The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0143-5124.htm

Leadership style
Relationship among leadership in university
style, organizational culture and libraries
employee commitment in
253
university libraries
Received 9 June 2009
Muhammad Rafiq Awan Revised 10 August 2009
The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur, Pakistan, and Accepted 15 November 2009

Khalid Mahmood
Department of Library and Information Science, University of the Punjab,
Lahore, Pakistan

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore leadership style, organizational culture and job
commitment in university libraries of Pakistan and the relationships among them.
Design/methodology/approach – A structured questionnaire was developed and self
administered to 115 professional librarians. Hypotheses were tested through t-test, Pearson
chi-square and ANOVA.
Findings – The results show that the library professionals were not very sensitive about any
relationship among these three variables at their workplace. A majority of the professionals perceived
that their chief librarians had an autocratic style of leadership and libraries tend to adopt an
achievement and bureaucratic culture. Most of the library professionals seemed to be highly
committed with their organizations. It means that they favored result-oriented culture.
Research limitations – The research was limited to university libraries in Pakistan’s province of
Punjab and federal capital Islamabad.
Originality/value – The study is useful to understand leadership style, organizational culture and
job commitment in university libraries.
Keywords Leadership, Organizational culture, Job satisfaction, University libraries, Pakistan
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
Leadership has always been a controversial issue among researchers and philosophers.
Hundreds of researches have been administered and thousands of books and articles
have been published on this topic. Burns (1978) stated that “leadership is one of the
most observed and least understood phenomena on earth”. People are imperative to
organizational life and they put their efforts in a coordinated way for certain outputs.
When people are working together for certain accomplishments, it is natural to form
groups. Each group member is affecting the activities of others in one-way or the other.
Leadership role ultimately develops within the group formally or informally. Within Library Management
Vol. 31 No. 4/5, 2010
formal groups having structured interaction and coordination, it is the fundamental pp. 253-266
role of leader to organize the activities, to motivate the group, to assign the task and q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0143-5124
finally achieve the targets. DOI 10.1108/01435121011046326
LM According to Chamers, leadership is a process of social influence through which one
31,4/5 person is able to enlist the aid of others in reaching a goal. A number of activities are
included in the leadership role, and it is illuminating to look at these activities in
relation to the organizational functions of internal maintenance and external
adaptability.
Regardless of contradiction among the concepts of leadership it is however, integral
254 for human groups to have a leadership role amongst them. Prophet Muhammad (Peace
be upon him) said, “if there were three in a trip, they must appoint a leader from among
them” (Reported by Abu Dawud). The gauge of any human group performance can
only be set by the performance of leaders. “In human affairs, the distance between the
leaders and the average is a constant. If the leadership performance is high the
performance of the group will go up” (Drucker, 1996).

