iew
ed
TOWARDS A HOLISTIC FRAMEWORK OF DIGITAL STRATEGY:
A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW
Malek BEN HAMIDA
Pr
ep
rin
tn
ot
pe
er
re
v
Toulouse School of Management
31000 Toulouse, France
TSM Research UMR 5303 CNRS
Malek.ben-hamida@tsm-education.fr
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
iew
ed
TOWARDS A HOLISTIC FRAMEWORK OF DIGITAL STRATEGY:
pe
er
re
v
A SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW
Abstract
The emergence of digital technologies has enabled companies across industries to create value
in new ways and to deploy digital strategies. The concept of digital strategy has been used
interchangeably which creates confusion in both academia and practice. To clarify the
constructs and to enhance the ability for researchers to further explore this phenomenon, we
conduct a systematic literature review. The main findings revealed three complementary
schools of definitions focusing on process, information technology and transformation levels.
We also found many similarities and differences as well as different related topics to this
concept. This paper fosters construct clarity of digital strategy by drawing a more holistic
definition and a framework highlighting four essential characteristics such as digital
ot
technology, value creation, organizational scope, and strategic aspects. Contextual conditions
ep
rin
tn
and futures avenues for digital strategy are also shared.
Pr
Keywords:
Digital strategy definition, Construct clarity, Digital transformation, Digital technologies,
Digital strategy characteristics, Systematic literature review
1
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
INTRODUCTION
iew
ed
I.
The everyday use of information technology (IT) is considered a top priority for organizations
(Nambisan et al., 2017) which increasingly transforming (or “disrupting”) their structures and
processes to benefit from the potential of digital technologies and their alleged effectiveness.
Based on Foundry digital business strategy 2023 report, 93% of organizations have adopted (or
“have plans to adopt”), a digital business strategy. Digital strategy has been a relevant concept
in the information system (IS) (Brahadwaj et al., 2013; Matt et al., 2015; Rauser 2016) and
pe
er
re
v
strategic management communities (Kontic et al. 2018, p 29-35). More than 80% of the studies
were published between 2010 and 2022, which underscores the novelty of the phenomenon of
digital strategy and catches the attention of the scientific community.
Terms such as digital strategy, digitalization strategy, and digital transformation strategy are
often used interchangeably to refer to the same phenomenon which caused a misleading theory
landscape. In addition to that, how companies make sense of digital strategies in today’s
environment remains confusing. Hence, the purpose of this paper is to provide a clear construct
definition and framework of digital strategy that is essential to appropriately compare, analyze,
and discuss the concept and to advance knowledge on this research interest. Construct clarity
is central for the scientific structuration of the fields and else important for practitioners
ot
(Suddaby 2010).
To do so, we conducted a systematic literature review, drawing on existing digital strategy
definitions to deduct the underlying schools of thought. The findings suggested three schools
tn
of definitions; (1) IT-centric: the use of advanced information technology to digitalize and
maintain competitive advantage; (2) process-centric: the use of IT to develop digital solutions;
and (3) digital transformation-centric: the use of IT to redesign an organization. The paper first
rin
creates parsimonious categorical distinction between the three schools and provides a clear
scientific structuration highlighting the key dimensions in a common definition and framework.
Second, it provides a coherent overview of the variety of concepts related to digital strategy as
ep
well as the scientific theories used to study it. This overview could serve as a map so that future
scholars approaching this topic know the boundary conditions (Suddaby 2010) and where to be
Pr
positioned.
This paper is structured as follows. First, the theoretical background of digital strategy is
presented. Second, the research method is explained. Third, the results of the systematic
literature review are presented. They consist of the different schools of definitions and the
2
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
related concepts to finally provide a new general definition and framework. The final section
II.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
iew
ed
includes the discussion of the framework and future avenues for research.
Researchers in the fields of strategic management and IS have suggested that the digital
revolution, characterized by the shift from traditional tools to digitalization and the use of new
digital technologies, might lead to a new perspective on strategy that differs from the traditional
pe
er
re
v
making (Bharadwaj et al.,2013; Kahre et al.,2017).
a) Digitalization has been considered one of the most important megatrends that are
currently influencing the world’s economy through the shift from an industrial society
to a digital society (Newell & Marabelli, 2015). It includes numerous technologies (e.g.,
artificial intelligence (AI), big data, online platforms, the cloud, and the Internet of
Things (IoT)) and any activity or process that is made by synchronizing IT technologies
and resources with digital value propositions. It is transforming the structure of social
relationships in both consumer and enterprise spaces.
b) Digital technologies, which are the “(combinations of information, computing,
communication, and connectivity technologies) [that] are fundamentally transforming
ot
business strategies, business processes, firm capabilities, products and services, and key
interfirm relationships in extended business networks” (Bharadwaj et al., 2013, pp.
471). These technologies are tools for computing (hardware and software) as well as for
tn
global connectivity, such as standard protocols (e.g., internet and mobile web). They are
associated with the development of new capabilities that facilitate the pursuit of strategic
rin
objectives such as information gathering, efficiency enhancement, and customer focus.
c) Digital strategy has emerged as an insightful and stimulating dimension of strategic
management. This term is frequently used in academia, but there is no consensus on a
ep
shared definition. It was first introduced as an alignment of IT and business in 1989,
was subsequently named “digital business strategy” in 2013 and was finally associated
Pr
with digital transformation strategy in 2015 and 2017.
3
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
2013
Alignment view
2015
2017
2023
iew
ed
1989
Digital transformation
Digital Business
Digital
strategy
Strategy
transformation
Henderson et al.
(1989)
Bharadwaj et al. Matt et al. (2015)
(2013)
Kane et al. 2017
Figure 1: The historical progression of digital strategy definition
1)
The alignment view
pe
er
re
v
First, Henderson and Venkatraman (1989) identified an alignment of business strategy and IT
strategy. They highlighted the importance of IT strategy in shaping business strategy and
transforming business processes and scope, emphasizing the necessity of integrating these two
elements. The concept of integrating IT strategies with business strategies is referred to as the
strategic alignment model.
This model is defined in terms of four domains of strategic choice: business strategy,
information technology strategy, organizational infrastructure and processes, and information
technology infrastructure and processes—each with its own underlying dimensions (Henderson
et al., 1993). This model is a tool used by corporate executives who aim to assess the level of
alignment between their business and IT strategies (Coleman & Papp 2006). It explains the
strategic fit between internal and external views and the functional integration between
ot
technological and organizational infrastructure.
tn
Other studies have observed that there is an alignment of digital technology with organizational
variables such as business strategy, organizational structure, and performance (Croteau et al.,
2001). Strategic alignment has been an important research area in recent decades and has been
rated among the top concerns and challenges for executives. Indeed, strategic alignment has
rin
been shown to positively impact performance (Gerow et al., 2014). Researchers have developed
and presented multiple frameworks to enable the assessment of strategic alignment within
companies (Henderson & Venkatraman 1989). Recently, academia has departed from the
ep
alignment view of acknowledging the combination of IT/IS strategy with business strategy
(Matt et al., 2015; Teubner 2013) and moved toward digital business strategy, which has been
Pr
designed as the new form of strategy in the digital era.
2)
Digital business strategy
4
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
Bharadwaj et al. (2013) stated that it is important to rethink the role of IT strategy in the digital
iew
ed
world and argued that there is now a fusion between IT strategy and business strategy (i.e., they
aim at going beyond the alignment view) rather than a need for an alignment in which
technologies follow the strategy. This fusion is labeled “digital business strategy”. Bharadwaj
et al. (2013) defined digital business strategy (DBS) as an “organizational strategy formulated
and executed by leveraging digital resources to create differential value” (pp. 472). Digital
strategy has the same purpose as a business strategy: to create value for the enterprise to stay
competitive and to generate revenue.This fusion manifested the jump of IT from the functional
pe
er
re
v
level to the firm level and demonstrated the top-down relevance of IT for business.
However, it is different from the traditional IT strategy as it is more than a cross-functional
strategy, and it goes beyond traditional functional areas (such as logistics, operations,
marketing, or others) and various IT-enabled business processes (such as customer services,
and others). Digital business strategy is more prominent, more embedded, and more
encompassing than other functional strategies. Consequently, it should not be positioned below
business strategy but treated as business strategy itself for the digital era.
Companies feel the need to have a strategy driven by technological capacity improvements,
digitalization, and digitization of information (Bharadwaj et al., 2013). This so-called “digital
business strategy” is considered a central topic in business. In practice, many pure digital
ot
players have found that maturing digital business depends on integrating digital technologies
such as the cloud, social networking, big data, and mobility (Kane et al., 2015).
tn
Beginning in 2015, this concept of “digital strategy” was, in many studies, strongly related to
the “digital transformation” strategy. Some researchers argued that those two key concepts are
different but still complementary. Others stated that both terms have the same meaning. In his
rin
article titled “Common elements of a successful digital strategy”, Eder et al. (2017) used the
term digital transformation to express digital strategy, which implies that both have the same
ep
meaning.
To date, this discussion is still ongoing. Based on different approaches, many researchers
present different definitions of digital strategy or slightly modify existing ones to fit their
Pr
studies. This creates complexity if not confusion. Is this definition about the formulation or
implementation of the strategy, an operational strategy, or a guide for digital decision-making?
Indeed, the starting point of such questioning is to clarify the central concept: what is the digital
strategy and what are its main key characteristics? Thus, this paper aims at fostering the
5
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
review.
III.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Systematic literature review:
iew
ed
construct clarity of the digital strategy. To do so, we have conducted a systematic literature
We conducted a systematic literature review (Webster & Watson 2002, Gass et al., 2015) to
synthesize the literature in an accurate, systematic, and reliable manner.
pe
er
re
v
Table 1: Detailed methodology following Gass et al., (2015)’s four phases approach.
Phase
Description
Phase 1: Searching Process
search for academic journals &
conference
papers
using
scientific databases
Keywords: TITLE: ("Digital strategy") OR TITLE: ("digital business
strategy") OR TITLE: ("digital transformation strategy")
OR TITLE: ("digital transformation") OR TITLE: ("IT business
alignment") OR TITLE: ("digital
technologies") OR TITLE: ("digitalization")
Conditions used to narrow the search include the following:
Phase 2: Screening Process
screening
conditions
were
developed and used to focus the
results obtained from the
searching process.
1. Articles should be published between 2010 and 2022 in a peer
reviewed journal.
2. Articles should be written in English.
3. Articles should have at least one of the keywords listed above.
4. Articles should be from journals/conferences proceedings in the
fields of strategic management or IS.
ot
5. Articles should explicitly include a definition of digital strategy.
Phase 3: Clustering Process
Thematic areas:
Characteristics of digital strategy
Practices of digital strategy
Drivers of digital strategy
Impacts of digital strategy
Strategic management orientation
tn
clusters were developed based
on thematic areas – constructs





rin
Phase 4: Analysis Process
The thematic areas were used to develop the findings in the next section
ep
Research design
Our initial search was performed in the Web of Science database and EBSCO host database;
Pr
these databases allow researchers to access articles from different disciplines such as
management and IS (Gusenbauer et al., 2020). They are thus one of the most complete sources
of business studies commonly used in literature reviews (e.g., Certo et al., 2009). These
databases were searched using the keywords mentioned in Table 1.
6
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
We also adapt the journal selection to our field of investigation refined by the following Web
iew
ed
of Science categories: (MANAGEMENT OR BUSINESS OR COMPUTER SCIENCE
INFORMATION SYSTEMS OR INFORMATION SCIENCE LIBRARY SCIENCE OR
COMPUTER
SCIENCE
THEORY
METHODS
OR
COMPUTER
SCIENCE
INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS). For EBSCO Host, we selected only Business
Source Premier (BSP).
We next performed a backward-forward search (Webster and Watson 2002) by (1) reviewing
pe
er
re
v
the references of the articles that we had identified in the initial search and (2) identifying
articles that cited the articles in our initial sample. In addition, another step was conducted to
complete the search phase. We complemented the sample by extending the search to other
databases to ensure that we did not miss relevant articles beyond our choice of outlets. The
electronic databases of Science Direct, JSTOR, Sage Journals, Springer Link, Taylor & Francis
Online, Emerald, and the Google Scholar electronic library provided us with access to
download the full-text articles.
We included peer-reviewed empirical and theoretical studies from 2010 to 2022. We excluded
books, gray literature (such as commentary, technical reports, discussion papers, lecture notes,
academic statements, and presentations), and findings that lacked relevance. Relevance refers
Selection process
ot
to the relation of the findings to the research questions.
tn
With the abovementioned search patterns, the search yielded 1,991 articles (1,652 articles from
the Web of Science and 339 articles from EBSCO). We then applied inclusion and exclusion
criteria. As a result, we found 853 papers in total in the first round based on the keywords in
rin
the title. The second search string used was to filter the articles by abstracts that included the
keywords or could answer our research questions. In the second round, we narrowed these to
79 papers with a focus on digital strategy and its relevant issues by filtering according to
ep
abstracts. In the final round, we eliminated papers that did not include a clear definition of the
term “digital strategy” based on full-text analysis; in the end, 57 articles remained.
Example of excluded articles is: “Frank, A. G., Mendes, G. H., Ayala, N. F., & Ghezzi, A.
Pr
(2019). Servitization and Industry 4.0 convergence in the digital transformation of product
firms: A business model innovation perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,
141, 341-351”, “Kaivo-Oja, J., Roth, S., & Westerlund, L. (2017). Futures of robotics. Human
7
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
work in digital transformation. International Journal of Technology Management, 73(4), 176-
iew
ed
205”. These articles were recently published in well-ranked journals and contained keywords
in the title, but the authors explored questions and issues loosely related to digital strategy and
they did not include an explicit definition of this concept.
Figure 1: selection process
pe
er
re
v
Total number returned from the search.
1991 papers
(1652 from Web of science
339 from EBSCO)
Total number returned from applying
inclusion and exclusion criteria.
853 papers
Total number returned from searching
based on abstract.
79 papers
tn
Descriptive analysis:
ot
Total number returned from searching
based on full text analysis.
57 papers
A Microsoft Excel spreadsheet was used to manage the references. The Excel spreadsheet
rin
included many columns to describe each article to facilitate the next step of the selection
process. These columns included discipline, journal, number of citations, paper type (empirical,
theoretical), methodology, definition of digital strategy, keywords, research question, discussed
ep
concepts, scientific approach, findings, etc. The analysis demonstrate that the sample has been
increased over the time (figure 2) focusing extensively on the automotive industry (e.g.,
Pelletier et Raymond 2019), the banking sector (e.g., Sia et al. 2016; Setia et al., 2013), and the
Pr
telecommunications sectors (e.g., Kane et al., 2015).
8
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
iew
ed
Figure 2: number of Articles on digital strategy published over time.
2024
2022
2020
2018
2016
2014
2012
2008
0
10
20
pe
er
re
v
2010
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Another important finding was that twenty-two of the analyzed papers were empirical papers.
Data were gathered through surveys; in seventeen papers, data were collected from multiple
case studies; two papers presented longitudinal studies; and the rest were based on archival
data. Nineteen papers were theoretical, presenting findings from literature reviews in which
data were collected mainly from systematic literature reviews (five papers) and meta-analyses
of industry reports (Holotiuk et al., 2017).
ot
Figure 3: used methods in Empirical papers.
5%
tn
14%
5%
case study
exploratory study
9%
longitudinal study
multiple case study
ep
rin
67%
archival data
Data analysis:
Pr
We conducted several iterative coding processes (Mayring 2014) to assess, extract, analyze,
and formulate our findings. This analysis was guided by five main issues: (a) the core idea of
the paper; (b) the definition of the terms; (c) the characteristics of digital strategy(s); (d) the
theory(s) used; and (e) future suggestions. For the selected papers, we coded and recorded all
9
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
the content or issues related to the research question, such as definitions of the term,
IV.
FINDINGS
iew
ed
characteristics, and sub-characteristics of each definition of digital strategy.
We present our findings according to the drivers detailed by Suddaby 2010. We started by
categorizing the different definitions existing in the literature to finally introduce a more holistic
definition and framework.
Pr
ep
rin
tn
ot
pe
er
re
v
1) Digital strategy - Schools of definitions:
10
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
d
e
Table 2. Identified definitions of digital business strategy
DEFINITION
AUTHORS
“Organizational strategy formulated and executed by leveraging digital resources to create differential value”.
Bharadwaj et al. 2013
Bharadwaj et al. 2013, Woodard et al. 2013, Chanias et al. 2019,
Grover et al. 2013, H. Ismail et al. 2017, Matt et al. 2015, Matt et al.
2015, Setia et al. 2013, Warner el al.2019, Weinrich et al. 2017,
Yeow et al.2018, Zomer et al. 2018, D’Cruz et al. 2015, Holgeid et
al.2018
Mithas et al. 2010, Mithas et al. 2012
Mithas et al. 2013
DBS is using technology as a strategic asset to enable new competencies or maintain a competitive advantage
We define digital business strategy as the extent to which a firm engages in any category of IT activity. Digital business
strategy often reflects competitive necessity as well as offering potential sources of competitive advantage.
w
e
i
v
e
r
A business strategy, inspired by the capabilities of powerful, readily accessible technologies (like SMACIT), intent on
delivering unique, integrated business capabilities in ways that are responsive to constantly changing market conditions
Ross et al. 2016, Sebastien et al 2017
A digital strategy is the strategic form of digitization intentions of companies. The short and mid-term objectives are
to create new or to maintain competitive advantages.
Schallmo et al. 2018, Schallmo et al. 2019
DBS “is not about changing the way we do technology but changing the way we do business” by rethinking strategy.
Digital strategies at early-stage entities have a decidedly operational focus. Digital strategies at maturing organizations
go beyond the technologies themselves. They target improvements in innovation, decision making and, ultimately,
transforming how the business works.
Holotiuk et al. 2017
Kane et al 2015
A digital business strategy is inherently cross-functional and thus requires the simultaneous development and
reconfiguration of IT and business resources across multiple organizational processes.
Sia et al 2016
A variety of digital growth strategies exist for digital firms, but the most prominent growth strategy involves the use of
digital platforms
Verhoef et al. 2019
Digital transformation strategy signposts the way toward digital transformation and guides managers through the
transformation process resulting from the integration and use of digital technologies.
Hess et al. 2016, Ivancic et al. 2019, Kontić et al. 2018
The digital transformation is an important cornerstone for helping organizations improve their business processes in
order to create business value and competitiveness. This transformation will be effective if it is established within the
framework of a digital strategy
Korachi et al. 2019
t
o
r
e
e
p
n
t
p
e
ir n
Digital transformation strategy has been defined as “a central concept to integrate the entire coordination, prioritization,
and implementation of digital transformation within a firm”
Matt et al. 2015, Pelletier 2019
Digital strategy does not treat technology in isolation, as a separate component of the business's operations; it is not
just an IT strategy or a marketing strategy. The digital transformation is a journey, and a journey needs a map in this
case, a clear roadmap driven by a digital strategy.
Gobble 2018
r
P
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
11
d
e
Table 3. The different schools of definitions of digital strategy
Type
of
definition
IT-centric
Process-centric
Digital
transformationcentric
Strategic
management
level
Strong
Middle
Low
r
P
DEFINITION
CHARACTERISTICS
AUTHORS
w
e
i
v
“Organizational strategy  Digital business strategy implies a dynamic
formulated and executed
synchronization and fusion between business
by leveraging digital
and IT to gain competitive advantage.
resources
to
create  Organizations need to develop a package of
differential value”.
IT-related resources, skills and knowledge to
Bharadwaj et al. 2013
develop business.
 DS is about creating new business models,
values, and strategic management decision.
Bharadwaj et al. 2013, Woodard et al. 2013, Chanias et al.
2019, Grover et al. 2013, Ismail et al. 2017, Setia et al. 2013,
Warner el al.2019, Weinrich et al. 2017, Yeow et al.2018,
Zomer et al. 2018, D’Cruz et al. 2015, Holgeid et al.2018, D.
Dang et al.2022, Canhoto A.I. et al.2021, Ahmad, A et al.
2021
 Organizations need to develop managerial
and organizational capabilities.
 DS is about adding digital value to product
and services.
 It is an alignment between both strategies.
Ross et al 2016, Schallmo et al. 2018, Schallmo et al. 2019,
Sebastien et al 2017, Holotiuk et al. 2017, Kane et al 2015, Sia
et al 2016, Verhoef et al. 2019, Becker et al. 2020
“A business strategy,
inspired by the capabilities
of
powerful,
readily
accessible
technologies
(like SMACIT), intent on
delivering
unique,
integrated
business
capabilities in ways that
are
responsive
to
constantly
changing
market conditions.” Ross
et al 2016
“a central concept to
integrate
the
entire
coordination,
prioritization,
and
implementation of digital
transformation within a
firm”. Hess et al. 2016
p
e
t
o
ir n
n
t
r
e
e
p
 This involves digital capabilities in the
domains of agility, ecosystem, connectivity,
and
visualization
to
drive
digital
transformation.
