Exploring the links between school principals’ self-efficacy,open innovation mindset,transformational leadership,and artificial intelligence (AI) attitudes in Türkiye
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2025
Exploring the links between school principals’ self-efficacy,open innovation mindset,transformational leadership,and artificial intelligence (AI) attitudes in Türkiye
This study tested a moderated mediation model of school principals’ self-efficacy effects on their artificial intelligence attitude, where transformational leadership was treated as the mediator and open innovation mindset as the moderator. Employing a cross-sectional survey design and gathering data from 393 school principals working in public schools across Türkiye, we performed a moderated mediation modelling with maximum likelihood estimation to estimate the structural links between our study variables. The results revealed the direct association between school principals’ self-efficacy and their artificial intelligence attitudes and the indirect association via transformational leadership. Our findings also added nuance to the global school leadership literature by suggesting that an open innovation mindset acted as a significant moderator of self-efficacy effects on both their transformational leadership and artificial intelligence attitude. This study provides a different perspective on school leadership by examining transformational leadership and other cognitive factors such as an open innovation mindset and self-efficacy that are effective in shaping school principals’ artificial intelligence attitude. Key implications for policy and practice were discussed.
AdamsDKuttyGRMohd ZabidiZ (2017) Educational leadership for the 21st century. International Online Journal of Educational Leadership1(1): 1–4.
2.
AjzenI (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes50(2): 179–211.
3.
AjzenIFishbeinM (2000) Attitudes and the attitude-behavior relation: Reasoned and automatic processes. European Review of Social Psychology11(1): 1–33.
4.
AkbariMBagheriAImaniSAsadnezhadM (2021) Does entrepreneurial leadership encourage innovation work behavior? The mediating role of creative self-efficacy and support for innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management24(1): 1–22.
5.
Al-HusseiniSElbeltagiI (2018) Evaluating the effect of transformational leadership on knowledge sharing using structural equation modelling: The case of Iraqi higher education. International Journal of Leadership in Education21(4): 506–517.
6.
Al DaraysehA (2023) Acceptance of artificial intelligence in teaching science: Science teachers’ perspective. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence4: 1–9.
7.
AntonsDDeclerckMDienerKKochIPillerFT (2017) Assessing the not-invented-here syndrome: Development and validation of implicit and explicit measurements. Journal of Organizational Behavior38(8): 1227–1245.
8.
AnysiadouMGkliatiA (2025) An experimental analysis of Greek school leaders’ readiness for AI integration. Leadership and Policy in Schools24(1): 155–177.
9.
ArarKTliliASchunkaL, Salha S and Saiti A (2025) Reimagining educational leadership and management through artificial intelligence: An integrative systematic review. Leadership and Policy in Schools24(1): 4–26.
10.
AvolioBJBassBM (1995) Individual consideration viewed at multiple levels of analysis: A multi-level framework for examining the diffusion of transformational leadership. Leadership Quarterly6(2): 199–218.
11.
BaiBWangJChaiCS (2019) Understanding Hong Kong primary school English teachers’ continuance intention to teach with ICT. Computer Assisted Language Learning34(4): 528–551.
12.
BanduraA (1986) Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
13.
BanduraA (1994) Self-efficacy. In: RamachaudranVS (ed.) Encyclopedia of Human Behavior (Vol. 4) New York: Academic Press, pp. 71–81.
14.
BenolielPSchechterC (2017) Promoting the school learning processes: Principals as learning boundary spanners. International Journal of Educational Management31(7): 878–894.
15.
BixlerKCeballosM (2025) Principals leading AI in schools for instructional leadership: A conceptual model for principal AI use. Leadership and Policy in Schools24(1): 137–154.
16.
BogersMChesbroughHHeatonSTeeceDJ (2019) Strategic management of open innovation: A dynamic capabilities perspective. California Management Review62(1): 77–94.
17.
BrecklerSJ (1984) Empirical validation of affect, behavior, and cognition as distinct components of attitude. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology47(6): 1191–1205.
18.
BushT (2017) The enduring power of transformational leadership. Educational Management Administration and Leadership45(4): 563–565.
19.
CarlessSAWearingAJMannL (2000) A short measure of transformational leadership. Journal of Business and Psychology14(3): 389–405.
20.
CascioWFMontealegreR (2016) How technology is changing work and organizations. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior3(1): 349–375.
21.
ChenCJHuangJW (2009) Strategic human resource practices and innovation performance—the mediating role of knowledge management capacity. Journal of Business Research62(1): 104–114.
22.
ChengBLinHKongY (2023) Challenge or hindrance? How and when organizational artificial intelligence adoption influences employee job crafting. Journal of Business Research164: 1–10.
23.
CheungGWLauRS (2017) Accuracy of parameter estimates and confidence intervals in moderated mediation models: A comparison of regression and latent moderated structural equations. Organizational Research Methods20(4): 746–769.
24.
ChoiSJangYKimH (2023) Influence of pedagogical beliefs and perceived trust on teachers’ acceptance of educational artificial intelligence tools. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction39(4): 910–922.
25.
ChuaYPChuaYP (2017) Developing a grounded model for educational technology leadership practices. Education and Science42(189): 73–84.
26.
CorriganJMerryM (2022) Principal leadership in a time of change. Frontiers in Education7: 897620.
27.
DarkoAChanAPAdabreMAEdwardsDJHosseiniMRAmeyawEE (2020) Artificial intelligence in the AEC industry: Scientometric analysis and visualization of research activities. Automation in Construction112: 103081.
28.
DawsonKP (1992) Attitude and assessment in nursing education. Journal of Advanced Nursing17: 473–479.
29.
DeciELRyanRM (2000) The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry11(4): 227–268.
30.
DongYBartolKMZhangZX and Li C (2017) Enhancing employee creativity via individual skill development and team knowledge sharing: Influences of dual-focused transformational leadership. Journal of Organizational Behavior38(3): 439–458.
31.
EisenbachRWatsonKPillaiR (1999) Transformational leadership in the context of organizational change. Journal of Organizational Change Management12(2): 80–89.
32.
EngelsbergerAHalvorsenBCavanaghJ and Bartram T (2022) Human resources management and open innovation: The role of open innovation mindset. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources60(1): 194–215.
FarahnakLREhrhartMGTorresEAaronsGA (2020) The influence of transformational leadership and leader attitudes on subordinate attitudes and implementation success. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies27(1): 98–111.
35.
FedericiRASkaalvikEM (2011) Principal self-efficacy and work engagement: Assessing a Norwegian principal self-efficacy scale. Social Psychology of Education14(4): 575–600.
36.
FitzgeraldSSchutteNS (2010) Increasing transformational leadership through enhancing self-efficacy. Journal of Management Development29(5): 495–505.
37.
FullanM (2012) Change Forces: Probing the Depths of Educational Reform. Bristol, PA: Routledge.
38.
GansserOAReichCS (2021) A new acceptance model for artificial intelligence with extensions to UTAUT2: An empirical study in three segments of application. Technology in Society65: 101535.
39.
GeijselFSleegersPLeithwoodKJantziD (2003) Transformational leadership effects on teachers’ commitment and effort toward school reform. Journal of Educational Administration41(3): 228–256.
40.
GistMEMitchellTR (1992) Self-efficacy: A theoretical analysis of its determinants and malleability. Academy of Management Review17(2): 183–211.
41.
GöksuDYGöksuS (2024) Determination of artificial intelligence literacy and attitudes towards artificial intelligence of teachers working with gifted students and examining them according to some variables. Instructional Technology and Lifelong Learning5(2): 278–299.
42.
GomezelARangusK (2018) An exploration of an entrepreneur’s open innovation mindset in an emerging country. Management Decision56(9): 1869–1882.
43.
GraceEVidhyavathiPKumarS (2023) AI in education: Opportunities and challenges. Industrial Engineering Journal52(5): 750–759.
