Dijital Liderliğin Teknoloji Yönetimi Üzerindeki Etkisi: Yönetici Desteğinin Aracılık Rolü

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı, dijital liderliğin teknoloji yönetimi üzerindeki etkisinde yönetici desteğinin aracılık rolünü incelemektir. Araştırma, Ankara ilinde faaliyet gösteren kamu bankalarında görev yapan çalışanlar üzerinde gerçekleştirilmiş olup veriler, kolayda örnekleme yöntemiyle ulaşılan 479 banka çalışanından çevrimiçi anket yöntemiyle toplanmıştır. Araştırmada dijital liderlik, teknoloji yönetimi ve yönetici desteği değişkenlerini ölçmeye yönelik ölçeklerden yararlanılmıştır. Elde edilen veriler SmartPLS programı aracılığıyla kısmi en küçük kareler yapısal eşitlik modellemesi (PLS-SEM) yöntemiyle analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma bulgularına göre dijital liderliğin teknoloji yönetimi ve yönetici desteği üzerinde pozitif ve anlamlı etkiye sahip olduğu görülmüştür. Ayrıca yönetici desteğinin teknoloji yönetimini pozitif yönde etkilediği belirlenmiştir. Aracılık analizi sonuçlarına göre ise yönetici desteğinin dijital liderliğin teknoloji yönetimi üzerindeki etkisinde kısmi aracılık rolü üstlendiği belirlenmiştir. Dijital liderliğin teknoloji yönetimine olan katkısının çalışanların yöneticilerinden algıladıkları destek aracılığıyla güçlendiği anlaşılmaktadır. Araştırmanın literatürdeki bilgi birikimine katkı sunması beklenmektedir.

Keywords

• Dijital Liderlik
• Teknoloji Yönetimi
• Yönetici Desteği
• Bankacılık Sektörü

The Impact of Digital Leadership on Technology Management: The Mediating Role of Supervisor Support

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the mediating role of supervisor support in the relationship between digital leadership and technology management. The research was conducted with employees working in public banks operating in Ankara, Türkiye. The data were collected through an online survey from 479 bank employees selected using the convenience sampling method. The study employed validated scales to measure digital leadership, technology management, and supervisor support. The collected data were analyzed using the Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) approach with the SmartPLS software. The findings revealed that digital leadership has a positive and significant effect on both technology management and supervisor support. In addition, supervisor support was found to have a positive and significant effect on technology management. The mediation analysis further demonstrated that supervisor support partially mediates the relationship between digital leadership and technology management. These findings indicate that the positive contribution of digital leadership to technology management is strengthened through employees' perceived support from their supervisors. The study is expected to contribute to the existing literature by providing further empirical evidence on the mechanisms through which digital leadership enhances technology management.

Keywords

• Digital Leadership
• Technology Management
• Supervisor Support
• Banking Sector.

References

1. AlAjmi, M. K. (2022). The impact of digital leadership on teachers’ technology integration during the COVID-19 pandemic in Kuwait. International Journal of Educational Research, 112, Article 101928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2022.101928
2. Amabile, T. M., Schatzel, E. A., Moneta, G. B., & Kramer, S. J. (2004). Leader behaviors and the work environment for creativity: Perceived leader support. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(1), 5–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.12.003
3. 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
4. Bhanthumnavin, D. (2003). Perceived social support from supervisor and group members’ psychological and situational characteristics as predictors of subordinate performance in Thai work units. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14(1), 79–97. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.1051
5. Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. Wiley.
6. Byrne, B. M. (2016). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (3rd ed.). Routledge.
7. Cetindamar, D., Phaal, R., & Probert, D. (2009). Understanding technology management as a dynamic capability: A framework for technology management activities. Technovation, 29(4), 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2008.10.004
8. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

