Transformational leadership in educational contexts: impact on teachers' occupational health and perspectives from international evidence

INTRODUCTION

Leadership has been classically defined as a set of personality qualities and capabilities oriented toward guiding and coordinating other individuals through interpersonal influence and communication processes aimed at achieving goals.(1,2) This early notion, collected in the Dictionary of Behavioral Sciences,(3) anticipates the relevance of leadership as an organizational phenomenon. Currently, leadership constitutes a central concept for explaining labor and institutional dynamics and, when analyzed as formal leadership, is usually linked to direction, administration, and management, considered basic managerial competencies.(4) From this perspective, leadership is not limited to a hierarchical function, but rather is configured as a relational process that affects structure, organizational climate, and collective performance.(5)

In the educational field, leadership practices have undergone significant transformations in recent decades, largely associated with educational policy reforms that promote greater institutional autonomy and, simultaneously, increase responsibility for school outcomes (6,7). This scenario has shifted attention from traditional administrative models toward approaches that consider the school as a complex organization, where leadership influences not only academic management but also the well-being of teaching staff (8,9). However, the study of educational leadership faces a persistent difficulty: most research reports practices considered successful, while comparative studies remain limited. Various authors have pointed out the need to develop new theoretical and methodological approaches that allow understanding school leadership from more integrative scientific frameworks, avoiding disciplinary fragmentation among administrative, sociological, and pedagogical approaches (10,11).

Within contemporary theories, transformational leadership has achieved a dominant position in the international literature.(12) Derived from Burns's proposal,(13) subsequently developed by Avolio and Bass,(14) this model describes a leadership style characterized by idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. Its application to the educational field has emphasized the leader's ability to build shared visions, generate high expectations, promote creativity in problem solving, and provide support for the professional and personal development of workers.(15,16) Despite its widespread dissemination, transformational leadership has received criticism related to its theoretical falsifiability and to the tendency of being adopted as a theory imported from the business field without sufficient adjustments to educational specificities.(17) These tensions have given rise to debates about its relevance and about the need to integrate it with other conceptual frameworks specific to educational administration.(18)

International reviews agree that the relationship between leadership styles and organizational variables continues to be an expanding field.(19) In particular, empirical evidence has begun to explore the connection between leadership and occupational health, including occupational stress, professional burnout, and job satisfaction.(20,21) Recent meta-analyses suggest that leadership behaviors are associated with stress levels of both leaders and subordinates, and that positive leadership styles could buffer certain psychosocial risks.(22,23) However, the available results are still heterogeneous and, in many cases, derive from non-educational contexts, which limits their direct transfer to schools. In the school setting, most research remains focused on indicators of institutional effectiveness, academic performance, and job satisfaction, while teacher health as a specific dimension remains insufficiently explored.

This gap is relevant when considering that teaching is a profession exposed to multiple psychosocial risk factors, including work overload, emotional demands, administrative pressure, and role ambiguity.(24,25) From contemporary occupational health models, work organization and leadership style are recognized as structural determinants that can aggravate or mitigate these risks. Consequently, analyzing transformational leadership from a teacher occupational health perspective implies shifting the focus from mere institutional effectiveness toward the human sustainability of the educational system.

Recent literature indicates that transformational leadership may be associated with favorable emotional states in teachers, better pedagogical practices, and working conditions perceived as more positive.(26,27,28) However, the magnitude of its association with health variables, such as stress and burnout, has been reported as slight and poorly documented. This discrepancy between the theoretical popularity of the model and the robustness of the empirical evidence suggests the need for critical reviews that integrate international findings, identify contradictions, and more precisely delimit its scope in educational contexts.

Within this framework, this article aims to analyze the available international evidence on transformational leadership in education and its impact on teacher occupational health, identifying trends, gaps, and future research perspectives. An integrative approach is adopted that considers the school as a work organization, recognizing that teacher well-being depends not only on individual factors but also on organizational structures, educational policies, and management practices. Based on this review, the aim is to contribute to the discussion on healthy educational leadership and to the construction of theoretical frameworks that articulate school management and occupational health.

