Effects of Distributive Leadership on Teachers’ Job Satisfaction in Public Schools: A Systematic Review

Abstract

This systematic literature review examines the association between distributive leadership and teachers’ job satisfaction in public schools, focusing on the mechanisms underlying this association in a broad context. A total of 12 high-quality studies published between 2020 and 2024 were included. A comprehensive search strategy, with strict inclusion and exclusion criteria, and detailed data integration were employed to ensure accuracy and reliability of the results. The concept and characteristics of distributive leadership were used to structure and organize the findings. The analysis revealed distributive leadership as an effective leadership style that exhibits a strong positive relation with teachers’ job satisfaction. This review not only enriches the theory of educational leadership but also provides practical guidance for school leaders and policymakers to improve the quality of education. Overall, the review highlights the importance of distributive leadership practices in improving teachers’ satisfaction and enhancing education quality.

1. Introduction

In the educational leadership field, the concept of the distributive leadership emerged in the 1990s and later became a topic of interest for researchers. Distributive leadership style offers a simple way to understand and change leadership and school practices. Duignan and Macpherson (2003) emphasized the importance of this leadership style to create a helpful and positive environment. In distributive leadership, teachers, staff, students, and other members of a school serve as decision-makers and share responsibility for improving students’ learning and growth (L. Li et al., 2016; S. Li et al., 2021). This leadership style fosters a positive and supporting environment, which improves teachers’ perception of their jobs. Teachers’ job satisfaction, a measure of how happy and successful they feel at work and their perception regarding their workplace, is crucial for their well-being. It affects their energy, drive, and the success of school education (Locke, 1969). Job satisfaction also helps teachers see the value of their efforts (Ho & Au, 2006; Zhu, 2006) and is affected by both internal factors (such as beliefs, attitudes, and emotions) and external factors (such as organizational culture, leadership style, and team atmosphere) (Sun & Xia, 2018; Torres, 2019).

The relation between distributive leadership and teachers’ job satisfaction aligns with the focus on “empowerment and capacity building” in modern school governance. Distributive leadership narrows the gap between leaders and followers by providing them with shared responsibility; this leadership style values each person’s role, with teachers serving as change-makers. This approach also highlights the need for good relationships and clear communication among team members. It values everyone’s input and effort, thus creating a supportive and cooperative environment and enhancing the role of teachers in improving school education (L. Li et al., 2016; S. Li et al., 2021). Distributive leadership is a key factor for teachers’ job satisfaction (Davison et al., 2011). Implementing measures to improve teachers’ perception of their work is essential to retain them and thus improve the quality of basic education. The idea of sharing leadership tasks among people with different skills has been gaining popularity. Despite theoretical studies on the effects of leadership on teachers’ satisfaction, evidence for the positive role of distributive leadership in teachers’ job satisfaction remains insufficient.

1.1. Background and Rationale

Distributive leadership has been gaining increasing recognition as a new leadership style, representing a departure from traditional leadership traits, styles, and actions focused on a single person. Unlike traditional leadership, distributive leadership is characterized by a group process created through the teamwork of multiple members (Bolden, 2011). Dou et al. (2020) noted that distributive leadership helps teachers feel more satisfied with their jobs and more committed to their school responsibilities, underscoring its importance in raising teachers’ morale and enhancing school education.

Examining the role of distributive leadership in improving job satisfaction of teachers in public schools is important to ensure high education quality. Distributive leadership involves sharing responsibilities among school members (Harris, 2008), fostering teamwork, teacher growth, and motivation, which enhances student learning. Principals play a pivotal role in promoting this approach, ultimately improving teaching and education quality (Torres, 2019). It represents a more inclusive style that offers many advantages over traditional leadership. It encourages people to work together to solve problems and try innovative ideas. This change is crucial to equip schools for navigating challenges (Kugelmass & Ainscow, 2004). Core values of this approach include teamwork, problem-solving, and trying new things, all of which play a role in shaping education. Studies on teachers’ job satisfaction have focused mainly on internal factors, including school size, location, type, resources, culture, leadership style, and teachers’ characteristics such as experience, gender, education, and age. However, job satisfaction also depends on external factors, such as rewards, stress, school climate, recognition, student behavior, and relationships with others. Many studies have focused on leadership in schools; however, school leadership must be adjusted to new challenges arising with changing times. In the information age, teachers have become increasingly aware of their roles. Old leadership styles, relying on principal-centered models and strict rules, have become ineffective for modern schools, and distributive leadership, which involves sharing leadership tasks among people with different skills, is gaining recognition. However, limited research has been conducted on the mechanism of distributive leadership and how it affects teachers’ job satisfaction.

