Research suggests that principal leadership behaviors affect teachers’ professional emotion (e.g., teacher efficacy and job satisfaction). Drawing on PISA 2015 data from 8447 teachers and 256 principals in Germany and 6423 teachers and 268 principals in China, this study explores the conceptual constructs of principal leadership, and teacher efficacy (self and collective) and job satisfaction via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Subsequently, it examines the relationships between principal leadership behaviors and these teacher emotional outcomes through multilevel structural equation modeling (MSEM). The results reveal that Germany and China share a similar leadership conceptual construct, encompassing setting vision/goals for school, instructional leadership, and developing people. In both contexts, effective leadership combines setting vision/goals and instructional leadership. However, cross-country differences emerged: setting vision/goals was positively associated with teacher job satisfaction in Germany but with teacher collective efficacy in China. Instructional leadership positively predicted teacher collective efficacy in Germany, whereas it predicted both self- and collective efficacy in China. Chinese principals should notice the negative effects of developing people initiatives on teacher collective efficacy and job satisfaction. Future research and practice should focus more on the culturally situated interpretation of leadership behaviors rather than on the behaviors in isolation.
AndréSMaulanaRHelms-LorenzM, et al. (2020) Student perceptions in measuring teaching behavior across six countries: A multi-group confirmatory factor analysis approach to measurement invariance. Frontiers in Psychology11: 273.
2.
BartlettLVavrusF (2017) Comparative case studies: An innovative approach. Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education1(1): 5–17.
3.
BaumE (2013) Kooperation und Schulentwicklung: Wie Lehrkräfte in Gruppen Entwicklungsanlässe Bearbeiten. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
4.
BeausaertSKyndtE (2023) Editorial: Social capital and wellbeing of teachers and principals: Social support and beyond. Frontiers in Psychology13: 1127740.
5.
BeausaertSFroehlichDERileyP, et al. (2023) What about school principals’ well-being? The role of social capital. Educational Management Administration & Leadership51(2): 405–421.
6.
BellensKVan DammeJVan Den NoortgateW, et al. (2019) Instructional quality: Catalyst or pitfall in educational systems’ aim for high achievement and equity? An answer based on multilevel SEM analyses of TIMSS 2015 data in Flanders (Belgium), Germany, and Norway. Large-Scale Assessments in Education7(1): 1.
7.
BerkemeyerNFeldhoffTBrüsemeisterT (2008) Schulische steuergruppen—ein intermediärer Akteur zur bearbeitung des organisationsdefizits der schule? In: LangerR (eds) Warum tun die das? Governanceanalysen zum Steuerungshandeln in der Schulentwicklung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 149–172.
8.
BonsenM (2015) Schulleitung und führung in der schule. In: HerbertAKatharinaMM (eds) Handbuch Neue Steuerung im Schulsystem. Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, 301–323.
9.
BourdieuP (1986) The forms of capital. In: RichardsonJG (Ed.) Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. New York: Greenwood Press, pp. 241–258.
10.
BrayMAdamsonBMasonM (2014) Comparative Education Research: Approaches and Methods. Cham: Springer.
11.
BrownGTHarrisLRO'QuinC, et al. (2017) Using multi-group confirmatory factor analysis to evaluate cross-cultural research: Identifying and understanding non-invariance. International Journal of Research & Method in Education40(1): 66–90.
12.
BrownCLuzmoreRO’DonovanR, et al. (2024) How educational leaders can maximise the social capital benefits of inter-school networks: Findings from a systematic review. International Journal of Educational Management38(1): 213–264.
13.
BushTGloverD (2014) School leadership models: What do we know?School Leadership & Management34(5): 553–571.
14.
CarneyS (2009) Negotiating policy in an age of globalization: Exploring educational “policyscapes” in Denmark, Nepal, and China. Comparative Education Review53(1): 63–88.
15.
ChangHAbdullahMY (2025) The relationship between school leadership styles and teacher job satisfaction in China. Uniglobe Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities4(2): 11–18.
16.
ChenDNingBBosW (2022) Relationship between principal leadership style and student achievement: A comparative study between Germany and China. Sage Open12(2): 21582440221094601.
ClaridgeT (2018) Introduction to social capital theory. Social Capital Research1(4): 1–44.
19.
CohenJ (1992) Statistical power analysis. Current Directions in Psychological Science1(3): 98–101.
20.
ColemanJS (1990) Commentary: Social institutions and social theory. American Sociological Review55(3): 333–339.
21.
DealTEPetersonKD (2016) Shaping school culture. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.
22.
DonohooJKatzS (2023) Quality implementation of professional learning communities: The role of leadership. Professional Development in Education49(2): 189–205.
23.
DouDDevosGValckeM (2017) The relationships between school autonomy gap, principal leadership, teachers’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Educational Management Administration & Leadership45(6): 959–977.
24.
EndersCKGottschallAC (2011) Multiple imputation strategies for multiple group structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling18(1): 35–54.
25.
FangJQiZ (2023) The influence of school climate on teachers’ job satisfaction: The mediating role of teachers’ self-efficacy. PLoS One18(10): e0287555.
26.
FarhJLHackettRDLiangJ (2007) Individual-level cultural values as moderators of perceived organizational support-employee outcome relationships in China: Comparing the effects of power distance and traditionality. Academy of Management Journal50(3): 715–729.
27.
FeldhoffTHuberSGRolffHG (2010) Steering groups as designers of school development processes. Journal for Educational Research Online2(2): 98–124.
28.
GarametsiVAnastasiouS (2021) Perceived leadership style and job satisfaction of teachers in public and private schools. International Journal of Management in Education15(1): 58–77.
29.
GoddardRGoddardYSook KimE, et al. (2017) A theoretical and empirical analysis of the roles of instructional leadership, teacher collaboration, and collective efficacy beliefs in support of student learning. American Journal of Education123(4): 501–530.
30.
HallingerPChenJ (2015) Review of research on educational leadership and management in Asia: A comparative analysis of research topics and methods, 1995–2012. Educational Management Administration & Leadership43(1): 5–27.
31.
HallingerPLiuSPiyamanP (2019) Does principal leadership make a difference in teacher professional learning? A comparative study China and Thailand. Compare49(3): 341–357.
32.
HofstedeG (1986) Cultural differences in teaching and learning. International Journal of Intercultural Relations10(3): 301–320.
33.
HofstedeG (2011) Dimensionalizing cultures: The hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture2(1): 8.
HooperDCoughlanJMullenMR (2008) Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods6(1): 53–60.
36.
HuangZWangTLiX (2015) The political dynamics of educational changes in China. Policy Futures in Education14(1): 24–41.
37.
HuberSTulowitzkiPHameyerU (2017) School leadership and curriculum: German perspectives. Leadership and Policy in Schools16(2): 272–302.
38.
JudgeTALockeEA (1993) Effect of dysfunctional thought processes on subjective well-being and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology78(3): 475–490.
39.
KhalifaMAGoodenMADavisJE (2016) Culturally responsive school leadership: A synthesis of the literature. Review of Educational Research86(4): 1272–1311.
40.
LarsonLMSeipelMTKellyK (2022) The mediating role of teacher self-efficacy on the relationship between principal leadership and teacher job satisfaction. School Leadership & Management42(3): 245–264.
41.
LauermannFBergerJL (2021) Linking teacher self-efficacy and responsibility with teachers’ self-reported and student-reported teaching practices. Learning and Instruction76: 101441.
42.
LeeS (2024) Linking transformational leadership to teacher job satisfaction: The mediating roles of trust and collective efficacy. Educational Administration Quarterly60(1): 102–132.
43.
LeeSLeeJLiuY (2022) The effect of principal leadership on teacher collaboration: The mediating roles of trust and collective efficacy. Educational Administration Quarterly58(3): 465–500.
44.
LeithwoodKHarrisAHopkinsD (2008) Seven strong claims about successful school leadership. School Leadership and Management28(1): 27–42.
45.
LeithwoodKPattenSJantziD (2010) Testing a conception of how school leadership influences student learning. Educational Administration Quarterly46(5): 671–706.
46.
LeserIVockR, et al. (2012) Wie bedeutsam sind schulentwicklungsnetzwerke? Eine analyse netzwerkspezifischer kooperationsbeziehungen im rahmen der schulentwicklungsinitiative” prima (r) forscher—naturwissenschaftliches lernen im grundschulnetzwerk. In: KulinSFrankKFickermannD (eds) Soziale Netzwerkanalyse. Theorie—Praxis—Methoden. Münster: Waxmann Verlag GmbH, 233–248.
47.
LiuSHallingerP (2020) Unpacking the effects of culture on school leadership and teacher learning in China. Educational Management Administration & Leadership49(2): 174114321989604.
48.
LiuSHallingerP (2026) The effect of department leadership on teacher professional learning in China: A multilevel moderated mediation model. Educational Management Administration and Leadership54(1): 6–27.
49.
LiuSKeeleyJWSuiY, et al. (2021) Impact of distributed leadership on teacher job satisfaction in China: The mediating roles of teacher autonomy and teacher collaboration. Studies in Educational Evaluation71: 101099.
50.
LiuYBellibasMŞ (2020) Conceptualizing the mediating paths connecting school leadership to teachers’ affective organizational commitment. Educational Management Administration & Leadership51(5): 1097–1118.
51.
MehtaJ (2013) From bureaucracy to profession: Remaking the educational sector for the twenty-first century. Harvard Educational Review83(3): 463–488.
52.
MeulemanB (2019) Multilevel structural equation modeling for cross-national comparative research. Kzfss Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie71(Suppl 1): 129–155.
53.
MeyerAYadaTYadaA, et al. (2025) Principal leadership practices for supporting teacher collaboration and collective teacher efficacy: A random intercept cross-lagged panel model. Educational Management Administration & Leadership: 1–19.
54.
MincklerCH (2014) School leadership that builds teacher social capital. Educational Management Administration & Leadership42(5): 657–679.
55.
MishraS (2020) Social networks, social capital, social support and academic success in higher education: A systematic review with a special focus on ‘underrepresented’ students. Educational Research Review29: 100307.
56.
NingBLiuHCuiY (2022) Working conditions influencing junior school principalship as a satisfying profession: A cross-country comparative study. Frontiers in Psychology13: 834349.
57.
RechsteinerBCompagnoniMMaag MerkiK, et al. (2022) “Title does not dictate behavior”: Associations of formal, structural, and behavioral brokerage with school staff members’ professional well-being. Frontiers in Psychology13: 885616.
58.
RobinsonVMLloydCARoweKJ (2008) The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly44(5): 635–674.
59.
SchratzMAmmannMAndereggN, et al. (2019) Schulleitungshandeln an ausgezeichneten schulen. Zeitschrift für Bildungsforschung9(1): 71–88.
60.
SchwartzSH (2006) An overview of the theory of basic human values. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
61.
SchwartzSH (2009) Culture matters: National value cultures, sources, and consequences. In: WyerRSChiuCHongY (Eds) Understanding Culture: Theory, Research, and Application. New York: Psychology Press, pp. 127–150.
62.
SehgalPNambudiriRMishraSK (2017) Teacher effectiveness through self-efficacy, collaboration and principal leadership. International Journal of Educational Management31(4): 505–517.
63.
ShaukatSVishnumolakalaVRAl BustamiG (2019) The impact of teachers’ characteristics on their self-efficacy and job satisfaction: A perspective from teachers engaging students with disabilities. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs19(1): 68–76.
64.
SkaalvikEMSkaalvikS (2011) Teacher job satisfaction and motivation to leave the teaching profession: Relations with school context, feeling of belonging, and emotional exhaustion. Teaching and Teacher Education27(6): 1029–1038.
UspNWinterSEM (2012) Some clarifications and recommendations on fit indices. Structural Equation Modeling523(623): 1–4.
68.
Van De SchootRLugtigPHoxJ (2012) A checklist for testing measurement invariance. European Journal of Developmental Psychology9(4): 486–492.
69.
Van De VijverF (2001) The evolution of cross-cultural research methods. In: MatsumotoD (Ed.) The Handbook of Culture and Psychology. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 77–97.
70.
VielufSHochweberJKliemeE, et al. (2020) Who has a good relationship with the teacher? A cross-national study of teachers’ instructional support and teacher-student relationships. American Educational Research Journal57(2): 737–783.
71.
VoelkelRH (2019) Causal relationship among transformational leadership, professional learning communities, and teacher collective efficacy. International Journal of Leadership in Education25(3): 1–22.
72.
WursterSBachASchliesingA, et al. (2016) Schulen als steuerungsakteure im bildungssystem–datenbasierte schul-und unterrichtsentwicklung aus der perspektive von schulleitungen, fachkonferenzleitungen und lehrkräften. In: Deutschland Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (ed) Steuerung im Bildungssystem. Bonn: Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, pp. 178–207.
73.
ZhangJHuangQXuJ (2022) The relationships among transformational leadership, professional learning communities and Teachers’ job satisfaction in China: What do the principals think?Sustainability14(4): 2362.
