The Relationship Between Leadership Style And Employee Engagement

Published Date: 23 Mar 2015 Last Modified: 28 Apr 2017

Introduction

Organizational effectiveness is essential in today's fast growing organizations where competitiveness is the main feature of the contemporary business. Leadership is the main determinant of organizational effectiveness and is the major identifier of an engaged workforce. The most common leadership style is the Traditional leadership style which is administered in almost all companies of the Petroleum Sector in Egypt with its public companies, joint companies and even part of the investment companies, a leadership style enforcing the concepts of power and authority. The traditional leadership style aims to keep things the same and doesn't promote the engagement of the employees that is not part of their job descriptions and emerges as a result of personal choices.

The leadership style applied in the petroleum companies needs to evolve from the traditional approach. It needs to apply leadership styles where the leader is capable of transforming and developing his employees' behaviors and benefiting from their efforts would achieve positive contribution to overall organizational effectiveness. This should be through adopting an attitude that supports and enhances motivation and performance of his followers allowing them to exceed their own expectations optimizing their performance to achieve such effectiveness.

In some cases, transactional leadership is administered where the leader promotes compliance of his followers through both rewards and punishments and is not looking to change the future. This type of leadership focuses on getting the work done by their followers. Transactional leadership works within the organization culture through management by exception to maintain status quo and stress corrective actions to improve performance.

Whereas, the transformational leadership changes the organization culture through its behaviors where the leader affects the followers' sense of identity and motivation aiming to achieve performance beyond expectations and employee engagement hence contributing to the main objective which is the organizational effectiveness. Leadership style is a strategic tool that needs to be practiced on a large span to assure employee engagement in order to comply with the surrounding dynamic environment.

Statement of Research Problem

The leadership style administered in the Egyptian petroleum companies is a traditional one enforcing the concepts of power and authority. This traditional style doesn't promote the engagement attitudes of the employees that are not part of their job descriptions that emerge as a result of personal choices. The leadership behaviors need to evolve to support the behaviors of leaders who are capable of transforming and developing their employees' behaviors and benefiting from their efforts would achieve positive contribution to overall organizational effectiveness.

Thus, the problem of this study can be stated in the following statement: What is the relationship between the leadership style and employee engagement?

Research Objectives

The main research objective is to investigate the leadership behaviors that are able to develop employees' engagement by:

Analyzing the reality of petroleum companies (area of the study) regarding the leadership style used in these companies and whether it has a relationship with employee engagement or not.

Using the appropriate behavioral methods to acquire and maintain employees' engagement.

Providing some recommendations to the responsible people in the petroleum companies regarding what should be done to enhance the relationship between the employees and their supervisors or leaders that would be guiding for future studies on the effect of leadership behaviors both transactional and transformational on employee engagement.

Research Importance

The academic importance:

This research will be an addition to the academic research because there is scarcity in the research topic, transactional and transformational leadership, and dealing with these leadership styles in the petroleum companies.

The empirical importance:

The empirical importance of this research lies in providing the petroleum companies with the results and the recommendations of the research that can be implemented for maintaining employee engagement aiming to achieve organizational effectiveness.

Literature Review

In the last two decades, many researches have covered the various leadership styles and many behavioral attributes one of them is employee engagement. Below is a summary of the literature review that the researcher read on the study variables, transactional leadership, transformational leadership and employee engagement.

Study

Variables

Sample

Results

Lale, Zahide and Giles, Journal of Business Research, 2012

Independent:

Transformational leadership

Dependent:

Commitment

445 personnel of R&D

Transformational leadership has a significant influence on followers' organizational commitment where transformational leaders enhance perceptions of organizational commitment.

Flavia, Valter and Mateus , The Leadership Quarterly, 2012

Independent:

Individual Differences

Managerial Performance

Mediator:

Transformational Leadership

Dependent:

Leadership effectiveness

134 midlevel managers

Leadership effectiveness is a function of transformational behaviors, and also effectiveness is a function of individual differences (experience, intelligence and conscientiousness) that are working through transformational behaviors.

Jonathan, Ontario International Development Agency ISSN: 1923-6654 (print), 2012

Independent:

Transactional and transformational leadership Behaviors

Dependent:

Governmental Organizational Performance

372

Transformational leadership behaviors have an impact on organizational performance, as leaders who use transformational leadership as their main leadership style have an impact on organizational performance over leaders who use transactional style.

Xiao-Hua and Jane, The Leadership Quarterly, 2012

Independent:

Group Transformational

Leadership Behavior

Individual Transformational Leadership Behavior

Dependent:

Group Performance

Individual Performance

200 team members

60 leaders

Transformational leadership behaviors influence performance outcomes at both cross levels (Group level & Individual level).

Seyyed, Fatemeh and Farnoosh, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2011

Independent:

Transformational Leadership

Dependent:

Organizational Learning

120

Transformational leadership has a significant relation with organizational learning.

Karina and Kevin, The Leadership Quarterly, 2011

Independent:

Group-level and Differentiated transformational leadership

Dependent:

Well-being

425 followers

56 leaders

Differentiated transformational leadership has a relationship with indicators of well-being.

Group transformational leadership had to be studied more as the results didn't show significant relation.

Yong-Ki et al., International Journal of Hospitality Management, 2011

Independent:

Leadership Style (transformational and transactional)

Dependent:

Job Performance

Transformational leadership has a positive influence on job performance through arousing emotions and customer orientation in in service employees.

Frank and Heike, The Leadership Quarterly, 2010

Independent:

Transformational leadership

Dependent:

Productive Organizational Energy

125 organizations

Organizational structure (Centralization and formalization) moderate the relationship between the transformational leadership occurrence and effectiveness and the productive organizational energy.

Maria, Arnold and Despoina, The Leadership Quarterly, 2011

Independent:

Transformational Leadership

Dependent:

Work Engagement

42

Daily transformational leadership has a positive relation with employees' daily engagement.

Víctor , María and Leopoldo, Journal of Business Research , 2011

Independent:

Transformational leadership

Dependent:

Organizational Performance

170 CEOs

Transformational leadership Influences organizational performance positively through organizational learning and innovation.

Jochen et al., The Leadership Quarterly, 2011

Independent:

Transformational leadership

Dependent:

Organizational Citizenship Behavior

18,094

TFL climate indirectly relate to organizational citizenship behavior through positive affective climate under high conditions of trust climate.

YoungHee, Peter and Celeste, The Leadership Quarterly, 2011

Independent:

Emotional Intelligence

Dependent:

Team outcomes

Mediator:

Transformational leadership

859

Transformational leadership doesn't mediate the relationships between emotional intelligence and team effectiveness

Michael , Arthur and Heike, The Leadership Quarterly, 2011

Independent:

Transformational leadership

Dependent:

Team performance

108

work teams

Transformational leadership is positively associated with team performance when consensus is high meanwhile the relation is negative when consensus is low.

Lale and Arzu, Journal of Business Research, 2009

Independent:

Transformational leadership

Dependent:

Organizational Innovation

163

R&D personnel

Transformational leadership has significant effects on creativity at both the individual and organizational levels.

Jeewon and Fred, The Leadership Quarterly, 2010

Independent:

Individualized Consideration

Charisma

(Transformational Leadership Behaviors)

Dependent:

Leader directed Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB)

Group directed OCB

159

Transformational leadership behaviors (Individualized Consideration and Charisma) have influence on organizational citizenship behaviors of followers in both individual and group levels.

Tahir, Khawar and Naveed, European Journal of Social Sciences, 2012

Independent:

Job Stress

Dependent:

Employee Engagement

137

The relationship between Job stress and employee engagement is negative as job stress threatens employee engagement and has to be eliminated to ensure the ultimate engagement of employees.

Weichun, Bruce and Fred, Group & Organization

Management, 2009

Independent:

Transformational Leadership

Dependent:

Employee Work Engagement

140 followers

48 supervisors

Follower's characteristics are a significant moderator in the relationship between transformational leadership and employee work engagement. When follower characteristics are high, the transformational leadership has a high influence over the employee work engagement.

Fred and Suzanne, Journal of Management Development, 2002

Independent:

Employee Engagement

Dependent:

Manager Effectiveness

170

The relationship between employee engagement and manager effectiveness is partially mediated by the manager self-efficacy.

Bobby and Kenneth, Industrial Management & Data Systems, 2009

Independent:

Goal setting

Mediator:

Employee Engagement

Dependent:

Individual Performance

426

Employee engagement mediates the relationship between goal setting and high levels of individual performance.

Simon, Leadership in Health Services, 2011

Independent:

Empowering Leadership

Mediator:

Empowerment

Employee Engagement

Dependent:

Turnover intentions

139

Empowerment mediated the influence of empowering leadership on employee engagement.

Employee engagement partially mediated the influence of empowerment on employee turnover intentions.

Alan, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 2006

Independent:

Antecedents:

Job Characteristics

Perceived Organizational Support

Perceived Supervisor Support

Reward and Recognition

Procedural Justice

Distributive Justice

Mediator:

Employee Engagement

Job Engagement

Organization Engagement

Dependent:

Consequences:

Job Satisfaction

Organizational Commitment

Intention to quit

Organizational Citizenship Behavior

102

There is a difference between job engagement and organization engagement.

Employee engagement, on both levels, job and organization engagement, mediate the relationship between antecedents and all consequences (organizational commitment, Job satisfaction, Organizational citizenship behavior and intentions to quit).

Hakan, Journal of Management Development, 2008

Independent:

Leadership style

Dependent:

Organizational commitment

Satisfaction of subordinates

60 managers 662 employees

Transformational leadership style has a positive influence on organizational commitment and the subordinates' satisfaction.

Other leadership styles (transactional, contingent reward, laissez-faire) are related to low satisfaction and commitment.

Fred, Cindy and Bani, The Leadership Quarterly,2008

Independent:

Contingent Reward Transactional Leadership

Mediator:

Procedural Justice Climate Perceptions and Strength

Dependent:

Organizational commitment

Satisfaction with supervisors

Organizational Citizenship Behavior

212

Procedural justice mediates the relationship between contingent reward leader behavior and satisfaction with supervisors and organizational commitment.

Procedural justice partially mediates the relationship between contingent reward leader behavior and organizational citizenship behavior.

Jun, Xiaoyu and Xianju, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 2011

Independent:

Transactional Leadership

Mediator:

Team-efficacy

Moderator:

Emotional Labor

Dependent:

Team Innovativeness

462 members

90 team leaders

Team-efficacy mediates the relationship between transactional leadership and team innovativeness.

The relationship between transactional leadership and team innovativeness is negative when emotional labor is high whereas positive when emotional labor is low.

Ologbo and Saudah, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2012

Independent:

Individual Factors of Employee Engagement:

Employee Communication

Employee Development

Co-employee support

Mediator:

employee engagement:

job engagement

organization engagement

Dependent:

Work Outcomes:

Organizational commitment

Intention to Quit

Organizational Citizenship Behavior

104

Co-employee support, the major individual factor, which influences both job and organization engagement and the work outcomes.

Employee engagement mediates the relationship between individual factors of employee engagement and work outcomes.

Timothy and Gian, Leadership & Organization Development Journal,2007

Independent:

Transformational Leadership

Mediator:

Empowerment

Trust

Dependent:

In-role Performance

Satisfaction

109

Both empowerment and trust mediate the relationship between transformational leadership and in-role performance.

Trust mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and satisfaction with the leader.

Inbal and Anit, The Leadership Quarterly, 2011

Independent:

Leadership Style:

Transformational Leadership

Transactional Leadership

Mediator:

Individual Differences:

Idiocentrism

Allocentrism

Dependent:

Organizational Citizenship Behaviors

(OCB)

150

When allocentrism increases, there is a positive relationship between transformational leadership and organizational citizenship behaviors whereas when Idiocentrism increases the relationship between transformational leadership and OCB is negative.

When Idiocentrism increases, there is a positive relationship between transactional leadership and organizational citizenship behaviors whereas when allocentrism increases the relationship between transactional leadership and OCB is negative.

Janelle and Jon, Team Performance Management, 2011

Independent:

Leadership Behaviors:

Transformational Leadership

Transactional Leadership

Mediator:

Satisfaction with the leader

Dependent:

Turnover Intentions

208

There is a negative relationship between leadership behaviors (both transformational and transactional) and the turnover intentions.

Satisfaction with the leader mediates the negative relationship between the leadership behaviors and the turnover intentions.

Dong, Chee and Anne, The Leadership Quarterly, 2003

Independent:

Transformational Leadership

Mediator:

Empowerment

Support for Innovation

Dependent:

Organizational Innovation

32 companies

There is a positive relationship between transformational leadership and organizational innovation.

Transformational leadership has a positive relation with both mediators (empowerment and support for innovation).

Empowerment has a negative relationship with organizational innovation whereas the support for innovation has a positive relationship with organizational innovation.

Millissa and Chi-Sum, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 2011

Independent:

Transformational Leadership

Mediator:

Task Support

Relations Support

Dependent:

Creativity

There is a positive relationship between transformational leadership and followers' creativity mediated by both leader's task support and relations support.

