Let Me Know What Kind of Leader You Are, and I Will Tell You If I Stay: The Role of Well-Being in the Relationship Between Leadership and Turnover Intentions

Abstract

This study aimed to analyze the association of leadership with turnover intentions and whether this relationship is mediated by employee well-being. The sample consists of approximately 306 individuals working in organizations based in Portugal. The results indicate that transformational leadership has a positive and significant association with turnover intentions, while the relationship between transactional leadership and turnover intentions is negative and significant. Both transformational leadership and transactional leadership have a positive and significant association with well-being. Well-being has a negative and significant association with turnover intentions. Well-being only has a mediating effect on the relationship between transactional leadership and turnover intentions. This study contributes to the advancement of academic research and knowledge about the mechanisms through which transformational and transactional leadership styles can influence employees’ turnover intentions, as well as providing empirical evidence on the mediating role of psychological well-being. In addition, practical insights are offered to organizational leaders and managers on adopting practices that foster psychological well-being in the workplace, thereby reducing employee turnover intentions.

1. Introduction

In the BANI (Fragile, Anxious, Non-linear, and Incomprehensible) world, with an increasingly dynamic and competitive business environment, the goal of companies to achieve success through competitiveness and innovation becomes a real challenge (Cascio, 2020). Understanding and correctly managing the factors that contribute to these premises for success will enable this challenge to be overcome, preparing fertile ground for prosperity. One of the key factors determining organizational sustainability and prosperity is effective leadership.

The BANI world follows the VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous) world, where organizations suffer from uncertainty about the future, damaging engagement, productivity, and the willingness to act independently, which means that leaders have to be attentive to how their organizations respond to issues of volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (Johansen, 2007).

Leadership plays a crucial role in the development of organizations in a constantly changing environment. It must be capable of having a clear and cross-cutting view of all levels of the organization, creating an environment conducive to creativity and innovation and maintaining open communication channels to promote transparency and trust in processes and people, among other important characteristics (Drucker, 1988; Klein, 2023).

Among leadership styles, Bass and Avolio (1993) highlight transformational leadership as the style that plays a fundamental role in shaping and sustaining organizational culture, promoting a culture of innovation, commitment, and adaptability within the organizational context. Transformational leaders are not concerned with immediate results; instead, they focus on long-term goals. They are better equipped to inspire and encourage the growth of their employees, which consequently results in the alignment of their values and behaviors with those of the organization.

Transformational leadership is a critical concept for the development of organizational behavior studies, as it is recognized for its potential to bring about positive, solid, and long-term change in organizations. Transformational leadership has received considerable attention for its positive impact on employee motivation, job satisfaction, and overall well-being (Abolnasser et al., 2023). When this connection between leaders and followers exists, based on ethical, inspirational, and collective pillars, there is depth for creating an organizational culture of creativity, innovation, and collaboration that sustains the competitiveness and continuity of organizations (Koh et al., 2019).

In contrast to this inspiring and formative approach to organizational culture, transactional leadership emerges as a leadership style based on a logic of exchange, where the relationship between leader and subordinate is defined by clear objectives and the use of rewards or sanctions, depending on performance (Bass, 1985). This model assumes that employees are primarily motivated by extrinsic incentives and is therefore effective in organizational contexts that prioritize stability, efficiency, and compliance with rules (Antonakis & House, 2014; Abbas & Ali, 2023). Transactional leadership remains a crucial factor in the field of people management, particularly in influencing variables such as performance, organizational commitment, and turnover intentions (Judge & Piccolo, 2004).

The third variant studied in this research, which has a fundamental impact on organizational dynamics, is employee turnover intentions. For Lazzari et al. (2022), turnover intentions refer to an employee’s stated desire to leave the organization within a specific period and are often used to study actual employee turnover. Tett and Meyer (1993) define employee turnover intentions as the predisposition or conscious desire to leave an organization. Although this variable is a good indicator of actual turnover, other factors also influence this predisposition, such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment. The authors demonstrate the cause-and-effect relationship between satisfaction, commitment, and turnover intentions.

Another of the predominant variables, and the last one analyzed in this study, for building a healthy and positive organizational climate and, consequently, a successful organization, is employee well-being. As mentioned above, leadership, and more specifically transformational leadership, has a significant impact on building employees’ emotional bond with the organization, as well as their motivation and intellectual stimulation. To achieve this level of connection with employees, leaders must possess high emotional intelligence and intense empathy, enabling them to support their teams on an emotional level. This, in turn, positively influences the psychological well-being of employees (Goleman, 1998). Transformational leadership fosters the development of psychological factors, such as self-confidence and self-efficacy, which are considered key determinants of well-being (Alfalih & Ragmoun, 2025).

In short, transformational leadership has a profound impact on organizational variables such as employee well-being and their turnover intentions (Martins et al., 2023). This leadership style, which aims to inspire and motivate employee development and growth, creates a positive, healthy, and trusting organizational environment that, in turn, satisfies employees’ psychological needs. Thus, the relationship between transformational leadership and transactional leadership, well-being, and turnover intentions is a living, dynamic, and interdependent one in the organizational context. Transformational leadership acts as a driver, providing psychological well-being and consequently reducing turnover intentions, thus creating a virtuous and positive circle that benefits both employees and the organization.

Although sometimes considered less inspiring than transformational leadership, transactional leadership has significant benefits when applied effectively, particularly in clarifying expectations, reinforcing individual responsibility, and maintaining order and productivity in the workplace (Podsakoff et al., 1982). Empirical studies indicate that in specific organizational contexts, the predictability and structure offered by this leadership style can mitigate ambiguity and stress at work, thereby indirectly contributing to greater stability within teams (Aslan et al., 2025; Breevaart et al., 2014). However, its effectiveness may be limited when seeking to promote emotional involvement or employee identification with the organization’s values. Thus, research into transactional leadership, in conjunction with transformational leadership, is crucial for a comprehensive understanding of its impact on organizational behavior, particularly regarding employee turnover intentions and well-being.

The decision to focus on transformational and transactional leadership styles to analyze their influence on employee turnover intentions is based on their solid theoretical foundation and extensive empirical validation. The literature has consistently shown that transformational leadership, characterized by inspiration, motivation, and individualized attention, is negatively associated with turnover intentions. This is because it promotes greater trust, engagement, and performance among employees, contributing to their retention (Ariyabuddhiphongs & Kahn, 2017; Martins et al., 2023). In turn, transactional leadership, based on a system of rewards and punishments, also plays a relevant role, mainly when its associations are mediated by factors such as organizational commitment and clarity of expectations (Martins et al., 2023; Yahaya et al., 2023). The relationship between leadership (transformational and transactional) and turnover intentions can be interpreted based on the Social Comparison Theory, developed by Adams (1965), which posits that employees tend to compare their leader with other leaders. If they perceive that their leader has more appropriate behaviors, they will want to remain in the organization and will not reveal any turnover intentions.

The choice of these two styles over other approaches, such as laissez-faire, authentic, or servant leadership, is justified by their conceptual and methodological robustness. Transformational leadership and transactional leadership are part of Bass’s (1985) two-factor model, widely recognized in the field of organizational psychology, and are consistently measured using internationally validated instruments, such as the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ). This reliability enables comparisons between studies and ensures greater accuracy in assessing their association with behavioral and attitudinal variables, such as commitment, job satisfaction, performance, and, particularly, turnover intentions (Kim & Brymer, 2011; Alkhadher, 2020).

On the other hand, although styles such as authentic and servant leadership have gained prominence in recent research, there is still limited standardization regarding their operational definitions and evaluation metrics, which may compromise the consistency of insights and hinder the generalization of results. Thus, the choice to analyze transformational and transactional leadership styles as independent variables is justified by their ability to offer a comprehensive and complementary perspective on the mechanisms by which leadership influences employees’ decisions to stay or leave, mainly when mediated by variables such as well-being.

This study aims to analyze the association of transformational and transactional leadership with employees’ turnover intentions, investigating whether this relationship is mediated by well-being.

It is expected that leadership (transformational and transactional) will have a significant negative association with turnover intentions, and that well-being will be the mechanism explaining this relationship.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Leadership

Various authors have discussed the concept of leadership over the last century, and it remains one of the most researched processes, as it is one of the most complex within an organization, occurring at different levels and taking various forms. Due to a constantly and rapidly changing world, where leadership plays an increasingly fundamental role, it must evolve to respond to social, technological, and economic transformations. Although leadership is most associated with management positions, it extends far beyond hierarchical roles, transcending specific functions and areas, and can be performed by anyone, regardless of their position. The concept itself has undergone an evolutionary process, offering various definitions with different perspectives, such as influence, mobilization, motivation, or inspiration, applied to various contexts.

Stogdill (1950) defines leadership as the process of influencing the activities of an organized group in its efforts to define and achieve goals, which means a more focused approach to the relationship between the leader and the members as an exchange of influence, whose goal will be to align the leader’s behavior with the expectations of those being led. The most comprehensive definition of leadership has evolved over time and generally refers to the ability to influence, motivate, and guide a group of people to achieve common goals (Bass, 1990; Northouse, 2007).

In a more recent approach to the concept of leadership, Bennis (2007) emphasizes the importance of continuous adaptation for leaders facing complex challenges arising from the rapidly evolving modern world. In his opinion, an effective leader can inspire and motivate others. This author also emphasizes the importance of leadership skills, such as active listening, flexibility, and recognizing others’ contributions, to create an empathetic and collaborative environment.

Yukl (2012) also analyzes and identifies more effective leadership behaviors, concluding that these constitute a combination of behaviors tailored to the situation and context. This set of behaviors aligns with the principle of flexibility, which is the ability of leaders to identify the most relevant behaviors for a given situation and apply them effectively. Although some studies have been conducted with moderating situational variables, further research is needed to understand how leaders adapt their behavior to situations and to assess the impact of the principle of flexibility.

In a more recent study, Eva et al. (2019) provide a comprehensive review of the literature on this leadership style, with the main objective of highlighting the various areas already studied and others that still require attention. This article examines the multifaceted nature of servant leadership and its implications for job satisfaction, organizational performance, and employee commitment. Although it is recognized as one of the leadership theories that has a positive and effective influence, there is still a lack of studies in cultures other than Western ones, where individual and collective values may modify the factors of effectiveness and influence of servant leadership.

Evolution over time reveals that leadership is a dynamic and flexible concept that adapts to various contexts and challenges and is influenced by several factors. In this study, we will focus on transformational leadership and transactional leadership.

2.1.1. Transformational Leadership

This concept was introduced by Burns (1978), who defined it as a construct that takes both the role of leader and follower to a higher level in terms of inspiration and motivation. For this author, transformational leadership transcends personal interests, developing a collective, ethical, and morally superior vision. In the relationship between leader and follower, there is mutual stimulation, always in the direction of genuine development and growth. The approach to this concept emphasizes collective well-being, fostering genuine connections between leaders and followers, and cultivating a lasting, intrinsic bond.

Bass (1985) expanded on the concept introduced by Burns (1978), describing transformational leadership as comprising four main components: idealized influence, inspirational motivation, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration. These elements enable leaders to inspire confidence, challenge the status quo, foster innovative thinking, and provide personalized support to their followers.

According to Bass and Avolio (1993), these behaviors not only promote individual satisfaction and performance but also strengthen organizational cohesion and effectiveness. Similarly, Podsakoff et al. (1996) emphasize that transformational leaders play a crucial role in fostering organizational citizenship behaviors. These behaviors, such as voluntarily helping colleagues and committing beyond formal obligations, are catalyzed by the leader’s ability to inspire a shared vision and emotionally engage team members.

Judge and Piccolo (2004) also conducted a meta-analytic analysis of the concepts of transformational and transactional leadership in their study, contributing their insights on the influence of these leadership styles in various contexts. The results of this study are consistent with the fundamental role of transformational leadership as a source of greater employee motivation and commitment, contributing to a healthy and positive work environment.

A study by Wang et al. (2011) reinforces the effectiveness of transformational leadership, demonstrating that this approach is strongly correlated with team and organizational performance, particularly in dynamic and highly competitive contexts. The authors note that transformational leadership serves as a facilitator of organizational adaptation, promoting innovation and continuous learning.

Additionally, recent studies, such as those by Arnold and Connelly (2013), suggest that transformational leadership not only affects performance and innovation but also significantly contributes to the well-being of those being led. By creating a work environment that promotes meaning, autonomy, and a sense of accomplishment, transformational leaders reduce stress and increase job satisfaction.

Therefore, transformational leadership is a holistic and multifaceted approach that positively impacts not only organizational results but also the well-being and individual growth of employees. This perspective remains a crucial pillar for organizations seeking to thrive in an ever-evolving environment.

2.1.2. Transactional Leadership

Burns (1978) also refers to transactional leadership, as opposed to transformational leadership. Transactional leadership is based on an exchange relationship between the respective actors. The focus of this relationship is to achieve the expected results by basing motivation on an explicit exchange agreement, which aims to reward the achievement of the defined goal.

Bass (1985) expanded on the concept of transactional leadership introduced by Burns, describing it as consisting of two main components: contingent reward and management by exception (active or passive). Contingent reward refers to the exchange of rewards for expected performance. Management by exception refers to the supervision of subordinates, focusing on intervention only when problems or deviations arise. This supervision can take two forms: active, where the leader continuously monitors the performance of subordinates to identify failures or errors—that is, they play a proactive role—and passive, which is characterized by the leader’s intervention when errors or failures have already occurred and involves a more reactive approach. These elements make transactional leadership effective in contexts where structure, compliance, and the execution of standardized tasks are essential. Although this author recognizes the value of this leadership style in specific contexts, he argues that because these transactional exchanges are instrumental and limited, they do not promote significant change or deep inspiration.

Although transactional leadership is sometimes seen as limited compared to transformational leadership, studies such as those by Podsakoff et al. (1984) demonstrate that it is particularly effective in short-term situations or routine tasks, where clarity, supervision, and monitoring are essential. In these circumstances, the emphasis on reward and strict supervision contributes to efficiency and the achievement of organizational objectives.

According to Hartog et al. (1997), transactional leadership tends to be more effective in highly regulated organizations or sectors that require strict adherence to rules and procedures. However, the authors note that in environments that require innovation and adaptation, transactional leadership can hinder the development of creativity and emotional commitment among followers.

Nevertheless, Bass and Avolio (1993) argue that transactional leadership should not be seen as antagonistic to transformational leadership but rather as complementary. Effective leaders often combine elements of both approaches to meet immediate requirements while promoting a long-term environment conducive to growth.

Judge and Piccolo (2004) also concluded that transactional leadership is effective in certain situations and contexts but does not have as strong an impact on employees’ intrinsic motivation and does not foster high performance in the long term.

Finally, Burke et al. (2006) emphasize that transactional leadership, when combined with transformational practices, can enhance team performance and cohesion, particularly in situations that necessitate both short-term management and strategic vision.

2.2. Turnover Intentions

Mobley (1977) was one of the first authors to study the process of disengagement from an organization from a psychological perspective. This psychological process, which leads to the effective departure of the employee, is fundamental and must be understood by organizations to identify and mitigate the risks of turnover. This author proposes a decision-making model for leaving, consisting of several stages, culminating in the employee’s effective departure, with the employee’s intent to leave presented as an intermediate stage between experiencing job dissatisfaction and departing. When employees experience dissatisfaction with their work, they begin to consider leaving the organization. From Mobley’s (1977) perspective, this entire reflection process is conscious and directed towards new alternatives, namely job opportunities. According to Tett and Meyer (1993), the intent to leave is a desire to leave the organization, which is influenced by job satisfaction and organizational commitment variables. The authors confirm, as presented in their theoretical model, that job satisfaction is a strong predictor of turnover intentions and that organizational commitment has a mediating effect, whose impact affects both turnover intentions and the likelihood of these intentions being realized. Turnover intentions refer to an employee’s stated desire to leave their organization within a specified period and are often used to study actual employee turnover (Lazzari et al., 2022).

Long et al. (2012) also agree with the approach that job satisfaction, or lack thereof, is one of the elements that has the most significant impact on turnover intentions. Alongside job satisfaction, other essential elements are also considered, such as organizational commitment and leadership, as they influence the bond between the employee and the organization. Once this impact is understood, it is possible to plan strategies that help companies retain employees and, above all, build a healthy and positive environment, which, in turn, fosters their loyalty.

Alongside factors such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and leadership that affect intentions to leave, Hui et al. (2007) also identified cultural and emotional values and positive affectivity as playing a significant role in strengthening an emotional bond with the organization. Cultural and emotional values are components that contribute to the dynamics of understanding turnover intentions. Specifically, in cultures where values such as commitment and group well-being are highly valued, employees are more likely to consider the effects their departure may have on others. Concerning positive affectivity, the fact that employees experience a positive environment also plays a significant role in increasing well-being, job satisfaction, and commitment to the organization. These authors concluded that the impact of these elements on reducing turnover and organizational commitment is relevant for organizational leaders.

Islam et al. (2012) also explore how two organizational factors—learning culture and citizenship behaviors within the organization —impact employees’ intent to leave. An organization that promotes a continuous learning environment and a culture that fosters collaboration and mutual support can reduce turnover intentions.

Leadership and Turnover Intentions

The relationship between leadership and turnover intentions has been widely studied over the years and remains a highly debated topic due to its significant impact on talent retention and, consequently, on reducing turnover intentions.

Several authors have investigated the direct influence of leadership styles on employee behavior and commitment, with practical implications for their intent to leave the organization (Martins et al., 2023; Nunes & Palma-Moreira, 2024; Lopes et al., 2025).