 It focuses on operational and organizational
aspects. It includes interfaces with suppliers.
e
r
Matt et al. 2015, Pelletier 2019, Hess et al. 2016, Ivancic et al.
2019, Kontić et al. 2018 Korachi et al. 2019, Gobble 2018, Vial
2019
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
12
A thorough analysis of the articles allowed us to identify three different conceptions of the
centric, and (3) digital transformation-centric (see Table 3).
iew
ed
digital strategy that were employed either explicitly or implicitly: (1) IT-centric, (2) process-
1. IT-centric definition: The IT–centric conceptualization originated in the IS field and
then was adopted in management science and considered the digital strategy as IS/IT
strategy. Organizations need to concentrate on developing IT capabilities as a package
of IT-related skills, resources, and knowledge. the IT-centric approach is more closely
pe
er
re
v
connected to strategy. It is about creating new business models, values, and strategic
management decisions. In here, technology is used as a strategic asset to enable new
competencies or maintain a competitive advantage.
2. Process-centric definition: The process-centric categorization is characterized by a
focus on the digitalization of organizational processes or the creation of new business
models. In the process-oriented approach, the digital business strategy is inherently
cross-functional and thus requires the simultaneous development and reconfiguration of
IT and business resources across multiple organizational processes. It is an alignment
of both IT and business strategies.
3. Digital transformation-centric definition: The digital transformation conceptualization
was originated from organization science (Nambisan et al., 2015) and was later adopted
ot
in both IS and strategic management theories. The definition focuses more on the
strategy of digital transformation, as observed, “Digital transformation strategy
signposts the way toward digital transformation and guides managers through the
tn
transformation process resulting from the integration and use of digital technologies”
(Hess et al., 2016, p125). The focus of this approach is on gathering digital capabilities
in the domains of agility, ecosystem, connectivity, and visualization to drive digital
rin
transformation. This approach is the least related to strategy because it deals mainly
with internal organizational operations and transformations.
ep
Based on the common features among all the deducted schools of definitions, we firstly
identified that digital ecosystem (Newell & Marabelli, 2015) is considered the basic
environment in which to adopt this strategy; Second, the aim of this strategy is to create a
Pr
differential digital value; and finally, digital technologies are used to attain digital objectives.
To clarify the links between the three schools of definitions, we started by comparing them
based on their common characteristics, as presented in Table 4.
13
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
iew
ed
Table 4: Characteristics of digital strategy
Sub-characteristic
IT-centric
Process-centric
Digital
Transformationcentric
Digital
technologies
Is driven by
Digital technologies
IT skills
Digital/IT
capabilities
Digital technologies
Digital technologies
Combine
existing
capabilities with new
digital technologies
Enabler (enable digital
solutions)
Leveraging
and
committing
IT
&
business
alignment
Create value,
improve
process
performance
Customer
engagement, digitized
solutions (products &
services)
Business
model,
product, process
BM, product, service
Digital capabilities
Type of capabilities
Strategic role of IT
Dig. tech actions
IT & business link
Value creation
Impact
To create
Fusion of IT &
business strategy
Create differential
value, look for
digital opportunities
Customer focus,
digital products &
services
Organization-wide
N/A
Strategic phase
Conception
Strategy type
Organizational
Conception
implementation
Cross-functional
&
Enabler (enable the
transformation)
Committing,
transforming
IT & business
alignment
Change in value
creation,
financial aspects
Digital design
Organizational
structure, process
Process, functions,
people
Implementation
Organizational
tn
Strategic
aspect
Aspects
of
organization
Operational change
Supporter (support
strategic goals)
Leveraging
ot
Organizational
scope
pe
er
re
v
Characteristic
First, we suggest clarifying the terminology used. Indeed, in existing studies, scholars use
rin
various words to refer to digital technologies. To encompass the various types of digital
elements that are components of digital strategy, we suggest using the concept of “digital
technologies” defined as “products or services that are either embodied in information and
ep
communication technologies or enabled by them” (Lyytinen, Yoo, & Boland, 2016: 49), digital
technologies encompass digital tools and infrastructure, digital platforms, and artifacts with
digitized components, applications, or media content (Nambisan, 2016; von Briel et al., 2018).
