Enhancing creative process engagement in university students: the mediating role of trust and empowerment and the moderating effect of proactive personality in humble teacher leadership

Abstract

This study examines the interplay between humble teacher leadership and student creative process engagement, grounded in Social Exchange Theory and Self-Determination Theory. Additionally, it analyzes the sequential mediating roles of student trust and psychological empowerment, as well as the moderating effect of proactive personality. Data were collected at three time points from 384 participants across Chinese universities and analyzed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) with Smart PLS 4.0 software. The findings reveal that humble teacher leadership significantly enhances students’ participation in creative processes. Student trust and psychological empowerment serve as sequential mediators in the relationship between humble leadership and creative engagement. Moreover, the presence of a proactive personality notably strengthens the positive influence of humble teacher leadership on students’ creative process engagement. By exploring the psychological states and individual differences, this research elucidates the mediating mechanisms and boundary conditions between humble teacher leadership and students’ creative engagement, providing theoretical foundations and practical guidelines for implementing humble leadership in educational settings.

Introduction

In the global educational landscape, rapid updates in knowledge and innovations in educational technology have shortened the applicability of learning content and teaching methods, making creativity and innovation essential skills that modern educational institutions must cultivate in students [1]. Student Creative Process Engagement (SCPE) encompasses students’ active exploration and practice at the cognitive, behavioral, and emotional levels toward innovative tasks, which are indispensable for nurturing and enhancing creativity [2]. To effectively transform creativity into tangible outcomes, students need to actively engage in key activities such as problem identification, information gathering, and idea generation, with support and assistance from teachers [3]. Teachers play a crucial role in fostering students’ creative abilities; their cognition, attitudes, and behaviors significantly impact the development of students’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills [4]. However, teachers’ reliance on traditional teaching methods, neglect of student feedback, and excessive emphasis on personal authority lead to a lack of belonging and initiative among students, thereby limiting their potential to demonstrate creative abilities and produce innovative outcomes [5].

While numerous studies have examined the impact of diverse leadership styles such as transformational [6], spiritual [7], and authoritarian [8] on student creativity and innovation performance, these studies often portray teachers as role models and authorities, overlooking the interactive modes between teachers and students as learning partners. Consequently, current research on teacher leadership is shifting towards an emphasis on humble behaviors. Humble leadership is defined as “leaders generously expressing respect for others in various ways, willing to accept criticism and seek advice“ [9], with core characteristics of self-reflection and mutual learning that facilitate the advancement of collective interests [10]. Humble teachers, by leading by example and displaying empathy and approachability, guide and mentor students in self-exploration and encourage an open attitude towards learning, thereby fostering student engagement in creative activities [11]. Additionally, given the scarcity of research on the relationship between teacher leadership and student creative engagement, this study aims to fill this gap by exploring the specific relationship and mechanisms between humble teacher leadership and university students’ creative process engagement.

Secondly, the transformation in the role of teachers necessitates that they relinquish some power to cultivate reciprocal relationships with students [12]. Trust is defined as a vulnerable psychological state based on positive expectations of another’s intentions or behaviors [13], where expectations of reliability and trustworthiness must be met to establish and develop trust. Students’ trust in teachers, including reliance on their words, guidance, and commitments, plays a crucial role in fostering the development of students’ self-concepts and self-awareness, and is a proximal factor affecting students’ psychological states and decision-making behaviors [14]. Additionally, trust is a key psychological state influencing the success of the empowerment process, reflecting whether individuals believe they have been empowered, rather than the actual transfer of power, involving psychological variables related to self-perception [15]. Psychological empowerment refers to the intrinsic motivation individuals experience based on cognitions associated with their work roles, related to the capacity to handle events, situations, and problems [16, 17]. Studies have shown that students who feel psychologically empowered often exhibit significant personal efficacy, tendencies towards self-determination, and a sense of responsibility, and are more likely to proactively propose new ideas and engage in creative activities [18]. Although trust and empowerment have been shown to be crucial for many positive organizational behaviors, existing research has not yet focused on their contribution to university students’ engagement in creative processes. Our study introduces trust and psychological empowerment as sequential mediators, revealing new perspectives on how humble teacher leadership influences university students’ engagement in creative processes.

Moreover, students with different personalities may perceive the same leadership style differently, undergoing diverse cognitive processes and displaying varied reactions. Proactive personality is defined as an individual’s inclination to identify opportunities, initiate change, and manipulate the environment to seize such opportunities [19], and has been demonstrated to be a more effective predictor of performance in organizational and creative tasks than other personality measure [20]. Research has shown that students with a high degree of proactive personality experience fewer constraints from external restrictions and exhibit greater spontaneity in changing and optimizing the learning environment [21]. To our knowledge, no prior studies have investigated whether proactive personality amplifies the effects of humble teacher leadership. Therefore, by examining the moderating role of proactive personality, this study deepens our understanding of how humble teacher leadership influences student creative engagement.

Because the educational process inherently involves complex interpersonal interactions, the influence of teachers on students can be explained through social exchange theory and self-determination theory. We employed a quantitative research approach to explore the key factors affecting student creative process engagement. The critical points of discussion in this study include: (1) how humble teacher leadership influences students’ creative engagement; (2) how students’ trust and psychological empowerment serve as mediating variables between teacher leadership and student creative engagement; and (3) how proactive personality traits modulate the effects of humble teacher leadership. The findings reveal the significance of these factors in promoting students’ creative development and aim to provide specific guidance strategies for educational practice to optimize teaching methods and student interactions.

