Semi-structured interview guide for a qualitative study of the AI project manager role

2026

Full text Open access: Green Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22154393
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Semi-structured interview guide used in the qualitative study reported in the article "Conceptualizing the AI Project Manager: Role Attributes and Competencies for Managing Projects in AI-Driven Organizations" (Administrative Sciences, manuscript admsci-4491955). The guide contains the full set of questions administered in eight semi-structured expert interviews with practitioners self-identifying as AI project managers across six countries and the IT, fintech, and edtech sectors. It is deposited so that readers can distinguish competencies that participants raised without prompting from competencies that were named in the questions and therefore elicited. Five competencies were introduced by the questions themselves: adaptability (Q18, "flexible and adaptive"), emotional intelligence (Q19, "understand and manage emotions"), AI literacy (Q20, "understand and have knowledge to apply AI technologies"), leadership (Q21, named directly), and AI ethics (Q22, as a conditional probe contingent on the participant raising ethical issues unprompted). Only leadership is named in the wording of the question; the other four are described in plain language rather than by their construct label. The study protocol, interview guide, participant information sheet, and written consent form were reviewed and approved by the Research Ethics Committee of Astana IT University, Astana, Kazakhstan (protocol code No. 7, 9 February 2026). The interview transcripts themselves are not deposited: participant consent does not extend to public sharing of the raw interview data, and the purposive sample is small enough that de-identification would not prevent re-identification. Version 1.2 supersedes versions 1.0 and 1.1. It contains the guide in both DOCX and PDF format; version 1.0 carried the DOCX only and version 1.1 the PDF only. The content of the guide is unchanged across all three versions.