Muntaha Manate Hashim (1)
General Background: Digital transformation has fundamentally altered administrative work through generative artificial intelligence (GAI), which enables human activity in developing novel content and creative solutions beyond existing paradigms. Specific Background: While GAI's theoretical frameworks are established globally, its integration with digital project management success within Arab administrative structures remains underexplored, particularly regarding how GAI dimensions interact with organizational efficiency. Knowledge Gap: Despite GAI's growing prominence, empirical evidence linking its specific dimensions—task definition, AI contribution, interaction methodology, AI structure, and human personality—to digital project management outcomes in developing economies is limited. Aims: This study investigates the relationship between GAI dimensions and digital project management success (organizational structure, technology, and digital innovation) among 188 employees at Iraq's Karbala Investment Authority using structural equation modeling. Results: GAI explains 43% of variance in digital project management success, with human personality (β=0.402), task definition (β=0.343), and AI contribution (β=0.278) showing significant positive effects, while interaction methodology and AI structure demonstrated non-significant impacts. Novelty: This research provides the first empirical Arabic-context framework demonstrating that human skills, behavior, and experience remain the primary drivers of digital project success when combined with GAI. Implications: Organizations must invest in behavioral and technical capabilities through command engineering training and digital simulation to bridge skills gaps and enable human-machine symbiosis for competitive advantage.Keywords : Generative Artificial Intelligence, Digital Project Management, AI Dimensions, Organizational Digital Transformation, Human-AI CollaborationHighlight :
The role of generative artificial intelligence in the success of digital project management: An analytical study of the opinions of a sample of employees of the Investment Authority in Karbala
Muntaha Manate Hashim
Al-Hussain University College , Iraq
muntaha.m.hashim@huciraq.edu.iq
Abstract:
This study sought to investigate the association between the independent variable (GI) and its dimensions (Task definition, AI contribution, Interaction method, AI structure, and Human personality) and the dependent variable (digital project management success) and its digital PM dimensions (organizational structure, technology, and digital innovation). The problem of the study was represented in a question: What is the level of relationship between generative artificial intelligence and the success of digital project management, and what is the effect of purposive sampling using the superiority approach at The significance of the study was explained based on the results of the sample research, which analyzed opinions, where 188 questionnaires were returned from a population of 198) male teachers who hold a Diploma degree or higher. This sample is chosen because it is the best match for the study objectives and provides valid responses to the research questionnaire, which is constructed on a five-point Likert scale. A five-step Likert questionnaire was used, and descriptive statistics, including the arithmetic mean and standard deviation, were employed to analyze the data—this involved path analysis and structural equation modeling (with SPSS software). The conclusions were many, but for me at least the most important was that it’s still the human factor – skill, behaviour, and experience – that is overwhelmingly the prime mover in success on digital projects. Attitudinally qualified employees for simulation and creative engagement with generative technologies give organizations a competitive edge in an uncertain environment, allowing them to turn technological output into value-added, sustainable competitive advantage. The authors held that investing in the behavioural and technical capabilities of individuals through the provision of educational infrastructure , such as “command engineering” and digital simulation-based creative simulators, helped them master this art. The only way to shrink the skills gap and maintain a solid human-machine symbiosis to jump up a class in efficiency in digital projects is to enable people to lead technological disruption.
Keywords: Generative artificial intelligence, success in managing digital projects, Investment Authority in the Holy Karbala Governorate.
Introduction
The breathtaking advances in today's technological landscape have transformed the concept of administrative labour through the digital revolution. Innovative computing systems are now employing generative artificial intelligence (AI), which serves as a system enabler, facilitating human activity in developing novel content and creative solutions that fall outside existing paradigms. The importance of such a variable goes beyond mere operational automation and reaches the level at which intelligent systems theatrically complement human intelligence. Together, we seek to make accurate predictions in an uncertain world and help people make smarter decisions under difficult work conditions. Importance of role The effectiveness of this mode depends on the natural dimensions, starting with how much the job is clearly specified to provide helpful outputs, based on the degree to which AI complements human or acts in place of them and breaks their own risk exposure, extending up to extending contact modalities that afford productive joint tasks between user(s) and system.
In a similar context, these capabilities are intrinsically integrated with digital project management systems that are fundamentally based on the ability to interact with digital systems, largely data-filling systems, to gain a competitive advantage over time. An AI flexible framework to enable information flow is made possible by the human factor, which involves the ability and innovativeness to deploy such tools. Thus, the intersection of technology and digital innovation emerges as a decisive factor in reconfiguring administrative processes once flexible organization configurations start to determine what should be adopted in terms of IoTs and cloud data, besides being responsible for operational effectiveness improvement, power, and sustainability of the digital projects in a context marked by uncertain and permanent complexity. The study framework consisted of four major sections. The investigation presented the first paragraph on methodology; the second one was woven around a review of the literature related to the variables (main research and their sub-dimensions); the analysis results of the study were discussed in the body of the third paragraph. It ended in the fourth paragraph, where research findings brought the environment to bear on generalisation, implications, etc., which emerged as outcomes of the statistical analysis.
This part includes the problem, objectives, significance, research methodology, data collection tool, and analytical instrument used, and statistical processing as follows:
The theoretical framework of this study is derived from a gap that arises despite the novelty of (CONCEPTUAL) generative artificial intelligence and the existence of intellectual frameworks that explain its interaction mechanisms, with success in digital project management within Arab administrative structures. Hence, it is important to establish this association scientifically. The practical issues are the limited use of existing smart technology resources within the Investment Authority and the unreasonably high level of control over personal expertise during decision-making to solve project problems. This results in delays in responding to digital changes and makes human error in difficult strategic decisions more likely. Accordingly, we aim to overcome this gap by exploring how generative technical dimensions can make sense of the unemployment of organizational efficiency and lift standard project management practices from business-as-usual frameworks towards the horizons of sustainable digital innovation. To make the problem, we ask:
Figure () Hypothetical model of the research
Source: Prepared by the researcher based on scientific sources.
An appropriate determination of the study site and population shall be further emphasized, as this is one of the most important issues for the precision and truthfulness of the results, as well as for the consistency in verifying hypotheses in this research. Thus, HKAIA, together with its branches and divisions, will be selected as the unit to which the study will be applied in practice within a private-sector setting, where hypotheses can be tested in an Iraqi context. The Holy Karbala Investment Commission comprises several associated, auditable sample project management experts and is therefore a goldmine of research data. Accordingly, we selected a purposeful sample of (188) employees who have a diploma and higher from a population of (198) who held diplomas or higher. The reason for selecting this sample is that it is closely related to the study's objective and problem and has a high capacity to respond to questionnaire items. The questions were constructed based on a five-point Likert scale. Personal Information of the Study Sample The sample was chosen from various aspects, whether individual or professional, among them age, sex, scientists, years of experience, and area of specialization, as follows:
Table 1: Personal information of the study sample
The respondents in the sample were assigned to age groups based on the age distribution: 30s, 40s, 50+, and so on. (30s: n=72 people; 34.1%, 40 ~ 49 years old: N=95 people;44.3%, ⩾50 years old :n =48 people,,20%) For this reason, it seems likely that most experienced workers' self-reported work experience reflected a variety of work across their careers. Next up are the 30-39 year olds at 26.6% (which sounds like they've got a reasonable mix, with some still yet to peak). The 24-29-year age group is the least dominant, with 18.6 per cent participation, which might indicate a trend towards occupational security and a higher average experience in the sample.
Gender imbalance: The gender profile of our sample is characterized by a significantly male majority at 62.2%, constituting nearly two-thirds of all respondents. In detail, women make up 37.8% of the overall sample. This distribution makes sense because there are more men than women in the sample, which is not surprising, since a couple of engineering and staff specialties in this workplace tend to be male.
Regarding educational attainment, the descriptive statistics indicate that the Bachelor's degree category was the largest (53.7%), suggesting that the majority of employees had the appropriate level of education. Those with a master’s-level degree are second (21.8%), and respondents with doctoral studies rank 3rd at 12.8%, showing that highly educated employees dominate this group.
The minority of the sample, at only 11.7%, are Diploma holders (the sample focuses on higher-education individuals at the postgraduate level).