Theoretical background and literature review

Social Exchange Theory posits that social exchange is a bidirectional, reciprocal process based on complementarity and mutual dependency, where one party provides resources in exchange for the reciprocal returns from another [22]. The theory further suggests that, irrespective of cultural backgrounds, people are innately inclined to engage in social behaviors such as sharing, maintaining balance and equity, obeying authority, and caring for others [23]. Effective social exchanges often rely on all parties’ positive perceptions and valuations of the interaction, fostering the development of deep relationships based on trust, loyalty, and mutual commitment [23]. Research indicates that trust is a key indicator of the quality of social exchanges between leaders and followers. From the perspective of Social Exchange Theory (SET), a teacher’s humility is seen as a manifestation of their charismatic personality and can be interpreted as a sign of high-quality interpersonal relationships [24]. The open and tolerant demeanor that humble teachers exhibit towards students is often viewed as friendly and kind behavior, pivotal in establishing positive and stable teacher-student relationships. In return, students who choose to trust their teachers are more likely to have opportunities to exchange information and discuss problems with them, enhancing their ability to generate creative ideas and their willingness to take creative risks [25]. Therefore, this study proposes that students’ trust in teachers acts as a key mediating variable between humble teacher leadership and university students’ engagement in creative processes, hypothesizing that teachers’ humble behaviors, by enhancing students’ trust, significantly foster students’ innovation potential and engagement.

Self-Determination Theory also emphasizes the importance of the external environment on individuals, proposing that the environment fosters the internalization of personal motivations and enhances perceived levels of self-determination by satisfying basic psychological needs such as competence, autonomy, and relatedness [26]. This suggests that teachers can stimulate students’ intrinsic motivation and self-awareness by meeting their psychological needs during the creative process. Specifically, autonomy refers to students’ need to feel control and choice over creative activities and decision-making processes; competence is the need to achieve a sense of accomplishment and efficacy during the creative process; relatedness is the desire to establish positive interactions and connections with teachers and peers [27]. Psychological empowerment is defined as an intrinsic task motivation, manifested in an individual’s sense of meaning, competence, self-determination, and impact [28]. Granting students more autonomy and responsibility can influence their perception of psychological empowerment [2], which in turn can lead to outcomes such as enhanced engagement in creative activities. We select psychological empowerment to represent intrinsic motivation and investigate its role alongside student trust as sequential mediators that link humble leadership with students’ engagement in creative processes.

Furthermore, the Causality Orientations Theory (COT) within Self-Determination Theory proposes that people interpret social or environmental inputs through autonomous, controlled, or impersonal orientations, each of which affects their ability to predict psychological and behavioral outcomes [26]. Individuals with an autonomous orientation tend to seek opportunities to enhance their autonomy and use information that aligns with their values and preferences to achieve their goals [26]. A proactive personality, characterized by self-motivation, a desire to improve work processes, and a tendency to embrace environmental changes, embodies the core attributes of an autonomous orientation [19]. Therefore, we consider “proactive personality” as a manifestation of an autonomous orientation and explore its role as a boundary variable in the context of humble teacher leadership.

Humble teacher leadership and creative process engagement

Humility originates from ancient Stoicism and Buddhist teachings and is considered a core human virtue and a stable trait of quality leadership [10]. It is based on self-perception that acknowledges something greater than the individual, treats others with appreciation and non-threatening demeanor, and effectively avoids arrogance, conceit, and self-aggrandizement [9]. The definition of humble leadership involves three dimensions: self-awareness encompassing understanding of strengths and weaknesses, openness characterized by acceptance of new thoughts and methods along with appreciation for others’ merits and contributions, and teachability defined by willingness to listen to others, encourage questions, and actively seek information and advice. Moreover, humble leaders establish closer relationships with their followers and are regarded as potential role models possessing high status and influence [29]. Leadership literature increasingly shows that through role modeling and positive recognition, humble leadership not only enhances followers’ work engagement and performance but also fosters their well-being and stimulates creativity [30]. In the field of education, humble teacher leadership is considered fundamental for fostering students [31], enabling teachers to objectively assess themselves, appreciate student strengths, and remain open to feedback. Research indicates that this leadership trait encourages students to develop self-regulation strategies while enhancing collaborative learning, emotional engagement, and active help-seeking, thereby improving academic outcomes [32].

The engagement in the creative process encompasses the time, energy, and effort individuals dedicate to work-related creative activities, simultaneously reflecting their subjective performance evaluations in these tasks [33]. This process encompasses three stages: problem identification, information searching and encoding, and idea generation [2]. Humble leadership characterized by precise, non-defensive, and objective self-assessment effectively facilitates student engagement in the creative process. Specifically, students need to construct the problem and establish both goals and procedures for its resolution during the problem identification stage [34]. Through an open attitude and non-judgmental feedback, humble teachers facilitate students’ abilities to clarify their thinking directions as they explore various solution paths [32]. Subsequently, students deepen their understanding of the problem by collecting and processing information, which involves consulting resources, accessing multiple information sources, and retaining detailed information for future use [3]. Humble teachers guide students by providing continuous signals and cues to identify key concepts and connections, thereby fostering the development of critical thinking and the generation of innovative solutions [31]. Finally, students are required to filter, design, and connect information to generate alternative solutions and new insights. Humble teachers facilitate this by acknowledging their own limitations and understanding, accepting, and respecting students’ ideas, effectively resolving conflicts and disagreements that may arise during the innovation process [35].

