ISSN: 2410-4477 The Impact of Leadership on Employees’ Loyalty and on Organizational Success: Do Transformational and Transactional Leadership Ensure Organizational and

6UU, United Kingdom Abstract: Leadership issues are vital to organizational success (Kumar and Kaptan, 2007). Without a strategic and effective leadership, it is difficult for the members of the organization to maintain profitability, productivity and competitive advantage (Lussier and Achua, 2007). Work commitment is important for understanding employee work behavior (Mowday et al., 1979; Meyer and Herscovitch 2001; Meyer et al. 2002). This commitment has an impact on many work-related characteristics, such as the intention to stay in the business (Porter et al. 1974; Mathieu and Zajac 1990; Meyer et al. 2002; Chew and Chan 2008), the absence (Porter et al. . 1974; Angle and Perry 1981; Meyer et al. 2002), and satisfaction (Yousef, 2000; Meyer et al., 2002; Chughtai and Zafar, 2006). The purpose of the research is to describe how leadership affects work commitment and employee effectiveness in a business. The target of the research is to examine which of the two transformational and transactional leadership styles has the most significant impact on employee engagement and employee effectiveness. In this research, an in-depth examination of the concepts of leadership, leadership style and work commitment was first conducted. The actions taken to investigate the research problem and the reasoning behind the application of specific procedures or techniques used to locate, select, process, and analyze the information used to understand the problem were then described, thus allowing the reader to critically evaluate the overall validity and reliability of the study. The interview questions were then taken and a comparison was made between the answers to give the results of the research. The results were also discussed to find homogenizations or contradictions in the existing literature review. Finally, the findings of the research were reported and suggestions for future research were made. The results showed that transformational leadership can lead to job commitment and better long-term effort, creativity and productivity of employees. On the contrary, the leadership of the transaction cannot cause a work commitment, but it is observed that on the part of the employees it can cause better results in a short period of time. Combined, transformational and transactional leadership can lead to job commitment, better results on the part of employees in the short term, and better long-term effort, creativity and


Introduction
In the present research, the way in which leadership influences work commitment and work efficiency will be studied. The benefits of research are oriented to the business side and more specifically to the management of the human factor. These benefits for which this research is being conducted are numerous and relate to leadership and job commitment issues. Leadership issues are vital to organizational success (Kumar and Kaptan, 2007). Without strategic and effective leadership, it is difficult for organization members to maintain profitability, productivity, and competitive advantage (Lussier and Achua, 2007). In recent years, leadership forms have become an important subject of study in the field of management, and many researchers consider leadership styles as an important variable that affects the way members of a business operate (Wu 2009). Job commitment has been repeatedly recognized as an important factor in determining employee work behavior in enterprises (Mowday et al., 1979;Meyer and Herscovitch, 2001;Meyer et al., 2002). As a result, it is an important factor that connects employees with the company (Meyer and Allen, 1997) and helps it succeed (Mowday et al., 1982;Fornes et al., 2008). This commitment is associated with many positive organizational outcomes such as job performance (Yousef, 2000;Chen et al., 2006), employee satisfaction (Yousef, 2000;Meyer et al., 2002;Chughtai and Zafar, 2006) and turnover (Angle and Perry, 1981;Meyer et al., 2002;Powell and Meyer, 2004). Organizations with dedicated employees are more likely to have higher work motivation as well as higher work efficiency (Yousef 2000;Riketta 2002; Abdul Rashid et al. 2003;Samad, 2005;Chen et al., 2006).
The purpose of this study is to describe how leadership affects the work commitment and effectiveness of employees in a company. More specifically, research questions are how transformational leadership style affects employee engagement and productivity and how transactional leadership style affects employee engagement and employee effectiveness. The aim of the research is to examine which of the two transformational and transactional leadership styles has the most significant effect on work commitment and employee effectiveness. This study contributes to the literature on the impact of leadership style on employees' commitment and performance as very little research in the literature is available on the links between managers' leadership behavior and employees' job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Mosadeghrad & Ferdosi, 2013) For this research the qualitative research was preferred and more specifically the data collection will be done with the interview tool. This was done because the researcher wanted to learn and then analyze the views of employees related to the issue of leadership, in order to determine whether there is any identification with existing research and existing literature. In-depth understanding of views and their subsequent analysis is a key element of qualitative research as it allows the researcher to deepen and analyze the results later. The type of purpose of the research chosen is descriptive because as mentioned above the purpose of the research is to describe how leadership affects the job commitment and effectiveness of employees in a company. Also due to the limitations that exist in the access of the companies, the method for the probability samples and the convenience sample was chosen, because the sample is based on the ease of access of the researcher.

Leadership, leadership styles and job commitment-A critical review
The research will be followed by a review of the literature which deals with an in-depth examination of the concepts of leadership, leadership styles and job commitment. This will be followed by the research methodology in which the research questions and the purpose of the work will be presented, the research onion on which the methodology, the research philosophy, the research approach, the research design, the research strategy, the type of research, the research tool with which the data will be collected, the sampling method, the ethical considerations and the limitations. In addition, the analysis and discussion of the results will follow. In this chapter each question will be taken separately and a comparison will be made between the answers given in order to obtain the results of the research. There will also be a discussion of the results, in order to find homogenizations or contradictions in the existing literature review. Finally, the conclusions that emerged from the research will follow and suggestions for future research will be reported. Job commitment is considered to be one of the most critical drivers of business success (Strom et al., 2014). This commitment has been associated with many positive business outcomes, such as improved productivity, increased turnover, improved behavior, managerial efficiency, and increased customer satisfaction (Blomme et al., 2015). On the contrary, the dismissal of workers leads to reduced productivity and higher costs. Nevertheless, the level of employee commitment in modern business is low.
A review of the literature shows that there has been extensive research on job commitment over time (Porter et al., 1974;Mowday et al., 1982;Mathieu and Zajac, 1990;Meyer et al., 2002;Meyer and Parfyonova, 2010). The positive effects of job commitment have been well recognized in the management literature.
Commitment has been repeatedly recognized in the organizational literature as an important variable in understanding employee work behavior in companies (Mowday et al., 1979;Meyer and Herscovitch, 2001;Meyer et al., 2002). Previous researchers have reported that this commitment has an impact on many work-related characteristics, such as intention to stay (Porter et al., 1974;Mathieu and Zajac, 1990;Meyer et al. 2002;Chew and Chan 2008), absence (Porter et al., 1974;Angle and Perry, 1981;Meyer et al., 2002), and job satisfaction (Yousef, 2000;Meyer et al., 2002;Chughtai and Zafar, 2006). This means that companies with dedicated employees can avoid the costs associated with high turnover and absenteeism. In addition, dedicated employees are more likely to have higher work motivations as well as higher job performance (Yousef, 2000;Riketta, 2002;Abdul Rashid et al., 2003;Samad, 2005;Chen et al., 2006).
Leadership is an important factor influencing work commitment (Bakker et al., 2011). The behavior of the leader is a source of motivation and satisfaction for employees, but also creates a healthy environment for their support. In addition, leadership is a process of interaction between leaders and employees, where a leader tries to influence the behavior of his employees to achieve organizational goals (Hersey and Blanchard, 1974;Hsu, 2001;Yukl, 2005). DuBrin (2004) believes that leadership can motivate the employees of a company to successfully complete organizational goals (Hsien, 1985;Robbins, 2001;Dale and Fox, 2008). Countless research has been done in the field of leadership skills. Unsurprisingly, there has been such an overwhelming focus from researchers, because leadership issues are vital to organizational success (Kumar and Captain, 2007). Without strategic and effective leadership, it is difficult for a company's employees to maintain profitability, productivity and competitive advantage (Lussier and Achua, 2007). Leadership has proven to be an important study topic in the field of management and many researchers consider it an important variable, which affects the way employees work in companies (Wu 2009). As a result, leadership emerges as an important predictor of performance (Bass et al. 2003). However, few studies have been conducted to examine the impact of leadership forms (Ghadi et al., 2013) on employee loyalty to target organizations (Hassan and Ahmed, 2011).

Transformational leadership
Transformational leadership is a recent approach. It is one of the approaches that has attracted the attention of many researchers (Northouse, 2007) and has been the most important leading theory of the last two decades (Judge and Piccolo, 2004). Burns (1978) was one of the first to develop the concept of transformational leadership and to characterize it as a style that motivates employees, attracting the highest ideals and moral values. According to Burns (1978) transformational leaders must define and articulate a vision for their business, while employees must accept the credibility of the leader. Transformational leadership can motivate and inspire employees to meet the expectations of leaders and transform both themselves and the companies they work for (Bass 1985;Keegan and Hartog, 2004). In the following years Bass and Avolio (1987) extended Burns' (1978) theory and proposed that transformational leadership is a process of commitment consisting of four factors: idealized influence (the strong vision and mission of a determined or transformational leader. such a leader is a role model for employees and their attitudes are idealized by them (Bass and Riggio, 2003;Lunenburg, 2003;Stewart, 2006).), inspirational motivation (Bass and Riggio, 2003;Lunenburg 2003;Stewart 2006), mental arousal (leaders always encourage their employees to come up with new ideas and come up with creative solutions to problems (Bass and Riggio, 2003;Lunenburg 2003;Stewart, 2006), and personalized examination (the leader is particularly interested in each employee taking in their opinion) (Northouse, 2007). According to Bass and Avolio (1993), transformation leaders can use one or more of the above factors.
Past studies have shown that transformational leadership is more efficient, productive, innovative and employee-friendly, and both parties work for the good of a business that is driven by shared visions and values as well as mutual trust and respect (Avolio and Bass, 1991;Fairholm, 1991;Lowe et al. 1996;Stevens et al. 1995). Also, transformational leadership is often associated with high levels of effort (Seltzer and Bass, 1990), as transformational leaders treat employees as individuals and devote time to guiding them. This results in employees developing their skills and then making meaningful changes with each other (Lee, 2005). Apart from this, the leaders of the transformation believe in the formal distribution of power and often exercise the use of personal power. Transformational leadership is seen as a critical approach to organizational innovation. Transformation leaders focus on the individual needs and personal development of employees. According to Bass (1985) these leaders encourage employees to achieve more than expected. Celik (2003) states that transformational leadership supports the intellectual development of employees and inspires enthusiasm for change. Transformational leaders can create a positive work environment, more easily achieve business goals, and increase job satisfaction and commitment levels (Deluga and Souza, 1991;Leithwood and Jant-zi, 1999;Rowold and Scholtz, 2009). All of this results in employees feeling trusted, admired, trusted and respected for their work. (Yulk, 2010).

Transactional leadership
Another type of leadership that has been widely used in organizational behavior studies is transactional leadership. Transactional leadership evolves when a person interacts with other people in order to exchange value that can be of economic, political, or psychological nature (Burns, 1978). Burns (1978) was one of the first to introduce transactional leadership and stated that transaction leaders are those who seek to motivate their employees to address their personal interests. These leaders motivate their employees to achieve the expected levels of performance, thereby helping employees recognize the responsibilities of the task, set goals, and develop confidence in achieving the desired performance . Burns (1978) noted that both parties have related goals, but their relationship does not go beyond the exchange of valuable benefits. Bass (1985) extended the work of Burns (1978) and suggested that transactional leadership is characterized by the transaction or exchange that takes place between leaders and employees. The transaction or exchange is based on the discussion between leaders and employees about the requirements and rewards that employees will receive if they meet the requirements of the leader (Bass and Avolio, 1994). Transactional leaders exchange things of value with employees to advance the demands of both parties (Ivey and Kline 2010).
Employees meet leaders' demands in return for praise and reward or avoidance of punishment for nonperformance or failure to achieve a goal (Bass et al., 2003). Thus, transaction management is realistic, as it focuses on achieving specific goals (Aarons 2006). Business leaders define the main tasks of employees, create the structure of the company and focus on the planned work. Employees are rewarded or punished for achieving organizational goals (Hoy and Miskel, 2010). According to Bass and Avolio (1994) and , transactional leaders use two factors: potential reward (the leader gives different rewards to improve employee performance and motivation, the employee will receive the reward in meeting business objectives (Bass and Avolio 1994; Bass and Riggio 2006) and exceptional management (These leaders monitor employee performance as problems arise and take steps to correct them (Bass and Avolio, 1994;. Transaction-oriented leaders also use their power to advice and influence employees to achieve the desired results (Avery, 2004;Bass, 1985). These leaders are more interested in achieving goals, so they focus on clarifying tasks and offer rewards for positive performance and punishments for negative performance (Burns 1978;Erkutlu 2008). Thus, transactional leaders reward employees for behaviors and performance that meet their expectations (Bass and Avolio, 1994;Northouse, 2007). According to Politis (2002), transaction leaders clarify the roles of employees and determine what they must do to achieve the goal. Thus, transactional leadership can be applied in many environments and is suitable for encouraging employees to adhere to standards of practice (Aarons 2006).
In addition, transaction leaders give employees confidence and therefore motivate them to achieve the desired performance (Politis, 2002). Business leaders mobilize employees by offering some form of satisfaction based on needs such as pay or other rewards in return for work (Sadler, 2003), so that employees produce the results that leaders expect. However, employees fulfill the demands of leaders because of the exchange of rewards offered and not because they are dedicated to their work. All this results in transactional leadership not causing additional behavior in the role of employees (Erhart and Nauman, 2004) and not engaging the employee with the leader in a mutual and continuous pursuit of a higher purpose (Burns, 1978). Yulk (2010) argued that the transactional leadership process is unlikely to create engagement between employees and leaders.

Employees' organisational commitment and leadership style
Employee organizational commitment is a variable that receives a lot of attention from researchers (Mowday et al., 1982;Chughtai and Zafar, 2006). Clinebell et al (2013) examined the relationship between transformational, transactional and passive/avoidant leadership styles and three dimensions of organizational commitment and revealed that transformational leadership has a significant positive affect on normative commitment, while transactional leadership has a significant positive affect on continuance commitment (Clinebell, Skudiene, Trijonyte & Reardon, 2013). In addition, leadership style has often been considered as one of the vital drivers that can enhance employees' commitment and the attainment of organizational goals (Abasilim, Gberevbie & Osibanjo, 2019). Aina and Verma (2017) indicated a significant relationship between leadership style of the senior managers and organizational commitment of the middle managers. More specifically, organizational commitment was found to be higher for middle managers whose senior managers exhibited transformational leadership style than those with transactional and laissez-faire leaders. It is generally accepted that employees' job satisfaction and commitment depends upon the leadership style of managers (Mosadeghrad and Ferdosi, 2017), which highlights the crucial role of leadership in employees' job satisfaction and commitment. Job commitment has been repeatedly recognized as an important factor in determining employee work behavior in enterprises ( As a result, it is an important factor that connects employees with the company (Meyer and Allen, 1997) and helps it succeed (Mowday et al., 1982;Fornes et al., 2008). This commitment is associated with many positive organizational outcomes such as job performance (Yousef, 2000;Chen et al., 2006), employee satisfaction (Yousef, 2000;Meyer et al., 2002;Chughtai and Zafar, 2006) and turnover (Angle and Perry, 1981;Meyer et al., 2002;Powell and Meyer, 2004). Research shows that commitment is defined in many different ways. This relationship has been further examined in a variety of sectors and industries, for instance, Hulpia and Devos (2010) focused on secondary school teachers as so as Omidifar (2013) who revealed positive and significant relationships between leadership style, organizational commitment and job satisfaction at high school teachers, and Leach's study (2005) was focused on nurse executives. Other researchers such as Zhou and Donkor (2020) tried to explain the relationship between transactional and laissez-faire leadership styles and employee performance in the public service environment, and they concluded in that public sector leadership should adopt strategies to inculcate continuance commitment in organizational activities towards enhanced employee performance. The results of Jernigan and Beggs (2011) also support the importance of leadership in developing important employee attitudes; however they point out the need for managers to recognize that more than one form of leadership may be required to achieve success.
There is a lack of coherence in the definition of commitment (Mat Zin, 1998), which contributes to the difficulty of understanding the results (Darolia et al., 2010). However, the definition of job commitment by Porter et al. (1974) is the most widely used in most research (Yousef, 2000). Porter et al. (1974) characterized work commitment by three psychological factors of employees: first, the acceptance of organizational goals and values (recognition), second, the willingness of employees to make significant efforts for the company (completion). and third, a strong desire to stay in business (faith). Allen (1991, 1997) identified three common themes in the concept of commitment and argued that the various definitions of commitment can be grouped into three general categories: emotional orientation, cost, and obligation or moral responsibility. The three categories were then referred to as emotional, regulatory, and sequential commitments Allen 1991, 1997). These data are useful for examining the effects of employee retention, job behavior, job satisfaction, and job performance (Meyer and Allen, 1991;Somers, 1995). Thus, job commitment can be a beneficial factor for employee behavior, job performance, and low turnover in a firm (Rose et al., 2009). Job commitment is an individual expression of commitment to a business (Kanter, 1968). Buchanan (1974) argued that work commitment is a type of belief that connects feelings of organizational values and organizational goals with the individual values and goals of employees. Job commitment is "the relative power of identifying an individual in a particular business" (Steers ,1977, p. 46) and represents a high level of love, loyalty and concentration in a job role (Dee et al., 2006). This commitment shows that the individual goals are the same or the same as the organizational goals and can boost employee productivity and commitment (Chen and Aryee, 2007). Chen and Hong (2005) commented that if employees in a company trust and accept organizational value, they are more willing to work hard to achieve organizational goals. High job commitment will be beneficial for a company because it suggests that employees have high organizational identification (Jiang and Huang 2002). Organizational commitment shows the psychological attachment of an employee to the organization (Kate & Masako, 2002). According to Meyer and colleagues (2002) there are three types of organizational commitment: Affective, Continuance and Normative Commitment. Affective commitment relates to an employee's emotional attachment to the organization and its goals. Continuance commitment shows cognitive attachment between an employee and his or her organization because of the costs associated with leaving the organization. Finally, normative commitment refers to typical feelings of obligation to remain with an organization (Mosadeghrad and Ferdosi, 2017).
Transaction leaders motivate employees by offering them some form of satisfaction based on needs such as pay or other rewards in return for work (Sadler, 2003). This leads employees to produce the results that leaders expect. However, employees fulfill the demands of leaders because of the exchange of rewards they offer and not because they are dedicated to their work. This relationship is unlikely to cause additional employee role behavior (Erhart and Nauman, 2004). Nor does it bind the leader and the employee to a mutual and continual pursuit of a higher purpose (Burns, 1978 , 1996). Transformational leaders have a strong influence on organizational commitment by encouraging employees ("followers" as stated) to think critically by using novel approaches, involving them in decision-making processes, inspiring loyalty, while recognizing and appreciating the different needs of each follower to develop a personal potential (Avolio, 1999;Bass & Avolio, 1994;Yammarino, Spangler & Bass, 1993). This is further supported by other researchers such as Walumbwa and Lawler (2003) who mention that transformational leaders can motivate and increase motivation and organizational commitment of employees by getting them to solve problems creatively and also understanding their needs. Hayward et al. (2004) and Lee (2004) found that transformational leadership is significantly correlated with job commitment. Transformational leadership focuses on the ability of a transformational leader. It is a process of changing and transforming employees by increasing motivation, building commitment and empowerment to achieve organizational goals (Yukl, 2010). In other words, transformational leaders are able to enhance employee engagement through shared values and a shared vision (Sadler, 2003). In addition, transformation leaders focus on business and direct employee engagement for organizational goals (Yulk, 2010).
Many researchers such as Walumbwa (2005) have concluded that leaders who use transformational leadership factors (idealized influence, inspirational motivation, mental stimulation, and personalized examination) can create higher levels of job satisfaction and job satisfaction. According to Hayward et al. (2004) correlation coefficients have been found between the factors of transformational leadership and the three general categories of work commitment (emotional, regulatory and successive commitments). Kent and Chelladurai (2001) considered that individualized influence has a positive relationship with both emotional commitment and regulatory commitment. Similarly, positive correlations were found between mental stimulation and regulatory commitment. Bass and Avolio (1994) found that transformational leaders who encourage their employees to think critically and creatively can influence work commitment. It is further argued by Walumbwa and Lawler (2003) that transformational leaders can motivate and increase the motivation and commitment of their employees by making them creatively solve problems and understand their needs. Price (1997) further shows that employees are much more likely to commit to a business if they have confidence in their leaders. The study of Daud (2019) concludes that transformational leadership style significantly affects job performance and organizational commitment, whereas organizational commitment significantly influences job performance.
Continuing, Keskes (2013) presents how leadership dimensions can influence employee organizational commitment, suggesting that transformational leadership is positively associated with organizational commitment in a variety of organizational settings and cultures, there has been little empirical research focusing on the precise ways in which style of leadership impacts employee organizational commitment (Keskes, 2014). Moreover, Aharon Tziner and Or Shkoler (2019) found that both transformational and transactional leadership associated positively with work motivation and only transformational leadership associated positively with work commitment (Tziner & Shkoler, 2018). Results of further studies (Dariush et al, 2016) also suggest that leadership style of managers has a significant effect on organizational commitment, so that the transformational and transactional leadership style has positive effect on organizational commitment (Dariush, Choobdar, Valadkhani & Mehrali, 2016). From the above, we conclude that transformational leadership style is the most common leadership style utilized by the managers within the organization and that there's a substantial relationship between leadership styles and employees' job commitment within the organization (Sakiru et.al, 2013) and that the majority of literature examined, agrees that leadership style had positive and sometimes indirect effects on organizational commitment (Nigusea and Hirpesa, 2018).

Research methodology
The purpose of this study is to describe how leadership affects the work commitment and effectiveness of employees in a company. More specifically, research questions are: , which is done in this research answers the questions how he also uses the interview as a research tool. The philosophy of research is the epistemology and includes positivism.. Next, the sampling method used non-probability samples.
The method used to perform the results analysis is content analysis. Content analysis is a research method that allows the qualitative data collected in research to be systematically and reliably analyzed, so that generalizations can be made in relation to the categories of interest to the researcher (Haggarty, 1996). More specifically, in this chapter, each question will be taken separately and a comparison will be made between the answers given in the interviews, in order to find common points or any contradictions. Ten interviews were used to analyze the results and each interviewee has a number from 1 to 10. The interviewees are divided into genders (Men, Women), where from number 1 to 4 are women and from number 5 to 10 are men. The questions posed during the interview are presented in detail in Annex 1. Also in this chapter, in addition to the analysis of the results, there will be a discussion of the results, in order to find homogenizations or contradictions in the existing literature review.
The data collection was done by ten employees who work in companies in Greece and more specifically in Attica. Participants will give an interview, on or off site. Each interview lasted 1 hour and all the ten participants knew in advance the subject of the study. The type of research that is qualitative was also developed and the research tool was the semistructured interview. The interviews were conducted in person with the presence of the researcher in order to check the representativeness of the sample, motivate the participants to answer and the possibility of clarifications and explanations. The questions posed during the interview are detailed in Table 1.
In order to ensure the protection of the personal data of the participants before each interview it was given information and consent forms of the responsible body and the information and consent forms of the participants. Participants then were informed that their answers will be anonymous and will not mention their personal details. Finally, they were told that they can leave the interview process at any time.
Finally, the limitations of the research originally arose from the research tool that is the interview. Fifteen interviews were required to obtain objective and reliable data from the sample used for primary data collection. Another limitation that arose concerns the type of research used. Qualitative research is a type of research that needs a lot of analysis. Due to the limited words in the analysis of results there was a difficulty of the researcher in documenting the results.

Research Results and Discussion
The questions used for the current qualitative research are presented in Table 1.

CATEGORY QUESTIONS General information
1) How would you introduce me to the business leader? Regarding the first question, all interviewees have at least one common answer and overall present a leader who is fair, organizational, cooperative, approachable, motivating, recognizing effort and providing feedback, tackling difficult situations, inspiring employees and knows how to take initiatives. These results confirm Bass and Avolio (1994), Bass and Riggio (2003), Lunenburg (2003),  and Stewart (2006) who report some behaviors followed by both transformational and transactional leaders. It is observed that the interviewees report behaviors from both leadership styles. Also when there is a separation of the two sexes (Men, Women) it is observed that men present a leader who knows how to take initiatives, while women a leader who knows how to provide motivation. All other answers are common.

