The Impact of Work-life Integration Flexibility and Authentic Leadership on Work Engagement: The Mediating Role of Basic Psychological Needs among Malaysian Academicians

The Impact of Work-life Integration Flexibility and Authentic Leadership on Work Engagement: The Mediating Role of Basic Psychological Needs among Malaysian Academicians

Qian Zhixin, Andi Tamsang Andi Kele^*, Ang Hong Loong

Faculty of Business, Economics and Accountancy, University Malaysia Sabah, Malaysia

*Corresponding author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.906000190

Received: 03 June 2025; Accepted: 06 June 2025; Published: 07 July 2025

ABSTRACT

This study focuses on basic psychological needs as potential mediator in the relationship between authentic leadership inventory, work-life integration flexibility and work engagement through the supportive of Self-Determination Theory (SDT) among academicians in the Malaysian higher education sector. According to SDT, people experience higher levels of intrinsic motivation and engagement when their underlying psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness are satisfied. Although work-life flexibility is assumed to foster autonomy, authentic leadership attends to all three of these psychological needs via the qualities associated with authentic leaders, which are high levels of self-awareness, relational transparency, internalized moral perspective, balanced processing. Employing a quantitative methodology, the study surveyed a sample of 120 academicians in universities, university colleges and colleges in Malaysia. SmartPLS was conducted to analyze the effects of the variables on one another. The results show that relational transparency, internalized moral perspective, and balanced processing are significant predictors of work engagement. Furthermore, indirect effects analysis shows that basic psychological needs (autonomy, competence, and relatedness) fully mediate the effect of work-life integration flexibility on work engagement and partially mediate the effect of authentic leadership inventory on work engagement. But the roles of self-awareness and flexibility in work-life integration did not prove significant. The findings highlight that work-life flexibility plays in isolation of this context and the importance of leaders who act in an ethical, inclusive and transparent manner to fuel engagement amongst academic staff. The findings provide context-specific contributions to the literature by situating the factors involved within the framework of Self-Determination Theory (SDT) within the context of the Malaysian academia. The implications for institutional policies and leadership development programs are discussed along with suggested future research to test psychological mediators and conduct cross- cultural comparisons.

Keyword: Work-life integration flexibility, authentic leadership, work engagement, psychological needs, Self-Determination Theory

INTRODUCTION

The world of work is rapidly changing due to technology, changing expectations from employees and growing awareness of how strongly related employee wellbeing is with organizational performance (Merwe & Olivier, 2024; Anand et al., 2024). This global transformation calls for a fundamental rethinking of the way work has traditionally been structured, especially in intense professional cultures. Among the industry’s most dramatically affected by this transformation is academia, colleges, university colleges and universities. Universities and colleges, which are responsible for generating knowledge, disseminating it, and nurturing talent, are suffering from high levels of faculty turnover, productivity, and job satisfaction while being continually pushed to higher job performance with increased mandates in teaching, research, and administration (Bhattacharya, 2024; Manchanda & Arora, 2023; Sharma & Syal, 2022; Diele-Viegas et al., 2022).

Within the Malaysian higher education landscape, academicians often face unique challenges. The constant need to apply for research funding, to publish in high-ranking journals, to fulfill high teaching loads, and have administrative responsibilities can create stress and possibly burn-out if so at pressures levels (Ramachandaran et al., 2024; Yusoff et al., 2024; Kamal et al., 2024; Raduan et al., 2022). Within this circumstance, work engagement defined as a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption (Alexias et al., 2024), is a vital importance not only for the wellbeing of individual academic, but also for the long-term viability of educational institutions. Engaged scholars make researchers, teachers and contributors better to the mission of their institutions (Maquidato & Bayani, 2024; Zhou, 2024).

Norms of hierarchy and traditional work expectations, which are common in some academic workplaces, can suppress the internal motivation and autonomy that lead to excellence in academia (Chaube & Koley, 2023). This poses an important problem, which gives the importance of academics for the development of nations and the nature and demands of their profession, there seems to be a problem with commitment to continuous work (Filatova et al., 2024). While the significance of enabling work environments is well recognized in the literature, there is not necessarily a clear understanding of how these factors translate into impact in a context such as Malaysia’s a one that is distinct from many other OECD countries (Kanapathipillai et al., 2024; Subramaniam et al., 2024; Atif et al., 2025).

As a result, there is little research that has examined what specifically within the organizational support that influences academicians’ work engagement (Li, 2023; Budiman, 2022). Although elements of flexibility or leadership may be addressed in some studies, there is a gap in the literature regarding the synergistic effects between the use of a work-life integration flexibility and authentic leadership inventory (Yamin & Pusparini, 2022; Cai, 2024). On top of that, the theory of why such factors would enhance work engagement has not been established in this context, especially with individual psychological needs as the underlying mechanism (Karimi & Reisi, 2023; Jin et al., 2022). More specifically, this gap is filled by the present work, which examines the mediating role of basic psychological needs (namely autonomy, competence, and relatedness) between work-life integration flexibility and authentic leadership on work engagement, and thus sheds light on the indirect processes that lead to engagement in the workplace.

The present study intends to fill this gap by exploring the role of work-life integration flexibility and authentic leadership inventory on work engagement among academicians in Malaysian colleges, university colleges and universities. Based on the Self-Determination Theory (SDT), it assumes that people flourish when their basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness are fulfilled (Olafsen et al., 2024; Shulzhenko, 2024). This study also aims to explain the mechanisms of why work-life integration flexibility and authentic leadership inventory can translate into higher engagement. Recognizing the nuances of such dynamics can help institutions in higher education in developing more meaningful ways of creating an energetic, committed, and productive academic labor force which is vital for the quality and sustainability of education in Malaysia (Wong et al., 2024).

LITERATURE REVIEW

Self-Determination Theory (SDT)

Self-Determination Theory or SDT, formulated by Martela (2020) and Deci and Ryan (2008) is one of the leading macro-theories of human motivation, development and well-being. At the core of SDT, autonomy, competence, and relatedness are considered three basic and universal psychological needs. Autonomy is defined as the experience of volition and choice in one’s actions as well as the sense that one is the source of one’s own actions (Gagné et al., 2022; Martela, 2020). Competence is an ability to be effective in interactions with one’ s environment and to exercise and express one’ s own capacities (Dunn & Zimmer, 2020; Gagné & Vansteenkiste, 2013). Relatedness is defined as the desire to relate to others, to belong, and to reciprocate care and respect (Shulzhenko, 2024). According to SDT, the fulfillment of these three basic psychological needs is critical to intrinsic motivation, psychological growth, well-being and optimal functioning. On the contrary, obstructing such needs is related to low motivation, ill-being, and maladaptive results (Sullivan, 2019; Flannery, 2017; Deci & Ryan, 2014).

Specifically, SDT clarifies that provided that the work situation is supportive of the three basic needs, employees will be intrinsically motivated to work, be absorbed in their work, and be dedicated to their organizations (Deci et al., 2017). The present study is particularly interested in this theoretical perspective as it provides a strong framework to understand the expected influence of work-life integration flexibility and authentic leadership inventory on work engagement. More specifically, flexible work arrangements are expected to have a direct positive impact on academicians’ autonomy by offering them greater control over their work conditions. By including all components of the authentic leadership inventory, namely self-awareness, relational transparency, internalized moral perspective, and balanced processing, it is argued that authentic leadership behaviors can satisfy the psychological needs for competence through support and constructive feedback, and relatedness by establishing trust and genuine connections (Helmuth et al., 2023; Novaes et al., 2019). Based on SDT, this research argues that by satisfying these core needs, both work-life integration flexibility and authentic leadership inventory can play a significant role in positively activating work engagement among academicians (Adil et al., 2023; Moore, 2017).

Work Engagement

Work engagement has become one of the most important and central concepts in organizational psychology as it describes a positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption (Turner, 2020; Stychno et al., 2018). Vigor is described as high levels of energy and mental resilience while working, the willingness to invest effort in one’s work, and persistence in the face of difficulties (Shirom, 2011; Levecque et al., 2019). Dedication is the sense of detachment from work and the sense of inspiration and enthusiasm about the work, pride in doing it well, and challenge in doing some of it (Bakker, 2009; Moura et al., 2017). The third dimension, absorption, is defined as being intensely focused on and enjoying the work so that time goes by quickly and one has a hard time pulling themselves away from it (Bakker, 2009). Work engagement is relevance since it has repeatedly been discussed in empirical studies to be associated with various desirable individual and organizational outcomes such as higher job performance, productivity, creativity and innovation, job satisfaction, lower turnover intentions, and higher overall well-being (Dabrai, 2025; Bakker & Albrecht, 2018).

Creating work engagement among faculty in a fast paced, high pressure and ever-changing environment is the utmost importance. For example, engaged academics are more likely to be successful teachers and researchers, participate in institutional development, and positively contribute to the academic community in general (Christensen et al., 2021; Mandernach et al., 2015). This study attempts to add to the literature by exploring how specific organizational resources, namely work-life integration flexibility and authentic leadership inventory, can serve as critical antecedents to cultivate and sustain this vital state of work engagement among academicians in Malaysia.

Work-life Integration Flexibility

Work-Life integration flexibility is understood as the degree of autonomy and empower workers must decide where, when and in how manner work is done, which gives them the opportunity to reconcile work and personal life (Hill et al., 2011; Nor Sham et al., 2024). These include a range of practices such as flextime, telecommuting, compressed workweeks, and job sharing (Angayarkanni & Sharma, 2024). Work-life integration has been making its way into human resource strategies across the world as technology becomes increasingly available to do work at home and individuals feel more in need to integrate work with other activities (Angayarkanni & Sharma, 2024; Li & Li, 2024). Benefits of work-life flexibility are numerous and have been highlighted in studies that indicate positive outcomes on variables such as employee well-being, reduced work-life conflict, job satisfaction, stress, and organizational commitment and retention, among others (Rajaram & Jha, 2024; Ray & Pana-Cryan, 2021). From the perspective of SDT, flexplace and flextime are also predicted to have significant levels of satisfaction of the basic need for autonomy (Gerdenitsch, 2017; Rajaram & Jha, 2024). This type of flexibility, by enabling faculty to juggle teaching, research, and personal commitments, provides them with a crucial sense of control and agency over their professional lives (Karabacak et al., 2023; Cholasseri & Senthilkumar, 2017).

Aside from its advantages, flextime can have drawbacks. For example, it can blur the boundaries between work and home life or reduce face-to-face contact, making it necessary to manage flextime carefully (Ridzuwan et al., 2025). Notwithstanding these possible complications, research has reported a reliable positive relationship between the presence and use of flexible work arrangement and a high level of work engagement among employees (Putri et al., 2025; Yan, 2022). Especially for individuals who have multiple caretaking demands and who also need large blocks of time for work (i.e., researchers and writers), work-life integration flexibility is a key component in allowing staff to maintain their energy, commitment, and absorption in their occupation (Nor Sham et al., 2024).

Thus, a direct positive relationship is proposed between work-life integration flexibility and work engagement. These choices align with the three basic needs suggested by Self-Determination Theory (SDT) in the realm of the need for autonomy, as it allows researchers to decide their schedules and manage their work and personal lives more effectively (Suryowibowo & Syakarofath, 2024; Deci et al., 2017). According to Sheldon et al. (2003) and Gagné et al. (2022), providing employees with a feeling of choice and control in their work environment enhances their intrinsic motivation, thereby fostering higher levels of vigor, dedication, and absorption. There is consistent literature supporting this relationship, for instance, employees who are offered choices in the way they work such as flexible work schedules, tend to have higher levels of engagement (Palumbo, 2021; Anderson & Kelliher, 2009).

Authentic Leadership Inventory

Authentic leadership is a form of leadership that is genuine, principled, and ethical conduct, in which leaders strive to be themselves based on what they believe in and value. It has four dimensions that make this leadership style to be effective and impact on followers (Helmuth et al., 2023; Ahma, 2024).

Through specific behaviors such as being self-aware, having honest relationships, maintaining high ethical standards and engaging in balanced processing, authentic leadership can fulfil followers’ psychological needs for autonomy by empowering them and respecting their views, for competence through support and constructive feedback, and for relatedness by establishing trust and genuine connections (Alshaar, 2023; Hilson, 2018; Kamal et al., 2018). Collectively, these four dimensions of authentic leadership present leaders with conditions that are most favorable for fostering contexts that support the satisfaction of basic psychological needs, as theorized by SDT (Maunz et al., 2024; Schoofs et al., 2023). Various research findings have supported the beneficial effect of authentic leadership on different organizational outcomes and found that authentic leadership has positive relationships with employee work engagement (Alwan & Andriani, 2023). Given the emphasis on academic freedom and collegiality amongst intellectuals, authentic leaders are important for cultivating environments that inspire and support academics to focus on what they do in teaching, research and engage in service (Adil et al., 2023; Mahmod & Uysal, 2023).

It is expected that authentic leadership inventory is positively associated with work engagement (Helmuth et al., 2023). Authentic leaders are ideally suited to help fulfill all three of the basic needs given the focus on self-awareness, relational transparency, internalized moral perspective, and balanced processing (Hilson, 2018; Adams, 2020). Their open and sincere communication, along with genuine care for their followers, boosts feelings of relatedness. By providing opportunities for personal growth and non-judgmental feedback, they contribute to a sense of competence. Furthermore, authentic leadership fosters autonomy by empowering followers and valuing their contributions and respect. These satisfaction needs are believed to promote higher levels of work engagement, and grounded by SDT (Ogunyemi & Ogunyemi, 2020; Gagné et al., 2022). In education, perhaps more than any other field, where intellectual autonomy and human inter-relationships are core, a servant leader’s vision has incredible potential to influence trends in higher education (Dul et al., 2024; Stephens, 2022).

Self-awareness

Authentic leadership, which is based on self-awareness, is defined as the leader’s awareness of strengths, limitations, values, motives, and emotions (Helmuth et al., 2023; Gatling et al., 2013). Authentic leaders are aware of what is going on in their own inner experiences and the implications of their behavior and how they are interpreting others (Hilson, 2018). Their own internal clarity allows them to control their feelings, act consistently with their values and truly comprehend how they affect their followers. Authentic leaders can do this because they are self-aware and able to maintain a consistent and reliable persona (Helmuth et al., 2023). Moreover, team members can have a sense of predictability and trust- characteristics critical to developing strong relationships (Viswanathan & lakshmi, 2018).

In Malaysian universities that combine traditional forms of hierarchical government with mounting pressure to perform research and to internationalize, a leader’s self-awareness becomes critical. It also adds to a sense of stability and trust that these leaders understand who they are, what their strengths and weaknesses are, what they hold as values, and what cultural sensitivities they possess when Malaysia academicians are concerned (Nasir et al., 2024; Krauss et al., 2010). This is particularly important in a multi-cultural setting where interpersonal relations require a high level of emotional intelligence. A self-reflective leader has the capability to set expectations that are more culturally appropriate and culturally sensitive offer direction and feedback that is more meaningful to the unique values and needs of Malaysian university (Westover, 2024b; Tharbe et al., 2020). This clear expectation also allows academicians to feel competent by understanding performance standards relative to the local environment. This stability and cultural insight provide Malaysian academics with the ability to focus their energy more effectively by becoming more absorbing and connected with their work (Mat et al., 2012; Crosling, 2017).

Relational Transparency

Relational transparency represents the leader’s open, honest communication with followers, including the sharing of pertinent information, thoughts, and feelings at the appropriate time and place (Mamaril, 2021; Neider & Schriesheim, 2011). It requires honesty, clarity of thought and a sincere wish to have real dialogue free from hidden agendas. This promotes trust and psychological safety as followers feel that their leader is authentic and sincere (Masimane et al., 2022; Willis, 2025). Leader interpersonal transparency also fosters interpersonal connections or feelings of belonging among team members by encouraging reciprocal behavior that satisfies the need for relatedness (Masimane et al., 2022).

Relational transparency, characterized by open, honest, and culturally appropriate communication are the key components to developing relationships in the Malaysian university (Dalib et al., 2019). Because of the collectivist nature of Malaysian society and the focus on avoiding conflict and maintaining harmonious relationships, leaders who are known for their honesty and transparency provide the foundational level of trust and psychological safety necessary to foster meaning at work (Vivekananda & Meenakshi, 2024; Rajandiran et al., 2022). Their openness is a direct response to the need for relatedness. Transparency begins with leaders and the more information available the more likely individuals are to feel accepted and respected. This becomes more significant when an academic power distance of sorts may exist (Sadiqin & Maslakhatul Khasanah, 2021; Dewey, 2019). A transparent leader clears ambiguity creates an environment where Malaysian academicians are unafraid to share their concerns and ideas, feeling respected for their input, and unlike the country’s political leadership, they are not told to talk to others (Wan, 2022; Esanova, 2023). These forms of culturally relevant and transparent communication largely help to motivate continued work.

Internalized Moral Perspective

An internalized moral perspective represents the leader’s self-regulation of behavior through their internal moral standards and values as opposed to outside pressure or rewards (Hirst et al., 2024; Neider & Schriesheim, 2011). Authentic leaders have a strong sense of morality and consistently do what they believe to be the right thing to do and not compromise in challenging situations (Helmuth et al., 2023; Willis, 2025). This unwavering commitment to individual values makes the leader seem honest and trustworthy, thus verifying their credibility and encouraging others to behave in ways that uphold ethical standards. It is the backbone of the authentic leadership’s authenticity and consistency (Helmuth et al., 2023; Ahma, 2024).

An internalized moral perspective, reflecting a leader’s consistent adherence to ethical principles is highly valued in Malaysian universities, where integrity and good ethical behavior are highly regarded (Shamsudin et al., 2023; Arokiasamy et al., 2022). When Malaysia’s academicians see their own leaders committed to high ethical grounds and fairness in making decisions, it would lead to a strong trust and sense of justice transferred to the academic environment (Sakiman & Yasin, 2023; Wan Khairuldin et al., 2024). This is crucial to the reputation of Malaysian Institutions of higher education. This moral foundation can foster relatedness by creating a community of shared values and trust and enhance competence by providing a predictable and fair order where efforts are justly rewarded (Yang, 2022; Arevuo, 2023). Thus, to the extent that academicians see their leaders as ethical, they are likely to develop higher levels of vigor and dedication because they develop a sense of purpose and meaning and are proud of their association with the institution (Abdelrahim, 2023; Al Halbusi et al., 2024).

Balanced Processing

Authentic leaders have a balanced processing, which means that the ability to objectively examine all pertinent information in making decisions while seeking and weighing perspectives that are divergent from their own (Ahma, 2024; Helmuth et al., 2023; Neider & Schriesheim, 2011). Authentic leaders do not tend to selectively process that which is in congruency toward their preconceived beliefs about an issue but exhibit a sense of intellectual humility and a desire to examine issues holistically (Frame, 2022). Not only does this create better and more informed decisions but it also demonstrates respect for the opinions of the followers, it empowers them to share their thoughts and thereby contributes to their sense of competence and worth to the team (Qureshi, 2023; Han et al., 2022).

Balanced processing is important to effective leadership in the heterogeneous, and often quite complicated, micro-climates created by Malaysian universities (Mutil et al., 2024; Hassan et al., 2021). For Malaysian academics, this represents an indication of respect for their opinion and expertise (Abdulrab et al., 2017). This is more important in a system that can be hierarchical at times. This clearly contributes to increasing their perceived autonomy by allowing them to be an active part of decision-making processes, while simultaneously enhancing their perceived competence as their opinions, experience, and knowledge are acknowledged (Mohd Hairul Nizam & Zulkiply, 2024; Steca & Monzani, 2014). Balanced processing leaders provide an open environment in which people feel safe and encouraged to offer their best intellectual work (Subasini & Nesamany, 2023). Academicians become more engaged, dedicated and absorbed in their work as they feel like what they provide as input counts, and results in thoughtful and carefully considered outcomes that consider the needs and perspectives of the various elements of the Malaysian academic community (Majid et al., 2020; Fahimirad et al., 2016).

Finally, it is anticipated that not only work-life integration flexibility and authentic leadership inventory will have a direct effect on work engagement, but this study also anticipates that their combined influence, mediated by the satisfaction of basic psychological needs and offers a comprehensive understanding of academicians’ engagement (Alwan & Andriani, 2023; Adil et al., 2023; Zhong et al., 2016). This combination of structural autonomy and relational support provides the strongest support for the satisfaction of the basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness, which will ultimately promote engagement at work (Shulzhenko, 2024; Zhang et al., 2010).  By drawing on SDT in this integrated manner, the present study able to generate a theoretical basis from which to investigate these important relationships in the distinct sphere of Malaysian higher education.

Basic Psychological Needs as a Mediating Construct

The basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness are central components of Self-Determination Theory (Mukba, 2023; Flannery, 2017). These needs are crucial to motivate intrinsically, having psychological well-being and functioning optimally (Bruno & Meyer, 2024). Autonomy is the experience of volition and a sense of control over one’s behavior; competence is a subjective sense of one’s ability to be effective in interactions and in the environment; and relatedness refers to a sense of connection and being cared for by others. These needs being met are crucial to sustain motivation and engagement in an academic environment, particularly in Malaysian higher education which can have strong hierarchical and collectivist dynamics (Mukba, 2023; Martela, 2020).

The basic psychological needs have been conceived in this study as the mediating process linking work-life integration flexibility, and authentic leadership as independent variables, with work engagement as the dependent variable (Usman et al., 2024; Silva et al., 2023). The existing literature indicates that the fulfilment of supportive leadership and autonomy needs through work-life integration flexibility and can lead to higher levels of engagement (Yadav et al., 2022; Saether & Bergman, 2019). This study brings a theoretical model on understanding engagement outcomes out of organizational and interpersonal resources using SDT. This model of mediation highlights areas in which academic practices in Malaysia can be reformulated to enhance the well-being, motivation, and performance of the academic staff and institutions (Idrus et al., 2020; Olafsen & Deci, 2020).

METHODOLOGY

The present research was quantitative in nature testing predicted direct relationships and employed an online survey as the data collection method. The target population for this study was defined as lecturers or professors from universities, university colleges, and colleges within the educational sector of Malaysia, including both larger public and private institutions giving an overall picture of Malaysian higher education (Md. Jani et al., 2018; Lo & Othman, 2023). A G*Power analysis indicated that at least 92 participants would be needed to obtain adequate statistical power to detect effects. Despite this constraint, the study did in fact manage to complete data collection from a total of 120 researchers, above the minimum requirement established. Purposive sampling, with selection criteria that wanted academicians working in the identified Malaysian higher education institutions was useful to identify the participants for the research. The study sought to test five direct hypotheses. This robust methodological approach ensures the collection of relevant data to effectively address the study’s research questions.

