1. Introduction
In recent years, organizational environments have undergone rapid transformation due to technological advancements, evolving a growing emphasis on employee well-being. Digital transformation has introduced collaboration tools that enhance transparency, communication, and productivity. Simultaneously, organizations are investing in employee mental health through in-house psychological counseling centers and well-being programs [1] recognizing the importance of supporting emotional resilience, especially in roles requiring emotional labor.
Additionally, organizations are shifting toward a more horizontal structure that promotes autonomy, mutual feedback, and trust, fostering a workplace culture that enhances employee engagement and organizational competitiveness [2]. As a result, HR functions have expanded beyond administrative tasks to include leadership development and employee experience management, positioning HR as a strategic partner in corporate growth and innovation [3]. These changes indicate that modern organizations must adapt to rapidly evolving environments and, most importantly, recognize the necessity of fostering a sustainable work environment.
Amid these transformations, the shift from an organization-centered to an individual-centered approach in career evaluation underscores the importance of subjective career success, which prioritizes personal satisfaction and self-evaluation over traditional metrics like salary and position [4,5]. This study explores how authentic leadership, characterized by self-awareness, genuine relationships, and personal development [6,7,8], influences this subjective career success. Specifically, it adds and examines the roles of psychological safety and mindfulness as mediating factors, where psychological safety enables an environment free from fear, enhancing positive emotional states [9,10], and mindfulness, defined as non-judgmental awareness [11], fosters these emotions, potentially leading to higher job satisfaction and reduced stress.
This research aims to empirically validate a comprehensive mediation model where authentic leadership influences subjective career success through psychological safety and mindfulness. Additionally, a competitive mediation model is proposed, suggesting that mindfulness may predict psychological safety, rather than the reverse. This detailed examination of the underlying psychological mechanisms offers valuable insights that could help organizations create a sustainable work environment, support sustainable leadership practices, promote employee well-being, and enhance career satisfaction, thereby contributing to sustainable economic growth. These efforts align with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) [12].
A sustainable work environment is essential for long-term organizational success as it enhances employees’ psychological safety, well-being, and job satisfaction, leading to higher engagement, productivity, and commitment while reducing turnover. By preventing workplace stress and burnout, it supports employees’ mental and physical health, ensuring consistent performance and fostering innovation. From a corporate perspective, sustainability aligns with ESG (environmental, social, and governance) management and ethical labor practices, reducing legal and ethical risks while strengthening social responsibility. Moreover, a sustainable workplace promotes adaptability and resilience, enabling organizations to thrive in an evolving business landscape. To achieve this, companies must actively implement strategies such as inclusive workplace culture, flexible work policies, and employee well-being programs to support long-term sustainability and success.
This study addresses a key research gap by establishing subjective career success as a central outcome and empirically demonstrating that authentic leadership fosters career success through psychological safety and mindfulness. While psychological safety provides stability in the workplace for career growth, mindfulness enhances self-awareness, helping individuals set clearer career goals and manage stress. These mediators work complementarily as key psychological mechanisms that ultimately enhance subjective career success. By selecting psychological safety and mindfulness as mediators, this study offers a more precise explanation of how authentic leadership influences career success. Additionally, unlike prior research that assumes a unidirectional link from psychological safety to mindfulness, this study introduces bidirectional models, showing that mindfulness can also enhance psychological safety. By integrating a sustainability perspective and bidirectional mediation, this study expands existing theories and offers a novel understanding of how authentic leadership supports long-term career fulfillment.
2. Literature Review and the Theoretical Model
2.1. Authentic Leadership and Subjective Career Success
Authentic leadership, defined through various scholarly lenses, generally emphasizes self-awareness, genuine relationships, and ethical conduct [13,14,15]. It is rooted in a developmental approach, where leaders continually evolve by fostering self-awareness, maintaining an internalized moral perspective, engaging in balanced information processing, and demonstrating relational transparency [16]. This leadership style supports an environment of trust and empowerment, where leaders and members co-create a space that enables individuals to develop and express their capabilities authentically [17,18].
Research has linked authentic leadership to positive organizational outcomes, including enhanced psychological capital, empowerment, self-efficacy, creativity, job satisfaction, and subjective career success [19]. These benefits extend to both individuals [20] and organizational performance [21,22,23,24]. In essence, authentic leadership enhances work engagement and job satisfaction, contributing to employees’ overall work happiness [25,26].
Subjective career success, unlike its externally measurable counterpart, objective career success, focuses on an individual’s satisfaction and sense of achievement within one’s career, shaped by both work and non-work domains [27,28]. This intrinsic career success is influenced by factors such as career attitudes, work–life balance, and managerial behaviors, all of which impact psychological well-being and overall life satisfaction [29,30]. Studies have shown that authentic leadership fosters job autonomy, informal learning, and job crafting, which in turn contribute to greater career satisfaction and fulfillment [31,32].
Authentic leadership plays a pivotal role in enhancing subjective career success by fulfilling psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness through supportive, trust-based relationships. According to self-determination theory (SDT), individuals experience higher motivation and well-being when these fundamental psychological needs are satisfied, leading to greater intrinsic motivation and engagement in their work [33,34]. By creating an environment that aligns with SDT’s principles, authentic leadership not only enhances employees’ sense of control over their careers but also nurtures their intrinsic drive for personal and professional growth, ultimately reinforcing their subjective career success. Building on these previous research insights and self-determination theory, this study hypothesizes that authentic leadership positively influences subjective career success, with this relationship further mediated by factors that promote personal growth and a supportive work environment.
2.2. Mediators of Psychological Safety and Mindfulness
Authentic leadership, as an external factor (outside), creates a supportive environment (middle layer) that fosters psychological safety [35]. This, in turn, promotes internal processes (inside), such as mindfulness, self-awareness, and stress regulation, ultimately contributing to subjective career success. This “outside-to-inside” model integrates self-determination theory with perspectives that emphasize the harmony between internal psychological needs and the external work environment. Social learning theory [36] suggests that employees observe and emulate the genuine, ethical behaviors exhibited by authentic leaders, reinforcing a culture of psychological safety.
Psychological safety refers to the perceived freedom within a team or organization to express oneself without fear of negative consequences [9,37,38]. This sense of safety cultivates an open atmosphere, encouraging members to engage in mindfulness practices, share innovative ideas, and commit to organizational goals. Building on this foundation, it is hypothesized that authentic leadership contributes to psychological safety, which, in turn, fosters an environment conducive to personal and professional growth.
Previous studies identified psychological safety as a key factor in explaining positive member behaviors and organizational performance. It promotes innovation, voice behaviors, organizational commitment, and trust [39,40,41,42]. Psychological safety correlates with perceived organizational support and trust, fostering positive emotions toward the organization [43,44]. Therefore, cultivating a psychologically safe environment is crucial for encouraging mindfulness practices and active career development participation, thereby contributing to subjective career success [45].
