The increasing pace of digital transformation has intensified leadership demands within information and communication technology (ICT) organizations. Strategic leadership—encompassing vision articulation, innovation enablement, organizational agility, and talent development—has emerged as a critical determinant of ICT organizational performance. Despite growing scholarly attention, existing research remains fragmented and unevenly distributed across contexts, with limited integration of leadership behaviors, mediating mechanisms, and development processes, particularly in emerging economies. This study presents a systematic literature review (SLR) of 20 high-impact peer-reviewed articles published between 2000 and 2024 and indexed in Scopus and Web of Science. Guided by PRISMA protocols and the ROSES review framework, the review employs qualitative thematic analysis to synthesize evidence on strategic leadership in ICT and digitally intensive organizations. The findings reveal three overarching themes: (1) strategic leadership behaviors driving innovation and agility, (2) organizational and contextual constraints shaping leadership effectiveness, and (3) leadership development approaches, with Action Research identified as a promising yet underutilized methodology. The review further identifies psychological safety, cross-functional collaboration, and reflective learning as critical mediating mechanisms linking leadership behaviors to organizational outcomes. Based on the synthesis, an integrative conceptual model is proposed, positioning Action Research as a mechanism for iterative leadership capability-building. This study contributes to leadership theory by integrating fragmented constructs into a unified framework and offers practical and policy-relevant insights for strengthening leadership capacity in ICT organizations, particularly within emerging digital economies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wah et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: