1. How would one explain the method used for the study and participation statistics in-depth for a statistics paper qithnthis data please include mean age and Standard dev? Method

The study adopted the descriptive survey design for the study. This is because the researcher is not interested in the causal effect but in the relationship or contribution of the variables to each other. Therefore, no intervention or treatment was given in the study.

Participants

A survey of 41 employees was conducted. The data collected was analyzed using descriptive statistics in frequency count and percentages for Demographic characteristics and Multiple regression analysis for the two hypotheses raised in the study. The result on employee characteristics shows that 39.0% of the respondents were male while 61.0% were female as shown in Table 1

Gender	Frequency	Percentage
Male	16	39.0
Female	25	61.0
Total	41	100.0

Table 1: Distribution of Respondents by Gender

The result indicates that the proportion of female respondents in the sample is more than males. It can also be observed in Table 2 that 19.5% of the respondents were born between 1974-1990 while 80.5% were born 23yrs ago.

Year of Birth	Frequency	Percentage
1991-2000	33	80.5
1974-1990	8	19.5

Table 2: Respondents' Year of Birth

This implies that most of the respondents were below 30 years of age while just 19.5% were above 25yrs. 2.please help with my literature review for my topic. l don't think this is enough for the topic The impact of managerial styles on employee job satisfaction and retention what can l add? The existing literature on the impact of managerial styles on employee outcomes is extensive and has evolved over time. Early studies on leadership focused on identifying distinct leadership styles, such as autocratic, democratic, and laissez-faire (Lewin, Lippitt, & White, 1939). Subsequent research has built upon this foundation, examining the nuanced relationships between various leadership approaches and their effects on employee attitudes and behaviors.One of the key areas of interest in the literature is the relationship between managerial styles and employee job satisfaction. Job satisfaction is a multifaceted construct that reflects the extent to which an individual is content with their work and the overall work environment (Locke, 1976). Researchers have explored how different leadership approaches can influence this important employee outcome.The literature suggests that managerial styles characterized by democratic and participative approaches are more likely to foster high levels of employee job satisfaction (Likert, 1961; Bass, 1990). When employees feel empowered to contribute to decision-making, have a sense of autonomy, and perceive their managers as supportive, they tend to report greater job satisfaction (Robbins & Judge, 2017). Conversely, autocratic and controlling managerial styles have been linked to lower job satisfaction, as employees may feel micromanaged and have less autonomy (Brayfield & Crockett, 1955; Robbins & Judge, 2017).Transformational leadership, which involves inspiring and empowering employees, has also been associated with higher levels of job satisfaction (Bass, 1985; Avolio & Bass, 1995). Transformational leaders tend to provide clear vision, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration, all of which can contribute to employee well-being and satisfaction (Avolio & Bass, 1995).In contrast, abusive supervision, characterized by hostile and demeaning behaviors, has been found to negatively impact employee job satisfaction (Tepper, 2000). Employees who experience abusive supervision may feel demoralized, disrespected, and less committed to their work (Tepper, 2000).The relationship between managerial styles and employee retention has also been extensively examined in the literature. Employee retention refers to an organization's ability to keep its employees and prevent voluntary turnover (Hausknecht, Rodda, & Howard, 2009).Transformational leadership has been shown to enhance employee commitment and reduce turnover intentions (Bass, 1985; Avolio & Bass, 1995). Transformational leaders who inspire and empower their employees are more likely to foster a sense of belonging and loyalty, leading to higher retention rates (Bass, 1985).Conversely, abusive supervision has been linked to higher employee turnover rates (Tepper, 2000). Employees who experience abusive supervision may feel demoralized, disrespected, and less committed to their organization, leading to increased intentions to leave (Tepper, 2000).The literature also suggests that flexible, empowering managerial styles that provide constructive feedback and recognize employee contributions tend to foster higher levels of employee retention (Hausknecht et al., 2009). Employees are more likely to remain with an organization when they feel supported, respected, and given opportunities for growth and development (Hausknecht et al., 2009).Charismatic leadership, which involves inspiring and motivating employees through personal charm and appeal, has been linked to enhanced employee commitment and performance (House, 1977; Bass, 1985). Laissez-faire leadership, on the other hand, is characterized by a hands-off approach where managers provide minimal guidance and direction (Lewin et al., 1939). Contingency leadership emphasizes the importance of adapting one's leadership style to the specific situational demands (Fiedler, 1967), while leadership by expectation focuses on setting clear expectations and monitoring employee performance (House & Mitchell, 1974).By examining the unique contributions of these managerial styles, the current study aims to provide a more nuanced understanding of the mechanisms through which leadership practices can influence employee job satisfaction and retention. This knowledge can inform organizational decision-making and leadership development initiatives, ultimately enhancing employee well-being and organizational effectiveness.