The Impact of Transparency and Accountability as Authentic Leadership Factors on Church Growth in Embu County, Kenya

The Impact of Transparency and Accountability as Authentic Leadership Factors on Church Growth in Embu County, Kenya

Stephen Njoroge Kamau, Edward Katue Nzinga, Jacob Kimathi

Department of Leadership, Pan Africa Christian University

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.909000368

Received: 06 September 2025; Accepted: 12 September 2025; Published: 11 October 2025

ABSTRACT

This study investigated the impact of transparency and accountability, as a key aspect of authentic leadership, on church growth in Embu County, Kenya. It employed a descriptive survey design and a positivist approach, focusing on church congregants in Embu West Sub-County. The denominations included Deliverance Churches, Restoration End Time Churches, Triumph Churches, Full Gospel Church of Kenya, Winners Chapel, and Great Gospel Visioners. Correlational research design was utilized. A total of 35 Pentecostal churches in Embu County were selected. A purposive sample of 387 respondents participated in the study. Data was gathered using questionnaires and interviews, and analyzed through descriptive and inferential statistics. The findings indicated that transparency and accountability were highly rated (3.92) as critical leadership dimensions. A strong positive correlation (r = .747) was established between church growth and transparency and accountability, demonstrating their significance. Regression analysis further confirmed that authentic leadership significantly predicted church growth (R² = .740), emphasizing the importance of ethical leadership practices in fostering growth. The study concluded that transparency and accountability are crucial for church growth, as they enhance trust, integrity, and effective decision-making within church leadership. It is recommended that church leaders enforce policies that promote openness and accountability to ensure ethical governance and sustainable growth. Congregants were encouraged to actively participate in church activities and hold leaders accountable for their actions to promote a culture of integrity. Leadership development programs should cultivate leaders who uphold transparency, accountability, and ethical decision-making. By fostering integrity and trust, these programs ensure responsible leadership, effective governance, and sustainable growth in organizations. Prioritizing these values strengthens relationships, enhances credibility, and promotes a culture of fairness, ultimately benefiting communities and institutions.

Keywords: Authentic leadership, transparency, accountability, church growth

INTRODUCTION

In the 21^st century, church leadership has emerged as a pivotal factor influencing church health and sustainability. In Kenya, numerous congregations face stagnation or decline not due to a lack of followers or faith, but due to failures in leadership authenticity—especially in transparency and accountability. The growth of churches—spiritually, numerically, and structurally—is significantly influenced by how church leaders conduct themselves and manage resources (Jenssen, 2020). Embu County, like many regions in Kenya, has witnessed both growing and struggling churches; a phenomenon often linked to varying leadership styles.

Avolio et al. (2004) argued that in authentic leadership, the focus on transparency, positivity, and high ethical standards is critical. Transparency provides the foundation upon which trust is built from the followers (Kleynhans et al., 2022). In church contexts, where spiritual guidance is intertwined with financial stewardship and moral authority, the role of transparent and accountable leadership becomes even more significant. This study explores how these two authentic leadership dimensions affect church growth in Embu County, Kenya.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Theoretical Review

Authentic leadership is a leadership approach grounded in principles of transparency, accountability, and unwavering ethical standards (Zhu, 2025). Leaders who adopt this style are recognized for their integrity and consistency in action (Gardner et al., 2020). Authenticity has ancient philosophical origins from the Greek maxim, “know thyself” attributed to Plato (Bayram, 2025), and later echoed by Shakespeare, “to thine own self be true” (Woods & Kates, 2024). These perspectives show the necessity of self-awareness and ethical consistency in leadership, asserting that effective leaders must possess a deep understanding of their identity, motivations, and values (Vilkinas, Murray, & Chua, 2020). Authentic leadership requires the recognition of both personal strengths and limitations, promoting a leadership style built on honesty, reflection, and moral clarity. Over time, the concept has matured into a widely accepted leadership paradigm that scholars use to examine how leadership values influence organizations and communities (Khan, Ahmed, & Khan, 2021), affirming its lasting significance in modern leadership discourse.

Authentic leaders are distinguished by their heightened self-awareness and recognition of how their behaviors affect others (Duarte et al., 2021). Authentic leaders are attuned to their environment, enabling them to adapt their strategies to suit different contexts effectively (Kleynhans et al., 2022). Hallmarks of authentic leadership include traits such as optimism, resilience, confidence, and moral uprightness (Almutairi et al., 2025). Through consistent modeling of ethical behavior and transparent relationships, authentic leaders cultivate authenticity in their teams, fostering purpose and self-determination (Gigol, 2020). By openly confronting personal challenges and embracing vulnerability, they create organizational cultures rooted in honesty, collaboration, and shared values. These environments significantly enhance workplace morale and engagement. Wei et al.(2018) found that authentic leadership is positively associated with employee satisfaction, commitment, and overall performance.

The theoretical foundation of authentic leadership is linked to – prudence, justice, fortitude, and temperance (Hendriks et al., 2020). These virtues are expressed through leadership behaviors such as balanced decision-making, relational transparency, and a deeply internalized moral compass. Authentic leaders align with their followers’ expectations for ethical conduct, social responsibility, and fairness, which in turn cultivates trust and mutual (Kleynhans et al., 2022). Relational transparency, characterized by openness and honest dialogue, strengthens follower confidence and inspires loyalty (Krejci, 2021). Effective authentic leaders adjust their leadership styles in ways that reflect their genuine character while remaining relatable to their followers (Duarte et al., 2021).

Authentic leadership emphasizes internal moral standards, relational transparency, balanced decision-making, and self-awareness (Gardner et al., 2020). In Christian settings, these values reflect biblical principles such as stewardship (1 Corinthians 4:2), truthfulness (Ephesians 4:25), and servant leadership (Mark 10:45). According to Mitekaro & Wa-Mbaleka (2021), authentic leaders in the church must align their personal integrity with spiritual mandates to influence followers effectively.

Empirical Review

Transparency is defined as the openness of leadership to share information, decisions, and motivations in a manner that is accessible and understandable (Gacheru & Kangu, 2023). Accountability refers to the obligation to answer for one’s decisions and actions, particularly in positions of trust and authority (McGrath & Whitty, 2018). Together, these practices reinforce trust and ethical conduct among followers.

Muriithi & Mwanthi (2022) found that churches with structured financial oversight and ethical leadership systems were more likely to experience member loyalty and financial sustainability. Transparency reduces speculation and conflict, while accountability ensures that leaders remain answerable to both congregants and spiritual standards.

Empirical research supports the significant role transparency and accountability play in promoting church growth. For example, Senoga (2023) noted that churches with robust financial accountability systems and participatory leadership structures experienced more consistent membership growth and higher retention rates. Similarly, Senoga (2023) found that accountability mechanisms in the Anglican Church of Uganda improved financial contributions, project completion rates, and leadership credibility.

A study by Henry et al (2025) also demonstrated that congregational growth in Pentecostal churches was positively influenced by leadership transparency, particularly in areas of project implementation and financial disclosure. Their study emphasized that congregants were more likely to invest their time and resources in churches where leadership actions matched verbal commitments.

Additionally, empirical research by Asamoah (2023) on Ghanaian churches highlighted the impact of leadership authenticity on church stability and community involvement. Churches led by transparent and accountable leaders saw increased levels of trust, greater participation in community outreach programs, and stronger intergenerational member retention.

