How and when transformational leadership sparks innovative workplace behaviors: cumulative evidence from a meta-analytic review

verifiedmedium profile · Current Psychology · 2026

Sanlioz, Elif; Yildiz, Bora

10.1007/s12144-026-09567-8 · CrossRef: verified

How this was studied

paradigm: positivistpurpose: explanatory causaldesign: meta analytic synthesisidentification: nonetime: cross sectionaldata: quantitative survey

A meta-analytic synthesis — it pools many primary studies rather than running a single design, so there is no single-study diagram.

analysis: meta analysis · validity (validity): internal addressed · external addressed · construct addressed · statistical addressed · classifier confidence 0.9

What this article reports

The findings we extracted from this work, normalized into Principia’s relationship form (X → Y). Each feeds the synthesized models below.

transformational leadershipinnovative work behavior

r = 0.35 · k=174 · grade B · unverified

Models this article informs

The meta-analytic priors this article contributes evidence to — its place in the broader synthesis.

In the authors’ words

The article’s own abstract.

Abstract Despite the growing body of research on innovative workplace behaviors (IWB)—a set of positive, change-oriented behaviors associated with transformational leadership (TL)—empirical findings remain mixed. While some studies report positive relationships, others report negative or nonsignificant results. To address these inconsistencies, this meta-analysis draws on Social Exchange and Self-Determination theories and adopts a multistage approach that clarifies when and how TL is associated with IWB by examining cultural contingencies (i.e., cultural configuration and uncertainty avoidance) through moderator analyses and testing psychological mechanisms (i.e., motivational, relational, and collaborative) using meta-analytic structural equation modeling (MASEM). A correlation-based meta-analysis (k = 174, N = 74,323) revealed a positive and significant overall effect for the TL-IWB relationship ( $$\widehat\rho$$ = 0.35, 95% CI [0.28,0.42]). Moderator analyses also showed that the overall effect size of the TL–IWB relationship was larger in studies conducted in vertical-collectivist cultures (e.g., Asian) ( $$\widehat\rho$$ = 0.41) and in cultures with high uncertainty avoidance ( $$\widehat\rho$$ = 0.45). Furthermore, MASEM results showed that trust in the leader, as a relational mechanism, fully mediated the TL–IWB link, whereas leader–member exchange (LMX) partially mediated it. Motivational mechanisms (psychological empowerment, work engagement, and intrinsic motivation) and collaborative mechanisms (psychological safety and knowledge sharing) partially mediated the link between TL and IWB. Collectively, these findings suggest that TL is associated with higher levels of IWB not only through culturally contingent leadership–follower dynamics but also through psychological, motivational, and relational pathways. Managerial implications, further research directions, and limitations are also provided.

What the literature says about it

Attributed, open-access quotes from other works that cite this article, plus the citation-graph verdict tally. Corroborations and disputes, in one place — the honest-broker view.

4 supporting

No open-access quotations have been captured yet.

Assembled from Principia’s registry — bibliographic record, extracted effect sizes, the models they inform, and open-access citing literature.