Literature review
Concept of leadership
Leadership has always been the subject of human society. Historians, philosophers,
researchers, and too many, studied leadership (Bass, 1990a, b). A wide range of
literature is available on the topic including historical writings like Epics of Gilgamesh,
perhaps the oldest book found from Ancient Sumerian civilization. It is the story of
King Uruk (somewhere between 2750 and 2500 BC ). The story revolves around a great
leader (King) having imaginary powers:
Anu granted him the totality of knowledge of all.
He saw the Secret, discovered the Hidden,
He brought information of (the time) before the Flood.
Niccolò Machiavelli’s The Prince (1513) is a classical and historical book on political
system and leadership for attaining political power. The book teaches that how a
prince can get advantage by behaving like a fox and lion (Scott, 2004). The prince like a
fox should be clever and cunning but like a lion should be powerful and frightening. In
the strategy (known as “Machiavellianism”) he advises that a prince should have the
qualities of cunningness, deceitfulness, mercilessness, and ruthlessness at the same
time to prolong his power.
Trait theories on leadership started in the twentieth century and formal theories on
leadership were given by sociologists, experts in human behavior and psychologists.
The researches from 1920s to 1960s focused on the personality of leader and tried to
find some traits as the basis of successful leadership (Adair, 1984). Frederick Taylor
(1856-1915) cultivated the theory of leadership for the first time for leading in the
formal organizations. His basic idea was to increase output by using scientific
parameters. Taylor’s scientific management philosophy revolves around the concept of
the machine metaphor (Hoy and Hoy, 2006). This wisdom about management theories
was solicitude with the name of Elton Mayo through his famous Hawthorn study after
1925. His thoughts defy the concept that humans are not feeling-less utilitarian
machines for mere economic output. They have physical as well as psychological needs
and social relationship at work place. Stephen Covey (Covey, 1989) is one of famous
writers on personal success. His famous book Seven Habits of Highly Effective People,
published in 1989, becomes a management model which is equally applicable in
business, social and personal life.
 Behavioral theories of leadership, started after Second World War, opened new Leadership style
avenues about leadership concepts, which negate the personal traits of leadership. The in university
American scientists gave the idea that human behavior could be scientifically
explained and predicted like other things. The first study of its kind was done by libraries
University of Iowa by Kurt Lewin and his associates. The approach to leader behavior
focused on identifying the best leadership styles. Research on the study of behavioral
leadership was initiated at university of Iowa, which makes out democratic, autocratic 255
and laissez-faire styles. Another famous study was done at University of Michigan,
headed by Rensis Likert. Likert identified two styles of leadership, i.e. “job-centered”
and “employee-centered.” There was a drawback in Likert’s study that it did not
propose the preferred pattern of behavior for good leadership. In the 1950s, the
University Personnel Research Board developed two-dimensional model of leadership
behavior (Hughes et al., 2002). Leader behavior description questionnaire (LBDQ)
comprised of 150 examples of definitive leader behaviors were identified by
administering it between 2,000 leaders. They come to the conclusion that leader’s
behavior can be described in two categories:
(1) Initiation structure: degree to which leader considers tasks and directs followers
for the achievement of goals.
(2) Consideration: degree to which leader is empathetic to workers, care their
feelings and develops mutual trust and harmony (Hellriegel, 2001).

Blake and Mouton in 1985 at University of Texas proposed model of Managerial Grid
by using Leadership Opinion Questionnaire (LOQ) to measure the behavior of leader
and followers on scientific bases (Yukl, 2006). The scale used in this study was 1-9
setting on two criteria: concerns for people and production. The score was plotted on
two-dimensional model. The managerial grid’s five leadership styles were
impoverished, country club, produce or perish, middle-of-the road, and team.
The shortcomings of behavioral theories lay claim to call for some more
comprehensive approach to leadership (Bass and Stogdill, 1990). Vecchio (1995)
indicates that “researchers realized that the behavioral approaches did not address the
contextual issues of leadership.” Bass and Stogdill (1990) state “situational theorists
suggested that leadership is all a matter of situational demands, that is, situational
factors determine who will emerge as leader”. Blanchard situational model recognizes
the growth levels of the follower along with the achievement. The leader assesses the
level of competence and commitment keeping the situation and growth pattern of
employees. Effective leaders always move to and fro between various styles according
to situation and development of followers. The development stages of followers and
styles of leaders change accordingly. Four development stages of followers are:
(1) D1: “Low competence low commitment” means poor skills – needs training and
guidance.
(2) D2: “Low competence, high commitment” needs incentives and training.
(3) D3: “High competence, low commitment” needs motivation.
(4) D4: “High competence, high commitment” means follower is experienced and
motivated.

Four styles of leadership are, directing, coaching, supporting, and delegating.

LM Hoy and Miskel (2001) and Lussier and Achua (2001) stated that Max Weber is
31,4/5 perhaps the first man who gave the idea of charismatic leadership in 1947. Basically
the term “charisma” was used to explain a form of influence based on followers’
perceptions that is gifted with exceptional characteristics. By using the exceptional
abilities charismatic leaders ignite followers’ to produce unexpected results, which are
not routine output. Thus, charisma is defined as the ability to influence major
256 modifications in the behaviors and thinking styles of organizational members and
building commitment for the goal achievements. The concept of charismatic leadership
is also criticized by many researchers but many of them have supported it. However,
the charismatic leadership is more apparent in the situation of crises.
Judge and Piccolo were the pioneers to introduce the idea of transactional,
transformational and laissez-faire leadership in 1978. This concept was however
further developed by Bass and Avolio. The fundamental concept is that there exists a
complex exchange between follower and leader. The major topics of transformational
leadership studies are charisma or idealized influence, inspirational motivation,
intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration. “Three dimensions of
transactional leadership like, contingent reward, management by exception active and
management by exception passive were taken as foundations” ( Judge and Piccolo,
1978).
Emotional intelligence is the capability to adaptively perceive, comprehend control,
and exploit emotions in the self and others. The concept is based on the view that
leaders should have accurate judgment and perceive the situation of followers in a total
perspective while expecting to perform any action.

