Scientific Paradigms in Maritime Technological Innovation: Leadership and Epistemological Decision-Making
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61132/digitalinnovation.v2i2.211Keywords:
Epistemology, Scientific Paradigms, Technological Innovation, Maritime Leadership, Decision-MakingAbstract
The maritime industry is undergoing rapid technological transformation, yet the role of scientific paradigms in shaping technological decision-making remains underexplored. This study examines how epistemological reasoning influences leadership approaches to technological innovation in maritime business management. The research is motivated by the need to bridge the gap between theory and practice, ensuring that technological advancements are implemented with structured decision-making rather than reactive adaptation. This study provides an original contribution by evaluating the intersection of leadership, epistemology, and technological adoption—a perspective largely overlooked in previous maritime innovation research. While digital transformation is widely discussed, few studies address how structured epistemological reasoning affects decision-making in technology adoption. The research seeks to answer: To what extent do scientific paradigms influence technological decision-making in maritime leadership, and what challenges hinder epistemological integration? Using a qualitative methodology, the study engages industry experts, lecturers, and postgraduate students, applying thematic and comparative analysis to explore epistemological competency development and sustainable innovation. Results indicate that leadership adaptability and epistemological literacy significantly enhance digital transformation efforts, yet barriers such as regulatory constraints and resistance to structured reasoning persist. The study concludes that embedding epistemology into maritime education and leadership training is essential for ensuring sustainable, data-driven technological decision-making in the industry.
Downloads
References
Akpinar, H., & Ozer-Caylan, D. (2021). Managing complexity in maritime business: Understanding the smart changes of globalization. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal, 32(4), 582–599.
Berg, H. P. (2013). Human factors and safety culture in maritime safety. Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation: STCW, Maritime Education and Training (MET), Human Resources and Crew Manning, Maritime Policy, Logistics and Economic Matters, 107, 107–115.
Burns, J. M. (2014). Ethics, the heart of leadership. Bloomsbury Publishing USA.
Chilisa, B. (2019). Indigenous research methodologies. Sage publications.
Cicek, K., Akyuz, E., & Celik, M. (2019). Future skills requirements analysis in maritime industry. Procedia Computer Science, 158, 270–274.
Farooq, M. S., Riaz, S., Abid, A., Umer, T., & Zikria, Y. Bin. (2020). Role of IoT technology in agriculture: A systematic literature review. Electronics, 9(2), 319.
Fischer, F., & Miller, G. J. (2017). Handbook of public policy analysis: theory, politics, and methods. Routledge.
House, D., & Saeed, F. (2016). The seamanship examiner: for STCW certification examinations. Taylor & Francis.
Issa, M., Ilinca, A., & Martini, F. (2022). Ship energy efficiency and maritime sector initiatives to reduce carbon emissions. Energies, 15(21), 7910.
Katz, J. (2015). A theory of qualitative methodology: The social system of analytic fieldwork. Méthod (e) s: African Review of Social Sciences Methodology, 1(1–2), 131–146.
Kim, T., & Mallam, S. (2020). A Delphi-AHP study on STCW leadership competence in the age of autonomous maritime operations. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 19(2), 163–181.
Kim, T., Sydnes, A. K., & Batalden, B.-M. (2021). Development and validation of a safety leadership Self-Efficacy Scale (SLSES) in maritime context. Safety Science, 134, 105031.
Merriam, S. B., & Grenier, R. S. (2019). Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis. John Wiley & Sons.
Pantouvakis, A., & Vlachos, I. (2020). Talent and leadership effects on sustainable performance in the maritime industry. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 86, 102440.
Plaza-Hernández, M., Gil-González, A. B., Rodríguez-González, S., Prieto-Tejedor, J., & Corchado-Rodríguez, J. M. (2021). Integration of IoT technologies in the maritime industry. Distributed Computing and Artificial Intelligence, Special Sessions, 17th International Conference, 107–115.
Rachmad, Y. E. (2022). Leadership Flexibility Theory. Pontevedra Rías Publicaciones Internacionales Edición Especial.
Sukomardojo, T., & Ratnaningsih, D. (2022). The Using of Media Games to Improve SMCP (Standard Marine Communication Phrases) Vocabulary in Maritime English. ICES 2021: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of Education and Science, ICES 2021, November 17-18, 2021, Jakarta, Indonesia, 56.
Theotokas, I., Lagoudis, I. N., & Kotsiopoulos, N. (2014). Leadership profiling of ocean going ship masters. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics, 30(3), 321–343.
Ubaidillah, A. F., Bafadal, I., Ulfatin, N., & Supriyanto, A. (2020). Cultivating marine leadership character through multicultural boarding-school system. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 39(1), 191–206.
Wahl, A. M., & Kongsvik, T. (2018). Crew resource management training in the maritime industry: a literature review. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 17(3), 377–396.
Willig, C. (2014). Interpretation and analysis. The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis, 481.
Zaderei, A. (2020). Ensuring the sustainability of the human resources management system of maritime industry enterprises. Access: Access to Science, Business, Innovation in Digital Economy, 1(2), 146–156.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Digital Innovation : International Journal of Management

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.