Introduction

Teacher well-being is crucial for enhancing the quality of education and students’ academic performance, involving the cognition and integration of diverse information (Steinmayr et al. 2018). Transformational leadership, a widely adopted approach among school leaders, seeks to cultivate a collaborative and supportive environment by setting ambitious goals that inspire enthusiasm and a sense of accomplishment among teachers (Karakus et al. 2024; Kılınç et al. 2024). However, existing research presents divergent findings regarding its impact on teacher well-being. While some studies highlight its positive effects (Zhao et al. 2023), others point to potential negative outcomes, such as emotional exhaustion and diminished well-being (Molines et al. 2022; Stein et al. 2021).

These inconsistent findings can be better understood through the lens of the Job Demands-Resources model, which posits that job demands (e.g., workload, role conflict) may deplete employee energy and lead to burnout, whereas job resources (e.g., social support, recognition, autonomy) enhance motivation and well-being (Bakker et al. 2004). Transformational leadership can serve as a potent job resource by offering vision, support, and opportunities for professional growth (Nurtjahjani et al. 2022). At the same time, it may inadvertently act as a job demand if it amplifies performance expectations or constantly pushes for innovation and change, creating additional pressure (Boekhorst et al. 2021; Fischer et al. 2021). Thus, its dual role as both a resource and a demand may give rise to a double-edged sword effect on the well-being of young teachers. Consequently, it is imperative to undertake further research to elucidate the underlying mechanisms of this effect and to identify the boundary conditions that moderate this complex relationship.

Generational characteristics significantly influence how young teachers respond to leadership, as different age cohorts exhibit distinct traits and behaviors (Barhate and Dirani 2022). This study focuses on teachers born between 1990 and 2005, a cohort shaped by China’s one-child policy (Cai and Feng 2021). Literature on only-child families suggests that parents, often characterized by heightened anxiety and focused attention, tend to impose high achievement expectations on their child, whether in academic pursuits or career success (Cai and Feng 2021; Liu 2016; Polit and Falbo 1987). Within the Job Demands–Resources model, such parental expectations can function in dual ways: as job demands or as personal resources.

As job demands, parents’ high expectations can create significant psychological pressure, manifesting as a strong desire for success and a fear of failure (Roberts and Blanton 2001). This pressure accelerates emotional and psychological exhaustion, increasing the risk of burnout, especially when organizational resources are limited (Salimi et al. 2005; Zhu et al. 2022). On the other hand, these high parental expectations also foster strong achievement motivation (Li and Xie 2020), which can function as a powerful personal resource (Kanfer et al. 2017). This, in turn, activates the motivational pathway of the Job Demands–Resources model, enhancing the meaningfulness of work and driving greater engagement (Bakker et al. 2023). Given these distinctive generational characteristics, further empirical investigation is necessary to clarify precisely how transformational leadership influences young teachers’ well-being and performance outcomes.

Traditionally, transformational leadership has been studied as an individual-level construct (Kılınç et al. 2024), potentially overlooking its multi-level attributes and violating assumptions of observational and error independence (Peugh 2010). The dual-level model proposed by Kark et al. (2003) addressed this gap by examining transformational leadership at both the individual and group levels. Although existing research has applied the dual-level model to examine outcomes such as performance (Lu and Li 2021), organizational citizenship behavior (Fang and Yu 2023), innovation (Yang et al. 2021), and creativity (Kim et al. 2022), the influence of these leadership behaviors on the well-being and psychological experiences of young teachers has received limited attention.

Moreover, a substantial body of literature indicated that the effectiveness of transformational leadership is significantly influenced by task complexity (Afsar and Umrani 2020; Mahmood et al. 2019; Wang et al. 2014). High task complexity environments often require more communication and coordination, potentially amplifying positive group-level outcomes (Cha et al. 2015), while exacerbating stress and role overload at the individual level (Tian et al. 2022). Despite the growing recognition of contextual factors in transformational leadership (Rosing et al. 2017), the moderating role of task complexity has not received equal attention in existing research.

To address these gaps, the present study draws upon the Job Demands-Resources model to examine the dual-level effects of transformational leadership on young teachers’ well-being and explores how task complexity moderates these effects, as illustrated in Fig. 1. Specifically, it aims to answer two core questions: (1) Does dual-level transformational leadership affect young teachers’ well-being through both a positive pathway (team adaptability) and a negative pathway (role overload)? and (2) How does task complexity moderate these pathways?

Fig. 1: Theoretical model of this study.
figure 1

The upper dotted line denotes the group level, whereas the lower dotted line denotes the individual level.

Full size image

This study makes three contributions to the literature. First, it conceptualizes transformational leadership as a factor that simultaneously influences job resources and job demands for young teachers and examines its effects on well-being from both positive and negative perspectives, providing a more comprehensive understanding of its impact. Second, by adopting a multi-level research design, this study reveals the differentiated functions of transformational leadership at the group and individual levels, thereby extending the Job Demands-Resources model beyond its traditional focus on individual-level processes and demonstrating the dynamic interplay of job resources and demands across hierarchical levels. Third, by incorporating task complexity as a boundary condition, this study refines the conceptual underpinnings of the double-edged sword model, elucidating the circumstances under which transformational leadership fosters engagement or exacerbates strain.

