 |
Exploring Participative Leadership Among Principals: A Quantitative Study on Teachers’ Perceptions in Sabah, Malaysia
Fung Lan Yong1*
, Florence Chuah2, Chung Jin Jong3
Frederick Chen Tshung Chong4, Loreta Ling Ling
Uie5 , Ming Ha Lee6
1Centre for Postgraduate Studies,
Jesselton University College,
88300 Kota Kinabalu,
Sabah, Malaysia Email: fungyong@jesselton.edu.my
2Inclusive GEMS Consultancy, 46200
Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia Email: florencecsy@gmail.com
3Centre for Postgraduate Studies,
North Borneo University College, 88400 Kota Kinabalu,
Sabah, Malaysia
Email: Jcjong@nbuc.edu.my
4Open University Malaysia, 88200 Kota Kinabalu,
Sabah, Malaysia Email: fredct@oum.edu.my
5Business Studies,
Jesselton University College,
88300 Kota Kinabalu,
Sabah, Malaysia Email: loretaling8383@gmail.com
6Faculty of Engineering, Computing
and Science, Swinburne University of Technology Sarawak Campus, 93350 Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia
Email: mhlee@swinburne.edu.my
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR (*):
Fung Lan Yong (fungyong@jesselton.edu.my)
KEYWORDS:
Participative Leadership Sabah, Malaysia
Teachers’ Perceptions
CITATION:
Yong, F. L., Chuah,
F., Jong, C. J., Chong,
F. C.
T, Uie, L. L. L., & Lee, M. H. (2026). Exploring
Participative Leadership Among Principals: A Quantitative Study on Teachers’ Perceptions in Sabah, Malaysia. Malaysian
Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 11(1), e003747.
https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v11i1.3747
ABSTRACT
The purpose of
this study was to examine secondary teachers’ perceptions of participative
leadership among principals in Sabah. It aimed to determine if (1) there were
any significant differences in teachers’ perceptions of participative
leadership among principals by way of gender,
age, and job experience, (2) there were any significant differences in perceived participative leadership
based on a hypothetical value
of 3.5, and (3) the descriptive
statistics related to perceived participative leadership among principals. The
sample comprised 63 teachers who completed the Participative Decision-Making
dimension of the Empowering Leadership Questionnaire on Google Forms. Data were
subsequently transferred onto a spreadsheet and analyzed using SPSS 26.0.
First, Kruskal- Wallis H test revealed nonsignificant differences in teachers’
perceptions of participative leadership by way of age and job experience, while
Mann-Whitney U test showed nonsignificant
differences in terms of gender. Second, Wilcoxon signed rank test showed that
four of the items were significant at p <
0.001 based on a hypothesized value of 3.5. Third, findings
indicated a moderate level of perceived participative leadership among
principals, suggesting that participative practices are present, but not yet
deeply institutionalized in secondary schools. In light of the findings, some recommendations
were made on how principals could incorporate participative leadership into
their daily school management.
1. Introduction
Participative
leadership is based on a team-based approach that allows all staff in the
organization to express their views on how things should operate. Involving all
staff in decision-making instils a sense of belonging, especially when the
decisions can affect their daily lives. It not only reduces turnover and
absenteeism, but also reminds staff to adhere to their decisions, thus ensuring
that they are being successfully implemented. Additionally, participative
leadership often leads to higher morale and creative thinking. It supports
staff wellbeing by encouraging them to assume an active role in the
organization. Being inclusive, it makes them feel more than just a cog in a
wheel, thus motivating them to actively engage in organizational policy,
besides experiencing greater job
motivation and pride. By promoting creative problem-solving, participative
leadership enables the management to make pragmatic decisions that often leads
to cost-saving innovations, which in turn, increases productivity and
efficiency (Western Governors University, 2021).
Additionally,
participative leadership is greatly influenced by the human motivation theory.
Instead of adopting a hierarchical approach to managing a team, participative
leaders try to engage every staff in making important decisions related to
organizational problems, issues, or challenges. Since their approach tends to
be democratic rather than authoritarian, they allow every staff to voice their
opinions concerning the day-to-day management of the organization. By involving
everyone in decision-making and work processes, participative leaders enhance
staff self-esteem, sense of belonging, and morale, which ultimately satisfies
the human need for self-actualization (Western Governors University, 2021).
Lastly,
participative leadership involves three basic stages. First, through consensus
decision-making, it encourages staff to make organization-wide decisions
through voting. While the leaders may
facilitate the discussions, ultimately, a unified agreement is essential to move things forward.
Second, through collective leadership, participative leaders ensure that all
staff in the organization have the opportunity to collaborate; staff across the
organization make decisions as a team with equal accountability. Third, while
adopting democratic principles, participative leaders make the final decision
after considering all staff’s input on key issues, problems, or challenges (Western Governors University, 2021).
1.1. Benefits of Participative Leadership
While driving
growth in an organization, participative leadership helps improve occupational
habits and work ethic (International Institute for
Management Development, 2025).
Participative principals can obtain useful feedback to conceptualize unprecedented ideas, besides fostering a culture
of respect and collaboration. By valuing each staff’s input, they cultivate an
academic environment that
welcomes
diverse perspectives and inclusivity, which not only promotes innovative
problem-solving, but also staff enthusiasm and engagement. Further,
participative principals make staff
feel appreciated, which
leads to higher
self-esteem, job satisfaction, and morale. Moreover, principals who adopt a participative style
also enhance their own
interpersonal skills through active listening, empathy, and effective
communication, which in turn, facilitates their team management and conflict
resolution skills. Lastly, by demonstrating respect for staff’s ideas, they
inculcate trust and loyalty amongst them, which ultimately yields favorable
teaching and learning outcomes.
Career-wise,
participative leaders can develop better decision-making and problem- solving
skills (International Institute for Management Development, 2025).
By involving staff members in the decision-making process, principals can
obtain a broad array of ideas, perspectives, and solutions, which helps them
derive innovative solutions to address issues and overcome challenges.
Moreover, this inclusive approach enables them
to mitigate risks more effectively because solutions or decisions are grounded
on multiple perspectives and consensus. Furthermore, principals can benefit
from participative because it increases their ability to delegate tasks,
leverage the strengths of their staff, and propagate a productive organizational
culture as motivators, visionary guides, and facilitators to empower and
delegate staff, promote strategic thinking, make moral-ethical choices, and
drive adaptability and innovation to achieve educational goals.
1.2. Attributes of Participative Principals
Participative
leadership is an effective management style because it promotes active staff engagement, creativity, and morale (International Institute for Management Development, 2025). First, participative principals encourage active engagement instead of making all significant decisions by themselves. To
help their schools reach greater heights, they facilitate greater engagement
amongst all staff members. Further, participative principals keep staff
actively involved and make them feel appreciated. They reinforce the notion
that every part of the school matters, and that each staff possesses unique skills and value. By ensuring that staff are contributing to collaborative
discussions, participative principals make them become more passionate about
the school, more self-assertive in their roles, and more aligned with the school’s
mission and vision.