METHODS

The present study was developed as a narrative review with an integrative approach to analyze international evidence on transformational leadership in educational contexts and its relationship with teacher occupational health. This type of review allows the articulation of findings from different research traditions, integrating empirical studies, theoretical reviews, and meta-analyses to identify trends, contradictions, and gaps in the literature. The choice of this approach reflects the conceptual and methodological heterogeneity of the field, in which research from organizational psychology, educational administration, and occupational health converges.

RESULTS

In a review of educational leadership, the authors state that it is necessary to continue generating proposals; it is recognized that much remains to be learned about leadership styles and their association with variables to develop school contexts.(29) According to the model of Avolio et al. (30), the components of transformational leadership are: (1) Idealized influence or Charisma, (2) Inspirational motivation, (3) Intellectual stimulation, (4) Individualized Consideration, (5) Psychological tolerance. The characteristics that distinguish transactional leadership are: (1) Contingent reward (2)

Studies reported at both the international and national levels demonstrate the need for further investigation into occupational health, leadership as a competence, and schools as healthy organizations. A meta-analysis conducted by Harms et al.(31) aimed to explore the relationship between three leadership constructs (transformational leadership, leader-member exchange, and abusive supervision), stress, and mental exhaustion. The researchers sought to explain the relationship between leadership styles and occupational stress and to determine how leadership styles influence occupational stress. The results supported the idea that leadership behaviors are affected by whether or not leaders experience stress. In turn, positive and negative leader behaviors and the relationships they develop with subordinates significantly determine stress outcomes in subordinates. Transformational leadership was found to be the most effective according to the meta-analytic review conducted by the authors. The need for future research concerning the boundary conditions of these relationships is highlighted, and the evidence presented generates new directions for leadership development training programs. The authors recommend that the results obtained lead to better working conditions for directors (leaders) and followers and improve the ability to develop better leaders, while also highlighting how inconclusive the studies are for shedding light on the topic they set out to address (31).

In a study of five platoons of the Spanish army (n = 243) that examined an exploratory model to evaluate the relationship between transformational leadership and group potency and to analyze the mediating role of group identification and group cohesion, 98% were men and 2% women, with a mean age of 26.1 years (SD 5.1). A positive and direct relationship was found between transformational leadership and group potency (β = .37, p < .01), explaining a proportion of variance (R^2) of .1. The proposed theoretical model suggests that military leaders at the most basic levels, through a transformational leadership style, influence group potency by developing group identification and group cohesion in the team (32).

In a study conducted in Somalia that aimed to analyze the impact of transactional, transformational, and laissez-faire leadership styles on job satisfaction among basic secondary school teachers (n = 210), participants were predominantly aged 26–35 years (71%), the most frequent educational level was a master's degree (90.5%), and 86.2% were men. Logistic regression analysis suggested three significant models: the laissez-faire style explained 47% of the variance in teacher satisfaction, the transactional style explained 15%, and the transformational leadership style explained 14% of the dependent variable (33). Thus, laissez-faire was the style that generated the most job satisfaction in this sample from Somalia.

In a study that aimed to examine the effect of transformational leadership on work stress among senior managers in Kenya, (n = 162) with the 40 to 49 age group predominating (38%) and mostly men (69%), based on a linear regression model, the results show (R^2 = .253) that 25.3% of the variance in work stress is explained by transformational leadership. The transformational leadership dimensions of modeling the way and inspiring a shared vision were key determinants in reducing work stress, while the dimensions of challenging the process, enabling others to act, and encouraging the heart did not influence work stress. Modeling the way had a positive effect on work stress, as did inspiring a shared vision. Work stress negatively influenced senior managers in commercial state-owned enterprises in Kenya.(34) This research was not conducted specifically in the school context, but it confirms that transformational leadership is the most suitable for reducing psychosocial risk factors and work stress; it is used due to the scarcity of studies in the educational area, and these results are transferred to school systems, taking into account the school as one organization and respecting its peculiarities.

According to a review conducted in Nigeria, the authors aimed to propose that outstanding principles and styles of educational leadership be adopted as a means to improve school management in Nigeria, given that currently no indicators of educational progress are identified after decades of training in public school administration. It is highlighted that most of the proposed principles are based on transformational criteria and declare, among them, that the educational leader should generate healthy and empowering spaces in schools.(35)

According to a systematic review on school leadership in Singapore, specific qualities, styles, and roles of principals are highlighted. Two fundamental trends are observed. The former relates to the acquisition and development of traits and skills necessary for effective leadership, including motivation skills and social skills, as well as the combination of leadership styles. Prospective school leaders in Singapore receive extensive training before taking the principalship. There is consensus regarding the styles to be used in the educational community. The latter trend found in this study is that various roles of school leaders are regarded as important, and that principals play an active role in facilitating leadership. The participation of principals in leadership development is a central component of leadership effectiveness in the Singapore school system.(36)

In national primary schools in the district of Kinta Selatan, Perak, Malaysia, according to a study that aimed to determine the level of transformational leadership practices of principals in their schools (n = 275). The results showed that the transformational leadership practices perceived by teachers are at a moderate level, with a mean of 2.59 (SD 0.62) on a Likert scale from 0 to 5, and there is a significant relationship between the level of transformational leadership and job satisfaction, (R = 0.138, p < 0.05) in primary school teachers. The importance of transformational leadership is highlighted and supported by previous studies by Holline (2007). It is suggested to implement transformational practices and that this affects the educational system in Malaysia.(37)

A study conducted in Turkey on the effect of leadership styles of basic education principals on teachers and job satisfaction determined that there is an increase in the effect of each of the leadership behaviors (authentic, ethical, and transformational) on leader effectiveness and on teachers' job satisfaction. The logistic regression performed showed that leaders who had authentic traits, ethical leadership, and transformational leadership considerably increased the level of leader effectiveness. When analyzing the Beta coefficients, the relative contribution of each of the independent variables was demonstrated, and it was confirmed that ethical leadership was the strongest predictor of leader effectiveness, together with transformational leadership. It is shown that transactional leadership affects job satisfaction positively. In particular, the contingent reward dimension of transactional leadership affects job satisfaction in a positive manner (38). This determines that in Turkey, transformational leadership, together with ethical leadership, and one dimension of transactional leadership, is effective.

In a review on school leadership in Latin America,(39) it was reported that school systems tend to show a new mixed form, developed by private providers such as universities, foundations, etc., and by public providers belonging to ministries of education, state universities, etc. These institutions are generally not specialized in leadership and management, except in the Dominican Republic. Restrictions are evident for developing quality school leader training from public policies, since there are neither adequate parameters nor the capacity to follow ongoing training programs. There is also an absence of actions to promote leadership in the medium and long term, except in Chile.

Another important point regarding the context is that, except for Argentina, the school systems studied differentiate salaries between teachers and principals. This difference shows great variability, for example, from 16% in Mexico to 200% above the national minimum basic salary for some principals in Chile.

According to this report, conducting a comparative analysis is complex given the contextual differences. Although the evidence available in these school systems is not systematic, it is apparent that becoming a principal is attractive to many teachers, which determines the need for further approaches to the topic of leadership as a competency, due to its importance for the development of school systems. This report does not address teacher health as a priority, nor studies concerning psychosocial risk factors and teacher occupational stress.

Research on transformational leadership, according to the systematic review conducted by Cruz-Ortiz et al.(40), shows that organizational structures need leaders to motivate workers, but considering work teams as a whole. The most relevant reported result is that current research has mostly addressed the antecedents of transformational leadership, its possible effects, and outcomes at the level of workers and the organization. Intervening variables (mediating and moderating) are identified in the leadership process, but few studies suggest designing intervention lines aimed at optimizing transformational leadership. It is recommended that longitudinal studies be conducted, as they are currently infrequent, as well as multilevel analyses of the transformational leadership process because it is multicausal and affects all levels from an organizational point of view.(40)

In a study conducted by Sun,(41) in which he systematized meta-analyses, after a search in the ProQuest online database covering the main journals and indexes on topics such as public management, management in different business sectors, sociology, and psychology, new information on the topic was collected for the period from 2005 to 2016. American approaches predominate, although studies conducted in Australia, Canada, China, Cyprus, Israel, Jordan, Kenya, Turkey, and the United Kingdom were found. Added to this review were unpublished evidence/dissertations produced by experts such as Sun and Leithwood,(29) on the topic of school transformational leadership. As a relevant finding of this research, it is stated that transformational leadership is the one with the greatest number of empirical studies conducted and has the greatest influence on policies for fostering school leadership. It has an impact on organizational and individual outcome variables, on management practices, and on students' academic performance. The author takes into account the convention for evaluating the magnitude of effect sizes established by Cohen,(42) in which a large relationship is ≥50, moderate means ≤50 and ≥30, and small is defined as ≤30 and ≥10. Taking this classification into account, it was found that the relationships between leadership and health variables are scarce, with only one study referenced involving the variables job stress and burnout, in which the relationship is significant but small (≤30 and ≥10).

The most relevant results of the research showed that school transformational leadership has a large relationship with teachers' emotional states and teaching practices. It also impacts favorable working conditions. It determined that the main dimensions that influence successful school transformational leadership are related to modeling the way, which implies fostering a shared vision, consensual goals, and generating high performance expectations. Another dimension that gained relevance is that of empowering people, which implies the intellectual stimulation of teachers. It was also reported in this study as a finding that the most current conceptualizations are placing more emphasis on strengthening the school organizational culture through transformational school leadership practices such as the creation of collaborative structures and the strengthening of a school culture. The important role of management through transactional leadership is also highlighted, where it is emphasized that there is a dependence between transactional and transformational behaviors, in which both styles are combined. Through this study, it was confirmed that there is scarce evidence on the antecedents of this leadership, so more global research is needed to explain the factors that account for this leadership style. It was proposed that studies be conducted that include mediating and moderating variables, and that more complex statistical modeling be used, such as structural equation models.(41)

Regarding Mexico, due to the country's current situation, existing empirical evidence and the collectivist tendency of Mexican society allow predicting that transformational leadership should be the most frequent and effective, followed by transactional and then passive-avoidant. This assertion was justified through one study aimed at identifying, using the leadership model of Avolio et al.,(30) which leadership styles are exercised by federal officials in the centralized public administration of Mexico (n = 1433). The hierarchical pattern expected in the relationship between leadership styles and performance indicators was the augmentative effect of transformational style over transactional and the prominence of transformational at the highest hierarchical levels.(43)

In a recent study in primary schools in Mexico, which aimed to determine the influence of leadership subscales on burnout subscales of teaching and administrative staff from three Escuelas Normales in the State of Mexico (n = 100), transformational leadership significantly influenced satisfaction (β = 0.61) and is also related to extra effort (β = 0.58). Transactional leadership had a significant direct influence on satisfaction (β = 0.35). Transactional leadership had an inverse influence on reduced personal accomplishment, while laissez-faire had a positive influence. The theoretical and empirical findings from previous studies were reaffirmed, such as significant direct correlations between the leadership subscales (transformational, transactional, and outcome variables), and all of them inverse with laissez-faire. Likewise, significant direct correlations among all burnout subscales. These results allow understanding of the need for teachers to agree upon their work commitment with the principals, and for principals to develop leadership that can directly influence satisfaction and extra effort of their staff in order to be more competent in their management functions.(44)

It is worth highlighting that studies from this perspective are scarce and in demand, making it necessary to determine how leadership, from a competency-based approach of the school principal in Mexico, influences the reduction of psychosocial risks and work stress. A stance focused on disease prevention is adopted, based on the WHO model on healthy work environments, which understands leadership as an under-explored variable, as well as its effects on the psychosocial risk factors that may occur in schools and on the work stress perceived by Mexican teachers. More frequently, leadership styles tend to be associated with variables such as school effectiveness, management, administration, job satisfaction, group cohesion, and burnout.

DISCUSSION

The reviewed evidence confirms that transformational leadership has become among the most influential theoretical frameworks in the study of educational leadership over the last few decades. Its adoption in the school setting has not been a simple conceptual transfer from organizational psychology but rather a process of progressive reinterpretation that links it to institutional culture, pedagogical dynamics, and interpersonal relationships within schools. However, the reviewed literature shows that its theoretical predominance does not always correspond to sufficiently robust empirical evidence regarding teacher occupational health.