1.2. Objective

The main objective of this systematic review was to explore how distributive leadership influences teachers’ job satisfaction in public schools. First, to understand the current state of distributive leadership, the research patterns, themes, and gaps in perspectives within the existing literature were identified. Then, we identified factors within the distributive leadership framework, which influence teachers’ job satisfaction. The review further examined different research methods and provides relevant evidence. Finally, it offers recommendations to strengthen the implementation of distributive leadership and improve teachers’ job satisfaction. This study explores how distributive leadership affects teachers’ job satisfaction and the underlying mechanisms, highlighting not only the theoretical and practical significance of enhancing teacher’s job satisfaction but also the urgent need for more attention and in-depth studies in this field.

1.3. Conceptualization

1.3.1. Distributive Leadership

The first branch of distributive leadership theory is cited as the “analytical view”, which has been covered in this study. The core question addressed in this study is “what exactly is distributive leadership?” In other words, this study focuses on the connotations and denotations of distributive leadership. So far, the conceptual analysis of distributive leadership has focused on single perspectives, including “process perspective (Kempster et al., 2014)”, “situated learning perspective (Gordon, 2002)”, “power and information asymmetry perspective (Cope et al., 2011)”, and “Behavioral Perspective (Spillane & Healey, 2010)”. The perspective widely recognized by the academic community is the conceptual analysis and definition of distributive leadership by Gronn (2003), Harris (2008), Spillane and Healey (2010). Building on activity theory, Gronn (2002) and Spillane et al. (2001) developed the concept of distributive leadership in their respective studies, incorporating activity theory into their framework. According to this approach, analyzing leadership solely through the lens of individual leaders cannot comprehensively reveal the complexity of leadership processes, and the inclusion of leadership activities distributed among situational elements in the analysis framework is essential (G. Zhou & Li, 2021). In (Gronn 2008), it is opined that distinctive leadership qualities are inherent in individuals, which allow them to undertake specific roles based on their strengths and expertise; as organizations’ requirements vary over time, different individuals with unique leadership skills can contribute to the organizations’ time-specific requirements. Furthermore, the school environment exemplifies a dynamic and complex situation. To emphasize the applicability of distributive leadership theory to the analysis of specific issues, Gronn (2009) proposed a novel “Hybrid Leadership Model”, according to which formal leadership, informal leadership, and personal leadership can coexist within an organization. He emphasized the collective nature of cooperation among individuals, disregarded the “one size fits all” distributive leadership model, and proposed using a unified form to adapt to complex and diverse situations. Leadership and multi-person leadership believed that “hybrid” could more accurately describe the intricate relationship network of individuals within an organization than “distribution”.

Spillane et al. (2007) viewed leadership as an interactive process involving three key components: the leader, the follower, and the situation. “Situation” encompasses the organizational structure, leadership tools, and behaviors that influence how leaders and followers interact, leading to positive or negative outcomes. “Leader” and “follower” were regarded as two corresponding concepts. “Leaders” include individuals in both formal and informal positions and are those possessing skills required for organizational growth at all stages. “Followers” are those who, while following a leader, exhibit their own leadership behaviors. The three elements—leader, follower, and situation—exhibit dynamic interactions and are interconnected. The collective value generated through this interaction exceeds the sum of the individual contribution of each element, producing a better output. In schools, leadership roles can be shared among teachers, principals, students, staff, and even parents. The leader’s role is not limited to providing directions but is also to influence and inspire others. Followers play an active role, and interactions between the two help shape leadership practices. Spillane (2004) identified three types of leadership distribution: coordinated, collaborated, and collective.

1.3.2. Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

Research on job satisfaction dates back to the Hawthorne Experiment conducted in the 1920s and 1930s. Regarding job satisfaction, scholars proposed the classification standards in the 1970s, identifying three main types (Taveggia & Hedley, 1976). The first is the “comprehensive definition”, proposed by scholars like (Sempane et al., 2002), which views job satisfaction as a whole and a single-dimensional concept without disintegrating it into multiple dimensions. Hoppock (1935) was the first to explore the concept of job satisfaction, considering it as the emotion reflecting an employee’s personal feelings about their work and their role orientation at work. Specifically, this concept was coined by Hoppock (1936) and Locke (1969). Hoppock (1937) viewed job satisfaction as a psychological perception shaped by both mental and physical factors, influenced by the overall work environment for members of an organization. Locke (1969) argued that job satisfaction depends on how an employee perceives the work environment, aligning with their personal values, and is primarily a psychological response to feeling valued and appreciated in the workplace.

