. The findings and recommendations of this study are provided in relation to existing literature and field data. The study also created the opportunity for further comparative research (across multiple organizations) for a cross-multiple understanding of the effects of leadership styles on organizational performance and success.

Research Hypotheses

Based on the Conceptual Framework and related literature, two main hypotheses are established

Ho_1: There is no significant relationship between organizational leadership styles and organizational performance and success. 

Ho_2: Organizational culture does not influence Leadership Styles, employee behavior, organizational performance, and organizational success.

Hypotheses Testing

Hypothesis 1

(Ho):  There is no significant relationship between organizational leadership styles and organizational performance and success.

(Ha): There is a significant relationship between organizational leadership styles and organizational performance and success.

The Mean sample score (3.60 ± 1.993) was lower than the population normal score of 5.0.

Table 2. One-Sample Test (Ho1)

The influence of leadership styles on organizational performance and success was statistically significantly lower than the population’s normal organizational performance and success score, t (29) = -3.847, p = .001. Organizational performance and success scores were statistically significantly lower by 1.4 (95% CI, 0.66 to 2.14) than a normal depression score of 5.0, t (29) = -3.847 p = .001. The mean Organizational performance and success score (3.60 ± 1.99) was lower than the normal Organizational performance and success score of 5.0, a statistically significant difference of 1.4 (95% CI, 0.66 to 2.14), t (29) = -3.847 p = .001. A one-sample t-test was run to determine whether the influence of organizational leadership on Organizational performance and success was different from the normal, defined score of 5.0. Organizational performance and success scores were normally distributed, as assessed by Bloom’s fractional ranked estimation method (SPSS, v25) (p < 0 .05) and there were no outliers in the data, as assessed by inspection of a boxplot. The Mean score for the influence of organizational leadership on Organizational performance and success (3.60 ± 1.99) was lower than the normal depression score of 5.0, a statistically significant difference of 1.4 (95% CI, 0.66 to 2.14), t (29) = -3.847 p = .001. This indicates there was a statistically significant difference between the sample and defined means (p < .05). Therefore, the null hypothesis (There is no significant relationship between organizational leadership styles and organizational performance and success) was rejected, and the alternative hypothesis (There is a significant relationship between organizational leadership styles and organizational performance and success), accepted

Hypothesis 2

(Ho2): Organizational culture does not influence Leadership Styles, employee behavior, organizational performance, and organizational success

(Ha2): Organizational culture influences Leadership Styles, employee behavior, organizational performance, and organizational success

Table 3. One-Sample Statistics (Ho2)

Table 4. One-Sample Test (Ho2)

The effect of organizational culture on Leadership Styles, employee behavior, organizational performance, and organizational success was statistically significantly lower than the population’s normal organizational performance and success score, t(29) = -10.762, p = .000. Organizational culture score was statistically significantly lower by 1.90 (95% CI, 1.54 to 2.25) than a normal score of 5.0 t (29) = -10.762, p = .000. The mean organizational culture score (3.11 ± 1.085) was lower than the normal organizational culture score of 5.0, a statistically significant difference of 1.895 (95% CI, 1.54 to 2.25)), t (29) = -10.762, p = .000. A one-sample t-test was run to determine whether the influence of organizational culture on leadership styles, employee performance, and organizational performance and success was different from the normal, defined score of 5.0. Leadership styles, employee performance, and organizational performance and success were normally distributed, as assessed by Bloom’s fractional ranked estimation method (SPSS, v25) (p < 0 .05) and there were no outliers in the data, as assessed by inspection of a boxplot. The Mean score for the influence of organizational culture on leadership styles, employee performance, and organizational performance and success (3.11 ± 1.085) was lower than the normal depression score of 5.0, a statistically significant difference of 1.90 (95% CI, 1.54 to 2.25), t(29) = -10.762, p = .000. This indicates there was a statistically significant difference between the mean score of the effect of organizational culture on leadership styles, employee performance, and organizational performance and success (p < .05). Therefore, the null hypothesis ((Ho2): Organizational culture does not influence Leadership Styles, employee behavior, organizational performance, and organizational success was rejected, and the alternative hypothesis (Ha2): Organizational culture influences Leadership Styles, employee behavior, organizational performance, and organizational success, accepted

