Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to approach the issue of how organizational innovation can be accelerated with the support of leadership structures and the organizational climate, specifically taking into account the top innovative universities of the world, which has not been found in previous empirical studies. Design/methodology/approach: A survey, based on a deductive approach, is adopted since the questionnaire for organizational innovation is designed for organizations in order to measure organizational innovation, widely used by experienced employees from senior managers to all kind of employees (Caird et al., 2013) facilitating the European Commission work, whereas for transformational leadership, a Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (Bass and Avolio, 1994) is utilized. A complete online questionnaire was developed for collecting data, and the PLS-SEM statistical technique is used for analysis and results. Findings: Top innovative universities of the world mostly have a transformational leadership style directly triggering organizational innovation which is consistent with the previous studies, while transactional leadership is having a positive relationship with organizational culture and innovation, but the results were statistically insignificant. Research limitations/implications: Based on this research and other previous studies, it is suggested that universities across the world ought to imply transformational leadership traits and style which have fostered organizational innovation in the top-ranked innovative universities in developed nations, whereas more factors needed to be studied so that comprehensive guidelines should be provided to universities and research institutes where innovation is stagnant and passive. Practical implications: The finding has practical implications, suggesting that universities and research institutes should draft and implement guidelines where leaders with certain traits and norms can play a role to nourish an environment where stakeholders think outside the box, with learning and knowledge creation, and proactive contribution beyond responsibilities, obligations, and compulsion. Social implications: This study has suggested that less innovative universities should draft and design leadership and cultural enriching plans so that society, organizations, and commercial firms could foster innovation, ultimately benefiting general public and society. Originality/value: Very few of the scholars have investigated from the perspective of innovative universities, where knowledge is created and flows into organizations, either governmental or private, and society in general. As a result, this study aims to investigate how leadership has impacted the culture of knowledge creation and innovativeness in the top 100 innovative universities. So, this is among rare studies where universities are suggested to adopt innovation supporting culture and leadership.

Due to the novelty of the smart education phenomenon, a quantitative investigation of the variables that will influence the implementation of ‘smart education’ was needed. Therefore, based on a probability simple random survey of 349 Grenadian employees from tertiary institutions in the education industry, the influence of leadership and human resource capacities on smart education were investigated. Results produced from SPSS analysis software and Smart PLS revealed that leadership and human resources capacities have sufficient confidence to have a significant influence on smart education, producing a positive association with ‘smart education.’ However, this relationship is positively moderated by additional investments, such as infrastructural innovation. These findings enrich the current literature on smart education (SE) by increasing knowledge of the phenomenon through the lenses of the Actor-Network Theory and Technology Adoption Model. Accordingly, policymakers should bear these findings in mind when developing holistic strategies to guide SE’s successful enactment.