Leadership styles
The role of leadership is largely determined by the culture of the organization. It has
been argued that organization’s “beliefs, values and assumptions are of critical
importance to the overall style of leadership that they adopt” (Bunmi, 2007).
Leadership style is the behavior pattern used by leader to resolve the organizational
issues. There are several different leadership styles that can be identified in various
leaders. Every style has its own set of good and not-so-good characteristics. The
leadership styles we are considering in this study are autocratic, democratic,
laissez-faire. “The autocratic leader dominates team-members, using unilateralism to
achieve a singular objective. This approach to leadership generally results in passive
resistance from team-members and requires continual pressure and direction from the
leader in order to get things done”. Autocrat leaders maintain servant-master
relationships with followers (Adair, 1984). Starrat (2001) states that democratic leader
consults his teem for making any decision however he acts as a central controlling unit
of the team. The democratic leader facilitates the team for initiating any task and gives
them liberty to achieve it at their own free will through mutual understanding. A good
democratic leader always promotes participation and delegates keeping the fact in
mind that he will be ultimately responsible for all outcomes. The laissez-faire leader
does not interfere in the affairs of followers very slightly showing little control on the
group. Participation of leader is very low in the activities of group members. In
laissez-faire leadership style team struggles with negligible direction or motivation
(Bittel, 1989).
Leadership in university libraries of Pakistan Leadership style
Personnel management in Pakistan is too academic in orientation that it loses in university
dynamism, organized action taking and human relation element. Recruitment methods
are so indecent that these cannot evaluate the leader’s potential and leadership libraries
capability. There is difference in service class and management class. Political posting
of heads of departments is also a major factor uprooting the true leadership. There is
no delegation of power, which may help heads of department to make decisions by 257
virtue of authority (Rehman, 1969).
University libraries are the subsidiary bodies of universities being affected by the
management styles of parent organization. Sajjad-ur-Rehman (1990) says that
curriculum of Library and Information Science must teach, planning, evaluation,
personnel management and scientific management. Haq (1991) stresses that university
librarians must adopt western styles of management. Hanif (1986), by mentioning the
problems of university libraries, says that there is lack of leadership in university
libraries in Pakistan.
Organizational culture varies from organization to organization, formal entities
operating in the same industry may exhibit similar values because of alike
environmental factors (Jennifer and Jehn, 1994). Mcdonald and Jeffrey (1992) suggested
four categories of culture based on fit with environment, strategies and values. The
difference lies on the fact, the extent to which external environment requires flexibility
or stability and the extent to which the strategic focus is internal or external. The four
quadrants represents cultural types:
(1) adaptability culture;
(2) achievement culture;
(3) clan culture;
(4) bureaucratic culture.

Libraries must exhibit the relationship between means and ends, facts and values.
Today’s severe problem for university libraries is low staff, salary package and a high
turn over of library staff. People went out of country for the sake of good salaries and
status (Khan, 1979). Librarians should be positioned themselves in an aggressive
manner and should be visible in front line (Khan, 1977).
There are many factors which affect the commitment level of staff in university
libraries. The number of library staff in university libraries in not sufficient, which
creates work pressure. The promotion of library staff is not rapid. Most of the
university libraries are without permanent chief librarian or the grade of chief librarian
less than 19-20. University librarians are normally having dual reporting system, like
Vice Chancellor and Chairman Library Committee (Ali, 1990). Temporary or acting
in-charge will not feel commitment with the library. Social acceptance of library staff is
discriminated as of the other staff in universities. Library staff does not enjoy same
social status as the teaching staff (Khan and Kazim, 1987). A study by Jaswal (1980)
concluded that most librarians are not satisfied with their current jobs. Hanif (1986)
says that highly trained and qualified staff left the country due to the lack of national
commitment. Also the appreciation of library staff from library administrator is poor.
Sabzwari (1986) says that due to the improper respect and status most of the qualified
persons migrate from the country or switch to the reputable institutes.
LM Objectives of the study
31,4/5 The objectives of study are to:
(1) Assess the leadership styles of chief librarians in universities.
(2) Assess organizational culture in university libraries.
(3) Assess job commitment of university librarians.
258 (4) Find out relationship among leadership style, organizational culture and
employee commitment in university libraries.