Table 5: Reliability statistics of the dimensions in the questionnaires

Independent variables

Mediating variable

Dependent variable

While the face internal validity of the instruments was achieved by subjecting them to experts’ valuation, the internal reliability of the instruments was determined using the Cronbach alpha tests. Reliability dimensions for the considered leadership styles were Autocratic Leadership (.868), Democratic Leadership (.844), Charismatic Leadership (.865), Transactional Leadership (.749), and Transformational Leadership (.899). The overall Cronbach alpha reliability for all leadership styles was (.965). The Cronbach alpha reliability for organizational Culture was (.922) and organizational Performance and Success was (.863). The various results support Cronbach (1951) and the position of Nunnally (1978) that if Cronbach’s Alpha value exceeds 0.7, then the instrument meets the internal consistency threshold and should be used to conduct the research. As the respective and overall reliabilities of the instruments are above 0.70, the questionnaires were considered reliable and were personally administered and retrieved by the investigators to ensure a better response rate. Statistical Packages for Social Science (SPSS) was used for inputting and data analysis. Pearson correlation analysis was conducted to establish the degree of relationship between the dependent variable and independent variables. General regression was used to determine how the independent variables affect the dependent variable. Significance level as pegged at p =0.05

Presentation of Results and Data Analysis

Table 6. Demographic Profile of Respondents

For Gender, the sample of employees consisted of 150 males (62.5%), mean of 1.38 (SD= 485) and 90 females (37.5%), mean of 1.38 (SD= .485) at (N = 240). For Staff Category, the sample of employees consisted of 139 males (57.9%), a mean of 1.42 (SD = .495) and 101 females (42.1%), a mean of 1.42 (SD= .495) respondents (N = 240), and the average age of respondents was 40.55 (SD = 7.867) respondents (N= 240)

Pearson’s Product Correlation

Table 7. Pearson correlation: Relationship between organizational culture and organizational leadership styles

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Pearson’s Product Correlation between Organizational Culture and Organizational Leadership Styles was found to be moderately positive and statistically significant (AL, r =.124, p< .001), (DL, r =.179, p< .001), (CL, r =.138 p< .001), (TL< r =.226, p<, 001) and (TFL, r =.374, p<.001). This shows that there is a positive correlation between Organizational culture and leadership styles and these correlations are adequate.

Table 8. Pearson correlation: Relationship between organizational leadership styles and organizational performance and success

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).  *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Pearson’s Product Correlation between Organizational Leadership Styles and organizational performance and success was also found to be moderately positive and statistically significant between 0.001 < r < 0.05 such that (AL and OPS, r =. 0.91, p< .001), (DL, r =.374, p< .001), (CL, r =.163 p< .05), (TL< r =.012, p<, 005) and (TFL, r =.1.000, p<.001). This shows that there is a positive correlation between leadership styles and organizational performance and success but the associations are adequate.

Table 9. Pearson correlation: Relationship between organizational culture and organizational performance and success

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Pearson’s Product Correlation between Organizational culture (OC) and organizational performance and success (OPS) was found to be fairly positive and statistically significant (r =.0.664, p< .001). This shows that there is a positive correlation between organizational culture and organizational performance and success and the relationship is moderate

Regression Analysis

Multiple linear regression was used to determine the effect of the independent (predictor) variables on the dependent (outcome) variable. Formula: Where:  = the predicted value of the dependent variable,  = the y-intercept (value of y when all other parameters are set to 0),  = the regression coefficient ( ) of the first independent variable, ( ) (the effect that increasing the value of the independent variable has on the predicted y value) … = do the same for however many independent variables you are testing,  = the regression coefficient of the last independent variable,  = model error (how much variation there is in the estimate of ). However, the tests were performed using SPSS. V25.

Table 10. Model Summary

Predictors: (Constant), TFL, TL, AL, CL, DL, OC

The results explain that 73.4% of the variance in the dependent/outcome/response variable (OPS) is explained by the independent/ predictor variables (TFL, TL, AL, CL, DL, and OC)

Table 11. ANOVA^a

1. Dependent Variable: OPS
2. Predictors: (Constant), TFL, TL, AL, CL, DL, OC

From the ANOVA table, the sig value is .000^b (p < .01). This means there are significant differences in Organizational Performance and Success across the different organizational cultures and Organizational Leadership styles. The study however did not run post-hoc analysis to determine how each predictor differs from another. The study thus relied on the general assumption derived from the ANOVA table.