Mindfulness originated from Buddhist meditation and was later integrated into the mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) therapy technique [46]. It has since expanded across various fields and is now utilized in human resource management to promote the psychological well-being of organizational members [47,48]. Defined as non-judgmental awareness of the present moment [11,46], mindfulness thrives in a psychologically safe environment. It enhances job satisfaction [49], reduces burnout, and promotes effective decision-making within organizations. Previous research indicated that mindfulness mediated the relationship between authentic leadership and work happiness in social media-driven work environments [26].
Authentic leadership supports mindfulness by modeling self-awareness and balanced information processing, which, through emotional contagion [50], encourages employees to adopt similar mindful practices. This alignment leads to better stress management, career goal clarity, and more effective action toward career success. The relationship between mindfulness and subjective career success is grounded in the conservation of resource theory, which suggests that mindfulness helps conserve personal resources [51]. By reducing stress and promoting more efficient use of time and energy, mindfulness facilitates work–life balance [52], and enhances job satisfaction [53], ultimately contributing to career success. The proposed sequential mediation model suggests that psychological safety and mindfulness mediate the relationship between authentic leadership and subjective career success, fostering a supportive, mindful, and psychologically safe work environment that enhances career sustainability (Figure 1).
2.3. Rival Model
Authentic leadership, defined by self-awareness, an internalized moral perspective, relational transparency, and balanced information processing, aligns closely with mindfulness, which emphasizes non-judgmental awareness and present-moment attention. According to the emotional contagion theory [50], authentic leaders’ genuine and transparent behavior facilitates the development of mindfulness within their teams. When mindfulness training enhances authentic leadership and managers’ skills [54], leaders model mindfulness, propagate it throughout the team, and help members manage stress and regulate emotions. This process cultivates a positive work environment, enhances performance and well-being, and strengthens psychological safety by fostering trust and open communication. Ultimately, these factors contribute to greater job satisfaction and career success.
Mindfulness plays a crucial role in fostering psychological safety by enhancing emotional regulation, trust, and openness. Individuals with high mindfulness exhibit greater self-awareness and emotional control, allowing them to navigate workplace challenges with composure rather than reacting impulsively. This self-regulation reduces interpersonal tension and creates a respectful and supportive team environment where employees feel secure in expressing themselves and collaborating effectively.
Mindfulness also promotes non-judgmental acceptance of others’ opinions, reducing defensiveness and fostering mutual respect. When employees approach discussions with openness, they are more willing to share ideas, take risks, and engage in constructive dialogue, which strengthens psychological safety. Additionally, mindful individuals tend to communicate with empathy and transparency, reinforcing organizational support, trust, and team cohesion, all of which contribute to psychological safety [43,44].
Psychological safety is essential for workplace performance and career success, supported by authentic leadership and mindfulness. Both factors foster an environment where employees feel empowered to share ideas and commit to organizational goals. Mindfulness reinforces the psychologically safe and supportive culture shaped by authentic leadership, amplifying its positive effects through partial mediation. By cultivating emotional stability, openness to diverse perspectives, and trust-based interactions, mindfulness strengthens psychological safety in the workplace. As key psychological mechanisms, mindfulness and psychological safety empower employees to build confidence, take initiative, engage actively, innovate, and contribute meaningfully, ultimately enhancing job satisfaction and career success.
Mindfulness mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and work happiness because mindfulness training improves self-regulation and attention control, helping employees manage distractions and maintain work happiness [26,55]. This suggests that the combination of authentic leadership and mindfulness training can create a positive synergy in enhancing employees’ well-being and happiness. Previous research [56] empirically demonstrated that mindfulness positively affected positive psychological capital, innovative behavior, and job satisfaction. When mindfulness is implemented, it enhances an individual’s positive psychological state, leading to positive outcomes like job satisfaction. Together, authentic leadership and mindfulness reinforce the psychological safety essential for fostering innovative and committed work behavior, which in turn enhances subjective career success (Figure 2).
2.4. Sustainable Perspective
Understanding the interactions between psychological safety and mindfulness within the framework of authentic leadership and subjective career success aligns with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) [12]. By elucidating these relationships, organizations can develop sustainable work practices that bolster long-term employee well-being and organizational resilience, essential for ongoing success in a dynamic global economy. Clarifying whether psychological safety fosters mindfulness or vice versa is crucial, as it guides the design of targeted interventions. If psychological safety is a precursor to mindfulness, creating a secure environment may be prioritized to cultivate mindfulness practices. Conversely, if mindfulness enhances psychological safety, programs might prioritize mindfulness training focused on personal development practices that enhance awareness and presence, thereby creating a psychologically safe atmosphere.
Efficient resource allocation is always required for organizations to tailor their development programs effectively. Understanding the causality between psychological safety and mindfulness ensures that initiatives such as strategic training, workshops, and systemic organizational changes maximize return on investment. These efforts lead to significant benefits, such as increased innovation, improved job performance, reduced stress, and greater employee satisfaction.
Additionally, integrating these strategies helps meet key SDGs. By enhancing psychological safety, organizations can directly contribute to the well-being and mental health of their employees, thus addressing SDG 3. Furthermore, by fostering environments that promote mindfulness and psychological safety, organizations can enhance job satisfaction and performance, contributing directly to SDG 8, which focuses on promoting sustained, inclusive, and sustainable economic growth and full and productive employment for all [57]. This strategic approach not only enhances individual and organizational performance but also contributes to building resilient infrastructures and sustainable industrialization, fundamental for the continuous success of businesses in the global market. Therefore, understanding the interplay between these elements becomes a strategic imperative for organizations seeking to effectively meet company goals while enhancing operational effectiveness and workforce resilience.
3. Research Methods
A quantitative, cross-sectional survey was conducted to collect data from employees across various industries, with a free coffee coupon offered as an incentive to encourage participation and address potential fatigue from the lengthy questionnaire. According to the Enforcement Rules of the Bioethics and Safety Act of Korea [58], this study is exempt from Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval. In accordance with Article 13 of the Act, formal IRB approval was not required, as this study does not involve identifiable research participants, the collection of sensitive or personally identifiable information, invasive procedures, or participation in vulnerable environments.
3.1. Data Collection
A pilot test was conducted with doctoral students in human resource management-related fields to assess the clarity, readability, and validity of the survey. Participants reviewed both the English and Korean versions simultaneously and provided feedback on wording clarity, response time, question appropriateness, and sequencing to ensure face validity. Their input was incorporated to refine the questionnaire, enhancing its completeness and readability while ensuring its overall validity.
Following the pilot test, organizational employees were recruited from diverse industries to answer the survey via a Google survey link. Due to corporate data privacy policies, limited data accessibility, and time and resource constraints, random sampling was not feasible. Instead, a non-probability sampling approach was adopted, leveraging professional networks across various industries to enhance research validity. To mitigate its limitations, data collection considered industry diversity, job roles, hierarchical positions, and employment types to improve sample representativeness and the generalizability of findings.
