The linkage between leadership style of project manager and project performance: Evidence from telecommunication industry
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research analyses how different leadership styles affect project managers in the telecommunications sector, focusing on transactional and transformational leadership's direct effects on project performance. Ambidextrous Leadership's role as a mediator is explored alongside the influence of Project Management approaches (Waterfall, Agile, Hybrid) and Project Manager Certifications. Data from 224 Project Managers in 77 Indonesian telecom companies was examined using Structural Equation Modelling Partial Least Square (SEM PLS). The findings indicate that Transactional and Transformational Leadership alone don't directly affect Project Performance, but Ambidextrous Leadership significantly enhances it. Different Project Management Approaches (Waterfall, Hybrid, Agile) amplify the impact of leadership styles. Transactional leadership is strongly linked to the waterfall, while transformational and ambidextrous leadership aligns with the agile and hybrid approach. Project Management Certification strengthens Transactional Leadership's effect on Project Performance, with less impact on Transformational Leadership. The research emphasizes the significance of Ambidextrous Leadership in improving project performance and how project management approaches and certifications can enhance or moderate the influence of leadership styles on telecommunication project management. These findings offer industry practitioners and organizations valuable insights, contributing to leadership, project management, and telecommunications research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it