Leading beyond the Job Description: Investigating the Association between Principals’ Leadership Styles and Teachers’ Organizational Citizenship Behaviors in North Wollo Secondary Schools

1.1. Statements of the problem

In Ethiopia, the primary method of decision-making for the development of school leadership programs was dominated by political command. Unfortunately, these choices were not inclusive of educational stakeholders and frequently failed to incorporate the needs and concerns of the principals (Gedifew, 2025; Tesfaye, 2018). Additionally, the evolution of school leadership was characterized by inconsistency, fluctuating rather than consistently advancing. Consequently, school leadership was not able to make the necessary contribution to the effectiveness of Ethiopian education (Ministry of Education [MoE], 2023).

As the “new” Ethiopian education policy criticized not paying a high premium for relevance and quality (Demeke, 2011), the MoE released an updated long-term education development plan to transform the education sector (MoE, 2023). Regarding school leadership, this framework states that insufficient qualifications of administrative staff and partners in the secondary education sector are one of the major shortcomings. The official documentation also recommended that the Ministry of Education should reconsider the current administrative structure of school leadership in secondary education so that the problems with teacher management can be solved (MoE, 2023). These recommendations indicate that the overall functioning of both school leadership and teachers was in a critical situation, which directly affected school effectiveness.

Recent international studies indicate that transformational leadership in principals and teachers’ OCBs has a significant positive correlation (r = .387, p < .005), suggesting consistent patterns across diverse global educational climates (Fang & Yu, 2023; Sharma & Yadav, 2024). However, the generalizability of these international quantitative findings to the Ethiopian context is limited by several factors. Many of these foundational studies were conducted exclusively in urban areas within middle-income countries like Turkey or India, failing to consider the significant geographic, cultural, economic, and political differences unique to Ethiopia (Assefa, 2024). Also, a sole reliance on quantitative methods in global literature prohibits the triangulation of results. Additionally, much of the existing sample data remains limited to elementary schools, where teacher conditions and academic standards differ significantly from those in secondary schools. Hence, it is important to exercise caution when applying external results to Ethiopia because there are significant differences in both context and method.

Conversely, some contemporary findings suggest that transformational and transactional leadership styles do not always directly affect teachers’ OCBs (Arar & Abu-Nasra, 2020). This deviation from conventional literature may be due to a methodological limitation, particularly when measurement instruments fail to account for overlapping leadership styles and overall structural outcomes. These specific findings contradict a significant body of contemporary research linking OCB to transformational, transactional, or laissez-faire leadership paradigms (Constantinou, 2025; Hermanto et al., 2024).

Locally, the performance of Ethiopian private higher educational institutions was best predicted by Markos and Bezabih (2022), who identified altruism as the most significant predictor due to sportsmanship, conscientiousness, and civic virtues. Nevertheless, Temesgen and Melaku (2022) conducted a qualitative study in Bahir Dar elementary schools and discovered varying scores for civic virtue, sportsmanship, conscientiousness, courtesy, and altruism. This contrast demonstrates how OCB practices and their perceived significance may vary significantly between educational levels (elementary vs. higher education) and contexts (urban vs. rural). Moreover, these distinctions highlight the overall problem that OCB in education is still not fully explored in developing countries, where cross-cultural differences in leadership and expectations are crucial for improved outcomes.

Another local study by Desta (2018), which solely examined the OCB dimensions of altruism, conscientiousness, and civic virtue, explicitly encouraged additional research to include the neglected aspects of sportsmanship and courtesy. This research seeks to bridge the divide and enhance universal applicability by examining the correlation between three principals’ leadership styles and all five OCB dimensions in secondary schools located in the North Wollo Zone of the Amhara Region. It concludes with relevant local studies demonstrating that the use of OCBs among teachers yields different outcomes within schools. This divergence can be attributed to various factors, such as insufficient teacher ownership (Temesgen & Melaku, 2022) and the complex impact of modern principal leadership styles (Fang & Yu, 2023). Also, insufficient leadership practices and inadequate governmental emphasis on secondary education contribute to this gap (Assefa, 2024; Elias, 2020).

In order to address contextual and methodological gaps uncovered by the results, this research investigates the relationships and practices among principals’ leadership styles and teachers’ OCBs in Amhara State secondary schools within the North Wollo Zone during the 2024/2025 academic year. Therefore, the primary objective of this study is to investigate the leadership styles of principals and their corresponding Organizational Citizenship Behaviors (OCBs) of teachers in secondary schools within the North Wollo administrative Zone. The research will examine three key questions:

1.2. Objectives of the Study

The general objective of this study is to investigate the practices and association between principals’ leadership styles and teachers’ OCBs in North Wollo Zone secondary schools. Under this general objective, specific objectives include:

1.3. Conceptual framework

The conceptual framework of this study goes beyond the theoretical basis set in the introduction to examine how the dependent variable, teachers’ OCBs practices is related with independent variables identified as independent factors. According to the framework, which is based on established theories (Bass, 1995; Organ, 1988), these styles are designed to predict voluntary and discretionary behaviors that are essential for school performance. It is anticipated that OCB will have a favorable impression of transformational leadership. OCB and job satisfaction in Africa are consistently positively linked to this style, which promotes intrinsic motivation and shared purpose (Akullo & Kamanyire, 2023; Le, 2026; Liu et al., 2024; Mugizi et al., 2019). A mixed or weakly positive relationship is believed to exist between transactional leadership and teachers’ OCBs. While the contingent reward dimension can be beneficial, its management-by-exception dimension is often counterproductive and results in inconsistent empirical results (Ludwikowska et al., 2024).

Teachers’ OCBs will reduce due to the laissez-faire leadership approach. This approach, as noted by McIntyre (2026) and Yohannes & Wasonga (2021), is associated with reduced staff motivation, a decreased sense of responsibility, and lower productivity due to the lack or absenteeism of school leaders (laissez-faire leadership style). Dimensions of OCBs are extensively used by contemporary researchers evaluating educational environments (Adnan et al., 2026; Atış and Avcı, 2026; Öz, 2026). These include altruism, courtesy, sportsmanship, civic virtue, and conscientiousness. Additionally, the framework was based on theories of leadership and organizational behavior, which highlighted how various types or models of leadership can predict teachers’ OCBs that impact school performance (Bass & Riggio, 2006; Organ, 2018). Based on these, the conceptual framework of this research suggests that transformational leadership has a positive impact on teachers’ OCB in North Wollo secondary schools, while transactional and laissez-faire leadership have weak and negative impact respectively (See Figure 1).

Fig. 1. Conceptual Framework (Source: Literature review).

This diagram maps the hypothesized predictive pathways between independent variables (Principals’ Transformational, Transactional, and Laissez-faire leadership styles) and dependent variable (Teachers’ Organizational Citizenship Behaviors) based on the Multifactor Leadership Theory and OCB Theory.

2.1. Research design

The research was based on a pragmatic approach, as it is considered the philosophical cohort for the mixed methods approach. Pragmatism, as per the researchers, provides a framework for knowledge and promotes pragmatic approaches, which set it apart from post-positivism and constructivism (Maxcy, 2003; Rallis & Rossman, 2003; Johnson & O'Neill, 2014). The researcher used an explanatory sequential mixed methods design (QUAN→qual). The design comprises of two steps: the quantitative data collection and analysis, followed by the qualitative phase based on numerical results of quantitative phase.

In quantitative part of the study, correlational design was employed to assess the strength, direction, and extent of the relationship (Creswell, 2014) between the leadership styles of principals and the OCBs of teachers. Then, Qualitative case studies are chosen to provide a deeper understanding of why specific variables are significant predictors. Therefore, case selection was guided by examining a combination of typical cases and significant predictors (Creswell and Creswell, 2018).

2.2. Population, sampling techniques and sample size

This research targeted a total population of 55 principals and 2522 teachers (1927 male and 595 female) from secondary schools located in the North Wollo administrative zone. The researcher conducted the quantitative phase using a multi-stage sampling method. The first phase involved categorizing schools into two clusters or strata (Urban and Rural) to ensure balanced representation. The second stage involved the selection of 13 secondary schools (5 urban and 7 rural) for each stratum, using a simple random sampling method. Using a proportional sampling technique, teachers were selected proportionally from each school that was selected in the second stage. The selection of sample teachers was done using Cochran’s (1977) formula, which is suitable for a large population, reduction of error, and accuracy in determining optimal sample size given. Therefore, 334 teachers were selected as a sample. Purposive sampling was used to select seven principals for an interview in the qualitative phase because experienced ones can provide discerning predictions about their leadership style and staff’s OCB. (See Table 1).

2.3. Data collection instruments

By using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ-5X rater form) developed by Avolio & Bass (2004), teachers rated the leadership styles of the principals. The MLQ-5X (rater-form) was chosen because it provides an edge by emphasizing the different leadership types, leading to a more precise assessment and more leadership development strategies (Gougas & Malinova, 2021), and is extensively proven in educational settings (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004; Tigist, Zenebe, & Belete, 2023). This instrument examines three types of leadership styles (transformational, transactional and laissez-faire) at the same time. MLQ comprises 45 questions on a five-point scale of 0 to 4, (0 = not at all to 4 = frequently, if not always).

This study utilized Podsakoff, Ahearne & MacKenzie (1997) 24-item OCB scale that was later modified by Herren (2014). This instrument examines the five fundamental aspects of OCBs (altruism, conscientiousness, sportsmanship, courtesy, and civic virtue). Teachers used a five-point Likert scale to determine their level of agreement with each statement, starting from “Strongly Disagree” (1) and ending at “Slightly Agree” (5). The semi-structured interview that was self-prepared was used to gather information from principals on their leadership styles and teachers’ OCBs in their schools.

2.4. Validity and reliability

In the pilot study phase, all instruments used to gather data were thoroughly tested for their validity. The internal consistency of the research instrument was confirmed in a pilot test with 90 teachers from Millennium Secondary School in Woldia town, where high Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients for transformational leadership style (α =0.97), transactional Leadership style (α =0.88), laissez-faire leadership (α =0.87) and teachers’ organizational citizenship behavior (α =0.89) were confirmed. These values are validated in previous studies. For example, Research on OCB has revealed an alpha coefficient of α = 0.75 (Niazi 2005) and α =0.94 (Karabatak, Alanoglu & Sebgur 2018).

In the main investigation, the reliability was verified and produced similarly robust outcomes for transformational, transactional, laissez-faire leadership styles and teachers’ OCBs (α =0.96, 0.87, 0.88, and 0.909, respectively), with internal consistency that ranged from satisfactory to high across all variables. This high-reliability finding indicates that the items within each construct accurately accounted for their intended theoretical domains (Pallant, 2020), providing a strong empirical basis for the study.

2.5. Data Analysis techniques and procedures

The surveyed quantitative data were analyzed by using descriptive and inferential analysis. Descriptive statistics were employed to analyze the quantitative data for frequencies, averages and patterns describing the demographic data of the participants. Mean values and standard deviations were also used to examine opinion, and the extent of implementations of PLS and TOCB in sample schools. Inferential statistics were employed to compare mean differences among respondent groups regarding the variables’ practices, analyze their relationships, and determine the predictive power of the independent variables on the dependent variable.

Pearson Product-moment correlation analysis was employed using SPSS version 20 and tested using a level of significance of 0.05. Hence, it allows testing of the strength and direction of the relationships between scores obtained and showing the predictability of variables (PLS & OCB) (Creswell, 2014). Multiple linear regressions was employed to see which independent variable (Transformational leadership, Transactional leadership, and Laissez-fair leadership) has the highest Beta coefficient, signifying it has the most influence on to the dependent variable (TOCB).

To determine the internal consistency, linearity, and multicollinearity of the instrument, it was first tested for normality (Isacco & Mores, 2015) before analysis of main data. In order to assess missing values, outliers, and errors, we examined the skewness and kurtosis coefficient (Leithwood and Sun, 2012). Both descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS version 20 software (See appendices).

3.1. Demographic characteristics of participants

The 303 teacher respondents’ key demographic variables are presented in Table 1. 84.8 per cent of the sample was comprised of males, while urban school population made up 55.8%. The majority of teachers were graduated with either a BA (40.6%) or BSc (28.1%). Among those with teaching experience, the majority had 11–15 years (31.0%).

3.2. Status of principals’ leadership styles

Table 2 shows that the prevalence of transformational leadership (M = 2.88, SD = 0.55) was higher than either transactional leaders (M = 2.82, SD = 0.51) or laissez-faire (M = 2.44, SD = 0.72) leadership styles.

For transformational leadership, all dimensions show mean scores consistently around the 2.8 to 2.9 range. Specifically, Idealized Behaviors (M = 2.92, SD = 0.52) and intellectual stimulation (M = 2.91, SD = 0.56) exhibit higher mean scores, suggesting that leaders are perceived as embodying desired values and encouraging innovative thinking more often. Idealized Attributes (M = 2.89, SD = 0.54) and Inspirational Motivation (M = 2.84, SD = 0.55) also indicate a moderate practice of leaders serving as role models and inspiring followers. Individual Consideration (M = 2.79, SD = 0.56) shows the lowest mean among the transformational dimensions, implying that personalized attention to followers’ needs is somewhat less prevalent. Relatively small standard deviations across these dimensions suggest a consistent level of practice for each.

Within transactional leadership, contingent reward (M = 2.86, SD = 0.50) is practiced more frequently than management by exception/Active (M = 2.79, SD = 0.53). This indicates that leaders are more likely to provide rewards for achieving goals and clarify expectations, rather than actively monitoring for deviations from standards. The third leadership style is further underscored by the Laissez-faire leadership style, which exhibits the lowest overall mean (M = 2.44, SD = 0.72) among all leadership styles and their dimensions. This indicates a general tendency for leaders to avoid responsibility and decision-making less often, which is a positive sign for organizational engagement.

3.3. Status of teachers’ OCBs

As described in Table 3, secondary school teachers engaging in OCBs at a moderate level (M = 3.32). The mean scores across the dimensions highlights some interesting differences. Sportsmanship (M = 3.43, SD = 0.70) and Courtesy (M = 3.36, SD = 0.71) received the highest mean scores, suggesting that teachers are more likely to demonstrate a positive attitude in the face of minor annoyances and to take preventative steps to avoid problems with colleagues. These findings imply a relatively harmonious and resilient work environment where teachers are willing to endure less-than-ideal circumstances without complaining and are proactive in their interpersonal interactions. This is a positive indicator for overall workplace climate and collegiality.

Conversely, the Conscientiousness dimension produced the smallest average score (M = 3.17, SD = 0.83). This implies that teachers may not always be responsible for meeting standards, being punctual, and meticulous in their work. Although still in the moderate range, this lower score could be a potential area for professional development and training. At a moderate level, teachers did demonstrate some kind behavior toward coworkers and participate in the school community, although not as often as sportsmanship or civic virtue. Additionally, Altruism (M = 3.34, SD = 0.78) and Civic Virtue (M = 3.31, SD = 0.85) were observed at an average level.

3.4. Association between leadership styles and teachers’ OCBs

Table 4 revealed that a significant positive correlation existed between teachers’ OCBs and transformational leadership style (r = .69, p < 001). A comparison of the two outcomes was also noteworthy. Teachers who view their principals as more influential are likely to have higher levels of OCBs, according to the findings. A strong positive association for transactional leadership was also observed (r = .61, p < 001). In comparison, there was a strong negative correlation (r = −.55, p < 001) for laissez-faire leadership. Conversely, inter-leadership correlations indicate that transformational and transactional leadership styles are frequently coexisting (r = 0.682, p < .001), and both exhibit negative associations with laissez-faire leadership, although not strongly. The transformational (r = −0.303) is highly challenging in contrast to the transactional (r = − 0.197).

3.5. Predictive power of principals’ leadership styles on teachers’ OCBs

The use of multiple regression analysis was necessary to determine the distinct role that each leadership style played in accounting for variance in teacher OCB. This model was important, accounting for about 64 percent of the variance in OCB (Adjusted R² = .634).

As presented in Table 5, the predictor variables, transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership, exhibit a positive correlation between the dependent variable and teachers’ OCB, with R values of.799. The high R value indicates that these leadership styles are effective in forecasting differences in Teachers’ OCB. A linear combination of the three leadership styles included in the model accounts for 63.8% (the overall variation) of Teachers’ OCBs. Adjusted R² (.634) is a conservative approximation of the population R², which takes into account the number of predictors in that model and also the size of this sample. The Standard Error of the Estimate is.37463. The included leadership styles can accurately predict teachers’ OCB, with a precision of.37463 in this case. The Durbin-Watson statistic reaches 1.933. Autocorrelation is identified in the residuals (errors) of a regression analysis by means of this statistic.

The absence of significant autocorrelation is indicated by a value near 2. However, 1.933 is close to 2, which means that the assumption of independent errors is fulfilled, and there’s no need to worry about whether the residuals have positive or negative correlation. The regression findings become more dependable. In summary, the model demonstrates that the regression model has a high explanatory power and is strong predictor of teachers’ OCB with sufficiently satisfying statistical assumptions.

In addition, Table 6 exhibited that transformational leadership was a statistically significant positive predictor of teachers’ OCB (B = 0.464, t = 7.853, p < .001). This implies that, for every one-unit increase in transformational leadership, teachers’ OCB is predicted to increase by 0.464 units, holding all other predictors constant. The standardized beta coefficient (β = 0.385) indicates that transformational leadership has a substantial unique contribution to explaining the variance in teachers’ OCB.

Transactional leadership also emerged as a statistically significant positive predictor of teachers’ OCB (B = 0.349, t = 5.716, p < .001). A one-unit increase in transactional leadership is associated with a 0.349-unit increase in teachers’ OCB, assuming other variables remain constant. The standardized beta coefficient (β = 0.272) suggests a notable unique contribution of transactional leadership to teachers’ OCB, though slightly less than that of transformational leadership.

Conversely, laissez-fair leadership was a statistically significant negative predictor of teachers’ OCB (B = −0.352, t = −10.378, p < .001). This indicates that for every one-unit increase in laissez-fair leadership, teachers’ OCB is predicted to decrease by 0.352 units, holding other predictors constant. The standardized beta coefficient (β = −0.379) suggests that laissez-fair leadership has a strong negative unique contribution to teachers’ OCB.

The Collinearity statistics (Tolerance and VIF) indicate that multicollinearity is not a significant concern in this model. All tolerance values are above 0.1, and all VIF values are well below 10 (Transformational VIF = 1.980; Transactional VIF = 1.870; Laissez-Fair VIF = 1.102). These values suggest that the independent variables are not overly correlated with each other, allowing for reliable interpretation of their individual effects on the dependent variable.

Semi-structured interviews results suggested the main causes of reduced teachers OCB dimensions in the conflict affected areas, North Wollo administrative Zone. Teaching is often discouraged from helping others because of stress, exhaustion, and survival concerns. Conscientiousness has led to a decrease in punctuality, preparation time, and voluntary effort, resulting in system disruptions and teachers burnout. Furthermore, conflict affected courtesy heightened with staff members who experienced stress, distrust, and anxiety. The existing conflict also affects teachers’ sportsmanship by making more frustration, complaints, pessimism, and a lack of tolerance for hardship. Due to insecurity and hopelessness, individual teacher exhibit reduced participation in meetings, committees, and school improvement activities (civic virtue).