9. Coşkun, R., Altunışık, R., & Yıldırım, E. (2019). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntemleri. Sakarya Yayıncılık.
10. Çolak, S., & Aykan, E. (2025). Dijital liderliğin yenilikçi iş davranışına etkisinde örgütsel destek algısının aracı rolü. Niğde Ömer Halisdemir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 7(1), 14–29. https://doi.org/10.56574/nohusosbil.1585306
11. Dağlar, H., & Öztürk, A. (2025). Dijital dönüşümün çalışanların iş tatminine etkisinde dijital liderliğin aracılık rolü. Kastamonu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 27, 34–56. https://doi.org/10.21180/iibfdkastamonu.1657992
12. Ding, X. (2026). Digital leadership, digital platform capability and digital business model innovation of start-ups. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 11, 100970. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2026.100970
13. Eberl, J. K., & Drews, P. (2021). Digital leadership—Mountain or molehill? A literature review. In F. Ahlemann, R. Schütte, & S. Stieglitz (Eds.), Innovation through information systems (Vol. 48, pp. 1–17). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86797-3_1
14. Eisenberger, R., Stinglhamber, F., Vandenberghe, C., Sucharski, I. L., & Rhoades, L. (2002). Perceived supervisor support: Contributions to perceived organizational support and employee retention. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 565–573. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.565
15. El Sawy, O. A., Kræmmergaard, P., Amsinck, H., & Vinther, A. L. (2016). How LEGO built the foundations and enterprise capabilities for digital leadership. MIS Quarterly Executive, 15(2), 141–166.
16. Giray, M. D., & Şahin, D. N. (2012). Algılanan örgütsel, yönetici ve çalışma arkadaşları desteği ölçekleri: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 15(30), 1–9.
17. Gregory, M. J. (1995). Technology management: A process approach. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 209(5), 347–356. https://doi.org/10.1243/PIME_PROC_1995_209_094_02
18. Guchait, P., Paşamehmetoğlu, A., & Dawson, M. (2014). Perceived supervisor and co-worker support for error management: Impact on perceived psychological safety and service recovery performance. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 41, 28–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2014.04.009
19. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2014). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage.
20. Hair, J. F., Matthews, L. M., Matthews, R. L., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: Updated guidelines on which method to use. International Journal of Multivariate Data Analysis, 1(2), 107–123.
21. Halkbank. (2026). Şube ve ATM ağı. https://www.halkbank.com.tr
22. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
23. Jameson, J., Rumyantseva, N., Cai, M., Markowski, M., Essex, R., & McNay, I. (2022). A systematic review and framework for digital leadership research maturity in higher education. Computers and Education Open, 3, 100115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2022.100115
24. Kane, G. C., Palmer, D., Phillips, A. N., Kiron, D., & Buckley, N. (2015). Strategy, not technology, drives digital transformation: Becoming a digitally mature enterprise. MIT Sloan Management Review & Deloitte University Press. http://sloanreview.mit.edu/digital2015
25. Karaman, F. (2024). Sivil havacılık sektöründe çevik ve dijital liderlik tarzlarının örgütsel çeviklik ve çalışan performansı ile ilişkisi. Journal of Emerging Economies and Policy, 9(2), 129–147. https://izlik.org/JA63XN37UW
26. Kottke, J. L., & Sharafinski, C. E. (1988). Measuring perceived supervisory and organizational support. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 48(4), 1075–1079. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316448804800431
27. Köksoy, E., & Oktaysoy, O. (2025). Dijital liderliğin dijital örgütsel dönüşüm sürecine etkisi: Örgütsel çevikliğin aracı rolü. Uluslararası Ekonomi, İşletme ve Politika Dergisi, 9(2), 799–817. https://doi.org/10.29216/ueip.1718041
28. Kurdi, S. O. M. (2026). Exploring the relationship between digital leadership and digital transformation in employee engagement at Saudi universities context—Makkah region. Arab Journal for Scientific Publishing, 9(87), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.36571/ajsp872
29. Kurtessis, J. N., Eisenberger, R., Ford, M. T., Buffardi, L. C., Stewart, K. A., & Adis, C. S. (2017). Perceived organizational support: A meta-analytic evaluation of organizational support theory. Journal of Management, 43(6), 1854–1884. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315575554
30. National Research Council. (1987). Management of technology: The hidden competitive advantage. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18890
31. Oktaysoy, O., Topcuoglu, E., & Kaygin, E. (2023). A study on digital leadership scale adaptation. International Journal of Organizational Leadership, 11(4), 407–425. https://doi.org/10.33844/ijol.2022.60342
32. Özdemir Köksal, M., & Umut, M. (2025). Teknoloji Kabul Modeli Kapsamında Algılanan Yönetici Desteği: Sigorta Acentelerinde Bir Uygulama. Anadolu Kültürel Araştırmalar Dergisi, 9(4), 975–989. https://doi.org/10.63556/ankad.v9i4.284
33. Özmen, Ö. N. T., Eriş, E. D., & Özer, P. S. (2020). Dijital liderlik çalışmalarına bir bakış. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(1), 57–69.
34. Phaal, R., Farrukh, C. J. P., & Probert, D. R. (2004). Technology roadmapping: A planning framework for evolution and revolution. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 71(1–2), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-1625(03)00072-6
35. Prajogo, D. I., & Ahmed, P. K. (2006). Relationships between innovation stimulus, innovation capacity, and innovation performance. R&D Management, 36(5), 499–515. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2006.00450.x
36. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(4), 717–731. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206553
37. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
38. Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 698–714. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.698
39. Rush, H., Bessant, J., & Hobday, M. (2007). Assessing the technological capabilities of firms: Developing a policy tool. R&D Management, 37(3), 221–236. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2007.00471.x
40. Sagbas, M., Oktaysoy, O., Topcuoglu, E., Kaygin, E., & Erdogan, F. A. (2023). The mediating role of innovative behavior on the effect of digital leadership on intrapreneurship intention and job performance. Behavioral Sciences, 13(10), 874. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13100874
41. Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Pick, M., Liengaard, B. D., Radomir, L., & Ringle, C. M. (2022). Progress in partial least squares structural equation modeling use in marketing research in the last decade. Psychology & Marketing, 39(5), 1035–1064. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21640
42. Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Henseler, J., & Hair, J. F. (2014). On the emancipation of PLS-SEM: A commentary on Rigdon (2012). Long Range Planning, 47(3), 154–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2014.02.007
43. Shore, L. M., Lynch, P., Tetrick, L. E., & Barksdale, K. (2006). Social and economic exchange: Construct development and validation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(4), 837–867. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00046.x
44. Tarafdar, M., Pullins, E. B., & Ragu-Nathan, T. S. (2015). Technostress: Negative effect on performance and possible mitigations. Information Systems Journal, 25(2), 103–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12042
45. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z
46. Topcuoglu, E., Kobanoglu, M. S., Kaygın, E., Karafakıoglu, E., Erdogan, S. U., Torun, B. T., & Oktaysoy, O. (2023). The improving role of digital leadership in the impact of social loafing on job performance. International Journal of Organizational Leadership, 12, 22–40. https://doi.org/10.33844/ijol.2023.60383
47. Topçuoğlu, E., Oktaysoy, O., & Şahin, Y. (2025). The mediating role of occupational stress in the impact of digital leadership on open innovation capability in the aviation sector. Journal of Aviation, 9(3), 658–668. https://doi.org/10.30518/jav.1717814
48. VakıfBank. (2026). Şube ve ATM bilgileri. https://www.vakifbank.com.tr
49. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
50. Warman, M. A., Affandi, M. J., & Sukmawati, A. (2022). Digital leadership: Develop perceived organizational support in the perception of talent mobility at Employment Social Security Supervisory Agency. Jurnal Aplikasi Bisnis dan Manajemen, 8(3), 769–778. https://doi.org/10.17358/jabm.8.3.769
51. Westerman, G., Bonnet, D., & McAfee, A. (2014). Leading digital: Turning technology into business transformation. Harvard Business Review Press.
52. Yıldız, E. (2021). SmartPLS ile yapısal eşitlik modellemesi: Reflektif ve formatif yapılar. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
53. Zeike, S., Bradbury, K., Lindert, L., & Pfaff, H. (2019). Digital leadership skills and associations with psychological well-being. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(14), Article 2628. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16142628
54. Zincirkıran, M., Yalçınsoy, A., & Işık, M. (2016). Yönetici desteği ile iş memnuniyeti arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. 2nd International Congress on Economics and Business (pp. 976–983), Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
55. Ziraat Bankası. (2026). Şube ve ATM bilgileri. https://www.ziraatbank.com.tr