This research investigates the relationship between the variables of public service reform (PSR) and bureaucratic revitalization and the relationship between digital leadership (DL) and bureaucratic revitalization. The research method used in this research is quantitative survey research which aims to determine the relationship between two or more variables. The research method for this research is quantitative associative, the population of this study is senior immigration officers. The data analysis method uses structural equation modeling (SEM) partial least squares (PLS), the respondents for this study were 634 senior immigration office employees who were determined using the simple random sampling method—non probability sampling, the questionnaire was designed to contain statement items using a 7 point Likert scale. A closed questionnaire is a list of questions or statements that are equipped with multiple answer choices expressed in scale form. The Likert scale used in this research is (1) strongly disagree, (2) disagree, (3) quite disagree, (4) neutral, (5) quite agree, (6) agree, (7) strongly agree. Data processing in this research used SmartPLS software. The independent variables of this research are digital leadership and public service reform and the dependent variable is bureaucratic revitalization. The stages of data analysis in this research are the outer model test which includes convergent validity, discriminant validity and composite reliability as well as inner model analysis, namely hypothesis testing. The results of this research show that public service reform has a positive and significant relationship to bureaucratic revitalization and digital leadership has a positive and significant relationship to bureaucratic revitalization. This research implies that leaders focus on engaging, using, and handling the uncertainty of emerging technologies, digital tools, and data, leaders to support bureaucratic revitalization, the immigration department must implement digital leadership, immigration leaders should encourage the use of digital platforms in their organizations, support and facilitate digital transformation. The immigration department should increase the revitalization of the bureaucracy, the immigration department should carry out public service reforms. Public services are to be good if they fulfill several principles of public interest, legal certainty, equal rights, balance of rights and obligations, professionalism, participativeness, equality of treatment/non-discrimination, openness, accountability, facilities and special treatment for vulnerable groups, timeliness, speed, convenience and affordability.

The increasing domains of digital technology in educational settings urgently require digital leadership (DL) to ensure the sustainability of school improvement initiatives in the digital era and to facilitate the digital transformation of educational institutions. DL emerges as an urgent and evolving topic of significant public interest. However, there is a notable lack of consensus persists regarding its definition and constructs within educational settings, hindering the advancement of DL theory. To address this gap, a systematic literature review was conceived, employing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology. The primary aim was to enhance comprehension of the geographical and temporal distribution of relevant publications, as well as to elucidate prevalent definitions and constructs of digital leadership in educational contexts. This article endeavors to synthesize the extant scientific literature on DL, focusing on studies published between 2019 and 2024. Inclusion criteria encompassed scientific research publications sourced from Scopus and the Web of Science (WoS) databases, available in English, and centered on educational settings. Initial database queries yielded 578 papers, subsequently refined to 35 studies through meticulous screening for duplicity and adherence to inclusion criteria. Notably, the reviewed publications predominantly characterize DL as a multifaceted process, amalgamation, or integration, with a predominant emphasis on functional aspects of leadership. Noteworthy constructs frequently encountered include digital age learning culture, visionary leadership, excellence in professional practice, systemic improvement, and digital citizenship. This review contributes to the enrichment of theoretical conceptualizations surrounding DL. It underscores the imperative for future research to explore into the measurement of DL, thereby presenting promising avenues for evaluating principal DL within educational institutions.