International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (IJTSRD) Volume 5 Issue 6, September-October 2021 Available Online: www.ijtsrd.com e-ISSN: 2456 – 6470 @ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD47616 | Volume – 5 | Issue – 6 | Sep-Oct 2021 Page 1217 Democratic Leadership Styles and Industrial Relations Atmosphere of Some Selected Oil Servicing Firms in Port Harcourt Ake, Okechukwu Department of Management, Faculty of Business Studies, Ignatius Ajuru University, Port Harcourt, Nigeria ABSTRACT This paper examined how democratic leadership style impacts on industrial relations atmosphere of some selected oil servicing firms in Port Harcourt. In line with the purpose of this paper as stated, the population of this study comprises of 761employees of some selected oil servicing firms in Port Harcourt. Taro-Yamene sample size determination formula was used to determine the sample size. The objective of this study is to assess the relationship between democratic leadership styles and its impacts on industrial relations atmosphere. Questionnaire were the major instruments used in gathering primary data which were analyzed using regression analyses. The study found that democratic leadership style can achieve improvement along the terms of industrial relation atmosphere with more emphases on industrial harmony, if leaders are able to improve on the level of industrial relations peace or unity within the oil servicing firms in port Harcourt, we recommends that in order for firms to maintain their attractiveness in the industry, they must have be conscious the different leadership style available and be sure in applying it in different situation as things transpires within the industry. Keywords: Democratic leadership styles, Industrial Relations Atmosphere How to cite this paper: Ake, Okechukwu "Democratic Leadership Styles and Industrial Relations Atmosphere of Some Selected Oil Servicing Firms in Port Harcourt" Published in International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development (ijtsrd), ISSN: 2456- 6470, Volume-5 | Issue-6, October 2021, pp.1217- 1228, URL: www.ijtsrd.com/papers/ijtsrd47616.pdf Copyright © 2021 by author (s) and International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development Journal. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) 1. INTRODUCTION Organizational or industrial relations atmosphere refers to a variable, or a set of variables, that represents the norms, feelings and attitudes prevailing at a workplace (Payne & Pugh, 1976). It is normally defined as an umbrella-type, or molar, concept that has the capacity to convey the general psychological atmosphere of an organization, and consequently can influence the satisfaction, motivation and behavior patterns of individuals in the workplace (Litwin& Stringer, 1968; Payne, 1971). In addition, research has shown that the concept of atmosphere links individual and organizational levels of analysis (Payne & Mansfield, 1973). Research on organizational atmosphere has adopted the concept of 'intervening' variables (Likert, 1967) for measurement and definition (e.g. Guion, 1973; Hellriegel& Slocum, 1974; Schneider & Hall, 1972). In other words, organizational atmosphere is affected by a set of 'causal' variables (e.g. organizational structure), and can potentially influence, or be influenced by the 'end-result' variables (e.g. job satisfaction). For example, empirical research has shown the impact of bureaucratic organizational structure and size (Payne & Mansfield, 1973, 1978), as well as characteristics of external environment (Dastmalchian, 1986) on perceptions of organizational atmosphere. Similarly, research has shown the influence of atmosphere on job satisfaction and individual job performance (Freidlander&Margolies, 1969; Pritchard &Karasick, 1973). These examples from the available empirical evidence can be used to reinforce the idea that organizational atmosphere as a concept can be usefully employed as an intervening construct. This is despite the fact that research designs that have used atmosphere specifically as an intervening variable are few (Hand, Richards & Slocum, 1973; Pritchard &Karsick, 1973; see Hellriegel& Slocum, 1974, for a review), and the results are not overwhelmingly conclusive (Payne & Pugh, 1976). Nevertheless, the idea of viewing organizational atmosphere as an intervening concept is appealing, as IJTSRD47616 International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470 @ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD47616 | Volume – 5 | Issue – 6 | Sep-Oct 2021 Page 1218 more recent reviews of this concept admit (Joyce & Slocum, 1979; Schneider &Reichers, 1983). This view emphasizes the role of organizational atmosphere not only as an important concept to explain organizational behaviour, but as an outcome of various policies and structures implemented by organizational decision makers and which consequently leads to the enhancement or deterioration of organizational performance. Moreover, whilst most of the studies and reviews referred to acknowledge the importance of the concept of atmosphere, many have been critical of the way in which atmosphere has been operationalized in empirical research. The lack of consistency in part reflects the potential breadth of the general concept, and the generalized way in which early studies applied it to diverse aspects of organizational activities. Following Schneider &Reichers (1983), one of the ways to reduce this diffuseness is by focusing on particular aspects of organizational atmosphere. For example, Zohar (1980) introduced the concept of 'safety atmosphere', and Schneider, Parkington& Buxton (1980) studied 'service atmosphere. The style of leadership focuses on the pattern a leader uses or adopts in dealing with subordinate. Etzioni (1958) cited in Genty (2005) postulated that the best situation for leaders’ effectiveness is to have both personal and position power. According to him, position-power is the ability to induce or influence behaviour of others. That is, power derived from an organisational office, personal influence or both. Individuals who are able to influence the behaviour of other persons in an organization because of their positions are said to have position-power. Personal- power on the other hand is the extent to which followers respect, feel good about, and are committed to their leaders, and see their goals as being satisfied by the goals of their leader (Genty, 2005). In essence, it is the extent to which people are willing to follow the leader. Consequently, in an organization personal-power comes from below, i.e. from the followers. However, Etizioni argued that in most cases it is not possible to build a relationship on the two based on behavioural school of thought and social factors possess by most people. Therefore, an effective leader is the one who is able to lead others by directing, helping, guiding, counselling and motivating followers to achieve desired goals. According to them, leadership effectiveness is contingent upon the leader adopting appropriate style in the light of situation favorableness. This implies that contingency style is a process whereby a leader influence to exercise his ability depends upon the group task, situation and the degree of personality and approach to which the leader considered fit the group. Genty (2005) advocates that leader should understand their own behaviour, the behaviour of their subordinates and the situation before utilising a particular leadership style. He maintained that to do this requires the leader to have a diagnostic skill in human behaviour. In the word of Fielder (1967) cited in Jacob (2004) said basically, an effective leader must be flexible enough to adapt to the differences among subordinates and situations because the performance of the groups is dependent on the interaction between leadership style and situational favourableness. Adair (1983) cited in Genty (2005) mentioned some of the situations that leaders must take into consideration in contingency style, namely: working environment; values, attitudes and experience of the super-ordinates and subordinates; tasks to be performed; and available resources. He concluded that the most favourable situation for leaders is when: he has good leader-member relations; the tasks are highly structured; and he has a powerful position. In a nut shell, contingency leadership style is dependent on situation. For instance, directive leadership style will be appropriate for situations of high task ambiguity, supportive for situations of stressful, dull or dangerous task, achievement oriented will produce positive results in situations where subordinates have confidence in their ability to attain challenging goals and participative for situation of high complexity (Lawal, 1993). The contemporary leadership approach include: A Transactional leadership style this style involves a correspondence between the leader and subordinates on daily basis (Idowu, 2003). Such leader is patient, purposeful, listening and conscious of priorities. The transactional leadership rewards exceptional contributions from subordinates and intervene when there is deviation from standard. That is, transactional leadership style is a style of leadership in which the leader promotes compliance of his followers through both rewards and punishment (Schultz & Duane, 2010). The exchange between the leader and his followers will determine the level of rewards and punishment that will be suitable for a task. This kind of leadership style can be recommended for trade union leaders at the National Executive Council (NEC) in order to discourage local unions or shop- floor members from deviating from the set objectives. Also, it will enhance exchange of ideas on daily basis on terms and conditions of employment or any other contract of employment issues. A Transformational Leadership style as the name implies, it changes the International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470 @ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD47616 | Volume – 5 | Issue – 6 | Sep-Oct 2021 Page 1219 belief system of subordinates. Transformational leaders are those transform their followers into becoming leaders themselves. That is, transformational leadership creates valuable and positive change in the followers. A transformational leadership style ensure elevating, mobilizing, uplifting of followers interest and makes the followers accept the interest of the corporate group over and above their own interest. Research has shown that transformational leadership can move followers to exceed expected performance as well as lead to high levels of follower’s satisfaction and commitment to group and organization (Bass, 1998). Bass (1998) identified four (4) components of transformational leadership namely: Idealised influence (Charismatic); Inspirational motivation; Intellectual Stimulation; and Individualised consideration. The subordinate sees leaders that adopt such style as a good leader hence the style could lead to employee satisfaction, commitment, loyalty, innovativeness and creativity among the rank and file. This perhaps, led to high performance level. Such a style can be recommended for all categories of trade union leadership. According to Lawal (1993), behavioural leadership theories shifted attention from the trait approach of physical or psychological characteristics that account for a person’s behaviour to what an effective leader do. That is, how they delegate tasks, how they communicate with and motivates their subordinates as well as how they carry out tasks. Lawal (1993) argued that behavioural approach unlike the trait assumes that behaviours could be learned. Behavioral leadership approach On the basis of the foregoing, this study will not only limited itself to the traditional leadership styles but will also explore the modern leadership styles practice across world presently. It is therefore, with this in our minds that this study will discuss briefly on the behavioral leadership styles which will serve as a basis for prosperous industrial relations actors on the need to revitalize their respective styles in order to achieve the common goal of industrial peace and harmony .Therefore, individuals trained in the appropriate leadership behaviours could be effective. The purpose of this study is to determine how democratic leadership style impact on Industrial Relations Atmosphere of some Selected Oil Servicing Firms in Port Harcourt. The objective is to determine:
Determine the association of democratic leadership style and industrial relations atmosphere of oil servicing firms in Port Harcourt.
Two researchable questions were raised, they include:
