A bibliometric analysis of influence of leadership styles on employees and organization in higher education sector from 2007 to 2022

ABSTRACT

This study addresses the concerns of leadership in the educational sector, particularly in higher education. While leadership styles and their effects on educational factors have been extensively studied, there is a lack of literature review studies focusing on the impact of leadership styles on employees and organizations in a higher educational context. Existing literature reviews have primarily examined specific leadership styles, while this study explores the influence of multiple leadership styles. By analyzing 127 papers published between 2007 and June 2022 using Biblioshiny package from R software and VOSViewer, this paper aims to consolidate the literature and achieve two objectives. First, it examines the research trends on leadership styles in higher education. Second, it provides insights into the relationship between various leadership styles and educational factors, specifically their impact on employees and organizations. The findings of this study contribute to the understanding of leadership effectiveness and the current state of educational leadership. Theoretical implications are provided to advance future research, while practical implications are suggested for the development of leadership in higher educational institutions.

Introduction

Leadership has been an universal interest for many hundreds of years since the time of Ancient Greece. However, leadership and the desire for influential leaders remain contemporarily critical, as successful leadership significantly impacts the achievements of individuals, organizations, industries and nations (Bolden, 2004). Although its concept is widely used in common discourses, leadership is an elusive phenomenon, of which the definition is difficult to specify (Counts et al., 1995; Rodd, 2001; Spotts, 1976). It might not be necessary to narrow the definition, but working definitions can be helpful for reference purposes (Leithwood & Reihl, 2003). Leadership is the process of influencing other people’s actions to achieve common goals (Stogdill, 1950). Bass (1990) emphasized that leadership was not only the leaders’ act of impacting others but also the interactive process among group members that could affect anyone involved. The core of most leadership definitions is providing direction and exercising influence (Leithwood & Reihl, 2003). More specifically, leadership in an educational context refers to the process of school leaders influencing the accomplishment of a shared vision (Leithwood & Reihl, 2003; Litz, 2021).

Leadership in the educational sector has become a significant matter of concern in the early twentieth century. Over the last decades, academicians have increased their interest in investigating leadership in education to engage with technology development, work innovative practices and globalization (Gumus et al., 2018; M. A. Khan et al., 2020; Leithwood et al., 2008). Leadership is a significant factor affecting the performance of individuals and organizations (Awan & Mahmood, 2010; Azizah et al., 2020; Godbless, 2021; Tjahjono et al., 2019). Various leadership styles have been practiced in organizational and educational contexts. Leadership styles can be characterized based on leaders’ traits (Denmark, 1993). Many educational leadership pieces of research have been dedicated to studying the influence of different leadership styles on organizational effectiveness and job performance (El Junusi et al., 2021; Nebiyu & Kassahun, 2021), innovativeness and creativity of employees (Almaskari et al., 2021; Arokiasamy et al., 2022; M. A. Khan et al., 2020; Ranjbar et al., 2019a), knowledge creation and sharing (Abdulmuhsin et al., 2021; Al-Husseini & Elbeltagi, 2018; Kim et al., 2021), job satisfaction (Alonderiene & Majauskaite, 2016; Udin et al., 2019), job commitment (S. Ahmad et al., 2018; HassenYimam, 2022), organizational citizenship behaviour (Dinc, 2018; Ho & Le, 2020; López-Domínguez et al., 2013), and well-being of academic workers (Adil & Kamal, 2016; Samad et al., 2022).

Although the effect of leadership styles on various educational factors has been demonstrated extensively in many empirical studies (Al-Husseini & Elbeltagi, 2018; Alonderiene & Majauskaite, 2016; Arokiasamy et al., 2022), there are still very few literature review studies paying attention to synthesize the impact of leadership styles on employees and organizations in a higher educational context. Most of the literature review studies in the educational sector were interested primarily in the influence of one or a few particular leadership styles (e.g. servant leadership, transformational leadership and transactional leadership) on some specific factors (e.g. well-being, job satisfaction and organizational commitment) (Aydin et al., 2013; Samad, 2015; Turner, 2022). These reviews only focused on a limited number of articles following their objectives and scopes. Some literature researches explored the change in trends of studies on educational leadership models (Gumus et al., 2018) and analyzed the development of literature reviews on educational leadership (Hallinger, 2014; Hallinger & Chen, 2015). Thus, the effectiveness of various leadership practices on different individual and organizational characteristics from a higher education perspective remains inconclusive. Literature reviews play an essential role in providing researchers, practitioners and policymakers with an overview of a specific subject matter and laying the groundwork for future research (Hallinger, 2014). Therefore, it is essential to consolidate the relevant research and examine the overall impact of multiple leadership styles on employees and organizations in higher education institutions. Numerous scholars have conducted systematic literature reviews in diverse domains, such as women leadership (Maheshwari et al., 2021), ethical leadership (Brown & Treviño, 2006), and transformational leadership (Udin, 2020). These reviews have aimed to comprehensively understand the advancements within their respective research domains and identify directions for future research. Building upon this existing body of work, the present study aims to make a similar contribution by conducting a systematic review in the leadership domain. Moreover, this review study holds significant importance as it offers a wider outlook on the research domain, allowing for the development of a more inclusive framework, by emphasizing the existing research gap for scholarly individuals to delve deeper into the topic in forthcoming academic studies.

To this end, the study aims to investigate the literature to understand the changes in the research trends on educational leadership and the extent to which how each leadership style is studied over time. In specific, the primary purpose of this literature review is to address two research questions:

RQ1:

What are the publication trends, most influential authors, regions, most researched methods, and overall intellectual structure of leadership styles impact on employees and organizational factors in the higher education sector?

RQ2:

How do leadership styles affect employee and organizational levels in the higher education sector?

The first question was addressed by conducting a bibliometric analysis on relevant papers indexed in the Scopus database (one of the biggest databases) to provide findings on the most prominent research periods, regions, journals and research methods studied in such articles. In addition, VOSviewer is constructed to visualize and identify the most occurred keywords, significant cited authors and references among the studies. The second question was addressed by analyzing the content of relevant papers. The content analysis provided an overview of the relationship between various leadership styles and outcomes, mediators, and moderators at the employee and organizational levels, contributing to the literature as a groundwork for future studies.

Following this brief introduction, the remaining part of the paper is arranged as follows. Section 2 provides a theoretical background on the evolution of different leadership styles and the impact of leadership styles in education sector. The review methodology has been discussed in Section 3, followed by results and analysis in Section 4. Section 5 provides the discussion from this review and the paper concludes by Section 6 which is about the conclusion of the paper.

Theoretical background

The change of leadership research in the educational sector

The research on education administration area before the 1900s had not focused on educational leadership as the difference between educational leadership roles and teaching activities was not clearly identified. The educational sector leaders’ responsibilities during this period involved managing administrative, teaching and institutional activities. Thus, training school leaders mainly targeted the concerns related to instruction, curriculum, and the attributes of outstanding leaders. As the description of leadership was defined through common conception instead of utilizing data, specified theories and leadership models were not established during that time (Gumus et al., 2018; Maheshwari, 2021). Nevertheless, decentralization in the 1990s, which involved the degradation of authority and responsibility, influenced the education sector globally. The phenomenon has shifted educational leaders from managerial administrators to academic leaders, focusing more on different leadership styles and their effects on the institutional community (Karunanayake, 2013). Therefore, more solid leadership theories and models have been developed, increasing the interest of researchers in the function and influence of leaders in educational institutions for the past three decades. This trend has been demonstrated by the growing number of studies in this field and the increasing need to investigate the extent to which leadership styles impact the education of researchers (Hallinger, 2014). In addition, methodological development has emphasized systematic approaches to conducting research, including quantitative, qualitative research, and literature reviews (Hallinger & Chen, 2015; Maheshwari et al., 2022). Quantitative studies have dominated the field during the last decade, attributable to the advancement in statistical techniques and the shift in research. The number of articles exploring the impact of leadership on employee and organizational behaviors has increased significantly in recent years, resulting in the substantial usage of quantitative methodology as most research with such purposes entail statistical analysis (Gumus et al., 2018).

The evolution of leadership styles

Power-based leadership

In the early twentieth century, the leadership theory mainly focused on the authority and power of leaders. The concept of ‘great man’ leadership, indicating that leaders are assumed to be born with leadership characteristics and not be able to gain such qualities afterward, dominated during this period. The premise was then developed into trait theory which is only concerned with determining leadership and non-leadership attributes rather than identifying whether leaders are born or made. The introduction of behavioural leadership theory was derived from the understanding that leaders’ behaviours can significantly impact the effectiveness of organizations. The notion concentrates on the behaviours of leaders and implies that leaders can be created by enhancing leadership characteristics. Combining the ideas of trait theory and behavioral theory, contingency or situational leadership theory suggests that leadership effectiveness depends on whether the leadership style is appropriate in a specific circumstance. Hence no leadership approach is the best. The four theories fit within power-based leadership as they differentiate between leaders and followers (Dambe & Moorad, 2009; Gumus et al., 2018; Kirkpatick & Locke, 1991). Transactional and autocratic leadership styles are some of the most eminent paradigms within power-based leadership.