Literature review and research hypotheses

The job demands-resources model and dual-level transformational leadership: theoretical framework

The Job Demands-Resources model underscores the dynamic interplay between two core processes: exhaustion and engagement (Demerouti and Bakker 2011). In the exhaustion process, when job demands continuously exceed an individual’s available resources, employees are prone to experience stress, fatigue, and eventually burnout (Bakker et al. 2004). By contrast, in the engagement process, sufficient job resources stimulate positive work engagement and enhance performance (Bakker et al. 2023).

Within this framework, transformational leadership, which operates at both the individual and group levels (Lu and Li 2021), emerges as a decisive factor that can either escalate job demands or bolster job resources (Tummers and Bakker 2021). At the individual level, transformational leaders encourage personal growth and maximize follower potential (Stein et al. 2021). However, by continually encouraging followers to undertake more ambitious goals and responsibilities, these leaders may inadvertently heighten job demands, thereby intensifying stress and possibly leading to burnout (Boekhorst et al. 2021; Harms et al. 2017; Tummers and Bakker 2021). In this sense, individual-focused transformational leadership may risk triggering the exhaustion process in the Job Demands-Resources model.

By contrast, group-focused transformational leadership is seen as a key source of job resources that can stimulate the engagement process (Jung et al. 2003; Lu and Li 2021). By creating a shared vision, promoting close collaboration, and cultivating mutual support and collective responsibility, group-focused leaders generate social and structural resources that help groups cope with demanding tasks (Cha et al. 2015; Chen et al. 2020; Tummers and Bakker 2021). Such supportive leadership practices fortify the group’s collective capacity to tackle challenges, mitigate stress, and foster higher levels of engagement and resilience (Tummers and Bakker 2021). In line with the Job Demands-Resources model, these supportive leadership behaviors not only enhance the group’s collective capacity to handle work demands but also fortify crucial psychological resources (Lu and Li 2021), thereby reinforcing engagement and resilience (Odeh et al. 2021).

Task complexity also operates as a dual-force factor in the Job Demands-Resources model (Tian et al. 2022). On one hand, highly complex tasks can impose substantial cognitive and emotional burdens, escalating job demands and potentially inducing stress (Chung-Yan 2010; De Jonge and Schaufeli 1998). On the other hand, when adequate support and guidance are provided, such tasks can spark engagement and facilitate professional development, effectively serving as a job resource (Bai et al. 2021; Tummers and Bakker 2021). Hence, understanding how dual-level transformational leadership interacts with task complexity is indispensable for explaining the distinct resource-enhancing and demand-increasing pathways that shape young teachers’ well-being.

In conclusion, grounded in the Job Demands-Resources model, this theoretical framework delineates two key pathways involving exhaustion and engagement to elucidate how dual-level transformational leadership and task complexity collectively shape young teachers’ well-being. By emphasizing the interplay between job demands and resources, it offers a nuanced perspective on the mechanisms through which leadership practices and task characteristics can either exacerbate stress or foster motivation.

The positive path between group-focused transformational leadership and the well-being of young teachers (engagement process): the mediating role of team adaptability

Reinforcing group identity, communicating a clear and inspiring group vision, and fostering team-building activities are key behaviors of group-focused transformational leadership (Wang and Howell 2012). These behaviors create a supportive environment that alleviates stress and boosts engagement and job satisfaction (Bakker et al. 2023). A strong group identity provides young teachers with a sense of belonging, reducing stress and promoting resilience (McKimmie et al. 2020). Young teachers with a strong identification with their group are less likely to experience isolation or burnout, as they find emotional support within their groups (Brown et al. 2022). This sense of belonging enhances collaboration, adaptability, and professional growth (Brown et al. 2022; Uzun 2018), and when individuals feel integral to the group, they are more invested in group activities, improving cohesion and collective problem-solving (Forsyth 2021).

Similarly, a compelling group vision aligns individual and collective goals, offering direction and purpose, which strengthens engagement and fosters group cohesion (Nurtjahjani et al. 2022). Young teachers who see the broader purpose behind their daily tasks are more motivated and better equipped to adapt to challenges and innovations in the teaching environment (Kılınç et al. 2024). Additionally, team-building activities, which are central to group-focused transformational leadership, promote trust, open communication, and mutual understanding (Ali et al. 2021). These activities reduce role ambiguity, enhance psychological safety, and enable innovative problem-solving (Dyer et al. 2013). In the Job Demands-Resources model, a supportive group environment serves as a critical resource that reduces stress and encourages positive engagement behaviors, such as knowledge sharing and collaboration, promoting adaptive teaching practices and helping teachers navigate complex roles (Kılınç et al. 2024).

In summary, group-focused transformational leadership fosters teacher team adaptability by solidifying a shared group identity, articulating a clear and inspiring vision, and cultivating trust-based intra-group relationships. Building on this rationale, the study posits the following hypothesis:

H1a: Group-focused transformational leadership has a significant positive impact on the team adaptability of teachers’ groups.

