Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Leadership challenges in the context of university 4.0. A thematic synthesis literature review

  • Manuscript
  • Published:
Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Supported by an environment that is increasingly immersed in digital transformation, universities are facing important organizational changes in both tangible and intangible structures. Digital transformation isn’t all about technology, there is a human side of the story. Leadership is seen as a key issue in any process of change. However, leaders of professional and knowledge-based institutions, like universities, face special demands. The present article aims to synthesize what has been investigated about leadership in the context of University 4.0. A systematic approach was adopted in conducting the literature review. The main body of the article focuses on illustrating five thematic clusters grounded in the literature and identifying co-citation network of each cluster using bibliometrics. Results demonstrate that this is an emerging theme. This paper is the first attempt to systematically review all research that so far has been made available in the broad field of leadership in University 4.0.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Afshari M, Bakar KA, Luan WS, Siraj S (2012) Factors affecting the transformational leadership role of principals in implementing ICT in schools. Turkish Online J Educat Technol-TOJET 11(4):164–176

    Google Scholar 

  • Alavi John M, Leidner DE (2001) Knowledge management and knowledge management systems: conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly 25(1):107–136. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250961

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson RE, Dexter S (2005) School technology leadership: an empirical investigation of prevalence and effect. Educat Adm Q 41(1):49–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aria M, Cuccurullo C (2017) bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. J Informetr 11(4):959–975

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asabin VV, Garanin MA, Gnatyuk MA, Klimova AS, Pervov PA (2019) “ Blue Ocean” For A Higher School. Educación, Política y Valores, Dilemas Contemporáneos, p 6

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi RP, Yi Y (1998) On the evaluation of structure equation models. Acad Mark Sci 16(1):76–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Bandura A (2010) Self-efficacy. The Corsini Encycl Psychol 1–3.

  • Bartol KM, Srivastava A (2002) Encouraging knowledge sharing: The role of organizational reward systems. J Leadersh Organiz Stud 9(1):64–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bock GW, Zmud RW, Kim YG, Lee JN (2005) Behavioral intention formation in knowledge sharing: Examining the roles of extrinsic motivators, social-psychological forces, and organizational climate. MIS Q 87–111

  • Bass B, Avolio B (1994) Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Newbury Park, CA, Sage

    Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, B., & Kingsley, G. (1998). Risk culture in public and private organizations. Publ Adm Rev 109–118

  • Brown C, Vessey I (2003) Managing the next wave of enterprise systems: leveraging lessons from ERP. MIS Q Exec 2(1):45–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Chawla D, Joshi H (2010) Knowledge management initiatives in Indian public and private sector organizations. J Knowl Manag 14(6):811–827

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng MY, Ho JSY, Lau PM (2009) Knowledge sharing in academic institutions: A study of multimedia university Malaysia. Electron J Knowl Manag 7(3)

  • Cheung R, Vogel D (2013) Predicting user acceptance of collaborative technologies: An extension of the technology acceptance model for e-learning. Comp Educat 63:160–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford G, Rudy JA (2003) Fourth annual EDUCAUSE survey identifies current IT issues. Educause Q 26(2):12–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell JW (2003) A framework for design. Res Design: Qual Quant Mixed Methods Approach 9–11

  • Cronin B (2001) Bibliometrics and beyond: some thoughts on web-based citation analysis. J Inform Sci 27(1):1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuban L (2001) How can I fix it?: Finding solutions and managing dilemmas: An educator’s road map. Teachers College Press.

  • Cuban L, Kirkpatrick H, Peck C (2001) High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: explaining an apparent paradox. Am Educat Res J 38(4):813–834

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davenport By Thomas HPL (1998) Working Knowledge How Organization Manage What They Know. Harvard Business School Press 1–15. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1145/348772.348775

  • Davis FD (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q 319–340.

  • de Sousa Borges S, Durelli VHS, Reis HM, Isotani S (2014) A systematic mapping on gamification applied to education. Proceedings of the 29th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing - SAC ’14. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1145/2554850.2554956

  • Dexter S (2008) Leadership for IT in schools. In International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 543–554). Springer.

  • Donate MJ, Canales JI (2012) A new approach to the concept of knowledge strategy. J Knowl Manag 16(1):22–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dufner D, Holley LM, Reed BJ (2002) Can private sector strategic information systems planning techniques work for the public sector? Commun Assoc Inform Syst 8(1):28

    Google Scholar 

  • Ernst DJ, others (1994) Organizational and Technological Strategies for Higher Education in the Information Age. CAUSE Professional Paper Series,# 13.