METHODOLOGY

Research Design

Correlational research design was utilized.  This is because it effectively examines the relationships between naturally occurring variables, which is particularly useful in real-world settings like churches where variables such as age, gender, education, and income cannot be manipulated (Creswell, 2021). This design allows for the identification of patterns and strengths of relationships between variables, providing insights into how transparency and accountability affect organizational outcomes, such as church growth (Babbie, 2020). Unlike experimental designs, which require manipulation and random assignment, correlational research allows for the study of these complex dynamics in a natural setting. While it does not establish causal relationships, it is valuable for uncovering associations that inform future research, especially in contexts where experimental manipulation is not feasible due to ethical or practical constraints (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). By using this design, the study contributes to understanding how transparency and accountability influence leadership outcomes, laying the groundwork for more targeted investigations in the future.

Population and Sampling

The research was conducted in Embu County, with a specific focus on church leaders and congregants from multiple denominations located in Manyatta Sub-County—particularly within Kirimari and Mbeti North Wards. These areas were strategically selected due to their high density of Pentecostal and charismatic churches. The denominations represented in the study included Deliverance Churches, Restoration End Time Churches, Triumph Churches, Full Gospel Churches of Kenya (FGCK) Embu, Winners Chapel, and Great Gospel Visioners (GGV). In total, 35 Pentecostal churches across Embu County were incorporated into the study, chosen based on their visibility, community engagement, and leadership activity. The sampling rationale was based on visibility, denominational diversity, accessibility, and community engagement.

To identify participants, a purposive sampling strategy was employed, resulting in the selection of 387 respondents. This approach ensured the inclusion of individuals—both church leaders and active members—who possessed firsthand experience with church leadership and internal operations. By targeting knowledgeable participants, the study aimed to gather meaningful insights into how leadership behaviors, specifically transparency and accountability, influence church growth. The sample was diverse in terms of age, gender, and levels of church involvement, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of perspectives from both leadership and congregational viewpoints.

Data Collection

Data collection was carried out using a structured questionnaire developed to capture responses on key dimensions of authentic leadership, personal demographics, and church growth indicators. The instrument employed a 5-point Likert scale, enabling respondents to express their levels of agreement or disagreement on a range of statements—from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” Measures of authentic leadership included constructs such as trust, transparency and accountability, visionary leadership, and teamwork. Demographic variables captured personal characteristics; age, gender, educational attainment, and income level. Church growth was evaluated using indicators such as congregational commitment, financial support, access to social amenities, and administrative capacity.

While the use of self-reported data facilitated direct insight into perceptions and experiences, it also introduced potential biases. One such limitation was social desirability bias, wherein respondents might provide answers that reflect socially acceptable norms rather than their genuine views (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Another concern was recall bias, particularly when participants were asked to reflect on past events or leadership practices that may influence church growth.

To address these methodological concerns, several mitigation strategies were implemented. Respondent anonymity was emphasized to encourage honest and uninfluenced participation, thereby minimizing the risk of socially desirable responses. Additionally, the questionnaire was carefully crafted with clear and unambiguous language to reduce the likelihood of misinterpretation and enhance the reliability of responses. To further strengthen the validity of the findings, the study adopted a triangulated approach by incorporating multiple indicators for both church growth and leadership behaviors. This approach helped to cross-verify data and reduce the influence of individual response biases on the overall results (Creswell, 2021).

Data Analysis

Quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS Version 26. Descriptive statistics, correlation, and regression analyses were conducted. Qualitative responses were analyzed thematically.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Descriptive Findings

The descriptive analysis revealed that the respondents generally perceived a moderate to high level of transparency and accountability in their churches. The mean score for transparency and accountability was 3.92 with a standard deviation of 0.729, suggesting that while most churches practiced these principles, there was some variation in implementation across different congregations.

Correlation and Regression Results

The Pearson correlation analysis demonstrated a strong positive relationship between transparency and accountability and church growth, with a correlation coefficient of r = .747, significant at the p < .01 level. This indicates that increases in transparency and accountability were associated with higher levels of church growth, measured by indicators such as congregational commitment, funding support, and administrative efficiency.

Table 1: Correlation between Transparency/Accountability and Church Growth

Multiple regression analysis was conducted to determine the predictive power of transparency and accountability on church growth. The analysis yielded a regression coefficient (β) of .308, with an R² value of .557, indicating that approximately 55.7% of the variance in church growth could be explained by transparency and accountability. The results were statistically significant at the p < .01 level, reinforcing the importance of these leadership traits in influencing growth outcomes.

Table 2:  Regression of Church Growth on Transparency and Accountability

The regression analysis revealed that transparency and accountability significantly predicted church growth, R²=.559, F(1,321)=406.18, p<.01. This indicates that transparency and accountability accounted for approximately 55.9% of the variance in church growth. The standardized regression coefficient (β=.747, p<.01)) was significant, t(321)=20.15, p<.01, demonstrating a strong positive relationship between transparency and accountability and church growth.

Thematic Insights

Qualitative themes revealed that:

– Churches with regular financial reports and participatory decision-making processes enjoyed greater trust.

– Lack of accountability often led to gossip, disengagement, and member exit.

– Leadership integrity fostered a culture of volunteerism and giving.

DISCUSSION

The findings align with previous studies suggesting that transparency and accountability enhance follower engagement and organizational effectiveness (Melo et al., 2020; Ovando, 2020). In Embu County, where churches compete for membership amid theological and financial scrutiny, trust in leadership becomes a strategic advantage. Leaders who openly share budgets, decisions, and plans inspire confidence, while those perceived as secretive or manipulative face resistance.

Accountability mechanisms—such as financial audits, participatory budgeting, and conflict resolution forums—strengthen member commitment and reduce internal strife. Furthermore, transparent churches are more likely to attract younger members, who often demand integrity and openness from institutions they support.

CONCLUSION

Transparency and accountability are more than ethical ideals—they are practical tools for church growth. This study establishes that these authentic leadership traits significantly impact membership growth, resource management, and congregational stability. Churches that prioritize these traits create environments where members feel valued, secure, and motivated to participate in ministry work.

RECOMMENDATIONS

To enhance church growth through effective leadership, it is recommended that churches institutionalize regular financial reporting practices. Transparent handling of finances can build trust among congregants and reduce potential conflicts related to mismanagement or suspicion. Church boards and senior leadership should ensure that financial statements and budgets are shared with the membership in clear, understandable formats.

In addition, participatory governance should be promoted. Churches are encouraged to involve congregants in key decisions such as planning, budgeting, and evaluating programs. When members feel that their voices are heard, they are more likely to remain engaged and committed to the vision and mission of the church.

Training and development of church leaders in ethical and authentic leadership should also be prioritized. Church institutions, theological colleges, and denominational bodies should incorporate modules on transparency, accountability, and servant leadership into their leadership development programs. This will ensure that leaders are not only spiritually prepared but also administratively competent.

Furthermore, it is important to establish clear accountability structures within church governance. This includes defining roles and responsibilities, implementing checks and balances, and ensuring regular performance evaluations of leadership. These structures can help in preventing abuse of power and promoting integrity in church administration.

Finally, churches should embrace digital tools and technology to promote transparency. For example, churches can utilize websites, mobile applications, and digital noticeboards to update members on financial status, project progress, and leadership decisions. Technology can bridge communication gaps and foster a culture of openness and accountability.

By implementing these recommendations, churches can foster a leadership culture that not only honors biblical principles but also meets the practical needs of a growing and informed congregation.