Furthermore, in a group that can quickly adapt to changes and challenges, young teachers are more likely to feel supported and positive about their work environment (Burke et al. 2006). This capability reduces the influence of work-related uncertainty and stress, providing stable and predictable working conditions (Hartwig et al. 2020). Additionally, effective internal communication and collaboration establish a strong social support network within the group (Jolly et al. 2021). Working in an environment of mutual trust and support is crucial for enhancing the psychological health and well-being of young teachers (Wilson et al. 2020).

Moreover, effective stress and conflict management is key to enhancing the well-being of young teachers (Desivilya et al. 2010). One manifestation of strong team adaptability is the adoption of effective management strategies when facing challenges and internal conflicts (Grass et al. 2020). The atmosphere created by strong team adaptability alleviates work-related psychological burdens and creates a more harmonious and supportive work environment. Therefore, this study proposes the following hypothesis:

H1b: Group-focused transformational leadership has an indirect positive impact on the well-being of young teachers through the mediating role of team adaptability.

The negative path between individual-focused transformational leadership and the well-being of young teachers (exhaustion process): the mediating role of role overload

Although individual-focused transformational leadership is frequently commended for enhancing motivation and performance (Karakus et al. 2024), an emerging body of research indicates that it may inadvertently amplify job demands (Molines et al. 2022; Niessen et al. 2017; Stein et al. 2021). Specifically, when leaders emphasize high performance and innovation, young teachers inevitably face increased workloads (Jensen et al. 2013; Kim et al. 2023), which deplete their job resources and, in turn, heighten stress levels (Abbasi 2015). Such sustained pressures can lead to professional burnout, ultimately undermining young teachers’ well-being (Bodenheimer and Shuster 2020). This outcome aligns with the exhaustion process outlined in the Job Demands-Resources model (Tummers and Bakker 2021).

Moreover, while a focus on personal growth and career development ostensibly benefits teachers in the long term (Zhang and Yuan 2020), it can also heighten job demands if adequate resources, such as training, time, and workload support, are not sufficiently provided (Smylie 1999). Young teachers often invest considerable time and energy in professional development activities, including attending training sessions, seminars, and adopting innovative teaching practices (Schaap et al. 2019). This additional workload can leave them feeling overwhelmed, ultimately triggering role overload (Buruck et al. 2020).

Finally, recognition mechanisms that overlook teachers’ actual demands or innovative contributions can exacerbate role overload by creating a disconnect between their efforts and the rewards they receive (Lo 2021; Shih and Susanto 2011). In the Chinese educational context, where recognition often relies on traditional teaching achievements or standardized assessments, the creative pursuits and novel approaches of young teachers may go underappreciated (Lo 2021; Szymkowiak et al. 2021). This misalignment can lead young teachers to perceive that their work is not sufficiently acknowledged, thereby intensifying role overload (Ouyang et al. 2022). Therefore, this study proposes the following hypothesis:

H2a: Individual-focused transformational leadership has a significant positive impact on the role overload of young teachers.

Further, according to the Job Demands-Resources model, job demands are defined as those aspects of work that require physical and psychological effort, often associated with psychological or physiological costs (Bakker et al. 2023). Role overload, as a specific job demand, can significantly increase psychological and emotional stress for young teachers (Xu 2019). When teachers strive to meet multiple responsibilities, expectations, or work roles, they may experience anxiety, stress, and job dissatisfaction, which in turn can diminish their well-being (Hascher and Waber 2021). Additionally, role overload often requires teachers to distribute limited energy and time among multiple tasks or roles, leading to resource depletion and divided attention (Iannucci and Richards 2022).

In the current fast-evolving and technology-driven educational environment, young teachers are particularly faced with constantly changing teaching demands and technological challenges (Lo 2021; Zhu et al. 2022). When they attempt to meet the multiple role expectations as innovators, educators, and technology users, role overload can cause significant psychological stress and anxiety as they struggle to balance these diverse expectations and responsibilities (Iannucci et al. 2021). This stress can disrupt the balance between work and personal life, leading young teachers to face challenges in pursuing professional achievements while maintaining personal life quality (Zahoor et al. 2021). If these challenges are not effectively managed, they can lead to dissatisfaction with both work and life, negatively impacting their well-being (Le et al. 2020). Therefore, this study proposes the following hypothesis:

H2b: Individual-focused transformational leadership has an indirect negative impact on the well-being of young teachers through the mediating role of role overload.

The moderating role of task complexity

Task complexity, as a significant dimension reflecting job characteristics, is considered an important contextual factor affecting followers’ attitudes and behaviors (Liu and Li 2012). Within organizations, task complexity refers to individuals’ perceptions of the challenges presented by their work (Wood 1986). Due to the limitations of individual cognition and the unpredictability and uncertainty inherent in complex tasks, the level of task complexity can change over time with the task performer’s skills, insight, and experience (Hærem et al. 2015). Therefore, task complexity may moderate the dual pathways between dual-level transformational leadership and the well-being of young teachers.

The moderating role of group task complexity

The Job Demands-Resources model indicates that balancing job demands, such as task complexity, and job resources, like group support and leadership, is crucial for follower well-being (Tummers and Bakker 2021). Under this framework, group-focused leadership, particularly as emphasized by situational leadership theory, involves adapting leadership styles to meet group members’ needs, thereby enhancing team adaptability and providing necessary support to help group members effectively manage work challenges and stress (Lyons and Schneider 2009).

Young teachers may face highly complex group tasks, including the diversification of teaching methods and interdisciplinary course design within groups. While completing these tasks requires more cognitive resources and creative thinking, which may increase work stress (Afsar and Umrani 2020), it also provides opportunities for school leaders to encourage innovation and collaboration. Additionally, the complexity of group tasks may deepen dependency among teachers, requiring them to strengthen collaboration and support to accomplish these collective tasks (Afsar and Umrani 2020). In environments with high task complexity, the positive impact of group-focused transformational leadership on team adaptability may be amplified. Therefore, this study proposes the following hypothesis:

H3a: Group task complexity positively moderates the mediating role of team adaptability in the relationship between group-focused transformational leadership and the well-being of young teachers.

The moderating role of individual task complexity

According to the distraction-conflict perspective, individual-focused transformational leadership, by imposing high-performance expectations and encouraging innovation and self-development, can create psychological stress for young teachers (Parveen and Adeinat 2019). This leadership style, in some cases, may compel teachers to handle multiple tasks with limited resources, potentially leading to insufficient attention resources and an inability to fully meet teaching responsibilities, thereby causing role overload (Iannucci and Richards 2022). However, distraction does not necessarily lead to cognitive overload, it depends on whether the residual resources after distraction are sufficient to complete the work tasks (Baron 1986). For instance, if the tasks are inherently simple, young teachers may be able to meet the demands of individual-focused transformational leadership without depleting cognitive resources (Liu and Li 2012). Conversely, in highly complex tasks, exceeding the limits of job resources can lead to cognitive overload caused by distraction, where the demands of leadership consume teachers’ critical cognitive resources, resulting in significant psychological fatigue (Baron 1986).

Similarly, young teachers in China, who grew up in an era that emphasizes individual well-being and quality of life, typically exhibit a high degree of concern for their work content and environment and possess the capacity to handle complex tasks (Jia 2021; Szymkowiak et al. 2021; Toropova et al. 2021). Their aspirations extend beyond professional success to include a rich and balanced personal life (Barhate and Dirani 2022). However, even though they can handle complex tasks, if these tasks require off-hours effort, they may find their attention and energy overly dispersed when trying to meet high-performance expectations and self-development opportunities presented by leadership (Chen et al. 2018). This dispersion could encroach upon the resources and time they need to maintain a work-life balance, leading to more pronounced psychological stress (Mark et al. 2018). Under these circumstances, an increase in individual task complexity could exacerbate the role overload effect of individual-focused transformational leadership on young teachers and negatively impact their well-being. Thus, this study proposes the following hypothesis:

H3b: Individual task complexity positively moderates the mediating role of role overload in the relationship between individual-focused transformational leadership and the well-being of young teachers.

Methodology

Sample and procedure

Data for this study were collected using an online questionnaire. To reduce common method bias and spurious correlations, a two-wave follow-up survey was conducted with eligible teachers. Both waves included two attention-check questions (e.g., “Please select ‘strongly disagree’ for this question”) to prevent random responses.

In the first wave, data on demographic information, dual-level transformational leadership, and task complexity were collected. A total of 2436 questionnaires were distributed across 96 schools and 286 groups. Of these, 1893 questionnaires were returned from 89 schools and 267 groups, yielding a response rate of 77.7%. Two weeks later, the second wave of the survey focused on gathering data on team adaptability, role overload, and the well-being of young teachers. Questionnaires were sent to the 1893 valid participants from the first wave. A total of 1286 responses were received from 213 groups, resulting in an effective response rate of 67.9%.

The questionnaires were then matched by group numbers. Individual responses with incorrect answers to attention-check questions and those from groups with fewer than four responses were excluded. This process resulted in a final dataset of 949 valid questionnaires from 177 groups and 68 schools, as detailed in Table 1.

Table 1 The demographic characteristics of the samples.
Full size table

Measurement tool

The measurement instruments in this study were derived from validated scales that have been previously tested in empirical research. To ensure clarity for participants, all questionnaires were administered in Chinese. Each English scale underwent a standard translation and back-translation procedure (Brislin 1970) to minimize potential translation errors. Most variables were measured on a 5-point Likert scale, except for the well-being of young teachers, which was assessed using a 7-point Likert scale in accordance with the original scale instructions. The reliability of the scales was confirmed by Cronbach’s α coefficients ranging from 0.873 to 0.931, all surpassing the acceptable threshold of 0.7 (Hair et al. 2010).

Dual-level transformational leadership was measured using the 34-item scale developed by Wang and Howell (2010), which includes two subscales. In this study, the subscales of group-focused and individual-focused transformational leadership yielded Cronbach’s α coefficients of 0.926 and 0.929, respectively.

Team adaptability was assessed with the scale developed by Marques-Quinteiro et al. (2015). The items in this scale were developed using the referent-shift consensus approach (Biemann et al. 2012), which involves asking participants about the adaptive performance of their group rather than their own performance. The Cronbach’s α coefficient for this scale in this study was 0.931.

Role overload was evaluated using the role overload subscale from the role stress scale developed by Schaubroeck et al. (1989). This subscale was recently validated in the context of Chinese culture by Ke et al. (2020), demonstrating good reliability and validity. The Cronbach’s α coefficient was 0.873 in this study.

Task complexity was measured using the scale by Maynard and Hakel (1997), also utilizing a referent-shift consensus approach to assess task complexity at both group and individual levels. In this study, the Cronbach’s α coefficient was 0.889 for group-level task complexity and 0.906 for individual-level task complexity.

The well-being of young teachers was measured using the teacher-specific well-being scale developed by Collie et al. (2015). Existing measures of general well-being or those based entirely on stress scales (Spilt et al. 2011), which interpret low stress as high well-being, may not accurately capture the well-being of young teachers (Huppert and So 2013). This is because the well-being of young teachers, like other socio-emotional constructs such as self-concept and affect, is often domain-specific (Hascher and Waber 2021). Therefore, selecting the teacher-specific well-being scale is likely to yield more precise results. The Cronbach’s α coefficient for these items was 0.926 in this study.

Control variables

To obtain more accurate research results, four demographic variables were set as control variables: age, gender, weekly teaching hours, and overall health status. These variables have been identified as relevant to teacher well-being (Hascher and Waber 2021).

Results

Preliminary analyses

Preliminary analyses were conducted to ensure the data’s appropriateness before testing the research hypotheses. Discriminant validity was confirmed via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), while potential common method bias was evaluated using both Harman’s single-factor test and an independent common method factor within the CFA. Aggregation tests were performed for the group-level constructs, and null model tests verified the multilevel structure. Finally, descriptive statistics and correlations for all key variables are presented.

Discriminant validity and common method bias

To test discriminant validity, this study utilized a model fit comparison method in CFA to evaluate the goodness-of-fit for various factor models. As shown in Table 2, the seven-factor model met all fit indices (χ2/df = 1.702 < 3, RMSEA = 0.027 < 0.08, TLI = 0.981 > 0.9, CFI = 0.983 > 0.9, SRMR = 0.021 < 0.05), significantly outperforming other models and demonstrating good discriminant validity among the variables (Bentler 1990).

Table 2 Results of confirmatory factor analysis.
Full size table

Despite collecting data at two different time points, the study may still be subject to common method bias since the same teachers completed the questionnaires. To address this, Harman’s single factor test was performed using exploratory factor analysis on all items, resulting in 14 unrotated factors with the first factor accounting for 17.08% of the variance, well below the critical value of 40%, initially indicating no significant common method bias (Podsakoff et al. 2003).

Subsequently, CFA was conducted by adding an independent common method bias factor to the seven-factor model. As shown in the last row of Table 2, although the fit indices for the seven-factor model with the common method bias factor were slightly better (χ²/df = 1.698, RMSEA = 0.027, TLI = 0.985, CFI = 0.981, SRMR = 0.020) compared to the original seven-factor model, the improvement in fit was not substantial. This indicates that common method bias is within an acceptable range.

Aggregation test

The measurements of group-focused transformational leadership, group task complexity, and team adaptability were aggregated from individual-level data to the group level. According to Kozlowski and Klein (2000), aggregating individual-level data to the group level requires testing for intra-group homogeneity and inter-group heterogeneity. This study employs the Rwg (within-group interrater agreement coefficient), ICC (1) (intraclass correlation coefficient), and ICC (2) (between-group variance) as indicators to validate the aggregation of group-level data.

As shown in Table 3, the results indicate that the Rwg values for group-focused transformational leadership, group task complexity, and team adaptability all exceed 0.70, meeting the standard for within-group consistency (Biemann et al. 2012). The F values for the between-group variance test are all significant at the 0.001 level. Additionally, the within-group variance ICC (1) is greater than 0.05, and the between-group variance ICC (2) is greater than 0.70, meeting the requirements for aggregation (Castro 2002). Therefore, it is appropriate to aggregate the data for group-focused transformational leadership, group task complexity, and team adaptability at the group level.

Table 3 Results of aggregation test.
Full size table

Null model test

The null model test is a prerequisite for multilevel analysis, as it must demonstrate that both role overload and the well-being of young teachers exhibit variance at the individual and group levels (Castro 2002). Therefore, a null model test was conducted, and the results are presented in Table 4.

Table 4 Results of null model.
Full size table

As shown in Table 4, for role overload, the between-group variance (t00) is 0.535, the within-group variance (σ²) is 0.525, and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) is 0.504. This indicates that between-group variance accounts for 50.4% of the total variance, which cannot be ignored. For the well-being of young teachers, the t00 is 0.625, the σ² is 0.525, and the ICC is 0.543, indicating that between-group variance accounts for 54.3% of the total variance, which also cannot be ignored. These findings suggest that there may be group-level variables that can explain individual-level variance in role overload and the well-being of young teachers (Castro 2002).

Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis

The descriptive statistics and correlation analysis for the variables are presented in Table 5. At the individual level, individual-focused transformational leadership is significantly positively correlated with role overload (r = 0.38, p < 0.001) and significantly negatively correlated with the well-being of young teachers (r = −0.375, p < 0.001). Role overload is significantly negatively correlated with the well-being of young teachers (r = −0.434, p < 0.001). At the group level, group-focused transformational leadership is significantly positively correlated with team adaptability (r = 0.423, p < 0.001). These results provide preliminary support for the hypotheses of this study.

Table 5 Results of descriptive statistics and correlation analysis.
Full size table

Hypothesis testing

After establishing the reliability and validity of the measures and confirming the suitability of the multilevel data structure, the next step involved testing the research hypotheses. Mplus 8.3 and R were employed to examine main effects, mediating effects, and moderated mediation effects.

Test of main effect

To test the hypothesis of the double-edged sword effect of transformational leadership on the well-being of young teachers (H1a and H2a), four different models were constructed. Models 1 and 2 primarily examine the effect of the independent variable on the mediating variable. Model 3 examines the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable. Model 4 comprehensively examines the effects of the independent variable and the mediating variable on the dependent variable.

As shown in Table 6, at the individual level, individual-focused transformational leadership has a significant positive effect on role overload (β = 0.342, p < 0.001) and a significant negative effect on the well-being of young teachers (β = −0.249, p < 0.001). Additionally, role overload has a significant negative effect on the well-being of young teachers (β = −0.292, p < 0.001).

Table 6 The results of cross-level analysis.
Full size table

At the group level, group-focused transformational leadership has a significant positive effect on team adaptability (β = 0.452, p < 0.001) and a significant positive effect on the well-being of young teachers (β = 0.123, p < 0.05). Furthermore, team adaptability has a significant positive effect on the well-being of young teachers (β = 0.280, p < 0.001).

The results of the main effect tests indicate that both the independent variables and mediating variables in this study have significant impacts on the dependent variable, supporting hypotheses H1a and H2a.

Test of mediating effect

To test the mediating effect hypotheses involving team adaptability and role overload (H1b and H2b), the study employed the Bootstrapping method, with 20,000 resamples to calculate the mediating effects. The results show that the mediating effect of team adaptability is significant (β = 0.13, p < 0.001, CI [0.077, 0.176]), and the mediating effect of role overload is also significant (β = −0.101, p < 0.001, CI [−0.124, −0.077]). Thus, hypotheses H1b and H2b are supported.

Test of moderated mediation effect

Before testing the moderated mediation effects (H3a and H3b), it is necessary to verify the moderation effects of task complexity at both levels on the first half of the mediation paths. The results, as shown in Table 6, indicate that the interaction terms of transformational leadership and task complexity at both levels have significant positive effects on team adaptability (β = 0.293, p < 0.001) and role overload (β = 0.231, p < 0.001), providing preliminary support for H3a and H3b.

A further examination utilizing simple slope analysis, as illustrated in Figs. 2 and 3, reveals that at the group level, high task complexity enhances the positive effect of group-focused transformational leadership on team adaptability. At the individual level, high task complexity intensifies the positive effect of individual-focused transformational leadership on role overload.

Fig. 2: Moderating effect of group task complexity on the relationship between group-focused transformational leadership and team adaptability.
figure 2

GTL group-focused transformational leadership, TA team adaptability, GTC group task complexity.

Full size image
Fig. 3: Moderating effect of individual task complexity on the relationship between individual-focused transformational leadership and role overload.
figure 3

ITL individual-focused transformational leadership, RO role overload, ITC individual task complexity.

Full size image

Finally, the indirect effects under different levels of task complexity were tested to verify the moderated mediation effects, as shown in Table 7. At the group level, task complexity significantly moderates the mediation path of team adaptability (Index = 0.082, p < 0.001, 95% CI [0.043, 0.121]). When group task complexity is high, the indirect effect of this path is significantly positive (β = 0.209, p < 0.001, 95% CI [0.136, 0.282]), whereas when group task complexity is low, the indirect effect is not significant (β = 0.044, p > 0.05).

Table 7 Results of moderated mediation effects test.
Full size table

At the individual level, individual task complexity also significantly moderates the mediation path of role overload (Index = −0.061, p < 0.001, 95% CI [−0.080, −0.043]). When individual task complexity is high, the indirect effect of this path is significantly negative (β = −0.168, p < 0.001, 95% CI [−0.203, −0.132]), and when individual task complexity is low, the indirect effect is still significantly negative (β = −0.033, p < 0.001, 95% CI [−0.055, −0.01]). Thus, hypotheses H3a and H3b are supported.

Discussion

The primary aim of this study was to address two critical questions: (1) Does dual-level transformational leadership influence young teachers’ well-being through both positive (team adaptability) and negative (role overload) pathways, and (2) how does task complexity moderate these pathways? In response to these questions, a dual-pathway model of engagement and exhaustion was constructed based on the job demands-resources theory, aiming to clarify the influence mechanisms and boundary conditions of dual-level transformational leadership on the well-being of young teachers in China. The findings indicate that:

  1. (1)

    Within the framework of the job demands-resources theory, dual-level transformational leadership can be perceived as a factor that simultaneously provides job resources while increasing job demands (Bakker et al. 2023; Tummers and Bakker 2021). On one hand, group-focused transformational leadership enhances group cohesion, clarifies a shared vision, and strengthens internal connections and trust among teachers, thereby improving team adaptability. This adaptability is crucial for groups to remain effective and competitive in a changing environment, providing group members with support and a positive work environment, ultimately fostering young teachers’ well-being. On the other hand, although transformational leadership is widely recognized for its ability to motivate and drive high performance (Judge and Piccolo 2004; Kark and Shamir 2013), the high-performance expectations and personal development demands it places on young teachers can increase their work stress and cognitive-emotional burden (Stein et al. 2021), leading to role overload and ultimately diminishing their well-being. These findings corroborate the conclusions of Boekhorst et al. (2021) and Molines et al. (2022), indicating that the effects of transformational leadership are not always positive. In certain contexts, transformational leadership may contribute to the accumulation of negative emotions among followers.

  2. (2)

    Task complexity delineates the boundaries between contrasting mechanisms at the group and individual levels. At the group level, as task complexity increases, typically requiring higher levels of innovation, coordination, and problem-solving (Beauchamp et al. 2017), complex group tasks provide opportunities for transformational leaders to emphasize group identity, clarify group vision, and underscore the importance of team-building. Under the guidance and support of group-focused transformational leadership, young teachers learn to tackle complex problems effectively and enhance their personal and collaborative skills. This process strengthens the overall team adaptability. As team adaptability increases, young teachers experience greater self-efficacy and a sense of achievement from successfully navigating challenges (Madi Odeh et al. 2023), leading to improved well-being.

At the individual level, task complexity could amplify the influence of individual-focused transformational leadership on role overload among young teachers. In situations characterized by high task complexity, the heightened expectations and motivational efforts associated with individual-focused transformational leadership might not yield positive outcomes. Rather, the excessive demands and motivational pressures could lead to the depletion of psychological resources, making it difficult for teachers to balance job demands with their personal job resources. This imbalance is likely to intensify role overload, thereby reducing the well-being of young teachers. These findings further validate the research conclusions of Bodenheimer and Shuster (2020), Harms et al. (2017), Molines et al. (2022), and Stein et al. (2021).

It is noteworthy that task complexity, as an objective task attribute, can be described by the degree of information load, diversity, and uncertainty (Campbell 1988). According to self-presentation theory, when young teachers have a strong sense of control over their tasks (i.e., low complexity tasks), external incentives and high standards are more likely to be converted into work enthusiasm (Goffman 2023). They believe that their investment of time and effort will lead to better work outcomes, thereby achieving the goal of self-presentation (Zajonc 1965). Therefore, it can be inferred that if young teachers’ tasks are relatively simple, motivations and high standards from transformational leadership are less likely to cause cognitive resource depletion or role overload.

However, this study found that even with low task complexity, the influence of individual-focused transformational leadership on the role overload experienced by young teachers, although diminished, remains significant. This persistence may be attributed to the inherent professional characteristics of secondary school educators. Teachers often find it difficult to completely disengage from work-related responsibilities during non-working hours (Kyriacou and Sutcliffe 1978). Despite the reduced complexity of tasks, the necessity to stay prepared outside of working hours hinders their ability to recuperate, thereby contributing to role overload. This finding aligns with the conclusion of Stein et al. (2021), who reported that the relationship between the extra effort demanded by transformational leaders and emotional exhaustion is ambiguous, contingent upon the followers’ psychological detachment from their work.

Academic contribution

The evolving theory of transformational leadership and the rise of multi-level research have highlighted the importance of group-focused transformational leadership (Chen et al. 2020). Wang et al. (2011) claimed that transformational leadership exerts its strongest influence on the performance of followers at the group level, whereas its effects at the individual level tend to be more incidental. Drawing on this premise, the first academic contribution of this study is the empirical confirmation that group-focused transformational leadership plays a pivotal role in enhancing young teachers’ well-being. This evidence provides additional clarity in the ongoing debate about whether transformational leadership primarily serves as a motivational driver or a source of depletion (Bose et al. 2021; Diebig et al. 2016; Kılınç et al. 2024; Molines et al. 2022; Siswanto and Yuliana 2022; Stein et al. 2021; Syrek and Antoni 2014). The findings indicate that positive outcomes mainly originate from group-level processes, while high performance expectations at the individual level can become “too much of a good thing” (Fischer et al. 2021), inadvertently draining young teachers’ resources and contributing to their exhaustion.

The second key academic contribution of this study lies in its adoption of a multi-level research design rooted in the Job Demands-Resources model. This approach acknowledges that leadership behaviors function differently across hierarchical levels (Liu et al. 2024), acting as a job resource that alleviates certain demands at the group level while simultaneously increasing demands and depleting resources at the individual level. As a result, a multi-level analytical framework is necessary to capture the complex organizational influences that shape young teacher well-being.

By moving beyond single-level analyses, which often fail to account for the nested structure of school environments (Chen et al. 2022; Muliati et al. 2022; Siswanto and Yuliana 2022), this study systematically examines how group-focused and individual-focused transformational leadership interact to influence young teachers’ engagement and exhaustion trajectories. In doing so, it expands the theoretical scope of the Job Demands-Resources model beyond its traditional focus on individual-level processes (Yin et al. 2018), demonstrating that job demands and resources do not function independently but are instead activated differently at each organizational tier. This perspective provides deeper insights into how group-level resources such as team adaptability and individual-level stressors such as role overload coexist within the same leadership context, clarifying the mechanisms through which transformational leadership produces its ‘double-edged sword’ effect on the well-being of young teachers.

Lastly, this research incorporates task complexity into the double-edged sword model, further expanding the boundary conditions for the positive and negative effects of dual-level transformational leadership. Niessen et al. (2017) found that not all followers benefit equally from transformational leadership; the impact can vary depending on the teacher’s level of emotional exhaustion. Specifically, for teachers with sufficient energy resources, transformational leadership can facilitate better coordination and communication within the group, fostering trust among group members and promoting the thriving development of individual teachers. Conversely, for teachers with low energy levels or limited emotional resources, transformational leadership may be perceived as stressful. These teachers may increase their work intensity to meet the high standards and expectations set by leadership, which can lead to rethinking their teaching principles and practices, potentially resulting in overload and fatigue, thereby hindering their development. This point also validates the theoretical conjecture of Campbell (1988) that task complexity can either facilitate or hinder individual behavior.

Niessen et al. (2017) emphasized that existing research in transformational leadership has not adequately addressed the differentiated impact of energy resource levels on teachers, leading to some divergence in related studies. This study responds to their call by proposing that the impact of transformational leadership on young teachers’ well-being is also differentiated, with task complexity playing a moderating role. The findings indicate that the impact of dual-level transformational leadership on individual teachers’ well-being is indeed differentiated. This not only confirms the views of Niessen et al. (2017) but also provides valuable insights for bridging theoretical divergences in the field of transformational leadership (Endriulaitienė and Morkevičiūtė 2020; McCombs and Williams 2021; Molines et al. 2022; Stein et al. 2021; Teetzen et al. 2022).

Practical contribution

Transformational leadership, as a leadership style suited to the contemporary era of change, has been widely implemented in school organizations (Karakus et al. 2024). The findings reveal that while transformational leadership enables groups to effectively confront changing environments, it can also lead to role overload among followers. Based on these findings, the primary practical implication for leadership practice in school organizations is to maximize the positive effects of transformational leadership, harnessing its beneficial aspects, while simultaneously mitigating its negative impacts, thus optimizing its effectiveness. The specific insights and management suggestions are as follows:

First, promoting robust teacher collaboration emerges as a key strategy for enhancing overall well-being. Extensive research shows that supportive and trusting professional communities significantly impact teachers’ sense of fulfillment and resilience (Hascher and Waber 2021; Karakus et al. 2024; Wilson et al. 2020). For school leaders, tailoring transformational leadership behaviors to the specific context of each school is paramount. Rather than employing a uniform blueprint, leaders might adjust their inspirational approaches and individualized considerations based on the group’s developmental stage, subject area, or skill sets. By actively cultivating an atmosphere of shared trust through regular peer observations, collaborative lesson planning, and open dialogue forums, leaders can foster a sense of collective efficacy that, in turn, bolsters teacher well-being.

According to the professional life cycle theory of teachers, young teachers face unique challenges such as inexperience, adapting to the demands of the profession, and establishing a strong sense of professional identity (Huberman 1989). These challenges necessitate careful calibration of performance expectations and individualized development goals to support their growth without imposing undue pressure. While setting ambitious targets can effectively enhance motivation, the application of excessive or uniform standards may lead to unnecessary stress, potentially undermining their well-being (Becker et al. 2022; Stein et al. 2021). To mitigate these adverse effects, school leaders should consider breaking down overarching performance objectives into manageable sub-goals, allowing young teachers to experience incremental success and avoid feeling overwhelmed. This strategy ensures that the challenges associated with transformational leadership serve as catalysts for professional growth rather than becoming sources of burnout. Additionally, implementing a flexible feedback loop, where teachers regularly assess their progress, receive targeted support, and express emerging concerns, can help alleviate role overload, enhance motivation, and sustain long-term engagement.

Second, it is crucial for school leaders to prioritize empathetic care and comprehensive support mechanisms for educators experiencing role overload. The findings indicate that when individual tasks become excessively complex, the emphasis on personal development within transformational leadership may shift from being motivational to becoming burdensome. Although teaching assignments are often shaped by specialized roles, making it impractical to uniformly reduce task complexity, leaders can take proactive steps to acknowledge and address teachers’ emotional strains. Establishing accessible communication channels, such as scheduled individual check-ins and institutionalized mental health resources, helps identify early warning signs of overwhelm. In addition, adjusting certain administrative responsibilities or providing supplemental assistance, especially for those who balance teaching and administrative roles, can alleviate heightened stress. By allocating resources in a timely manner and modifying workload distributions, school leaders maintain the motivational core of transformational leadership without overlooking individual capacities and well-being.

Limitation and future studies

Given various constraints and time limitations, this study has certain limitations that necessitate further exploration and improvement in future research.

Firstly, the relationship between transformational leadership and young teachers’ well-being explored in this study is based on the Chinese context, and its generalizability needs further validation in other cultural settings.

Secondly, although this study collected data at two time points, it essentially remains cross-sectional in nature, making it difficult to accurately infer causality. Future research should employ longitudinal designs to more deeply investigate the relationship between transformational leadership and young teachers’ well-being.

Lastly, dual-level transformational leadership behaviors are likely to impact innovative performance through different mediating mechanisms. Therefore, future research should introduce various mediating variables from new theoretical perspectives to better reveal the underlying processes.