Research design
A survey was conducted by using a questionnaire of four parts. The first part was
comprised of demographic information of respondents. In the second part T-P
Leadership Questionnaire was used which contained of 35 items. It was developed by
Sergiovanni et al. and has been used in many leadership style studies
(Sophonthummapharn, 2005). The items are derived from the Leadership Behavior
Description (LBDQ). The original LBDQ consists of 100 statements; however shorter
forms of instrument have been developed by reducing the items in latter studies.
Instrument categorizes the leadership style into two types. The variable (leadership
style) in the research was based on task oriented (autocratic) leadership style and
people oriented (laissez-faire) leadership style. In many exploratory and descriptive
studies this instrument was successfully used to derive leadership styles (Brooks, 1982;
Deluga, 2006).
It encompassed 35 questions to find the leadership style of chief librarians as per the
perception of their professional subordinates. Likert scale was used, having five scale
options according to the description of T-P questionnaire:
(1) Always.
(2) Often.
(3) Seldom.
(4) Very rare.
(5) Never.

Library professionals were asked to rate the leadership style items as their degree of
agreement.
.
Phase I. Each respondent was reviewed to allocate the scores of “Task oriented”
(autocratic) and “People oriented” (laissez-faire) style. The allocation of score was
done through the formula (methodology) described in T-P leadership
questionnaire.
. Phase II. According to T-P Leadership Questionnaire the score were allotted on
two scaled lines connected on the base by equal angles showing the score of 100
percent divided equally.
.
Phase III. Cumulative score of leadership style of university chief librarians was
calculated through SPSS.

The organizational culture of libraries was explored through organizational culture

questionnaire (ECQ) and part four consisted of quantification of the level of employee
commitment with their organizations (libraries/universities). The questions were Leadership style
translated in Urdu so that respondents could easily comprehend the questions. in university
The population included qualified librarians (with at least master degree in library
science) from all universities and degree awarding institutions in Punjab and libraries
Islamabad. A list of 44 such organizations was prepared after consulting the web site
of the Higher Education Commission (HEC). The sample was delimited to 30
institutions where at least three librarians, including chief librarian, were working. The 259
total number of professionals in the sample was 197. For data collection, all institutions
were personally visited by the researcher or his trained assistants. Two surveyors were
involved for data collection one of them is serving in a research organization namely
Institute of Research Promotion (IRP) and second was a Master in Business
Administration (MBA) and both have been involved in some researches. The
respondents who filled the questionnaire were 115. Of the rest of the persons 37 refused
to participate in the study while 45 were on leave on the day of visit. The usable
questionnaires (n ¼ 115) were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences
(SPSS).

Results
Leadership style of chief librarians
A total 35 statements were provided to the respondents for the evaluation of leadership
style of their chief librarian. A five-point Likert scale was used to see perceptions of the
respondents about the chief librarians. It contained options like always, often, seldom,
rare and never. Cumulative score of leadership style of university chief librarians was
calculated through SPSS. Table I shows the ratio of dominant leadership styles. It was
discovered that 93 percent of chief librarians fall in the category of autocratic
leadership style and only 7 percent fall in the category of laissez-faire leadership style.
A very high score in favor of autocratic style shows that chief librarians in university
libraries are task oriented.
Autocratic leadership style was the highly dominant leadership style of chief
librarians in the university libraries. A very high score of (93 percent) respondents
shows that chief librarians in university libraries are task oriented. The reasons might
be:
.
Flat organizational structure where chief librarian has to be involved in all types
of library operations and also participate in other university meetings etc. The
researchers reconfirm the phenomenon by asking some questions on telephone
from chief librarians and some respondents. For example it was asked about the
frequency of library staff meetings. Most of the people replied that it was very
rare that chief librarian had called upon a meeting. The agenda of most of the
meetings was just to pass on some orders and instruction instead of sharing and
participation of staff.

Leadership style Frequency Percent

Table I.
Autocratic 107 93 Perceived leadership
Laissez-faire 8 7 style of chief librarians
LM .
Most of the staff in university libraries in junior staff, chief librarians may
consider that it would be useless to involve them in decision making and
31,4/5 strategic issues.
.
In the bureaucratic system of university management, advancing through filing
system is the tradition in the university culture.
.
The orientation of chief librarians is from public sector, which is dominantly
260 tasked oriented in Pakistan.

Organizational culture in libraries

Fourteen sets, of four statements each, were provided with a four-point ranking scale of
preferences (1 – Would not prefer at all, 2 – Would prefer on occasion, 4 – Would
prefer often, 8 – Would prefer most of all). Respondents were asked to rank the
preferences keeping the culture of their organization in mind. Score of preferences (1, 2,
4, 8) was taken from questions and placed in four columns. The score of each column
was added to find the dominant culture of organizations by dividing it to total
frequency of respondents.
Higher number of respondents (44 percent) perceived that their organizations
exhibited achievement culture, second category of respondents (23 percent) perceived
that culture of their organizations was bureaucratic, 11 percent thought that their
organizations displayed adaptability culture and 22 percent supposed that their
organizations demonstrated clan culture (Table II).
In the presence of authoritative leadership it is natural to prevail achievement
culture and bureaucratic in the university libraries. “Libraries are often viewed
through stereotypical lens that might suggest the idea of single dominant or strong
culture” (Kaarst-Brown et al., 2004). The findings of the study confirmed the
dominance of these two cultures. In total 44 percent libraries exhibit achievement
culture while 23 percent respondents alleged about bureaucratic culture. However, the
ratio of clan culture is 22 percent and lowest of the cultures is adaptability (11 percent).
The findings show that dominant organizational culture is authoritative but the ratio
of clan culture is almost equal to clan culture. It means that in the absence of
participation with chief librarians, subordinate staff shares their feelings and issues
with each other.

Employee commitment in libraries

To measure the employee commitment a section of the questionnaire consisted of 15
statements. The data were converted into four levels of commitment, i.e. less, moderate,
high and very high. The results are shown in Table III. The results show that seven
percent respondents felt that they were less committed with their organizations while

Type of organizational culture Frequency Percent

Achievement culture 50 44
Table II. Bureaucratic culture 26 23
Perceived types of Adaptability culture 13 11
organizational culture in Clan culture 25 22
libraries Missing 1 1
most of the respondents (92 percent) were very highly committed with their Leadership style
organizations. Only two percent respondents perceived that they were committed but in university
not very high while none of the respondents showed moderate commitment with their
current organizations. libraries
Relationship between leadership style and organizational culture
In the present study, one of the null hypotheses was that “There is no relationship 261
between leadership style and organizational culture”. After applying the cross
tabulation between the two variables and chi-square test to find the significant
relationship, the values found as: chi-square ¼ 4.55 and p ¼ 0:208, which is higher
than 0.05. It states that there is no significant relationship between the expected and
observed result. It means that leadership style and organizational culture has no
relationship and null hypothesis is accepted (Table IV).
In the studies of other sectors the situation is not same for example in a study of
garments industry of Pakistan it was found that there is a significant relationship
between leadership style and organizational culture (Adnan, 2008).

Relationship between leadership style and employee commitment

An independent sample t-test was performed to see the relationship between employee
commitment and two groups of leadership style. The results (Table V) reveal that the
mean of autocratic leadership style is 3.69 and of laissez-faire leadership style is 3.54.
The results found not to be statistically significant at alpha level 0.05 (t ¼ 0:760). This
means that leadership style has no effect on the commitment of employees in

Level of commitment Frequency Percent

Less committed 7 6
Moderately committed 0 0 Table III.
Highly committed 2 2 Level of employee
Very highly committed 106 92 commitment

Organizational culture
Leadership style Achievement culture Bureaucratic culture Adaptability culture Clan culture

Autocratic 47 25 13 21 Table IV.

Laissez-faire 3 1 0 4 Cross tabulation of
leadership style and
Notes: Pearson chi-square ¼ 4.55, df ¼ 3, Sig. ¼ 0.208 organizational culture

Leadership style Mean SD

Autocratic 3.69 0.55 Table V.

Laissez-faire 3.54 0.55 Results of t-test regarding
employee commitment by
Notes: t ¼ 0.760, Sig. ¼ 0.890 leadership style
LM university libraries. It makes no difference on the commitment of library professionals
31,4/5 that leadership style of their chief librarian is autocratic or laissez-faire. The analysis
shows that the job commitment of the respondents remained unchanged with the
change of leadership style.

Relationship between organizational culture and employee commitment

262 One of the research hypotheses of this study was to examine the difference of opinion
between organizational culture and employee commitment as measured by
Organizational Culture Questionnaire (OCQ) and Employee Commitment
Questionnaire (ECQ) among the university librarians. One-way ANOVA test was used
to see the significant relationship in different types of organizational culture and the level
of commitment. Results (Table VI) show that there is a significant relationship among
the organizational culture and employee commitment in the surveyed university
libraries. The analysis reveals (F ¼ 2:789 and mean difference with achievement culture
is 4, SD ¼ 0:58 with bureaucratic culture is 3.47, SD ¼ 0:50, with adaptability culture is
3.50, SD ¼ 0.57 and with clan culture is 3.83, SD ¼ 0:46) that change in organizational
culture has a significant effect on the commitment of professionals.
Once the results of ANOVA become significant, it necessitates the post hoc multiple
comparison test to see the significant relationship between all possible pairs. For this
purpose LSD procedure was used in the analysis. Table VII shows values of the test.
The results show that the job commitment of professionals working in achievement
culture is higher than those working in bureaucratic culture. Similarly the mean job
commitment of those working in clan culture is higher than those of bureaucratic
culture.

Type of organizational culture Mean SD

Table VI. Achievement culture 3.80 0.58
ANOVA table for Bureaucratic culture 3.47 0.50
responses of different Adaptability culture 3.50 0.57
types of organizational Clan culture 3.83 0.46
culture on employee
commitment Notes: F ¼ 2.789, Sig. ¼ 0.044

Type of organizational culture Mean difference Sig.

Achievement culture
Bureaucratic culture 0.28 0.031 *
Adaptability culture 0.26 0.130
Clan culture 2 0.08 0.553
Table VII.
Bureaucratic culture
Post hoc multiple
Adaptability culture 2 0.03 0.878
comparison analysis for
Clan culture 2 0.36 0.018 *
different types of
Adaptability culture
organizational culture
Clan vulture 2 0.33 0.072
and employee
commitment Notes: * Significant at 0.05 level
Discussion and conclusion Leadership style
Literature has established the facts that conceptual framework including factors of in university
leadership style, organizational culture and employee commitment constitute links
between one another. The study was administered in university libraries on the basis libraries
of standard models of leadership styles, organizational cultures and employee
commitment. These items involve communication, facilitation and involvement
through participation etc. The study was based on quantitative method for which 263
standard questionnaires were used after Urdu translation so that the understanding of
terminology would be made easy. The study brought to light the influence of
leadership style, organizational culture and commitment of library professionals. The
focus was to develop strategic concerns for appropriate leadership style, culture and
how the level of commitment can be enhanced in university libraries. As far as
academic world is concerned, the study adds to the repertoire of knowledge in the area
of library management.
The research was conducted with the curiosity to explore the leadership style,
organizational culture and employee commitment of university libraries in Pakistan
but the scarcity of literature in the area was a calamity. However, the available studies
in the area of university librarianship helped in this regard. Much less is known about
this phenomenon in academia of Pakistan especially, in the field of librarianship. So the
researchers had to consult the relevant studies in corporate as well as public sector
other than librarianship with the hope to contribute in the body of knowledge in the
area of librarianship.
Before drawing general conclusion about leadership style of university chief
librarians some limitations to the study may be discussed. The concept examining
leadership style of chief librarians was somewhat astonishing for library professionals
and some of them felt reluctant to fill the questionnaire. A major concern for such
studies might to explore the relationship of such variables with performance and
productivity while no measure of performance could be inducted in case of libraries. In
spite of some limitations of the study the over all results are satisfactory. As a
conclusion we can state that the general leadership style is the same and the
subordinates are contented with their tasks and they are motivated to work. This
finding is surprising because the most of the previous researches prove the relationship
between leadership styles, organizational cultures and employee commitment. In the
studies by Burd (2003), Murray (1999), Lynch (2000), Faerman (1993), Hernon et al.
(2003) it was concluded that leadership styles have relationship with the cultures and
commitment.
Library professionals have thrill to excel for tasks. It is a motivational factor for the
library professionals. Maehr (1990) has studied relationship between organizational
culture and motivation and concluded that culture shapes up the “psychological
environment” in the organizations. It has been however seen through this study that
library professionals favor their culture for learning development and professional
growth. The other dominant culture explored in this study is bureaucratic in the
university libraries. It is suggested in many studies of university libraries that
organizational learning will not take place if library administrator will not develop a
culture that supports transformation (Castiglione, 2006; Bell, 2005; Gieseck and McNeil,
1999; McConnel, 2004). Clan culture is the least found culture in university libraries. It
is however considered by the library professionals that adaptability culture should be
LM promoted in libraries and significant relationship is found in both achievement culture
31,4/5 and adaptability culture especially the professionals in large university libraries are
inclined toward this type of combination.
The results of employee commitment were very interesting. It was explored through
the study that library professionals are highly committed with their organizations.
This commitment is like potential energy, which can only be effectively used by the
264 library leaders by converting it into kinetic energy through leadership skills. This is
the generation of commitment and the force of commitment can be utilized by creating
“sense of identity, unity of purpose to the members of organization, and facilitating the
generation of commitment and shaping the behavior by providing the guidance on
what is expected” (Adeyoyn, 2006). There are many strategies, which can be beneficial
for utilizing this potential, like training and development, reward system, recognition
etc.
Keeping in view the findings of this study it is recommended that training programs
should be arranged for the development of leadership skills in library professionals.
Especially, senior professionals must be sent for such training in corporate sector etc.
Library schools and library associations can also play a pivotal role in this regard.
Further research can be helpful to make betterment in the areas of leadership, culture
and employee commitment in libraries.

