Leadership Styles and Competency Development in Technical and Vocational Education and Training Institutions in Kenya

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to examine the influence of leadership styles on competency development in Technical and Vocational Education and Training Institutions in Kenya. The study was guided by the following specific objectives: To establish influence of transformational, transactional, laissez-faire and servant leadership on competency development in Technical and Vocational Education and Training Institutions (TVET) in Kenya. The study also sought to examine the moderating effects of organizational culture on the relationship between the leadership styles and competency development in Technical and Vocational Education and Training Institutions in Kenya. The study was anchored to the trait theory of leadership, path- goal leadership theory, behavioral leadership theory, leadership-member exchange theory and institutional leadership theory. A conceptual framework was developed which was used in the study and depicts the interrelationship between the study variables. The independent variables were transactional leadership style, transformational leadership style, servant leadership style and laissez-faire leadership style. The leadership styles were moderated by the organizational culture. The dependent variable was competency development in the TVET institutions. The study adopted descriptive, exploratory, and correlational research design. The study population was 796 (Principals and Academic Registrars) of the TVET institutions. The Slovin's Formula was used to determine the sample size of 262 respondents to be used during the research study. The study population was justified because the Principals and Academic Registrars were the ones mandated to carry out leadership and decision making in the TVET institutions in Kenya. The study used primary data, which was collected using questionnaires. The questionnaires were both open and close ended. A pilot study was conducted to establish the reliability and validity of the research instruments. A coefficient of above 0.7 was obtained and this indicated that the data collection instruments were valid. The gathered data was analyzed using computer aided IBM Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS) version 24 premium. Both descriptive and inferential statistics were used to analyze the data collected. Descriptive statistics involved computation of mean scores, standard deviation, percentages, cross tabulation, and frequency distribution which described the demographic characteristics of the organization and the respondents. Inferential statistics was used to determine the relationships and significance between independent and dependent variable. The results were presented using tables and graphs. To draw conclusions on the relationship among the variables, the study tested the hypotheses by use of regression models at .05 level of significance. The results indicated that the overall model was satisfactory. This meant that leadership styles (transactional, transformational, servant and laissez- faire) variables explain 72.10% of the variations in competency development in the TVET institutions. Overall, the study concluded that leadership styles (transactional, transformational, servant and laissez-faire) had a positive contribution on competency development in the TVET institutions. Specifically, the study established that transformational leadership style made the most positive contribution, among the independent variables investigated. This study addresses the existing knowledge gap by determining the relationship between leadership styles and competency development in TVET institutions which is not direct but rather through adopted leadership styles of transactional, transformational, servant and laissez-faire leadership styles. Organizational culture had a moderating effect on the relationship between leadership styles and competency development in TVET institutions. The findings of this study therefore have implications for theory, practice, and policy.