The number of years of experience shows that one-third (29.3%) of the sample has between 11 and 15 years of experience, making this the most represented group in terms of expertise and suggesting medium- to long-term staff stability. The 16-20 and 20+ age categories combined account for a majority of the sample population, at over 45%, reinforcing the earlier conclusions about extensive work experience. While the least represented -those with 6 to fewer than ten years’ experience and those with 10 or fewer- already are, this is yet another confirmation of the fact that most respondents have long service.
characterized in the sample is administrative, which represents 39 of the respondents, being the highest percentage, which emphasizes the prominence of the administrative occupation in the sample. Next is engineering at 23.9%, followed by senior engineer at 17.6%, which shows that a mix of administrative, engineering, and technical roles dominates the sample. Program editors and chiefs are the least represented (5.9%) in the sample, while chief engineers are represented at 8.0%, something to keep in mind when examining digital project attitudes in this sample.
Generative artificial intelligence is a set of computer systems designed for human use to perform tasks and roles that often lead to innovative applications, the creation of creative ideas and new methods adaptable to functions, and the generation of creative solutions to solve problems or improve performance in digital and non-digital projects [1]. Ban (2023) argues that artificial intelligence (AI) is a revolution in the digital landscape, capable of generating high-quality, contextually relevant content that is almost indistinguishable from human work. This results in the development of creative, realistic, and unique content, together with humans and intelligent systems, across business and private settings[2]. AI technology is being embraced in many different ways, particularly for process optimization and decision-making to enhance the performance and activity of digital projects. Barcaui (2023) points out that generative AI is a general-purpose tool: it evolves by learning from data inputs and creates new, modern content, activities, and tasks that share a degree of similarity with human work. This underpins decision-making to enhance the performance and quality of digital projects. Generative AI also supports efficient and effective human resource management for digital projects, thereby ensuring the sustainability of the function [3].
Ban (2023) and Chowdhury (2024) explain generative AI as business generated through the installed practices, operations, and business models, or aspects of innovation. This can introduce a new era of management practices and innovative work patterns in digital projects using generative AI. Companies need a plan for implementing generative AI to ensure the desired value from projects. General AI is not like previous technological revolutions that lacked built-in functionality to create context-appropriate content on demand, learn from one’s responses, and improve based on what it knows [2][4] . López (2025) defines generative AI as “AI producing new insights, creative ideas, and predictions. Using generative AI can greatly transform the value chain, helping workers become more productive, providing decision support for strategic endeavors, and allowing business-led digital projects to compete by innovating and building proprietary value [5].
Doshi and Alastair (2025) specify generative artificial intelligence in terms of the following dimensions [6]:
Al-Mawhab (2025) describes digital project management as a core capability that combines two primary dimensions: digital integration and data-based decision-making. Digital integration is an indicator of cross-platform synchronization and collaboration; (ii) it is easy to exchange data between tooling systems associated with the project phases, thus keeping them harmonized. This involves interoperability among systems, BIM with IoT sensors, project information systems (PIS), and ERP systems [15]. Data-driven decision-making is the ability to use empirical, quantitative, and real-time data and analysis to make strategic or operational decisions, rather than relying solely on intuition or logic. Chen et al. (2025) define digital project management as the tools for decision-making in digital projects, team coordination, and the capabilities required to support digital functions and features. It requires transforming the foundational management systems that generate project value and deliver services, as well as addressing uncertainty with newly introduced technologies, including AI, big data, cloud platforms, and the internet of things (IoT) [16].
In multi-activity digital business and project environments, digital project management emerges as an organizational system that demands optimal planning, integration, and leadership [17]. This model requires management to oversee the outcomes of digital projects and assess them using analytical tools to drive the strategic implementation of digital transformations. The challenges in these projects require advanced technology to develop a smart series. Gonçalves et al. (2023) describe digital project management as the promotion and application of the firm’s technology in planning, directing, and controlling projects already underway to an extent that exceeds mission by understanding them better than competitors, having other competitive advantages; efficiently apply resources-enable efficient labor utilization-plan necessary financial (economic), technological and social process for successful digital project management [18].
The dimensions of digital project management are [19]:
H11: There is a statistically significant effect of task definition on the success of digital project management in the studied entity.
H12: There is a statistically significant effect of the interaction method dimension on the success of digital project management in the studied organization.
H13: “ There is a statistically significant effect of the AI contribution dimension on the success of digital project management in the studied entity ” .
