MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416284563 · doi:10.63329/av3nz12314

Digital Leadership in the Hybrid Work Era: Its Impact on Employee Innovation and the Mediating Role of Digital Readiness

2025· article· W4416284563 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sukhmandeep Kaur

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Societal & Behavioral Research Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Leadership and Innovation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforceLeverage (statistics)Work (physics)Digital transformationMediationEmployee engagementSurvey data collection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The shift to hybrid work models, accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic, demands a new paradigm of leadership. Digital leadership, defined as a leader’s ability to leverage technology to empower and guide distributed teams, has emerged as a critical competency. This study examines the impact of digital leadership on employee innovative work behavior within hybrid work settings, with a specific focus on the mediating role of employee digital readiness. A cross-sectional research design was employed, and data was collected via an online survey from 208 professionals working in hybrid models across various sectors in Canada. The data was analyzed using correlation and mediation analysis (PROCESS Macro). The findings reveal a statistically significant positive relationship between digital leadership and employee innovation. Furthermore, digital readiness fully mediated this relationship, indicating that digital leadership fosters innovation primarily by enhancing employees’ competence, confidence, and resources to effectively use digital tools. The study concludes that for organizations to thrive in the new normal, investing in developing digital leaders who can cultivate a digitally ready workforce is not merely an IT strategy but a core business imperative for sustaining innovation.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.286
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.193 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Societal & Behavioral Research JournalSame topicEducational Leadership and InnovationFrench-language works237,207