Conclusion

Transactional and transformational leadership are considered contrasting leadership styles even though the leader may use both styles of leadership at different times and different situations. Transactional leadership is an exchange process where the leader exchanges rewards for efforts of the subordinates or followers and this in turn allows the leader to punish the subordinates or followers if the task is not accomplished. Whereas transformational leader encourages his followers to make decision, he empowers them and allows them to grow on the individual basis and also among teams by coaching and mentoring them.

Transformational leadership and the reward approach of the transactional leadership have a positive influence on employee behaviors, emotions and performance. They have a positive impact on organizational teams, organizational commitment, effectiveness and employees satisfaction in addition citizenship behaviors.

For organizations to survive in the rapid competing world, they have to maintain an engaged workforce. Employee engagement will result in high levels of performance and low levels of turnover in organizations. Employee engagement eliminates job stress and is strategic tool leading to job satisfaction, organizational commitment, less turnover and organizational citizenship behaviors.

As the literature review shows that the study variables have been covered in many industries and countries around the world, yet it hasn't been given much consideration in the Arab world. This is why the researcher finds that it is a must to conduct this study in the petroleum sector where she works.

Research Variables and Operationalization

1. Research Variables:

Independent Variables

Transformational Leadership

Transactional Leadership

Dependent Variables

Employee Engagement

2. Variables Operationalization

Independent Variables

The leadership styles in this study: transformational and transactional leadership, are evident but don't replace each other as processes, and the same leader may use both types of leadership at different times in different situations. (Yukl 1998)

The researcher chooses two of the leadership style for this study as follows:

Transformational Leadership: attempts to create emotional links with its followers and inspires higher values (Bass, 1999). Transformational leadership meets the higher order needs of employees (Yusof and Shah, 2008).

Also, transformational leadership refers to the leader motivating the follower beyond self-interests. It raises the follower's level of maturity and ideals for achievement and the well-being of others, the organization and the society (Hakan 2008).

Transactional Leadership: places an emphasis on exchanging rewards for accomplishment (Burton and Peachey, 2009)

Transactional leadership focuses mainly on the physical and the security needs of followers. The relationship that evolves between the leader and the follower is based on exchange and reward systems (Bass and Avolio, 1993).

Dependent Variable

Employee Engagement is the 'benefiting of organizational members themselves to their work roles; in engagement, people employ and express themselves physically, perceptually and emotionally during role performances" (Kahn, 1990)

Employee engagement refers to the ''individual's involvement and satisfaction as well as enthusiasm for work'' (Harter et al., 2002).

Proposed Research Model

Independent Dependent

Employee Engagement

Transactional Leadership

Transformational Leadership

Research Hypotheses

Based on the previous model, we can develop the following hypotheses that try to express the relationship between study variables:

H1 There is a strong positive significant relationship between transactional leadership and employee engagement.

H2 There is a strong positive significant relationship between transformational leadership and employee engagement.

Source of Research Data (Sample)

Primary data

The researcher collected the primary data from the research sample of 236 employees working in Suez Oil Company by using 30 items questionnaire.

Secondary data

Secondary data is collected from organizational records from the HR department in the company.

Research Variables Instruments

In this study, the researcher conducted the questionnaire based on two main research instruments:

Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire

Transactional and transformational leadership was measured using 20 items from the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ 5X rater form) on a Likert 5 point scale.

The components of leadership dimensions derived from the MLQ 5X rater form questionnaire

Leadership Styles/Dimensions

Number Of Items

Transactional

9

Transformational

11

Utrecht Work Engagement Scale

Employee engagement was measured using 10 items from Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) on a Likert 5 point scale.

Research Population and Sample

Population

The population of present study is 1200 employees of Suez Oil Company, a petroleum company in the Egyptian petroleum sector.

Sample

The present study sample is a stratified random sample of 300 employees from all departments and job levels in the company.

Statistical Methods/Techniques used in Data Analysis

Cronbach's Alpha

Split-half

T-Test

ANOVA

Scheffe Test

Correlations

Regression "Stepwise"

Research Results and Findings

Validity and Reliability

Questionnaire Validity:

It means the ability of the questionnaire to measure what it is set for.

Reliability of internal consistency:

Calculation of correlation coefficients between each axis component phrases and questionnaire axis total marks.

Calculation of correlation coefficients between questionnaire axis total marks and questionnaire total mark.

First Axis: Transformational Leadership:

Validity was calculated by using internal consistency through calculating the correlation coefficient (Person Correlation Coefficient) between each phrase mark and the axis mark (transactional leadership). The same is shown in the following table below:

It is evident from the table that all correlation coefficients are indicating significance at (0.05 - 0.01) that shows it is close to one which means that questionnaire phrases are valid and consistent.

