Does the Institutional Type Matter for Leadership, Trust, and Faculty Performance in Public and Private Zambian Universities?

Authors

  • Lydia Mhango School of Graduate Studies, The Copperbelt University
  • Chanda Sichinsambwe School of Business, The Copperbelt University
  • Evaristo Nsenduluka School of Business, The Copperbelt University
  • Matthew Banda School of Business, The Copperbelt University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14738/abr.1407.12012

Keywords:

leadership, trust, employee performance, higher education institution (HEI), Zambia, Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), Multi-Group Analysis (MGA)

Abstract

This study explores the structural and relational mechanisms linking leadership, trust, and employee performance within public and private higher education institutions (HEIs) in Zambia. Drawing on Social Exchange Theory and the Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) framework, data were gathered from a cross-sectional survey of 276 academic staff across 43 participating HEIs. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) was deployed to evaluate the relationships among perceived leader trustworthiness (ability, benevolence, and integrity), dual-target trust (individual and organizational), and composite work outcomes (commitment, engagement, productivity, and effectiveness). The structural model indicates that leadership is a highly significant predictor of both trust and performance, with dual-target trust acting as a vital partial mediator. Crucially, a Partial Least Squares Multi-Group Analysis (PLS-MGA) revealed a significant contextual divergence between institutional types: the positive effect of leadership on trust is significantly stronger within private Zambian HEIs than in public ones, whereas the downstream pathways linking trust to performance remain structurally invariant. These findings demonstrate that while trust serves as a universal engine for optimizing academic outcomes across all universities, private-sector faculty exhibit heightened psychological sensitivity to leaders’ behavior due to the precarious, market-driven nature of private contracts. The study contributes to the limited literature on organizational behavior in African higher education and provides actionable, governance-sensitive recommendations for university councils, policymakers, and institutional leaders.

References

Argyris, C. (1964). Integrating the individual and the organization. John Wiley & Sons.

Becker, J. M., Rai, A., Ringle, C. M., & Völckner, F. (2013). Discovering unobserved heterogeneity in structural equation modeling to enable context-specific conclusions. MIS Quarterly, 37(3), 665–694. doi.org

Byrne, B. M. (2016). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (3rd ed.). Routledge.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Colquitt, J. A., Scott, B. A., & LePine, J. A. (2007). Trust, trustworthiness, and trust propensity: A meta-analytic test of their unique relationships with risk taking and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 909–927. doi.org

Cummings, L. L., & Bromiley, P. (1996). The Organizational Trust Inventory (OTI): Development and validation. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research (pp. 302–330). SAGE Publications. doi.org

Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 611–628. doi.org

Dziminska, M., Fijałkowska, J., & Sułkowski, Ł. (2018). Trust-building culture as an instrument for enhancing institutional performance: The case of Polish higher education institutions. Education Sciences, 8(2), Article 74. doi.org

Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. J. (1986). Bootstrap methods for standard errors, confidence intervals, and other measures of statistical accuracy. Statistical Science, 1(1), 54–75. doi.org

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. doi.org

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24. doi.org

Jameson, J., Post, J., & Academic Leadership Working Group. (2023). Trust and academic leadership in higher education: Developing a culture of collaborative governance. Higher Education Policy, 36(2), 241–263. doi.org Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C. M., Hildebrandt, V. H., van Buuren, S., van der Beek, A. J., & de Vet,

H. C. (2012). Development of an individual work performance questionnaire. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 62(1), 6–28. doi.org

Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709–734. doi.org

Mushi, H. M., Ndibalema, P., & Mkulu, D. G. (2020). Relational trust and performance of academic staff in East African public universities. African Journal of Educational Studies in Mathematics and Sciences, 16(2), 45–61.

Page | 62 Scholar Publishing Nodooshan, S., Alavi, S., & Sharifi, M. (2023). Academic leadership in higher education: A systematic review of features and competencies. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 45(4), 412–430. doi.org

Poon, J. M. (2023). Components of supervisor trustworthiness and their effects on employee performance: A cognitive-affective processing perspective. Journal of Management & Organization, 29(1), 114–132. doi.org

Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J. M. (2024). SmartPLS 4. SmartPLS GmbH. smartpls.com

Ruben, B. D., De Lisi, R., & Gigliotti, R. A. (2018). A guide for leaders in higher education: Core concepts, competencies, and tools. Stylus Publishing.

Rumbley, L. E., Altbach, P. G., & Reisberg, L. (2018). Internationalization and leadership development in higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education, 22(4), 283–298. doi.org

Salamzadeh, Y., Nejati, M., & Salamzadeh, A. (2016). Agility path in higher education: The role of transparent leadership and trust. International Journal of Management in Education, 10(4), 387–404. doi.org

Ullman, J. B. (2006). Structural equation modeling: Reviewing the basics and moving forward. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87(1), 35–50. doi.org

Werts, C. E., Linn, R. L., & Jöreskog, K. G. (1974). Intraclass reliability estimates: Testing structural assumptions. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 34(1), 25–33. doi.org

Wong, K. K. K. (2016). Mediation analysis, multi-group analysis, and measurement invariance assessment with SmartPLS3. Marketing Bulletin, 26, 1–22.

World Values Survey. (2014). World Values Survey Wave 6 (2010-2014). World Values Survey Association. worldvaluessurvey.org

Zaheer, A., McEvily, B., & Perrone, V. (1998). Does trust matter? Exploring the effects of interorganizational and interpersonal trust on performance. Organization Science, 9(2), 141–159. doi.org

Downloads

Published

2026-07-21

How to Cite

Mhango, L., Sichinsambwe, C., Nsenduluka, E., & Banda, M. (2026). Does the Institutional Type Matter for Leadership, Trust, and Faculty Performance in Public and Private Zambian Universities?. Archives of Business Research, 14(07), 46–63. https://doi.org/10.14738/abr.1407.12012