See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/363423802

Digital Leadership: A Bibliometric Analysis

Article in Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies · September 2022

DOI: 10.1177/15480518221123132

CITATIONS
READS
5
1,072

3 authors:

Fernanda Bethlem Tigre

Carla Curado
University of Lisbon
ISEG - University of Lisbon
2 PUBLICATIONS 7 CITATIONS
96 PUBLICATIONS 2,160 CITATIONS

Paulo Lopes Henriques

University of Lisbon
31 PUBLICATIONS 484 CITATIONS

All content following this page was uploaded by Fernanda Bethlem Tigre on 25 September 2022.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
Article

Digital Leadership: A Bibliometric Analysis Journal of Leadership &

Organizational Studies
1–31
© The Authors 2022
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
Fernanda Bethlem Tigre1 , Carla Curado1 DOI: 10.1177/15480518221123132
journals.sagepub.com/home/jlo
, and Paulo Lopes Henriques1

Abstract
Digital disruption has changed organizations in an unprecedented way. The thriving field of digital leadership is
expanding fast and few retrospective studies on this evolution have been made so far. This study presents a bibliometric
and network analysis combining both Scopus and Web of Science databases to provide fresh insights into the evolution of
the digital leadership research field. This study is based on a review of 79 publications from 57 journals, published
between 2000
and 2020. The newness of the topic and the range of journals in which it is published confirms that digital leadership
has gained interest from several different areas. Bibliometric analysis provides a description of the research field identifying
the leading publishing journals, affiliation statistics, and most influential authors and expressive publications in the research
field. Network analyses identify keyword evolution over time, co-citation relationships, and research clusters. Content anal-
ysis is used to identify key topics in the field with attention paid to interrelations among them. A brief description of
each
paper in the dataset and its methodological approach is provided. The results suggest that the topic will continue to attract
more research, as it has not yet entered its maturity stage. This paper contributes to the literature by analyzing the
rela- tionship between digital leadership and e-leadership. This study also identifies the most leading digital leadership
capabilities for a fast-changing world. Limitations and future avenues are also discussed.

Keywords
leadership, digital leadership, e-leadership, literature review, bibliometric analysis

Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic has affected workers in a
variety of ways. The lockdown has forced an abrupt
change from face-to-face and analog interactions to the
digital realm (Faraj et al., 2021). Teleworking, dispersed
teams, and remote management were new experiences for
many orga- nizations (Kirchner et al., 2021). Some types
of work that previously was uncommon or unaccepted in
certain organi- zations (i.e., virtual work) became typical
to workers around the globe (Wang et al., 2020). COVID-
19 has fos- tered experimentation as digital technology has
made the world more decentralized (Fenwick et al., 2021).
However, due to digital technology, people could maintain
connections as they were forced to maintain social distance
(Peng, 2021). Digital transformation leads to a work
transformation (Nagel, 2020), shaping how people work,
think, and interact (Hai et al., 2021). Although no one can
foresee how the rapid change to digital work will affect
organizations in the future, effective digital transformation
programs may not be simple to achieve and sustain (Wade
& Shan, 2020). Therefore, leadership practices must adapt
will resemble (Dirani et al., 2020). While digital
transforma- tion represents challenges to leaders (Bartsch
et al., 2021), digital leadership (hereafter, DL) helps
organizations to deal with risks and constant uncertainties
(Fenwick et al., 2021). Against this backdrop, DL has
become a key element in the effort to modernize
organizations, and it is worth considering in detail (Peng,
2021) as leaders experience new challenges due to digital
disruption (Kane et al., 2019).
Some of the works on DL focus on e-leadership
(Avolio et al., 2000; Avolio & Kahai, 2003; Kissler, 2001),
leading virtual teams (Mitchell, 2012; Perizade et al.,
2017), perfor- mance (Fernandez & Jawadi, 2015;
Wakefield et al., 2008; Wolor et al., 2020), communication
(Braun et al., 2019; Darics, 2020; Narbona, 2016), the
public sector (Banerjee & Chau, 2004; Rubino-Hallman &
Hanna, 2007), technol- ogy (Larson & DeChurch, 2020;
Leduc et al., 2015), and
Advance/CSG, ISEG – Lisbon School of Economics & Management,
1

to a new setting to attain an effective, enduring Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal

performance (Contreras et al., 2020). The pandemic
appears to be a major test for leaders world- wide, as it is
not possible to predict what the new world
Corresponding Author:
Fernanda Bethlem Tigre, Advance/CSG, ISEG – Lisbon School of
Economics & Management, Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal, Rua Miguel
Lupi, 20, 1200-725 Lisboa, Portugal.
Email: fernandatigre@phd.iseg.ulisboa.pt
2 Journal of Leadership & Organizational
competencies (Maduka et al. 2018; Roman et al., 2019).
Also, encompassing reviews have been done (Avolio et al.,
2014; Cortellazzo et al., 2019). Although in the literature
there are some definitions of DL, such as it is
conceptualized as the human aspect of a leadership
operating with digital tools in the virtual world (Narbona,
2016), or it is a combi- nation of leadership capabilities
and digital technology to support the decision-making
process (Sasmoko et al., 2019), the pattern of research in
this field and the link with other related constructs (e.g., e-
leadership, virtual leader- ship), and digital
transformation remains unclear. Avolio et al. (2014)
reviewing the e-leadership approach, suggest it may be
time to rethink what constitutes leadership in an Advanced
Information Technology (AIT) scenario (e.g., inter- net,
email, video conferencing, virtual teams). Cortellazzo et
al. (2019) stated in the DL review that there is a need for
more theoretical contributions between leadership and
digital transformation. Therefore, we address the following
research questions: What is the structure of the DL
domain, and what has been its evolution? What can we
learn from that? Is a new leadership paradigm emerging
following the digital disruption we are facing? This study
aims to close the gap by examining the content,
characteristics, and relation- ships of all the publications
from the Scopus and Web of Science databases from 2000
to 2020 to present an extensive and holistic perspective on
the domain of DL. Thus, it can complement and go further
than a literature review, which is not necessarily extensive
enough, or meta-analyses that do not adequately emphasize
the relationships between the pub- lications within the
area (Ertz & Leblanc-Proulx, 2018;
Zupic & Čater, 2015).
A bibliometric study is a quantitative approach for
study- ing the bibliographic material and mapping the
research field without subjective bias (Zupic & Čater,
2015). It brings into
light the most influential works and authors, the evolution
of the most used keywords, the most associated topics, and
the dominant outcomes, among other pieces of evidence.
The visualization technique of the network analysis
completes the analysis of the research field (Cobo et al.,
2011a). This study uses VOSviewer for the network
analysis that uses the VOS (visualization of similarities)
algorithm. VOS algo- rithm visualizes similarities between
objects (e.g., citations) based on their location, and the
distance reflects their sim- ilarities (van Eck & Waltman,
2010). Network analysis allows for visualizations of the
scientific fields in which network nodes represent units of
analysis (e.g., docu- ments, authors, journals, words), and
network ties repre-
sent similarity connections, with the strongest drawn
closer together (Zupic & Čater, 2015). Bibliometric tools
and network analysis foster a unique understanding of
the DL field’s progress and the connected topics within
this domain by making sense of unstructured data in rigor-
ous ways and advancing the domain in meaningful ways
(Donthu et al., 2021).
A DL bibliometric study is important to map the DL
domain with its characteristics and evolution, to present how
the con- ceptual items are organized, interrelated, and
displayed, and to show the emerging trends of a
research field (Donthu et al., 2021; Marsilio et al., 2011).
Furthermore, DL is receiv- ing increased attention (Zeike et
al., 2019). This study can lead to a broader understanding
of the DL domain by focus- ing on leadership related to
digital transformation (Williams et al., 2021). Therefore,
this study has several benefits to researchers and
practitioners: revealing the evolutionary nuances of the DL
field while shedding light on the emerging topics within that
field (Donthu et al., 2021); assisting others in absorbing the
growing body of DL studies through the application of
transparent and replicable protocols; providing a
comprehensive, holistic analysis at DL work; and facilitat-
ing potential research paths for future studies (Williams
et al., 2021).
Finally, DL is worth studying as, in today’s digital
trends, the leadership role is paramount in propelling a fast
decision- making process and promoting change (Jäckli
& Meier,
2020). Studying the phenomena of DL is relevant because
of its importance to organizations, as digital transformation
requires leaders to discover new ways to thrive in times of
uncertainty (Matzler et al., 2018). Therefore, the study pre-
sents a comprehensive review of the field using
bibliometric tools and network analysis. It begins by
showing the aca- demic evolution of the field, the more
influential papers and researchers, the most used
keywords, and affiliation statistics. Then, a network
analysis informs the evolution
of the author’s keywords over the years and the
relationship between authors and academic publications.
Also, it algo-
rithmically identified three major clusters used to examine
research topics through content analysis. Finally,
additional insights and potential directions for future
avenues are also presented.
Literature Review
Digital transformation is a key theme for businesses in this
century (İnel, 2019) and is without precedent in relation to
speed, range, and impact (Matzler et al., 2018). Due to
technological disruption, organizations currently face enor-
mous changes in the way work is done and how to lead
(Schwarzmüller et al., 2018). The rise of digital technolo-
gies has accentuated the need to study the role of leader-
ship, as incorporating digital technology into leadership
study makes the topic even more challenging
(İnel, 2019). Vial (2019, p. 118) defines digital
transformation
as “a process that aims to improve an entity by triggering
significant changes to its properties through combinations
of information, computing, communication, and connec-
tivity technologies”. However, skilled human resources
are at the heart of the digital revolution (Hanna, 2018).
As leadership is context-specific, in times of uncertainty
 Tigre et al.
4 Journal of Leadership & Organizational
and complexity, prepared leadership is crucial (Bolden &
Regan, 2016). As Cortellazzo et al. (2019) stated in the
review about leadership and the digitalized world, leaders
are crucial to develop a digital culture enabling collabora-
tive processes in complex scenarios with ethical concerns.
In the late 1990s, the rise in information technology (e.g.,
internet, email, and videoconference) started to significantly
transform work and leadership and established a new form
to lead: e-leadership (Avolio et al., 2014). In response to
those changes, many authors began to investigate the implica-
tions of information technology on leadership (Avolio &
Kahai, 2003; Kissler, 2001; Pulley & Sessa, 2001). The
term “e-leadership” started to be used to refer to leaders
who carry out many of the leadership processes through
elec- tronic channels and their global reach (Zaccaro &
Bader,
2003). One of the widely employed definitions of e-leader-
ship states that it is a social influence process mediated by
information technology to produce a change in attitudes, feel-
ings, thinking, behavior, and/or performance with individuals,
groups, and/or organizations (Avolio et al., 2000; Hambley
et al., 2007; Jawadi et al., 2013; Jiang et al., 2017). Many
dif- ferent types of studies about e-leadership have taken
place, such as in the governmental area (Banerjee & Chau,
2004; Rubino-Hallman & Hanna, 2007), SMEs (small-to-
medium enterprises) (Belitski & Liversage, 2019), online
game players (Lu et al., 2014), and even in the study of the
migra- tion decision-making process (Amit et al., 2016).
Beyond that, there are several studies about information
technology and the impact on organizations, focusing
specifically on leadership challenges in a virtual
environment (Anoye & Kouamé, 2018). In an e-leadership
review, Avolio et al. (2014), inform that AIT technologies
have not deeply modi- fied the way leadership is studied or
theorized, and it may be time to reevaluate what represents
leadership in this scenario with ethical mindset. The ethical
aspects remain a concern in the use of AIT, as ethical
leadership in the virtual teams differs from traditional
face-to-face interactions, and the e-leader need to discern
moral dilemmas, evaluate risks, and protect privacy (Lee,
2009). The virtual work settings provide a high level of
versatility, allowing organizations to pool staff worldwide,
but it also challenges how to lead (Pradhan, 2019). E-
leaders can empower followers to partic- ipate more in
decision-making and becoming self-reliant working in
virtual teams as they communicate effectively (Walvoord
et al., 2008). Although communication aids in overcoming
the uncertainties of the digital environment, it is also
another challenge, as most of the exchanged informa- tion
between leaders and followers is non-verbal, which is
reduced in a virtual team (Maduka et al., 2018). Also, trust
is a key aspect of any relationship and also a challenge for
leaders due to the establishment of trust within the virtual
team (Cascio & Shurygailo, 2003).
Nonetheless, the concept of e-leadership is changing,
moving from an electronically mediated form of
intercommunication
3
to a broader view of digital technologies (Belitski &
Liversage, 2019; Cortellazzo, Bruni, & Zampieri, 2019).
According to this perspective, e-leadership is no longer
about only electronic tools and communication, but
mainly involves leading effectively in a digital environ-
ment (Roman et al., 2019). Digital technology is changing
the context in which people work, increasing ambiguity,
and the need for change (Pulley, Sessa, & Malloy, 2002).
Therefore, many of the assumptions about leadership
must evolve. Many challenges may appear to arise for
the digital leaders, affecting their leadership effectiveness
(Amit et al., 2016). The digital scenario is changing some
skills, as the ability to lead networks instead of via
hierarchy seems to become more critical because it
facilitates fast and collaborative work, removing barriers
and increasing agility (Kane et al., 2019). The digital
scenario is also implicated in some leadership paradoxes.
As technology may change how leadership is performed,
some dilemmas appear. DL needs to provide autonomy to
its teams without their feeling isolated; to preserve focus and
purpose in an environment of continu- ous change that
requires strong adaptability; and, also, to balance efficient
well-known responses with new ideas and innovation
(Pulley et al., 2002). This scenario leads us to ques- tion the
structure of the DL domain and its evolution and what we can
learn from it. Another question is if a new leadership
paradigm is emerging from digital disruption. Using
biblio- metric tools and network analysis provides a
comprehensive review of the field. It can assist in giving
the summarization and connections within the research
subject to conclude and learn from the complementary
pieces of evidence.
Research Methodology
In this study, we use bibliometric analysis, which is all
about summarizing past research to advance the lines of
research knowledge (Zupic & Čater, 2015). Bibliometric
analysis is a
quantitative study of written publications (Broadus, 1987;
Pritchard, 1969) that analysis the history of scientific
works to measure impact (Lee et al., 2005). Following
Fahimnia et al. (2015), we use a four-step methodology
(determining the search keywords, data cleaning and
formatting, initial analysis, and data analysis) to identify
the higher impact studies and authors and to analyze the
topics of research that contribute to insights for future
research in the domain. In line with Ertz and Leblanc-
Proulx (2018), the use of the two databases (Scopus and
Web of Science) instead of one is an important
contribution aiming to obtain more depth and variety in
our results.
Determining the Search Keywords
First, we performed a search on the terms “e-leadership” or
“virtual leadership” or “digital leadership” or “leading
online communities” using the Scopus database, focusing
4 Journal of Leadership & Organizational

on three main subject areas (i.e., social sciences; business, lications on the DL topic from 2000 to 2020. We can
management, and accounting; and psychology) using
article title, abstract, and keywords for the search. We
decided to limit our search to articles published after 2000
(included), when Avolio et al. (2000) started to
use the term
“e-leadership” connecting leadership and technology.
Then, we restricted our search by selecting only peer-
reviewed
journal articles in the English language, since these works
are a body of certified knowledge and mostly suggest
reliable results (Bhatt et al., 2020; Haleem et al., 2020).
The Scopus database was composed of 173 articles.
Afterward, the same search was done on the Web of
Science database core collec- tion, aiming to avoid missing
articles and resulting in a sample of 86 articles, with the vast
majority overlapped with Scopus.