Hypothesis 1

Humble teacher leadership is positively correlated with creative process engagement.

Mediation of student trust

Trust is the degree to which one has confidence in another’s words, actions, and decisions, and the extent to which one is willing to act based on this confidence [36]. It is founded on both cognitive and emotional bases. Cognitive trust is built upon rational assessments of an individual’s abilities and reliability, typically involving evaluations of past responsibility and competence, established through logical analysis of behavior and evidence [37]. In contrast, emotional trust develops from deeper emotional bonds, evolving over time and reflected in mutual care and commitment [38]. Trust typically arises from sustained interpersonal interactions, such as those between leaders and subordinates or between teachers and students [13]. In our research, teachers characterized by openness and supportiveness are more likely to earn both cognitive and emotional trust from students. This trust is defined as students’ recognition and reliance on a teacher’s professional competence, ethical quality, and decision-making, as well as their willingness to follow the teacher’s advice in areas such as academic guidance, career development, and personal growth [14]. Existing research has demonstrated that trust is a mediating mechanism that explains the relationship between leaders’ expressed humility and more distal outcomes, allowing individuals under humble leadership to exhibit greater enthusiasm in creative tasks [39].

By openly accepting feedback and new ideas, fairly evaluating students’ contributions, and communicating honestly, humble teachers enhance students’ trust in their decisions or objectives set [40]. In addition, humility acts as a “lubricant” in relationships, enabling teachers to send friendly and sincere signals that effectively reduce the psychological distance between teachers and university students. Research indicates that the altruistic behavior of humble teachers can serve as a basis for emotional trust, thereby reducing students’ feelings of loneliness and their rate of disengagement from activities [41]. High levels of trust not only increase university students’ satisfaction with their learning and professional commitment but also reduce their fear of exploring new fields, motivating them to actively seek new knowledge and embrace more challenges of uncertainty [42]. Conversely, low levels of trust might lead students to believe that teachers will not fairly fulfill their duties [43]. This perception can increase psychological stress among students, thereby deterring them from engaging in creative activities [44].

Hypothesis 2

Student trust mediates the relationship between humble teacher leadership and creative process engagement.

Mediation of psychological empowerment

Psychological empowerment is conceptualized as a perceived psychological state or a cognitive constellation, manifested across four dimensions: competence, impact, self-determination, and meaning [16]. Competence refers to an individual’s confidence in their skills and knowledge required to complete specific tasks, along with a firm belief in their ability to successfully execute tasks and fulfill responsibilities [45]. Impact is the individual’s self-assessment of the extent to which they can influence strategic directions, operational processes, and outcomes within organizations [46]. Self-determination refers to the sense of freedom and autonomy an individual feels about how to carry out their work tasks [47], involving the independence they experience in initiating and conducting activities or tasks. Meaning relates to the degree to which an individual perceives their work as valuable or significant, reflecting the alignment between job role demands and an individual’s values, beliefs, and behaviors [48]. Thus, psychological empowerment is a motivational state achieved through the synthesis of these cognitions, leading to a proactive orientation and sense of control over work, thereby enabling individuals to shape their work environment with interest and capability [16]. For university students, psychological empowerment refers to the students’ feeling of being capable of completing meaningful tasks and impacting their environment [49]. Existing research has demonstrated that psychological empowerment, significantly correlating with the fostering of students’ lifelong learning abilities, emotional learning, and proactive learning behaviors, plays a pivotal role in identifying student needs and regulating their behavior [50]. This motivational state is closely related to students’ needs for autonomy in creative activities and their problem-solving capabilities, further indicating that psychological empowerment plays a crucial role in fostering students’ creative engagement [51].

Psychological empowerment is broadly defined as the process through which leaders delegate authority and control to subordinates [28], essentially fulfilling the subordinates’ intrinsic needs for autonomy and competence. We believe that the humble teacher leadership can significantly impact the various dimensions of students’ psychological empowerment, thereby fostering their engagement in the creative process. Firstly, humble teachers enhance student innovative self-efficacy by providing personal support, dedicating time to teaching and mentoring, and developing students’ strengths, helping students recognize their ability to solve complex problems [52]. Secondly, when teachers connect academic activities with the real world through exemplary behavior, students gain a deeper appreciation of the practical value of knowledge, further cultivating their innovation awareness and sense of social responsibility [53]. Thirdly, humble teachers value students’ needs for autonomy, encouraging students to explore new concepts at their own pace and interest, thereby sparking their enthusiasm for creative activities [54]. Lastly, the humble behavior of teachers transmits signals of academic support and psychological safety to students, encouraging open sharing of views and exchange of resources, thus providing a better learning experience and opportunities for creative development [39]. Research shows that psychological empowerment enables individuals to recognize the importance of creativity, acting as a mediator between leaders’ encouragement and engagement in creative processes [55].

