Abstract

The present study investigated the association between college teacher’s motivation and leadership styles. The population comprised of the lecturers in Physical education of all government degree colleges for girls and boys in Punjab, Pakistan. No sampling technique was preferred due to the accessible population. The total number of lecturers in Physical Education was 576 in which 210 were male and 366 were females. Two self-prepared, Likert type scales were used for data collection and SPSS 24 was used for data analysis. The results indicated that there is a positive significant association between the principals’ leadership styles and the teachers’ motivating factors. Also, the lecturers were found to be well-motivated with transactional leadership style. It was suggested that the government may conduct short-term awareness programs and arrange training and workshops for LPEs and college principals regarding the appropriate leadership style, upgrade their skills and motivational strategies for LPEs towards the job.

Key Words

Motivation, Leadership, Leadership Styles.

Introduction

Leadership plays an essential role in inspiring, motivating, and empowering staff members as well as obtaining institutional success. Kiel (2015) indicated that a leader is a person who can obtain the same objective by undertaking the cumulative action of mobilizing the faculty. Leadership is a basic requirement of each organization including its team. Leadership allows the heads of institutions to influence the teachers’ behaviour in an institution. So, it can be said that motivated and committed staff is one of the most imperative outcomes of successful leadership. Research studies by Abbas and Asgar (2010) revealed that another name of successful leaders is also successful managers due to their inspiration for workers to achieve institutional goals. Accomplishing institutional goals, though, isn't sufficient to sustain workers stimulated but assisting them to attain their individual as well as institutional goals is the chief part of their inspiration (Thornton, Ocasio & Lounsbury, 2012).  Leadership and motivation are interactive and a key part of each other. Leadership effectiveness is significantly described as the ability of someone to stimulate the subordinates toward combined goals/vision or mission (Afsar, at el., 2014). It means that the more stimulated/motivated the teachers, the more efficient the head; the more efficient the head, the more stimulated the teachers.  

Generally, professional motivation is known as the power that stimulates the individuals persistently to move on or to perform something (Miller & Rollnick, 2012).  Motivation is the thing that enhances the worker’s performance and the organizational goals can be obtained in a good manner. The performance and behaviour of a worker can be renovated through the source of motivation. Saefullah, (2012) concluded that a person has different motivation levels, according to the circumstance.  Motivation plays a chief role to drive force in satisfying and pursuing the needs of a person (Miller & Rollnick, 2012) indicated that. It is something that influences the behaviour of persons in practising a certain type of outcome. Moreover, motivation concentrates and comprises the knowledge that leads the direction and common strength of the action of an individual over-time. This period is much significant because although the stimulated behaviour occurs in the present age only its direction and general strength are toward the future phase (Bernard at el., 2005). Similarly, Olusola (2011) described that motivation plays the role as a basic tool for stimulating the employees’ behaviour of work. On the other side, Kaufmann, Schulze and Veit (2011) indicated that extrinsic motivation of workers leads to perform anything because of it is intrinsically motivating or enjoyable. Every organizational success depends upon its drive of workers to thrive throughout their struggles, continue practice, engagement, and commitment. Thus professional motivation is a vital subject for the reason that competencies of leadership include the capability to stimulate the workers as one of the fundamental jobs or duties (Lussier, 2010). The heads of institution understand about their power and authority and also know about their authority source: their status, their capability, and their appeal to inspire others. They have an impact on their leadership styles on the teachers’ behaviour through set dynamics, discipline, communication, training and reward (Western, 2019). There are many styles of leadership, transformational, autocratic, charismatic, transactional and visionary leadership. Whilst, this research paper was intended to build a leadership style’s role in determining the motivation level of lecturers in physical education and also stimulating the teaching faculty to be committed with their assigned work and institution.  