Figure 1 provides a visual representation of the theoretical framework guiding the study and the expected relationships. As summarized in the figure, the model shows work-life integration flexibility and authentic leadership inventory (comprising of self-awareness, relational transparency, internalized moral perspective, and balanced processing) as the independent variables influencing work engagement, the dependent variable. Also, this study examines the mediating effect of basic psychological needs. The conceptual framework incorporates Self-Determination Theory (SDT) into the model, proposing that the effect of the independent variables on engagement is supported by the satisfaction of the basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. This model provides a clear visual roadmap for the study’s empirical investigation and theoretical grounding.

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework (adapted from Deci et al., 2001; Schaufeli et al., 2002; Albion, 2004; Neider & Schriesheim, 2011)

The survey items for work engagement, work-life integration flexibility, and the authentic leadership inventory four dimensions are displayed in Table 1. Work engagement is measured with 17 items adapted from Schaufeli et al. (2002), and work-life integration flexibility uses 11 items adapted from Albion (2004). The four dimensions of authentic leadership inventory (i.e., self-awareness, relational transparency, internalized moral perspective, and balanced processing) are measured by 4 items each from Neider and Schriesheim (2011) for a total of 16 items in the authentic leadership inventory. Additionally, there are nine items of basic psychological needs adapted from Deci et al. (2001). Overall, there are 53 measurement items listed in the table, which indicate the utilization of validated scales for quantitatively measuring the constructs studied.

Table 1: Measurement Items

The demographic information adapted from Gašić and Berber (2023) is presented in Table 2. The table provides information on gender, age, level of education, type of institution of higher education (IHE) (college, university college, or university) and institutional sector (public or private). This table is important to establish the demographic composition of the sample, relevant for the interpretation of the findings. Moreover, although this type of demographic information was gathered, no sub-group analyses were performed in this study. This is an important opportunity for future research to explore whether demographic characteristics moderate the relationship between work-life integration flexibility, authenticity, and work engagement, highlighting potential differences among subgroups of the Malaysian academic community.

Table 2: Demographic Profile of Respondents

RESULTS

Table 3 below displays the outcome of SmartPLS measurement model test that examines the reliability and validity of the constructs utilized in the study. The degree of internal consistency is acceptable for all the other three constructs, with values in Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability (rho_a and rho_c) superior to 0.70, for work engagement, work-life integration flexibility and the four dimensions of authentic leadership inventory: balanced processing, internalized moral perspective, relational transparency, and self-awareness. The mediating construct, Basic Psychological Needs, also demonstrated acceptable internal consistency with its Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability values exceeding 0.70. On top of that, the loading of all the items is greater than 0.70, which indicates that the individual items are reliable. The average variance extracted (AVE) value for each construct is superior to the threshold of 0.50, supporting the convergent validity. These results indicate that the measurement items can effectively measure the specified latent constructs and are appropriate for additional structural analysis (Hair et al., 2019).

Table 3: Results of Reliability Analysis

 The hypotheses of this study, tested using structural equation modeling (SEM) and detailed in Table 4, revealed a multifaceted influence on work engagement among Malaysian academicians. Regarding direct relationships, work-life integration flexibility (H6; β = 0.380, p = 0.006), along with two dimensions of authentic leadership inventory (ALI), internalized moral perspective (H9; β = 0.312, p = 0.000) and balanced processing (H10; β = 0.089, p = 0.006) were found to be significant positive predictors of work engagement. Notably, basic psychological needs (H11) also exhibited a robust direct positive relationship with work engagement (β = 0.932, p = 0.000). Conversely, self-awareness (H7) and relational transparency (H8) did not show significant direct effects on work engagement.

The role that basic psychological needs played as mediator was further clarified. Contrastingly, work-life integration flexibility (H1; β = 0.406, p = 0.005), internalized moral perspective (H4; β = 0.333, p = 0.000), and balanced processing (H5; β = 0.095, p = 0.006) were all significant positive predictors of basic psychological needs, thus supporting H1, H4, and H5; and discarding H2, H3, and H6. However, self-awareness (H2) and relational transparency (H3) were not significant predictors of basic psychological needs. Overall, the results suggest that not only some of the authentic leadership dimensions and work-life integration flexibility promote work engagement, but the basic psychological needs also appear to serve as an important mediating effect for transmitting these positive effects. To sum up, these findings in general support the importance of direct and basic psychological needs for work engagement in academia.

Table 4: Hypothesis Testing

  Note: **p<0.01, *p<0.05

Table 5 shows that each of the study construct is unique from one another, indicating strong discriminant validity. Employing the Fornell-Larcker criterion, the square roots of the AVE of the constructs are greater than their constructs’ correlations, thus showing that each measure is capturing the intended construct. This guaranteed balanced processing, internalized moral perspective, relational transparency, self-awareness, work-life integration flexibility, and work engagement represent distinct and non-overlapping factors in the model.

Table 5. Discriminant Validity Analysis

Note: Diagonals represent the square root of the AVE while the off-diagonals represent the correlations

DISCUSSION

Result for Hypothesis H1 supported the prediction that the relationship between work-life integration flexibility and basic psychological needs would be positive and statistically significant (β =0.406, p=0.005). This is an important finding because it reveals that more autonomy and control of one’s work-life conditions allow individuals to better access their needs of autonomy, competence and relatedness (Garcia-Salirrosas & Rondon-Eusebio, 2023; Kawasaki, 2019; Karkkola et al., 2018). Flexibility allows obtaining more control on time and responsibilities, which should increase the sense of autonomy and self-efficacy (Vartiainen, 2024). This autonomy often means there is less stress and more motivation when working outside of normal hours on academic projects. Moreover, flexibility communicates trust and respect in the institution which in turn strengthen the interpersonal relationship within the workplace (Paschina, 2023; Badri & Panatik, 2020). Flexibility is then a structural facilitator of both psychological well-being and motivation in line with Self-Determination Theory and recent work on higher education (Namaziandost et al., 2024; Kerr, 2019).

Hypothesis H2 was not supported (β = 0.078, p = 0.389), meaning that the relationship between leaders’ self-awareness and the satisfaction of basic psychological needs amongst academic staff is not significant. Self-awareness is a critical element of emotional intelligence and authentic leadership, but it can play a role in an indirect, or situational manner (Schoofs et al., 2023). Furthermore, in hierarchical environment and collectivist educational environment like Malaysia, the employees may not interpret or value their leaders’ introspection unless it is somehow manifested in their behaviors (Kennedy, 2002; Mansor, 2000). In the absence of direct evidence for support or participative leadership, having self-awareness may not satisfy subordinates’ needs for autonomy, competence, or relatedness (Slemp et al., 2021). This result highlights the importance of the leadership influence on psychological needs to be externally translated into concrete behaviors to be impactful (Bojovic & Jovanovic, 2020).

Result shows that Hypothesis H3 was not supported (β = 0.100, p = 0.131), or the lack of significant prediction of the fulfilment of basic psychological needs by relational transparency (Masimane et al., 2022; Choi et al., 2024). Undeniable, although open communication and honesty are seen as ideal leadership traits, they may not fulfil the psychological need unless reinforced by some form of support or participatory decision-making (Aksoy, 2023). Among staffs in academia, such gestures as an honest conversation and the inclusion of people in decision-making can mean as much to staff as monetary compensation (Chevtayeva & Okuneva, 2023; Aliyan, 2012). On top of that, in a culture of high-power distance openness may be limited by hierarchical borders, thus not carrying actual power (Sumpter et al., 2023). From these previous findings, it becomes apparent that the relationship transparency to impact psychological needs, it must be contained within a culture of participative leadership and empowerment (Farzana & Charoensukmongkol, 2023).

Hypothesis H4 was supported (β = 0.333, p < 0.001), revealing that internalized moral perspective has a strong positive effect toward satisfying the basic psychological needs of employees within the university system (Pineda et al., 2024; Salikhova et al., 2024). Leaders are seen as fair, trustworthy, and moral, all of which are necessary if employees have their needs met for relatedness and competence (Bakar & Connaughton, 2022). This behavior might also increase perceived organizational fairness and emotional security in an environment, like Malaysian universities where ethical leadership is part of the cultural fabric (Rashid et al., 2022). This provides further evidence that authentic moral leadership is beneficial to the well-being of both subordinates and the organizational team (Ohya et al., 2022).

Hypothesis H5 was supported, reinforcing the positive link between balanced processing and basic psychological needs (β = 0.095, p= 0.006). Leaders who are open to consideration for multiple perspectives and take well thought out decisions can also foster a likelihood of psychological safety, by which an individual feels that their point of view has been taken into consideration and that the individual is seen and respected (Purba, 2023; Vaishal, 2023). This process also fulfils the necessity of autonomy and competence in the sense that it empowers academic staff, makes them feel like they are valued by the institution. These types of inclusive leadership practices are especially powerful in an academic environment which values free inquiry and professional judgment (Gbobaniyi & Srivastava, 2024; Gbobaniyi, 2024). The finding supports the claim that procedural justice and cognitive availability are crucial to maintain motivation and well-being among academic staff members (Yang et al., 2022; Amar et al., 2022).

Besides, there was the expected positive significant direct effect of work-life integration flexibility on work engagement (H6) among Malaysian academicians (β = 0.380, p = 0.006), suggesting that flexible work arrangements lead to higher engagement among academicians in Malaysian universities (Putit et al., 2023). This is consistent with Self-Determination Theory which suggests that individuals are more intrinsically motivated and engaged in supportive contexts (Subramaniam et al., 2022; Zhang & Bhaumik, 2024). For scholars, whose labor is frequently undefined and multi-faceted, this ability to be flexible allows some to exert autonomy and to setup their job such that it supports their work and family life. The independence is what provides individuals with a sense of power over, satisfaction and emotion in their work. This outcome indicates that, when enhanced flexibility is present in terms of scheduling, location, or task control, it can not only reduce burnout, but it can also increase affective commitment to the job (Zaitouni et al., 2024; Weimer, 2022). This may be particularly relevant in the Malaysian higher education context, in which workloads and institutional demands are substantial, and in which flexibility may be seen as a gesture of confidence and encouragement on the part of one’s administrators (Johari et al., 2024; Putit et al., 2023).

In contrast to Hypothesis 7 (H7), the direct effect of self-awareness on work engagement was not significant (β = 0.073, p = 0.384). This gives us an indication that leaders’ understanding of their own abilities, limitations, and effects on people is not sufficient to lead and increase engagement among academic staff (Asmamaw & Semela, 2023; Pretorius & Plaatjies, 2023). It might be even though self-awareness is a key part of leadership, it needs to be shown through actions like being open or acting ethically for followers to notice it (Fonseca et al., 2022). Given Malaysia’s collectivist and high-power distance culture, followers are more inclined to center on the behavior of the leader rather than their personal characteristics (Jiang et al., 2024; Bakar, 2017). This focus can have a great impact on the effectiveness of the leader and the motivation of the followers (Mansor, 2000).

Hypothesis H8, which postulated that relational transparency would positively influence work engagement, was not supported (β = 0.094, p = 0.129), indicating no relationship between the two variables was found. Although relational transparency is one aspect of authentic leadership, this finding indicates that openness, honesty, and communication alone may not be enough to drive engagement among faculty in Malaysian higher education (Helmuth et al., 2023; Ahma, 2024). In Malaysia, as a collectivist high power distance culture, the focus may be on actions and results instead of merely verbal openness on the part of subordinates (Azmi et al., 2023; Ishaq et al., 2023). In addition, clear communication might just be seen as business as usual, rather than serving to inspire people, especially in traditional academic capitalism environment where many decision-makers operate downstream from the dean or the president (Azmi et al., 2023). Thus, without being accompanied by effective support, empowerment, or voicing on the organization of the workplace, transparency in relationships may not have promising effects on employees’ engagement with their work. This result requires observing the context and important institutional and cultural factors which could impact on which leadership is perceived and the reaction that might have on the ground (Putri et al., 2024; Kim et al., 2022).

Similarly, internalized moral perspective (H9) was found positive relationship with work engagement (β = 0.137, p<0.05). It suggests that leaders who act in accordance with his/her own internal ethical standards foster a higher level of engagement among academic staff. Correct ethical behavior and integrity can lead to perceptions of trust and fairness (Awan, 2023; Rahal & Farmanesh, 2022; Lange, 2019). Within an academic context, having a moral or ethical principle-centered leader will lead to academicians having a stronger sense of purpose and pride in the work they do, which will in turn be reflected in a stronger dedication and emotional attachment to their work. This finding is particularly important in the Malaysian scholarly domain which culturally values integrity and moral leadership (Wan Khairuldin et al., 2024; Alwis & Hendriani, 2024).

Next, H10 found the positive effect of balanced processing on work engagement (β = 0.089, p = 0.006). The finding indicates that the presence of leaders in academic institutions who were open to new ideas and evaluate information objectively before making decisions, it leads to higher levels of employee engagement among academicians (Jangra & Ahlawat, 2024; Hutapea, 2022). It fulfills the psychological needs for autonomy and competence because it makes the staff feel heard, respected, and involved in organizational decisions. In environments like Malaysian universities where a clear hierarchy is often strictly enforced, the use of participative leadership can empower and inspire academic staffs to feel driven, committed and mentally strong (Hanaysha, 2023; Al-Mamary, 2021; Ahadi, 2012).

Hypothesis H11 was strongly supported (β = 0.936, p < 0.001), demonstrating the importance of basic psychological needs for the development of work engagement. This finding reveals that if the autonomy, competence, and relatedness of faculty members is supported, they are more likely to become cognitively and emotionally engaged with their work (Kapica et al., 2022; Ni et al., 2022). Such results are coherent with Self-Determination Theory, according to which motivation and engagement originate in the internalization of the psychological needs (Yengkopiong, 2025; Zhu et al., 2024). This strong effect size suggests that beyond leadership behaviors alone, meeting these internal needs provides the strongest possible handle or lever that can be used to achieve high levels of engagement and performance in academics (Myers, 2022; Sultana et al., 2024).

Similarly, Hypothesis H12 is accepted (β = 0.380, p = 0.006), which supports the mediation effect of basic psychological needs on the relationship between work-life integration flexibility and work engagement. This suggests that more flexible work leads to higher engagement not only through direct effects, but also because it satisfies basic psychological needs (Kapica et al., 2022; Ni et al., 2022; Rahmadani et al., 2019). When institutions are more flexible, employees experience greater feelings of autonomy and competence and, in turn, are more engaged. This means that flexibility is not only a structural adjustment but also a source of motivation when connected with the satisfaction of foundational needs (Zychová et al., 2023; Gerdenitsch, 2017). Offering such a form of flexibility is also a way, for the institution, to foster the development of a greater engagement through the psychological empowerment of the work (Aurel et al., 2023; Shah et al., 2020).

H13 was not supported (β = 0.073, p = 0.384), continuing the support for the fact that even if via psychological needs, the sole experience of self-awareness can meaningfully lead to engagement (Lavigna & La Torre, 2024; Westover, 2025). This speaks to the fact that if leader self-awareness does not manifest in behaviors that followers desire or need it would remain an internal characteristic without illustrating much potential within the context of the organization (Knight, 2024; Westover, 2025). Perhaps in the collectivist and hierarchical culture of Malaysian academia, subordinates are better addressed through relational or even action-oriented leadership, than through introspective traits. In their findings, this is evidence that internal leadership attributes alone are not enough to motivate engagement when there is no external behavior display of it (Low et al., 2024; Haryanto et al., 2024).

H14 was rejected or unsupported (β = 0.094, p= 0.129), which means that, via the indirect effect of basic psychological needs, greater levels of relational transparency cannot lead to increased work engagement. While information is often taken to be conducive to trust and collaboration, this finding indicates that it may not be able to satisfy more deeply held psychological requirements to generate interest (Tomlinson & Schnackenberg, 2022; Masimane et al., 2022). Cultural values of deference and hierarchy might also render transparency less significant of an impact if not also coupled with actions of empowerment or inclusivity. So, transparency must be linked with structural or relational shifts to have any real impact on participation (Hidayat et al., 2024; Ndraha et al., 2024).

Interestingly, hypothesis H15 was supported (β = 0.312, p < 0.001), demonstrating an indirect effect of internalized moral perspective on engagement via the satisfaction of basic psychological needs. Leaders who consistently act ethically promote trust, fairness, and integrity that can satisfy an individual’s needs for relatedness and competence, while also motivating and energizing the individual to do even more in the workplace (Westover, 2024a; Wijaya. 2023). This is especially pertinent to universities in Malaysia where integrity and moral conduct are also upheld as cultural values. It is consistent with the more general argument that ethical leadership can contribute to both performance and psychological well-being of followers (Muktamar, 2023; Zainal et al., 2023; Hon & Sihes, 2024).

H16 was also supported (β = 0.089, p = 0.006). This result shows that balanced processing has a positive indirect effect on work engagement, through the satisfaction of the basic psychological needs (Usman et al., 2024; Astuti & Dhania, 2022). This type of leadership that is open to feedback and makes objective decisions empowers academic staff to feel valued and competent. The indirect effect of psychological needs indicates that participative decision-making and fairness meet intrinsic motivations which, in turn, lead to increased engagement (Faujiah et al., 2023; Zhang et al., 2024; Westover, 2024a). In Malaysian universities, which have traditionally practiced top-to-down decision-making, these more balanced roles might particularly contribute to fostering more inclusive and motivational academic cultures (Hanaysha, 2023; Al-Mamary, 2021).

CONCLUSION

This study discussed the impact of work-life integrated flexibility and authentic leadership inventory on the work engagement of academicians in Malaysia, supported through the theoretical lens of Self-Determination Theory. Overall, balanced processing, internalized moral perspective, and relational transparency had a positive effect on work engagement, whereas there was no evidence of an impact of authentic leadership self-awareness and work-life balance flexibility. They show how ethical and transparent leadership in an educational setting can foster motivation and binding staff together.

Importantly, the present research was examined with the aim of exploring the mediating effect of basic psychological needs (i.e., autonomy, competence and relatedness). While some of the more specific mediated pathways were specified in more detail in the discussion, this exploration of need fulfillment was critical to understanding the mechanisms through which work-life integration flexibility and authentic leadership were likely to lead to work engagement. These results put a particular emphasis on the identified dimensions of authentic leadership and the necessity of providing the contextual support for academicians to maintain their psychological well-being.

More detailed explorations of mediated effects of psychological need satisfaction should be the focus of future research, possibly attempting to explore the possibility of indirect effects in cases in which the direct relationships were not significant. Also, longitudinal and qualitative research are likely to provide deeper insight, while comparative research to different cultures or institutions could increase generalizability and policy support. These studies would help elucidate these complex interplays between the organizational conditions, the individuals’ psychological and personal characteristics, and their engagement at work within the academic context.

