Editorial summary. This is our text summary of an article published by PLOS ONE. Charts, figures, and the author’s full voice are at the original — read it there .
Editorial verdict
Methodologically rigorous. The longitudinal multilevel design and large nested sample strengthen causal inference, but single-organisation sampling and self-report measures limit generalisability — treat the directional findings with reasonable confidence, the practical recommendations with appropriate caution.
Executive summary
This article addresses how engaging leadership influences work engagement at the individual level and team effectiveness at the team level, with a focus on identifying mediating mechanisms. The authors — Mazzetti and Schaufeli (2022) — argue that engaging leadership, grounded in Self-Determination Theory, fosters follower engagement and team effectiveness by building personal resources (psychological capital: optimism, resiliency, self-efficacy, and flexibility) and team resources (performance feedback, trust in management, communication, and participation in decision-making). Using a two-wave longitudinal design with N = 1,048 employees nested within 90 work teams from a single Dutch public service agency, and analysed via Multilevel Structural Equation Modelling (MSEM), the study finds that psychological capital partially mediated the relationship between engaging leadership and individual work engagement, while team resources fully mediated the relationship between shared perceptions of engaging leadership and team effectiveness. A significant cross-level effect was also observed: team resources positively influenced individual work engagement. The study concludes that engaging leadership operates through both individual-level psychological and collective team-level resource mechanisms to produce positive organisational outcomes.
Key insights
- 1Psychological capital (optimism, resiliency, self-efficacy, and flexibility) partially mediates the longitudinal relationship between individual perceptions of engaging leadership at T1 and work engagement at T2, indicating that direct effects of engaging leadership on engagement also exist beyond resource-building pathways.
- 2Team resources (performance feedback, trust in management, communication, and participation in decision-making) fully mediate the relationship between shared team-level perceptions of engaging leadership at T1 and team effectiveness at T2, suggesting the effect of engaging leadership on team outcomes is entirely resource-dependent.
- 3A significant cross-level effect was identified: team-level resources had a positive impact on individual work engagement (β = .57), indicating that collective team climate processes independently contribute to individual engagement over and above individual-level resource mechanisms.
Practical takeaways
- Organisations investing in leadership development programmes, coaching, or workshops oriented toward inspiring, strengthening, and connecting behaviours may observe downstream effects on both individual psychological capital and collective team resources, with corresponding associations with engagement and team effectiveness.
- The finding that psychological capital is state-like and developable suggests that interventions targeting personal resources — such as structured PsyCap Interventions — alongside leadership development may address engagement through complementary pathways.
Frameworks mentioned
Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model
A motivational model positing that job resources and challenging demands are inherently motivating and lead to work engagement; used here as the overarching theoretical structure linking leadership to engagement outcomes.
Self-Determination Theory (SDT)
A psychological theory of motivation proposing that satisfaction of three basic psychological needs — autonomy, competence, and relatedness — is essential for optimal functioning; used as the theoretical foundation for the engaging leadership construct.
Average Leadership Style (ALS)
A multilevel leadership model positing that leaders display a consistent style toward all team members, resulting in homogeneous leader-follower interactions within teams but variation across teams.
References
- Journal of Happiness Studies (2002).The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach.
- Frontiers in Psychology (2021).Bottom-up interventions effective in promoting work engagement: A Systematic review and meta-analysis.
- Psychological Reports (2021).Work engagement: A meta-analysis using the Job Demands-Resources model.
- Organizational Dynamics (2017).Applying the Job Demands-Resources model: A 'how to' guide to measuring and tackling work engagement and burnout.
- Journal of Managerial Psychology (2007).The job demands-resources model: State of the art.
- Psychological Inquiry (2000).The 'what' and 'why' of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior.
- Career Development International (2015).Engaging leadership in the job demands-resources model.
- Human Resource Development Review (2015).Leadership and employee engagement: Proposing research agendas through a review of literature.
- German Journal of Human Resource Management (2019).Leadership and work engagement: Exploring explanatory mechanisms.
- The Academy of Management Annals (2013).A critical assessment of charismatic-transformational leadership research: Back to the drawing board?.
- Organizational Psychology Review (2018).Construct proliferation in leadership style research: Reviewing pro and contra arguments.
- Personnel Psychology (2007).Positive psychological capital: Measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction.
- Human Resource Development Quarterly (2019).Basic psychological need satisfaction mediates the relationship between engaging leadership and work engagement: A cross-national study.
- Leadership & Organization Development Journal (2020).How engaging leaders foster employees' work engagement.
- European Management Journal (2019).Engaging leader–Engaged employees? A cross-lagged study on employee engagement.
- International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (2020).Engaging leadership and its implication for work engagement and job outcomes at the individual and team level: A multi-level longitudinal study.
- Human Resource Management (2021).The challenge of increasing employees' wellbeing and performance: How human resource management practices and engaging leadership work together toward reaching this goal.
- International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (2020).Business results and well-being: An engaging leadership intervention study.
- The Leadership Quarterly (2013).Transformational leadership, job satisfaction, and team performance: A multilevel mediation model of trust.
- Journal of Applied Psychology (2004).A multiple-goal, multilevel model of feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team performance.
- Academy of Management Review (1995).An integrative model of organizational trust.
- The Leadership Quarterly (2006).What type of leadership behaviors are functional in teams? A meta-analysis.
- European Journal of Psychological Assessment (2017).An ultra-short measure for work engagement: The UWES-3 validation across five countries.
- Journal of Applied Psychology (2010).Linking job demands and resources to employee engagement and burnout: a theoretical extension and meta-analytic test.
- Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (2010).The power of positive psychology: Psychological capital and work engagement.
Source & Provenance
PLOS ONE
Mazzetti & Schaufeli
Not specified
Research Study
Europe
Original source metadata is preserved. AI analysis is generated separately.
Like this? Get the Monday Decision Brief — free, every week.
No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
Rate this article
Want the full article? Read it at the original source — free, no paywall.
Read original article