Transactional leadership

The transactional leadership style involves leaders controlling and managing everything in organizations and promoting followers through rewards and punishments (Dambe & Moorad, 2009). Additionally, transactional leaders are task-focused as they aim at improving employees’ task involvement and commitment by determining work structure and providing necessary resources for work achievement (Ceri-Booms et al., 2017).

Autocratic leadership

The autocratic leaders hold the utmost power and authority and impose tight control on organizational decisions and activities. The leaders tend to make all decisions by themselves without permitting any input from team members. Little to no employee involvement is allowed in the organizational decision-making process and work methods. Hence, there is a gap in the relationship between leaders and followers, and skepticism is formed by employees toward the judgments and decisions of others (Choi, 2007; Chukwusa, 2018). Transactional leadership, and autocratic leadership, together with power-based leadership theories, emphasize the authority and power of leaders over followers, a reward system managed by leaders, and tasks assigned to employees per the direction of leaders (Cunningham & Cordeiro, 2006).

Empowerment-based leadership

Leaders had been considered to be controlling, commanding and autocratic until 1978, when Burns changed the perspective into leaders being willing to share power by introducing transformed leadership. In 1985, Bass extended Burns' work with transformational leadership (Bass, 1985; Burns, 1978). Dambe and Moorad (2009) and proposed empowerment-based leadership as group leadership styles with common characteristics such as sharing power, developing followers, working collaboratively and enhancing leaders’ moral standards. Some of the paradigms within this group include transformational leadership, ethical leadership, democratic leadership, and servant leadership.

Transformational leadership

Transformational leadership aims to motivate employees by acknowledging the importance of organizational objectives and promoting the positive transformation of their self-interests for the sake of the organization (Marks & Printy, 2003; Yukl, 1999). The leadership style also focuses on longer-term goals and visions, leader–follower relationships, and stimulates employees to develop commitment, engagement and trust in organizations (Liu et al., 2003; Potosky & Azan, 2022). Transformational leadership is one of the prominent paradigms for the shift from old to new leadership theories.

Ethical leadership

Ethical leaders are regarded as fair, honest and trustworthy decision-makers who behave ethically and care for other people and society. The leaders also put effort into influencing employees’ ethical behaviour by evaluating the intentions and conduct of followers based on specific ethical standards and implementing a reward system to ensure individuals follow those standards (Brown & Treviño, 2006). The leadership approach creates a positive environment to give employees opportunities to develop and to perceive themselves as crucial players in the organization. By sharing responsibilities, motives and goals, followers and leaders are involved in the organizational transformation and determining the organization’s successes or failures (Dambe & Moorad, 2009).

Democratic leadership

In a democratic leadership paradigm, apart from the leaders, other team members can have the opportunity to participate in the organizational decision-making process. The leadership style has specific key characteristics, which include group loyalty, cooperative behaviour, inclusiveness and democratic decision-making (Harvey, 1996). Democratic leadership - increases followers’ satisfaction, creativity, engagement, productivity and commitment (Hackman & Johnson, 2013).

Servant leadership

Introduced by Greenleaf (1970), servant leadership prioritizes the well-being and development of other people and surrounding communities. A servant leader’s desire to share power focuses on the needs of followers and commits to the growth of people personally and professionally. The servant leader’s goal is serving followers first rather than leading them. By doing so, they seek to establish trust between leaders and employees and transform employees into servant leaders.

Transformational leadership, ethical leadership, democratic leadership and servant leadership are some typical empowerment-based leadership that the leaders demonstrate their willingness to share power, their efforts to develop followers in professional and ethical manners and their desire to involve employees in the decision-making process organizations. Such leadership styles not only enhance job satisfaction, job involvement and performance of employees but also nurture the relationship between leaders and followers.

The impact of leadership on education

Various studies have been conducted to investigate the influence of leadership styles in the higher education sector and the effects of leadership on employee and organizational factors. Effective leadership is vital for enhancing organizational performance (Collinson & Collinson, 2009). Transformational leadership was found to provide employees in the higher education sector with mutual trust, increasing creativity, confidence and collaboration, positively impacting their performance (Jamali et al., 2022). Ethical leadership and servant leadership also showed a positive relationship with employees’ creativity, job performance, OCB, confidence and trust in higher education institutions (Godbless, 2021; Güçel et al., 2012). Although the concept of empowerment-based leadership has been practiced broadly and considered the most suited approach in various organizations, the transition from power-based leadership to a power-sharing paradigm is more in theory than practice as leaders are likely not to lose all the power. The ideal empowerment cannot be achieved as there is still a lack of sincerity and trust between leaders and followers (Dambe & Moorad, 2009). Both transformational and transactional leadership can be demonstrated simultaneously in organizational leadership approaches (Bass, 1985). Various studies have proved that transformational and transactional leadership positively impact many performance outcomes of factors at employee, team and organizational levels (Bass & Bass, 2009). From qualitative studies by Collinson and Collinson (2009), employees perceived power-based and empowerment-based leadership as complementary and mutually entailed in effective leadership. Despite valuing power-sharing leadership, the employees are also inclined toward more directive and managerial types of leadership. Therefore, the effectiveness of leadership paradigms toward educational variables is expected to depend on the leaders’ versatility and ability to balance strategic priorities, along with external determinants such as cultural or contextual factors (Collinson & Collinson, 2009).

Review methodology

Search procedure

A systematic literature review was conducted to address the two research questions. The articles chosen for this literature review studied the effect of leadership styles on various employee and organizational factors in higher educational institutions, written in English and published from January 2000 – June 2022. To extract the articles for this review, we chose Scopus as a final database to extract the articles due to three reasons (1) Scopus was chosen as a main database source for the review as compared to Web of Science (WoS) or any other database, because it is considered one of the largest citation databases of literature, with many highly ranked journals on educational themes and covers 60% of the literature (Bang et al., 2023; Donthu et al., 2021), (2) As suggested by Bang et al. (2023), using one database has been advised to avoid human errors as different databases present data in different formats and lastly (3) Scopus database meets the publication standards and helps in conducting network analysis in VOSviewer and Biblioshiny package of R software. This study adopted the PRISMA 2020 diagram (Figure 1) for replicability purposes (Veli Korkmaz et al., 2022) and the final articles are extracted following the PRISMA process. The database search focused on academic articles including keywords such as ‘leadership’, ‘higher education’, ‘university’, ‘relationship’, ‘impact’, ‘affect’, or ‘influence’ that generated total 742 results. After eliminating studies published before 2007, studies not in English and studies those were not journal articles (n = 288), the remaining 454 articles were then assessed for content eligibility. The papers irrelevant to this research topic were excluded (n = 327) after reading the abstract of the papers, leaving the final dataset of 127 articles for further analysis.

Figure 1. Search procedure PRISMA-2020.

Analysis and results

The data for this review have been analyzed using the Biblioshiny package of R software and VOSViewer. Before answering the research questions, the descriptive statistics of the published articles are provided as in Table 1. The descriptive results indicate that the relevant studies were published in 88 sources, including journals, books, and others, and the average citation per document was 8.06. A total of 346 authors published research on this topic, and out of those, 18 were single-authored papers. The annual growth rate in publications was found to be 14.87%. To answer this study’s first research question regarding identifying the existing literature patterns, the selected 127 papers were analyzed based on published years, regions of research, journal details, and research methodologies. Co-occurrence and co-citation analysis was generated by importing the Scopus database into VOSviewer software, which provided insights into the linkages among related papers. The second research question was answered by reviewing the relevant articles and gathering details of leadership styles, mediators, moderators, and dependent variables that were grouped into two main clusters, i.e. employee factors and organizational factors. The contents of papers were then reviewed to understand how each leadership style impacts various variables and identify any differences among the results of related articles.

Table 1. Main information of data using descriptive statistics.

Description	Results
MAIN INFORMATION ABOUT DATA
Timespan	2007:2022
Sources (Journals, Books, etc)	88
Documents	127
Annual Growth Rate %	14.87
Document Average Age	4.98
Average citations per doc	8.063
References	6707
DOCUMENT CONTENTS
Keywords Plus (ID)	116
Author’s Keywords (DE)	334
AUTHORS
Authors	346
Authors of single-authored docs	18
AUTHORS COLLABORATION
Single-authored docs	18
Co-Authors per Doc	2.84
International co-authorships %	16.54
DOCUMENT TYPES
article	126
article in press	1

Bibliometric analysis

Publication trend

The growth in research field can be identified by understanding the publication trend (as seen in Figure 2) which shows the increase in publications significantly since the research field expanded in 2016; 104 articles (82%) have been published within the last seven years. The interest in this topic has remained especially high in the last 4 years, with the number of papers accounting for 63.8% of total papers.

Figure 2. Number of papers by years.

Regions of research

Table 2 shows the studies conducted in various regions to study the influence of leadership on higher education factors from 2007 to June 2022. Most articles were focused on Asia (72.4%), followed by Africa (17.3%), while the number of papers based in Europe, Oceania, and America only made up 10.1% of total papers. Mostly, Asia was the only region where the studies were conducted between 2007 and 2010. Since 2019, researchers have started discovering this topic in Africa as the number of papers in this region increased considerably from 5 to 15 articles.

Table 2. Number of papers by regions.

Regions	2007 – 2010	2011 – 2014	2015 – 2018	2019 – 2022	Total	%
Asia	5	9	16	62	92	72.4%
Africa	-	2	5	15	22	17.3%
Europe	-	1	2	2	5	3.9%
Oceania	1	1	1	1	4	3.1%
America	1	-	2	1	4	3.1%

Contributing authors countries

Table 3 shows the corresponding author’s country, and this analysis shows that most of the corresponding authors are from Asian countries, with Malaysia (N = 10) and Indonesia (N = 9) topping the list. This aligns well with Table 2’s finding which suggested that Asia is leading this research domain.

Table 3. Top 10 countries in research domain.

Country	Articles	SCP	MCP	Frequency	MCP_Ratio
Malaysia	10	8	2	0.079	.2
Indonesia	9	9	0	0.071	0
Iran	8	7	1	0.063	.125
China	6	6	0	0.047	0
Nigeria	5	4	1	0.039	.2
Pakistan	5	5	0	0.039	0
Saudi Arabia	5	4	1	0.039	.2
Australia	3	3	0	0.024	0
Italy	3	1	2	0.024	.667
Jordan	3	3	0	0.024	0

SCP: Single country publication; MCP: Multiple country publication.

Most relevant sources

According to Table 4, the top five journals indexed in the Scopus database that published the most papers on this related topic between 2007-June 2022 period are International Journal of Leadership in Education (six papers), International Journal of Educational Management (five), Library Philosophy and Practice (five), International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change (five), and International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research (four). Most journals published significant papers between 2019 and 2022 (17 out of 25) (as in Table 4).

Table 4. Scopus journals that published most papers in related studies in 2007–2022.

Journals	2007 – 2010	2011 – 2014	2015 – 2018	2019 – 2022	Total
International Journal of Leadership in Education	–	–	2	4	6
International Journal of Educational Management	–	–	4	1	5
Library Philosophy and Practice	–	1	1	3	5
International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change	–	–	–	5	5
International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research	–	–	–	4	4

Research methods used in studies

As per the analysis as seen in Table 5, most research (N = 121) used quantitative methods to investigate the impact of leadership styles on various employee and organizational factors in the higher education context. In contrast, only three papers used qualitative methods, and three used mixed approach methods to conduct research. Quantitative has been the most popular method used by scholars to study this research topic. Thus, future research can use other approaches such as qualitative or mixed methodology for this research field.

Table 5. Research methods used in the studies.

Methods	Number of papers
Quantitative	121
Qualitative	3
Mix methods	3
Total	127

Most frequently occurring words

Figure 3 illustrates the network of keywords which was conducted based on the co-occurrence of authors’ keywords at least two times, and this resulted in 74 items and five clusters. The critical keywords that most frequently appeared in related research topics are transformational leadership (39 times), followed by leadership (20 times), job satisfaction (14 times), leadership style (11 times), and ethical leadership (10 times). These words have formed the foundation for the subject of leadership in higher education. Transaction leadership, work engagement, job performance, organizational culture, creativity, knowledge management, servant leadership, organizational citizenship behavior, and organizational commitment appeared to a lesser extent. The majority of the top 10 most frequently occurring keywords are related to leadership styles (transformational leadership, ethical leadership, leadership, leadership styles) and various employees’ outcomes (job satisfaction, work engagement, and organizational citizenship behavior), which indicates a connection between the influence of different leadership styles on employee outcomes. The color clusters and lines in the network map demonstrate the occurrence of keywords in the same research papers. For instance, transformational leadership was studied with keywords such as knowledge management, high performance, innovation, knowledge sharing, and employee engagement.

Figure 3. Network map of keywords co-occurrence in research.

Most influential authors in related papers

The co-citation analysis indicates the knowledge foundation used in literature and similarities among researchers cited in articles on this topic and are considered thematically similar (Bang et al., 2023). The most influential authors and their joint citations in the research field are presented in Figure 4. The co-citation analysis indicates the knowledge foundation used in literature and similarities among researchers cited in articles on this topic. According to Figure 4, the most prominent researchers on leadership’s impact on higher educational factors are Bruce J. Avolio and Bernard Morris Bass. Avolio, a professor at the University of Washington, is famous for various leadership models and development work. Bass was a notable Binghamton University professor specializing in organizational behavior and leadership studies. He developed the well-known Bass’s Transformational Leadership Theory based on the original work of Burns (1978) to explain the measurement of transformational leadership and how the leadership style affects an individual’s performance and motivation (Bass, 1985). Bass and Avolio (1994) then proposed the Full Range of Leadership Model (FRLM), which includes three types of leadership based on the extent of engagement and efficiency of leaders: transformational leadership, transactional leadership, and laissez-faire leadership. These theories have been used as theoretical frameworks for much research in the leadership field. Other authors such as Walumbwa, Podsakoff, and Bakker also have a considerable number of citations in the research topic of the influence of leadership on employee and organizational factors in university. The colors and lines illustrate the connection of those particular cited authors. For example, Bass and Avolio have the green color and link together, indicating that the works of those authors were usually cited in the same papers.

Figure 4. Network map of most cited authors in research.

Most cited references in related papers

Figure 5 shows the most-cited references among related papers in the research field. Some of the works of the most influential authors, such as Bass and Avolio, include the development of transformational leadership extended theory (Bass, 1985), a comparison between transactional leadership and transformational leadership (Bass, 1990), analysis of the impact of transformational leadership on individual performance and organizational commitment (Avolio et al., 2004; Dvir et al., 2002), and literature review on leadership (Avolio et al., 2009). In addition, other research works that were greatly cited in related articles are analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM) theory (Anderson & Gerbing, 1988; Fornell & Larcker, 1981), which can refer that many researchers in this field applied SEM to explain the relationship between leadership styles and higher educational factors. These works are reliable and have been used in various papers on the topic, and thus future researchers can consider these studies as a reference to develop a research framework.

Figure 5. Network map of most referenced papers in research.

Content analysis

General analysis of leadership styles and relationships

Based on prior empirical research on higher educational leadership, this literature review investigates the relationships of various leadership styles with mediators, moderators, and outcomes at the employee and organizational levels. Figure 6 summarizes employee and organizational factors, affected by different leadership styles.

Figure 6. Summary of variables in related papers.

The most studied leadership style in this research field is transformational leadership, with 70 papers conducting research into its influence on educational factors, followed by transactional leadership (N = 28), laissez-faire leadership (N = 13) and ethical leadership (N = 12). Transformational leadership and transactional leadership have been the dominant leadership style studied since 2007, while laissez-faire leadership and ethical leadership have only grabbed attention in 2019–2022. Furthermore, the four leadership styles are studied mainly in Asia and Africa, indicating that those leadership styles have been implemented in most Asian and African higher educational institutions. However, this might be due to the high volume of total related papers conducted in these two regions. Sakiru et al. (2014) found that a department head most practiced transformational leadership, transactional leadership, and laissez-faire leadership at public universities in Nigeria. Transformational leadership was also proven to be a predominant leadership style used in higher educational institutions in the study of Al-Omari (2008), Celdran (2020) and Cuadros et al. (2018). On the other hand, in the research on leadership of librarians at Nigeria private universities, Jerome (2018) explored that among autocratic leadership, democratic leadership and laissez-faire leadership, autocratic styles were most implemented by library staff and suggested that democratic leadership should be applied further to enhance job satisfaction of employees due to the unhappiness of employees toward autocratic management styles of leaders. Autocratic leadership was also adopted the most by librarians of Ghana university, but servant leadership and democratic leadership were suggested to help increase employees’ commitment in the study of Banji (2020).

Dependent variables that educational leaders have an impact on target at employee levels, especially employees’ job commitment (Huang et al., 2021; Long et al., 2012; Mwesigwa et al., 2020; Suong et al., 2019), performance and effectiveness (Azizah et al., 2020; Ramsden et al., 2007; Ugwu, 2019), job satisfaction (Alonderiene & Majauskaite, 2016; Samad et al., 2022; Webb, 2008), organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) (Asgari et al., 2020; Khaola & Rambe, 2021; Majeed et al., 2017), and innovativeness and creativity (Al-Mansoori & Koç, 2019; Elrehail et al., 2018; M. A. Khan et al., 2020). Less attention has been paid to organizational factors in existing research papers, mostly about organizational culture (Awan & Mahmood, 2010; Awan et al., 2014), performance (Alsayyed et al., 2020; Quddus et al., 2020) and innovation (Ghabash et al., 2019; Ngo et al., 2022).

Existing research primarily targeted employee-related mediating variables such as Job satisfaction (Azizah et al., 2020; Suong et al., 2019), job commitment (Djaelani et al., 2020; Ramsden et al., 2007), work engagement (M. Aboramadan, Dahleez, & Hamad, 2020; Adil & Kamal, 2016; Arokiasamy & Tat, 2020) and motivation (I. Ahmad et al., 2015; Shareef & Atan, 2019) have been most used as mediators to explain the relationship between leadership styles and various outcomes in a higher educational context. Meanwhile, organizational mediators need more attention from the researchers. Some papers have also studied leader-member exchange as a mediator (Ho & Le, 2020; Jyoti & Bhau, 2016).

Regarding moderating factors, the majority of papers focused on employee moderators. For example, OCB significantly moderated the relationship between transformational leadership, transactional leadership and employees’ innovative work behavior (M. A. Khan et al., 2020) and the relationship between exploitative leadership and knowledge creation (Abdulmuhsin et al., 2021). Organizational moderators were also investigated by some articles, such as that organizational structure moderated the relationship between transformational leadership and knowledge management (Darus et al., 2014). Other factors, including supervisor-subordinate (S–S) guanxi (Zeng & Xu, 2020), collectivism tendency (Zhu & Guo, 2021), and association period (Jyoti & Bhau, 2016), significantly moderated the effects of leadership on various educational outcomes.

Relationships of most studied leadership styles on different outcomes

After summarizing the effect of leadership on employee and organizational factors, we further summarized the specific effect of specific leadership style on employee and organizational factors as demonstrated in Figure 7.

Figure 7. The relationship between most studied leadership styles and outcomes.

Transformational leadership

Transformational leadership style has a positive impact on most employee-related variables in an educational context, such as job commitment (Abudaqa et al., 2019; Huang et al., 2021; Maheshwari, 2022; Mwesigwa et al., 2020; Othman et al., 2012; Simanjuntak et al., 2019), performance and effectiveness (Agusta & Nurdin, 2021; Pongpearchan, 2016; Ramsden et al., 2007), job satisfaction (Mukhtar & Anwar, 2019; Noorshahi & Sarkhabi, 2008; Samad et al., 2022; Veerasundar & Maideen, 2019), innovativeness and creativity (Al-Mansoori & Koç, 2019; Elrehail et al., 2018; Ghorbani & Yekta, 2012; Hussain et al., 2014), knowledge creation and sharing (Allameh et al., 2012; Kim et al., 2021; Popoola, 2021), OCB (Asgari et al., 2020; Khaola & Rambe, 2021; Majeed et al., 2017), motivation (Chipunza & Matsumunyane, 2018; George & Sabhapathy, 2010; Noorshahi & Sarkhabi, 2008), job engagement (Lacap, 2019), well-being (Amirkhani & Kazemi, 2016; Charoensukmongkol & Puyod, 2021). Nevertheless, some studies found no relationship between transformational leadership and employee variables. The research of Nurtjahjani et al. (2020) shows that transformational leadership did not have a significant direct impact on the job engagement of lecturers in Indonesian higher educational institutions as the relationship needed to be mediated by job satisfaction. In addition, the relationship between transformational leadership, transactional leadership and gender was not significant at universities in Jordan, implying that employees and leaders should be more aware of their sex-role identification profile to enhance collaborative skills and sex-role orientation in the educational context (Al-Omari, 2008).

Transformational leadership significantly impacted employee outcomes more than other leadership styles. In particular, in the study of Mayowa-Adebara and Opeke (2019), transformational leadership contributed more to the work commitment of librarians than transactional leadership in Nigerian universities. Ugwu and Okore (2020) in their research also found that transformational leadership had more influence on the knowledge management activities of library staff than transactional leadership in Nigerian universities. However, Sakiru et al. (2014) explored that although transformational leadership was practiced the most by leaders of Nigerian public universities, the correlation coefficient of the relationship between transformational leadership and employees’ job satisfaction was slightly lower than that of the relationship between transactional leadership and satisfaction. Similarly, transformational leadership did not have the greatest influence on the job satisfaction of faculty members in Lithuanian universities in the research of Alonderiene and Majauskaite (2016). Thus, the positive relationship between leadership style and educational outcomes might vary by research context and population background.

Some studies considered dimensions of transformational leadership to investigate their impact on educational factors (Al-Husseini & Elbeltagi, 2018; Ranjbar et al., 2019a; Ugwu & Okore, 2020). The four components of transformational leadership were suggested by Bass (1985), including inspirational motivation, idealized influence, individualized consideration, and intellectual stimulation. Among the four dimensions, intellectual stimulation was proven to substantially influence knowledge management in Iraqi universities (Al-Husseini & Elbeltagi, 2018). However, in the study of Ugwu and Okore (2020), intellectual stimulation had no significant impact on the knowledge management process in Nigerian university libraries. This might be due to the difference in structures of higher educational institutions in various regions and contexts.

Regarding outcomes at the organizational level, the leadership style has a positive relationship with organizational performance (Alsayyed et al., 2020; Somjai & Sangperm, 2019), organizational learning (Khalifa & Ayoubi, 2015), innovation (Ngo et al., 2022), management (Pérez-Ortega & Moreno-Freites, 2019), knowledge management practices (Darus et al., 2014) and social responsibility practices (Alshihabat & Atan, 2020). The study of Alsayyed et al. (2020) shows that two transformational leadership dimensions, idealized influence and intellectual stimulation, significantly affected organizational performance, while inspirational motivation and individualized consideration had an insignificant influence on the performance. This is due to the university’s traditional structure and bureaucratic procedures instead of the modern structure that might increase organizational performance. In the research of Khalifa and Ayoubi (2015), inspirational motivation, as a dimension of transformational leadership, significantly influenced organizational learning, while intellectual stimulation, idealized influence and individualized consideration had no significant impact on organizational learning, which could be explained by the ambiguous and turbulent environment in Syria that motivated employees to concentrate more on future clarification. Additionally, the organizational structure was found to have a critical moderating effect on the relationship between transformational leadership dimensions and knowledge management practices in Malaysian higher education institutions (Darus et al., 2014).

Transactional leadership

Most studies investigating transactional leadership focused more on employee outcomes than organizational factors. Transactional leadership has a positive impact on job commitment (HassenYimam, 2022; Mayowa-Adebara & Opeke, 2019; Mwesigwa et al., 2020; Othman et al., 2012), job satisfaction (Sakiru et al., 2014; Veerasundar & Maideen, 2019; Webb, 2008), performance and effectiveness (Angriani et al., 2020; Azizah et al., 2020; I. U. Khan et al., 2021), and innovation (Al-Mansoori & Koç, 2019; M. A. Khan et al., 2020) of employees in higher educational institutions. Some studies have found a negative effect of transactional leadership on educational factors. Chipunza and Matsumunyane (2018) investigated that transactional leadership style was negatively correlated with the instrumental motivation of middle managers in South African universities, which could be explained if university middle managers did not have authority over employee monetary rewards or academic managers had fewer rewards than non-academic ones. In addition, a negative relationship was found between transactional leadership and intrapreneurial behavior. At the same time, a positive effect was proven between transformational leadership, authentic leadership and the dependent variable in the study of Farrukh et al. (2019). The authors pointed out that transactional leadership concentrated on monitoring deviations in the organization, aiming to control the activity consistency and maintain the current situation rather than risk-taking and innovative behaviors such as intrapreneurship. In the research of Asgari et al. (2020) on leadership impact at universities in Iran, transactional leadership also negatively influenced OCB with perceived organizational support and job satisfaction mediated the relationship. Furthermore, leadership styles (transactional, autocratic, democratic leadership) in Nigerian university librarians had a considerable impact on employees’ turnover intention as there were insufficient academic freedom and organizational autonomy, inconsistent salary payment, and lack of incentives contributing to the intention to leave the job of librarians (Hamzat et al., 2020). The study of Long et al. (2012) also showed no significant relationship between transactional leadership, transformational leadership and turnover intentions in academic staff in Malaysian higher education because academic employees might work independently of their higher managers. Three dimensions of transactional leadership, contingent reward, active management-by-exception, and passive management-by-exception (Bass, 1985; Hater & Bass, 1988), were also considered when studying the effect of transactional leadership in higher education. In the paper of Ugwu and Okore (2020), only contingent reward demonstrated a significant impact on the knowledge management process of library staff in Nigerian universities. This might explain why knowledge was so powerful that some people were unwilling to share, but the contingent reward could motivate knowledge sharing and creation in an organization. Existing researches show that transformational leadership and transactional leadership have been commonly implemented together and have a positive impact on employee factors such as job satisfaction, motivation, work commitment and organizational factors, including organizational learning in higher education institutions (George & Sabhapathy, 2010; Khalifa & Ayoubi, 2015; Othman et al., 2012; Webb, 2008). This also aligns with Bass and Bass (2009), who indicated that the practice of combined leadership styles would lead to effective management.

The relationship between transactional leadership and organizational outcomes was found in the study of Khalifa and Ayoubi (2015). Specifically, among the three dimensions of transactional leadership, the only contingent reward had a significant positive effect on organizational learning in Syrian universities, which might be due to the recent harsh economic situation in the country.

Laissez-faire leadership

The relationship between laissez-faire leadership and educational factors has the most adverse outcomes. Regarding employee-dependent variables, the leadership style has a negative or insignificant influence on job commitment (Awan & Mahmood, 2010; Awan et al., 2014; HassenYimam, 2022), innovative work behavior (M. A. Khan et al., 2020), employees’ efficiency (Antonopoulou et al., 2019) and intrapreneurial behavior (Farrukh et al., 2019). This could be explained by the nature of laissez-faire leadership traits which include leaders’ behavior such as working independently, acting uninvolved, neglecting employees’ issues and achievements that might impose counteractive effects such as demotivation or unclear roles on employees (HassenYimam, 2022; Suong et al., 2019). However, some papers show a positive impact of laissez-faire leadership on job satisfaction (Celdran, 2020; Jerome, 2018; Sakiru et al., 2014; Webb, 2008), job commitment (Suong et al., 2019) and performance of employees (Andoh & Ghansah, 2019) with low correlation. In the research on Vietnamese public universities, Suong et al. (2019) indicated that laissez-faire leadership had a positive effect on employees’ job satisfaction as self-determination was crucial in the academic environment, and the leadership style could allow employees to make their own decisions. A Laissez-faire leadership style would be an appropriate approach when employees understand their responsibilities clearly, and leaders are undoubtedly confident in the abilities of team members (Andoh & Ghansah, 2019).