Table 12. Coefficients^a

1. Dependent Variable: OPS

The results indicate that organizational culture, autocratic leadership, charismatic leadership, democratic leadership, transformational leadership, and transactional leadership styles jointly predicted organizational performance and success in a manner (F (6, 73) = 110.774; R2 = 0.740; P <0.05). The results further revealed that Democratic leadership (β = -0.270; t = – 3.705; P< 0.05) and Transactional leadership (β= -0.221; t = -1.514; P>0.05) have a negative effect on organizational performance and success while organizational culture (β = 0.305; t= 2.059; P< 0.05), Autocratic leadership style (β = 0.620; t= 8.775; P< 0.05), Charismatic leadership (β = 0.228; t= 4.668; P< 0.05), and Transformational leadership (β = 0.445; t= 11.029; P< 0.05 were independent predictors of organizational performance and success. These results demonstrate that organizational performance and success are indeed influenced by organizational culture positively and organizational leadership styles both positively and negatively. Also, the three organizational leadership styles that were found to have a positive relationship with organizational performance and success are autocratic, charismatic, and transformational leadership styles. The other two leadership styles that were found to have a negative impact on organizational performance and success are democratic and transactional leadership styles. The results also show a positive correlation between Organizational culture and leadership styles and these correlations are adequate. Overall, the results demonstrate that organizational culture and leadership styles contribute effectively to predicting organizational performance and success. Consequently, the hypotheses were tested to be valid.

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

The findings of the study have a number of agreements with previous studies and existing literature. As in previous studies (Ganescu, 2011; State, 2004; Tsai Y, 2011; Klien et al, 2013; Ethelmary Dim & Chidi Anthony Nzube, 2019; Muzaffar & Devanadhen, 2015; Akparep et al, 2019; Beakana, 2017; Munteanu & Păun, 2017; Tanner, 2019; Al Khajeh, 2018; Cote, 2023), the study established a moderately positive and statistically significant positive association between Organizational culture and leadership styles and these correlations are adequate. It also found the same moderately positive and statistically significant association between Organizational Leadership Styles and organizational performance and success and a positive association between organizational culture and organizational performance and success. The findings of the study however deviated from earlier studies when it indicated that association between Organizational culture and leadership styles and that of leadership styles and organizational performance and success are adequate which was not the case in those studies. It also noted that the association between organizational culture and organizational performance and success is moderate which is in variance with findings of the previous studies. The two-way ANOVA results of the study which shows a substantial variance in Organizational Performance and Success across the different organizational cultures and Organizational Leadership styles also disagreed with the position of the earlier studies. Against previous conclusions that applying two or more leadership styles in an organization negatively impacts organizational performance and success, this study found that collectively, organizational culture, autocratic leadership, charismatic leadership, democratic leadership, transformational leadership, and transactional leadership styles can be blended to impact organizational performance and success positively. The study discovered in agreement with previous positions that Democratic leadership and Transactional leadership have adverse effects on organizational performance and success but discovered a new dimension that Organizational culture, Autocratic leadership style, Charismatic leadership, and Transformational leadership can operate independently to influence organizational performance and success. The study to a large extent supports previous scholarly conclusions that leadership styles in general can affect organizational performance. As a contribution to knowledge, this study introduces a new dimension, organizational success as an outcome of the interplay of organization’s culture and leadership that previous studies did not pat mush attention to which assumptions were firmly supported by field data. In pervious studies, autocratic leadership style was found to have a negative effect on organizational performance and success, to the contrary, this study found that autocratic leadership rather has a significant positive impact on organizational performance and success.

While this study agreed with previous studies that charismatic and transformational leadership styles have positive effects on organizational performance and success, it found that organizational performance and success under charismatic leadership styles do not last beyond the existence of the charismatic leader and therefore cannot be a trusted leadership style for a sustainable organizational performance and success.  However, in contrast with literature and earlier studies, this study found charismatic rather than transformational leadership style can have short term positive impact on organizational performance and success. This study also found a higher variance of 73.4% in the dependent/outcome/response variable (OPS) being explained by the independent/ predictor variables (TFL, TL, AL, CL, DL, and OC) which was not the case of previous studies. However, the unstandardized coefficients in this study were relatively lower than in previous studies. This means that although variances of effect may be high in this study, a unit increase or decrease in the prognosticator variables may not correspond to a much higher impact on the outcome variable. This implies that the individual effects of the autonomous variables are moderate but if combined they may have a stronger impact. The aggregate implication of these findings is that while organizational performance and success to a large extent are a function of organizational culture, the type of organizational leadership can throw that out of balance as it may have both positive and negative implications for organizational performance and success depending on its context and application.

