Leadership Styles Dimensions and Organizational Commitment Nexus: Evidence from a Public Sector in Nigeria

Scholarly works have shown that one of the outstanding factors of organizational commitment has been leadership, which relates to the style adopted by the leader and the impact it has on the commitment level of employees for performance. The aim of this research was to explore the effect of leadership styles on organizational commitment. Transformational, transactional, and laissez faire styles of leadership were examined. A cross-sectional survey of 151 employees at a public sector agency in Abuja, Nigeria, was conducted. The research employed a quantitative approach to the collection of data using questionnaire administration. All questionnaire items were assessed using the five-point Likert scale. Inferential statistics in research was carried out using multiple regression technique to substantiate the survey findings. Based on the Great man theory, Contingency theory and Behavioural theory, the study confirms that transformational, transactional and laissez faire leadership styles and organizational commitment were statistically associated. In terms of contribution to the model, the explanatory variables jointly contributed 68.2 percent in explaining organizational commitment. On individual contribution, transformational leadership style contributed the most, 58.6 percent to the model while transactional leadership style contributed 11.8 percent to the model and finally laissez-faire leadership style contributed 11.2 percent to organizational commitment in the study context. The study therefore recommends that AEA should use continuous transformational leadership style practices to sustain high employee commitment and organizational effectiveness. Also, AEA should apply a bit of both transactional and laissez faire leadership styles from time to time depending on the situation of things at the workplace as there is no particular leadership style that is one-size fit all but depends on situation at hand. One realistic implication that could be learned from this study is that in order to minimize employee turnover, managers need to implement affirmative strategies that will benefit the establishment.


INTRODUCTION
This scholarly work intends to reflect on the compatibility of an ideal leadership style that will lead to greater employee commitment. Also, it intends to identify how organizational managers' leadership styles influence the commitment of the members of staff of the organization. Demir (2017) has point out how the concepts of leadership and organizational commitment are amongst the most significant and remarkable topics in the management space, especially on the increase of number of studies in recent years.
Previous works of research such as Fasola, Adeyemi & Olowe (2013), Bushra, Usman and Naveed 2011), Sá and Lemoine (1998) and Bycio, Hackett and Allen (1995) indicate that the style of leadership an organization employs usually influences the loyalty of the employee to the organization. When workers feel a high level of job satisfaction, they increase the level of productivity in the organization thereby adding to the success of the establishment (Malik, Saleem & Naeem 2016). Studies have shown that employee commitment to an organization is a direct replica of the type of leadership style the organization follows. Productivity, and quality of service of production are reduced when an organization has poor leadership; also poor leadership will increase workers' turnover and absenteeism (Aung 2018). Royal (2012) mentioned how high levels of commitment, are not sustainable when it is devoid of working conditions that encourage the worker. In pursuance of keeping them committed over time, da Silva, Nunes, & Andrade (2019) identified two main rudiments namely, (a) optimized functions and (b) an environment of support for employee commitment. Thus, in both, there is direct action from managers.
Numerous definitions of leadership have been given by many researchers (Boseman 2008;Amagoh 2009;Bryman 2013;Michie & Zumitzavan 2012). A basic component in these definitions is that of leadership being about "influence and goals of the organization". Rauch & Behling (1984) define leadership as the process of persuading the actions of a group towards goal attainment. Also, Jaques & Clement (1994) state that leadership is the process in which a person puts the objectives for one or more other persons, and persuades them to move together with him or her and with each other in that direction with competence and full dedication to achieve these objectives. Furthermore, Northouse (2010) defines leadership as a process by which one person influences a group of people to achieve the central aim of any organization. However, some researchers think that leadership is associated with the management process. A case in point is Bowditch & Buono (2001) who contend that leadership can be defined as the process by which a person who acts as a manager takes on a unique responsibility for a wide range of duties that are achieved mainly through the work of other people.
In all, most of the scholars and practitioners agree that employees' performance, commitment, and satisfaction in any organization generally depend on the quality of its leadership (Ristow, Amos, & Staude, 1999). That is why leadership is usually considered as the ability to influence subordinates (their behaviour and attitude) and/or to transform the organization (Conger & Kanungo, 1987;House, 1976). In other words, in this competitive age, organizations are in need for such leaders who can align the organization with competitive challenges and can motivate the workforce to exert extra efforts to achieve organizational goals. Bass (1985) operationalized transformational leadership through his development of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ), which has symbolized the major tool for measuring transformational leadership. The first version of the MLQ comprised of three dimensions of transformational leadership, comprising charisma, individual consideration, and intellectual stimulation. In subsequent versions of the MLQ, the charisma factor was separated into two elements ensuing in the four elements of: i) idealized influence, ii) inspirational motivation, iii) individual consideration, and iv) intellectual stimulation (Bass & Avolio, 1995).