The second type is “dimensional definition”, described by Sempane et al. (2002) and it differs from the comprehensive definition, which regards job satisfaction as a single-dimensional concept. It is also referred to as the “referential framework definition” or the “multidimensional definition” of job satisfaction. Key scholars representing this view include Smith (1969) and Vroom (1962). Smith (1969) defined job satisfaction as encompassing five dimensions—the work itself, salary, promotion, coworkers, and supervisors. Vroom (1962) expanded this definition by including two additional variables—organization and the work environment—characterizing job satisfaction as encompassing seven dimensions. Some scholars, such as Spector (1997), emphasized the multidimensionality of job satisfaction, arguing that job satisfaction comprises various dimensions and that employees must weigh their satisfaction and dissatisfaction across all these dimensions to reflect on their overall attitude toward work.

The third type is the “discrepancy definition”, proposed by scholars such as Porter et al. (1974). It defines job satisfaction as the gap between employees’ expectations and the actual reward they receive from their work. The larger the gap, the lower the satisfaction, and vice versa. Porter et al. (1974) emphasized that job satisfaction depends on the difference between expectations and actual outcomes at workplace. Regarding teachers’ job satisfaction, scholars have proposed their views from the aforementioned three perspectives. L. Zhou (2004) supported the “comprehensive definition” of teacher’s job satisfaction, viewing it as a single, comprehensive concept.

1.3.3. Linking Distributive Leadership to Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

The relationship between distributive leadership and teachers’ job satisfaction has been analyzed empirically in most studies. Using data from the 2013 International Teaching and Learning Survey, Y. Liu and Watson (2023) revealed how differences in leadership functions among principals, management teams, and teachers were related to teachers’ job satisfaction. They employed a three-level structural equation model to investigate multidimensional associations, highlighting the additive value effects of distributive leadership and its mechanisms underlying enhanced teachers’ job satisfaction. In 2019, Eggleston found that the implementation of distributive leadership could significantly improve teachers’ job satisfaction. Eggleston (2019) conducted empirical research on teacher empowerment, finding that teachers tend to have greater job satisfaction when principals provide them with opportunities for professional development and allow them to participate in decision-making on school-related matters. This viewpoint was also supported by Harper (2018). Teachers’ job satisfaction was also found to be directly related to the degree of their empowerment (Chamberlin et al. 2018).

Studies have confirmed that different leadership styles affect the psychological states and behaviors of personnel, and even their job satisfaction, either positively or negatively (S. Liu et al., 2018). Furthermore, preliminary discussions have been centered on whether distributive leadership is related to teachers’ job satisfaction, and if so, what is the underlying mechanism for this relation. This review examines how distributed leadership impacts teachers’ job satisfaction, focusing on strategies to enhance satisfaction within a well-defined conceptual and theoretical framework. The main aim was to explore the interaction between these concepts in public school settings. Overall, this study seeks to provide a comprehensive and insightful understanding of how distributive leadership impacts education leadership in the global context, highlighting its significance in improving education quality.

2. Methods

This systematic literature review adhered to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) framework to ensure a transparent, consistent, and replicable research process. The PRISMA guidelines facilitate methodological rigor, enable the identification of potential biases, and enhance the reliability and validity of the review findings.

2.1. Selection Criteria

The inclusion criteria for this study are as follows: (a) empirical studies and reviews examining the relationship between teachers’ job satisfaction and distributive leadership; (b) studies focusing on the public education sector; (c) studies published in peer-reviewed journals; (d) full-text articles published in English across all four databases searched; (e) reports on distributive leadership in public (elementary, middle, and high) schools and universities; and (f) studies focusing on the effects, impacts, consequences, influences, changes, outcomes, or results of distributive leadership on teachers’ job satisfaction within these environments.

Non-peer-reviewed articles, conference presentations, duplicate papers, and studies not focusing on the field of interest were excluded. Records pertaining to educational settings other than public schools were also excluded. For search strings (a) and (b), no time limit was applied to ensure a broad understanding of the history and background of distributive leadership. For search string (c), the articles selected must be peer-reviewed to ensure that the cited research is of high quality and reliability. However, for search strings (d)–(f), a 5-year period from 2019 to 2024 was set in the secondary screening to ensure that the records are based on relatively recent practices.

2.2. Context of Literature Review and Search Strategy

The rigorous application of a meticulous approach in a systematic literature review is crucial, as it directly influences the accuracy and trustworthiness of the results. Considering the distribution of schools and the previously reported role of leadership styles in enhancing teachers’ job satisfaction, we conducted a systematic review of studies on the leadership styles within the context of public schools. We followed PRISMA guidelines to ensure transparency of the results. Given that compliance with these guidelines ensures comprehensive and transparent reporting practices, facilitating peer review and replication of a study, we consistently adhered to them to summarize the rationale, processes, and findings of the selected studies. Moreover, this review has been registered on the Open Science Framework and linked to the meta-analyses (PRISMA) process, with a PRISMA flowchart to illustrate the literature searching process, underscoring its commitment to openness, transparency, and reproducibility in scientific research.

The framework and process of this review were as follows: (a) collect relevant literature on distributive leadership, providing a solid foundation for subsequent analysis; (b) provide evidence for the role of distributive leadership in enhancing teachers’ job satisfaction through well-designed search strategies, and comprehensively explore the influences, consequences, and outcomes of distributive leadership in terms of teachers’ job satisfaction in elementary, middle, and university schools based on empirical evidence; (c) identify key terms related to the effect of distributive leadership on teachers’ job satisfaction from the collected literature and recognize the key terminologies, providing a conceptual framework for subsequent analysis; (d) develop an analytical framework based on a series of distributive leadership models and elements to examine the impact of distributive leadership on teachers’ job satisfaction in public schools and its impact mechanism; and (e) carefully review and summarize the findings of selected studies within the context of the constructed analytical framework, revealing the practical effects of distributive leadership on teachers’ job satisfaction in public schools.

We gathered relevant studies from both domestic and international sources through an exhaustive literature search, using databases such as the Web of Science, ERIC, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Our search strategy involved English keywords and their variants related to “distributive leadership”, utilizing the following search strings in sequence: (a) “distributive leadership” (b) “distributed school leadership” (c) “shared leadership” AND “collaborative leadership” (d) “public elementary school” OR “public middle school” OR “public school” (e) “distributive leadership” AND “impact” OR “effect” OR “consequence” OR “outcome” OR “result” AND “school teachers”, and (f) “distributive leadership” AND “impact” OR “effect” OR “consequence” OR “change” OR “result” OR “output” AND “teacher job satisfaction.” Incorporating these keywords was particularly important given the regional focus of our review. We refined our searches using Boolean operators (AND, OR), applied filters to retrieve publications from the inception of the databases to the present day, and adjusted search terms and keywords to ensure comprehensive coverage of the existing literature.

The uniqueness of the present review lies in its focus on how distributive leadership influences teachers’ job satisfaction. It includes studies conducted in public schools (elementary, middle, and high schools) and universities worldwide. The review was structured using a framework based on the conception of distributive leadership. After selecting relevant papers, we analyzed and synthesized their findings.

2.3. Quality Assessment

The 12 selected articles have been authored by researchers worldwide. The methodological quality of these studies was assessed using a modified version of the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) checklist. This tool evaluates the extent to which studies address potential biases in their design, conduct, and analysis, encompassing the study design, data collection, data analysis, bias, and ethics as key aspects. Based on CASP scores of the studies, we rated their quality as high, medium, or low; low-quality studies identified to have significant risks of bias or lack of relevance were excluded.

2.4. Resulting Documents for Synthesis

First, an extensive literature search was conducted across databases, identifying 14,269 records. Second, the review involved a well-defined search strategy to summarize evidence for the impacts, effects, and outcomes of distributive leadership, specifically focusing on its effect on teachers’ job satisfaction in public primary and secondary schools; the review covered studies published between 2020 and 2024, resulting in the selection of 12 records for detailed analysis and synthesis, the screening was rigorously structured, as depicted in the PRISMA flow diagram (Figure 1). Finally, the literature revealed a range of positive terms related to the impact of distributive leadership on teachers’ job satisfaction, most of which are widely used in educational leadership policies associated with educational aspirations.

At the pre-screening level, 11,269 titles were retrieved from the four databases. These titles were imported into an EndNote library, and duplicates were removed, resulting in 9531 titles. Further assessment for relevance yielded 1738 titles. During the first-level screening, abstracts were independently reviewed for two inclusion criteria, namely availability of full-text article and English as the publication language. This step narrowed the selection to 1700 records. In the second-level screening, the third search criterion was applied, leading to the exclusion of 867 records and retaining 833 for further analysis.

After applying six inclusion and exclusion criteria for eligibility assessment, a total of 780 records were excluded for not aligning with the objectives of the current review. Among these excluded 780 records, 438 records were excluded due to their irrelevance to public school/primary/secondary/university settings, an additional 342 records were further excluded because the keywords related to impacts, consequences, changes, or results did not directly pertain to the influence of distributive leadership on teachers’ job satisfaction. This process refined the selection to 53 records related to distributive leadership. These records were exported to a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet for summarization. The results are presented in Section 3.

The final 53 records were categorized into three levels based on: (a) content standards, (b) research quality, (c) the depth of discussion on distributive leadership, and (d) their findings on teachers’ job satisfaction. Twelve records satisfying all the criteria were classified as Level 1, indicating their strong relevance to the topic of interest, and thus were deemed suitable for the analysis. Twenty records were classified as Level 2, indicating their high relevance but partial focus on distributive leadership. Lastly, 21 records were classified as Level 3, indicating their weak relevance with research on distributive leadership. Based on this classification, we selected the 12 Level-1 records that met all the set criteria.

3. Results

3.1. Characteristics of Included Studies

The final set of studies on distributive leadership and teachers’ job satisfaction showcased diverse methodological designs and scopes, reflecting extensive attention paid to this aspect. Published between 2020 and 2024, these studies have employed qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods to elucidate the relationship between leadership practices and teachers’ job satisfaction. All 12 studies have explicitly been conducted in public school settings; however, extending beyond public school contexts, studies have also been conducted in private and international school settings, reporting findings applicable to or comparable to those of public school settings. This geographic and contextual diversity emphasizes transferable leadership strategies that can enhance job satisfaction of teachers across different institutional types. The studies included in this review exhibit differences in terms of their methodological approaches (ranging from small-scale case studies to extensive survey-based research) and participant groups (including principals, mid-level leaders, teachers, and administrative staff). Collectively, these studies underscore that the contextual or methodological diversity is a key factor determining the effect of distributive leadership on teachers’ satisfaction. Characteristics of each study are summarized in the accompanying

Table 1. Results Found in the Systematic Review.

No	Article	Author and Year	Research Method	Study Description	Study Findings
1	Distributive leadership Among School Principals in the Eastern Region and Its Relationship to Teachers’ Job Satisfaction	(Alshehri 2022)	(a) Descriptive analytical and correlational method (b) Questionnaire	The study was conducted in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia. It involved 361 randomly selected male and female teachers from public schools. The study aimed to determine the influence of distributive leadership on job satisfaction.	A strong positive correlation was found between the degree of distributive leadership practiced by school principals and teachers’ job satisfaction. This suggests that higher levels of distributive leadership positively impact teacher job satisfaction.
2	Does Distributive leadership Deliver on Its Promises in Schools? Implications for Teachers’ Work Satisfaction and Self-Efficacy	(Tucaliuc et al., 2023)	(a) Quantitative	The study tested hypotheses in a sample of 3528 teachers from 329 Romanian schools using multi-level mediation analyses. It investigated the relationship between distributive leadership and teachers’ job satisfaction and self-efficacy, suggesting that distributive leadership can positively or negatively impact these factors.	The study revealed an indirect negative association between distributive leadership and both work satisfaction and work self-efficacy. This finding contradicts much of the existing empirical evidence that praises distributive leadership for its benefits.
3	Effects of Distributive leadership on Teachers’ Commitment and Job Satisfaction at Secondary Level	(Khan & Mahmood, 2020)	(a) Quantitative (b) Questionnaire	The study involved 315 teachers from Lahore, Pakistan, and it aimed to measure the effects of distributive leadership on teachers’ commitment and job satisfaction. Distributive leadership was defined as the distribution, sharing, and spreading of leadership responsibilities across individuals and within the school organization.	Distributive leadership had a significant effect on teachers’ commitment and job satisfaction. While most distributive leadership factors did not show significant gender differences, female teachers were found to be more collaborative than male teachers.
4	Effects of Distributive leadership on Teachers’ Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment and Organizational Citizenship	(Samancioglu et al., 2020)	(a) Quantitative (b) Inventory, Scale	The study aimed to explore how distributive leadership affects teachers. It focused on job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and citizenship behavior. Researchers studied 344 teachers from 15 primary schools in Gaziantep, Turkey. These schools were chosen at random.	Distributive leadership had a significant impact on teachers’ job satisfaction. Two aspects were key: Leadership Functions and the Coherent Leadership Team. Both influenced job satisfaction positively. However, the Coherent Leadership Team was a stronger predictor.
5	Ensuring Teachers’ job satisfaction Through Distributed and Instructional Leadership of Chinese School Principals: Mediating Role of Reward, Motivation and Effectiveness	(Xin & Tahir, 2024)	(a) Quantitative study using PLS-SEM (Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling).	The study involved 260 schoolteachers within the context of China, and it indicated how distributed and instructional leadership affect job satisfaction. It focused on mediators such as motivation, rewards, and effectiveness.	Distributive leadership and instructional leadership significantly enhance teacher satisfaction. Motivation, rewards, and effectiveness were critical mediators.
6	Examining the Relationship of Distributive leadership and Job Satisfaction on the Mediating Roles of Teacher Self-Efficacy and Cooperation	(Yakut Özek & Büyükgöze, 2023)	(a) Correlation and mediational study using TALIS (Teaching and Learning International Survey) 2018 data and path analysis	Analyzed distributive leadership behaviors and their impact on job satisfaction, mediated by teacher self-efficacy and cooperation in Turkey.	Distributive leadership is a strong predictor of job satisfaction. Self-efficacy and cooperation serve as mediators, explaining 45% of the variance in job satisfaction.
7	Perceived Distributive leadership, Job Satisfaction, and Professional Satisfaction Among Academics in Guanajuato Universities	(Cano Ibarra et al., 2023)	(a) Descriptive and correlational study. (b) Questionnaire with Likert-scale responses. (c) Exploratory Factor Analysis and Confirmatory Factor Analysis using structural equation modeling (SEM)	The study aimed to find out how job satisfaction, professional satisfaction, distributive leadership, and feelings of insecurity are linked. It focused on academics at five universities in Guanajuato with a total participation of 300 academics in Mexico.	A positive but non-significant relationship, indicating that distributive leadership did not strongly influence job satisfaction in this context.
8	School Principals’ Distributive leadership Style, Teachers’ Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment: A Case of Low-Income and Underdeveloped Country	(Tariq, 2024)	(a) Quantitative Structural (b) Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)	The study was conducted in Kabul, the capital city of Afghanistan, among 650 school teachers working at 65 private secondary schools. The results also suggested that teachers’ work experience positively influenced their level of commitment and job satisfaction, while their age had no significant impact on the mentioned variables.	The study showed that distributive leadership positively influences teachers’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Leaders who share responsibilities create a more enjoyable work environment. This approach also strengthens teachers’ loyalty and dedication to their organization.
9	The Effects of Distributive Leadership Style Beyond Teachers’ Job Satisfaction	(Sahraee et al., 2021)	(a) Descriptive analytical and correlational method (b) Questionnaire	The study examined how distributive leadership affects teachers’ job satisfaction by inviting seven teachers from five districts in Iran to complete the questionnaire. It also aimed to see if these two factors could predict students’ academic performance.	The study found that distributive leadership has a significant positive relationship with teachers’ job satisfaction. The study concluded that distributive leadership not only enhances teachers’ job satisfaction but also indirectly contributes to improved student outcomes.
10	The Impact of Distributive leadership on Teachers’ job satisfaction	(Alam et al., 2023)	(a) Qualitative research (b) Literature study	The aim of the study conducted in Indonesia was to investigate the impact of distributive leadership on teachers’ job satisfaction. The article discusses the importance of teacher job satisfaction in improving the quality of education and explores how distributive leadership could contribute to this.	The research shows that distributive leadership positively impacts teacher job satisfaction. This leadership style effectively enhances satisfaction among teachers. Increased satisfaction can lead to better educational quality.
11	Principal Job Satisfaction, Distributive leadership, Teacher-Student Relationships, and Student Achievement in Turkey: A Multilevel Mediated-Effect Model	(Kılınç et al., 2022)	(a) Quantitative (b) Conducted Multilevel Structural Equation Modeling (MSEM),which was an extension of traditional Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)	The study in Turkey explored the relationship between principal job satisfaction, distributive leadership, teacher–student relationships, and student reading achievement, using survey data from 142 secondary schools with 142 principals, 3515 teachers, and 5528 students. It proposed teacher–student relationships as a mediator of distributive leadership’s effects on student achievement, with principal job satisfaction as a precursor.	The study shows that better teacher–student relationships lead to higher reading scores. Distributive leadership, where principals involve teachers and students in decisions, improves these relationships and indirectly boosts reading achievement. Principal job satisfaction is linked to adopting such leadership practices.
12	The Roles of Collective Teacher Efficacy and Commitment in the Relationship Between Turkish Language Teachers’ Job Satisfaction and School Principal Distributive leadership	(Kaya et al., 2024)	(a) Quantitative	This study draws data from a sample of 338 Turkish language teachers in secondary schools in Turkey, and it investigated the relationship between principal distributive leadership and teacher job satisfaction, with a focus on the mediating role of collective teacher efficacy and the moderating role of teacher commitment.	The study found that distributive leadership has a moderate direct positive relationship with teacher job satisfaction. Collective teacher efficacy mediated this relationship, indicating that when teachers perceive high collective efficacy, distributive leadership has a stronger positive effect on their job satisfaction.

to ensure transparency and reproducibility.

3.2. Synthesis of Findings

The included studies consistently report a positive relationship between distributive leadership and teachers’ job satisfaction, demonstrating collective teacher efficacy, teacher commitment, and self-efficacy as significant mediators of this relationship. However, heterogeneity exists in the study results, primarily attributable to the geographical and cultural factors, as well as methodological differences. The exclusion analysis method used in sensitivity analyses confirm the robustness of the synthesized results, underscoring the importance of distributive leadership in fostering a supportive work environment and enhancing teachers’ job satisfaction, eventually contributing to improved educational outcomes. This review analyzed the effect of distributive leadership on teachers’ job satisfaction under five themes, summarized in the subsequent sections.

3.2.1. Positive Influence of Distributive Leadership on Teachers’ Job Satisfaction

Multiple studies have reported that distributive leadership boosts teachers’ job satisfaction. Factors such as decision-making, participation, teacher collaboration, and professional support contribute to enhanced job satisfaction under distributive leadership (Alam et al., 2023; Kaya et al., 2024; Khan & Mahmood, 2020; Yakut Özek & Büyükgöze, 2023; Samancioglu et al., 2020). Furthermore, improved communication and coordination among team members in distributive leadership practices promotes a supportive work environment and enhances job satisfaction of the members (Alam et al., 2023).

3.2.2. Role of Collective Teacher Efficacy and Commitment

Collective teacher efficacy and commitment emerge as significant mediators in the relationship between distributive leadership and teachers’ job satisfaction. As reported in a study, distributive leadership promotes teachers’ collective belief in their ability to positively impact student outcomes, thereby enhancing their job satisfaction (Kaya et al., 2024). Furthermore, teachers’ commitment to their profession and school has been shown to play a positive and significant moderating role in the relationship between teachers’ collective efficacy and job satisfaction (Kaya et al., 2024; Samancioglu et al., 2020; Tariq, 2024; Xin & Tahir, 2024).

3.2.3. Principals’ Job Satisfaction and Distributive Leadership Practices

Principals’ job satisfaction is a prerequisite to effective distributive leadership practices. Principals who are satisfied with their work environment are more likely to use distributive leadership, which strengthens teacher–student relationships, eventually improving student performance and outcomes (Kılınç et al., 2022). Therefore, principals’ well-being is crucial in fostering a culture of distributive leadership that benefits both teachers and students equally.

3.2.4. Contextual Factors Influencing Distributive Leadership Effectiveness

Despite yielding positive outcomes, the effectiveness of distributive leadership practices can be influenced by contextual factors. A study reported a negative association of these practices with teachers’ empowerment and organizational identification in Romanian schools (Tucaliuc et al., 2023). These findings highlight the importance of exploring specific contextual factors that influence the relation between distributive leadership and teachers’ job satisfaction.

3.2.5. Cross-Cultural Consistencies and Variations

The effect of distributive leadership on teachers’ job satisfaction varies across different cultures. For example, in the contexts of developed and underdeveloped nations, such as Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan, distributive leadership has been reported to significantly affect teachers’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Alshehri, 2022; Tariq, 2024). However, in Guanajuato universities, distributive leadership was reported to exert a positive but nonsignificant effect on the job satisfaction among teachers (Cano Ibarra et al., 2023). These variations highlight the importance of considering cultural and contextual nuances when implementing distributive leadership practices.

4. Discussion

This review summarizes the existing literature on the positive effect of distributive leadership on teachers’ job satisfaction, providing a robust foundation for further discussion on the topic.

4.1. Summary of Evidence

The results of the referenced studies regarding the effect of distributive leadership have been consistent, indicating its positive effect on teachers’ job satisfaction. The included studies encompass empirical investigations conducted across different countries and educational contexts. Although most studies, for example, those in Turkey (Yakut Özek & Büyükgöze, 2023), Saudi Arabia (Alshehri, 2022), China (Samancioglu et al., 2020), Pakistan (Khan & Mahmood, 2020), Iran (Torres, 2019), and Indonesia (Alam et al., 2023), highlight a positive correlation between distributive leadership practices and teachers’ job satisfaction, some have reported opposite results.

Distributive leadership enhances teachers’ job satisfaction through multifaceted mechanisms. First, distributive leadership fosters a collaborative and inclusive environment where teachers are allowed to serve as decision-makers, which, in turn, enhances their sense of ownership and responsibility (Hulpia et al., 2009; Y. Liu et al., 2021). Second, this leadership approach reduces the workload of individual leaders, allowing them to support and guide teachers, thus boosting their morale and job satisfaction (Kaya et al., 2024). Finally, distributive leadership guides teachers for their professional development and continuous learning, which further contributes to their job satisfaction (Sun & Xia, 2018).

4.2. Limitations

While the evidence presented in this review is supported by various empirical investigations, several limitations of the included studies must be acknowledged. First, most studies have used cross-sectional data, which complicates the identification of causal links between distributive leadership and teachers’ job satisfaction. This limitation necessitates longitudinal studies to explore changes in these relationships over time.

Second, the included studies differ in the methodological approaches used to examine the relation between distributive leadership and teachers’ job satisfaction; thus, direct comparison of the findings is unfeasible. Moreover, the use of different instruments and scales to assess these constructs introduces potential biases and reduces the generalizability of the results.

Third, most of the included studies are from Western and developing countries, and non-Western or high-income contexts remain underrepresented. This geographical imbalance in the selection of studies limits the applicability of the findings to all educational settings.

Fourth, most of the studies have employed quantitative methods, which provide limited qualitative insights into teachers’ and school leaders’ experiences and perceptions regarding distributive leadership. In particular, studies with mixed-method designs are needed to gain a more nuanced understanding of these phenomena.

Fifth, while most of the selected studies were conducted in ordinary public schools, they consistently highlighted that distributive leadership emphasizes teamwork, resource sharing, and decentralized decision-making to enhance teaching quality and teacher development. In contrast, universities may prioritize academic leadership and foster team innovation. University teachers, who enjoy higher status and autonomy, may have a different level of participation and influence in decision-making processes. However, due to the limited number of university studies included in this review, there are limitations for discussing how distributive leadership may differ in higher education settings compared to school environments.

Finally, the limitations that may exist in this review process include reliance on specific databases, which could lead to geographical or cultural bias; exclusion of grey literature, which might overlook important insights; a focus on recent studies that could neglect foundational research; and publication bias that may affect the interpretation of results.

4.3. Implementation

The positive association between distributive leadership and teachers’ job satisfaction offers important practical implications. First, school administrators should be encouraged to adopt distributive leadership practices to foster a more collaborative and supportive work environment. This can be achieved by involving teachers in decision-making, providing them with opportunities for leadership development, and promoting an atmosphere to support their continuous learning.

Second, educational policies aimed at promoting distributive leadership in schools should be formulated. This may involve providing resources and training to school leaders, as well as establishing incentives and recognition programs for teachers in active leadership roles.

Third, teachers should be empowered to take on leadership responsibilities within schools. Professional development programs to enhance teachers’ skills and knowledge and creating a supportive and inclusive organizational culture can be giant steps toward teachers’ empowerment.

4.4. Future Research

Firstly, this review highlights the need for longitudinal studies to clarify how distributive leadership affects teachers’ job satisfaction over time. Secondly, cross-cultural research is essential to validate the applicability of the findings to different educational systems and cultures. Thirdly, studies with mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative data with qualitative perspectives, are warranted to gain a nuanced understanding of how teachers and school leaders perceive distributive leadership. Finally, researchers should investigate other potential factors, such as organizational culture, teacher demographics, and the availability of school resources, which shape the relationship between distributive leadership and job satisfaction.

The present review offers robust evidence for the positive effect of distributive leadership on teacher’s job satisfaction. In conclusion, these findings offer significant implications for practice, policy, and future research. However, it is recommended that future studies address and integrate the limitations outlined in this review, adopting a more comprehensive and inclusive approach in the review process to address the issues identified.