REFERENCES

1. Almutairi, M., Timmins, F., Wise, P. Y., Stokes, D., & Alharbi, T. A. (2025). Authentic Leadership—A Concept Analysis. Journal of advanced nursing, 81(4), 1775–1793.
2. Asamoah, H. (2023). A Qualitative Study Examining the Styles of Leadership and Clergy Burnout in Pentecostal Churches in Ghana.
3. Babbie, E. R. (2020). The Practice of Social Research. Cengage AU.
4. Bayram, Y. (2025). From ‘know thyself!’ to ‘be your true self’: Free will belief as a mediator in the relationship between internal state awareness, appearance consciousness, style consciousness, and social anxiety with authenticity. Current Psychology: A Journal for Diverse Perspectives on Diverse Psychological Issues, 44(6), 4791–4805.
5. Creswell, J. W. (2021). A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research 2nd ed. Sage Publications.
6. Duarte, A. P., Ribeiro, N., Semedo, A. S., & Gomes, D. R. (2021). Authentic Leadership and Improved Individual Performance: Affective Commitment and Individual Creativity’s Sequential Mediation. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 675749.
7. Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., Jackson, P. R., & Jaspersen, L. J. (2018). Management and Business Research. SAGE Publications.
8. Gacheru, W., & Kangu, M. (2023). Influence of Leader’s Relational Transparencyon Employee Commitment in Agencies Implementing Public Financial Management Reforms in Kenya. Kabarak Journal of Research & Innovation, 102-111.
9. Gigol, T. (2020). Influence of Authentic Leadership on Unethical Pro-Organizational Behavior: The Intermediate Role of Work Engagement. The Intermediate Role of Work Engagement. Sustainability, 12(3)., 1182.
10. Hendriks, M., Burger, M., Rijsenbilt, A., Pleeging, E., & Commandeur, H. (2020). Virtuous leadership: a source of employee well-being and trust . Management Research Review, 43 (8), 951–970.
11. Henry, S. M., Gathogo, N., & Munyao, S. M. (2025). Church Growth Risk and Protective Factors: Perspectives from Leaders of Selected Pentecostal Churches in Kenya. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 9(3), 2016-2027.
12. Jenssen, J. I. (2020). How Church Leadership May Influence Growth by Applying an Organizational Life Cycle Perspective on Church Development: A Literature Study. Scandinavian Journal for Leadership & Theology, 7.
13. Khan, M. M., Ahmed, S. S., & Khan, E. (2021). The Emerging Paradigm of Leadership for Future: The Use of Authentic Leadership to Lead Innovation in VUCA Environment. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 759241.
14. Kleynhans, D. J., Heyns, M. M., Stander, M. W., & Beer, L. T. (2022). Authentic Leadership, Trust (in the Leader), and Flourishing: Does Precariousness Matter? Front Psychology.
15. Krejci, J. (2021). Leader’s Relational Transparency and Team-level Trust and Distrust. Walden University.
16. McGrath, S. K., & Whitty, J. (2018). Accountability and responsibility defined. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 11(3), 687-707.
17. Mitekaro, W., & Wa-Mbaleka, S. (2021). Enhancing Authentic Leadership to Address Organizational Challenges in Church Settings. Pan-African Journal of Education and Social Sciences,2(2), 7-15.
18. Muriithi, P. N., & Mwanthi, T. (2022). The Triple Bottom Line and Church Sustainability in Kenya. European Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences 2(5):, 31-36.
19. Senoga, W. A. (2023). The Effect of Accountability, Transparency, And Integrity of Church Leaders on Fraud Prevention in The Management of Church Funds. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 1388-1409.
20. Vilkinas, T., Murray, D., & Chua, S. M. (2020). Effective leadership: Considering the confluence of the leader’s motivations, behaviours and their reflective ability. Leadership & Organization Development Journal.
21. Wei, F., Zhang, Y., Liu, S., & Li, Y. (2018). The Interactive Effect of Authentic Leadership and Leader Competency on Followers’ Job Performance: The Mediating Role of Work Engagement. Journal of Business Ethics, 153(3).
22. Woods, K., & Kates, M. A. (2024). Authentic leadership: Taylor’s version. Journal of Leadership Education.
23. Zhu, Y. (2025). Authentic Leadership: Fostering Ethical Cultures, Employee Engagement, and Organizational Resilience in Complex Environments. Proceedings of The International Conference on Research in Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(1) (pp. 1-14). University of Cambridge.