i ) Dimensions of Transformational leadership
Idealized Influence was described by Abeysekera (2011) as having transformational leaders who act in ways that lead to their followers becoming role models. These leaders are valued, revered and trusted. Followers identify with and want to imitate the leaders.
Transformational leaders inspire their followers to render efforts beyond their interest in idealized influence, for the achievement of common goals. The explanation is that the stimulating vision and priorities are structured through this leadership style (Dionne, Yammarino, Atwater, & Spangler, 2004). Transformational leaders are highly regarded, efficient, and trusted by their workers in line with this, as well as serving as a role model. Leaders with an ideal mindset take chances and are steadier when high moral and ethical expectations are stressed (Bass & Riggio, 2006). In addition, transformational leaders are innovative thinkers who give explicit intentions and provide their followers with the resources they need to achieve their goals (Suifan, Abdallah, & Al Janin 2018). The idealized impact behavior includes employees in the implementation process, makes employees feel that their views matter, encourages employees to demonstrate self-determination, and makes employees feel secure about their work (Rezvani, Dong, & Khosravi 2017). When win over supporters to realize their goals, transformational leaders become trainers for assisting their followers achieve their aims.

ii) Inspirational motivation
Inspirational motivation refers to how leaders can motivate their followers to achieve a state of inspiration that enhances their ingenuity, innovation, and ability to do their utmost to help achieve goals for their organization (Vuković, Damnjanović, Papić-Blagojević, Jošanov-Vrgović, & Gagić, 2018). It is important for leaders to eradicate doubts and fears for their followers through the use of inspirational motivation and encourage them to believe in change for the application of an effective change initiative. Leaders who empower staff successfully will match the values of employees with the values of the company (Carroll 2020). Furthermore, inspirational motivation provides an opportunity that enhances the cognitive and behavioral habits of followers to embrace difficult tasks and produce desirable results. Here, leaders build up and set off the staff to conform to the organization's mission and vision. Leaders steer their followers with inspiring encouragement by cultivating the enduring team spirit amongst them (Antonakis, Avolio, & Sivasubramaniam, 2003;Bass & Riggio, 2006). Leaders inspire their staff to introduce new methods and strategies to deal with old hitches (Amin, Akram, Shahzad, & Amir 2018).

iii) Individualized consideration
Individualized consideration is the aspect of transformative leadership where leaders give their followers individualized attention and understand each of their differences and efforts (Garcia-Morales, Jiménez-Barrionuevo, & Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez 2012; Hannah, Schaubroeck, & Peng, 2016;Jirawuttinaunt, 2013;Lin, 2014). Bass (1985) notes that an intricate aspect of an individualized consideration is to mentor and grow followers. It also applies to the participation of individuals in an organization's process of change (Long, Yusof, Kowang, & Heng 2014). Individualized consideration is characterized as the degree to which the front runner recognizes and appreciates the influence of each follower on the group, takes care of the needs of each individual and acts as a mentor. With regard to the outcomes of Odumeru and Ogbonna (2013), where the leader achieves and enhances each person in the group's self-fulfillment and self-respect, empowering them to achieve more and develop. In order to take that factor into account in decision making in any case, the leader must be keen on the development needs of the follower. (Jiang, Zhao & Ni, 2017). Murigi 2019) argues that there must be good communication skills and strong faith between the leader and the supporters to achieve a balance between organizational prosperity and each person's needs.