Second,
creativity is valuable for any school, and participative principals promote it more than other leadership styles (International Institute for Management Development, 2025).
By being receptive of staff’s ideas and suggestions, participative principals
can increase their understanding of their school to develop new, innovative
teaching and learning strategies. By permitting all staff member to share their
ideas and contribute to the decision-making process, participative principals
will have a broad range of creative ideas to practice efficient
problem-solving, while always having different alternatives to grow their
school. Third, schools can benefit from participative leadership because it
improves morale by instilling a sense of belongness amongst staff. By keeping
staff motivated and excited about their work, participative principals are able to increase staff retention rates,
while planning for the long-term future of their school. By boosting staff
morale, participative principals propagate a close-knit community, which makes
staff feel included and guided through teamwork and open communication.
Lastly,
principals can become more participative by implementing participative
leadership methods, opening collaboration, and discussions (International Institute for Management Development, 2025). First, by encouraging reciprocal communication,
they can promote collaboration amongst staff, who are free to share their ideas
without fear or judgment. To transition staff into participative leadership,
principals can commence by soliciting opinions and ideas through anonymous
surveys to assess staff’s perceptions
of various aspects of the organization. Further, by practicing opening
collaboration, principals can create online or offline environments that allow
diverse individuals or teams to freely share ideas, skills, and resources for
innovation, problem- solving, or content creation. Lastly, by overseeing
discussions without influencing them, principals let staff know that their
ideas and opinions are essential to the school’s overall success.
1.3. Statement of the Problem
Participative
leadership is a democratic leadership style that involves staff in decision-
making and implementing their input to encourage collaboration, empowerment,
open communication, inclusiveness, flexibility, and responsibility-sharing (Western Governors University, 2021). A literature review
indicated that empirical research on participative leadership is lacking in
Sabah, Malaysia. It is important to investigate perceived participative
leadership in the Bornean state to determine the extent to which school
principals engage teachers in decision-making to get diverse perspectives for
effective problem-solving, besides making them feel valued personally and
professionally. The purpose of this study was to examine teachers’ perceptions
of participative leadership among principals in Sabah, Malaysia.
1.4. Significance of the Study
This study is
significant for the following reasons. First, findings can contribute to
theoretical understanding of participative leadership in the limited
literature, besides providing pragmatic means for principals to adopt a
leadership style that can increase team morale by allowing teachers to voice
their opinions and express their suggestions, which in turn, makes them more
motivated in, and more engaged with, both curricular and extracurricular
activities. Second, findings will encourage principals to promote teamwork by
providing teachers with the flexibility to collaborate in terms of goal
attainment and planning, which will result in higher morale and more vibrant
interpersonal communication. Third, they will inspire principals to uncover
creative solutions by encouraging a free-flowing exchange of ideas that often
leads to innovative solutions. Lastly, they will provide a framework for
principals to improve teacher retention by fostering an environment that makes
staff feel genuinely valued, besides providing room for them to grow and
implement innovative ideas to enhance teaching and learning outcomes.
1.5. Research questions
With the
establishment of the problem statement, conceptual gap, and research
significance, the following research questions were formulated to guide the
current study:
i.
Are there any significant differences in teachers’ perceptions of participative
leadership among principals by way of gender, age and job experience?
ii.
Are there any significant differences in teachers’ perceptions of participative
leadership among principals based on a hypothetical value of 3.5?
iii.
What are the descriptive statistics related to teachers’ perceptions of
participative leadership among principals, and what do they imply?
2. Review of
Literature
A literature review was conducted as an integral
part of the study; it serves as a compass that guides the writers through
the existing landscape of knowledge related to participative leadership. By
offering a comprehensive synthesis of prior studies, the literature review
unveils critical gaps in research and allows the contextualization of the research
problems. Further, it facilitates the construction of a robust theoretical
framework, aids in methodological decision-making, and prevents duplication on
the leadership construct. This literature review summarizes the impacts of
participative leadership on different aspects by abstracting published research
and using direct chronology to report secondary findings.
2.1. Impact on Performance and
Commitment
In an earlier
study, Godwin-Charles and Harrington (2009) scrutinized the impact of participative on the
financial performance and strategy implementation in the food sector. Findings
showed that food organizations with greater participative leadership tend to
achieve significantly more success in strategy implementation, achieve higher
overall profitability than those with other types of leadership. On the other
hand, the relationship between participative leadership and job performance
among interns and their supervisors was examined by Newman, Rose, and
Teo (2012). Findings demonstrated that participative leadership tends to
significantly influence job performance and affective trust. Lastly, the
relationship between participative leadership
and intern job performance tends to be partially mediated by affective trust.
The impact of
participative and directive leadership on team performance among university
administrative staff was researched by Bell, Dodd, and
Mjoli (2018). Findings showed that participative leadership
tends to significantly affect team effectiveness, implying that it tends to
motivate staff to establish more effective work structures and enhance their
cognitive processes related to decision-making. Moreover, Mwaisaka, K’Aol, and Ouma (2019),
who inquired into the impact of participative leadership on bank employees’ job
satisfaction, affirmed that participative leadership tends to significantly and
positively predict middle-level managers’ job satisfaction via organizational
decision-making. Bhatti et al. (2019), who probed the impact of
participative leadership on organizational citizenship behavior, divulged that
both factors tend to be significantly mediated by affective leadership.
Additionally, affective trust was found to significantly mediate the
relationship between participative leadership and organizational citizenship
behavior, while continuous commitment was found to significantly mediate the relationship
between participative leadership and organizational citizenship behavior.
The influence
of participative leadership style on employees' performance was examined by Khassawneh and
Elrehail (2022). Findings revealed a significant and positive
relationship between participative leadership and employee loyalty, and
employee loyalty and job performance. Finding imply that participative
leadership strongly fosters employee
loyalty because it fosters
empowerment and autonomy
through shared
decision-making, which increases staff’s sense of control, thus making them
feel more capable and independent. By increasing staff’s motivation and value,
participative leadership makes them feel that their opinions matter, thus
boosting their morale and making them more motivated to achieve goals. By
allowing staff to internalize organizational goals as their own, participative
leadership increases their commitment and loyalty.
Research shows
that participative leadership has a favorable effect on staff performance and
organizational commitment. Parnell, Carraher, and Holt (2002),
who examined the organizational factors that might influence strategic
diffusion among service and production employees, found that a participative
organizational culture tends to promote greater involvement in strategy
formulation. In a study that examined the impact of participative leadership on
teachers’ empowerment and team innovation at elementary schools, Somech (2005) revealed that
participative leadership tends to be significantly related to teachers’
empowerment and team innovation. Similarly, Torlak, Demir, and Budur (2022) found that participative decision-making tends to
significantly and positively influence educators’ perceptions, ethical
leadership, and leadership performance, while significantly mediated the
relationship between ethical leadership and leadership performance.
