Impact of Artificial Intelligence Adoption and Leadership Styles on Strategic Planning Effectiveness in the Philippine Techno Firms

Authors

Mark Ian C. Abrias

Graduate School of Business, National University (Philippines)

Araceli J. Angeles

Graduate School of Business, National University (Philippines)

Carina B. David

Graduate School of Business, National University (Philippines)

Ricky Boy Garcia

Graduate School of Business, National University (Philippines)

Mercedito V. Tambalque

Graduate School of Business, National University (Philippines)

Nanette N. Tabuac

Graduate School of Business, National University (Philippines)

Dr. Ronald L. Pancho

Graduate School of Business, National University (Philippines)

Ellery D. De Leon

Graduate School of Business, National University (Philippines)

Article Information

DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI.2026.1303000031

Subject Category: Business Management

Volume/Issue: 13/3 | Page No: 337- 351

Publication Timeline

Submitted: 2026-03-06

Accepted: 2026-03-11

Published: 2026-03-26

Abstract

This quantitative, descriptive-correlational study examined the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) adoption and leadership styles on strategic planning effectiveness among technology firms in the Philippines. Guided by frameworks from Biloslavo et al. (2024), Gichuki et al. (2024), and Phillips and Moutinho (2000), the study explored how leadership behaviors mediate the relationship between AI integration and effective planning. A total of 105 executives and managers participated in the survey, using a validated questionnaire with a reliability range of .71 to .91 across three scales. Descriptive statistics revealed very high levels of AI adoption (M = 6.40, SD = 0.79) and strategic planning effectiveness (M = 6.30, SD = 0.79), and a high level of leadership styles (M = 5.64, SD = 0.61). Pearson’s correlation showed significant positive relationships among the three variables, while multiple regression confirmed that AI adoption and leadership styles collectively explained 72% of the variance in strategic planning effectiveness (R² = .72, p < .001). Mediation analysis further indicated that leadership styles significantly mediated the relationship between AI adoption and strategic planning outcomes (β = 0.31, p < .001). The findings underscore the importance of aligning AI initiatives with effective leadership to achieve sustainable organizational planning. The study recommends enhancing leadership development programs to strengthen digital integration strategies and maximize the benefits of AI in strategic management.

Keywords

artificial intelligence adoption, leadership styles, strategic planning effectiveness, mediation, technology firms

Downloads

References

1. Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. Free Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Biloslavo, R., Edgar, D., Aydin, E., & Bulut, C. (2024). Artificial intelligence (AI) and strategic planning process within VUCA environments: A research agenda and guidelines. Management Decision. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-10-2023-1944 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Csaszar, F. A. (2024). Artificial intelligence and strategic decision-making: Evidence from firms. Strategic Science Journal, 13(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1287/stsc.2024.0190 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2019). IBM SPSS statistics 26 step by step: A simple guide and reference (16th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429056765 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Gichuki, G. K., Karanja, K., & Atikiya, R. (2024). The influence of transformational and transactional leadership styles on the implementation of strategic plans by devolved governments in Kenya. Journal of Agriculture, Science and Technology, 23(2), 76–113. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Khuong, M. N. (2022). A review of empirical research on leadership and firm performance. SAGE Open, 12(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221109588 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Mousa, K. M. (2024). Strategic planning and organizational performance: Integrating sustainability and digital transformation perspectives. Sustainability, 16(15), 6690. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16156690 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Phillips, P. A., & Moutinho, L. (2000). The strategic planning index: A tool for measuring strategic planning effectiveness. Journal of Travel Research, 38(4), 369–379. https://doi.org/10.1177/004728750003800407 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Sellke, T. M., Bayarri, M. J., & Berger, J. O. (2001). Calibration of p values for testing precise null hypotheses. The American Statistician, 55(1), 62–71. https://doi.org/10.1198/000313001300339950 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

Metrics

Views & Downloads

Similar Articles