iv) Intellectual stimulation
A central component of transformational leadership is intellectual stimulation. Transformational leaders inspire the efforts of their followers to "to be innovative and creative by questioning assumptions, reframing problems, and tackling old circumstances in innovative techniques" (Avolio & Bass, 2002). In addition, in intellectual stimulation, the faults of followers are not publicly blamed and freely stimulated by imagination. Transformational leaders call for feedback and innovative solutions to challenges from their followers, including problem solving followers. The intellectually stimulating leader motivates supporters to pursue new approaches.
Furthermore, by intellectual stimulation, transformational leaders motivate supporters to query their own beliefs, assumptions, and values, and, when appropriate, those leaders, which may be old-fashioned or incompatible for solving existing problems (Bass & Avolio, 2004;Elkins & Keller, 2013;Sundi, 2013). Also, Anjali and Anand (2015) affirm that intellectual stimulation leads to the development of employee commitment to the organization.
This, in turn, has consequences for the organization's ability to accomplish results based on employees' commitment and hard work (Anjali & Anand, 2015). Empirically, Cheung and Wong (2011) state a positive relationship between leadership styles of intellectual stimulation and the imagination of employees that require and invigorate employees to search for creative methods for their work (Yunus & Anuar, 2012). Bhatia (2013) addressed how leaders understand that creativity is what drives growth in profitable, high-growth companies. The study agrees that workers with a common persistent growth mindset and shared enthusiasm for problem solving are achieving innovation. Likewise, creativity is recognized on an organization's knack for identifying market opportunities and as a result, build a sustainable innovation organization from this (Burton & Thakur, 2009).

v ) Dimensions of Transactional leadership
The fragment of one leadership style that focuses on supervision, organization, and efficiency is transactional leadership or transactional management; it is a critical part of the Full Range Leadership Model. Transactional leadership is a leadership style in which, through both rewards and punishments, leaders promote obedience by followers. Transactional leaders are able to keep followers focused for the short term through a system of incentives and punishments. Those using the transactional method are definitely not considering transforming the future, in comparison to transformational leaders. Transactional leadership "arises when an individual takes the drive in creating interaction with others for the aim of an exchange of valued things" (Burns, 1978).
There are three dimensions of transactional leadership styles (Bass, & Avolio, 1990): a. Contingent Reward This style exchanges reward for effort and encourages reward and appreciation for good results. In return for mutually approved goal achievement, it offers various kinds of incentives. Contingent incentives include actions designed to clarify performance standards and to build the credibility of followers who will obey valued rewards (verbal or tangible) in return for good performance.
b. Management-by-Exception (Active) This type examines any deviation from the regulation and corrects any amendments when they occur. Active management by exception includes monitoring for deviances from regulations and guidelines and taking remedial measures. Active management-by-exception practices aimed at proactively avoiding future issues until they occur (Bass, & Avolio, 2006).

c. Management-by-Exception (Passive)
This style guards and only get involved when it does not reach the norm. Management-by-Exception (Passive) requires interfering only if requirements are not met. Management-by-exception (passive) requires monitoring for deviances from the planned expectations and standards of efficiency, and providing input to correct deviations from the norm.

vi ) Organizational Commitment
Organizational commitment as defined by Porter, Steers, Mowday, & Boulian (1974), is the strength of an individual's association and involvement within a particular organization. The organizational commitment epitomizes a relationship between the worker and the organization that includes employee job satisfaction (Nidadhavolu, 2018). Scholarly works have shown that organizational commitment remains one of the most studied phenomena in the works of literature related to organizational behaviour for the reason related to its relationship with job satisfaction and job performance of the employees (e.g. Hakim, & Viswesvaran, 2005;Simmons, 2005). Allen and Meyer, (1990) describe organizational commitment as a multidimensional construct that embraces positive feelings and a sense of belonging to the company (affective dimension), moral duty and identification with the norms of the organization (normative dimension) and the needs of the employee to remain in the organization (dimension of continuance). Furthermore, Allen and Meyer (1990) summarize that an employee with strong affective commitment will remain working for a company because he or she wants to; and an employee with strong continuance commitment will remain working for a company because he or she needs to; and finally an employee with strong normative commitment will remain working for a company because he or she thinks that he or she ought to. However, this extant study conceptualizes organizational commitment to affective commitment only. The choice of affective commitment only is based on the fact that studies have identified affective commitment as the most influential component in predicting workplace commitment and performance (Meyer, Stanley & Parfyonova, 2012;Tasnim, Yahya, & Zainuddin 2014). These studies and more have established the affirmative gains of affective employee commitment, both to the organization generally, and the employee to be specific.

Problem Statement
Leaders provide direction for an organization (Belias & Koustelios, 2014). Although, leaders are incapable to perform and accomplish the organization's goals without commitment from employees (Manning & Robertson, 2016). When employees experience a high level of job satisfaction, they enhance the level of productivity in the organization thereby adding to the success of the firm (Malik, Saleem & Naeem 2016). Numerous leadership concepts within the last century have affected the general effectiveness of organization's productivity (Muogbo, 2013). The absence of effective leadership is a serious problem prevalent in several organizations. It is evident that the resultant outcome is poor workers' performance. This study looks at the appropriate leadership style that will lead to high employee commitment to the organization.

Objectives of the Study
i. To examine the transformational leadership style on organizational commitment ii. To investigate the influence of transactional leadership style on organizational commitment iii. To examine the impact of laissez faire leadership style on organizational commitment

LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT
Leadership is dynamic and multifaceted with numerous dimensions and no single definition (Nikolic & Robinson, 2013;Yanney, 2014). One view is that leadership is a process in which the leader uses power and influence to direct followers in their activities to accomplish the goals of an organization (Franco & Matos, 2015). Other researchers asserted that leadership is a science of encouraging persons to participate voluntarily in the achievement of individual and organizational targets (Bohlooli & Ghahari, 2014;Moghadam & Chakherlouy, 2014;Nanjundeswaraswamy & Swamy, 2015). Leadership is also a behaviour that involves the way an individual behaves and expedites actions in motivating and stimulating individuals to pursue and achieve the organization's goal (Arham, 2014). Advancing a definition of leadership, Nikolic and Robinson (2013) explained leadership as the practice of virtuous characteristics in inspiring followers to accept and work towards goals that will benefit the organization. By contrast, Crossan, Mazutis, Seijts, and Gandz (2013) defined leadership as individuals who can utilize their best capabilities to enable and support others in achieving the company's objectives at the highest level, and by extension contribute positively to society.
The leader's role extends beyond personal abilities and includes creating and sustaining balance in the organization through employees' empowerment and satisfaction (Bambale, Girei, & Barwa, 2017). An alternative view is that the role of the leader is to influence and engage persons in attaining the organization's goals in a complex business environment (Marques, 2015). Effective leaders, according to Taylor, Cornelius, & Colvin (2014), are individuals who secure the relevant knowledge and skills to assess and respond appropriately to issues that affect the operations of their organizations. Leaders, who understand their role, could be in a better position to identify and develop the skills necessary to practice the leadership style that aligns with varying situations (Taylor et al., 2014).
The framework of this study identified transformational leadership style, transactional leadership, and laissez faire leadership style and organizational commitment.
The two most popular theories related to leadership styles are transformational, and transactional leadership styles founded by Burns (1978) and further developed by Bass in 1985. The fundamental premise of the transactional theory involves the use of reward and punishment to influence followers' behaviour (Bass, 1985). Studies have shown that since 2000, the transactional and transformational styles of leadership occurred as the epicenter of interest amongst scholars (e.g. Franco & Matos, 2015;Özer & Tinaztepe, 2014). This goes to show how significant these two styles of leadership to organizations.