  • Ertmer PA (2005) Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educat Technol Res Dev 53(4):25–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flanagan L, Jacobsen M (2003) @book{hofstede2001culture, title={Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations}, author={Hofstede, Geert}, year={2001}, publisher={Sage publications} }tury principal. J Educat Adm 41(2):124–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. SAGE Publications Sage CA, Los Angeles, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Gefen D, Straub D, Boudreau M-C (2000) Structural equation modeling and regression: Guidelines for research practice. Commun Assoc Inform Syst 4(1):7

    Google Scholar 

  • Gil-Garcia JR, Pardo TA (2005) E-government success factors: mapping practical tools to theoretical foundations. Govern Inform Q 22(2):187–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gold AH, Malhotra A, Segars AH (2001) Knowledge management: an organizational capabilities perspective. J Manag Inform Syst 18(1):185–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair Jr JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE, Tatham RL (2010) SEM: An introduction. Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspect 629–686

  • Hanseth O, Ciborra CU, Braa K (2001) The control devolution: ERP and the side effects of globalization. ACM SIGMIS Database: DATABASE Adv Inform Syst 32(4):34–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hew KF, Brush T (2007) Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educat Technol Res Dev 55(3):223–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede G (2001) Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations. Sage Publications.

  • Hu L, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equat Model: Multidisc J 6(1):1–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inan FA, Lowther DL (2010) Factors affecting technology integration in K-12 classrooms: A path model. Educat Technol Res Dev 58(2):137–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ipe M (2003) Knowledge sharing in organizations: a conceptual framework. Human Res Dev Rev 2(4):337–359

    Google Scholar 

  • Jameson J (2013) e-L eadership in higher education: The fifth “age” of educational technology research. Br J Educat Technol 44(6):889–915

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonas S, others (1996) Campus Financial Systems for the Future. ERIC.

  • King P (2002) The promise and performance of enterprise systems in higher education. EDUCAUSE Q 4(2):6–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolb DA (2014) Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. FT Press

  • Korkmaz G, Kalayci N (2019) Theoretical Foundations of Project Based Curricula in Higher Education. Cukurova Univ Facul Educat J 48(1)

  • Kriger M, Zhovtobryukh Y (2013) Rethinking strategic leadership: stars, clans, teams and networks. J Strat Manag 6(4):411–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lapteva AV, Efimov VS (2016) New generation of universities. University 4.0.

  • Lave J, Wenger E (1991) Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.

  • Lee H, Choi B (2003) Knowledge management enablers, processes, and organizational performance: an integrative view and empirical examination. J Manag Inform Syst 20(1):179–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leidner DE, Jarvenpaa SL (1993) The information age confronts education: case studies on electronic classrooms. Informat Syst Res 4(1):24–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin HF (2007) Effects of extrinsic and intrinsic motivations on employee intentions to share knowledge. J Inform Sci 33(2):135–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lukovics M, Zuti B (2017) Successful universities towards the improvement of regional competitiveness:‘fourth generation’universities. Available at SSRN 3022717.

  • Markus ML, Petrie D, Axline S et al (2000) Bucking the trends: what the future may hold for ERP packages. Inform Syst Front 2(2):181–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin R, Maytham B, Case J, Fraser D (2005) Engineering graduates’ perceptions of how well they were prepared for work in industry. Eur J Eng Educat 30(2):167–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCredie JW (2000) Planning for IT in higher education: It’s not an oxymoron. Educause Q 23(4):14–21

    Google Scholar 

  • McGredie J (2003) Does IT matter to higher education? Educause Rev 38:14–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Minina A, Mabrouk K (2019). Transformation of university communication strategy in terms of digitalization. in 2019 communication strategies in digital society workshop (ComSDS) (pp. 117-120). IEEE.

  • Mohan L, Holstein WK, Adams RB (1990) EIS: it can work in the public sector. MIs Q 14(4):435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mumtaz S (2000) Factors affecting teachers’ use of information and communications technology: a review of the literature. J Inform Technol Teacher Educat 9(3):319–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka I, Takeuchi H (1995) The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford university press.

  • Rainey HG, Backoff RW, Levine CH (1976) Comparing public and private organizations. Publ Adm Rev 36(2):233–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riege A (2005) Three-dozen knowledge-sharing barriers managers must consider. J Knowl Manag 9(3):18–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robey D, Ross JW, Boudreau M-C (2002) Learning to implement enterprise systems: an exploratory study of the dialectics of change. J Manag Inform Syst 19(1):17–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rocheleau B (2000) Prescriptions for public-sector information management: a review, analysis, and critique. Am Rev Publ Adm 30(4):414–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rocheleau B, Wu L (2002) Public versus private information systems: do they differ in important ways? A review and empirical test. Am Rev Publ Adm 32(4):379–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowley J (2000) Is higher education ready for knowledge management? Int J Educat Manag 14(7):325–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadiq Sohail M, Daud S (2009) Knowledge sharing in higher education institutions: perspectives from Malaysia. Vine 39(2):125–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sallis E, Jones G (2002) Knowledge management in education: Enhancing Learning & Education. Psychology Press.

  • Schiller J (2002) Interventions by school leaders in effective implementation of information and communications technology: perceptions of Australian principals. J Informat Techol Teacher Educat 11(3):289–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shang S, Seddon PB (2002) Assessing and managing the benefits of enterprise systems: the business manager’s perspective. Informat Syst J 12(4):271–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shuman LJ, Besterfield-Sacre M, McGourty J (2005) The ABET “professional skills”—Can they be taught? Can they be assessed? J Eng Educat 94(1):41–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shute VJ, Rahimi S (2017) Review of computer-based assessment for learning in elementary and secondary education. J Comp Assis Learn 33(1):1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Star SL, Ruhleder K (1996) Steps toward an ecology of infrastructure: design and access for large information spaces. Inform Syst Res 7(1):111–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Subba Rao S (2000) Enterprise resource planning: business needs and technologies. Indus Manag Data Syst 100(2):81–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun P-C, Tsai RJ, Finger G, Chen Y-Y, Yeh D (2008) What drives a successful e-Learning? An empirical investigation of the critical factors influencing learner satisfaction. Comp Educat 50(4):1183–1202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tippins MJ (2003) Implementing knowledge management in academia: teaching the teachers. Int J Educat Manag 17(7):339–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Eck NJ, 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Eck NJ, Waltman L (2014) Visualizing bibliometric networks. In: Ding Y, Rousseau R, Wolfram D (eds) Measuring scholarly impact. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10377-8_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Vanderlinde R, van Braak J, Dexter S (2012) ICT policy planning in a context of curriculum reform: disentanglement of ICT policy domains and artifacts. Comp Educat 58(4):1339–1350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh V, Bala H (2008) Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sci 39(2):273–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh V, Morris MG, Davis GB, Davis FD (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q 425–478.

  • Vygotsky LS (1978) Mind in society: the development of higher mental processes (E. Rice, Ed. & Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.(Original work published 1930, 1933).

  • Wallace M, O’Reilly D, Morris J, Deem R (2011) Public service leaders as ‘change agents’–for whom? Responses to leadership development provision in England. Publ Manag Rev 13(1):65–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward D, Hawkins BL (2003) Presidential leadership for information technology. EduCause Rev 38(3):36–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger E, McDermott RA, Snyder W (2002) Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. Harvard Business Press.

  • Wiig KM (2002) Knowledge management in public administration. J Knowl Manag 6(3):224–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiao Y, Watson M (2019) Guidance on conducting a systematic literature review. J Plann Educat Res 39(1):93–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yee DL (2000) Images of school principals’ information and communications technology leadership. J Inform Technol Teacher Educat 9(3):287–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin RK (2003). Designing case studies.

  • Yuen AHK, Law N, Wong KC (2003) ICT implementation and school leadership: case studies of ICT integration in teaching and learning. J Educat Adm 41(2):158–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal

    Álvaro Rocha

  2. CEOS P.P, Politécnico do Porto, Porto, Portugal

    Maria José Angélico Gonçalves, Amélia Ferreira da Silva & Sandrina Teixeira

  3. CETC, Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal

    Rui Silva

Authors
  1. Álvaro Rocha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria José Angélico Gonçalves
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amélia Ferreira da Silva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sandrina Teixeira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rui Silva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria José Angélico Gonçalves.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rocha, Á., Gonçalves, M.J.A., da Silva, A.F. et al. Leadership challenges in the context of university 4.0. A thematic synthesis literature review. Comput Math Organ Theory 28, 214–246 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-021-09325-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-021-09325-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation