Leading local government during COVID-19: An empirical finding from Ghana

Purpose : This is to look into the impact of leadership on employee output in the local governance sector during the COVID – 19 Era. Research Methodology : A quantitative and descriptive approach, as well as a census method, were used to sample 220 employees. A structured questionnaire was used to gather data, multiple linear regression was used to test hypotheses, and SPSS version 20 was used to input, process, and analyze data. Result : The findings demonstrate that visionary, laissez-faire, and servant leadership styles have a considerable impact on staff output. Furthermore, employees' output is unaffected by autocratic and charismatic leadership styles. Limitation : The research only investigated five different types of leadership styles. Within the central region, it was similarly limited to only one metropolitan assembly. Contribution : It was demonstrated by the theory that under the local government, some various forces and situations drive the organization's activities; thus, leadership should be ready to change and dynamically position themselves to handle issues that arise.


Introduction
Local government leaders are more frequently found in communities and serve as agents of the central government, demonstrating the ability to persuade employees and community members to achieve developmental goals.They try to attract people from all walks of life by demonstrating faith and a desire to use the resources available to them, and because local government organizations are more decentralized, leadership is required to push employees to produce generally acceptable results.When an organization requires dynamism or a management shift, leadership is viewed as the pillar around which it evolves and revolves.Despite speculation that traditional leadership approaches must be abandoned due to generational shifts in employee and client behavior, these approaches continue to be important in the operation of organization management.According to Oyetunji (2006), leadership patterns have shifted from old leadership practices to new perceptions.Just at the start of the year 2020, the entire world was infected with COVID -19, one of the speediest viruses, which was first discovered in the Chinese city of Wuhan (El-Sayyad & Abdalhafid, 2020).
As a result of this global challenge, leadership took on a new dimension during COVID -19, and employee output dwindled due to inconsistency in their reporting to work.To deliver the organization's goods, leaders are expected to need to adopt new approaches to leading and managing employees in the near future.Because the organizational environment is changing, leadership must be flexible in order to achieve organizational goals, which cannot be achieved unless employees give their all during the pandemic.Today's leaders and managers must begin to shift from being armchair leaders and managers who expect the receptionist, who is always perceived to be the one to attend to clients or customers at the reception area, to being recipient-based or servant leaders and managers, ready to attend to every client at the earliest opportunity.According to Colbert, Minic, and Director (2009), elements impacting leadership include manager traits, subordinate characteristics, and organizational environment.In their study of a situational theory of leadership, J.W. Osborne (2008) argues that there is a need for the conventional method of leadership since the context in which leaders interact is both radically different and unique in a given setting.
As a result, leadership must not be reserved for a specific group or personality within the organization but must be demonstrated by everyone from the floor member, and receptionists, to the top executives, because each person in the organization represents the face of the organization and should represent the goals and aspirations of the organization.According to Amegayibor (2021), leadership has got a lot of interest in both large and small organizations all over the world as a result of globalization and technological improvements, and there is a need for leaders to become more proactive in their thinking when it comes to handling their organizations.Public institution leadership is at the heart of this global threat COVID -19 has been called into question due to a lack of clear demonstration of different leadership in these given circumstances.The pandemic primarily impacted public institutions; the unexpected nature of the pandemic threw all organization's plans out of gear, and the organization's management was to apply the necessary theory to solve the issue at hand by demonstrating leadership consistent with occurrence.
Managers' leadership behaviors within an organization allow for clear communication between the leader and the workers.This situation allows for the elimination of job stress within the organization of workers as well as the provision of an organizational environment that aids in the promotion of employee performance.The COVID-19 pandemic was unquestionably one of the most devastating disasters in human history (Loayza & Pennings, 2020).Leadership in diverse countries has demonstrated that particular leadership is only appropriate for certain scenarios in the COVID-19 pandemic crisis (Carter & May, 2020).During the COVID -19 staff members were permitted to work and make decisions from home, and physical appearance at a job was no longer required.As a result, leaders must lead from a variety of positions, whether in the office or at home and this largely affected output.Worker job satisfaction and output rise, while worker turnover falls (Kim & Brymer, 2011).Many authors proposed the contingency theory of leadership as the most relevant theory in such unexpected situations.Contingent theories aid in gaining experienced freedom in leadership (Northouse, 2001).According to Prasertwattanakul and Chan (2007); Northouse (2000), Fiedler's contingency theory arose from the lack of trait and behavioral theories to deliver dependable results, which led to a focus on a contingency or environmental factors that govern behavior (Yukl, 2002).
According to Chan (2010), researchers who have studied leadership styles have not come up with a proper style suitable for a specific issue; however, Chan advises that different styles are needed for diverse contexts and leaders simply need to know when to use a specific approach; and by using suitable leadership style, leaders can affect employee job satisfaction, dedication, productivity, employee performance, and organizational performance.This begs the question of how leaders and managers in state institutions such as the local government institutions respond to unexpected situations, as well as the type of leadership style displayed in a given circumstance.Previous research on leadership and employee performance has focused on sectors such as education (Tessema, 2014), SMEs (Jalal-Eddeen, 2015), banking (Bushra, Ahmad, & Naveed, 2011), communication (Karamat, 2013), oil and gas (Makhamara & Simiyu, 2016), etc. but studies on employee performance in the local government sector appear to be rare.Furthermore, there is a scarcity of literature in the Ghanaian leadership literature on the effect of leadership on employee output.The study will look into the relationship between leadership and employee output in Ghanaian local government to close these gaps.

