Ethical Climate, Charismatic Leadership of School Heads and Teachers&rsquo; Sense of Self-Efficacy: A Structural Equation Model on Teacher Engagement

Caroline  Ferrando,; Eugenio  Guhao,

Ethical Climate, Charismatic Leadership of School Heads and Teachers’ Sense of Self-Efficacy: A Structural Equation Model on Teacher Engagement

Abstract:

This study was conducted to determine best-fit model on teacher engagement as influenced by ethical climate, charismatic leadership of school heads and teachers’ sense of self-efficacy in public elementary schools in Region XI, Philippines. It was conducted from August to December 2022. The study used quantitative, non-experimental correlational research using Structural Equation Model (SEM). The 400 teachers among public elementary schools were determined using the stratified sampling procedure. Mean, Pearson r, and SEM were used as statistical tools. Moreover, adapted survey questionnaires used were modified to contextualize to the local setting. The results showed that the levels of ethical climate and charismatic leadership of school heads, and teacher engagement were very high while the teachers’ sense of self-efficacy was high. Further, when each exogenous variable was correlated with teacher engagement, results showed that the ethical climate, charismatic leadership of school heads and teachers’ sense of self-efficacy were significantly correlated with teacher engagement. Model 3 came out as the best-fit model on teacher engagement. Further, results showed that the best fit model was model 3 showing the direct causal relationships of ethical climate, charismatic leadership of school heads and teacher’s sense of self efficacy on teacher engagement. Furthermore, structure modifications revealed that teacher engagement was defined by its retained indicators, namely: vigor, and absorption. On the other hand, ethical climate was described by its domains: laws and rules, efficiency and independence. Charismatic leadership was determined by its retained indicators, namely: strategic vision and articulation, sensitivity to member needs and personal risk. Finally, teachers’ sense of self-efficacy was measured by its domains: efficacy in student engagement and efficacy in instructional strategies. This implies that schools may focus on improving teacher engagement by setting school ethical norms and expectations with improved teachers’ efficacy coupled with enhanced charismatic leadership behavior of school heads.

References:

Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E., & Sanz-Vergel, A.I. (2014). Burnout and work engagement: The JD-R approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1 (1), 389-411.
Baldoni, J. (2013). Employee engagement does more than boost productivity. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2013/07/employeeengagement-does-more.
Blazek, K. (2011). Managers need to develop organizational sensitivity. Retrieved from https://www.truscore.com/360-feedback-resources/managers-need-to-develop-organizational-sensitivity/.
Bongcayat, J. T., &Guhao Jr, E. S. (2020). Structural Equation Model on Work Engagement of Non-Teaching Personnel in Public Secondary Schools. Review of Integrative Business and economics Research, 9, 259-316
Brook, J. (2019). Why employee engagement is key to company success. Retrieved from https://www.socialchorus.com/employee-engagement-key-tocompany-success/.
Crabtree, S. (2013). Worldwide, 13% of employees are engaged at work. Gallup. Retrieved from https://news.gallup.com/poll/165269/worldwide-employeesengaged-work.aspx.
Deligero, J., &Laguador, J. (2014). Work engagement among employees and its relationship with work units’ performance of a higher education institution. International Journal of Management Sciences, 3(12), 909-917.
Evje, B. (2018). Dangers of Charismatic Leadership. Retrieved from https://www.inc.com/brian-evje/three-dangers-of-charismatic-leadership.html
Furst, P. (2014). Employee engagement and organizational performance. Retrieved, from https://www.irmi.com/articles/expert-commentary/employee-engagement-and-organizational-performance.
Gebour, J. (2009). Getting employees onboard and engaged. Retrieved from http://www.theedgemalaysia.com/management/16336-gettingemployeesonboard-and-engaged.html.
Hastings, M., & Agrawal, S. (2015). Lack of teacher engagement linked to 2.3 million missed workdays. Retrieved fromhttps://news.gallup.com/poll/180455/lack-teacher-engagement-linked-million-missed-workdays.aspx.
Hayati, D., Charkhabi, M. &Naami, A. (2014). The relationship between transformational leadership and work engagement in governmental hospitals nurses: a survey study. Springer Plus 3(25). http://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-3-25
Gould, T. (2016). Professional development positively effects engagement and retention, study says. Retrieved from http://www.hrmorning.com/professional-development-positively-effects-engagement-and-retention-study-says/.
Konermann, J. (2012). Teachers’ work engagement: A deeper understanding of the role of job and personal resources in relationship to work engagement, its antecedents, and its outcomes. Retrieved from https://research.utwente.nl/en/publications/teachers-work-engagement-a-deeper-understanding-of-the-role-of-jo.
Kroc, R. (2017). What is Charismatic Leadership? Retrieved from http://teamworkdefinition.com/charismaticleadership/.
Latham, G., &Pinder, C. (2005). Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annu Rev Psychol, 56(1), 485–516.
Menkens, J. (2011). Heightened Sensitivity: Why It’s Such a Critical Leadership Component. Retrieved from https://www.tlnt.com/heightened-sensitivity-why-its-such-a-critical-leadership-component/.
Morgan, J. (2018). The big problem with employee engagement. Retrieved from https://www.inc.com/jacob-morgan/the-big-problem-with-employee-engagement.html.
Ray, S. (2011). An Insight into the Vision of Charismatic Leadership: Evidence from Recent Administrative Change in West Bengal Province of India. European Journal of Business and Management, 3(9), 55-67.
Rayton, B., &Yalabik, Z. (2014). The International Journal of Human Work engagement, psychological contract breach and job satisfaction. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. Taylor & Francis. http://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2013.87644.
Robinson, D., Perryman S., &Hayday S. (2014). The drivers of employee engagement. Report 408, Institute for Employment Studies.
Schaufeli, W., & Bakker, A. (2014). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(1), 293-315.
Schweitzer, M. (2014). Predictors of work engagement among teachers in Regina ans Saskatoon. Retrieved from https://ourspace.uregina.ca/bitstream/handle/10294/5443/Schweitzer_Marie_200213278_MED_EPSY_Spring2014.pdf.
Shamir, B., House, R., J. &Authur, M., B. (2013). The motivational effects of charismatic leadership: A self-concept-based theory. Organization Science, 4(4), 577-94.
Shekari, H. (2015). Evaluating the Three Dimensions of Work Engagement in Social Security Organization of Yazd Province in Iran. Journal of Educational and Management Studies, 5(3), 168-174.
Song, J. H., Kolb, J. A., Lee, U. H., & Kim, H. K. (2012). Role of Transformational Leadership in Effective Organizational Knowledge Creation Practices: Mediating Effects of Employees’ Work Engagement. HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY, 23(1), 65–101.
Steger, M., Littman-Ovadia, H., Miller, M., Menger, L., Rothmann, S. (2013). Engaging in work even when it is meaningless: Positive affective disposition and meaningful work interact in relation to work engagement. Journal of Career Assessment, 21(2), 348-361.
Towler, A. (2019). How charismatic leaders gain commitment to their vision and the mission of the organization. Retrieved from https://www.ckju.net/en/dossier/how-charismatic-leaders-gain-commitment-their-vision-and-mission-organization/1276.
Wilson, J. (2018). The Impact of Leadership Behaviors on Teacher Engagement. Dallas Baptist University.
Yener, M., Yaldiran, M., & Ergun, S. (2012). The effect of ethical climate on work engagement. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58(1), 724 – 733.