Dispositional and Contextual Determinants of Informational Leadership: The Mediating Role of Organizational Climate in Thai Private Higher Education

Background and Aim: Digital transformation has fundamentally reshaped governance structures in higher education, particularly within tuition-dependent private institutions operating under competitive pressures. Informational leadership, defined as the strategic governance of data-driven decision-making, digital strategy implementation, and institutional information systems, has emerged as a critical capability. However, limited empirical research has examined how administrators’ personality traits and organizational climate jointly shape informational leadership. This study investigates the mediating role of organizational climate in the relationship between administrators’ personality traits and informational leadership in Thai private higher education institutions. Materials and Methods: A quantitative, cross-sectional design was employed using survey data from 350 administrators across private higher education institutions in Thailand. Personality traits were measured based on the Five-Factor Model, organizational climate was assessed using established climate dimensions, and informational leadership was operationalized within a digital governance framework. Data were analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) validated the measurement model. Mediation was tested using bias-corrected bootstrapping (5,000 resamples). Effect sizes (f²), predictive relevance (Q²), competing model comparisons, and multi-group analysis were conducted to evaluate robustness. Results: Personality traits significantly influenced informational leadership. In the structural model, personality traits had a significant direct effect on informational leadership (β = 0.39, p < .001). Bootstrap mediation analysis further indicated that, after accounting for the mediating role of organizational climate, the direct effect decreased to 0.23 (p < .001), while the indirect effect through organizational climate was 0.18 (p = .001), confirming partial mediation. Organizational climate exerted the strongest structural influence on informational leadership (β = 0.54, p < .001; f² = 0.41, large effect). The model explained 55% of the variance in informational leadership (R² = 0.55) and demonstrated strong predictive relevance (Q² = 0.32). Multi-group analysis revealed that senior administrators exhibited stronger direct dispositional effects, whereas middle-level administrators were more dependent on organizational climate in enacting informational leadership. Conclusion: This study advances digital leadership theory by integrating dispositional and contextual determinants within a unified structural framework. Findings indicate that informational leadership in private higher education is not solely disposition-driven but structurally amplified through innovation-supportive organizational climates. Institutions aiming to strengthen digital governance capacity should adopt a dual strategy that integrates leadership development with systematic climate-building initiatives.