The objective of the study
The study's primary goal is as follows: 1. To look into the impact of visionary leadership on employee output in Ghana's local government sector.
2. To see how autocratic leadership affects employee output in Ghana's local government sector.3. To examine the effect of laissez-faire leadership on employees' output in the Ghanaian local government sector.4. To examine the effect of charismatic leadership on employees' output in the Ghanaian local government sector. 5. To investigate the impact of servants on employee output in Ghana's local government sector.

Contingency theory
In an article titled "A Contingency Model of Leadership Effectiveness in 1958," Fred E. Fiedler suggested the contingency theory of leadership.The theory is based on the idea that the proper type of leadership is determined by an environmental circumstance that manifests itself in the form of a specific event or behavior (Sahal, 1979).The emergence of the theory in the 1960s and 1970s, according to Hernandez, Eberly, Avolio, and Johnson (2011), was an attempt to describe the impacts of leadership and explain greater variances in the effectiveness of leaders by taking situational elements into account more precisely.Situational favorableness and leadership style are the two fundamental principles of Fiedler's theory.Fiedler sees group effectiveness as "depending on both the leader's motivational system and the amount of dominion the leader has, viewing the leadership position as an arena in which the leader attempts to accomplish both his and the organization's goals" (Singh, Bohra, & Dalal, 1979).The theory tailors a leader's performance to the circumstances (Northouse, 2012).
It evaluates the leader's efficacy based on his personality, hence the word "contingency."The theory is defined by three factors: leader-member relationships, work structure, and position authority (Northouse, 2000).Leaders profit from the current globalization climate in a variety of ways ("Addressing Leadership Problems in a Global Context," 2011).According to contingency theory, there is no single, prescribed method for achieving change.Alternatively, the unique conditions must be considered.In general, the theory asserts that change is influenced by the relationship between leaders and followers, the task structure, and the leader's position (Doyle & Smith, 2001).Contingency theory is made up of three principles, according to Weihrich and Cannice (2010) position power, task structure, and leader-member relationships.The degree to which the power of a position, as opposed to other forms of influence such as personality or skill, enables a leader to persuade group members to follow orders is known as position power (Weihrich & Cannice, 2010).They are forced to work because of the leader's or manager's power and ability to exert certain levels of influence and control over subordinates.The leader's power may come from his or her knowledge, experience, and level of authority which has been awarded him or her by the organization.
As a conceptual premise, task structure entails a clear specification of a task and the individuals who are responsible for it.As a result, task structure refers to a procedure by which organizational tasks are clearly defined and responsibilities are distributed to members clearly and concisely.if organizational activities are well-structured and separated, there will be an opportunity for successful employee performance review.The task structure specifies how normal the work will be, as well as the mechanism for assigning job responsibilities and tasks to the worker.The idea of leader-member interactions essentially refers to a situation in which a leader uses positive methods to earn trust from his subordinates, which ostensibly necessitates an awareness of the subordinates' needs, desires, and motivations (Weihrich & Cannice, 2010).This component exemplifies the relationship between the leader and his or her subordinates.The success of the organization is determined by how successfully the leader manages these relationships.It is a crucial aspect of organizational management because the leader and employees demonstrate trust, loyalty, consistency, and reliability.The theory applies to the research because it has shown that organizational change is increasingly dynamic as a result of technology and globalization issues necessitating different leadership styles in these circumstances to illustrate that leadership or management is prepared to lead in a variety of ways depending on the situation.It has been demonstrated that the aspects listed in the contingency theory should not be overlooked since they play a part in a leader's or manager's effectiveness.

The leadership concept
Researchers from all over the world continued to see leadership as one of the most widely discussed topics (Kuchler, 2008).According to De Jong and Den Hartog (2007), leadership is the practice of persuading others to achieve specific goals.According to Lok and Crawford (2004), a firm's outcome is mostly driven by its leadership.Gill (2006)discovered that leaders engage, inspire, develop, and acknowledge their people to achieve critical performance results.Leadership is the capability to guide a group toward a common objective that would not have been achieved without the presence of a leader (J.Graham, 1997).The practice of persuading others to identify and concur on what matters and how it is done, as well as the process of aiding individual and collective efforts to achieve shared goals, is known as leadership (Yukl, 2010).
According to Kent (2005), leadership involves interaction between both the leader and his followers, which is capable of altering both their motivation and behavior through change and development.Ability to persuade others to do something, believe something, or act in a particular way (Lehman, 2007).Leadership is critical in determining a company's success or failure (Lok & Crawford, 2004).Gill (2006) discovered that to achieve critical performance goals, leaders must aid to inspire, motivating, encouraging, and recognizing their people.Komakech, Obici, and Mwesigwa (2021)state that effective leadership necessitates professional ability, a lack of which can cripple an organization in a variety of ways.Leadership is a factor used in institutions to influence employees to achieve personal or organizational goals.

Leadership styles
There are many different types of leadership styles to choose from when it comes to studying employees' performance or output.In 1939, Kurt Lewin identified three types of leadership: authoritarian, democratic, and laissez-faire.According to Mirumbe (2020), some authors identify transactional, transformational, bureaucratic, laissez-faire, autocratic, and democratic leadership styles.Autocratic, democratic, laissez-faire, charismatic, democratic, visionary, transactional, and transformational leadership were identified by Mosadegh (2003).The behavior of a leader is referred to as his or her leadership style.It is the outcome of the leader's ideas, charisma, and knowledge (Jalal-Eddeen, 2015).These leadership styles are based on the old notion that leaders should be great managers capable of guiding and controlling their people.Alkahtani, Abu-Jarad, Sulaiman, and Nikbin (2011) defined followers (employees) as obedient subordinates who obey orders.The theory and the study to be undertaken have an existing relationship in that the theory concentrates on visionary, autocratic, laissez-faire, charismatic, and servant leadership styles in an institution due to the situation such as COVID -19 and the nature of the organization.Even though other leadership styles can be tested, these five styles were used in the organization mostly at different times and affect employee performance or output.It means that implementing one of these leadership styles will result in either improved or decreased employee performance.

Autocratic leadership
Autocratic leadership is characterized by the display of a certain level of power granted to them by the organization, as well as the position of being an expert.It is used to compel someone to work or do something before complaining, such as compelling an employee to reach a specific goal in a specific method and period.This leadership style is referred to as the classical tradition (Nwokocha & Iheriohanma, 2015).This form of leadership, according to Karamat (2013), is defined as an individual who sets his or her goals without considering the viewpoints of his or her followers, then forces his or her followers to carry out their obligations without inquiry.The primary idea behind this leadership style is that leaders are skilled professionals who control and monitor their subordinates.Alkahtani et al. (2011) define followers (employees) as obedient subordinates who obey directions.Autocratic leaders in companies, according to Balunywa (2000), are more concerned with despotic influence to get the work done than with the development and growth of subordinates.According to Gordon (2013), firms with an authoritarian leadership style have employee absenteeism and abnormally high turnover.According to Zervas and David (2013), an authoritarian leader achieves goals by embedding a clear, strong vision, guaranteeing that the vision is included in strategy implementation, and directing activities throughout the organization.Autocratic leaders lead to a situation in which subordinates who refuse to acknowledge the value of work are forced to work (Mullins, 2002).

