The use of Core Values as aBasis for Effective Leadership :a case study of NEGST

Abstract

This research was designed to find out the RJace-.2f core values as a basis for effective leadership. There was a dual purpose to this research. First was to understand from the literature what was meant by the term "leadership" and second was to study an existing institution and see how these principles of leadership actually operate in a live situation. The m~nagers of the institution plus the workers of the institution were asked to analyze their role in the running of the institution with particular reference to the use of core values in their day-to-day running of their work. The workers who were selected to participate in this research are (111 those who had worked in NEGST for a period exceeding two years, and everybody who qualified was given a questionnaire to fill out. The total number of those who were approached was 34 individuals. The study was divided into three categories of respondents. Category one had the top four office holders at NEGST, I.e the Vice Chancellor and the three Deputy Vice Chancellors. Category two had the managers of institution that reported to each of the three Deputy Vice Chancellors, while Category three had those workers who reported the managers. Each department was divided into these three categories, and a similar questionnaire given to everybody in each category, irrespective of what department they were in. Questionnaire forms were given out which sought to enquire whether the staff member consciously used core values in their job, and also whether they insisted that their juniors use their core values. This was to try and see whether the core values of the top office holders actually trickled down to the lower levels of the organization. The research revealed that of all the persons who returned the questionnaires, no two people held the same set of core values. Each person had values which were different from the other person. The study also revealed that the third category of respondents interpreted the actions of the category one respondents to mean that they all held different core values from each other. In fact the category three respondents thought that the Vice Chancellor held four different sets of core values. The other significant finding was that the respondents indicated that NEGST did not hold to any consistent set of core values.