Second Axis: Transformational Leadership:

Validity was calculated by using internal consistency through using correlation coefficient (Person Correlation Coefficient) between each phrase mark and the axis mark (Transformational Leadership). The same is shown in the following table below:

It is evident from the table that correlation coefficients are significant at (0.05-0.01), thus indicating validity and consistency of the questionnaire phrases.

Third Axis: Employee Engagement:

Reliability was calculated by using the internal consistency through calculating the correlation coefficient (Person correlation coefficient) between each phrase mark and the axis mark (Employee Engagement).

The following table shows the same below.

It is evident from the table that correlation coefficients are all indicating significance at (0.05-0.01) which shows it is close to one, thus indicating validity and consistency of the questionnaire phrases.

Validity by using internal consistency between axis total mark and questionnaire total mark

Validity was calculated by using the internal consistency through calculating the correlation coefficient (Person Correlation Coefficient) between each axis total mark (transactional leadership-transformational leadership-employee engagement) and questionnaire total mark, the following table shows the same below:

Employee Engagement

It is evident from the table that correlation coefficients are all indicating significance at (0.01), thus indicating validity and consistency of the questionnaire phrases.

Reliability:

Reliability means accuracy of the test in measurement and observation, non-contradiction to oneself, its consistency and elaboration, thus providing us of information about the examined person behavior, and it is the ratio between the mark variance on the scale indicating the virtual performance of the examined person. Reliability was calculated through:

Cronbach's Alpha

Split-half

Reliability of the whole questionnaire

It is evident from the above table that all reliability coefficients values: Alpha and Split-half coefficients are indicating significance at (0.01) thus indicating the questionnaire reliability.

Description of the Study

A comprehensive description of the study sample is shown in the following tables (from 6 to 9) and charts (from 1to 4), as follows:

Gender :

Table (6) and chart (1) show distribution of the research sample according to the gender.

Chart (1) shows distribution of the research sample according to the gender

It is evident from table (6) and chart (1) that 133 research sample individuals are male at the percentage of 56.4%, whereas 103 research sample individuals are female at the percentage of 43.6%.

2-Education:

Table (7) and chart (2) show distribution of the research sample according to the education.

Chart (2) shows distribution of the research sample according to the education

Table (7) and Chart (2) show that 126 individuals of the research sample are university degrees holders at the percentage of 53.4% followed by 71 individuals of research sample are high school certificates or less holders at the percentage of 30.1%, and the last 39 individuals of the research sample are postgraduates at the percentage of 16.1%.

3-Age:

Table (8) and chart (3) show distribution of the research sample according to age.

Chart (3) shows distribution of the research sample according to age

Table (8) and Chart (3) show that 74 individuals of the research sample whose ages ranging between 30 and 39 years at 31.4%, followed by 68 individuals whose ages ranging between 40 and 49 years at 28.8%, followed by 52 individuals whose ages were below 30 years at 22% and coming last 42 individuals aged 50 years and above at 17.8%.

4-Years of experience:

Table (9) and chart (4) show distribution of the research sample according to years of experience.

Chart (4) shows distribution of the research sample according to years of experience

Table (9) and Chart (4) show that 78 individuals of the research sample whose number of years of experience ranging between 11 to 16 years at 33.1% , followed by 63 individuals whose number of years of experience was above 16 years at 26.6% ,followed by 54 individuals whose number of years of experience ranging between 5 and 10 years at 22.9% , and the last 41 individuals with less than 5 years of experience at 17.4%.

Description of Questionnaire answers

Below is a detailed discussion (in figures and percentages) of sample individuals' answers of the phrases in the questionnaire:

Transactional Leadership

1- Provides assistance in exchange for effort:

It is evident from the table that 55 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 23.3%, whereas 110 individuals of research sample agreed at 46.6%, and 43 individuals of research sample were neutral at 18.2%, however, 28 individuals of research sample disagreed at 11.9%.

2- Very clear on the reward if goals are achieved:

It is evident from the table that 115 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 48.7%, whereas 78 individuals of research sample agreed at 33.1%, and 32 individuals of research sample were neutral at 13.6%, however, 11 individuals of research sample disagreed at 4.7%.

3- Express satisfaction when expectations are met:

It is evident from the table that 65 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 27.5%, whereas 132 individuals of research sample agreed at 55.9% and 39 individuals of research sample were neutral at 16.5%.

