[
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Arnold, K. A., Loughlin, C., & Walsh, M. M. (2016). Transformational leadership in an extreme context: Examining gender, individual consideration and self-sacrifice. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 37(6), 774–788.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Arora, N., & Dhole, V. (2019). Generation y perspective, engagement, expectations, preferences and satisfactions from workplace; a study conducted in Indian context. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 26(5), 1378–1404.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Avolio, B. J., & Bass, M. B. (2004). Multifactor leadership questionnaire third edition: Manual and sampler set. Mind Garden, Inc. www.mindgarden.com
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Babcock-Roberson, M., & Strickland, O. J. (2010). The relationship between charismatic leadership, work engagement, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The Journal of Psychology, 144(3), 313–26.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bako, M. (2018). Different leadership style choices, different generations. Prizren Social Science Journal, 2(2), 127–143.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (2000). Multifactor leadership questionnaire for research. Menlo Park, CA: Mind Garden, Inc.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Basu, M., & Mukherjee, K. (2019). Transformational leadership: A contextual evaluation of gender and perception. Adhyayan: A Journal of Management Sciences, 9(1), 52–64.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bolkan, S. (2015). Intellectually stimulating students’ intrinsic motivation: The mediating influence of affective learning and student engagement. Communication Reports 28(2), 80–91.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Breevaart, K., Bakker, A., Hetland, J., Demerouti, E., Olsen, O. K., & Espevik, R. (2014). Daily transactional and transformational leadership and daily employee engagement. The British Psychology Society, 87(1), 138–157.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Brown, O., Shallcross, D., & Stuebs, M. (2019). What it takes for accounting firms to recruit Gen Z: Organizational culture and opportunities for career growth are the top factors today’s students seek in an employer. Journal of Accountancy, 228(6), 37.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bru, E., Virtanen, T., Kjetilstad, V., & Niemiec, C.P. (2021). Gender differences in the strength of association between perceived support from teachers and student engagement. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 65(1), 153–168.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Burke, R. J. (1994). Generation X: Measures, sex, and age differences. Psychological Reports, 74, 555–562.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Deichmann, D., & Stam, D. (2015). Leveraging transformational and transactional leadership to cultivate the generation of organization-focused Ideas. Leadership Quarterly, 26(2), 204–219.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Dhopade, P. (2016). Support Generation Z. Benefits Canada, 40(2), 22–23.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Douglas, S., & Roberts, R. (2020). Employee Age and the Impact on Work Engagement. Strategic HR Review, 19(5), 209–213.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Edgar, S. (2015). Identifying the influence of gender on motivation and engagement levels in student physiotherapists. Medical Teacher, 37(4), 348–353.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Filsecker, M., & Hickey, D.T. (2014). A multilevel analysis of the effects of external rewards on elementary students’ motivation, engagement and learning in an educational game. Computers & Education, 75, 136–148.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Geue, P. E. (2018). Positive practices in the workplace: Impact on team climate, work engagement, and task performance. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 54(3), 272–301.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ghadi, M. Y., Fernando, M., & Caputi, P. (2013). Transformational leadership and work engagement: The mediating effect of meaning in work. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 34(6), 532–550.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hansen, A., Byrne, Z., & Kiersch, C. (2014). Increasing employee engagement: The role of interpersonal leadership. Strategic Direction, 31(2), 34–36.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Heffner, A. L., & Antaramian, S. P. (2016). The role of life satisfaction in predicting student engagement and achievement. Journal of Happiness Studies, 17(4), 1681–1701.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hernandez-Bark, A. S., Escartin, J., Schuh, S. C., & Van Dick, R., (2016). Who leads more and why? A mediation model from gender to leadership role occupancy. Journal of Business Ethics, 139(3), 473–483.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Islam, N., Furuoka, F., & Idris, A. (2021). Employee engagement and organizational change initiatives Does transformational leadership, valence, and trust make a difference? Global Business & Organizational Excellence, 40(3), 50–62.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kasasa (2020). Boomers, Gen X, Gen Y, and Gen Z explained. Retrieved April August 28, 2020 from https://www.kasasa.com/articles/generations/gen-x-gen-y-gen-z
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kleinaltenkamp, M., Karpen, I., Plewa, C., Jaakkola, E., Conduit, J. (2019). Collective engagement in organizational settings. Industrial Marketing Management, 80, 11–23.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kolodinsky, R. W., Ritchie, W. J., & Kuna, W. A. (2018). Meaningful engagement: Impacts of a ‘calling’ work orientation and perceived leadership support. Journal of Management and Organization, 24(3), 406–423.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kunze, F., & Bruch, H. (2010). Age-based faultlines and perceived productive energy: The moderation of transformational leadership. Small Group Leadership, 41(5), 593–620.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lee, C. C., Aravamudhan, V., Roback, T., Lim, H. S., & Ruane, S. G. (2021). Factors impacting work engagement of Gen Z employees: A regression analysis. Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 18(3), 147–159.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Li, Y., Castano, G., & Li, Y. (2018). Linking Leadership Style to Work Engagement. Chinese Management Studies, 12(2), 433–452.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Martin, J. (2015). Transformational and transactional leadership: An exploration of gender, experience, and institution type. Portal: Libraries & the Academy, 15(2), 331–351.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Nienaber, H., & Martins, N. (2020). Exploratory study: Determine which dimensions enhance the levels of employee engagement to improve organizational effectiveness. TQM Journal, 32(3), 475–495.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Prochazka, J., Gilova, H., & Vaculik, M. (2017). The relationship between transformational leadership and engagement: Self-efficacy as a mediator. Journal of Leadership Studies, 11(2), 22–33.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Putriastuti, B. C. K., & Stasi, A. (2019). How to lead the millennials: A review of 5 major leadership theory groups. Journal of Leadership in Organizations, 1(2), 96–111.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Salas-Vallina, A., & Fernandez, R. (2017). The HRM-performance relationship revisited. Employee Relations, 39(5), 626–642.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sessa, V. I., Kabacoff, R. I., Deal, J., & Brown, H. (2007). Generational differences in leader values and leadership behaviors. The Psychologist-manager Journal, 10(1), 47–74.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701–716.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Schroth, H. (2019). Are you ready for Gen Z in the workplace? California Management Review, 61(3), 5–18.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Twenge, J. M., Campbell, S. M., Hoffman, B. J., & Lance, C. E. (2010). Generational differences in work values: Leisure and extrinsic values increasing, social an intrinsic values decreasing. Journal of Management, 36, 1117–1142.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wang, C. C., Hsieh, H. H., & Wang, Y. D. (2020). Abusive supervision and employee engagement and satisfaction: The mediating role of employee silence. Personnel Review, 49(9), 1845–1858.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wang, C. C., Hsieh, H., & Wang, Y. d. (2020). Abusive supervision and employee engagement and satisfaction: The mediating role of employee silence. Personnel review, 49(9), 1845–1858.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Washington, R. R., Sutton, C. D., & Sauser Jr., W. I. (2014). How distinct is servant leadership theory? empirical comparisons with competing theories. Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 11(1), 11–25.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wolfram, H. J., & Gratton, L. (2014). Gender role self-concept, categorical gender, and transactional-transformational leadership: Implications for perceived workgroup performance. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 21(4), 338–353.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wu, H., Li, S., Zheng, J., Guo, J. (2020) Medical students’ motivation and academic performance: The mediating roles of self-efficacy and learning engagement. Medical Education Online, 25(1), 1–7.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Xu, L., Du, J., Lei, X., & Hipel, K. W. (2020) Effect of locus control on innovative behavior among new generation employees: A moderated mediation model. Social behavior & personality: An international journal, 48(10), 1–12.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Yoerger, M., Crowe, J., & Allen, J. A. (2015). Participate or else!: The effect of participation in decision-making in meetings on employee engagement. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice & Research, 67(1), 65–80.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Zhang, T., Avery, G. C., Bergsteiner, H., & More, E. (2014). The relationship between leadership paradigms and employee engagement. Journal of Global Responsibility, 5(1), 4–21.
]Search in Google Scholar