Transformational Leadership Style and Organizational Commitment
In a study conducted by Avolio, Zhu, Koh, & Bhatia. (2004) on staff nurses in a public hospital in Singapore indicated that transformational leadership positively affects organizational commitment. Also, Limsili and Ogunlana (2008) assert that transformational leadership is a better leadership style and workers' productivity and organizational commitment is expedited by transformational leadership. Furthermore, Ismail and Yusuf (2009) examined the impact of transformational leadership on followers' commitment and established that there is significant positive relation between these two variables. Transformational leadership is the most effective leadership style in determining organizational commitment of employees (Bushra, Usman and Naveed 2011).
In addition, a study conducted by Batool (2013) on the effect of leadership styles on organizational commitment in National Bank of Pakistan shows that each of charisma and intellectual stimulation/individual consideration traits of transformational leadership style exerts positive impact on the performance of employees and leading to the strong commitment for their organization. The study resolves that transformational leadership style is more suitable in encouraging performance in NBP than transactional leadership style. In view of that, the study commends that National Bank of Pakistan should adopt transformational leadership style.
Moreover, Marmaya, Hitam, Torsiman and Balakrishnan (2011) study which examined the employees' perceptions of leadership style among Malaysian managers and its impact on organizational commitment found that leadership tends to be more transformational than transactional. From the foregoing, the hypothesis for analysis is posited in alternate form thus: H1: Transformational leadership style is significantly related to organizational commitment.

Transactional Leadership Style and Organizational Commitment
Hayward, Goss and Tolmay (2004) remarked that transactional leadership has more positive correlation with employee commitment than transformational style. However, Alkahtani, (2015) discussed how transactional leadership styles that consist of contingent reward, management by exception (passive) and management by exception (active) are weakly related to organizational commitment since employees have a tendency to circumvent those leaders who just get involved when difficulty arises.
Also, a study conducted by Lo, Ramayah, & Min (2009) examined leadership styles and employees' organizational commitment in Malaysia manufacturing industry. The aim of the study was to ensure the successful management of employees and to improve productivity and achievements of an organization. The sample size of the study was 156 participants. The authors found that several dimensions of transactional and transformational leadership have positive relationship with organizational commitment but the impacts are stronger for transactional leadership style. Similarly, transactional leadership has been found to have significant relationship with organizational commitment (Alqudah, 2011).
Furthermore, in the Nigerian context, a study conducted by Fasola, Adeyemi & Olowe (2013) examined the relationship between transformational, transactional leadership style, and their dimensions on the organizational commitment among Nigerian banks' employees. The study's target population covered all employees in banks within Ibadan. The sample was made up of 80 employees from 10 banks randomly selected. The instrument used for the study was tagged MLQ and OCQ. Correlation coefficient and multiple regressions were used to analyze the data. The results of the study showed that there is a positive relationship between transformational, transactional leadership, and organizational commitment. Furthermore, the results discovered that the impact of transactional leadership styles on the commitment of banking employees in Nigeria are more effective than the transformational style. Consequently, this style of leadership is not significantly inducing employees' commitment. However, the results of the study showed that the impact of transactional leadership styles on the commitment of banking employees in Nigeria is more effective than the transformational style. Hence, another proposition is postulated thus: H2: Transactional leadership style is significantly related to organizational commitment.