CONCLUSION

This study concentrated on the impact of organizational culture and leadership styles on organizational performance and success. The emphasis was on organizational culture and five leadership styles- autocratic, democratic, charismatic, transactional, and transformational. The study discovered that organizational performance and success are related to an organization’s culture and leadership style, both of which have positive and negative impacts on the performance and success of the organization depending on their applications. Subject to the organizations included in this study, and contrary to the generally held view, organizational culture, transformational, autocratic, and charismatic leadership styles were established to have strong positive effects on organizational performance and success, while transactional and democratic leadership styles were found to have a minimal or an adverse effect on organizational performance and success.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on this study, organizations are encouraged to pay more attention to their cultures by ensuring that they incorporate good corporate values, norms, beliefs, rules, and philosophies that will resonate with both leadership and employees as a shared vision and serve as a framework and guideline for all within the organization that will govern the way things are done within the organizations. Even with a very excellent and unmatched organizational culture and leadership, no organization can perform and succeed without people so it is imperative that leadership focus and essentially premium employees by involving them in decision-making, giving them recognition and opportunities, and providing them with a sense of fellow feeling. The findings of this study have shifted the gear from the old notion that autocratic leadership cannot positively affect organizational performance. This has been proven to be an inaccurate assumption. It is therefore time for organizations to reinvent the wheel by bringing on board autocratic leadership alongside other tested styles like transformational and democratic leadership styles to harness the full potential of their organizations for the needed performance and success.

Limitations

The study relied solely on quantitative data. After establishing that a significant relationship exists between the independent variables and the dependent variable, the study just relied on multiple linear regression to establish the general association between the dependent and independent variables without running a post hoc regression analysis to discover the extent of the effect of each variable on the other.

Approval

Approval for the study was granted by Dr Kofi Amo-Kordie, Regional Director of Health Services for the Bono Region of Ghana.

Further Research

Future research should use mixed methods to determine the relationship between organizational culture, leadership style, and organizational performance and success. It should also go deeper to use other tested alternative statistical tools and run post hoc regression analysis in its analysis to ensure more acceptable generalizability.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

We are most grateful to God who has inspired us to conduct this study. Any attempt to own absolute originality for this work will amount to academic dishonesty. In this regard, we are heavily indebted to distinguish forerunners in the field of organizational culture, leadership, organizational performance and success, and other important related disciplines whose texts we have consulted variously to make this study a reality. Our single appreciation also goes to the faculty of Business Management at Philippine Christian University, Manila Philippines where we are currently studying for our Ph.D. in Business Management (International Healthcare Systems), and Dr. Kofi Amo Kordie, Regional Director of Health Services for Bono Region for permitting us to conduct the study and health professionals and institutions in the Bono region of Ghana for participating in the study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper

REFERENCES

1. Akparep, J., Jengre, E. and Mogre, A. (2019). The Influence of Leadership Style on Organizational Performance at TumaKavi Development Association, Tamale, Northern Region of Ghana. Open Journal of Leadership, 8, 1-22. doi: 10.4236/ojl.2019.81001.
2. Amanchukwu R.N., G. J. Stanley, and N. P. Ololube (2015). A Review of Leadership Theories, Principles and Styles and Their Relevance to Educational Management.  Management, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 6–14.
3. Al Khajeh, Ebrahim Hasan. (2018). Impact of Leadership Styles on Organizational Performance. Journal of Human Resources Management Research. Vol. 2018. DOI: 10.5171/2018.687849
4. Al Sawai A, (2013). Leadership of Healthcare Professionals: Where Do We Stand? Oman Med. J., vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 285–287.
5. Appelbaum S, (2015). Organizational outcomes of leadership style and resistance to change (Part One). Ind. Commer. Train., vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 73–80.
6. Avolio, B. J, & Bass, B. M (2002). Developing Potential across a full range of Leadership: Cases on Transactional and Transformational Leadership. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7. Ayeleke, R. O., Dunham, A., North, N., & Wallis, K. (2018). The Concept of Leadership in the Health Care Sector. InTech. doi: 10.5772/intechopen.76133
8. Banjeri, P., & Krishnan, V.R. (2000). Ethical preferences of transformational leaders: An empirical investigation. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21(8): 405-413.
9. Baškarada S, Watson J, Cromarty J (2017) Balancing transactional and transformational leadership. International Journal of Organizational Analysis.
10. Bass, B. M. & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
11. Bass, B. M. (1999). Two decades of research and development in Transformational Leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 8: 9-32.
12. Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13. Bawuotuo, (2022). MPH Lecture Notes. Catholic University of Ghana. Unpublished
14. Beakana, A.N. (2017). Effects of Leadership Styles on Organisational Performance in Ahantaman Rural Bank Limited. The International Journal of Management, 3, 131-146.
15. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.
16. Business Dictionary (2019). [Online]. Available: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/leadersh ip.html.
17. Bylahalli, G. (2017). The 4 Cs of organizational success. Retrieved on 9th April 2020 from https://www.itproportal.com/features/the-4-cs-of-organisational-success/
18. Cote, Catherine (2023). HOW DOES LEADERSHIP INFLUENCE ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE? Harvard Business School Online’s Business Insights. https://online.hbs.edu/blog/post/organizational-culture-and-leadership
19. Chan, S. C. H., Huang, X., Snape, E., & Lam, C. K. (2013). The Janus face of paternalistic leaders: Authoritarianism, benevolence, subordinates’ organization-based self-esteem, and performance. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(1), 108–128.
20. Cheng, M. Y., & Wang, L. (2015). The mediating effect of ethical climate on the relationship between paternalistic leadership and team identification: A team-level analysis in the Chinese context. Journal of Business Ethics, 129(3), 639–654.
21. Chen, Z. J., Davison, R. M., Mao, J. Y., & Wang, Z. H. (2018). When and how authoritarian leadership and leader renqing orientation influence tacit knowledge sharing intentions. Information & Management, 55(7), 840–849.
22. Cheng, B. S., Chou, L. F., Wu, T. Y., Huang, M. P., & Farh, J. L. (2004). Paternalistic leadership and subordinate responses: Establishing a leadership model in Chinese organizations. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 7(1), 89–117.
23. Counte MA, Newman JF. (2002). Competency-based health services management education: Contemporary issues and emerging challenges. The Journal of Health Administration Education. 20(2):113-122
24. Colquitt, J.A., LePine, J.A. and Wesson, M.J. (2014) Organizational Behavior. McGraw Hill, New York
25. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26. Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334.
27. Didier Noyé (2002). Manager Les performances [Managing Performance], Insep Consulting Editions, Paris.
28. Ecler Jaqua, Terry Jaqua (2021). Transactional Leadership. Am J Biomed Sci & Res. 2021 – 14(5). AJBSR.MS.ID.002021. DOI: 10.34297/AJBSR.2021.14.00.
29. Ethelmary Dim and Chidi Anthony Nzube. (2020). Effect of Leadership Styles on Organizational Performance of Selected Foam Manufacturing Firms in Anambra State. International Journal of Management and Entrepreneurship (IJME) Vol. 2, No. 1, COOU
30. Garman A, Scribner L. (2011). Leading for quality in healthcare: Development and validation of a competency model. Journal of Healthcare Management. 56(6):373
31. Gãnescu, C. (2011). Organizational culture and competitiveness, University Publishing, Bucharest, pp. 21.