Literature Review

Leadership contributes a lot in establishing or running successful and effective educational system in Pakistan. Robbins, Judge and Sanghi (2005) described that the leader is defined as someone who has the administrative authority and has the capability to inspire the other people. Leadership starts with the primary endeavour made to hire a new worker; carries on through the complete process of induction; and maintains on daily until the worker leaves the organization. All this practice is cultivated through a leader/head by stimulating new staff and it also throws lights on the significance of leadership for an institution. The excellence of relationship of a leader with a teacher is a very powerful aspect of teacher motivation (Robbins, & Finley, 2006). It establishes a positive, respectful and professional attitude of teachers and they are more liable to accept and adopt the same approach and feel pleasure to perform their work. It is very clear that the administrative style which is followed through a job has a significant association with the motivation of teachers, the self-esteem and the fulfillment of the task (Eyal & Roth, 2011). Nonetheless, the correlation between the motivation of teachers and heads’ leadership style within a task-force is a matter of high debate within an institution. In various spheres of life, there is continuously discussed the topic that whether managers are born or build up. Reflecting upon the motivation debates, it’s cleared that human beings have different personalities along with a large number of characteristics. Knafo at el. (2008) indicated that with motivation, these powers are both hereditary and obtained through influences and environment. So the current research study tried to find and to build up the role of heads’ leadership styles on teachers’ motivation.

Similarly, the type or drive of force that stimulates a man to do something is known as working motivation. Han and Yin (2016) explained that motivation determines the causes, why the persons decide to do some tasks/things and why they can maintain and practise the same act for a while. The motivation of a teacher is retention, attraction, and attention of a person about his/her profession. Oladele (2005) described that motivation replies to the question that why people do certain types of tasks or behaviour that is why it is described as a human motive. Primarily, a person feels some drive or need which stimulate the psychological process and at the result, the persons do a certain type of works or behaviors. What motives for a person to continue his/her primary courses of teaching and adopt the profession of teaching? Sinclair (2008) indicated that the motivation of teachers is a degree because of the teaching staff attach to their courses of teaching and profession. The motivation of teacher endorses the intrinsic values of a teacher to select the profession of teaching and uphold Educational managers and leaders have a particular concern about motivation of teacher. In addition to Ololube (2006) indicated that both types (intrinsic/extrinsic) of motivation are necessary to make effort, whether, is decisive in the workers’ lives because it formulates the fundamental reason for performing a task in life. Lai (2011) elaborated that intrinsic type of professional motivation is synchronized by an individual’s interest, pleasure/enjoyment and it entails the activity performance for the constitutional fulfillment of an act.

Moreover, lecturers play a chief role in the environment of teaching and learning. If lecturers do not well

stimulated and committed then the required institutional objectives can never be obtained. These days, educators have a general complaint against the student difficulty in learning process during class and also found that the pupils are not well motivated about learning. So, it can be said that it is very difficult to stimulate the pupils if teaching staff is not stimulated. Jesus and Lens (2005) explained that well stimulated teachers make an effort for reforms implementation which is originated through policy-makers. Motivation of teacher has a main role in excellence of education. The desired objectives and goals cannot be obtained without a motivated and effective teacher. Lectures must be well motivated to obtain the quality of learning. The motivation of teacher increases the teachers’ empowerment in their profession. Ofojebe and Ezugoh (2010) elaborated that well-motivated educators can perform their assigned duty efficiently. It is cleared that if the educators are well-stimulated then teaching and learning takes place successfully. It is because of educators are the actual actors of teaching and learning environment and their motivation has an impact on educational standards and their productivity (Adeyemi & Oyetede, 2011).

The above-mentioned studies were carried out in various corners of the world with several scopes, different genders, and sample sizes, different independent, and dependent variables, moderate, extraneous and demographic variables. Previous studies, historical information, library books, catalogs, the Internet and databases have a key role in connection with reaching the spaces/gaps in the literature. Concentrated literature review reveals that there is no shortage of studies that focused on different leadership styles and workers’ motivation. Although, a limited number of research studies had been conducted to sort out the effect of different leadership styles upon working motivation and loyalty of workers as well. But it is very rare to find research studies that had been carried for investigating the relationship between different leadership styles with the professional motivation of LPEs in public sector colleges generally and especially in the province Punjab, Pakistan. Due to some uncertain circumstances like, poverty, unemployment, and migrations, the Pakistani environment changed dramatically, which has badly affected each individual in the country. Following the conceptual framework will provide a research gap for the present study.


Hypothesis of Study
These Hypotheses will Guide this Particular Research
 Ha: The transformational style of principals’ leadership has a significant association with professional   motivation (working condition, professional development, relations at the institution, and job satisfaction) of college LPEs.
Ha: The transactional style of principals’ leadership has a significant association with professional motivation (working condition, professional development, relations at the institution, and job satisfaction) of college LPEs.
Ha: Laissez-faire style of principals’ leadership has a significant negative association with professional motivation (working condition, professional development, relations at the institution, and job satisfaction) of college LPEs.
Ha: Predictor (leadership styles) are positively and significantly correlated with the criterion variable (professional motivation). 

Methodology

This particular research examined the existing association between the motivation of teachers and different styles of principals’ leadership working in a government college of Punjab, Pakistan.  The following research methodology was adopted in this regard. According to Maxwell (2012), a population is like all the objects or persons which are the key part of the research to complete the particular objectives. The lecturers (PE) working in all the Government colleges for women and boys in Punjab, were the target population of this particular research. There were total 576 Government degree colleges for males and females located in 36 districts of the Punjab, Pakistan. The total number of lecturers in physical education who were working in all government degree colleges was 576, 210 were the male lecturer (PE) whereas 366 were the female lecturers (PE). According to the official record (Higher education department, Punjab [HED, 2019]) the existing number of government degree colleges for women and boys and working lecturers (PE) are as under:

 

Table 1.  Detailed Description of Population before and after data Collection

S No	Total degree colleges’ number	Lecturers (Male)	Lecturers (Female)	After data collection
01	576	210	366	439

Web Source: www.hed.punjab.gov.pk (2019)

For this present research study, being a descriptive research, the questionnaire was the most appropriate instrument. As the current research study deals with two main variables like principals’ leadership styles and professional motivation so two self-made Likert type scales (Leadership Style scale and Professional motivation) were designed and the requisite data was collected by the 439 respondents by using the survey approach. The scale of Leadership style was utilized for analyzing the leadership style of the principals. The self-made scale of Leadership Style classified into three segments like transactional leadership, transformational leadership and laissez-faire styles. The professional motivation scale (PMS) was utilized for assessing the professional motivation level of the lecturers (PE). Requisite information was gained from the target population of 439 lecturers (PE) working at the college level. The consistency of PMS was determined through a data editing process after gaining requisite data through scales from 439 participants. The total return rate of participants’ responses was obtained as 76%.30 numbers of lecturers in physical education working in both male and females’ degree colleges were taken for pilot study. The preliminary drafts of the leadership styles and professional motivation scales were filled by them. The first version of the scales made valid through valid suggestions and observations. The research instruments’ consistency was found 0.84 by using Cronbach alpha method. Descriptive analysis has shown the frequency percentages of collected responses. Multiple regressions and Pearson’s correlation were applied for assessing the impact and relationship level of principals’ leadership styles upon lecturers’ motivation of the lecturers.

Descriptive Analysis

Table 2. Showing Demographics- Wise Frequencies and Percentages of Participants

Demographics	Category		Frequency	Percent
Gender		Male	292	66.5%
		Female	147	33.5%
Locality	Urban		254	57.9%
	Rural		185	42.1%
Marital status	Married		323	73.6%
	Unmarried		116	26.4%
Educational Qualification	Master		306	69.7%
	M.Phill		128	29.2%
	PhD		5	1.1%
Professional Qualification	JDPE		44	10.0%
	B.ED		198	45.1%
	M.ED		73	16.6%
	Any other		27	6.2%
	Not any one		97	22.1%
Teaching Experiences	(1 -5) years		185	42.1%
	(6 -10 )years		100	22.8%
	(11 - 15) years		69	15.7%
	more than 15		85	19.4%
Total Respondents			439	100.0%

The overall 439 participants respond positively to the present research. In the above table, 66.51% (292) were male participants while 33.49% (147) were female participants. This table shows that the total urban respondents in present research were 57.66% (254) and the remaining were rural participants which were 42.14% (185). The following table also shows the respondents’ marital status. Total married participants in the research were 73.58% (323) and unmarried participants were 26.42% (116). Likewise, in the identical table, total MSC/MA participants were 69.70% (306), M.Phil participants were 29.2% (128) and Ph.D participants were 1.14% (5). Furthermore, the above table also demonstrates the professional qualifications of the respondents. Holders of JDPE degree were 10% (44), B.ED degree were 45.1% (198), whereas 16.6% (73) were M.ED degree holders and 6.2% (27) were any other while 22.1% (97) participants responded the option “not anyone”. The similar table also indicates the teaching experience’s percentages of the participants of the present research. The total participants that have experience of teaching from 1-5 (years) were 42.1% (185), 6-10 (years) were 22.8% (100), 11-15 (years) were 15.7% (69) and more than 15 (years) were 19.4% (85).

 

Table 3. Association Between Transformational Style of Hois’ Leadership and Professional Motivation

Testing Variables		Transformational Leadership style	Working Conditions	professional Development	relation at Institution	Job Satisfaction
Transformational Leadership style	Pearson Correlation	1
	Sig. (2-tailed)
	N	439
working Conditions	Pearson Correlation	.452**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000
	N	439
Professional Development	Pearson Correlation	.471**	.613**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000
	N	439	439
Relation at Institution	Pearson Correlation	.469**	.666**	.615**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000	.000
	N	439	439	439
Job Satisfaction	Pearson Correlation	.358**	.708**	.614**	.619**	1
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000	.000	.000
	N	439	439	439	439	439
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The above table depicts the association between the transformational leadership style with the motivation (working condition, professional development, relations at institution and job satisfaction) of lecturers (PE) at the college level. The respondents of the study were lecturers (PE) and Likert type scales were used for data collection. The data in the above table indicates the correlation between transformational style of leadership and motivation’ sub factors such as; (working condition was 45%, moderate positive which was found significant at .01 alpha level r²_{= .}452, Sig. = .000 < a= .01,  professional development was 47% moderate positive which was found significant at .01 alpha level r²_{= .}471, Sig. = .000 < a= .01, relations at institution was 46% moderate positive which was found significant at .01 alpha level r²_{= .} 459, Sig. = .000 < a= .01 and job satisfaction was 35% moderate positive which was found significant at .01 alpha level r²_{= .} 358, Sig. = .000 < a= .01. Therefore, the transformational style of HOIs leadership are positively associated with motivation (working condition, professional development, relation at institution and job satisfaction) of lecturer physical Education, at college level and the above hypothesis is hereby accepted at significant level 0.01.

 

Table 4. Association Between Transactional Style of Hois’ Leadership and Professional Motivation

Testing variables		Transactional Leadership Style	working Conditions	professional Development	relation at Institution	Job Satisfaction
Transactional Leadership Style	Pearson Correlation	1
	Sig. (2-tailed)
	N	439
working Conditions	Pearson Correlation	.445**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000
	N	439
professional Development	Pearson Correlation	.535**	.613**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000
	N	439	439
Relations at Institution	Pearson Correlation	.523**	.666**	.615**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000	.000
	N	439	439	439
Job Satisfaction	Pearson Correlation	.415**	.708**	.614**	.619**	1
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000	.000	.000
	N	439	439	439	439	439
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The above table indicates the existing relationship between Transactional leadership style and motivation (working condition, professional development, relations at institution and job satisfaction) of lecturers (PE) at college level. The data in above table indicates the correlation between transactional style of leadership and working motivation’ sub-factors. i.e. (working condition was 45%, moderate positive which was found significant at .01 alpha level r²_{= .}445, Sig. = .000 < a= .01,  professional Development was 53% moderate positive which was found significant at .01 alpha level r²_{= .}535, Sig. = .000 < a= .01, relations at institution was 52% moderate positive which was found significant at .01 alpha level r²_{= .} 523, Sig. = .000 < a= .01 and job satisfaction was 41% moderate positive which was found significant at .01 alpha level r²_{= .} 523, Sig. = .000 < a= .01. Thus, there is significant association between transactional style of HOIs’ leadership and motivation (working condition, professional development, relation at institution and job satisfaction) of lecturers in Physical education, at college level and the above hypothesis is hereby accepted at significant level 0.01.

Table 5. Correlation Between Laissez-Faire Leadership Style of Hois and Professional Motivation

Testing variables		laissez-faire leadership Style	Working conditions	Professional development	Relation at Institution	Job Satisfaction
Laissez-faire leadership syle	Pearson Correlation	1
	Sig. (2-tailed)
	N	439
Working Conditions	Pearson Correlation	-.416**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000
	N	439
Professional development	Pearson Correlation	-.500**	.613**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000
	N	439	439
Relation at Institution	Pearson Correlation	-.476**	.666**	.615**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000	.000
	N	439	439	439
Job satisfaction	Pearson Correlation	-.419**	.708**	.614**	.619**	1
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000	.000	.000
	N	439	439	439	439	439
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

As shown in table 5, the Pearson correlation, indicated the negative relationship between lassies-fair leadership style of HOIs and motivation (working condition, professional development, relation at institutions and job satisfaction) of lecturer physical education, at college level. Results from the above table indicates that lassies-fair leadership style has negative correlation with all the motivation’s sub-factors such as; working condition, professional development, relation at institutions and job satisfaction (r = -.416, -.500, -.476 and -.419) at significant level (P = .000, .000, .000 and .000 < .01) which is less then to the alpha level. Similarly, the table also indicates there is a positive association among all the sub-factors of the motivation (working condition with professional development, relation at institutions and job satisfaction), because the r-value is positive in nature (r = .613, .666, & .708) at significant level is (P = .000 & .000 < .01) and the p-value is also less then to alpha level (0.01 > .000). The table has also shown the relationship among professional development with relation at institution and job satisfaction (r = .615 & .614), whereas, the table also shows the relationship between relation at institution and job satisfaction (r = .619). Therefore, it can be stated that there is a negative association between laissez-faire leadership style of HOIs and professional motivation (Working Conditions, professional development, relations at institution and job satisfaction) of lecturers in Pphysical Education, at the college level and the above hypothesis is hereby accepted at significant level 0.01.

 

Table 6. The leadership Styles are Positively and Significantly Associated with Professional Motivation.

		Transactional	Transformational	Laissez Faire
Transformational	P-Correlation	.255**	1	.512**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000		.000
	N	439	439	439
Transactional	P-Correlation	.386**	.512**	1
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000
	N	439	439	439
Motivation	P-Correlation	.556**	.300**	.356**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000	.000	.000
	N	439	439	439
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The hypothesis # 6 was about correlation between leadership styles (transformational, transactional & laissez-faire) and professional motivation. The results show that all the three predictors are significantly associated with the criterion variable. Transactional leadership style is highly correlated with professional motivation (.556) as compared to transformational leadership style (.300) and laissez-faire leadership style (-.356). Therefore, results confirmed the existence of relationship between different leadership styles and professional motivation.  Therefore, the H2 is accepted and substantiated as true.

Results and Discussion

Discussion 

The particular study aimed to analyze the relationship between different principals’’ leadership styles (transactional, transformational and laissez-faire) and professional motivation of college lecturers (PE). The present research reveals that the Transactional, Transformational styles of HOIs’ leadership are positively associated with teachers’ motivation whereas laissez-faire style has a negative association with professional motivation of LPEs. It was found that transformational leadership style of HOIs has a positive correlation with teachers’ motivation. Similarly, Ahmad at el (2014) also confirmed that there is a significant relationship between transformational leadership style and employees’ motivation.  Chaudhry and Javed (2012) described that transformational style of leadership emphasized on the higher order of necessity than rewards system and short-term goals. The above-mentioned literature proved that there is the significant relationship between transformational styles of leadership with workers’ motivation. 

Likewise, the study findings also indicated that there is a strong positive association of transactional style of leadership with the LPEs’ motivation at the college level in province Punjab, Pakistan. The outcomes of present research supported by many world research studies. Eyal and Roth (2011) found that transactional leadership is an ideal thing for establishing autonomous teachers’ motivation whereas controlled motivation produces by transformational leadership. The motivation level of lecturers has also a significant association with achievement of students (Komarraju, Musulkin, & Bhattacharya, 2010). Motivation of teachers leads to effectiveness of an institution and quality of learning in several ways (Fullan, 2007). In addition to this, the researcher also concluded that lecturers’ motivation and performance are correlated with transactional leadership. Similarly, Webb (2007) also noted that contingent rewards are a positive skill for the educational administrators to stimulate the workers to struggle hard and to obtain set objectives.  As Ofojebe and Ezugoh (2010) indicated that well-motivated teachers can do their works effectively. As the research study  by Moreno, (2010) concluded that intrinsically motivated persons participate in different activities for their personal interest and satisfaction while extrinsically motivated persons participate in tasks for the sake of external rewards, promotions and bonus only. Additionally, it was found that there is negative effect of laissez-faire leadership upon professional motivation of LPEs. Judge and Piccolo, (2004) also found that if the head of an institute remains silent and does not take care of institutional affairs until error arises then the effect of leadership is negative in regard to motivation.

The last and final hypothesis was about correlation amid leadership styles (transactional, transformational and laissez-faire etc.) and professional motivation. The results of the study shown that transactional leadership style is highly correlated with professional motivation than the transformational and laissez-faire style. Thus, it is concluded that the artistic attributes of the transactional leadership are more effective in determining the motivation of the lecturers in physical education. and Kalar and Wright (2007) also supported that transactional style of leadership is generally based upon methods of intrinsic motivation towards employees. Previous literature supports this statement with Barbuto, (2006) describing that how teachers’ professional motivation depends upon emotions, fun, self-worth and trust, the same traits that are required in the transactional style of leadership.

Conclusion

The particular study aimed to investigate the association between college teacher’s motivation and leadership styles. There have been numerous research studies on the professional motivation of employees in progressed countries. This current research focused on teachers’ motivation at the college level in Punjab, Pakistan. 

The study found that the principals’ leadership styles are significantly associated with the teachers’ motivating factors. It was also found that transformational leadership style has a positive correlation with college teacher’s motivation. The study also revealed that there is a significant association among the transformational and transactional with professional motivation whereas a negative correlation of laissez-faire leadership styles was found regarding LPEs’ motivation. It was concluded that under control of the transactional style of leadership, the lecturers were happy with the working conditions of their institution and had freedom and power to do to the best of their capabilities. Under these circumstances, they were also fully satisfied with fringe benefits, current salary and fulfillment of their psychological needs and also had job security. Moreover, it was also concluded that the transactional leadership style provides sufficient resources, professional development opportunities and refresher and coaching courses to do their job better. The lecturers having transactional principals were well-motivated and well equipped to teach the physical education and sports. Moreover, the present study results also shown that owing to transactional and transformational, leadership, the lecturers (PE) had a good relationship with their superiors as well as colleagues to develop a spirit to their professionalism. They were totally satisfied with their job and well-motivated. The study further indicated that the job satisfaction level of teachers also increases when the style of the leader was transactional. 

Hence, the research study recommended that there are two ways to describe the professional motivation as recruiting honest teachers by the fair selection policy. The second option is to deal with teachers with corporate values and norms. Teachers’ thoughts can be visualized as their intentions and they can be more motivated and performed well. It was also indicated that lecturers see to be well motivated with transactional leadership style than laissez-faire or transformational styles. So, it was suggested that the government may conduct short term awareness programs and should arrange training and workshops for LPEs and college principals regarding the appropriate leadership style, upgrade their skills and motivational strategies for LPEs towards the job. 

References

• Abbas, W. & Asgar, I. (2010). The role of leadership in organizational change: Relating the successful organizational change to visionary and innovative leadership. MasterÂ’s Thesis. University of Gavle.
• Adeyemi, S. B., & Oyetade, E. M. (2011). Motivating the primary school teachers for effective classroom performance. European Journal of Educational Studies, 3(3), 587-594
• Afsar, B., F. Badir, Y., & Bin Saeed, B. (2014). Transformational leadership and innovative work behavior.Industrial Management & DataSystems,114(8), 1270-1300.
• Ahmad, F., Abbas, T., Latif, S., & Rasheed, A. (2014). Impact of transformational leadership on employee motivation in telecommunication sector.Journal of management policies and practices,2(2), 11-25
• Asrar-ul-Haq, M., & Kuchinke, K. P. (2016). Impact of leadership styles on employees' attitude towards their leader and performance: Empirical evidence from Pakistani banks.Future Business Journal,2(1), 54-64
• BarbutoJr, J. E., & Wheeler, D. W. (2006). Scale development and construct clarification of servant leadership. Group & Organization Management, 31(3), 300-326.
• Bennell, P., & Akyeampong, K. (2007). Teacher motivation in sub-Saharan Africa and South asia (No. 71). London: DfID
• Bernard, L.C. Mills, M., Swenish, L. & Walsh. R.P. 2005. An Evolutionary theory of motivation. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monography, 131(2): 129-184.
• Bushra, F., Ahmad, U., &Naveed, A. (2011). Effect of transformational leadership on employees' job satisfaction and organizational commitment in banking sector of Lahore (Pakistan). International journal of Business and Social science, 2(18).
• Chaudhry, A. Q., & Javed, H. (2012). Impact of transactional and laissez faire leadership style on motivation.International Journal of Business and Social Science,3(7)
• Eyal, O., & Roth, G. (2011). Principals' leadership and teachers' motivation: Self-determination theory analysis. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(3), 256-275
• Fullan, M. (2007). Leading in a culture of change. John Wiley & Sons
• Han, J., & Yin, H. (2016). Teacher motivation: Definition, research development and implications for teachers. Cogent Education, 3(1),118
• Hoskins, S. L., & Van Hooff, J. C. (2005). Motivation and ability: which students use online learning and whatinfluence does it have on their achievement?British journal of educational technology, 36(2), 177-192
• IIEP (2006). Making basic choices for external quality assurance system. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning, 7-9 Rue Eugene Delacroix, 75016 Paris (France)Publication.
• Iliya, A., & Ifeoma, L. G. (2015). Assessment of Teacher Motivation Approaches in the Less Developed Countries.Journal of Education and Practice,6(22), 10-17.
• Jesus, S. N., Lens, W. (2005). An integrated model for the study of teacher motivation. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 54(1), 119-13
• Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of applied psychology, 89(5), 755
• Kalar, T., & Wright, D. L. (2007). Leadership theory and motivation of medical imaging employees. Radiology management, 29(6), 20
• Kaufmann, N., Schulze, T., & Veit, D. (2011, August). More than fun and money. Worker Motivation in Crowdsourcing-A Study on Mechanical Turk. InAMCIS(Vol. 11, No. 2011, pp. 1-11).
• Kennedy, M. M. (2010). Attribution error and the quest for teacher quality.Educational Researcher,39(8), 591-598
• Kiel, D. H. (2015). Creating a faculty leadership development program.Academic Impressions.
• Kiziltepe, Z. (2008). Motivation and demotivation of university teachers. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and practice, 14(4-5), 515530
• Knafo, A., Zahn-Waxler, C., Van Hulle, C., Robinson, J. L., & Rhee, S. H. (2008). The developmental origins of a disposition toward empathy: genetic and environmental contributions.Emotion,8(6), 737
• Komarraju, M., Musulkin, S., & Bhattacharya, G. (2010). Role of student-faculty interactions in developing college students' academic self-concept, motivation, and achievement.Journal of college student development,51(3), 332-342
• Kontodimopoulos, N. Paleologou, V. &Niakas, D. 2009. Identifying important motivational factors for professionals in Greek Hospitals. BMC Health Services Research, 9(164): 1-11.
• Lai, E.R. 2011. Motivation: A literature review. Pearson Research Report. 1-43
• Levy, J. (2005). Do you know what you look like?: Interpersonal relationships in education. Routledge
• Limsili, K., &Ogunlana, S. O. (2008). Performance and leadership outcome correlates of leadership styles and subordinate commitment. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 15(2), 164-184
• Lussier, A. 2010. Effective Leadership. 5th ed. Cengage learning. South Western
• Manion, J. (2005). From management to leadership: Practical strategies for health care leaders (Vol. 136). John Wiley & Sons
• Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (Vol. 41). Sage publications
• Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (2012).Motivational interviewing: Helping people change. Guilford press
• Ofojebe, W. N., Ezugoh, T. C. (2010). TeachersÂ’ motivation and its influence on quality assurance in the Nigerian educational system. African Research Review, 4(2), 398-417
• Oladele, J. O. (2005). Fundamental of educational psychology. Handbook for Education students and teachers (5th Ed.). Lagos: Johns. Lad Publishers Ltd
• Ololube, O. 2006. Teacher job satisfaction and motivation for school effectiveness: An assessment. Essay in Education, 18:1-19.
• Olusola, 2011. Intrinsic motivation and self-efficacy as predictors of job performance of individual workers in Ijebu Zone of Ogun state. The Journal of International Social Science Research, 4(17): 570-577
• Robbins, H., & Finley, M. (2006). The accidental leader: What to do when you're suddenly in charge. John Wiley & Sons
• Robbins, S., Judge, T., & Sanghi, S. (2005). Organizational behaviour (8th ed.). New Delhi: Pearson Education
• Ryan, R.M. &Deci, E.L. 2000. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25: 54-97
• Saefullah, U. (2012). Work motivation in Islamic educational institutions.Advances in Natural and Applied Sciences,6(8), 1562-1568.
• Sinclair, C. (2008). Initial and changing student teacher motivation and commitment to teaching. Asia Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36(2), 79-104
• Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. (2012).The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure, and process. Oxford University Press on Demand
• Webb, K. (2007). Motivating peak performance: Leadership behaviors that stimulate employee motivation and performance. Christian Higher Education, 6(1), 53-71. doi:10.1080/15363750600932890
• Western, S. (2019).Leadership: A critical text. SAGE Publications Limited
• Zareen, M., Razzaq, K., & Mujtaba, B. G. (2015). Impact of transactional, transformational and laissez-faire leadership styles on motivation: A quantitative study of banking employees in Pakistan.Public Organization Review,15(4), 531-549