4- Concentrate attention on dealing with mistakes, complaints and failures:

It is evident from the table that 69 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 29.2%, whereas 101 individuals of research sample agreed at 42.8%, and 31 individuals of research sample were neutral at 13.1%, however, 25 individuals of research sample disagreed at 10.6% and finally 10 individuals of research sample strongly disagreed at 4.2%.

5- Keep track of mistakes:

It is evident from the table that 54 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 22.9%, whereas 85 individuals of research sample agreed at 36% and 41 individuals of research sample were neutral at 17.4%, yet, 34 individuals of research sample disagreed at 14.4%, and finally 22 individuals of research sample strongly disagreed at 9.3%.

6- Takes corrective action on mistakes :

It evident from the table that 105 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 44.5% ,whereas 80 individuals of research sample individuals of research sample agreed at 33.9% and individuals of research sample were neutral at 16.1% ,however,13 individuals of research sample disagreed at 5.55%.

7- Fails to interfere when problems become serious:

It is evident from the table that 12 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 5.1%, whereas 43 individuals of research sample agreed at 18.2% and 37 individuals of research sample were neutral at 15.7%, yet, 63 individuals of research sample disagreed at 26.7%, and finally 81 individuals of research sample strongly disagreed at 34.3%.

8- If it isn't broken don't fix it :

It is evident from the table that 34 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 15.3%, whereas 87 individuals of research sample agreed at 36.9% and 44 individuals of research sample were neutral at 18.6%, yet, 60 individuals of research sample disagreed at 25.4%, and finally 9 individuals of research sample strongly disagreed at 3.8%.

9- Waits for things to go wrong before taking action :

It is evident from the table that 16 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 6.8%, whereas 65 individuals of research sample agreed at 27.5% and 34 individuals of research sample were neutral at 14.4%, yet, 72 individuals of research sample disagreed at 30.5%, and finally 49 individuals of research sample strongly disagreed at 20.8%.

Transformational Leadership

10- Goes beyond self -interest for the good of others :

It is evident from the table that 43 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 18.2%, whereas 129 individuals of research sample agreed at 54.7% and 33 individuals of research sample were neutral at 13.9%, yet, 17 individuals of research sample disagreed at 7.2%, and finally 14 individuals of research sample strongly disagreed at 5.9%.

11- Admired, respected and trusted:

It is evident from the table that 122 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 51.7%, whereas 73 individuals of research sample agreed at 30.9% and 41 individuals of research sample were neutral at 17.4%.

12- Display sense of power and confidence, willing to take risk :

It is evident from the table that 45 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 19.1%, whereas 64 individuals of research sample agreed at 27.1% and 81 individuals of research sample were neutral at 34.3%, yet, 11 individuals of research sample disagreed at 4.7%, and finally 35 individuals of research sample strongly disagreed at 14.8%.

13- Talks about values and beliefs:

It is evident from the table that 101 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 42.8%, whereas 74 individuals of research sample agreed at 31.4% and 40 individuals of research sample were neutral at 16.9%, yet, 21 individuals of research sample disagreed at 8.9%.

14- Talks optimistically about the future:

It is evident from the table that 100 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 42.4%, whereas 81 individuals of research sample agreed at 34.4% and 55 individuals of research sample were neutral at 23.3%.

15- Motivate and inspire people around:

It is evident from the table that 99 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 41.9%, whereas 106 individuals of research sample agreed at 44.9% and 21 individuals of research sample were neutral at 18.9%, yet, 10 individuals of research sample disagreed at 4.2%

16- No public criticism:

It is evident from the table that 52 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 22%, whereas 71 individuals of research sample agreed at 30.1% and 44 individuals of research sample were neutral at 18.6%, yet, 39 individuals of research sample disagreed at 16.5%, and finally 30 individuals of research sample strongly disagreed at 12.7%.

17- Spends time coaching, mentoring and teaching:

It is evident from the table that 98 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 41.5%, whereas 46 individuals of research sample agreed at 19.5% and 42 individuals of research sample were neutral at 17.8%, yet, 31 individuals of research sample disagreed at 13.1%, and finally 19 individuals of research sample strongly disagreed at 8.1%.

18- Considers every employee as having different needs, aspiration and abilities:

It is evident from the table that 84 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 35.6%, whereas 64 individuals of research sample agreed at 27.1% and 52 individuals of research sample were neutral at 22%, yet, 23 individuals of research sample disagreed at 9.7%, and finally 13 individuals of research sample strongly disagreed at 5.5%.

