AI Literacy and Institutional Governance Response among Leaders in Private Higher Education

Artificial intelligence tools are already in daily use across Zambia's private higher education institutions, yet little is known about whether the leaders responsible for governing that use are equipped to do so, or whether their institutions have built the structures to support them. This paper reports findings from a sequential exploratory mixed-methods study examining governance-level AI literacy and institutional AI response among strategic leaders across Zambia's twelve Tier 1 private universities. A structured questionnaire completed by one hundred governance-role staff was combined with semi-structured interviews conducted with twelve strategic leaders purposively drawn from five institutions, and the two strands were integrated using the Technology Acceptance Model as an interpretive lens. The study finds that governance-level AI literacy, the capacity to evaluate, question, and be accountable for AI's institutional use rather than simply operate the tools, is markedly underdeveloped among leaders regardless of seniority or academic qualification, and that this deficit is mirrored, and compounded, by an almost total absence of formal institutional AI governance: defined strategies, adoption procedures, and ethical safeguards are the exception rather than the rule. Leaders consistently recognise AI's strategic importance in principle while lacking the specific capacity to govern it in practice, a gap this paper argues is structural rather than personal, rooted in professional formation systems that did not anticipate AI governance as a leadership competency. The findings carry direct implications for institutional capacity-building, sector regulation, and national policy, and this paper's originality lies in providing the first empirically grounded account of the AI-literacy-to-governance pathway, and its breakdown, within Africa's private higher education sector.

AI literacy; institutional governance; strategic leadership; higher education; Zambia

1. Anderson, F.V. (2025) 'Developing AI leadership capacity in Africa: exploring the role of education, training, and mentorship programs', IRPJ (Intergovernmental Research and Policy Journal). Available at: https://irpj.eu [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Bass, B.M. and Avolio, B.J. (1994) Improving Organizational Effectiveness Through Transformational Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006) 'Using thematic analysis in psychology', Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), pp. 77–101. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2022) Thematic Analysis: A Practical Guide. London: Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Bryman, A. (2016) Social Research Methods. 5th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Buolamwini, J. and Gebru, T. (2018) 'Gender shades: intersectional accuracy disparities in commercial gender classification', Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, 81, pp. 77–91. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Burns, J.M. (1978) Leadership. New York: Harper & Row. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K. (2018) Research Methods in Education. 8th edn. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Creswell, J.W. and Plano Clark, V.L. (2023) Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. 4th edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Davis, F.D. (1989) 'Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology', MIS Quarterly, 13(3), pp. 319–340. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. (1983) 'The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields', American Sociological Review, 48(2), pp. 147–160. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Dube, B., Nkomo, D. and Apadile-Thokweng, M. (2024) 'Pragmatism: an essential philosophy for mixed methods research in education', International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 8(3), pp. 1001–1010. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Dusengumuremyi, F., Chukwudi John, H., Ndahimana, S., Ndahayo, C. and Sangwa, S. (2026) 'From innovation signaling to governance readiness: generative artificial intelligence integration, policies, opportunities, and challenges in two Rwandan universities', Open Journal of AI, Ethics and Society, 2(2). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Fiedler, F.E. (1967) A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K.H. (1982) Management of Organizational Behavior: Utilizing Human Resources. 4th edn. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Higher Education Authority of Zambia (2024) The State of Higher Education in Zambia 2023: Quality Assurance in Higher Education. Lusaka: Higher Education Authority. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Higher Education Authority of Zambia (2026a) Gazette Notice No. 665 of 2026: Classification of Universities. Government Gazette of the Republic of Zambia, Vol. LXII, No. 46, 17 April 2026. Lusaka: Government Printer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Jacobs-Basadien, M. and Pather, S. (2026) 'Assessing AI policy and guideline progress within the South African public higher education system: insights from documented policies', Universal Access in the Information Society, 25(2), article 71. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-026-01340-9. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Kvale, S. and Brinkmann, S. (2015) InterViews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing. 3rd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Long, D. and Magerko, B. (2020) 'What is AI literacy? Competencies and design considerations', in Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. New York: Association for Computing Machinery. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Memarian, B. and Doleck, T. (2023) 'Fairness, accountability, transparency, and ethics (FATE) in artificial intelligence (AI) and higher education: a systematic review', Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Meyer, J.W. and Rowan, B. (1977) 'Institutionalized organizations: formal structure as myth and ceremony', American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), pp. 340–363. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Miao, F., Holmes, W., Huang, R. and Zhang, H. (2021) AI and Education: Guidance for Policy-Makers. Paris: UNESCO. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Miles, M.B., Huberman, A.M. and Saldaña, J. (2020) Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook. 4th edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Nunnally, J.C. (1978) Psychometric Theory. 2nd edn. New York: McGraw-Hill. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. O'Neil, C. (2016) Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy. New York: Crown Publishers. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Pasipamire, N. and Muroyiwa, A. (2024) 'Navigating algorithm bias in AI: ensuring fairness and trust in Africa', Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 9, 1486600. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2024.1486600. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Pretorius, L. (2024) 'Demystifying research paradigms: navigating ontology, epistemology, and axiology in research', The Qualitative Report, 29(10), pp. 2698–2715. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Sangwa, S., Ngobi, D., Ekosse, E. and Mutabazi, P. (2026) 'AI governance in African higher education: status, challenges, and a future-proof policy framework', Artificial Intelligence and Education, 1(1), Article 2054. Available at: https://doi.org/10.62617/AIE2054. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2019) Research Methods for Business Students. 8th edn. Harlow: Pearson. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Venkatesh, V. and Bala, H. (2008) 'Technology Acceptance Model 3 and a research agenda on interventions', Decision Sciences, 39(2), pp. 273–315. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B. and Davis, F.D. (2003) 'User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view', MIS Quarterly, 27(3), pp. 425–478. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Weiner, B.J. (2009) 'A theory of organizational readiness for change', Implementation Science, 4, article 67. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-67. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Zambia, Ministry of Technology and Science (2025) National Artificial Intelligence Strategy 2025–2027. Lusaka: Government of the Republic of Zambia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study