To what extent does democratic leadership styles impacts harmonious atmosphere of oil servicing firms in Port Harcourt? To what extent does democratic leadership styles impacts adversarial atmosphere of oil servicing firms in Port Harcourt? In carrying out the study, two research hypotheses were stated, which include: Ho1: There is no significant relationship between democratic leadership styles and adversarial atmosphere in oil servicing firms in Port Harcourt. Ho2: There is no significant relationship between democratic leadership styles and harmonious atmosphere in oil servicing firms in Port Harcourt. 1.1. Conceptual framework Figure 1.1: Conceptual Framework; Democratic leadership styles and Industrial Relations Atmosphere of some Selected Oil Servicing Firms in Port Harcourt Source: Measures: Pritchard &Karsick, 1973 Dimensions: Hellriegel& Slocum, 1974 Democratic leadership styles Industrial relations atmosphere Harmonious atmosphere Adversarial atmosphere International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470 @ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD47616 | Volume – 5 | Issue – 6 | Sep-Oct 2021 Page 1220 2. LITERATURE 2.1. Theoretical Foundation Transformational leadership, Downton (1973), which can be defined as the process of influencing major changes in the attitudes, beliefs, and values of followers to a point where the goals of an organization and the vision of the leader are internalized and followers achieve performances beyond expectations (Bass, 1985; Yukl, 1999a; 1999b). In this process, leaders and followers raise one another’s levels of morality and motivation (Carlson &Perrewe, 1995), and leaders achieve followers’ best efforts by inspiring them to identify with a vision that surpasses their own immediate self-interests. The transformational leader aspires to elevate the followers’ higher-order needs meaning that leaders and followers raise each other’s motivations and senses of purpose. This implies that the aims and aspirations of both parts congeal into one, being established common goals in which they can identify themselves (Bryman, 1992). 2.2. Democratic leadership styles This is a leadership style whereby leaders give others (subordinates) a chance to participate, contribute and exchange ideas, believes in decision making process. This kind of leadership involve group to determine work- method, communicate overall-all goals to the subordinates, seeks advice, gives rooms for feedback as well as allows two-way flow of information. Here, rewards rather than threats of punishment are used to motivate subordinates (Lawal, 1993). Democratic leadership styles allows for decentralisation of authority whereby decisions with employees takes place in form of participation and this allow employees (followers) to work as a social group. In this style of leadership new ideas and changes are welcome while this lead to improvement in productivity, level of cooperation increases as well as enhances morale of the workers. The decision making process is however slower due to the fact that the leader has to give reasons or explaining why certain decisions were taken (Lawal, 1993). Gastil (1994) defined the characteristics of democratic leadership as distributing responsibility among the membership, empowering group members, and aiding the group’s decision-making process. The varied characteristics of democratic leadership contribute to the fact that there has been no clear definition of democratic leadership. Gastil (1994) argued that “the absence of a clear definition may have also contributed to the decreased amount of research on democratic leadership”. Industrial democracy is a term generally used to argue that, by analogy with political democracy, workers are entitled to a significant voice in the decisions affecting the organizations in which they work. (Fejoh 2015). The term is not used in a consistent manner as it is also used by some workers to argue that any system short of full workers‟ control is a denial of industrial democracy and this was the standpoint adopted by union activists in the early decade of the century who advocated a form of guild socialism which was a form of workers‟ control of industrial organizations. (Fejoh, 2015). In any human society, there must be leaders and followers. In work organization however, it is the management and labour and as related to power distribution and structures between the levels. 3. Industrial Relations Atmosphere Industrial relations atmosphere is the degree to which the labor-management relations are cooperative or conflicting, reflected in the extent to which relations between management and employees are seen by participants as mutually trusting, respectful, and cooperative (Hammer, Currall& Stern, 1991). Payne and Pugh (1976) stated the usefulness of positive industrial relations atmosphere as it improves employee motivation, satisfaction, quality of work life and overall organizational effectiveness. Industrial relations atmosphere has increasingly been recognized as a multidimensional concept, particularly in light of the decline in trade union density and coverage, and an associated increase in non-union workplaces, the increased use of direct voice, and the relationship between workplace democratic practices and organizational performance (Kersley, Alpin, Forth, Bryson, Bewley, Dix and Oxenbridge, 2006). Further, according to Kersley - Oxenbridge et al. (2006) industrial relations atmosphere affects workplace outcomes. Schneider and Reichers (1983) stated that industrial relations atmosphere is a function of the interactions between ‘organizational members’, individuals and groups within an organization. Kuruvilla and Erickson (2002) observed that the goal of the industrial relations system was to maintain labor peace and, more generally, industrial stability. They further explain that industrial relation helps in containing industrial conflict hence making it difficult for the parties to go on strike by mandating some form of third party dispute resolution, and by attempting to foster responsible trade unionism rather than militant trade unionism. As a result industrial peace or stability is realized, which is a pre-requisite for economic development in many of the International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470 @ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD47616 | Volume – 5 | Issue – 6 | Sep-Oct 2021 Page 1221 countries. On the other hand industrial relations environment refers to the atmosphere, norms, attitudes and behaviours reflecting and underpinning how workers, unions and managers interact collectively with each other in the workplace, which in turn, affects workplace outcomes (Kersleyet al., 2006). According to Pyman et al. (2010), workplace environment and the contextual factors are sometimes described as the industrial relations atmosphere, and this concept has been used to explain behavior and attitudes in the workplace, and interactions between unions, employees and employers. Industrial