H14: There is a statistically significant effect of the AI structure dimension on the success of digital project management in the studied organization.
H15: There is a statistically significant effect of the human personality dimension on the success of digital project management in the studied organization.
The study variables and dimensions were coded transparently, making them easy to interpret. This is because data needs to be processed and statistically analyzed using specialized software, such as SPSS or Amos version. 26. The current code attempts to provide short and distinct symbols for each dimension and principal variables (e.g., X for the independent variable, Y for the dependent) to help researchers when conducting statistical analyses or interpreting structural models.
Normality is a basic rule that should be tested, even when we are applying different parametric statistical tests or equations, as in multiple statistical analyses such as path analysis and structural modeling. This distribution is evaluated by calculating the Coefficients of Skewness and Kurtosis. Values close to ±1.96 indicate that the sample response is normally distributed and satisfies the normality assumption, enabling advanced statistical analysis of the data [35].
Table (2) Coding of the Study Scale, (Normal) Distribution, and Scale Reliability
“Source: Prepared by the researcher”.
The table above presents the preliminary statistical analysis results for the study’s variables and dimensions. The reliability findings indicate that all the scale factors have very high internal consistency, with Cronbach’s alpha scores ranging from 87.1% (for factor X5, Human Personality) to 92.6% (for factor X2x, Contribution of AI). All of these values are well above the acceptable threshold of 70%, indicating that the instrument's measurements are reliable and fit for further analysis. For the normal distribution, skewness and kurtosis for all dimensions are within a good range, indicating that the data are also relatively normally distributed. The absolute values of skewness were not larger than 2 (the largest was 1.766), and, similarly to kurtosis, the largest value did not exceed 7 (in this case, 1.654). This enables the analysis to employ state-of-the-art parametric statistical techniques, including Structural Equation Modeling (SEM).
This section of the analysis seeks to understand the reality of the study variables by investigating the dimensions of each variable from the perspectives of a selected sample of 188 employees from the Investment Authority in the Holy Karbala Governorate. The degree of responsiveness to respondents' thoughts will be assessed based on their responses to the questionnaire items, using a five-point Likert scale.
The table below displays the results of calculating the arithmetic mean of the respondents' responses.
Table (3) Weighted Mean and Response Level
Source: Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). “A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM),” 2nd Ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, p.289 [35] .
The comparison and dimensions aimed to achieve the minimal coefficient of variation and the maximal degree of relative significance, indicating high consistency and response, while also assessing the levels of availability, practice, interest, and homogeneity within the studied entity concerning the primary dimensions and variables.
The overall results: The results of the Investment Authority employees' responses revealed that the mean values for the Generative Artificial Intelligence variable as a composite variable were high, including the arithmetic mean (3.437), and the rate of consent=68.7% from the maximum value on the scale. This percentage attest to employees' understanding of the growing role that generative AI plays as a tool for ideating creative ideas and novel, adaptable solutions in line with [1]. A high level of concord is a testimony that AI has taken root in the organizational culture at the Authority in multiple aspects to add value to digitized project process as observed by (Ban 2023) [2].
The breakdown of the interpretations of generative AI dimensions was:
Table 4 presents descriptive statistics.
Source: Researcher used SPSS statistical software.”
The opinions of the Authority's employees on "success of digital project management" were average - good, respectively, with a total arithmetic mean of 3.339, and a related rate of agreement to (66.8%), including the maximum range value. According to Tommasi ( 2018), this percentage reflects employees' understanding of the significance and centrality of the organizational frameworks, management, and co-ordination that are part of working in multi-activity digital project environments [17]. The standard deviation of the total factor (0.741) and dispersion (22.3%) show an acceptable variation in the opinions that opens the path to further advancement of digital integration factors' mechanisms as well as data-driven decision mechanisms, according to Al-Mawhab (2025) [15]."