Bass (1990) analyzes how transformational leadership influences turnover intentions and how it can reduce them.

In recent research, Yücel (2021) confirms that transformational leadership has a negative influence on employees’ intentions to leave, as the more they perceive their leaders as inspiring and motivating, the less they desire to seek new opportunities in the market. This study also demonstrates the vital role that this leadership style plays in times of crisis, not only improving employee performance but also promoting retention through the trust that transformational leaders inspire. Transformational leadership also has a significant negative impact on the turnover intentions of new generations of workers, a crucial group for the growth and development of an organization.

It has also been found that transformational leadership should be combined with personal development and autonomy, characteristics of the new generations, who tend to respond positively to a culture of development and feedback, which in turn helps retain these individuals in organizations (Xiong et al., 2023).

Mardiyana et al. (2019) investigated the associations of transformational and transactional leadership with employees’ intentions to leave their organizations. They attempted to determine which of these leadership styles is most effective in promoting loyalty and commitment to the organization. Although both leadership styles have their value, these authors validated transformational leadership as the most effective in increasing performance and organizational commitment, which leads to a reduction in turnover intentions.

In a study conducted by Martins et al. (2023), the authors concluded that leadership (transformational and transactional) has a significant negative association with turnover intentions. This reasoning leads us to formulate the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1:

Leadership (transformational and transactional) has a significant negative association with turnover intentions.

2.3. Well-Being

The concept of well-being has been extensively explored in the academic literature, encompassing a diverse range of approaches. It is based on a multidimensional perspective of the concept of well-being, as presented by Ryff (1989) in her robust model, which challenges traditional definitions of happiness and well-being, which are more closely associated with feelings of pleasure. This author argues in her work that psychological well-being is a complex concept that encompasses deeper and more vital dimensions.

In Seligman’s (2011) model, the author proposes five essential elements that contribute to human well-being, ultimately leading to flourishing personally. The PERMA model illustrates that well-being encompasses not only feelings of happiness but also various factors that contribute to achieving a meaningful and fulfilling life. The five essential elements for human well-being are positive emotions, commitment, relationships, meaning, and fulfillment. By listing these components that impact well-being, Seligman (2011) demonstrates that human beings have other needs that go beyond pleasure.

The article by Ng and Fisher (2013) offers a more comprehensive understanding of the concept of well-being, exploring its complexity and examining it in a multidimensional manner. However, this author presents a view of the contextual experience, not just the individual’s view. For these authors, well-being is influenced by both micro-level factors, such as mental health, and macro-level factors, including the community. External factors, such as a healthy work environment or an inclusive community, can significantly contribute to an individual’s overall well-being. The interaction between various factors and levels must be considered, and interventions must be designed to provide a holistic view and further shape the experience of well-being.

Carr (2023) corroborates the view that the concept of well-being is linked to an external context, stating that working conditions and remuneration influence and play a crucial role in the well-being of employees. In his interpretation of the concept of well-being, this author considers both material factors, such as income and job security, and social factors, including dignity and inclusion. These factors should contribute to their interconnection, resulting in an increase or decrease in the individual’s well-being. The study concludes that social and economic structures have a significant impact on well-being and that implementing policies that promote decent working conditions can have lasting effects on well-being, ultimately improving people’s overall quality of life.

It is essential to recognize the variations in individuals’ perceptions of this concept. Deijl et al. (2023) analyzed the five different conceptions of well-being that they identified in individuals, highlighting both the consensus on the importance of physical and mental well-being and the variation in other factors, such as freedom and social relationships. The five concepts are physical and mental health and well-being; home, with family and home life as the pillars of a good life; freedom and autonomy, prioritizing independence and personal freedom; social relationships and purpose, emphasizing meaningful relationships and activities; and individualism and independence, valuing fulfillment and self-sufficiency.

Employee well-being is a central factor in the work experience, influencing both the perception of leadership and the decision to stay or leave the organization. Wright and Bonett (2007) highlight that psychological well-being is a significant predictor of turnover intentions, demonstrating that employees with high levels of well-being are less likely to leave the organization, even when they have lower levels of job satisfaction.

2.3.1. Leadership and Well-Being

Several academic studies have demonstrated that leadership plays a crucial role in employee well-being, directly impacting various factors, including the work environment, motivation, and psychological health. The conditions created by effective leaders contribute to employees feeling supported, guided, and respected, which in turn promotes a sense of general well-being (Arnold et al., 2007; Bono et al., 2007).

In their study, Lundqvist and Wallo (2023) examine the behaviors of leaders that are crucial to employee performance and well-being. The authors identified six essential leadership behaviors: effective communication; regular feedback and alignment with organizational goals; demonstrating trust and granting autonomy, support, and empathy towards employees; promoting health and well-being; and balancing individual and group needs. This set of leadership behaviors maximizes trust, clarity in communication, and emotional support.

According to Berger et al. (2019), leadership dynamics and their influence on employee well-being impact employee experiences, particularly through job demands and resources. This research is based on the JD-R model, which helps us to understand how different factors in the organizational environment impact employee well-being, and has two fundamental components:

• Job demands.
• Work resources.

This research provided not only a more in-depth analysis of the interaction between leadership and workplace characteristics and their impact on employees but also relevant insights from a practical perspective.

Burger et al. (2023) examine how leadership from a positive perspective influences employee well-being in contexts characterized by rapid economic and social changes. The associations of this type of leadership, specifically transformational leadership, are evident in building a solid foundation of trust, which helps increase well-being and reduce turnover intentions. This is mainly because employees feel that their development and well-being are a priority.

Fernet et al. (2015) show that the results of their study suggest that transformational leaders not only inspire high performance but also promote intrinsic motivation and psychological well-being. The following hypothesis is therefore formulated:

Hypothesis 2:

Leadership (transformational and transactional) has a positive and significant association with well-being.

2.3.2. Well-Being and Turnover Intentions

Several studies indicate that psychological well-being not only improves the quality of life at work but is also a determining factor in turnover intentions. Several aspects, including social support, purpose at work, and a set of individual characteristics (such as resilience and optimism), stand out as vital factors.

Fredrickson (1998) presents the Broaden and Build theory, emphasizing the importance of positive emotions such as joy, interest, love, and contentment, which build lasting personal resources that can be utilized in the present or saved for the future, thereby enhancing coping mechanisms in situations of stress and anxiety. These positive emotions not only promote immediate well-being but also have long-term effects. In a work context, it has been proven that when employees experience high levels of well-being, they tend to remain with the organization.

The study by Amin and Akbar (2013) also demonstrates that psychological well-being is directly related to a decrease in employee turnover intentions, which is supported by effective stress management and psychological support. This research suggests that promoting well-being through mental health and emotional support programs can significantly reduce turnover intentions and enhance organizational performance. The following hypothesis is therefore formulated:

Hypothesis 3:

Well-being has a significant and negative association with turnover intentions.

2.3.3. Leadership, Well-Being, and Turnover Intentions

The field of organizational psychology has extensively explored the relationship between leadership, well-being, and turnover intentions, highlighting the significant contributions these variables make to organizational performance and talent retention.

Rafferty and Griffin (2004) analyze the leadership model proposed by Bass and Avolio (1993) and propose adding new dimensions to this model to address gaps in the specificity of certain areas. In this research, the authors present five new, more practical, and measurable sub-dimensions: articulating a vision, inspirational communication, intellectual stimulation, leadership support, and personal recognition. The results demonstrated significant relationships and very powerful practical applications. Organizations should provide their leaders with training in skills such as clear communication, regular feedback, and personal development support, which in turn promotes a healthy working environment, thereby contributing to a reduction in turnover intentions. As far as leaders are concerned, they should combine inspiration and motivation with concrete actions that support the development and growth of employees.

The longitudinal study by Lindert et al. (2023) makes a significant contribution to understanding how leadership influences well-being over time, specifically examining the impact of transformational leadership on employees’ mental health and its role in enhancing well-being and promoting employee retention.

Leadership (transformational and transactional) enhances employee well-being (Berger et al., 2019), reducing their turnover intentions (Amin & Akbar, 2013). This reasoning leads us to conclude that well-being is the mechanism that explains the relationship between leadership and turnover intentions, formulating the following hypothesis:

Hypothesis 4:

Well-being has a mediating effect on the relationship between leadership and turnover intentions.

The literature review conducted above justifies the study of the association of leadership (both transformational and transactional) with turnover intentions, as well as whether well-being serves as the mechanism that explains this relationship. The model presented in Figure 1 summarizes these relationships and the hypotheses formulated in this study.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Research Design

The primary objective of this research was to investigate whether leadership (both transformational and transactional) exhibited a negative and significant association with turnover intentions, and whether this association was mediated by employee well-being.

Once the research hypotheses had been formulated, it was decided that an exploratory study with a quantitative methodology would be conducted, as we intended to describe and explain a phenomenon (Vilelas, 2025). This study is also cross-sectional, as it aimed to describe and analyze this phenomenon in the present day (Trochim, 2000).

As it was not possible to survey the entire Portuguese working-age population, a technique was used that allowed for the construction of a small sample of this universe and which, according to Pardal and Lopes (2011), is the technique that, if well-constructed, will enable us to replace the universe under analysis with a sample with a reasonable degree of certainty, thanks to its descriptive, correlational nature.

The snowball method was used for this purpose, as indicated by Ragab and Arisha (2017), which makes it easier for the researcher to quickly reach participants who are closest to them, inviting them to participate and expand the study to other individuals.

3.2. Data Collection Procedure

This study involved the voluntary participation of 306 individuals, all of whom worked in organizations based in Portugal.

The questionnaire was made available online through the Google Forms platform and disseminated through LinkedIn and emails sent to the researchers’ contacts. At the beginning of the questionnaire, participants had access to the informed consent form, ensuring the confidentiality of their responses. Next, a question assessed their agreement to participate in the study: those who answered “no” were automatically directed to the end of the questionnaire. In contrast, those who answered “yes” proceeded to the next section.

The questionnaire included sociodemographic questions and four scales designed to assess transformational leadership, transactional leadership, turnover intentions, and well-being. Data were collected between December 2024 and February 2025.

3.3. Participants

The sample for this study consists of 306 participants who voluntarily contributed to this study and were aged between 19 and 71 years, with an average age of 41.32 years and a standard deviation of 10.43. In terms of gender, 59.2% (n = 181) of respondents were female, and 40.8% (n = 125) were male. In terms of marital status, most participants were married or in a civil partnership (57.8%; n = 177), while 32.7% (n = 100) were single and 9.5% (n = 29) were divorced or separated. In terms of educational attainment, 42.5% (n = 130) had a bachelor’s degree, 40.2% (n = 123) had a master’s degree or higher, and 17.3% (n = 53) had an educational level equal to or lower than the 12th grade. The geographical distribution of the sample shows that most participants lived in the Greater Lisbon area (61.8%; n = 189). The remaining regions are represented as follows: South (13.4%; n = 41), Center (12.4%; n = 38), North (10.8%; n = 33), Autonomous Region of the Azores (1.0%; n = 3), and Autonomous Region of Madeira (0.7%; n = 2). Concerning the length of service in the organization, 28.1% (n = 86) of participants had been working in their current organization for up to 2 years, 23.5% (n = 72) between 3 and 5 years, 19.0% (n = 58) between 6 and 10 years, and 29.4% (n = 90) for more than 10 years. In terms of seniority in the role, 25.8% (n = 79) had been in their current role for up to 2 years, 21.2% (n = 65) between 3 and 5 years, 22.2% (n = 68) between 6 and 10 years, and 30.7% (n = 94) for more than 10 years. As for the type of contract, most participants had a permanent contract (69.9%; n = 214). The remainder is distributed among fixed-term contracts (11.1%; n = 34), indefinite-term contracts (9.5%; n = 29), and other types of employment relationships (9.5%; n = 29). In terms of sector of activity, 80.7% (n = 247) of respondents worked in the private sector, 15.0% (n = 46) in the public sector, and 4.2% (n = 13) in a mixed (public/private) regime. Finally, 38.9% (n = 119) of participants held management positions, while 61.1% (n = 187) did not perform leadership roles.

3.4. Data Analysis Procedure

After the collection stage, the data were entered into SPSS Statistics 30 software for subsequent analysis. The first step was to evaluate the metric qualities of the instruments used in this study. To assess the validity of the instruments, confirmatory factor analyses were performed using AMOS Graphics 30 software. Confirmatory factor analyses were chosen, as all the instruments used in this study have been extensively tested and their factor structures are well known. The procedure followed a “model generation” logic (Jöreskog & Sörbom, 1993), considering the results obtained interactively when analyzing their fit: for chi-square (χ²/df) ≤ 5, for the Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI) > 0.90, for the Goodness Fit Index (GFI) > 0.90, for the Comparative Fit Index (CFI) > 0.90, for the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) ≤ 0.08 (MacCallum et al., 1996), and for the root mean square residual (RMSR), and a lower value corresponds to a better fit (Hu & Bentler, 1999). After performing the confirmatory factor analysis and obtaining the data, the reliability of the construct was calculated for each dimension of each instrument, with a value of greater than 0.70 being considered acceptable. To test convergent validity, the average variance extracted (AVE) was calculated, which should be greater than 0.50 (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). However, values above 0.40 can be accepted if the Cronbach’s alpha value of the instrument is greater than 0.70 (Hair et al., 2011). The discriminant validity of each factor of the instruments was tested by comparing the square root of the AVE values and the correlation values between the factors. The square root of the AVE must be greater than the correlation value between the factors.

The internal consistency of the instruments was verified using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, whose value ranges from 0 to 1, with negative values being discarded (Hill & Hill, 2002). A coefficient greater than 0.70 is considered the minimum acceptable in organizational research (Bryman & Cramer, 2003). In addition, the sensitivity of the instruments was analyzed by calculating measures of central tendency, dispersion, and distribution for the items on the scales, allowing for the normality of the data for all items and scales to be assessed.

The scale items presented responses distributed across the entire range of the scale, avoiding excessive concentration at the extremes. Additionally, the limits established for the absolute values of asymmetry (<2) and kurtosis (<7) were respected, as recommended by Finney and DiStefano (2013). After these steps, a descriptive statistical analysis was performed to characterize the sample and the variables under study.

Next, following the recommendations of Podsakoff et al. (2003), two confirmatory factor analysis models were tested: one with a single factor and the other with four factors, to determine whether the theoretical conceptualization, which identified four variables, adequately represents the observed data.

The descriptive statistics of the variables under study were performed using Student’s T-tests for a sample. To study the association of sociodemographic variables with the variables under study, Student’s T-tests were performed for independent samples when the independent variable consisted of two groups, and one-way ANOVA tests were performed when the independent variable consisted of more than two groups. Pearson correlations were used to study the association between the variables under study. The research hypotheses were tested using Path Analysis performed in AMOS Graphics 30 software, considering a significance level of 0.05. This approach allowed us to examine the relationships between the variables and assess the statistical significance of the proposed hypotheses. It also allowed us to test the hypotheses by differentiating the results for participants who hold a management position from those who do not. The use of robust statistical analysis methods ensured a detailed understanding of the patterns and associations present in the collected data, contributing to a more in-depth interpretation of the results.

3.5. Instruments

Leadership was measured using an adapted version of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (Bass, 1985), which was adapted for the Portuguese population by Salanova et al. (2011). In brief, the scale comprises 28 items, divided into two subscales: transformational leadership and transactional leadership. Transformational leadership consists of five dimensions: idealized attributes (items 1, 2, 3, and 4); idealized behaviors (items 5, 6, 7, and 8); Inspirational Motivation (items 9, 10, 11, and 12); Intellectual Stimulation (items 13, 14, 15, and 16); Individualized Consideration (items 17, 18, 19, and 20). Transactional leadership consists of two dimensions: Contingent Rewards (items 21, 22, 23, and 24) and Management by Active Exception (items 25, 26, 27, and 28). The items are organized on a five-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 “Never” to 5 “Frequently if not always”).

To test the validity of the transformational leadership subscale, a confirmatory factor analysis with five factors was initially performed. However, the factors were strongly correlated with each other, so a new factor analysis with one factor was conducted. The adjustment indices obtained were adequate (χ²/gl = 2.13; GFI = 0.91; CFI = 0.98; TLI = 0.97; RMSEA = 0.061; SRMR = 0.040). All items have factor weights greater than 0.70. This instrument has a composite reliability of 0.98. In terms of convergent validity, it has an AVE of 0.71. In terms of internal consistency, it has a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.97.

For the transformational leadership subscale, a two-factor confirmatory factor analysis was performed, but the fit indices were not adequate (χ²/gl = 7.42; GFI = 0.91; CFI = 0.93; TLI = 0.89; RMSEA = 0.145; SRMR = 0.086). A new confirmatory factor analysis with one factor was performed, and this time, the adjustment indices proved adequate (χ²/gl = 2.01; GFI = 0.98; CFI = 0.99; TLI = 0.98; RMSEA = 0.058; SRMR = 0.026). All items have factor weights greater than 0.50. Composite reliability has a value of 0.87, and convergent validity has a mean value of 0.51. Internal consistency has a Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.89.

To measure well-being, the PERMA Profiler scale was used, developed by Butler and Kern (2015) and adapted to the Portuguese population by Alves et al. (2023), consisting of 23 items. In this study, only 16 items were used, as the dimensions of “health” and “negative emotions” were not used. The 16 items used are divided into five dimensions: meaning (items 1, 9, and 17); fulfillment (items 2, 8, and 16); engagement (items 3, 11, and 21); positive emotions (items 5, 10, and 22); relationships (items 6, 15, and 19). The item happiness (item 23) was added to these dimensions. According to the authors of this instrument, well-being is calculated by averaging the scores of these 16 items. Participants were asked to respond using an 11-point Likert scale ranging from “0” to “10”.

A confirmatory factor analysis with five factors was initially performed; however, as these factors were strongly correlated with each other, a new confirmatory factor analysis with a single factor was conducted. The fit indices of the confirmatory factor analysis with one factor were adequate (χ²/gl = 2.90; GFI = 0.91; CFI = 0.98; TLI = 0.96; RMSEA = 0.079; SRMR = 0.105). All items have factor weights greater than 0.60. A composite reliability of 0.97 was obtained. Regarding convergent validity, the AVE is 0.71. For internal consistency, a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.97 was obtained.

Turnover intentions were measured using the instrument developed by Bozeman and Perrewé (2001), adapted for the Portuguese population by Bártolo-Ribeiro (2018), which consists of six items classified on a five-point scale (from 1, “Does not apply to me at all”, to 5, “Applies completely to me”).

A confirmatory factor analysis was performed on one factor, and the fit indices were found to be adequate (χ²/gl = 2.96; GFI = 0.98; CFI = 0.99; TLI = 0.98; RMSEA = 0.080; SRMR = 0.049). All items have factor weights greater than 0.60. A composite reliability of 0.89 was obtained. Regarding convergent validity, the AVE is 0.63. For internal consistency, a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.92 was obtained.

All items have responses across all points. No item has a median constrained to one of the extremes. As for the absolute values of asymmetry and kurtosis, all items have values below 2 and 7, respectively, which indicates that they do not grossly violate normality (Finney & DiStefano, 2013).

4. Results

Two models were initially tested: one with a single factor and one with four factors. The fit indices obtained in the one-factor model were not adequate (χ²/gl = 7.71; GFI = 0.26; CFI = 0.52; TLI = 0.48; RMSEA = 0.148; SMRM = 0.641). After performing confirmatory factor analysis with four factors, the fit indices proved adequate or close to adequate values (χ²/gl = 1.74; GFI = 0.81; CFI = 0.95; TLI = 0.95; RMSEA = 0.049; SMRM = 0.119). These results enable us to conclude that the theoretical conceptualization, which identified four variables, adequately represents the observed data. The correlations are consistent with the theorized pattern of relationships.

4.1. Descriptive Statistics of the Variables Under Study

Descriptive statistics were performed on the variables under study to understand the position of the responses given by the participants in this study.

The analysis revealed significant trends in the participants’ perceptions.

Transformational leadership had an average score of 3.68, above the midpoint (3). These values suggest that participants perceive the leadership exercised in the organization as predominantly transformational, characterized by inspiration, motivation, and employee development (

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the variables under study.

Variable	t	df	p	d	Mean	SD
Transformational Leadership	12.89 ***	305	<0.001	0.74	3.68	0.92
Transactional Leadership	6.02 ***	305	<0.001	0.34	3.31	0.91
Turnover Intentions	−7.58 ***	305	<0.001	0.43	2.50	1.14
Well-being	22.31 ***	305	<0.001	1.28	7.17	0.10

Note. *** p < 0.001.

).

Transactional leadership, although scoring an average of 3.31, which is above the midpoint (3), is lower than transformational leadership, indicating that participants recognize the presence of transactional practices, but to a lesser extent than transformational ones (Table 1).

Regarding turnover intentions, the average score was 2.50, which is below the midpoint (3). These results indicate that, in general, participants do not express high intentions to leave the organization, which may be related to their positive perception of leadership, especially transformational leadership (Table 1).

Finally, the well-being variable had the highest values in the analysis, with an average of 7.17, above the midpoint (5). This suggests that participants perceive their well-being quite positively, which may be associated with the predominant leadership style and the organizational environment (Table 1).

In summary, the results indicate that participants perceive transformational leadership as more present than transactional leadership, which may contribute to greater well-being and lower intentions to leave the organization.

4.2. Association of Sociodemographic Variables with the Variables Under Study

To test the association of sociodemographic variables with the variables under study, T-tests for independent samples were used when the independent variable consisted of two groups, and one-way ANOVA tests were used when the independent variable consisted of more than two groups. For age, as it was a quantitative variable, Pearson correlations were used. It should be noted that only results considered statistically significant will be presented.

Gender, marital status, educational qualifications, length of service, and sector of activity do not have a significant association with the variables under study.

Whether or not the participant is a manager has no significant association with the perception of transformational leadership, transactional leadership, and well-being (

Table 2. Results of the association of management/non-management with the variables under study.

Variable	t	df	p	d	Not a Manager		Manager
					Mean	SD	Mean	SD
Transformational Leadership	−3.94 ***	304	<0.001	0.46	3.51	0.95	3.93	0.80
Transactional Leadership	−3.34 ***	304	<0.001	0.39	3.18	0.93	3.53	0.84
Well-being	−2.02 *	304	0.048	0.24	7.01	1.63	7.41	1.78

Note. * p < 0.05; *** p < 0.001.

).

Regarding the region of Portugal where the participants worked, there is a significant association with the perception of transformational leadership and transactional leadership. Participants working in the southern region had a higher perception of transformational leadership than participants working in the Greater Lisbon region and the central region (

Table 3. The association of the region where the participants worked with the variables under study.

Variable	One-Way ANOVA		Region A	Region B	Tukey HSD
	F	p			Mean Difference (A–B)	p
Transformational Leadership	3.27 **	0.007	South Region	Greater Lisbon Region	0.47 *	0.046
				Center region	0.59 *	0.033
Transactional Leadership	2.80 *	0.017	South Region	Greater Lisbon Region	0.47 *	0.028

Note. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.

). A significant association was also observed in the perception of transactional leadership. Participants from the southern region had significantly higher averages in their perception of transactional leadership than participants from the Greater Lisbon region (Table 3).

The variable “Seniority in the Organization” proved to have a statistically significant association with participants’ turnover intentions. This analysis revealed that participants with 3 to 5 years of seniority in the organization showed significantly higher intent to leave compared to those with more than 10 years of seniority in the organization (

Table 4. Association of seniority in the organization with the variables under study.

Variable	One-Way ANOVA		Seniority in the Organization A	Seniority in the Organization B	Tukey HSD
	F	p			Mean Difference (A–B)	p
Turnover Intentions	4.59 **	0.004	3 to 5 years	More than 10 years	0.64 **	0.002

Note. ** p < 0.01.

).

Regarding the perception of transformational leadership among groups with different types of contracts, the one-way ANOVA test revealed a significant difference. Participants with fixed-term contracts exhibited a significantly lower perception of transformational leadership compared to those with other types of contracts. For participants with other types of contracts, transformational leadership was perceived as more effective and more present in the workplace (

Table 5. The association of contract type with the variables under study.

Variable	One-Way ANOVA		Contract A	Contract B	Tukey HSD
	F	p			Mean Difference (A–B)	p
Transformational Leadership	3.28 *	0.021	Other	Fixed-term	0.73 *	0.013
Transactional Leadership	3.30 *	0.021	Other	Fixed-term	0.69 *	0.018
Well-being	5.34 **	0.001	Open-ended	Fixed-term	0.95 *	0.022
			Other		1.74 ***	<0.001

Note. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.

).

The transactional leadership variable also had a significant association, meaning that participants’ perceptions of this leadership style differed according to the type of contract they had. Participants with fixed-term contracts had a lower perception of transactional leadership compared to participants with other types of contracts (Table 5).

The one-way ANOVA test showed that the variable “Contract” has a significant association with the well-being of participants. The perception of well-being varies according to the type of contract participants have. Participants with fixed-term contracts reported significantly lower well-being compared to those with permanent contracts. However, participants with other types of contracts reported higher perceptions of well-being than participants with fixed-term contracts.

Participants with other types of contracts, such as permanent contracts, may experience greater autonomy and job satisfaction due to the stability of their contracts (Table 5).

Concerning the age of participants, this is negatively and significantly correlated with turnover intentions (r = −0.12, p = 0.040), indicating that older participants are less likely to intend to leave the organization.

4.3. Association Between the Variables Under Study

To analyze the association between the variables under study, Pearson correlations were calculated, enabling us to understand how the variables relate to each other and whether these relationships are statistically significant.

Transformational leadership has a positive and significant correlation with employee well-being, indicating that the greater the perception of transformational leadership, the greater the well-being of participants tends to be. This reinforces the idea that a more inspiring and motivating leadership style is associated with a healthier and more satisfying environment for employees (

Table 6. Association between the variables under study.

	1.1	1.2	2	3
1.1. Transformational Leadership	--
1.2. Transactional Leadership	0.78 ***	--
2. Well-being	0.41 ***	0.36 ***	--
3. Turnover Intentions	−0.38 ***	−0.24 ***	−0.19 ***	--

Note. *** p < 0.001.

).

Transactional leadership also exhibits a significant but negative correlation with well-being, indicating that although the transactional style may contribute to some level of structure and predictability in the work environment, its impact on employee well-being is less pronounced than that of transformational leadership (Table 6).

Transformational leadership is negatively and significantly correlated with turnover intentions, indicating that the more employees perceive their leader as transformational, the less likely they are to leave the organization. This suggests that a leader who motivates, inspires, and supports employees can reduce their propensity to leave the organization (Table 6).

Transactional leadership, in turn, also shows a negative correlation, albeit not as significant, with turnover intentions. This indicates that transactional practices may have a slight impact on employee retention, but their influence is less significant than that of transformational leadership (Table 6).

Well-being has a weak negative correlation with turnover intentions, suggesting that employees who perceive a higher level of well-being tend to have lower intentions to leave the company. However, this relationship is relatively weak (Table 6).

The results indicate that transformational leadership has a more significant impact on promoting well-being and reducing employee turnover intentions compared to transactional leadership. Thus, organizational strategies that encourage transformational leadership practices can contribute to a more positive work environment and talent retention.

4.4. Hypotheses

The hypotheses formulated in this study were tested using Path Analysis in AMOS Graphics 30 software. This software enabled us to test the hypotheses with the total population. Then, the hypotheses were further tested for both participants who held management positions and those who did not. When using the total sample, it is evident that transformational leadership has a significant negative association with turnover intentions (β = −0.38; p < 0.001), and the model explains 15% of the variability in turnover intentions (

Table 7. Association of leadership with turnover intentions.

Participants	Independent Variable	Dependent Variable	Z	β	R2	p
Total	Transformational Leadership	Turnover Intentions	−7.27 ***	−0.38 ***	0.15	<0.001
Manager			−4.30 ***	−0.37 ***	0.14	<0.001
Not a Manager			−5.72 ***	−0.39 ***	0.15	<0.001
Total	Transactional Leadership		−4.28 ***	−0.24 ***	0.06	<0.001
Manager			−2.10 *	−0.19 *	0.04	0.035
Not a Manager			−3.55 ***	−0.25 ***	0.06	<0.001

Note. * p < 0.05; *** p < 0.001.

).

It was also found that for participants who held management positions (β = −0.37; p < 0.001) and those who did not hold management positions (β = −0.39; p < 0.001), transformational leadership had a negative and significant association with turnover intentions (Table 7). When participants hold a managerial position, the model explained 14% of the variability in turnover intentions, whereas when participants do not hold a managerial position, this explanation increases to 15% (Table 7).

For the total sample, transactional leadership has a negative and statistically significant association with turnover intentions (β = −0.24; p < 0.001), accounting for 6% of the variability in turnover intentions (Table 7).

It was also found that for participants who held a managerial position (β = −0.19; p = 0.035) and participants who did not hold a managerial position (β = −0.25; p < 0.001), transactional leadership had a negative and significant association with turnover intentions (Table 7). When participants hold a managerial position, this accounts for 4% of the variability in turnover intentions, and when participants do not hold a managerial position, this explanation accounts for 6% (Table 7). The results support this hypothesis.

The results for the total sample indicate that transformational leadership has a positive and significant association with well-being (β = 0.41, p < 0.001), and the model explains 17% of the variability in well-being (

Table 8. Association of leadership with well-being.

Participants	Independent Variable	Dependent Variable	Z	β	R2	p
Total	Transformational Leadership	Well-being	7.80 ***	0.41 ***	0.17	<0.001
Manager			3.96 ***	0.34 ***	0.12	<0.001
Not a Manager			6.49 ***	0.43 ***	0.19	<0.001
Total	Transactional Leadership		6.69 ***	0.36 ***	0.13	<0.001
Manager			2.95 **	0.26 **	0.07	0.003
Not a Manager			5.91 ***	0.40 ***	0.16	<0.001

Note. ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.

).

It was also found that for both participants who held management positions (β = 0.34; p < 0.001) and those who did not hold management positions (β = 0.43; p < 0.001), transformational leadership had a positive and significant association with well-being (Table 8).

When participants held a managerial position, the model explained 12% of the variability in well-being, whereas when participants did not hold a managerial position, this explanation increased to 19% (Table 8).

For the total sample, transactional leadership has a positive and significant association with well-being (β = 0.24; p < 0.001), and the model explains 13% of the variability in well-being (Table 8).

For participants who held management positions (β = 0.26; p = 0.003) and those who did not hold management positions (β = 0.40; p < 0.001), transactional leadership had a positive and significant association with well-being (Table 8).

When participants held a managerial position, this accounted for 7% of the variability in well-being, whereas when participants did not hold a managerial position, this explanation accounted for 16% (Table 8).

The results support hypothesis 2.

For all participants, it was found that well-being has a significant negative association with turnover intentions (β = −0.19; p < 0.001) and that the model explains 4% of the variability in turnover intentions (

Table 9. Association of well-being with turnover intentions.

Participants	Independent Variable	Dependent Variable	Z	β	R2	p
Total	Well-being	Turnover Intentions	−3.39 ***	−0.19 ***	0.04	<0.001
Manager			−2.54 *	−0.22 *	0.05	0.011
Not a Manager			−2.14 *	−0.16 *	0.02	0.033

Note. * p < 0.05; *** p < 0.001.

).

It was also found that for participants in management positions (β = −0.22; p = 0.011) and those not in management positions (β = −0.16; p < 0.001), well-being has a negative and significant association with turnover intentions (Table 9).

When participants hold a management position, the model explains 5% of the variability in turnover intentions, and when participants do not hold a management position, this explanation is 2% (Table 9).

The results support hypothesis 3.

Considering that hypothesis 4 assumed a mediating effect, the conditions proposed by Baron and Kenny (1986) were tested. These conditions were verified in hypotheses 1, 2, and 3.

For all participants, the results indicate that well-being does not mediate the relationship between transformational leadership and turnover intentions (

Table 10. The mediating effect of well-being on the relationship between transformational leadership and turnover intentions.

Participants	Independent Variables	Dependent Variable	Z	β	R2	p
Total	Transformational Leadership	Turnover Intentions	−6.36 ***	−0.37 ***	0.15	<0.001
	Well-being		−0.70	−0.04		0.483
Manager	Transformational Leadership		−3.64 ***	−0.33 ***	0.15	<0.001
	Well-being		−1.27	−0.12		0.204
Not a Manager	Transformational Leadership		−5.24 ***	−0.23 ***	0.15	<0.001
	Well-being		−0.18	−0.07		0.859

Note. *** p < 0.001.

).

When analyzing the results for participants in management positions and those not in management positions, it was also found that well-being does not mediate the relationship between transformational leadership and turnover intentions (Table 10).

The mediating effect of well-being on the relationship between transformational leadership and turnover intentions is not verified since the effect of well-being on turnover intentions is not significant (Table 10).

For all participants, the results indicate that well-being has a partial mediating effect on the relationship between transactional leadership and turnover intentions, as the effect of transactional leadership on turnover intentions remained significant but decreased in intensity when the mediating variable was introduced in the model (β1 = −0.24; β = −0.20) (

Table 11. The mediating effect of well-being on the relationship between transactional leadership and turnover intentions.

Participants	Independent Variables	Dependent Variable	Z	β	R2	p
Total	Transactional Leadership	Turnover Intentions	−3.29 ***	−0.20 ***	0.07	<0.001
	Well-being		−2.05 *	−0.12 *		0.041
Manager	Transactional Leadership		−1.52	−0.14	0.07	0.128
	Well-being		−2.08 *	−0.19 *		0.038
Not a Manager	Transactional Leadership		−2.93 **	−0.23 **	0.07	0.003
	Well-being		−0.84	−0.07		0.401

Note. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.

). The model explains 7% of the variability in turnover intentions.

For participants in management positions, well-being had a total mediating effect on the relationship between transactional leadership and turnover intentions (Table 11). When the mediating variable is included in the model, transactional leadership no longer has a significant effect on turnover intentions (Table 11). The model explains 7% of the variability in turnover intentions.

For participants who did not hold management positions, well-being does not have a total mediating effect on the relationship between transactional leadership and turnover intentions since the effect of well-being on turnover intentions was not significant.

The results partially support this hypothesis.

5. Discussion

This study aimed to investigate the association of leadership (both transformational and transactional) with turnover intentions and whether this relationship was mediated by employee well-being.

As expected, hypothesis 1 was confirmed. For all participants, transformational leadership and transactional leadership have a significant negative association with turnover intentions. These results align with the study by Walumbwa et al. (2008), which demonstrated that transformational leadership is associated with higher levels of organizational commitment, which in turn reduces the likelihood of employees’ intentions to leave. Similarly, Avolio et al. (1999) found evidence that both transformational and transactional leadership are negatively related to intentional turnover, suggesting that effective leadership styles play a crucial role in talent retention. The association of transformational leadership with turnover intentions is stronger than the association of transactional leadership. These results are also in line with the existing literature, as they are consistent with the findings reported in the study by Martins et al. (2023).

It should be noted, however, that for participants who do not hold a management position, when compared to those who do, both transformational and transactional leadership have a more substantial reducing association with turnover intentions. One explanation for this difference may be related to the fact that employees who do not hold a management position are focused on the possibility of promotion, which, according to Hamstra et al. (2011), can have a more substantial association with reducing turnover intentions. These results reinforce the idea that inspiring and motivating leaders who recognize employee performance contribute to their retention within the organization.

Hypothesis 2, which considers that for all participants, transformational leadership and transactional leadership have a positive and significant association with employee well-being, was confirmed by the results obtained in this study, revealing the importance of leadership styles in promoting psychologically healthy organizational contexts. Specifically, the data showed that transformational leadership explains 17% of the variability in participants’ well-being, while transactional leadership accounts for 13%, with both models being statistically significant. However, the association of leadership (both transformational and transactional) with well-being is stronger for participants who do not hold a management position than for those who do. These results corroborate a broad theoretical basis that supports the relationship between effective leadership behaviors and indicators of psychological health at work.

Transformational leadership, characterized by behaviors such as charisma, motivational inspiration, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration (Bass & Riggio, 2006), has been consistently associated with increased job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and subjective well-being. According to Arnold et al. (2007), transformational leaders can foster a sense of purpose and meaning at work by promoting an environment that values personal growth and recognizes individual competencies. This type of leadership positively influences well-being by satisfying fundamental psychological needs, such as autonomy, competence, and interpersonal relationships, as described in self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000).

Although transactional leadership is often perceived as more focused on supervision, control, and the contingent exchange of rewards, it can also play a significant role in promoting well-being. By setting clear expectations, recognizing performance, and offering proportionate rewards, this leadership style contributes to predictability and perceived fairness in the workplace (Judge & Piccolo, 2004). These elements have been identified as protective factors for workers’ psychological health, reducing role ambiguity and organizational stress (Skakon et al., 2010).

Empirical confirmation of the hypothesis, therefore, reinforces the idea that different leadership styles can act complementarily in building positive work contexts. While transformational leadership may be more effective in inspiring and intrinsically motivating employees, transactional leadership provides the structure and incentives necessary for stability and performance. Thus, adopting leadership practices that integrate elements of both styles can be an effective strategy for promoting employee well-being, contributing not only to organizational health but also to talent retention and sustained performance.

Finally, it is worth noting that the literature on leadership (transformational and transactional) primarily focuses on the impact that supervisors’ leadership has on followers, influencing their performance, attitudes, and well-being, rather than the effect of implementing these leadership styles on the leaders themselves (Arnold & Connelly, 2013).

As expected, hypothesis 3 was confirmed, which stated that well-being has a statistically significant negative association with turnover intentions. When comparing participants who hold management positions with those who do not, the association of well-being with turnover intentions is more substantial, playing a greater role in reducing turnover. This finding aligns with the existing academic literature, which consistently demonstrates this relationship.

Several studies have shown that higher levels of well-being at work are associated with a lower propensity for employees to consider leaving the organization. According to Wright and Bonett (2007), employee well-being is negatively correlated with turnover intention, with well-being acting as a protective factor against the desire to leave, even when other adverse organizational factors are present. Similarly, Warr’s (2002) model, which addresses psychological well-being in an organizational context, suggests that employees who are satisfied with their work experience less stress and greater personal fulfillment, which reduces the likelihood of them seeking alternatives in the labor market. Furthermore, studies such as those by Schaufeli and Bakker (2004) highlight that positive psychological states, including vigor, dedication, and absorption, which are components of work engagement, are associated with lower intentions to leave.

For Nair et al. (2024), employee experience has a positive association with well-being and a negative association with turnover intentions. Participants in management positions may have more experience than those who are not in management. This may explain why the association of well-being with turnover intentions is more substantial for participants in management positions. In this sense, the results obtained in this present study, which reveal that well-being explains 4% of the variability in turnover intentions, reinforce the understanding that investing in promoting employee well-being is an effective strategy for increasing retention and mitigating turnover, especially in competitive and demanding organizational contexts.

Finally, data analysis reveals that hypothesis 4, which stated that well-being mediates the relationship between leadership styles and turnover intentions, was only partially confirmed. More specifically, well-being did not significantly mediate the relationship between transformational leadership and turnover intentions, but it did mediate the relationship between transactional leadership and these same intentions. These results are particularly relevant to the literature on the psychosocial mechanisms by which leadership influences employee behavior.

The fact that transformational leadership does not show significant mediation through well-being may be related to the inspiring and motivational nature of this style, which acts directly on organizational commitment and the meaning of work (Bass & Riggio, 2006), directly influencing intentions to stay without necessarily depending on well-being as a mediating variable. As shown in the results, the relationship between transformational leadership and turnover intentions is powerful, accounting for a significant portion of the explanatory power. Previous studies corroborate this line of thinking by showing that transformational leadership is strongly associated with reduced intentions to leave due to the strengthening of the affective bond with the organization (Avolio et al., 2009), regardless of momentary levels of well-being. Another reason why this mediating effect was not observed may be related to the fact that the association between transformational leadership is the strongest, while the weakest association is between well-being and turnover intentions.

On the other hand, for all participants, transactional leadership has been shown to partially mediate well-being, suggesting that this style influences turnover intentions both directly and indirectly through its impact on employees’ perception of well-being. For participants in management positions, well-being has a full mediating effect on the relationship between transactional leadership and turnover intentions. In contrast, for participants not in management positions, this mediating effect was not significant.

According to Judge and Piccolo (2004), although transactional leadership is often associated with more instrumental and conditional practices, it can contribute positively to emotional stability and perceptions of fairness. These elements are closely linked to work well-being (Warr, 2002). Thus, when employees perceive that their contributions are recognized and rewarded appropriately, there is an increase in well-being, which in turn decreases the intent to leave. This dynamic explains the results observed in this present study, which are also confirmed by the Sobel test, demonstrating a statistically significant mediating effect.

In summary, the results of this study reinforce the relationships between leadership styles, well-being, and turnover intention, highlighting that well-being acts as a relevant mechanism, especially in transactional leadership. In contrast, in the case of transformational leadership, the associations with the intent to remain in the organization operate through more direct channels, linked to intrinsic motivation and emotional attachment to the organization. The association of transformational leadership with turnover intentions and well-being is stronger than that of transactional leadership, a finding consistent with the existing literature (Abbas & Ali, 2023; Klein, 2023).

Regarding the descriptive statistics of the variables under study, the results indicate a predominantly positive perception among participants regarding leadership and the organizational environment. Transformational leadership was the most valued variable, indicating a marked presence of inspiring, motivational, and employee development-oriented behaviors. Transactional leadership, although also rated positively, ranks slightly below transformational leadership. Regarding turnover intentions, the average of 2.50 indicates a reduced tendency towards turnover, possibly influenced by the positive perception of transformational leadership. Well-being, on the other hand, scored above the midpoint, reflecting a general feeling of satisfaction and emotional balance among participants. Taken together, these results suggest a positive association between transformational leadership, employee well-being, and their intent to remain in the organization.

Regarding the association of sociodemographic variables with the variables under study, gender, marital status, educational qualifications, length of service, and sector of activity did not have a significant association.

The hierarchical status of participants, specifically their management positions, proved to be a factor with a statistically significant impact on the perception of the variables under analysis: transformational leadership, transactional leadership, and well-being. The data suggest that employees in leadership positions evaluate both the leadership styles practiced in the organization and their well-being more positively. This association can be explained, in part, by these professionals’ proximity to decision-making processes, their greater autonomy and influence in their daily work, and the likelihood that they recognize themselves in the leadership behaviors analyzed, specifically the characteristics associated with transformational leadership. This result reinforces the importance of considering organizational position as a relevant moderating variable in the analysis of leadership perception and its effects on workplace well-being.

The geographical region in which participants carry out their professional activity in Portugal has a statistically significant association with the perception of transformational and transactional leadership styles. Participants working in the South region report higher levels of perceived transformational leadership than their peers in the Greater Lisbon and Center regions, suggesting that in this area of the country, leaders are seen as more inspiring, motivating, and oriented towards the development of their teams. Similarly, the perception of transactional leadership is also significantly higher among participants in the South region compared to those in the Greater Lisbon area. These results may reflect the cultural, structural, or organizational idiosyncrasies of the regional context, such as closer relationships between managers and teams, less bureaucratic organizational structures, smaller organizations, or a more personalized management style. It is therefore essential to consider regional dynamics when analyzing leadership, as the territorial context can shape not only the behavior of leaders but also how this behavior is interpreted and valued by employees.

The variable “Seniority in the Organization” was found to have a statistically significant association with participants’ turnover intentions, showing that the length of service in the company influences the predisposition to consider leaving the organization. The analysis showed that employees with 3 to 5 years of seniority had significantly higher levels of turnover intentions when compared to colleagues with more than 10 years of tenure in the organization. This result can be understood in consideration of the work–life cycle theory, which suggests that the middle stage of a career is often associated with a reassessment of expectations, goals, and opportunities. In addition, organizational commitment tends to strengthen over time, which may mitigate the desire to seek new opportunities among employees with more than 10 years of seniority. These data suggest the importance of developing specific retention strategies for employees in the middle stages of their careers, ensuring continuous challenges, career progression, and recognition to avoid talent losses in this critical range.

Finally, an analysis of the association of contract type with the variables under study revealed statistically significant differences in perceptions of transformational leadership, transactional leadership, and well-being. Participants with “Other” contracts demonstrated significantly higher perceptions of both transformational and transactional leadership compared to those with fixed-term contracts. In addition, well-being showed even more pronounced differences: employees with permanent contracts and, above all, those with “Other” contracts, reported significantly higher levels of well-being than those with fixed-term contracts. These results suggest that stability and the type of contractual relationship influence how employees experience leadership and perceive their well-being, with more stable relationships being associated with more positive experiences in the organizational context.

5.1. Limitations

This research has some limitations that should be considered in future replications of these studies.

Firstly, the data collection process should be mentioned, which was non-probabilistic, intentional, and snowball in nature.

Secondly, this is a cross-sectional study, which does not allow us to test causal relationships, as only a longitudinal study can.

Thirdly, the questionnaires consisted of self-assessment tools with closed questions and mandatory answers, which may have influenced the responses given by participants. The use of self-assessment questionnaires may lead to biased results. However, several methodological and statistical recommendations were followed to reduce the impact of common method variance (Podsakoff et al., 2003). To this end, two confirmatory factor analyses were performed, with one and four factors. The results obtained confirmed the existence of four variables as conceptualized theoretically.

Fourthly, we may be limited by the fact that the majority of participants work in the Lisbon region (Portugal) and in the private sector. Portugal is a small country, but it has a wide variety of customs.

Finally, the fact that other types of leadership, such as laissez-faire leadership or servant leadership, were not studied can be considered a limitation.

5.2. Theoretical Implications

The results of this study make significant contributions to enhancing people management and developing organizational strategies that focus on retaining talent and promoting workplace well-being. Firstly, the confirmation that both leadership styles have negative associations with turnover intentions corroborates previous studies (Walumbwa et al., 2008; Avolio et al., 1999), demonstrating that effective leadership practices not only motivate employees but also reduce the likelihood of voluntary turnover. Transformational leadership, more specifically, is aligned with strengthening the emotional bond with the organization (Avolio et al., 2009), making it a critical resource for building more stable and emotionally committed organizational contexts.

The study data on well-being supports the proposal by Deci and Ryan (2000), as consolidated in the self-determination theory, indicating that transformational leadership, by promoting autonomy, purpose, and individual appreciation, significantly increases employee well-being. This conclusion aligns with Arnold et al. (2007), who emphasize the role of transformational leaders as a crucial factor in a healthy organization.

Based on the results of this study, it can be concluded that transactional leadership also contributes to well-being, thus broadening the traditional understanding of this leadership style, which is often criticized for its mechanistic focus (Burns, 1978). The data support the position of authors such as Judge and Piccolo (2004) and Skakon et al. (2010), who point out that when well applied, transactional leadership can reduce role ambiguity and increase predictability, which are essential elements for a psychologically healthy work environment.

Regarding the mediation hypothesis, the fact that well-being does not significantly mediate the relationship between transformational leadership and turnover intentions may suggest that this leadership style exerts its influence more directly through mechanisms such as value alignment and/or affective commitment (Bass & Riggio, 2006). This result challenges models that propose well-being as a universal mediator (Warr, 2002) and highlights the need to explore other mediating variables to better understand the effects of transformational leadership.

In turn, the partial mediation of well-being in the relationship between transactional leadership and turnover intentions provides empirical support for approaches that emphasize the importance of clear structures and fair rewards in fostering organizational well-being. This indicates that, although transactional leadership does not inspire in the same way as transformational leadership, its impact on well-being may be sufficient to reduce turnover intentions, revealing a more indirect and instrumental mechanism.

In short, and theoretically, the results of this study suggest the relevance of integrative leadership models (Yukl, 2012), which strategically combine transformational and transactional elements to simultaneously respond to the emotional and structural demands of contemporary organizational environments.

5.3. Practical Implications

The results of this study offer relevant contributions to improving people management and formulating organizational strategies aimed at retaining talent and promoting well-being in the workplace. Firstly, the confirmation that both transformational and transactional leadership are negatively associated with employees’ turnover intentions reinforces the importance of investing in the development of leadership skills at different hierarchical levels. Organizations that promote effective leadership styles create more stable environments in which employees feel valued, recognized, and motivated to stay.

This understanding is corroborated by the study data, which reveal an overall positive perception of leadership and the organizational environment, with transformational leadership being the most valued by participants. This result suggests the practical relevance of this leadership style, characterized by inspiring behaviors that promote employee development and create more motivating and challenging work contexts.

Regarding well-being, participants reported a positive perception, indicating a general sense of satisfaction and emotional balance at work. These results support the protective associations of transformational leadership and well-being with the intent to remain in the organization, indicating that these two variables not only promote healthier organizations but also serve as an antidote to voluntary turnover. However, the study data also showed that differences between sociodemographic groups should be taken into consideration. Hierarchical status, for example, had a significant impact on perceptions of leadership and well-being. Employees in management positions tend to evaluate leadership styles and their well-being more positively. In practice, this suggests that one’s position in the organizational structure shapes how leadership is experienced, likely due to greater autonomy, influence, and proximity to decision-making. It is therefore necessary to ensure that non-hierarchical levels also experience the positive effects of leadership through more inclusive and accessible leadership practices throughout the organization.

The geographical region of professional practice was another sociodemographic variable that significantly impacted the perception of leadership styles. Participants from southern Portugal reported higher levels of transformational and transactional leadership than those from the Greater Lisbon and Center regions. These data highlight the importance of considering contextual and cultural differences between regions when designing leadership development programs, ensuring that management practices are tailored to local realities and respect regional specificities.

Another finding of great practical relevance pertains to seniority within the organization. Employees with 3 to 5 years of service reported higher intentions to leave than those with more than 10 years of service. This result highlights the need to invest in retention strategies targeted at this intermediate group, such as individual development plans, career progression, and performance recognition, which can strengthen commitment and prevent talent loss at this critical stage of the professional life cycle.

Finally, the type of contract revealed significant differences in perceptions of leadership and well-being. Employees with fixed-term contracts reported lower levels of well-being and a less positive perception of leadership, while employees with permanent or “Other” contracts reported more positive experiences. These data underscore the importance of ensuring fair and stable working conditions, as precarious employment relationships can negatively affect how employees perceive the work environment and, consequently, their intent to stay.

In conclusion, the results of this study suggest that integrating transformational and transactional leadership practices, combined with a policy of employee appreciation and adaptation to organizational realities, may represent a promising approach to strengthening the bond between professionals and the organization, reducing turnover, and fostering a healthier and more productive work environment.

Of course, how one chooses leaders who will, over time, be transformational and/or transactional—and hence contribute to talent retention and well-being in the workplace—may prove challenging and problematic in the real world. Intuitively, one should hire values (e.g., hire good people) and then provide them with the expertise necessary to do a great job (e.g., the execution part). Remember to ask the following: Do they possess the soft skills that are valued and cherished by their subordinates—to see us through a crisis, for example? Leave out and move away from the “rotten apples” in terms of values. Leaders need to exhibit high levels of altruism and low levels of selfishness and narcissism (Graça & Au-Yong-Oliveira, 2024), and, more importantly, register low levels of envy, as described in previous studies (Walter & Au-Yong-Oliveira, 2022, 2025). Envy may prove to be a barrier to empathy and hinder the organization’s ability to thrive in a meritocracy. We need to let the good people know they are cherished and valued—and that they will be promoted, rather than expelled, as an object of envy.

6. Conclusions

This study aimed to investigate the relationships between leadership styles, employee well-being, and turnover intentions. The results obtained enabled us to paint a comprehensive picture of the organizational experience of employees and the dynamics that influence their engagement, satisfaction, and retention within the company.

The results revealed a positive perception of leadership and the organizational environment, with an emphasis on transformational leadership, which is associated with greater well-being and lower turnover intentions.

For future research, it is recommended that longitudinal studies be conducted to track career trajectories over time, analyzing how perceptions of leadership, well-being, and turnover intentions evolve at different stages of the career. Additionally, it would be relevant to explore the roles of mediating and moderating variables, such as engagement, perceived organizational support, and alignment between personal and organizational values. Expanding the study to other companies and sectors could also enrich our understanding of the cultural and structural specificities that shape the employee experience.

Thus, this study provides a solid foundation for the development of more strategic, humane, and sustainable organizational practices, contributing to the creation of healthier, more motivating work environments that align with the long-term goals of organizations.