This study leveraged social networking platforms for efficient data collection, distributing survey links via KakaoTalk, Naver Band, and others. In South Korea, KakaoTalk is the dominant messaging platform, used by over 90% of the population, while Naver Band is widely utilized in professional networks, industry communities, and alumni groups. Given their frequent use in workplace communication, these platforms effectively facilitated the recruitment of respondents with work experience across various industries. To prevent overrepresentation of any single group, quasi-stratified sampling was applied across manufacturing, IT, education, healthcare, finance, and the public sector. Additional distribution through professional networks, human resource (HR) communities, and corporate HR programs further enhanced respondent diversity and improved sample representativeness.
The survey was conducted over a two-week period (8–23 April 2024), resulting in 307 responses, of which 287 were valid, yielding a 93.5% response rate. A power analysis using G*Power version 3.1.9.7. [59] was conducted to determine the required sample size. The analysis was based on a medium effect size (f2 = 0.15), which is commonly used as a default or reasonable estimate for multiple regression, along with α error probability of 0.05, power (1 − β) of 0.95, and three predictors. The results indicated that a minimum of 119 participants was needed. This study exceeded that requirement, with more than twice the necessary sample size.
At the beginning of the questionnaire, respondents could find an instructional section that provided a brief explanation of the academic research purpose, the voluntary nature of participation, and their right to withdraw at any time without consequences. It also assured that all anonymous data would be securely stored on a password-protected computer and used solely for academic purposes. Additionally, it expressed great appreciation for their time and contribution and provided transparent contact information for any inquiries. At the end of the instructions, the following statement was included: By deciding to complete the questionnaire, respondents acknowledge that they have read and understood this information and agree to the terms of the above informed consent.
Messages of appreciation were included on both the first and last pages of the survey to encourage participation. Respondents had the option to voluntarily provide their contact information to receive a free mobile coffee coupon as an incentive. To minimize incomplete responses, the Google survey’s auto-save feature was utilized, allowing participants to resume the survey if interrupted. Various measures were implemented to facilitate survey completion and enhance response rates. Additionally, responses from individuals with less than six months of work experience were excluded from the measurement of subjective career success, as they did not meet the study’s target population criteria. This exclusion aligns with the probationary period for new hires [20], ensuring that only eligible participants were included in the analysis.
3.2. Measurement
Authentic leadership refers to leadership characterized by self-awareness, relational transparency, balanced information processing, and an internalized moral perspective, fostering trust and transparency within teams [16]. This study measured authentic leadership using the Authentic Leadership Questionnaire (ALQ) [16,60], which consists of 16 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Sample items include: “My leader solicits feedback to improve relationships” and “My leader clearly states his or her intentions”.
Subjective career success is defined as an individual’s satisfaction and sense of achievement in their career [61]. It was assessed using the CJH-CSS scale [62], which includes 21 items divided into work and non-work domains (work-existence, relationships, growth/non-work-existence, relationships, disposition), rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Sample items include: “Considering the overall level of rewards (both financial and non-financial) achieved so far, my career has been successful” and “Considering the positive relationships I have established with supervisors, colleagues, subordinates, and clients, my career has been successful”.
Psychological safety is defined as a work environment where individuals feel free to express their thoughts and opinions [37]. This study employed a 7-item measure developed by [9] and validated by [63]. Responses were rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Sample items include: “In our department, taking risks at work is positively acknowledged” and “In our department, it is acceptable for members to raise difficult problems or issues”.
Mindfulness is described as a state of present-moment awareness and acceptance [46]. This study utilized the Korean version of the Kentucky Mindfulness Scale (KIMS) [64,65], consisting of 37 items categorized into four subcomponents: observe, describe, act with awareness, and accept without judgment, rated on a 5-point Likert scale. Sample items include: “I tend to evaluate whether my perceptions are right or wrong” and “I can easily put my beliefs, opinions, and expectations into words”. Additionally, demographic variables were included as control factors, such as gender, age, education level, employment type, number of job changes, total career duration, current tenure, and company size, to account for potential influences on the study’s results.
All measurement items in this study were selected from validated English-language survey instruments used in previous research. Additionally, survey items that had been translated and tested in prior Korean studies were examined, as these items had already undergone reliability and validity testing in prior Korean research. A thorough review ensured translation accuracy by comparing the original English items with their Korean counterparts. A pilot test was then conducted to further assess and confirm the readability, clarity, and validity of the Korean survey items.
4. Results and Discussion
This session presents the results and explores their theoretical and practical implications. It first analyzes participant demographics and the reliability and correlations of the variables, then evaluates the efficacy of the proposed mediation models. Lastly, it examines the directional relationships between psychological safety and mindfulness, assessing their impact on organizational dynamics.
4.1. Demographic Profile of Participants
Table 1 presents the demographic characteristics of the 287 participants. The sample consisted of 173 males (60.3%) and 114 females (39.7%), with 161 married (56.1%) and 126 single (43.9%). The largest age group was participants in their 30s (104, 36.2%).
Regarding education, 139 participants (48.4%) held a college degree. In terms of job turnover, 228 participants (79.4%) had changed jobs three times or fewer. The most common work experience range was 4 to 10 years (114, 39.7%), and 158 participants (55.1%) had been with their current employer for three years or less.
For company size, 83 participants (28.9%) worked in organizations with more than 300 employees. Full-time employment was the most prevalent, with 201 participants (70.0%). By industry, the education and services sector had the highest representation (61 participants, 21.3%). The most common job position was staff (86, 30.0%), while the most frequent job role was management/support (126, 43.9%) (Table 1).
4.2. Descriptive Analysis
Since this study focuses on the overall relationship model among variables, all variables were treated as single-dimensional constructs, and their reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha: Authentic leadership = 0.903, subjective career success = 0.947, psychological safety = 0.823, and mindfulness = 0.742. All values exceed the recommended threshold of 0.70, indicating acceptable reliability. On a five-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree), the means of the four variables ranged from 3.220 to 3.515, with standard deviations between 0.325 and 0.739.
Correlation analysis (Table 2) revealed that the Pearson correlation coefficients ranged from 0.141 to 0.542, with all coefficients being statistically significant (p < 0.05). The results indicate that the weakest relationship is between authentic leadership and mindfulness, while the strongest relationship is between authentic leadership and psychological safety. The multi-collinearity check confirmed that the variance inflation factor (VIF) values remained below 10, indicating that the variables were independent and that the common method bias was not a concern.
The Heterotrait–Monotrait (HTMT) ratio of the correlation method [66] was used to assess discriminant validity. This statistical analysis measures the degree of similarity between latent variables, with values below 0.85 indicating that discriminant validity is established [67]. In this study, all computed HTMT values were below the threshold, confirming that discriminant validity was adequately met. The HTMT results are presented in Table 2.
4.3. Sustainable Work Environment: The Mediation Model
A linear multiple regression analysis was conducted to examine the proposed model. First, the impact of the independent variable, authentic leadership, on the dependent variable, subjective career success, was analyzed. The adjusted R2 value was 18.4%, indicating the proportion of variance explained in subjective career success, which aligns with previous studies [31,32].
