Exploring the Effect of Leadership styles on Community Forest Performance and the Mediating role of Community Participation in Cameroon - Joseph Mbane, CIFOR-IRCAF Community forestry enterprises in the Congo Basin Seminar 10.00 -13.00 2 April 2024 NCountR Room, Impulse, Wageningen CMAPUS & online doctoral Defense Serge Piabuo “Community Forest Enterprises (CFEs) as successful social enterprises: Empirical Evidence from Cameroon” 16.00 – 17.30 2 April 2024 Omnia Auditorium, Wageningen campus & online Link to recording https://wur-educationsupport.screenstepslive.com/m/111045/l/1595365-about-recording-and-livestreaming-a-promotion-phd-defence-graduation-ceremony-inauguration-farewell-speech-or-other-public-events#where-can-i-watch-the-livestream

1. Community forestry enterprises in the
Congo Basin
Effect of Leadership Styles on Community Forest
Performance and the Mediating Role of
Community Participation in Cameroon
Joseph Mbane*; Divine Foundjem-Tita; Jane Mutune; John N. Muthama
2nd April 2024

2. Introduction
• Globally, Participatory Forest Management (PFM) has been widely adopted since the 1980’s
(UNCED, 1992; WCED, 1987) to allow forest adjacent communities to drive the management of
their own resources, and effectively benefit from them,
• CF performance will be enhanced by community participation (FAO, 2016; Rout, 2018; van der
Jagt & Lawrence, 2019),
• Elite capture of leadership as critical issue in CF (García-López, 2019; Ghimire & Lamichhane,
2020; Lund & Saito-Jensen, 2013; Persha & Andersson, 2014; Warren & Visser, 2016)
• Leadership has also been argued to play a fundamental role in the performance of NRM
institutions (Evans et al., 2015; Li et al., 2020; Springer et al., 2020) and states development
(Gberevbie, 2013; Kuada, 2010).
• Leadership can enhance community action by inspiring people’s participation in social activities,
enforce institutional norms, resolve conflicts, and guarantee attainment of expected benefits for
community members (Donkor et al., 2021; Kahsay & Medhin, 2020; Pahlevan Sharif et al., 2018;
Springer et al., 2020)

3. Introduction
• The Full Range Leadership Model (FRLM) developed by Burns (1978), determines how the
transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership styles related to leaders’ behavior and
actions which influence followers’ behavior and performance (Avolio, 2011; Bass, 1985), (J.
Maxwell, 2007)
• Transformational leadership style consisted of four characteristics including idealized influence,
inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration.
• Idealized influence_ extent leaders display the qualities, attitudes and confidence which cause
followers to view them as their role models
• Inspirational motivation_ level to which a leader can take different actions such as designing a
visionary future and confidently encourage followers on what is required for its accomplishment
• Intellectual stimulation, followers are brought to question basic approaches and become creative
and more innovative in addressing challenges.
• Individualized consideration _leader pays attention to the developmental needs of followers
through individual’s mentoring and coaching (Bass and Riggio, 2005).

4. Introduction
• Transactional leadership style comprise contingent reward, and management-by-exception
(Avolio, 2011).
• Management-by-exception is when leaders concentrate on mistakes, avoid responding on time and
delay making decisions. In the passive form, monitor sitting at the fence
• Contingent reward_ contractual agreement between followers and the leader (Avolio, 2011;
Shaaban, 2017), which result in positive or negative rewards for followers on achievement
• Laissez-faire _ the absence of leadership, also known as hands off leadership (Bass, 1985). The
leader avoids making decisions, do not take responsibility, and does not use his authority (Avolio,
2011).
• Bass (1985) note that transformational and transactional leadership style behaviors though separate
and independent could be manifested simultaneously; as the transactional leaders could exhibit
transformational leadership behavior attributes depending on the situation.
• FRLM (Avolio, 2011; Bass, 1985) encompasses central elements of contingency theory (Kerr,
1974), situational theory (Mangalam et al., 2016; Zakeer et al., 2016), path-goal leadership theory
(Mangalam Birla et al., 2016), and charismatic leadership (Bass, 1996; Bell, 2013), autocratic and
democratic leadership (peker et al., 2018).

5. Context
• Cameroon CF initiated with Forest law No 94/01 of 20 January 1994. CF is “the part of non-
permanent forest estate (5000 ha maximum) in agreement between government and a community,
SFM for 25 years renewable”(Government of Cameroon, 2009)
• To establish CF, community is required to: legal entity with a management committee headed by a
manager /leader, map the area for CF; develop a simple management plan (SMP) for first 5 years
• CF was introduced to promote effective community participation in forest management,
sustainable management and conservation of forest resources, and reducing poverty in forest
adjacent communities.
• Outcomes largely remained questionable to date (Alemagi et al., 2022; Duguma et al., 2018;
Minang et al., 2017; Piabuo et al., 2018)
• This inconclusive outcome attributed to many factors of which a major one is the quality of
leadership by at the head of CF institutions (Alemagi et al., 2022; Foundjem-Tita et al., 2018;
Piabuo et al., 2018).
• CF governance studies in Cameroon (Essougong et al., 2019; MONSI, 2014; Ngang, 2015; Nkemnyi et al.,
2016) seem to have overlooked the relationship leadership styles (transformational and transactional) and CF
performance and the role of community participation

6. Conceptual framework
• Major factor that influences community participation is the style of leadership displayed by organizations’
leaders (Donkor et al., 2021; Evans et al., 2015; Faiz Rasool et al., 2015b; Warren & Visser, 2016)
• Transformational leadership style “new leadership” model (Bass, 1985; Krishnan, 2012; Zakeer et al., 2016)
has a positive effect in individuals and social systems (Donkor, 2021; Evans et al., 2015; Jane & Abdimajid,
2018; Jensen et al., 2019) by enhancing their commitment to organizational goal.
• Transformational leadership goes beyond exchanging inducements for desired performance by developing,
intellectually stimulating, and inspiring followers to transcend their own self-interests for a higher collective
purpose (Avolio, 2011; Bass, 1985).
• Transactional leadership based on contingent reward leads to followers just achieving the negotiated level of
performance (Bass, 1985; Shaaban, 2017).
• Transactional leadership based on managing by exception, has a negative impact on satisfaction, hence on
participation and so performance; especially when the leader passively waits for problems to arise before
taking necessary action (Avolio, 2011; Birla et al., 2016).

7. Conceptual framework
Transformational Leadership
- leader instills pride in me for being associated with him/ her- leader
enables us to think about old problems in new ways
- leader helps us develop ourselves
- leader gets others to rethink ideas that they had never questioned
before
Transactional Leadership
-leader is satisfied when we meet agreed‐upon standards
-leader provides recognition/rewards when we reach our goals
-leader calls attention to what we can get for what we accomplish
Community Participation
-I do attend in CF’s meetings
-I do feel free to put out my own views at
general assembly meetings
-I participate in the implementation of
community forest activities
-I do participate in monitoring and evaluation
activities
Improved or reduced community forest
Performance
-Finances from CF has led to improved
health facilities in the village
-Finances from CF has been used to pay part
time teachers in our school
-Tree plantation activities have been done in
the CF after exploitation
H1
H2
H3
H6
H5
H4
H7

8. Methodology
Division Village/CFs HH targeted HH
interviewed
% HH sampled
Mbam & Kim Mambioko/CRVC 32 26 81%
Ngoume/ADNG 54 47 87%
Mambi/PNNT 48 27 56%
Upper-Nyong Zoulabot/COBAB’A 9 9 100%
Medjoh/GIC CFB5 66 51 77%
Mindourou/GICECOM 67 44 66%
Total 276 204 73%
Study Area Table 2: Sample frame HH interviewed
Date collection HH on availability and willingness
• MLQ-6S (Bass & Aviolo, 1992; Vinger & Cilliers, 2006)
• Participation and CF performance (Lamichhane &
Parajuli (2014) and Piabuo (2018) (5 point Likert scales)
Data Analysis
• PLS-SEM to test study hypotheses using RStudio v
4.3.0
• Measurement model and structural model evaluations
(Hair et al., 2017; Hair et al., 2021)