Laissez Faire Leadership style and Organizational Commitment
Laissez faire as a leadership style is described by its physical presence but absent in leadership (Lewin, Lippitt, & White, 1939). It is defined as "leaders who avoid making decisions, hesitate in taking action, and are absent when needed" (Piccolo, Bono, Heinitz, Rowold, Duehr, and Judge 2012). Laissez-faire leaders allow their subordinates to take decisions and attain their goals by reducing the cognitive disagreement at the workplace (Aronson & Mills, 1959). Other leadership styles assume some control over subordinates and enhance the performance (Bennis, 2007). Equally, controlling the subordinates can be obvious misuses of autonomy, (Gagné, & Deci, 2005;Spreitzer, De Janasz & Quinn, 1999). In the recent past, Bhatti, Maitlo, Shaikh, Hashmi, and Shaikh (2012) commented how laissez-faire style of leadership comprises "non-interference policy, allows complete freedom to all workers and has no particular way of attaining goals." In a study by Sorenson, (2000), laissez faire leadership style was found positively associated with employee commitment. Also, Wallace, de Chernatony, & Buil (2013) found a positive connection between laissez-faire leader and employee commitment. Likewise, Huynh (2014) and Lee (2005) in their study found mixed results about laissez-faire leadership, where a positive relationship was discovered with continuance commitment and affective commitment. However, there are other earlier empirical studies that answered for laissez-faire leadership style influencing employee commitment positively (e.g. Pahi, Hamid, Umrani & Ahmed, 2015;Garg, & Ramjee, 2013;Alqudah, 2011;Pahi, Shaikh, Abbasi, & Hamid, 2018). Following the above discussions, herein is another hypothesis formulated in an alternate form for analysis: H3: Laissez faire leadership style is significantly related to organizational commitment.

Theoretical Framework
Leadership theories are schools of thought brought forward to describe how and why certain individuals become leaders. The theories emphasize the traits and behaviours that individuals can embrace to enhance their own leadership abilities.

Great Man Theory
According to the Great Man Theory (which should perhaps be called the Great Person Theory), leaders are born with just the right traits and abilities for leadingcharisma, intellect, confidence, communication skills, and social skills. The theory suggests that the ability to lead is inherentthat the best leaders are born, not made. It defines leaders as courageous, symbolic, and designed to rise to leadership when the situation arises. The term "Great Man" was adopted at the time because leadership was reserved for males, especially in military leadership. The Great Man Theory believes that the inherent traits that one is born with contribute to great leadership.

Contingency Theory
The Contingency Theory emphasizes different variables in a specific setting that determine the style of leadership best suited for the said situation. It is founded on the principle that no one leadership style is applicable to all situations. Renowned leadership researchers Hodgson and White (2003) consider the best form of leadership as one that finds the perfect balance between behaviours, needs, and context. Respectable leaders possess both the ideal qualities as well as have the intuition to appraise the desires of their followers and the current state of affairs. In a nutshell, the contingency theory submits that good leadership is an admixture of various important variables. Gill (2011) clarifies that contingency theories indicate that there is no single best leadership style. Depending on the essence of the scenario and the followers, effective and determined leaders will use different types.
Today, the contingency approach to management remains prominent, but it is not without critique. Gill (2011) suggests that two of the major critiques of theories of contingency are that they do not account for the leader's position or how styles shift. While these theories help to account for the significance of the situation, they do not clarify the mechanisms behind how leadership styles differ according to the situation.

Behavioural Theory
In Behavioral theory, the focus is on the specific behaviours and actions of leaders in lieu of their personalities or features. The theory indicates that the outcome of several acquired skills is productive leadership. To lead their followers, individuals need three primary skills-technical, human, and conceptual skills. Technical abilities denote the awareness of the method or strategy of a leader; human abilities suggest that one is able to communicate with other people; whereas conceptual skills empower the leader to come up with ideas for operating the firm or association efficiently. The Behavioral Theory necessitates learning the aptitudes needed to turn into an effective leader.

