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

2 806

3 authors:

Fernanda Bethlem Tigre Carla Curado

University of Lisbon ISEG - University of Lisbon
2 PUBLICATIONS   4 CITATIONS    94 PUBLICATIONS   2,005 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Paulo Lopes Henriques

University of Lisbon
31 PUBLICATIONS   449 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

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
Journal of Leadership &
Organizational Studies
Digital Leadership: A Bibliometric Analysis 1–31
© The Authors 2022
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/15480518221123132
journals.sagepub.com/home/jlo
Fernanda Bethlem Tigre1 , Carla Curado1 ,
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 will resemble (Dirani et al., 2020). While digital transforma-

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 to a new setting to attain
an effective, enduring 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
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
1
Advance/CSG, ISEG – Lisbon School of Economics & Management,
Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal
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 Studies
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 & Č ater, 2015).
A bibliometric study is a quantitative approach for study-
ing the bibliographic material and mapping the research field
without subjective bias (Zupic & Č ater, 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 & Č ater, 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 (İ nel, 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 (İ nel,
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.
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 & Č ater, 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 Studies
on three main subject areas (i.e., social sciences; business,
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 authoŕ s
name was misspelled) or excluded articles with bibliometric
problems. Then we read every abstract of the remaining doc-
uments. Our exclusion criteria follow Gümüş et 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; Gümüş et al., 2019;
Keathley-Herring et al., 2016).
Initial Analysis
Figure 1 shows the publishing trend in the number of pub-
lications on the DL topic from 2000 to 2020. We can
notice that from 2009 to 2011, the number of publications
was practically stable. However, mainly from 2018
onwards, the increase rate was more 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 & Č ater, 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 similarities between
objects (e.g., co-occurrence, co-citations) providing accurate
visual information about the distance between any pair of
 Table 1. Articles Belonging to the Research Dataset.
Citation
Amit et al. (2016)
Angelo & McCarthy (2020)
Anoye & Kouamé (2018)
Avolio & Kahai (2003)
Avolio et al. (2000)
Avolio et al. (2014)
Banerjee & Chau (2004)
Belitski & Liversage (2019)
Boje & Rhodes (2005)
Braun et al. (2019)
Campion & Campion
(2020)
Camps (2009)
5
Title Brief description Main concepts Approach*
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
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
Leadership challenges in virtual team environment. Summarizes other researchers’ work and challenges in Virtual leadership T
virtual teams. Motivation
Trust
Relationship
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
E-leadership: Implications for theory, research, and practice. Reviews e-leadership in organizations. E-leadership T
Adaptive structuration
theory
Advanced information
technology
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
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
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
The virtual leader construct: The mass mediatization and Explores what happens when leaders become virtualized Virtual leadership T
simulation of transformational leadership. through mass media. Mediatization
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.
Leading matters: take it from the professionals — a high-level Compilation of behaviors research recommends to be Virtual leadership T
overview of virtual leadership according to educational necessary for effective virtual leadership. Communication
technology scholars (and a few others). Trust
Collaboration
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)
6
Table 1. (continued).
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)
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 of Exposes the strategies leaders employ to achieve a range of E-leadership E (Quali)
nonverbal communication. complex communication goals. Virtual teams
Communication
Open plan offices—the response to leadership challenges of Explores different workspaces with virtual work in relation Virtual leadership E (Quali)
virtual project work? to leadership. Office space
The e-leadership linking inter-organizational collaboration and Investigates the effect of inter-organizational collaboration Collaboration E (Quanti)
ambidextrous innovation. on ambidextrous innovation. E-leadership
Innovation
How LEGO built the foundations and enterprise capabilities for Analyze the role of digital leadership in driving innovation Digital leadership E (Quali)
digital leadership. management and dynamic capability. Capabilities
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
Virtual R&D project teams: From e-leadership to 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 what Digital leadership E (Quali)
how to avoid it. 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 and Transparency
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)
 Table 1. (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
İ nel (2019) An empirical study on measurement of efficiency of digital Measures the relative efficiency of digital transformation E-leadership E (Quanti)
transformation by using data envelopment analysis. among EU Countries based on data envelopment analysis. Digital transformation
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 community Natural language processing
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 civil E-leadership E (Quali)
actions. army corps responsible for the security of people and Information and
property. communication
technology
Relationship