REFERENCES

1. Abdelrahim, A. (2023). The Role of Ethical Leadership in Creating Organizational Loyalty among Employees: A Case Study of The Administrative Staff at Najran University. https://doi.org/10.59992/ijsr.2023.v2n9p8
2. Abdulrab, M., Zumrah, A. R., Al-Maamari, Q. A., & Al-Tahitah, A. (2017). Transformational Leadership and Psychological Empowerment in Malaysian Public Universities: A Review Paper. Research on Humanities and Social Sciences, 7(24), 98–105. https://iiste.org/Journals/index.php/RHSS/article/view/40148/41295
3. Adams, D. (2020). Authentic Leadership: A Value-Laden Leader. 4(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.22452/IOJEL.VOL4NO1.1
4. Adil, H., Tariq, A., Shinwari, A., & Sabah, S. (2023). Effect of Authentic Leadership on Employees’ Engagement and Job Satisfaction: A Case Study of Public Sector Universities. https://doi.org/10.47577/eximia.v12i1.289
5. Ahadi, S. (2012). Mediating role of psychological empowerment in relationships between structural empowerment and organizational culture, and workplace outcomes among academics in Malaysian research universities. http://psasir.upm.edu.my/32208/
6. Ahma, J. B. (2024). A Comprehensive Review of Authentic Leadership Previous Study: Challenge, Strategies and Practices. International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v14-i9/22802
7. Aksoy, I. (2023). Employees’ openness to change, transformational leader and inter organization transparent communication relationship in the context of organizational change. Dogus University Journal. https://doi.org/10.31671/doujournal.1329096
8. Albion, M. J. (2004). A measure of attitudes towards flexible work options. Australian Journal of Management, 29(2), 275–294. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/031289620402900207
9. Alexias, G., Papandreopoulou, M., & Togas, C. (2024). Work Engagement and Burnout in a Private Healthcare Unit in Greece. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21020130
10. Al Halbusi, H., Ruiz‐Palomino, P., Linuesa‐Langreo, J., & Scalzo, G. (2024). Ethical Leadership as a Driver of Supervisor Technical and Social Effectiveness: A Triple Helix for Cultivating Employees’ Sense of Purpose. Business Ethics, the Environment and Responsibility. https://doi.org/10.1111/beer.12750
11. Aliyan, P. M. (2012). The Influence of Participative Decision Making and Demographic Characteristics Towards Job Performance Among Academic Staffs in Universiti Utara Malaysia. https://etd.uum.edu.my/3263/
12. Al-Mamary, Y. H. (2021). The impact of transformational leadership on organizational citizenship behaviour: Evidence from Malaysian higher education context. Human Systems Management, 40(5), 737–749. https://doi.org/10.3233/HSM-201068
13. Alshaar, A. M. K. (2023). Authentic Leadership and its Impact on Supporting Strategic Intelligence. International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences, 13(3). https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v13-i3/16438
14. Alwan, Z., & Andriani, C. (2023). Authentic Leadership on Work Engagement with Psychological Capital as a Mediating Variable. https://doi.org/10.24036/hrms.v3i4.306
15. Alwis, D. A. Y., & Hendriani, S. (2024). Pengaruh Etika Kepemimpinan Terhadap Kinerja Guru di MAN 2 Sijunjung. Indo-Fintech Intellectuals, 4(3), 947–954. https://doi.org/10.54373/ifijeb.v4i3.1439
16. Amar, H., Shaikh, S., Mangi, Q. A., & Bhutto, S. A. (2022). Study of Human Resource Practices and Work Engagement in Public Sector Universities of Pakistan: An Intervening Analysis of Procedural Justice. Journal of Social Sciences Advancement, 3(1), 26–34. https://doi.org/10.52223/jssa22-030103-29
17. Anand, N., Lakshmi, V., Jena, S. K., Pundir, A., Lourens, M., & Prusty, A. (2024). Exploring the Link between Employee Well-Being and Organizational Performance. 11, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/tqcebt59414.2024.10545103
18. Anderson, D., & Kelliher, C. (2009). Flexible working and engagement: the importance of choice. Strategic Hr Review, 8(2), 13–18. https://doi.org/10.1108/14754390910937530
19. Angayarkanni, R., & Sharma, A. (2024). Flexible Work Arrangements: A Comparative Analysis of their Impact on Work-Life Balance. 1603–1610. https://doi.org/10.53555/kuey.v30i6.5554
20. Arevuo, M. (2023). Adam Smith’s moral foundations of self‐interest and ethical social order. Economic Affairs. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecaf.12592
21. Arokiasamy, A. R. A., Maheshwari, G., & Nguyen, K. L. (2022). The Influence of Ethical and Transformational Leadership on Employee Creativity in Malaysia’s Private Higher Education Institutions: The Mediating Role of Organizational Citizenship Behaviour. Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management, 17, 001–033. https://doi.org/10.28945/4896
22. Arokiasamy, A. R. A., & Tat, H. H. (2020). Exploring the influence of transformational leadership on work engagement and workplace spirituality of academic employees in the private higher education institutions in Malaysia. Management Science Letters, 10(4), 855–864. https://doi.org/10.5267/J.MSL.2019.10.011
23. Asmamaw, A., & Semela, T. esfaye. (2023). Exploring the influence of leader emotional intelligence on faculty engagement in Ethiopian higher education. Cogent Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2023.2277547
24. Astuti, D., & Dhania, D. R. (2022). Work engagement ditinjau dari psychological well-being dan komunikasi interpersonal. 1(1), 37–48. https://doi.org/10.58959/cjss.v1i1.6
25. Atif, M. R., Ghani, M. A., & Rehman, A. ur. (2025). The Impact of Cultural, Economic, Institutional, Interpersonal and Technological Factors on the Globalization of Malaysian Service SMEs: A Literature Review. International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, 6(1), 738–741. https://doi.org/10.55248/gengpi.6.0125.0225
26. Aurel, R. O., Prakoso, H., & Putera, V. S. (2023). Pengaruh Psychological Empowerment terhadap Work Engagement pada Dosen. Bandung Conference Series: Psychology Science, 3. https://doi.org/10.29313/bcsps.v3i1.5317
27. Awan, R.-N. (2023). Trust glues the relationship between ethical leadership of heads and university teachers’ moral competence. Journal of Arts and Social Sciences, 10(2), 75–81. https://doi.org/10.46662/jass.v10i2.315
28. Azmi, S. F., Ma’rof, A. A., Abdullah, H. A., & Zarimohzzabeih, Z. (2023). Culture and Communication Styles: Collectivism vs Individualism Cultural Orientations from Malaysian Perspectives. International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v13-i16/18738
29. Badri, S. K. Z., & Panatik, S. A. (2020). The Roles of Job Autonomy and Self-Efficacy to Improve Academics’ Work-life Balance. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 25(2). https://doi.org/10.21315/AAMJ2020.25.2.4
30. Bakar, H. A. (2017). Explaining cohesion linkages in workgroups: the cooperative communication in collectivism and high power distance workgroup context. Jurnal Komunikasi: Malaysian Journal of Communication, 33(3), 157–177. https://doi.org/10.17576/JKMJC-2017-3303-10
31. Bakar, H. A., & Connaughton, S. L. (2022). Ethical leadership, perceived leader–member ethical communication and organizational citizenship behavior: development and validation of a multilevel model. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 43(1), 96–110. https://doi.org/10.1108/lodj-07-2021-0356
32. Bakker, A. B., & Albrecht, S. L. (2018). Work engagement: current trends. Career Development International, 23(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-11-2017-0207
33. Bakker, A. B. (2009). Work engagement: An overview of 10 years of research. Gedrag & Organisatie, 22(4).
34. Bhattacharya, S. (2024). The Pressing Need for Enhanced Academia-Industry Collaboration in the AI Epoch: A Closer Look at Part-Time Faculty Positions for Industry Professionals. https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/jkcre
35. Bojovic, I., & Jovanovic, S. S. (2020). Transformational leadership and psychological needs of employees. Technium Soc. Sci. J., 7, 226.
36. Bruno, C., & Meyer, V. (2024). A Comprehensive Review of Self-Determination Theory: Exploring Challenges, and Impacts. Power System Technology, 48(4), 6492–6499. https://doi.org/10.52783/pst.1456
37. Budiman, A. (2022). Pengaruh Perceived Organizational Support terhadap Work Engagement Guru Sekolah Dasar Swasta X. Bandung Conference Series: Psychology Science, 2, 674–681. https://doi.org/10.29313/bcsps.v2i3.2875
38. Cai, M. (2024). The Effect of Servant Leadership on Work Engagement: The Role of Employee Resilience and Organizational Support. Behavioral Science. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14040300
39. Chaube, P., & Koley, M. (2023). Hierarchy and the case of indian academia. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/mx4qv
40. Chevtayeva, N. G., & Okuneva, T. V. (2023). Staff Involvement as a Factor of Improving Work Satisfaction. Vestnik Ûžno-Uralʹskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta, 23(1), 81–88. https://doi.org/10.14529/ssh230110
41. Choi, E., ten Brummelhuis, L. L., & Leroy, H. (2024). Honesty Is Not Always the Best Policy: The Role of Self-Esteem Based on Others’ Approval in Qualifying the Relationship Between Leader Transparency and Follower Voice. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/15480518241231045
42. Cholasseri, S., & Senthilkumar, R. (2017). Work life balance of college teachers in malappuram city, kerala state – a descriptive study. International Journal of Advance Research and Innovative Ideas in Education, 3(2), 3842–3854. http://ijariie.com/AdminUploadPdf/WORK_LIFE_BALANCE_OF_COLLEGE_TEACHERS__IN_MALAPPURAM_CITY__KERALA_STATE___A_DESCRIPTIVE_STUDY_ijariie4767.pdf
43. Christensen, M., Dawson, J., & Nielsen, K. (2021). The Role of Adequate Resources, Community and Supportive Leadership in Creating Engaged Academics. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(5), 2776. https://doi.org/10.3390/IJERPH18052776
44. Crosling, G. (2017). Quality assurance and quality enhancement in Malaysian higher education (pp. 127–141). Chandos Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100553-8.00004-5
45. Dabrai, R. (2025). Impact of Employee Engagement on the Performance of Employee and Organization. Social Science Research Network. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5012056
46. Dalib, S., Harun, M., Yusof, N., & Ahmad, M. K. (n.d.). Connecting with Culturally Diverse Others the Case of Malaysian Students’ Social Interactions on Campus. https://doi.org/10.36923/jicc.v19i1.771
47. Deci, E. L., Olafsen, A. H., & Ryan, R. M. (2017). Self-Determination Theory in Work Organizations: The State of a Science. Social Science Research Network, 4(1), 19–43. https://doi.org/10.1146/ANNUREV-ORGPSYCH-032516-113108
48. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-Determination Theory: A Macrotheory of Human Motivation, Development and Health. Canadian Psychology, 49(3), 182–185. https://doi.org/10.1037/A0012801
49. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2014). The importance of universal psychological needs for understanding motivation in the workplace. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780199794911.013.003
50. Dewey, B. I. (2019). Open leadership for a vibrant future. Portal – Libraries and the Academy, 19(3), 359–364. https://doi.org/10.1353/PLA.2019.0021
51. Diele-Viegas, L. M., Sales, L. P., Slobodian, V., Virginio, F., Sousa, S. de A., Pareja-Mejía, D., Bacon, C. D., Mugarte, A. S. X., Amati-Martins, I., Dias-Silva, F., Araújo, O. G. S., Nassif, J., Carvalho, M. M., Luz, C., Soares, B. E., Pêgas, R. V., & Souza, L. (2022). Productivity in academia: When the rules determine the losers. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fevo.2022.1021812
52. Dul, V., Sam, R., Hak, S., Bou, D., Vy, S., & Kheuy, S. (2024). Servant Leadership Style in High Education Institutions: A Systematic Literature Review. European Journal of Contemporary Education and E-Learning, 2(6), 116–139. https://doi.org/10.59324/ejceel.2024.2(6).08
53. Dunn, J. C., & Zimmer, C. (2020). Self-determination theory (pp. 296–312). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429052675-23
54. Esanova, S. (2023). Theoretical foundations of authenticity in leadership. Yashil Iqtisodiyot va Taraqqiyot, 1(11–12). https://doi.org/10.55439/ged/vol1_iss11-12/a636
55. Fahimirad, M., Idris, K., & Kotamjani, S. S. (2016). Effective Academic Leadership of Learning and Teaching in Malaysian Higher Education. International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 6(4), 67–83. https://doi.org/10.5296/IJHRS.V6I4.10337
56. Faujiah, H., Gunawan, A., & Syarifudin, E. (2023). Hubungan Antara Gaya Kepemimpinan Partisipatif Vroom-Yetton dan Motivasi Belajar Siswa di Lembaga Pendidikan Indonesia. Tarbiatuna, 4(1), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.47467/tarbiatuna.v4i1.4416
57. Farzana, S., & Charoensukmongkol, P. (2023). Using approach-inhibition theory of power to explain how participative decision-making enhances innovative work behavior of high power distance-oriented employees. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness. https://doi.org/10.1108/joepp-10-2022-0304
58. Filatova, M. N., Mayer, V., & Sheinbaum, V. S. (2024). Mentoring with regard to continuous professional development. Èkonomika i Upravlenie: Problemy, Rešeniâ, 6/7(147), 244–250. https://doi.org/10.36871/ek.up.p.r.2024.06.07.035
59. Flannery, M. (2017). Self-Determination Theory: Intrinsic Motivation and Behavioral Change. Oncology Nursing Forum, 44(2), 155–156. https://doi.org/10.1188/17.ONF.155-156
60. Fonseca, D. S., Myres, H., & Hofmeyr, K. (2022). The influence of self-awareness on effective leadership outcomes in South Africa. South African Journal of Business Management, 53(1). https://doi.org/10.4102/sajbm.v53i1.2720
61. Frame, M. C. (2022). The Role of Intellectual Humility in Leadership and Promoting Workplace Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belongingness (pp. 81–98). IGI Global eBooks. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-4023-0.ch005
62. Gagné, M., Kanat-Maymon, Y., Roche, M. A., & Tian, A. W. (2022). Self-Determination Theory Perspectives on Leadership and Management. Proceedings – Academy of Management, 2022(1). https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2022.15588symposium
63. Gagné, M., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2013). Self-Determination Theory’s Contribution to Positive Organizational Psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 61–82). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2046-410X(2013)0000001006
64. Garcia-Salirrosas, E. E., & Rondon-Eusebio, R. (2023). Impact of Labor Autonomy and Work-Life Balance on Job Satisfaction in Teleworking. https://doi.org/10.1145/3599609.3599621
65. Gašić, D., & Berber, N. (2023). The Mediating Role of Employee Engagement in the Relationship between Flexible Work Arrangements and Turnover Intentions among Highly Educated Employees in the Republic of Serbia. Behavioral Sciences, 13(2), 131. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13020131
66. Gatling, A., Castelli, P. A., & Cole, M. L. (2013). Authentic Leadership: The Role of Self-Awareness in Promoting Coaching Effectiveness. Asia-Pacific Journal of Management Research and Innovation, 9(4), 337–347. https://doi.org/10.1177/2319510X14523097
67. Gbobaniyi, O. (2024). The Increasing Need for Inclusive Leadership for Academic Loyalty in Higher Education Institutions. IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.1005298
68. Gbobaniyi, O., & Srivastava, S. (2024). Ensuring Inclusivity in Higher Education Leadership. Advances in Higher Education and Professional Development Book Series, 25–52. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-3443-0.ch002
69. Gerdenitsch, C. (2017). New Ways of Working and Satisfaction of Psychological Needs (pp. 91–109). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54678-0_6
70. Gordon, G., Gilley, A., Avery, S., Gilley, J. W., & Barber, A. (2014). Employee Perceptions of the Manager Behaviors That Create Follower-Leader Trust. 1(2), 44. https://doi.org/10.5430/MOS.V1N2P44
71. Hair, J. F., Jr., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage.
72. Han, S., Harold, C. M., Hu, B., D’Innocenzo, L., & Lee, S. (2022). Why and When Differentiated Empowering Leadership Hurts Team Performance. Proceedings – Academy of Management, 2022(1). https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2022.13759abstract
73. Hanaysha, J. (2023). Impact of participative and authoritarian leadership on employee creativity: organizational citizenship behavior as a mediator. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijotb-08-2022-0165
74. Haryanto, I., Mulyo Harsono, R. D., & Marianti, M. M. (2024). Pengaruh leadership style dan internal communication terhadap employee engagement. Jurnal Ilmiah Manajemen, Ekonomi, Dan Akuntansi, 8(1), 2381–2397. https://doi.org/10.31955/mea.v8i1.3985
75. Hassan, R., Asimiran, S., Basri, R., & Omar, Z. (2021). Relationship between Exemplary Leadership Practices and Organizational Citizenship Behavior of Academic Staff in Malaysian Research Universities. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 10(1), 406–424. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/V10-I1/8850
76. Helmuth, C. A., Cole, M. S., & Vendette, S. (2023). Actions are authentic, but are leaders? A reconceptualization of authenticity and leadership practice. Journal of Organizational Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2723
77. Hidayat, A., Kesuma, A. I., & Sakka, A. R. (2024). Masyarakat Inklusif Berbasis Nilai Budaya dan Norma Sosial di Desa Lakawali Kabupaten Luwu Timur. Pepatudzu: Media Pendiidkan Dan Sosial Kemasyarakatan, 20(1), 81. https://doi.org/10.35329/fkip.v20i1.4985
78. Hill, E. J., Carroll, S. J., Jones, B. L., Buswell, L. A., Fackrell, T. A., & Galovan, A. M. (2011). Temporal Workplace Flexibility and Associated Work-Life Outcomes for Professionals (pp. 209–223). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16199-5_12
79. Hilson, N. (2018). Authentic Leadership Theory: Exemplifying Self-Awareness, Character and Transparency in Nursing Leadership. https://journals.kpu.ca/index.php/nlsj/article/download/170/35
80. Hirst, G., Hughes, D., Li, K., & Shi, Y. (2024). Leadership theory—moral (pp. 146–156). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035308767.ch18
81. Hon, S. Y., & Sihes, A. J. (2024). Appreciation of ethics and civilization as general course in malaysian university: a literature review. International Journal of Education, Psychology and Counseling, 9(56), 198–214. https://doi.org/10.35631/ijepc.956013
82. Hutapea, B. (2022). Servant Leadership among Higher Education Academic Leaders: The Role of Personality Traits. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.220404.286
83. Idrus, N., Ahmad, N. A., & Zakaria, N. S. (2020). Conceptualizing Basic Psychological Needs (BSPN) and Motivation Regulations as Antecedents for Guided Teachers’ Work Commitment And Satisfaction. The International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 10(11), 779–803. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/V10-I11/8145
84. Ishaq, E., Zakariya, R., & Ishaq, B. (2023). All that Glitters may not be Perceived Gold. When and How Authentic leadership can be ineffective in power distance cultures. 4(2), 46–59. https://doi.org/10.70580/jwb.04.02.0199
85. Jangra, G., & Ahlawat, R. (2024). A study of academic leadership styles in higher educationinstitutions and its impact on faculty engagement and satisfaction. https://doi.org/10.31124/advance.24899214.v1
86. Jiang, X., Wang, M., Ma, C., & Chen, N. (2024). Culturally-shaped Mindsets of Authoritarian Leadership: Power Motivation and Effectiveness Belief Promoted by Power Distance. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4373396/v1
87. Jin, W., Zheng, X., Gao, L., Cao, Z., & Ni, X. (2022). Basic Psychological Needs Satisfaction Mediates the Link between Strengths Use and Teachers’ Work Engagement. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(4), 2330. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19042330
88. Johari, F. S., Ahmad, S. N. A., Bashirun, S. N., Zolkapli, N. M., & Samudin, N. M. R. (2024). Flexible Work Arrangements, Job Satisfaction and Family Satisfaction: The Spillover Effect of Work-Family Conflict. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 11(7), 274–287. https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.117.17325
89. Kamal, G., Khan, Engr. A. U., & Tahir, M. (2018). The Effects of Authentic Leadership on Employees’ Interpersonal Trust; Case of Employees of Private Commercial Banks in Peshawar City. 4(1), 53–63. http://jmgtr.com/index.php/jmg/article/view/45
90. Kamal, U. A., Razali, R., & Arifin, M. A. (2024). Challenges in navigating the academic world: a perspective from early-career academics. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MODERN EDUCATION (IJMOE), 6(21), 448–461. https://doi.org/10.35631/ijmoe.621032
91. Kanapathipillai, K., Zainal, N., Ram Sing, R. D., & Hassan, N. (2024). Cultivating Remote Work Excellence: The Role of Work Environment, Work-Life Balance, Technology, and HR Policies in Central Malaysia’s Manufacturing Industry. International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, 14(4). https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarafms/v14-i4/23876
92. Kapica, Ł., Baka, Ł., & Stachura-Krzyształowicz, A. (2022). Job resources and work engagement: the mediating role of basic need satisfaction. Medycyna Pracy, 73(5), 407–416. https://doi.org/10.13075/mp.5893.01257
93. Karabacak, E., Němejc, K., & Yapicioğlu, D. K. (2023). Everybody Has Their Own Image: Teacher Autonomy of the University Teachers. Rural Environment. Education. Personality. https://doi.org/10.22616/reep.2023.16.016
94. Karimi, S., & Reisi, S. (2023). Linking Entrepreneurial Passion to Entrepreneurs’ Life Satisfaction: The Mediating Role of Basic Psychological Needs Satisfaction and Work Engagement. FIIB Business Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/23197145231190520
95. Karkkola, P., Kuittinen, M., Hintsa, T., Ryynänen, J., & Simonen, A. (2018). Each One Counts: Basic Needs Mediating the Association Between Social Support and Vitality at Work. 3(1). https://doi.org/10.16993/SJWOP.54
96. Kawasaki, S. (2019). Effects of Psychological Need Satisfaction on Proactive Work Behaviors. https://cornerstone.lib.mnsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1901&context=etds
97. Kennedy, J. C. (2002). Leadership in Malaysia: Traditional values, international outlook. Academy of Management Executive, 16(3), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.5465/AME.2002.8540292
98. Kerr, T. B. I. (2019). Self-Determination Theory and Student Emotional Engagement in Higher Education. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=8373&context=etd
99. Kim, Y. S., Lee, E., Kang, M., & Yang, S.-U. (2022). Understanding the Influence of Authentic Leadership and Employee-Organization Relationships on Employee Voice Behaviors in Response to Dissatisfying Events at Work. Management Communication Quarterly, 37(1), 64–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/08933189221085562
100. Knights, J. (2024). Increasing self-awareness (pp. 51–61). Informa. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003409007-7
101. Krauss, S. E., Hamid, J. A., & Ismail, I. A. (2010). Exploring Trait and Task Self-awareness in the Context of Leadership Development among Undergraduate Students from Malaysia. Leadership, 6(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715009354236
102. Lange, D. J. (2019). The Influence of Ethical Leadership and Ethical Culture on Faculty Engagement. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3140&context=doctoral
103. Lavigna, A., & La Torre, G. (2024). Validation of the Self Awareness Outcome Questionnaire (SAOQ) in the Italian framework. 175(4), 234–238. https://doi.org/10.7417/ct.2024.5069
104. Lee, Y.-J. (2022). Personality traits and organizational leaders’ communication practices in the United States: perspectives of leaders and followers. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 27(3), 595–615. https://doi.org/10.1108/ccij-10-2021-0118
105. Levecque, K., Rigolle, F., De Beuckelaer, A., & Mortier, A. (2019). PhD students and vigour : on bursting with energy, feeling fit and being enthusiastic about work. 21. https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/8634623
106. Li, M. (2023). Organizational support, job satisfaction and work engagement of university teachers: Basis for teachers’ career development program. International Journal of Research Studies in Management, 11(7). https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrsm.2023.1081
107. Li, W., & Li, C. (2024). The Role of Flexible Work Arrangements in Enhancing Employee Well- Being and Productivity: A Study on SDG 8 Implementation in Tech Companies. Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 2024(1). https://doi.org/10.61453/jobss.v2024no18
108. Lo, Y. Y., & Othman, J. (2023). Lecturers’ readiness for EMI in Malaysia higher education. PLOS ONE, 18. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284491
109. Low, M. C., Jayasingam, S., Bakar, R. A., & Omar, S. (2024). A multi-level study on principals’ Guanxi-driven impact on teachers’ work and home life: insights from Malaysia. Management Research Review. https://doi.org/10.1108/mrr-11-2023-0872
110. Mahmod, L. S., & Uysal, B. (2023). The effect of authentic leadership on innovative work behavior, psychological empowerment and work engagement: a research in banking sector. Journal of Business, Economics and Finance. https://doi.org/10.17261/pressacademia.2023.1783
111. Majid, M., Ramli, M. F., Badyalina, B., Roslan, A., & Azreen Jihan Che Mohd Hashim, A. J. (2020). Influence of engagement, work-environment, motivation, organizational learning, and supportive culture on job satisfaction. International Journal of Human Resource Studies, 10(4), 186–207. https://doi.org/10.5296/IJHRS.V10I4.17822
112. Mamaril, E. (2021). Effective Followership Impacting Transparent Leadership (pp. 161–183). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-61996-1_10
113. Manchanda, M., & Arora, J. (2023). Higher Education’s Position in Shaping the Workforce of the Future and the Importance of Adapting to the Digital Age. International Journal of Educational Reform. https://doi.org/10.1177/10567879231211285
114. Mandernach, B. J., Barclay, J. P., Huslig, S., & Jackson, C. M. (2015). Faculty Engagement as a Function of Instructional Mode and Employment Status. 4(2015), 159–167. https://doi.org/10.9743/JIR.2015.20
115. Mansor, N. B. (2000). Malaysian Culture and the Leadership of Organisations: A GLOBE Study. 35.
116. Maquidato, J. N. C., & Bayani, R. T. (2024). Workload and work engagement among the teachers: a descriptive-correlational study. EPRA International Journal of Environmental, Economics, Commerce and Educational Management, 136–148. https://doi.org/10.36713/epra17756
117. Martela, F. (2020). Self-Determination Theory. 369–373. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118970843.CH61
118. Masimane, B. A., Ndambuki, V., & Mulinge, D. N. (2022). The Effect of Relational Transparency on the Performance of Employees of Commercial Banks in Kenya. International Journal of Economics, Business and Management Research, 06(08), 258–273. https://doi.org/10.51505/ijebmr.2022.6819
119. Mat, N., Romli, R., Mat, N., & Mohd Noor, N. A. (2012). Modelling workplace spirituality and teaching effectiveness for academician in malaysia. The International Journal of Business and Management, 4(1), 157–164. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/255847
120. Maunz, L. A., Thal, S. B., & Glaser, J. (2024). Authentic leaders, energized employees? Indirect beneficial and adverse effects of authentic leadership on intrinsic motivation and exhaustion. Applied Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12546
121. Jani, S. H., Md. Shahid, S. A., Thomas, M., Francis, P., & Jislan, F. (2018). Using Teaching Effectiveness Scale as Measurement for Quality Teaching. The International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 8(9), 1394–1404. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/V8-I9/4704
122. Merwe, C. P., & Olivier, B. H. (2024). The relationship between employee well-being and organisational effectiveness. Sa Journal of Industrial Psychology, 50. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v50i0.2169
123. Mills, M. J., Culbertson, S. S., & Fullagar, C. J. (2012). Conceptualizing and measuring engagement: An analysis of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Journal of Happiness Studies, 13, 519-545.
124. Mohd Hairul Nizam, D. N. B., & Zulkiply, N. (2024). The Relationship between Locus of Control and Decision-Making among Undergraduate Students. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 9(12), e003129. https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v9i12.3129
125. Moore, B. (2017). Authentic Leadership: Applications in Academic Decision-Making (pp. 76–94). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-1968-3.CH004
126. Mukba, G. (2023). An Investigation of Basic Psychological Needs Satisfaction and Its Basic Components: A Literature Study. Humanistic Perspective. https://doi.org/10.47793/hp.1345948
127. Moura, I., Charão-Brito, L., Lopes, L. F., & Nunes, L. R. (2017). Vigor, dedicação, absorção: uma análise da percepção de profissionais pós-graduandos sobre engajamento no trabalho. 22(2), 229–245. https://doi.org/10.17765/1516-2664.2017V22N2P229-245
128. Muktamar, B. A. (2023). The role of ethical leadership in organizational culture. Jurnal Mantik, 7(1), 77–85. https://doi.org/10.35335/mantik.v7i1.3635
129. Mutil, G., Busari, A. H., Mazlan, M. N. A., & Ujil, A. T. (2024). Readiness of school leaders in malaysia to face the vuca (volatile, uncertain, complex, ambiguous) era: a recent comprehensive structured review. International Journal of Education, Psychology and Counseling, 9(55), 556–575. https://doi.org/10.35631/ijepc.955037
130. Myers, R. (2022). Leader Effects on Engagement (pp. 287–302). IGI Global eBooks. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-8239-8.ch016
131. Namaziandost, E., Kargar Behbahani, H., & Heydarnejad, T. (2024). Like coloured pencils in a pencil case: A portray of the connections between learning style preferences, needs satisfaction, academic motivation, and psychological well‐being from the window of self‐determination theory. European Journal of Education. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12715
132. Nasir, M., Ma’rof, A. A., & Rosnon, M. R. (2024). The Influence of Personality Traits on Leadership Styles among Student Leaders in Malaysian Public Universities. International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences, 14(12). https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v14-i12/24044
133. Ndraha, A. B., Waruwu, E., Zebua, D., & Zega, A. (2024). Kebijakan Kelembagaan Kehumasan Dan Jurnalistik Untuk Meningkatkan Transparansi Dan Partisipasi Masyarakat Dalam Pemerintahan. Jurnal Ilmu Ekonomi, Pendidikan Dan Teknik., 1(2), 23–31. https://doi.org/10.70134/identik.v1i2.37
134. Neider, L. L., & Schriesheim, C. A. (2011). The authentic leadership inventory (ALI): Development and empirical tests. The leadership quarterly, 22(6), 1146-1164.
135. Ni, Y., Wu, D., Bao, Y., Li, J.-P., & You, G.-Y. (2022). The mediating role of psychological needs on the relationship between perceived organizational support and work engagement. International Nursing Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/inr.12797
136. Nor Sham, N. I. S., Salleh, R., Syed Sheikh, S. S., & Saleem, M. S. (2024). Work-Life Balance and Work-Life Integration: A Comparative Analysis through Conceptual Distinction. Business Management and Strategy, 16(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.5296/bms.v16i1.22332
137. Novaes, V. P., Ferreira, M. C., & Gabardo-Martins, L. M. D. (2019). Validity evidences regarding the Authentic Leadership Inventory. Estudos De Psicologia (Campinas), 36. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-0275201936E180058
138. Ogunyemi, O., & Ogunyemi, K. (2020). Authentic Leadership: Leading with Purpose, Meaning and Core Values (pp. 369–380). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38129-5_20
139. Ohya, T., Tsuchiya, Y., & Matsushita, H. (2022). Authentic Leadership and Subordinates’ Well-Being: The Mediating Effect of Self-Compassion. Proceedings – Academy of Management, 2022(1). https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2022.16914abstract
140. Olafsen, A. H., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Self-Determination Theory and Its Relation to Organizations. https://doi.org/10.1093/ACREFORE/9780190236557.013.112
141. Olafsen, A. H., Marescaux, B. P. C., & Kujanpää, M. (2024). Crafting for autonomy, competence, and relatedness: A self‐determination theory model of need crafting at work. Applied Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12570
142. Palumbo, R. (2021). Engaging by releasing: an investigation of the consequences of team autonomy on work engagement. Team Performance Management, 27, 425–445. https://doi.org/10.1108/TPM-03-2021-0021
143. Paschina, S. (2023). Trust in Management and Work Flexibility: A Quantitative Investigation of Modern Work Dynamics and their Impact on Organizational Performance. European Research Studies Journal. https://doi.org/10.35808/ersj/3205
144. Pineda, D., Lozano-Jiménez, J. E., & Moreno Murcia, J. A. (2024). Autonomy support in higher education: a key strategy for the well-being of university students. F1000Research, 13, 839. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.144803.1
145. Pretorius, A., & Plaatjies, B. O. (2023). Self-Awareness as a Key Emotional Intelligent Skill for Secondary School Principals’ Leadership Toolkit. Research in Educational Policy and Management. https://doi.org/10.46303/repam.2023.9
146. Purba, D. E. (2023). Kepemimpinan inklusif dan persepsi keamanan psikologis: Peran mediasi kepercayaan pada manajemen. Persona, 11(2), 154–171. https://doi.org/10.30996/persona.v11i2.7057
147. Putit, L., Subramaniam, G., Shariff, S. H., Ramachandran, J., & Maniam, B. (2023). Mediating Role of Autonomy on FWA and WLB among Malaysian Academics. Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal, 8(25), 61–70. https://doi.org/10.21834/e-bpj.v8i25.4782
148. Putri, S. E., Suherman, E., & Anggela, F. P. (2025). Pengaruh Flexible Working Arrangement, Work Life Balance, Terhadap Job Satisfaction yang Dimediasi oleh Work Engagement pada Karyawan Milenial PT Nagahama Mesin Balancing. Al-Kharaj : Jurnal Ekonomi, Keuangan Dan Bisnis Syariah, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.47467/alkharaj.v7i1.5374
149. Putri, Z. R. D., Yulianti, S., & Anshori, M. I. (2024). Pengaruh Budaya Organisasi dan Gaya Kepemimpinan terhadap Kinerja Karyawan; Literature Review. Jurnal Ilmiah Dan Karya Mahasiswa, 2(2), 298–310. https://doi.org/10.54066/jikma.v2i2.1761
150. Qureshi, Q.-U.-A. (2023). Role of Followership Dimensions in Shaping Leaders’ Behavior. 1(2), 120–126. https://doi.org/10.59365/amsj.1(2).2023.43
151. Raduan, N. J. N., Mohamed, S., Hashim, N. A., Nikmat, A. W., Shuib, N., & Ali, N. F. (2022). Psychological Distress, Burnout and Job Satisfaction among Academicians in Science and Technology Faculties in a Malaysian University. Asean Journal of Psychiatry, 23(06). https://doi.org/10.54615/2231-7805.47262
152. 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(24), 16528. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416528
153. Rahmadani, V. G., Rahmadani, V. G., Schaufeli, W. B., Schaufeli, W. B., Ivanova, T., & Osin, E. (2019). Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction Mediates The Relationship Between Engaging Leadership and Work Engagement: a Cross-National Study. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 30(4), 453–471. https://doi.org/10.1002/HRDQ.21366
154. Rajandiran, S., Abdul Wahat, N. W., & Subramaniam, A. (2022). Psychosocial Safety Climate in the Malaysian Context: A Systematic Literature Review. International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences, 12(12). https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v12-i12/15924
155. Rajaram, H., & Jha, A. (2024). The Impact of Flexible Work Arrangements on Job Satisfaction. International Journal For Science Technology And Engineering, 12(3), 1996–2000. https://doi.org/10.22214/ijraset.2024.59265
156. Ramachandaran, S. D., Nuraini, R., & Doraisingam, P. (2024). Understanding Work-Life Balance Challenges among Academic Professionals in Higher Education: A Phenomenological Study. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 23(12), 130–147. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.23.12.8
157. Rashid, I. M., Zaini, M. R., Roni, M., Adanan, A., Faisal, S. I., & Jamil, M. F. (2022). The Importance of Effective Educational Leadership: Evidence from Malaysian Higher Education Context. International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences, 12(12). https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v12-i12/15345
158. Ray, T. K., & Pana-Cryan, R. (2021). Work Flexibility and Work-Related Well-Being. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(6), 3254. https://doi.org/10.3390/IJERPH18063254
159. Ridzuwan, M. A., Fakhri, N. N. F. N. M., & Tenny, J. A. (2025). Flexible Working Hours: Balancing Opportunities and Challenges in the Modern Workplace. International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v15-i1/24230
160. Sadiqin, A., & Maslakhatul Khasanah, U. (2021). Pengaruh keterbukaan komunikasi pimpinan perusahaan dalam membentuk peningkatan dan kenyamanan kinerja karyawan di pt .global sinergi kartu. 14(2), 417–426. https://doi.org/10.46306/JBBE.V14I2.96
161. Sæther, W. K. O., & Bergman, L. V. (2019). The Effect of Shared Perception of Engaging Leadership on Employee Work Engagement – a Multilevel Framework. https://bora.uib.no/bora-xmlui/handle/1956/19706
162. Sakiman, J. bt, & Yasin, M. (2023). Importance of Ethics of Education Management. International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v13-i12/20343
163. Salikhova, N. R., Lynch, M. F., Salikhova, A., & Fakhrutdinova, A. (2024). Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction among Students in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.26907/esd.19.1.05
164. Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., Gonzalez-Roma´, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A confirmative analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71–92.
165. Schoofs, L., Maunz, L. A., & Glaser, J. (2023). Multi-level effects of authentic leadership on self-actualization at work – the mediating roles of authentic followership and basic psychological need satisfaction. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-05480-6
166. Shah, M. W., Khattak, P., & Shah, M. H. (2020). The Impact of Flexible Working Hours and Psychological Empowerment onTeam Performance with the Role of Work Engagement. 7(1). https://www.imedpub.com/articles/the-impact-of-flexible-working-hours-and-psychological-empowerment-on-team-performance-with-the-mediating-role-of-work-engagement.pdf
167. Shamsudin, A. S., Badlishah, S., & Ali, A. (2023). Ethical Behaviour of Malaysia University Students: A Proposed Model.
168. Sharma, G., & Syal, S. (2022). A conceptual analysis of employee turnover intention: The causes of turnover intention in the faculties in higher educational institutions. International Journal of Research in Finance and Management, 5(2), 283–289. https://doi.org/10.33545/26175754.2022.v5.i2d.181
169. Sheldon, K. M., Turban, D. B., Brown, K. G., Barrick, M. R., & Judge, T. A. (2003). Applying self-determination theory to organizational research (Vol. 22). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-7301(03)22008-9
170. Shirom, A. (2011). Vigor as a Positive Affect at Work: Conceptualizing Vigor, Its Relations with Related Constructs, and Its Antecedents and Consequences. Review of General Psychology, 15(1), 50–64. https://doi.org/10.1037/A0021853
171. Shulzhenko, E. (2024). Self-determination theory (pp. 238–246). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035308767.ch30
172. Silva, V. H., Duarte, A. P., & Oliveira, J. P. (2023). How Does Authentic Leadership Boost Work Engagement? Exploring the Mediating Role of Work Meaningfulness and Work–Family Enrichment. Administrative Sciences. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13100219
173. Slemp, G. R., Lee, M. A., Mossman, L. H., & Mossman, L. H. (2021). Interventions to support autonomy, competence, and relatedness needs in organizations: A systematic review with recommendations for research and practice. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 94(2), 427–457. https://doi.org/10.1111/JOOP.12338
174. Steca, P., & Monzani, D. (2014). Locus of Control. 3678–3680. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5
175. Stephens, C. R. (2022). The Influence Servant Leadership Has on Emergent Leaders in the Field of Education. Advances in Logistics, Operations, and Management Science Book Series, 87–94. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-5812-9.ch005
176. Stychno, E., Ksykiewicz-Dorota, A., & Kulczycka, K. (2018). Zaangażowanie w pracy pielęgniarek – przegląd badań. 43, 81–91. http://yadda.icm.edu.pl/yadda/element/bwmeta1.element.agro-dd956b6d-97b1-4043-9d31-077a4c49bcf0
177. Subasini, N. S., & Nesamany, B. (2023). Academic Staff CPD in A Private Higher Education Institute in Malaysia: Exploring the Perspective. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development. https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarped/v12-i2/17484
178. Subramaniam, G., Abd Rahman, S. A. B., Dass, L. C., & Wu, M. (2024). The Impact of Flexible Working Arrangements on Employee Outcomes Pre – Covid in Malaysia. SMART Journal of Business Management Studies, 20(2), 102–112. https://doi.org/10.34293/2321-2012.2024.0002.10
179. Subramaniam, G., Rozlan, N., Putit, L., & Maniam, B. (2022). Flexible Working Arrangements and Millennials During COVID-19:Work Better Leads to Feel Better? Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal, 7(21), 423–431. https://doi.org/10.21834/ebpj.v7i21.3729
180. Sullivan, G. S. (2019). SDT Mini-Theories: Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction, Intrinsic Motivation, and Cognitive Evaluation (pp. 219–227). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-11248-6_14
181. Sumpter, D. M., Gibson, C. B., Phan, P. W. M. J., & Porath, C. (2023). Vicarious Empowerment as a Novel Mechanism for Empowering High Power Distance Employees. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220221231202400
182. Suryowibowo, K., & Syakarofath, N. A. (2024). Peran job autonomy terhadap work engagement pada karyawan. Cognicia. https://doi.org/10.22219/cognicia.v12i2.37223
183. Sultana, N., Ayoob, M., Samson, H. E., & Anwar, S. (2024). Explore How Transformational Leadership Styles Impact Educational Environments and Student. Bulletin of Business and Economics, 13(3), 500–507. https://doi.org/10.61506/01.00530
184. Tharbe, I. H. A., Sumari, M., & Ng, K. M. (2020). Emotional Intelligence from Perspectives of Malaysian Helping Professionals: A Qualitative Study. Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities, 28(4). https://doi.org/10.47836/PJSSH.28.4.03
185. Tomlinson, E. C., & Schnackenberg, A. (2022). The effects of transparency perceptions on trustworthiness perceptions and trust. Journal of Trust Research, 12(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2022.2060245
186. Turner, P. (2020). What Is Employee Engagement (pp. 27–56). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36387-1_2
187. Usman, A., Hanif, M. Z., & Majeed, P. (2024). Servant Leadership as a Driver of Work Engagement: Unveiling the Mediating Role of Basic Psychological Needs Satisfaction. Journal for Social Science Archives, 2(2), 509–528. https://doi.org/10.59075/jssa.v2i2.80
188. Vaishal, A. (2023). The Impact of Psychological Safety on Leader Decision-Making: An Empirical Analysis of the Relationship. Indian Scientific Journal Of Research In Engineering And Management, 07(07). https://doi.org/10.55041/ijsrem24958
189. Vartiainen, M. (2024). Flexibility paradigm (pp. 5–21). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035320103.00009
190. Viswanathan, R., & lakshmi, D. (2018). The relationship between Team Trust and Team Performance – A Study with special reference to IT companies. Global Journal for Research Analysis, 6(7).
191. Vivekananda, N., & Meenakshi, Dr. R. (2024). Honesty And Its Role In Maintaining Social Cohesion And Trust. https://doi.org/10.53555/kuey.v30i2.1644
192. Wan, C. D. (2022). Academic Freedom in Malaysian Public Universities. Kajian Malaysia, 40(2), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.21315/km2022.40.2.1
193. Wan Khairuldin, W. M. K. F., Wan Nor Anas, W. N. I., Embong, A. H., Hassan, S. A., Suhaimi, M. A., & Idham, M. (2024). Model Holistik Integriti Akademik Berteraskan Islam bagi Institusi Pengajian Tinggi di Malaysia. Global Journal Al-Thaqafah, 193–207. https://doi.org/10.7187/gjatsi122024-13
194. Weimer, W. B. (2022). The outcomes of flexible working (pp. 54–68). Policy Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781447354772.003.0004
195. Westover, J. (2024a). Harnessing Social Psychology and Human-Centered Leadership. Human Capital Leadership., 16(1). https://doi.org/10.70175/hclreview.2020.16.1.9
196. Westover, J. (2024b). Leading with Heart: The Importance of Emotional Intelligence for Effective 21st Century Leadership. 13(4). https://doi.org/10.70175/hclreview.2020.13.4.9
197. Westover, J. (2025). Self-Awareness: More Than Just Insight. Human Capital Leadership., 17(2). https://doi.org/10.70175/hclreview.2020.17.2.7
198. Willis, S. (2025). Authentic nursing leadership. Nursing Management, 56(1), 7. https://doi.org/10.1097/nmg.0000000000000211
199. Wijaya, S. (2023). Pengaruh ethical leadership dalam menciptakan work engagement karyawan. Jurnal Bina Manajemen. https://doi.org/10.52859/jbm.v12i1.497
200. Wong, C. H., Soo, S. W., Ibrahim, F., & Madhavedi, S. (2024). Impact Of Self-Efficacy, Self-Esteem, Employee Engagement, And Organizational Citizenship Behaviour On Job Performance Of Academic Staff In Higher Education Institutions Of Klang Valley, Malaysia. https://doi.org/10.53555/kuey.v30i5.2226
201. Yadav, A. S., Pandita, D., & Singh, S. (2022). Work-life integration, job contentment, employee engagement and its impact on organizational effectiveness: a systematic literature review. Industrial and Commercial Training. https://doi.org/10.1108/ict-12-2021-0083
202. Yamin, R. A., & Pusparini, E. S. (2022). The Effect of Flexible Work Arrangement and Perceived Organizational Support on Employee Job Performance: The Mediating Role of Employee Engagement. https://doi.org/10.2991/aebmr.k.220701.081
203. Yan, Y. (2022). The Effect of Flexible Work Arrangement and Work-Life Balance on Work Engagement and the mediating Role of Work-Family Conflict. https://doi.org/10.26756/th.2022.388
204. Yang, H. M., He, M., Cheung, F., Chau, C. T. J., Cheong, I. S., & Wu, A. M. S. (2022). Perceived procedural justice and psychological flourishing among mental health professionals in Macao: a moderated mediation model. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10775-022-09541-3
205. Yang, S. Q. (2022). Cross-Cultural Reflections on Citizen’s and Mankind’s Moral Identity as a Foundation of Community with a Shared Future. Ethics in Progress, 13(1), 164–154. https://doi.org/10.14746/eip.2022.1.10
206. Yengkopiong, J. P. (2025). The Way Forward for Secondary School Students: The Role of Self-Determination Theory and Intrinsic Motivation. East African Journal of Education Studies, 8(1), 288–299. https://doi.org/10.37284/eajes.8.1.2643
207. Yusoff, M. S. B., Abdul Latiff, A. R., Ong, E. B. B., Manan, H. A., Ismail, N. A., Rahim, N. A. A., Ruhaiyem, N. I. R., Firdaus, R. R., Rahmat, S. R., Din, T. A. D. A. T., & Lockman, Z. (2024). Academic Workloads: Insights from Medical and Non-medical Lecturers’ Experience in Universiti Sains Malaysia. Education in Medicine Journal, 16(3), 119–139. https://doi.org/10.21315/eimj2024.16.3.10
208. Zainal, H., Basriani, A., Rahmat, A., & Yadi, E. (2023). Ethical Leadership And Voice Behavior: Mediating Psychological Safety And Ethical Culture. Jurnal Manajemen – Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Tarumanagara, 27(3), 493–514. https://doi.org/10.24912/jm.v27i3.1448
209. Zaitouni, M., Hewapathirana, G. I., Mostafa, M. K., Hajj, R. A., & ElMelegy, A. R. (2024). Work-Life Balance: A Landscape Mapping of Two Decades of Scholarly Research. Heliyon, e34084. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e34084
210. Zhang, G., & Bhaumik, A. (2024). Work-life harmony and retention of employees: a review of the impact of flexible work arrangements. Deleted Journal, 02(02), 31–38. https://doi.org/10.62674/ijabmr.2024.v2i02.005
211. Zhang, H., Yang, B., Yang, L., & Liu, Y. (2024). Empowering Innovation and Performance in Higher Education: The Transformative Role of Participative Decision-Making. Applied Mathematics and Nonlinear Sciences. https://doi.org/10.2478/amns-2024-0849
212. Zhang, J., Zhang, J.-B., Li, Y., & Deci, E. L. (2010). An Effective Path for Promoting Work Motivation:The Self-determination Theory Perspective. 18(05), 752–759. http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlkxjz/EN/abstract/abstract573.shtml
213. Zhong, X. N., Li, X., Liu, T., & Chen, Y. (2016). The mediator role of Psychological Capital: A study among authentic leadership, work engagement, and psychological capital. Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, 1861–1865. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEM.2016.7798200
214. Zhou, Y. (2024). Teacher well-being and teaching quality: The mediating role of work engagement. Social Behavior and Personality, 52(11), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.13617
215. Zhu, Y., Dolmans, D., Köhler, L., Kusurkar, R. A., Abidi, L., & Savelberg, H. H. C. M. (2024). Paths to Autonomous Motivation and Well-being: Understanding the Contribution of Basic Psychological Needs Satisfaction in Health Professions Students. Medical Science Educator. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-024-02106-9
216. Zychová, K., Fejfarová, M., & Jindrová, A. (2023). Job Autonomy as a Driver of Job Satisfaction. Central European Business Review. https://doi.org/10.18267/j.cebr.347