Evidence Hub

Going the distance? A meta-analysis of leadership styles, social distance, turnover intention, and organizational commitment

Silas Blomqvist Johansen, Tine Bentzen, Sofie Loklindt Christensen

Social Science & Medicine (1967), 2026

Abstract

Retention of healthcare personnel is a global challenge with severe implications for securing stable, high-quality healthcare services. The common saying that 'people do not leave a bad job, but they leave a bad boss' stresses the influence a formal leader has on employees' turnover intentions (TI) and organizational commitment (OC). Understanding what makes an effective leader is essential for understanding managers' agency in dealing with employee retention; yet, few systematic reviews compare the effectiveness of leaders. This study conducts a systematic review and identifies 54 studies that include 147 correlation effect sizes from public hospitals worldwide. Conducting a multi-level meta-analysis, we find that leadership is significantly associated with employee's TI (r = -0.158, [-0.213; -0.102]) and OC (r = 0.266, [0.194; 0.336]); however, the meta-regression reveals that the correlation effect sizes of leadership styles vary significantly across studies where leader-member exchange (LMX) (OC: r = 0.32; TI: r = -0.37), servant (OC: r = 0.40), supportive (OC: r = 0.35; TI: r = -0.36), and ethical (OC: r = 0.43) leadership styles are most strongly associated with the employee outcomes. A deeper dive into the leadership styles reveals that social distance moderates the relationship between leadership styles and OC and TI as correlation effect sizes decrease when social distance increase (TI: r = 0.161, std error = 0.046, p = 0.032; OC: r = -0.298, std. error = 0.072, p =…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free