(continued)

7
8
Table 1. (continued).
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 advanced Examines e-leadership and innovation capacity at the E-leadership E (Quanti)
countries: the case of e-leadership in South Korea and the individual public manager level. Culture
United States. Information and
communication
technologies
Innovation
Lu et al. (2014) Friending your way up the ladder: Connecting massive multiplayer Tackles how technology and technology mediated E-leadership E (Quanti)
online game behaviors with offline leadership. communications have transformed leadership-diagnostic Technology mediated
traits and behaviors. communications
Relationship
Maduka et al. (2018) Analysis of competencies for effective virtual team leadership in Identifies and analyzes the required competencies for Leadership E (Quali)
building successful organizations. virtual team leadership and its effectiveness in an Virtual teams
organization. Trust
Communication
Meghana & Vijaya (2019) E-leadership, psychological contract and real-time performance Examines impact of psychological contract, mediated by E-leadership E (Quanti)
management: Remotely working professionals. e-leadership, on real-time performance management of Psychological contract
remotely working professionals. Performance management
Virtual teams
Mihardjo et al. (2019b) Digital leadership role in developing business model innovation Assesses the role of digital leadership (directly or indirectly) Digital leadership E (Quanti)
and customer experience orientation in industry 4.0. and its influence the customer experience orientation in Digital transformation
business innovation. Innovation
Customer experience
Mihardjo et al. (2019a) Digital leadership impacts on developing dynamic capability and Examines the roles of digital leadership in developing Digital leadership E (Quanti)
strategic alliance based on market orientation. strategic alliance and dynamic capability based on the Dynamic capabilities
market orientation. Market orientation
Strategic alliances

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

Mihardjo et al. (2019c) The influence of digital leadership on innovation management Study on the role of digital leadership based on dynamic Dynamic capabilities E (Quanti)
based on dynamic capability: Market orientation as a moderator. 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 online Digital leadership E (Quali)
conversation and the use that microblogs can provide for Online communication
this purpose. Relationship

Nasution et al. (2020) Digital mastery in Indonesia: The organization and individual Provides a gap model of digital mastery development in a Digital leadership E (MM)
contrast. 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 address E-leadership E (Quali)
technological and change issues in a practical way. Paradoxes
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 leadership’s Virtual leadership T
paradox lens. 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

(continued)

9
10
Table 1. (continued).
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 the new technologies as a tool to transform the public sector. Transparency
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 how Virtual teams
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
Toleikienė et al. (2020) Whether and how does the crisis-induced situation change Reveals challenges, tensions and how the pandemic E-leadership E (Quali)
e-leadership in the public sector? Evidence from Lithuanian influences e-leadership in Lithuanian municipal Teleworking
public administration. 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 leaders’ E-leadership E (Quali)
elements of e-leadership. interactions with followers via information and E-skills
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 members’ E-leadership E (Quanti)
face-to-face communication settings. work affects the perceived importance of leadership Virtual leadership
behaviors. Relationship
Task orientation

*Approach: T/E: theoretical/empirical; Quali: qualitative; Quanti: quantitative; MM: mixed method.