Laissezfaire leadership
This is a leadership style in which a boss allows a subordinate to work autonomously and make decisions to reach a certain goal.This sort of leadership is believed to be a lazy man approach to employee management, and if care is not taken, employees get cocky of themselves and may make arbitrary decisions that are not in the best company's interest.Karamat (2013) describes this form of leadership as "very laid-back."The group's leader allows its members to take whatever action they deem necessary.The term laissez-faire was used to refer to free-market capitalism, and it is defined in politics and culture as an institutional system that works best when there is no state involvement.It is considered a "natural" economic paradigm that maximizes personal well-being while also extending to the community.Using this leadership style, individuals are provided with complete authority or influence, and they are responsible for formulating goals, making choices, and solving issues on their own (Nwokocha & Iheriohanma, 2015).According to Muhammad and Usman (2012), a laissez-faire leadership style gives employees greater options and the least degree of assistance in making organizational decisions.It was stressed that the motive for this leadership style is that the leaders think that giving employees the ability to respond to obligations and tasks in their unique way improves performance.According to S. Brown and Bryant (2015), if team members do not perform their roles properly or lack the expertise, skills, or motivation to perform their work effectively, the leadership style can be detrimental.Uncertainty, inefficiency, and anarchy can result from a laissezfaire leadership style.

Visionary leadership
The leader who carries or bears the future and direction of a company by inspiring individuals within the organization to focus on reaching the established targets is known as visionary leadership.They are visionaries who are focused on the institution's greater aim or mission.Visionary leadership, according to Ahmad and Oranye (2010), is a type of leadership in which empowerment is the process of building self-efficacy, promoting helplessness, and strengthening intrinsic forces within organizational members to achieve successful aims and outcomes.In contrast to the direct approach and assumptions, visionary leadership is a dynamic and interactive phenomenon.Leaders who have the trait of visionary leadership have a foresight of future events and set certain goals for achieving them.Visionary leadership is defined as the ability to create an influence on individuals to engage in specific goals and transmit this talent to their followers (Buluç, 2009).A visionary leader is concerned with how to transform a stagnant institution into a massive, innovative system (Almog- Bareket, 2012).The study of strategic vision should take into account the strategic substance of products, markets, issues, processes, and organizations, as well as distinct visionary approaches (Westley & Mintzberg, 1989).Visionary leadership, according to Khan (2002), entails the skill, capability, and extraordinary expertise to ensure future success.A visionary leader can anticipate issues, plan for the long term, and inspire others to behave properly.This means that visionary leaders may identify challenges and opportunities within the organization to assist the organization in achieving its goals.When presented with undesirable or unexpected events, visionary leaders aggressively research a way to benefit from those changes (Adriansyah, 2015).

Charismatic leadership
Charismatic leadership refers to a type of leader who has the charisma and firepower to inspire others to achieve a common objective.Is most typically a type of individual that desires to influence a group in achieving a vision; this desire stems from the person's innovative personality.They maintain their eyes on the ball at all times.According to academicians, charismatic leadership is defined by three unique behaviors that occur in three stages: the first is evaluating the environment.At this point, the charismatic leader understands his or her followers' requests and expresses their discontent with the existing quo.The charismatic leader's second stage occurs when he or she develops a purpose and effectively communicates it to those around them (employees).The third step is vision execution, which requires the leader to adopt a risky and unconventional strategy in order to win followers' dedication, such as willingly exposing themselves to situations with unknown outcomes and taking risks (Ehrhart & Klein, 2001).This form of leadership fosters a sense of oneness between the two people or a person who wants to be like the other; the bigger the desire, the greater the power (Bass & Avolio, 1990).A leadership style is one where the leader's influence is primarily based on his or her personality (Eze, 2010).According to Zervas and David (2013), a charismatic leader becomes forceful when a follower fails to satisfy aspirations or when there is conflict.According to S. Brown and Bryant (2015), charismatic leaders have a higher level of confidence than their peers.

Servant leadership
This leadership is where the leader influences an individual by paying attention to their needs, displaying compassion, and offering a certain level of awareness, persuasion, and stewardship to reach a specific purpose.There is a new concept of servant leadership emerging, and it shares many characteristics with transformational leadership.The drive to serve and empower subordinates motivates the leader, resulting in an egalitarian leader-follower relationship (Brownell, 2010).Servant leadership suggests greater compassion for the people because the leader's primary attention is on his or her subordinates (Stone, Russell, & Patterson, 2004).Servant leadership is a style of leadership that takes into account the needs of members (and other stakeholders), to assist followers to, and succeed (J.W. Graham, 1991;Greenleaf, 1998).According to Matteson and Irving (2005), servant-leadership is fundamentally centered on putting the needs of followers ahead of personal interests.Greenleaf (1998) defines servant-leadership as an approach to management in which an individual simultaneously leads and serves in a coordinated manner, while also interacting thoughtfully with the environment.Servant leaders, according to Spreitzer and Cameron (2012), represent a good view of organizational behavior since their actions excite individuals and help them reach their full potential.
The key distinction between a servant leader as well as other managers is the care with which the servant leader ensures that other people's most pressing needs are met (Gordon, 2017).The major obligation of servant leaders is to work for the employees' basic needs and desires while considering their interests (Whetstone, 2002).Leaders enable employees to perform by supporting them rather than utilizing their authority (Russell, 2001).According to Hart and Quinn (1993), managers who are primarily concerned with people perform better in terms of business and financial objectives.M. E. Brown and Treviño (2006) noted that to implement servant leadership more effectively, staff must be valued and their contributions recognized.

Employees' output
The act of delivering or supplying something to serve a shared objective or purpose is known as output.This can be utilized in a variety of ways, such as determining the level of employee performance in a company or the person's resulting point.Anyango (2015) defines employee output as "the result of behavioral patterns performed to attain a target by prescribed criteria."Job performance, according to Ibrahim (2004), is a critical activity that determines both the goals and strategies for achieving organizational as well as the level of output accomplishment.Work performance in the context of task performance was defined by Borman and Motowidlo (1997) as "the effectiveness with which they represent the best and undertake their assigned duties, culminating in the accomplishment of the organization's objectives while adjusting both the organization and the individual accordingly."According to Putterill and Rohrer (1995), employee performance can be defined as assessing the number of units of an adequate standard produced by an individual in a manufacturing enterprise within a specific time frame.
Employee output refers to how individuals contribute to the achievement of organizational goals.It underlines the importance of the employees' contribution to the organization's objectives.Job performance entails activities that are reflected in the actions taken by the individual (Oswald, Hambrick, & Jones, 2007).When goals are achieved the employees receive better wages and incentives based on production, the amount and quality of total production increases, and the organization's goodwill increases.All of these factors contribute to the development of the national economy and the overall living standard of society, and employees receive job satisfaction.Employee output refers to the activities performed by the institution's staff to achieve the main organizational goal.Employees perform to the highest level of expectation to achieve the desired result.

Local Government organization
The local government institution is more of a decentralized system led by a chief executive officer and other departmental leaders, but management does not always make decisions on its own.Authorities from the centralized system demonstrate the path of a specific decision they made, and the conduct of business within the organization takes on a different dimension per an instruction requiring a specific approach to handle a situation.During COVID -19, it was more difficult for the local government institutions especially Cape Coast metropolitan because decisions from above affected every aspect of the organization's activities, so management within the establishment needed to demonstrate leadership that was consistent with the situation and ensure that goals were met.The executive and management have over the years exhibited some type of leadership in executing the community development programs through employees of the institution and to be identified.According to Amegayibor (2021), Ghana's local governmental agencies are the Metropolitan, Municipal, and District Assemblies (MMDAs).They are backed by Ghana's Republican Constitution of 1992.
The general assembly of each municipality adopts decisions that are carried out by several departments.The general assembly of each local government takes decisions that are carried out by numerous departments.Officials in this decentralized organization perform accounting, auditing, planning, and engineering, to name a few functions (Crawford, 2004).Citizens expect local government entities to offer high-quality, efficient services, and they must live up to those expectations (Buccus, Hemson, Hicks, & Piper, 2007).The mission is to improve people's quality of life by delivering essential quality services and fostering a growth-friendly atmosphere for the company.Because its finances are created and dispersed from the consolidated account, as well as the help of other stakeholders such as NGOs and donors, the local government assumes a specific nature of administration that is generically linked to the central government.According to Eton, Mwosi, and Ogwel(2022), some operate strictly in accordance with the Local Government Act, while others are influenced by political heads and leaders, who are fueled by personal ethos.Mutohar and Jani (2020) investigated the role of visionary leadership, lecturer performance, and academic culture in increasing the competitiveness of Islamic tertiary institutions in Indonesia.It was determined that a visionary leadership style affected the performance of lecturers.Bataineha and Salehb investigate the impact of visionary leadership on employee innovation at King Abdullah University Hospital in Irbid, Jordan.According to the findings, visionary leadership enhances employee innovation.Gimuguni, Nandutu, and Magolo (2014) discovered that autocratic and laisseZfaire styles of leadership affect employees' performance Mbale district, Uganda.Nuhu (2010) researched the effects of laissez-faire and autocratic leadership styles on employees' performance at Kampala City Council.Quantitative evidence supports laissez-faire and autocratic leadership styles had an impact on employee performance.In Pakistan, Mawoli, Mohammed, and Sarkin-Daji (2013) examined autocratic and laissez-faire leadership styles in work performed at public health institutions, it was discovered that autocratic, and laissez-faire leadership styles affected job performance.Using a census sample of 159 employees, Abdilahi (2016) assessed the effects of laissez-faire leadership style on employee performance at Dashen Bank in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.According to the findings, the most effective variable on employee performance is laissez-faire leadership.On this basis, it is theorized that: H1: Employee output is influenced by visionary leadership.H2: Employee output is affected by autocratic leadership.H3: Employee output is impacted by laissez-faire leadership.H4: Employee output is affected by charismatic leadership.H5: Employee output is influenced by servant leadership.

Figure 1. Conceptual framework
This framework is grounded on Fred Edward Fiedler's contingency theory of leadership, which he developed as an industrial and organizational psychologist.According to the theory, leaders should consider adjusting their leadership in different settings to inspire people to be productive and perform at their best.That there is no one proper way to accomplish things, and that when a situation arises, the appropriate leadership should be exhibited to deal with it.According to the notion, leaders cannot be efficient and effective if they ignore the surroundings and contextual or situational aspects.As seen in figure 1, leadership styles (visionary, autocratic, laissez-faire, charismatic, and servant) are independent variables that are expected to have an impact or effect on the output of employees, which is the dependent variable.It's been suggested or hypothesized that leadership styles have an impact on employee output.

Research methodology
Cape Coast, in the central region, was the focus of the research.The Cape Coast Metropolitan is one of Ghana's 260 Metropolitan, Municipal, and District Assemblies (MMDAs), and is part of the Central Region's 22 MMDAs.The City is the smallest metropolis in the country, covering only 122 square kilometers.The researcher used a quantitative approach to determine the link between variables as well as their statistical values.According to Creswell (2011), a quantitative research approach enables scientists to use computational techniques to reach independent and objective, and methodical conclusions.Because the study's goal is to understand the link between the variables under investigation, this approach was chosen.Ooi and Teoh (2021)emphasized that quantitative research methods allow for the examination of the relationship between independent variables and dependent variables.The investigation was conducted using the descriptive study design.According to Quartey and Awoyemi (2002), descriptive design is the method of collecting information to answer research questions or test hypotheses about the current state of phenomena to provide an accurate and objective account of the current condition or real-life situation.
According to Aggarwal (2008), descriptive design is concerned with gathering data about new conditions or situations for validity and reliability, and it includes appropriate analyses, explanation, comparisons, and recognition of trends and relationships, rather than simply collecting and tallying facts.A total population of 220 employees in the institution was included in the research.Staff members of the Cape Coast Metropolitan Assembly are included in the population because they carry out all work processes as directed to achieve the goals.The inclusion of the complete population in the study was to reduce the risk of mistakes, increase the reliability of census figures, and deepen the applicability of the findings by Jason W Osborne and Costello (2004).The respondents were sampled using the census sample technique.Census data is more valid and dependable than other sources of data.According to Prasad (2015), the census approach ensures the most accurate and specific representation of a phenomenon without any element of bias because all elements are taken into account without any likelihood of being overlooked.Data collecting via the census approach allows an investigator to conduct a thorough investigation into a topic.Many individuals feel a census, which contacts every member of the target population, is more accurate than a sample survey (Dalenius & Reiss, 1982).

Servant
Employees' output

Data collection and analysis
In this study, a structured questionnaire was used to collect primary data.This survey is designed to collect raw data for use in quantitative research.It can also be used to initiate formal research, supplement and validate previously collected data, and validate hypotheses.Structured questionnaires, according to Acharya (2010), have fewer disparities, are easier to conduct, have consistent replies, and are simple to manage data.It ensures that participants understand the goal of the research and will answer questions thoroughly till the completion of the survey (McGuirk & O'Neill, 2016).A, B, and C were the three sections of the questionnaire.Section 1(A) deals with personnel personal data (demographics), such as sex, education, and experience.The second section (B) discusses visionary, autocratic, laissez-faire, charismatic, and servant leadership styles.Section 3 (C) also addressed employee output.The independent variables' leadership styles were rated on a five-point Likert scale, with 1 indicating the least influence, 2 implying less influence, 3 implying influence, 4 implying much influence, and 5 most influence.Employee output was also assessed on a five-point Likert scale, with 1 representing little effect, 2 representing less effect, 3 representing effect, 4 representing much effect, and 5 representing most effect.It is critical to employ Likert-type scales and allow the researcher to calculate Cronbach's alpha coefficient for internal consistency (Gay & Mills).
Professionals in the field reviewed the structured questionnaire for validity and reliability before it was administered, and their feedback was fully integrated into the completed instrument.The instrument's acceptable validity and reliability consistency was assessed using the Cronbach Alpha measurement, which confirmed a score of 0.8, suggesting that the instrument was credible enough to produce reliable and valid data.The data collection, which included 220 questions, took 6 months due to the organization's fluid and political nature.The five hypotheses were evaluated using a multiple linear regression test.The Statistical Social Science Program (SPSS) 20.0 version was used for entering data, data management, output values, and analysis.

Hypotheses Testing Simple Linear Regression Analysis
The regression analysis was performed to establish the statistical significance of the independent variables leadership styles (visionary, autocratic, laissez-faire, charismatic, and servant) and dependent employees' output in the local government sector.H1: Employee output is influenced by visionary leadership.Amegayibor (2021) The relationship between visionary leadership style, the independent variable, and employee output, the dependent variable, is depicted in Table 2.The simple regression test demonstrates that visionary leadership style with (Beta =.123; Sigvalue =.014) supports the hypothesis H1 that states "visionary leadership influences employees' output."Because the sigvalue is less than 0.05.H2: Autocratic leadership influences employees' output..579Adjusted R Square = -.002R Square = .001P-value = 0.00 Source: Amegayibor (2021) The relation between the independent variable, autocratic leadership style, and the dependent variable, employee output, is depicted in Table 3.The simple regression test shows that the autocratic leadership style with (Beta =.028; Sigvalue =.579) does not support hypothesis H2 which claims "autocratic leadership influences employees' output."Because the sigvalue is more than 0.05.H3: Laissez-faire leadership influences employees' output The relationship between the independent variable, laissez-faire leadership, and the dependent variable, employee output, is shown in Table 4.The simple regression test results suggest that the laissez-faire leadership style with (Beta =.110; Sigvalue =.028) supported the hypothesis H3 which asserts "autocratic leadership influences employee output."Because the sigvalue is lower than the alpha value (α) 0.05.H4: Charismatic leadership influences employees' output..804Adjusted R Square = -.002R Square = .000P-value = 0.00 Source: Amegayibor (2021) The association between the dependent variable, employee output, and the independent variable, charismatic leadership style, is shown in Table 5.The findings of the simple regression test show that the charismatic leadership style (Beta =-.012; Sigvalue =.804) does not support hypothesis H4, which states that "charismatic leadership influences employee output."This is because the sigvalue is greater than the alpha value (0.05).H5: Servant leadership influences employees' output.The dependent variable, employee output, and the independent variable, servant leadership style, are shown in Table 6.The results of the simple regression test revealed that the servant leadership style (Beta =-.101; Sigvalue =.044) supports hypothesis H5, "servant leadership influences employee output."This is because the sigvalue is smaller than the alpha value (0.05).

Discussion
The research aimed to investigate the link between leadership and employee output in the local government sector.Five hypotheses were developed in response to the study's five objectives.H1, H3, and H5 were all validated by statistical data, demonstrating that leadership styles (visionary, laissezfaire, and servant) have an effect on employee output and are substantially related to employee output.Furthermore, the results revealed that leadership styles (autocratic and charismatic) have no effect on employee output and that hypotheses H2 and H4 were not validated.This suggests that improving visionary, laissez-faire, and servant leadership styles will increase employee output by 0.13, 0.10, and 0.08 percent, respectively.Leadership styles have a strong significant association with employee performance, according to prior empirical studies.This illustrates that developing specific leadership styles in response to situational demands improves staff efficiency in a given setting.The findings of this study support those of Bataineha and Salehb ;Mutohar and Jani (2020); Gimuguni et al. (2014); Nuhu (2010); Abdilahi (2016)who found that visionary, laissez-faire, and servant leadership styles had an impact on employee output.However, the study disagrees with Gimuguni et al. (2014), Mawoli et al. (2013),Al Khajeh (2018), and Durowoju, Abdul-Azeez, and Bolarinwa (2011) in one way or another that autocratic and charismatic leadership styles have an impact on employee output.These findings are significant and intriguing because the study is one of the first to explore the relationship between visionary, autocratic, laissez-faire, charismatic, and servant leadership styles and employee output in the local government sector, using an efficient census method of data collection.The study demonstrates that such a relationship does exist.It also demonstrates that not all leadership styles are effective in all situations and that they should be varied based on the circumstances.

Conclusion
In other sectors such as banking, oil and gas, agriculture, education, communication, and so on, studies on leadership have shown a significant relationship between employee performance and its dimensions, as well as job satisfaction, but research on leadership in the local government sector appears to be scarce, especially in the Ghanaian context.The purpose of this study is to look into the impact of leadership on employee output in the Ghanaian local government sector in the Central Region.The sample was obtained from the Cape Coast Metropolitan Assembly in Ghana's Central Region.The result revealed that visionary, laissez-faire, and servant leadership styles have a significant impact on employee output.It was ascertained once more that autocratic and charismatic leadership styles do not affect employee output.

Implication
The majority of research explains why leadership in organizations should be dynamic and situationally contingent.According to the theory, under the local government, various forces and situations drive the organization's activities; thus, leadership should be ready to change and dynamically position themselves to handle issues that arise, though the organization is established as a decentralized and more democratic system, it still has contextual factors that make its operations more political.People move in and out of this institution as political power shifts, therefore leadership must display a certain sort of leadership to overcome obstacles and challenges that arise in terms of employee performance.Visionary, laissez-faire, and servant leaderships emerge as the types of leadership styles that drive output or performance.This is not surprising because leaders must bear the vision of the central government by demonstrating attributes such as moving the institution away from stagnation, having a spirit of success, displaying confidence in employees, and emotional commitment.Employees should be given a hands-off approach because it is a decentralized organization.Others should be allowed to make their own decisions, while leaders provide the resources and tools they need to succeed.The institution's primary function is to serve and develop communities, therefore leaders should demonstrate qualities such as hearing, compassion, caring, awareness, persuasion, conceptualization, foresight, and stewardship to advance the organization's mission.

Limitations and study forward
Only five leaderships were examined in the study.Within the central region, it was similarly limited to only one metropolitan assembly.Due to the time and movement of responders within the institution, gathering information was difficult.

Table 2 .
The connection between visionary leadership and employee output

Table 3 .
Association between autocratic leadership style and employees' output

Table 4 .
The link between a laissez-faire leadership style and employee output

Table 5 .
The correlation between charismatic leadership style and employee output

Table 6 .
Correlation between servant leadership style and employees' output