KONSTRUKSI MAKNA KEPEMIMPINAN DIGITAL PADA ERA KECERDASAN BUATAN: KAJIAN FENOMENOLOGI TERHADAP PEMIMPIN PERUSAHAAN TEKNOLOGI DI INDONESIA
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58174/078gqp97Keywords:
digital leadership, artificial intelligence, phenomenology, meaning construction, Indonesian technology companiesAbstract
The artificial intelligence era introduces profound transformations in organizational leadership practices, particularly within the technology sector operating at an unprecedented pace of disruption. This study aims to explore and understand the construction of digital leadership meanings from the subjective perspectives of technology company leaders in Indonesia who directly face challenges of AI integration in decision-making processes, team development, and organizational culture transformation. This research adopts a qualitative approach with Husserl's transcendental phenomenological design as its methodological foundation, enabling researchers to capture the essence of participants' lived experiences deeply and authentically. Data were collected through semi-structured in-depth interviews with twelve senior leaders of medium-to-large technology companies in Indonesia who have implemented AI solutions in their business operations for at least two years. Data analysis followed Moustakas's (1994) procedures encompassing epoche, phenomenological reduction, imaginative variation, and meaning synthesis. Findings reveal five essential meaning themes of digital leadership in the AI era: (1) leadership as navigation of algorithmic uncertainty; (2) data-based authority versus human intuition; (3) reconstruction of leader-subordinate relations in AI ecosystems; (4) leader identity at the crossroads of technology and humanism; and (5) leadership as a curator of AI ethical values. These findings enrich contemporary leadership theory by providing contextual indigenous perspectives on digital leadership dynamics in developing countries, while offering practical implications for AI-based leadership capacity development in Indonesia.
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
Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid modernity. Polity Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/3089803
Bennis, W., & Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders: The strategies for taking charge. Harper & Row. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.23-1709
Contreras, F., Baykal, E., & Abid, G. (2020). E-leadership and teleworking in times of COVID-19 and beyond: What we know and where do we go. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 590271. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.590271
Correani, A., De Massis, A., Frattini, F., Petruzzelli, A. M., & Natalicchio, A. (2020). Implementing a digital strategy: Learning from the experience of three digital transformation projects. California Management Review, 62(4), 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125620934573
Cortellazzo, L., Bruni, E., & Zampieri, R. (2019). The role of leadership in a digitalized world: A review. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1938. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01938
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
Deloitte Indonesia. (2024). Technology leadership readiness in Indonesia: Annual survey report 2024. Deloitte Insights. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123001
Dirani, K. M., Abadi, M., Alizadeh, A., Barhate, B., Garza, R. C., Gunasekara, N., Ibrahim, G., & Majzun, Z. (2020). Leadership competencies and the essential role of human resource development in times of crisis. Human Resource Development International, 23(4), 380–394. https://doi.org/10.1080/13678868.2020.1780078
Graen, G. B., & Uhl-Bien, M. (1995). Relationship-based approach to leadership: Development of leader-member exchange (LMX) theory of leadership over 25 years. The Leadership Quarterly, 6(2), 219–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/1048-9843(95)90036-5
Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(9), 389–399. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00005033
Kane, G. C., Phillips, A. N., Copulsky, J., & Andrus, G. (2019). How digital leadership is (n't) different. MIT Sloan Management Review, 60(3), 34–39. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3423428
Liao, Y. (2017). Humanitarian logistics network design for disaster preparedness with separation of funding and donation management. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 112, 573–585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2016.12.011
McKinsey Global Institute. (2023). The economic potential of generative AI: The next productivity frontier. McKinsey & Company. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412995658
Schwarzmüller, T., Brosi, P., Duman, D., & Welpe, I. M. (2018). How does the digital transformation affect organizations? Key themes of change in work design and leadership. Management Revu, 29(2), 114–138. https://doi.org/10.5771/0935-9915-2018-2-114
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203505984-16
Van Manen, M. (2016). Phenomenology of practice: Meaning-giving methods in phenomenological research and writing. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315422657
Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Paeno, Sutrisno, Hadi Winata
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
