Purpose Even though e-leadership was broadly defined in 2001 (Avolioet al.), there has been surprisingly little progress (Avolioet al., 2014). In order to make a better progress, the authors recommend dividing the field into four quadrants to facilitate the research focus. It can be divided by e-leadership phases (the adoption of technology phase vs the quality of use of technology phase), as well as the purposes (e-leadership as virtual communication vs e-leadership as management of organizational structures). The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach This study provides a model of e-leadership as communication adoption at the individual level (ECAMi). Structural equation modeling was used to test a previously published model by Van Wartet al.(2017a). The model included select traits and skills (as antecedent conditions), awareness of ICTs, evaluation of ICTs, willingness to expend effort in learning about ICTs, intention to use ICTs, and facilitating conditions. Findings The overall model demonstrates a good fit. It can be concluded that the ECAMirepresents a valid model for understanding e-leaders’ technological adoption. It is also found that while all select skills and traits are significant – energy, responsibility and analytical skills stand above the others. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this represents the first effort to operationalize e-leadership.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 107 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.