Connected by Purpose: How Organizational Effectiveness Relates to Leadership Styles and Employee Engagement in a Philippine Public Welfare Agency

Whether the leadership employees experience and the engagement they bring to their work are significantly associated with organizational outcomes remains an empirical question that Philippine public-sector research has largely left unanswered. This study examined the relationship between organizational effectiveness and the sub-variables of leadership styles and employee engagement among employees of the Department of Social Welfare and Development Field Office 10 (DSWD-10), Northern Mindanao, Philippines. Employing a quantitative correlational design, data were collected from 350 employees selected through stratified random sampling and analyzed using Pearson product-moment correlation. Four leadership styles (transformational, transactional, servant, and democratic) and four engagement dimensions (vigor, dedication, absorption, and commitment) were correlated with three organizational effectiveness outcomes: job satisfaction, workplace productivity, and service quality. Findings showed that all twenty-four correlations were positive and statistically significant, leading to the rejection of the null hypothesis for every pairing. Two distinct relational patterns emerged. Leadership styles correlated most strongly with job satisfaction, led by servant and democratic leadership, and only moderately with workplace productivity and service quality, where democratic leadership was consistently the strongest style. Employee engagement, by contrast, associated robustly with all three outcomes, with commitment the strongest correlate of job satisfaction and dedication the strongest correlate of both workplace productivity and service quality. The study concludes that leadership relates most proximally to how employees experience their work, while engagement is most closely associated with what employees produce and deliver. The findings affirm the Full Range Leadership Theory, Servant and Democratic Leadership perspectives, and the Job Demands-Resources Model, and identify commitment- and dedication-building as high-leverage points for public welfare institutions.

leadership styles, employee engagement, organizational effectiveness, correlation, job satisfaction, workplace productivity, service quality, public sector

1. Akingbola, K., Rogers, S. E., & Intindola, M. (2022). Creating and sustaining employee engagement through human resource management. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-08469-0_4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. AlAbri, I., Siron, R. bte, Alzamel, S., Al-Enezi, H., & Cheok, M. Y. (2022). Assessing the employees' efficiency and adaptive performance for sustainable human resource management practices and transactional leadership: HR-centric policies for post COVID-19 era. Frontiers in Energy Research, 10, 959035. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2022.959035 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Aniebonam, E. E. (2023). Transformational leadership and transactional leadership styles: Systematic review of literature. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8410953 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Backhaus, L., & Vogel, R. (2022). Leadership in the public sector: A meta-analysis of styles, outcomes, contexts, and methods. Public Administration Review, 82(6), 986-1003. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13516 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Sanz-Vergel, A. (2023). Job demands-resources theory: Ten years later. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 10, 25-53. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-120920-053933 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Costa, J., Pádua, M., & Moreira, A. C. (2023). Leadership styles and innovation management: What is the role of human capital? Administrative Sciences, 13(2), 47. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13020047 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Cropanzano, R., Anthony, E. L., Daniels, S. R., & Hall, A. V. (2017). Social exchange theory: A critical review with theoretical remedies. Academy of Management Annals, 11(1), 479-516. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2015.0099 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Deepalakshmi, N., Tiwari, D., Baruah, R., Seth, A., & Bisht, R. (2024). Employee engagement and organizational performance: A human resource perspective. Educational Administration: Theory and Practice, 30(4), 5941-5948. https://doi.org/10.53555/kuey.v30i4.2323 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Fischer, T., & Sitkin, S. B. (2023). Leadership styles: A comprehensive assessment and way forward. Academy of Management Annals, 17(1), 331-372. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2020.0340 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., Agrawal, S., Blue, A., Plowman, S. K., Josh, P., & Asplund, J. (2020). The relationship between engagement at work and organizational outcomes: 2020 Q12 meta-analysis (10th ed.). Gallup. https://www.gallup.com/workplace/321725/gallup-q12-meta-analysis-report.aspx [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Irianti, I., Syarifuddin, S., & Haerani, A. (2024). Leadership styles and organizational effectiveness: A review of recent literature. Advances Jurnal Ekonomi & Bisnis, 2(4), 201. https://doi.org/10.60079/ajeb.v2i4.316 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Kumar, M., Verma, M., & Ray, B. (2023). Unlocking the power of engagement: A comprehensive review and future research roadmap. Acta Universitatis Bohemiae Meridionalis, 26(3), 33. https://doi.org/10.32725/acta.2023.015 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Mazzetti, G., Robledo, E., Vignoli, M., Topa, G., Guglielmi, D., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2021). Work engagement: A meta-analysis using the job demands-resources model. Psychological Reports, 126(3), 1069-1107. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941211051988 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Garzón-Lasso, F., Serrano-Malebrán, J., Arenas-Arango, S., & Molina, C. (2024). Full range leadership style and its effect on effectiveness, employee satisfaction, and extra effort: An empirical study. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1380935. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1380935 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Grobler, A., & Flotman, A.-P. (2020). The validation of the servant leadership scale. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 46(0), a1754. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v46i0.1754 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Hutama, A. A., Noermijati, N., & Irawanto, D. W. (2024). The effect of transactional leadership on employee performance mediated by job satisfaction, job stress and trust. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science, 13(3), 151-166. https://doi.org/10.20525/ijrbs.v13i3.3297 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C. M., Hildebrandt, V. H., de Vet, H. C. W., & van der Beek, A. J. (2014). Construct validity of the Individual Work Performance Questionnaire. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 56(3), 331-337. https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000000113 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Pažur, M. (2020). Development and validation of a research instrument for measuring the presence of democratic school leadership characteristics. Educational Management Administration & Leadership. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220937312 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Saadah, M., & Agustiyara, A. (2024). Transformational leadership and dynamic managerial capabilities in public sector innovation. Jurnal Bina Praja, 16(1), 201. https://doi.org/10.21787/jbp.16.2024.201-214 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Saks, A. M. (2019). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement revisited. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 6(1), 19-38. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP-06-2018-0034 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Schaufeli, W. B., Shimazu, A., Hakanen, J., Salanova, M., & De Witte, H. (2019). An ultra-short measure for work engagement: The UWES-3 validation across five countries. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 35(4), 577-591. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000430 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Taherdoost, H. (2016). Sampling methods in research methodology: How to choose a sampling technique for research. International Journal of Academic Research in Management, 5(2), 18-27. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3205035 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Tang, H., An, S., Zhang, L., Xiao, Y., & Li, X. (2024). The antecedents and outcomes of public service motivation: A meta-analysis using the job demands-resources model. Behavioral Sciences, 14(10), 861. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14100861 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. van der Vaart, L., & Linde, B. (2021). The performance measurement conundrum: Construct validity of the Individual Work Performance Questionnaire in South Africa. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences, 24(1), a3581. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajems.v24i1.3581 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Varshney, D., & Goel, D. (2025). The impact of work engagement on job satisfaction among employees teaching in the university. International Journal of Research Publication and Reviews, 6(6), 5036. https://doi.org/10.55248/gengpi.6.0625.2178 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Zahri, T. A., Lubis, A. R., Djalil, M. A., & Syafruddin, S. (2023). Analysis of service quality factors of the Regional Planning Agency of Aceh. Emerging Science Journal, 7(5), 1723. https://doi.org/10.28991/esj-2023-07-05-017 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study