SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türkiye Mesleki ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 8

HOW DOES INNOVATIVE LEADERSHIP DIFFER BETWEEN OPENAI AND GOOGLE?

Maher Mohammed Abedah(Al-Bayan University)0000-0003-4336-726X
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-06-17
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The lessons are a precious lesson on how to think and act in the tech-enabled spaces to think about creative leadership.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The article that I will discuss in this paper will be about the in-stigation of innovative leadership within state-of-the-art technolo-gy companies that are breaking the edge with artificial intelli-gence.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In-ternal analysis was conducted in the form of thematic analysis according to the established structure of strategic principles of leadership, and optimization of the framework regarding prob-lems, e.g., when the crisis becomes opportunities, network of talents was formed and the network was established.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The lessons are a precious lesson on how to think and act in the tech-enabled spaces to think about creative leadership.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Innovative Leadership · Digital Transformation · Artificial Intelli-gence (AI)

Abstract

The article that I will discuss in this paper will be about the in-stigation of innovative leadership within state-of-the-art technolo-gy companies that are breaking the edge with artificial intelli-gence. Central research problem This is in response to a clear gap and a literature gap; the less empirical work that outlines how abstract leadership principles of all natures are actually practiced, in the highly challenging, hyper-competitive, and vola-tile context of high-tech situations. The study question of the given research is as follows: How do the tenets of innovative leadership manifest and how to practice them within OpenAI and Google and what are their similarities and differences in leadership mod-els? To solve this, the research will employ a qualitative compar-ative case study design. Triangulation of information was done through publicly available documents, secondary literature and media material and a historical approach to major projects. In-ternal analysis was conducted in the form of thematic analysis according to the established structure of strategic principles of leadership, and optimization of the framework regarding prob-lems, e.g., when the crisis becomes opportunities, network of talents was formed and the network was established. An example of what I would call the Mission-Centric Pioneer, with high-risk AGI-led strategy, high-tier all-star talent acquisition and high-depth (but narrow) partnerships would be OpenAI. In compari-son, Google applies an Ecosystem-Focused Scalator model founded on a managed-risk orientation of scaling and protecting its core business, a hybridization of talents and the well-developed net of partners with decentralized solutions. This study finds that the success of an innovative leadership depends on situation - and each model has an alternative set of strategic trade-offs, in agility, risk-taking, and scalability trade-offs. One of the lessons attained by organizations based on that empirical observation: Organizations ought actively to fine-tune their own leadership model (including risk appetite, talent strategy and partnership model) to the thing that is actually working on their returns, and not to run after something that is a one-size-suits-all sizing outlay: Well spotted! The lessons are a precious lesson on how to think and act in the tech-enabled spaces to think about creative leadership.

Özet

The article that I will discuss in this paper will be about the in-stigation of innovative leadership within state-of-the-art technolo-gy companies that are breaking the edge with artificial intelli-gence. Central research problem This is in response to a clear gap and a literature gap; the less empirical work that outlines how abstract leadership principles of all natures are actually practiced, in the highly challenging, hyper-competitive, and vola-tile context of high-tech situations. The study question of the given research is as follows: How do the tenets of innovative leadership manifest and how to practice them within OpenAI and Google and what are their similarities and differences in leadership mod-els? To solve this, the research will employ a qualitative compar-ative case study design. Triangulation of information was done through publicly available documents, secondary literature and media material and a historical approach to major projects. In-ternal analysis was conducted in the form of thematic analysis according to the established structure of strategic principles of leadership, and optimization of the framework regarding prob-lems, e.g., when the crisis becomes opportunities, network of talents was formed and the network was established. An example of what I would call the Mission-Centric Pioneer, with high-risk AGI-led strategy, high-tier all-star talent acquisition and high-depth (but narrow) partnerships would be OpenAI. In compari-son, Google applies an Ecosystem-Focused Scalator model founded on a managed-risk orientation of scaling and protecting its core business, a hybridization of talents and the well-developed net of partners with decentralized solutions. This study finds that the success of an innovative leadership depends on situation - and each model has an alternative set of strategic trade-offs, in agility, risk-taking, and scalability trade-offs. One of the lessons attained by organizations based on that empirical observation: Organizations ought actively to fine-tune their own leadership model (including risk appetite, talent strategy and partnership model) to the thing that is actually working on their returns, and not to run after something that is a one-size-suits-all sizing outlay: Well spotted! The lessons are a precious lesson on how to think and act in the tech-enabled spaces to think about creative leadership.

🔖

Cite This Article

Abedah, M. M. (2026). HOW DOES INNOVATIVE LEADERSHIP DIFFER BETWEEN OPENAI AND GOOGLE?. Türkiye Mesleki ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 8. https://ajindex.com/articles/1067187

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (24)

  1. I. B. A. Alharbi, (2021), “Innovative Leadership: A Literature Review Paper,” Open Journal of Leadership, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 214–229. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4236/ojl.2021.103014
  2. N. Anderson, K. Potočnik, and J. Zhou, (2014), “Innovation and Creativity in Organizations,” Journal of Management, Vol. 40, No. 5, pp. 1297–1333. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314527128
  3. L. Cortellazzo, E. Bruni, and R. Zampieri, (2019), “The Role of Leadership in a Digitalized World: A Review,” Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 10, Article 1938, pp. 1–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01938
  4. Y. K. Dwivedi et al., (2022), “Metaverse beyond the hype: Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy,” International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 66, Article 102542, pp. 1–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.102542
  5. M. Javaid, A. Haleem, R. P. Singh, R. Suman, and E. S. Gonzalez, (2022), “Understanding the adoption of Industry 4.0 technologies in improving environmental sustainability,” Sustainable Operations and Computers, Vol. 3, pp. 203–217. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susoc.2022.01.008
  6. K. Jun and J. Lee, (2023), “Transformational Leadership and Followers’ Innovative Behavior: Roles of Commitment to Change and Organizational Support for Creativity,” Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 13, No. 4, Article 320, pp. 1–16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13040320
  7. P. Kivimaa, S. Laakso, A. Lonkila, and M. Kaljonen, (2021), “Moving beyond disruptive innovation: A review of disruption in sustainability transitions,” Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, Vol. 38, pp. 110–126. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2020.12.001
  8. K. Koziol-Nadolna, (2020), “The Role of a Leader in Stimulating Innovation in an Organization,” Administrative Sciences, Vol. 10, No. 3, Article 59, pp. 1–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci10030059
  9. B. H. Leso, M. N. Cortimiglia, and A. Ghezzi, (2023), “The contribution of organizational culture, structure, and leadership factors in the digital transformation of SMEs: a mixed-methods approach,” Cognition, Technology & Work, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 151–179. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-022-00703-0
  10. L. Lobschat et al., (2021), “Corporate digital responsibility,” Journal of Business Research, Vol. 122, pp. 875–888. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.10.006
  11. T. Saarikko, U. H. Westergren, and T. Blomquist, (2020), “Digital transformation: Five recommendations for the digitally conscious firm,” Business Horizons, Vol. 63, No. 6, pp. 825–839. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2020.07.005
  12. J. Schweitzer, (2014), “Leadership and innovation capability development in strategic alliances,” Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 35, No. 5, pp. 442–469. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-07-2012-0089
  13. P. Sunarmo, D. P. Rini, N. Albart, and S. Hasanah, (2023), “The Importance of Innovative Leadership in Improving Organisational Readiness for Technology Disruption,” Jurnal Minfo Polgan, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 1427–1436. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33395/jmp.v12i1.12345
  14. B. Trenerry et al., (2021), “Preparing Workplaces for Digital Transformation: An Integrative Review and Framework of Multi-Level Factors,” Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 12, Article 620766, pp. 1–24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.620766
  15. D. A. Garvin, A. C. Edmondson, and F. Gino, (2008), “Is Yours a Learning Organization?” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 86, No. 3, pp. 109–116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1225/R0803H
  16. M. Iansiti and K. R. Lakhani, (2020), Competing in the Age of AI: Strategy and Leadership When Algorithms and Networks Run the World, Harvard Business Review Press, Boston. DOI: https://doi.org/10.16363/9781633697621
  17. G. C. Kane et al., (2017), “Achieving Digital Maturity: Adapting Your Company to a Changing World,” MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 58, No. 4, pp. 1–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11416.003.0001
  18. C. A. O’Reilly and M. L. Tushman, (2013), “Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present, and Future,” Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 324–338. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2013.0025
  19. D. J. Teece, G. Pisano, and A. Shuen, (1997), “Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management,” Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18, No. 7, pp. 509–533. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7 3.0.CO;2-Z
  20. J. Tidd and J. R. Bessant, (2020), Managing Innovation: Integrating Technological, Market and Organizational Change, 6th ed., Wiley, Hoboken. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119713306
  21. M. Uhl-Bien and M. Arena, (2018), “Leadership for Organizational Adaptability: A Theoretical Synthesis and Integrative Framework,” The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 89–104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.12.009
  22. G. von Krogh, I. Nonaka, and L. Rechsteiner, (2012), “Leadership in Organizational Knowledge Creation: A Review and Framework,” Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 49, No. 1, pp. 240–277. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00978.x
  23. C. L. Wang and P. K. Ahmed, (2007), “Dynamic Capabilities: A Review and Research Agenda,” International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 31–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00201.x
  24. G. Westerman, D. Bonnet, and A. McAfee, (2014), Leading Digital: Turning Technology into Business Transformation, Harvard Business Review Press, Boston. DOI: https://doi.org/10.16363/9781625272478