essay on team leadership and motivation

• View programs
• Take our program quiz
• Online BBA Degree Program
• > Specialization in Artificial Intelligence
• > Specialization in Business Analytics
• > Specialization in Digital Marketing
• > Specialization in Entrepreneurship
• Online BBA Top-Up Program
• Associate of Applied Science in Business (AAS)
• Online MS Degree Programs
• > MS in Data Analytics
• > MS in Digital Transformation
• > MS in Entrepreneurship
• Online MBA Degree Program
• > Specialization in Cybersecurity
• > Specialization in E-Commerce
• > Specialization in Fintech & Blockchain
• > Specialization in International Business
• > Specialization in Sustainability
• Undergraduate certificates
• Graduate certificates
• Undergraduate courses
• Graduate courses
• Apply to Nexford
• Transfer to Nexford
• Explore Education Partners
• Scholarships
• For organizations
• Career Coalition
• Accreditation
• Our faculty
• Career services
• Academic model
• Learner stories
• Book consultation
• Careers - we're hiring!

How to Motivate Your Team As a Leader - 10 Strategies

They say that true leaders are born and not created. Forbes maintains that leadership can be taught and learned, but some people are more likely to learn or acquire the talent for leadership than others, because the predisposition to lead is significantly amplified by some qualities that are already manifested early in life, and on which there are stable and significant individual differences.

No matter what camp you find yourself in, what is an undeniable truth is that all great leaders share one trait and that is their ability to build trust amongst those that they lead so that everyone feels like they would want to rally behind them.

That said, leaders need to lay the ground work well before that ever happens to effectively motivate employees. A good leader should have passion, integrity, self-awareness, courage, respect, empathy, social skills, and gratitude.

They should be learning agility and flex their influence while communicating and delegating effectively. Great leaders such as Winston Churchill, Mahatma Gandhi, and the greatest motivator, Nelson Mandela, had all of these motivational traits in spades, and look where it got them and their throngs of followers because of what it did for morale.

How To Motivate Your Team As A Leader - 10 Strategies

1. understand the psychology behind employee motivation .

The great Tony Robbins maintains that there are two types of team motivation in the work environment: extrinsic and intrinsic. Extrinsic motivation includes pay, benefits and in-office perks. Intrinsic motivation refers to the sense of accomplishment a person gets from completing a certain task or from their job overall. Extrinsic motivation is temporary. The best ways to motivate your team and make employees feel valued and do their best work, is by using intrinsic motivation, which tap into deeper needs.

2. Leverage the six human needs 

As a leader, understanding and leveraging the six human needs can be an effective way to motivate your team. These needs, according to Tony Robbins, are: certainty, variety, significance, connection/love, growth, and contribution. Here's how you can leverage them to motivate your team:

People have a need for stability and predictability. Provide your team with a clear vision, well-defined goals, and a sense of security in their roles. Communicate openly, be transparent about expectations, and provide regular feedback to create a sense of certainty.

Humans also have a need for excitement and variety. Encourage creativity and innovation within your team. Offer challenging assignments, allow for job rotation, or organize team-building activities that promote new experiences and learning opportunities.

Significance

People want to feel valued and important. Recognize and acknowledge your team's achievements and contributions regularly. Provide them with autonomy and involve them in decision-making processes, making them feel that their opinions matter.

Connection/Love

Foster a sense of belonging and connection within your team. Encourage collaboration, create a positive work environment, and promote open communication. Organize team-building activities or social events to strengthen relationships and build a supportive team culture.

Support your team's personal and professional development. Provide opportunities for skill-building, offer training programs, and encourage continuous learning. Help your team members set and achieve meaningful goals that contribute to their growth and development.

Contribution

Humans have a fundamental need to make a difference and contribute to something greater than themselves. Clearly communicate the purpose and impact of your team's work. Highlight how their efforts align with the organization's goals and values. Recognize and celebrate their contributions to create a sense of fulfillment.

Remember that each individual's needs may vary, so it's essential to have open conversations with your team members to understand their motivations and aspirations. By aligning their needs with their work, you can create a motivating environment that encourages productivity and engagement.

3. Examine your company culture 

Motivating your team as a leader starts with examining and shaping your company culture. Here are some steps you can take to motivate your team by focusing on company culture:

Define your values

Clearly define the core values that drive your organization. These values should reflect what your company stands for and what behaviors are expected from team members. Communicate these values to your team and ensure they are integrated into your day-to-day operations.

Lead by example

As a leader, your behavior sets the tone for the entire team. Demonstrate the values and behaviors you expect from your team members. Act with integrity, show empathy, and be accountable for your actions. Leading by example creates a culture of trust and inspires your team to follow suit.

Foster open communication

Establish a culture of open and transparent communication. Encourage your team members to share their ideas, concerns, and feedback. Actively listen to their input and involve them in decision-making processes. This inclusive approach makes employees feel valued and motivates them to contribute their best work.

Recognize and reward

Implement a recognition and reward system that acknowledges and appreciates your team members' efforts. Celebrate achievements, milestones, and successes both individually and as a team. Recognition can be in the form of verbal praise, public acknowledgment, rewards, or opportunities for growth and development.

Promote collaboration and teamwork

Encourage collaboration among team members by fostering a collaborative work environment. Break down silos and encourage cross-functional collaboration. Provide opportunities for team members to work together on projects, share knowledge, and support each other. Collaboration enhances motivation as it creates a sense of belonging and collective achievement.

Provide growth opportunities

Support the professional and personal growth of your team members. Offer training programs, mentorship, and coaching opportunities. Provide clear career paths and development plans. When employees see that their growth is supported and that there are opportunities for advancement within the company, they are more likely to be motivated and engaged.

Create a positive work environment

Foster a positive work environment that promotes well-being and work-life balance. Encourage a healthy work culture by offering flexible work arrangements, promoting work-life integration, and providing resources for stress management and employee well-being. A positive work environment boosts morale and motivation.

Remember, building and maintaining a motivating company culture requires ongoing effort and commitment. Regularly assess and adjust your practices to ensure they align with the needs and aspirations of your team members. By creating a culture that values and supports its employees, you will foster motivation and engagement among your team.

4. Know and share your vision

Learning how to inspire your team starts with learning that inspires you: You must discover your purpose before you can relate to others’ needs for fulfillment. What gets you to work every day? What is your ultimate goal for your business? Distill your purpose into a powerful vision statement and share it with your team. When everyone knows the deeper why behind going to work each day, leaders will be able to motivate their team effectively and give employees a clear-cut direction.

Learn how to develop the most in-demand skills for your future career!

Discover how you can acquire the most in-demand skills with our free report, and open the doors to a successful career. 

5. Lead by example

Sharing your vision isn’t enough – you must live your purpose every day. Great leaders can keep employees motivated and employees engaged by embodying the traits they want to see in their team: hard work, dedication, loyalty and more. Ways to motivate employees include discovering your values and bringing them to the table at work. Admit when you’re wrong and learn from your mistakes. You’ll inspire your team to do the same. Remember that a happy team is a productive team.

6. Develop your self-awareness

Leading by example is a great start, but you can dig deeper to motivate your employees. What are your strengths and weaknesses? Develop your self-awareness and learn about your natural leadership style which can assist in leadership development. When you better understand yourself, you can develop your skills and become a well-rounded leader who can switch styles to inspire a team or an individual employee in any circumstance.

7. Master communication

Strong leadership means that the best leaders have found ways to excel at reading nonverbal cues and using mirroring and pacing techniques to exert influence. Leaders should also be able to adapt to different and effective communication styles to motivate their employees by ensuring that said employees are understood. They’re always empathetic and open to new views, and they know how to use deep listening to listen to the answers and implement solutions. Often feeling heard is enough for team inspiration and will help motivate them to be the best version of themselves and through their actions they might motivate others independently of you.

8. Building rapport and trust

Building rapport and trust with your team members is essential for motivating them as a leader and this can be achieved by being you, meeting people halfway and being respectful to others. Creating those deeper connections is essential to intrinsic team motivation and is one of many ways to motivate a team. The benefits of authenticity go even further. When you’re transparent with your team, you’ll build trust in the workplace, earn respect, encourage productive work, and motivate people to excel. When your team respects you, they will be much more open to your suggestions and you'll find it easier to develop a productive work environment.

9. Use leverage

As a leader, leveraging certain strategies can help you motivate your team effectively. You can do this by; aligning goals with individual motivations, providing autonomy and decision-making power, offering rewards and incentives, providing growth opportunities, recognizing and applauding achievements, and fostering a positive and supportive environment.

Remember, effective motivation requires understanding your team members as individuals and leveraging strategies that resonate with them. Tailor your approach to their needs and preferences, and continuously assess and adapt your motivational strategies to ensure their effectiveness.

10. Give ownership

We’ve all been in situations where we've felt like we had no control. It’s the opposite of inspiring. Motivating a team means giving them total ownership of their tasks and can create a positive vibe. Empower your team by letting them collaborate and discuss ideas and opinions. One of the leadership tips is to let team members feel that they are empowered to take risks with unconventional tactics. Let them make big decisions – and feel consequences. A seat at the table inspires motivation.

Looking To Further Develop Your Leadership Skills?

Leadership skills are extremely important to excel in a career. However, other soft and hard skills are also needed.

Discover how you can acquire the most in-demand skills with our free report, and open the doors to a successful career.  Download the free report  today!

Why not also check out our  leadership and organization development course , which will give you skills need to be confident in leadership within an organization!

Great leadership is arguably the most important part of a company and its ability to succeed. Without a rudder the ship will veer off course and you'll find it difficult to make your employees feel motivated. To help leaders become better leaders and hone their skills to ensure that employees feel valued, there are tons of online courses that can be undertaken. Leadership training can teach you the skills you need to lead effectively, including the often-tricky skills needed to persuade and influence people – even those over whom you have little direct authority. Leadership training widens thinking abilities to help leaders think in innovative and creative ways and make employees feel motivated and inspired.

Thinking of going on a leadership course but don't quite know where to start?

A great place would be to attend online courses at a university such as Nexford that allows you to learn at your own pace and fit studies into your busy schedule. Besides MBA and BBA programs, Nexford offers two courses to help good leaders to become great leaders. The Leadership Management and Teams course , focuses on how to create a personal and shared vision and communicate effectively with teams, as a leader, a manager and a team member. On the other hand, the Leadership and Organizational Development course , examines individual and group interaction and helps learners gain a deeper understanding of how human behavior drives organizational behavior and development.

What is team motivation?

A motivated team is a team that gives its absolute best effort. It is a team that is characterized by many benefits, such as a high level of commitment, innovation, and energy in the workplace. As a result, it is a team that often works well together and thrives, meets goals, and achieves over the odds. Team motivation is recognizing a team member(s) for their individual progress on a project or task. Knowing how to motivate a team takes several skillsets, but experts agree that there are five major motivations that drive people's actions and improve their performance at work. They are; Achievement, Power, Affiliation, Security and Adventure.

Why can team motivation lack?

Boredom, stress, burnout, feeling overwhelmed, and a lack of clear goals can lead to a lack of motivation and make your team feel undervalued. Setting small, achievable goals, practicing self-care, changing your environment, and turning to others for inspiration can be great steps to motivate people again. The effects of poor motivation in the workplace are well-attested: higher employee turnover, lower levels of engagement, poor communication, and diminished productivity are just a few of the issues that may proliferate and lead to your workplace become a toxic environment. Before that happens, and it can take months to turn the ship around, make sure that you find the most effective ways to inspire and motivate your team. 

How do you motivate a team or individual that doesn’t care?

You can only inspire and motivate the team if they know what they are working towards. Make sure the whole team is aware of your vision and what your ultimate goals are for the business. Types of motivation used to motivate demotivated teams or individuals is to clearly and constantly communicate with your staff what is required of them, give positive feedback and reward success, and provide opportunities for development.

Why is it crucial that a leader knows effective team building strategies?

Effective team building strategies promote collaboration among team members. When individuals work well together, share ideas, and support each other, the team's overall performance improves. A leader who understands how to foster collaboration can create an environment where team members work synergistically towards shared goals. A leader's knowledge of effective team building strategies is crucial for several reasons; it enhances collaboration: increases productivity, encourages innovation and creativity, builds trust and camaraderie, helps manage conflicts and resolving issues, boosts morale, and helps retain top talent.

What’s are the pros of a motivated team? 

Having a motivated workforce has a range of advantages, such as lower levels of absenteeism , retention of workers and low levels of staff turnover, improved relations between management and workers, improved worker performance, improved quality and improved customer service. Every leader should strive to have a highly motivated workforce. A company that focuses on motivating its employees and enhancing the employee experience will see several benefits from doing so. These include, increased employee engagement, higher productivity and performance, greater levels of creativity and innovation, improved manager-employee relationships, a great company culture, and lower employee absenteeism and turnover.

What’s are the cons of an unmotivated team?

As well as the impact on an individual's productivity, a demotivated employee can also affect the overall team, creating a negative atmosphere. Additionally, with increased absenteeism or lateness at work and a lack of focus on daily tasks, other employees can become stressed when trying to pick up the slack. Over time, this can lead to further demotivation in the team, as colleagues feel overworked and under-appreciated.

Looking to potentially take your career even further? Consider how an  Online BBA  or  Online MBA  can help you develop these skills and increase your earning potential.

Mark is a college graduate with Honours in Copywriting. He is the Content Marketing Manager at Nexford, creating engaging, thought-provoking, and action-oriented content.

Join our newsletter and be the first to receive news about our programs, events and articles.

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

The impact of engaging leadership on employee engagement and team effectiveness: A longitudinal, multi-level study on the mediating role of personal- and team resources

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – original draft

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation Department of Education Studies, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy

Roles Conceptualization, Investigation, Project administration, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliations Research Unit Occupational & Organizational Psychology and Professional Learning, KU Leuven, Belgium, Department of Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

• Greta Mazzetti, 
• Wilmar B. Schaufeli

• Published: June 29, 2022
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269433
• Reader Comments

Most research on the effect of leadership behavior on employees’ well-being and organizational outcomes is based on leadership frameworks that are not rooted in sound psychological theories of motivation and are limited to either an individual or organizational levels of analysis. The current paper investigates whether individual and team resources explain the impact of engaging leadership on work engagement and team effectiveness, respectively. Data were collected at two time points on N = 1,048 employees nested within 90 work teams. The Multilevel Structural Equation Modeling results revealed that personal resources (i.e., optimism, resiliency, self-efficacy, and flexibility) partially mediated the impact of T1 individual perceptions of engaging leadership on T2 work engagement. Furthermore, joint perceptions of engaging leadership among team members at T1 resulted in greater team effectiveness at T2. This association was fully mediated by team resources (i.e., performance feedback, trust in management, communication, and participation in decision-making). Moreover, team resources had a significant cross-level effect on individual levels of engagement. In practical terms, training and supporting leaders who inspire, strengthen, and connect their subordinates could significantly improve employees’ motivation and involvement and enable teams to pursue their common goals successfully.

Citation: Mazzetti G, Schaufeli WB (2022) The impact of engaging leadership on employee engagement and team effectiveness: A longitudinal, multi-level study on the mediating role of personal- and team resources. PLoS ONE 17(6): e0269433. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269433

Editor: Ender Senel, Mugla Sitki Kocman University: Mugla Sitki Kocman Universitesi, TURKEY

Received: December 29, 2021; Accepted: May 23, 2022; Published: June 29, 2022

Copyright: © 2022 Mazzetti, Schaufeli. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: The data that support the findings of this study are available on Open Science Framework (OSF) website at the following link: https://osf.io/yfwgt/?view_only=c838730fd7694a0ba32882c666e9f973 . DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YFWGT .

Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

Multiple studies suggest that work engagement, which is defined as a positive, work-related state of mind characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption [ 1 ], is related to extremely positive outcomes, particularly in terms of employees’ well-being and job performance (for a narrative overview see [ 2 ]; for a meta-analysis see [ 3 ]).

Therefore, when work engagement is arguably beneficial for employees and organizations alike, the million-dollar question (quite literally, by the way) is: how can work engagement be increased? Schaufeli [ 4 ] has argued that operational leadership is critical for enhancing follower’s work engagement. Based on the logic of the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model [ 5 ], he reasoned that team leaders may (or may not) monitor, manage, and allocate job demands and resources to increase their follower’s levels of work engagement. In doing so, team leaders boost the motivational process that is postulated in the JD-R model. This process assumes that job resources and challenging job demands are inherently motivating and will lead to a positive, affective-motivational state of fulfillment in employees known as work engagement.

The current study focuses on a specific leadership style, dubbed engaging leadership and rooted in Self-Determination Theory (SDT) [ 6 ]. Engaging leaders inspire, strengthen, and connect their followers, thereby satisfying their basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness, respectively. In line with the motivational process of the JD-R model, cross-sectional evidence suggests that engaging leaders increase job resources [ 7 ] and personal resources [ 8 ], which, in their turn, are positively associated with work engagement. So far, the evidence for this mediation is exclusively based on cross-sectional studies. Hence, the first objective of our paper is to confirm the mediation effect of resources using a longitudinal design.

Scholars have emphasized that “the study of leadership is inherently multilevel in nature” (p. 4) [ 9 ]. This statement implies that, in addition to the individual level, the team level of analysis should also be included when investigating the impact of engaging leadership.

The current study makes two notable contributions to the literature. First, it investigates the impact, over time, of a novel, specific leadership style (i.e., engaging leadership) on team- and individual outcomes (i.e., team effectiveness and work engagement). Second, it investigates the mediating role of team resources and personal resources in an attempt to explain the impact of leadership on these outcomes. The research model, which is described in greater detail below, is displayed in Fig 1 .

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269433.g001

Leadership and work engagement

Leadership is defined as the way in which particular individuals–leaders–purposefully influence other individuals–their followers–to obtain defined outcomes [ 10 ].

A systematic narrative review identified twenty articles on leadership and work engagement [ 11 ] and showed that work engagement is positively associated with various person-centered leadership styles. The most pervasively used framework was transformational leadership, whereas authentic, ethical, and charismatic leadership was used much less. The authors conclude that "most of the reviewed studies were consistent in arguing that leadership is significantly correlated with and is affecting employee’s work engagement directly or via mediation” (p. 18) [ 11 ]. Moreover, they also conclude that research findings and inferences on leadership and engagement remain narrowly focused and inconclusive due to the lack of longitudinal designs addressing this issue. A recent meta-analysis [ 12 ] identified 69 studies and found substantial positive relationships of work engagement with ethical (k = 9; ρ = .58), transformational (k = 36; ρ = .46) and servant leadership (k = 3; ρ = .43), and somewhat less strong associations with authentic (k = 17; ρ = .38) and empowering leadership (k = 4; ρ = .35). Besides, job resources (e.g., job autonomy, social support), organizational resources (e.g., organizational identification, trust), and personal resources (self-efficacy, creativity) mediated the effect of leadership on work engagement. Although transformational leadership is arguably the most popular leadership concept of the last decades [ 13 ], the validity of its conceptual definition has been heavily criticized, even to the extent that some authors suggest getting “back to the drawing board” [ 14 ]. It should be noted that three main criticisms are voiced: (1) the theoretical definition of the transformational leadership dimensions is meager (i.e., how are the four dimensions selected and how do they combine?); (2) no causal model is specified (i.e., how is each dimension related to mediating processes and outcomes?); (3) the most frequently used measurement tools are invalid (i.e., they fail to reproduce the dimensional structure and do not show empirical distinctiveness from other leadership concepts). Hence, it could be argued that the transformational leadership framework is not very well suited for exploring the impact of leadership on work engagement.