Prior studies researched the relationship between laissez-faire leadership and organizational culture concerning organizational outcomes. The study by Awan and Mahmood (2010) proved that there was no relationship between leadership style, including laissez-faire leadership and autocratic leadership and organizational culture in Pakistan university libraries. Subsequently, Awan et al. (2014) found that leadership styles practiced in Pakistan university libraries did not affect organizational culture in the public sector but showed significant influence on the dependent variable in the private sector. The results also indicated that librarians in private universities perceived that their working environment had a more incredible organizational culture.

Ethical leadership

Ethical leadership has a positive impact on employee outcomes in an educational context, including OCB (Nemr & Liu, 2021; Sait Dinc, 2018; Shareef & Atan, 2019), academically positive behaviors (Imam & Kim, 2022), job performance (Taboli & Zaerizadeh, 2016), job engagement (Bhana & Suknunan, 2019; Hussin et al., 2009; Zeng & Xu, 2020), and job commitment (Gollagari et al., 2021). One interesting observation is that many studies have investigated the mediating and moderating effect in the relationship between ethical leadership and employee factors. For instance, the ethical climate, job satisfaction facets, organizational commitment, and intrinsic motivation mediated the relationship between ethical leadership and OCB (Sait Dinc, 2018; Shareef & Atan, 2019). The leadership style positively influenced OCB with the moderating impact of organizational cynicism, indicating that the higher level of cynicism among employees, the weaker relationship between ethical leadership and OCB (Nemr & Liu, 2021). Moreover, the relationships between ethical leadership and work behaviors, work engagement, and employee commitment were mediated by prosocial silence, organizational commitment, organizational trust, perceived good governance practices, and job-related affective well-being (S. Ahmad et al., 2018; Gollagari et al., 2021; Imam & Kim, 2022; Zeng & Xu, 2020). In particular, the study by Taboli and Zaerizadeh (2016) proved that individual creativity significantly impacted job performance with ethical leadership as a mediator.

Regarding organizational factors, ethical leadership positively affects energy efficiency (Bahzar, 2019), organizational innovation and organizational slack (Ghabash et al., 2019). Very few studies explore the impact of leadership style on the environmental outcomes of organizations, and the research of Bahzar (2019) is one of them. The author found that ethical leadership and green transformational leadership had a significant positive impact on eco-innovation and green creativity and enhanced energy efficiency in the Indonesian higher educational sector. The contribution of leadership styles in higher education could help curtail environmental issues and achieve eco-friendly business goals in the country. In addition, paternalistic leadership, including ethical and authoritarian leadership, demonstrated a positive impact on organizational innovation and slack management (Ghabash et al., 2019).

Relationships of other leadership styles and outcomes

There are many other leadership styles used in higher educational institutions, such as autocratic leadership (Andoh & Ghansah, 2019; Jerome, 2018), democratic leadership (Agusta & Nurdin, 2021; Veerasundar & Maideen, 2019), authentic leadership (Adil & Kamal, 2020; I. Ahmad et al., 2015), servant leadership (M. Aboramadan, K. Dahleez, & M. H. Hamad, 2020; Wahyu et al., 2019), spiritual leadership (Akbar et al., 2018; Mohammed et al., 2022; Supriyanto & Ekowati, 2020). However, existing research has not focused on investigating such leadership styles and their impacts. Specifically, among relevant papers found in the Scopus database, only 37% of articles conducted research on 35 other leadership styles. Most studies concentrated on the relationship between these leadership styles and employee variables, while only six articles considered organizational outcomes.

As summarized in Figure 8, the majority of leadership styles demonstrated a positive effect on employee factors such as job satisfaction (Alonderiene & Majauskaite, 2016; Veerasundar & Maideen, 2019), performance and effectiveness (Ahmed et al., 2022; El Junusi et al., 2021; Fikri et al., 2021), OCB (Ho & Le, 2020; Khasawneh, 2011; Rashid et al., 2019), job engagement (M. Aboramadan, Dahleez, & Hamad, 2020; Dang & Basur, 2017). There are some excellent relationships among those leadership styles and particular variables. For instance, organizational justice, identified as the perception of employees on implementations and decision-making process in an organization, was positively influenced by participative leadership, instrumental leadership and supportive leadership since the needs, well-being and opinions of employees had been considered by higher managers (Taner et al., 2015). The study of Alenezi (2018) shows that distributed leadership increased academic optimism in employees, enhancing self-efficacy, trust and interactions among colleagues and students. Moreover, differential leadership in Chinese universities positively affected professional ethics, with professional identity as a mediating factor (Zhu & Guo, 2021). In recent years, science and technology have been considered when studying the influence of leadership in the educational sector. Human engineering, described as the science exploring the engineering relationship between humans and the work environment, was significantly impacted by spiritual leadership with mindfulness as a mediator in Arab higher educational institutions (Mohammed et al., 2022).

Figure 8. The relationship between other leadership styles and outcomes.

Additionally, there was a positive relationship between technology leadership and the competence of university lecturers in Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), imposing the need for developing e-skills and providing more ICT learning opportunities in the higher education sector (Yuting et al., 2022). Notably, autocratic and democratic leadership were usually investigated closely, possibly due to the contrasting characteristics of the two leadership styles. The findings indicated that most employees were unhappy with autocratic leadership as they did not feel they belonged to the directive management style. Autocratic leadership tended to have less or no correlation with employee factors. On the other hand, democratic leadership was preferred as it demonstrated a positive impact on the performance, job satisfaction and job commitment of employees (Andoh & Ghansah, 2019; Banji, 2020; Hamzat et al., 2020; Jerome, 2018).

Regarding organizational outcomes, most leadership styles also have a positive influence on factors such as organizational performance and effectiveness (Kayode et al., 2019; Quddus et al., 2020), organizational culture (Shulhan, 2019), and organizational innovation (Bahzar, 2019; Ghabash et al., 2019). Nevertheless, autocratic leadership showed no significant relationship with organizational culture in Pakistan university librarians (Awan & Mahmood, 2010) and demonstrated no significant impact on organizational culture in public universities but had the opposite effect in the private sector (Awan et al., 2014).

Discussion

The purpose of this literature review was twofold. The first research question was aimed at understanding the intellectual structure of the research domain which included identifying the publication trend, regions of research, contributing authors countries, most relevant journals, research methods used, co-occurrence of keywords, most influential authors, most cited papers. The second research question was aimed to understand the influence of various leadership styles on different employees’ outcome and that was explored with a content analysis approach. The following section discusses the findings and further implications to advance researchers in the leadership field and leaders in higher educational institutions.

Trend in research

To answer the first research question (RQ1), the results from bibliometric analysis demonstrated that studying leadership in the educational sector has increased significantly since 2016, with the most significant surge seen in the 2019–2021 time-period. The growing interest might be due to various motives, including internationally accelerating demands, globalization, more available big data and developed statistical approaches (Gumus et al., 2018). Additionally, most research focuses on Asia and Africa, while studies in other areas require more attention so that differences among various backgrounds can be identified further. The quantitative research method dominated the selected studies, which was also specified by previous literature reviews (Gumus et al., 2018; Hallinger & Chen, 2015; Heck & Hallinger, 2005). This could be explained by increased access to data and advanced statistical methods in recent periods (Gumus et al., 2018). According to the analysis of the most cited authors and references, the works by Bruce J. Avolio and Bernard Morris Bass were referred outstandingly pertaining to theoretical frameworks indicating one of the biggest clusters, and influential author like Podsakoff was referenced in various studies related to SEM, one of the approaches applied significantly to explain the relationship between leadership styles and variables in educational leadership research domain as identified as second biggest cluster.

The impact of leadership styles on employees and organizational factors

The second research question (RQ2) was answered by undertaking content analysis in order to synthesize various leadership styles used in higher educational institutions and their effects on employee and organizational factors. From the analysis, transformational leadership is the most studied leadership style in existing literature, followed by transactional leadership, laissez-faire leadership and ethical leadership. This is consistent with previous studies, which indicated that instructional and transformational leadership had been one of the most prominent leadership styles implemented in the educational context due to its effectiveness in employee management (Berkovich, 2016; Bush, 2014; Daniëls et al., 2019; Hallinger, 2003). Other leadership styles such as autocratic leadership, democratic leadership, authentic leadership, servant leadership need more attention from researchers so that implications can be provided for various management styles practiced in different higher educational institutions to improve the effectiveness and well-being of employees and organizations.

Employee-related outcomes, mediators and moderators have been widely studied, while less attention has been paid to factors targeting the organizational level. The mutual effects between leadership and organizational culture or atmosphere are complex to investigate due to various linkages among the assumptions of such relationships (Awan et al., 2014). Thus, to conduct a thorough study, it is essential to understand human development, management practices, and local traditions within the research context (Hofstede, 2001). However, as understanding organizational factors in an academic setting is significant to developing educational practices, researchers need to pay more attention to the determinants at the organizational level (Shulhan, 2019).

In addition, the findings from various researches might show inconsistency in the relationship between leadership styles and educational factors. For instance, the study by HassenYimam (2022) found a negative correlation between laissez-faire leadership and job commitment as leaders avoided being involved in the decision-making process when issues occurred at universities in Ethiopia. Meanwhile, laissez-faire leadership positively affected employee commitment since self-determination was considered essential in Vietnamese universities (Suong et al., 2019). Therefore, it is crucial that leaders can provide a positive environment to employees.

Conclusion

This literature review has been conducted using bibliometric analysis and content analysis on 127 articles focusing on the impact of various leadership styles on employee and organizational factors in the worldwide higher educational sector. We aimed to provide findings on the research trends on this topic and the relationship between each leadership style and educational outcomes. This review demonstrates that there has been a growing trend in these research studies since 2016, with most of the studies focusing on Asia and Africa regions indicating that those leadership styles have been implemented in most Asian and African higher educational institutions. However, this might be due to the high-volume studies conducted in these two regions. The research also highlights that most studies conducted quantitative approaches, especially the SEM technique.

To conduct a more comprehensive analysis of the evolution of the research topic, we employed thematic analysis to gain a deeper understanding of the research domain and offer suggestions for future research. As depicted in Figure 9, the dominant leadership styles studied since 2007 have been transformational leadership and transactional leadership, whereas ethical leadership only gained attention between 2017 and 2022. Various studies, including Al-Omari (2008), Celdran (2020), and Cuadros et al. (2018), have established transformational leadership as the predominant style employed in higher educational institutions. Ethical leadership style, on the other hand, has been explored by scholars such as Bhana and Suknunan (2019), Dinc (2018), and Gollagari et al. (2021). Consequently, there is potential for future studies to examine the influence of ethical leadership style.

Figure 9. Thematic evolution of keywords in the research domain.

Additionally, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, e-leadership has emerged as a crucial form of leadership, demanding the ability to manage employees in flexible and blended work settings. Therefore, it is worth investigating the impact of e-leadership on employees and organizations in future studies. Figure 6 provides a summary of the different variables considered by various scholars, and based on the identified themes in Figure 9, it is evident that leadership style acts as an antecedent that affects employees both on a personal and organizational level. However, there is a notable imbalance between the number of individual factors and organizational factors that have been considered. Hence, future studies can explore the impact of leadership styles on a broader range of organizational factors, such as organizational climate, teamwork, and blended working modes. Consequently, this review paves the way for further research opportunities. Further, based on the findings from this review, we provide some theoretical and practical implications.

Theoretical implications

The study aimed to uncover research trends in educational leadership, including the practiced leadership styles in higher education and their influences on employee and organizational factors. Two distinct research themes emerged: Theme #1 focused on the influence of leadership style on organizational factors, while Theme #2 examined the impact of leadership style on employees’ personal factors. Understanding the current state of research and these themes can aid scholars in developing new frameworks in the field.

The study revealed that most published studies were conducted in Asia and Africa, potentially influenced by cultural norms and local traditions. Therefore, it is crucial to explore educational leadership in other regions, comparing leadership styles and their relationships with outcomes, particularly between developed and developing countries. Additionally, while quantitative methods were predominantly used to investigate correlations, future studies should consider qualitative or mixed approaches for more robust findings.

Furthermore, although transformational leadership has been extensively studied, the exploration of other leadership styles is necessary to explain mutual effects among variables and provide further implications for fostering a conducive educational environment. Given the significant implementation of technology in higher education, understanding the impact of e-leadership on educational factors is imperative. The shift to remote working during the COVID-19 pandemic has also highlighted the relevance of virtual or E-leadership as a suitable style in the post-pandemic era, which the scholars can explore in future research as well.

Most research has focused on employee-level factors, necessitating a broader examination of other organizational outcomes, mediators, and moderators to fully comprehend the effects of leadership in higher education.

Lastly, as higher education plays a vital role in sustainable development, the importance of leadership in accomplishing sustainable goals deserves more attention. Researchers are encouraged to explore the influence of sustainable leadership on educational factors and investigate the relationship between leadership styles and social responsibility variables that contribute to the leadership literature. Effective leadership is essential for enhancing sustainable performance in organizations. Finally, the aspects of diversity, inclusivity and equity in leadership position have not been considered in the studies, and thus future studies can focus on these topics as potential areas of research.

Practical implications

The findings of this literature review offer valuable insights into leadership theories and practices within educational institutions. Organizations can now gain a deeper understanding of how different leadership approaches impact various factors in higher education and determine which management styles are suitable for different cultures and contexts. Consequently, higher education practitioners can align their organizations with the most appropriate leadership styles and provide training to enhance managers’ leadership skills and knowledge, facilitating successful goal achievement.

To effectively implement leadership strategies, organizations should identify key leadership roles and develop specific leadership paradigms for each role. This allows for the definition and combination of competencies necessary for success (Hollenbeck et al., 2006). Effective leadership styles not only improve organizational performance but also enhance the well-being and work–life balance of employees. Creating an inclusive and supportive work environment for different genders and minorities positively impacts performance and employee retention (Li et al., 2017; Randel et al., 2018).

Additionally, establishing a feedback system for educational leaders can be beneficial. Gathering input from both managers and employees about the current leadership styles practiced in higher education institutions helps identify areas for improvement and enhances the reward system (Veli Korkmaz et al., 2022).

In summary, these findings provide organizations with actionable insights to inform their leadership approaches in higher education. By aligning leadership styles with specific contexts, investing in leadership development, promoting inclusivity, and incorporating feedback mechanisms, educational institutions can foster a positive work environment and drive improved performance and employee satisfaction.

Limitations and directions for future research

This review has some limitations. Firstly, we only focused on the papers published in the Scopus database between 2007 and 2022, which might have resulted in missing out some papers in this field and hence for future studies, the different databases might be considered to synthesize this literature. Further, this review does not consider the correlations among quantitative results of independent studies by using statistical methods, which suggests the use of the meta-analysis method for future studies (Ceri-Booms et al., 2017). Finally, some comparative review between different regions can be carried out to see if there are any differences in leadership style on employees and organizational factors.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

The authors confirm that the data (articles) supporting the findings of this study are available within the article as supplementary materials and can be found in Appendix.

Additional information

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for this article: This project [Grant 3 – 2022] was funded by a RMIT University, Vietnam, under Internal Research Grant Scheme.

Notes on contributors

Greeni Maheshwari

Greeni Maheshwari is working as a Senior Lecturer at RMIT Vietnam in The Business School since February 2008. She gained a doctorate in business administration (DBA) in Global Business and Leadership from California, USA. She is teaching and coordinating quantitative courses such as Business Statistics, Quantitative Analysis and Basic Econometrics. She was the recipient of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor’s Award for Teaching Innovation in 2020, the Vice Chancellor’s Award for Outstanding Contributions to Learning and Teaching: Outstanding Contributions to Student Learning, Higher Education in 2018, the Excellence in Teaching Award in 2017 at RMIT University and the Award for Excellence in Learning and Teaching in 2016 at RMIT University, Vietnam. She has been awarded two gold medals during her engineering studies. She was awarded the Fellow of Higher Education Academy (FHEA) in 2018 and Senior Fellow of Higher Education (SFHEA) in 2020 from the Higher Education Academy, UK. She is also a member of Certified Management & Business Educator (CMBE) from Chartered Association of Business Schools, UK. Her research interest lies in gender studies, educational leadership, scholarship of learning & teaching, entrepreneurship, SMEs, and human resource management topics.

Khanh Linh Kha

Khanh Linh Kha is a graduate from RMIT University, Vietnam in School of Business and Management with Bachelor of Business (Economics and Finance). She has experience in business research and data analytics in the finance and marketing industry, and academic research on social sciences.

Appendix

List of 127 studies used for this review

Table

Title of the paper	Name of authors	Name of Journals
The impact of Transformational and Authentic leadership on innovation in higher education: The contingent role of knowledge sharing	Elrehail et al. (2018)	Telematics And Informatics
The Interplay of Leadership Styles, Innovative Work Behavior, Organizational Culture, and Organizational Citizenship Behavior	M. A. Khan et al. (2020)	SAGE Open
Transformational leadership and innovation: the mediating role of knowledge sharing amongst higher education faculty	Al-Husseini et al. (2021)	International Journal of Leadership in Education
The effects of transformational leadership on organizational citizenship behavior: the role of organizational justice and affective commitment	Khaola and Rambe, (2021)	Management Research Review
Leadership style and job satisfaction in higher education institutions	Alonderiene and Majauskaite (2016)	International Journal of Educational Management
The influence of ethical leadership on academic employees’ organizational citizenship behavior and turnover intention: Mediating role of intrinsic motivation	Shareef and Atan (2019)	Management Decision
Influence of transformational leadership on role ambiguity and work – life balance of Filipino University employees during COVID-19: does employee involvement matter?	Charoensukmongkol and Puyod (2021)	International Journal of Leadership in Education
Intrapreneurial behavior in higher education institutes of Pakistan: The role of leadership styles and psychological empowerment	Farrukh et al. (2019)	Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education
Transformational or transactional leadership style: Which affects work satisfaction and performance of Islamic university lecturers during COVID-19 pandemic?	Azizah et al. (2020)	Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy
How exploitative leadership influences on knowledge management processes: the moderating role of organizational citizenship behavior	Abdulmuhsin et al. (2021)	International Journal of Organizational Analysis
Servant leadership and academics outcomes in higher education: the role of job satisfaction	Aboramadan et al. (2021)	International Journal of Organizational Analysis
Transformational leadership as an antecedent of change-oriented organizational citizenship behavior	López-Domínguez et al. (2013)	Journal of Business Research
Evaluating the effect of transformational leadership on knowledge sharing using structural equation modeling: the case of Iraqi higher education	Al-Husseini and Elbeltagi (2018)	International Journal of Leadership In Education
Servant leadership and academics’ engagement in higher education: mediation analysis	M. Aboramadan, Dahleez and Hamad (2020)	Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management
University teachers’ experiences of academic leadership and their approaches to teaching	Ramsden et al. (2007)	Learning And Instruction
The Impact of Leadership Styles on the Engagement of Cadres, Lecturers and Staff at Public Universities – Evidence from Vietnam	Suong et al. (2019)	Journal of Asian Finance Economics and Business
Spiritual leadership and employee performance: Mediating role of organizational commitment in Indonesian public university	Akbar et al. (2018)	Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
Transformational leadership and organizational citizenship behavior: Modeling emotional intelligence as mediator	Majeed et al. (2017)	Management and Marketing
Impact of psychological capital and authentic leadership on work engagement and job related affective well-being	Adil and Kamal (2016)	Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research
Transformational Leadership, Systems, and Intrinsic Motivation Impacts on Innovation in Higher Education Institutes: Faculty Perspectives in Engineering Colleges	Al-Mansoori and Koç (2019)	Sustainability
Leadership styles, job satisfaction and organizational commitment among academic staff in public universities	Mwesigwa et al. (2020)	Journal of Management Development
The role of leadership styles in organizational citizenship behavior through the mediation of perceived organizational support and job satisfaction	Asgari et al. (2020)	Innovar
Authentic leadership and psychological capital in job demands-resources model among Pakistani university teachers	Adil and Kamal (2020)	International Journal Of Leadership In Education
How transformational and contingent reward leaderships influence university faculty’s organizational commitment: the mediating effect of psychological empowerment	Huang et al. (2021)	Studies in Higher Education
The impact of ethical leadership on organizational citizenship behaviors: Moderating role of organizational cynicism	Nemr and Liu (2021)	Cogent Business and Management
Relationship among leadership style, organizational culture and employee commitment in university libraries	Awan and Mahmood (2010)	Library Management
Exploring the influence of transformational leadership on work engagement and workplace spirituality of academic employees in the private higher education institutions in Malaysia	Arokiasamy and Tat (2020)	Management Science Letters
Leadership styles and employees’ turnover intention: Exploratory study of academic staff in a Malaysian college	Long et al. (2012)	World Applied Sciences Journal
The mediating effect of knowledge sharing among intrinsic motivation, high-performance work system and authentic leadership on university faculty members’ creativity	Hassan and Din (2019)	Management Science Letters
Implementing the student-centered teaching approach in Vietnamese universities: the influence of leadership and management practices on teacher engagement	Nghia et al. (2018)	Educational Studies
The impact of transformational leadership on organizational citizenship behavior: Evidence from Malaysian higher education context	Al-Mamary et al. (2021)	Human Systems Management
Empirical investigation of moderating and mediating variables in between transformational leadership and related outcomes: A study of higher education sector in North India	Jyoti and Bhau (2016)	International Journal of Educational Management
Leadership styles at Syrian higher education: What matters for organizational learning at public and private universities?	Khalifa and Ayoubi (2015)	International Journal of Educational Management
Authentic leadership style and academia’s creativity in higher education institutions: Intrinsic motivation and mood as mediators	I. Ahmad et al. (2015)	Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences
How ethical leadership stimulates academics’ retention in universities: The mediating role of job-related affective well-being	S. Ahmad et al. (2018)	International Journal of Educational Management
Ethical leadership and young university teachers’ work engagement: A moderated mediation model	Zeng & Xu (2020)	International Journal Of Environmental Research And Public Health
A framework of brand-centered training and development activities, transformational leadership and employee brand support in higher education	Sujchaphong et al. (2020)	Journal Of Brand Management
Spiritual leadership, job satisfaction, and its effect on organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behavior	Djaelani et al. (2020)	Management Science Letters
The mediating effect of employee engagement on the relationship of transformational leadership and intention to quit: Evidence from local colleges in pampanga, Philippines	Lacap (2019)	Asia-Pacific Social Science Review
Effect of ecological, servant dan digital leadership style influence university performance? evidence from Indonesian universities	Quddus et al. (2020)	Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy
Direct and indirect effect of ethical leadership on employee behaviors in higher education	Dinc (2018)	International Journal of Management in Education
Shared leadership and organizational citizenship behavior in Jordanian public universities: Developing a global workforce for the 21st century	Khasawneh (2011)	Educational Management Administration and Leadership
Supervisors’ paternalistic leadership influences college English teachers’ teaching efficacy in China	Song (2016)	Social Behavior and Personality
Effect of transformational leadership and high performance work system on job motivation and task performance: Empirical evidence from business schools of Thailand universities	Pongpearchan (2016)	Journal of Business and Retail Management Research
An investigation on the nexus between leadership style and job satisfaction of library staff in private university libraries South-West, Nigeria	Jerome (2018)	Library Philosophy and Practice
The impact of transformational leadership and psychological empowerment on organizational citizenship behaviors: A PLS-SEM approach	Abdulrab et al. (2020)	Journal of Critical Reviews
The mediating effect of organizational citizenship behavior in the relationship between transformational leadership and corporate social responsibility practices: Middle eastern example/Jordan	Alshihabat and Atan (2020)	Sustainability (Switzerland)
Transformational and transactional leadership influence on knowledge management activities of librarians in university libraries in Nigeria	Ugwu and Okore (2020)	Journal Of Librarianship And Information Science
Effects of green transformational and ethical leadership on green creativity, eco-innovation and energy efficiency in higher education sector of Indonesia	Bahzar (2019)	International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy
Transition from educational leadership to e-leadership: A data analysis report from TEI of western Greece	Antonopoulou et al. (2019)	International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research
LEADERSHIP STYLES AND COMMUNICATION SKILLS AT INDONESIAN HIGHER EDUCATION: PATTERNS, INFLUENCES, AND APPLICATIONS FOR ORGANIZATION	Udin et al. (2019)	Organizations And Markets In Emerging Economies
Mediation effect of knowledge management on the relationship between transformational leadership and job performance of librarians in university libraries in Nigeria	Ugwu (2019)	Journal Of Librarianship And Information Science
Lecturers’ perception toward chaiperson leadership style, task-oriented, relationship-oriented in promoting work motivation level in smart campus university	Basri et al. (2018)	International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology
The Influence Personality and Leader Behaviours have on Teacher Self-leadership in Vocational Colleges	Marshall et al. (2012)	Educational Management Administration and Leadership
The impact of transformational leadership on organizational performance case study: The University of Jordan	Alsayyed et al. (2020)	International Journal of Business Excellence
The relationship between empowering leadership, work characteristics, and work engagement among academics: A sem mediation analysis	Helland et al. (2020)	Scandinavian Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology
Investigating the relationship between benevolent leadership and the organizational citizenship behavior of academic staff: The mediating role of leader-member exchange	Ho and Le (2020)	Management in Education
Spiritual leadership and Islamic organizational citizenship behavior: Examining mediation-moderated process	Supriyanto and Ekowati (2020)	International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change
Investigating leadership and employee well-being in higher education	Samad et al. (2022)	Personnel Review
Ethical leadership, good governance and employee commitment: Testing a moderated mediation model in public universities of Ethiopia	Gollagari et al. (2021)	Journal Of Public Affairs
Ethical leadership and improved work behaviors: A moderated mediation model using prosocial silence and organizational commitment as mediators and employee engagement as moderator	Imam and Kim (2022)	Current Psychology
Creating satisfied employees in Christian higher education: Research on leadership competencies	Webb (2008)	Christian Higher Education
The effect of the leadership perception and organizational justice on organizational commitment: A research in a state university	Taner et al. (2015)	International Review of Management and Marketing
The Relationship between distributed leadership practices and academic optimism among faculty members in Northern Border University [Northern Border üniversitesi öğretim elemanlarinin dağitimci liderlik uygulamalari ve akademik iyimserliği arasindaki ilişki]	Alenezi (2018)	Pegem Egitim ve Ogretim Dergisi
Analysis of leadership styles developed by teachers and administrators in technical-technological programs: the case of the Cooperative University of Colombia	Cuadros et al. (2018)	International Journal Of Leadership In Education
Does a transformational and transactional leadership style predict organizational commitment among public university lecturers in Nigeria?	Othman et al. (2012)	Asian Social Science
New leadership style and lecturers’ commitment in Yemen higher education institutions	Saeed et al. (2013)	World Applied Sciences Journal
Examine the effect of individual creativity on job performance with the mediating role of ethical leadership of headquarters staff of Hormozgan University of medical sciences	Taboli and Zaerizadeh (2016)	International Business Management
Leadership style as a predictor of employee commitment in university libraries in South-West, Nigeria	Mayowa-Adebara and Opeke (2019)	Library Management
Leadership style, culture and commitment: An analytical study of university libraries in Pakistan	Awan et al. (2014)	Library Philosophy and Practice
Influence of Ownership Structure and Leadership Styles on Turnover Intention of LIS Professionals: Empirical Evidence from Private Universities in Osun State Nigeria	Hamzat et al. (2020)	Library Philosophy and Practice
The effect of transactional and transformational leadership on lecturer performance with job satisfaction as the mediation	Angriani et al. (2020)	Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy
Leadership styles and job satisfaction in the colleges of nursing among the universities in Zamboanga City	Celdran (2020)	International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change
Exploring the impact of transformational leadership on process innovation and product innovation: A case of Iraqi public universities	Hussain et al. (2014)	Asian Social Science
Work motivation of teachers: Relationship with transformational and transactional leadership behavior of college principals	George and Sabhapathy (2010)	Academic Leadership
The impact of ethical leadership on employee engagement within a South African public higher education institution	Bhana and Suknunan (2019)	Problems and Perspectives in Management
Investigating the relationship between transformational leadership style and organizational identity of faculty members in the State Universities of West Azerbaijan Province, Iran	Hesar et al. (2019)	Serbian Journal of Management
A PLS analysis on the relationship between servant leadership and academicians OCB in MTUN universities	Rashid et al. (2019)	International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology
The effect of motivation, working environment, and self leadership on lecturer performance at politeknik negeri jember	Kurniawati and Tobing (2019)	International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research
HRM practices as determinates of the employee intention to stay: The moderating effect of transformational leadership: A case of higher education institutes in UAE	Abudaqa et al. (2019)	Humanities and Social Sciences Reviews
Transformational Leadership Style and Employee Creativity: A Case Study in Yazd Medical University	Ranjbar et al. (2019b)	Health Care Manager
The role of servant leadership and organizational climate on organizational citizenship behavior with job satisfaction as mediator	Wahyu et al. (2019)	International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research
The study of relationship between leadership styles (Transformational/Transactional) and knowledge conversion processes among faculty members in university	Allameh et al. (2012)	Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences
Motivation sources and leadership styles among middle managers at a South African university	Chipunza and Matsumunyane (2018)	SA Journal of Human Resource Management
Impact of leadership styles on employee engagement and conflict management practices in Nigerian universities	Akanji et al. (2018)	Issues In Educational Research
Organic leadership style and employee engagement: The mediating effect of social relevance of work in context of faculty members in higher education	Dang and Basur (2017)	Purushartha
The influence of ethical leadership on lecturers’ job involvement	Hussin et al. (2009)	Academic Leadership
A study of relationship between consequences of leadership and transformational leadership style of the presidents of Iranian universities and institutions of higher education	Noorshahi and Sarkhabi (2008)	Academic Leadership
Relationship between head of department leadership styles and lecturers job satisfactions in Nigerian public universities	Sakiru et al. (2014)	Asian Social Science
Leadership, peer relationship, and transformational organizational culture: A relational approach to a Taiwan college music faculty sample	Ji and Chuang (2012)	International Journal of Music Education
A study of relationship between transformational leadership and personnel creativity in higher education centers	Ghorbani and Yekta (2012)	World Applied Sciences Journal
The relationships between sex-role characteristics and leadership behaviors of faculty members at the Hashemite University	Al-Omari (2008)	Journal of Institutional Research South East Asia
Transformational leadership style and knowledge management among university administrators in Malaysia: Examining the moderating effect of organizational structure	Darus et al. (2014)	International Journal of Economic Research
Effect of transformational leadership on employee stress and fatigue in payam noor university	Amirkhani and Kazemi (2016)	International Business Management
Leadership skill, leadership style and job commitment among academic staff of Nigerian universities: the moderating effects of employee’s attitude and work environment	Ekpe et al. (2017)	International Journal of Management in Education
Investigating the relationship between a cooperative leadership style and the rate of employee motivation (case study: University of Sistan and Baluchestan)	Sheikhzadeh (2017)	International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research
Transformational leadership and employee organizational commitment in a rural-based higher education institution in South Africa	Ndlovu et al. (2018)	Sa Journal Of Human Resource Management
Effect of authentic leadership on academic atmosphere and organizational culture in Indonesian Islamic higher education	Shulhan (2019)	International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change
The interactive relationship between paternalistic leadership strategies and organizational innovation for addressing organizational Slack: An analytical study of a sample from faculties at Dhi-Qar University	Ghabash et al. (2019)	International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change
The moderating role of entrepreneur orientation in the relationship between knowledge management, transformational leadership and performance of Higher Education Institutes in Thailand	Somjai and Sangperm (2019)	International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change
The impact of leadership styles, perception toward gender and working experience on employees’ job satisfaction in the higher education institute	Veerasundar and Maideen (2019)	International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering
The effects of transformational leadership, learning organizations and decision making on lecturers’ professional commitment	Simanjuntak et al. (2019)	International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering
The mediating role of a quality academic process on the relationship between distributed leadership and the effectiveness of public universities in Nigeria	Kayode et al. (2019)	Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences
Model of relationship of transformational leadership and university management [Modelo de relación de liderazgo transformacional y gerencia universitaria]	Pérez-Ortega and Moreno-Freites (2019)	DYNA (Colombia)
The moderating role of type of university in the relationship between transformational leadership and supply chain management: Evidence from universities in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq	Waisy and Wei (2019)	International Journal of Supply Chain Management
The effect of transformational leadership, management information system, and organizational climate on lecturers’ job satisfaction	Mukhtar and Anwar (2019)	International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research
A Study of Leadership Style on Employees’ Performance in Some Selected Private Universities in Ghana	Andoh and Ghansah (2019)	International Journal Of Engineering Research In Africa
The role of smart working in mediating participatory altruistic leadership, competence, quality knowledge in learning performance of lecturers in higher education	Handayani et al. (2020)	International Journal of Higher Education
Transformational leadership, general competence, special competence, affective commitment, as an impact on lecturer performance with lecturer certification as a moderating variable	Paramarta et al. (2020)	Journal of Advanced Research in Dynamical and Control Systems
Transformational leadership influence on job engagement: Case study in Indonesian lecturers	Nurtjahjani et al. (2020)	International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research
EXPLORATION OF LEADERSHIP STYLES AND EMPLOYEES’ COMMITMENT TO EFFECTIVE LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICES IN A UNIVERSITY LIBRARY IN GHANA	Banji (2020)	Library Philosophy and Practice
Authentic leadership and teachers’ ‘green’ knowledge management in higher education-mediating effect of trust	Hou et al. (2020)	Journal Of Environmental Protection And Ecology
The Moderating Effect of Transformational Leadership on Relationship between Organizational Silence and Knowledge Transfer among Librarians in Federal Universities in Southern Nigeria	Popoola (2021)	International Journal of Information Science and Management
Creative leadership and its relationship to thinking styles among Saudi University leaders	Alshammri and Alenezi (2021)	International Journal of Education and Practice
Mediation and moderation models on the effect of empowering leadership and professionalism toward lecturer performance	Fikri et al. (2021)	Quality – Access to Success
Integrative Leadership Style of Libraries at Islamic Universities in Indonesia	Agusta and Nurdin (2021)	Library Philosophy and Practice
Leadership style and performance in higher education: the role of organizational justice	I. U. Khan et al. (2021)	International Journal of Leadership in Education
Inclusive leadership and extra-role behaviors in higher education: does organizational learning mediate the relationship?	Aboramadan et al. (2022)	International Journal of Educational Management
The mutual impact of university president’s leadership and organizational justice on knowledge sharing: the mediating effect of communication	Kim et al. (2021)	Industrial And Commercial Training
Influence of differential leadership on teachers’ professional ethics: an empirical study from Chinese universities	Zhu & Guo (2021)	Asia Pacific Education Review
Building The Relationship of Islamic Transglobal Leadership with Human Resource Performance Through a Meaningful Work, Engagement, and Creativity	El Junusi et al. (2021)	International Journal of Economics and Management
The managerial effects of leadership, knowledge sharing and innovation in higher education [Efekty menedżerskie przywództwa, dzielenia się wiedzą i innowacją w szkolnictwie wyższym]	Anis et al. (2021)	Polish Journal of Management Studies
The relationship between technology leadership and teacher ICT competency in higher education	Yuting et al. (2022)	Education and Information Technologies
The Impact of Empowering Leadership on Job Performance of Higher Education Institutions Employees: Mediating Role of Goal Clarity and Self-Efficacy	Ahmed et al. (2022)	Psychology Research and Behavior Management
The relationship between spiritual leadership and human engineering among university employees: The mediating role of mindfulness	Mohammed et al. (2022)	Global Business and Organizational Excellence
The impact of transformational leadership style and employee creativity on organizational innovation in universities during the COVID-19 pandemic	Ngo et al. (2022)	Humanities and Social Sciences Letters
Impact of leadership style on employee commitment in Bahir Dar University, Ethiopia	HassenYimam (2022)	Teaching Public Administration