Onn the other
hand, Bakare and Ojeleye (2020), who examined the
influence of participative leadership on employee commitment among academic and
non-academic staff at a technical college, concluded that participative
leadership and organizational culture tend to exert a significant impact on
employee commitment, implying that that higher
management should encourage participative leadership to promote psychological attachment and dedication
amongst staff. Under participative leadership, staff are likely to be loyal,
dedicated, and engaged with their work, thus contributing to a more cohesive organizational culture and
improved outcomes. Lastly, Khassawneh and Elrehail (2022),
who investigated the impact of participative leadership on managers’
performance in relation to the contingent role of institutional theory,
revealed a significant and positive relationship between participative leadership
and manager loyalty. Lastly, the relationship between the two variables was
also found to be significantly and positively moderated by institutional
context with fewer constraints.
In their
study, Huang et al. (2006) analyzed
the influence of participative leadership on public staff’s organizational
commitment. Findings revealed that participative leadership tends to make staff feel competent, thus increasing
their organizational commitment. Findings imply that participative leadership
tends to strengthen a psychological bond (positive emotional attachment and a
sense of belonging) that reflects staff’s identification with, and loyalty to,
the organization and its goals. Additionally, the influence of participative
and directive leadership on service quality commitment shared customer-oriented
values, role clarity, and among bank staff was investigated by Dolatabadi and Safa (2011). Findings indicated
participative leadership tends to exert a significant influence on creating
shared customer-oriented values and fostering
a commitment to service quality
within a financial
organization. Findings imply that participative leaders, who
often involve staff in goal-setting and decision-making, help inculcate a
collective understanding and consensus on the importance of the customer
experience. Besides, staff who feel heard and valued while defining service
standards are more likely to internalize desired professional values and commit
to delivering high-quality service.
2.2. Impact on Decision-making
The influence of participative leadership and team climate
on joint decision-making, was examined by Coffeng et al. (2021). Findings revealed that participative
leadership tends to be significantly related to reflectiveness and
decisiveness, implying that participative leaders foster reflectiveness and
decisiveness by promoting cooperative trust and goal commitment. Further, Amos, Siamoo, and Ogoti (2022), who inquired into the
effect of collective decision-making in participative leadership on improving
the quality of education among educators and students from public secondary
schools. Findings revealed that collective decision-making tended to be the
most crucial strategy of involving teachers and students in participative
leadership by encouraging them to resolve the challenges encountered by the education sector.
Moreover, principals tended to be more involved in collective
decision-making than teachers and students. Findings also showed that
collective decision making was affected by top-down leadership based on
directive decisions from the highest authority, implying that principals
require a clear policy toward
implementing collective decision-making among teachers and students.
Mbua (2023) examined the
impact of participatory leadership on school management and administration.
Findings showed that principals’ participatory decision-making tends to be
significantly related to teacher effectiveness. Findings imply that teachers’
participation in the decision-making process can increase their efficiency,
idea generation, job commitment, and accountability. Additionally,
participative principals also encourage teachers to actively connect to a
shared goal, which has a positive influence on curricular development and
academic achievement.
The impact
of participative leadership on curriculum decisions
at secondary schools
was investigated by Mataboge (2024).
Findings revealed that participative leadership tends to facilitate inclusive
decision-making and promote effective curriculum development because it
increases teachers’ sense of ownership, curricular relevance, and
organizational adaptability. Findings imply that participative leadership
increases the teachers’ participation in curricular decisions, which makes them
feel a greater sense of ownership and accountability, thus leading to more
effective implementation. Besides, its
inclusive practices ensure that the curriculum reflects diverse perspectives
and remains responsive to the needs of the school community. Lastly,
participative approaches allow schools to become more agile in responding to
changing educational demands and technological advancements.
2.3. Impact on
Quality
The impact of
participative leadership on the quality of education at public secondary
schools was analyzed by Amos, Ogoti, and Siamoo (2022).
Findings revealed that shared participative principals tend to formulate a
strategic vision to increase teacher involvement in preparing an elaborate
school system that (1) enhances academic achievement, (2) provides conducive
teaching and learning environment characterized by timely rewards, (3)
facilitates the sustainable implementation of education goals through clear
objectives for augmenting quality education, (4) facilitates effective
monitoring and evaluation of teaching and learning process, and (5) increases
teacher commitment and efficiency to terms of lesson planning and syllabus
completion. Findings imply that, by underscoring a shared strategic vision,
participative principals proactively involve teachers
in defining and creating organizational goals, turning
abstract ideas
into practical, collaborative plans, which in turn, boosts staff commitment,
innovation, and performance. Besides, a shared strategic vision also promotes
collaborative goal setting, whereby principals facilitate discussions for
teachers to help shape the vision and segment it into actionable steps. Lastly,
by contributing to the vision, teachers feel a deeper connection and
responsibility for improving the quality of education at public secondary schools.
In a survey, Almutairi (2024) assessed
participative leadership at secondary schools in relation to institutional
quality. Findings showed that participative leadership tends to be
significantly and positively related to school excellence by way of authority,
decision- making, and interpersonal connections. Findings imply that
participative principals often share
decision power that makes teachers feel more valued, respected, and empowered,
leading to better engagement and commitment to school goals. Their leadership
style builds trust, enhances communication, and fosters teamwork, thus creating
a positive, supportive culture where staff are more willing to share ideas and
help each other. Laslty, by involving teachers in decision-making,
participative princiapls boost their
intrinsic motivation, sense of responsibility, and expertise, thus eading to
better job performance and innovative problem-solving.
In their
study, Paulus, Zakso, and Rustiyarso (2024) investigated the influence of participative
leadership on the quality of educational services. Findings indicated that
participative leadership tends to significantly influence the quality of
educational services in terms of speed, convenience, capabilities, hospitality,
and relationships. Findings imply that participative leadership enhances the quality of educational services by involving staff and other stakeholders, which leads
to better decisions and higher quality services.
It also promotes more favorable educational services by increasing staff motivation and satisfaction, while encouraging shared
ideas to drive creative solutions and adaptation to new challenges. Lastly,
participative leadership augments educational services by establishing an
inclusive school culture grounded on trust, teamwork, and positivity, leading
to improved learning outcomes and institutional excellence.
2.4. Impact on Organizational Citizenship, Job Satisfaction, and Work-life Balance
In a study, Sagnak (2016) surveyed the
influence of participative leadership on elementary school teachers’ intrinsic
motivation and organizational citizenship. Findings
revealed that participative leadership tends to significantly predict teachers’
intrinsic motivation and
organizational citizenship.
Moreover, intrinsic motivation tends to fully mediate the
relationship between participative leadership and organizational citizenship.
On the other hand, Benoliel and Barth (2017) examined the relationships among participative
leadership, job satisfaction, and occupational exhaustion in relation to school
cultural characteristics. Findings revealed that teachers’ perceptions of
participative leadership tend to be significantly influenced by cultural
attributes. Further, significant differences were also found in the effects of
participative leadership on occupational exhaustion across schools with
different cultural attributes. Findings imply that a school's cultural
attributes can significantly influence participative leadership, making it more
effective in cultures that value collaboration (clan/collectivist), which in
turn, impacts teacher satisfaction, motivation, and innovation by shaping how
shared decisions are perceived and implemented.
