Danlord M. Malubag, MBA
Divine
Word College of Laoag
Abstract
Leadership
is what keeps public institutions working well, helping them grow and deliver
services properly, and this is especially true for Local Government Units, or
LGUs. As part of the government closest to the people, LGUs bear the heavy task
of translating national policies into concrete actions that meet local needs.
They also have to manage public funds and resources responsibly while
responding to a wide range of concerns and demands from the communities they
serve. In this paper, I examine the different ways leaders guide their teams
and departments across the LGU. I discuss how each approach changes how the
organization functions, how efficiently work gets done, and, most importantly,
the quality of service that reaches ordinary citizens.
Leading
in government is very different from leading in private businesses. While
companies focus on making a profit, public leadership’s main goal is always the
public good. It means strictly following the law, being transparent about how
work is done, and ensuring every action can be explained and justified. I go
through the different methods used, from those that are strict and structured,
to those that are collaborative, flexible, or centered on values. I explain how
each is used depending on the kind of work being done, the goals being pursued,
and the situations that arise along the way. Based on established studies and
management principles, I point out one clear truth: there is no single way of
leading that works all the time perfectly. Real good governance happens when
leaders know how to choose, adapt, and combine these methods according to their
specific situation.
I
also talk about the real struggles leaders face every day. Things like limited
budget and manpower, slow and rigid processes, political influences, and the
high expectations of people who rely heavily on government help and support.
Beyond just managing people or office tasks, I emphasize that being a leader in
the LGU means being a guide and a steward, someone who makes sure the whole
organization stays true to its purpose and duties as set by law. By explaining
what each style offers, where it works best, and its limitations, this work
aims to provide a clear and practical view of how leadership shapes local
governance. It is written to help fellow administrators, officials, and government
workers improve how they manage their teams and operations, leading to better
results and more meaningful service for everyone.
Keywords
Local Government Unit, Leadership Styles, Public Governance, Public Administration, Institutional Management, Service Delivery
Introduction
Leadership
is the most important factor in how well government institutions perform and
how effectively they serve the public. Having worked in this field and observed
how things operate, I have seen just how complex the working environment of
LGUs really is. Leaders here have to juggle many responsibilities at once: ensuring
all activities comply with rules and regulations, using limited resources
wisely, responding quickly to community needs, and maintaining strong working
relationships with diverse groups and stakeholders.
According
to Wallis and Gregory (2009), the way leaders direct their staff, influence
behavior, and handle daily operations directly impacts how successfully
programs are carried out, how the organization performs overall, and how
satisfied people are with the services they receive. In local governance,
leaders hold positions of great trust and responsibility. They serve as the
primary link between the government and citizens, and the decisions they make
and the methods they use to manage people and resources set the direction for
development and shape the quality of life for everyone in their area.
The
need to discuss this also stems from the way public administration itself is
changing. Old ways of doing things are no longer enough to meet today’s demands
for services that are faster, more inclusive, and more innovative. As Andrews
et al. (2011) noted, modern public service requires leaders who can handle
complicated situations, push for needed changes and improvements, and adjust to
shifts in social, economic, and political conditions that directly affect local
communities.
Leadership
exists at every level within the LGU structure, from elected officials and
department heads down to division chiefs and supervisors. Each level has its
own set of duties, problems, and priorities, and each requires different approaches
to managing and decision-making to achieve good results. Knowing and
understanding these different styles, what they involve, and when they are most
useful is therefore a must for anyone working in public service. This journal aims
to discuss these approaches clearly and simply, explaining how they work in the
unique setting of local government, how they help achieve success, and what
limits need to be kept in mind to make sure governance is effective,
responsible, and sustainable for the long term.
What
Leadership Means and Why It Matters in Local Governance
When
we talk about leadership in the Local Government Unit, we have to remember that
it is very different from how it works in private companies. While businesses
focus mostly on earning profits and expanding their operations, leading in
public service is about promoting the common good and ensuring services are
delivered properly to the community. As Van Wart (2011) explained, this kind of
leadership is defined by a strong commitment to following legal rules,
respecting constitutional values, and being answerable to everyone involved, including
the national government, local councils, employees, and, most especially, the
citizens we serve.
Unlike
in the private sector, where decisions can be made quickly just to meet
business goals, actions in the LGU must always stay within the limits of
existing laws, local ordinances, and standard procedures. Authority here does
not come only from the position you hold or the power given by law. More
importantly, it comes from the respect and trust you earn through being
consistent, honest, and open in all your dealings. Leaders here act as
caretakers of public resources and public trust, meaning every decision must
prioritize what is best for everyone, not just personal or group interests.
Understanding
this clearly shows that leading in local governance is a serious
responsibility. It requires knowing exactly what the institution stands for and
having the ability to guide everyone toward the right goals of development and
service. It is never just about managing tasks or supervising people; it is
about making sure the whole system works well to improve the lives of the
people it was created to serve.
Structured
and Rule-Based Approaches: Autocratic and Transactional Leadership
In
the daily operations of the LGU, there are many situations where order, clear
systems, and strict compliance are needed to make sure things run smoothly and
regulations are properly followed. Two styles that focus on these needs are
autocratic and transactional leadership, and each plays a key role in how
government work is done.
Autocratic
leadership means the leader makes the most important decisions, takes full
responsibility for them, and gives clear instructions for the team to follow.
While many think this style is too strict or old-fashioned, it is still very
useful in certain situations. According to Yukl (2013), it works best when
rules must be strictly observed, when tasks are routine and standard, when
immediate action is needed during emergencies, or when dealing with technical
matters where the leader has special knowledge. In the LGU, this is often
applied in areas such as tax collection, enforcement of local laws, public
safety, and adherence to standard procedures, where consistency and fairness
are very important.
On
the other hand, transactional leadership works on clear agreements and
arrangements. Roles, responsibilities, and performance standards are clearly defined,
and results are directly linked to rewards or corrective action as needed. As
Rainey (2014) pointed out, this is one of the most commonly used styles in
government because it fits well with how public service is structured, where
every process follows established rules. It creates a clear setup where
everyone knows exactly what is expected of them and what outcomes they need to
achieve.
However,
these methods also have their downsides. Rosenbloom et al. (2015) noted that
relying too heavily on strict, top-down leadership can make employees feel that
their ideas are not valued, which often leads to lower motivation and reduced
creativity in finding better ways to work. Meanwhile, Paarlberg and Lavigna
(2010) observed that using only transactional methods may encourage staff to do
only exactly what is required of them, and they may not take extra steps or
suggest improvements even when there are opportunities to deliver better
service or results.
Participatory
and Progressive Approaches: Democratic and Transformational Leadership
As
community needs become more diverse and public work becomes more complex,
leadership styles that engage people and drive positive change have become
increasingly important in the LGU. Democratic and transformational leadership
are two approaches that value everyone's contributions and focus on continuous
improvement.
Democratic
or participative leadership means that leaders actively involve team members in
decision-making. They encourage everyone to share their ideas and opinions
before finalizing plans or policies. This fits perfectly with good governance
principles that value transparency, inclusion, and shared responsibility. As
Denhardt and Denhardt (2015) explained, this approach to management creates a
work environment where people feel respected, valued, and empowered, leading to
greater commitment and better results. In the LGU, this is especially useful
when planning projects, creating new policies, or solving complex problems that
require diverse perspectives and expertise. When people are consulted, they
feel a sense of ownership over the work and are more willing to support and
carry out the decisions made.
Transformational
leadership, meanwhile, focuses on inspiring and motivating people to look
beyond their daily tasks and work toward long-term goals and a shared vision.
Leaders using this style encourage new ideas, support their staff's growth, and
work hard to bring about meaningful changes in the organization and its
systems. According to Bass and Riggio (2006), they act as good role models,
clearly communicate what the organization wants to achieve, and provide the
guidance needed for everyone to reach their full potential. In local
government, this is critical when introducing new technologies, implementing
reforms, improving services, or addressing new challenges that need fresh ways
of thinking. It helps shift employees' mindset from just doing their jobs to
understanding how their work contributes to the bigger picture of development.
Of
course, these also have limitations. Northouse (2019) noted that discussing and
building agreement can take time, which may slow down work when fast decisions
are needed. Trottier et al. (2008) also pointed out that changes and
improvements will succeed only with sufficient support, resources, and proper
systems in place.
Service-Focused
and Flexible Approaches: Servant and Situational Leadership
Aside
from managing systems and processes well, good leadership in the LGU also requires
approaches that focus on the real purpose of public service and the ability to
adjust methods as the situation demands. Servant leadership and situational
leadership capture these two important aspects perfectly.
Servant
leadership is based on the idea that a leader's primary role is to serve others
first. This means prioritizing the needs, growth, and well-being of staff and
the community, even above personal status or interests. This concept,
introduced by Greenleaf (1977), fits exactly with the mission of government,
which is simply to serve the people and work for their progress and welfare.
Leaders who practice this style listen carefully to concerns, understand the
difficulties faced by their team and constituents, and work to create solutions
that are fair and beneficial to everyone. According to Russell and Stone
(2002), this builds strong working relationships, deep trust, and loyalty,
which are very important in keeping a harmonious workplace and good relations
between the government and the public. It reminds us that being a leader is not
about having power, but about taking responsibility to help and support others.
Situational
leadership, on the other hand, is based on the principle that there is no
single way of leading that works in every situation. The best approach depends
on what is happening, how complex the task is, the team's skills, and the
conditions both inside and outside the organization. Developed by Hersey and
Blanchard (1969), this approach holds that effective leaders are flexible and
can adjust their style to achieve the best results. In the LGU, where work
ranges from simple daily tasks to major projects, emergency response, and
policymaking, this ability to adapt is highly useful and practical. For
example, a leader may be direct and clear when dealing with new procedures or
less experienced staff, but become more supportive and open when working with
skilled people or solving issues that need collective input. As Thompson and
Glasø (2018) emphasized, this adaptability is one of the most important skills
a public leader can have, as it helps handle a wide range of situations
effectively.
Ethical
Leadership: The Foundation of Trust and Integrity
Among
all the leadership styles we have discussed, ethical leadership stands out as
the most basic and required quality for anyone holding a position in the Local
Government Unit. In public service, where the trust of the people is the most
valuable asset any institution can have, this serves as the strong foundation
that supports every action and decision made.
Ethical
leadership simply means consistently applying good values, honesty, and strong
principles in everything you do, whether inside the office or when dealing with
the public. According to Brown and Treviño (2006), leaders who practice this
are open, fair, and truthful in all their dealings. They set clear standards of
behavior that apply not only to others but also to themselves, regardless of
rank or position.
For
leaders in the LGU, following ethical standards is not just something good to
do; it is both a legal duty and a moral obligation required by law and expected
by every citizen. This ensures that public funds and resources are used
properly and only for their intended purpose, that decisions are made without
bias or favoritism, and that services are given fairly and equally to everyone.
It also means building a culture of honesty and responsibility across the
organization, where everyone is accountable for their actions and any
wrongdoing is corrected immediately.
Lawton
et al. (2013) noted that when leaders act with integrity, they greatly
strengthen the government's reputation and credibility. This makes it much
easier to secure the cooperation and support of citizens, stakeholders, and
partner agencies when implementing various programs and projects. Without this
solid foundation of honesty and good values, even the best systems and plans
will fail to deliver real, lasting progress to the community.
Common
Challenges That Affect Leadership in Local Government
Even
with all these effective leadership styles available, leading in the Local
Government Unit comes with its own set of challenges that can affect the
success of your strategies. These difficulties stem from various sources and
need to be well understood when deciding how to manage and lead the
organization.
Some
of the most common issues include limited budgets and manpower, strict, slow
bureaucratic rules, political influences, and differing expectations among
various groups and sectors. According to O’Toole and Meier (2011), public
leaders often find themselves balancing legal requirements, administrative
duties, political pressures, and community demands simultaneously, which
complicates decision-making.
There
are times when leaders have good plans to improve services or operations, but
they cannot move forward due to limited funds or existing regulations that make
changes difficult or slow to implement. The structure of the civil service,
while designed to ensure fairness and stability, can also limit flexibility in
managing staff, providing incentives, or making necessary adjustments within
the organization.
Public
expectations are also a big challenge. People want services that are fast, good
quality, and easy to access, but delivering these is not always possible when
resources are lacking or processes take time. There are also situations where
political interests interfere with administrative work, making it hard for
leaders to focus only on what is truly best for the public.
Knowing
these challenges helps leaders realize that choosing the right leadership style
is not just about what looks good in theory. It is also about making practical
decisions that consider the real limits and complexities of working in
government. Being an effective leader means having the right knowledge and
skills, as well as patience, determination, and the ability to find solutions
even in difficult situations.
Combining
Different Approaches for Better Governance
From
what we learn from studies and what we observe in government operations, one
thing is clear: no single leadership style can solve every problem or handle
all the responsibilities of public administration. Every approach has its own
strengths and weaknesses, and what works well in one situation may not work at
all in another.
Leading
an LGU means handling a range of tasks, working with diverse people, and
responding to changing situations all at once. Because of this, the best
leaders are those who understand what each style offers and know how to combine
and apply them as needed. As Cairney (2012) pointed out, effective leaders in
the public sector know how to draw on the best elements of different management
styles and combine them effectively. They understand that each approach has its
own strengths and uses, and they apply what works best depending on the organization's
needs and the situation at hand.
They
use the structure and clarity of transactional and autocratic leadership to
make sure rules are followed and work is done properly. At the same time, they
use the vision and creativity of transformational leadership to help the
organization grow and adapt to new changes. They always keep the values of
servant leadership at the center of their work, remembering that their main
purpose is to serve the people and prioritize their welfare above everything
else. And no matter what method they use, they always make sure that honesty,
fairness, and integrity guide every decision they make.
