A Conceptual Framework for the Leadership Style that Fostering Teachers’ Self Efficacy

A Conceptual Framework for the Leadership Style that Fostering Teachers’ Self Efficacy

Mukhiffun Mukapit¹, Siti Rohana Daud*², Nani Shuhada Sehat², Azira Rahim², Intan Liana Suhaime², Najihah Abdul Rahim², Jumaelya Jogeran²

¹Faculty of Management and Technopreneurship, University Teknikal Malaysia Melaka.

²Faculty of Business and Management, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Melaka Campus.

*Corresponding Author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.9010342

Received: 11 January 2025; Accepted: 20 January 2025; Published: 21 February 2025

ABSTRACT

This article explores the factors influencing teachers’ self-efficacy. The investigation uses the conceptual framework of Social Cognitive Theory. A literature review process consists of journals analysis, conference papers, theses, and a conceptual framework. The variables in this analysis are defined and quantified based on previous research and guidelines. This study’s findings stress the significance of leadership styles, which are transformational leadership, servant leadership, and digital leadership, as crucial factors in cultivating self-efficacy among teachers. This study provides valuable insights into the leadership factors influencing teachers’ propensity for self-efficacy and their potential to enhance education system. The study’s limitations stem from its reliance on a literature review and the analysis of prior research findings to construct a conceptual framework concerning teachers’ self-efficacy. Future empirical research is recommended to interpret additional factors promoting self-efficacy comprehensively.

Keywords: Leadership Styles, Self-efficacy, Social Cognitive Theory, Teachers, Education.

INTRODUCTION

Enhancing organizational productivity, particularly within the education sector, is necessary in global education and is an escalating concern for educational stakeholders. As the global educational scene grows more complicated and expectations for educational outcomes intensify, the role of teachers has transformed from mere conveyors of knowledge to proactive agents and catalysts of educational transformation (Cassata & Allensworth, 2021). This transition signals increased expectations for educational quality and underscores the escalating significance of teachers in influencing educational policies and school environments (Datnow, 2022). Additionally, as the need for creativity in the job market grows (IBM 2010), teachers’ reaction to this shift gains more importance. The impact of teachers on school enhancement is significant. Teachers are obligated to perform additional duties, including guidance, counselling, student discipline, classroom management, and participation in curriculum development committees, apart from their teaching duties (Yuniah, Walter & Duke, 2015). The consistent implementation of their responsibilities cannot be realized without continuous support from the school administration. The principals should provide teachers with the necessary managerial assistance to perform well in their institutions (Castler, 2010). To achieve assigned tasks and goals at educational institutions, leadership requires developing mutually beneficial relationships through effective interpersonal communication to foster shared understanding and collaboration among personnel (Stahl, 2018).

Hence the principal leadership is crucial in promoting teachers’ professionalism. Leadership styles may constitute environmental effects (Sehgal et al., 2017), as how leaders treat employees can impact their perceptions regarding their status and worth (Takeuchi et al., 2012). Leadership is a skill set that can be acquired by all school members, not just a quality that only some people have (Galdames-Calderón, 2023).  Teachers’ self-efficacy (SE) is critical to teachers’ professionalism. Self-efficacy plays a crucial role in overcoming challenges in education. For teachers and students, self-efficacy is a significant element of motivation, persistence, and resilience in the face of barriers. Over the past few years, self-efficacy has become a hot topic. It’s now a keyway to understand and predicting how people act and what happens. Bandura (1986) explained self-efficacy as how people judge their ability to plan and carry out the steps needed to get specific things done.

Furthermore, teacher self-efficacy denotes teachers’ confidence in their capacity to execute teaching responsibilities proficiently, is an essential psychological construct crucial for improving teaching quality and student learning outcomes (Bandura, 1997). The self-efficacy theory suggests that a teacher’s confidence in their instructional abilities directly influences their classroom performance and selection of teaching tactics. Teachers with elevated self-efficacy are more inclined to implement new pedagogical approaches, address educational obstacles, and markedly enhance student learning results (Li, 2023). Comprehending the significance of teacher self-efficacy in education enhances individual teaching effectiveness and contributes to the overall improvement of the educational system.

In rapidly evolving educational environment, self-efficacy endows individuals with the ability to embrace change and adapt effectively. Teachers with high self-efficacy are more likely to integrate new technologies and pedagogies into their practices, while students feel confident navigating digital tools and learning platforms (Leithwood & Jantzi, 2005). Therefore, the study leadership styles, such as servant leadership, transformational leadership, and digital leadership, to forecast teachers’ self-efficacy. This is significant as effective leadership can impact educational outcomes teacher motivation and self-efficacy. Thus, this study is expected to provide relevant insights into teachers’ professionalism, which can assist the government in formulating effective educational reforms for the betterment of its citizens.

METHODOLOGY

This study involves a literature review investigating the relationship between leadership style and teachers’ self-efficacy. A thorough review of significant literature and past research meets that purpose including information from reliable journals, books, conference proceedings, reports, websites, and numerous commentaries. Then, the following parts recommend an overview of relevant studies about leadership styles (transformational, servant, and digital leadership), and the relationship between these components and self-efficacy. The research findings are discussed and summarised in the final sections.

LITERATURE REVIEW

This section investigates the variables proposed by researchers, which include self-efficacy, transformational leadership, servant leadership and digital leadership.

Self-efficacy

Self-efficacy pertains to an individual’s conviction in their capacity to execute tasks to get desired results effectively. The formation of this notion is influenced by individual experiences, observed phenomena, social input, and physiological reactions (Rachma & Perdana, 2023; Nasution & Pasaribu, 2023). Self-efficacy is essential across multiple domains, including education, health, and the workplace, as it influences individuals’ actions, thoughts, motivation, and emotions. It also related to an individual’s subjective assessment of their own readiness to successfully transition from institutional care to a state of independent life (Stenclová, 2020).

The concept of self-efficacy is intricately linked to the emotional experiences of employees, which subsequently influence their attitudes and beliefs regarding their respective work environments (Ozer & Akgun, 2015; Warren & Gerler, 2013). Baharin et al. (2019) and Tims et al. (2014) propose that self-efficacy can strengthen an individual’s competence and distinctiveness, resulting in improved performance and professionalism. According to Schunk & DiBenedetto (2016), data suggests that individuals may experience negative consequences due to strong self-efficacy. Individuals with high self-efficacy may tend to have excessive confidence and engage in projects with reduced levels of effort.

Other than that, it relates to the internal beliefs of teachers regarding their ability to proficiently accomplish actions that improve their teaching performance. Research Nemeržitski et al. (2013) has extensively utilized research finding to analyze teacher or student behavior in the educational setting. Self-efficacy pertains to teachers’ confidence in effectively implementing novel tasks (Siregar, 2019).

Transformational Leadership

Bass and Riggio (2010) identified transformational leadership as a process that shapes individuals. It involves altering subordinates, personal belief and self-perceptions to enhance organizational efficacy and subordinate performance. Northouse (2014) articulated that the theory suggests that followers must be acknowledged, esteemed, and trusted for the leader to garner their loyalty, and that everyone possesses valuable contributions. Transformational leaders can inspire followers to enact substantial life changes and pursue a higher purpose and vision (Robbins, 2001). Luthans (2005) states that transformative leaders can change their followers’ consciousness, elevate their enthusiasm, and motivate them to exert maximum effort to achieve organizational goals. This is accomplished not by compulsion, but through the voluntary willingness of the followers.

Several studies conducted in this area found that transformational leadership is associated with increased subordinate commitment, improved performance, and encouragement of more creative problem solutions (Mittal & Dhar, 2015; Yukl, 2012). Transformational leaders inspire and motivate employees, fostering an environment where self-efficacy can thrive. This leadership style enhances employees’ belief in their capabilities, leading to improved performance, engagement, and job satisfaction. Transformational leaders highlight collaboration and connection cultivation, fostering a helpful educational environment. These fosters trust and collaboration among staff, as Liu and Hallinger (2018) emphasized, which is crucial for tackling complicated educational difficulties.

Servant Leadership

Eva et al. (2019) define servant leadership as an other-oriented style displayed by one-on-one, prioritizing followers’ needs and interests, and redirecting followers’ care for self to concern for others within the organization and the greater community. This kind of leadership guarantees success at the personal, organizational, and social levels and in the long run (Coetzer et al., 2017). This leadership model emphasizes serving others, meeting their needs, enhancing their well-being, and fostering their development. This approach deviates from conventional methods that depend on exerting authority via power or control (Mayangsari & Pujianto, 2023; Maria, 2023). Servant leaders exhibit characteristics including modesty, authenticity, selflessness, compassion, and a commitment to the development and progress of their subordinates (Rahal & Farmanesh, 2022).

Servant leadership is a philosophy that prioritizes ethical, positive, and sustainable dimensions (van Dierendonck, 2011). This leadership philosophy aims to serve others and promote the common good (Greenleaf, 1997; Lee et al., 2020). In the education area, Principals employing servant leadership foster an environment characterized by trust and collaboration. Taylor et al. (2007) assert that servant leaders promote teamwork and facilitate professional development, enabling teachers to exchange best practices and enhance their teaching skills continuously. In addition, Iqbal et al. (2020) described this leadership style as prioritizing altruism, ethical conduct, and service above self-interest. Servant leadership emphasizes personal integrity and a commitment to serving others, encompassing employees, clients, and the broader community.

 Digital Leadership

According to Mihardjo and Sasmoko (2019), digital leadership, characterized by the integration of digital culture and digital competencies, emerges when an organization effectively combines these elements. The objective of digital leadership is to establish a customer-centric, digitally enabled, innovative business model through (a) transforming the role, skills, and leadership approach of the digital leader, (b) developing a digital organization encompassing governance, vision, values, structure, culture, and decision-making processes, and (c) adjusting people management, virtual teams, knowledge, communication, and collaboration at the individual level (Eberl & Drews, 2021). It involves using technology to facilitate communication, decision-making, and change. It combines conventional leadership practices with digital tools to enhance efficiency and engagement (Avolio et al., 2001).

In education, digital leadership is related to preparing schools to meet the demands of a digital world. It emphasizes guiding educational communities through the challenges of digital transformation while integrating technology to improve student learning outcomes (McLeod & Shareski, 2018). This parallel the finding of Sheninger (2014), stating that digital leadership is the practice of using technology to create a school culture that empowers teachers and students to adapt to digital changes. It involves fostering innovation, collaboration, and digital citizenship within educational institutions.

UNDERPINNING THEORY

Based on the study, a theory has been applied to the factors underpinning self-efficacy. This theory has been employed in this investigation. Accordingly, the study uses this theory to assess the proposed theoretical framework.

Social Cognitive Theory

Social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986) developed from the social learning theory (Bandura, 1977) in developmental psychology, highlighting the role of imitation and observation in learning through modelling influences. The theory subsequently integrated cognition to enhance the explanation of human behaviour through mental processes, including information processing in reaction to these modelling influences. Furthermore, it examines individual motivation, performance, skill acquisition, and self-regulation (Koutroubas & Galanakis, 2022). This theory posits that leaders’ actions and the social environment they create significantly influence employees’ innovative work behaviour. In the school context, principals and administrators can encourage teachers’ development, boost teachers’ self-efficacy and promote employee engagement in carrying out tasks with dedication. It will produce very good work results by exemplifying innovative conduct, offering reinforcement and support, and enabling vicarious learning opportunities. Social cognitive theory has elucidated how workplace environments, including leadership, motivate and influence employees’ self-efficacy in doing their job.

Figure 1: Conceptual framework

This study establishes a research framework as a foundation for the study’s objective. The study’s conceptual framework comprises three independent variables: transformational leadership, servant leadership, and digital leadership, with self-efficacy as the dependent variable. The independent dependent variable exhibits a direct relationship within the model. The research will use the social cognitive theory as its theoretical framework.

DISCUSSION

The discussion emphasizes the critical role of leadership styles in fostering teachers’ self-efficacy, highlighting their potential to transform educational environments. By addressing the limitations and expanding the scope of future research, this study lays a foundation for developing leadership practices that empower educators and enhance the overall quality of education. The findings of this study focusing on the significant influence of transformational, servant, and digital leadership styles on teachers’ self-efficacy within the educational context and environment. This discussion integrates understandings from the literature with the conceptual framework with theory to better understand this interaction.

Transformational Leadership and Teachers’ Self-Efficacy

Transformational leadership substantially improves teachers’ self-efficacy by fostering a supportive environment supporting professional growth, motivation, and confidence. Transformational leaders inspire teachers to gain a clear vision, provide intellectual stimulation, and offering individualized support. This supports Bass and Riggio (2010), who noted that transformational leadership reforms the subordinates’ personal beliefs and self-perceptions, leading to higher organizational commitment and performance. In educational situations, transformational leaders empower teachers to embrace innovative teaching practices and overcome challenges, contributing to improved student outcomes. This study confirms previous findings (Liu & Hallinger, 2018) that contributing on emphasizing leaders foster trust and collaboration, creating an environment conducive to self-efficacy development.

Servant Leadership and Teachers’ Self-Efficacy

Servant leadership in this study pivotal in enhancing teachers’ self-efficacy by prioritizing their well-being, growth, and development. By adopting an altruistic approach, servant leaders emphasize ethical conduct and personal development, cultivating a sense of trust and collaboration among educators. This aligns with the finding by Eva et al. (2019), who emphasized the ability of servant leaders to relay focus from self-interest to collective well-being. In a school’s environment and situation, this leadership style of continuous learning, fosters teamwork, and the sharing of excellent practices, as supported by Taylor et al. (2007). The study’s findings from this paper suggest that servant leadership creates an emotional support environment where teachers feel more valued and confident in their abilities to meet career demands effectively.

Digital Leadership and Teachers’ Self-Efficacy

Digital leadership is an emerging leadership style that is very important to equip teachers to face the challenges of 21st-century education. This leadership approach leverages digital tools and nurtures innovation to enhance teaching practices and learning effects. Digital leaders have a role in integrating technology into the educational process, empowering teachers to implement digital tools confidently and effectively. Sheninger (2014), noted that digital leadership creates a culture of digital citizenship and continuous learning, enhancing teachers’ confidence in applying digital platforms effectively. This study reaffirms the importance of digital leadership in developing and building self-efficacy, mainly as schools increasingly believe in technology for instructional delivery and administrative duties.

Integration of Social Cognitive Theory

Social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986) provides a strong theoretical foundation for identifying the relationships between leadership styles and teachers’ self-efficacy. As emphasized in the theory, three factors influence how a person will act. These factors highlight how environmental factors, like leadership, interact with personal beliefs to shape behavior. Leaders who model positive behaviors, provide constructive response, and foster supportive environments strengthen teachers’ self-efficacy through domination experiences, vicarious learning, and verbal persuasion. This theoretical alignment underscores the importance of leadership styles in modelling teachers’ confidence and professional behaviors.

Implications for Educational Leadership

The findings have efficient implications for educational leadership facing the challenges in 21st century digital era. School administrators and principals should prioritize leadership development programs emphasizing transformational, servant, and digital leadership styles. By adopting these approaches to this finding study, leaders can create an environment that nurtures teachers’ self-efficacy, leading to better student outcomes through enhanced teaching quality, increased motivation. Additionally, policymakers can integrate these leadership strategies into professional development frameworks for administrators and principals to support teachers in adapting to evolving educational demands.

Limitations and Future Directions

While the study provides valuable insights, its reliance on a literature review limits the generalization of findings across different educational contexts. Future research should focus on empirical validation of the proposed conceptual framework through quantitative and qualitative methods. Exploring self-efficacy’s mediating or moderating roles in the relationship between leadership styles and other educational outcomes, such as job satisfaction or student performance, would provide a more comprehensive understanding of these dynamics.

CONCLUSION

Leadership style is crucial in developing attitudes, behaviors and employee effectiveness in multiple organizational environments. Among the various leadership styles, Servant leadership, transformational leadership, and digital leadership have garnered considerable attention in research due to their unique approaches to influencing employee outcomes, such as self-efficacy. Research suggests that Servant leadership has a positive impact on employees’ self-efficacy. Servant leaders help employees feel more confident in their abilities by aiding and encouraging them. Servant leadership is significantly related to enhanced self-efficacy among employees, as the leaders’ emphasis on personal development and empowerment grants employees to foster confidence in their skills and judgment (Liden et al., 2008).

Transformational leadership has been widely associated with improved self-efficacy among employees. The inspirational nature of Transformational Leadership motivates employees to achieve challenging goals, which enhances their confidence and confidence in their abilities. A study by Schaubroecket al. (2007) proved that transformational leadership positively influences employees’ self-efficacy by preparing a sense of purpose and positioning individual goals with organizational goals. Meanwhile, digital leadership also positively impact on employees’ self-efficacy. A study by El Sawy et al. (2016) highlighted that Digital Leadership positively influences employees’ self-efficacy by promoting a culture of continuous learning and innovation. As digital leaders guide their teams through digital transformations, they help employees develop the skills and confidence necessary to thrive in a digital workplace. In addition, by fostering a collective and flexible work culture, digital leaders increase employees’ belief in their ability to contribute to the organization’s success in the digital age (Gurtner et al., 2014).

The researchers recommended that school principals should maintain their effective leadership styles and advocate for further advancements and reforms within the educational institutions (Hussain & Siddiqua, 2023) 

REFERENCES

1. Avolio, B. J., Kahai, S., & Dodge, G. E. (2001). E-leadership: Implications for theory, research, and practice. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(4), 615–668.
2. Baharin, N. L., Hanafi, W. N. W., Rahman Zahari, A., Fadzline Muhammad Tamyez, P., Azlinna Azizan, N., & Esa, E. (2019). Work readiness skills and career self-efficacy: A case of Malaysian private university. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences, 100.
3. Bandura, A. (1986). Fearful expectations and avoidant actions as coeffects of perceived self-inefficacy.
4. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
5. Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2010). The transformational model of leadership. Leading organizations: Perspectives for a new era, 2(1), 76-86.
6. Cassata, A., & Allensworth, E. (2021). Scaling standards-aligned instruction through teacher leadership: methods, supports, and challenges. International Journal of STEM Education, 8, 1-21.
7. Castler, A.O. (2010). Management Support Qualification and Gender on Teachers Performance at an In-service Course. Nigeria Journal of School Leadership, 15(1):12-17.
8. Coetzer, M.F., Bussin, M. and Geldenhuys, M. (2017). The functions of a servant leader. Administrative Sciences, 7(1), 1-32.
9. Datnow, A. (2020). The role of teachers in educational reform: A 20-year perspective. Journal of Educational Change, 21(3), 431-441.
10. Eberl, J.K. & Drews. P. (2021). Digital leadership‒mountain or molehill? A literature review. International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik, Cham, Springer, 223-237.
11. El Sawy, O., Kræmmergaard, P., Amsinck, H., Vinther. A., (2016). How LEGO built the foundations and enterprise capabilities for digital leadership. MIS Q Exec, 15 (2), 141-166.
12. Eva, N., Robin, M., Sendjaya, S., van Dierendonck, D. and Liden, R.C. (2019). Servant leadership: a systematic review and call for future research. The Leadership Quarterly, 30 (1), 111-132.
13. Eva, N., Robin, M., Sendjaya, S., van Dierendonck, D., & Liden, R. C. (2019). Servant leadership: A systematic review and call for future research. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(1), 111-132.
14. Galdames-Calderón, M. (2023). Distributed leadership: School principals’ practices to promote teachers’ professional development for school improvement. Education Sciences, 13(7), 715.
15. Greenleaf, R.K. (1997). Servant leadership: a journey into the nature of legitimate power and greatness. Paulist Press, New York, NY.
16. Gurtner, S., Reinhardt, R., & Soyez, K. (2014). Designing mobile business applications for different age groups. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 88, 177-188.
17. Hussain, M. K., & Siddiqua, N. (2023). The Effects of Principals’ Transformational Leadership on Teachers’ Self-Efficacy in Federal Government Educational Institutions in Karachi Region. Educational Research and Innovation, 3(2), 39-62.
18. IBM. (2010). Capitalizing on complexity: Insights from the global chief executive officer (CEO) study. Portsmouth: UK: IBM United Kingdom Limited.
19. Iqbal, A., Latif, K.F. and Ahmad, M.S. (2020). Servant leadership and employee innovative behaviour: exploring psychological pathways. Leadership and Organization Development Journal. 41(6), 813-827.
20. Koutroubas, V. & Galanakis, M. (2022). Bandura’s social learning theory and its importance in the organizational psychology context. Psychology Research, 12(6), 315-322.
21. Lee, A., Lyubovnikova, J., Tian, A.W. and Knight, C. (2020). Servant leadership: a meta-analytic examination of incremental contribution, moderation, and mediation. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 93 (1), 1-44.
22. Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (2005). Transformational leadership. In B. Davies (Ed.), The essentials of school leadership (pp. 31–43). SAGE Publications.
23. Li, S. (2023). The effect of teacher self-efficacy, teacher resilience, and emotion regulation on teacher burnout: A mediation model. Front. Psychol., 14, 1185079.
24. Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Liao, C., & Meuser, J. D. (2014). Servant leadership and serving culture: Influence on individual and unit performance. Academy of Management Journal, 57(5), 1434-1452.
25. Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., Zhao, H., & Henderson, D. (2008). Servant leadership: Development of a multidimensional measure and multi-level assessment. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(2), 161–177.