Hypothesis 3

Psychological empowerment mediates the relationship between humble teacher leadership and creative process engagement.

Serial mediation of student trust and psychological empowerment

Building on the above discussion, we further propose that humble teacher leadership, by enhancing students’ trust, helps to establish psychological empowerment, which in turn influences students’ participation in the creative process. In the context of the networked, complex, and diverse nature of creative activities, students facing unknown risks, challenges, conflicts, and mistakes require special support [1]. Students’ trust in teachers not only inspires them to see their teachers as positive and reflective role models but also encourages them to follow their guidance and decisions, actively exploring and proposing innovative solutions [42]. Moreover, trust relationships enhance students’ sense of self-worth and responsibility when making creativity-related decisions, prompting them to take risks together with teachers who are perceived as safe and trustworthy [56]. When teachers openly acknowledge their own mistakes and limitations, actively highlight students’ strengths and contributions, and treat all students more fairly, it not only enhances students’ trust but also significantly increases their sense of psychological empowerment and engagement in creative processes by establishing a fair and transparent learning environment [32]. Existing research supports the pivotal role of teachers in empowering student decision-making and confirms a positive correlation between trust and psychological empowerment [54, 57].

Hypothesis 4

Student trust and psychological empowerment sequentially mediate the relationship between humble teacher leadership and creative process engagement.

Moderating of effect proactive personality

Proactive personality is defined as an individual’s inherent tendency to take action to achieve goals, characterized by initiative, change orientation, and a future focus [19]. These traits not only drive students to actively improve their current conditions but also stimulate creative thinking, which is positively correlated with creativity [58]. Proactive students actively adapt to and respond to the characteristics of their educational and group environments, rather than operating in a social vacuum [59]. Considering that teachers are a significant component of students’ external environments, a proactive personality can significantly influence how students perceive and understand changes in their attitudes, cognitions, and behaviors toward teachers [60]. As previously noted, humble leaders shape their followers’ perceptions of themselves and their openness to new ideas and information, providing a secure foundation [61]. When teachers adopt a humble approach and foster an environment of mutual respect and openness, students with proactive personalities are more likely to choose novel and challenging tasks and complete these tasks with greater curiosity, perseverance, and creativity. Furthermore, humility is seen as a virtue, and those with humble traits often exhibit a relational orientation that shows concern for others’ needs [10]. Humble teacher leadership that continuously provides feedback and student-centered teaching behaviors encourages proactive students to actively participate in communication and interaction [62]. Instead of constantly directing how things should be done, teachers allow students to take leadership roles at appropriate times and implement their ideas, thus enhancing their contributions and value in the creative process [63].

Hypothesis 5

Proactive personality moderates the relationship between humble teacher leadership and creative process engagement.

Research model.

Based on the aforementioned hypotheses, the proposed research model is illustrated in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Shows the proposed research model

Methodology

Data collection and sampling

Our study, conducted from April to July 2024, collected data from undergraduates at three universities in China using a stratified random sampling method. The sample allocation was based on the proportion of undergraduate students enrolled at each university to ensure representativeness and the general applicability of the research findings. Before collecting data, we presented the purpose of our study to the management of the Schools of Innovation and Entrepreneurship at the three universities and obtained lists of undergraduate students through academic advisors. Selected students were required to have been enrolled for at least six months and have experience in innovative activities. Samples were chosen using a random number generator to ensure equal probability of selection for all students. Selected students received an invitation to participate in the study via their official university email addresses, which detailed the purpose, significance, and specifics of participation to ensure students fully understood the content and significance of their involvement. The questionnaire included a consent form, emphasizing the voluntary nature of participation and the security of the information provided. Our research was conducted in three surveys: the first survey collected demographic data and assessments of teachers’ humility, yielding 487 valid responses. Four weeks later, the second survey focused on students’ trust in teachers and their sense of psychological empowerment, collecting 416 valid responses. Another four weeks later, the third survey assessed participants’ engagement in creative activities over the previous two months, gathering 457 valid responses. In total, 384 valid datasets were matched using unique IDs, resulting in a 76.8% response rate. Participant demographics included 47.8% female and 52.2% male, with 31.2% first-year, 23% second-year, 23.9% third-year, and 21.9% fourth-year students. Distribution by discipline showed 35.2% in natural sciences, 34.7% in social sciences, and 30% in humanities. Institutional types included 36.9% from “985” project universities, 38.8% from “211” project universities, and 24.2% from other universities.

Measurement tools

To enhance the precision of our measurements, we employed established questionnaires and utilized the back-translation method proposed by Brislin, translating the questionnaires from English to Chinese and vice versa [64]. To verify the quality of the translations, we invited two professors from the School of Foreign Languages to review the language and two professors from the School of Higher Education to evaluate the content of the questionnaires, ensuring they accurately reflected the intended context and avoided potential misunderstandings. Based on the feedback from these experts, we optimized and revised the questionnaires. The finalized questionnaire comprised 48 items covering areas such as humble leadership of university teachers, creative process engagement, student trust, psychological empowerment, and proactive personality. Response options for all items ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Humble teacher leadership

We measured students’ perceptions of their university teachers’ humble leadership using a 9-item scale developed by Owens and Hekman [65]. This scale is divided into three subscales: clear self-awareness, appreciation of students’ strengths and contributions, and fostering teachability. An example item is, “My teacher demonstrates an openness to others’ ideas.” Cronbach’s α coefficient is 0.944.

