Processo de liderança e engajamento de equipes: um estudo no Instituto Federal da Bahia (IFBA) - Campus Salvador

Abstract

In light of social, economic, and technological transformations, the adoption of management practices that promote greater efficiency, effectiveness, and innovation in public organizations has become necessary. In this context, leadership and team engagement play a strategic role in institutional development. This study aimed to analyze how the leadership process influences team engagement at the Federal Institute of Bahia (IFBA) – Salvador Campus, as well as to characterize the leadership exercised on campus, identify the factors that determine team engagement, and understand how leaders’ actions may foster or hinder it. The theoretical framework addressed the historical evolution of leadership, contemporary models, such as Sensitive, Transformational, and Servant Leadership, and engagement theories applied to the public sector, with particular emphasis on Public Service Motivation (PSM). Methodologically, the study adopted an interpretive paradigm, with a qualitative approach and an exploratory design. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with leaders and subordinates from three administrative sectors, totaling 17 intentionally selected participants. Data analysis was conducted using Interpretive Comprehensive Analysis. The results reveal that leadership in the studied context is configured as a relational, situated, and dynamic process, legitimized by listening, empathy, and the construction of trust-based relationships. Team engagement proved to be heterogeneous and fluctuating, sustained mainly by the quality of interpersonal relationships and a sense of belonging, often associated with the “idea of family.” It was observed that the Performance Management Program (PGD) contributed to greater transparency and goal definition; however, hybrid work posed challenges to maintaining social bonds and a collective sense of purpose. Among the factors limiting engagement, bureaucratic rigidity, lack of institutional recognition, and functional overload stand out. It is concluded that leadership fosters engagement when it transcends technical competence and becomes humanized, serving as a mediator between institutional demands and the subjective needs of public servants.