relations environment therefore depicts the state and quality of union–management relations in an organization. Industrial relations environment can therefore be described as a function of work practices (the organization of work) and employment practices -the management of people , and thus may be linked to organizational performance company and worker outcomes (Boxall and Macky, 2009). Some studies have shown that favourable perceptions of industrial relations environment are positively associated with commitment to both the employer and the union. These studies have further indicated that favorable perceptions of the industrial relations environment allows for commitment of employer and employee because of cognitive consistency between the role of employee and union member in workplaces with more cooperative union-management relations (Redman and Snape, 2006). Industrial relations environment has therefore been identified as a key mediating factor in the link between high-performance work systems and organizational performance and effectiveness (Kersleyet al., 2006). 3.1. Harmonious Atmosphere Harmony refers to a friendly and cooperative agreement on working relationships between employers and employees for their mutual benefit (Otobo, 2005; Osad and Osas, 2013). According to Puttapalli and Vuram (2012), harmony is concerned with the relationship between management and employees with respect to the terms and conditions of employment and the work place. In effect, it is a situation where employees and management cooperate willingly in pursuit of the organization’s aims and objectives. Industrial harmony in its ideal form, presupposes an industry in a condition of relative equilibrium where relationship between individuals and or groups are cordial and productive. Sayles and Strauss (1981) assert that with the inevitable differences among groups within an organization, conflict and differing objectives permeate modern organizations. Industrial Harmony constitutes one of the most delicate and complex problems of the modern industrial society. This phenomenon of a new complex industrial set-up is directly attributed to the emergence of „Industrial Revolution”. The pre-industrial revolution period was characterized by a simple process of manufacturing, small scale investment, local markets and small number of persons employed which resulted to a close relationship between the manager and the managed. Due to personal and direct relationship between the employer and the employee it was easier to secure cooperation among employees in organizations. Any grievance or misunderstanding on the part of either party could be promptly removed. In recent times, industrial disharmony is assuming unprecedented proportion in most of the food and beverages firms in Nigeria. The incessant grievance and conflicts between management and employee in food and beverage industry has more than ever before been publicized in the manifestation of negative consequences such as decline in the performance of organization and that of the employee (Agba, Ushie; &Agba, 2009). Albert and Yahaya (2013) lent credence to this view, that the pattern of industrial relations in Nigeria has been conflictual in nature with disruptive consequences and significant work-stoppages. Various reasons and explanations have been adduced as to why the relationship between labour and management is conflict ridden. Arguably, it is observed that management of food and beverage firms in Anambra State practice management of exclusionism, neglect of power sharing mechanism which ensure partnership amongst stakeholders in the workplace and derogation of organizational communication pattern may breed disharmony in contemporary organizations (Iheriohanma, 2007). Harmony can only come out of what is known as “Industrial Democracy” a situation in organisation where to a larger extent, the participation of workers is adequately sought in the process of making decisions that will determine the conditions of their working lives. It involves joint participation in decision making process between the two major actors to labour relations. It encompasses such concepts as joint consultation, co- ownership or co-partnership, co-determination and whiltleyism (Otobo 2005). Industrial harmony enhances labour productivity and in turn improves performance in organizations, achieving economic growth, and enhancing living standards and quality of life. It creates a peaceful working environment conducive to tolerance, dialogue and other alternative (to strike) means of resolving industrial or labour disputes in Nigeria (such as International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470 @ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD47616 | Volume – 5 | Issue – 6 | Sep-Oct 2021 Page 1222 negotiation, mediation, arbitration, conciliation and litigation or court adjudication). This creates a high level of employee satisfaction. 3.2. Adversarial Atmosphere Adversarial atmosphere refers to an atmosphere fill with grievances, conflict, dispute and could migrate to a state of crisis within the organisation or industry. Thomas (1976) Grievance refers to any dissatisfaction or sense of injustice which is felt by an employee in relation to his pay, working conditions, leave, recoveries of dues or other aspects of employment. Broadly speaking, “a grievance is any dissatisfaction that adversely affects organisational relations and productivity. Conflict on the other hand is broadly defined as the perception by the parties involved that they hold discrepant views or have interpersonal incompatibilities (Boulding, 1963). Edwards et al. (1995:283) argue that adverse forms of industrial atmosphere could take the form of covert forms of conflict which may be labelled worker resistance and it is central to understanding the experience of IR systems. Resistance is considered in terms of power asymmetries and opposition through a variety of employee behaviours used to contest the management prerogative (Roscigno&Hodson, 2004; Mulholland, 2004; Hebdon& Gall, 2008; Gall, 2013). Cahn and Abigail (2007) also defined conflict as a problematic situation, differing perceptions and desired outcomes, interdependence, potential which adversely affect the relationship between individuals. Robbins (1978) defines conflict as “any kind of opposition or antagonistic interaction between two or more parties”. Conflict, according to De Dreu, Harinck, & Van Vianen (1999) can also be viewed as a process that begins when an individual or group perceives differences and opposition between oneself and another