Next, psychological safety and mindfulness were included as mediators, expanding the model to a more comprehensive mediation analysis. The explained variance of subjective career success greatly increased to 34.7% (adjusted R2) (F change = 22.572, p < 0.001) when control variables (gender, age, education, employment type, job changes, total career experience, and tenure at the current company) were included and 29.1% without control variables. All three predictors, including authentic leadership, psychological safety, and mindfulness, had statistically significant regression coefficients (Table 3). Among them, authentic leadership had the strongest predictive power (standardized regression coefficient = 0.302), followed by mindfulness (0.280) and psychological safety (0.166). Regarding control variables, only age showed a weak but significant positive relationship with subjective career success (standardized regression coefficient = 0.160, p = 0.013), suggesting that older employees tend to report slightly higher subjective career success.
The inclusion of psychological safety and mindfulness as mediators significantly enhances the explanatory power of the model, demonstrating their crucial role in linking authentic leadership to subjective career success. The increase in explained variance from 18.4% to 34.7% (with control variables) highlights that a more comprehensive mediation model provides a better understanding of the mechanisms driving career satisfaction. To enhance subjective career success, the findings suggest that organizations should not only promote authentic leadership but also cultivate psychological safety and mindfulness as key elements of a sustainable work culture.
A sustainable working environment fosters employee well-being, resilience, and long-term career growth by integrating psychological safety and mindfulness. Psychological safety creates a trust-based culture, allowing employees to express ideas, take risks, and engage in open communication without fear, supporting continuous learning, innovation, and commitment. Mindfulness enhances this environment by promoting self-awareness, stress management, and emotional regulation, enabling employees to navigate challenges, stay focused, and maintain career motivation. Together, these factors reinforce authentic leadership, cultivating a workplace that prioritizes employee development, mental well-being, and long-term engagement, thereby supporting career success.
4.4. Theoretical Versus Rival Model
The key difference between the theoretical model and the rival model is the direction of the relationship between psychological safety and mindfulness, specifically whether psychological safety predicts mindfulness or mindfulness predicts psychological safety. This distinction has both theoretical and practical implications. To compare these models, two multiple regression analyses were conducted.
In the theoretical model, mindfulness was the dependent variable, while authentic leadership and psychological safety were the independent variables. In the rival model, psychological safety was the dependent variable, with authentic leadership and mindfulness as independent variables. The results showed that the rival model had a higher adjusted R2 (31.7%) than the theoretical model (5.2%).
Both regression coefficients in the rival model were significant, suggesting that mindfulness may serve as a partial mediator between authentic leadership and psychological safety. However, in the theoretical model, only the coefficient for psychological safety was significant (Table 4). This result indicates that psychological safety may fully mediate the relationship between authentic leadership and mindfulness in the theoretical model. Given the above analyses, the path coefficients are shown in Figure 3 based on Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4.
The serial mediation analysis using Model 6 of PROCESS [68] with 5000 bootstrap samples confirmed a significant total indirect effect of X on Y through M1 and M2 in both the theoretical model (β = 0.123, 95% CI [0.042, 0.203]) and the rival model (β = 0.123, 95% CI [0.042, 0.206]), supporting a serial mediation effect. These findings suggest that X influences Y sequentially either through M1 (psychological safety) and M2 (mindfulness) or through M1 (mindfulness) and M2 (psychological safety), validating both mediation models. However, in the theoretical model, the indirect effect of path 2 (X → M2 → Y) was not significant, as its confidence interval included zero, indicating that mindfulness fully mediates the relationship between authentic leadership and subjective career success. Additionally, the indirect effect of path 3 (X → M1 → M2 → Y) in the theoretical model (β = 0.0338) was stronger than in the rival model (β = 0.0038), suggesting a more pronounced sequential mediation effect in the theoretical model. Table 5 presents the detailed results.
The theoretical and rival models examining the relationship between psychological safety and mindfulness under the influence of authentic leadership provide distinct theoretical and practical insights. In the theoretical model, where psychological safety is posited to predict mindfulness, the implication is that a secure and open environment fosters the development of mindfulness among employees, reflecting an “outside-to-inside” influence. This model underscores the importance of creating a psychologically safe workplace as a precursor to encouraging mindfulness practices. Theoretically, this suggests that the environment significantly influences individual psychological processes, aligning with environmental psychology principles.
Conversely, the rival model suggests that mindfulness may lead to psychological safety, positioning mindfulness as a potential transformative organizational tool. This model highlights the practical implications of enhancing mindfulness to actively foster a safer work environment, which could then improve workplace dynamics and performance. The higher adjusted R2 of the rival model indicates its greater explanatory power regarding mindfulness’s role in enhancing a psychologically safe atmosphere. This approach advocates for proactive organizational behavior management, where developing individual mindfulness skills can initiate significant organizational improvements. Thus, this model underscores the potential of leveraging personal capabilities to benefit the broader organizational context.
5. Conclusions, Implications, Suggestions, and Future Research
5.1. Conclusions
This research has empirically validated a comprehensive mediation model where authentic leadership influences subjective career success through psychological safety and mindfulness. Building on prior studies like [69], which reported no direct mediation effect of mindfulness between leader-member exchange (LMX) and innovative behavior, this study introduces serial mediation with job engagement to refine the psychological mechanisms underlying LMX. In this model, psychological safety, enhanced by authentic leadership, cultivates positive emotions that significantly boost mindfulness, thereby increasing job satisfaction and ultimately enhancing subjective career success.
This study further focuses on contrasting the theoretical and rival models in terms of the relationship between psychological safety and mindfulness. In the theoretical model, psychological safety is posited to lead to mindfulness, highlighting an approach where the environment drives personal development. In contrast, this research introduces a competitive mediation model where mindfulness might predict psychological safety, supporting mindfulness training interventions that focus on the individual to actively foster a safer work environment. Such investigations provide essential insights that could assist organizations in enhancing career satisfaction, supporting sustainable leadership practices, and improving employee well-being, all contributing to sustainable economic growth aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth).
5.2. Implications
Theoretical Implications and Contributions. This study contributes to the theoretical advancement of leadership and career development research by empirically demonstrating that psychological safety and mindfulness function as sequential mediators in the relationship between authentic leadership and subjective career success. While previous studies have examined these mediators separately, this study integrates them within a comparative framework, offering a nuanced understanding of their interplay. Notably, the findings challenge the conventional unidirectional assumption that psychological safety fosters mindfulness by suggesting a potential bidirectional relationship, where mindfulness also enhances psychological safety. This perspective enriches existing theoretical models by emphasizing the reciprocal nature of psychological mechanisms in leadership and career development, opening avenues for further research on their dynamic interactions.
Beyond conceptualizing mindfulness as an individual psychological resource, this study reframes it as a strategic competency that develops through organizational factors, particularly leadership and psychological safety. The findings extend existing theories by showing that mindfulness is not merely a personal trait but a cognitive and emotional skill that can be nurtured through organizational interventions. This challenges previous views that primarily position psychological safety as an outcome of leadership or organizational culture [70,71], instead proposing that mindfulness itself plays an active role in shaping the psychological environment within organizations. By verifying that mindfulness facilitates self-regulation, cognitive flexibility, and emotional stability, this study highlights its organizational-level impact and presents a new theoretical direction for understanding how individual psychological competencies interact with leadership to drive long-term career success.
Practical Implications for Organizational Contexts. This study provides actionable insights for organizations aiming to enhance leadership effectiveness, employee well-being, and sustainable career success. The findings highlight the sequential mediation effect of psychological safety and mindfulness in the relationship between authentic leadership and subjective career success. To maximize the benefits of authentic leadership, organizations must first foster psychological safety, which serves as the foundation for mindfulness and long-term career success. This requires structured initiatives such as cultivating an open feedback culture, reframing failures as learning opportunities, and strengthening trust-based communication through transparent leadership practices. Additionally, leaders should integrate psychological safety workshops, provide regular feedback sessions, and model integrity-driven decision-making to reinforce this supportive culture. By embedding these practices, organizations can create a work environment that empowers employees to take on challenges and advance their careers while ensuring long-term leadership sustainability.
Beyond individual mindfulness practices, organizations should adopt a strategic, system-wide approach to institutionalizing mindfulness within their culture and leadership frameworks. This can be achieved by providing mindfulness-based coaching, emotional regulation training, and cognitive resilience programs to help employees stay present and engaged. Concrete interventions such as regular mindfulness meditation, stress management programs, and structured cognitive training can further enhance focus, emotional well-being, and work engagement. Additionally, establishing open communication systems and reinforcing institutional mechanisms that promote collaboration and psychological safety are essential in sustaining a healthy and innovative work environment. These strategies collectively position mindfulness as a key driver of sustainable organizational development, ensuring long-term employee satisfaction, career growth, and overall workplace resilience.
5.3. Suggestions
This research provides practical insights for organizational management on fostering a conducive work environment and enhancing leadership effectiveness. Authentic leadership, as demonstrated by this study, plays a pivotal role in creating a psychologically safe atmosphere that enhances mindfulness among employees. This not only promotes non-judgmental acceptance and focus but also enhances employees’ attitudes and satisfaction at work. To capitalize on these benefits, organizations should consider implementing targeted training programs aimed at developing authentic leadership qualities among managers. Such initiatives could help leaders to more effectively influence and engage their teams, fostering an environment where employees feel secure to express diverse opinions and contribute creatively.
Moreover, the findings underline the importance of mindfulness in driving subjective career success, suggesting that mindfulness training and meditation programs could be integral in boosting leadership [54], employee satisfaction, and performance. Organizations are encouraged to support these programs actively, enhancing positive emotional states among employees, which are crucial for personal and professional development. In addition, as the rival mediation model of this research suggests, focusing on individual-driven interventions that promote mindfulness may also enhance psychological safety, thereby creating a feedback loop that further secures a positive working environment. Thus, by integrating strategies that enhance both leadership qualities and employee mindfulness, organizations can achieve a more dynamic and supportive workplace conducive to sustained success and growth.
To further align this research with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), the proposed models offer actionable insights for promoting sustainable work practices. By demonstrating that authentic leadership fosters psychological safety and mindfulness, this study provides empirical support for leadership development programs that prioritize employee well-being and engagement, directly contributing to SDG 3. Organizations can implement structured mindfulness initiatives, such as meditation workshops, resilience training, and stress management programs, to enhance employees’ emotional regulation, reduce burnout, and improve overall mental health. Additionally, psychological safety, as reinforced through authentic leadership and mindfulness, cultivates an environment where employees feel empowered to innovate, collaborate, and take initiative. These factors align with SDG 8 by fostering sustainable productivity and inclusive economic growth.
Furthermore, creating a sustainable work environment requires strengthening authentic leadership, enhancing psychological safety, and fostering an organizational culture that supports mindfulness. This can be achieved through leadership training, organizational culture improvement, and the implementation of practical support programs. To ensure measurable impact, organizations should integrate regular well-being assessments, leadership feedback mechanisms, and employee engagement metrics to monitor and optimize these interventions. These insights provide valuable foundational data to advocate for initiatives that align businesses with SDG 3 and SDG 8, reinforcing long-term growth and workplace sustainability. By embedding these strategies into corporate policies and culture, businesses can proactively support workplace sustainability, enhancing both employee fulfillment and long-term organizational resilience.
5.4. Future Research
This study employed a cross-sectional design, collecting data through self-reported surveys. While this approach provides valuable insights, it limits the ability to establish causal relationships and may introduce Common Method Bias (CMB). Future research could adopt longitudinal or experimental designs with multi-source data to track variable changes over time, verify causality more precisely, mitigate CMB, and strengthen the validity of findings.
Further research should explore mindfulness within training programs, focusing on its multifaceted nature and diverse implementation across organizational levels to clarify its benefits for employees. Examining these interventions longitudinally can provide empirical evidence of their long-term individual and organizational impacts. Additionally, beyond subjective career success as an outcome of authentic leadership, it is essential to investigate how such leadership can reduce negative workplace behaviors such as social loafing, job boredom, and counterproductive actions through psychological safety and mindfulness, aiming to boost overall workplace morale and productivity.
Expanding research to encompass various leadership styles could reveal additional ways in which leadership influences employee behavior and organizational outcomes, enriching our understanding of leadership dynamics. This broader approach would not only enhance management practices but also align them with sustainable organizational change and the integration of artificial intelligence in workplace systems. Comprehensive studies in these areas would support the development of systemic thinking capabilities among leaders, fostering balance and synergy in achieving diverse organizational goals.
Conceptualization, J.-H.P. and J.-J.S.; Methodology, J.-H.P., J.-J.S. and L.-S.G.; Software, J.-H.P., J.-J.S. and L.-S.G.; Validation, J.-H.P., J.-J.S., L.-S.G. and J.-C.K.; Formal analysis, J.-H.P., J.-J.S. and L.-S.G.; Investigation, J.-H.P. and J.-J.S.; Resources, J.-H.P., J.-J.S. and J.-C.K.; Data curation, J.-H.P., J.-J.S. and L.-S.G.; Writing—original draft, J.-H.P. and J.-J.S.; Writing—review & editing, J.-H.P., L.-S.G. and J.-C.K.; Visualization, L.-S.G.; Supervision, J.-H.P. and J.-C.K.; Project administration, J.-H.P. and J.-C.K.; Funding acquisition, J.-H.P., J.-J.S. and J.-C.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
According to the Enforcement Rules of the Bioethics and Safety Act of Korea [
Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Demographic characteristics of participants (N = 287).
| Category | Classification | No. | % | Category | Classification | No. | % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 173 | 60.3 | Employment type | Public servant (Indefinite contract) | 20 | 7.0 |
| Female | 114 | 39.7 | Dispatched/Outsourced employee | 7 | 2.4 | ||
| Marital status | Married | 161 | 56.1 | Other | 10 | 3.5 | |
| Single | 126 | 43.9 | Industry | Education services | 61 | 21.3 | |
| Age | 20s | 38 | 13.2 | Professional, scientific, and technical services | 38 | 13.2 | |
| 30s | 104 | 36.2 | Construction | 30 | 10.5 | ||
| 40s | 44 | 15.3 | Healthcare, social welfare services | 26 | 9.1 | ||
| 50s | 37 | 12.9 | Business facilities management and business support services | 24 | 8.4 | ||
| 60 and above | 64 | 22.3 | Manufacturing | 24 | 8.4 | ||
| Education level | High school | 47 | 16.4 | Associations and organizations | 12 | 4.2 | |
| Associate degree | 42 | 14.6 | Public institutions | 11 | 3.8 | ||
| Bachelor | 139 | 48.4 | Wholesale and retail trade | 11 | 3.8 | ||
| Master’s degree | 48 | 16.7 | Publishing, media, and information services | 8 | 2.8 | ||
| Doctorate degree | 11 | 3.8 | Transportation | 6 | 2.1 | ||
| Number of job changes | 0–3 times | 228 | 79.4 | Finance and insurance | 5 | 1.7 | |
| 4–7 times | 52 | 18.2 | Arts, sports, and leisure services | 4 | 1.4 | ||
| 8 times or more | 7 | 2.3 | Repair and other personal services | 4 | 1.4 | ||
| Career experience | Up to 3 years | 66 | 23.0 | Accommodation and food services | 1 | 0.3 | |
| 4–10 years | 114 | 39.7 | Other | 22 | 7.6 | ||
| 11–20 years | 41 | 14.3 | Job position | Staff | 86 | 30.0 | |
| 21–30 years | 32 | 11.1 | Assistant manager | 52 | 18.1 | ||
| 31–40 years | 34 | 11.8 | Manager | 56 | 19.5 | ||
| Current tenure | Up to 3 years | 158 | 55.1 | Deputy manager | 17 | 5.9 | |
| 4–10 years | 81 | 28.2 | Department head | 34 | 11.8 | ||
| 11–20 years | 24 | 8.4 | Executive level and above | 25 | 8.7 | ||
| 21–30 years | 15 | 5.2 | Other | 17 | 5.9 | ||
| 31–40 years | 9 | 3.1 | Job role | Management/Support | 126 | 43.9 | |
| Current number of employees | 1–9 people | 61 | 21.3 | Production/Technical | 36 | 12.5 | |
| 10–29 people | 60 | 20.9 | Research/Development | 31 | 10.8 | ||
| 30–99 people | 44 | 15.3 | Strategy/Planning | 22 | 7.7 | ||
| 100–299 people | 39 | 13.6 | Finance/Accounting | 18 | 6.3 | ||
| 300 or more | 83 | 28.9 | Marketing/Sales | 14 | 4.9 | ||
| Employment type | Permanent | 201 | 70.0 | Education | 12 | 4.2 | |
| Contract | 49 | 17.1 | Other | 28 | 9.7 |
Note: “No.” represents the number of people in each category, indicating the frequency of occurrences.
Correlation analysis.
| Mean | S.D. | Cronbach’s Alpha | Authentic Leadership | Mindfulness | Psychological Safety | Subjective Career Success | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Authentic leadership | 3.409 | 0.727 | 0.903 | 0.188 | 0.632 | 0.465 | |
| Mindfulness | 3.220 | 0.325 | 0.742 | 0.141 * | 0.317 | 0.454 | |
| Psychological safety | 3.427 | 0.739 | 0.823 | 0.542 ** | 0.242 ** | 0.455 | |
| Subjective career success | 3.515 | 0.689 | 0.947 | 0.432 ** | 0.363 ** | 0.398 ** |
Note: * indicates p is less than 0.05, whereas ** indicates p is less than 0.01. S.D. stands for standard deviation. The HTMT results for the four variables are shown in the upper right section of the table.
Regression model.
| Standardized Coefficients: Beta | t Value | p Value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authentic leadership | 0.302 | 5.103 ** | <0.001 |
| Psychological safety | 0.166 | 2.750 ** | 0.006 |
| Mindfulness | 0.280 | 5.461 ** | <0.001 |
| Adjusted R square = 29.1% | |||
Note: The dependent variable is subjective career success. ** indicates p is less than 0.01.
Theoretical versus rival model.
| Theoretical Model | Rival Model | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Independent Variable | Standardized Coefficients: Beta | t Value | p | Standardized Coefficients: Beta | t Value | p |
| Authentic leadership | 0.014 | 0.203 | 0.840 | 0.519 | 10.510 ** | <0.001 |
| Psychological safety | 0.234 | 3.420 ** | 0.001 | NA | NA | NA |
| Mindfulness | NA | NA | NA | 0.169 | 3.420 ** | 0.001 |
| Dependent Variable: Mindfulness | Dependent Variable: Psychological safety | |||||
| Adjusted R square = 5.2% | Adjusted R square = 31.7% | |||||
Note: NA = not available. ** indicates p is less than 0.01.
Indirect effects.
| Path | Theoretical Model | Rival Model | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Effect | LLCI | ULCI | Effect | LLCI | ULCI | |
| Total | 0.1230 | 0.0419 | 0.2031 | 0.1230 | 0.0417 | 0.2059 |
| Indirect path 1 | 0.0856 | 0.0101 | 0.1583 | 0.0375 | 0.0065 | 0.0742 |
| Indirect path 2 | 0.0037 | −0.0339 | 0.0383 | 0.0818 | 0.0116 | 0.1525 |
| Indirect path 3 | 0.0338 | 0.0128 | 0.0620 | 0.0038 | 0.0001 | 0.0108 |
Notes: Indirect paths are defined as follows: Path 1: X → M1 → Y, Path 2: X → M2 → Y, and Path 3: X → M1 → M2 → Y. LLCI (lower level confidence interval) and ULCI (upper level confidence interval) represent confidence interval bounds. In both models, X represents Authentic Leadership, and Y represents Subjective Career Success. In the theoretical model, M1 is Psychological Safety and M2 is Mindfulness, whereas in the rival model, M1 is Mindfulness and M2 is Psychological Safety.
References
1. Oracle.com. 11 Ways to Prevent Employee Burnout (in Korean). Research Report. 2021; Available online: https://www.oracle.com/oce/dc/assets/CONT86630DD629A34C45A14C94BD92F413B5/native/11-ways-tohelp-prevent-employee-burnout-kr.pdf (accessed on 9 February 2025).
2. Monthly Recruit. Now, Organizational Culture Determines a Company’s Growth (in Korean). Special Report. 21 September 2023. Available online: http://www.hkrecruit.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=26745 (accessed on 9 February 2025).
3. HR Caster. HR Caster: Analysis of HR Trends in 2024 (in Korean). Carrot Newsletter. 9 January 2024. Available online: https://carrotnewsletter.stibee.com/p/24/ (accessed on 9 February 2025).
4. Hupkens, L.; Akkermans, J.; Solinger, O.; Khapova, S. The dynamics of subjective career success: A qualitative inquiry. Sustainability; 2021; 13, 7638. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su13147638]
5. Kostal, J.W.; Wiemik, T. The evolving nature of career success: A 30-year review. J. Organ. Behav.; 2017; 38, pp. 569-592.
6. Gardner, W.L.; Avolio, B.J.; Walumbwa, F.O. Authentic leadership development: Emergent themes and future directions. Authentic Leadership Theory and Practice: Origins, Effects, and Development; Gardner, W.L.; Avolio, B.J.; Walumbwa, F.O. Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2005; pp. 387-406.
7. Gardner, W.L.; Avolio, B.J.; Luthans, F.; May, D.R.; Walumbwa, F.O. “Can you see the real me?” A self-based model of authentic leader and follower development. Leadersh. Q.; 2005; 16, pp. 343-372.
8. Luthans, F.; Avolio, B.J. Authentic leadership development. Posit. Organ. Scholarsh.; 2003; 241, pp. 1-26.
9. Edmondson, A.C. Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Adm. Sci. Q.; 1999; 44, pp. 350-383. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2666999]
10. Park, S.E. Thriving at work as an affective mediating mechanism of the effectiveness of psychological safety. J. Organ. Manag.; 2019; 43, pp. 195-222. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.36459/jom.2019.43.1.195]
11. Brown, K.W.; Ryan, R.M. The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.; 2003; 84, pp. 822-848.
12. United Nations Development Programme. The SDGs in Action. 2025; Available online: https://www.undp.org/sustainable-development-goals (accessed on 9 February 2025).
13. Avolio, B.J.; Walumbwa, F.O.; Bruce, J.A. Authentic leadership: Theory-building for veritable sustained performance. Leadersh. Q.; 2005; 16, pp. 343-372.
14. Chan, A. Authentic leadership measurement and development: Challenges and suggestions. Authentic Leadership Theory and Practice: Origins, Effects, and Development; Gardner, W.L.; Avolio, B.J.; Walumbwa, F.O. Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2005; pp. 227-251.
15. George, B. Authentic Leadership: Rediscovering the Secrets to Creating Lasting Value; Jossey-Bass: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2003.
16. Walumbwa, F.O.; Avolio, B.J.; Gardner, W.L.; Wernsing, T.S.; Peterson, S.J. Authentic leadership: Development and validation of a theory-based measure. J. Manag.; 2008; 34, pp. 89-126.
17. Eagly, A.H. Achieving relational authenticity in leadership: Does gender matter?. Leadersh. Q.; 2005; 16, pp. 459-474.
18. Shamir, B.; Eilam, G. “What’s your story?” A life-stories approach to authentic leadership development. Leadersh. Q.; 2005; 16, pp. 395-417. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.005]
19. Choi, J.W. The effect of authentic leadership on subjective career success of employees: The moderated mediation effect of organizational justice through followership. Korean Corp. Manag. Rev.; 2021; 28, pp. 45-77.
20. Duarte, A.P.; Ribeiro, N.; Semedo, A.S.; Gomes, D.R. Authentic leadership and improved individual performance: Affective commitment and individual creativity’s sequential mediation. Front. Psychol.; 2021; 12, 675749. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.675749] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34025537]
21. Jin, X.; Hahm, S.W. The effect of authentic leadership on organizational commitment and organizational citizenship behavior in the IT industry: The moderating effects of self-efficacy. International Information Institute (Tokyo). Information; 2017; 20, pp. 3823-3834.
22. Joo, B.K.; Jo, S.J. The effects of perceived authentic leadership and core self-evaluations on organizational citizenship behavior: The role of psychological empowerment as a partial mediator. Leadersh. Organ. Dev. J.; 2017; 38, pp. 463-481. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-11-2015-0254]
23. Pradipto, Y.D.; Chairiyati, L.R. The role of authentic leadership, self-efficacy, job satisfaction and employee silence to organizational commitment among millennials. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci.; 2021; 729, 012092. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/729/1/012092]
24. Sri Ramalu, S.; Janadari, N. Authentic leadership and organizational citizenship behaviour: The role of psychological capital. Int. J. Product. Perform. Manag.; 2022; 71, pp. 365-385. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-03-2020-0110]
25. Farid, T.; Iqbal, S.; Basahal, A.S.; Khattak, A.; Khan, M.K.; Salam, M.A. “Doing good and feeling good” Relationship between authentic leadership with followers’ work engagement: The mediating role of hedonic and eudaimonic wellbeing. Front. Public Health; 2022; 10, 1018599. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.1018599]
26. Zheng, X.M.; Huang, S.Z.; Pongsakornrungsilp, P. The impact of authentic leadership and mindfulness on employees’ work happiness in the presence of social media use. Int. J. Ebus. Egov. Stud.; 2024; 16, pp. 390-410.
27. Arthur, M.B.; Khapova, S.N.; Wilderom, C.P.M. Career success in a boundaryless career world. J. Organ. Behav.; 2005; 26, pp. 177-202. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.290]
28. Greenhaus, J.H.; Parasuraman, S.; Wormley, W.M. Effects of race on organizational experiences, job performance evaluations, and career outcomes. Acad. Manag. J.; 1990; 33, pp. 64-86. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/256352]
29. Kurtuldu, S.; Özçelik, A.O. The role of work life balance in the effect of boundaryless career and protean career attitudes on subjective career success. Trak. Univ. Iktis. Idari Bilim. Fak. E-Dergi; 2023; 12, pp. 97-117. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47934/tife.12.01.05]
30. Lee, Y.S.; Cho, D.Y.; Kim, J.M. The effect of supervisor coaching behavior on subjective career success: Application of multilevel analysis. Korean J. Hum. Resour. Dev. Q.; 2018; 20, pp. 225-247.
31. Chang, W.; Busser, J.; Liu, A. Authentic leadership and career satisfaction: The meditating role of thriving and conditional effect of psychological contract fulfillment. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manag.; 2020; 32, pp. 2117-2136.
32. Jang, M.Y.; Lee, S.S. The effect of authentic leadership of industrial workers on subjective career success through mediation of the job autonomy, informal learning, and job crafting. J. Corp. Educ. Talent. Res.; 2021; 23, pp. 55-83. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.46260/KSLP.23.4.3]
33. Deci, E.L.; Ryan, R.M. The empirical exploration of intrinsic motivational processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology; Berkowitz, L. Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1980; Volume 13, pp. 39-80.
34. Ryan, R.M.; Deci, E.L. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am. Psychol.; 2000; 55, pp. 68-78.
35. Han, J.H. The Impact of Authentic leadership on psychological safety and voice behavior: The moderated mediation effect of Self efficacy. Korean Rev. Corp. Manag. (KRCM); 2022; 13, pp. 289-309.
36. Bandura, A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory; Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA, 1986.
37. Edmondson, A.C. The Fearless Organization: Creating Psychological Safety in the Workplace for Learning, Innovation, and Growth; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2018.
38. Schein, E.H.; Bennis, W.G. Personal and Organizational Change Through Group Methods: The Laboratory Approach; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1965.
