Section 1: Comparing two research methodologies 1.4 Research problem This report focuses on the analysis and selection of the research methods and relevant instruments to analyze changes in leadership attitudes within selected business organizations ‘that happen over time as the latter undergo a process of olgital transformation, Specifically, we are looking at the leadership attitudes of middle management in these organizations. (The reapeotive terme are “Ee B RM This area of research i ) digital Yratskortndtidh f 2 recent phenomenon in itself, (2) most leadership thedties are still quite diverse in explaining the origin, nature and components of leadership (Dinh et al., 2014), (3) these and related concepts (discussed as well below) are most often viewed from a post-modernist perspective, thus requiring interpretative (and inductive) approach in research. Studies offen take a normative stance delivering findings an what leadership aught fo he (and to 40) to positively affect organizational transformation making it successful (Day & Antonakis, 2012). Yet, managers themselves at the same time are both affected by changes and need to act 2a leaders to make them successful Our research question is thus formulated: ‘What impact does digital transformation in organizations have on their middle managers’ leadership attitudes over time? 4.2 Selected key readings Relevant theoretical concepts include (1) leaderships studies, (2) studies on innovation, and (3) selected inter-disciplinary studies on the “digital” phenomenon (namely, digital age, digital transformation and several related) inthis report. Leadership studies of (Bass, 1990; Blanchard, 2010; Bryman, 1982; Day & Antonakis, 2012; Gardner, 1990; Rost, 1991 and others) historically focused on defining who leaders are and what leaders do. A working definition may state that ‘Leadership is @ process whereby an individual influences group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (Northhouse, 2018). Modernist approach to that discussion largely resulted in two major views (and sets of models) on leadership: ‘transactional and transformational. The former theorles (LMIX, Contingency theories) focused on the leader influencing followers via a process of certain value exchange transactions. The latter(Charismatic, Path-Goal, Transformational, Servant, etc.) assumed that leaders are influencing by appealing to needs and ‘higher’ motivations of followers. Post-modemist scientific paradigm introduced discussions about the increased role of followers in origin of leadership as well as of subjective leadership nature (examples being the Attribution Theory and Psychodynamic Approach (Winkler, 2010)). Leadership is made even more complex in digital age as the leader needs to attend to the needs of "knowledge Workers", more independent and skilful, all capable of participating in leadership at all corporate levels. This undermines hierarchy and makes leadership proccss even mors resiprocal (Covey, 2004), Literature review on leadership suggests that following interpretive and constructive approach will be more effective in discovering the nature of leadership attitudes change as the latter are subjective in na BRM. ization) ipbor?%ra business model driven by “the changes associated with the application of digital technology in all aspects ofhuman Society” (Stolterman and Fors, 2004). The above phenomenon belongs to the innavation theories domain in the first place. (“Digital" is yet another innovation coming the way of business organizations). Innovation is a larger concept. Key authors on the subject (Christensen, 2003; 2010; and others) often define innovation as a “a company’s efforts in instituting new methods of juction and/or bringing new products or services to market” (Burgelman & Sayles, 1988). oe authors have further defined innovation as being either incremental (also called sustaining) or disruptive (Christensen, 2003; Moore, 2005). Disruptive kind implies sharp change in technology that undermines existing business models to make organizational changes global and inevitable across most of industries. There ie a consensus to treat digital transformation ae a disruptive case (Berman, 2012). Studies on successful disruptive innovations stress effective leadership as one of the key suggess factors to the former. Post-modernist view on innovation stresses growing importance of “collaboration and selforganization rather than on hierarchy and Control” (Tapscott & Williams, 2008), The shitting away from hierarchical (top-down) approach has been already noted in discussion (on leadership above. Innovation is thus seen to have similar impact on leaders’ (possibly on their behaviors and attitudes) in innovating organizations and requires respective attention in research