44.
GumusSBellibasMS (2020) The relationship between professional development, and school principals’ leadership practices: The mediating role of self-efficacy. International Journal of Educational Management34(7): 1155–1170.
45.
GümüslüogluLIlsevA (2009) Transformational leadership, creativity and organizational innovation. Journal of Business Research62(4): 461–473.
46.
HairJFHultGTMRinglCMSarstedtM (2022) A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47.
HallingerPHosseingholizadehRHashemiN, et al. (2018) Do beliefs make a difference? Exploring how principal self-efficacy and instructional leadership impact teacher efficacy and commitment in Iran. Educational Management Administration & Leadership46(5): 800–819.
48.
HallingerPMurphyJ (1985) Assessing the instructional management behavior of principals. The Elementary School Journal86(2): 217–247.
49.
HannahSTAvolioBJLuthansFHarmsPD (2008) Leadership efficacy: Review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly19(6): 669–692.
50.
HofstedeG (2011) Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture2(1): 8.
51.
HuLTBentlerPM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modelling: A Multidisciplinary Journal6(1): 1–55.
52.
HughesDJLeeATianAWNewmanALegoodA (2018) Leadership, creativity, and innovation: A critical review and practical recommendations. The Leadership Quarterly29(5): 549–569.
53.
JeongJJeongI (2025) Driving creativity in the AI-enhanced workplace: roles of self-efficacy and transformational leadership. Current Psychology44: 8001–8014.
54.
Jesacher-RoesslerLAJ (2021) The travel of ideas: The dual structure of mobilized knowledge in the context of professional learning networks. Journal of Professional Capital and Community6(2): 133–147.
55.
JiaNLuoXFangZLiaoC(2024) When and how artificial intelligence augments employee creativity. Academy of Management Journal67(1): 5–32.
56.
JohnOPSrivastavaS (1999) The big five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In: PervinLAJohnOP (eds) Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research. Berkeley, CA: Guilford Press, pp. 102–138.
57.
JustusKArghodeVBarkerD (2023) Principal self-efficacy, mindset and performance outcomes: Exploring the connection. European Journal of Training and Development47(5/6): 565–585.
58.
KaserLHalbertJ (2009) Leadership Mindsets: Innovation and Learning in the Transformation of Schools. New York: Routledge.
59.
KayaFAydinFSchepmanARodwayPYetişensoyODemir KayaM (2024) The roles of personality traits, AI anxiety, and demographic factors in attitudes toward artificial intelligence. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction40(2): 497–514.
60.
KılınçAÇErEBeyciogluK (2021) Mapping the terrain of training and appointment of educational leaders in the Turkish context: An historical perspective. In: SamierEEl KalehEHammadW (eds) Internationalisation of Educational Administration and Leadership Curriculum. Bingley: Emerald Publishing, pp. 139–157.
61.
KlineRB (2010) Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York: Guilford.
62.
KreinU (2025) Exploring the transformative impact of technology on school leadership. Affordances, practices, implications. Leadership and Policy in Schools24(1): 90–102.
63.
LeithwoodKHarrisAHopkinsD (2020) Seven strong claims about successful school leadership revisited. School Leadership and Management40(1): 5–22.
64.
LeithwoodKJantziD (1999) Transformational school leadership effects: A replication. School Effectiveness and School Improvement10(4): 451–479.
65.
LeithwoodKMascallBStraussT (2010) Distributed Leadership According to the Evidence. London: Routledge.
66.
LiVMitchellRBoyleB (2020) The divergent effects of transformational leadership on individual and team innovation. Group & Organization Management45(2): 145–174.
67.
LiangYLeeSA (2017) Fear of autonomous robots and artificial intelligence: Evidence from national representative data with probability sampling. International Journal of Social Robotics9(3): 379–384.
68.
LyonsJBSwindlerSDOffnerA (2009) The impact of leadership on change readiness in the US military. Journal of Change Management9(4): 459–475.
69.
Mac CallumKKinshukLJ (2014) Factors impacting teachers’ adoption of mobile learning. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research13: 141–162.
70.
MarksHMPrintySM (2003) Principal leadership and school performance: An integration of transformational and instructional leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly39(3): 370–397.
71.
MarshHWLüdtkeOPekrunRParkerPDMurayamaKGuoJBasarkodGDickeTDonaldJNMorinAJS (2023) School leaders’ self-efficacy and job satisfaction over nine annual waves: A substantive-methodological synergy juxtaposing competing models of directional ordering. Contemporary Educational Psychology73: 102170.
72.
MartMKayaG (2024) The examination of preschool teacher candidates’ attitudes towards artificial intelligence and their artificial intelligence literacy relationship. Edutech Research2(1): 91–109.
73.
Martínez-RománJARomeroI (2013) About the determinants of the degree of novelty in small businesses’ product innovations. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal9: 655–677.
74.
MaviDTutiGÖzdemirM (2024) The effect of principal self-efficacy on innovative work behavior: The mediating role of principal entrepreneurship. Current Psychology43: 5020–5031.
75.
MccallG J (2013) Interactionist perspectives in social psychology. In: DeLamater J and Ward A (eds) Handbook of Social Psychology: Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 3–29.
76.
McCormickMJ (2001) Self-efficacy and leadership effectiveness: Applying social cognitive theory to leadership. Journal of Leadership Studies8(1): 22–33.
77.
McLeodSRichardsonJW (2013) Supporting effective technology integration and implementation. In: MilitelloMFriendJI (eds) Principal 2.0: Technology and Educational Leadership. Charlotte, NC: InformationAge Publishing, Inc., pp. 249–272.
78.
McLeodSRichardsonJWSauersNJ (2015) Leading technology-rich school districts. Journal of Research on Leadership Education10(2): 104–126.
MittalSDharRL (2015) Transformational leadership and employee creativity: Mediating role of creative self-efficacy and moderating role of knowledge sharing. Management Decision53(5): 894–910.
83.
MlakarMK (2019) Principals’ Mindset: Growth or Fixed?Ohio: Youngstown State University.
84.
MumfordMDScottGMGaddisB, et al. (2002) Leading creative people: Orchestrating expertise and competitive innovation. The Leadership Quarterly13(6): 705–750.
85.
NielsenKMunirF (2009) How do transformational leaders influence followers’ affective well-being? Exploring the mediating role of self-efficacy. Work and Stress23(4): 313–329.
86.
Owusu-ManuDGDebrahCAmissahLEdwardsDJChilesheN (2021) Exploring the linkages between project managers’ mindset behaviour and project leadership style in the Ghanaian construction industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management28(9): 2690–2711.
87.
ÖzdemirNÇobanÖBuyukgozeHGümüşSPietschM (2024a) Leading knowledge exploration and exploitation in schools: The moderating role of teachers’ open innovation mindset. Educational Administration Quarterly60(5): 668–717.
88.
ÖzdemirSSezginFKılınçAÇErdoğanOTuran BoraH (2024b) Unveiling the associations between principal self-efficacy, openness to change and transformational leadership: The mediating role of well-being. Journal of Educational Administration62(5): 528–544.
89.
PanYXuYCWangXZhangCLingHLinJ (2015) Integrating social networking support for dyadic knowledge exchange: A study in a virtual community of practice. Information Management52(1): 61–70.
90.
PanagopoulosNDimitriadisS (2009) Transformational leadership as a mediator of the relationship between behavior-based control and salespeople’s key outcomes: An initial investigation. European Journal of Marketing43(7/8): 1008–1031.
91.
ParkJWooSE (2022) Who likes artificial intelligence? Personality predictors of attitudes toward artificial intelligence. The Journal of Psychology156(1): 68–94.
92.
PereiraVHadjieliasEChristofiMVrontisD (2023) A systematic literature review on the impact of artificial intelligence on workplace outcomes: A multi-process perspective. Human Resource Management Review33(1): 100857.
93.
PodsakoffPMMacKenzieSBLeeJYPodsakoffNP (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology88(5): 879–903.
94.
PreacherKJHayesAF (2008) Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods40(3): 879–891.
95.
QuaquebekeNVGerpottFH (2023) The now, new, and next of digital leadership: How artificial intelligence (AI) will take over and change leadership as we know it. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies30(3): 265–275.
96.
QuigleyNR, 2003. The relationship between leader core self-evaluations, team feedback, leader efficacy, transformational leadership, team efficacy, team goals, team action and transition processes, and team performance. Doctoral dissertation. University of Maryland.
97.
RaffertyAEGriffinMA (2004) Dimensions of transformational leadership: Conceptual and empirical extensions. The Leadership Quarterly15(3): 329–354.
98.
RichardsonJWVedderBCRobertsAB, et al. (2025) What’s the chatter about AI and school leaders?Leadership and Policy in Schools24(1): 103–116.
99.
SalehiNAsrarMM (2022) The effect of open innovation mindset on absorptive capacity: The mediation role of entrepreneurial alertness. Pressacademia9: 147–155.
100.
SantamariaTNathan-RobertsD (2017) Personality measurement and design in human-robot interaction: A systematic and critical review. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting61(1): 853–857.
101.
SchepmanARodwayP (2023) The general attitudes towards artificial intelligence scale (GAAIS): Confirmatory validation and associations with personality, corporate distrust, and general trust. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction39(13): 2724–2741.
102.
SezginFKılınçAÇÖzdemirSÖzdemirNErdoğanO (2024) Exploring the moderation role of teacher cultural value profiles on the association between transformational leadership and teacher job satisfaction: Evidence from Turkish education context. Educational Management Administration & Leadership. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432241237374.
103.
ShankDBGravesCGottAGamezPRodriguezS (2019) Feeling our way to machine minds: People’s emotions when perceiving mind in artificial intelligence. Computers in Human Behavior98: 256–266.
104.
SmithAMGreenM (2018) Artificial intelligence and the role of leadership. Journal of Leadership Studies12(4): 85–87.
105.
SmithWGuarinoAStromP and Adams O (2006) Effective teaching and learning environments and principal self-efficacy. Research for Educational Leaders3(2): 4–23.
TemelYCoskunB (2024) A review on artificial intelligence applications in education in some countries and Türkiye. International Technology and Education Journal8(1): 9–23.
108.
Tschannen-MoranMGareisCR (2004) Principals’ sense of efficacy. Journal of Educational Administration42(5): 573–585.
109.
Turkish Official Gazette (2021) Presidential Circular numbered 2021/18 published on 20/08/2021 and numbered 31574.
110.
VerslandTMEricksonJL (2017) Leading by example: A case study of the influence of principal self-efficacy on collective efficacy. Cogent Education4(1): 1286765.
111.
WangYLiuCTuY (2021) Factors affecting the adoption of AI based applications in higher education: An analysis of teachers perspectives using structural equation modeling. Educational Technology and Society24(3): 116–129.
112.
WangYYChuangYW (2024) Artificial intelligence self-efficacy: Scale development and validation. Education and Information Technologies29(4): 4785–4808.
113.
WitthöftJAydinBPietschM (2024) Leading digital innovation in schools: The role of the open innovation mindset. Journal of Research on Technology in Education: 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2024.2398528.
114.
WuQYanDUmairM (2023) Assessing the role of competitive intelligence and practices of dynamic capabilities in business accommodation of SMEs. Economic Analysis and Policy77: 1103–1114.
115.
YuklG (2002) Leadership in Organizations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
116.
ZhangCSchießlJPlößlLHofmannFGläser-ZikudaM (2023) Acceptance of artificial intelligence among pre-service teachers: A multigroup analysis. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education20(1): 49.
117.
ZhangDCHighhouseSNyeCD (2019) Development and validation of the general risk propensity scale (GRiPS). Journal of Behavioral Decision Making32(2): 152–167.