In an
empirical study focusing on the mediating role of respect for staff in the
relationship between participative leadership and job satisfaction among university
staff, Ghaffari et al. (2017) found
that fair treatment, a dimension of respect for staff, tends to mediate the
relationship between the two variables. Findings imply that human resources
management should ensure that staff are treated fairly to enhance their job
motivation and performance. On the other hand, Fatima, Majeed, and
Saeed (2017), who examined the impact of participative
leadership on the innovative behavior among service staff, concluded that
participative leadership tends to increase innovative work behavior, with the
relationship being partially mediated by staff commitment to change.
Additionally, change readiness was found to moderate the relationship between
participative leadership and staff commitment to change, and the relationship
between participative leadership and innovative behavior.
In their
investigation, Kosgei and Edabu (2023) studied the impact of participative leadership on
teachers’ job satisfaction at public primary schools. Findings showed that
participative headteachers tend to have a significant and positive influence on
teachers’ job satisfaction. Findings imply that participative headteachers
strive to increase teachers’ autonomy and ownership, which makes them feel more
engaged and satisfied since they help shape school goals and processes, thus
aligning their work with personal
values. By promoting joint decision-making among teachers, participative
headteachers enhance their motivation and commitment, which makes teachers work
harder, thus fostering enthusiasm and stronger commitment to their roles and
the institution. By emphasizing innovative problem-solving and better work-life
balance, participative headteachers enable teachers to tackle challenges and
find creative solutions, which leads to professional growth, better
performance, and job satisfaction.
The influence
of participatory leadership on employee job satisfaction and organizational
culture was examined by Nassani et al. (2024).
Findings revealed that participatory leadership was significantly related to
job satisfaction and organizational culture, with work-life balance mediating
the relationship between participatory leadership and job satisfaction.
Findings imply that participatory leaders increase job satisfaction by
involving staff in decision-making, which makes them feel accountable and
invested in outcomes, thus boosting their job satisfaction. By recognizing and
apppreciating staff’s contributions and input, participatory leaders make them
feel valued and motivated. By being consultative, participatory leaders
increase organizational commitment and loyalty. Findings also imply that
participatory leaders propagates a positive organizational culture by
establishing a framework of collaboration, trust, fairness, and shared values.
By encouraging open communication, they encourage proactive information
sharing, while reducing hierarchical barriers. Laslty, by cultivating an
ethical environment, they reinforce fair practices and accountability, which
aligns with a productive organizational culture.
The impact of
participative leadership on work-life balance among staff from diverse
industries was assessed by Ahad et al. (2024).
Findings revealed that work interference tends to play a significant role of in
staff’s personal life, and vice versa, thus contributing to their emotional
exhaustion. Findings imply that participative leadership, characterized by empathy and emotional
intelligence, acts as a crucial mitigating factor against stress and emotional
burnout. Further, Mpuangnan et al. (2024) looked into the impact of participative leadership
and motivation on university staff’s performance. Findings revealed that
participatory leadership and motivation tend to have a considerable positive
impact on staff performance, with job satisfaction acting as a mediator in the
relationship between participative leadership, motivation, and staff
performance. Findings imply that universities should enhance staff motivation and
engagement by
fostering a work environment characterized by participative leadership, which
can foster growth opportunities and a culture of appreciation and
acknowledgment of staff.
2.5. Impact on Character Education
Purwanto et al. (2019) probed
the effect of participative leadership on the implementation of character
education in schools among vice-principals and teachers. Findings showed that
participative leaders tend to be inclusive and involve all staff, besides
allowing them to express their ideas and paying close attention to all ideas.
Further, they were also found to provide constructive feedback to staff, thus
providing an opportunity for them to
compare ideas and provide meaningful suggestions. Lastly, participative leaders
were found to provide motivation and support for character education at the
class, school and community levels, thus earning greater trust and respect from
staff.
In their
investigation, Komariah et al. (2024) studied the impact of participative leadership on
character education implementation at elementary schools. Findings showed that
participative principals tend to create harmonious relationships amongst staff
to promote understanding and reduce conflict when executing character education
tasks. Findings imply that participative principals emphasize or promote (1) a
shared vision by involving all stakeholders in developing character education
goals, (2) staff empowerment and autonomy by giving teachers the freedom to
innovate in terms of teaching character education, (3) collaboration by
building strong relationships and teamwork among teachers, staff, and parents
to implement character education, (4) delegation by distributing
responsibilities for character-building activities, and (5) modeling by acting
as role models for moral-ethical behavior.
2.6. Impact on
Innovation
In their
investigation, Aljufri and Kusumawati (2025) examined the impact of participatory leadership on
school innovation climate and teacher collaboration. Findings indicated that
participatory leadership tend to have a significant impact on school innovation
climate, with teacher collaboration as a significant mediator in the
relationship between participatory leadership and innovation climate. Findings
imply that participatory leadership impacts innovation climate by way of
inclusivity and trust, whereby school leaders
encourage shared decision-making that
makes teachers feel safe to propose
creative ideas. Besides, it emphasizes staff empowerment and autonomy that
allows teachers to have greater control over their work, which acts as a key
driver for creative problem-solving and innovation. Lastly, participatory
leadership fosters collective innovation, which encourages teachers to share
good practices, learn from each other, and collectively develop new strategies,
thus amplifying innovation.
Lastly, Riza, Hutahayan, and Chong (2025) surveyed the impact of participative revealed that participative leadership tends to
significantly and positively influence both innovation and organizational
commitment because it promotes innovation by (1) encouraging idea generation,
whereby diverse perspectives and suggestions are solicited to develop novel and effective solutions, (2)
fostering psychological safety, whereby staff who feel that their opinions are
valued, are more likely to take calculated risks, (3) enhancing cognitive
flexibility, whereby exposure to diverse viewpoints help staff adapt their
thinking and problem-solving strategies, and (4) promoting knowledge
sharing, whereby
open communication and information exchange
among team members often lead to successful
innovation. On the other hand, participative leadership influences
organizational commitment because it (1) increases a sense of ownership by
involving staff in decision-making, which gives them a personal stake in the
organization's success, (2) builds trust and loyalty, whereby leaders who
respect staff input can strengthen trust and loyalty, reducing turnover rates
and fostering a more dedicated workforce, (3) aligns organizational goals,
whereby staff participation in goal setting helps align individual goals with
those of the organization, ensuring that everyone is working toward common
goals, and (4) boosts morale and satisfaction, whereby staff who feel heard and
valued tend to demonstrate greater job satisfaction and higher morale, directly
contributing to higher levels of commitment.
2.7.
Impact on Competencies, Assertive Behavior, Communication, and Social Responsibility
In a study, Gahwaji (2019) investigated
the impact of participative leadership on principals’ professional competencies.
Findings revealed significant differences between participative leadership dimensions and professional
competencies. Participative leadership tends to significantly boosts principals' professional competencies
by involving teachers in decisions, fostering collaboration, and empowering
staff, which leads to increased motivation, better problem-solving, and
improved learning quality and outcomes. Lastly, participative leadership, which
underscores a shared vision, teacher consultation, co-learning, and autonomy,
enables principals to demonstrate and foster other crucial competencies,
including change management, relationship building, and instructional
leadership, which in turn, improve overall school effectiveness and quality of
education.
Toufighia et al. (2024) surveyed
the impact of participative leadership and on staff’s speaking-up behavior and
knowledge-sharing. Findings indicated that participative leadership tends to be
positively related to speaking-up behavior. Moreover, language proficiency and
region were also found to significantly influence staff’s willingness to speak
up. Findings imply that organizations should adopt participative leadership to
foster an inclusive environment that empowers staff voice, thus allowing them
express their opinions, concerns, and suggestions to influence decisions and
organizational matters. Encompassing both formal and informal channels for
communication and feedback, staff voice helps create a more engaged,
productive, and inclusive work environment through sharing knowledge and accommodating
cultural and linguistic diversity. On the other hand, Al-Mawla (2024) appraised the relationships among participative
leadership, stress, and job satisfaction among hospital staff. Findings
revealed that participative leadership tends to reduce stress, while increasing
job satisfaction, implying that hospitals should replace rigid leadership
styles with participative leadership to improve healthcare workers’ overall
wellbeing, efficiency, and
productivity.
The impact of
participative leadership in terms of communication by school principals was
were examined by Emmanuel and Mtana (2025).
Findings indicated that participative school administrators tend to encourage
frequent staff meetings, open discussion, joint decision-making and one-on-one
communication, besides using virtual channels to obtain staff feedback.
Additionally, they also tend to delegate work, value teachers' ideas, and
involve teachers in curricular planning. Findings imply that participative school
administrators practice or foster (1) inclusive decision-making,
while
retaining final responsibility for outcomes. (2) active listening and empathy
by paying close attention to teachers’ perspectives and creating a safe space
for open communication without judgment, (3) transparency and trust by being
reliable, honest, and sharing information about school goals and challenges,
and (4) collaboration over hierarchy by moving from traditional top-down or
bureaucratic models to decentralized leadership that values collective wisdom.
The impact of
participative leadership on academic leaders’ social responsibility was
examined by Bataineh et al. (2025). Findings indicated that
academic leaders tend to demonstrate moderate levels of participative
leadership and social responsibility. Besides, participative leadership and
social responsibility was also found to be significantly and positively
related. Findings imply that, participative leaders who provide decision-making
autonomy and support often increase staff’s positive attitudes and behaviors,
including a greater sense of responsibility toward organizational social goals.
They also support work-life balance, which generates organizational loyalty and
raises affective commitments, further reinforcing socially responsible internal
environments.
Lasty, while
participative leadership has been associated with multiple organizational
outcomes, the present study focused specifically on participative
decision-making as perceived by secondary school teachers in Sabah.
3. Methodology
3.1. Research Design and
Approach
This study
employed a quantitative research approach for its suitability in systematically investigating perceived
participative leadership. The approach was aligned to the primary purpose of
the study, which was to survey teachers’ perceptions of participative leadership among
principals in Sabah, Malaysia. It enabled the writers to
objectively evaluate teachers’ perceptions at four large secondary schools in
Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, besides providing the appropriate statistical technique
to determine if significant differences existed by way of gender, age, and job
experience in perceived participative leadership. Additionally, the approach
also facilitated data collection through a Likert-scale questionnaire, thus
guaranteeing adequate representation of teachers from the Kota Kinabalu area. Lastly, the quantitative design
enabled the writers to use
numerical data to provide the empirical information needed to reach a conclusion
about the research grounded on statistical evidence.
3.2. Research Location
Kota Kinabalu,
the capital of Sabah was chosen as the research location, where quantitative
research on participative leadership among secondary school principals is
lacking. It was also chosen because it has 17 large secondary schools, which
could provide a sufficiently representative sample of teachers, thus allowing
for a relatively accurate assessment of teachers’ perceptions of participative
leadership at Sabahan secondary schools.
3.3. Sample and Justification
The sample
consisted of 63 teachers (n = 63)
recruited from four secondary schools in Kota Kinabalu, Sabah. Initially, nine
secondary schools were contacted via email and phone, but ultimately, only four
principals agreed to participate by disseminating the survey link with
teachers. The sample was deemed adequate in providing relevant data because the
central limit theorem states that a minimum of 30 respondents is sufficient to
yield statistical power for basic survey research (Roscoe, 1975;
RUBIKTOP, 2023). Additionally, the sample was considered
representative of teachers from the Kota Kinabalu area because selection bias
was minimized through the initial systematic random sampling of the nine
schools.
While the
sample size was limited to 63, it met the minimum requirement for quantitative
research in the educational field. Roscoe (1975) and Turney (2022) recommended a sample size of 30 for most statistical
research, which is supported by the
central limit theorem, stipulating that sampling distributions reach normality
with 30 or more respondents. Lastly,
the current sample
size provided a reasonable margin
of error and enough power to identify modest effects in the statistical
tests used in the current study.
About 68.3 percent were males, while 31.7 percent
were females. Age-wise, 17.5 percent
were 26 to 36 years old, 41.3 percent were 37 to 47 years old, and 33.3 percent
were 48 to 58 years old. About 15.9 percent have less than five years of job
experience, 14.3 percent have six to 10 years of job experience, 14.3 have 11
to 15 years of job experience, 7.9
percent have 16 to 21 years of job experience, and 47.6 percent have more than 21 years of job experience.
All of them came from diverse ethnic
communities in Sabah and are fluent in both the Malay Language and
English (see Table 1).
Table 1: Demographic Characteristics of Teachers
|
Characteristic |
Category |
Frequency |
Percentage (%) |
|
Age |
Below 25 |
0 |
0.0 |
|
|
26-36 |
11 |
17.5 |
|
|
37-47 |
26 |
41.3 |
|
|
48-58 |
21 |
33.3 |
|
|
More than 58 |
5 |
7.9 |
|
Gender |
Male |
43 |
68.3 |
|
|
Female |
20 |
31.7 |
|
Job experience (years) |
Less than 5 |
10 |
15.9 |
|
|
6-10 |
9 |
14.3 |
|
|
11-15 |
9 |
14.3 |
|
|
16-21 |
5 |
7.9 |
|
|
More than 21 |
30 |
47.6 |
3.4. Instrument
The
Participative Decision-Making dimension of Empowering Leadership Questionnaire
(ELQ) developed by Arnold et al. (2000) was used to collect data. It
consists of six Likert-
scale items ranging from Never
= 1, Rarely = 2, Sometimes
= 3, Often = 4,
and Always = 5. Moreover, Arnold et al. (2000) provided a detailed description on the validity and
reliability of the ELQ based on three separate studies; results indicated that
the Participative Decision-Making dimension
has adequate validity
and reliability to provide
numerical data.
To establish its reliability for the current study, a pilot test was carried
out on 25 Malaysian teachers. Data were analyzed using SPSS 26.0. Results
indicated that its Cronbach’s alpha
value is 0.94, thus indicating that it has high internal consistency.
3.5. Data Collection and Analysis
After being
informed that survey completion was an indication of consent to voluntarily
participate in the study, teachers
were required to complete the questionnaire on Google
Forms. Anonymity was strictly maintained, while all responses were kept
strictly confidential. Data were subsequently transferred onto a spreadsheet and analyzed using SPSS 26.0. First, Kruskal-Wallis
H test was conducted to determine if there were any significant differences
perceived participative leadership by way of age and job experience. Second, to determine if there were any significant
gender differences, Mann- Whitney U
test was run. Third, to determine if any of the participative leadership items
were significant at a hypothesized value of 3.5, Wilcoxon signed rank test was
used. Lastly, descriptive statistics were used to present the percentages of
agreement on each item.
4. Findings
Kruskal-Wallis
H test revealed nonsignificant differences in teachers’ perceptions of
participative leadership by way of age and job experience, while Mann-Whitney U
test showed nonsignificant differences in terms of gender (see Table 2).
Table 2: Kruskal-Wallis H and Mann-Whitney U Results
|
Fixed variables |
Non-parametric test |
p-value |
|
Age |
Kruskal-Wallis H test |
0.363 |
|
Gender |
Mann-Whitney
U test |
0.818 |
|
Job experience |
Kruskal-Wallis H test |
0.701 |
Results of the
Wilcoxon signed rank test showed that four (4) of the items were significant at
p < 0.001, while only one item was
significant at p < 0.05 (see Table 3).
Table 3: Wilcoxon
Signed Rank Test Results (Hypothesized Value = 3.5)
|
My principal …. |
p-value |
|
Encourages teaching group
members to express
ideas/suggestions |
< 0.001*** |
|
Listens to teaching group's
ideas and suggestions |
< 0.001*** |
|
Uses teaching group's
suggestions to make
decisions |
< 0.001*** |
|
Gives all teaching group
members a chance
to voice their
opinions |
< 0.001*** |
|
Considers teaching group's
ideas even when
he/she disagrees with
them |
< 0.041* |
|
Makes decisions that are based on everyone’s ideas |
0.070 |
***p < 0.001; *p < 0.05
Percentages of
“often” and “always” for each item were collapsed to gain an overall view of
teachers’ perceptions of participative leadership among principals. First, 77.7
percent of teachers perceived that principals often/always encourage teaching
group members to express ideas or suggestions and give them a chance to voice their opinions.
Second,
68.3 to 69.9
percent of teachers indicated that principals often/always listen to their
ideas and suggestions and use their suggestions to make decisions. Lastly, 61.9 to 63.5
percent agreed
that principals often/always make decisions that are based on everyone’s ideas and always consider their
ideas even when they disagree with them. Overall percentages indicated that
only an average proportion of teachers tend to perceive their principals are
participative leaders (see Table 4).
Table 4: Percentages of Agreement on Perceived Instructional Leadership
|
My principal …. |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
4+5 (collapsed) |
|
Encourages teaching group
members to express
ideas/suggestions |
3.2 |
6.3 |
12.7 |
31.7 |
46.0 |
77.7 |
|
Listens to teaching group's ideas and suggestions |
1.6 |
7.9 |
20.6 |
28.6 |
41.3 |
69.9 |
|
Uses teaching group's suggestions to make decisions |
1.6 |
3.2 |
27.0 |
39.7 |
28.6 |
68.3 |
|
Gives all teaching group members a chance to voice their opinions |
1.6 |
4.8 |
15.9 |
31.7 |
46.0 |
77.7 |
|
Considers teaching group's ideas even when
he/she disagrees with them |
1.6 |
9.5 |
25.4 |
41.3 |
22.2 |
63.5 |
|
Makes decisions that are based
on everyone’s ideas |
1.6 |
9.5 |
27.0 |
41.3 |
20.6 |
61.9 |
Never = 1, Rarely =
2, Sometimes = 3, Often
= 4, Always = 5
5. Implications and Recommendations
5.1. Collective Wellbeing
Findings imply
that only an average proportion of teachers perceive their principals as
participative leaders, reflecting that principals tend to practice a moderate
level of participative leadership; in brief, participative practices are
present in secondary schools, but not yet deeply institutionalized. Previous
research showed that Malaysian leaders tend to adopt the hierarchical approach
in their administration. Kennedy (2002) asserted that Malaysian leaders tend to place high
emphasis on collective wellbeing and display a strong humane orientation, while
maintaining an authoritarian stance. The Malaysian culture generally inhibits
assertive, confrontational behavior and prioritizes the preservation of organizational harmony. Giving face
is a crucial concept in Malaysian
society, whereby people are required to show respect or deference to others,
especially those with higher status; highly valued, it is a way of maintaining
or enhancing an individual or group’s reputation and honor. Rather than
participative, Malaysian principals tend to be paternalistic, showing
compassion toward staff.
5.2. Sociocultural Expectations
Additionally,
Malaysian principals tend to practice leadership in ways that are more
concordant with their sociocultural status. They find it difficult to accept
participative leadership due to the deeply-rooted sociocultural values in
Malaysia, where high power distance is common. Besides, many Malaysian
principals are often regarded as civil servants who serve as line managers
within the hierarchy of a centralized system of education. Therefore,
participative leadership is a novel practice that seems challenging for them; they are more accustomed to practicing administrative leadership that enables them to retain their formal authority. Since participative leadership involves sharing and redistribution of power, it is incompatible
with the highly hierarchal form of leadership
that allows
principals to exert disproportionate influence over teachers. Additionally, the top-down, stratified approach at
Malaysian schools also dictates that all important decisions are made at the
principal’s office, which are subsequently communicated to the rest of the staff to execute
on. This leadership style perpetuates a strong emphasis
on respect for authority and deference to those holding influential
positions (Bush et al., 2018; Bush & Glover, 2014).
5.3. Power Structure
Additionally,
the existing power structure at Malaysian schools is an obstacle to the
successful introduction and implementation of participative leadership, which
presents inherent threats to the leadership status and status quo. The gap
between participative leadership theory and leadership practice in Malaysia is
widening, while teachers are already constrained by high power distance. The
practice of participative leadership at schools depends largely on whether
principals, who are often authoritarian or paternalistic, are willing listen to
teachers’ ideas and suggestions and incorporate them in the decision-making
process. Current findings imply that opportunities for teacher initiative tend
to be limited, with decision-making mainly guided or controlled by principals,
who tend to be highly prescriptive under the Ministry of Education (Bush et al., 2018;
Bush & Glover, 2014).
Mohamad, Silong, and Hassan (2009) reiterated
that the Malaysian public sector should change its leadership style to become
more participative rather than relying on a directive and autocratic style to
remain relevant in the 21st century. As aforementioned, the principal-teacher
relationship has been grounded on the principal’s authority and teachers’
subservience due to large power distance. Malaysian principals tend to take
unilateral and decisive actions in terms of goal setting goals, planning and
strategizing, organizing and coordinating activities, and evaluating teacher
performance. In contrast, participative leadership is not limited to the top management, but also involves all levels of the organization.
To become more participative, principals should act as facilitators,
communicators, problem-solvers, team leaders, coaches, change agents, and
mentors who encourages teachers to participate in decision-making by engaging
them in planning, implementing, and monitoring teaching and learning
activities. Lastly, they should also be open-minded and listen to teachers’
views and comments by mingling freely with them.
5.4. Commitment, Civic-consciousness, and Innovativeness
Participative
leadership tends to increase staff’s commitment, civic-consciousness, and
innovativeness (Hawley, 2024). First, to enhance
teacher commitment, principals should adopt a participative approach to boost
their morale and make
them feel psychologically empowered to become more
involved in decision-making, which can lead to higher levels of job satisfaction and organizational
commitment. Moreover, committed teachers also tend to display a higher sense of
emotional trust in their principals. Second, to promote civic-consciousness
among teacher at school, principals can become more participative by promoting
change-oriented organizational citizenship behaviors, which allow teachers to
undertake tasks that are not part of their formal job description. For
instance, teachers can assist overburdened colleagues with work tasks, mentor
new colleagues, or help keep the workspaces and communal areas spik and span.
Lastly, since participative
leadership tends to promote innovation and change, principals should encourage teachers
to generate possible
solutions to counter
the problems and
challenges
faced by the school community. They should organize workshops and other forms
of training to inculcate a higher degree of change readiness among teachers to
make them become more committed to change, while demonstrating higher levels of
innovation under a participative style.
5.5. Final Thought
Finally, this
study makes an important contribution to understanding the nature and extent of
participative leadership in secondary schools in Sabah, Malaysia, more
generally, within a centralized context. However, to increase generalizability
of findings, data should be collected from more Malaysian states so that a
larger, more diverse sample could be recruited to yield more valid and reliable
results, thus increasing the generalizability of current findings. Lastly, the
impact of participative leadership should be explored by correlating it with
teacher job satisfaction, school morale, and other educational variables.
Ethics Approval
and Consent to Participate
This study has
strictly adhered to all ethical procedures involving the use of human subjects.
Informed consent was obtained from all respondents who were ascertained of
their anonymity, with their responses kept strictly confidential. They were
also informed that the study was of
low risk and that they could stop participating any time without any
repercussions.
Acknowledgement
The authors
wish to thank all the participants of the study as well as Jesselton University College that has
provided the technical facilities to complete it. All authors have contributed
equally to the study.
Funding
This study was partially funded by Jesselton University College, Sabah,
Malaysia.
Conflict of Interest
The authors report no potential conflict
of interest regarding this study in terms of the
research or publication of this article.
References
Ahad, T. R., Khan, N., Subbarao, A., & Rahman, H. M.
M. (2024). Unlocking work-life balance: The impact of participative leadership on reducing
emotional exhaustion. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2372456
Aljufri, H., & Kusumawati, E. (2025).
The influence of participative leadership on school innovation climate with
teacher collaboration as a mediating variable. Lex Localis- Journal of Local
Self-Government, 23(10), 390-399.
https://doi.org/10.52152/
Al-Mawla,
M. A.-W. J. (2024). The role of participative leadership style in reducing
stress in the workplace: An analytical study on a sample of medical staff at
Anbar Teaching Hospital. International
Journal of Academic Research in Economics and Management Sciences, 13(3), 572-584.
10.6007/IJAREMS/v13-i3/22630
Almutairi,
N. Z. (2024). Participative leadership as an approach to achieving local
excellence in secondary schools at Hail City. International Journal of Education and Informational Technologies, 18, 154-161. 10.46300/9109.2024.18.15
Amos, O., Ogoti, E., & Siamoo, P. (2022). Shared strategic vision in participative leadership style and quality
education provision in public secondary
schools in Arusha Region, Tanzania. British Journal of Education, 10(7), 51-74. https://www.eajournals.org/wp-content/uploads/Shared-Strategic-Vision-in- Participative-Leadership-Style.pdf
Amos, O., Siamoo,
P., & Ogoti, E. (2022).
Influence of collective decision making in participative leadership style on improving
the quality of education in public secondary schools in Arusha Region,
Tanzania. British Journal of Education,
10(4), 69-85. https://eajournals.org/bje/vol10-issue-4-2022/influence-of-collective-
decision-making-in-participative-leadership-style-on-improving-the-quality-of-
education-in-public-secondary-schools-in-arusha-region-tanzania/
Arnold,
J. A., Arad, S., Rhoades, J. A., & Drasgow, F. (2000). The Empowering
Leadership Questionnaire: The construction and validation of a new scale for measuring leader behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21(3), 249-269.
https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(200005)21:3<249::AID- JOB10>3.0.CO;2-%23
Bataineh, O. T., Al Zoubi, Z. H., Issa, H.
M. B., & Qasem, M. L. Z. M. (2025). Participatory leadership and its
relationship to the level of social responsibility among academic leaders in
Jordanian universities. International
Journal of Education and Practice, 13(2),
431-444. 10.18488/61.v13i2.4064
Bakare, M., & Ojeleye, Y. C. (2020).
Participative leadership style and employee commitment in Federal College of Education (Technical)
Gusau: Moderating role of organizational culture. International Journal of Intellectual
Discourse, 3(1), 17-31. https://ijidjournal.org/index.php/ijid/article/view/94
Bell, C., Dodd, N., & Mjoli, T. (2018). The effect
of participative and directive leadership on team effectiveness among
administrative employees in a South African tertiary institution. Journal of Social Science, 55(1-3), 81-91.
10.31901/24566756.2018/55.1-3.1716
Benoliel, P., & Barth, A. (2017). The
implications of the school’s cultural attributes in the relationships between
participative leadership and teacher job satisfaction and burnout. Journal of Educational Administration, 55(6), 640-656.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-10-2016-0116
Bhatti,
M. H., Ju, Y., Akram, U., Bhatti, M. H., Akram, Z., & Bilal, M. (2019).
Impact of participative leadership on organizational citizenship behavior: Mediating
role of trust and moderating role of continuance commitment: Evidence from the Pakistan
hotel industry. Sustainability, 11(1170), 1-21.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su11041170
Bush, T., & Glover,
D. (2014). School leadership models:
What do we know? School
Leadership and Management, 34(5), 553-571.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2014.928680
Bush, T., Ng, A. Y. M., Abdul Hamid, S., & Kaparou, M. (2018).
School leadership theories and the Malaysia Education Blueprint: Findings from
a systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Management, 32(7),
1245-1265.
Coffeng, T., van Steenbergen, E. F., de
Vries, F., Steffens, N. K., & Ellemers, N. (2021). Reflective and decisive
supervision: The role of participative leadership and team climate in joint
decision-making. Regulation &
Governance, 17(1). 10.1111/rego.12449
Dolatabadi, H. R., & Safa, M.
(2011). The effect of directive and participative leadership style on employees’ commitment to service
quality. Journal of Business and Management, 4(2), 1-12.
https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=3617337 Emmanuel, B., & Mtana, N. (2025).