19- Develops employees into Leaders:

It is evident from the table that 83 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 35.2%, whereas 99 individuals of research sample agreed at 41.9% and 38 individuals of research sample were neutral at 16.1%, yet, 16 individuals of research sample disagreed at 6.8%

20- Interaction with employees are personalized:

It is evident from the table that 64 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 27.1%, whereas 70 individuals of research sample agreed at 29.7% and 57 individuals of research sample were neutral at 24.2%, yet, 36 individuals of research sample disagreed at 15.3%, and finally 9 individuals of research sample strongly disagreed at 3.8%.

Employee Engagement

1- At my work, I feel bursting with energy :

It is evident from the table that 69 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 29.2%, whereas 101 individuals of research sample agreed at 42.8% and 49 individuals of research sample were neutral at 20.8%, yet, 17 individuals of research sample disagreed at 7.2%.

2- I find the work that I do full of meaning and purpose:

It is evident from the table that 71 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 30.1%, whereas 82 individuals of research sample agreed at 34.7% and 46 individuals of research sample were neutral at 19.5%, yet, 29 individuals of research sample disagreed at 12.3%, and finally 8 individuals of research sample strongly disagreed at 3.4%.

3- Time flies when I'm working:

It is evident from the table that 88 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 37.3%, whereas 73 individuals of research sample agreed at 30.9% and 22 individuals of research sample were neutral at 9.3%, yet, 39 individuals of research sample disagreed at 16.5%, and finally 14 individuals of research sample strongly disagreed at 5.9%.

4- When I am working, I forget everything else around me:

It is evident from the table that 67 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 28.4%, whereas 108 individuals of research sample agreed at 45.8% and 37 individuals of research sample were neutral at 15.7%, yet, 24 individuals of research sample disagreed at 10.2%.

5- My job inspires me:

It is evident from the table that 58 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 24.6%, whereas 93 individuals of research sample agreed at 39.4% and 39 individuals of research sample were neutral at 16.5%, yet, 30 individuals of research sample disagreed at 12.7%, and finally 16 individuals of research sample strongly disagreed at 6.8%.

6- When I get up in the morning, I feel like going to work:

It is evident from the table that 81 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 34.3%, whereas 84 individuals of research sample agreed at 35.6% and 41 individuals of research sample were neutral at 17.4%, yet, 21 individuals of research sample disagreed at 8.9%, and finally 9 individuals of research sample strongly disagreed at 3.8%.

7- I am proud of the work that I do:

It is evident from the table that 82 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 34.7%, whereas 94 individuals of research sample agreed at 39.8% and 60 individuals of research sample were neutral at 25.4%.

8- I can continue working for very long periods at a time:

It is evident from the table that 64 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 27.1%, whereas 86 individuals of research sample agreed at 36.4% and 43 individuals of research sample were neutral at 18.2%, yet, 25 individuals of research sample disagreed at 10.6%, and finally 18 individuals of research sample strongly disagreed at 7.6%.

9- To me, my job is challenging:

It is evident from the table that 100 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 42.4%, whereas 79 individuals of research sample agreed at 33.5% and 34 individuals of research sample were neutral at 14.4%, yet, 13 individuals of research sample disagreed at 5.5%, and finally 10 individuals of research sample strongly disagreed at 4.2%.

10- I get carried away when I'm working:

It is evident from the table that 83 individuals of research sample strongly agreed at 35.2%, whereas 103 individuals of research sample agreed at 43.6% and 50 individuals of research sample were neutral at 21.2%.

Hypotheses Testing

There is a correlation between "transactional leadership" and "employee engagement" and a correlation between "transformational leadership "and "employee engagement"

To test the developed hypotheses, a Pearson correlation method is used for figuring out the relationship between the study variables. The obtained results can be shown in the following table:

Table (10) correlation matrix among "transactional leadership", "transformational leadership "and "employee engagement"

Employee Engagement

0.831**

Transactional Leadership

0.924**

Transformational Leadership

** p = ≤ 0.01

Table (10) shows a positive correlation among "transactional leadership", "transformational leadership "and "employee engagement" at significance of (0.01) function. In other words, the better the transactional leadership perception is the better the "employee engagement" which supports H1and the better the "transformational leadership" perception is the better the "employee engagement" which supports H2.

Demographic Analysis

Transactional Leadership and Demographics:

There are differences of statistical indication between the sample individuals' marks average in transactional leadership according to the study demographics.

T-Test was applied and the sample individuals' marks were calculated by ANOVA in the transactional leadership, the following tables show the same below:

Chart (5) differences in the sample individuals' marks average in transactional leadership according to the gender

Table (11) and Chart (5) show that T value was (20.931 ),it is a value statistically indicating significance at (0.01 ) in favor of females, as females' marks average was ( 39.019 ) , whereas males' marks average was ( 21.451 ), that means that females consider transactional leadership better than males.