They
also know when to adjust their style depending on the situation. For example,
strict, direct methods work best for enforcing rules or handling emergencies,
while open, collaborative approaches are better for planning projects or
solving complex problems. When the organization needs improvement or change,
transformational leadership becomes the driving force to inspire everyone. And
in daily interactions, a servant leader's attitude helps build good
relationships and trust.
When
leaders combine all these methods effectively, the result is an organization
that is structured yet flexible, disciplined yet caring, and always focused on
what the community really needs. At the end of the day, the main goal of
leadership in the LGU is not just to manage work or to show authority, but to
guide the whole institution in its duty to promote public welfare, maintain
peace and order, and improve the quality of life of every citizen.
Conclusion
To
sum it all up, leadership in the Local Government Unit is a complex
responsibility that goes far beyond just doing office work or making decisions.
It is a continuous commitment to service, accountability, and development that
defines the quality and success of local governance.
We
have discussed different leadership styles, each with its own characteristics,
strengths, limitations, and situations in which it works best. We saw that
structured methods give the order and discipline needed to follow rules and be
accountable, while collaborative approaches help build strong teams and
encourage innovation and growth. Service-focused and flexible approaches remind
us that leading is all about serving others and adapting to different needs,
while ethical leadership stands as the solid foundation that ensures all
actions are based on honesty and integrity, the very things that earn and keep
the trust of the people.
We
also recognized that working in government comes with its own set of real
difficulties. From limited resources and strict regulations to political
influences and high public expectations, these challenges make the job
demanding and sometimes difficult. But they also teach us that there is no single,
perfect way to lead. Success does not come from sticking strictly to one method
or theory, but from understanding what each approach offers and knowing how to
combine them according to what the situation actually requires.
As
public institutions continue to evolve amid social progress, economic shifts,
and modern technology, the role of leaders remains more important than ever.
They are the ones who keep the organization moving forward, improving systems,
and making sure services get better every day. By understanding and applying
these different ways of leading thoughtfully and wisely, officials and
administrators can create a positive and productive working environment. They
can make operations more effective, and most importantly, deliver public
services that are accessible, efficient, and truly helpful to everyone in the
community.
At
the end of the day, great leadership in local governance is not measured by how
many projects are completed or how much work is done. It is measured by how
much it contributes to making life safer, easier, and better for every single
person that the government exists to serve.
References
Andrews,
R., Boyne, G. A., & Walker, R. M. (2011). Strategic management in
public organizations. Palgrave Macmillan.
Bass,
B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd
ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Brown,
M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future
directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595–616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.10.003
Cairney,
P. (2012). Understanding Public Policy: Theories and Issues. Palgrave Mcmillan
Denhardt,
R. B., & Denhardt, J. V. (2015). The new public service: Serving, not
steering (3rd ed.). Routledge.
Greenleaf,
R. K. (1977). Servant leadership: A journey into the nature of legitimate
power and greatness. Paulist Press.
Hersey,
P., & Blanchard, K. H. (1969). Management of organizational behavior:
Utilizing human resources. Prentice-Hall.
Lawton,
A., Rayner, J., & Lasthuizen, K. (2013). Ethics and management in the
public sector. SAGE Publications.
Northouse,
P. G. (2019). Leadership: Theory and practice (8th ed.). SAGE
Publications.
O’Toole,
L. J., & Meier, K. J. (2011). Public management: Organizations,
governance, and performance. Cambridge University Press.
Paarlberg,
L. E., & Lavigna, B. (2010). Transformational leadership and public service
motivation: Driving individual and organizational performance. Public
Administration Review, 70(5), 710–718.
Rainey,
H. G. (2014). Understanding and managing public organizations (5th
ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Rosenbloom,
D. H., Kravchuk, R. S., & Clerkin, R. M. (2015). Public administration:
Understanding management, politics, and law in the public sector (8th ed.).
McGraw-Hill Education.
Russell,
R. F., & Stone, A. G. (2002). A review of servant leadership attributes:
Developing a practical model. Leadership & Organization Development
Journal, 23(3), 145–157.
Thompson,
G., & Glasø, L. (2018). Situational leadership theory: A test from three
levels of analysis. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies,
22(3), 259–273.
Trottier,
T., Van Wart, M., & Wang, X. (2008). Examining the nature and significance
of leadership in government organizations. Public Administration Review,
68(2), 319–333.
Van
Wart, M. (2011). Leadership in public organizations: An introduction.
M.E. Sharpe.
Wallis,
J., & Gregory, R. (2009). Leadership, accountability, and public value:
Resolving a problem in “new governance”? International Journal of Public
Administration, 32(3–4), 250–273.
Yukl,
G. (2013). Leadership in organizations (8th ed.). Pearson Education.
https://maddenwiped.com/q9h97sj5?key=23b279e99ed6a529a30f577cdce2aeb9