Headmasters’ Leadership Styles and their Significant Impact on the General Performance in Schools: Using the Basic Schools in Adansi-South District in Ghana as a Study

Abstract

The main concepts and definitions of leadership and its styles differ in many ways. Thus; from one individual or position to the other. The word "leadership" is used in different circles of human endeavours, for example, in the political, business, academics, social and institutional spheres. In the early on, leadership was seen as a personal trait. The degree to which the individual exhibits leadership traits depends not only on his characteristics and personal abilities but also on the characteristics of the situation and environment in which he finds himself (Messick & Kramer, 2004). This study was conducted on the motivation that no country develops and succeeds better than the quality of the leaders who manage the educational system. This means that for a country to be successful, it depends largely on the quality of leadership that the school managers offer in the schools they manage in the development of skills and potential of the students for the country. The study employed a qualitative research method in the work. The data was collected from Adansi-South District in Ashanti Region in Ghana. Random purposive sampling procedures were adopted with a sample size of forty (40) respondents including heads of schools, teachers, and students. Data were collected through interviews, documentary reviews, and observations. They were analyzed through the use of content analysis technique and other renowned data software such as Excel, and SPSS 22 in the data computations. The findings and policy suggestions at the end of the research concluded that the autocratic leadership is useful if something has to be achieved in the short term and democratic leadership style is usually the most preferable in most situations. Participation leadership style is the most useful because it has a long term effect on employees in a more positive way. School heads who normally applied unreasonable laissez-faire and autocratic leadership styles failed in their schools’ goals, visions and missions implementations due to lack support and cooperation.