26. Liu, S., & Hallinger, P. (2018). Principal instructional leadership, teacher self-efficacy, and teacher professional learning in China: Testing a mediated-effects model. Educational Administration Quarterly, 54(4), 501–528.
27. Luthans, F. (2005). Perilaku Organisasi (Edisi Kese). Penerbit ANDI
28. Maria, A. (2023). Servant leadership competence to improve the quality of services for health workers graduates of the Akademi Kesehatan John Paul II Pekanbaru. Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat Bestari.
29. Mayangsari, A. S., & Pujianto, W. E. (2023). Servant leadership model: studi kasus pada dinas kependudukan Provinsi Jawa Timur. Public Sphere Review: Journal of Public Administration, 2 (1), 1-12.
30. McLeod, S., & Shareski, D. (2018). Different schools for a different world: School improvement for 21^st-century learners. Solution Tree Press.
31. Mihardjo, L. W. W., & Sasmoko, S. (2019). Digital transformation: digital leadership role in developing business model innovation mediated by co-creation strategy for telecommunication incumbent firms. In Strategy and behaviors in the digital economy. IntechOpen.
32. Mittal, S., and Dhar, R. L. (2016). Effect of green transformational leadership on green creativity: a study of tourist hotels. Tour. Manag.
33. Nasution, R. A., & Pasaribu, L. H. (2023). Peningkatan kemampuan komunikasi matematik dan self-efficacy siswa dengan menggunakan pendekatan matematika realistik. Jurnal Basicedu, 7(1), 798-806.
34. Northouse, P. G. (2014). Leadership: Theory and practice (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
35. Ozer, E.A.; Akgun, O.E. (2015). The effects of irrational beliefs on academic motivation and academic self-efficacy of candidate teachers of computer and instructional technologies education department. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci., 197, 1287–1292.
36. Rachma, B., & Perdana, R. (2023, February). Efikasi diri dan tingkat stress pada pelajar SMA Negeri 1 Cibitung selama pembalajaran di masa pandemi Covid-19. In Bandung Conference Series: Medical Science (Vol. 3, No. 1).
37. Rahal, F.E.Z.M.; Farmanesh, P. (2022). Does servant leadership stimulate work engagement in the workplace? The mediating role of trust in leader. Sustainability, 14, 16528
38. Robbins, S. P. (2001). Organizational behavior: concept, controversies, applications (8th Editio). Indeks Kelompok Gramedia.
39. Schaubroeck, J., Lam, S. S., & Cha, S. E. (2007). Embracing transformational leadership: team values and the impact of leader behavior on team performance. Journal of Applied psychology, 92(4), 1020.
40. Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K. (2020). Motivation and social cognitive theory. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 60, 101832.
41. Sehgal, P., Nambudiri, R., & Mishra, S. K. (2017). Teacher effectiveness through self-efficacy, collaboration and principal leadership. International Journal of Educational Management, 31(4), 505-517.
42. Sheninger, E. (2014). Digital leadership: Changing paradigms for changing times. Corwin Press.
43. Siregar, Z. M. E., Suryana, E. A., & Senen, S. H. (2019). Factors influencing innovative work behavior: an individual factors perspective. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 8(9), 324-327.
44. Stahl, W.E., (2018). Leadership: A resource in the workplace. Wayne State University Theses.
45. Stenclová, V. (2020). Self-Efficacy: The perception of self-preparedness for leaving institutional care and becoming an independent individual. European Scientific Journal, ESJ,
46. Takeuchi, H., Taki, Y., Hashizume, H., Sassa, Y., Nagase, T., Nouchi, R., & Kawashima, R. (2012). The association between resting functional connectivity and creativity. Cerebral Cortex, 22(12), 2921-2929.
47. Taylor, M. L., Martin, B. N., Hutchinson, S. R., & Jinks, M. (2007). Examination of leadership practices of principals identified as servant leaders. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 10(4), 401–419.
48. Tims, M., B. Bakker, A., & Derks, D. (2014). Daily job crafting and the self-efficacy–performance relationship. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29(5), 490-507.
49. Van Dierendonck, D. (2011). Servant leadership: a review and synthesis. Journal of Management, 37 (4), 1228-1261.
50. Warren, J.M.; Gerler, J.E.R. (2013). Effects of school counsellors’ cognitive behavioural consultation on irrational and efficacy beliefs of elementary school teachers. Prof. Couns., 3, 6–15.
51. Yukl, G. (2012). Effective leadership behavior: What we know and what questions need more attention. Academy of Management Perspectives, 26(4), 66-85.
52. Yuniah, K. M., Walter, B. O., & Duke, N. N. (2015). Determinants of teachers’ motivation in public secondary schools in Masaba South sub country, Kenya. International Journal of Economic, Commerce and Management, 3(6), 37-78.