Effects of Leadership Style and Employee Commitment on Production Efficiency on Selected State Institutions in Ghana

Abstract

Abstract

Background and Aim: This study investigated the effects of leadership style and employee commitment on production efficiency in ten selected state institutions in the Greater Accra Region of Ghana. Leadership style is widely recognised as a key driver of employee commitment and organisational performance, yet empirical evidence from Ghanaian and other West African public-sector settings remains scarce. The study examined how five leadership styles autocratic, democratic, transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire relate to employee commitment (affective, continuance, normative, and organisational) and, in turn, to production efficiency.

Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional descriptive correlational design was adopted, using a stratified sample of 100 respondents (50 senior and 50 junior officers) drawn from the ten institutions. Sample size was determined using Krejcie and Morgan's (1970) formula. Data were collected through a structured questionnaire and analysed using descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis (KMO = .607; explained variance = 53.5%), and multiple regression.

Results: Laissez-faire leadership was found to be the most practiced leadership style (M = 3.76, SD = 0.81), followed by democratic leadership (M = 3.72, SD = 0.70). Transformational and transactional leadership styles were significant positive predictors of employee commitment: transformational leadership predicted affective commitment (β = .391, *p* < .001) and organisational commitment (β = .383, *p* < .001), while transactional leadership significantly predicted all four commitment dimensions (β = .225 to .263, *p* < .05). Laissez-faire leadership was not a significant predictor of any commitment dimension (*p* > .05).

Conclusion: Leadership style is significantly associated with employee commitment in Ghanaian state institutions, with transformational and transactional styles offering the strongest levers for improving commitment. Because laissez-faire leadership was nonetheless the most prevalent style practiced, the findings point to a meaningful mismatch between current leadership practice and the styles most likely to strengthen commitment. Implications for leadership development and human resource policy in the public sector are discussed.