32. Germano, M. A., (2010). Leadership Style and Organizational Impact. [Online] Available at: http://alaapa.org/newsletter/2010/06/08/spotlight/
33. Gertner EJ, Sabino JN, Mahady E, Deitrick LM, Patton JR, Grim MK, et al (2010). Developing a culturally competent health network: A planning framework and guide/practitioner application. Journal of Healthcare Management. 55(3):190
34. Cummings G. G. et al., (2010). Leadership styles and outcome patterns for the nursing workforce and work environment: A systematic review.  Int. J. Nurs. Stud., vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 363–385, 2010.
35. Ghana Health Service. (n.d). Regional Profiles.  https://ghs.gov.gh/bono/
36. Ghana Statistical Services (2021). statsghana.gov.gh. Retrieved 25 August 2023.
37. Grint, Keith (2005). Leadership: Limits and Possibilities. London: Palgrave. ISBN 9780333963876. Moral leadership is not the way to secure democracy, morality, and justice because morality, like power and leadership, is an essentially contested concept […].
38. Guo KL, Anderson D (2005). The new health care paradigm: Roles and competencies of leaders in the service line management approach. Leadership in Health Services. 18(4):12-20
39. Gozukara, I. (2016). Leadership and Managerial Effectiveness in Higher Education. International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, 6(1): 73–82.
40. Harris, A. et al., (2007). Distributed leadership and organizational change: Reviewing the evidence. Journal of Educational Change, 8(4), pp. 337-347
41. Indeed Editorial Team. (2022, June 25). https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/types-of-culture).
42. Ion Elena-Iuliana & Criveanu Maria, 2016. “Organizational Performance – A Concept That Self-Seeks To Find Itself,” Annals – Economy Series, Constantin Brancusi University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 4, pages 179-183, August.
43. Herrity, Jennifer. Indeed Editorial Team. (2022, October 22).  (https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/organizational-culture-and-leadership).
44. Klein, A. S., Cooke, R. A. & Wallis, J., (2013). The impact of leadership styles on organizational culture and firm effectiveness: An empirical study. Journal of Management & Organization, 19(3), pp. 241-254.
45.  Mihelič, K. K. (2010). Ethical Leadership. Int. J. Manage. Inf. Syst., vol. 14, no. 5.
46. Kumar, R. (2005). Research Methodology: A Step-by-Step Guide for Beginners. London: SAGE.
47. Lebas M. J. (1995). Performance Measurement and Performance Management, International Journal of Production, vol. 41, no. 1-3.
48. Leggat, SG (2007). Teaching and learning teamwork: Competency requirements for healthcare managers. The Journal of Health Administration Education. 24(2):135-149
49. Lewin, K., Lippit, R., & White, R. K. (1939). Patterns of Aggressive Behaviour in Experimentally Created Social Climates. Journal of Social Psychology, 10, 271-301.
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1939.9713366
50. Liang Z, Short SD, Brown CR (2006). Senior health managers in the new era: Changing roles and competencies in the 1990s and early 21st century. The Journal of Health Administration Education. 23(3):281-301
51. Luthans, F. (2011) Organizational Behaviour: An Evidence-Based Approach. McGraw-Hill, New York.
52. Mitonga-Monga, J. & Coetzee, M., (2012). Perceived leadership style and employee participation. African Journal of Business Management, 6(15)
53. McKinney, P. (2016, January 4). Organizational Success: Factors & Definition. Study.com. https://study.com/academy/lesson/organizational-success-factors-definition-quiz.html
54. McShane, S.L. and von Glinow, M.A. (2000) Organizational Behavior. McGraw-Hill, Boston.
55. Munteanu Valentina & Păun Oana Ileana, (2017). “The Influence of Organizational Culture on Company Performance,” Ovidius University Annals, Economic Sciences Series, Ovidius University of Constantza, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 0(2), pages 435-439, December.
56. Muzaffar Ahmad Sofi and Dr. K. Devanadhen. (2015). Impact of Leadership Styles on Organizational Performance: An Empirical Assessment of Banking Sector in Jammu and Kashmir (India). IOSR Journal of Business and Management (IOSR-JBM) e-ISSN: 2278-487X, p-ISSN: 2319-7668. Volume 17, Issue 8.Ver. III. PP 31-45 www.iosrjournals.org
57. Northouse, P. G. (2010). Leadership, Theory and Practice (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
58. Nurman, & Rauf, D. I. (2023). The Essence of Organizational Culture in Improving Organizational Performance. Current Research on Practice Economics and Sharia Finance (CAPITAL), 1(1), 23–26. Retrieved from https://malaqbipublisher.com/index.php/CAPITAL/article/view/70
59. Obiwuru, T. C., Okwu, A. T., Akpa, V. O., & Nwankwere, I. A. (2011). Effects of Leadership Style on Organizational Performance: A Survey of Selected Small-Scale Enterprises in Ikosi-Ketu Council Development Area of Lagos State, Nigeria. Australian Journal of Business and Management Research, 1, 100-111.