Total

Table (12) shows that F value was ( 31.402 ) which is a statistically indicating significance at ( 0.01 ), that means that there are differences among the sample individuals in transactional leadership according to education. To verify the direction of the indication, Scheffe Test was applied for multiple comparisons. The following table shows the same below:

Table (13) and chart (6) show no differences in transactional leadership between post graduate studies holders and university degree holders, whereas there are differences between post graduate studies holders and high school certificate or less holders in favor of post graduate studies holders significant at ( 0.01 ). There are also differences between university degree holders and high school certificate or less holders in favor of university degree holders significant at ( 0.01 ), whereas the average of marks of post graduate studies holders and university degree holders was (35.205) and (34.515) respectively, followed by high school certificate or less holders sample individuals at the average of ( 16.197 ) , post graduate studies holders and university degree holders came first as they had better perception of transactional leadership , while high school certificate or less holders came second.

It is evident from table (14) that the value of T was ( 39.670 ) , it is a value indicating statistically significant at ( 0.01 ), thus indicating the differences among sample individuals according to age. To define the function direction, Scheffe Test was applied for multiple comparisons .The following table shows the same below.

Chart (7) differences of sample marks in transactional leadership according to age

Table (15) and chart (7) show that there are differences in transactional leadership between sample individuals aged 50 years and above and sample individuals aged 40-49 years ,30-39 years and those below 30 years in favor of the sample individuals aged 50 years and above with significance at (0.01), whereas there are differences between sample individuals aged 40-49 and sample individuals aged 30-39 in favor of sample individuals aged 40-49 years with significance at (0.05), whereas there are differences between sample individuals aged 40-49 and sample individuals aged below 30 years in favor of the first with significance at (0.01), whereas there are differences between sample individuals aged 30-39 years and sample individuals aged below 30 years in favor of the first with significance at (0.01).

The average marks of the sample individuals aged 50 years and above were (42.000), followed by the sample individuals aged 40-49 at the average of (32.441) ,followed by sample individuals aged 30-39 at the average of (29.540) ,and sample individuals aged below 30 years at the average of (13.769) was last . In other words, sample individuals aged 50 years and above came first as they had a better perception of transactional leadership ,followed by sample individuals aged 40-49 years came second, followed by sample individuals aged 30-39 years came third ,followed by sample individuals aged below 30 years that came last.

Total

It is evident from table (16) that the value of ( F ) was ( 27.416 ) ,it is a value indicating statistically significant at ( 0.01 ), thus indicating that there are differences among sample individuals' marks in transactional leadership according to years of experience. To define the indication direction, Scheffe Test for multiple comparisons was applied. The following table shows the same below:

Table (17) and chart (8) show no differences in transactional leadership between sample individuals whose years of experience exceeded 16 years and sample individuals whose years of experience ranging between 11 and 16 years ,yet there are differences between sample individuals whose years of experience exceeded 16 years and both sample individuals whose years of experience ranging between 5 and 10 years and those less than 5 years in favor of sample individuals whose years of experience exceeded 16 years significant at ( 0.01 ). Moreover, there are differences between sample individuals whose years of experience ranging between 11 and 16 years and both sample individuals whose years of experience ranging between 5 and 10 years and those less than 5 years in favor of sample individuals whose years of experience ranging between 11 and 16 years significant at ( 0.01 ). There are also differences between sample individuals whose years of experience ranging between 5 and 10 years and those less than 5 years in favor of sample individuals whose years of experience ranging between 5 and 10 years significant at ( 0.01 ).

The average of both sample individuals whose years of experience exceeded 16 years and sample individuals whose years of experience ranging between 5 and 10 years was ( 36.936 ) and ( 35.833 ) respectively, followed by sample individuals whose years of experience ranging between 5 and 10 years at the average of ( 22.000) ,and finally those less than 5 years at the average of ( 13.707 ) . Both sample individuals whose years of experience exceeded 16 years and sample individuals whose years of experience ranging between 11 and 16 years came first as their transactional leadership perception was better, sample individuals whose years of experience ranging between 5 and 10 years came second and those less than 5 years of experience came last.

Transformational Leadership and Demographics:

There are differences of statistical indication among the average of sample individuals' marks in transformational leadership according to the study demographics.

T-Test was applied and ANOVA was calculated for sample individuals' marks in transformational leadership .The following table shows the same below: