Shaping University Organisational Culture in Uganda: A Systematic Review of Visible and Invisible Leadership Actions and Values in Public Universities

Abstract

Public universities in Uganda face significant pressure to improve organisational effectiveness, foster staff commitment, and meet rising societal expectations. Leadership actions and values, both visible and invisible, play a key role in shaping university organisational culture, yet existing evidence remains scattered and fragmented. Methods: This study employed a systematic literature review to synthesise knowledge on how leadership actions and values influence organisational culture in Ugandan public universities and similar higher education contexts. Electronic databases and institutional repositories were searched using predefined keywords related to leadership styles, organisational culture, institutional culture, values, and Ugandan public universities. Inclusion criteria targeted empirical and conceptual studies examining leadership practices, cultural dimensions, and organisational outcomes. Data were extracted into a matrix and analysed thematically. Results: The review indicates that visible leadership actions, such as communication patterns, decision-making processes, structural arrangements, and performance management, significantly affect organisational climate, communication, and perceived effectiveness. Espoused beliefs and values, alongside fundamental assumptions, are positively associated with organisational effectiveness and staff engagement. Adaptive, participatory, servant, transformational, and socially responsible leadership styles are linked to more inclusive, collaborative, and committed cultures, whereas bureaucratic, top-down, and passive-avoidant approaches hinder engagement and innovation. Misalignment between official values and everyday leadership behaviour can erode trust and weaken culture-building efforts. Conclusion: Leadership actions and values fundamentally shape the culture of Ugandan public universities. When visible practices align with shared values and deeper cultural assumptions, they promote commitment, effectiveness, and innovation; misalignment, however, can lead to dysfunction and low morale. Recommendations: University leaders should intentionally align structures, communication channels, human resource systems, and governance processes with clearly defined institutional values. Leadership development should focus on adaptive, participatory, servant, and socially responsible approaches. Governance frameworks must foster collaboration, transparency, accountability, and inclusive decision-making. Areas for further research: Future studies should adopt longitudinal and mixed-method designs to explore how visible and invisible leadership actions embed or transform culture over time, compare institutions with varying leadership profiles, and investigate the links among culture, academic quality, and student outcomes.