60. Ojokuku, R. M., Odetayo, T. A. & Sajuyigbe, A. S., (2012). Impact of leadership style on organizational performance: a case study of Nigerian banks. American Journal of Business and Management, 1(4), pp. 202-207.
61. Pellegrini, E. K., & Scandura, T. A. (2008). Paternalistic leadership: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of Management, 34(3), 566–593.
62. Renjith, V., Renu, G., & George, A. (2015). Transformational Leadership in Nursing. International Journal of Science Research and Management Studies, 2, 112-118.
63. Rolstadas A. (1998). Entreprise Performance Measurement, International Journal of Operations and Production Management, vol. 18, no. 9-10.
64. Rukmani, K., Ramesh, M. & Jayakrishnan, J., (2010). Effect of leadership styles on organizational effectiveness. European Journal of Social Sciences, 15(3), pp. 365-369.
65. Schaubroeck, J. M., Shen, Y., & Chong, S. (2017). A dual-stage moderated mediation model linking authoritarian leadership to follower outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(2), 203–214.
66. Schein, E.H. and Schein, P.A. (2017). Organizational Culture and Leadership. 5th Edition, Wiley & Sons, San Francisco.
67. Shen, Y., Chou, W. J., & Schaubroeck, J. M. (2019). The roles of relational identification and workgroup cultural values in linking authoritarian leadership to employee performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28(4), 498–509.
68. State, O. (2004). Organizational culture and management, ASE Publishing, Bucharest, pp.56.
69. Stefl M. (2008). Common competencies for all healthcare managers: The healthcare leadership alliance model. Journal of Healthcare Management. 53(6):360
70. Stephanie Fergusson (2022). How Leadership Influences Organizational Culture. https://www.ddiworld.com/blog/leadership-culture
71. Stogdill, R.M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York: The Free Press.
72. Stone, G. A., Russell, R. F., & Patterson, K. (2003). Transformational versus servant leadership: A difference in leader focus. Leadership and organizational development Journal. 25: 349-361.
73. Tannenbaum, R., & Schmidt, W. H. (1958). How to choose a leadership pattern. Harvard bus. Rev., 36 (2).
74. Tanner O.C. (2019). How does leadership influence organizational culture? https://www.octanner.com/insights/articles/2019/10/23/how_does_leadership_.html
75. Tsai, Y. (2011). Relationship between Organizational Culture, Leadership Behavior, and Job Satisfaction. BMC Health Serv Res 11, 98. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-11-98
76. Uchenwamgbe, B.-B. P., (2013). Effects of Leadership Style on Organizational Performance in Small and Medium Scale Enterprises (SMEs) in Nigeria. European Journal of Business and Management, 5(23), pp. 53-73.
77. Wallick WG, Stager KJ (2002). Healthcare managers’ roles, competencies, and outputs in organizational performance improvement/practitioner response. Journal of Healthcare Management. 47(6):390
78. Wang, Z., Liu, Y. & Liu, S.  (2019). Authoritarian leadership and task performance: the effects of leader-member exchange and dependence on leader. Front. Bus. Res. China 13, 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s11782-019-0066-x
79. Western, Simon (2013). Leadership: A critical text. London: Sage. p. 26. ISBN 9781446294208. Leadership is a contested term with multiple meanings and diverse practical applications.
80. Wholey J. S. (1996). Formative and Summative Evaluation: Related Issues in Performance Measurement, American Journal of Evaluation, vol. 17, no. 2.
81. Wu, M., Huang, X., & Chan, S. C. H. (2012). The influencing mechanisms of paternalistic leadership in mainland China. Asia Pacific Business Review, 18(4), 631–648.
82. Xu, G. Y. & Wang, Z. S., (2008). The impact of transformational leadership style on organizational performance: The intermediary effects of leader-member exchange. Long Beach, CA, USA, IEEE Xplore, pp. 1090-1097.
83. Yukl, G. (2006). Leadership in the organization. Hudson, New York: Pearson Education.

APPENDIX

Research Instrument

The Influence of Organizational Culture and Organizational Leadership Styles on Organizational Performance and Success in Ghana: The Case of Public and Private Organizations. This study was set to examine how Organizational Culture and Organizational Leadership Styles can affect organizational performance and success in Public and Private Organizations in Ghana. The study specifically looks at how Organizational Culture can affect leadership style and how Organizational Culture and leadership style can impact organizational performance and success.

Please tick (√) in the appropriate column that represents your opinion in each statement. Keywords are as follows: (1) Not at all, (2) Once a while, (3) Sometimes, (4) Fairly, and (5) Frequently if not always