Research Design
Parahoo (2006) defines a research design as "a plan that describes how, when, and where data are to be collected and analysed". Additionally, Burns & Grove (2007) define it as a "blueprint for the conduct of a study that maximizes control over factors that could interfere with the study's desired outcome". However, before making the choice of design and method, the researcher must understand the purpose of the research and the objectives of the research design in supporting the study (Parahoo 2006). The only clear rule in selecting a design is that the question dictates the design. There are different types of research: quantitative, qualitative and mixed method. This study chose a quantitative method. Welch, Plakoyiannaki, Piekkari, and Paavilainen-Mäntymäki (2013) indicate that a quantitative method is appropriate to examine the relationship between two or more variables in the study, and is mainly relevant for theory testing. The quantitative method was appropriate to examine the relationship between the independent variables and the dependent variable in the study. Furthermore, the quantitative method is important to compare two groups or to determine the existence of a relationship between two or more variables in the study (Tsang, 2014). Allwood (2012) indicates that a quantitative method is appropriate to analyse quantifiable and numerical data in the research. Kombo & Tromp, (2006) describe population as a group of individuals, objects or items from which samples are taken for measurement. It is a complete set of individuals, cases or objects with some common observable characteristics (Mugenda & Mugenda 2008). They are the larger groups from which a sample is taken. The study area of this study is public sector represented by Abuja Enterprise Agency (AEA) and the population size is two hundred and forty-eight (248).

Sample Size and Sampling Technique
In statistical analysis, sampling is a process used in selecting a predetermined number of observations taken from a larger population. A sample size of 151 was drawn from the population of 248 research participants who were purposively selected. The key aim of purposive sampling is to focus on particular characteristics of a population that are of interest, which will best enable one to answer one's research questions.

Response Rate
A response rate measures the level of success or quality achieved in collecting survey data (Garrison-Mogren, 2007). In other words, response rate is a ratio of the number of people who respond to a study to the estimated sample size for the study.
Response rate is one of the most significant pointers of survey quality as it displays the demographic representativeness within the range studied. The researcher administered 151 questionnaires to employees of the government agency in Abuja in Nigeria. The findings of response rate presented in Table 1 Table The results indicate that out of 151 questionnaires that were distributed to participants, 110 were completely and correctly filled and returned, which is 73% response rate, while 41 or 27 percent were not completely or correctly returned. Sekaran (2003) recommends a minimum of 30 percent response rate as suitable for a survey research. Hence, the response rate in this study was a sufficient representation of the target population that can be reliable for data analysis.

Reliability Statistic
As the original questionnaire was adapted from various previous research papers, the reliability of the questionnaire questions need to be measured. Cronbach alpha was computed and utilized to examine the reliability of the variables of the study. Cronbach alpha is a significant concept in the estimation of assessments and questionnaires as high-quality tests are central to examine the reliability of data supplied in a research study.
To do this, the reliability of the scale was measured using the Cronbach's alpha. With the aid of SPSS, the reliability of the questions of each variable was computed. The results as presented in Table 2 reveals a Cronbach alpha of .792 which is higher than the threshold of 0.7.

Assumptions of Multiple Linear Regression
Key assumptions for multiple regression exist. For multiple regression, the dependent or independent variables have to be an interval or scale level variable which is normally distributed in the population from which it is drawn. Figure 1 confirmed to the normally distributed feature. That is the error, or residual, is normally distributed Figure 1: Normality Histogram Another assumption to take care of, prior to the consideration of the analysis proper is the linearity assumption (Leech, Barrett, & Morgan, 2008). From the Linearity probability plot (Figure 4.2) above, the variables are clustered very closely along the regression line; indicating that the data are well suited for this study and analysis.

Figure 2: Linearity P-P Plot
Next in line is the multicollinearity which occurs when two or more independent variables contain much of the same information. The study used Collinearity statistics (variance inflation factors (VIF) and Tolerance values) for each variable to check for multicollinearity. . Field (2005)  Finally, homoscedasticity test was carried out to determine if the data was equally scattered from the centre, thus implying that the variances of the data from the mean were equal. Figure 3 displays the results for the test for homogeneity.   Table 4 (ANOVA) shows a sig value of .000, which indicates that any of the three leadership styles could predict the model. From this table, it was revealed that these variables (leadership styles) were significant to organizational commitment (p=.000). This finding led to further studies into probing their individual significance. laissez faire contributed .129 or 12.9 percent to organizational commitment which is also significant and therefore, significantly contribute to organizational commitment. Thus, for every unit increase in Trsfmational, Organizational Commitment will go up by 0.586 units, provided the other variables (Trnxnal and Laissez_Faire) remain unchanged. For every unit increase in Trnxnal, Organizational Commitment will go up by 0.118 units, provided the other variables (Trsfmational and Laissez_Faire) remain unchanged. Finally, for every unit increase in Laissez_Faire, Organizational Commitment will go up by 0.112 units provided the other variables (Trsfmational and Trnxnal) remain unchanged.

