Rethinking Organizational Leadership in Post-Digital Enterprises: A Qualitative Model of Adaptive Management System Evolution
Keywords:
Post-digital enterprise, adaptive leadership, management system evolution, digital transformation, human–machine collaboration, qualitative research, organizational learning, dynamic capabilitiesAbstract
The objective of this study was to develop a qualitative model explaining how organizational leadership evolves in post-digital enterprises through adaptive management systems, human–machine collaboration, and continuous capability reconfiguration. This qualitative study used an inductive interpretive design based on semi-structured interviews with 24 managers, executives, digital transformation specialists, and organizational development professionals working in post-digital or digitally mature enterprises in Tehran, Iran. Participants were selected through purposive and theoretical sampling to capture diverse managerial experiences across information technology, finance, telecommunications, manufacturing, retail, e-commerce, and service sectors. Data collection continued until theoretical saturation was reached after 22 interviews, followed by two confirmatory interviews to validate category stability. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using thematic analysis supported by NVivo software. Open coding, category development, constant comparison, memo writing, and iterative theme refinement were used to construct the final qualitative model. The findings revealed five main categories that explain adaptive management system evolution in post-digital enterprises: adaptive orchestration of human–machine judgment, modular and networked governance, continuous organizational sensing and learning, socio-technical trust and ethical alignment, and capability reconfiguration for resilience. The core category was identified as adaptive management system evolution, defined as the continuous recalibration of leadership roles, decision rights, technological infrastructures, learning routines, and ethical controls in response to complex digital–human interactions. Participants emphasized that leadership in post-digital enterprises is no longer limited to individual authority or hierarchical control, but is enacted through distributed sensemaking, data-informed interpretation, collaborative experimentation, and the capacity to align human expertise with intelligent digital systems. This study suggests that leadership in post-digital enterprises should be understood as an adaptive system function rather than a fixed managerial role. The proposed qualitative model shows that effective leadership emerges when organizations integrate digital intelligence, human judgment, ethical governance, and flexible capabilities into a coherent management system. The findings contribute to leadership and digital transformation literature by clarifying how post-digital enterprises move beyond technology adoption toward system-level adaptation, continuous renewal, and responsible human–machine collaboration.
References
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
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Brynjolfsson, E., & McAfee, A. (2014). The second machine age: Work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. W. W. Norton.
Cramer, F. (2015). What is “post-digital”? In D. M. Berry & M. Dieter (Eds.), Postdigital aesthetics: Art, computation and design (pp. 12–26). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137437204_2
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE.
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11), 1105–1121. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0266(200010/11)21:10/11
Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112452151
Hanelt, A., Bohnsack, R., Marz, D., & Antunes Marante, C. (2021). A systematic review of the literature on digital transformation: Insights and implications for strategy and organizational change. Journal of Management Studies, 58(5), 1159–1197. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12639
Heifetz, R. A., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership: Tools and tactics for changing your organization and the world. Harvard Business Press.
Jandrić, P., Knox, J., Besley, T., Ryberg, T., Suoranta, J., & Hayes, S. (2018). Postdigital science and education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 50(10), 893–899. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2018.1454000
Kane, G. C., Palmer, D., Phillips, A. N., Kiron, D., & Buckley, N. (2015). Strategy, not technology, drives digital transformation. MIT Sloan Management Review and Deloitte University Press.
Kane, G. C., Phillips, A. N., Copulsky, J., & Andrus, G. R. (2019). The technology fallacy: How people are the real key to digital transformation. MIT Press.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4th ed.). SAGE.
Nambisan, S., Lyytinen, K., Majchrzak, A., & Song, M. (2017). Digital innovation management: Reinventing innovation management research in a digital world. MIS Quarterly, 41(1), 223–238. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2017/41:1.03
Orlikowski, W. J. (2007). Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization Studies, 28(9), 1435–1448. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607081138
Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of sustainable enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.640
Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. (2007). Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. The Leadership Quarterly, 18(4), 298–318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.04.002
Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003
Warner, K. S. R., & Wäger, M. (2019). Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation: An ongoing process of strategic renewal. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 326–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2018.12.001
Yoo, Y., Henfridsson, O., & Lyytinen, K. (2010). The new organizing logic of digital innovation: An agenda for information systems research. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 724–735. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1100.0322