Creative process engagement

For assessing students’ engagement in creative processes, we utilized an 11-item scale developed by Zhang and Bartol [2]. This scale measures engagement in creative processes, including problem identification, information search and encoding, and idea generation. An example item is, “I spend significant time filtering information that facilitates new ideas.” Cronbach’s α coefficient is 0.953.

Student trust

We employed the 9-item trust scale proposed by McAllister to assess students’ cognitive and affective trust in their teachers [36]. Cognitive trust was measured using five items, such as “My teacher approaches his/her job with professionalism and dedication.” Affective trust was assessed through four items, for example, “I can freely discuss my learning difficulties with my teacher, knowing he/she is willing to listen.” Cronbach’s α coefficient is 0.927.

Psychological empowerment

We utilized the 12-item Psychological Empowerment Scale developed by Spreitzer to evaluate university students’ sense of psychological empowerment [16]. This scale includes four dimensions: meaning, competence, self-determination, and impact. Specifically, meaning is assessed by items such as “The work I do is very important to me”; competence by items such as “I am confident about my ability to perform my tasks”; self-determination by items such as “I have a significant amount of freedom and independence in my studies”; and impact by items such as “I have a significant degree of control over what happens in project activities.” Cronbach’s α coefficient is 0.947.

Proactive personality

We employed the Proactive Personality Scale (PPS) developed by Bateman and Crant [19]. Given the distinct characteristics of university students and the educational context in China, we streamlined the original 17-item scale down to 7 items to better align with the specific needs and behaviors of our sample. For instance, one of the retained items is: “Whenever there is a problem in my studies, I immediately look for solutions.” Cronbach’s α coefficient is 0.933.

Control variables

In this study, we included gender (1 = male, 2 = female), academic year (1 = first year, 2 = second year, 3 = third year, 4 = fourth year), discipline (1 = natural sciences, 2 = social sciences, 3 = humanities), and school type (1 = 985 project universities, 2 = 211 project universities, 3 = other universities) as control variables. Previous research has demonstrated that these variables are related to the main variables under investigation.

Common method bias (CMB)

Due to the collection of both independent and dependent variable data from the same respondents, we employed the Harman single-factor test and the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) based multicollinearity test methods to assess the potential for Common Method Bias (CMB) [66]. The Harman single-factor test revealed that, among the seven factors with eigenvalues greater than 1, the first factor accounted for 36.471% of the variance, which is well below the 40% threshold, and together explained 75.031% of the total variance. Additionally, the VIF values for all constructs ranged from 1.493 to 1.769, significantly below the commonly accepted threshold of 3. These results suggest that there is no common method bias in the model.

Empirical analysis and results

Measurement models

We conducted our model analysis using the PLS-SEM technique in Smart PLS 4.1.0.8 software, primarily due to its suitability for predictive and complex models. Unlike covariance-based SEM (CB-SEM), PLS-SEM does not require overall fit indices and has more lenient assumptions regarding data distribution, making it appropriate for models with emergent or less established theoretical frameworks. Moreover, the bootstrapping method in Smart PLS allows for effective significance testing of path models, which is particularly crucial for examining sequential mediation and moderating relationships within our research model [67].

Measurement model assessment

Our measurement model included five key latent constructs (namely, humble teacher leadership style, student trust, psychological empowerment, proactive personality, and university students’ creative process engagement). In assessing the measurement model, we tested the reliability and validity associated with the latent constructs [68, 69]. Reliability was evaluated through item factor loadings and the composite reliability (CR) of the scales. As shown in Table 1, all item loadings exceeded the recommended threshold of 0.70, ensuring appropriate representation of each construct [70]. The CR values exceeded 0.70, demonstrating good internal consistency across all scales. Subsequently, validity was assessed through convergent and discriminant validity. The average variance extracted (AVE) values for all latent constructs exceeded the standard threshold of 0.50, meeting the requirements for convergent validity. Discriminant validity was assessed using the heterotrait-monotrait ratio (HTMT), and all HTMT values were below the critical threshold of 0.85, supporting the appropriate distinction between constructs (see Table 2).

Table 1 Reliability and convergent validity assessment

Table 2 Discriminant validity (HTMT ratio)

Hypothesis testing

We utilized Smart PLS 4.1.0.8 software and a bootstrap procedure with 5,000 subsamples to test the model hypotheses according to the PLS-SEM standard procedure, including a two-tailed test at the 0.05 significance level to assess the importance of path coefficients [70]. As shown in Table 3, the path coefficients (Beta values) confirmed the hypotheses proposed in our single model. In the analysis of control variables (including gender, grade, major, and school), their impact on the model was not significant (p > 0.5). In terms of primary effects, the direct relationship between humble teacher leadership (HTL) and university student creative process engagement was significant (β = 0.113, t = 2.417, p = 0.016). Additionally, HTL exhibited positive and significant path coefficients with student trust (ST) (β = 0.422, t = 10.048, p < 0.001) and psychological empowerment (PE) (β = 0.342, t = 8.835, p < 0.001). Furthermore, ST also showed a significant positive correlation with PE (β = 0.435, t = 11.378, p < 0.001) and with university student creative process engagement (β = 0.290, t = 6.409, p < 0.001). The impact of PE on university student creative process engagement was likewise significant (β = 0.304, t = 5.651, p < 0.001).