Data Cleaning and Formatting

Due to the use of two different databases instead of only one,
a higher amount of work related to the standardizing of the
data is needed to obtain the consolidated information.
Because many publications appeared in both databases at
the same time, the duplicates were suppressed manually
from the Web of Science data because their citation format
was less complete than that of Scopus (Zhao & Strotmann,
2015). Also, the data retrieved from the bibliographic
databases nor- mally contain errors, such as misspelled
elements, among others. Therefore, an analysis of the
retrieved data is necessary (Cobo et al., 2011b). We
conducted a review of the bibliomet-
ric information and corrected (e.g., in one article the
authorś name was misspelled) or excluded articles with
bibliometric
problems. Then we read every abstract of the remaining
doc- uments. Our exclusion criteria follow Gümüşet al.
(2019) and Soriano et al. (2018), as studies unrelated to the
scope of our research, i.e., articles not related to
organizational studies, were excluded. In this way, we
excluded thirty-nine articles from non-organizational
domain (e.g., educational, health areas), three articles that
were non-English studies, and sixty-eight that the search
terms were missing (e.g., the search results in the
databases selected articles with the
word “leadership” instead of “e-leadership”). We also con-
firmed if the article were within the years defined for the
search (see the Appendix 1 for all excluded articles).
Finally, 79 records remained in our database to be more
deeply examined (Table 1). The decrease in the number of
articles from the initial dataset were significant, although it
is not unusual in bibliometric analysis, as it occurred in a
variety of other studies (e.g., Figueroa-Rodríguez et al.,
2019; Galvagno & Giaccone, 2019; Gümüşet al., 2019;
Keathley-Herring et al., 2016).

Initial Analysis
Figure 1 shows the publishing trend in the number of pub-
notice that from 2009 to 2011, the number of similarities between objects (e.g., co-occurrence, co-
publications was practically stable. However, mainly citations) providing accurate visual information about the
from 2018 onwards, the increase rate was more distance between any pair of
pronounced. The
volume of articles published significantly increased
by 243% in the last decade (2011–2020); even in the
recent 5 years (2016–2020), the growth rate was still
more than 100%. This growth rate is in line with
other studies such
as Wei et al. (2021), in which the number of articles
pub- lished increased by 211% in the last decade and
by over 90% in the recent 5 years. Therefore,
concerning not only the emerging subject (Zeike et
al., 2019) but also the increased rate of the number of
articles during this period, this preliminary result
suggests that the topic will continue to attract
significantly more research. The topic is still in the
growth period and has not entered its maturity stage
yet, in line with the conclusion of Ertz & Leblanc-
Proulx (2018) and Davarzani et al. (2016) regarding
the cumulative growth presented over the years.
The 79 articles in the research dataset published by
57 different journals are related to leadership, human
resources, business, innovation, government,
psychology, and strat- egy. The newness of the topic
and the range of journals in which it is published
confirms that DL has gained interest from several
different areas. Such a dispersal of the litera- ture, and
the different perspectives it has allowed, confirm the
need for structure and discussion about avenues of
future research. Most articles were written by two
(30.4%) or three authors (27.8%), with a maximum of
seven authors writing a single paper. From a
methodological per- spective, empirical research
represents 64.6% of the total articles in the dataset,
being closely distributed between qualitative and
quantitative studies and with mixed method
representing 13.7% of the total empirical studies.
These qualitative studies use methods such as general
qual- itative methods (interviews, content analysis) in
12 articles, case study in 6 articles, and observational
in 1 article. The quantitative studies implement
methods such as survey (17 articles), econometric
model (4 articles), experimental designs (3 articles),
and secondary data analysis (1 article).

Data Analysis
Data analysis is performed in two parts, regarding
bibliomet- ric analysis (section 4) and network
analysis (section 5). Bibliometric analysis uses
BibExcel because it allows for the analysis of
diversified datasets and is the software most used for
executing bibliometric analysis in management
and organizations (Zupic & Čater, 2015).
VOSviewer
works efficiently with different databases (e.g.,
Scopus and Web of Science), providing visualization
and analysis options (van Eck & Waltman, 2010). The
visualization of similarities (VOS) algorithm presents
 6 Journal of Leadership & Organizational

Table 1. Articles Belonging to the Research Dataset.

Citation Title Brief description Main concepts Approach*

Amit et al. (2016) The role of leadership in the migration decision-making process. Explores the involvement of leadership in the migration Immigration E (MM)
decision-making process. Leadership style
Angelo & McCarthy (2020) A pedagogy to develop effective virtual teams. Demonstrates that one aspect of shared leadership Shared leadership E (Quanti)
contributes to virtual teams in a business class and a Virtual groups
business setting. Group performance
Anoye & Kouamé (2018) Leadership challenges in virtual team environment. Summarizes other researchers’ work and challenges in Virtual leadership T
virtual teams. Motivation
Trust
Relationship
Avolio & Kahai (2003) Adding the “e” to e-leadership: How it may impact your Analyzes how to manage and lead people when they are not E-leadership T
leadership. physically together and their interactions through Communication
information technology. Diversity
Avolio et al. (2000) E-leadership: Implications for theory, research, and practice. Reviews e-leadership in organizations. E-leadership T
Adaptive structuration
theory
Advanced information
technology
Avolio et al. (2014) E-leadership: Re-examining transformations in leadership source Examines how the theory, research, and practice domains E-leadership T
and transmission. have evolved with respect to the work on e-leadership. Virtual team
Advanced information
technology
Banerjee & Chau (2004) An evaluative framework for analysing e-government Proposes an evaluative framework for analysing E-leadership T
convergence capability in developing countries. e-government convergence capability in developing E-government
countries. Administrative reforms
Belitski & Liversage (2019) E-leadership in small and medium-sized enterprises in the Develops an e-leadership framework for small- and E-leadership E (MM)
developing world. medium-sized enterprises in developing economies. Product trading
Digital technologies
Boje & Rhodes (2005) The virtual leader construct: The mass mediatization and Explores what happens when leaders become Virtual leadership T
simulation of transformational leadership. virtualized through mass media. Mediatization

Braun et al. (2019) Emails from the boss—curse or blessing? Relations between Investigates if and how a more digitally centered Communication E (Quanti)
communication channels, leader evaluation, and employees’ communication between supervisors and employees E-leadership
attitudes. satisfies employees’ needs.

Campion & Campion Leading matters: take it from the professionals — a high-level Compilation of behaviors research recommends to be Virtual leadership T
(2020) overview of virtual leadership according to educational necessary for effective virtual leadership. Communication
technology scholars (and a few others). Trust
Collaboration
Camps (2009) Two images of the future: Virtual leadership and leadership in Significance of virtualization and network formation for Virtual leadership T
organization. managers. Network formation

(continued)
5
 Table 1. (continued).
6
Citation
Cascio & Shurygailo (2003)
Cordery et al. (2009)
Cortellazzo et al. (2019)
Darics (2020)
De Paoli & Ropo (2015)
Doghri et al. (2020)
El Sawy et al. (2016)
Elidjen et al. (2019)
Fernandez & Jawadi (2015) Virtual R&D project teams: From e-leadership to performance.
Gerth & Peppard (2016)
Gierlich-Joas et al. (2020)
Gleave & Al-Hawamdeh
(2002)
Hambley et al. (2007)
Title Brief description Main concepts Approach*
E-leadership and virtual teams. Identification of some key challenges for e-leaders of virtual E-leadership T
teams. Virtual teams
Communication
Trust
Leading parallel global virtual teams: Lessons from Alcoa. Studies virtual team leaders regarding virtual challenges and Virtual teams E (Quali)
ways to overcome them. Engagement
Communication
The role of leadership in a digitalized world: A review. Provides a comprehensive analysis of the contribution of E-leadership T
studies on leadership and digitalization. Digital transformation
Virtual teams
E-leadership or “how to be boss in instant messaging?” The role Exposes the strategies leaders employ to achieve a range of E-leadership E (Quali)
of complex communication goals. Virtual teams
nonverbal communication. Communication
Explores different workspaces with virtual work in relation Virtual leadership E (Quali)
Open plan offices—the response to leadership challenges of to leadership. Office space
virtual project work? Investigates the effect of inter-organizational collaboration Collaboration E (Quanti)
The e-leadership linking inter-organizational collaboration and on ambidextrous innovation. E-leadership
ambidextrous innovation. Innovation
Analyze the role of digital leadership in driving Digital leadership E (Quali)
How LEGO built the foundations and enterprise capabilities for innovation management and dynamic capability. Capabilities
digital leadership.
Intervening role of innovation management on relationship
Studies the role of digital leadership in driving innovation Digital leadership E (Quanti)
between digital leadership and dynamic capability accelerated by management and dynamic capability and the influence of Dynamic capability
collaboration
collaboration. Collaboration
Innovation
Performance
Identify variables enabling high quality relationship building E-leadership E (Quali)
in virtual R&D teams and to analyzes their influence on Virtual teams
team performance. Performance
The dynamics of CIO derailment: How CIOs come undone and Illuminate reasons why CIO leaders are derailed, and Digital leadership E (Quali)
how to avoid it. what they and the CEO can do to avoid this outcome. Collaboration
More self-organization, more control—or even both? Inverse Provides a solution to the challenges of using transparency Digital transformation T
transparency as a digital leadership concept. in leadership in a mutually beneficial way for managers Transparency
and employees. Leadership
Empowerment
Knowledge economy and the digital divide in Asia. Provides an overview of the driving forces and key E-leadership T
characteristics of the knowledge economy. Digital
Knowledge economy
Virtual team leadership: the effects of leadership style and Investigates the effects of transformational and Virtual leadership E (Quanti)
communication medium on team interaction styles and transactional leadership styles and communication media Virtual teams
outcomes. on team interaction styles and outcomes. E-leadership
Communication
(continued)
 Citation Title Brief description Main concepts Approach*

Holland et al. (2009) Health care globalization: A need for virtual leadership. Provides guidelines for leading and motivating individuals or Virtual leadership T
teams from a distance. Virtual teams
Globalization
Hunsaker & Hunsaker Virtual teams: A leader’s guide. Provides guidelines to help leaders understand and lead Teambuilding T
(2008) virtual teams. Leadership
Communication
Iannotta et al. (2020) Defining leadership in smart working contexts: A concept Aims to develop a comprehensive understanding of Leadership T
synthesis. leadership in smart working contexts. Ethics
Trust
Relationship
İnel (2019) An empirical study on measurement of efficiency of Measures the relative efficiency of digital transformation E-leadership E (Quanti)
digital transformation by using data envelopment among EU Countries based on data envelopment analysis. Digital transformation
analysis. Efficiency

Jäckli & Meier (2020) Leadership in the digital age: Its dimensions and actual state in
Reveals the dimensions of an adequate understanding of Digital leadership E (MM)
Swiss companies.
leadership for the digital age. Agility
Autonomy
Jawadi et al. (2013) Relationship building in virtual teams: A leadership behavioral
Identifies the key roles that enable virtual team leaders to E-leadership E (Quanti)
complexity perspective
build high-quality exchanges with their team members. Virtual teams
Collaboration
LMX theory
Jiang et al. (2017) Strategic social media use in public relations: professionals’
Examines strategic communicators’ perceptions of the E-leadership E (Quanti)
perceived social media impact, leadership behaviors, and
impact of social media use on work, leadership behaviors, Work-life conflict
work-life conflict.
and work-life conflict. Leadership behaviors
Johnson et al. (2015) The emergence of online community leadership. Provides a model to study online language use and points to Online communities E (Quali)
the emergent and shared nature of online Natural language processing
community leadership. Network analysis
Collaboration
Kane et al. (2019) How digital leadership is(n’t) different. Explores what can be learned from organizations that are Digital leadership E (Quanti)
digitally maturing. Adaptability
Transformative vision
Kissler (2001) E-leadership. Aimed at e-businesses leaders to learn from and improve E-leadership T
upon past successes. Building, leading networks
Life-long learning
Larson & DeChurch Leading teams in the digital age: Four perspectives on technology Organizes existing work on leadership and technology, Teamwork T
(2020) and what they mean for leading teams. outlining four different perspectives. Digital technology
Leading online communities
Leduc et al. (2015) Impact of ICTs on leadership practices: Representations and Presents the results of research carried out within a E-leadership E (Quali)
actions. civil army corps responsible for the security of people Information and
and property. communication
technology
Relationship

(continued)
7
8

Table 1. (continued).
Table 1.
Citation Title Brief description Main concepts Approach*

Lee (2009) E-ethical leadership for virtual project teams. Presents a review of current literature on ethical theories E-leadership T
as they relate to ethical leadership in the virtual business E-ethics
environment. Virtual teams
Li et al. (2016) E-leadership through strategic alignment: an empirical study of Develops an empirically derived e-leadership model E-leadership E (Quali)
small- and medium-sized enterprises in the digital age. concerning strategy and digital technology. Organizational change
Digital technology
Strategic alignment
Liang (2007) The new intelligence leadership strategy for iCAS. Analyzes complex traits and dynamics of the future Virtual leadership T
leadership strategy. Complex adaptive systems
Liao (2017) Leadership in virtual teams: A multilevel perspective. Presents a model that explicates how task- and Virtual leadership T
relationship-oriented leader behaviors influence team and Virtual teams
individual processes and outcomes. Collaboration
Trust
Liu et al. (2018) E-leadership: An empirical study of organizational leaders’ virtual Represents a model for understanding e-leaders’ E-leadership E (Quati)
communication adoption. technological adoption. Analytical skills
Advanced information
technologies
Liu et al. (2020) The effects of national cultures on two technologically Examines e-leadership and innovation capacity at the E-leadership E (Quanti)
advanced individual public manager level. Culture
countries: the case of e-leadership in South Korea and the Information and
United States. communication
technologies
Innovation
Tackles how technology and technology mediated E-leadership E (Quanti)
Lu et al. (2014) Friending your way up the ladder: Connecting massive multiplayer communications have transformed leadership-diagnostic Technology mediated
online game behaviors with offline leadership. traits and behaviors. communications
Relationship
Identifies and analyzes the required competencies for Leadership E (Quali)
Maduka et al. (2018) Analysis of competencies for effective virtual team leadership in virtual team leadership and its effectiveness in an Virtual teams
building successful organizations. organization. Trust
Communication
Examines impact of psychological contract, mediated by E-leadership E (Quanti)
Meghana & Vijaya (2019) E-leadership, psychological contract and real-time performance e-leadership, on real-time performance management of Psychological contract
management: Remotely working professionals. remotely working professionals. Performance management
Virtual teams
Assesses the role of digital leadership (directly or indirectly) Digital leadership E (Quanti)
Mihardjo et al. (2019b) Digital leadership role in developing business model innovation and its influence the customer experience orientation Digital transformation
and customer experience orientation in industry 4.0. in business innovation. Innovation
Customer experience
Examines the roles of digital leadership in developing Digital leadership E (Quanti)
Mihardjo et al. (2019a) Digital leadership impacts on developing dynamic capability and strategic alliance and dynamic capability based on the Dynamic capabilities
strategic alliance based on market orientation. market orientation. Market orientation
Strategic alliances

(continued)
 Citation Title Brief description Main concepts Approach*

Mihardjo et al. (2019c) The influence of digital leadership on innovation management

based on dynamic capability: Market orientation as a moderator. Study on the role of digital leadership based on dynamic Dynamic capabilities E (Quanti)
capability in fostering innovation and the impact of market Digital leadership
orientation. Innovation management
Transformation model
Mitchell (2012) Interventions for effectively leading in a virtual setting. Explores the role of interventions in improving technology Virtual leadership E (Quali)
choice in a virtual setting. Virtual teams
Collaborative learning
Narbona (2016) Digital leadership, Twitter and Pope Francis. Studies the concept of digital leadership as a guide for Digital leadership E (Quali)
online Online communication
conversation and the use that microblogs can provide for Relationship
this purpose.

