Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The managerial value of artificial intelligence in higher education depends on how universities organize its use. Digital platforms can expand access to information but do not, by themselves, guarantee improvements in coordination, institutional adaptability, or strategic decision-making. This conceptual study examines this issue in Uzbekistan and reformulates the Artificial Intelligence-Driven Digital Management Framework for Universities in Uzbekistan (AIDMF-UZ). The framework integrates the resource-based view, dynamic capabilities, the Technology-Organization-Environment perspective, and research on organizational AI capabilities. It connects AI resources with digital leadership, digital management capability, intelligent decision-making, organizational agility, innovation capability, and institutional performance. Secondary indicators of higher education sector expansion and the innovation portfolio of a technical university provide contextual justification rather than causal evidence. A complementary maturity assessment instrument, AIDMI-UZ, is proposed for institutional diagnosis. The analysis suggests that sustained benefits require reliable data, coordinated management routines, staff competencies, and accountable human oversight. The framework and index remain conceptual propositions that require empirical validation before their application in benchmarking or policy evaluation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marina Sagatovna Abdurashidova (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: