Dual Engines of Public Welfare Effectiveness: Testing Competing Structural Models and Advancing the Requilme Multigenerational Workforce Effectiveness Model

How do leadership and employee engagement jointly produce organizational effectiveness: independently, through a mediated chain, or as correlated co-equal forces? Organizational research has largely settled into the mediation orthodoxy, in which leadership drives outcomes through engagement, yet rival structural configurations are rarely tested against one another, and almost never in developing-country public welfare institutions. This study subjected three competing structural models to formal comparison using structural equation modeling with data from 350 employees of the Department of Social Welfare and Development Field Office 10 (DSWD-10), Northern Mindanao, Philippines, selected through stratified random sampling. Leadership Style (transformational, transactional, servant, and democratic) and Employee Engagement (vigor, dedication, absorption, and commitment) were modeled as latent exogenous constructs, Organizational Effectiveness (job satisfaction, workplace productivity, and service quality) as the latent outcome, and generational cohort dummies as contextual variables. Findings showed that the Independence Model, which fixes the leadership-engagement covariance at zero, was rejected on fit; the Full Mediation Model achieved acceptable but marginal fit; and the Covariance Model demonstrated the best fit across all indices, with both structural paths significant. Employee Engagement emerged as the stronger structural driver of organizational effectiveness, Leadership Style as the second, and the two constructs covaried substantially, while all generational cohort paths were non-significant. The null hypothesis of no best-fitting structural model was rejected, and the validated Covariance Model is advanced as the Requilme Multigenerational Workforce Effectiveness (RMWE) Model, a four-tier framework positioning integrative leadership and mission-driven engagement as mutually reinforcing dual engines of effectiveness, with implementation guidelines aligned to Philippine civil service systems. The findings challenge the assumption that engagement is merely a conduit for leadership effects and offer public institutions an evidence-based, generationally inclusive framework for organizational development.

Structural Equation Modeling, Model Comparison, Leadership, Employee Engagement, Organizational Effectiveness, RMWE Model, Public Welfare, Multigenerational Workforce

1. 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]

2. 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]

3. 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]

4. 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]

5. 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]

6. 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]

7. 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]

8. 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]

9. 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]

10. 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]

11. 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]

12. 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]

13. 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]

14. Reed, C., & Thomas, R. (2021). The generation game: Governing through bio-politics. Management Learning, 52(1), 47-64. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507620938926 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. 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]

16. Sansa, A., K'Obonyo, P., Muindi, F., & Munjuri, M. G. (2024). Do nuanced perspectives of diversity management practices warrant inclusivity in multigenerational organizations? A meta-analytic review. European Journal of Business and Management Research, 9(5), 113-123. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejbmr.2024.9.5.2414 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. 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]

18. 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]

19. 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]

20. Yusof, N. M., Zawawi, A. A., Khan, H. H. A., & Anuar, A. (2025). Generational differences and organizational behavior: Mapping trends, gaps, and future directions. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 9(10), 2818-2827. https://doi.org/10.47772/ijriss.2025.910000229 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. 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]

• A Decadal Overview of Welfare Schemes in Telangana (2014–2024)
• Ubuntu and the Missed Development Goals in the Global South: Rethinking MDGs and SDGs through an African Philosophical Lens
• Exploring the Factors of Obesity: Insights from Johor State Civil Servants
• Navigating the Nexus: Challenges Faced by Part-Time Postgraduate Government Employees in Malaysia
• The Lived Experiences of Skilled Filipino Women Immigrants in Denmark