Leadership, Collaboration, and Resident Well-Being: A Quantitative Analysis of Community Dynamics in Taiwan

Background and Purpose: Since the 1990s, communities have increasingly been recognized as crucial spaces for addressing structural issues such as social alienation, poverty, and inequality. In Taiwan, following global trends in community development, communities are seen as key providers of public services and care functions, aiming to strengthen social connections and enhance residents' overall well-being. Community leaders play an essential role in mobilizing residents, integrating resources, and fostering participatory governance and collaborative action. Their leadership skills and the development of collaborative networks significantly influence residents' subjective well-being and quality of life. This study aims to explore the relationships between community leadership, collaborative relationships, and resident well-being, as well as to offer theoretical, policy, and practical implications from the perspectives of social work and community practice.

Methods: This study employed a quantitative research design using a structured questionnaire developed by the researchers. The instrument included three major dimensions: (1) Community Leadership, assessed by "management capacity" and "problem-solving capacity"; (2) Collaborative Relationships, encompassing "internal collaboration," "neighborhood collaboration," and "external collaboration"; and (3) Resident Well-being, covering "psychological well-being," "safety well-being," and "relational well-being." The study targeted residents aged 20 and above from 40 communities across eight counties and cities in Taiwan, with a sample size of 795 valid responses. A probability sampling method was used, and data were collected through group-administered questionnaires, supplemented by face-to-face interviews to enhance response rates and data quality.

Results: The results indicated that respondents rated community leadership, collaborative relationships, and resident well-being at moderately high levels, with average scores of 4.11, 3.97, and 3.83, respectively. Correlation analysis revealed strong and significant positive associations between community leadership and collaborative relationships (r = .771), community leadership and resident well-being (r = .534), and collaborative relationships and resident well-being (r = .590), all with p < .001. Regression analysis confirmed significant positive effects: community leadership positively influenced collaborative relationships (β = .710), collaborative relationships enhanced resident well-being (β = .425), and community leadership directly impacted resident well-being (β = .432). Furthermore, collaborative relationships were found to partially mediate the relationship between community leadership and resident well-being (β = .334, p < .001).

Conclusion and Implications: This study empirically confirms the positive interconnections among community leadership, collaborative relationships, and resident well-being, with collaboration serving as a partial mediator. These findings emphasize the critical role of community leaders in promoting policy implementation and enhancing welfare, suggesting that effective leadership and collaborative strategies are essential for building resilient, supportive communities. The study contributes to the community development literature by proposing an integrated framework to understand community dynamics. From a policy perspective, it advocates for initiatives that strengthen the capacity of community leaders and the development of intersectoral collaborative platforms to support sustainable community development and holistic well-being. Practically, community practitioners are encouraged to focus on enhancing their leadership and collaboration skills and to use resident well-being as a core indicator to address the challenges of contemporary community practice.