11
12
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
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies
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 al. 13

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

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 fit 5 457
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 (1992) 5 6,271
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 authoŕ s 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 authoŕ s
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 al.
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 authoŕ s 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.
15
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 publicationś co-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 (Batistič et 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.
16
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
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies
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 al. 17

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.
18
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
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies
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 al.
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
19
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 authoŕ s 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.
20
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
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies
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 al.
(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 peopleś avatars 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
21
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 & Č ater,
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
22
Balthazard, P. A., Waldman, D. A., & Warren, J. E. (2009).
Predictors of the emergence of transformational leadership
in virtual decision teams. The Leadership Quarterly, 20(5),
651-663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.06.008
Banerjee, P., & Chau, P. Y. K. (2004). An evaluative framework
for analysing e-government convergence capability in devel-
oping countries. Electronic Government, 1(1), 29-48. https://
doi.org/10.1504/EG.2004.004135
Bartsch, S., Weber, E., Büttgen, M., & Huber, A. (2021). Leadership
matters in crisis-induced digital transformation: How to lead
service employees effectively during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Journal of Service Management, 32(1), 71-85. https://doi.org/10.
1108/JOSM-05-2020-0160
Batistič , S., Č erne, M., & Vogel, B. (2017). Just how multi-level
is leadership research? A document co-citation analysis
1980–2013 on leadership constructs and outcomes.
Leadership Quarterly, 28(1), 86-103. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.leaqua.2016.10.007
Belitski, M., & Liversage, B. (2019). E-Leadership in small and
medium-sized enterprises in the developing world.
Technology Innovation Management Review, 9(1), 64-74.
https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1212
Boje, D. M., & Rhodes, C. (2005). The virtual leader construct:
The mass mediatization and simulation of transformational
leadership. Leadership, 1(4), 407-428. https://doi.org/10.
1177/1742715005057232
Bolden, R., & Regan, N. O. (2016). Digital disruption and the
future of leadership: An interview with rick haythornthwaite,
chairman of centrica and MasterCard. Journal of
Management Inquiry, 25(4), 438-446. https://doi.org/10.
1177/1056492616638173
Bolukbasi, T., Chang, K. W., Zou, J., Saligrama, V., & Kalai, A.
(2016). Man is to computer programmer as woman is to home-
maker? Debiasing word embeddings. Advances in Neural
Information Processing Systems, 29, 4356-4364.
Bhatt, Y., Ghuman, K., & Dhir, A. (2020). Sustainable manufac-
turing. Bibliometrics and content analysis. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 260, 120988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2020.120988
Brake, T. (2006). Leading global virtual teams. Industrial and
Commercial Training, 38(3), 116-121. https://doi.org/10.
1108/00197850610659364
Braun, S., Bark, A. H., Kirchner, A., Stegmann, S., & Van Dick,
R. (2019). Emails from the boss—curse or blessing?
Relations between communication channels, leader evalua-
tion, and employees’ attitudes. International Journal of
Business Communication, 56(1), 50-81. https://doi.org/10.
1177/2329488415597516
Broadus, R. N. (1987). Toward a definition of ‘bibliometrics’.
Scientometrics, 12(5–6), 373-379. https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF02016680
Campion, L. L., & Campion, E. D. (2020). Leading matters: Take
it from the professionals — a high-level overview of virtual
leadership according to educational technology scholars (and
a few others). Tech Trends, 64(1), 182-184. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11528-019-00470-7
Camps, T. W. A. (2009). Two images of the future: Virtual leadership
and leadership in organisation. Journal of Chain and Network
Science, 9(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.3920/JCNS2009.x169
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies
Cascio, W. F., & Shurygailo, S. (2003). E-leadership and virtual
teams. Organizational Dynamics, 31(4), 362-376. https://doi.
org/10.1016/S0090-2616(02)00130-4
Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera,
F. (2011a). An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visu-
alizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application
to the fuzzy sets theory field. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1),
146-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.002
Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera,
F. (2011b). Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis,
and cooperative study among tools. Journal of the American
Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(7),
1382-1042. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21525
Contreras, F., Baykal, E., & Abid, G. (2020). E-leadership and tel-
eworking in times of COVID-19 and beyond: What we know
and where do we go. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 590271.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.5902
Cordery, J., Soo, C., Kirman, B., Rosen, B., & Mathieu, J. (2009).
Leading parallel global virtual teams: Lessons from Alcoa.
Organizational Dynamics, 38(3), 204-216. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.orgdyn.2009.04.002
Cortellazzo, L., Bruni, E., & Zampieri, R. (2019). The role of lead-
ership in a digitalized world: A review. Frontiers in
Psychology, 10, 1938. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.
01938
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information
requirements, media richness and structural design.
Management Science, 32(5), 554-571. https://doi.org/10.
1287/mnsc.32.5.554
Dai, S., Duan, X., & Zhang, W. (2020). Knowledge map of envi-
ronmental crisis management based on keywords network and
co-word analysis, 2005-2018. Journal of Cleaner Production,
262, 121168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121168
Darics, E. (2020). E-leadership or “ how to be boss in instant mes-
saging ?” the role of nonverbal communication. International
Journal of Business Communication, 57(1), 3-29. https://doi.
org/10.1177/2329488416685068
DasGupta, P. (2011). Literature review: E-leadership. Emerging
Leadership Journeys, 4(1), 1-36.
Davarzani, H., Fahimnia, B., Bell, M., & Sarkis, J. (2016). Greening
ports and maritime logistics: A review. Transportation
Research Part D, 48, 473-487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
trd.2015.07.007
DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1994). Capturing the complexity
in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory.
Organization Science, 5(2), 121-147. https://doi.org/10.
1287/orsc.5.2.121
De Paoli, D., & Ropo, A. (2015). Open plan offices - the response
to leadership challenges of virtual project work? Journal of
Corporate Real State, 17(1), 63-74. https://doi.org/10.1108/
JCRE-08-2014-0020
Dirani, K. M., Abadi, M., Alizadeh, A., Barhate, B., Garza, R. C.,
& Gunasekara, N., … Z. Majzun (2020). Leadership compe-
tencies and the essential role of human resource development
in times of crisis: A response to COVID-19 pandemic. Human
Resource Development International, 23(4), 380-394. https://
doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2020.1780078
Doghri, S. B. S., Horchani, S. C., & Mouelhi, M. (2020). The e-leadership
linking inter-organizational collaboration and ambidextrous
Tigre et al.
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
23
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 leadeŕ s
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
İ nel, 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
24
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
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
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies
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.
Organization Science, 11(5), 473-492. https://doi.org/10.
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 al.
model innovation and customer experience orientation in
industry 4.0. Management Science Letters, 9, 1749-1762.
https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.6.015
Mihardjo, L. W. W., Sasmoko, Alamsyah, F., & Elidjen, E.
(2019c). The influence of digital leadership on innovation
management based on dynamic capability: Market orientation
as a moderator. Management Science Letters, 9, 1059-1070.
https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.3.018
Mitchell, A. (2012). Interventions for effectively leading in a
virtual setting. Business Horizons, 55(5), 431-439. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2012.03.007
Nagel, L. (2020). The influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on the
digital transformation of work. International Journal of
Sociology and Social Policy, 40(9–10), 861-875. https://doi.
org/10.1108/IJSSP-07-2020-0323
Narbona, J. (2016). Digital leadership, twitter and pope francis.
Church, Communication and Culture, 1(1), 90-109. https://
doi.org/10.1080/23753234.2016.1181307
Nah, F. F., Lau, J. L., & Jinghua, K. (2001). Critical factors for suc-
cessful implementation of enterprise systems. Business
Process Management Journal, 7(3), 285-296. https://doi.org/
10.1108/14637150110392782
Nasution, R. A., Arnita, D., Rusnandi, L. S. L., Qodariah, E.,
Rudito, P., & Sinaga, M. F. N. (2020). Digital mastery in
Indonesia: The organization and individual contrast. Journal
of Management Development. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-
03-2019-0081
Orlikowki, W. J. (1992). The duality of technology: Rethinking the
concept of technology in organizations. Organization Science,
3(3), 398-427. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.3.3.398
Peng, B. (2021). Digital leadership: State governance in the era of
digital technology. Cultures of Science, Advance online publi-
cation, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1177/2096608321989835
Perizade, B., Eka, D., Widiyanti, M., Adam, M., & Muhtia, F.
(2017). Virtual leadership: Concept, expectation and future.
International Journal of Applied Business and Economic
Research, 15(10), 227-239.
Peter, M. K., Kraft, C., & Lindeque, J. (2020). Strategic action
fields of digital transformation: An exploration of the strategic
action fields of Swiss SMEs and large enterprises. Journal of
Strategy and Management, 13(1), 160-180. https://doi.org/10.
1108/JSMA-05-2019-0070
Pomaza-Ponomarenko, A. L., Hren, L. M., Durman, O. L.,
Bondarchuk, N. V., & Vorobets, V. (2020). Management
mechanisms in the context of digitization of all spheres of
society. Revista San Gregorio, 42(special edition), 1-9.
Pradhan, B. B. (2019). Review paper on virtual leadership. Interna-
tional Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 23(6), 633-638.
Prashar, A., & Sunder M, V. (2020). A bibliometric and content
analysis of sustainable development in small and medium-
sized enterprises. Journal of Cleaner Production, 245,
118665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118665
Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistic bibliography or bibliometrics?
Journal of Documentation, 25(4), 348-349.
Pulley, M. L., & Sessa, V. I. (2001). E-leadership: Tackling
complex challenges. Industrial and Commercial Training,
33(6), 225-230. https://doi.org/10.1108/00197850110405379
Pulley, M. L., Sessa, V., & Malloy, M. (2002). E-leadership: A
two-pronged idea. T + D, 56(3), 34-47.
25
Purvanova, R. K., & Bono, J. E. (2009). Transformational leader-
ship in context: Face-to-face and virtual teams. The
Leadership Quarterly, 20(3), 343-357. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.leaqua.2009.03.004
Purvanova, R. K., & Kenda, R. (2018). Paradoxical virtual leader-
ship: Reconsidering virtuality through a paradox lens. Group
& Organization Management, 43(5), 752-786. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1059601118794102
Richardson, J. W., Clemons, J., & Sterrett, W. (2020a). How super-
intendents use technology to engage stakeholders. Research in
Educational Administration & Leadership, 5(4), 954-988.
https://doi.org/10.30828/real/2020.4.1
Roman, A. V., Van Wart, M., Wang, X., Liu, C., Kim, S., &
McCarthy, A. (2019). Defining e-leadership as competence
in ICT-mediated communications: An exploratory assessment.
Public Administration Review, 79(6), 853-866. https://doi.org/
10.1111/puar.12980
Rubino-Hallman, S., & Hanna, N. K. (2007). New technologies for
public sector transformation: A critical analysis of e-govern-
ment initiatives in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Journal of E-Government, 3(3), 3-39. https://doi.org/10.
1300/J399v03n03_02
Sasmoko, S., Mihardjo, L. W. W., Alamsjah, F., & Elidjen, E.
(2019). Dynamic capability: The effect of digital leadership
on fostering innovation capability based on market orienta-
tion. Management Science Letters, 9(10), 1633-1644. https://
doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.5.024
Saputra, N., & Hutajulu, G. E. (2020). Engaging the millennials at
office: Tracking the antecedents of holistic work engagement.
Polish Journal of Management Studies, 21(1), 342-354.
https://doi.org/10.17512/pjms.2020.21.1.25
Schmidt, G. B. (2014). Virtual leadership: An important leadership
context. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 7(2), 182-
187. https://doi.org/10.1111/iops.12129
Schwarzmüller, T., Brosi, P., Duman, D., & Welpe, I. M. (2018).
How does the digital transformation affect organizations? Key
themes of change in work design and leadership. Management
Revue, 29(2), 114-138. https://doi.org/10.5771/0935-9915-
2018-2-114
Sherk, K. E., Nauseda, F., Johnson, S., & Liston, D. (2009). An
experience of virtual leadership development for human
resource managers. Human Resources for Health, 7(1), 1-3.
https://doi.org/10.1186/1478-4491-7-1
Soriano, A. S., Álvares, C. L., & Valdés, R. M. T. (2018).
Bibliometric analysis to identify an emerging area: Public rela-
tions intelligence — a challenge to strengthen technological
observatories in the network society. Scientometrics, 115(3),
1591-1614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2651-8
Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues:
Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management
Science, 32(11), 1492-1512. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.11.
1492
Takey, S. M., & Carvalho, M. M. (2016). Fuzzy front end of sys-
temic innovations: A conceptual framework based on a sys-
tematic literature review. Technological Forecasting &
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
26
field evidence. Edpacs, 42(5), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/
07366981.2010.537182
Thompson, L. F., & Coovert, M. D. (2003). Teamwork online: The
effects of computer conferencing on perceived confusion, sat-
isfaction, and postdiscussion accuracy. Group Dynamics, 7(2),
135-151. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.7.2.135
Toleikienė , R., Rybnikova, I., & Juknevič ienė , V. (2020). Whether
and how does the crisis-induced situation change e-leadership
in the public sector? Evidence from Lithuanian public admin-
istration. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences,
16(SI), 149-166. doi:10.24193/tras.SI2020.9
Torre, T., & Sarti, D. (2020). The `way' toward e-leadership: Some
evidence from the field. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 554253.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.554253
Turesky, E. F., Smith, C. D., & Turesky, T. K. (2020). A call to
action for virtual team leaders: Practitioner perspectives on
trust, conflict and the need for organizational support.
Organization Management Journal, 17(4), 185-206. https://
doi.org/10.1108/OMJ-09-2019-0798
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey:
VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping.
Scientometrics, 84(2), 523-538. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11192-009-0146-3
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2011). Text mining and visualiza-
tion using VOSviewer. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:1109.2058.
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2017). Citation-based clustering of pub-
lications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer. Scientometrics,
111(2), 1053-1070. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2300-7
Van Wart, M., Roman, A., & Pierce, S. (2016). The rise and effect
of virtual modalities and functions on organizational leader-
ship: Tracing conceptual boundaries along the e-management
and e-leadership continuum. Transylvanian Review of
Administrative Sciences, 12(SI), 102-122.
Van Wart, M., Roman, A., Wang, X., & Liu, C. (2017).
Operationalizing the definition of e-leadership: Identifying
the elements of e-leadership. International Review of
Administrative Sciences, 85(1), 80-97. https://doi.org/10.
1177/0020852316681446
Venkatesh, V., Brown, S. A., & Bala, H. (2013). Bridging the
qualitative-quantitative divide: Guidelines for conducting
mixed methods research in information systems. Management
Information Systems Quarterly, 37(3), 855-879. https://doi.org/
10.25300/MISQ/2013/37.3.09
Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and
a research agenda. Journal of Strategic Information Systems,
28(2), 118-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003
Wade, M., & Shan, J. (2020). COVID-19 has accelerated digital
transformation, but may have made it harder not easier. MIS
Quarterly Executive, 19(3), 213-220. https://doi.org/10.
17705/2msqe.00034
Wakefield, R. L., Leidner, D. E., & Garrison, G. (2008). A model
of conflict, leadership, and performance in virtual teams.
Information Systems Research, 19(4), 434-455. https://doi.
org/10.1287/isre.1070.0149
Walvoord, A. A. G., Redden, E. R., Elliott, L. R., & Coovert, M. D.
(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
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies
Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., & Noyons, E. C. M. (2010). A unified
approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks.
Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 629-635. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.joi.2010.07.002
Wang, B., Schlagwein, D., Cecez-Kecmanovic, D., & Cahalane,
M. C. (2020). Beyond the factory paradigm: Digital nomad-
ism and the digital future(s) of knowledge work
post-COVID-19. Journal of the Association for
Information Systems, 21(6), 1379-1401. https://doi.org/10.
17705/1jais.00641
Wei, J., Zhao, K., Zhang, R., & Wang, M. (2021). Exploring devel-
opment and evolutionary trends in carbon offset research:
A bibliometric perspective. Environmental Science and
Pollution Research, 28(15), 18850-18869. doi:10.1007/
s11356-021-12908-8
Williams, R. I., Anne, L., Clark, W. R., & Raffo, D. M. (2021).
Re-examining systematic literature review in management
research: Additional benefits and execution protocols. European
Management Journal, 39(4), 521-533. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
emj.2020.09.007
Wolor, C. W., Solikhah, S., Fidhyallah, N. F., & Lestari, D. P.
(2020). Effectiveness of e-training, e-leadership, and work
life balance on employee performance during COVID-19.
Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business,
7(10), 443-450. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2020.vol7.
no10.443
Yilmaz, R., Yilmaz, F. G. K., & Keser, H. (2020). Vertical versus
shared e-leadership approach in online project-based learning:
A comparison of self-regulated learning skills, motivation and
group collaboration processes. Journal of Computing in
Higher Education, 32(3), 628-654. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s12528-020-09250-2
Zaccaro, S. J., & Bader, P. (2003). E-leadership and the challenges
of leading e-teams: Minimizing the bad and maximizing the
good. Organizational Dynamics, 31(4), 377-387. https://doi.
org/10.1057/9781137280640.0005
Zeike, S., Bradbury, K., Lindert, L., & Pfa, H. (2019). Digital
leadership skills and associations with psychological well-
being. International Journal of Environmental Research
and Public Health, 16(4), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijerph16142628
Zhao, D., & Strotmann, A. (2015). Analysis and visualization of
citation networks. Morgan & Claypool. https://doi.org/10.
2200/s00688ed1v01y201512vis006.
Ziek, P., & Smulowitz, S. (2014). The impact of emergent virtual
leadership competencies on team effectiveness. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 35(2), 106-120. https://
doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-03-2012-0043
Zigurs, I. (2003). Leadership in virtual teams: Oxymoron or oppor-
tunity? Organizational Dynamics, 31(4), 339-351. https://doi.
org/10.1016/S0090-2616(02)00132-8
Zimmermann, P., Wit, A., & Gill, R. (2008). The relative impor-
tance of leadership behaviours in virtual and face-to-face com-
munication settings. Leadership, 4(3), 321-337. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1742715008092388
Zupic, I., & Č ater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in
management and organization. Organizational Research
Methods, 18(3), 429-472. https://doi.org/10.1177/10944
28114562629
Tigre et al. 27