Further analysis of indirect effects revealed how ST and PE mediate the relationship between HTL and university students’ creative process engagement. Specifically, ST (β = 0.122, t = 5.461, p < 0.001) and PE (β = 0.104, t = 4.492, p < 0.001) both played significant mediating roles between HTL and university students’ engagement in creative processes. Moreover, sequential mediation analysis indicated that HTL has a significant indirect impact on university students’ creative process engagement through ST and PE (β = 0.056, t = 4.658, p < 0.001).

Table 3 Path coefficients and significances

In the model, we incorporated the SPP*HTL interaction term to explore its moderating effect on the relationship between humble teacher leadership (HTL) and student creative process engagement (SCPE). As shown in Table 3, this interaction term significantly and positively moderated the impact of HTL on SCPE (β = 0.121, t = 3.288, p = 0.001), thereby supporting Hypothesis 5. The slope graph in Fig. 2 further reveals that the positive impact of HTL on SCPE is more pronounced at higher levels of SPP, exhibiting a steeper positive slope. Conversely, at lower levels of SPP, this positive effect is relatively weakened, with the slope tending to flatten. These findings highlight how the level of SPP modulates the effectiveness of HTL in stimulating student creative process engagement.

Fig. 2

Student proactive personality as moderator: Johnson-Neyman Plot. SPP: Student proactive personality. HTL: Humble teacher leadership

Additionally, to assess the moderating effects, this study followed the recommendations of Henseler and Fassott by comparing the R² values of the main model, which includes only the exogenous variables, with the full model that incorporates the moderator [71]. The size of the moderating effect was calculated using Cohen formula: $\:{f}^{2}=\frac{{{R}^{2}}_{included}-{{R}^{2}}_{excluded}}{1-{{R}^{2}}_{included}}$ [72].According to the effect size standards set by Henseler and Fassott [71], f² values of 0.35, 0.15, and 0.02 represent large, medium, and small effects, respectively. The results indicate that the humble teacher leadership (HTL) has a medium effect on student trust (f² = 0.217) and psychological empowerment (f² = 0.170), and a smaller effect on university student creative process engagement (f² = 0.026). Moreover, student trust has a medium impact on psychological empowerment (f² = 0.274) and a weaker impact on creative process engagement (f² = 0.103). The impact of psychological empowerment on creative process engagement is also relatively weak (f² = 0.102). Regarding Hypothesis 5’s interaction effect, following the stricter categorization criteria suggested by Hair—greater than 0.005 for a small effect, 0.01 for a medium effect, and 0.025 for a large effect—due to the typical mean f² value of 0.009 in interaction relationships, Hypothesis 5 in this study (f² = 0.027) is classified as having a large effect [73]. These findings highlight the potential influence of humble teacher leadership across different structural variables, thereby underscoring the significant role of this leadership in enhancing university students’ engagement in creative processes and other related variables.

Explanatory power and predictive relevance

This study employed two methods to assess the explanatory power and predictive relevance of the model. Firstly, the coefficient of determination R² was calculated using the PLS algorithm in Smart PLS software, with all models’ R² values significantly exceeding the minimum threshold of 0.10 [74]. Specifically, the R² value for university student creative process engagement was 0.478, for student trust it was 0.178, and for psychological empowerment it was 0.433, indicating that the model possesses good explanatory power. Secondly, the model’s predictive relevance was assessed using the Stone-Geisser Q² value, which determines by measuring the model and its parameters’ ability to replicate observed data. The results showed that the Q² value for university student creative process engagement was 0.273, for student trust it was 0.104, and for psychological empowerment it was 0.235, all values being above zero thus confirming the model’s good predictive relevance. Figure 3 illustrates the proposed relationship path coefficients, their indicators loadings, and their level of significance.

Fig. 3

Structural equation modeling

Discussion

General findings

Drawing on Social Exchange Theory and Self-Determination Theory, our study focuses on the impact of humble teacher leadership on university student creative process engagement. We further explored the mediating roles of student trust and psychological empowerment, as well as the moderating effect of proactive personality. This research demonstrates that humble teacher leadership positively influences university students’ creative engagement, consistent with previous literature on creative process engagement [2, 11]. This indicates that leaders’ humility and approachability encourage students to participate more actively in creative activities. Our findings also corroborate theories suggesting that humble behaviors of leaders positively affect their followers, specifically that humble leadership has a significant exemplary effect, worthy of observation and emulation [10]. Humble teachers establish a model for growth and development by acknowledging their own limitations, emphasizing students’ strengths, and openly accepting new perspectives and feedback [35]. Such behavioral patterns not only promote role exchange between teachers and students but also enhance students’ involvement and responsibility for innovative tasks [24]. Students feel ongoing support and recognition from their teachers during interactions, making the feedback and support from humble teachers a key driver in students’ decision-making and responses in creative tasks [31].