Discussion of Findings
The results of the analysis specify that there is a significant relationship between Transformational leadership style and organizational commitment of AEA, Abuja. This implies that transformational leadership style (idealized influence, inspirational motivation, individual consideration, and intellectual stimulation) contribute significantly to organizational commitment (affective commitment) of AEA, Abuja. The study is in line with the finding of Ismail and Yusuf (2009), who in the course of examining the impact of transformational leadership on followers' commitment, established that there is significant positive relation between these two variables. The study is also in tandem with the findings of Batool (2013), who showed that each of charisma and intellectual stimulation/individual consideration traits of transformational leadership style exerts positive impact on the performance of employees which leads to the strong commitment for their organization. The study is also in tandem with the contingency theory which underscores diverse variables in a specific situation that determine the style of leadership best suited for the various circumstances. It is founded on the principle that no one leadership style is related to all situations.
Hypothesis 2, revealed that there is a significant relationship between transactional leadership style and organizational commitment (affective commitment) of AEA, Abuja. This implies that transactional leadership style contributes significantly to organizational commitment (affective commitment) of AEA, Abuja. This finding is in agreement with Hayward, Goss and Tolmay (2004) who stated how transactional leadership style has more positive correlation with employee commitment than transformational style. Consequently, the study's findings are in harmony with Alqudah, (2011) who found transactional leadership style to have significant relationship with organizational commitment. Also, the study's findings are in tandem with Lo, Ramayah, & Min (2009) who found that several dimensions of transactional and transformational leadership have positive relationship with organizational commitment but the impacts are stronger for transactional leadership style.
In Hypothesis 3, the study found that there is a significant relationship between laissez faire leadership style and organizational commitment (affective commitment) of AEA, Abuja. This infers that laissez faire contributes significantly to organizational commitment (affective commitment) of AEA, Abuja. Laissez faire leadership style contributed the least to the model. Findings of this study can be seen to be in line with previous studies that accounted for laissez-faire leadership style influencing employee commitment to service quality positively (Pahi, Hamid, Umrani & Ahmed, 2015;Garg, & Ramjee, 2013;Alqudah, 2011;Pahi, Shaikh, Abbasi, & Hamid, 2018).

Conclusions
The following conclusions were drawn from the results of the findings: i) There is a significant relationship between transformational leadership style and organizational commitment (affective commitment) of AEA, Abuja. This implies that transformational leadership style contributes to organizational commitment (affective commitment) of AEA, Abuja. Furthermore, transformational leadership style contributes most to the model.
ii) There is a significant relationship between transactional leadership style and organizational commitment (affective commitment) of AEA, Abuja. The implication is that transactional leadership style contributes significantly to organizational commitment (affective commitment) of AEA, Abuja. In addition, this leadership style contributes more than the laissez faire leadership style.
iii) There is a significant relationship between laissez faire and organizational commitment (affective commitment) of AEA, Abuja. This suggests that laissez faire contributes significantly to organizational performance (affective commitment) of AEA, Abuja. This leadership style contributed less than both transformational and transactional leadership styles.

Recommendations
Based on the study results, the following recommendations posit that AEA should use continuous transformational leadership style practices to sustain high employee commitment and organizational effectiveness. Also, AEA should apply a bit of both transactional and laissez faire leadership styles from time to time depending on the situation of things at the workplace as there is no particular leadership style that is onesize fit all but depends on situation at hand.