Nasution et al. (2020) Digital mastery in Indonesia: The organization and individual
Provides a gap model of digital mastery development in Digital leadership E (MM)
contrast.
a company. Digital capabilities
Creativity
Perizade et al. (2017) Virtual leadership: Concept, expectation and future. Discusses the concept, expectation and the future of virtual Virtual leadership T
leadership. Competencies
E-leadership
Peter et al. (2020) Strategic action fields of digital transformation: An exploration of Analyzes digital transformation across Swiss businesses and Digital transformation E (Quanti)
the strategic action fields of Swiss SMEs and large enterprises. establishes a framework based on the strategic action Business strategy
field theory. Strategic action field
Pomaza-Ponomarenko Management mechanisms in the context of digitization of all Informs that the modernization of public policy under the Digital leadership E (Quanti)
et al. (2020) spheres of society. influence of digitalization forms a new era of digital Digitalization
leadership. E-government
Pradhan (2019) Review paper on virtual leadership. Analyzes virtual leaderships, virtual work environment, Virtual leadership T
virtual leadership challenges and suggestions to improve Virtual teams
virtual team performance. Performance
Pulley & Sessa (2001) E-leadership: Tackling complex challenges. Explores the impact of digital technology on leadership Leadership T
characterized by five paradoxes. Training
Team building
Pulley et al. (2002) E-leadership: A two-pronged idea. Creates a leadership training program that would E-leadership E (Quali)
address technological and change issues in a practical Paradoxes
way. Change management
Collaboration
Purvanova & Bono (2009) Transformational leadership in context: Face-to-face and virtual Examines transformational leadership using face-to-face E-leadership E (Quanti)
teams. communication and virtual teams using Virtual teams
computer-mediated communication. Transformational leadership
Communication
Purvanova & Kenda (2018) Paradoxical virtual leadership: Reconsidering virtuality through a Shows that virtuality is a paradox and virtual Virtual leadership T
paradox lens. leadership’s core function is to deal with paradox. Paradoxes
Leadership styles
Richardson et al. (2020) How superintendents use technology to engage stakeholders. Analyzes how superintendents leverage technology to Digital leadership E (Quali)
engage school level stakeholders through technology. Innovation
Engagement
9

(continued)
1

Table 1. (continued).
Table 1.
Citation Title Brief description Main concepts Approach*

Roman et al. (2019) Defining e-leadership as competence in ICT-mediated Develops a model that focuses on e-leadership as a E-leadership E (Quanti)
communications: An exploratory assessment. competence in virtual communications and the digital Virtual communications
opportunities and challenges created. Team skills
Trust
Rubino-Hallman & Hanna New technologies for public sector transformation: A critical Analyzes current e-government trends and discusses using E-government T
(2007)
analysis of e-government initiatives in Latin America and new technologies as a tool to transform the public sector. Transparency
the Caribbean. E-leadership
Information and
communication
technology
Saputra & Hutajulu (2020) Engaging the millennials at office: Tracking the antecedents of Aims to examine work engagement holistically and Work engagement E (Quanti)
holistic work engagement. attempts to find out the impactful antecedents of work Stress management
engagement. Digital leadership
Corporate culture
Sasmoko et al. (2019) Dynamic capability: The effect of digital leadership on fostering Studies on the role of digital leadership on the development Digital leadership E (Quanti)
innovation capability based on market orientation. of dynamic capability based on innovation capability and Dynamic capabilities
market orientation. Innovation
Market orientation
Schmidt (2014) Virtual leadership: An important leadership context. Analyzes virtual leadership based on who is seen as a leader, Virtual leadership T
how effective a leader is perceived to be, and Virtual teams
how effective a leader is. Communication
Social media
Sherk et al. (2009) An experience of virtual leadership development for human Reports how to build HR leadership and management Virtual leadership E (Quali)
resource managers. capacity at all levels of the health system. Health system
Development program
Toleikienėet al. (2020) Whether and how does the crisis-induced situation change Reveals challenges, tensions and how the E-leadership E (Quali)
e-leadership in the public sector? Evidence from Lithuanian pandemic influences e-leadership in Lithuanian Teleworking
public administration. municipal administrations. Communication
Performance
Torre & Sarti (2020) The “way” toward e-leadership: Some evidence from the field. Informs how enterprises face the problems and E-leadership E (Quali)
opportunities through diffusion of information and Virtual teams
communication technologies. Information and
communication
technologies
Turesky et al. (2020) A call to action for virtual team leaders: Practitioner perspectives Investigates the leadership behaviors of managers of virtual Trust E (Quali)
on trust, conflict, and the need for organizational support. teams. Conflict management
Virtual leadership
Coaching
Van Wart et al. (2017) Operationalizing the definition of e-leadership: Identifying the Studies how the digital revolution has changed E-leadership E (Quali)
elements of e-leadership. leaders’ interactions with followers via information E-skills
and communication technologies. Information and
communication
technologies

(continued)
 Table 1. (continued).
Citation Title Brief description Main concepts Approach*

Van Wart et al. (2016) The rise and effect of virtual modalities and functions on Uses adaptive structuration theory to provide a framework E-leadership
organizational leadership: Tracing conceptual boundaries along for the field of e-leadership and e-management. E-management E (MM)
the e-management and e-leadership continuum. Adaptive structuration
theory
Advanced information
technologies
Wakefield et al. (2008) A model of conflict, leadership, and performance in virtual teams. Integrates the model of conflict in distributed teams with Virtual teams E (Quanti)
the behavioral complexity in leadership theory to reduce Virtual leadership
virtual team conflict. Team conflict
Communication
technologies
Walvoord et al. (2008) Empowering followers in virtual teams: Guiding principles from Reviews issues related to virtual teams and developments in E-leadership T
theory and practice. multimodal displays that allow teams to communicate Virtual teams
effectively. Computer-mediated
communication
Wolor et al. (2020) Effectiveness of e-training, e-leadership, and work life balance on Analyzes the effectiveness of several topics on millennial E-leadership E (Quanti)
employee performance during COVID-19. generation employees’ performance in COVID-19 work Motivation
life. Performance
Work-life balance
E-training
Yilmaz et al. (2020) Vertical versus shared e-leadership approach in online Examines the effect of vertical and shared e-leadership E-leadership E (MM)
project-based learning: A comparison of self-regulated learning approaches in online project-based learning. Self-regulated learning skills
skills, motivation and group collaboration processes. Motivation
Collaboration
Zaccaro & Bader (2003) E-leadership and the challenges of leading e-teams: Minimizing the Analyzes how e-teams are different from face-to-face E-leadership T
bad and maximizing the good. teams. E-teams
Performance
Trust
Ziek & Smulowitz (2014) The impact of emergent virtual leadership competencies on team Examines which emergent leadership competencies most Communication E (MM)
effectiveness. impact virtual team effectiveness. Virtual teams
Virtual leadership
Zimmermann et al. (2008) The relative importance of leadership behaviors in virtual and Examines how the degree of virtualness in team E-leadership E (Quanti)
face-to-face communication settings. members’ work affects the perceived importance of Virtual leadership
leadership behaviors. Relationship
Task orientation

*Approach: T/E: theoretical/empirical; Quali: qualitative; Quanti: quantitative; MM: mixed method.
1
 1 Journal of Leadership & Organizational
Figure 1. Cumulative growth in the number of source documents.
objects (van Eck & Waltman, 2010). Also, content
analysis followed the publication co-citation analysis to fully
compre- hend the research areas of each cluster.
Bibliometric Analysis
Leading Publishing Journals
The main journal repositories that published in the field of
DL, five main journals respond for 19 studies, correspond-
ing to 24% of all publications under study. These journals
are Organizational Dynamics, Leadership Quarterly,
Management Science Letters, Frontiers in Psychology,
and Leadership and Organization Development Journal.
As expected, among the most published studies, there are
journals concerning organization and leadership topics as
well as psychology.
Influential Authors and Affiliation Statistics
In terms of the number of authors’ local citations, i.e., the
number of citations within the 79 publications inside our
dataset, most authors cited work in the United States, as
shown in Table 2. When considering the most cited
authors, names such as Bass and Yulk, which are particu-
larly impactful in leadership studies, appear in the list as
expected.
Analyses of the author’s affiliation show the international
dimension of the research field studied (Cobo et al.,
2011b).
The research of organizations contributing to the DL
litera- ture was produced in 28 countries around the world.
While
most publications on DL are from the United States (39%),
Europe accounts for 31.4% of the topical research, with
the United Kingdom and France leading the European
continent in this domain. The research is spread among 13
European countries. Following Europe, Asia accounts for
21.9% of the total organizations of the research, with
Indonesia leading this continent, followed by China.
The California State University is the leading university
regarding the DL topic. In second place, following the
American university, are three organizations from Asia,
namely, Bina Nusantara University (Indonesia), City
University of Hong Kong (China), and KDI School of
Public Policy and Management (South Korea), with four
publications each. Although most of the DL literature
comes from organizations in the United States, the most pro-
ductive universities are spread through the United States
(California State University and University of Southern
California), Europe (Aix Marseille University, National
University of Ireland, and University of Reading), and
Asia (Bina Nusantara University, City University of Hong
Kong, KDI School of Public Policy and Management, and
Singapore Management University).
Keyword Statistics and Most Cited Articles
Co-word analysis is a technique that considers the text in the
publications and presents joint occurrences among the
main concepts related to a field (Cobo et al., 2011b).
Usually, the words for this analysis are from author
keywords, but they can come from document titles or
abstracts (Donthu et al., 2021). A pool of over 336
author keywords was drawn
 Tigre et 1

Table 2. The Most Cited Authors Based on the Number of Publications.

Author Local citation* Country** Author Local citation* Country**

Avolio, B. 77 United States Desanctis, G. 15 United States
Bass, B. 38 United States Zigurs, I. 15 United States
Van Wart, M. 23 United States Purvanova, R. 14 United States
Cascio, W. 21 United States Bell, B. 13 United States
Jarvenpaa, S. 21 United States Hambley, L. 12 Canada
Kahai, S. 21 United States Judge, T. 12 United States
Zaccaro, S. 21 United States Balthazard, P. 11 United States
Hertel, G. 20 Germany Dennis, A. 11 United States
Orlikowski, W. 19 United States Berman, S. 10 United States
Sosik, J. 19 United States Gibson, C. 10 United States
Kirkman, B. 18 United States Hoch, J. 10 United States
Kayworth, T. 17 United States Hair, J. 9 United States
Daft, R. 16 United States Kane, G. 9 United States
Malhotra, A. 16 United States Kozlowski, S. 9 United States
Yukl, G. 16 United States Townsend, A. 9 United States

*Local publication: publication within the 79 publications of the dataset.

**Country: country of the author’s affiliation.

Table 3. The Most Popular Keywords.

Word Occurrence Word Occurrence

E-leadership 28 Digital transformation 6

Leadership 18 Communication 5
Virtual leadership 12 Computer-mediated communication 4
Virtual teams 12 Digital technology 4
Digital leadership 11 Dynamic capabilities 4
ICT 7 Market orientation 3

from the 79 publications based on the number of occur- accounting; computer science; social sciences, and
rences, and data refinement was used (e.g., singular/plural) psychol- ogy. In conclusion, although the most popular
to obtain the final keywords (Davarzani et al., 2016). keywords are related to e-leadership, virtual leadership and
From Table 3, we find that most of the keywords
teams, and digital aspects, the term “digital” does not
correspond to the search criteria used (Soriano et al.,
2018). The most frequent keywords are those related to e- appear in the
title of the most cited articles yet. Typically, the highly
leadership, digital aspects (e.g., digital leadership, digital cited papers need some time until other studies use them
transformation, digital technology), and virtual leadership
as references.
and virtual teams.
Table 4 shows that the most cited articles are about e-
leadership and virtual teams, including the seminal article Network Analysis of Publications
about e-leadership from Avolio et al. (2000). The term
“digital” is more recent and, although it appears in the list Network analysis allows for visualizations of the scientific
fields in which network nodes represent units of analysis
of most popular keywords, it is not yet seen in the
(e.g., documents, authors, journals, words), and network
titles of the most cited articles. Although citation is
ties represent similarity connections, with the strongest
mainly a measure of impact, usually the highly cited drawn closer together (Zupic & Čater, 2015). Mapping
papers have enough time to establish citations (Zupic &
and clustering are complementary to each other. Mapping
Čater, 2015). We acknowledge that these most provides a picture of the structure of a bibliometric
cited papers are at least seven years old and that more network restricted to two dimensions, and clustering does
recent
not have dimensional restrictions, but works with binary
papers are not contained in the set of articles most cited in
rather than continuous dimensions (Waltman et al., 2010).
our citation analysis. Moreover, the main subject areas
VOSviewer construct maps of authors or publications
con- cerning the global citations are business,
management, and
 1 Journal of Leadership & Organizational

Table 4. The Set of Cited Articles Ordered by Number of Local Citations.

Local Global
Publication cited citation* citation
Malhotra, A., Majchrzak, A., Rosen, B., Leading virtual teams (2007) Academy of Management Perspectives, 21 (1), 10 691
pp. 160–170
Purvanova, R.K., Bono, J.E., Transformational leadership in context: Face-to-face and virtual teams (2009) The 10 545
Leadership Quarterly, 20 (3), pp. 343–357
Zigurs, I., Leadership in virtual teams: Oxymoron or opportunity? (2003) Organizational Dynamics, 31 (4), 10 704
pp. 339–351
Avolio, B.J., Sosik, J.J., Kahai, S.S., Baker, B., E-leadership: Re-examining transformations in leadership source and 8 338
transmission (2014) The Leadership Quarterly, 25 (1), pp. 105–131
Hertel, G., Geister, S., Konradt, U., Managing virtual teams: A review of current empirical research (2005) Human 8 1,397
Resource Management Review, 15 (1), pp. 69–95
Cascio, W.F., Shurygailo, S., E-leadership and virtual teams (2003) Organizational Dynamics, 31 (4), pp. 362–376 7 567
DeSanctis, G., Poole, M.S., Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory 7 4,946

(1994) Organization Science, 5 (2), pp. 121–147

Kayworth, T.R., Leidner, D.E., Leadership effectiveness in global virtual teams (2002) Journal of Management 7 1,109
Information Systems, 18 (3), pp. 7–40
Kirkman, B.L., Mathieu, J.E., The dimensions and antecedents of team virtuality (2005) Journal of Management, 6 663
31 (5), pp. 700–718
Martins, L.L., Gilson, L.L., Maynard, M.T., Virtual teams: What do we know and where do we go from here? (2004) 6 1,715
Journal of Management, 30 (6), pp. 805–835
Avolio, B.J., Kahai, S., Dodge, G.E., E-leadership: Implications for theory, research, and practice (2000) Leadership 5 895
Quarterly, 11 (4), pp. 615–668
Balthazard, P.A., Waldman, D.A., Warren, J.E., Predictors of emergence of transformational leadership in virtual 5 199
teams (2009) Leadership Quarterly, 20 (5), pp. 651–663
Daft, R.L., Lengel, R.H., Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design (1986) 5 12,216
Management Science, 32 (5), pp. 554–571
Gibson, C.B., Gibbs, J.L., Unpacking the concept of virtuality: The effects of geographic dispersion, electronic 5 1,178
dependence, dynamic structure, and national diversity on team innovation (2006) Administrative Science
Quarterly, 51, pp. 451–495
Maruping, L.M., Agarwal, R., Managing team interpersonal processes through technology: A task-technology 5 457
fit perspective (2004) Journal of Applied Psychology, 89 (6), pp. 975–990
Orlikowski, W.J., The duality of technology: Rethinking the concept of technology in organizations
5 6,271
(1992) Organization Science, 3 (3), pp. 398–427

*Local citation: citation within the 79 publications of the dataset.

