Does ICT Influence Organizational Behaviour? An Investigation of Digital Natives Leadership Potential

Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation book series (LNISO, volume 2)

Abstract

It was stated that intense use of ICTs since birth stimulated the development of new skills in a cohort of persons called digital natives. Such skills shall allow them to more easily interact with ICTs compared to the digital immigrants, the cohort of persons that entered in contact with the technologies later in their life. Taking this point of view this paper represents an exploratory study in the investigation of the potential influence of the use of ICTs by digital natives on their organizational behavior. On the basis of a dataset of interest for such purpose, this paper investigates the potential cause/effect relationship between the fact of being digital native and the emotional intelligence, a necessary prerequisite to wield good leadership.

Keywords

Emotional intelligence Digital natives Leadership Fs/QCA 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This paper stems from an idea originally discussed with Prof. Alessandro D’Atri, who sadly passed away before he could see it put in practice. The paper awarded the Alessandro D’Atri prize at the ItAIS 2012 conference. The author is thankful for this praise, and wishes to thank Prof. D’Atri for his precious mentoring and support during four years of joint work.

References

  1. 1.
    Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: The rise of the net generation. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9, 1–6.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants, part II: Do they really think differently? On the Horizon, 9, 1–9.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2000). Millennials rising: The next great generation. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kanai, R., Bahrami, B., Roylance, R., & Rees, G. (2012). Online social network size is reflected in human brain structure. Proceedings of the Biological Sciences/The Royal Society, 279, 1327–1334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    MarketWatch. College students boost digital adoption, according to course smart survey, http://www.marketwatch.com/story/college-students-boost-digital-adoption-according-to-coursesmart-survey-2012-05-23.
  7. 7.
    Bennet, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The “digital natives” debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39, 775–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kupperschmidt, B. R. (2000). Multigeneration employees: Strategies for effective management. The Health Care Manager, 19, 65–76.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rhodes, S. (1983). Age-related differences in work attitudes and behavior: A review and conceptual analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 93, 328–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goleman, D. (2004). What makes a leader? Harvard Business Review, 82, 82–91.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Palfrey, J., & Gasser, U. (2008). Born digital. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Palfrey, J., Gasser, U., Simun, M., & Barnes, R. (2009). Youth, creativity, and copyright in the digital age. International Journal of Learning, 1, 79–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Frand, J. L. (2000). The information-age mindset: Changes in students and implications for higher education. Educause Review, 35, 14–24.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Oblinger, D. T., & Oblinger, J. L. (2005). Is it age or IT: First steps toward understanding the net generation. In D. G. Oblinger & J. L. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the net generation (pp. 2.1–2.20). North Carolina State University.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vodanovich, S., Sundaram, D., & Myers, M. (2010). Digital natives and ubiquitous information systems. Information Systems Research, 21, 711–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2008). Adolescents’ identity experiments on the internet: Consequences for social competence and self-concept unity. Communication Research, 35, 208–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McMahon, M., Pospisil, R. (2005) Laptops for a digital lifestyle: Millennial students and wireless mobile technologies. Proceedings of Ascilite Conference, 421–431. Australia: Brisbane.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Leung, L. (2003). Impacts of net-generation attributes, seductive properties of the internet, and gratifications obtained on internet use. Telematics Informatics, 20, 107–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Howe, N., Strauss, W. (2003). Millennials go to College. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Smola, K. W., & Sutton, C. D. (2002). Generational differences: Revisiting generational work values for the new millennium. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23, 363–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jurkiewicz, C. E. (2000). Generation X and the public employee. Public Personnel Management, 29, 55–74.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Parry, E., & Urwin, P. (2010). Generational difference in work values: A review of theory and evidence. Journal of Management Reviews, 13, 79–96.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Joshi, A., Dencker, J. C., & Franz, G. (2011). Generations in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 31, 177–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ragin, C. (1987). The comparative method: Moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ragin, C. (2000). No fuzzy-set social science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Braumoeller, B. F., & Goertz, G. (2000). The methodology of necessary conditions. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 844–858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fiss, P. (2007). A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1180–1198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipartimento di Economia e ImpresaUniversità degli Studi della TusciaViterboItaly

Personalised recommendations