References
Adair, J. (1984), The Skills of Leadership, Gower, Aldershot.
Adeyoyn, S.O. (2006), “Managing the library’s corporate culture for organizational efficiency,
productivity, and enhanced service”, Library Philosophy and Practice, Vol. 8 No. 2,
pp. 53-64.
Adnan, A. (2008), “Organizational climate and employee commitment: a study of Pakistani
knitwear industry”, Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 124-33.
Ali, Y. (1990), “University libraries in Pakistan: a profile”, PULLSA News, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 49-70.
Bass, B.M. (1990a), “From transactional to transformational leadership: learning to share the
vision”, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 19-31.
Bass, B.M. (1990b), Handbook of Leadership, Free Press, New York, NY.
Bass, B.M. and Stogdill, R.M. (1990), Handbook of Leadership: A Survey of Literature, Freeman
Press, New York, NY.
Bell, S.J. (2005), “Submitt or resist: librarianship in the age of Google”, American Libraries, Vol. 36
No. 9, pp. 68-71.
Bittel, L.R. (1989), The McGraw-Hill 36-hour Management Course, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Brooks, D. (1982), “An investigation of the leadership style of selected basketball coaches”,
available at: www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/
80/2e/02/20.pdf (accessed December 6, 2007).
Bunmi, O. (2007), “Effects of leadership style on job related tension and psychological sense of
community in work organizations: a case study of four organizations in Lagos State,
Nigeria”, Bangladesh Journal of Sociology, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 45-73.
Burd, B. (2003), “Work values of academic librarians: exploring the relationship between values,
job satisfaction commitment and intent to leave”, available at: www.ala.org/ala/acrl/
acrlevents/burd.pdf (accessed December 6, 2007).
Burns, J.M. (1978), Leadership, Harper & Row, New York, NY.
Castiglione, J. (2006), “Organizational leadership and transformational leadership in the library Leadership style
environment”, Library Management, Vol. 27 Nos 4/5, pp. 289-99.
Covey, S. (1989), Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, Simon and Schuster, New York, NY.
in university
Deluga, R.J. (2006), “The politics of leadership: the relationship between task-people leadership
libraries
and subordinate influence”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 359-66.
Drucker, P.F. (1996), The Executive in Action: Managing for Results Innovation and
Entrepreneurship, Harper Collins, New York, NY. 265
Faerman, S.R. (1993), “Organizational change and leadership style”, Journal of Library
Administration, Vol. 19 Nos 3-4, pp. 55-79.
Gieseck, J. and McNeil, B. (1999), “Core competencies and learning organizations”, Library
Administration and Management, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 158-66.
Hanif, A. (1986), “University libraries and national reconstruction in Pakistan”, Pakistan Library
Bulletin, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 17-31.
Haq, I. (1991b), “Needed transformation in the role of librarians”, PULSAA News, Vol. 4 No. 1,
pp. 21-5.
Hellriegel, D. (2001), Organizational Behavior, 9th ed., South-Western College Publications,
Australia.
Hernon, P., Powell, R.R. and Young, A.P. (2003), Next Library Leadership: Attributes of Academic
and Public Library Directors, Libraries Unlimited, West Post, CT.
Hoy, W.K. and Hoy, K.H. (2006), Instructional Leadership: A Learning Centered Guide for
Principals, 2nd ed., Allyn & Bacon, Boston, MA.
Hoy, W.K. and Miskel, C.G. (2001), Educational Administration: Theory, Research, and Practice,
6th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Hughes, R., Ginnet, R. and Curphy, G. (2002), Leadership: Enhancing the Lesson of Experience,
4th ed., McGraw-Hill/Irwin, Boston, MA.
Jaswal, B.A. (1980), “Role expectations: a study of librarians working in departments and
institutes”, unpublished masters thesis, Department of Library and Information Science,
University of the Punjab, Lahore.
Jennifer, A.C. and Jehn, K.A. (1994), “Assessing relationship between industry characteristics and
organizational culture: how different can you be?”, Academy of Management Journal,
Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 522-53.
Judge, T.A. and Piccolo, R.F. (1978), “Leadership dynamics”, Journal of Applied Psychology,
Vol. 23, pp. 755-78.
Kaarst-Brown, M.L., Nicholson, S., Dran, G.M. and Stanton, J.M. (2004), “Organizational cultures
of libraries as a strategic resource”, Library Trends, Vol. 53 No. 1, pp. 341-63.
Khan, A.U. (1979), Proceedings of PLA 11th Conference on: Libraries and Documentation Centers
in National Development and Need for National Information System, from 16-18 October,
Islamabad.
Khan, M.S. (1977), Proceedings of Seminar on Problems of University Libraries in Sindh,
Department of Libraries, University of Karachi, Karachi.
Khan, N.A. and Kazim, M. (1987), “Education and university libraries in Pakistan”, Pakistan
Library Bulletin, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 25-44.
Lussier, R.N. and Achua, C.F. (2001), Leadership: Theory, Application and Skill Development,
South-West College Publishing, Cincinnati, OH.
Lynch, M.J. (2000), “What we know about librarians: ALA member survey conducted by
READEX”, American Libraries, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 8-9.
LM McConnell, C. (2004), “Staff and leadership shortages: grow your own”, American Libraries,
Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 34-6.
31,4/5 Mcdonald, P. and Jeffery, L. (1992), “Getting values from shared values”, Organizational
Dynamics, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 64-76.
Maehr, M. (1990), The Psychological Environment of the School: A Focus for School Leadership,
National Center for School Leadership, Illinois.
266 Murray, R.A. (1999), “Job satisfaction of professional and paraprofessional library staff at
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill”, master thesis, University of North Carolina,
Chapel Hill, NC.
Rehman, M.A. (1969), Administrative Reforms in Pakistan, Administrative Staff College, Lahore.
Sabzwari, G.A. (1986), “University library standards for Pakistan: a proposal”, Pakistan Library
Bulletin, Vol. 16 Nos 3-4, pp. 1-50.
Sajjad-ur-Rehman (1990), “Revision of library science curriculum”, PULSAA News, Vol. 2 No. 3,
pp. 127-42.
Scott, A. (2004), “Machiavelli’s: The Prince”, available at: www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/
machiavelli.html
Sophonthummapharn, K. (2005), “Leadership styles and e-commerce adoption: An analysis of
Thai food exporters”, master’s dissertation, School of Management, Blekinge Institute of
Technology, available at: www.bth.se/fou/cuppsats.nsf/all/157c521b6f522189c1257023006
29878/$file/FinalThesis_Kittipong.pdf
Starrat, R.J. (2001), “Democratic leadership theory in late modernity: an oxymoron or ironic
possibility”, International Journal of Leadership in Education, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 333-52.
Vecchio, R.P. (1995), Organizational Behavior, 3rd ed., Harcourt Brace & Company, Fort Worth,
TX.
Yukl, G.A. (2006), Leadership in Organizations, 6th ed., Prentice-Hall, New York, NY.

Further reading
Bartel, T.M.C. (2005), “Factors associated with attachment in international adoption”, doctoral
dissertation, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS, available at: http://krex.ksu.edu/
dspace/bitstream/2097/131/1/TeresaBartel2005.pdf
Bass, B.M. (1985), Leadership and Performance beyond Expectations, Free Press, New York, NY.
Sardhar, P.M. (n.d.), “Leadership styles”, available at: www.citehr.com/50222-leadership-styles.
html

Corresponding author
Muhammad Rafiq Awan can be contacted at: rafiqawan@gmail.com

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints