%0 Journal Article
%A Bistra, Mizova
%A Yonka, Parvanova
%A Roumiana, Peytcheva-Forsyth
%D 2026
%F iab_repo:1747
%I Faculty of Education, Sofia University
%J Administrative Sciences
%K typologisation of digital leadership; school principals; digital transformation; educational management; mixed methods research; Bulgaria
%N 57
%P 15-37
%T Leading the Digital Transformation of Education: The Perspective of School Principals
%U http://eprints.iab.edu.my/v2/1747/
%V 16(1)
%X This mixed-methods study investigates the strategic management of digital transformation in Bulgarian schools by analysing principals’ self-reported leadership practices and styles.Using data from a nationally representative sample (N = 349) gathered through the SELFIE tool, complemented by 30 in-depth interviews, the research examines how school leaders understand and enact their roles as digital leaders within a context of fragmented policies and uneven digital capacity. Quantitative results reveal a central paradox: although 89.7% of principals claim to actively support teachers’ digital innovation, only about half report having a formalised digital strategy. This imbalance between strong operational support and weak institutionalisation reflects the dominant approach to school digitalisation in Bulgaria. Qualitative cluster analysis identifies three leadership profiles: (1) a strategic–collaborative profile, characterised by long-term planning, partnerships, and data-driven decisions; (2) a supportive–collaborative profile focused on teacher communities and context-specific professional development but lacking strategic vision; and (3) a balanced–pragmatic profile oriented toward measurable improvements and adaptive responses. Triangulation with national assessment data shows that leadership styles align with institutional contexts: high-performing schools tend to apply strategic–collaborative leadership, while lower performing schools adopt pragmatic, adaptive approaches. The study argues that digital transformation requires context-sensitive frameworks recognising multiple developmental trajectories, highlighting the need for differentiated policies that support strategic institutionalisation of existing digital innovations while addressing structural inequalities.