The results indicate a consistent tendency to associate transformational leadership with positive organizational indicators, including job satisfaction, institutional commitment, and perceived support (45,46). These associations suggest that leader behaviors may function as psychosocial resources within the school environment, contributing to teachers' emotional regulation and their perception of control over work demands. From this perspective, leadership does not act solely as an administrative factor but rather as a contextual variable that participates in shaping the psychosocial climate of the school organization.

However, when the discussion shifts toward more specific occupational health variables, the available evidence is more limited and heterogeneous. Studies linking transformational leadership with teacher occupational stress tend to report modest and in some cases indirect effects, mediated by variables such as job satisfaction or affective commitment (47,48). This mediation suggests that leadership does not by itself eliminate the structural sources of stress, but rather modulates the way in which teachers interpret and cope with work demands. Consequently, the relationship between leadership and teacher health cannot be understood as linear or deterministic, but rather as part of a broader organizational system in which political, administrative, and cultural factors intervene.

A recurring tension in the reviewed literature is the coexistence of results favorable to transformational leadership with studies showing contextually variable effects (49). In certain educational settings, different leadership styles or combinations of transformational and transactional practices have shown equally positive associations with satisfaction and effectiveness indicators. This variability suggests that transformational leadership does not operate as a universal formula, but rather as a repertoire of practices whose effectiveness depends on institutional characteristics, the social capital of the school, and the specific working conditions of the teaching staff.

The theoretical discussion also reveals that much of the research has focused on broad organizational effects, while teacher health has remained in the background. Although the literature recognizes teachers' exposure to elevated psychosocial risks, the systematic integration between educational leadership and occupational health is still incipient (50). Most studies analyze intermediate variables such as satisfaction or commitment, but few employ clinical indicators or comprehensive occupational health models. This absence limits the possibility of establishing solid connections between leadership and prevention of occupational disease in educational contexts.

Another relevant aspect is the predominance of cross-sectional designs based on self-report. This methodological pattern introduces limitations for interpreting causal directionality. It is not possible to determine clearly whether transformational leadership improves occupational health or whether healthier work environments favor positive perceptions of leadership. The lack of longitudinal studies and multilevel models prevents capturing the dynamic nature of school leadership, which is built in continuous interaction among actors, institutional policies, and structural conditions.

From an applied perspective, the findings invite a reconsideration of school leader training beyond administrative effectiveness. If leadership influences teacher well-being, then the preparation of educational leaders should explicitly incorporate competencies related to organizational health, collective emotional management, and prevention of psychosocial risks. However, the reviewed evidence shows that leadership training programs tend to focus on academic outcomes and institutional management, leaving the health dimension of teaching work in the background.

The discussion also suggests that transformational leadership should not be interpreted as a substitute for adequate labor policies. A favorable leadership style can buffer tensions, but it does not compensate for adverse structural conditions such as work overload, precariousness, or normative ambiguity. Therefore, healthy leadership needs to be articulated with educational policies that recognize teacher health as a component of the school system and not as an individual worker's issue.

In terms of the research agenda, the literature points to the need for studies that integrate mediating and moderating variables, complex statistical models, and longitudinal approaches. It is especially pertinent to move toward research that combines psychological, organizational, and clinical indicators, allowing the real impact of leadership on teacher health to be evaluated. Likewise, comparative studies between educational systems are required to distinguish which components of leadership are culturally transferable and which respond to local conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis of international evidence allows us to affirm that transformational leadership occupies a central place in the contemporary discussion on educational management, but its relationship with teacher occupational health is still in a phase of theoretical and empirical consolidation. The review conducted shows that this leadership style is consistently associated with positive organizational variables, especially job satisfaction, institutional commitment, and perception of support, which suggests that it may act as a relevant psychosocial resource within the school environment. However, when attention is specifically directed to occupational health indicators, the available evidence is less conclusive and shows moderate or small effect sizes.

This finding invites us to qualify the idea that transformational leadership by itself constitutes a solution to teacher health problems. The reviewed studies suggest that its influence operates mainly through mediating mechanisms related to the subjective experience of work, rather than through the direct elimination of structural risk factors. Consequently, teacher occupational health cannot be interpreted as an exclusive result of leadership style, but rather as a complex construction involving organizational conditions, educational policies, and characteristics of the sociocultural context.

Among the main contributions of this article is to situate educational leadership within the framework of occupational health, shifting the focus from institutional effectiveness toward the human sustainability of teaching work. This perspective allows us to understand that the school is not only a space for academic production, but also a work environment that can foster or deteriorate the psychological well-being of those who comprise it. Integrating leadership and occupational health broadens the field of analysis and opens the possibility of designing preventive strategies that recognize the organizational dimension of teacher stress.

The review also highlights a significant methodological gap. Cross-sectional studies based on self-report predominate, while longitudinal research capable of capturing dynamic processes is scarce. This limitation restricts the understanding of leadership as an evolving phenomenon and makes it difficult to establish causal relationships between leadership practices and teacher health. In this regard, the future agenda requires multilevel approaches that integrate psychological, organizational, and clinical indicators, as well as statistical models that allow analyzing complex relationships among mediating and moderating variables.

From an applied perspective, the findings suggest that the training of school leaders should explicitly incorporate the dimension of occupational health. Educational management cannot be separated from the institutional responsibility to protect the well-being of teachers. Leadership oriented toward the creation of healthy work environments could contribute to reducing psychosocial risks, provided that it is articulated with coherent educational policies and adequate working conditions.

Available evidence indicates that transformational leadership represents a valuable interpretive pathway for understanding the interaction between school leadership and teacher well-being, although its effects on occupational health require greater empirical precision. The consolidation of this field will depend on research that integrates interdisciplinary approaches and recognizes that teacher health is a structural component of educational quality.

References

1. 1 Benmira S, Agboola M. Evolution of leadership theory. BMJ Leader. 2021;5(1):3-5. https://doi.org/10.1136/leader-2020-000296
2. 2 Bolden R, Hawkins B, Gosling J, Taylor S. Exploring Leadership: Individual, Organizational and Societal Perspectives. Human Resource Management International Digest. 2012;20(7). https://doi.org/10.1108/hrmid.2012.04420gaa.013
3. 3 Wolman BB. Diccionario de Ciencias de la Conducta. Trillas; 1996.
4. 4 Jain V, Gupta SS, Shankar KT, Bagaria KR. A Study on Leadership Management, Principles, Theories, and Educational Management. World Journal of English Language. 2022;12(3):203. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v12n3p203
5. 5 Ospina SM, Foldy EG, Fairhurst GT, Jackson B. Collective dimensions of leadership: Connecting theory and method. Human Relations. 2020;73(4):441-63. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726719899714
6. 6 Beerkens M, Van Der Hoek M. Academic leaders and leadership in the changing higher education landscape. En: Research Handbook on Academic Careers and Managing Academics. Edward Elgar Publishing; 2022. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839102639.00017
7. 7 Strielkowski W, Volchik V, Maskaev A, Savko P. Leadership and Effective Institutional Economics Design in the Context of Education Reforms. Economies. 2020;8(2):27. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies8020027
8. 8 Samad A, Muchiri M, Shahid S. Investigating leadership and employee well-being in higher education. Personnel Review. 2022;51(1):57-76. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-05-2020-0340
9. 9 Benevene P, De Stasio S, Fiorilli C. Editorial: Well-Being of School Teachers in Their Work Environment. Frontiers in Psychology. 2020;11:1239. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01239
10. 10 Torres LL. School Organizational Culture and Leadership: Theoretical Trends and New Analytical Proposals. Education Sciences. 2022;12(4):254. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12040254
11. 11 Burch P, Bingham AJ, Miglani N. Combining Institutional and Distributed Frameworks in Studies of School Leadership. Peabody Journal of Education. 2020;95(4):408-22. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2020.1800176
12. 12 Manu A. The Philosophy of Disruption: From Transition to Transformational Change. Emerald Publishing Limited; 2022. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-80262-849-420221006
13. 13 Burns JM. Leadership. New York: Harper and Row; 1978.
14. 14 Avolio BJ, Bass BM. The full range of leadership development: Basic and advanced manuals. Binghamton: Bass, Avolio & Associates; 1991.
15. 15 Al-Husseini S, El Beltagi I, Moizer J. Transformational leadership and innovation: the mediating role of knowledge sharing amongst higher education faculty. International Journal of Leadership in Education. 2021;24(5):670-93. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2019.1588381
16. 16 Sliwka A, Klopsch B, Beigel J, Tung L. Transformational leadership for deeper learning: shaping innovative school practices for enhanced learning. Journal of Educational Administration. 2024;62(1):103-21. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-03-2023-0049
17. 17 Ytterstad S, Olaisen J. Learning Transformational Leadership: A Pedagogical and Practical Perspective. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-21824-8
18. 18 Kwan P. Is Transformational Leadership Theory Passé? Revisiting the Integrative Effect of Instructional Leadership and Transformational Leadership on Student Outcomes. Educational Administration Quarterly. 2020;56(2):321-49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X19861137
19. 19 Mwesigwa R, Tusiime I, Ssekiziyivu B. Leadership styles, job satisfaction and organizational commitment among academic staff in public universities. Journal of Management Development. 2020;39(2):253-68. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-02-2018-0055
20. 20 Dyrbye LN, Major-Elechi B, Hays JT, Fraser CH, Buskirk SJ, West CP. Relationship Between Organizational Leadership and Health Care Employee Burnout and Satisfaction. Mayo Clinic Proceedings. 2020;95(4):698-708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2019.10.041
21. 21 Mullen J, Thibault T, Kelloway EK. Occupational health and safety leadership. En: Handbook of occupational health psychology (3rd ed). Washington: American Psychological Association; 2024. p. 501-16. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000331-025
22. 22 Kaluza AJ, Boer D, Buengeler C, Van Dick R. Leadership behaviour and leader self-reported well-being: A review, integration and meta-analytic examination. Work & Stress. 2020;34(1):34-56. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2019.1617369
23. 23 Montano D, Schleu JE, Hüffmeier J. A Meta-Analysis of the Relative Contribution of Leadership Styles to Followers’ Mental Health. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies. 2023;30(1):90-107. https://doi.org/10.1177/15480518221114854
24. 24 Wischlitzki E, Amler N, Hiller J, Drexler H. Psychosocial Risk Management in the Teaching Profession: A Systematic Review. Safety and Health at Work. 2020;11(4):385-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2020.09.007
25. 25 Agyapong B, Obuobi-Donkor G, Burback L, Wei Y. Stress, Burnout, Anxiety and Depression among Teachers: A Scoping Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022;19(17):10706. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191710706
26. 26 Li M, Liu F, Yang C. Teachers’ Emotional Intelligence and Organizational Commitment: A Moderated Mediation Model of Teachers’ Psychological Well-Being and Principal Transformational Leadership. Behavioral Sciences. 2024;14(4):345. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14040345
27. 27 Tian Y, Guo Y. How Does Transformational Leadership Relieve Teacher Burnout: The Role of Self-Efficacy and Emotional Intelligence. Psychological Reports. 2024;127(2):936-56. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941221125773
28. 28 Mansor AN, Abdullah R, Jamaludin KA. The influence of transformational leadership and teachers’ trust in principals on teachers’ working commitment. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. 2021;8(1):302. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00985-6
29. 29 Sun J, Leithwood K. Direction-setting school leadership practices: a meta-analytical review of evidence about their influence. School Effectiveness and School Improvement. 2015;26(4):499-523. 10.1080/09243453.2015.1005106
30. 30 Avolio BJ, Bass BM, Jung DI. Re‐examining the components of transformational and transactional leadership using the Multifactor Leadership. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 1999;72(4):441-62. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317999166789
31. 31 Harms PD, Credé M, Tynan M, Leon M, Jeung W. Leadership and stress: A meta-analytic review. The Leadership Quarterly. 2017;28(1):178-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.10.006
32. 32 García-Guiu C, Moya M, Molero F, Moriano JA. Transformational leadership and group potency in small military units: The mediating role of group identification and cohesion. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. 2016;32(3):145-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rpto.2016.06.002
33. 33 Ali AYS, Dahie AM. Leadership style and teacher job satisfaction: Empirical survey from secondary schools in Somalia. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences. 2015;5(8):84-96. https://iiste.org/Journals/index.php/RHSS/article/view/21948
34. 34 Muthamia S, Lewa P, Ndwiga M. Effects of transformational leadership on work stress among top managers in state owned enterprises (SOEs) in Kenya. European Journal of Business and Management. 2015;7(36):185-94. https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/EJBM/article/view/27537
35. 35 Amanchukwu RN, Stanley GJ, Ololube NP. A review of leadership theories, principles and styles and their relevance to educational management. Management. 2015;5(1):6-14. https://doi.org/10.5923/j.mm.20150501.02
36. 36 Ng D, Nguyen DT, Wong BKS, Choy WKW. A review of Singapore principals’ leadership qualities, styles, and roles. Journal of Educational Administration. 2015;53(4):512-33. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-08-2013-0085
37. 37 Arokiasamy ARA, Abdullah AGK, @ Shaari MZA, Ismail A. Transformational Leadership of School Principals and Organizational Health of Primary School Teachers in Malaysia. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2016;229:151-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.07.124
38. 38 Aydin A, Sarier Y, Uysal S. The Effect of School Principals’ Leadership Styles on Teachers’ Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction. Educational sciences: Theory and practice. 2013;13(2):806-11. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1017309.pdf
39. 39 UNESCO. El liderazgo escolar en América Latina y el Caribe: un estado del arte con base en ocho sistemas escolares de la región. Santiago de Chile; 2014.
40. 40 Cruz-Ortiz V, Salanova M, Martínez IM. Liderazgo transformacional: investigación actual y retos futuros. Universidad & Empresa. 2013;15(25):13-32. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=187229746002
41. 41 Sun J. Características, impactos y antecedentes del modelo de liderazgo escolar transformacional (Characteristics, impacts and background of the transformational school leadership model). Revista Eletrônica de Educação. 2019;13(1):146-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.14244/198271993069
42. 42 Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers; 1988.
43. 43 Ayoub Pérez JL. Estilos de liderazgo y sus efectos en el desempeño de la administración pública mexicana [Tesis doctoral]. Universidad Autónoma de Madrid; 2010. https://repositorio.uam.es/bitstream/handle/10486/662373/ayoub_perez_jose_luis.pdf
44. 44 Mendoza Martínez IA, García Rivera BR. Liderazgo transformacional y desgaste profesional de personal docente de Escuelas Normales del Estado de México. Revista del Centro de Investigación Universidad La Salle. 2013;10(39):57-79. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=34231070004
45. 45 Msn TO, Rn, Msn, PhD HK. The relationship between transformational leadership, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment in Jordanian nurses. Anaesth pain intensive care. 2022;26(3):304-9. https://doi.org/10.35975/apic.v26i3.1896
46. 46 ASTUTY I, UDIN U. The Effect of Perceived Organizational Support and Transformational Leadership on Affective Commitment and Employee Performance. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business. 2020;7(10):401-11. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.no10.401
47. 47 Schoch S, Keller R, Buff A, Maas J, Rackow P, Scholz U, et al. Dual-Focused Transformational Leadership, Teachers’ Satisfaction of the Need for Relatedness, and the Mediating Role of Social Support. Frontiers in Education. 2021;6:643196. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.643196
48. 48 Alzoraiki M, Ahmad AR, Ateeq AA, Naji GMA, Almaamari Q, Beshr BAH. Impact of Teachers’ Commitment to the Relationship between Transformational Leadership and Sustainable Teaching Performance. Sustainability. 2023;15(5):4620. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054620
49. 49 Windlinger R, Warwas J, Hostettler U. Dual effects of transformational leadership on teacher efficacy in close and distant leadership situations. School Leadership & Management. 2020;40(1):64-87. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.1585339
50. 50 Pimenta A, Ramos D, Santos G, Rodrigues MA, Doiro M. Psychosocial Risks in Teachers from Portugal and England on the Way to Society 5.0. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023;20(14):6347. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20146347