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. Personnel Search terms missing
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)
28 Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies

APPENDIX 1. (continued).
Reference Exclusion reason

Chua, Y. P., & Chua, Y. P. (2017). How are e-leadership practices in implementing a school virtual learning environment Non-organizational scope
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, 17(4), Search terms missing
307–312.
Dervitsiotis, K. N. (2010). A framework for the assessment of an organisation’s innovation excellence. Total Quality Search terms missing
Management, 21(9), 903–918.
Dervitsiotis, K. N. (2010). A framework for the assessment of an organisation’s innovation excellence. Total Quality Search terms missing
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 Studies, Non-organizational scope
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 between Search terms missing
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 of Search terms missing /
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 of Non-organizational scope
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 al. 29

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 lens Non-organizational scope
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 1983/1984. Search terms missing
Journal of Technology in Human Services, 37(2–3), 93–112.
Lam, P. H. C., & Woodhead, P. (2012). A critical analysis of the challenges facing e-leaders in the 21st Century: A review and Non-organizational scope
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.
Park, C. L., & Paiva, E. L. (2018). How do national cultures impact the operations strategy process?. International Journal of Search terms missing
Operations & Production Management, 38(10), 1937–1963.
Leung, Y. K., Franken, I., Thurik, R., Driessen, M., Kamei, K., Torrès, O., & Verheul, I. (2021). Narcissism and Search terms missing
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 your Search terms missing / Year
personality? An investigation with two longitudinal studies from a role-based perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, out of search period
106(6), 882–901.
Lichtenthaler, P. W., & Fischbach, A. (2018). Leadership, job crafting, and employee health and performance. Leadership & Search terms missing
Organization Development Journal, 39(5), 620–632.
Loucks, S., & Ozogul, G. (2020). Preparing business students for a distributed workforce and global business environment: Non-organizational scope
Gaining virtual leadership skills in an authentic context. TechTrends, 64, 655–665.
Martínez, M. L., Loyola, L. I., & Cumsille, P. (2017). Quality of participation in youth organizations: Relationships with identity Search terms missing
and sense of sociopolitical control. Youth & Society, 49(7), 968–993.
McGillivray, D., McPherson, G., Jones, J., & McCandlish, A. (2016). Young people, digital media making and critical digital Non-organizational scope
citizenship. Leisure Studies, 35(6), 724–738.
McGregor, A., Magee, C. A., Caputi, P., & Iverson, D. (2016). A job demands-resources approach to presenteeism. Career Search terms missing
Development International, 21(4), 402–418.
McLeod, S. (2015). Facilitating administrators’ instructional leadership through the use of a technology integration discussion Non-organizational scope
protocol. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 10(3), 227–233.
Morganson, V. J., Major, D. A., & Litano, M. L. (2017). A multilevel examination of the relationship between leader–member Search terms missing
exchange and work–family outcomes. Journal of Business and Psychology, 32(4), 379–393.
Mukesh, H. V., Prabhu, N., Koodamara, N. K., Chakraborty, S., & Kamath, P. (2020). Entrepreneurial potential of students of Non-organizational scope
MBA and engineering schools in the Indian context: Roles of leadership and achievement motivation. Journal of Applied
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 Non-organizational scope
principal leadership in the digital transformation of schools. Computers in Human Behavior, 112, 106481.
Nelson G., Caplan R., MacLeod T., Macnaughton E., Cherner R., Aubry T., Méthot C., Latimer E., Piat M., Plenert E., Search terms missing
McCullough S., Zell S., Patterson M., Stergiopoulos V., Goering P. (2017). What happens after the demonstration phase?
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 Non-organizational scope
Learning Technology, 24, 1–12.
Obal, M., Morgan, T., & Joseph, G. (2020). Integrating sustainability into new product development: The role of organizational Search terms missing
leadership and culture. Journal of Small Business Strategy, 30(1), 43–57.
Obschonka, M., Duckworth, K., Silbereisen, R. K., & Schoon, I. (2012). Social competencies in childhood and adolescence and Search terms missing
entrepreneurship in young adulthood: A two-study analysis. International Journal of Developmental Science, 6(3–4), 137–150.
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.

(continued)
30 Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies

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. Human Search terms missing
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 best Search terms missing
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 of Search terms missing / Year
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-network Search terms missing
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 of Search terms missing
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 school Search terms missing
characteristics in relation to educational change: the case of ICT integration. Educational Studies, 35(2), 223–235.
Trienekens J., van Velzen M., Lees N., Saunders C., Pascucci S. (2018). Governance of market-oriented fresh food value Search terms missing
chains: Export chains from New Zealand. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 21(2), 249–268.
Tuzovic, S; Wirtz, J; Heracleous, L. (2018). How do innovators stay innovative? A longitudinal case analysis. Journal of Services Search terms missing
Marketing, 32(1), 34–45.
Valléry G., Leduc S. (2016). Supervision practices and ICT’ uses: An example in National gendarmerie. Psychologie du Travail et Non-English article
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 and Search terms missing / Year
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 al. 31

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-12 Non-organizational scope
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.

View publication stats