based on co-citation information and generate maps of
key- words based on co-occurrence data (van Eck &
Waltman, 2010). A co-occurrence network is the
interconnection of terms based on their relatedness (van
Eck & Waltman, 2011). After the relatedness of the
unit of analysis has been determined, VOSviewer
clustering technique assigns each topic to exactly one
cluster, not having overlap of clus- ters, and there are no
unit of analysis without a cluster assignment (van Eck &
Waltman, 2017).
Co-Occurrence Analysis
Figure 2 shows the authoŕs keyword co-occurrence network
to understand the keyword evolution over the years based on
the frequency of words used in the articles belonging to
the dataset. Thus, corresponding terms extracted from
authoŕs keywords from Scopus and Web of Science
dataset are
used in this analysis (Soriano et al., 2018). The keywords
co-occurrence networks examinations combine the unified
approach to clustering and mapping bibliometric networks
(Waltman et al., 2010). Recent studies employed this
method as effective to perform clustering and grouping lit-
erature data graphically to explore trends (Prashar &
Sunder, 2020). VOSviewer software was used to mining
the Scopus and Web of Science datasets containing the
bib- liographic information of the articles without
modifications. A threshold of keyword frequency was
established to be 3 (Dai et al., 2020), which we found to
properly cover the main keywords of most articles.
Density based clustering employing full counting method
and association-based nor- malization algorithm was used
(Kriegel et al., 2011; Prashar & Sunder, 2020). The
keywords that meet the established threshold were then
mapped, and cluster and co-occurrence networks analysis
was performed.
 Tigre et
Figure 2. Author’s keyword co-occurrence network from dataset publications.
From the chronological perspective, which was aimed
at understanding the temporal distribution of the
keywords, e-leadership, virtual teams, and virtual
leadership are some of the keywords most used until 2016.
The term “virtual”, focusing on the virtual aspect of
leadership brought by the
Internet and the new sorts of communication technology,
seems to change to “digital”. Digital transformation and
DL are newer keywords, reinforcing the digital aspects of
market orientation from today’s publications. These find-
ings are in line with the co-word analysis from Table 3.
Regarding cluster analysis, four clusters were created
regarding the authorś keywords. The first cluster have
the
terms “virtual teams” and “virtual leadership”, while the
second cluster have the terms “e-leadership”, “ict”,
“commu- nication” and “leadership”. Digital aspects, such
as “digital technology” and “digital transformation” appear
in a third cluster, highlighting these terms together.
Finally, the
fourth cluster relates to market change, containing the key-
words “digital leadership”, “dynamic capabilities”, and
“market orientation”, suggesting a new market demand
towards digital leadership and its capabilities in a changing
business scenario. Therefore, we conclude that there is a
trend in the use of the keywords. The keyword “ICT” (infor-
mation and communication technology) appears together
with “e-leadership” and “communication” studies,
reinforc- ing the aspect that e-leadership is mediated by
information
technology. Nonetheless, the evolution of the keywords is
transitioning from the e-leadership and virtual aspects to
the digital term (e.g., digital technology, digital
transforma- tion, digital leadership), reinforcing todaýs
market orienta- tion due to the digital-oriented era.
1
Co-Citation Analysis
Figure 3 graphically shows the networks of co-citation
rela- tionship for authors produced by VOSviewer, and
Figure 4 dis- plays the publicationsć o-citation relationship by
VOSviewer
as well. Nonetheless, the clustering was run independently
for each map. Co-citation analysis is about the relatedness
of items and is determined by the number of times they are
cited together. It is a reliable measure of the impact of
publica- tions of a field in the scholarly community through
the identi- fication of its core works (Batističet al., 2017).
The publications that are more co-cited are more likely
to present similar subject areas having a strong co-citation
rela- tionship within each cluster, being the base of the
different subfields (Cobo et al., 2011a). Clustering
techniques are used to identify groups of related
publications, authors, or journals (van Eck & Waltman,
2017). The VOSviewer mapping technique generated three
clusters, each containing a group of articles with a similar
co-citation profile. Therefore, each cluster has a
probability of sharing the same theme or knowledge base.
The size of the clusters ranged from 5 publications in
cluster 3 to 11 publications in cluster 1. Afterward, we
conducted a content analysis to determine the research
focus in each of the three clusters. The articles in each
cluster were scrutinized to identify the specific topics
related to each cluster. Attentive analysis of
the articles of each cluster can delineate the cluster’s area
of research focus (Fahimnia et al., 2015). Figure 4 indicates
each cluster generated by VOSviewer. Cluster 1 is shown
in red, cluster 2 in green, and cluster 3 in blue. Table 5
shows the publications in each cluster.
 1 Journal of Leadership & Organizational
Figure 3. Visualization of authors’ co-citation relationship.
Both clusters 1 and 2 seem to approach a virtuality
com- ponent and aspects of trust in organizations
(Jarvenpaa & Leidner, 1999; Thomas & Bostrom, 2010).
It seems that the question of how to build and maintain
trust is a concern with both virtual teams and leadership
effective- ness. The papers in cluster 1 address the
characterization of virtual teams and the challenges related
to their dynamics and functioning in the organizations.
Topics covered include the main aspects of virtual teams
(Kirkman & Mathieu, 2005; Maznevski & Chudoba,
2000), different elements that drive groups to higher levels
of team virtual- ity (Kirkman & Mathieu, 2005), and
differences between virtual teams and face-to-face teams
(Zaccaro & Bader, 2003). This cluster has the two oldest
publications within the three clusters, considering
electronic mail as a tool to speed up the exchange of
information within teams (Sproull & Kiesler, 1986) and
some aspects of information processing to reduce
equivocality and uncertainty in inter- departmental
relations (Daft & Lengel, 1986). Also, team virtuality
(e.g., geographic dispersion, electronic depen- dence) can
hinder innovation through different mecha- nisms, but a
psychologically safe environment can help to overcome it
(Gibson & Gibbs, 2006). Communication is important to
the operation of effective virtual teams (Maznevski &
Chudoba, 2000), and empathy for other team
members is another aspect of highly effective virtual teams
(Kayworth & Leidner, 2002). “E-teams” is labeled when
inter- actions among team members occur through
electronic com- munication (Zaccaro & Bader, 2003).
Cluster 2 draws on the leadership aspects and their chal-
lenges in managing virtual teams. Avolio et al. (2000), a
seminal paper about e-leadership, is present in this publication
selection. Also, transformational leadership is approached
by comparing face-to-face and virtual aspects (Balthazard
et al., 2009; Purvanova & Bono, 2009). A practitioner view is
estab- lished, providing practical guidelines for the virtual
team leader to build a strong sense of team identity and
minimize uncertainty and ambiguity (Brake, 2006). Virtual
teams need guidance but leaders are often not sufficiently
prepared to lead effectively, as specific challenges of remote
leadership are unclear (Hertel et al., 2005).
Finally, cluster 3 approaches the interrelation between
technology and organization. Adaptive structuration
theory (AST) is reported as a theoretical perspective of
technology and change. AST can be a viable approach
for studying AIT (advanced information technology) in
orga- nizations, as AST examines the technology process
change and how people interact with technology
(DeSanctis & Poole, 1994). Nonetheless, diverging
perspectives about tech- nology within organizations may
have restrained the topic
 Tigre et 1

Figure 4. Visualization of publications’ co-citation relationship.

Table 5. The Publications of Each Cluster.

Cluster 1 (11 items) Cluster 2 (9 items) Cluster 3 (5 items)

Daft & Lengel (1986) Avolio et al. (2000) Avolio et al. (2014)
Gibson & Gibbs (2006) Balthazard et al. (2009) DasGupta (2011)
Jarvenpaa & Leidner (1999) Brake (2006) DeSanctis & Poole (1994)
Joshi et al. (2009) Cascio & Shurygailo (2003) Kerfoot (2010)
Kayworth & Leidner (2002) Hertel, Geister, & Konradt (2005) Orlikowki (1992)
Kirkman & Mathieu (2005) Malhotra et al. (2007)
Maznevski & Chudoba (2000) Nah et al. (2001)
Sproull & Kiesler (1986) Purvanova & Bono (2009)
Thompson & Coovert (2003) Thomas & Bostrom (2010)
Zaccaro & Bader (2003)
Zigurs (2003)

(Orlikowki, 1992). In this cluster, a notion of what
constitutes e-leadership is broadened, and AIT is related to
shaping the function of the organizations (Avolio et al.,
2014).
In summary, the authors’ and the publications’ co-citation
relationship analysis was run independently for each
VOSviewer map. Co-citation analysis refers to the related-
ness of items by the frequency they are cited together.
Each
different authors’ and publications’ groups are more
likely to present similar subject areas. Cluster 1 presents
papers about virtual teams and the challenges related to
their dynamics and functioning in the organizations;
Cluster 2 focuses on the leadership challenges for virtual
teams; Cluster 3 addresses the interrelation between tech-
nology and organization.
 1 Journal of Leadership & Organizational
Figure 5. Integrated elements for the DLs main capabilities.
Discussion
The findings show that an important part of the field is
formed by empirical works showing the practical
relevance of the domain. Such managerial work continues
to grow and, together with the theoretical studies, spur
additional research interest in the field. It appears that
leadership effec- tiveness through virtuality was a major
concern until digital technologies become more present in
organizations. and which emergent leadership capabilities
most impact virtual team effectiveness (Ziek & Smulowitz,
2014). More recently, the focus seems to migrate toward
analyzing the impact of digital transformation in
organizations (Peter et al., 2020). A content analysis of the
dataset articles helped us better understand the critical DL
capabilities needed to thrive in a digital scenario. It is used
to get the most from the surveyed
articles to frame the study’s theoretical aspects. While
biblio- metric and network analysis reveal the publication
patterns and their evolution, content analysis is
complementary to
them (Takey & Carvalho, 2016). Our findings concerning
DL content analysis are in line with Kane et al. (2019), as
while many core leadership capabilities remain the same,
the unique characteristics of digital transformation requires
new capabilities as well.
The fundamental capabilities normally related to
leadership (e.g., communication, direction-setting) continue to
apply, but are changing (Pulley et al., 2002).
Communication seems to be a constant leadership concern
over the years, as it is a topic of continuous discussion
both at the beginning of e-leadership conceptualization
(Purvanova & Bono, 2009) and now in the digital scenario
(Darics, 2020). It is a funda- mental aspect that appears in
the list of the most used key- words. Communication is a
foundational component of DL. It is a skill that provides
team effectiveness (Ziek & Smulowitz, 2014), aiding
leaders in influencing team inter- action (Hambley et al.,
2007). Transparency in digital times seems to be an
important aspect of DL. Transparency helps leaders to
communicate clear progress and problems toward
establishing goals, thereby enabling team members to per-
ceive the impact of their work on overall performance
(Turesky et al. 2020). Leaders need to clearly indicate the
strategic goals to their teams so they can experiment with
 Tigre et
new ways of doing things in a digital scenario (Kane et al.,
2019). Also, DL needs to keep its team headed in the same
direction, both intellectually and emotionally. The team
needs clear information on what they are working on together,
and also care that the work is worthwhile (Amit et al.,
2016). A clear vision in a digital environment is crucial.
The DL needs to anticipate trends and solve complex
problems that are emerging due to technology and lead the
team in response to those changes (Kane et al., 2019).
Trust is another essential part of leadership and is
partic- ularly relevant in a virtual environment. Building
trust with team members is fundamental for effective DL
(Campion & Campion, 2020). But it is also a challenge for
DL. Trust is easier to build through face-to-face
interactions rather than in a virtual environment, and it is a
challenge for DL to rediscover how to lead teams based on
trust rather than control (Maduka et al., 2018). Leading
within a distance, leaders have little or no control over
the group (Amit et al., 2016). Transparency also has a
valuable impact on trust-building for a dispersed team
(Liao, 2017). In virtual teams, trust helps each member
better communicate with each other and encourages people
to have initiative, and even take risks when performing
their tasks (Liao, 2017). Also, recent literature indicates
that building trust is one of the most important predictors of
virtual team performance (Turesky et al., 2020).
The relationship that the digital leaders establish with
their teams is crucial for a fast-changing environment.
Relationship-building in DL helps to avoid the sense of
isolation of followers and support the leaders in coping
with diversity (Fernandez & Jawadi, 2015). DL is
collabora- tive and supports a collective action (Ziek &
Smulowitz, 2014). Speed is mandatory in a digital
scenario, so leaders must have the ability to lead networks
of people instead of leading through a linear hierarchy. A
network approach gen- erates a fast and collaborative
leadership interaction with the team, facilitating the
decision-making process, eliminating barriers, and helping
the group increase agility and innova- tion in their work
(Kane et al., 2019). Collaboration also helps the team
overcome potential anxiety derived from working in a
virtual setting and increasing their motivation (Liao,
2017). Nonetheless, a leadership aspect that has remained
important over the years is empowering followers, as DL
must enable its followers to pursue new initiatives (Kane
et al., 2019).
Innovation and adaptability are topics that have
strongly appeared more recently, perhaps because,
nowadays, organi- zations may need to change
continuously and quickly to thrive in a digital world. DL
needs to be change-oriented and, therefore, open-minded,
adaptable, and innovative (Kane et al., 2019). DL seems to
have a key aspect in driving innovation throughout the
organization as a compet- itive advantage (Doghri et al.,
2020; El Sawy et al., 2016). Digital leaders must have an
innovative mindset, allowing
1
their followers to try new things, make mistakes, adjust,
and scale (Kane et al., 2019). Figure 5 shows different DL
capabilities concerning four elements from the content
anal- ysis. The DL seems to have an interpersonal
orientation (i.e., interacting successfully with others),
personal attributes (i.e., managing their inner selves),
strategic focus (i.e., helps the organization achieve its
future goal), and delivery-related aspects (i.e., the capacity
of achieving the desired outcome). The articles in the
dataset revealed a new reality for leaders performing in
the digital era. However, none offered a new definition
necessary to understand the main aspects of the DL
clearly. The articles used many different definitions
concerning the topic. One of the most adopted definitions
by many authors for e-leadership is from Avolio et al.
(2000), that state that it is a social influence process
mediated by information technology to produce a change
in attitudes, feelings, thinking, behavior, and/or per-
formance with individuals, groups, and/or organizations
(Hambley et al., 2007; Jawadi et al., 2013; Jiang et al.,
2017; Roman et al., 2019). Nonetheless, there has been
little progress in the e-leadership concept from the year
2000 until now (Avolio et al., 2014; Liu et al., 2018).
Therefore, more recent articles started to differentiate e-
leadership from DL, using the DL concept instead. Some
DL definitions that appear in the dataset are DL is doing
the right things for the strategic success of digitaliza- tion
in the organization and its ecosystem (El Sawy et al.,
2016); a leadership perspective needed to successfully
encounter challenges in the digital age (Jäckli & Meier,
2020); the human aspect of a leadership operating with
digital tools in the virtual world (Narbona, 2016); or it is a
combination of leadership capabilities and digital technol-
ogy to support the decision-making process (Sasmoko
et al., 2019). However, the existing DL definitions are
vague about the main aspects of DL to thrive nowadays.
Although the link between e-leadership and DL is not
clearly stated in the literature, maybe the difference is
that the latter is not only mediated by technology but
has evolved into a way of thinking and behaving in a
complex time. The authoŕs keyword co-occurrence
network (Figure 2) provides the evolutionary pattern of the
most used keywords over the years. The keywords
changed
the focus on e-leadership, virtual teams, virtual leadership,
and communication to a broader view concerning digital
transformation and technologies to address the demanding
aspects of market orientation and dynamic capabilities
through the DL approach. This evidence reinforces the
necessity of a new DL definition that addresses essential
points for the DL in the current scenario. Therefore, we
propose the following definition: DL is an ethical and
agile mindset that quickly responds to changes and
learns from them, fostering a trust-based culture that
values people and its diversity, coaching them to collabo-
rate and thrive in a digital scenario.
 2 Journal of Leadership & Organizational
Finally, many academics rely on well-established
leader- ship theories to explain the relationship between
DL and the digital scenario (Boje & Rhodes, 2005;
Cortellazzo et al., 2019). However, topics such as leading in
the digital ecosys- tem, leading within different
organizational structures, col- laboration for co-generating
ideas and strategies for digital change, dealing with a high
amount of data, and artificial intelligence are some topics
that have not received much attention so far. Perhaps
different leadership theories and leadership capabilities may
emerge due to the organizational characteristics of digital
disruption. Therefore, the potential for an important
contribution to the field of DL may lie there. Lastly, it may
seem that the digital scenario brings a new leadership
paradigm, i.e., DL, which has unique chal- lenges related
to digital technologies. As can be observed in the
evolution of the keywords over the years, DL must
manage the firm’s dynamic capabilities while following a
market orientation to thrive in the fast-changing and
complex digital environment.
Conclusions, Limitations, and
Future Work
This paper aims to analyze the DL domain’s structure and
evolution, learn from it, and verify if a new leadership par-
adigm is emerging from digital disruption. Although
reviews of the literature on DL have been conducted (e.g.,
Cortellazzo et al., 2019), a bibliometric study coupled
with a network analysis remained inexistent. In addition,
we used two databases instead of one for maximum cover-
age. COVID-19 seems to be a major test for leaders world-
wide, as it is not possible to predict what the new world
will resemble (Dirani et al., 2020). The complex and fast-
changing digital transformation scenario represents a chal-
lenge to leaders (Bartsch et al., 2021). Therefore, DL has
become a key element in the effort to modernize organiza-
tions (Peng, 2021) as leaders experience new challenges
due to digital disruption (Kane et al., 2019).
The results suggest that the interest in the DL field will
continue to attract significantly more research, as it has
not entered its maturity stage yet (Ertz & Leblanc-Proulx,
2018; Soriano et al., 2018; Zeike et al., 2019), stating the
relevance and actuality of the theme. Moreover, the range
of journals within our dataset shows that DL has gained
attention from several different areas, revealing the
breadth of the field. Although the publications are domi-
nated by academic scholars within the research teams, the
topic interests academics and practitioners. Perhaps this
explains why empirical studies represent most of the total
publications in the dataset. The continued integration of
market data into academic studies is likely to benefit both
practical and theoretical advancement. The affiliation
statis- tics, which is the international dimension of the
research
field studied (Cobo et al., 2011b), show that the DL work
was produced in 28 countries worldwide. Mainly, DL pub-
lications are from the United States, followed by Europe,
with Asian publications not far behind. Co-citation
analysis enables studying the past influences of a
domain (Cobo et al., 2011b). We opted for a co-citation
analysis for more coverage, although it is lacking in
considering the most recent publications. Old publications
collect citations over the years, favoring them over more
recent ones. As expected, the results show that the more
influential works
are older. Nonetheless, in terms of the authors’ citation
within the dataset, the authors most cited are from the
United States, indicating the strong influence of American
authors in the DL field.
Although the most cited articles are about “virtual” and
“e-leadership”, speculating about the technology impact
on leadership and teams, a keyword analysis detected, in
either bibliometric analysis or network analysis, that the
term “digital” has become more relevant in addressing the
type of challenge facing organizations today. These findings
reaffirm the idea stated by Belitski and Liversage
(2019) and
Cortellazzo et al. (2019) that the concept of e-leadership is
changing from an electronically mediated form of
intercommu- nication to a broader view of digital
technologies. Therefore, it is becoming mainly about how to
lead effectively in a digital environment (Roman et al.,
2019). Therefore, it seems that a new leadership paradigm
is emerging from the digital disrup- tion we are facing.
The emergent DL paradigm seems to have leadership
characteristics needed to thrive in a digital environment,
such as communication, direction setting, transparency,
trust, agility, collaboration, innovation, empowerment, and
adaptability. Also, DL must manage the organizational
dynamic capabilities while pursuing a market orientation
to thrive in a rapidly changing business scenario.
This paper contributes to the literature by presenting a
comprehensive analysis of the rising field of DL, examin-
ing the characteristics and relationships of the DL field of
publications from a determined timeframe. While some
leadership aspects seem to have changed due to digital
transformation, not all have. We agree with Kane et al.
(2019) that DL must have a combination of leadership
skills identified with insights from the past, with the
agile mindset to address the needs of a fast-changing envi-
ronment. The study provides a broad and holistic perspec-
tive on the domain that has not been offered before. Also,
it differentiates between literature reviews and meta-
analyses, as it is extensive and evaluates the relationships
between the publications within the area.
While our review is timely and includes the most recent
publications, it is not without its limitations. Despite the
rigorous procedure of our systematic review, we
considered only peer-reviewed articles as these works are a
body of certified knowledge and mostly suggest reliable
results
 Tigre et
(Bhatt et al., 2020; Haleem et al., 2020). Nevertheless, a
future review can include conference proceedings and other
non-peer review manuscripts to expand the boundaries and
analyze the nuances of DL’s broad and recent phenomenon.
Another lim-
itation regards the sample size (79 articles). While we use
two
databases for higher coverage, and many similar studies in
other areas use only one database for this type of analysis
(Fahimnia et al., 2015; Galvagno & Giaccone, 2019), we
may have missed some relevant articles.
The avenues for future research are numerous.
Subsequently, literature reviews can consider expanding
the keywords for different searches on the digital phenom-
ena. Our bibliometric study showed that the digital
transfor- mation is affecting both leaders and organizations
in a variety of ways and, therefore, future research will
likely consider different topics and approaches. The field
of DL may focus more on digital technologies (e.g.,
artificial intel- ligence, machine learning, internet of
things) as a major backbone so that new leadership
characteristics can emerge as the topic becomes more
mature in organizations and the academic literature. With
the increase in both AI-based orga- nizational processes and
leaders interacting simultaneously with humans and
robots, a case study based on technology companies could
analyze the impact of AI on the capabilities required by
leaders in the context of human and non-human interaction
as collaborative units. Moreover, another future study
could focus on ethics and removing bias. The datasets used
in machine learning systems need to ensure diverse rep-
resentation to avoid bias amplification and have inclusion
in mind (e.g., see Bolukbasi et al. (2016) as an example of
gender bias in machine learning datasets). This future
study could use a mixed methods approach to offer a
holistic view of the phenomenon (Venkatesh et al., 2013).
The find- ings may have implications for HR practice
regarding train- ing and hiring policies, as there are more
machine-based human interactions. Hence, calling leaders
to focus their attention on it. As leadership is context-
related, another potential study regards the metaverse
ecosystem and its impact on leaders working in this
environment. In a recent study, Dozio et al. (2022) discuss
design elements in a virtual environment to elicit distinct
emotions in people. Suppose the interaction between
leader and follower may occur with peoplesá vatars in the
metaverse. How might
this setting affect building trust and connection between
them? Maybe grounded theory could provide a
methodolog- ical way to explain the manifestation of
contextualized social interactions (Kempster & Parry,
2011). Further, exploratory and confirmatory studies can
be used for these new study scenarios. Besides, future
research can examine the evolu- tion of the clusters
identified in this paper for cross- validation and
advancement purposes. It would be interest- ing to see
whether some clusters disappear while others appear or
whether they will fragment into smaller but more focused
sub-areas of research. For example, new digital
2
technologies can fragment cluster 3. Finally, bibliographic
coupling analysis can be used in future work to study
recent publications. Bibliographic coupling employs the
number of references shared by two documents to compute
their similarity. The more the references of the two articles
match, the stronger their connection (Zupic & Čater,
2015). This type of study can increase the visibility of
more recent publications in the field.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the encouraging words and comments from
the Editor, Dr. Daan Stam, and the suggestions from the anony-
mous reviewers, together they provided valuable contributions to
this manuscript.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect
to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support
for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article:
We gratefully acknowledge financial support from FCT-
Fundação para a Ciencia e Tecnologia (Portugal), national
funding through research grant UIDB/04521/2020.
ORCID iDs
Fernanda Bethlem Tigre https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5270-2165
Carla Curado https:/ orcid.org/0000-0002-2608-8982
Paulo Lopes Henriques https:/ orcid.org/0000-0001-7869-7619
References
Amit, K., Riss, I., & Popper, M. (2016). The role of leadership in
the migration decision-making process. Journal of
Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 14(4), 371-389.
https://doi.org/10.1080/
15562948.2015.1132805
Angelo, R., & McCarthy, R. (2020). A pedagogy to develop
effective virtual teams. Journal of Computer Information
Systems, 61(5), 450-457. https://doi.org/10.1080/08874417.
2020.1717396
Anoye, A. B., & Kouamé, J. S. (2018). Leadership challenges in
virtual team environment. International Journal of Scientific
& Technology Research, 7(7), 160-167.
Avolio, B. J., & Kahai, S. S. (2003). Adding the ‘e’ to e-leadership:
How it may impact your leadership. Organizational
Dynamics, 31(4), 325-338. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-
2616(02)00133-X
Avolio, B. J., Kahai, S., & Dodge, G. E. (2000). E-leadership:
Implications for theory, research, and practice. The
Leadership Quarterly, 11(4), 615-668. https://doi.org/10.
1016/S1048-9843(00)00062-X
Avolio, B. J., Sosik, J. J., Kahai, S. S., & Baker, B. (2014). E-
leadership: Re-examining transformations in leadership
source and transmission. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(1),
105-131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.003
 2 Journal of Leadership & Organizational

Balthazard, P. A., Waldman, D. A., & Warren, J. E. (2009).

Cascio, W. F., & Shurygailo, S. (2003). E-leadership and virtual
Predictors of the emergence of transformational leadership
teams. Organizational Dynamics, 31(4), 362-376. https://doi.
in virtual decision teams. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(5),
org/10.1016/S0090-2616(02)00130-4
651-663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.06.008
Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera,
Banerjee, P., & Chau, P. Y. K. (2004). An evaluative framework
F. (2011a). An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visu-
for analysing e-government convergence capability in devel-
alizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application
oping countries. Electronic Government, 1(1), 29-48. https://
to the fuzzy sets theory field. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1),
doi.org/10.1504/EG.2004.004135
146-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.002
Bartsch, S., Weber, E., Büttgen, M., & Huber, A. (2021). Leadership
Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera,
matters in crisis-induced digital transformation: How to lead
F. (2011b). Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis,
service employees effectively during the COVID-19
and cooperative study among tools. Journal of the American
pandemic. Journal of Service Management, 32(1), 71-85.
Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(7),
https://doi.org/10. 1108/JOSM-05-2020-0160
1382-1042. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21525
Batistič, S., Černe, M., & Vogel, B. (2017). Just how multi-level
Contreras, F., Baykal, E., & Abid, G. (2020). E-leadership and
is leadership research? A document co-citation analysis
tel- eworking in times of COVID-19 and beyond: What we
1980–2013 on leadership constructs and outcomes.
know and where do we go. Frontiers in Psychology, 11,
Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 86-103. https://doi.org/10. 590271. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.5902
1016/j.leaqua.2016.10.007
Cordery, J., Soo, C., Kirman, B., Rosen, B., & Mathieu, J.
Belitski, M., & Liversage, B. (2019). E-Leadership in small and
(2009). Leading parallel global virtual teams: Lessons from
medium-sized enterprises in the developing world.
Alcoa. Organizational Dynamics, 38(3), 204-216.
Technology Innovation Management Review, 9(1), 64-74.
https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.orgdyn.2009.04.002
https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1212
Cortellazzo, L., Bruni, E., & Zampieri, R. (2019). The role of
Boje, D. M., & Rhodes, C. (2005). The virtual leader construct:
lead- ership in a digitalized world: A review. Frontiers in
The mass mediatization and simulation of transformational
Psychology, 10, 1938. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.
leadership. Leadership, 1(4), 407-428. https://doi.org/10.
01938
1177/1742715005057232
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information
Bolden, R., & Regan, N. O. (2016). Digital disruption and the
requirements, media richness and structural design.
future of leadership: An interview with rick haythornthwaite,
Management Science, 32(5), 554-571. https://doi.org/10.
chairman of centrica and MasterCard. Journal of
1287/mnsc.32.5.554
Management Inquiry, 25(4), 438-446. https://doi.org/10.
Dai, S., Duan, X., & Zhang, W. (2020). Knowledge map of envi-
1177/1056492616638173
ronmental crisis management based on keywords network
Bolukbasi, T., Chang, K. W., Zou, J., Saligrama, V., & Kalai, A.
and co-word analysis, 2005-2018. Journal of Cleaner
(2016). Man is to computer programmer as woman is to home-
Production, 262, 121168.
maker? Debiasing word embeddings. Advances in Neural
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121168
Information Processing Systems, 29, 4356-4364.
Darics, E. (2020). E-leadership or “ how to be boss in instant mes-
Bhatt, Y., Ghuman, K., & Dhir, A. (2020). Sustainable manufac-
saging ?” the role of nonverbal communication. International
turing. Bibliometrics and content analysis. Journal of
Journal of Business Communication, 57(1), 3-29. https://doi.
Cleaner Production, 260, 120988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
org/10.1177/2329488416685068
jclepro.2020.120988
DasGupta, P. (2011). Literature review: E-leadership. Emerging
Brake, T. (2006). Leading global virtual teams. Industrial and
Leadership Journeys, 4(1), 1-36.
Commercial Training, 38(3), 116-121. https://doi.org/10.
Davarzani, H., Fahimnia, B., Bell, M., & Sarkis, J. (2016). Greening
1108/00197850610659364
ports and maritime logistics: A review. Transportation
Braun, S., Bark, A. H., Kirchner, A., Stegmann, S., & Van Dick,
Research Part D, 48, 473-487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
R. (2019). Emails from the boss—curse or blessing? trd.2015.07.007
Relations between communication channels, leader evalua-
DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1994). Capturing the complexity
tion, and employees’ attitudes. International Journal of
in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory.
Business Communication, 56(1), 50-81. https://doi.org/10.
Organization Science, 5(2), 121-147. https://doi.org/10.
1177/2329488415597516
1287/orsc.5.2.121
Broadus, R. N. (1987). Toward a definition of ‘bibliometrics’. De Paoli, D., & Ropo, A. (2015). Open plan offices - the
Scientometrics, 12(5–6), 373-379. https://doi.org/10.1007/ response to leadership challenges of virtual project work?
BF02016680
Journal of Corporate Real State, 17(1), 63-74.
Campion, L. L., & Campion, E. D. (2020). Leading matters: Take https://doi.org/10.1108/ JCRE-08-2014-0020
it from the professionals — a high-level overview of virtual
Dirani, K. M., Abadi, M., Alizadeh, A., Barhate, B., Garza, R. C.,
leadership according to educational technology scholars (and & Gunasekara, N., … Z. Majzun (2020). Leadership compe-
a few others). Tech Trends, 64(1), 182-184. https://doi.org/ tencies and the essential role of human resource development
10.1007/s11528-019-00470-7 in times of crisis: A response to COVID-19 pandemic.
Camps, T. W. A. (2009). Two images of the future: Virtual Human Resource Development International, 23(4), 380-
leadership and leadership in organisation. Journal of Chain 394. https:// doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2020.1780078
and Network Science, 9(1), 1-7. Doghri, S. B. S., Horchani, S. C., & Mouelhi, M. (2020). The e-
https://doi.org/10.3920/JCNS2009.x169 leadership linking inter-organizational collaboration and
ambidextrous
 Tigre et
innovation. International Journal of Innovation
Management, 25(4), 1-32.
https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919621500432
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Marc, W.
(2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An
overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133,
285-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
Dozio, N., Marcolin, F., Scurati, G. W., Ulrich, L., Nonis, F.,
Vezzetti, E., Marsocci, G., La Rosa, A., & Ferrise, F.
(2022). A design methodology for affective Virtual Reality.
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 162,
102791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2022.102791
Elidjen, M. L. W. W., & Rukmana, R. A. N. (2019). Intervening
role of innovation management on relationship between
digital leadership and dynamic capability accelerated by col-
laboration. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity
and Change, 6(1), 249-264. https://doi.org/10.21533/pen.
v10i1.2237
El Sawy, O. A., Amsinck, H., Kraemmergaard, P., & Vinther, A.
L. (2016). How LEGO built the foundations and enterprise
capa- bilities for digital leadership. MIS Quarterly Executive,
15(2), 141-166.
Ertz, M., & Leblanc-Proulx, S. (2018). Sustainability in the
collab- orative economy: A bibliometric analysis reveals
emerging interest. Journal of Cleaner Production, 196,
1073-1085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.095
Fahimnia, B., Sarkis, J., & Davarzani, H. (2015). Green supply
chain management: A review and bibliometric analysis.
International Journal of Production Economics, 162(April),
101-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.01.003
Faraj, S., Renno, W., & Bhardwaj, A. (2021). Unto the breach:
What the COVID-19 pandemic exposes about digitalization.
Information and Organization, 31(1), 100337. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2021.100337
Fenwick, M., McCahery, J. A., & Vermeulen, E. P. M. (2021).
Will the world ever be the same after COVID-19? Two
lessons from the first global crisis of a digital age. European
Business Organization Law Review, 22(1), 125-145. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s40804-020-00194-9
Fernandez, D. B., & Jawadi, N. (2015). Virtual R&D project
teams: From e-leadership to performance. The Journal of
Applied Businesss Research, 31(5), 1693-1709. https://doi.
org/10.19030/jabr.v31i5.9384
Figueroa-Rodríguez, K. A., Álvarez-Ávila, M. d. C., Castillo, F.
H., Rindermann, R. S., & Figueroa-Sandoval, B. (2019).
Farmers' market actors, dynamics, and attributes: A bibliomet-
ric study. Sustainability, 11(3), 745. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su11030745
Galvagno, M., & Giaccone, S. C. (2019). Mapping creative
tourism research: Reviewing the field and outlining future
directions. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research,
43(8), 1256-1280. https:/ doi.org/10.1177/1096348019862030
Gerth, A. B., & Peppard, J. (2016). The dynamics of CIO
derailment: How CIOs come undone and how to avoid it.
Business Horizons, 59(1), 61-70.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2015.09.001
Gibson, C. B., & Gibbs, J. L. (2006). Unpacking the concept of vir-
tuality: The effects of geographic dispersion, electronic depen-
dence, dynamic structure, and national diversity on team
innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(3), 451-
495. https:/ doi.org/10.2189/asqu.51.3.451
2
Gierlich-Joas, M., Hess, T., & Neuburger, R. (2020). More self-
organization, more control -or even both? Inverse transpar-
ency as a digital leadership concept. Business Research,
13(3), 921-947. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685-020-00130-0
Gleave, T., & Al-Hawamdeh, S. (2002). Knowledge economy
and the digital divide in Asia. Journal of Information &
Knowledge Management, 1(1), 7-15. https://doi.org/10.1142/
S0219649202000121
Gümüş, S., Bellibaş, MŞ, Gümüş, E., & Hallinger, P.
(2019). Science mapping research on educational leadership
and man- agement in Turkey: A bibliometric review of
international publications. School Leadership &
Management, 40(1), 23- 44.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2019.157873
Hai, T. N., Van, Q. N., & Tuyet, M. N. T. (2021). Digital
transfor- mation: Opportunities and challenges for leaders in the
emerg- ing countries in response to COVID-19 pandemic.
Emerging Science Journal, 5(SI), 21-36.
https://doi.org/10.28991/esj- 2021-SPER-03
Haleem, A., Khan, M. I., Khan, S., & Jami, A. R. (2020).
Research status in Halal: A review and bibliometric analysis.
Modern Supply Chain Research and Applications, 2(1), 23-
41. https://doi.org/10.1108/mscra-06-2019-0014
Hambley, L. A., O’Neill, T. A., & Kline, T. J. B. (2007). Virtual
team leadership: The effects of leadership style and
communi-
cation medium on team interaction styles and outcomes.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
103(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.09.004
Hanna, N. (2018). A role for the state in the digital age. Journal
of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 7(1), 1-16.
https://doi.org/ 10.1186/s13731-018-0086-3
Hertel, G., Geister, S., & Konradt, U. (2005). Managing virtual
teams: A review of current empirical research. Human
Resource Management Review, 15(1), 69-95. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.hrmr.2005.01.002
Holland, J. B., Malvey, D., & Fottler, M. D. (2009). Health care
globalization: A need for virtual leadership. The Health
Care Manager, 28(2), 117-123. https://doi.org/10.1097/
HCM.0b013e3181a2cb63
Hunsaker, P. L., & Hunsaker, J. S. (2008). Virtual teams: A
leadeŕs guide. Team Performance Management, 14(1/2), 86-
101. https://doi.org/10.1108/13527590810860221
Iannotta, M., Meret, C., & Marchetti, G. (2020). Defining leader-
ship in smart working contexts: A concept synthesis.
Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.3389/
fpsyg.2020.556933
İnel, M. N. (2019). An empirical study on measurement of effi-
ciency of digital transformation by using data envelopment
analysis. Management Science Letters, 9(4), 549-556. https://
doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.1.008
Jäckli, U., & Meier, C. (2020). Leadership in the digital age:
Its dimensions and actual state in Swiss companies.
International Journal of Management and Enterprise
Development, 19(4), 293-312. https:/ doi.org/10.1504/IJMED.
2020.110815
Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and
trust in global virtual teams. Organization Science, 10(6),
791-815. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1998.tb00080.x
Jawadi, N., Daassi, M., Favier, M., & Kalika, M. (2013).
Relationship building in virtual teams: A leadership
behavioral
 2 Journal of Leadership & Organizational
complexity perspective. Human Systems Management, 32(3),
199-211. https://doi.org/10.3233/HSM-130791
Jiang, H., Luo, Y., & Kulemeka, O. (2017). Strategic social
media use in public relations: Professionals’ perceived social
media impact, leadership behaviors, and work-life
conflict.
International Journal of Strategic Communication, 11(1),
18-41. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2016.1226842
Johnson, S. L., Safadi, H., & Faraj, S. (2015). The emergence of
online community leadership. Information Systems
Research, 26(1), 165-187. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2014.
0562
Joshi, A., Lazarova, M. B., & Liao, H. (2009). Getting everyone on
board: The role of inspirational leadership in geographically
dispersed teams. Organization Science, 20(1), 240-252.
https://doi.org/10.1287/Orsc.1080.0383
Kane, G. C., Phillips, A. N., Copulsky, J., & Andrus, G. (2019).
How digital leadership is(n’t) different. MIT Sloan
Management Review, 60(3), 34-39.
Kayworth, T. R., & Leidner, D. E. (2002). Leadership effectiveness
in global virtual teams. Journal of Management Information
Systems, 18(3), 7-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2002.
11045697
Kerfoot, K. M. (2010). Listening to see: The key to virtual
leader- ship. Nursing Economics, 28(2), 114.
Kempster, S., & Parry, K. W. (2011). Grounded theory and
leader- ship research: A critical realist perspective. The
Leadership Quarterly, 22(1), 106-120.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.
2010.12.010
Keathley-Herring, H., Van Aken, E., Gonzalez-Aleu, F.,
Deschamps, F., Letens, G., & Orlandini, P. C. (2016).
Assessing the maturity of a research area: Bibliometric
review and proposed framework. Scientometrics, 109(2),
927-951. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2096-x
Kirchner, K., Ipsen, C., & Hansen, J. P. (2021). COVID-19 lead-
ership challenges in knowledge work. Knowledge
Management Research & Practice, 19(4), 493-500. https://
doi.org/10.1080/14778238.2021.1877579
Kirkman, B. L., & Mathieu, J. E. (2005). The dimensions and
ante- cedents of team virtuality. Journal of Management,
31(5), 700-718. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305279113
Kissler, G. D. (2001). E-leadership. Organizational Dynamics,
30(2), 121-133. https:/ doi.org/10.1016/S0090-2616(01)00047-
X Organization Science, 11(5), 473-492. https://doi.org/10.
Kriegel, H. P., Kröger, P., Sander, J., & Zimek, A. (2011). Density-
based clustering. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data
Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 1(3), 231-240. https://
doi.org/10.1002/widm.30
Larson, L., & DeChurch, L. A. (2020). Leading teams in the digital
age: Four perspectives on technology and what they mean
for leading teams. The Leadership Quarterly, 31(1), 1-18.
https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.101377
Leduc, S., Guilbert, L., & Vallery, G. (2015). Impact of ICTs on
leadership practices: Representations and actions. Leadership
& Organization Development Journal, 36(4), 380-395.
https:/ doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-07-2013-0090
Lee, M. R. (2009). E-ethical leadership for virtual project teams.
International Journal of Project Management, 27(5), 456-
463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2008.05.012
Lee, J. D., Cassano-Pinché, A., & Vicente, K. J. (2005). Bibliometric
analysis of human factors (1970-2000): A quantitative
description of scientific impact. Human Factors, 47(4), 753-
766. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872005775570970
Li, W., Liu, K., Belitski, M., Ghobadian, A., & ÓRegan, N. (2016).
E-leadership through strategic alignment: An empirical study
of small -an medium- sized enterprises in the digital age.
Journal of Information Technology, 31(2), 185-206. https://
doi.org/10.1057/jit.2016.10
Liang, T. Y. (2007). The new intelligence leadership strategy for
iCAS. Human Systems Management, 26(2), 111-122. https://
doi.org/10.3233/HSM-2007-26204
Liu, C., Van Wart, M., Kim, S., Wang, X., Mccarthy, A., & Ready,
D. (2020). The effects of national cultures on two technolog-
ically advanced countries: The case of e-leadership in South
Korea and the United States. Australian Journal of Public
Administration, 79(3), 298-329. https://doi.org/10.1111/
1467-8500.12433
Liao, C. (2017). Leadership in virtual teams: A multilevel
perspec- tive. Human Resource Management Review, 27(4),
648-659. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.12.010
Liu, C., Ready, D., Roman, A., Van Wart, M., Wang, X. H.,
McCarthy, A., & Kim, S. (2018). E-leadership: An empirical
study of organizational leaders’ virtual communication adop-
tion. Leadership and Organization Development Journal,
39(7), 826-843. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-10-2017-0297
Lu, L., Shen, C., & Williams, D. (2014). Friending your way up the
ladder: Connecting massive multiplayer online game behav-
iors with offline leadership. Computers in Human Behavior,
35(June), 54-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.013
Maduka, N. S., Edwards, H., David, G., Osborne, A., &
Babatunde, S. O. (2018). Analysis of competencies for effec-
tive virtual team leadership in building successful organisa-
tions. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 25(2), 696-
712. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-08-2016-0124
Marsilio, M., Cappellaro, G., & Corrado, C. (2011). The intellec-
tual structure of research into PPPs. Public Management
Review, 13(6), 763-782. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.
2010.539112
Matzler, K., von den Eichen, S. F., Anschober, M., & Kohler, T.
(2018). The crusade of digital disruption. Journal of
Business Strategy, 39(6), 13-20. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBS-
12-2017-0187
Maznevski, M. L., & Chudoba, K. M. (2000). Bridging space
over time: Global virtual team dynamics and effectiveness.
1287/orsc.11.5.473.15200
Malhotra, A., Majchrzak, A., & Rosen, B. (2007). Leading
virtual teams. Academy of Management Perspectives, 21(1),
60-70. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMP.2007.24286164
Meghana, J., & Vijaya, R. (2019). E-leadership, psychological
contract and real-time performance management: Remotely
working professionals. SCMS Journal of Indian
Management, 16(3), 101-111.
Mihardjo, L. W. W., Sasmoko, Alamsyah, F., & Elidjen, E.
(2019a). Digital leadership impacts on developing dynamic
capability and strategic alliance based on market orientation.
Polish Journal of Management Studies, 19(2), 285-297.
https://doi.org/10.17512/pjms.2019.19.2.24
Mihardjo, L. W. W., Sasmoko, Alamsyah, F., & Elidjen, E.
(2019b). Digital leadership role in developing business
 Tigre et 2

model innovation and customer experience orientation in

Purvanova, R. K., & Bono, J. E. (2009). Transformational leader-
industry 4.0. Management Science Letters, 9, 1749-1762.
ship in context: Face-to-face and virtual teams. The
https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.6.015
Leadership Quarterly, 20(3), 343-357. https://doi.org/10.
Mihardjo, L. W. W., Sasmoko, Alamsyah, F., & Elidjen, E.
1016/j.leaqua.2009.03.004
(2019c). The influence of digital leadership on innovation
Purvanova, R. K., & Kenda, R. (2018). Paradoxical virtual
management based on dynamic capability: Market
leader- ship: Reconsidering virtuality through a paradox lens.
orientation as a moderator. Management Science Letters, 9,
Group & Organization Management, 43(5), 752-786.
1059-1070. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.3.018
https://doi. org/10.1177/1059601118794102
Mitchell, A. (2012). Interventions for effectively leading in a
Richardson, J. W., Clemons, J., & Sterrett, W. (2020a). How super-
virtual setting. Business Horizons, 55(5), 431-439. https://
intendents use technology to engage stakeholders. Research in
doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2012.03.007
Educational Administration & Leadership, 5(4), 954-988.
Nagel, L. (2020). The influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on
the digital transformation of work. International Journal of https://doi.org/10.30828/real/2020.4.1
Roman, A. V., Van Wart, M., Wang, X., Liu, C., Kim, S., &
Sociology and Social Policy, 40(9–10), 861-875. https://doi.
McCarthy, A. (2019). Defining e-leadership as competence
org/10.1108/IJSSP-07-2020-0323
in ICT-mediated communications: An exploratory assessment.
Narbona, J. (2016). Digital leadership, twitter and pope francis.
Public Administration Review, 79(6), 853-866.
Church, Communication and Culture, 1(1), 90-109. https://
https://doi.org/ 10.1111/puar.12980
doi.org/10.1080/23753234.2016.1181307
Rubino-Hallman, S., & Hanna, N. K. (2007). New technologies for
Nah, F. F., Lau, J. L., & Jinghua, K. (2001). Critical factors for suc-
public sector transformation: A critical analysis of e-govern-
cessful implementation of enterprise systems. Business
ment initiatives in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Process Management Journal, 7(3), 285-296. https://doi.org/
Journal of E-Government, 3(3), 3-39. https://doi.org/10.
10.1108/14637150110392782
1300/J399v03n03_02
Nasution, R. A., Arnita, D., Rusnandi, L. S. L., Qodariah, E.,
Sasmoko, S., Mihardjo, L. W. W., Alamsjah, F., & Elidjen, E.
Rudito, P., & Sinaga, M. F. N. (2020). Digital mastery in
(2019). Dynamic capability: The effect of digital leadership
Indonesia: The organization and individual contrast. Journal
on fostering innovation capability based on market orienta-
of Management Development. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-
tion. Management Science Letters, 9(10), 1633-1644. https://
03-2019-0081
doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.5.024
Orlikowki, W. J. (1992). The duality of technology: Rethinking the
Saputra, N., & Hutajulu, G. E. (2020). Engaging the millennials
concept of technology in organizations. Organization
at office: Tracking the antecedents of holistic work
Science, 3(3), 398-427. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.3.3.398
engagement. Polish Journal of Management Studies, 21(1),
Peng, B. (2021). Digital leadership: State governance in the era
342-354. https://doi.org/10.17512/pjms.2020.21.1.25
of digital technology. Cultures of Science, Advance online
Schmidt, G. B. (2014). Virtual leadership: An important
publi- cation, 1-16.
leadership context. Industrial and Organizational
https://doi.org/10.1177/2096608321989835
Psychology, 7(2), 182- 187.
Perizade, B., Eka, D., Widiyanti, M., Adam, M., & Muhtia, F.
https://doi.org/10.1111/iops.12129
(2017). Virtual leadership: Concept, expectation and future.
Schwarzmüller, T., Brosi, P., Duman, D., & Welpe, I. M. (2018).
International Journal of Applied Business and Economic
How does the digital transformation affect organizations?
Research, 15(10), 227-239.
Key themes of change in work design and leadership.
Peter, M. K., Kraft, C., & Lindeque, J. (2020). Strategic action
Management Revue, 29(2), 114-138.
fields of digital transformation: An exploration of the
https://doi.org/10.5771/0935-9915-
strategic action fields of Swiss SMEs and large enterprises.
2018-2-114
Journal of Strategy and Management, 13(1), 160-180.
Sherk, K. E., Nauseda, F., Johnson, S., & Liston, D. (2009). An
https://doi.org/10. 1108/JSMA-05-2019-0070
experience of virtual leadership development for human
Pomaza-Ponomarenko, A. L., Hren, L. M., Durman, O. L.,
resource managers. Human Resources for Health, 7(1), 1-3.
Bondarchuk, N. V., & Vorobets, V. (2020). Management
https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-4491-7-1
mechanisms in the context of digitization of all spheres of
Soriano, A. S., Álvares, C. L., & Valdés, R. M. T. (2018).
society. Revista San Gregorio, 42(special edition), 1-9. Bibliometric analysis to identify an emerging area: Public rela-
Pradhan, B. B. (2019). Review paper on virtual leadership. Interna- tions intelligence — a challenge to strengthen technological
tional Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 23(6), 633-638.
observatories in the network society. Scientometrics, 115(3),
Prashar, A., & Sunder M, V. (2020). A bibliometric and content
1591-1614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2651-8
analysis of sustainable development in small and medium-
Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues:
sized enterprises. Journal of Cleaner Production, 245,
Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management
118665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118665
Science, 32(11), 1492-1512. https:/
Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistic bibliography or bibliometrics?
doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.11.
Journal of Documentation, 25(4), 348-349.
1492
Pulley, M. L., & Sessa, V. I. (2001). E-leadership: Tackling
Takey, S. M., & Carvalho, M. M. (2016). Fuzzy front end of sys-
complex challenges. Industrial and Commercial Training,
temic innovations: A conceptual framework based on a sys-
33(6), 225-230. https://doi.org/10.1108/00197850110405379
tematic literature review. Technological Forecasting &
Pulley, M. L., Sessa, V., & Malloy, M. (2002). E-leadership: A
two-pronged idea. T + D, 56(3), 34-47. Social Change, 111(October), 97-109. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.techfore.2016.06.011
Thomas, D., & Bostrom, R. (2010). Building trust and
cooperation through technology adaptation in virtual
teams: Empirical
 2 Journal of Leadership & Organizational

field evidence. Edpacs, 42(5), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/

Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., & Noyons, E. C. M. (2010). A
07366981.2010.537182
unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric
Thompson, L. F., & Coovert, M. D. (2003). Teamwork online:
networks. Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 629-635.
The effects of computer conferencing on perceived
https://doi.org/10. 1016/j.joi.2010.07.002
confusion, sat- isfaction, and postdiscussion accuracy. Group
Wang, B., Schlagwein, D., Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., & Cahalane,
Dynamics, 7(2), 135-151. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-
M. C. (2020). Beyond the factory paradigm: Digital nomad-
2699.7.2.135
ism and the digital future(s) of knowledge work post-
Toleikienė, R., Rybnikova, I., & Juknevičienė, V. (2020). Whether
COVID-19. Journal of the Association for Information
and how does the crisis-induced situation change e-
Systems, 21(6), 1379-1401. https://doi.org/10.
leadership in the public sector? Evidence from Lithuanian
17705/1jais.00641
public admin- istration. Transylvanian Review of
Wei, J., Zhao, K., Zhang, R., & Wang, M. (2021). Exploring devel-
Administrative Sciences, 16(SI), 149-166.
opment and evolutionary trends in carbon offset research:
doi:10.24193/tras.SI2020.9
A bibliometric perspective. Environmental Science and
Torre, T., & Sarti, D. (2020). The `way' toward e-leadership:
Pollution Research, 28(15), 18850-18869. doi:10.1007/
Some evidence from the field. Frontiers in Psychology, 11,
s11356-021-12908-8
554253. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.554253
Williams, R. I., Anne, L., Clark, W. R., & Raffo, D. M. (2021).
Turesky, E. F., Smith, C. D., & Turesky, T. K. (2020). A call to
Re-examining systematic literature review in management
action for virtual team leaders: Practitioner perspectives on
research: Additional benefits and execution protocols.
trust, conflict and the need for organizational support.
European Management Journal, 39(4), 521-533.
Organization Management Journal, 17(4), 185-206. https://
https://doi.org/10.1016/j. emj.2020.09.007
doi.org/10.1108/OMJ-09-2019-0798
Wolor, C. W., Solikhah, S., Fidhyallah, N. F., & Lestari, D. P.
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey:
(2020). Effectiveness of e-training, e-leadership, and work
VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping.
life balance on employee performance during COVID-19.
Scientometrics, 84(2), 523-538. https://doi.org/10.1007/
Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business,
s11192-009-0146-3
7(10), 443-450. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2011). Text mining and visualiza-
no10.443
tion using VOSviewer. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:1109.2058.
Yilmaz, R., Yilmaz, F. G. K., & Keser, H. (2020). Vertical versus
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2017). Citation-based clustering of
shared e-leadership approach in online project-based
pub-
learning: A comparison of self-regulated learning skills,
lications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer. Scientometrics,
motivation and group collaboration processes. Journal of
111(2), 1053-1070. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2300-7
Computing in Higher Education, 32(3), 628-654.
Van Wart, M., Roman, A., & Pierce, S. (2016). The rise and
https://doi.org/10.1007/ s12528-020-09250-2
effect of virtual modalities and functions on organizational
Zaccaro, S. J., & Bader, P. (2003). E-leadership and the
leader- ship: Tracing conceptual boundaries along the e-
challenges of leading e-teams: Minimizing the bad and
management and e-leadership continuum. Transylvanian
maximizing the good. Organizational Dynamics, 31(4), 377-
Review of Administrative Sciences, 12(SI), 102-122.
387. https://doi. org/10.1057/9781137280640.0005
Van Wart, M., Roman, A., Wang, X., & Liu, C. (2017).
Zeike, S., Bradbury, K., Lindert, L., & Pfa, H. (2019). Digital
Operationalizing the definition of e-leadership: Identifying
leadership skills and associations with psychological well-
the elements of e-leadership. International Review of
being. International Journal of Environmental Research
Administrative Sciences, 85(1), 80-97. https://doi.org/10.
and Public Health, 16(4), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3390/
1177/0020852316681446
ijerph16142628
Venkatesh, V., Brown, S. A., & Bala, H. (2013). Bridging the
Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2015). Analysis and visualization of
qualitative-quantitative divide: Guidelines for conducting
citation networks. Morgan & Claypool. https://doi.org/10.
mixed methods research in information systems.
2200/s00688ed1v01y201512vis006.
Management Information Systems Quarterly, 37(3), 855-879.
Ziek, P., & Smulowitz, S. (2014). The impact of emergent virtual
https://doi.org/ 10.25300/MISQ/2013/37.3.09
leadership competencies on team effectiveness. Leadership
Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review
& Organization Development Journal, 35(2), 106-120.
and a research agenda. Journal of Strategic Information
https:// doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-03-2012-0043
Systems, 28(2), 118-144. https:/
Zigurs, I. (2003). Leadership in virtual teams: Oxymoron or oppor-
doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003
tunity? Organizational Dynamics, 31(4), 339-351.
Wade, M., & Shan, J. (2020). COVID-19 has accelerated digital
https://doi. org/10.1016/S0090-2616(02)00132-8
transformation, but may have made it harder not easier. MIS
Zimmermann, P., Wit, A., & Gill, R. (2008). The relative impor-
Quarterly Executive, 19(3), 213-220. https://doi.org/10.
tance of leadership behaviours in virtual and face-to-face com-
17705/2msqe.00034
munication settings. Leadership, 4(3), 321-337. https://doi.
Wakefield, R. L., Leidner, D. E., & Garrison, G. (2008). A model
org/10.1177/1742715008092388
of conflict, leadership, and performance in virtual teams.
Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in
Information Systems Research, 19(4), 434-455. https://doi.
management and organization. Organizational Research
org/10.1287/isre.1070.0149
Methods, 18(3), 429-472. https://doi.org/10.1177/10944
Walvoord, A. A. G., Redden, E. R., Elliott, L. R., & Coovert, M. D.
28114562629
(2008). Empowering followers in virtual teams: Guiding
prin- ciples from theory and practice. Computers in Human
Behavior, 24(5), 1884-1906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.
2008.02.006
 Tigre et 2

Author biographies
Fernanda Bethlem Tigre is a researcher at ADVANCE/CSG at
ISEG Lisbon School of Economics and Management,
Universidade de Lisboa, and an invited professor at this University.
She is finishing her PhD at ISEG and is interested in conducting
research concerning Leadership and Organizational Behavior,
especially regarding digital trends, creativity and innovation, trust,
and sustainability. She has been a senior executive consultant and
project manager in human performance for many years.
Carla Curado holds a PhD in Management from the Technical
University of Lisbon, Portugal (2006). She has published over
150 articles in international peer-reviewed journals and
conference proceedings, numerous book chapters and reports.
Prof. Curado has been regularly presenting her work in leading
international conferences and her research appears in numerous
influential jour- nals. She serves on the editorial review board
for several
international journals and she regularly guest edits special issues
on such scientific outlets. She also serves in international confer-
ences scientific and organizing committees and she has received
several University and international awards for research
achievements and knowledge dissemination. Her research interests
include Human Resource Management and Organizational
Behavior.
Paulo Lopes Henriques (PhD in Management from the Technical
University of Lisbon, 2006) is a full Professor of Organizational
Behavior and Human Resources Management at ISEG Lisbon
School of Economics and Management, Universidade de Lisboa,
and a researcher at CSG – Advance (Research in Social Sciences
and Management). He has published several articles in interna-
tional peer-reviewed journals, conference proceedings, book
chap-
ters, and reports. His research interests and publications are in
HRM and Organizational Behavior, Knowledge Management,
Green HRM and sustainability, Trust, and Ethics.

APPENDIX 1. Articles excluded from the initial search.

Reference Exclusion reason

Agustina, R., Kamdi, W., Hadi, S., & Nurhadi, D. (2020). Influence of the principal´s digital leadership on the reflective Non-organizational scope
practices of vocational teachers mediated by trust, self efficacy, and work engagement. International Journal of Learning,
Teaching and Educational Research, 19(11), 24–40.
Aksal, F. A. (2015). Are headmasters digital leaders in school culture?. Education & Science/Egitim ve Bilim, 40(182), 77–86. Non-organizational scope
Amichai-Hamburger, Y., McKenna, K. Y., & Tal, S. A. (2008). E-empowerment: Empowerment by the Internet. Computers in Search terms missing
Human Behavior, 24(5), 1776–1789.
Antonopoulou, H., Halkiopoulos, C., Barlou, O., & Beligiannis, G. N. (2020). Leadership types and digital leadership in higher Non-organizational scope
education: Behavioural data analysis from University of Patras in Greece. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and
Educational Research, 19(4), 110–129.
Antonopoulou, H., Halkiopoulos, C., Barlou, O., & Beligiannis, G. N. (2019). Transition from educational leadership to Non-organizational scope
e-leadership: A data analysis report from TEI of Western Greece. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational
Research, 18(9), 238–255.
Arain, G. A. (2018). The impact of leadership style on moral identity and subsequent in-role performance: A moderated Search terms missing
mediation analysis. Ethics & Behavior, 28(8), 613–627.
Arânik M.Z. (2012). Leadership for learning through the lens of the candidates for headship. Didactica Slovenica - Pedagoska Non-English article
Obzorja, 27(5), 19–35.
Asogwa, B. E., Asadu, B. U., Ezema, J. U., & Ugwuanyi, F. C. (2014). Use of ServQUAL in the evaluation of service quality of Non-organizational scope
academic libraries in developing countries. Library Philosophy and Practice, (1), 1158.
Asree, S., Zain, M., & Razalli, M. R. (2010). Influence of leadership competency and organizational culture on responsiveness Search terms missing
and performance of firms. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 22(4), 500–526
Asogwa, B. E., Asadu, B. U., Ezema, J. U., & Ugwuanyi, F. C. (2014). Use of ServQUAL in the evaluation of service quality of Non-organizational scope
academic libraries in developing countries. Library Philosophy and Practice, (1), 1158.C13
Bang, J., Youn, S., Rowean, J., Jennings, M., & Austin, M. (2018). Motivations for and outcomes of participating in research Search terms missing
online communities. International Journal of Market Research, 60(3), 238–256.
Blau, I., & Presser, O. (2013). E-Leadership of school principals: Increasing school effectiveness by a school data management Non-organizational scope
system. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(6), 1000–1011.
Blom, M., & Alvesson, M. (2014). Leadership on demand: Followers as initiators and inhibitors of managerial leadership. Search terms missing
Scandinavian Journal of Management, 30(3), 344–357.
Boon, O. K., Arumugam, V., Safa, M. S., & Bakar, N. A. (2007). HRM and TQM: Association with job involvement. Search terms missing
Personnel Review, 36(6), 939–962.
Chang, W. L., & Lee, C. Y. (2013). Virtual team e-leadership: The effects of leadership style and conflict management mode on Non-organizational scope
the online learning performance of students in a business-planning course. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(6),
986–999.
Chinda, T., & Mohamed, S. (2008). Structural equation model of construction safety culture. Engineering, Construction and Search terms missing
Architectural Management, 15(2), 114–131.

(continued)
 2 Journal of Leadership & Organizational

APPENDIX 1. (continued).
Reference Exclusion reason

Chua, Y. P., & Chua, Y. P. (2017). How are e-leadership practices in implementing a school virtual learning Non-organizational scope
environment enhanced? A grounded model study. Computers & Education, 109, 109–121.
Dang, G. P., & Basur, P. (2018). Organic leadership style and employee engagement: the mediating effect of social relevance of Non-organizational scope
work in context of faculty members in higher education. PURUSHARTHA-A Journal of Management, Ethics and Spirituality,
10(1), 107–116.
Day, D. V., Sin, H. P., & Chen, T. T. (2004). Assessing the burdens of leadership: Effects of formal leadership roles on individual Search terms missing
performance over time. Personnel Psychology, 57(3), 573–605.
de Freitas, S., & Routledge, H. (2013). Designing leadership and soft skills in educational games: The e-leadership and soft skills Non-organizational scope
educational games design model (ELESS). British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(6), 951–968.
de Jonge, W. (2006). Supporting civil society and NGOs in Eastern Europe: Some lessons learned. Helsinki Monitor, Search terms missing
17(4), 307–312.
Dervitsiotis, K. N. (2010). A framework for the assessment of an organisation’s innovation excellence. Total Search terms missing
Quality Management, 21(9), 903–918.
Dervitsiotis, K. N. (2010). A framework for the assessment of an organisation’s innovation excellence. Total Search terms missing
Quality Management, 21(9), 903–918.
Desimone, L. M., & Garet, M. S. (2015). Best practices in teacher’s professional development in the United States. Psychology. Non-organizational scope
Society and Education, 7(3), 252–263.
Dimitriadi, Y. (2019). Who You’re Gonna Call? The development of university digital leaders: A case study. Media Non-organizational scope
Studies, 10(19), 102–118.
Dubey, R., Singh, T., & Ali, S. S. (2015). The mediating effect of human resource on successful total quality management Search terms missing
implementation: An empirical study on SMEs in manufacturing sectors. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 22(7),
1463–1480.