Specific research in digital transformation by a number of writers ~ the list of reviewed in this report is far from complete — (Avolio, Kahai, Dodge, Annunzio, Bygstad, Bharadway, Zhu, Berman, Henriette, Kreutzer, Neugebauer, Pattloch and others) reveals the following facts. (1) 2Recent stage of transformation was preceded by emergence of “e-prefaced” concepts, among which one was e-leadership (Avolio et al., 2000). It described changes in leadership due to emergence of “Virtual” (teams, workers) and “electronic” (means of communicaton) as dominant realities (Annunzio, 2001). (2) Subsequent digital transformation (approximately since 2007 and ing in 2010s) is seen in organizations relying on a number of revolutionizing technologies: ‘artificial intelligence and machine learning, big data and data analytics, cloud computing, Conversational systems and adaptive architectures, robotics as well as virtual and augmented reality’ (Bauer et expected to radically change competencies, work conditions and work relations in every . 2017) to organize their business models. (3) Digital transformations are organization (Bauer et al., 2017) Having surveyed a body of mul-disciplinary research on leadership and digital transformation, we see that leaders are not only a factor of that transformation but their roles, behaviors and attitudes are influenced by this transformation back as well. This ascertains the value of our research question earch BRM... 1.3 Two appropriate reseat Selecting research methods wi in the context of the problem area (and research quéstion). Research strateaies and desions in leadership studies Leadership is demonstrated to be progressively understood as the interpreted secial construct, of which leaders and their enviroament (in particular their followers) have essential and most valuable perception (Klenke, 2016). Existing post-modemist theories of leadership do not provide clear theoretic models on how leaders’ attitudes are changing over time when influenced by environment (especially such an ambiguous and complex as the digital one) (Wilson III et al., 2004). Absence of such theoretical models also explains us favoring the inductive approach rather than following a “positivist” and deductive approach. So, we will not be formulating any hypotheses about leaders’ atfitudes change but will study these first to possibly generalize after. Historically, however, most of research on leadership has been quantitative as ‘ar as strategy is. concemed (Latham, 2014). The followingsecentiy published studies in leadership examined in this report are all quantitative in strategy (Engelen et al, 2015; Jaiswal & Dhar, 2016; Kane et al., 2015; Kontic & Vidicki, 2018; Ozyapar & Zahid, 2017, Zhu et al., 2006). The advantages of quantitative research statempaaggeen throughout these sources to be explained in terms of (1) 3replicabilty, (2) measurement v administered on a global scale and in multiple environments. Sampling and data collection was easy to set up. (Cross-cultural studies and studies in different companies all were made easier). The latter was explained partly due to the fact that leadership (viewed most often as a factor) was often measured against financial or economic dependent variables. e.g. produativity. Studying effects for quantifiable variables favors quantitative methods implementation. Most popular research designs used in modern studies of leadership thus were: cross-sectional, longitudinal ty, The former allowed many of these research studies to be and experiment oes However, as was already noted, recgént popular leadership theories (Transformational, Charismatic, Ati ution, and Corvant) all acknowledge interpretative nature of leadership. \ umber of studies (Ferile et al., 2017; Hyvénen, 2018, Bygstad et al., 2017, Patterson, 2013) are noted to actually combine research strategies and use mixed methods research (rely both on quantitative and qualitative methods), This observation provides @ reasonable justification to consider using qualitative methods as well (thus adopting a mixed strategy). Research strategies and designs in innovation and digital transformation studies The study of theoretical background on these research areas adjunct to leadership reveals additional approaches used by researchers. Innovations theoretical models have historically been describing organizations as objects of innovation. In the modernist context organizations with their silos and functional sinichires were often madeled allowing for an ahjectivist apprnach in many research instances (Drucker, 2014). Subsequently the quantitative strategy was often used. As far as digital transformation, we survey that most recent publications adhere to mixed methods strategy. many using qualitative methods for exploring the nature of diaital transformation, a phenomenon that can hardly be explained by a predefined testable theoretical model. Both innovation and digital transformation studies have one more specific research design often Used, which is a case study one. Indeed, exploring successful innovations has historically been done by focusing on successes of given industry champions (Dell, IBM, Apple, P&G, GE and ‘many more). Digital transformation studico (Hyvénen, 2018, Bygotad et al, 2017) explicitly inolude ‘a case study design in their work. This again favors a qualitative approach for our given research problem and question on leaders’ attitude change.Literature Used in the ReportSelection and critique of most relevant research methods ‘Somi-ctructured Interview As already mentioned, many of the contemporary researchers acknowledge high interpretative and context-dependent nature of leadership thus advocating for qualitative and inductive approach to its study. Inline with that approach we find that researchers tended to use semi-structured interviews in most of the cases when they explored attitudes, values or behaviors of leaders. (Northouse, 2018; Patterson, 2013). This method implies preparing a guide for the interviewer so that a number of questions on a preselected topic were asked. The method allows for flexibly since the interviewee | allowed to deviate trom the mainstream questions by sharing his / ner opinion on a subject that interests or concems him /her most. We will select this method as well with considerations of its pros and cons. Justifieation E, - B RM, In most cases of BEGeeNs Fouled tmth someotNer Methods, e.g. eross- sectional study inthe form of a questmnaire. As mentioned above, certain variables (factors) are sillbeovedtohave quantitative nature, Therefore, researchers endo use mixed ahods strategy In this mic, qualitative interview (semi-structured or unstructured one) provides an opportunity to explore opinions and perceptions of the interviewee and then to construct possible generalized observations, Using yet semi-structured rether than unstuctured metnod 1s justined by he fact at the subject explored is quite narrow (only concems the attitudes of leaders towards the digital traneformation ieeuee). Additionally, interview in general ie a time coneuming and knowledge intensive method. It takes time for the interviewee to respond to it and for the interviewer to be trained Into the subject. Since we focus our research on middle managers, we need to remember they are often time-stressed in their dally routine, Even though unlike the CXOs (C-level) organization members, who its hard to arrange the interview with, middle managers are more avaitable for initial contact, they tend to have difficulties of finding time-slots to devote to interviews. Pros. Semi-structured interviews will allow to receive a deep perception of leaders on what they call and how they view digital transformation in their organizations. They will be able to identify (whether discrete and (of) integral) influence transformation has on the organization and them. Interview will sive them the opportunity to share their beliefs on their own work, their leadership experience, their relationship with followers. The same interview method can also be applied to the selected “followers” {rom this organization. The view followers have on the same processes and on their leader as he / she demonstrates certain attitudes can be a valuable compatison opportunity to construct 2 wholesome descriotion ofthe process. ons. Semi-structured interview (as other kinds of interviews) has the following disadvantages: (1) it is time constiming ta prepare, ta conduct and ta analyze (transerihe and onde) Significant 7contributor to a success will be the professional behavior of the interviewer: not asking leading ‘questions. Even when well prepared, a particular interviewer (of a certain age, sex or ethnicity) may bias the interviewee to be more or less open and favorable to the former (Alshenqeeti, 2014). This will ultimately affect the quality ofthe interview results, In case of middle managers as leaders, one important risk of using this method may be failing to construct a complete and trustworthy description ofa given individual: (a) because usually th Imicro-environment (colleagues as followers or independent observers), (b) because of ethical ‘reasons as an in-depth micro-environment invoyement may be sensitive to the interviewee. Self-completed ufone - We observed this MetitbdYorbe ore uent onyrsecbmpanyhng esearch design on leadership. Once we are canfident ahatit certain aesumptions derived from qualitative study on leadership, we will ikely be willing to test these assumptions by quantifying variables and testing significance of relationship between those. For instance, we may discover (from Interviews) that leaders believe they develop healthier (positive) attitudes in exercising leadership under digital transformation, when having an access to strategic vision creation process and when having a coach ‘or mentor relationship with at least one senior manager on the long-term basis. To test the significance of that statement, we may want to measure how many middle members do actually have ‘coach / mentor support offered by their seniors on a long-term basis. The attitudes expressed and captured in the questionnaire answers (by the “mentored”) can be compared to attitudes of the “non- mentored’, is not enough time to interview enough people in thelr Pros. In addition to the complementing nature of a questionnaire illustrated in the example above, this quantitative method will be helpful since we want to measure the attitude development over time. ‘Thereby, we could incorporate the elements of the longitudinal design into our study by asking these ‘same managers of transforming organizations to repeat the questionnaire assessment several times over the necessary period. Since digital transformation is a fast and multi-dimensional, multi-factor process, it is very hard to capture it in “continuum”, Same is true of leadership attitudes changes. ‘Therefore, capturing changae by repetitive uce of quantitative mothod will bring a eignifcant contribution to this field of studies. Cons. Self-completed questionnaires have higher risk of lower response rates, respondents becoming bored or otherwise discouraged from taking active part in answering. There is no control ‘over the respondent's authorship of answers. Many concepts / hypotheses tested have to be id and refined questinns We can attempt ta affset same of answered with a limited set af simpli these effects by using the online questionnaire tool, which would be conveniently designed and anractvely formaned,Section 2: Instrument and Conclusions 2.4 Instrument This section contains reflection on the instrument design, which we have selected for the research in ‘question. As previously argued, the problem area and research question imply that we use a mixed method research strategy (more than one research method and more than one instrument as well) Of the two methods the crucial one to the successful answer to the research question is the qualitative semi-structured interview method, Therefore, we will choose it to describe here rather than the self- ‘completed questionnaire, The other justification of the choice is that of logical sequence. We wil implement the interview before the questionnaire because it is the interview that will allow us to ‘construct a descriptive concept of leadership attitudes and then design a questionnaire based on this ‘concept later on, Inus we wil not know Now to tg;mulate the second instrument before We nave applied and analyzed ex, b RM A semi-structured inter m&Yiny 118 AEF she I collecting the information so there is no complete set of Fequired questions. At the same time so-called “m ‘questions” (no more than 6-7) will help the conversation stay within the topic or research, We discuss develo lie sample excerpl from the fnlerview Guide (See Appendix) lo demonstrate Ue nature of the interview and to provide insights into the possible questions that would explore leadership attitudes, ‘The Guide's purpose is to provide the interviewer with the training and supporting tool ‘On the content part of the interview, we can say that it will be likely formulated based on attitudes evaluation techniques developed by a number of researchers (Caldini, 1901; Zaller, 1982). According to the general practice, attitude evaluation assumes the respondent is welcomed to ‘express his / her opinion (degree of appreciation) on the defined / described situation or object (in particular, a person or a concept), For instance, the terviewer may start by saying: “John, the XYZ Corp. has recently introduced robotic ine in the mechanical shop, What do you think of how ie the shop performing now?" By cetting the scene (of innovation just introduced in the company), the interviewer invites the respondent to share his / her opinion of that event. Further probing of the respondent will be directed towards learning “how he feels about it’, “what is he happy with and what is he upset with in regard to this event?" ete. 2.2 Conclusions ‘The selected research methods (semi-structured interview and self-completion questionnaire) are the most offen contemporarily used combination. The instruments (Interview guide and a questionnaire) are believed to provide the reliable and valid source of information to come to scientifically significant conclusions. Interview Guide will help deliver effective inquiry into the 9attitudes of leaders. One potential limitation to the use of the Interview Guide (end of other arrangements supporting the interview as @ method) is that we cannot make the flow of questions, and research the subject broad enough when the instrument is applied for the first time. Respondents may exhibit specific reactions or reveal other topics they think valid which were not planned to be talked about and evaluated. Therefore, we believe a pilot testing of this instrument is necessary to construct a more wholesome scenario for the interview. Parameters that may change could be not ‘only subjects of interest to the leaders but the sampling of respondents and arrangements of the Interviews, Thus, we may conclude that specitc followers, seniors, other team members need to be involved in the interview as well. The interviews locations and other settings may be redefined to suit the purpose Ee strategy. This leaves room for using ‘other designs we have talked about in the beginning. In particular, using a case study design we could sample digitally transforming organizations and then apply interviews within a framework of that design. Using interviews within organizations as a method within @ case study approach may provide additional challenges and require to develop alternative Interview sverrativs (guides) es well 10aaj Bibliography Annunzio, S., 2001. eLeadership: Proven techniques for creating an environment of speed and flexibility inthe digital economy. Simon and Schuster. ‘Antonakia, J. and Day, D.V. eds., 2017. The natute of leadership. Sage publications. Blot, Bs. and Kahal, SS, 2003. Adding the” Eto ELeadership: How it may impact your leadership. Organizational Dynamics. Avolio, B.J., Kahai, S. and Dodge, G.E., 2000. E-eadership: Implications for theory, research, and practice. The Leadership Quarterly, 11(4), pp.613-668, FBnengeet, H, 2014. interviewing ae a data collection method: A crical review. English Linguistos Research, 3(1),p.39. ss, BM, and Stogdl, RM, 1990. Boss & Stogls handbook of leadership: Theory, research, ‘and managerial applications. Simon and Schuster. Bauer, W, Schlund, 5. and Vocke, C2017, Ju. Working Life Within a Hyd Werld-How Digital Transformation and Agile Structures Affect Human Functions and Increase Quality of Work and Business Performance. In International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics (pp. 3-40). Springer, Cham Berman, S.J. Bre. Digital transformation: opportunities to create new business models. Strategy & Leadership, 40(2), pp.16-24 lanchard, K.H., 2010. Leading at a higher level: Blanchard on leadership and creating high performing organizations. FT Press. Bryman, A., 1992. Charisma and leadership in organizations. Sage Pubns. Srcuan RA and Sayles, LR., 1988, Inside corporate innovation, Simon and Schuster. Bygstad, B., Aanby, H.P. and Iden, J., 2017, August. Leading Digital Transformation: The ‘Scandinavian Way. In Scandinavian Conference on Information Systems (pp. 1-14). Springer, Cham, Blain RB, Pety, RE. and Cacioppo, JT. 1961. Attude and aitude change. Anual review ot psychology, 32(1), pp.357-404, @ Seg CC. and Raynor, M., 2013. The innovator’s solution: Creating and sustaining successful growth, Harvard Business Review Press. Christensen, C.M. and Christensen, C.M., 2003. The innovator’s dilemma: The revolutionary book that will change the way you do business (p. 320). New York, NY: HarperBusiness Essentials. vey, S.R., 2004. The Bth habit: From effectiveness to greatness, "1bow P. Beroire Review: e-Leadership Probal DasGupta Regent University. Day, D.V. and Antonakis, J., 2012. Leadership: Past, present, and future. The nature ofleadership. 2, 3-25. Davis, C. and Bailey, D., 2018. Police leadership: the challenges for developing contemporary practice. International Journal of Emergency Services, 7(1), pp.13-23. Denning, Ps. id Bantam Ri 2008, innovation” ex language bdon; Communications of the ‘ACM, 49(5), pp.47-52. inh, J.E., Lord, R.G., Gardner, WL, Meuser, J.0., Liden, R.C. and Hu, J., 2014. Leadership theory ‘and research in the new millennium: Current theoretical trends and changing perspectives. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1), pp.26-62. Drucker, P., 2014. Innovation and entrepreneurship. Routledge. Engen, A, Gupta, Vs Strenger, L. and Brettel, M., 2015. Entrepreneurial orientation, firm performance, and the moderating role of transformational leadership behaviors. Journal of ‘Management, 41(4), pp.1069-1097. Ferlie, E., Nicolini, D., Ledger, J., D’Andreta, D., Kravcenko, D. and de Pury, J., 2017. NHS top managers, knowledge exchange and leadership: the early development of Academic Health Science Networks-a mixed-methods study Gladwell, M., 2002. The Tipping Point. 2002. Little, Brown and Company. Nueva York g Hentiette, E., Feki, M. and Boughzala, |, 2015. The shape of digital transformation: a systematic literature review. MCIS 2015 Proceedings, pp.431-443, a Hyvénen, J., 2018. Strategic leading of digital transformation in large established companies—a meta case-study Jaiswal, N.K. and Dhar, R.L., 2015. Transformational leadership, innovation climate, creative self: efficacy and employee creativity: A multilevel study. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 51, pp.30-41, ‘ane, G.C., Palmer, D., Philips, AN., Kiron, D. and Buckley, N., 2015. Strategy, not technology, drives digital transformation. MIT Sloan Management Review and Deloitte University Press, 14, pp.1- 25. Klenke, K., $h16. Qualitative research in the ‘study of leadership. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, reutzer, R.T., Neugebauer, T. and Pattloch, A, 2018. Digital Business Leadership: Digital ‘Transformation, Business Model Innovation, Agile Organization, Change Management. Springer. 12Bre. LL. and Vidicki, ., 2018. Strategy for digital organization: Testing a measurement tool for digital transformation. Strategic Management, 23(1), pp.29-35. Bharmurerzorarvesdernip orquanyeraionovaion: chalengea: tecieaTand a rarenNK at future research. Quality Management Journal, 21(1), pp.11-15. Moore, GA, 95: Dealing with Darwin: How great companies innovate at every phase of their evolution. Penguin, Northouse, P.G., 2018. Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications. japar, AH. and Zahid, K., 2017. Leadership and Employee Engagement in organizations: an analysis on correlation. a Patterson, B.J., 2013. A mixed methods investigation of leadership and performance in practice- based research networks, Rogers, EM, 200. Difuson ofinnovatons. Simon and Schuster Rost, J. C., 1991. Leadership for the twenty-first century. New York: Praeger. B Stolterman, E. and Fors, A.C.,2004. Information technology and the good life. In Information systems esearch (pp. 687-692). Springer, Boston, MA. Tapscott, D. and Williams, A.D., 2008. Wikinomics: How mass collaboration changes everything, Penguin, Fnkatraman, N, El Sawy, 0, Pavou, P. and Bharadwaj, A, 2014. Theorizing dtl business innovation: platforms and capabilities in ecosystems. Alcon il, EJ, Goethals, GR, Sorenson, G. and Burns, JM. 2008. Leadership in the digital ‘age. Encyclopedia of leadership, 1, p.4 Fert, 2010. ‘Contemporary leadership theories: Enhancing the understanding of the complexity, subjectivity and dynamic of leadership. Springer Science & Business Media. Pers and Fetémen,s., 11992. A simple theory of he survey response: Answering questions versus ‘evealing preferences. American journal of political science, pp.579-616. lu. K., Dong. S., Xu, S.X. and Kraemer, K.L., 2006. Innovation diffusion in global contexts: determinants of post-adoption digital transformation of European companies. European journal ot information systems, 15(6), pp.601-616. 13Section 3: Research Dissemination 3.1 Relevance and audience Research proposed will help understand the dynamics of leadership attitudes as it changes over time when an organization mostneeds leaders’ assistance in making the successful digital transformation. ‘Since the concepts studies develop rapidly itis very important to be able to capture changes before they are over to learn from ther the next transformation iterations. ‘The audience, therefore, that would benefit from the research consists of several groups: (1) C-level executives who want to use as well as assist the middle managers in transition; (2) managerial enneiitancy enmm ity, who want to provide expertice and assistance ta the leariers of all level and also to improve their competencies of assisting leadership in general; (3) management and leadership research community who want to enrich thelr theoretical concepts with the results of this, new research; (4) finally, the middle managers themselves (coming last since their organizational position historically leaves them heavily focused on the “internal” of their organizations thus not capturing timely all the relevant outside knowledge and insights made available to the business, ‘community. 3.2 Communicatigfi ot EE Ar BRM cmon to be done via established electronic media whose audience is C-executives and research ‘community, e.g. HBR, MIT Sioan Management Review, ete. Avticles in those will publicize the results and establish awareness. Enrolling into the business / training conferences on leadership / digital ‘transformation as speakers is another venue to go. NGOs that are supporting educations and aid to the developing countries may asset to dieseminate the knowledge to the less developed countries! audiences. Finally, standard and high quality academic publications are necessary to establish trust, of the scientific community 14