39. Chandrahaas, C.S.; Narasimhan, N. Authentic leadership and affective organizational commitment: The mediating role of workplace psychological safety. Int. Manag. Rev.; 2022; 18, pp. 12-103.
40. Jin, X.; Qing, C.; Jin, S. Ethical leadership and innovative behavior: Mediating role of voice behavior and moderated mediation role of psychological safety. Sustainability; 2022; 14, 5125. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su14095125]
41. Kim, Y.J.; Kim, B.J. The meditating effect of psychological safety on the relationship between servant leadership and innovative behavior: The importance of authentic leadership. Korean Manag. Consult. Rev. (KMCR); 2021; 21, pp. 173-186.
42. Lee, H. Organization resilience and organizational commitment: The roles of emotion appraisal and psychological safety. Hum. Resour. Manag. Serv.; 2023; 5, 3371.
43. Mitterer, D.M.; Mitterer, H.E. The mediating effect of trust on psychological safety and job satisfaction. J. Behav. Appl. Manag.; 2023; 23, pp. 29-41.
44. Xu, D.; Zhang, N.; Bu, X.; He, J. The effect of perceived organizational support on the work engagement of Chinese nurses during the COVID-19: The mediating role of psychological safety. Psychol. Health Med.; 2022; 27, pp. 481-487.
45. Chen, J.; May, D.R.; Schwoerer, C.E.; Augelli, B. Exploring the boundaries of career calling: The moderating roles of procedural justice and psychological safety. J. Career Dev.; 2018; 45, pp. 103-116.
46. Kabat-Zinn, J.; Hanh, T.N. Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness; Delta: Atlanta, GA, USA, 2009.
47. Kumprang, K.; Suriyankietkaew, S. Mechanisms of organizational mindfulness on employee well-being and engagement: A multi-level analysis. Adm. Sci.; 2024; 14, 121. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/admsci14060121]
48. Zeshan, M.; de La Villarmois, O.; Rasool, S.; Niazi, A.R.K. The perfect moment is this one. The effect of mindfulness on employees: A perspective from self-determination theory. Int. J. Organ. Anal.; 2023; 31, pp. 3617-3633.
49. Lin, C.Y.; Huang, C.K.; Li, H.X.; Chang, T.W.; Hsu, Y.C. Will they stay or leave? Interplay of organizational learning culture and workplace mindfulness on job satisfaction and turnover intentions. Public Pers. Manag.; 2022; 51, pp. 24-47.
50. Hatfield, E.; Cacioppo, J.T.; Rapson, R.L. Emotional Contagion; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1994.
51. Hobfoll, S.E. Conservation of resources: A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. Am. Psychol.; 1989; 44, pp. 513-524.
52. Zivnuska, S.; Kacmar, K.M.; Ferguson, M.; Carlson, D.S. Mindfulness at work: Resource accumulation, well-being, and attitudes. Career Dev. Int.; 2016; 21, pp. 106-124.
53. Vaculík, M.; Vytásková, J.; Procházka, J.; Zalis, L. Mindfulness, job satisfaction and job performance: Mutual relationships and moderation effect. Proceedings of the 21st International Scientific Conference Economics and Management; Brno, Czech Republic, 19–20 May 2016; pp. 148-156.
54. Warda, S.; Li, Z.; He, X. Authentic leadership and mindfulness training: Effects on nursing managers’ competence development. J. Nurs. Manag.; 2024; 32, pp. 45-59.
55. Ruedy, N.E.; Schweitzer, M.E. In the moment: The effect of mindfulness on ethical decision making. J. Bus. Ethics; 2010; 95, pp. 73-87.
56. Kim, K.S.; Hong, J.W. The effect of mindfulness on positive psychological capital, job satisfaction, and innovative behavior: The mediating roles of positive psychological capital. J. CEO Manag. Stud.; 2023; 26, pp. 107-129.
57. UNDP. Goal 8. Decent Work and Economic Growth, United Nations Development Programme. 2025; Available online: https://www.undp.org/sustainable-development-goals/decent-work-and-economic-growth (accessed on 9 February 2025).
58. National Bioethics Policy Institute. Key Evaluation Criteria and Cases for IRB Exemption, Institutional Review Board Evaluation and Accreditation Office, Planning (Report). 2024; Available online: https://irb.or.kr/menu04/ReferenceView.aspx?page=1&id=2040&title=%EB%A9%B4%EC%A0%9C&type= (accessed on 9 February 2025).
59. Faul, F.; Erdfelder, E.; Buchner, A.; Lang, A.G. Statistical power analyses using G* Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav. Res. Methods; 2009; 41, pp. 1149-1160.
60. Avolio, B.J.; Bass, B.M. Individual consideration viewed at multiple levels of analysis: A multi-level framework for examining the diffusion of transformational leadership. Leadersh. Q.; 1995; 6, pp. 199-218.
61. Gattiker, U.E.; Larwood, L. Subjective career success: A study of managers and support personnel. J. Bus. Psychol.; 1986; 1, pp. 78-94.
62. Choi, J.H. Development of subjective career success scale (CJH-CSS). J. Corp. Educ. Talent. Res.; 2022; 24, pp. 197-248.
63. Jeon, Y.U. Structural Analysis of Factors Affecting Project Team Learning in Large Corporations. Ph.D. Thesis; Seoul National University: Seoul, Republic of Korea, 2009.
64. Baer, R.A.; Smith, G.T.; Allen, K.B. Assessment of mindfulness by self-report: The Kentucky Inventory of Mindfulness Skills. Assessment; 2004; 11, pp. 191-206.
65. Kim, J.M. A validation study of Korean version of Kentucky inventory of mindfulness skills. Korean J. Clin. Psychol.; 2006; 25, pp. 1123-1139.
66. Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci.; 2015; 43, pp. 115-135.
67. Franke, G.; Sarstedt, M. Heuristics versus statistics in discriminant validity testing: A comparison of four procedures. Internet Res.; 2019; 29, pp. 430-447.
68. Hayes, A.F. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach; 3rd ed. Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2022.
69. Mulligan, R.; Carroll, J. The mediating effect of mindfulness on the relationship between LMX and innovative behavior. J. Appl. Psychol.; 2021; 106, pp. 701-715.
70. Balli, A.I.K.; Ustun, F.; Balli, E. The mediating role of psychological safety in the effect of organizational culture on innovation: A research in hotel enterprises. Int. J. Bus.; 2021; 26, pp. 46-69.
71. Maximo, N.; Stander, M.W.; Coxen, L. Authentic leadership and work engagement: The indirect effects of psychological safety and trust in supervisors. SA J. Ind. Psychol.; 2019; 45, pp. 1-11.
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Details
; Jong-Chae, Kim 3
1 Department of Human Resource Development, Graduate School of Techno-HRD, Korea University of Technology and Education (KOREATECH), Cheonan 31253, Republic of Korea;
2 Department of Business Administration, Asia University, Taichung 413305, Taiwan
3 International School of Hospitality, Sports, and Tourism Management, Fairleigh Dickinson University, Teaneck, NJ 07666, USA