9. Results: Measurement Model Evaluation (consistency reliability and Convergent validity)
CONSTRUCTS /indicators loadings rho C rho A Alpha AVE
Transfo 0.947 0.941 0.939 0.599
The CF leader instills pride in me for being associated with him or her 0.689
The CF leader express with a few simple words what we could and should do 0.747
The CF leader enables us to think about old problems in new ways 0.757
The CF leader helps us develop ourselves 0.810
We have complete faith in our CF leader 0.825
The CF leader provides appealing images about what we can do 0.813
The CF leader provide us with new ways of looking at puzzling things 0.782
The CF leader let us know how he thinks we are doing. 0.741
Others community members are proud to be associated with him 0.827
The CF leader helps others find meaning in their work 0.727
The CF leader gets others to rethink ideas that they had never questioned before 0.807
The CF leader gives personal attention to those who seem rejected 0.750
Transa 0.765 0.672 0.614 0.467
The CF leader is satisfied when we meet agreed‐upon standards 0.341
The CF leader provides recognition/rewards when we reach our goals 0.727
The CF leader calls attention to what we can get for what we accomplish 0.746
The CF leader tells us the standards we have to know to carry out our work 0.817
Parti 0.830 0.822 0.779 0.319
I do attend in CF’s meetings 0.497
I do feel free to put out my own views at general assembly meetings 0.460
My inputs are taken into consideration at the planning of community forest activities 0.716
The voice of the youths in the community is considered in CF decision making 0.649
Women’s voice is considered in CF decision making 0.687
The voice of the Baka minority is considered in CF decision making 0.571
I participate in the implementation of community forest activities 0.387
I do participate in monitoring and evaluation activities 0.333
I attend in meeting of community forest products/benefits distribution 0.712
I participated in training organized by the CF 0.609
I did participate in study tours organized by the CF 0.423
Perfo 0.885 0.862 0.853 0.439
Finances from CF has led to improved health facilities in the village 0.751
Finances from CF has resulted in quantitative improvement in classrooms in the village 0.731
Finances from CF has been used to pay part time teachers in our school 0.730
Finances from CF has been used to provide scholarship to some students in the village 0.669
Thanks to CF there have been a perceptible improvement in income generating activities in the community 0.644
Finances from CF has been used to construct boreholes for potable water in the village 0.792
Finances from CF has been used to provide roofing plates for improving housing in the village 0.565
CF provided forest management training to community members 0.641
Tree plantation activities have been done in the CF after exploitation 0.543
Forest management activities are carried out in line with simple management plan 0.492
Cut off rate (0.6 – 0.95) thus,
different constructs yields
adequate internal consistency
reliability and convergent
validity (Ahadzadeh et al.,
2015; Hair et al., 2021).
Not fulfil the requirement of
the method by Fornell and
Larker (1981)
(Malhotra, Nunan, and Birks,
2017), AVE is a more
conservative measure of
convergent validity than
Composite reliability (rhoc)

10. Results: Measurement Model Evaluation (Discriminant validity)
Constructs Transfo Transa Parti
Transfo
Transa 0.810
Parti 0.697 0.456
Perfo 0.740 0.465 0.616
HTMT values less than 0.85 (Hair et
al., 2017) for all constructs. Hence,
all study constructs are clearly
distinct from each other.

11. Results: Structural Model Evaluation
• The measurement model having been confirmed,
the structural model was then examined to test the
conceptual model consisting of the above seven (7)
theoretical hypotheses.
• Following structural model evaluation procedure
(Hair et al., 2021), we assessed:
• the collinearity issues of the structural model using
variance inflation factor (VIF),
• significance and relevance of the structural model
paths, and
• model’s explanatory power using coefficient of
determination (R2) and,
• effect size (f2).
• Table 5: Collinearity assessment
• VIF<3, no issue of multicollinearity

12. Results: Structural Model Evaluation
• Table 6: Significance of structural model path
Hypothesis Standardized path
coefficients (ꞵ)
t-values 95% Confident
Interval
Direct effects
Transfo Parti 0.722* 12.953 [0.611; 0.828]
Transfo Perfo 0.629* 8.344 [0.475; 0.771]
Transa Parti -0.121 -1.653 [-0.253; 0.035]
Transa Perfo -0.100 -1.594 [-0.222; 0.025]
Parti Perfo 0.164* 2.189 [0.023; 0.316]
Indirect effects
Transfo Parti Perfo 0.118* 2.143 [0.016; 0.235]
Transa Parti Perfo -0.020 -1.196 [-0.059; 0.005]
H2 supported
H1 supported
H6 supported
H5 supported
H3 supported
H4 supported
H7 supported
Partial (complementary) mediation Btw Transfo-Parti- Perfo
Non-effect , non-mediation Btw Transa –Parti-Perfo

13. Results: Structural Model Evaluation
• Figure 3: Plot of measurement model and structural model evaluation results
(Hair et al., 2017) the coefficient of
determination R2 of 0.75, 0.50, and 0.25
can be respectively described as
substantial, moderate, and weak
Inner model however indicates that
TRANSFO has the most potent effect
on PARTI (0.722) and on PERFO
(0.629)
Transfo leadership is a moderately strong
predictor of parti and CF perfo.

14. Results: Structural Model Evaluation
• Effect size (f2)
• (Cohen, 1993) the f2 values of 0.02, 0.15, and 0.35 indicating small, medium, and large effects of the
exogenous constructs on the endogenous construct’s R2.
• Therefore, our finding indicates that the removal of TRANSFO would have a large impact on PARTI (0.570)
and medium impact on PERFO (0.266); while removal of TRANSA would have a small impact on PARTI
(0.015) and PERFO (0.012); and the removal of PARTI would equally have a small impact on PERFO
(0.029).

15. Discussion
• Findings are consistent with previous researchers’ (Donkor et al., 2021; Krishnan, 2012; Russell, 2017;
Saleem, 2015) who also demonstrated the key role of transformational leadership style on achieving
organization performance and its importance for enhancing social action in the pursue of this goal.
• Our findings resonate with (Faiz Rasool et al., 2015; Silva et al., 2022; Shaaban, 2017) that transformational
leadership is a positive predictor of community participation and CF performance as it enhances
organizational commitment
• This is so because by appealing to the self-interests of community members as well as their shared values
(4IS), leaders can help followers collectively maximize participation, and thus performance.
• Transactional leadership style was found to be a negative predictor of community participation and CF
performance. Consistent Sinha & Suar (2005) found that authoritative and manipulative behaviors that
characterized transactional leadership dampened community participation. Donkor et al.(2021) reported that
transactional leadership style had a negative effect on employee commitment and performance.
• According to Bass (1985) transactional leadership based on contingent reward results in followers just
achieving just the negotiated level of performance.
• Transactional leader focus on extrinsic motivation, hence, fail to activate group intrinsic value

16. Discussion
• Both leadership styles are not mutually exclusive and the level of adoption of a leadership style
may depend on the specific situation or condition in the surrounding environment (Avolio, 2011;
Bass, 1985).
• Lee (2010), transformational leadership and transactional leadership styles had a significant
positive effect on organization commitment.
• Alamir (2010) in a study of the impact of transformational and transactional leadership,
organization commitment and job satisfaction, revealed a positive relationship of transactional
leadership and these variables.
• An appropriate composition of these leaderships’ elements, with a larger share of transformational
than transactional elements, is of great importance (Springer et al., 2020)

17. Conclusion and policy implication
• Transformational leadership style builds followers’ sense of self-confidence, motivation, and
vision, whereas transactional leadership style tends to focus only on the task with little to no
attention to community strengthening and intrinsic motivation for a higher objective.
• Hence, Transformational leadership was demonstrated to positively affect participation and CF
performance, and participation mediated the relationship; contrary to transactional leadership.
• These styles of leadership are not mutually exclusive, it is however critical that transformational
leadership style be the dominant style to augment the limited effect of transactional leadership
behaviors that only connect with extrinsic values.
• Given the importance of transformational leadership for effective community participation and
enhanced performance of community forestry in Cameroon, it is essential to raise the profile of this
leadership style.
• Adequate human development training program could be established and implemented to build
transformational leadership style in community forestry in Cameroon, as well as developing
community member leadership needs for their organizations to reduce the responsibility load of the
main leader. “make more leaders”

18. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
Email:
kmbane09@gmail.com
jmbane@awf.org