individual or group about interests, beliefs or values that matter to them. Conflict is a likely result of contacts within family, friends, and colleagues, as well as between managers and their subordinates (Suppiah& Rose, 2006); thus, conflict is inevitable whenever human element is involved. Democratic Leadership Style and Industrial Relations Atmosphere The democratic leadership style is also called the participative style as it encourages employees to be a part of the decision making team. The democratic manager keeps his or her employees informed about everything that affects their work and shares decision making and problem solving responsibilities. Anderson (1959) identified the democratic leader as one who shares decision making with the other members and therefore, democratic leadership is connected with higher morale in the majority of the situations. He denied that democratic leadership is associated with low productivity and high morale and that authoritarian leadership is associated with high productivity and low morale. Hackman and Johnson (1996) supported Anderson’s explanation of the relationship between democratic leadership and productivity. Democratic leadership is related with increased followers’ productivity, satisfaction, involvement, and commitment (Hackman & Johnson, 1996). Member satisfaction and nominations for leadership are greater under democratic leadership (Bass, 1990; Stogdill, 1974). Although the significant drawbacks to democratic leadership are time consuming activities and lengthy debate over policy, participation plays a key role for increasing the productivity of leadership (Denhardt&Denhardt, 2003; Hackman & Johnson).Consequently, the primary characteristics of democratic leadership signifies that group members are encouraged to share ideas and opinions, even though the leader retains the final say over decisions and members of the group feel more engaged in the process leading to encouragement of creativity . Participation is a core characteristic of democratic leadership; and the ideal of democratic leadership is friendly, helpful, and encouraging participation (Luthar, 1996). Again, Wilson, George, Wellins, and Byham (1994) categorized autocratic leadership, participative leadership, and high involvement leadership by the level of participation encouraged by the leader. Chemers (1984) also defined democratic leadership as emphasizing group participation. Thus, participation is the major characteristic of democratic leadership (Bass, 1990). On the other hand, Kuczmarski and Kuczmarski (1995) talked about the distinctiveness of a democratic leader as erudite, influential, motivating, a winner of cooperation, a provider of logical consequences, encouraging, permitting of self-determination, guiding, a good listener and respecting, and situation-centered. Gastil (1994) defined the characteristics of democratic leadership as distributing responsibility among the membership, empowering group members, and aiding the group’s decision-making process. Gastil (1994) argued that “the absence of a clear definition may have also contributed to the decreased amount of research on democratic leadership”. International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470 @ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD47616 | Volume – 5 | Issue – 6 | Sep-Oct 2021 Page 1223 Okon, Asu, Patrick and Antigh (2012) carried out a study to determine the impact of inter-union conflicts on industrial harmony. University of Calabar Teaching Hospital and Federal NeuroPsychiatric Hospital Calabar were the only tertiary health institutions in Nigeria‟s Cross River State and the 2575 total staff strength of the two organizations was the study population. A total of 266 subjects was randomly sampled. Pearson Product Moment Correlation test was conducted to test the null hypothesis and it was established that there was significant influence of inter-union conflicts on industrial harmony in the study case. Recommendations to reduce the inter-union conflicts and enhance industrial harmony include, among others, the removal of salary disparity among unions, and the review of law and working conditions. Moorthy (2005) carried out a study on industrial relations scenario in Textile Industry in Tamil Nadu. The paper attempted to identify the changes that have occurred in industrial relations scenario in textile industry in Tamil Nadu after the economic reforms introduced during the nineties. The study concluded that economic reforms have affected industrial relations in textile industry in Tamil Nadu as there is a declining tendency in industrial disputes. The prevailing atmosphere of labour unrest could be attributed to total violation of certain norms of discipline by a section of trade unions and also by some employers. Mojaye and Dedekuma (2015) conducted a study on the influence of communication on Industrial Harmony in the Civil Service of Delta State Nigeria. The study tries to establish a link between communication and good industrial relations and industrial peace. The study focused on the Delta State Civil Service and attempted to find out the role that effective communication had played in ensuring industrial peace since the advent of the state. Questionnaires were administered to 325 civil servants out of which only 299 were useful. One of the research questions was whether there is any relationship between industrial harmony and effective communication. The study showed that while effective communication may not necessarily lead to good industrial relations but it may engender industrial peace. Nkiinebari (2014) conducted a study on workplace democracy and industrial harmony in Nigeria. This study seeks to unravel the immediate causes of this workplace social distance. In an effort to provide the antidote for workplace cooperation, selected manufacturing firms in Port Harcourt Nigeria were studied. The population consisted of 588 workers of selected manufacturing firms in Port Harcourt and the sample size determined using the Krejcie and Morgan (1970) sample size table was 234. For data analysis, frequencies and descriptives were used, the use of percentages, mean scores and standard deviations were used alongside linear regression to examine the relationship between Workplace democracy and Industrial harmony. The study revealed that there is a high prevalence of tall structured organization which creates a gap between labour and management, thus mutual cooperation seemed not to be existing. Qualitative and quantitative methods were used in gathering and analyzing the data and recommendations were obvious that some mutual conditions among which due process, voting and collective bargaining are palliative agents capable of reducing the evident relationship strain between labour and management which have frequently resulted in strikes as the extremes 4. Methods this study adopt the quasi experimental design to analyze its data, the information collected from the questionnaire was summarized in their groups and percentage were used to analyses the data, also inferential statistical tool of regression analyses was used to test the level of significance among variables and finally The analysis was aided with SPSS version 21.0. Y =F[X1, X2, X3……….XN] Where Y =dependent variable X1, x2 ,x3….xn=independent variable F=Functional relationship among variables The study was conducted within the Port Harcourt metropolis where some oil servicing firms have their offices in different parts of the city. Taro-Yamene sample size determination formula was used to determine the sample size 4.1. Reliability of the Research Instrument The scale to use for this study had been previously adjudged reliable. However, we verify reliability outcomes through confirmatory test of internal consistency on the instrument with our sample using Cronbach alpha. This calculates the average of all possible Split-half Reliability Coefficient and the threshold level, 0.7 which is generally accepted by the rule of thumb (Cortina, J. M. , 1993) was considered adequate. International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470 @ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD47616 | Volume – 5 | Issue – 6 | Sep-Oct 2021 Page 1224 5. Findings 5.1. Result and Frequency Analysis In this section, the output of the primary and secondary data is presented. Analysis was carried out on individual variables and measures. Mean scores and standard deviations are also illustrated. The presentation begins with the independent variable which is democratic leadership styles. It then proceeds to the dependent variable- industrial relations atmosphere, whose measures are harmonious atmosphere and adversarial atmosphere. These are all scaled on the five (5) point Likert scale (ranging from 1: SD=strongly disagree, 2: D=disagree, 3: N=neutral, 4: A=agree and 5: SA= strongly agree). The secondary data analysis was carried out using the Spearman rank order correlation tool at a 95% confidence interval. Specifically, the tests cover hypotheses HO1 to HO2 which were bivariate and all stated in the null form. We have relied on the Spearman Rank (rho) statistic to undertake the analysis. The 0.05 significance level is adopted as criterion for the probability of either accepting the null hypotheses at (p>0.05) or rejecting the null hypotheses at (p<0.05) 5.2. Analysis on Democratic Leadership Style For the purpose this study, we adopted 5point likert scale in our questionnaire, having response categories in the order of SA =5, A=4, U=3, D=2 and SD=1. Going by this, the interpretation of our mean is according to Ahiazu&Asawo’s (2009) categorization where all responses with mean value (x) between 1-2 as being low, 2.5- 3.5 as being moderate, 3.5 – 4.5 as high and 4.5 above as very high. Table 1 Response Rates for Democratic Leadership Styles Democratic Leadership styles SA A N D SD X Std. 1 I go beyond self-interest for the good of the organization 56 19 0 34 12 3.60 1.530 2 The best decision will be the one with the best consensus 30 32 15 29 15 3.27 1.390 3 I help others to develop their strength 27 31 16 27 20 3.15 1.424 4 I welcome others to constructively and constantly challenge my strategies. 38 30 10 22 21 3.35 1.509 Survey Data, 2019 The data in table 1 illustrates the response rates and frequency for democratic leadership styles measured on a 4- item instrument and scaled on a 5-point Likert scale. From the data, the first question item shows a mean score of 3.60 which is high on the measurement scale. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th question items with 3.27, 3.15 and 3.35 mean scores respectively also means that the respondents responses are on the moderate range of the scale used in measurement. Table 2 Descriptive Statistics for democratic leadership Style N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Democratic leadership style 121 1.00 5.00 3.3430 1.43728 Valid N (listwise) 121 SPSS 21.0 Data Output, 2019 Table 2 above illustrates the descriptive statistics for democratic with mean scores of 3.3430 indicates that most of the respondents were on the moderate range of the measurement scale, Table 3: Response Rates for Harmonious Atmosphere Harmonious atmosphere SA A N D SD X Std. 1 I create an atmosphere of growth 31 20 15 24 31 2.97 1.560 2 I accept ownership for team decisions 30 30 13 30 18 3.20 1.435 3 Unionize climate are quiet. 24 32 9 25 31 2.94 1.518 Survey Data, 2019 Table 3 above shows descriptive data on the extent to which harmonious atmosphere is a measure of industrial relations atmosphere. The 1st, 2nd, and 3rd question items with a mean score of , 2.94, and 3.20 and 2.94 respectively shows that the respondents are more on the moderate range of the scale. Table 4: Response Rates for Adversarial Atmosphere Adversarial atmosphere SA A N D SD X Std. 1 resistance produce conflict situation 27 33 12 26 23 3.12 1.464 2 Neglect of union members disturb business peace 42 32 17 17 13 3.60 1.369 3 Neglect don’t have any adverse effect on union peace. 35 35 14 20 17 3.42 1.419 Survey Data, 2019 International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470 @ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD47616 | Volume – 5 | Issue – 6 | Sep-Oct 2021 Page 1225 Table 4 illustrates the response rates and frequency for adversarial atmosphere measured on a 3-item instrument and scaled on a 5-point Likert scale. From the data, the first and second question items show a moderate mean scores of 3.26,and3.42 respectively while the third question item with a mean score of 3.60 illustrates that the respondents are more inclined to the agree range of the scale used in measurement. Table 5 Descriptive Statistics for Industrial Relation Atmosphere N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Harmonious atmosphere 121 1.00 5.00 3.0358 1.37423 Adversarial atmosphere 121 1.00 5.00 3.3829 1.32404 Valid N (listwise) 121 SPSS 21.0 data Output, 2019 Table 5 above illustrates the descriptive statistics for industrial relations atmosphere in some oil servings companies in Port Harcourt’s. Harmonious atmosphere with a mean score of 3.0358, with a mean score of adversarial atmosphere3.3829 indicates that most of the respondents were on the moderate range of the measurement scale. Table 6 Descriptive Statistics for the Study Variables N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Democratic leadership styles 121 1.17 5.00 3.2225 1.29584 Industrial relations atmosphere 121 1.44 5.00 3.2507 1.22773 Valid N (listwise) 121 Source: SPSS 21.0 data Output, 2019 The data in table 6 illustrates the descriptive statistics summary for the study variables which are union leadership style (Independent variable) and industrial relations atmosphere. (Dependent variable). Table 7 Relationship between Democratic Leadership Style and Harmonious Atmosphere Correlations Democratic leadership style Harmonious atmosphere Spearman's rho Democratic leadership style Correlation Coefficient 1.000 .968** Sig. (2-tailed) . .000 N 121 121 Harmonious atmosphere Correlation Coefficient .968** 1.000 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 . N 121 121 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). SPSS 21.0 data Output, 2019 Table 7 shows the Spearman’s correlation coefficient; rho = 0.968** and the probability Value (PV) = 0.000 < 0.05 (level of significance). This is to shows that there is a positive relationship between democratic leadership style and harmonious atmosphere. Therefore, increasing the level of democratic leadership style will also increase harmonious atmosphere as a measure of industrial relations atmosphere. Therefore based on the results illustrated, all previous bivariate null hypothetical statements are hereby rejected as the study finds that: There is a significant relationship between democratic leadership style and harmonious atmosphere in oil servicing firms in Port Harcourt. Table 8: Relationship between Democratic Leadership Style and Adversarial Atmosphere. Correlations Democratic leadership style Adversarial atmosphere Spearman's rho Democratic leadership style Correlation Coefficient 1.000 .882** Sig. (2-tailed) . .000 N 121 121 Adversarial atmosphere Correlation Coefficient .882** 1.000 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 . N 121 121 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). SPSS 21.0 data Output, 2019. International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470 @ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD47616 | Volume – 5 | Issue – 6 | Sep-Oct 2021 Page 1226 Table 8 shows the Spearman’s correlation coefficient; rho = 0.882** and the probability Value (PV) = 0.000 < 0.05 (level of significance). This is to shows that there is a positive relationship between democratic leadership style and adversarial atmosphere. Therefore, increasing the level of democratic leadership style as a dimension of union leadership style will also increase adversarial atmosphere as a measure of industrial relations atmosphere. Therefore based on the results illustrated, all previous bivariate null hypothetical statements are hereby rejected as the study finds that: There is a significant relationship between democratic leadership style and adversarial atmosphere in oil servicing firms in Port Harcourt. Table 9: Correlation Result for the Relationship between democratic Leadership Style and Industrial Relations Atmosphere democratic leadership style Industrial relations atmosphere Spearman's rho Democratic leadership style Correlation Coefficient 1.000 .984** Sig. (2-tailed) . .000 N 121 121 Industrial relations atmosphere Correlation Coefficient .984** 1.000 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 . N 121 121 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). SPSS 21.0 data Output, 2019 Table 9 above illustrates the relationship between democratic leadership style and industrial relation atmosphere in oil serving firms in Port Harcourt. Hence it was hypothesized that there is no significant relationship between democratic leadership style and industrial relation atmosphere in oil serving firms in Port Harcourt.. The results show that (rho = 0.984 and p value 0.000<0.05). The result of the analysis shows a very strong positive correlation between democratic leadership style and industrial relation atmosphere in oil serving firms in Port Harcourt.. This relationship is also statistically significant at p=0.0000<0.05 significance level. 6. Conclusion and recommendation Referring back to our finding where democratic style affects the harmonious and adversarial atmosphere. All leadership styles are acceptable, there is no particular leadership styles that can single handedly influence a firms industrial relation atmosphere. Firms should be conscious of the various leadership styles if they want to achieve their ultimate goal. From the foregoing conclusions, The study recommend that;
The union leaders should put in place appropriate policies which will be fair to her members. It is clearly demonstrated in the result that democratic leadership style showed and are important partial determinant of the measures of industrial relations atmosphere adopted in this study, whereas an optimal solution would require complete knowledge of all circumstances around the various leadership styles. REFERENCE [1] Adair, J. (1983). Effective leadership: A self- development manual. London: Kogen Page limited. [2] Ahiauzu, A., &Asawo, S. P. (2010). Altruistic love culture and workers’ commitment in the Nigerian manufacturing industry: A study in workplace spirituality. Journal of Management Policy and Practice, 11(5), 97-105. [3] Ahiazu, A. &Asawo, S. P., (2009). Unwavering Hope and Worker’s Commitment in the Nigerian Manufacturing Industry: A Study in Workplace Spirituality. Business Renaissance Quartely 4(1). [4] Bass, B. M. (1990), Bass &Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: Theory, research & managerial applications. New York: Free Press. [5] Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York: Free Press. [6] Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational dynamics, 18(3), 19- 31. [7] Bass, B. M., &Avolio, B. J. (1997). Concepts of leadership. Leadership: Understanding the dynamics of power and influence in organizations, 3-22. [8] Bass, S. A. (1998). Microscopic models for ultrarelativistic heavy ion collisions. Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics, 41, 255-369. International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470 @ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD47616 | Volume – 5 | Issue – 6 | Sep-Oct 2021 Page 1227 [9] Blua, M. J. (1992). Alatae production and population increase of aphid vectors on virus- infected host plants. Oecologia, 92(1), 65-70. [10] Bolden, R., Gosling, J., Marturano, A. & Dennison, P., (2003). A Review of leadership theory and competency frameworks, Exeter: Chase Consulting and the Management Standards Centre. 1(8)34-51 [11] Boxall, P. &Macky, K. (2009). Research and theory on high-performance work systems: Progressing the high-involvement stream. Human Resource Management Journal, 19. 1, 3–23. . London: Sage. [12] Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma and leadership in organizations. London: Sage. [13] Bryman, A. and Bell, E. (2003) Business Research Methods, Oxford University Press, Oxford. [14] Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row. [15] Burns, J. M. (2003). Transforming leadership: A new pursuit of happiness. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press. [16] Carlson, D. S. &Perrewe, P. L. (1995). Institutionalization of organizational ethics through transformational leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 14, 829-838. [17] Dastmalchian, A. (1986). Environmental characteristics and organizational atmosphere: An exploratory study. Journal of Management Studies, 23(6), 609-633. [18] Dastmalchian, A., Adamson, R. &Blyton, P. (1986). Developing a measure of industrial relations atmosphere. Relations Industrielles Industrial Relations, 41, 851-859. [19] De Dreu, C. K. W., Harinck, F., & Van Vianen, A. E. M. (1999). Confiict and performance in groups and organizations. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International Review of Industrial and organizational psychology 14, 376-405. [20] Downton, J. V. (1973). Rebel leadership: Commitment and charisma in a revolutionary process. New York: Free Press [21] Etzioni, A. (1958). Industrial sociology: The study of economic organizations. Social Research, 303-324. [22] Fejoh, J. (2015). “Industrial democracy as determinant of job satisfaction among workers of public health institutions in Ogun State, Nigeria”. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science 5 (10). [23] Fielder, M. L. (1967). The absolute thermoelectric powers of some liquid alloys. Advances in Physics, 16(64), 681-687. [24] Friedlander, F. &Margolies, N. (1969). Multiple inputs of organizational atmosphere and individual value systems upon job satisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 22, 171- 183. [25] Gastil, J. (1994). A definition and illustration of democratic leadership. Human Relations, 47(8), 953-975. [26] Gastil, J. (1994). A definition and illustration of democratic leadership. Human Relations, 47, 954-971. [27] Genty, G. (2005). Supercontinuum generation in large mode-area microstructured fibers. Optics Express, 13(21), 8625-8633. [28] Guion, R. M. (1973). A note on organizational atmosphere. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 9, 120-125. [29] Hammer, T., Currall, S., & Stern, R. (1991). Worker representation on boards of directors: A study of competing roles. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 44(4), 661-680. [30] Hellriegel, D. & Slocum, J. W., Jr. (1974). Organizational atmosphere: Measures, research and contingencies. Academy of Management Journal, 17, 255-279. [31] James, W. (1880). Great men, great thoughts and their environment. Atlantic Monthly, 46, 441–459. [32] Kersley, B., Alpin, C., Forth, J., Bryson, A., Bewley, H., Dix, G., &Oxenbridge, S. (2013). Inside the workplace: Findings from the 2004 workplace employment relations survey. Routledge. [33] Kuruvilla, S. & Erickson, C. L. (2002). “Change and transformation in Asian industrial relations.” Industrial Relations, 41(2) 171-228. [34] Lawal, A. A. (1993). Management in focus, Lagos. Abdul Industrial Enterprises. [35] Likert, R. (1967). The human organization. New York: McGraw-Hill. [36] Litwin, G. H. & Stringer, R. A. (1968). Motivation and Organizational Atmosphere. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. International Journal of Trend in Scientific Research and Development @ www.ijtsrd.com eISSN: 2456-6470 @ IJTSRD | Unique Paper ID – IJTSRD47616 | Volume – 5 | Issue – 6 | Sep-Oct 2021 Page 1228 [37] Osad, O. I. &Osas, U. E. (2013). Harmonious industrial relations as a panacea for ailing enterprises in Nigeria. Journal of Asian Scientific Research, 2013, 3(3):229-246. [38] Otobo, D. (2005). Industrial Relations: Theory and Controversies. Lagos: Malhhouse Press Ltd. [39] Payne, R. & Pugh, D. S. (1976). Organizational structure and atmosphere. InM. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1125-1173. Chicago: Rand McNally. [40] Payne, R. (1971). Organizational atmosphere: The concept and some research findings. Prakseologia, 39(40), 143-158. [41] Pritchard, R. D. &Karasick, B. A. (1973). The effects of organizational atmosphere on managerial job performance and job satisfaction. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 9, 126-246. [42] Pugh, D. S. & Payne, R. (1977). Organizational Behaviour in its Context: The Aston Programme. Famborough, Hants: Saxon House. [43] Puttapalli, A. K. &Vuram, I. R. (2012). Discipline: The tool for industrial harmony. New Jersey, Prentice Hall Inc [44] Pyman, A., Holland, P., Teicher, J., & Cooper, B. K. (2010). “Industrial relations atmosphere, employee voice and managerial attitudes to E- ISSN 2039-2117 ISSN 2039-9340 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences MCSER Publishing, Rome-Italy :4(11), 460– 480 [45] Robbins, S. P. (Winter 1978). Conflict management and conflict resolution are not synonymous terms. California Management Review. 21(2); 67-75. [46] Sayles L, Straus G (1981) Managing human resources. New Jersey, Prentice Hall Inc. [47] Schneider, B. &Reichers, A. E. (1972). On the etiology of atmospheres. Personnel Psychology, 36, 19-39. [48] Schneider, B., Parkington, J. J. & Buxton, V. M. (1980). Employee and customer perception of service in banks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25, 252-267. [49] Schultz, D. (2010). Custer: Lessons in Leadership. St. Martin's Press. [50] Suppiah, W. & Rose, R. (2006). A competence- based view to conflict management, American Journal of Applied Sciences 3(7); 1905-1909. [51] Thomas, K. W. (1976). Conflict and conflict management: Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, In M. D. Dunnette (ed.), Chicago: Rand McNally. [52] Yukl, G. (1999a). An evaluation of conceptual weaknesses in transformational and charismatic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 10(2), 285–305. [53] Zohar, D. (1980). Safety atmosphere in industrial organizations: Theoretical and applied implications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65(1), 96. .