This is how the nuts and bolts of what it takes to succeed in digital project management were explained:
Table (5) A summary of descriptive indicators for dimensions of the digital project management success variable
The Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) is an important step in structural modeling that assesses how closely the factor structure of the variables approximates the theoretical model adopted for the study. To determine the model's reliability and validity for further testing, the researcher must also scrutinize the indices of fit, which indicate how well the field data represent the theoretical model. Table 1: Basic Rules for Judging the Model Fitting quality The ratio of Chi-squared value to degree of freedom (chisq/df) indicator may not exceed the allowable limits Good Fit Indexes (GFI), Comparative Fit Indexes (CFI): improve model reliability. Lastly, the RMSEA indicates that a decreasing difference between the model and sample data supports the instrument's ability to be measured accurately and reliably by what it is intended to measure (Costello & Osborne, 2005).
Table (6): Indicators of CFA match quality
The results from the confirmatory factor analysis are presented in a table and a figure, where we may observe that all of the item loads in their supposed factors were greater than this reference level (40%), which confirmed not only that all these items really belonged to their measurement dimension, but also showed us that our statistical construct was validated. Therefore, based on the research design, the study's scale was confirmed as appropriate, with five independent and three dependent variables, thereby meeting the fit, validity, and reliability criteria.
Table (7) Confirmatory factor analysis of study variables
“Source: Researcher used AMOS statistical software.”
This part of the study will shift from descriptive statistics to inferential analysis, examining causal inferences among research variables. Amos was then used to perform structural equation modeling (SEM). Ver. 26 software was used to confirm the sub-hypotheses and the main hypothesis. Thus, it is designed to examine the extent to which dimensions of generative AI (task definition, AI contribution, interaction type, the form of the computer system that integrates AI [AI structure], and human personality) can predict variations in digital PM success across these dimensions. Hypotheses will be accepted or rejected based on specific statistical thresholds (such as standardized path coefficients, CR values that need to exceed the critical value, and so on), i.e., by levels of significance of effects (measured via p-value). These criteria will be listed in subsequent tables and graphs.
There is a statistically significant effect of a strong personality and its dimensions on the success of digital project management.
As per the confirmatory factor analysis and path model shown in the figure, it is evident that a good amount of "goodness of fit" and consistency is present in the model, which could be used for testing hypotheses. Weighted chi-squared (CMIN/DF) was about 1.915, acceptable (<3). The GFI was optimal (1.000), and the CFI also exceeded the threshold (0.968). The RMSEA was 0.062, less than.08. All of these results demonstrate that the aforementioned model is consistent with real field data and demonstrates sound structural relationships between variables.
The table and figure above present the results of inferential statistics used to test the impact of generative artificial intelligence. The F-value (42.006) is higher than the critical value (3.91), indicating support for the main hypothesis H1: “Generative AI has a statistically significant effect on the success of digital project management.” This finding is also confirmed by a p-value (Sig.) of 0.000, which is less than the significance level (5%). In addition, the R-squared of 0.43indicates that generative AI explai43% of the variance in success in project management, with the remaining variation explained by factors outside of the model.
The standardized estimate (effect factor) of (0.644), which shows a one-unit rise in generative AI application interest, causing a 0.644 increase in digital project management’s success. This suggests that the better employees understand dimensions of generative AI — such as understanding tasks, drawing on intelligent systems’ contributions to achieve goals, and improvement in digital interaction patterns or creating AI architectures to be more like humans — the better the results will be for digital projects that have three dimensions: organizational structure, technology, and digital innovation. This added value emphasizes that employees’ competence and experience in generating tool use lead to the automation of difficult work, reduced risks, faster job completion, and on-time production, thereby creating additional value and competitive advantage in digital projects across the Investment Authority.
Table 8: Main hypotheses of the impact of generative artificial intelligence on the success of digital project management
“Source: Researcher used AMOS statistical software."
Figure 2: Impact Analysis of Generative Artificial Intelligence on the Success of Digital Project Management
Source: AMOS Program 25
The interpretations of the hypotheses were as follows:
Figure (3) Analyzing the impact of generative AI dimensions on the success of digital project management
Source: "AMOS Program"
Table (9) Analyzing the impact of generative AI dimensions on the success of digital project management
This chapter contains some of the most significant findings made by the stud ie s, which are:
Sources:
[1] A. M. Felicetti et al., "Artificial intelligence and project management: An empirical investigation on the appropriation of generative Chatbots by project managers," Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, vol. 9, no. 3, p. 100545, 2024.
[2] L. Banh and G. Strobel, "Generative artificial intelligence," Electronic Markets, vol. 33, no. 1, p. 63, 2023.
[3] A. Barcaui and A. Monat, "Who is better in project planning? Generative artificial intelligence or project managers?," Project Leadership and Society, vol. 4, p. 100101, 2023.
[4] S. Chowdhury, P. Budhwar, and G. Wood, "Generative artificial intelligence in business: towards a strategic human resource management framework," British Journal of Management, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 1680-1691, 2024.
[5] O. López-Solís et al., "Effect of generative artificial intelligence on strategic decision-making in entrepreneurial business initiatives: A systematic literature review," Administrative Sciences, vol. 15, no. 2, p. 66, 2025.
[6] A. R. Doshi and A. Moore, "Toward a Human-AI Task Tensor: A Taxonomy for Organizing Work in the Age of Generative AI," arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.15490, 2025.
[7] A. Bordas et al., "What is generative in generative artificial intelligence? A design-based perspective," Engineering Design Research, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 427-443, 2024.
[8] D. V. Galkin and W. Wei, "The Role of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Modern Design: Theoretical Considerations," Tomsk State University. Culture and Experience Science, vol. 57, pp. 25-39, 2025.
[9] E. W. Felton, M. Raj, and R. Siemens, "Occupational Variability in Exposure to Generative Artificial Intelligence," SSRN Scholarly Paper 4414065, 2023.
[10] D. Goller, C. Gschwendt, and S. C. Volter, "This time it's different - generative artificial intelligence and career choice," The Economics of Labor, p. 102746, 2025.
[11] S. Huang et al., "Human–GenAI collaboration across creative phases: Cognitive mechanisms shaping novelty and usefulness," International Journal of Information Management, vol. 86, p. 102986, 2026.
[12] S. Wu et al., "Human-AI collaboration enhances task performance but undermines human intrinsic motivation," Scientific Reports, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 15105, 2025.
[13] L. Yan et al., "Promises and challenges of generative artificial intelligence for human learning," Human Behavior Nature, vol. 8, no. 10, pp. 1839-1850, 2024.
[14] X. Weng et al., "Personality traits for self-regulated learning with generative artificial intelligence: The case of ChatGPT," Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, vol. 7, p. 100315, 2024.
[15] S. Al-Mawhab, "Digital Project Management Capability and Project Performance: The Mediating Role of Project Management Agility," African Journal of Business and Finance, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 84-94, 2025.
[16] M. Chen et al., "Digital transformation in project management: a systematic review and research agenda," Systems, vol. 13, no. 8, 2025.
[17] B. L. Tommasi, "Project Management and Digital Transformation: A Project Performance Measurement Model and Digital Archives," JLIS: Italian Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 92-108, 2018.
[18] M. L. A. Gonçalves et al., "The Relationship Between Project Management and Digital Transformation: A Systematic Review of the Literature," McKinsey Management Review, vol. 24, p. eRAMR230075, 2023.
[19] C. H. J. Hafsfeld, B. Hussein, and A. B. Rauzzi, "An attempt to understand the complexity of the government's digital transformation project," International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 70-91, 2021.
[20] V. Mirkovic et al., "Key characteristics of an organizational structure supporting digital transformation," in Proc. Int. Scientific Conf. Strategic Management and Decision Support Systems in Strategic Management, 2019, p. 257.
[21] M. M. Bonanomi et al., "The impact of digital transformation on formal and informal organizational structures of large architecture and engineering firms," Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 872-892, 2020.
[22] Y.-H. Tong, F.-C. Chia, and F. Y.-Y. Yung, "Exploring the use of digital technologies for construction project management," Planning Malaysia, vol. 19, 2021.
[23] P. E. D. Love and J. Matthews, "How to manage benefits under digital technology: from engineering to asset management," Automation in Construction, vol. 107, p. 102930, 2019.
[24] S. Nambisan et al., "Managing Digital Innovation," MIS Quarterly, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 223-238, 2017.
[25] P. Barthel et al., "Towards a Methodology for Evaluating Digital Innovation Projects," 2021.
[26] R. Ronge, M. Maier, and B. Rathgeber, "Towards a definition of Generative artificial intelligence," Philosophy & Technology, vol. 38, no. 1, p. 31, 2025.
[27] L. Pereira et al., "Artificial intelligence and project management: exploring the contributions and implications," International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 432-467, 2024.
[28] M. Z. Hossain et al., "The impact of artificial intelligence on project management efficiency," International Journal of Management Information Systems and Data Science, vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 1-17, 2024.
[29] Y. A. Lawal, A. O. Ayyanleke, and I. I. Ochin, "The impact of artificial intelligence technologies on the quality of human-artificial intelligence interaction in project management: a mixed-methods study," Journal of Human Capital Development, vol. 3, no. 2, p. 1, 2024.
[30] N. O. C. Victor, "How Artificial Intelligence Affects Project Management," 2023.
[31] S. S. Sengar et al., "Generative artificial intelligence: a systematic review and applications," Multimedia Tools and Applications, vol. 84, no. 21, pp. 23661-23700, 2025.
[32] S. Noy and W. Zhang, "Experimental evidence on the productivity effects of generative artificial intelligence," Science, vol. 381, no. 6654, pp. 187-192, 2023.
[33] J. D. Mayer, "How Human Personality Will Change With the Use of Artificial Intelligence," Personality Science, vol. 6, p. 27000710251386963, 2025.
[34] R. Riedl, "Is trust in artificial intelligence systems related to user personality? Review of empirical evidence and future research directions," Electronic Markets, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 2021-2051, 2022.
[35] J. F. Hair, W. C. Black, B. J. Babin et al., Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2010.
A. M. Felicetti, R. Pietroluongo, A. Zammit, and L. Cricelli, "Artificial Intelligence and Project Management: An Empirical Investigation on the Appropriation of Generative Chatbots by Project Managers," Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, vol. 9, no. 3, p. 100545, 2024.
L. Banh and G. Strobel, "Generative Artificial Intelligence," Electronic Markets, vol. 33, no. 1, p. 63, 2023.
A. Barcaui and A. Monat, "Who Is Better in Project Planning? Generative Artificial Intelligence or Project Managers?," Project Leadership and Society, vol. 4, p. 100101, 2023.
S. Chowdhury, P. Budhwar, and G. Wood, "Generative Artificial Intelligence in Business: Towards a Strategic Human Resource Management Framework," British Journal of Management, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 1680-1691, 2024.
O. López-Solís, J. A. Martínez-López, R. Merigó-Lindahl, and J. M. Merigó, "Effect of Generative Artificial Intelligence on Strategic Decision-Making in Entrepreneurial Business Initiatives: A Systematic Literature Review," Administrative Sciences, vol. 15, no. 2, p. 66, 2025.
A. R. Doshi and A. Moore, "Toward a Human-AI Task Tensor: A Taxonomy for Organizing Work in the Age of Generative AI," arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.15490, 2025.
A. Bordas, M. C. Yang, and K. N. Otto, "What Is Generative in Generative Artificial Intelligence? A Design-Based Perspective," Research in Engineering Design, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 427-443, 2024.
D. V. Galkin and W. Wei, "The Role of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Modern Design: Theoretical Considerations," Tomsk State University Journal of Cultural Studies and Art History, vol. 57, pp. 25-39, 2025.
E. W. Felton, M. Raj, and R. Seamans, "Occupational Variability in Exposure to Generative Artificial Intelligence," SSRN Scholarly Paper 4414065, 2023.
D. Goller, C. Gschwendt, and S. C. Wolter, "This Time It's Different – Generative Artificial Intelligence and Career Choice," Labour Economics, vol. 92, p. 102746, 2025.
S. Huang, J. Sutcliffe, A. F. Niculescu, and C. L. Teo, "Human-GenAI Collaboration Across Creative Phases: Cognitive Mechanisms Shaping Novelty and Usefulness," International Journal of Information Management, vol. 86, p. 102986, 2026.
S. Wu, Y. Zhang, X. Liu, and L. Chen, "Human-AI Collaboration Enhances Task Performance but Undermines Human Intrinsic Motivation," Scientific Reports, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 15105, 2025.
L. Yan, T. Martinez-Maldonado, and D. Gasevic, "Promises and Challenges of Generative Artificial Intelligence for Human Learning," Nature Human Behaviour, vol. 8, no. 10, pp. 1839-1850, 2024.
X. Weng, S. Cui, N. Liang, and J. Zhang, "Personality Traits for Self-Regulated Learning with Generative Artificial Intelligence: The Case of ChatGPT," Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, vol. 7, p. 100315, 2024.
S. Al-Mawhab, "Digital Project Management Capability and Project Performance: The Mediating Role of Project Management Agility," African Journal of Business and Economic Research, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 84-94, 2025.
M. Chen, Y. Liu, H. Zhang, and W. Wang, "Digital Transformation in Project Management: A Systematic Review and Research Agenda," Systems, vol. 13, no. 8, 2025.
B. L. Tommasi, "Project Management and Digital Transformation: A Project Performance Measurement Model and Digital Archives," JLIS.it: Italian Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 92-108, 2018.
M. L. A. Gonçalves, R. A. Oliveira, and J. P. Silva, "The Relationship Between Project Management and Digital Transformation: A Systematic Review of the Literature," RAE-Revista de Administração de Empresas, vol. 24, p. eRAMR230075, 2023.
C. H. J. Hatfield, B. Hussein, and O. J. Rausand, "An Attempt to Understand the Complexity of the Government's Digital Transformation Project," International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 70-91, 2021.
V. Mirkovic, M. Obradovic, N. Dencic-Mihajlov, and D. Cockalo, "Key Characteristics of an Organizational Structure Supporting Digital Transformation," in Proc. Int. Scientific Conf. Strategic Management and Decision Support Systems in Strategic Management, 2019, p. 257.
M. M. Bonanomi, D. E. Caruso, and W. Sacks, "The Impact of Digital Transformation on Formal and Informal Organizational Structures of Large Architecture and Engineering Firms," Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 872-892, 2020.
Y.-H. Tong, F.-C. Chia, and F. Y.-Y. Yung, "Exploring the Use of Digital Technologies for Construction Project Management," Planning Malaysia, vol. 19, 2021.
P. E. D. Love and J. Matthews, "How to Manage Benefits Under Digital Technology: From Engineering to Asset Management," Automation in Construction, vol. 107, p. 102930, 2019.
S. Nambisan, K. Lyytinen, A. Majchrzak, and M. Song, "Digital Innovation Management: Reinventing Innovation Management Research in a Digital World," MIS Quarterly, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 223-238, 2017.
P. Barthel, M. Fuchs, C. Medaglia, and R. Urbanek, "Towards a Methodology for Evaluating Digital Innovation Projects," 2021.
R. Ronge, M. Maier, and B. Rathgeber, "Towards a Definition of Generative Artificial Intelligence," Philosophy & Technology, vol. 38, no. 1, p. 31, 2025.
L. Pereira, J. Santos, A. Silva, and M. Costa, "Artificial Intelligence and Project Management: Exploring the Contributions and Implications," International Journal of Logistics Systems and Management, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 432-467, 2024.
M. Z. Hossain, R. Ahmed, S. Khan, and N. Rahman, "The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Project Management Efficiency," International Journal of Management Information Systems and Data Science, vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 1-17, 2024.
Y. A. Lawal, A. O. Ayanleke, and I. I. Ochim, "The Impact of Artificial Intelligence Technologies on the Quality of Human-Artificial Intelligence Interaction in Project Management: A Mixed-Methods Study," Journal of Human Capital Development, vol. 3, no. 2, p. 1, 2024.
N. O. C. Victor, "How Artificial Intelligence Affects Project Management," 2023.
S. S. Sengar, X. Liu, M. Dauwels, and A. Kumar, "Generative Artificial Intelligence: A Systematic Review and Applications," Multimedia Tools and Applications, vol. 84, no. 21, pp. 23661-23700, 2025.
S. Noy and W. Zhang, "Experimental Evidence on the Productivity Effects of Generative Artificial Intelligence," Science, vol. 381, no. 6654, pp. 187-192, 2023.
J. D. Mayer, "How Human Personality Will Change With the Use of Artificial Intelligence," Personality Science, vol. 6, p. 27000710251386963, 2025.
R. Riedl, "Is Trust in Artificial Intelligence Systems Related to User Personality? Review of Empirical Evidence and Future Research Directions," Electronic Markets, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 2021-2051, 2022.
J. F. Hair, W. C. Black, B. J. Babin, and R. E. Anderson, Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2010.