Transformational leadership, perceived organizational support, and self-reported lecturer performance: Mediation by interpersonal collaboration skills

  • 29 Views
  • 3 Downloads

Creative Commons License DMCA.com Protection Status
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Type of the article: Research Article

Lecturer performance in geographically dispersed higher education institutions depends on more than individual expertise; it also requires the coordinated use of academic knowledge. This study aims to examine how transformational leadership and perceived organizational support explain self-reported lecturer performance and whether interpersonal collaboration skills mediate these relationships in higher education institutions in the Nias Archipelago. Survey data from 217 permanent lecturers were analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modeling. Transformational leadership was positively associated with interpersonal collaboration skills (β = .340, p = .003) and self-reported lecturer performance (β = .226, p = .010). Perceived organizational support was positively associated with collaboration skills (β = .387, p < .001) and performance (β = .267, p = .003). Interpersonal collaboration skills had the strongest direct association with performance (β = .401, p < .001). The indirect effects of transformational leadership (β = .136, 95% CI [.039, .263]) and perceived organizational support (β = .156, 95% CI [.077, .244]) were significant, indicating complementary partial mediation. The model explained 46.6% of the variance in collaboration skills and 62.8% in self-reported lecturer performance. The findings show that leadership and organizational support contribute to perceived academic accomplishment partly by enabling lecturers to communicate, coordinate responsibilities, build trust, manage disagreement constructively, make joint decisions, and collaborate across units.

Acknowledgment
The authors thank the participating lecturers and the institutional contacts who supported the survey distribution. The authors also appreciate the editor and reviewers whose comments improved the methodological transparency and focus of the manuscript.

view full abstract hide full abstract
    • Figure 1. Proposed research model
    • Figure 2. Structural model results
    • Figure E1. PLS-SEM algorithm output for the four-construct hierarchical model
    • Figure E2. Final structural-model display with higher-order dimensions
    • Figure E3. Importance–performance map analysis (IPMA) output
    • Table 1. Respondent characteristics (N = 217)
    • Table 2. Common method bias diagnostics
    • Table 3. Measurement model reliability, convergent validity, and collinearity
    • Table 4. Heterotrait-monotrait ratios
    • Table 5. Direct effects and hypothesis tests
    • Table 6. Direct, indirect, and total effects
    • Table 7. Explanatory power and model diagnostics
    • Table A1. Transformational leadership items
    • Table A2. Perceived organizational support items
    • Table A3. Interpersonal collaboration skills items
    • Table A4. Self-reported lecturer performance items
    • Table B1. Institutional distribution of respondents
    • Table C1. Institutional affiliation by gender
    • Table C2. Institutional affiliation by age
    • Table C3. Institutional affiliation by education
    • Table C4. Institutional affiliation by academic rank
    • Table C5. Institutional affiliation by faculty / school
    • Table C6. Institutional affiliation by institutional tenure
    • Table D1. Transformational leadership (TL) items by institution
    • Table D2. Perceived organizational support (POS) items by institution
    • Table D3. Interpersonal collaboration skills (ICS) items by institution
    • Table D4. Self-reported lecturer performance (LP) items by institution
    • Conceptualization
      Eliagus Telaumbanua, Prihatin Lumbanraja, Yeni Absah, Beby Karina Fawzeea Sembiring
    • Data curation
      Eliagus Telaumbanua
    • Formal Analysis
      Eliagus Telaumbanua
    • Investigation
      Eliagus Telaumbanua, Yeni Absah
    • Methodology
      Eliagus Telaumbanua, Prihatin Lumbanraja, Beby Karina Fawzeea Sembiring
    • Project administration
      Eliagus Telaumbanua, Yeni Absah
    • Resources
      Eliagus Telaumbanua, Yeni Absah
    • Software
      Eliagus Telaumbanua
    • Visualization
      Eliagus Telaumbanua, Yeni Absah
    • Writing – original draft
      Eliagus Telaumbanua
    • Writing – review & editing
      Eliagus Telaumbanua, Prihatin Lumbanraja, Yeni Absah, Beby Karina Fawzeea Sembiring
    • Supervision
      Prihatin Lumbanraja, Beby Karina Fawzeea Sembiring
    • Validation
      Prihatin Lumbanraja, Yeni Absah, Beby Karina Fawzeea Sembiring