Moreover, our research demonstrates that student trust mediates the relationship between humble teacher leadership and student creative process engagement. The greater the vulnerability or uncertainty within a context, the more attention individuals pay to trust, and the more significant its impact on outcomes. Existing knowledge and “sufficient reason” form the basis for trust decisions, and the inherently risky nature of creativity along with the need for knowledge renewal make trust even more crucial in engaging in creative processes [75]. The evidence from this study shows that humble teachers enhance students’ cognitive trust by demonstrating openness and transparency, and cultivate strong trust relationships by providing continuous support and positive feedback, thus motivating students to engage more deeply in creative exploration and participation. Interactions between teachers and students unfold within a continuum of social relationships that deepen from agreement to support [23]. The formation of trust is essential for students’ initiative and depth in problem-solving and proposing innovative solutions [42]. These findings further validate the positive role of trust in stimulating students’ creative engagement and underscore the importance of incorporating trust into research on the relationship between teacher leadership and students’ creative behaviors.

Furthermore, psychological empowerment mediates the relationship between humble teacher leadership and students’ engagement in creative processes. This indicates that teachers’ humble behaviors grant students greater autonomy, enabling them to perceive their own value and capabilities, thereby enhancing their desire to participate in creative activities. These findings are consistent with the results of earlier research [46, 54]. We also discovered that trust is a fundamental pillar of psychological empowerment, and together they form a continuous mediation, collectively enhancing the impact of humble teacher leadership on university students’ engagement in creative processes. This discovery supports previous research [65, 68] and aligns with the perspective of self-determination theory, which posits that students’ values, beliefs, and behaviors, when combined with task objectives, enable them to subjectively evaluate project activities based on their own principles and standards [76]. This evaluative process not only reflects students’ intrinsic motivation and autonomy but also promotes their proactive involvement and the expression of creativity in both academic and personal development.

Finally, proactive personality positively moderates the relationship between humble teacher leadership and university student creative processes engagement. This finding reconfirms that proactive personality is one of the essential traits for fostering university students’ innovation and participation in extracurricular activities [58]. The results suggest that proactive personality implies students’ initiative, enthusiasm, and perseverance in pursuing goals, with students possessing high proactive traits enhancing the impact of humble teacher leadership on creative process engagement. Conversely, when students exhibit lower levels of proactive personality, the effect of humble teacher leadership is relatively weak. Our research pioneers a new path of inquiry into the situational effects within humble leadership, exploring when the benefits of humble teacher leadership might manifest in creative process engagement.

Theoretical implications

Our research makes several theoretical contributions to the literature on the relationship between teacher leadership and student creativity. First, this study examines the effectiveness of university teachers’ leadership from the perspective of humble leadership, broadening the theoretical and practical application of research on teacher leadership. Existing literature often treats student creativity as an outcome variable and fails to fully capture the direct impact of teacher leadership on students’ creative engagement [4, 7, 12, 25, 35]. By introducing the people-oriented humble leadership, we explored its potential positive effects on creative process engagement among Chinese university students. The findings indicate that creative process engagement serves as an important outcome variable demonstrating students’ creativity levels. They also support the cross-cultural transferability of the humble teacher leadership concept, contributing to an enhanced understanding of its effectiveness.

Secondly, this study elucidates that trust and psychological empowerment are key mediators through which humble teacher leadership facilitates student creative processes engagement, thereby enriching the literature on creative teaching. Trust is considered an essential element in positive interpersonal relationships, creating a collaborative environment by providing individuals with a sense of security and attachment [40]. Previous research supports the crucial role of trust in fostering positive workplace attitudes [13, 14, 17, 37]. By exploring from the students’ perspective, this study examines the positive effects of trust on university students’ engagement in creative processes, thereby enhancing our understanding of the multifaceted impacts that a sense of trust can catalyze. Furthermore, our research responds to the call by Seibert, Wang and Courtright to explore the antecedents and mechanisms of psychological empowerment more thoroughly [77]. In this study, we assessed the mediating role of students’ perceptions of psychological empowerment between humble teacher leadership and engagement in creative processes. Self-Determination Theory underscores that when individuals’ intrinsic psychological needs are met through interactions with their environment, activities are more deeply internalized as part of their identity [26]. The higher the degree of internalization, the stronger the sense of psychological empowerment, and the more sustained the individual’s engagement. Humble teacher leadership fosters students’ perceptions of autonomy, competence, meaningfulness, and impact in learning tasks by emphasizing openness, self-reflection, and supportive growth [78]. This aids students in deeply internalizing learning activities and maintaining ongoing enthusiasm and creativity in academic tasks. The mediating role of psychological empowerment in this positive relationship provides new insights, advancing our understanding of the link between teacher leadership behaviors and students’ creative performances. Additionally, our study validates the applicability of Social Exchange Theory and Self-Determination Theory in the context of higher education, offering theoretical support for analyzing how trust and psychological empowerment influence students’ creativity development [22, 26]. These theories widely applied in management studies are now also proven effective in educational settings supporting the formation of student creativity.

Finally, our study examines the boundary conditions of the relationship between humble teacher leadership and university students’ creative engagement, contributing to the literature on creativity. Previous research has highlighted the importance of students’ proactive personality, but there has been limited exploration of its moderating role between humble teacher leadership and students’ creative engagement [21, 58, 60]. Responding to Tuncdogan who posited that the traits of followers must align with those of the leader or the leader’s actions to effectively influence outcomes [79], this study demonstrates that the characteristics of humble teacher leadership including attentiveness to others, accurate self-awareness, and teachability closely align with the key features of proactive personality. The integration of these traits significantly enhances student engagement in creative processes. Thus, our study not only reveals how individual proactivity influences the complex process by which students effectively utilize external cues to enhance innovation through a moderating mechanism, but it also provides a new perspective on understanding the individual heterogeneity in creativity performance.

Managerial implications

Based on empirical research findings, this paper provides several implications for schools implementing humble teacher leadership and fostering student creative process engagement. First, educational institutions should encourage or support teachers to act as advisors or counselors in students’ innovation processes, respecting diverse perspectives to motivate them to pursue their personal learning goals [80]. Second, teachers should send appropriate behavioral signals and cues in classroom teaching to promote students’ active response and appropriate behavior [31]. Additionally, teachers should remain open to novel and diverse academic ideas, by listening to and considering the views and suggestions of students and colleagues, thereby facilitating their own learning and development [11].

Furthermore, students with high proactive personalities often exhibit greater self-directed learning capabilities compared to their less proactive peers [81]. School teachers and administrators might consider assigning students with high proactivity to leadership roles in projects, granting them autonomy not only to enhance their leadership and decision-making skills but also to increase the overall creativity and efficiency of the team. Conversely, for students with lower proactive personalities, teachers can create a positive learning environment that encourages students to evaluate information and develop critical thinking skills. By providing meaningful and challenging tasks, teachers can foster students’ creative engagement, which not only strengthens their sense of purpose and responsibility but also enhances their understanding of the significance of their contributions to academic and personal growth.

Finally, schools can enhance the connections and interactions between teachers and students by establishing digital teaching tools and fostering an innovative atmosphere [1]. This approach not only promotes knowledge sharing and collaborative learning but also strengthens students’ sense of belonging, motivating them to actively learn and proactively seek information. Simultaneously, by establishing ethical standards and formulating codes of conduct for teachers, schools can enhance students’ recognition and trust in teachers’ fulfillment of their responsibilities. Moreover, schools should implement strategies to cultivate and stimulate students’ proactivity, rewarding those who demonstrate initiative, actively seek opportunities, and drive meaningful change.

Limitations and future research

While this study contributes valuable insights, it also acknowledges certain limitations. Recent discourse in leadership research highlights a phenomenon of “hyper-positivism“ [82], where seemingly beneficial leadership behaviors may carry unintended dual effects. This is no less true in the realm of education. Humble teacher leadership conveys deep commitment to student development, boosting their sense of self-efficacy and autonomy. However, an underlying risk is that students might misconstrue teacher humility and modesty as a sign of concession or helplessness, potentially leading to diminished respect or undervaluation of academic guidance. Such misinterpretations could erode teacher authority and compromise the effectiveness of teacher-student relationships, ultimately deterring active student engagement in innovative activities. Future research should rigorously test and validate how humble teacher leadership affects students’ psychological attitudes and behavioral responses, and explore strategies to balance humility with authority to prevent overreliance on student autonomy or potential undermining of teacher authority. Moreover, as a leadership virtue, the manifestation and impact of humility may vary across different cultural contexts. Future research should engage in cross-cultural comparisons to thoroughly examine the acceptance and reactions to humble teacher leadership within diverse educational systems and cultural environments, to assess their consistency and universality. Such comparative studies not only prevent the fragmentation of knowledge but also explore how teacher leadership is shaped by cultural, institutional, and educational system differences [83]. This will enhance our comprehensive understanding of how teacher leadership globally influence student behavior and academic achievements.

Secondly, our study primarily assesses students’ engagement in creative processes from their perspective. While this approach directly reflects students’ subjective experiences of creativity, reliance on a singular viewpoint is susceptible to personal experiences and cognitive biases, which may limit the study’s scope. Future research should adopt a multi-perspective approach, incorporating comprehensive assessments from teachers, parents, and schools, along with measures of innovative performance, to integrate objective indicators and observational data sources, thereby enhancing the comprehensiveness and objectivity of the research. Furthermore, the sample of this study was limited to undergraduate students from the Colleges of Innovation and Entrepreneurship at three universities, which restricts the generalizability of the findings. Future research should consider including a broader range of student types and more educational institutions to enhance the generalizability and practical application value of the research.

Lastly, while this study utilized a three-wave lagged survey to collect data, the inherent limitations of cross-sectional data in establishing causality and capturing the dynamic changes of variables over time cannot be entirely avoided. Considering that proactive personality may vary with time and context, future research should employ longitudinal methods to explore these changes and their impacts on the creative process. Such an approach would enable a more profound understanding of the dynamic mechanisms driving creativity and personal development.

Conclusions

In summary, this study explored how humble teacher leadership significantly influences university students’ engagement in creative processes through the sequential mediation of trust and psychological empowerment, as well as the moderating role of proactive personality. The findings provide school administrators and teachers with deep insights, helping them identify key factors that promote students’ creative engagement, thereby guiding them to develop more effective teaching strategies and innovation support services. Furthermore, these findings emphasize the importance of considering individual differences among students in educational practices, suggesting that teachers should tailor their teaching methods to the personality traits of students to maximize their creative development.