The study’s design deserves close attention because it captures a moment in workplace life that is rarely measured directly: the period surrounding a male subordinate’s parental leave. Rather than surveying a general sample of managers, the researchers recruited 365 section-chief level supervisors who had each overseen at least one male subordinate taking leave. This deliberate sampling choice matters. It means the findings are not speculative projections about how managers might feel if such a situation arose; instead, they reflect the retrospective experiences of people who actually navigated the redistribution of duties, the schedule adjustments, and the interpersonal negotiations that parental leave entails. The section-chief level is particularly significant in Japanese organizational hierarchies, where these mid-level managers typically serve as the operational hinge between senior leadership’s policies and frontline employees’ daily realities. When a subordinate takes leave, it is usually the section chief who must reorganize workflows, mediate among colleagues, and absorb any residual workload.

The temporal structure of the survey also adds analytical depth. Participants answered questions about three distinct phases: the period before the subordinate’s leave, the leave period itself, and the present moment. This retrospective three-phase design allowed the researchers to trace how conditions established early on—such as a family-friendly organizational culture and a mutual aid mindset—flowed forward into motivation during the leave period, and ultimately into current outcomes like work role performance, wellbeing, and attitudes toward male parental leave. Path analysis, the statistical technique used to test these connections, enables researchers to model chains of association rather than isolated correlations. In this case, the models suggested that the psychological seeds of a positive leave experience may be planted well before the leave begins, in the everyday norms and expectations that define how a workplace distributes and receives help.

The distinction between the two kinds of motivation identified in the study is worth unpacking. Cooperative motivation, as operationalized here, reflects a heightened awareness of teamwork—an orientation toward working together with colleagues to cover the gaps created by a subordinate’s absence. Learning-oriented motivation, by contrast, captures an appetite for growth: the sense that a challenging situation offers opportunities to develop new skills, rethink established routines, or strengthen one’s own capabilities. The finding that mutual aid mindset was associated with both forms of motivation suggests that viewing workplace assistance as reciprocal does not channel supervisors into a single response pattern. Instead, it appears to open two parallel pathways—one oriented toward collaboration and shared effort, the other toward personal and professional development. These pathways, in turn, showed different downstream associations: learning-oriented motivation and mutual aid mindset were linked to current work role performance, while cooperative motivation was linked to wellbeing and to positive attitudes toward male parental leave.

These results align with a broader body of organizational research on goal orientation and prosocial motivation. Meta-analytic work has consistently found that learning goal orientation predicts better job and work performance, presumably because employees who treat difficulties as learning opportunities persist longer and adapt more flexibly. Similarly, prosocial motivation—working to benefit others—has been linked to greater wellbeing in recent meta-analytic syntheses. The present study extends these general findings into a specific and underexplored context: the supervision of male parental leave. What emerges is a picture in which the same organizational conditions that support the leave-taking employee may simultaneously support the supervisor, reframing the leave not as a zero-sum transfer of burden but as a shared episode with benefits distributed across the team.

The theoretical grounding in social exchange theory and the norm of reciprocity helps explain why a mutual aid mindset might function this way. According to these frameworks, people track the flow of benefits and obligations in their relationships, and perceptions of imbalance can generate distress, resentment, or perceptions of unfairness. A supervisor who believes that helping a colleague today will be reciprocated—whether by that colleague, by other team members, or by the organization over time—can interpret the temporary workload of covering a leave as one node in an ongoing exchange rather than a unilateral loss. This reframing may be especially consequential in Japanese workplaces, where prior research has documented that pluralistic ignorance can suppress paternity leave intentions: employees underestimate how accepting their colleagues actually are, each assuming others hold more negative views than they do. In such an environment, a supervisor’s visible, reciprocal framing of leave-related support could carry outsized signaling value, quietly correcting misperceptions that keep other men from taking leave themselves.

The policy backdrop amplifies the practical stakes. Japan’s 2021 legal reforms explicitly encouraged fathers to take parental leave, and uptake has climbed rapidly—reaching 50.9 percent in fiscal year 2025, up from 40.5 percent in the previous survey. Yet the fact that roughly half of male employees still do not take leave indicates that statutory entitlements alone have not dissolved the barriers. Prior studies point to fear of negative evaluation, worries about the impact of one’s absence on work outcomes, and entrenched gender norms as persistent obstacles. Men who have taken extended leave have reported anxiety about workplace reactions and guilt about burdening coworkers. If supervisors’ attitudes shape the interpersonal climate in which such decisions are made, then the current findings suggest a lever for change that operates independently of legislation: cultivating reciprocal support norms and family-friendly values within teams may soften the psychological friction that policy alone cannot reach.

It is also notable that the study frames supervisors not merely as gatekeepers or obstacles but as potential beneficiaries of the leave process. Earlier qualitative work by the same research program had identified that managers sometimes use a subordinate’s leave as an occasion to reconstruct management systems—redesigning workflows, clarifying roles, and distributing knowledge that had been concentrated in one person. The same interviews, however, revealed a darker possibility: under stressful conditions, supervisors could react with anger or perceptions of unfairness, and workplace stressors could heighten coworkers’ negative responses. The present quantitative results help explain what separates these two trajectories. Where a mutual aid mindset and cooperative motivation are present, the leave period appears to be experienced as constructive; where they are absent, the additional demands may be interpreted through a lens of inequity. The difference is not the objective workload itself but the interpretive frame through which that workload is perceived.

Several caveats temper the interpretation of these findings. The data are cross-sectional and rely on retrospective self-reports, which means the direction of the associations cannot be established with certainty. It is plausible, for example, that supervisors who already perform well and feel positive about parental leave are more inclined to recall their workplace culture and their own motivation in favorable terms, rather than the reverse. Common-method variance—where the same respondents supply all measures—may also inflate observed associations. The sample, while well-suited to the research question, consists of section-chief level managers in Japan who volunteered for a web survey, and the findings may not generalize to other organizational levels, industries, or national contexts. Longitudinal designs that measure workplace culture and motivation before, during, and after an actual leave would provide stronger evidence for the causal pathways the path models propose.

Even with these limitations, the study fills a conspicuous gap. Research on men’s parental leave has historically centered on the leave-takers themselves—their intentions, barriers, and post-leave outcomes—while the supervisors who manage the transition remained largely unstudied despite their pivotal role in shaping work–life balance. By documenting that supervisors can emerge from a subordinate’s leave with enhanced performance, wellbeing, and attitudes, the research reframes male parental leave as an organizational event with the potential to generate value on multiple sides of the exchange. For employers seeking to sustain the momentum of rising leave uptake, the message is that preparing the supervisory layer—through cultures that value work–family integration and norms of mutual, reciprocal aid—may be as important as the leave policies themselves.

Subject of Research: Workplace and psychological factors associated with supervisors' outcomes when male subordinates take parental leave in Japan

Article Title: Family-friendly organizational culture and a mutual aid mindset are associated with supervisors' work role performance, wellbeing, and positive attitudes toward male parental leave in Japan

Article References: Ono, H. (2026). Family-friendly organizational culture and a mutual aid mindset are associated with supervisors' work role performance, wellbeing, and positive attitudes toward male parental leave in Japan. Frontiers in Organizational Psychology, 4, Article 1927630. https://doi.org/10.3389/forgp.2026.1927630

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.3389/forgp.2026.1927630

Keywords: parental leave, Japan, supervisors, mutual aid mindset, work motivation, wellbeing, organizational culture, gender equity, work role performance, cooperative motivation, Family-friendly, organizational