LEADERSHIP EXPECTATIONS ACROSS STRATEGIC, OPERATIONAL, AND TACTICAL C2 LEVELS IN A HYPOTHETICAL MILITARY OPERATION: THE INFLUENCE OF PROCEDURAL JUSTICE, TRUST IN LEADERS, AND DIGITALIZATION IN PEACETIME SETTINGS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.68302/std2026.vol1.123Keywords:
procedural justice, C2 leadership, digitalization, trust in leaderAbstract
A two-layered analytical approach was applied to assess the influence of actual experience with the state and functioning of procedural justice, trust in leadership, and the level of digitalization of equipment in military formations in a peacetime context on service members’ expectations regarding the performance of strategic, operational, and tactical levels of leadership in the command and control (C2) system during a hypothetical operational scenario. The adopted methodological framework allows for a parallel analysis of the substantive relationships among the included variables while simultaneously accounting for the mental transition between cognitive representations of actual experience and those constructed at the level of abstract hypothesizing.
In conditions of compressed timeframes and escalating complexity, dynamism, and multi-layered operational environments, modern C2 system are conceptualized around the principle of centralized command and decentralized execution, which functions as a system-forming mechanism for maintaining operational tempo and ensuring coordination coherence across different levels of command.
Procedural justice in peacetime and established trust in leadership are recognized as fundamental prerequisites for effective mission command, as they foster perceptions of legitimacy, commitment, and willingness to take initiative at lower levels of command.
Digitalization, including the development of artificial intelligence transforms command into the so-called “digital mission command” [1, p.162] emphasizing the achievement of decision superiority. This requires leaders at all levels to interpret and effectively act upon digitally provided information, thereby enabling closer and faster alignment between strategic objectives and tactical actions on the battlefield.
The empirical study was conducted on a representative sample of 1,257 service members and included analysis of data collected through a battery of questionnaires covering psychological and organizational measures.
Correlation and mediation analyses demonstrate that procedural justice, trust in leadership, and digitalization exert systematic and multi-level effects on expectations of leadership effectiveness in C2 systems in the context of real operational scenario. The results indicate that digitalization and trust in leadership enhance command effectiveness through the mediating role of procedural justice, with digitalization exhibiting a stronger mediating effect than trust.
Supporting Agencies
The document was developed under the National Scientific Programme "Security and Defence", funded by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Bulgaria in implementation of the National Strategy for the Development of Scientific Research 2017-2030, adopted by Decision of the Council of Ministers No. 731 of 21 Oct. 2021.Downloads
References
[1] A. T. Bollmann and T. Heltberg, “The Strategic Corporal, the Tactical General, and the Digital Coup d’oeil – Military Decision-Making and Organizational Competences in Future Military Operations,” Scandinavian Journal of Military Studies, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 151–168, Aug. 2023.
[2] NATO, NATO Digital Transformation / Digital Mission Command Concepts. Brussels, Belgium, 2020.
[3] V. Vasileva and V. Aleksandrova, “Application of NATO models for building information infrastructure in crisis conditions,” in Proceedings of the Romanian Military Thinking International Scientific Conference, Bucharest, Romania, 2024, pp. 232–247.
[4] D. Ginev, National Crisis Management Capabilities – State and Prospects [in Bulgarian]. Sofia, Bulgaria: Videlina, 2024.
[5] P. Stoilov, Administrative Management in Defense [in Bulgarian]. Sofia, Bulgaria: DioMira, 2022.
[6] M. van Creveld, Command in War. Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press, 1985.
[7] J. Greenberg, “A taxonomy of organizational justice theories,” Academy of Management Review, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 9–22, 1987.
[8] T. R. Tyler, Why People Obey the Law. New Haven, CT, USA: Yale University Press, 1990.
[9] D. De Cremer, R. van Dijke, and A. Bos, “Leader’s procedural justice affecting identification and trust,” The Leadership Quarterly, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 602–617, 2006.
[10] R. Cropanzano and M. S. Mitchell, “Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review,” Journal of Management, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 874–900, 2005.
[11] M. Klimchak, J. A. O’Neill, and B. S. Palmer, “Perceptions of organizational support, work–life balance, and employee well-being: The mediating role of work engagement,” Journal of Organizational Psychology, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 36–50, 2020.
[12] K. E. Weick, Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 1995.
[13] B. M. Bass, Leadership and Performance Beyond Expectations. New York, NY, USA: Free Press, 1985.
[14] B. J. Avolio, Full Leadership Development: Building the Vital Forces in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage, 1999.
[15] R. M. Kramer, “Trust and distrust in organizations: Emerging perspectives, enduring questions,” Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 50, pp. 569–598, 1999.
[16] V. Vasileva and V. Gagamova, “Application of simulation modeling in education and scientific research: An exploration through predictive scenarios of cybersecurity threats,” in Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Education, Research and Innovation (ICERI 2025), Seville, Spain, Nov. 10–12, 2025, pp. 8962–8969.
[17] V. Aleksandrova, V. Tagareva, and V. Vasileva, “Regarding the needs for knowledge and artificial intelligence as a guarantee for the change of modern Bulgaria—ethical aspects of the application of artificial intelligence in autonomous systems,” in Proceedings of the XVIII International Conference on Open and Underwater Mining of Minerals, Varna, Bulgaria, 2025, pp. 225–234.
[18] M. Castells, The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell, 1996.
[19] D. S. Alberts and R. E. Hayes, Power to the Edge: Command and Control in the Information Age. Washington, DC, USA: CCRP, 2003.
[20] M. I. Nenovska, “Biosecurity concerns and benefits of artificial intelligence use in the life sciences,” in Proceedings of the IX International Scientific Conference CONFSEC, Borovets, Bulgaria, Dec. 8–11, 2025.
[21] K. Peicheva, Development of the Public Service “Defense” in Bulgaria [in Bulgarian]. Sofia, Bulgaria: Academic Publishing House “Prof. Marin Drinov”, 2014.
[22] Z. Zdravkov, Zh. Petrov, A. Atipova, and S. Stoykov, “Synchronization of sociological survey processes for the quality of education and the lessons-learned process at the Rakovski National Defence College, in Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference “Defense Technologies”, Shumen, Bulgaria, 2022, pp. 452–461, ISSN 2367-7902.
[23] D. Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York, NY, USA: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011.
[24] H. A. Simon, Models of Man: Social and Rational. New York, NY, USA: Wiley, 1957.
[25] V. Vasileva and J. Hlebarov, “Methodology for improving cyber awareness competencies of employees in public administration,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Application of Information and Communication Technology, Statistics and Economic Education (ICAICTSEE 2020), Sofia, Bulgaria, 2020, pp. 278–285, published by UNWE Publishing Complex, 2021.
[26] Report on the Results of a Representative Sociological Study on the Topic: “Motivation of Personnel in the Formations of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Bulgaria”. Sofia, Bulgaria: Defence Advance Research Institute, Rakovski National Defence College, Nov. 2025, Reg. No. SI-29-10294/25.11.2025, unpublished.
[27] V. Vasileva, V. Aleksandrova, and A. Guncheva, “Developing information technologies and digital transformation to answer modern educational and security challenges,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Application of Information and Communication Technology, Statistics and Economic Education (ICAICTSEE 2017), Sofia, Bulgaria: UNWE Publishing Complex, 2017, pp. 300–305.
[27] T. Grozdanova, Social Status of Military Personnel in the Years of Transition [in Bulgarian]. Sofia, Bulgaria: IK VIDJI, 2024.
[29] R. M. Baron and D. A. Kenny, “The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 1173–1182, 1986.
[30] P. M. Senge, The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York, NY, USA: Doubleday, 1990.
[31] T. R. Tyler and S. L. Blader, “The group engagement model: Procedural justice, social identity, and cooperative behavior,” Personality and Social Psychology Review, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 349–361, 2003.
[32] G. Klein, Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press, 1998.
[33] D. Tashkov, “Building organizational resilience: Strategic approaches,” Military Journal, vol. 132, no. 1, pp. 5–13, Sofia, Bulgaria: Publishing House “G. S. Rakovski,” 2025, ISSN 2534-8388.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Teodora Georgieva, Ivo Radulov
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