2) Is there a common vision and team spirit in the business
Subsequently, it is observed that in the business of the interviewees (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,9,10) there is a common vision, while in the business of the interviewee (8) there is not. Then, it is observed that in the organisation of the interviewees (1,2,4,5,6,7,9,10) there is a team spirit, while in the business of the interviewees (3,8) there is not. From these answers, it also emerged that all interviewees have at least one common answer, followed by common answers among the interviewees. The common answers of the interviewees are that individuality prevails, there are excellent working relationships, the common vision and team spirit are coordinated by the leader and that it is a basic foundation in a company. According to the last two comments of the interviewees, there is a homogenization with Burns' (1978) theory which states that leaders must define and formulate a vision for their business, while employees must accept the credibility of the leader. In this question it is worth noting three personal comments of the interviewees 3, 5 and 8, which were considered to better illuminate the main issues that have been included in the literature review.

Interviewee 3. "They recently gave us a seminar on the company's vision and the policy we should follow, and everyone does what they think is right, exposing other colleagues."
Interviewee 5. "Our employer helps us a lot in this as friendships have developed between us and no matter how much work we have, it is pleasant and easy.
However, there are 1, 2 people who come just because they have to and this can be seen in their performance at work." Interviewee 8. "I believe as an employee of the company that individuality prevails over teamwork and common vision." Based on the above we can understand that in a company not only the leadership plays a role, but also the human resources that complement it. If the employees cannot or do not want to adopt some standards for the development not only of the company, but also for their personal development, then the leadership can do nothing and it is logical that there are problems. According to what has just been mentioned, there is a gap in the wider literature on how employee behavior can affect a company either positively or negatively.
The next four questions (3,4,5,6) are about transformational leadership. These questions address the factors of transformational leadership. The reason here is to find out if in the company where the interviewees work there is a leader who follows transformational leadership standards. According to Bass and Avolio (1993) transformational leaders can use one or more of the above factors mentioned in the questions (3,4,5,6). From the answers it is observed that the interviewees (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,9,10) have this type of the leader, while the interviewee (8) does not. To the interviewees (1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10) the leader's behaviors are idealized by the employees of the companies, while to the interviewees (4,8) no. The common answer among the interviewees to the question why the leader is a role model is because he/she knows how to take initiatives, has a lot of knowledge, is a good example to follow, is an example of personal development and is a motivator. Also, when the two genders are separated (Men, Women), it is found that for men the leader is a role model because he knows how to take initiatives and because he has enough knowledge, while for women because he is a motivator.
Then, regarding the fourth question, it was found that in the companies of the interviewees (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10) the leader generates original ideas, encourages entrepreneurship as well as the beginning of changes, while in the company of the interviewee (8) not to a large extent. When the two genders are separated (Men, Women) it is observed that men gave more importance to the production of original ideas, while women gave more importance to encouraging entrepreneurship and starting changes. The answers to the fifth question of the interview show that in the business of the interviewees (1,2,4,5,6,7,9,10) new ideas for the production of creative solutions to problems are encouraged, while in the business of the interviewees (3 , 8) are not encouraged. It is worth noting in the fifth question is that during the interviews it was observed that all interviewees prefer a leader who encourages new ideas and helps to produce creative solutions to problems.
Analyzing the answers to the sixth question, it is observed that in the interviewees (1,2,4,5,6,7,9,10) the leader of the working companies shows special interest for each employee and takes into account their opinion, while the leader in the company where the interviewees work (3,8) not to a large extent. What is worth noting in the sixth question is that during the interviews it was found that all interviewees prefer a leader who shows interest in employees, but also a leader who takes their opinion into account. Based on the answers given to the questions (3, 4, 5, 6) of the interview and the theory of Bass and Avolio (1993) that transformation leaders use one or more of the above factors, you find that in the companies where the interviewees work (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,9,10) there are standards of transformational leadership, while in the business of the interviewee (8) they do not exist.
The questions 8, 9 concern transactional leadership. These are just some of the goal setting shareware that you can use. The reason you do this is to see if the leader in the business where the interviewees work follows standards of transactional leadership. According to Bass and Avolio (1994) and , transactional leaders use both of the factors listed in the following questions (8,9). It is found that in the business of the interviewees (1,5,6,7,8,9,10) the leader provides rewards to improve the performance and motivation of the employees, while in the business of the interviewees (2, 3, 4) do not become something like that. Based on the answers and the theory of Bass and Avolio (1994) and , transactional leaders use both of the above factors. Ιnterviewees (1,5,6,7,8,9,10) pointed that there are standards of transactional leadership, while in the business of the interviewees (2, 3, 4) they do not exist. At this point it is worth noting that in the organisation where the interviewees work (2, 3, 4) the leader follows transformational leadership standards, while in the organization where the interviewee (8) works the leader follows transactional leadership standards. Regarding the interviewees (1,5,6,7,9,10) it is found that the leader of the company follows the standards of both transformational and transactional leadership. These results confirm Bass (1985) who states that leaders pursue both transformational and transactional leadership behaviors.
The next three questions (10,11,12) are about job commitment. These questions address the three psychological factors of employee engagement to determine whether in companies where leaders follow transformational or transactional or even transformational and transactional leadership standards, they can create employee engagement. Porter et al. (1974) characterized that job commitment consists of three psychological factors of employees. It is observed that the interviewees (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,9,10) are satisfied with their work, with the result that the interviewees comment that it is quite good, excellent and good. In contrast to the interviewee (8) who states that "No there is not enough satisfaction from my work". It is also worth noting a common comment from the interviewees (3, 4) who generally state "however there is room for improvement".
What is worth noting is that during the interviews it was observed that all interviewees consider organizational goals and common values something necessary that should exist in a company and that employees should accept them. This is also confirmed by Burns (1978). It is found that all interviewees make efforts for the company they work for. In this question it is worth noting three personal comments of the interviewees 1, 5 and 10, which were also considered absolutely relevant to what was analyzed in the literature review and to the question that is being attempted to be answered. Interviewee 10. "When an employee is satisfied and rewarded for his effort so the employee tries in the best possible way to set up the business as it is done to us." Based on the above comments, it is observed that when a company recognizes the effort of the employees and provides rewards that are not necessarily monetary, then the employees will increase their performance and will make greater efforts for the company. This is confirmed by Bass and Avolio (1994), Aarons (2006) and   Kent and Chelladurai (2001) and homogeneity is observed. All interviewees have at least one common answer and overall the changes they present in their work behavior are a stronger shared vision, better day-to-day management, better stress management, improved performance, stronger team spirit and greater motivation to work.
The next two questions (15,16) concern work efficiency. These questions will show how leadership affects employee effectiveness. All interviewees have at least one common answer and overall the changes they present in their work behavior are a stronger shared vision, better day-to-day management, better stress management, improved performance, stronger team spirit and greater motivation to work. The next two questions (15,16) concern work efficiency. These questions will show how leadership affects employee effectiveness. At this point it was observed that in the companies of the interviewees (2,3,4) where the leader follows transformational leadership standards, the employees offer satisfactory results for the company in a short period of time and there is better long-term effort, creativity and productivity on their part. In contrast to the business where the interviewee (8) works that follows transactional leadership standards, the employee offers better results in the short term for the business, but there is no long-term effort, creativity and productivity on his part. In companies where the interviewees (1,5,6,7,9,10) work where the business leader follows standards of both transformational and transactional leadership, employees offer better results in the short term and there is better long-term effort, creativity and productivity on their part.
These results confirm Bass (1998) who states that transactional leadership can deliver satisfactory results in the short term (short term), while transformational leadership can generate long-term effort, creativity and productivity (long term) and Aarons (2006) and Snodgrass and Shachar (2008) who report that effective leaders are those who combine both leadership styles.
Closing in this section, it is initially observed that in a business not only the leadership plays a role, but also the human resources that complement it. If the employees cannot or do not want to adopt some standards for the development not only of the company, but also for their personal development, then the leadership can do nothing and it is logical that there are problems. It goes on to say that when a company recognizes the effort of its employees and provides rewards that are not necessarily financial ones. Then the employees will increase their performance and make greater efforts for the company. It is also found that even if one of the factors of transformational leadership is followed then it can cause job commitment. All these results discussed in the current section, are presented graphically in the Appendix 1.
In addition, it is observed that employees consider organizational goals and common values as something that must exist in a company. It is later found that employees prefer a leader who encourages new ideas and helps produce creative solutions to problems and a leader who shows interest in employees and takes their opinion into account. When the two genders are separated (Men and Women) it is observed that for men the leader is a role model because he knows how to take initiatives and because he has enough knowledge, while for women because he is a motivator. It is also found that men gave more importance to the production of original ideas, while women gave more importance to encouraging entrepreneurship and starting changes.
Finally, based on the answers given by the interviewees, it is initially established that the present research to a large extent confirms the existing state of knowledge and the information collected from the international literature and articles. More specifically, it was confirmed that transformational leadership can lead to job commitment and better long-term effort, creativity and productivity of employees. On the contrary, the transactional leadership cannot cause job commitment but it is observed that on the part of the employees it can cause better results in a short period of time. Combined, transformational and transactional leadership can lead to job commitment, better employee results in the short term, and better long-term employee effort, creativity, and productivity.

Conclusions and suggestions for future research
Taking into consideration the above data which were presented in this research, it is ascertained that no serious problem arose. In reviewing the literature there was ease in collecting secondary data because the broader literature shows that there has been extensive research on job commitment over time (Porter et (Burns, 1978). The only difficulty in reviewing the literature was that work commitment has been defined in many different ways, resulting in a lack of coherence in its definition (Mat Zin, 1998) and contributing to the difficulty of understanding the results (Darolia et al., 2010).
The research methodology also did not pose a serious problem because the methodology was based on the research onion. The research onion illustrates the stages involved in the development of a research project (Saunders et al., 2007) and provides an effective development through which a research methodology can be designed (Bryman, 2012). Its usefulness guarantees adaptability to almost any type of research methodology and can be used in a variety of contexts (Bryman, 2012). The only difficulty in the methodology was in sampling given the limitations that exist in the access of companies but the method for the samples of probability and the sample of convenience was undone because it is based on the ease of access of the researcher to the sample. No serious problems arose in the analysis and discussion of the results. Some problems arose in the analysis of the results. The first problem that arose concerns the collection of primary data. Fifteen interviews were required to obtain objective and reliable data from the sample. The second problem that arose in the analysis of the results is that there was difficulty for the researcher in documenting the results due to the limitation of words. In contrast to the discussion of the results, no problem arose as the results answer the research questions and are confirmed by the existing literature. Also during the discussion and based on the results that emerged it was found that some results are not confirmed in general in the wider literature and a great novelty was observed, with the result that this research can give suggestions for future research.
The purpose of this study was to describe how leadership affects the work commitment and effectiveness of employees in a company. The objectives of this research are to examine which of the two transformational and transactional leadership styles has the most significant effect on employee commitment and employee effectiveness. In the above research it was found that transformational leadership can cause job commitment and better long-term effort, creativity and productivity of employees. On the contrary, transactional leadership cannot cause job commitment but it is observed that on the part of employees can cause better results in a short time. Combined transformational and transactional leadership can lead to job commitment, better employee results in the short term, and better long-term effort, creativity, and employee productivity.
In addition, it was observed that employees consider organizational goals and common values as something that must exist in a company. It was later found that employees prefer a leader who encourages new ideas and helps produce creative solutions to problems and a leader who shows interest in employees and takes their opinion into account. Finally, when the two genders were separated (Men and Women), it was observed that for men the leader is a role model because he knows how to take initiatives and because he has enough knowledge, while for women because he is a motivator. It was also found that men gave more importance to the production of original ideas, while women gave more importance to encouraging entrepreneurship and starting changes.
The contribution of this study is that it adds more information in the literature concerning the impact of leadership style on employees' commitment and performance as very little research in the literature is available on the links between managers' leadership behavior and employees' job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Mosadeghrad & Ferdosi, 2013). Furthermore, these results could be used from executives in order to adapt the proper leadership style based on the individuals' characteristics and organizational culture, in order to enhance the employees' motivation and loyalty and thus to increase their productivity.
Based on the analysis and discussion of results, some results emerged which could be suggestions for future research and are directly related to this research. Initially it was observed that in a company not only the leadership plays a role, but also the human resources that complement it. If employees cannot or do not want to adopt some standards for the development not only of the company, but also for their personal development, then the leadership can do nothing and it is logical that there are problems. It was further stated that when a company recognizes the effort of the employees and provides rewards not necessarily monetary, then the employees will increase their performance and will make greater efforts for the company. It was also found that even one of the factors of transformational leadership then followed can cause job commitment. Furthermore, although research has focused on the relationship between leadership styles and employees' commitment, little consideration has been paid to identify the influence of demographic variables on the nexus between leadership styles and employees' commitment and that could be a thought for a further research on the current field. One area that clearly requires additional research according to Keskes (2014) is the influence of vision on employees. However, as Rafferty and Griffin (2004) mentioned, there is a clear need to more understand the theoretical nature of the relationship between vision and continuance commitment.
The present study examined how leadership influences work commitment and work efficiency. The benefits of research are oriented to the business side and more specifically to the management of the human factor. These benefits for which this research is conducted are numerous and relate to issues of leadership, work commitment and work efficiency. This research is so important as it describes how leadership influences employee commitment and employee effectiveness in a business and examines which of the two transformational and transactional leadership styles has the most significant effect on work commitment and efficiency. The results of the research are many. Through this research, it was found that transformational leadership can lead to work commitment and better long-term effort, creativity and productivity of employees. On the contrary, the transactional leadership cannot cause work commitment but it is observed that on the part of the employees it can cause better results in a short period of time. Combined, transformational and transactional leadership can lead to work commitment, better employee results in the short term, and better long-term employee effort, creativity, and productivity. In addition, it was observed that in a business not only the leadership plays a role, but also the human resources that complement it. If the employees cannot or do not want to adopt some standards for the development not only of the company, but also for their personal development, then the leadership can do nothing and it is logical that there are problems. It was further stated that when a company recognizes the effort of the employees and provides rewards not necessarily monetary, then the employees will increase their performance and will make greater efforts for the company. It has also been found that even if one of the factors of transformational leadership is followed then it can cause work commitment. In addition, it was observed that employees consider organizational goals and common values to be something that must exist in a company. It was later found that employees prefer a leader who encourages new ideas and helps produce creative solutions to problems and a leader who shows interest in employees and takes their opinion into account. Finally, after the separation of the two sexes (Men and Women) it was observed that for men the leader is a role model because he knows how to take initiatives and because he has enough knowledge, while for women because he is a motivator. It was also found that men gave more importance to the production of original ideas, while women gave more importance to encouraging entrepreneurship and starting changes.