Democratic leadership and organizational performance: the moderating effect of contingent reward
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to investigate the moderating effect of contingent reward on the relationship between democratic leadership and organizational performance. Design/methodology/approach: Explanatory and cross-sectional survey designs were used. A quantitative research approach was also adopted to collect the data from 476 employees in the telecommunication industry. Using statistics package for social science, the data was analyzed via descriptive statistics, correlation and hierarchical regression techniques. Findings: The results reveal that both democratic leadership and contingent reward have a significant positive relationship with organizational performance. Furthermore, contingent reward significantly augments and moderates the relationship between democratic leadership and organizational performance. Thus, the combination of democratic leadership and contingent reward would more likely produce higher organizational performance. Originality/value: This study has made a significant contribution to leadership and organizational literature by establishing the effectiveness of contingent reward as a moderator on the relationship between democratic leadership and organizational performance in a telecommunication industry.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Reward systems can enhance engagement and performance.
“It has been demonstrated that reward systems can enhance engagement and performance”
From Rewards and Employee Performance in Government Agencies: Evidence from Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA), Uganda (2026) · cites this paper as Hilton et al., 2021
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Okelloa, O. K., Alochere, D. B. J., & Norman, N. (2026) · International Journal of Research and Innovation in Applied Science · doi:10.51584/ijrias.2026.110400073
- Authors
- Hilton, S. K., Arkorful, H., & Martins, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Professional Studies (GH)
- Venue
- Management Research Review
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2021-02-05
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1042-1058
- ISSN
- 2040-8269 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3130656122
- Cited by
- 80
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 2
- FWCI
- 12.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Management Research Review (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Employee Performance and Leadership
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Employee Performance and Management
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Leadership and Management in Organizations
- Keywords
- democratic leadership, contingent reward, organizational performance, moderating effect, telecommunications industry, employee performance
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review