Participative leadership practices
(PLP) used by
public secondary schools’
administrators to communicate with teachers in Ifakara Town Council Morogoro,
Tanzania. International Journal of
Innovative Science and Research Technology, 10(9), 2526-2534.
https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25sep1303
Fatima, T., Majeed, M., & Saeed, I.
(2017). Does participative leadership promote innovative work behavior? The
moderated mediation model. Business & Economic Review, 9(4), 139-156.
dx.doi.org/10.22547/BER/9.4.7
Gahwaji, N. M. (2019). Practices of
participative leadership in relation to professional competency of principals
at Saudi kindergartens. Social Science
and Humanities Journal (SSHJ), 3(9),1513-1521. https://sshjournal.com ›
sshj › article
Ghaffari, S., Shah, I. M., Burgoyne, J., & Aziz, J. S. S. (2017).
The influence of motivation on job performance: A case study at Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia. Australian Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences,
11(4), 92-99. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2969825
Godwin-Charles,
O., & Harrington, R. J. (2009). The relationship among participative
management style, strategy implementation success, and financial performance in
the foodservice industry. International
Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 23(6), 1-9 10.1108/09596111111153448
Hawley, M. (2024, August 6). What is participative leadership?
https://www.reworked.co/leadership/what-is-participative-leadership/
Huang, X., Shi, K., Zhang,
Z., & Cheung,
Y. L. (2006). The impact of participative leadership behavior on psychological
empowerment and organizational commitment in Chinese state-owned enterprises:
The moderating role of organizational tenure. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23, 345-367 10.1007/s10490-006-9006-3
International Institute for Management Development
(2025, August). Everything you need to know about participative leadership. IMD.
https://www.imd.org/blog/leadership/participative-leadership/
Kennedy, J. C. (2002).
Leadership in Malaysia: Traditional values, international outlook. Academy of Management Perspectives, 16(3). https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.2002.8540292
Khassawneh, O., & Elrehail, H. (2022).
The effect of participative leadership style on employees' performance: The
contingent role of institutional theory. Administrative Sciences, 12(4), 1-13,
https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci12040195
Komariah, A., Kurniady. D. A., Abdullah, Z., & Sunaengsih, C.
(2023). Elementary school principal
participative leadership: Coordination in character education implementation.
Proceedings of the 2nd Padang International Conference on Educational
Management and Administration 2021 (PICEMA 2021). https://www.atlantis-press.com/proceedings/picema-21/125976593
Kosgei, A. C.,
& Edabu, P. (2023). Head teachers’ participative leadership style and
teachers’ job satisfaction in public primary schools in Baringo Sub-county,
Kenya. European Journal of Education Studies, 10(2). 203-213.
https://oapub.org/edu/index.php/ejes/article/view/4672
Mataboge, S. K. C. (2024). Examining participative management’s impact
on curriculum decisions in secondary schools through collaboration. Educational Administration: Theory and
Practice, 30(11) 1126-1132.
10.53555/kuey.v30i11.8268
Mbua, E. M. (2023). Principal’s participatory leadership approaches: An effective tool
for teacher effectiveness in Fako Division, Cameroon. Journal of Education and Teaching Methods, 2(1), 63-86. https://doi.org/10.58425/jetm.v2i1.133 6
Mohamad, M., Silong, A. D., & Hassan, Z. (2009). Participative and
effective community leadership practice in Malaysia. The Journal of Human Resource
and Adult Learning, 5(1), 139-148. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:35361000
Mpuangnan, K., Govender, S., Hlengiwe, M., & Osei, F. S. (2024).
Impact of motivation and participative leadership style on employee
performance: Mediating the role of job satisfaction. International Journal
of Innovative Research
and Scientific Studies, 7(3),1088-1098. 10.53894/ijirss.v7i3.3084
Mwaisaka, D. M., K’Aol, G., & Ouma, C. (2019). Influence of
participative leadership style on job satisfaction of employees in commercial banks in Kenya. European
Journal of Business and
Strategic Management, 4(3), 23-45.
10.20525/ijrbs.v8i5.465
Nassani, A. A., Badshah, W., Grigorescu,
A., Cozorici, A. N., Yousaf, Z., & Zhan, X. (2024). Participatory
leadership and supportive organisational culture: Panacea for job satisfaction
regulatory role of work-life balance. Heliyon,
10(16), e36043. 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36043
Newman, A., Rose, P. S., & Teo, S. T.
(2016). The role of participative leadership and trust-based mechanisms in eliciting intern performance: Evidence
from China. Human Resource Management,
55, 53-67. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21660
Parnell, J. A., Carraher, S., & Holt,
K. (2002). Participative management’s influence on effective strategic
diffusion. Journal of Business Strategies,
19(2), 161-175. https://doi.org/10.54155/jbs.19.2.161-179
Paulus, P., Zakso, A., & Rustiyarso, R.
(2024). Participatory leadership of the school principal in developing the
quality of education services at State Senior High School 1 Menyuke. Jurnal
Pendidikan Sosiologi dan Humaniora, 15(1),
104-112. 10.26418/j-psh.v15i1.76365
Purwanto, Komariah, A., Kurniady, D. A.,
& Sunaengsih, C. (2019). Participative leadership in the implementation of
character education, Opción
Año, 35(88), 736- 758.
https://produccioncientificaluz.org/index.php/opcion/article/view/24224
Riza, M.
F., Hutahayan, B., & Chong, H. Y. (2025). Fostering high-performing organizations in higher education: The
effect of participative leadership, organizational culture, and innovation on
organizational performance and commitment. Cogent Education, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2448884
Roscoe,
J. T. (1975). Fundamental research
statistics for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston.
https://books.google.com.my/books/about/Fundamental_Research_Statistics_for_ the.html?id=Fe8vAAAAMAAJ&redir_esc=y
RUBIKTOP.
(2023, September 14). The magic number 30: Why a sample size of 30 is often considered sufficient for statistical significance. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/magic-number-30-why-sample-size-often- considered-sufficient/
Sagnak, M.
(2016). Participative Leadership and change-oriented organizational
citizenship: The mediating effect of intrinsic motivation. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 16(62).
https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/ejer/issue/24400/258677
Somech, A. (2005). Directive versus
participative leadership: Two complementary approaches to managing school
effectiveness. Educational Administration Quarterly, 41(5), 777-800. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X05279448
Torlak, N. G., Demir, A., & Budur, T.
(2022). Decision-making, leadership and performance links in private education
institutes. Rajagiri Management Journal,
16(1), 63-85.
https://doi.org/10.1108/RAMJ-10-2020-0061
Toufighi, S. P., Sahebi, I. G., Govindan,
K., Lin, M. Z. N., Vang, J., & Brambini, A. (2024). Participative
leadership, cultural factors, and speaking-up behaviour: An examination of
intra-organisational knowledge sharing. Journal
of Innovation & Knowledge, 9(3), 100548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2024.100548.
Turney, S. (2022, July 6). Central limit
theorem: Formula, definition & examples. Scribbr. https://www.scribbr.com/statistics/central-limit-theorem/
Western Governors
University. (2021, February
19). What is participative leadership?
Comments
Post a Comment