Schaufeli [ 7 ] introduced the concept of engaging leadership , which is firmly rooted in Self-Determination Theory. According to Deci and Ryan [ 6 ], three innate psychological needs are essential ‘nutrients’ for individuals to function optimally, also at the workplace: the needs for autonomy (i.e., feeling in control), competence (i.e., feeling effective), and relatedness (i.e., feeling loved and cared for). Moreover, SDT posits that employees are likely to be engaged (i.e., internalize their tasks and show high degrees of energy, concentration, and persistence) to the degree that their needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness are satisfied [ 15 ]. This is in line with Bormann and Rowold [ 16 ]. Based on a systematic review on construct proliferation in leadership research, these authors recommended that leadership concepts should use SDT because this motivational theory allows a more parsimonious description of the mechanisms underlying leadership behaviors. These authors posited that the core of "narrow" leadership constructs "bases on a single pillar" (p. 163), and therefore predict narrow outcomes. In contrast to broad leadership constructs, the concept of engaging leadership is narrow because it focuses on leadership behaviors to explicitly promote work engagement.

Schaufeli [ 7 ] reasoned that leaders, who are instrumental in satisfying their followers’ basic needs, are likely to increase their engagement levels. More specifically, engaging leaders are supposed to: (1) inspire (e.g., by enthusing their followers for their vision and plans, and by making them feel that they contribute to something important); (2) strengthen (e.g., by granting their followers freedom and responsibility, and by delegating tasks); and (3) connect (e.g., by encouraging collaboration and by promoting a high team spirit among their followers). Hence, by inspiring, strengthening, and connecting their followers, leaders stimulate the fulfillment of their follower’s basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness, respectively, which, in turn, will foster work engagement.

The underlying mechanisms of the relationship between engaging leadership and work engagement are a major focus of research, as the construct of engaging leadership was built upon the identification of the leadership behaviors that are capable of stimulating positive outcomes by satisfying needs. The literature on engaging leadership provides empirical evidence for its indirect impact on followers’ engagement by fulfilling followers’ basic needs. This finding is consistent across occupational sectors and cultural contexts [ 17 – 19 ]. Further, the observation of a partial mediation effect for need satisfaction suggests the presence of a direct relationship between engaging leadership and engagement [ 20 , 21 ]. In their behaviors, engaging leaders are likely to improve their job characteristics to the point of stimulating greater engagement among their employees. This assumption has been corroborated by a recent longitudinal study that delved deeper into the association between engaging leadership and needs satisfaction [ 22 ]. That study found that the relationship between engaging leadership and basic needs satisfaction is mediated by enhanced levels of job resources (among them were improved feedback and skill use and better person-job fit). The fulfilment of those needs, in turn, resulted in higher levels of work engagement. Therefore, perceived job resources seem to play a crucial role in the causal relationship between engaging leadership and basic needs satisfaction. This evidence found support in a later two-wave full panel design with a 1-year time lag, where engaging leadership promoted employees’ perception of autonomy and social support from colleagues [ 23 ]. In addition, a recent study by Van Tuin and colleagues [ 24 ] revealed that engaging leadership is associated with increased perceptions of intrinsic organizational values (e.g., providing a contribution to organizational and personal development) and satisfaction of the need for autonomy which, in turn, may boost employees’ level of engagement.

A recent study investigated the ways in which engaging leadership could boost the effects of human resource (HR) practices for promoting employees’ psychological, physical, and social well-being over time [ 25 ]. Teams led by an engaging leader reported higher levels of happiness at work and trust in leadership, combined with lower levels of burnout than their colleagues who were led by poorly engaging leaders. Happiness and trust played a key role in improving team member performance. These findings indicate that engaged leaders provide a thoughtful implementation of HR practices focused on promoting employee well-being, being constantly driven by their employees’ flourishing.

Another line of studies may reveal the causality between engaging leadership and work-related outcomes. A multilevel longitudinal study provided cross-level and team-level effects of engaging leadership [ 26 ]. Engaging leadership at T1 explained team learning, innovation, and individual performance through increased teamwork engagement at T2. Interventions targeting engaging leadership created positive work outcomes for leaders (e.g., autonomy satisfaction and intrinsic motivation) and decreased employee absenteeism [ 27 ]. However, cross-lagged longitudinal analyses indicate that employees’ current level of work engagement predicts their leaders’ level of engaging leadership rather than the other way around [ 23 ]. These findings imply that the relationship between engaging leadership and work engagement cannot be narrowed to a simple unidirectional causal relationship but rather exhibits a dynamic nature, where engaging leadership and work engagement mutually influence each other. The dynamic nature of engaging leadership has also been investigated through a diary study. The results suggest that employees enacted job crafting strategies more frequently on days when leaders were more successful in satisfying their need for connectivity [ 28 ]. Hence, leaders who satisfy the need for connectedness among their followers will not only encourage higher levels of engagement among their followers but also an increased ability to proactively adapt tasks to their interests and preferences.

Since transformational leadership is currently the most frequently studied leadership style, a summary of the similarities and differences in the proposed new conceptualization of leadership proposed (i.e., engaging leadership) must be provided.

A key difference between transformational and engaging leadership originates from their foundation. Whereas transformational leadership is primarily a change-oriented style, engaging leadership encourages employees’ well-being through the promotion of supportive relationships and is defined as a relationship-oriented leadership style [ 29 ].

Further similarities entail the combination of behaviors meant to foster employees’ well-being and growth. Transformational leaders act as role models admired and emulated by followers (idealized influence), encourage a reconsideration of prevailing assumptions and work practices to promote stronger innovation (intellectual stimulation), identify and build on the unique characteristics and strengths of each follower (individualized consideration), and provides a stimulating view of the future and meaning of their work (inspirational motivation) [ 30 ]. A considerable resemblance involves the dimensions of inspirational motivation and inspiring, which are, respectively, included in transformational and engaging leadership. They both entail recognizing the leader as a guiding light to a specific mission and vision, where individual inputs are credited as essential ingredients in achieving the shared goal. Thus, they both fulfill the individual need for meaningfulness. In a similar vein, transformational and engaged leaders are both committed to promote followers’ growth in terms of innovation and creativity. In other words, the intellectual stimulation offered by transformational leadership and the strengthening component of engaging leadership are both aimed at meeting the need for competence among followers.

Alternatively, it is also possible to detect decisive differences between the dimensions underlying these leadership styles. Transformational leadership entails the provision of personal mentorship (i.e., individualized consideration), while engaging leadership is primarily focused on enhancing the interdependence and cohesion among team members (i.e., team consideration). Furthermore, engaging leadership disregards the notion of idealized influence covered by transformational leadership: an engaging leader is not merely identified as a model whose behavior is admired and mirrored, but rather proactively meets followers’ need for autonomy through the allocation of tasks and responsibilities.

Empirical results lent further support to the distinctiveness between transformational and engaging leadership. The analysis of the factor structure of both constructs revealed that measures of engaging and transformational leadership load on separate dimensions instead of being explained by a single latent factor [ 31 ]. More recently, additional research findings pointed out that engaging and transformational leadership independently account for comparable portions of variance in work engagement [ 32 ]. However, this does not alter the fact that a certain overlap exists between both leadership concepts; thus, it is not surprising that a consistent, positive relationship is found between transformational leadership and work engagement [ 11 ].

In sum: a positive link appears to exist between person-centered leadership styles and work engagement. Moreover, this relationship seems to be mediated by (job and personal) resources. However, virtually all studies used cross-sectional designs, and the causal direction remains unclear. We followed the call to go back to the drawing board by choosing an alternative, deductive approach by introducing the theory-grounded concept of engaging leadership and investigate its impact on individual and team outcomes (see Fig 1 ).

Engaging leadership, personal resources, and employee engagement (individual level)

Serrano and Reichard [ 33 ], who posit that leaders may pursue four pathways to increase their follower’s work engagement: (1) design meaningful and motivating work; (2) support and coach their employees; (3 ) facilitate rewarding and supportive coworker relations, and (4) enhancing personal resources. In the present study, we focus on the fourth pathway. Accordingly, a cross-sectional study using structural equation modeling [ 8 ] showed that psychological capital (i.e., self-efficacy, optimism, resiliency, and flexibility) fully mediated the relationship between perceived engaging leadership and follower’s work engagement. Consistent with findings on job resources, this study indicated that personal resources also mediate the relationship between engaging leadership and work engagement. In a nutshel, when employees feel autonomous, competent, and connected to their colleagues, their own personal resources benefit, and this fuels their level of engagement.

In the current study, we use the same conceptualization of psychological capital (PsyCap) as Schaufeli [ 7 , 8 ], which slightly differs from the original concept. Originally, PsyCap was defined as a higher-order construct that is based on the shared commonalities of four first-order personal resources: “(1) having confidence (self-efficacy) to take on and put in the necessary effort to succeed at challenging tasks; (2) making a positive attribution (optimism) about succeeding now and in the future; (3) persevering toward goals and, when necessary, redirecting paths to goals (hope) to succeed; and (4) when beset by problems and adversity, sustaining and bouncing back and even beyond (resiliency) to attain success” (p. 10) [ 34 ]. Instead of hope, flexibility is included; that is, the capability of employees to adapt to new, different, and changing requirements at work. Previous research showed a high correlation ( r > .70) between hope and optimism, thus increasing the risk of multicollinearity [ 35 ]. This strong relationship points at conceptual overlap: hope is defined as the perception that goals can be set and achieved, whereas optimism is the belief that one will experience good outcomes. Hence, trust in achieving goals (hope) implies optimism. Additionally, hope includes "when necessary, redirecting paths to goals", which refers to flexibility. Finally, in organizational practice, the flexibility of employees is considered an essential resource because organizations are continuously changing, which requires permanent adaption and hence employee flexibility. In short, there are psychometric, conceptual, and pragmatic arguments for replacing hope by flexibility.

According to Luthans and colleagues [ 36 ], PsyCap is a state-like resource representing an employee’s motivational propensity and perseverance towards goals. PsyCap is malleable and open to development, thus it can be enhanced through positive leadership [ 37 ]. Indeed, it was found that transformational leadership enhances PsyCap, which, in turn, increases in-role performance and organizational citizenship behavior [ 38 ]. In a similar vein, PsyCap mediates the relationships between authentic leadership and employee’s creative behavior [ 39 ].

We argue that engaging leadership may promote PsyCap as well. After all, by inspiring followers with a clear, powerful and compelling vision, engaging leaders: (1) create the belief in their ability to perform tasks that tie in with that vision successfully, thereby fostering follower’s self-efficacy ; (2) generate a positive appraisal of the future, thereby fostering follower’s optimism ; (3) trigger the ability to bounce back from adversity because a favorable future is within reach, thereby fostering follower’s resiliency ; (4) set goals and induce the belief that these can be achieved, if necessary by redirecting paths to those goals, thereby fostering follower’s flexibility [ 38 ].

Furthermore, engaging leaders strengthen their followers and unleash their potential by setting challenging goals. This helps to build followers’ confidence in task-specific skills, thereby increasing their self-efficacy levels, mainly via mastery experiences that occur after challenging goals have been achieved [ 40 ]. Setting high-performance expectations also elevates follower’s sense of self-worth, thereby leading to a positive appraisal of their current and future circumstances (i.e., optimism ). Moreover, a strengthening leader acts as a powerful contextual resource that augments followers’ self-confidence and, hence, increases their ability to bounce back from adversity (i.e., resiliency ) and adapt to changing requirements at work (i.e., flexibility ).

Finally, by connecting their followers, engaging leaders promote good interpersonal relationships and build a supportive team climate characterized by collaboration and psychological safety. Connecting leaders also foster commitment to team goals by inducing a sense of purpose, which energizes team members to contribute toward the same, shared goal. This means that in tightly knit, supportive and collaborative teams, followers: (1) experience positive emotions when team goals are met, which, in turn, fosters their level of self-efficacy [ 40 ]; (2) feel valued and acknowledged by others, which increases their self-worth and promotes a positive and optimistic outlook; (3) can draw upon their colleagues for help and support, which enables to face problems and adversities with resiliency ; (4) can use the abilities, skills, and knowledge of their teammates to adapt to changing job and team requirements (i.e., flexibility ).

In sum, when perceived as such by followers, engaging leadership acts as a sturdy contextual condition that enhances their PsyCap. We continue to argue that, in its turn, high levels of PsyCap are predictive for work engagement; or in other words, PsyCap mediates the relationship between engaging leadership and work engagement.

How to explain the relationship between PsyCap and work engagement? Sweetman and Luthans [ 41 ] presented a conceptual model, which relates PsyCap to work engagement through positive emotions. They argue that all four elements of PsyCap may have a direct and state-like relationship with each of the three dimensions of work engagement (vigor, dedication, and absorption). Furthermore, an upward spiral of PsyCap and work engagement may be a source of positive emotion and subsequently broaden an employee’s growth mindset, leading to higher energy and engagement [ 42 , 43 ]. In short, PsyCap prompts and maintains a motivational process that leads to higher work engagement and may ultimately result in positive outcomes, such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment [ 44 ].

Psychological capital is a valuable resource to individuals [ 45 ] that fosters work engagement, as demonstrated in past research [ 46 ]. Hence, following the reasoning above, we formulate the following hypothesis:

• Hypothesis 1: Psychological capital (self-efficacy , optimism , resiliency , and flexibility) mediates the relationship between T1 employee’s perceptions of engaging leadership and T2 work engagement .

Engaging leadership, team resources, and work team effectiveness (team level)

So far, we focused on individual-level mediation, but an equivalent mediation process is expected at the aggregated team level as well. We assume that leaders display a comparable leadership style toward the entire team, resulting in a similar relationship with each of the team members. This model of leader-follower interactions is known as the average leadership style (ALS) [ 47 ]. This means that homogeneous leader-follower interactions exist within teams, but relationships of leaders with followers may differ between teams. The relationships between leadership and team effectiveness might be based on an analogous, team-based ALS-approach as well [ 48 ]. Following this lead, we posit that team members share their perceptions of engaging leadership, while this shared perception differs across teams. Moreover, we assume that these shared perceptions are positively related to team effectiveness.

An essential role for leaders is to build team resources, which motivate team members and enable them to perform. Indeed, the influence of leader behaviors on team mediators and outcomes has been extensively documented [ 49 , 50 ].

Most studies use the heuristic input-process-output (IPO) framework [ 51 ] to explain the relationship between leadership (input) and team effectiveness (output), whereby the intermediate processes describe how team inputs are transformed into outputs. It is widely acknowledged that two types of team processes play a significant role: “taskwork” (i.e., functions that team members must perform to achieve the team’s task) and “teamwork” (i.e., the interaction between team members, necessary to achieve the team’s task). Taskwork is encouraged by task-oriented leadership behaviors that focus on task accomplishment. In contrast, teamwork is encouraged by person-oriented leadership behaviors that focus on developing team members and promoting interactions between them [ 49 ]. The current paper focuses on teamwork and person-oriented (i.e., engaging) leadership.

Collectively, team resources such as performance feedback, trust in management, communication between team members, and participation in decision-making constitute a supportive team climate that is conducive for employee growth and development, and hence fosters team effectiveness, as well as individual work engagement. This also meshes with Serrano and Reichard [ 33 ], who argue that for employees to flourish, leaders should design meaningful and motivating work (e.g., through feedback and participation in decision making) and facilitate rewarding and supportive coworker relations (e.g., through communication and trust in management).

To date, engaging leadership has not been studied at the team level and concerning team resources and team effectiveness. How should the association between engaging leadership and team resources be conceived? By strengthening, engaging leaders provide their team members with performance feedback; by inspiring, they grant their team members participate in decision making; and by connecting, they foster communication between team members and install trust. Please note that team resources refer to shared, individual perceptions of team members, which are indicated by within-team consensus. Therefore, taken as a whole, the team-level resources that are included in the present study constitute a supportive team climate that is characterized by receiving feedback, trust in management, communication amongst team members, and participating in decision-making. We have seen above that engaging leaders foster team resources, but how are these resources, in their turn, related to team effectiveness?

The multi-goal, multi-level model of feedback effects of DeShon and colleagues [ 52 ] posits that individual and team regulatory processes govern the allocation of effort invested in achieving individual and team goals, resulting in individual and team effectiveness. We posit that the shared experience of receiving the team leader’s feedback prompts team members to invest efforts in achieving team tasks, presumably through team regulatory processes, as postulated in the multi-goal, multi-level model.

Trust has been defined as: “the willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the actions of another party based on the expectation that the other party will perform a particular action to the trustor, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other party” (p. 712) [ 53 ]. Using a multilevel mediation model, Braun and colleagues [ 54 ] showed that trust mediates the relationship between transformational leadership and performance at the team level. They reasoned that transformational leaders take into account a team member’s needs, goals, and interests, making them more willing to be vulnerable to their supervisor. This would apply even more for engaging leaders, which is defined in terms of satisfying basic follower’s needs. It is plausible that a team’s shared trust in its leader enhances the trust of team members in each other. That means that team members interact and communicate trustfully and rely on each other’s abilities, which, in turn, is conducive for team effectiveness [ 55 ].

Communication is a crucial element of effective teamwork [ 56 ]. Team members must exchange information to ascertain other members’ competence and intentions, and they must engage in communication to develop a strategy and plan their work. Several studies have shown that effectively gathering and exchanging information is essential for team effectiveness [ 57 , 58 ]. Furthermore, participation in decision-making is defined as joint decision-making [ 59 ] and involves sharing influence between team leaders and team members. By participating in decision-making, team members create work situations that are more favorable to their effectiveness. Team members utilize participating in decision-making for achieving what they desire for themselves and their team. Generally speaking, shared mental models are defined as organized knowledge structures that allow employees to interact successfully with their environment, and therefore lead to superior team performance [ 60 ]. That is, team members with a shared mental model about decision-making are ‘in sync’ and will easily coordinate their actions, whereas the absence of a shared mental model will result in process loss and ineffective team processes.

Taken together and based on the previous reasoning, we formulate the second hypothesis as follows:

• Hypothesis 2: Team resources (performance feedback , trust in management , team communication , and participation in decision-making) mediate the relationship between T1 team member’s shared perceptions of engaging leadership and T2 team effectiveness .

Engaging leadership, team resources, and work engagement (cross-level)

Engaging leaders build team resources (see above). Or put differently, the team member’s shared perceptions of engaging leadership are positively related to team resources. Besides, we also assume that these team resources positively impact work engagement at the individual level. A plethora of research has shown that various job resources are positively related to work engagement, including feedback, trust, communication, and participation in decision- making (for a narrative overview see [ 61 ]; for a meta-analysis see [ 62 , 63 ]). Most research that found this positive relationship between job resources and work engagement used the Job-Demands Resources model [ 5 ] that assumes that job resources are inherently motivating because they enhance personal growth and development and are instrumental in achieving work goals. Typically, these resources are assessed as perceived by the individual employee. Yet, as we have seen above, perceptions of resources might also be shared amongst team members. It is plausible that these shared resources, which collectively constitute a supportive, collaborative team climate, positively impact employee’s individual work engagement. Teams that receive feedback, have trust in management, whose members amply interact and communicate, and participate in decision-making are likely to produce work engagement. This reasoning agrees with Schaufeli [ 64 ], who showed that organizational growth climate is positively associated with work engagement, also after controlling for personality. When employee growth is deemed relevant by the organization this is likely to translate, via engaging leaders, into a supportive team environment, which provides feedback, trust, communication, and participative decision-making. Hence, we formulate:

• Hypothesis 3: Team resources (performance feedback , trust in management , team communication , and participation in decision-making) mediate the relationship between team shared perceptions of engaging leadership at T1 and individual team member’s work engagement at T2 .

Sample and procedure

In collaboration with the HR department, data were collected among all employees of a business unit of a large Dutch public service agency. This agency is responsible for the administration of unemployment benefits and work incapacitation claims, as well as for the rehabilitation and return to work of unemployed and incapacitated employees. A one-year time-lagged design was applied to minimize the likelihood of common method variance effects and to explore causal relationships among the study variables [ 65 ]. The questionnaire included a cover letter reporting the aims and contents of the study. The letter also stated that participation in the study was completely voluntary, and that one can withdraw from the study at any time without having to give explanations and without this involving any disadvantage or prejudice. Participants’ consent was concluded by conduct, through ticking the consent checkbox as a prerequisite to access the questionnaire. This research was conducted in 2015, thus before the publication of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and complied with the latest version of the Declaration of Helsinki. Thus, ethics approval was not compulsory, as per applicable institutional and national Dutch guidelines. Additionally, the current study did not involve any treatment, medical diagnostics, or procedures generating psychological or social discomfort among participants.

In the first survey at Time 1 ( N = 2,304; response rate 63%), employees were asked about their socio-demographic background, engaging leadership, team resources (i.e., performance feedback, trust in management, communication, and participation in decision-making), team effectiveness, personal resources (i.e., resiliency, optimism, and flexibility), and work engagement. At Time 2 ( N = 2,183; response rate 51%), participants filled out the same survey, which included an additional self-efficacy scale. At both measurement points, participants received an email from the HR department containing a link that allowed them to fill out the online survey. This introductory email provided background information about the study’s general aim and guaranteed that participants’ responses would be treated confidentiality. A sample of N = 1,048 employees filled out the questionnaire twice, with an interval of one year between T1 and T2.

The estimation of multilevel models with at least 50 teams of at least 5 members per group is strongly recommended to avoid underestimating standard errors and variances for random effects [ 66 , 67 ]. Therefore, participants being part of teams with less than 5 employees were excluded from the analyses. Accordingly, the data of 1,048 participants, who completed both questionnaires, could be linked and constitute the current study sample. Employees were nested within 90 work teams, with an average of 13.7 ( SD = 5.72) employees per team. Slightly more women (51.8%) as men were included (48.2%), the average age of the sample was 49.70 years ( SD = 7.46), and the mean organization tenure was 12.02 years ( SD = 9.56).

All measures described below were rated using five-point scales that either ranged from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5), or from never (1) to always (5). The internal consistencies (Cronbach’s α) of the measures are displayed on the diagonal of Table 2 .

Engaging Leadership was measured using a scale developed by Schaufeli [ 64 ] including nine items. This questionnaire contains three subscales of three items each: Inspiring, Strengthening, and Connecting. Sample items are: “My supervisor is able to enthuse others for his/her plans” (inspiring); “My supervisor delegates tasks and responsibilities” (strengthening); and “My supervisor encourages team members to cooperate” (connecting).

Individual-level measures.

Optimism was measured with three items from the Optimism scale of the PsyCap Questionnaire developed by Luthans and colleagues [ 36 ], which is aimed at assessing employees’ expectations about future success at work because of a positive view of their job. A sample item is: “I always look on the bright side of things regarding my job”.

Resiliency was assessed using three items from the Resiliency scale of the PsyCap Questionnaire [ 36 ]. These items refer to employees’ beliefs about their ability to recover from uncertainty and failure and to react successfully to setbacks that can occur at work. A sample item is: "I usually take stressful things at work in stride”.

Self-efficacy referred to the perceived capability to efficiently plan and implement courses of action required to attain a specific work goal and was measured using three items from Mazzetti, Schaufeli, and Guglielmi [ 68 ]. A sample item is: "At work, I reach my goal even when unexpected situations arise".

Flexibility refers to the individual ability to adapt to changes in the workplace and to modify one’s schedules and plans to meet job requirements. It was assessed by using three items: "If the job requires, I am willing to change my schedule”; “I do not have problems changing the way I work” and “I adapt easily to changes at work”.

Work engagement was assessed using a three-item scale developed by Schaufeli and colleagues [ 69 ]. This ultra-short version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale has similar psychometric properties as the nine-item version. A sample item is: "At my work, I feel bursting with energy”.

Team-level measures.

Performance feedback was assessed by the three-item scale from the Questionnaire on the Experience and Evaluation of Work (QEEW) [ 70 ]. A sample item is: “Do you get enough information about the result of your work?”.

Trust in Management of team members was assessed using two items from Schaufeli [ 7 ]: “I trust the way my organization is managed”, and “I have confidence in my immediate supervisor”. Following the recommendations from Eisinga and colleagues [ 71 ] we computed the Spearman-Brown coefficient, since it represents the most appropriate reliability coefficient for a two-item scale ( r s = .43, p < .001).

Communication , meaning the perception of an efficient and prompt circulation of information at the team level was measured using the three-item Communication scale taken from the QEEW [ 70 ]. A sample item is: "I am sufficiently informed about the developments within my team”.

Participation in decision-making was measured by a single item (i.e., “Can you participate in decision making about work-related issues?”) from the QEEW [ 70 ].

Team effectiveness . The team-level criterion variable was assessed with a three-item scale [ 8 ]. A sample item is: “Do you cooperate effectively with others in your team?”.

In order to check for systematic dropout, the social-demographic background, as well as the scores on the study variables were compared of those employees in the panel who filled out the questionnaire twice at T1 and T2 ( N = 1,142) and those who dropped out and filled out the questionnaire only once at T1 ( N = 1,161). It appeared that compared to the group who dropped out, the panel group was slightly younger (t (2301) = -2.21; p < .05) and had less organizational tenure (t (2301) = -4.05; p < .001). No gender differences were observed between both groups (χ 2 = .88; n . s .). A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) that included all study variables revealed a significant between-groups effect: F (12,2291) = 3.54, p < .001. Subsequent univariate tests showed that compared to the dropouts, the panel group scored higher on inspiring (F (1,2302) = 14.90, p < .001), strengthening (F (1,2302) = 9.39, p < .01), and connecting leadership (F (1,2302) = 14.90, p < .05), as well as on optimism (F (1,2302) = 5.59, p < .05), flexibility (F (1,2302) = 12.56, p < .001), work engagement (F (1,2302) = 9.16, p < .05), performance feedback (F (1,2302) = 11.68, p < .01), and participation in decision making (F (1,2302) = 8.83, p < .05). No significant differences were found for resiliency, trust in management, communication, and team effectiveness.

It seems that, taken together, the panel group is slightly younger and less tenured, and scores more favorable than the dropouts on most study variables. However, the differences between both groups are relatively small and vary between 0 and .13 on a 5-point scale. Therefore, it is not likely that systematic dropout has influenced the results of the current study.

Control variables.

At the individual level, we controlled for the potential confounding effects of gender, age, and tenure by including these variables as covariates in our analyses. More specifically, the impact of age was controlled for because previous research suggested that older employees report higher levels of personal resources [ 72 ] and work engagement [ 73 ]. Gender was also included as a control variable because previous research suggested that compared to women, men score lower on work engagement [ 74 ] and higher on personal resources, such as optimism and self-efficacy [ 75 ]. Finally, previous investigations also revealed that job tenure may affect employees’ level and stability of work engagement, with tenured employees reporting higher and more stable levels of work engagement compared to newcomers [ 76 ]. Besides, Barbier and colleagues [ 77 ] suggested that job tenure might affect employees’ personal resources (i.e., self-esteem and optimism). Considering this empirical evidence, job tenure was also included as a covariate in our model.

Data aggregation.

Our research model includes the three dimensions of engaging leadership (i.e., inspiring, strengthening, and connecting) three team resources (i.e., performance feedback, trust in management, communication and participation in decision-making), and one outcome (i.e., team effectiveness) at the team level of analysis. To check the reliability and validity of aggregated scores at the team level, four indices were computed [ 78 ]: (1) ICC [1] , which indicates the proportion of variance in ratings due to team membership; (2) ICC [2] , representing the reliability of between-groups differences; (3) r wg(j) , that measures the level of agreement within work teams; (4) deff , that measures the effect of independence violations on the estimation of standard errors through the formula 1+(average cluster size-1)*ICC [ 79 ]. Generally speaking, values greater than .05 for ICC [1] [ 80 ] and .40 for ICC [2] [ 81 ] an r wg(j) higher than .70, and a deff- index exceeding 2 are considered a prerequisite for aggregating data [ 78 ]. Moreover, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to explore whether participants’ scores on the Level 2 constructs differed significantly among work teams. The results of the aggregation tests are displayed in Table 1 . Taken together, these results justify the aggregation of the team-level variables.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269433.t001

Strategy of analysis

To test our hypotheses, a multilevel structural equation modeling (MSEM) was tested using the Mplus 7 statistical modeling software [ 82 ]. The application of this procedure allows the inclusion of latent variables that take measurement errors into account and permits the simultaneous estimation of mediation effects at the individual and team levels; therefore, it is superior to stepwise approaches [ 83 ]. As suggested by Zhang and colleagues [ 84 ], predictors at the individual level (i.e., engaging leadership dimensions and personal resources) were team-mean centered using a centering within context – CWC approach [ 85 ]. This procedure was aimed at preventing the confounding effect of mediation within and between work teams. In other words, predictors at the individual level for subject i were centered around the mean of the cluster j to which case i belongs (i.e., predictor ij —M predictor j ). Accordingly, the latent engaging leadership factor at within-level was indicated by the CWC means of the three dimensions of engaging leadership (i.e., inspiring cwc , strengthening cwc , and connecting cwc ) at T1. In a similar vein, personal resources were included as a latent variable indicated by the observed levels of optimism cwc , reisliency cwc , self-efficacy cwc , and flexibility cwc at T2. Finally, T2 work engagement was included as an observed variable equal to the mean score of the corresponding scale. As previously stated, gender, age, and organizational tenure were included as covariates at the individual level of the MSEM model.

At the team level, the latent measure of engaging leadership at T1 was assessed through the observed scores on the three dimensions of inspiring, strengthening, and connecting leadership. T2 team resources were modeled as a single latent factor indicated by the observed scores on performance feedback, trust in management, communication, and participation in decision-making. The observed mean score on T2 team effectiveness was modeled as the team level criterion variable.

At the individual level, the mediation was tested by considering path a , from T1 individual perceptions of engaging leadership (X) to T2 personal resources (M) and path b , from T2 personal resources to T2 work engagement (Y), controlling for X → Y. At the team level, the same procedure was applied considering path c , linking team perceptions of T1 engaging leadership (X) and T2 team resources (M) and path d , from T2 team resources to T2 team effectiveness (Y).

The individual and team-level perceptions of engaging leadership were assessed at T1. In contrast, the mediating variables (i.e., psychological capital and team resources), and the outcomes (i.e., work engagement and team effectiveness) were measured at T2.

Preliminary analysis

Before testing our hypotheses, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed using the maximum likelihood method of estimation using the software package AMOS 21.0 [ 86 ]. This preliminary analysis was aimed at assessing redundancy between the constructs under investigation. For the team level, engaging leadership was included as a latent factor indicated by the observed team levels of inspiring, strengthening, and connecting leadership dimensions. The measured performance feedback levels indicated the latent team resources factor, trust in management, communication, and participation in decision-making. Team effectiveness, assessed as a criterion variable at the team level, was indicated by a single corresponding item. At the individual level, the group-mean centered scores on inspiring, strengthening, and connecting dimensions were considered indicators of the latent engaging leadership factor. Besides, optimism, resiliency, self-efficacy, and flexibility were included as indicators for the single personal resources latent factor; the observed average score on work engagement was used for assessing the corresponding latent variable. The model fit was assessed by considering the comparative fit index (CFI) and Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) ≥ .95, Root-Mean-Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) ≤ .06, and Standardized Root-Mean-Square Residual (SRMR) ≤ .08 [ 87 , 88 ]. According to these criteria, the hypothesized measurement model showed a good fit to the data, with χ 2 (91) = 465.09, CFI = .96, TLI = .95, RMSEA = .06, and SRMR = .03. Moreover, all indicators showed significant factor loadings on their respective latent factors ( p < .001) with λ values ranging from .51 to .95, thus exceeding the commonly accepted criterion of .50 [ 89 ]. Hence, these results support the assumption that the study variables were non-redundant and adequately distinct from each other.

Model testing

The means, standard deviations, correlations, and internal consistencies for all study variables are displayed in Table 2 . As expected, the constructs under investigation showed significant relationships in the hypothesized direction.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269433.t002

The hypothesized MSEM showed a good fit to data: χ 2 (60) = 155.38, CFI = .97, TLI = .96, RMSEA = .04, SRMR = 0.03 (within teams) and .08 (between teams). As displayed in Fig 2 , at the individual level the three indicators of engaging leadership loaded significantly on their intended latent factor, with λ = .83 ( p = .000, 95% CI = [.79, .87]) for inspiring, λ = .77 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [.73, .81]) for strengthening, and λ = .81 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [.78, .85]) for connecting. Similarly, the standardized factor loadings for the indicators of personal resources were all significant as well: λ = .74 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [.68, .79]) for optimism, λ = .68 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [.63, .72]) for resiliency λ = .68 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [.62, .74]) for self-efficacy, and λ = .64 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [.59, .69]) for flexibility.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269433.g002

The direct relationship between T1 engaging leadership and T2 work engagement was significant β = .16 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [.10, .22]). Moreover, results indicated that engaging leadership at T1 had a positive impact on personal resources at T2: γ = .27 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [.18, .37]). T2 personal resources, in turn, were positively associated with T2 work engagement: β = .55 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [.49, .62]). The estimated indirect effect of T1 engaging leadership on T2 work engagement via personal resources (i.e., a*b) was statistically significant: B (SE) = .19 (.04), p < .001, 95% CI [.11, .27]. Hence, personal resources (i.e., optimism, resiliency, self-efficacy, and flexibility) at T2 partially mediated the impact of T1 engaging leadership on employees’ engagement within work teams at T2. These findings provide partial support for Hypothesis 1 . Among the covariates included at the individual level, only gender and age showed a significant association with work engagement, with γ = -.10 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [-.15, -.05]) and γ = .10 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [.04, .16]), respectively.

At the team level, all factor loadings for the three indicators of engaging leadership on their corresponding latent variable were significant: λ = .95 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [.93, .99]) for inspiring, λ = .86 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [.80, .91]) for strengthening, and λ = .94 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [.90, .97]) for connecting. Additionally, the observed measure of each team resource loaded significantly on its intended latent variable: λ = .69 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [.56, .82]) for performance feedback, λ = .86 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [.78, .94]) for trust in management, λ = .89 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [.81, .97]) for communication, and λ = .71 ( p = .000, 95% CI = [.60, .82]) for participation in decision-making. Moreover, engaging leadership at T1 had a nonsignificant direct impact on team effectiveness at T2, with β = -.06 ( p = .641, 95% CI = [-.30, .19]). In contrast, team perception of engaging leadership at T1 had a positive impact on team resources at T2: γ = .59 ( p < .001, 95% CI = [.42, .75]). Team resources at T2 were, in turn, positively related to T2 team effectiveness, β = .38 ( p = .003, 95% CI = [.13, .62]). These results suggest full mediation and were supported by the estimation of the indirect effect of T1 engaging leadership on T2 team effectiveness via team resources at T2 (i.e., c*d): B (SE) = .18 (.07), p = .013, 95% CI [.04, .32]. Thus, Hypothesis 2 was fully supported.

Hence, in the current study team resources at T2 (i.e., performance feedback, trust in management, communication, and participation in decision-making) fully mediated the effect of T1 engaging leadership on T2 team effectiveness across different work teams. Moreover, T2 team resources (i.e., performance feedback, trust in management, team communication, and participation in decision-making) showed a significant cross-level effect on T2 individual team member’s level of engagement: β = .57 (p < .001, 195% CI = [.27, .87]). This result provided evidence for Hypothesis 3 .

The current study aimed to explore the role of individual and collective perceptions of engaging leadership in predicting team effectivity and work engagement. To this purpose, we developed a two-level research model using a two time-point design.

Main results

At the individual level, the obtained results suggest that psychological capital (i.e., the combination of self-efficacy, optimism, resiliency, and flexibility) partly mediated the longitudinal relationship between employees’ perceptions of engaging leadership and their levels of work engagement. In other words, team leaders perceived as inspiring, strengthening, and connecting could enhance their followers’ engagement directly and indirectly through an increase in psychological capital. Thus, engaging leaders could make their followers feel more optimistic, resilient, self-efficacious, and flexible. At the team level, a shared perception of engaging leadership was associated with a greater pool of team resources (i.e., performance feedback, trust in management, communication, and participation in decision-making), which contribute to define an open and supportive team climate that is conducive for employee growth and development. In their turn, these collective resources were positively related to the perceived effectiveness of work teams.

Hence, team resources at the team level fully mediated the relationship between engaging leadership and team effectiveness. That means that teams in which the leader is considered to be inspiring, strengthening, and connecting can draw upon more team resources, and could feel, in turn, more effective. Simultaneously, a significant cross-level mediation effect was found for team resources, meaning that they mediate the relationship between engaging leadership at team level and individual level work engagement. In other words, teams with engaging leaders are not only more effective at the team level, but they also report higher levels of work engagement among their members. These leaders create a team climate that fosters employee growth and development by providing performance feedback, installing trust, and stimulating communication and participation in decision-making.

Three different contributions.

Thus, three major conclusions can be drawn for the current study, which signifies its contribution to the literature. First, engaging leadership can be considered an individual-level construct (i.e., the perception of particular leadership behaviors by individual followers) and a collective, team-level construct (i.e., the shared perception of specific leadership behaviors among team members). As far as the latter is concerned, our results support the notion of an average leadership style (ALS) [ 47 ]; namely, that homogeneous leader-follower interactions exist within teams, but relationships of leaders with followers differ between teams.

Secondly, Individual-level engaging leadership predicts individual work engagement through increasing follower’s PsyCap. Previous research suggested a positive relationship between person-focused leadership styles and follower’s work engagement, albeit that virtually all studies were cross-sectional in nature (for an overview see [ 11 , 33 ]). Our study added longitudinal evidence for that relationship and hinted at an underlying psychological process by suggesting that psychological capital might play a mediating role. As such, the current study corroborates and extends a previous cross-sectional study that obtained similar results [ 8 ]. However, it should be noted that the present study used a slightly different operationalization of PsyCap as is usually employed [ 36 ]. In addition to the three core elements of optimism, resiliency, and self-efficacy, flexibility instead of hope was used as a constituting fourth element of PsyCap. The reason was that hope and optimism overlap both theoretically as well as empirically [ 35 ] and that flexibility–defined as the ability to readapt, divert from unsuccessful paths, and tackle unpredictable conditions that hinder employees’ goal attainment [ 8 ]–was deemed particularly relevant for public service agencies that are plagued by red tape. Our results indicate that engaging leaders strengthen followers’ sense of proficiency when developing a task-specific skill to reach challenging objectives (i.e., self-efficacy). They also encourage a favorable appraisal of the prevailing conditions and future goal achievement (i.e., optimism).

Furthermore, they enhance subordinates’ abilities to recover from failures and move beyond setbacks effectively (i.e., resiliency) through supporting an increased aptitude for adaption to unfamiliar work circumstances (i.e., flexibility). These results corroborate the assumption that leaders who inspire, strengthen, and connect their followers provide a stimulating work environment that enhances employees’ personal resources. In their turn, elevated levels of PsyCap mobilize employees’ energy and intrinsic motivation to perform, expressed by a high level of work engagement. This result concurs with previous evidence that PsyCap can be framed as a critical component of the motivational process of the JD-R model, namely as a mediator of the relationship between contextual resources (i.e., engaging leadership) and work engagement [ 46 ]. However, this mediation was only partial because a direct effect of engaging leadership on follower’s work engagement was also observed in the current study. This evidence is not surprising since previous research showed that other mediating factors (which were not included in the present study) played a role in explaining the relationship between leadership and work engagement. Among them, innovative work behaviors, meaningful work, role clarity, positive emotions, identification with the organization, and psychological ownership [ 11 ]. Thus, increasing their follower’s PsyCap is not the whole story as far as the impact of engaging leadership is concerned. It is likely that engaging leaders also impact these alternative mediating factors. If this is the case, this might explain why the additional variance in follower’s work engagement is explained by engaging leadership, as indicated by the direct effect.

Thirdly, team-level engaging leadership predicts work engagement of individual team members and team effectiveness through increasing team resources. An earlier cross-sectional study found that engaging leadership, as perceived by their followers, showed an indirect, positive effect on their work engagement level through an increase in job resources [ 7 ]. However, in that study, engaging leadership and job resources, including performance feedback, trust in management, communication, and participation in decision-making, were assessed at the individual and not at the aggregated team level. This means that the current study corroborates previous findings at the aggregated team level, using a longitudinal design. It is important to note that employees’ level of work engagement not only depends on individual-level processes (through the increase in PsyCap) but also on collective processes (trough the rise in team resources). Finally, our findings concur with research on team climate, showing that leaders who endorse supportive relations between team members and create an open, empowering team climate enable employees to succeed [ 33 ]. Simultaneously, a team climate like that is also likely to foster personal growth and development, which, in turn, translates into greater work engagement [ 63 ].

Practical implications

Our study shows that engaging leadership matters, and therefore organizations are well-advised to stimulate their managers to lead by the principles of engaging leadership. To that end, organizations may implement leadership development programs [ 90 ], leadership coaching [ 91 ], or leadership workshops [ 92 ]. Previous research has shown that leadership behaviors are malleable and subject to change using professional training [ 93 – 95 ]. Furthermore, leaders may want to establish and promote an open and trusting team climate in which employees feel free to express their needs and preferences [ 96 , 97 ].

Accordingly, our study shows that this climate is conducive not only for work engagement but also for team effectiveness. Finally, our results also suggest that psychological capital is positively associated with work engagement, so that it would make sense to increase this personal resource, mainly because PsyCap is state-like and open to development through instructional programs [ 45 ]. For instance, a short PsyCap Intervention (PCI) has been developed by Luthans and colleagues, which is also available as a web-based version for employees [ 98 ]. PCI focuses on: (a) acquiring and modifying self–efficacy beliefs; (b) developing realistic, constructive, and accurate beliefs; (c) designing goals, pathway generation, and strategies for overcoming obstacles; and (d) identifying risk factors, and positively influencing processes.

Strengths, limitations, and directions for future research

A significant strength of the current study is its design that combines a multilevel investigation of engaging leadership with mediating processes at the individual and team levels. This is in line with the claim that leadership research suffers from a lack of theoretical and empirical differentiation between levels of analysis [ 99 ]. However, leadership is an inherently multilevel construct in nature [ 9 ]. Although the current findings shed light on the role of the emergent construct of engaging leadership, both regarding individuals and teams, an exciting venue for future research involves exploring its predictive validity in comparison with traditional leadership models. This concurrent validation would adhere to the recommendations accompanying the introduction of new leadership constructs in the face of the risk of construct proliferation [ 16 ].

A further strength of the current study is its large sample size, including 1,048 employees nested within 90 work teams. Moreover, data were collected at two time points with a one-year time lag that was considered long enough for the effects of engaging leadership to occur. In contrast with widespread cross-sectional studies that sometimes draw unjustified conclusions on the corollaries of leadership [ 100 ], the current research relied on a longitudinal design to better understand the consequences of engaging leadership at the individual and team level of analysis. According to our results, engaging leadership indeed shows a positive effect across time on outcomes at the individual (i.e., work engagement) and team level (i.e., team effectiveness).

Along with its strengths, the current study also has some limitations that should be acknowledged. The main weakness of the current study lies in the homogeneity of the sample, which consisted of employees working in a Dutch public service agency. This specific work setting prevents us from generalizing the findings of our research with other occupational groups. However, focusing on an organization where most activities are conducted in teams permits independent but simultaneous assessment of the impact of (engaging) leadership on the perceived pool of resources among teams and workers, as suggested by current trends in leadership literature [ 101 , 102 ].

Furthermore, the collection of data at different time points overcomes the inherent weakness of a cross-sectional design, yet a design including at least three data waves would have provided superior support for the hypothesized mediated relationships. Based on within-group diary studies [ 103 , 104 ], it can, on the one hand, be argued that leadership might impact the team and personal resources within a much shorter time frame. On the other hand, work engagement represents a persistent psychological state that is not susceptible to sudden changes in the short term [ 1 ]. Thus, the chosen one-year time lag can be considered reasonable for a between-group study to detect the impact of engaging leadership accurately. This impact needs some time to unfold. An additional limitation of this study entails measuring individual and team resources with only a few items. Nevertheless, all scales had an internal consistency value that met the threshold of .65 [ 105 ] with an average Cronbach’s alpha value equal to .81.

Concluding remark

Despite the novelty of the construct, the emerging research on engaging leadership suggests the potential value of a theoretically sound leadership model that could foster followers’ engagement. While earlier findings showed that engaging leadership is positively associated with the employee’s level of engagement [ 7 , 8 ], the current study suggested that engaging leadership could predict work engagement and team effectiveness. More specifically, being exposed to a leader who inspires, strengthens and connects team members may foster a shared perception of greater availability of team resources (i.e., performance feedback, trust in management, communication, and participation in decision-making), as well as greater psychological capital (i.e., self-efficacy, optimism, resilience, and flexibility). Hence, engaging leadership could play a significant role in the processes leading to work engagement at both the team and the individual levels.

Supporting information

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0269433.s001

• View Article
• Google Scholar
• PubMed/NCBI
• 13. Antonakis J., Day D.V. Leadership: Past present and future. In, Antonakis J. & Day D.V.(Eds.), The nature of leadership (3rd. Ed.) London: Sage. 2017; 3–28.
• 15. Deci E.L., Ryan R.M. Self-determination theory. In Van Lange P.A.M., Kruglanski A.W., & Higgins E.T.(Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology. London: Sage. 2012; 416–436. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446249215.n21 .
• 17. Erasmus, A. (2018). Investigating the relationships between engaging leadership, need satisfaction, work engagement and workplace boredom within the South African mining industry (Doctoral dissertation, North-West University).
• 21. Robijn, W. (2021). “Taking care of the team member is taking care of the team: a team conflict perspective on engaging leadership,” in: Leadership and Work Engagement: A Conflict Management Perspective, ed W. Robijn (Unpublished PhD) (Belgium: KU Leuven), 79–107.
• 30. Bass B.M., Riggio R.E. Transformational leadership. In Transformational leadership . 2nd ed. Psychology Press Ltd., 2006.
• 31. Smith, D.J. (2018). The Importance of Self-Determined Leadership in Building Respectful Workplace. (Unpublished PhD thesis), University of Southern Queensland, Australia.
• 34. Luthans F., Youssef C.M., Avolio B.J. Psychological capital: Investing and developing positive organizational behaviour. In Nelson D & Cooper C. L.(Eds.), Positive organizational behaviour. London: Sage. 2007; pp. 9–24.
• 40. Bandura A. Cultivate self-efficacy for personal and organizational effectiveness. In Locke E. (Ed.), Handbook of principles of organizational behavior. Oxford: Blackwell. 2000; pp. 120–136.
• 41. Sweetman D., Luthans F. The power of positive psychology: Psychological capital and work engagement. In Bakker A.B. & Leiter M. P. (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research. New York: Psychology Press. 2010; pp. 44–68.
• 42. Fredrickson B.L. Positive emotions broaden and build. In Devine P., & Plant A. (Eds.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (ed., Vol. 47). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 2013; pp. 1–54.
• 48. Bass B.M. Leadership and performance beyond expectation. New York: Free Press; 1985.
• 51. McGrath J.E. Social psychology: A brief introduction. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston; 1964.
• 61. Schaufeli W.B. What is engagement? In Employee engagement in theory and practice. Routledge. London: Routledge. 2013; pp. 29–49.
• 66. Hox J.J. Multilevel analyses: Techniques and applications. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2002.
• 67. Hox J.J. Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge; 2010.
• 78. Bliese P.D. Within-group agreement, non-independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In Klein K. J. & Kozlowski S. W. J. (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2000, pp. 349–381.
• 79. Muthén B., Satorra A. Complex sample data in structural equation modeling. In Marsden P. V. (Ed.), Sociological methodology. Washington, DC: American Sociological Association; 1995, pp. 264–316. https://doi.org/10.2307/271070
• 82. Muthén B.O., Muthén L.K. Mplus version 7 [Computer Programme]. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén; 2012.
• 86. Arbuckle J.L. Amos (Version 21.0). Chicago: IBM SPSS; 2015.
• 87. Brown T. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2006.
• 89. Hair J.F., Black W.C., Babin B.J., Anderson R.E., Tatham R.L. Multivariate Data Analysis. Uppersaddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hal Hall; 2006.
• 92. Segers J., De Prins P., Brouwers S. Leadership and engagement: A brief review of the literature, a proposed model, and practical implications. In Albrecht S. L. (Ed.), New horizons in management. Handbook of employee engagement: Perspectives, issues, research and practice. Edward Elgar Publishing; 2010, pp. 149–158.
• 105. DeVellis R.F. Scale development: Theory and applications (Vol. 26). London: Sage publications; 2016.

Leadership motivation: Tips & examples to cultivate better leaders & teams

Leadership isn't just about giving orders or making decisions; it's about motivating and inspiring a team to achieve exceptional results. Leadership motivation is the fuel that drives this engine of success, and its importance cannot be overstated.

According to research , motivated teams turned out more productive than their demotivated counterparts. This clearly portrays the importance of a motivating leader in any organization.

In this ever-competitive environment, where businesses are constantly competing for market share, having motivated leaders at the helm is not just a nice to have; it's a game-changer. Let's discuss the world of leadership motivation , uncovering its power to transform teams and organizations, and explore practical tips and real-life examples that can help cultivate better leaders and, in turn, drive your entire team to success.

Manager vs. leader

Managers play distinct but complementary roles within an organization. Managers are primarily concerned with the efficient execution of tasks, focusing on planning, organizing, and controlling resources to achieve specific objectives. They emphasize structure, processes, and adherence to established protocols.

In contrast, leaders are focused on inspiring and guiding their teams toward a shared vision or goal. They prioritize innovation, motivation, and the development of their team members. Leadership is about fostering a culture of collaboration, adaptability, and empowerment .

While managers ensure that the day-to-day operations run smoothly , leaders provide direction, motivation, and a sense of purpose. The best organizations often strike a balance between effective leadership and inspirational management, recognizing that both are essential for sustained success. Ultimately, the key lies in blending these roles seamlessly to achieve organizational excellence.

Leadership motivation definition

Leadership motivation refers to the inner drive and enthusiasm that propels individuals in leadership roles to inspire, guide, and empower their teams effectively. It's the passion, commitment, and purpose that leaders exhibit as they work toward business goals, inspiring their teams to excel and creating a positive and motivated work environment .

Motivating leader is the force that fuels a leader's actions, resilience, and dedication to achieving success while fostering growth , innovation, and a shared sense of purpose among team members.

What are the types of leadership motivation?

Leadership motivation comes in various forms, and understanding these types can help leaders inspire and drive their teams effectively. Here are some key types of leadership motivation:

• Intrinsic motivation: This type of motivation comes from within an individual. Leaders can tap into intrinsic motivation by helping employees find personal meaning and satisfaction in their work. For example, allowing employees to work on projects that align with their passions can boost intrinsic motivation.
• Extrinsic motivation: Extrinsic motivation is external and often involves rewards or recognition . Leaders can use this by offering bonuses, promotions, or other incentives to inspire their teams. However, it's essential to balance extrinsic motivation with intrinsic factors for sustained performance.
• Affiliative motivation: This approach emphasizes building positive relationships within the team. Leaders who use affiliative motivation focus on creating a harmonious work environment, fostering a sense of belonging and teamwork.
• Transformational motivation: Transformational leaders inspire their teams by setting a compelling vision and fostering a sense of purpose. They encourage innovation, creativity, and personal growth, motivating employees to exceed expectations.
• Transactional motivation: Transactional leaders use a system of rewards and punishments to motivate their teams. They establish clear expectations, provide feedback, and administer consequences based on performance.
• Servant leadership: Servant leaders prioritize the needs of their team members above their own. They are motivated by a desire to support and serve their employees, creating a culture of trust and empowerment.
• Authentic leadership: Authentic leaders motivate by being true to themselves and their values. They build trust through transparency, honesty, and consistent actions, inspiring their teams to do the same.
• Charismatic leadership: Charismatic leaders motivate through their magnetic personalities and compelling visions. They can inspire deep loyalty and commitment among their followers.
• Goal-oriented leadership: Goal-oriented leaders motivate by setting clear objectives and rallying their teams to achieve them. They break down larger goals into smaller, achievable milestones to maintain motivation.
• Feedback-driven leadership: Leaders who prioritize continuous feedback motivate their teams by providing regular guidance for improvement. Constructive feedback can inspire employees to strive for excellence.

Effective leaders often employ a combination of these motivation types based on the needs of their team and the context of their organization. Understanding these various approaches can help leaders adapt and tailor their motivational strategies to maximize team performance and engagement.

What is the motivation theory of leadership?

The motivation theory of leadership is a concept that explores how good leader can inspire and drive their teams. It draws from various motivation theories, including Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory, and Expectancy Theory.

This approach emphasizes understanding individual and collective motivations within a team , tailoring leadership strategies to meet these motivations, and creating a work environment that encourages enthusiasm, commitment, and high performance. Essentially, it's about leveraging motivational leaders' insights to guide leadership practices and foster a motivated and engaged team.

Why is motivational leadership important?

Motivation is pivotal in leadership for several compelling reasons. Firstly, motivated leaders inspire and energize their teams, fostering a positive work environment. Their enthusiasm is contagious, encouraging employees to be more engaged and productive.

Secondly, motivated leaders are more resilient and better equipped to face challenges. They exhibit determination and perseverance, serving as a role model for their teams. This resilience is especially crucial during times of adversity.

Furthermore, motivation fuels innovation and creativity. Leaders who are motivated to find better solutions inspire their teams to think outside the box and drive continuous improvement.

Motivation in leadership is essential for creating a dynamic, engaged, and high-performing team, ultimately driving organizational success.

Importance & key traits of leadership motivation in the workplace

Leadership motivation plays a pivotal role in creating a thriving workplace. Here are five key points highlighting its importance and the essential traits associated with it:

Boosts employee morale : Motivated leaders inspire their teams, fostering higher levels of engagement. Engaged employees are emotionally committed to their work, resulting in increased productivity and a positive workplace atmosphere.

Drives performance : Leaders who are skilled in motivation can drive better performance among their teams. By setting clear goals, providing regular feedback, and offering incentives, they encourage employees to consistently perform at their best.

Enhances job satisfaction : Motivated leaders are more likely to create a work environment where employees feel valued and recognized for their contributions. This, in turn, leads to higher job satisfaction and lower turnover rates.

Promotes innovation : Motivated leaders often embrace a transformational leadership style, encouraging creativity and innovation. They inspire their teams to think outside the box, take risks, and explore new ideas, which can lead to breakthroughs and improvements.

Cultivates a positive culture : Leadership motivation contributes to the development of a positive workplace culture. Leaders who motivate their teams through positivity, trust, and collaboration set an example for the entire organization, leading to improved teamwork and morale.

Key Traits of Leadership Motivation:

• Visionary: Motivated leaders have a clear vision of the future and can communicate this vision to their teams. They inspire others by outlining a compelling path forward.
• Effective communication: Motivation relies on effective communication . Leaders need to articulate goals, expectations, and feedback clearly and concisely.
• Empathy: Motivated leaders understand the unique needs and aspirations of their team members. They show empathy and tailor their motivational strategies accordingly.
• Adaptability: Effective leaders adjust their motivation techniques to suit the individual and situational needs of their team members. What motivates one employee might not work for another.
• Consistency: Consistency in motivation is crucial. Leaders need to maintain their enthusiasm and commitment to inspire their teams consistently.

Incorporating these traits of motivational leadership can lead to a workplace that thrives on innovation, resilience, and a shared sense of purpose, ultimately contributing to organizational success.

How can leadership motivation assessment help you analyze your manager’s pulse?

A leadership motivation assessment can serve as a valuable tool to gauge your manager's motivation levels and gain insights into their leadership style. Here's how it can help you analyze your manager's pulse:

Identifying strengths and weaknesses

Through a motivation assessment, you can pinpoint your manager's leadership strengths and areas that may need improvement. This understanding can guide targeted discussions and development plans.

Assessing alignment with organizational goals

By evaluating your manager's motivations, you can determine how closely they align with the organization's mission and vision . A well-aligned manager is more likely to inspire and lead effectively.

Measuring engagement

A motivated manager is often more engaged in their role. The assessment can provide insights into your manager's level of enthusiasm, which directly affects their ability to motivate employees .

Recognizing burnout

Identifying signs of burnout is crucial. A motivation assessment can highlight if your manager is experiencing excessive stress or demotivation, allowing for timely intervention to prevent further issues.

Enhancing communication

Understanding your manager's motivation factors can improve communication . You can tailor your approach based on their preferences, fostering better interactions and a stronger working relationship.

Setting development goals

Based on the assessment results, you can collaboratively set development goals with your manager. This can include strategies for boosting motivation and leadership effectiveness.

Improving retention

Identifying and addressing any motivation-related issues can contribute to higher manager retention rates . Motivated managers are more likely to stay committed to their roles and the organization.

7 Leadership motivation activities to try at your workplace

Boosting leadership motivation is essential for creating an engaged and productive workplace. Here are seven leadership motivation activities to consider implementing:

• Recognition and appreciation : Acknowledge and celebrate leaders' accomplishments and efforts regularly, whether through awards , shout-outs in team meetings, or simple thank-you notes.
• Goal setting and tracking : Encourage employees, the future leaders to set personal and professional goals, helping them stay focused and motivated. Regularly review progress and provide support when needed.
• Leadership workshops: Organize workshops and seminars focusing on leadership development , providing new leadership skills and perspectives to reignite their passion for their roles and human nature among employees.
• Mentorship programs: Pair leaders with experienced mentors or coaches who can offer guidance, support, and insights, fostering personal and professional growth.
• Team-building activities : Plan team-building exercises to strengthen bonds among leaders and their teams, promoting collaboration and shared motivation.
• Continuous learning opportunities : Invest in leadership training and development , offering unlimited access to courses, webinars, or conferences to expand their knowledge and skills.
• Feedback and evaluation : Conduct regular performance evaluations and provide constructive feedback, outlining areas for improvement and recognizing achievements.

The link between leadership motivation and retention

The link between leadership motivation and employee retention is a critical aspect of organizational success. Motivated leaders play a pivotal role in retaining top talent for several reasons.

Firstly, motivated leaders inspire and engage their teams. When leaders are passionate about their work, they radiate enthusiasm, fostering a positive work environment. This, in turn, motivates employees to stay and contribute to the organization's goals.

Secondly, motivated leaders invest in employee development . They recognize the value of their team members and provide opportunities for growth and advancement. This commitment to employee well-being and career progression significantly enhances retention rates.

In contrast, leaders who lack motivation may create a toxic work environment characterized by disengagement and apathy, which can lead to high turnover rates. Therefore, leadership motivation is not only vital for personal success but also for relationship-building and a cohesive and long-lasting workforce.

13 Leadership motivation examples you should know

Let's explore examples that illustrate the diverse ways in which motivation can manifest in leadership, highlighting the unique qualities that different leaders bring to their roles.

• Purpose-driven leadership : Leaders who are motivated by a sense of purpose and a deep connection to their organization's mission are more likely to inspire their teams to work toward a shared vision.
• Servant leadership : Motivated by a genuine desire to serve others, servant leaders prioritize the well-being and development of their team members, fostering the company's values.
• Intrinsic motivation : Leaders who are internally driven by personal satisfaction and a love for their work often exhibit unwavering dedication and passion, inspiring their teams to find joy in their roles.
• Transformational leadership : Transformational leaders are motivated to bring about positive attitudes in the workplace. They challenge the status quo, encourage innovation, and inspire their teams to exceed expectations.
• Resilience-fueled leadership : Leaders who draw motivation from their ability to bounce back from setbacks demonstrate tenacity and determination, setting an example for their teams to persevere in the face of challenges.
• Learning-centric leadership : Leaders who are motivated by continuous learning and growth seek opportunities to expand their knowledge and skills, encouraging their teams to do the same.
• Ethical leadership : Leaders motivated by strong leadership moral and ethical principles set a high standard for integrity, earning employees the respect and trust of their stakeholders.
• Empowerment-driven leadership : Motivated by the empowerment of others , these leaders delegate authority, provide autonomy, and offer opportunities for team members to take ownership of their work.
• Recognition-oriented leadership : Leaders who derive motivation from recognizing and celebrating their team's achievements create a culture of appreciation, boosting morale and performance.
• Social impact leadership: Leaders inspired by making a positive impact on society align their organization's goals with broader social and environmental concerns, driving purpose-driven change.
• Collaborative leadership: Motivated by the potential of collective efforts, collaborative leaders encourage cross-functional teamwork, breaking down silos and fostering innovation.
• Adaptive leadership : Leaders motivated by adaptability and flexibility embrace change and guide their teams through transitions, showing that change can lead to growth and improvement.
• Feedback-driven leadership: Effective leaders who value feedback and use it for personal and organizational improvement create a culture of openness, continuous improvement, and motivation to excel.

How is leadership motivation linked to manager effectiveness?

Leadership motivation significantly impacts manager effectiveness . Motivated leaders are more likely to inspire and engage their teams, resulting in higher productivity and morale. They exhibit resilience, enabling them to navigate challenges effectively.

Motivation also drives continuous improvement and innovation, essential leadership qualities for an effective leader. Moreover, motivated leaders tend to be better communicators and listeners, enhancing team dynamics. In summary, leadership motivation is the driving force behind a manager's ability to lead, influence, and create a positive work environment , ultimately contributing to their overall effectiveness in achieving organizational goals.

Leadership motivation is the catalyst for driving team success. It involves setting a compelling vision, leading by example, effective communication, recognition, and personal growth. Motivated leaders inspire employees to perform better, and motivated employees have higher job satisfaction. Real-life examples illustrate the impact of motivated leadership.

Measuring motivation's effect helps organizations understand its benefits. Despite challenges , leadership motivation remains a potent force for achieving exceptional results in today's competitive business world.

1. What is leadership motivation, and why is it important for teams?

Leadership motivation refers to a leader's ability to inspire and energize their team members to achieve common goals. It's vital because motivated teams are 147% more productive, leading to higher job satisfaction and lower turnover rates.

2. How can leaders set a compelling vision for their teams?

Leaders can set a compelling vision by defining clear goals, sharing their passion, and articulating a vision that resonates with team members' values and aspirations.

3. What are some practical ways leaders can lead by example?

Leading by example involves demonstrating the behaviors, values, and work ethic expected from team members. This includes being punctual, taking initiative, and displaying a strong commitment to the team's objectives.

4. How can recognition and rewards boost leadership motivation?

Recognition and rewards acknowledge and reinforce desired behaviors and accomplishments. When leaders recognize and reward their team members' efforts, it enhances motivation and fosters a positive work environment.

5. Can you provide examples of successful leaders who have excelled in motivation?

Some notable leaders like Steve Jobs, Oprah Winfrey, and Elon Musk have inspired and motivated their teams to achieve remarkable success. Their leadership stories serve as powerful examples of how motivation can drive extraordinary outcomes.

Kailash Ganesh

Kailash is a Product Marketer with 5+ years of experience. He loves story-telling in the simplest way possible and he is an avid reader, movie buff, and likes to travel new places to meet new people.

You might also like

Effective employee engagement leadership to enhance your workplace in 2024.

Do you think your company needs more leadership initiatives to improve employee engagement? Read the article to see how employee engagement leadership can significantly enhance workplace communication, development, sense of belonging, and objectives through employee feedback.

33 Top one on one questions that are a must-ask in 2023

One-on-one meetings, also known as individual meetings, are dedicated conversations between a manager or team leader and individual team members. They provide a private and focused space for discussing various topics, addressing concerns, giving feedback, and fostering a good working relationship.

Book a free, no-obligation product demo call with our experts.

Business Email is a required field*

Too many attempts, please try again later!

Please enter a valid business email address

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

How to Keep Your Team Motivated, Remotely

• Lindsay McGregor

Give people the opportunity to solve problems that really matter.

When researchers measured the total motivation of employees, they saw that those forced to work from home were the least motivated. But there is an effective way managers can increase their team’s productivity and performance, even under the circumstances of this crisis: through experimentation. The researchers found that experimentation results in a 45-point increase in employee motivation. The key is for leaders to make sure their weekly routines are not focused only on the tactical work. Half of their weeks should also be focused on adaptive performance, where there is no plan to follow but instead an emphasis on experimentation and problem-solving.

In these difficult times, we’ve made a number of our coronavirus articles free for all readers. To get all of HBR’s content delivered to your inbox, sign up for the Daily Alert newsletter.

Many leaders have crossed the first hurdles of moving their teams remote : ensuring colleagues have set up their tech tools, defined their processes, and permanently logged in to their videoconference accounts.

• LM Lindsay McGregor is the coauthor of the New York Times  bestseller   Primed to Perform , and the CEO of Vega Factor and Factor.ai. She works with many exceptional companies to engineer high-performing cultures. She is a frequent contributor to the  Harvard Business Review  on the topics of motivation and performance. Feel free to reach out to  Lindsay  on LinkedIn with questions and ideas, or stay current with the latest insights on high-performing teams and leaders through her   Primed to Perform   newsletter.
• ND Neel Doshi is the coauthor of the New York Times  bestseller  Primed to Perform , and the cofounder of Vega Factor and Factor.ai. He works with many exceptional companies to engineer high-performing cultures. He is a frequent contributor to the Harvard Business Review  on the topics of motivation and performance. Feel free to reach out to  Neel on LinkedIn with questions and ideas, or stay current with the latest insights on high-performing teams and leaders through his   Primed to Perform  newsletter.

Partner Center

Leadership motivation: A guide to cultivating better leaders

Not all managers are naturally born with leadership skills. However, the right leadership development program can train managers to become better leaders. Identify management candidates who display these traits of leadership motivation.

People are more likely to trust someone with high integrity or a high level of honesty. Those traits are essential for leadership motivation because employees who don’t trust their managers are less likely to engage meaningfully with their work.

Integrity also encompasses whether people are earnest, genuine, and show alignment between their values and behaviors. Alignment is crucial for leaders modeling company values. If employees see that their managers are hypocritical or half-heartedly embody company values, they’ll be less inclined to live those values themselves. This can lead to cynicism and disengagement.

Motivating leaders are aware of their limitations. They understand where they have room to grow and pinpoint which growth opportunities to prioritize. These leaders have a sense of humility that can inspire others. When employees see that their manager is focusing on developing the team and delivering great results — rather than pursuing power or feeding their ego — they’re more likely to want  to follow that leader.

Self-awareness also helps leaders develop habits to prevent their weaknesses from hurting their leadership. If a leader knows they tend to become absorbed in their work, scheduling regular check-ins can help them ensure they’re not ignoring their reports.

One of the most important traits of an effective leader is being hungry to learn. Leaders with curiosity signal that they don’t  know everything. Instead of using that as an excuse to underperform, these leaders continue to learn and grow.

Leaders who are always asking questions and always learning are good role models for their teams. Continuous learning is key to leading a team that can serve the business effectively. By demonstrating the importance of learning, motivational leaders give employees permission to exercise their curiosity, ask questions, and devote time to workplace learning.

Followers want proof that leaders are interested in helping employees overcome their challenges and concerns. One way to demonstrate this is with deep listening, or active listening — marked by a total focus on the speaker. Deep listening requires leaders to ask questions that prompt longer responses from employees (not just yes-or-no questions).

Active listening is about engaging with the speaker to truly understand what they need. That’s key to fostering agile leadership . Leaders who take the time to understand what employees need are better able to remove roadblocks and keep the team operating smoothly and efficiently.

Employees need to feel like they’re genuinely being heard. They should trust that their manager takes what they’re saying seriously. Deep listening is a way for leaders to signal that they’re invested in supporting their teams, inspiring employees to respond with loyalty and enthusiasm about their work.

Motivational leaders are self-aware enough to know that they don’t have all the answers. They seek perspectives from others across different levels of the business. They also respect their team members, regardless of their status or position in the organization.

Managers pursuing leadership to gain power or control may not value input from an intern, for example. Motivational leaders respect each individual and understand the value of their perspective. They help employees feel included in teamwide conversations and empowered to speak up.

This team-based approach to leadership elevates employees and gives them the confidence they need to voice their perspectives, producing better outcomes.

Effective leadership motivation requires an upbeat, positive attitude. Employees are less likely to devote extra effort when their managers tend to be negative or anxious.

That’s not to say that motivational leaders must be unnaturally optimistic. Great leaders are realistic and explore the possibility of failure to try to prevent it, but they don’t wallow in negativity. A positive attitude can inspire employees and help them feel empowered. Enthusiasm feels good and is contagious across teams, potentially sparking engagement, productivity, and achievement.

Finally, motivational leaders are effective communicators — and they communicate with purpose. Decisive communication shows that leaders are confident in their decisions and quickly communicate pertinent information with the right people.

As decisive communicators, motivational leaders stand up for what they believe in. They’re quick to condemn behaviors that don’t align with company values and always refer to those values when making and communicating tough decisions.

How to motivate others as a leader

The key traits of motivational leaders are most effective when paired with intentional, motivational behaviors. Prioritize these actions to inspire your team to be their best.

Leaders must understand their intrinsic motivation. Often, this comes from a personal sense of purpose. Leaders have to feel that they’re contributing to something bigger than themselves. For example, they might fulfill this purpose by achieving the organization’s mission, vision, and values.

By communicating their purpose to the team, leaders improve motivation. When employees see that leaders feel a sense of responsibility for and pride in their work (and aren’t just seeking control), they’re more likely to take ownership of their work, too.

Accountability can be a powerful motivator — especially when employees respect their leader. When employees expect accountability in leadership , they approach their work with greater responsibility.

By being accountable as leaders and holding employees accountable for their work, leaders instill a sense of ownership and pride.

It’s in our nature to seek meaningful activities. Effective leaders can help employees understand the company’s values and how the team’s work contributes to bigger-picture goals. When employees understand the value of their contributions, they’re more likely to derive motivation and satisfaction from the work itself.

Leaders recognize that there’s more to work than results. By recognizing and rewarding employees for their efforts — even if they fail or face obstacles — employees won’t feel compelled to hide mistakes or cut corners to achieve results. Emphasizing effort alongside results can drive a culture of learning and experimentation where employees are motivated and encouraged to try new ways of doing things.

When every team in your workforce is highly motivated, their passion and purpose create momentum and better results. Tap into leadership motivation to bring the best out of your workforce and power your business with increased satisfaction and engagement.

Learn how to improve employee performance .

How to Strengthen Manager-Employee Relationships

Related Blog Posts

How Performance Enablement Promotes Internal Mobility

Shifting from traditional performance management to a performance enablement model supports your internal mobility strategy.

Sabrina Park, on Using Performance Management to ‘Make Sure That People Are Growing and Learning’

Sabrina Park joins the People Fundamentals podcast to discuss AI, the challenges managers face, and…

Stacia Garr, Live From HR Tech: A New Roadmap for Manager Success

Stacia Garr of RedThread Research shares three steps to improving manager effectiveness by supporting managers…

Upcoming Events

The Future of HR: Merging Skills Growth with Performance Excellence

Gartner ReimagineHR: London

HR Tech: Las Vegas

Subscribe to the betterworks magazine, you might find interesting.

3 Ways AI Cultivates More Effective Managers

Presentations made painless

• Get Premium

102 Team Management Essay Topic Ideas & Examples

Inside This Article

As a team manager, one of the most important aspects of your role is to ensure that your team is working effectively and efficiently towards achieving common goals. One way to improve team performance is through effective communication and leadership. However, another important aspect of team management is understanding the dynamics of your team members and how to effectively manage and motivate them.

One way to enhance your team management skills is by writing essays on various team management topics. This not only allows you to deepen your understanding of team dynamics and leadership principles, but it also helps you to develop your critical thinking and writing skills.

To help you get started, here are 102 team management essay topic ideas and examples:

• The role of emotional intelligence in team management
• Strategies for building trust within a team
• The importance of effective communication in team management
• How to effectively manage conflict within a team
• The impact of diversity on team performance
• The role of feedback in team management
• Strategies for building a strong team culture
• The importance of setting clear goals for a team
• How to motivate and inspire team members
• The impact of leadership styles on team performance
• The role of teamwork in achieving organizational goals
• Strategies for managing virtual teams
• The challenges of managing cross-functional teams
• The role of creativity and innovation in team management
• The impact of team size on team performance
• Strategies for building effective team collaboration
• The role of team building activities in team management
• The impact of team diversity on creativity and innovation
• Strategies for managing conflict within a team
• The role of coaching and mentoring in team management
• The importance of psychological safety in team management
• Strategies for managing team performance
• The impact of team autonomy on team motivation
• The role of team dynamics in team performance
• Strategies for managing remote teams
• The importance of team communication in virtual teams
• The impact of team culture on team performance
• Strategies for building a high-performing team
• The role of team building exercises in team management
• The impact of team size on team communication
• Strategies for managing team conflicts
• The importance of team diversity in team performance
• The role of team leadership in team management
• Strategies for building team cohesion
• The impact of team trust on team performance
• The importance of team motivation in team management
• Strategies for managing team accountability
• The role of team empowerment in team performance
• The impact of team feedback on team performance
• Strategies for building team resilience
• The importance of team collaboration in team management
• The role of team decision-making in team performance
• Strategies for managing team dynamics
• The impact of team recognition on team performance
• The importance of team conflict resolution in team management
• Strategies for building team engagement
• The role of team communication in team performance
• The impact of team diversity on team collaboration
• Strategies for managing team motivation
• The importance of team trust in team management
• The role of team building in team performance
• The impact of team empowerment on team performance
• The importance of team feedback in team management
• Strategies for managing team recognition
• The role of team conflict resolution in team performance
• The impact of team communication on team collaboration
• The role of team trust in team performance
• Strategies for managing team building activities
• The impact of team diversity on team motivation
• The importance of team recognition in team management
• Strategies for building team communication
• The impact of team empowerment in team management
• The importance of team feedback on team performance
• Strategies for managing team collaboration
• The role of team building in team motivation

By exploring these team management essay topics, you can gain a deeper understanding of team dynamics, leadership principles, and effective communication strategies. Additionally, writing essays on these topics can help you develop your critical thinking and writing skills, which are essential for effective team management. So, start writing and enhancing your team management skills today!

Want to research companies faster?

Instantly access industry insights

Let PitchGrade do this for me

Leverage powerful AI research capabilities

We will create your text and designs for you. Sit back and relax while we do the work.

Explore More Content

• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Service

© 2024 Pitchgrade

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

• Workplace Training
• Professional Practice Credentials
• Soft Skills
• Technical Skills
• Leadership Skills
• View all skills
• Vocational Education & Training
• Articles and News
• White Papers
• Deakin University

POWERING WORKPLACE PERFORMANCE

6 january, 2023, eight qualities of motivating and inspiring leaders.

All leaders take on a huge responsibility, whether they are a CEO, a manager, a supervisor or a project team leader. A leader should motivate and inspire others in the team to work to the best of their ability and reach their full potential. But what exactly is the relationship between leadership and motivation? And how can companies provide their management staff with the right resources to foster motivation across all levels of an organisation?

Below we examine eight defining characteristics of a motivating and inspiring leader, and how organisations can empower both current and future leaders to take on a more active role in fostering innovation in the workplace .

Why is knowing how to motivate a team important?

To put it simply, employee motivation is important because it can have a significant impact on an organisation’s success. When employees are motivated, they are more likely to be engaged, productive, and committed to their work. This can contribute to:

Improved performance

Motivated employees can drive the performance of an organisation. A motivated workforce has lower levels of absenteeism, improved relations between management and workers and improved worker performance all of which will increase the productivity of an organisation. Motivated employees are also often more satisfied with their jobs and are more likely to stay with the organisation for a longer period of time, which can reduce the cost and disruption of employee turnover.

Enhanced innovation

Motivation is a major force behind innovative ideas. An employee who is motivated is more likely to identify and exploit opportunities for improvement in the workplace. A ‘can-do’ attitude will spark creativity and imagination – two valuable assets for any workforce.

Improved workplace culture

Employee motivation and organisational culture are closely linked.  Members of a motivated workforce bring commitment, drive and energy to their roles which enhances employee morale and helps to create a positive work culture.

Positive branding

Through the support of inspiring leadership, motivation in the workplace can enhance an organisation’s reputation. A motivated workforce will understand their role in contributing to an organisation’s reputation, which can be extremely beneficial in maintaining strong relationships with stakeholders as well as attracting both customers and potential employees. Motivated employees will become emotionally engaged with their organisation and its brand, subsequently transforming into powerful brand ambassadors.

Highly motivating leaders…

1. share a common vision and purpose.

A leader should create and share an inspiring vision which will motivate their team. The vision should be realistic and attainable so that their entire team will be motivated to work towards achieving the vision.

2. Set clear goals and expectations

One of the most critical leadership skills is knowing how to set well-structured and transparent goals. Project goals should be clear to ensure that team members know what the project is seeking to achieve and what is expected of them. An inspiring leader will establish a clear goal that is specific, achievable, measurable and time bound. This will motivate the team to work harder if they understand and agree with the goal that is set.

3. Encourage employee self-development

A good leader inspires employees to continuously develop their self-management skills and knowledge. Consider introducing rewards, such as promotions or financial rewards, for employees who work on self-development. Encouraging employee self development will help to promote a dynamic team where team members are motivated to work harder and grow professionally.

4. Provide opportunities for collaboration

Collaboration and teamwork are essential for the success of any group or organization. Importantly, it helps team members feel engaged and a part of the work community. Leaders can encourage collaboration between team members by emphasising the connection between teamwork and reaching team goals. Collaboration makes employees feel more engaged and less isolated from the workplace, two precursors for ensuring a healthy working environment.

5. Foster healthy workplaces

A healthy workplace is one where leaders collaborate with employees to improve the health, safety and well being of all team members. Motivating leaders seek to maintain a positive attitude and outlook, which inspires their team to adopt the same positive attitude and outlook. Employees who feel safe, valued and optimistic about their work will feel more engaged in their tasks and responsibilities, which will naturally improve business resilience and productivity over time.

6. Give positive feedback and reward hard work

Positive feedback is one of the best ways a leader can motivate their team to work harder toward individual and team goals. Praising one employee in front of the team will inspire the whole team to work hard in order to receive praise. Leaders should also offer rewards so that employees have something tangible to work towards.

7. Communicate effectively with employees

Effective leadership and effective teamwork requires effective communication. The best leaders are good communicators who transmit clear information and inspire others to communicate effectively down the reporting chain. A good communicator will also be a good listener who is available to their team to answer questions and offer advice. An inspiring leader will need to be able to communicate with a range of people across different roles and backgrounds.

8. Trust employees with autonomy and self-management

Highly motivating leaders empower their team members by providing them with autonomy and the opportunity to self-manage their work. Giving employees more control over how they complete their tasks will lead to a happier and more productive team.  An employee who is given autonomy is more likely to engage with their work and be inspired to achieve their goals. This in turn will boost business productivity.

Prepare your organisation’s leaders for tomorrow’s workforce

Motivational leadership is a valuable asset to any organisation wanting to embrace new opportunities and tackle both existing and arising challenges. But motivational leadership is not necessarily a natural consequence of strong leadership or collaboration skills . Knowing how to motivate a team takes time, forethought and purposeful training.

DeakinCo. provides organisations with a wide range of innovative training and workforce development solutions that can be customised to complement your organisation and its people. Contact DeakinCo . to find out more about how our leadership programs can empower your organisation’s current and future leaders through purposeful learning initiatives.

Looks like you’re in India. Would you like to go to your local site?

Team Leadership: Essential Features & Problems Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

What is leadership?

Leadership is an art of managing and developing strategies to be followed in an organization: the success of an organization depends on the quality of leaders; managerial decisions are the driving force of an organization. Leaders have the role of shaping and guiding an organization to its path to success. The structure of well-organized organization has leadership at different levels, from the chief executive officer who can be seen as the entire organizational leader to micro teams leaders.

At all these levels, leaders need to make decisions that are responsive to the situation that the organization is going through. Their decisions must be timely and effective. Other than making business decisions, leaders have the task of managing their team members to the attainment of the set team goals and objectives. The attainment of team goals leads to the attainment of organizational goals and objectives; leadership is imperative for making a group into an orchestrate team (Parker, 2009).

One of the major roles of a manager is to mentor and develop human resources in his organization; they need to understand the potential that their company has and devise mechanisms to develop and tap intellectualism in the human resources. Every human resource has some potential in him that need to be developed, natured and exploited; it is the work of leaders to undertake these roles. Talents within a team need to be managed effectively to facilitate innovation and invention; this is how a team leader can have orchestrate robust team.

Leadership traits

Although different teams need different management approaches, there are some common characteristics that team managers should posses. Great team leaders understand and appreciate that the attainment of a team’s goals is pegged on the human resources a d their productivity; they thus are willing to empower and create good working environments such that the team can attain its set goals and objectives.

Team members, as a pre-requisite before individual contribution, should feel appreciated and welcomed by the group environment that they are working in, the manager thus has the role of creating a conducive environment for team members to feel at motivated make decisions.

Despite that team leaders are the controlling point, they need to have the passion and the will to conduct their businesses effectively. They should understand that one of the strongest attribute of leader is the ability to serve other. Team leaders should have the heart and will to serve other; to be an effective server, then one need to have perfect communication and listening skills strengthened by wisdom, knowledge and intelligence.

Team members see the leaders as their role model and they envy to be like him in one way or another: they are more willing to work and be loyal to leader who is enthusiastic, energetic, and inspirational and one who leads by an example. Though the above attributes can be argued to be inborn traits, a manager can develop them alongside his career.

Different issues emerge in an organization: they need to have someone who will own up the issues so as the healing process can start. Managers should assume this role: when challenges occur or they are under pressure, they should be composed enough to handle the situation and pioneer the process to change management of the entire situation. They should be honest admitting their mistakes and at the same time, they should be bold enough to say when they are not able to do something.

Managers vs. Leaders

The difference between leaders and managers is minimal however, it appears on how they handle situations; mangers manage tasks, thus he offers instructions and requires them handled whereas leaders manage people, this means that he involves people in business decisions.

One of the major functions of a leader is to motivate his team; however, we are all motivated differently. It is only by understandings of his team members that he can effectively motivate them. It is important to note that a good leader is a good manager, but it is not always the case that a good manager is a good leader.

What differentiates a leader and a manager is that a leader understands his team members, one at a time and thus blends them for the best result; the success of a team is vested on how well the strengths and weaknesses of the team member are combined. There are different styles of leadership and a leader should be sharp enough to know the best style to adopt in different situations (Margerison, 2002).

What is Teamwork?

Teamwork in an organization refers to a joint action of human resources in an organization with the aim of attaining certain common goal. When a company has embraced the spirit of teamwork, every employee works to the benefit of the entire organization and finds his task important in the attainment of corporate goals and objectives. Corporate missions and vision are attained if a company adapts to the spirit of teamwork.

What makes an Effective Team?

The definition of team is wide and covers different aspects; however, a team can be defined as a group of people with a common objective to meet within a certain period work. They range from small teams of two people to an entire organization can be referred to as a team.

When working in team, team members work for the general good of the organization and the team; organizations are run through different teams that are made to meet certain corporate objectives. To effectively manage and attain results, team manager’s roles are required; a team manager is mandated with the task of coordinating and ensuring that things are flowing within a team; he is involved in daily activities of the team but is the reference point in the team.

Their major roles can be classified as technical, functional, problem solving and human resourcing. An effective team leader should posses strong leadership skills as well as be expert communicator and listener. The performance of teams is influenced by the efficiency and the capability that its management has.

Building a Team

Teams are made from available human resources and sourcing for external human resources. When developing a team, the initial point is defining the task, then interpolating the resources that a company has. The available internal resources should be scrutinized and enforced by other experts if they do not have the capacity.

The task that need to be accomplished should be analyzed, objective and goals set; with the task understanding and understanding the potential at hand, then managers blend the resources effectively to the benefit of the task. Different personalities, expertise, age and experiences should be combined and team leader elected.

Benefits of team work

When a company adopts the policy of teamwork, then corporate goals and objectives are attained effectively; there is a higher likelihood that the organization will fulfill its corporate goals and objectives. With team spirit, employees are highly motivated and willing to use their experience and intellectualism for the benefit of the organization.

Such firms enjoy staffs invention and innovation, as staffs are willing to go an extra mile for the benefit of the company. When people are working as a team, they develop efficient routes of doing business, which is to the benefit of a firm, the firms enjoy a low operating cost.

Essential features of a team

An effectively managed team has some basic features; these features are:

• They have a self-drive towards the attainment if the team’s goals; when every member is making a decision, he/she does so with the welfare of the team at the back of the decision.
• Team members are highly motivated and are willing to improve other member’s intellectual knowledge.
• They have a common drive/objective/goal and work to the attainment of the goals in the most effective manner
• They are loyal to the group and have concern for each other social well being

There is team spirit supported by good communication among them; members respect their team leader, on the other hand, team leader involve members in decision-making (Lewis, 2004)

Team problem

When managing teams, there are problems that arise from time to time; such problems may be classified as personal problems, institutional and leadership problems. People have different personalities, thus they may have different standpoints and views on a certain issue, when this happens they may have conflicts amongst themselves. The situation may be even worse when one of the party’s standpoints is supported by the larger team, this bleeds unhealthy competition within a team.

The fulfillment of a team’s objective is dependent with the resources available, sometimes an organization may face resources shortage hampering the success of a team, at the end of the day, the team may be forced to worker extra hard to fulfill the goals initially set. This demand may create problems within a team.

Communication is one of the major problems of teams; when a team fail to have an effective communication strategy, then it is likely to fall into problems. Communication among the team-members and the team leader or top management should be effective and involving. Team leaders have the role of establishing any chance of problem and handle the situation before the problem erupts (Crother-Laurin, 2006).

Team leaders have the role of developing orchestrate teams from groups in an organization; their decisions and the way they exercise their leadership power determines the success of the team. One major attribute that leads to success of a team is effective communication method; team leaders have the role of developing an effective communication strategy. When a company has effective team’s chances of attainment of the corporate goals are high. An orchestrate team has a high team spirit and adopts the policy of teamwork.

Crother-Laurin, C. ,2006. Effective Teams: A Symptom of Healthy Leadership . The Journal for Quality and Participation , 29(3), p. 4.

Lewis, P. ,2004. Team-Based Project Management . Washington: Beard Books.

Margerison, C., 2002. Team leadership . Gale: Cengage Learning.

Parker, G. ,2009. Team Leadership: 20 Proven Tools for Success . New Jersey: Human Resource Development Press.

• The Concept of Hotel Management
• Managing in an Inclusive Environment: Discrimination
• John F. Kennedy's Tragedy
• “The Corporation” a Film by Mark Achbar, Jennifer Abbott and Joel Bakan
• Closing Education Attainment Gap in Schools
• Leadership Management in the Hospitality Industry
• Business Operations Planning
• The evolution of McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y in relation to the development of management theory
• Leadership Concepts: Kentucky Fried Chicke
• The Organization Structure of Training2Work
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, February 20). Team Leadership: Essential Features & Problems. https://ivypanda.com/essays/team-leadership/

"Team Leadership: Essential Features & Problems." IvyPanda , 20 Feb. 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/team-leadership/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Team Leadership: Essential Features & Problems'. 20 February.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Team Leadership: Essential Features & Problems." February 20, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/team-leadership/.

1. IvyPanda . "Team Leadership: Essential Features & Problems." February 20, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/team-leadership/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Team Leadership: Essential Features & Problems." February 20, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/team-leadership/.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

A meta-analysis of leadership and intrinsic motivation: Examining relative importance and moderators

Hanbing xue.

1 School of Labor and Human Resources, Renmin University of China, Beijing, China

Yuxiang Luan

2 School of Business, North Minzu University, Yinchuan, China

Associated Data

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/ Supplementary materials , further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author/s.

This paper provides the first meta-analytic examination of the relationship between leadership and followers' intrinsic motivation. In particular, we examined 6 leadership variables (transformational, ethical, leader-member exchange, servant, empowering, and abusive supervision) using data from 50 independent samples and 21,873 participants. We found that transformational leadership, ethical leadership, leader-member exchange (LMX), servant leadership, and empowering leadership were positively related to intrinsic motivation, whereas abusive supervision was negatively linked to intrinsic motivation. Although these leadership styles were associated with intrinsic motivation, they varied considerably in their relative importance. Empowering, ethical, and servant leadership emerged as the more important contributors to intrinsic motivation than transformational leadership. LMX showed a similar contribution with transformational leadership to intrinsic motivation. Effectiveness of leadership styles in relation to intrinsic motivation varied by power distance, publication year, and journal quality. Drawing on our findings, we discuss the theoretical and practice implications.

Introduction

About a half-century ago, Deci ( 1971 ) found external reward would undermine intrinsic motivation and published his well-known paper about intrinsic motivation. He aroused people's great interest (intrinsic motivation) in studying intrinsic motivation. Since then, intrinsic motivation, which refers to doing something because it is inherently interesting or enjoyable (Ryan and Deci, 2000a ; Sheldon and Prentice, 2019 ), has drawn so much academic attention. In the workplace, when employees are intrinsically motivated, they are likely to achieve high-quality performance (Deci et al., 2017 ). For example, meta-analyses provided solid evidence that intrinsic motivation is strongly and positively related to creativity (de Jesus et al., 2013 ) and work performance (Cerasoli et al., 2014 ). Besides, experiments showed that intrinsic motivation influences individuals' psychological wellbeing (Burton et al., 2006 ).

Given the importance of intrinsic motivation in work, not surprisingly, scholars, and managers are seeking the answers to the following question: what factors could influence intrinsic motivation? Drawing on self-determination theory (SDT) (Deci and Ryan, 2000 ; Gagné and Deci, 2005 ), motivation would be influenced by contextual factors. As such, scholars try to detect the contextual antecedents of intrinsic motivation. Leadership is an important factor that would influence employees' wellbeing (Salas-Vallina and Alegre, 2018 ) and intrinsic motivation (Deci et al., 2017 ). Although fruitful evidence between leadership and intrinsic motivation has been accumulated, some unsolved issues still exist.

First, true population correlations between leadership styles and intrinsic motivation have not been evaluated yet. Primary studies would suffer from statistical artifacts and thereby conclude different correlations of interest (Hunter and Schmidt, 2004 ). For example, for the association between transformational leadership and intrinsic motivation, Nguyen et al. ( 2022 ) found a small magnitude of the effect size ( r = 0.03), while Al Harbi et al. ( 2019 ) found a medium one ( r = 0.30). Fortunately, meta-analysis methodology could help us to correct the statistical artifacts and estimate the true population correlations of interest. As such, in the current study, we will evaluate the links between intrinsic motivation and various leadership styles (i.e., transformational, ethical, servant, empowering, LMX, and abusive supervision). By doing so, we seek to contribute to leadership and motivation literature.

Second, the relative importance of leadership to intrinsic motivation is not clear. Following early meta-analyses (Hoch et al., 2018 ; Lee et al., 2020a , b ), we will compare the relative importance of transformational leadership and other types of leadership in the current study. This effort would not only enrich our understanding of the relationship between leadership and intrinsic motivation but also provide meaningful management suggestions for managers. For instance, to increase followers' intrinsic motivation, managers can use suitable leadership according to our meta-analytic results.

Finally, the potential moderators of the relationship between leadership and intrinsic motivation have not been detected yet. For instance, a previous meta-analysis (Lee et al., 2020b ) found that correlations of interest are higher when using a common source research design. In this study, we will detect five potential moderators. That is publication year, source (common source vs. non-common source), power distance, individualism, and quality of the journal.

Theoretical background and hypotheses development

Leadership and intrinsic motivation.

In the current study, we research the links between six types of leadership and intrinsic motivation. We focus on these six types of leadership (rather than other leadership) for three reasons. First, a recent review of SDT (Deci et al., 2017 ) suggested that transformational leadership would influence their followers' intrinsic motivation. As such, transformational leadership should be taken into consideration. Deci et al. ( 2017 ) also suggested researching other types of leadership and their relations with motivation. Second, based on leadership literature, meta-analyses about leadership and creativity (Lee et al., 2020a ) and engagement (Li et al., 2021 ) consider these types of leadership. That is to say, these leadership styles capture scholars' research interest to some extent. Finally, to accurately estimate the links between leadership and intrinsic motivation, the leadership style should include more than 3 primary studies. As such, we include leadership styles that have more than 3 primary studies. We present their definitions in Table 1 .

Leadership definition.

To start, we would like to briefly introduce intrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation have been widely studied. Extrinsically motivated behaviors are “governed by the prospect of instrumental gain and loss (e.g., incentives), whereas intrinsically motivated behaviors are engaged for their very own sake (e.g., task enjoyment), not being instrumental toward some other outcome” (Cerasoli et al., 2014 , p. 1). This definition of intrinsic motivation has been widely accepted in meta-analyses (e.g., Deci et al., 1999 ; Patall et al., 2008 ; Cerasoli et al., 2014 ). Beyond enjoyment-based intrinsic motivation, individuals also are likely to be intrinsically motivated by obligation. That is, obligation-based intrinsic motivation (to meet the morals, values. and ethics dictated by an individual) may exist (Li et al., 2012 ). This study focus on enjoyment-based intrinsic motivation.

We apply SDT to develop the links between leadership and intrinsic motivation. Drawing on SDT, all human beings have three basic psychological needs, namely, needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness (Ryan and Deci, 2000b ; Gagné and Deci, 2005 ; Deci and Ryan, 2014 ). The need for autonomy reflects the need to be the origin of their own behaviors and choices; the need for competence reflects the need to be competent, effective, and masterful; and the need for relatedness reflects the need to feel a sense of meaningful connection with at least some other people (Sheldon and Prentice, 2019 ). SDT argues that social contexts that satisfy these needs would increase intrinsic motivation (Deci and Ryan, 2000 ; Ryan and Deci, 2000b ).

Based on SDT, leadership would influence basic psychological needs, thus activating intrinsic motivation. First, transformational leaders use intellectual stimulation and individualized consideration to influence their followers. Intellectual stimulation would make their followers innovative, while individual consideration would meet their developmental needs (Bass, 1999 ). Positive leadership behaviors (i.e., intellectual stimulation and individual consideration) would allow transformational leaders to build a positive relationship with their followers and satisfy their followers' need for relatedness. Second, empowering leaders use multiple behaviors to support their followers' autonomy. For instance, empowering leaders share power with their followers, support subordinates' motivation to work autonomously, and promote subordinates' learning and development in their work roles (Amundsen and Martinsen, 2014 ). By doing so, empowering leaders are likely to build a positive association with their followers and thereby satisfy the need for relatedness. Third, servant leaders empower their followers. They encourage and facilitate their followers, in identifying and solving problems, and determining when and how to complete work tasks (Liden et al., 2008 ). As such, servant leaders are likely to build positive relationships with their followers, fulfilling the need for relatedness. Fourth, with a high quality of LMX, employees are likely to have a social exchange relationship including trust, loyalty, and commitment with their leaders (Dulebohn et al., 2012 ), satisfying the need for relatedness. Finally, ethical leaders show their honesty and trustworthiness to their followers and care for them (Brown and Treviño, 2006 ), which would help them to build positive relationships with their employees, satisfying their followers' need for the relatedness.

Together, transformational leadership, servant leadership, empowering leadership, LMX, and ethical leadership would satisfy their followers' need for relatedness. According to SDT, when psychological need is satisfied, individuals would be motivated intrinsically (Ryan and Deci, 2000b ). Besides, early studies found that transformational leadership (Al Harbi et al., 2019 ; Mahmood et al., 2019 ), servant leadership (Kong et al., 2017 ; Su et al., 2020 ), empowering leadership (Byun et al., 2016 ; Ju et al., 2019 ), LMX (Piccolo and Colquitt, 2006 ; Xie et al., 2020 ), and ethical leadership (Yidong and Xinxin, 2012 ; Potipiroon and Ford, 2017 ) are positively related to intrinsic motivation.

Hypothesis 1 : Transformational leadership (a), servant leadership (b), empowering leadership (c), ethical leadership (d), and LMX (e) will positively relate to intrinsic motivation.

Abusive supervision may harm their relationships with their followers through their abusive behavior. For example, they ridicule their followers and invade their followers' privacy (Tepper, 2000 ). Drawing on SDT (Deci and Ryan, 2000 ), abusive supervision would undermine the need for relatedness and thereby decrease their followers' intrinsic motivation. Previous studies found that abusive supervision is negatively linked to intrinsic motivation (Hussain et al., 2020 ; Onaran and Göncü-Köse, 2022 ).

Hypothesis 2 : Abusive supervision will negatively relate to intrinsic motivation.

Relative importance of leadership

Although five positive leadership styles may positively relate to intrinsic motivation, it is unclear what kinds of leadership contribute more variance to intrinsic motivation. Based on the need for relatedness, we could not explain which leadership styles might promote more intrinsic motivation. Fortunately, SDT is a very grand theory that includes many mini-theories, based on the organismic integration mini-theory, we try to explain the different impacts of leadership styles on intrinsic motivation. Besides, it seems very hard to compare all leadership together. As such, following early studies (Hoch et al., 2018 ; Lee et al., 2020a ), we use transformational leadership as a benchmark and then compare other leadership with it.

The organismic integration mini-theory argues all motivated behaviors can be located on an underlying autonomy continuum, somewhere between feeling a complete lack of self-determined to feeling completely self-determined (Ryan and Deci, 1989 , 2000a ). Drawing on SDT, leadership that provides a higher level of autonomy may link to a higher level of intrinsic motivation. First, compared to transformational leadership, empowering leadership may influence motivation that is more autonomous. In particular, transformational leaders may not empower their followers in some situations. For instance, Sharma and Kirkman ( 2015 ) argued that leaders may exhibit transformational behavior without actually transferring much control or power to their followers. However, empowering leaders encourages independence and autonomy (Amundsen and Martinsen, 2014 ). In other words, transformational leadership may undermine autonomy in some situations while empowering leaders may not. Drawing on SDT, the motivation influenced by empowering leadership rather than transformation leadership is more closed to intrinsic motivation. As such, empowering leadership may contribute a larger variance to intrinsic motivation than transformational leadership.

Second, servant leadership may influence a higher degree of autonomous motivation than transformational leadership. Servant leaders' primary focus is on their followers, while transformational leaders primarily focus on organizational objectives (Hoch et al., 2018 ). As such, servant leaders would consider more interests of their followers and provide more autonomy to their followers than transformational leaders. Besides, the measure of servant leadership includes empowerment (e.g., Liden et al., 2015 ), while empowerment was removed in the recent measure of transformational leadership (Bass, 1999 ). Together, compared to transformation leadership, servant leadership may provide more autonomy to their followers, contributing more variance to intrinsic motivation.

Third, ethical leadership may influence a lower degree of autonomous motivation relative to transformational leadership. The ethical leader would punish their followers who violate ethical standards (Brown et al., 2005 ). Although punishment is necessary in the organization, punishment is a kind of control that might undermine autonomy. Punishment is a kind of behavior in transactional leaders rather than transformational leaders (Bass, 1999 ). Thus, transformational leadership might undermine less autonomy than ethical leadership, contributing more variance to intrinsic motivation.

Fourth, LMX is a form of relational leadership (Liden and Maslyn, 1998 ). It does not emphasize empowerment or control. Drawing on SDT, it is quite hard to predict its relative importance to intrinsic motivation relative to transformational leadership. Although SDT could help us to illustrate the relative importance of leadership styles to some extent, similarities of concepts between leadership styles may limit us accurately predicting which leadership styles will contribute a larger part of the variance. For instance, early meta-analyses found large correlations between ethical leadership ( ρ = 0.70), servant leadership ( ρ = 0.52), and transformational leadership. As such, we do not propose a hypothesis. Instead, we try to answer the following research question:

Research Question 1 : Will empowering leadership (a), servant leadership (b), ethical leadership (c), and LMX (d) contribute more variance to intrinsic motivation relative to transformational leadership?

Moderators of leadership–intrinsic motivation

We choose two cultural dimensions as moderators for two reasons. The first one is that SDT literature (e.g., Chirkov et al., 2003 ; Church et al., 2013 ; Deci et al., 2017 ) focus on individualism and power distance. By researching these two moderators, we could contribute to SDT literature. The second one is that prior meta-analyses about leadership (e.g., Lee et al., 2020a , b ) focus on individualism and power distance, suggesting these two moderators are very important in leadership literature.

Power distance

Early meta-analyses (Lee et al., 2020a ; Li et al., 2021 ) have found power distance has a moderating effect on leadership effectiveness. Power distance reflects “the extent to which a society accepts the fact that power in institutions and organizations is distributed unequally” (Hofstede, 1980 , p. 45). Employees who are in a society with a high-power distance orientation expect direction from their leaders (Javidan et al., 2006 ). As such, leadership may have a stronger influence on employees in a high power distance country. That is, the association between leadership and intrinsic motivation will be stronger in a country with a higher power distance.

Hypothesis 3 : Power distance moderates the association between leadership and intrinsic motivation. In particular, the effect size will be higher when the sample comes from a country with a higher power distance.

Individualism

Individualism implies “a loosely knit social framework in which people are supposed to take care of themselves and of their immediate families only” (Hofstede, 1980 , p. 45). According to SDT, although all human beings have three basic psychological needs (Deci and Ryan, 2000 ), individuals vary in internalizing the influence of the environment. In the workplace, the degree of internalization of leaders' influence varies in different cultures. Internalization is relatively low in cultures with high individualism (Chirkov et al., 2003 ). In other words, when samples from a country with a higher individualism level, the impact of leadership would be weaker.

Hypothesis 4 : Individualism moderates the association between leadership and intrinsic motivation. In particular, the effect size will be lower when the sample comes from a country with a higher individualism.

When a study uses common source data, namely, independent and dependent variables are collected from a single time point, correlations are likely to inflate due to common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003 ). In contrast, using non-common source data may decrease the influence of common method bias to some extent. Previous meta-analyses (Lee et al., 2020a , b ) found that correlations are higher when using common source data.

Hypothesis 5 : Source the association between leadership and intrinsic motivation. In particular, the effect size will be higher when the study uses common source data.

Journal quality

The peer-review process for a paper published in a higher-quality journal is generally more rigorous. A rigorous peer-review process may influence the quality of data. That is, in a high-level quality journal, data are likely to have higher quality than in a relatively lower-level quality journal. For instance, papers published in the Journal of Applied Psychology (SSCI Q1) are more likely to have a higher quality of data than in a journal that was included in SSCI Q4. We want to know whether the journal quality would influence the correlations of interest.

Research Question 2 : Does journal quality moderate the links between leadership and intrinsic motivation?

Publication year

Since papers published in different years might be influenced by many factors (e.g., economic conditions and research paradigm), we want to know if the publication year moderates the effect sizes.

Research Question 3 : Does publication year moderate the links between leadership and intrinsic motivation?

This research used multiple strategies to identify studies that include relationships between leadership and intrinsic motivation. In particular, searches were conducted in the following databases in March 2022: PsycINFO and Web of Science. We used the following keywords: leadership and intrinsic motivation.

Inclusion criteria and coding

We employed several criteria to determine whether to include studies in our analyses. First, the study should be an empirical study that includes correlation(s). For instance, the qualitative review was removed because it does not provide a correlation. Second, studies should be written in English. Third, the sample should come from the workplace. For example, student and athlete samples were removed. Finally, leadership types should be one of the six we mentioned. In the coding process, we noticed some leadership styles have few studies ( k < 3). As such, these studies were excluded. To illustrate our research process, the PRISMA flowchart is presented in Figure 1 .

PRISMA flowchart.

Two of our authors coded the following information: bibliographic references (authors and publication year), sample description (sample size and country), research design/sampling strategy, effect sizes (correlations), and the reliabilities of all scales. For studies with multiple indicators of a focal construct, we averaged them (Hunter and Schmidt, 2004 ; Hoch et al., 2018 ). For example, when one study did not report an overall correlation between leadership and motivation, but only the correlations between dimensions of leadership and motivation, we averaged these correlations to evaluate an overall correlation.

We applied the Hunter-Schmidt method's meta-analysis methodology to correct sampling error and measurement error (Hunter and Schmidt, 2004 ). In particular, the measurement error was corrected by reliability individually. Cronbach's α was employed as the reliability. The details of reliability were shown in Table 2 . The sampling error was corrected by the random-effect model. Meta-analysis was performed using the psychmeta package (Dahlke and Wiernik, 2019 ) in R. The results of meta-analysis were shown in Table 3 .

Cronbach's α reliabilities of the current study.

Bivariate relationships between leadership and intrinsic motivation.

k, number of studies; n, total sample size in the meta-analysis; r, uncorrected effect size; ρ, corrected effect size; SDρ, standard deviation of the corrected effect size; CI, confidence interval; CV, credibility interval.

Following the guidance by Tonidandel and LeBreton ( 2011 ), we conducted a relative importance analysis. We built a meta-analytic correlation matrix for the relative importance analysis (see Table 4 ). Then, we applied RWA Web (Tonidandel and LeBreton, 2015 ) to accomplish this analysis. The results was provided in Table 5 .

Meta-analytic correlation matrix.

Unless stated, meta-analytic correlations were calculated by authors.

Relative weights analysis.

We employed meta-regression to detect the potential moderating effects of power distance, individualism, source, journal quality, and publication year. The index of power distance and individualism was extracted from Hofstede's website ( www.geerthofstede.com ). Source was coded as a dummy variable. In particular, “common source” was coded as “0,” while “non-common source” was coded as “1.” Journal quality was coded according to the journal rank. For instance, if one paper is published in SSCI Q4, it would be coded as 4; if one paper is published in SSCI Q1, it would be coded as 1. The regression was accomplished using metafor (Viechtbauer, 2010 ) package in R. In particular, we employed a random-effect model and regarded Restricted Maximum Likelihood (REML) method as an estimator to conduct our meta-regression. The results were presented in Table 6 .

Moderation analyses.

Finally, publication bias occurs because statistically significant results are published more frequently than studies without significant results (Rothstein et al., 2005 ). To ensure the robustness of the current study, we applied the trim-and-fill method (Duval and Tweedie, 2000 ) and Eggs' regression to detect publication bias (see Table 7 ).

Publication bias analysis.

Observed k, number of aggregated effect sizes included in analyses; Unadj. r+, unadjusted effect size estimate; imputed k, number of additional effect sizes added by trim-and-fill analyses; Adj. r+, adjusted effect size estimate (i.e., including imputed studies).

As shown in Table 3 , we find that abusive supervision ( ρ = −0.42, 95%CI = [−0.51, −0.32]) is negatively related to intrinsic motivation. Transformational leadership ( ρ = 0.37, 95%CI = [0.29, 0.45]), ethical leadership ( ρ = 0.49, 95%CI = [0.23, 0.74]), servant leadership ( ρ = 0.49, 95%CI = [0.17, 0.81]), empowering leadership ( ρ = 0.45, 95%CI = [0.29, 0.60]), and LMX ( ρ = 0.37, 95%CI = [0.25, 0.50]) are positively related to intrinsic motivation. Thus, H1 (a), H1 (b), H1 (c), H1 (d), H1 (e), and H2 are accepted.

As presented in Table 5 , empowering leadership (65.54%) played a more important role in explaining intrinsic motivation than transformational leadership (34.46%). Similarly, ethical leadership (71.36%) explained a larger portion of the variance than transformational leadership (28.64%). LMX (49.76%) and transformational leadership (50.24%) played a similar role in explaining intrinsic motivation. Servant leadership (69.98%) played a more important role than transformational leadership (30.02%). Together, RQ1 was answered.

As illustrated in Table 4 , we did not find evidence that supports the moderating effects of individualism and source. Regarding publication year, we found that the links between ethical (servant) leadership and intrinsic motivation were larger when the publication year was larger. Interestingly, for abusive supervision and empowering leadership, the correlation became larger as the journal quality became lower. These results answer RQ 2. In terms of power distance, we noticed that the correlation between servant leadership and intrinsic motivation became smaller when power distance became larger. These results answer RQ 3. Therefore, H4 and H5 were rejected, while H3 was accepted partly.

Finally, as depicted in Table 7 , the overall publication is not serious. First, drawing on Egg's regression method, among six leadership styles, all the p -value is bigger than 0.050, suggesting publication bias is not series. Second, the Trim-and-Fill method helps to fill asymmetric effect sizes and provides an adjusted overall effect size. In terms of empowering leadership, LMX, servant leadership, and transformational leadership, no asymmetric effect sizes were found. Regarding abusive supervision, effect size only changes by 0.01 after adjusting asymmetric effect sizes. For ethical leadership, effect size only changes by 0.03 after adjusting asymmetric effect sizes. Together, we did not find large changes after using the Trim-and-Fill method, confirming the robustness of the current meta-analysis.

Given the importance of intrinsic motivation in work, it is critical to understand the leadership–intrinsic motivation association. This study aimed to contribute to the leadership and intrinsic motivation literature by estimating the true population correlations between leadership styles and intrinsic motivation, comparing the relative importance of leadership to intrinsic motivation, and detecting the potential moderators of the relationship between leadership and intrinsic motivation. We discuss our findings in relation to our three key aims.

True population correlations

Cohen ( 2013 ) provided a standard to understand the magnitude of correlations. That is, small effect sizes are correlations of 0.10, moderate are 0.30, and large are 0.50. We applied this standard to discuss the magnitude of effect sizes. We found that abusive supervision ( ρ = −0.42) is moderately and negatively related to intrinsic motivation. Early meta-analyses (Mackey et al., 2015 ; Zhang and Liao, 2015 ) has found abusive supervision is positively related to a series of bad consequence such as counterproductive work behavior, emotional exhaustion, and so on. Our study enriches the understanding of the negative outcomes of abusive supervision, that is, abusive supervision is negatively associated with intrinsic motivation. Besides, it is worth mentioning that this correlation is large, indicating managers could not ignore the bad impact of abusive supervision on intrinsic motivation.

Transformational leadership ( ρ = 0.37) and LMX ( ρ = 0.37) are moderately and positively related to intrinsic motivation. These findings highlight the importance of these two leadership styles in organizations. Transformational leadership and LMX have been researched for more than 40 years. Our meta-analysis first quantitatively and accurately estimated their links with intrinsic motivation, contributing to transformational leadership and LMX literature. In the relationship between transformational leadership and intrinsic motivation, we noticed that one study (Li et al., 2012 ) measured intrinsic motivation using the obligation-based measure. We conducted a sensitivity analysis (leave-one-out analysis) to detect whether the measure of intrinsic motivation would influence the robustness of the results. We found that k changed from 29 to 28 and n changed from 9,852 to 9,734 after removing this study. However, r and ρ did not change, suggesting the robustness of the result. That is to say, the measure of intrinsic motivation did not influence the robustness of the current study. This result should be explained carefully because (a) these two kinds of definitions of intrinsic motivation are different to some extent and (b) only one study may not make us capture such influence when applying sensitivity analysis.

Ethical leadership ( ρ = 0.49), servant leadership ( ρ = 0.49), and empowering leadership ( ρ = 0.45) is positively and largely related to intrinsic motivation. Compared to transformational leadership and LMX, ethical leadership, servant leadership, and empowering leadership are three emerging forms of positive leadership and have been studied recently. The twenty-first century is the era of the knowledge economy, more and more jobs need intrinsic motivation. Thus, organizations need to provide employees with more autonomy. Using three positive leadership could be a good choice to provide autonomy to employees.

Relative importance

We found that empowering and servant leadership explain a larger variance in intrinsic motivation than transformational leadership. According to SDT (Deci and Ryan, 2010 ; Deci et al., 2017 ), when individuals are motivated intrinsically, they are likely to be creative and innovative. Lee et al. ( 2020a ) also found similar findings that empowering and servant leadership explain a larger variance in creativity than transformational leadership. Together, our findings provide solid evidence that servant and empowering leadership is important for individuals' intrinsic motivation.

LMX and transformational leadership had a similar role in explaining intrinsic motivation. Interestingly, Lee et al. ( 2020a ) finds LMX ( ρ = 0.34) and transformational leadership ( ρ = 0.31) have similar correlations with creativity. The theories and measures of these two leadership styles are quite different. Perhaps they both affect the needs for relatedness, causing them to have similar effects on intrinsic motivation and creativity.

Transformational leadership explained less variance in intrinsic motivation than ethical leadership, which is out of our expectation. In our hypothesis, we believed that ethical leadership may influence less autonomy than transformational leadership, causing ethical leadership to contribute less variance than transformational leadership. Lee et al. ( 2020a ) found ethical leadership explains a larger variance than transformational leadership in creativity. Ethical leadership is a kind of moral leadership. Why a moral leadership would contribute to more variance in intrinsic motivation? SDT may provide an explanation. SDT argues that three psychological needs independently influence intrinsic motivation (Deci et al., 2017 ). This argument has been confirmed by meta-analytic evidence (Slemp et al., 2018 ). Transformational leaders may not be ethical and abusive to their followers in some situations (Hoch et al., 2018 ), which may harm the need for relatedness and thereby decrease intrinsic motivation. As such, ethical leadership may influence a larger need for relatedness than transformational leadership. Together, more theoretical explanations and evidence are called to explain the links between ethical (transformational) leadership and intrinsic motivation.

In line with early studies (Lee et al., 2020a , b ; Lyubykh et al., 2022 ), power distance has been found to moderate leadership effectiveness. As such, leadership should be contingent according to culture. That is, there is no single type of leadership that works in all cultural situations. This point is especially important in multinational companies as the same leadership may have different effects in different cultures.

We did not find evidence that individualism has a moderating effect. This finding may suggest intrinsic motivation is a more universal concept. Intrinsic motivation is based on the enjoyment of the process rather than the consequence (Deci and Ryan, 2010 ). However, individualism is more likely to focus on the consequence immediately (Hofstede, 1980 ). As such, whether in a low or high individualism country, individuals may be motivated intrinsically equally due to the enjoyment of the process rather than the consequence, and thereby not be influenced by individualism.

Results did not support that source has a moderating effect. Although studies using common source data would suffer from common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003 ), these effects in the current study are not series. Nonetheless, we still recommend using time-lagged research designs to reduce the effect of common method bias.

We noticed that publication year had a moderating effect on some leadership. However, these findings should be explained carefully. Publication year may be associated with a lot of factors. For example, publication year may be linked to economy and management level that may influence leadership and motivation. Besides, publication year may be related to research quality as research quality may increase as time goes by. Together, the moderating effect of the publication year should be understood cautiously.

We noticed that the correlation became larger as the journal quality became lower. This finding is in line with our research experience. That is, the data quality would be higher in a journal with higher quality. When data quality is low, they tended to exhibit higher correlations due to an unrigorous research design. Unfortunately, few meta-analyses researched the modering effect of journal quality. We look forward to more meta-analyses focusing on this moderator variable

Practice implications

The current study also contributes to practice. Drawing on our findings, some management suggestions should be mentioned. First, managers should avoid using abusive supervision in the workplace. In the era of the knowledge economy, intrinsic motivation is very important to the employees' performance quality. However, abusive supervision would undermine intrinsic motivation deeply as the current study finds a strong and negative association between abusive supervision. Second, the organization should provide leadership training programs to managers. In particular, drawing on our findings, ethical, servant, and empowering leadership positively relate to intrinsic motivation. However, many managers are still lacking systematic leadership training. They just manage their followers according to their experience. The human resource department should provide these leadership training programs to managers. Finally, leaders should provide an antonomy support climate to their followers, increasing their followers' intrinsic motivation.

Limitations and future research directions

Two limitations should be mentioned. First, since the effect sizes used in this study are correlation coefficients, we could not make a valid causal inference. Although it is unlikely that reverse causality exists, for example, employee motivation influencing leadership, there may be a common factor that affects both leadership and employee motivation at the same time. For instance, organizational culture may influence both leadership and employee motivation at the same time. Future studies should use more experiment research designs to make accurate causality between leadership and intrinsic motivation.

Second, multicollinearity may harm the robustness of the current study. One positive leadership is usually highly correlated with other positive leadership, which in turn, may cause multicollinearity. For example, Hoch et al. ( 2018 ) find ethical ( ρ = 0.70) and servant ( ρ = 0.52) leadership are largely related to transformation leadership. Carlson and Herdman ( 2010 ) suggested that convergent validity is well when r is bigger than 0.7. In other words, measures of multiple leadership styles have well-convergent validity and they may reflect the same construct to some extent. At the same time, with the influence of multicollinearity, the links between leadership and intrinsic motivation might be biased. For instance, B leadership rather than A leadership is related to intrinsic motivation theoretically. However, due to the high correlation between A and B leadership, A leadership is found to be related to intrinsic motivation. As such, the link between A leadership and intrinsic motivation could be biased. Future studies should use more effective measures to decrease multicollinearity and make a clearer distinction between leadership and its influence on intrinsic motivation.

Leadership is important for the followers' intrinsic motivation. Although fruitful evidence has been accumulated, some unsolved issues still exist. To address these, the current study provides the first analysis between leadership and intrinsic motivation. Overall, positive leadership (e.g., transformational leadership and servant leadership) positively relate to intrinsic motivation, while abusive supervision negatively relates to intrinsic motivation. Empowering, ethical, and servant leadership explain a larger variance in intrinsic motivation than transformational leadership. Power distance, publication year, and journal quality moderates the association between leadership and intrinsic motivation. Our research enriches our understanding of the relationship between leadership and intrinsic motivation. We also provide some practice suggestions for managers drawing on our findings.

Data availability statement

Author contributions.

HX: idea. HX and YLuan: introduction. HX and YLuo: hypotheses. YLuo, YLuan, and NW: method. NW: result. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.941161/full#supplementary-material

• Al Harbi J. A., Alarifi S., Mosbah A. (2019). Transformation leadership and creativity . Pers. Rev. 48 , 1082–1099. 10.1108/PR-11-2017-0354 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Amundsen S., Martinsen Ø. L. (2014). Empowering leadership: construct clarification, conceptualization, and validation of a new scale . Leadersh. Q. 25 , 487–511. 10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.009 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bass B. M. (1999). Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership . Eur. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 8 , 9–32. 10.1080/135943299398410 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brown M. E., Treviño L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: a review and future directions . Leadersh. Q. 17 , 595–616. 10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.10.004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brown M. E., Treviño L. K., Harrison D. A. (2005). Ethical leadership: a social learning perspective for construct development and testing . Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 97 , 117–134. 10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.03.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Burton K. D., Lydon J. E., D'Alessandro D. U., Koestner R. (2006). The differential effects of intrinsic and identified motivation on well-being and performance: prospective, experimental, and implicit approaches to self-determination theory . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 91 , 750–762. 10.1037/0022-3514.91.4.750 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Byun G., Dai Y., Lee S., Kang S.-W. (2016). When does empowering leadership enhance employee creativity? A three-way interaction test . Soc. Behav. Pers. 44 , 1555–1564. 10.2224/sbp.2016.44.9.1555 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Carlson K. D., Herdman A. O. (2010). Understanding the impact of convergent validity on research results . Organ. Res. Methods 15 , 17–32. 10.1177/1094428110392383 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cerasoli C. P., Nicklin J. M., Ford M. T. (2014). Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives jointly predict performance: a 40-year meta-analysis . Psychol. Bull. 140 , 980–1008. 10.1037/a0035661 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chirkov V., Ryan R. M., Kim Y., Kaplan U. (2003). Differentiating autonomy from individualism and independence: a self-determination theory perspective on internalization of cultural orientations and well-being . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 84 , 97–110. 10.1037/0022-3514.84.1.97 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Church A. T., Katigbak M. S., Locke K. D., Zhang H., Shen J., de Jesùs Vargas-Flores J., et al.. (2013). Need satisfaction and well-being: Testing self-determination theory in eight cultures . J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 44 , 507–534. 10.1177/0022022112466590 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cohen J. (2013). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences . New York, NY: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203771587 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dahlke J. A., Wiernik B. M. (2019). psychmeta: an R package for psychometric meta-analysis . Appl. Psychol. Meas. 43 , 415–416. 10.1177/0146621618795933 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• de Jesus S. N., Rus C. L., Lens W., Imaginário S. (2013). Intrinsic motivation and creativity related to product: a meta-analysis of the studies published between 1990–2010 . Creat. Res. J. 25 , 80–84. 10.1080/10400419.2013.752235 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Deci E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 18 , 105–115. 10.1037/h0030644 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Deci E. L., Koestner R., Ryan R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation . Psychol. Bull. 125 , 627–668. 10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.627 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Deci E. L., Olafsen A. H., Ryan R. M. (2017). Self-determination theory in work organizations: the state of a science . Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav. 4 , 19–43. 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113108 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Deci E. L., Ryan R. M. (2000). The what and why of goal pursuits: human needs and the self-determination of behavior . Psychol. Inq. 11 , 227–268. 10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Deci E. L., Ryan R. M. (2010). Intrinsic motivation . In: Weiner I. B., Craighead W. E. edItors. The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology (Hoboken: John Wiley and Sons, Inc; ), 1–2. 10.1002/9780470479216.corpsy0467 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Deci E. L., Ryan R. M. (2014). Autonomy and need satisfaction in close relationships: relationships motivation theory, in Human Motivation and Interpersonal Relationships (Dordrecht, NL: Springer; ), 53–73. 10.1007/978-94-017-8542-6_3 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dulebohn J. H., Bommer W. H., Liden R. C., Brouer R. L., Ferris G. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of antecedents and consequences of leader-member exchange: integrating the past with an eye toward the future . J. Manage. 38 , 1715–1759. 10.1177/0149206311415280 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Duval S., Tweedie R. (2000). Trim and fill: a simple funnel-plot–based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis . Biometrics 56 , 455–463. 10.1111/j.0006-341X.2000.00455.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Eva N., Robin M., Sendjaya S., van Dierendonck D., Liden R. C. (2019). Servant leadership: a systematic review and call for future research . Leadersh. Q. 30 , 111–132. 10.1016/j.leaqua.2018.07.004 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gagné M., Deci E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation . J. Organ. Behav. 26 , 331–362. 10.1002/job.322 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hoch J. E., Bommer W. H., Dulebohn J. H., Wu D. (2018). Do ethical, authentic, and servant leadership explain variance above and beyond transformational leadership? A meta-analysis . J. Manage. 44 , 501–529. 10.1177/0149206316665461 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hofstede G. (1980). Motivation, leadership, and organization: do American theories apply abroad? Organ. Dyn. 9 , 42–63. 10.1016/0090-2616(80)90013-3 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hunter J. E., Schmidt F. L. (2004). Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings . Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hussain K., Abbas Z., Gulzar S., Jibril A. B., Hussain A., Foroudi P. (2020). Examining the impact of abusive supervision on employees' psychological wellbeing and turnover intention: the mediating role of intrinsic motivation . Cogent Bus. Manage. 7 , 1–21. 10.1080/23311975.2020.1818998 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Javidan M., House R. J., Dorfman P. W., Hanges P. J., Sully de Luque M. (2006). Conceptualizing and measuring cultures and their consequences: a comparative review of GLOBE's and Hofstede's approaches . J. Int. Bus. Stud. 37 , 897–914. 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400234 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ju D., Ma L., Ren R., Zhang Y. (2019). Empowered to break the silence: applying self-determination theory to employee silence . Front. Psychol. 10 :485. 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00485 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kong M., Xu H., Zhou A., Yuan Y. (2017). Implicit followership theory to employee creativity: the roles of leader–member exchange, self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation . J. Manage. Organ. 25 , 81–95. 10.1017/jmo.2017.18 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee A., Legood A., Hughes D., Tian A. W., Newman A., Knight C. (2020a). Leadership, creativity and innovation: a meta-analytic review . Eur. J. Work Organ. Psychol. 29 , 1–35. 10.1080/1359432X.2019.1661837 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee A., Lyubovnikova J., Tian A. W., Knight C. (2020b). Servant leadership: a meta-analytic examination of incremental contribution, moderation, and mediation . J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 93 , 1–44. 10.1111/joop.12265 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee A., Willis S., Tian A. W. (2018). Empowering leadership: A meta-analytic examination of incremental contribution, mediation, and moderation . J. Organ. Behav. 39 , 306–325. 10.1002/job.2220 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Li P., Sun J.-M., Taris T. W., Xing L., Peeters M. C. (2021). Country differences in the relationship between leadership and employee engagement: a meta-analysis . Leadersh. Q. 32 :101458. 10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101458 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Li Y., Tan C.-H., Teo H.-H. (2012). Leadership characteristics and developers' motivation in open source software development . Inf. Manag. 49 , 257–267. 10.1016/j.im.2012.05.005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liden R. C., Maslyn J. M. (1998). Multidimensionality of leader-member exchange: an empirical assessment through scale development . J. Manage. 24 , 43–72. 10.1016/S0149-2063(99)80053-1 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liden R. C., Wayne S. J., Meuser J. D., Hu J., Wu J., Liao C. (2015). Servant leadership: validation of a short form of the SL-28 . Leadersh. Q. 26 , 254–269. 10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.12.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liden R. C., Wayne S. J., Zhao H., Henderson D. (2008). Servant leadership: development of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment . Leadersh. Q. 19 , 161–177. 10.1016/j.leaqua.2008.01.006 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lyubykh Z., Turner N., Hershcovis M. S., Deng C. (2022). A meta-analysis of leadership and workplace safety: examining relative importance, contextual contingencies, and methodological moderators . J. Appl. Psychol . 10.1037/apl0000557. [Epub ahead of print]. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mackey J. D., Frieder R. E., Brees J. R., Martinko M. J. (2015). Abusive supervision: a meta-analysis and empirical review . J. Manage. 43 , 1940–1965. 10.1177/0149206315573997 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mahmood M., Uddin M. A., Fan L. (2019). The influence of transformational leadership on employees' creative process engagement . Manag. Decis. 57 , 741–764. 10.1108/MD-07-2017-0707 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nguyen T. P. L., Nguyen T. T., Duong C. D., Doan X. H. (2022). The effects of transformational leadership on employee creativity in Vietnam telecommunications enterprises . Manage. Decis. 60 , 837–857. 10.1108/MD-07-2020-0882 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Onaran S. O., Göncü-Köse A. (2022). Mediating processes in the relationships of abusive supervision with instigated incivility, CWBs, OCBs, and multidimensional work motivation . Curr. Psychol . 10.1007/s12144-022-03128-5. [Epub ahead of print]. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Patall E. A., Cooper H., Robinson J. C. (2008). The effects of choice on intrinsic motivation and related outcomes: a meta-analysis of research findings . Psychol. Bull. 134 , 270–300. 10.1037/0033-2909.134.2.270 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Piccolo R. F., Colquitt J. A. (2006). Transformational leadership and job behaviors: the mediating role of core job characteristics . Acad. Manag. J. 49 , 327–340. 10.5465/amj.2006.20786079 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Podsakoff P. M., MacKenzie S. B., Lee J. Y., Podsakoff N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies . J. Appl. Psychol. 88 , 879–903. 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Potipiroon W., Ford M. T. (2017). Does public service motivation always lead to organizational commitment? Examining the moderating roles of intrinsic motivation and ethical leadership . Public Pers. Manag. 46 , 211–238. 10.1177/0091026017717241 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rothstein H. R., Sutton A. J., Borenstein M. (2005). Publication bias in meta-analysis, in Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis: Prevention, Assessment and Adjustments (Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons; ), 1–7. 10.1002/0470870168 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ryan R. M., Deci E. L. (1989). Perceived locus of causality and internalization: examining reasons for acting in two domains . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 57 , 749–761. 10.1037/0022-3514.57.5.749 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ryan R. M., Deci E. L. (2000a). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new directions . Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 25 , 54–67. 10.1006/ceps.1999.1020 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ryan R. M., Deci E. L. (2000b). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being . Am. Psychol. 55 , 68–78. 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Salas-Vallina A., Alegre J. (2018). Unselfish leaders? Understanding the role of altruistic leadership and organizational learning on happiness at work (HAW) . Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J. 39 , 633–649. 10.1108/LODJ-11-2017-0345 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sharma P. N., Kirkman B. L. (2015). Leveraging leaders: a literature review and future lines of inquiry for empowering leadership research . Group Organ. Manag. 40 , 193–237. 10.1177/1059601115574906 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sheldon K. M., Prentice M. (2019). Self-determination theory as a foundation for personality researchers . J. Pers. 87 , 5–14. 10.1111/jopy.12360 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Slemp G. R., Kern M. L., Patrick K. J., Ryan R. M. (2018). Leader autonomy support in the workplace: a meta-analytic review . Motiv. Emot. 42 , 706–724. 10.1007/s11031-018-9698-y [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Su W., Lyu B., Chen H., Zhang Y. (2020). How does servant leadership influence employees' service innovative behavior? The roles of intrinsic motivation and identification with the leader . Balt. J. Manag. 15 , 571–586. 10.1108/BJM-09-2019-0335 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tepper B. J. (2000). Consequences of abusive supervision . Acad. Manag. J. 43 , 178–190. 10.2307/1556375 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tonidandel S., LeBreton J. M. (2011). Relative importance analysis: a useful supplement to regression analysis . J. Bus. Psychol. 26 , 1–9. 10.1007/s10869-010-9204-3 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tonidandel S., LeBreton J. M. (2015). RWA web: a free, comprehensive, web-based, and user-friendly tool for relative weight analyses . J. Bus. Psychol. 30 , 207–216. 10.1007/s10869-014-9351-z [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Viechtbauer W. (2010). Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package . J. Stat. Softw. 36 , 1–48. 10.18637/jss.v036.i03 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Xie Z., Wu N., Yue T., Jie J., Hou G., Fu A. (2020). How leader-member exchange affects creative performance: an examination from the perspective of self-determination theory . Front. Psychol. 11 :573793. 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.573793 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yidong T., Xinxin L. (2012). How ethical leadership influence employees' innovative work behavior: a perspective of intrinsic motivation . J. Bus. Ethics 116 , 441–455. 10.1007/s10551-012-1455-7 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang Y., Liao Z. (2015). Consequences of abusive supervision: a meta-analytic review . Asia Pac. J. Manag. 32 , 959–987. 10.1007/s10490-015-9425-0 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]