Dulebohn, J. H., & Hoch, J. E. (2017). Virtual teams in organizations. Human Resource Management Review, 27(4), 569–574. Search terms missing
Falkenthal, E., & Byrne, A. M. (2021). Distributed leadership in collegiate esports. Simulation & Gaming, 52(2), 185–203. Non-organizational scope
Flannery, K. B., & McGrath Kato, M. (2017). Implementation of SWPBIS in high school: Why is it different?. Preventing School Non-organizational scope
Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 61(1), 69–79.
Fryman C., Fei A., Mehta R., Ahmad S. (2018). Jigsaw method for non-technical skills in cardiac arrest: A novel application of Non-organizational scope
this active learning pedagogy. Medical Science Educator, 28(2), 401–405.
Goh, J., Truman, B., & Barber, D. (2019). Exploring individual differences as factors to maximize interactive learning Non-organizational scope
environments for future learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(4), 497–507.
Hai-Jew, S. (2004). Washington online virtual campus: Infusing culture in dispersed web-based higher education. International Non-organizational scope
Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 5(2), 1–19.
Horwitz, S. K., & Santillan, C. (2012). Knowledge sharing in global virtual team collaboration: Applications of CE and thinklets. Search terms missing
Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 10(4), 342–353.
Hui, R. T. Y., Law, K. K., & Lau, S. C. P. (2021). Online or offline? Coaching media as mediator of the relationship Search terms missing
between coaching style and employee work-related outcomes. Australian Journal of Management, 46(2), 326–345.
Ibrahim, M. Y. (2014). Model of e-leadership, intra-team communication and job satisfaction among school leaders in Malaysia. Non-organizational scope
Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(23), 1927–1927.
Issahaka, A. W., & Lines, R. (2020). Research literature on leadership of knowledge workers: where are we, and where should Search terms missing
we be heading?. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 22(1), 122–148.
Jackson, N. C., & Dunn-Jensen, L. M. (2021). Leadership succession planning for today’s digital transformation economy: Key Search terms missing
factors to build for competency and innovation. Business Horizons, 64(2), 273–284.
Jain, V., Pich, C., Ganesh, B. E., & Armannsdottir, G. (2017). Exploring the influences of political branding: a case from the Non-organizational scope
youth in India. Journal of Indian Business Research, 9(3), 190–211.
Jalal, A. N., Bahari, M., Tarofder, A. K., & Musa, W. M. N. M. W. (2019). Factors influencing customer social relationship Non-English article
management implementation and its benefits in healthcare industry. Polish Journal of Management Studies, 19(2), 196–205.
Jameson, J. (2013). E-leadership in higher education: The fifth “age” of educational technology research. British Journal of Non-organizational scope
Educational Technology, 44(6), 889–915.
Jameson, J. (2011). Leadership of shared spaces in online learning communities. International Journal of Web Based Communities, Non-organizational scope
7(4), 463–477.
Jones, E., Kantak, D. M., Futrell, C. M., & Johnston, M. W. (1996). Leader behavior, work-attitudes, and turnover Search terms missing /
of salespeople: An integrative study. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 16(2), 13–23. Year out of search period
Khattak, S. R., Saeed, I., Rehman, S. U., & Fayaz, M. (2020). Impact of fear of COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health Non-organizational scope
of nurses in Pakistan. Journal of Loss and Trauma, 6(5), 421–435.
Kidd, W. (2012). Utilising podcasts for learning and teaching: A review and ways forward for e-Learning cultures. Management Non-organizational scope
in Education, 26(2), 52–57.
Kim, Y. M., Newby-Bennett, D., & Song, H. J. (2012). Knowledge sharing and institutionalism in the healthcare industry. Search terms missing
Journal of Knowledge Management, 16(3), 480–494.

(continued)
 Tigre et 2

APPENDIX 1. (continued).
Reference Exclusion reason

Kociatkiewicz, J., & Kostera, M. (2012). The good manager: An archetypical quest for morally sustainable leadership. Search terms missing
Organization Studies, 33(7), 861–878.
Kokkinos, C. M., Charalambous, K., & Davazoglou, A. (2010). Primary school teacher interpersonal behavior through the Non-organizational scope
lens of students’ Eysenckian personality traits. Social Psychology of Education, 13(3), 331–349.
Koohang, A., Anderson, J., Nord, J. H., & Paliszkiewicz, J. (2019). Building an awareness-centered information security policy Search terms missing
compliance model. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 120(1), 231–247.
Koohang, A., Nowak, A., Paliszkiewicz, J., & Nord, J. H. (2020). Information security policy compliance: leadership, trust, role Search terms missing
values, and awareness. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 60(1), 1–8.
Korzynski, P. (2013). Online social networks and leadership: Implications of a new online working environment for Search terms missing
leadership. International Journal of Manpower, 34(8), 975–994.
Kuscu, M., & Arslan, H. (2016). Virtual leadership at distance education teams. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, Non-organizational scope
17(3), 136–156.
La Rose, T. (2019). Rediscovering social work leaders through YouTube as archive: The CASW oral history project Search terms missing
1983/1984.
Journal of Technology in Human Services, 37(2–3), 93–112. Non-organizational scope
Lam, P. H. C., & Woodhead, P. (2012). A critical analysis of the challenges facing e-leaders in the 21st Century: A review and
comparison of the information and communication technology development of a public school and a public
independent school in Hong Kong. International Journal of Learning, 18(3), 131–146. Search terms missing
Park, C. L., & Paiva, E. L. (2018). How do national cultures impact the operations strategy process?. International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, 38(10), 1937–1963. Search terms missing
Leung, Y. K., Franken, I., Thurik, R., Driessen, M., Kamei, K., Torrès, O., & Verheul, I. (2021). Narcissism
and entrepreneurship: Evidence from six datasets. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 15, e00216.

Levesque, P. (2012). Virtual leadership in nursing education. Nurse Educator, 37(5), 211–213. Non-organizational scope
Li, P. P., Bai, Y., & Xi, Y. (2012). The contextual antecedents of organizational trust: A multidimensional cross-level analysis. Search terms missing
Management and Organization Review, 8(2), 371–396.
Li, W. D., Li, S., Feng, J. J., Wang, M. O., Zhang, H., Frese, M., & Wu, C. H. (2021). Can becoming a leader change Search terms missing /
your personality? An investigation with two longitudinal studies from a role-based perspective. Journal of Applied Year out of search
Psychology, 106(6), 882–901. period
Lichtenthaler, P. W., & Fischbach, A. (2018). Leadership, job crafting, and employee health and performance. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 39(5), 620–632. Search terms missing
Loucks, S., & Ozogul, G. (2020). Preparing business students for a distributed workforce and global business
environment: Gaining virtual leadership skills in an authentic context. TechTrends, 64, 655–665. Non-organizational scope
Martínez, M. L., Loyola, L. I., & Cumsille, P. (2017). Quality of participation in youth organizations: Relationships with identity
and sense of sociopolitical control. Youth & Society, 49(7), 968–993. Search terms missing
McGillivray, D., McPherson, G., Jones, J., & McCandlish, A. (2016). Young people, digital media making and critical digital
citizenship. Leisure Studies, 35(6), 724–738. Non-organizational scope
McGregor, A., Magee, C. A., Caputi, P., & Iverson, D. (2016). A job demands-resources approach to presenteeism.
Career Development International, 21(4), 402–418. Search terms missing
McLeod, S. (2015). Facilitating administrators’ instructional leadership through the use of a technology integration discussion
protocol. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 10(3), 227–233. Non-organizational scope
Morganson, V. J., Major, D. A., & Litano, M. L. (2017). A multilevel examination of the relationship between leader–member
exchange and work–family outcomes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 32(4), 379–393. Search terms missing
Mukesh, H. V., Prabhu, N., Koodamara, N. K., Chakraborty, S., & Kamath, P. (2020). Entrepreneurial potential of students of
MBA and engineering schools in the Indian context: Roles of leadership and achievement motivation. Journal of Applied Non-organizational scope
Research in Higher Education, 13(3), 782–810.
Navaridas-Nalda, F., Clavel-San Emeterio, M., Fernández-Ortiz, R., & Arias-Oliva, M. (2020). The strategic influence of school
principal leadership in the digital transformation of schools. Computers in Human Behavior, 112, 106481. Non-organizational scope
Nelson G., Caplan R., MacLeod T., Macnaughton E., Cherner R., Aubry T., Méthot C., Latimer E., Piat M., Plenert E.,
McCullough S., Zell S., Patterson M., Stergiopoulos V., Goering P. (2017). What happens after the demonstration phase? Search terms missing
The sustainability of Canada’s at home/chez Soi housing first programs for homeless persons with mental illness. American
Journal of Community Psychology, 59(1–2), 144–157.
Newland, B., & Handley, F. (2016). Developing the digital literacies of academic staff: An institutional approach. Research in
Learning Technology, 24, 1–12. Non-organizational scope
Obal, M., Morgan, T., & Joseph, G. (2020). Integrating sustainability into new product development: The role of organizational
leadership and culture. Journal of Small Business Strategy, 30(1), 43–57. Search terms missing
Obschonka, M., Duckworth, K., Silbereisen, R. K., & Schoon, I. (2012). Social competencies in childhood and adolescence and
entrepreneurship in young adulthood: A two-study analysis. International Journal of Developmental Science, 6(3–4), 137–150. Search terms missing
Ooi, K. B., Lin, B., Teh, P. L., & Chong, A. Y. L. (2012). Does TQM support innovation performance in Malaysia’s
manufacturing industry?. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 13(2), 366–393. Search terms missing

(continued)
 3 Journal of Leadership & Organizational

APPENDIX 1. (continued).
Reference Exclusion reason

Ooi, K. B., Lin, B., Teh, P. L., & Chong, A. Y. L. (2012). Does TQM support innovation performance in Malaysia’s Search terms missing
manufacturing industry?. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 13(2), 366–393.
Park, S. M., & Rainey, H. G. (2008). Leadership and public service motivation in US federal agencies. International Public Search terms missing
Management Journal, 11(1), 109–142.
Paunova, M. (2017). Who gets to lead the multinational team? An updated status characteristics perspective. Search terms missing
Human Relations, 70(7), 883–907.
Peterson, N. A., Lowe, J. B., Hughey, J., Reid, R. J., Zimmerman, M. A., & Speer, P. W. (2006). Measuring the intrapersonal Search terms missing
component of psychological empowerment: Confirmatory factor analysis of the sociopolitical control scale. American
Journal of Community Psychology, 38(3–4), 287–297.
Phipps, S. A. A. (1991). Family systems functioning, family health roles, and utilization of physical health services. Lifestyles, Search terms missing / Year
12(1), 23–41. out of search period
Pitakkornrat, P., & Pongsiri, P. (2020). A structural equation model of knowledge management strategy to develop Search terms missing
best practice for industrial business in Thailand. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 19(2), 1–13.
Preston, J. P., Moffatt, L., Wiebe, S., McAuley, A., Campbell, B., & Gabriel, M. (2015). The use of technology in Prince Edward Non-organizational scope
Island (Canada) high schools: Perceptions of school leaders. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 43(6),
989–1005.
Quigley, N. R. (2013). A longitudinal, multilevel study of leadership efficacy development in MBA teams. Academy of Search terms missing
Management Learning & Education, 12(4), 579–602.
Rennick, L. A., Smedley, C. T., Fisher, D., Wallace, E., & Kim, Y. K. (2013). The effects of spiritual/religious engagement on Search terms missing
college students’ affective outcomes: Differences by gender and race. Journal of Research on Christian Education, 22(3),
301–322.

Rich, A. B. (1997). Continuous improvement: The key to future success. Quality Progress, 30(6), 33–38. Search terms missing / Year
out of search period
Rickard, M. K., Marshall, G. W., & Rutherford, B. N. (2018). Antecedents leading to perceived franchise support. Journal of Search terms missing
Marketing Channels, 25(3), 157–169.
Sanders, M. G. (1999). Schools’ programs and progress in the national network of partnership schools. The Journal Search terms missing / Year
of Educational Research, 92(4), 220–229. out of search period
Schutte, N., Barkhuizen, N., & Van der Sluis, L. (2016). The development of a human resource management (HRM) Search terms missing
professional competence model: A pilot study. Journal of Psychology in Africa, 26(3), 230–236.
Sharpp, T. J., Lovelace, K., Cowan, L. D., & Baker, D. (2019). Perspectives of nurse managers on information communication Non-organizational scope
technology and e-leadership. Journal of Nursing Management, 27(7), 1554–1562.
Slåtten, T., Lien, G., & Svensson, G. (2018). The value of cultivating norms for market orientation in professional service firms. Search terms missing
International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 10(3), 316–330.
Smith, S. F., & Lilienfeld, S. O. (2013). Psychopathy in the workplace: The knowns and unknowns. Aggression and Violent Search terms missing
Behavior, 18(2), 204–218.
Soga, L. R., Vogel, B., Graça, A. M., & Osei-Frimpong, K. (2020). Web 2.0-enabled team relationships: an actor- Search terms missing
network perspective. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 1–14.
Srimindarti, C., Oktaviani, R. M., Hardiningsih, P., & Udin, U. (2020). Determinants of job satisfaction and performance Search terms missing
of auditors: A case study of Indonesia. Calitatea, 21(178), 84–89.
Suutari, V. (1996). Leadership ideologies among European managers: A comparative survey in a multinational company. Search terms missing / Year
Scandinavian Journal of Management, 12(4), 389–409. out of search period
Teh, P. L., Yong, C. C., Arumugam, V., & Ooi, K. B. (2009). Does total quality management reduce employees’ role conflict?. Search terms missing
Industrial Management & Data Systems, 109(8), 1118–1136.
Tondeur, J., Devos, G., Van Houtte, M., Van Braak, J., & Valcke, M. (2009). Understanding structural and cultural Search terms missing
school characteristics in relation to educational change: the case of ICT integration. Educational Studies, 35(2), 223–
235. Search terms missing
Trienekens J., van Velzen M., Lees N., Saunders C., Pascucci S. (2018). Governance of market-oriented fresh food
value chains: Export chains from New Zealand. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 21(2), 249–
Search terms missing
268.
Tuzovic, S; Wirtz, J; Heracleous, L. (2018). How do innovators stay innovative? A longitudinal case analysis. Journal of Services
Non-English article
Marketing, 32(1), 34–45.
Valléry G., Leduc S. (2016). Supervision practices and ICT’ uses: An example in National gendarmerie. Psychologie du Travail et
des Organisations, 22(1), 39–53.

Vázquez E. (2013). Open government and e-leadership in schools mediated by ICT. Croatian Journal of Education, 15(1), 11–41. Non-organizational scope
Wallace D.M., Torres E.M., Zaccaro S.J. (2021). Just what do we think we are doing? Learning outcomes of leader Search terms missing / Year
and leadership development. The Leadership Quarterly, 32(5), 101494. out of search period
Wang Y.-S., Tseng T.H., Wang Y.-M., Chu C.-W. (2019). Development and validation of an internet entrepreneurial Search terms missing
self-efficacy scale. Internet Research, 30(2), 653–675.
Ward W.L. (2017). Pediatric psychologists’ role in faculty development. Pediatric Psychology, 5(2), 137–148. Search terms missing
Weiser E.B. (2015). #Me: Narcissism and its facets as predictors of selfie-posting frequency. Personality and Individual Search terms missing
Differences, 86, 477–481.

(continued)
 Tigre et 3

APPENDIX 1. (continued).
Reference Exclusion reason

Westberg K.L., Archambault Jr. F.X. (1997). A multi-site case study of successful classroom practices for high ability students. Search terms missing
Gifted Child Quarterly, 41(1), 42–51.
Whitney C.K., Gardner J., Ban N.C., Vis C., Quon S., Dionne S. (2016). Imprecise and weakly assessed: Evaluating voluntary Search terms missing
measures for management of marine protected areas. Marine Policy, 69, 92–101.
Wituk S.A., Shepherd M.D., Warren M., Meissen G. (2002). Factors contributing to the survival of self-help groups. American Search terms missing
Journal of Community Psychology, 30(3), 349–366.
Wu B., Yu X., Hu Y. (2019). How does principal e-leadership affect ICT transformation across different school stages in K- Non-organizational scope
12 education: Perspectives from teachers in Shanghai. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(3), 1210–1225.
Yildirim H., Saygin S. (2011). Effects of owners’ leadership style on manufacturing family firms’ entrepreneurial orientation in Search terms missing
the emerging economies: An emprical investigation in Turkey. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative
Sciences, 32, 26–32.
Young A., Wilkins E. (2008). Dispositional statements on student teacher evaluation instruments: Commonalities across Search terms missing
institutions. Teacher Educator, 43(3), 198–215.
Yu B., Gerido L., He Z. (2017). Exploring text classification of social support in online health communities for people who are Non-organizational scope
D/deaf and hard of hearing. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 54(1), 840–841.
Zagorsek H., Stough S.J., Jaklic M. (2006). Analysis of the reliability of the leadership practices inventory in the item response Search terms missing
theory framework. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14(2), 180–191.
Zieba M., Zieba K. (2014). Knowledge management critical success factors and the innovativeness of KIBS companies. Search terms missing
Engineering Economics, 25(4), 458–465.
 3 Journal of Leadership & Organizational

View publication stats