Pr
Hence, this concept allows for the study of all kinds of digital products and services that might
be used in strategic practices.
14
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
According to the three schools of definitions, digital strategy is driven by digital technologies
iew
ed
either through a fusion of IT and business strategies (Bharadwaj et al., 2013) or an alignment
between them (Matt et al., 2015, Sia et al., 2016). This dimension requires that strategists assess
the role of their IT skills and their actions toward new technologies.
Previous research reveals that some firms consider IT to be an enabler of digital strategy. IT is
an enabler of strategic goals means that it is seen as a core function and includes an
understanding of the potential of digital technologies for business success. It can be used to
pe
er
re
v
generate new solutions through the combination of business and digital content. Enabler means
that the technology itself is the implementation of the strategic goal.
In both the process-centric definition and digital transformation centric definition, digital
technologies enable the development of new products and services or the transformation of
organizational processes. As authors have noted, “Digital transformation strategy signposts the
way toward digital transformation and guides managers through the transformation process
resulting from the integration and use of digital technologies” (Hess et al., 2016, Ivancic et al.,
2019).
According to the IT-centric definition, however, these technologies are used to support and
fulfill defined business strategic goals and decisions. IT is a supporter means that it is seen as
ot
a support function for reaching strategic goals. It is merely a means for an efficient process. In
this case, it can be used to strategize or to transform the business. Mithas et al. (2010) stated
that digital business strategy is “using technology as a strategic asset to enable new
tn
competencies or maintain a competitive advantage”. Here, IT is used to generate and
conceptualize new strategic opportunities and goals. Thus, in some firms, leveraging and
committing to a suitable technology with the existing capabilities must be done to drive the
rin
transformation process or to create new products and services (process-centric), whereas in
others, the initial driver of digital strategy is leveraging new digital technology (IT-centric).
ep
Digital strategy is about creating value to maintain a competitive advantage. From a business
perspective, the use of new technologies often implies added value creation (Matt et al., 2015).
This value creation can improve firm performance or financial aspects. It is always about how
Pr
far the new digital activities deviate from the classical core business. Furthermore, firms adopt
digital technologies to better sense and respond to customer needs. Using an IT-centric
definition or process centric definition creates a customer focus. Enriching products or services
and expanding digital initiatives may help to satisfy customers. These solutions are designed to
15
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
provide a better customer experience and to advance service quality, all while keeping in mind
iew
ed
distinctive market characteristics and being guided by customer needs. According to a
transformation-centric definition, IT has a pure design function within the company’s digital
business unit.
From an operational perspective, new technologies can significantly change the products and
services that are currently being delivered to customers. Second, digital technologies can
change business processes. Business processes can be classified as operational, support, or
pe
er
re
v
management, but the focus of digital transformation initiatives is on operational processes.
However, according to the process-centric definition, digital transformation is closely related
to the strategic level, focusing on changing business models.
Most importantly, from a strategic aspect, we can deduce that each definition has a specific
focus on one strategic phase. For the strategic aspect, we were referring to the degree of strategy
concerns, in which high means strategic and low involves dealing with operations and
organizational aspects. The IT-centric definition involves the digital conception and
formulation of the strategy. The process-centric definition involves both the conception and
implementation of the strategy through the creation of business models and the offer of digital
solutions to implement the digital objective. Finally, the transformation-centric definition
ot
mainly involves implementation because it deals with the design of digital operational aspects.
These findings involve the related concepts discussed in digital strategy papers that are the main
performance.
tn
components of this strategy and the ecosystem or the factors that explain its success or
2) Digital strategy – Related concepts
rin
This section acknowledges all the identified articles that deal implicitly with the concept of
digital strategy and explains it in relationship with other fields. Coreynen et al. (2017) argued
that digital strategy is considered to be a cross-functional strategy that also includes the
ep
digitalization of services and products, which is known as servitization, as well as the
information around them and organizational structures and processes. They provided an
explanation of how digitization can enable servitization for manufacturers using dynamic
Pr
resource configuration. This strategy may be categorized as a process-oriented definition. This
is the same as Rohmer et al. (2016), who stated implicitly that digital strategy refers to the
strategy a company applies to all its digital initiatives. This includes the entire process:
16
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
collecting all required information, planning, identifying risks and opportunities, maintaining
iew
ed
the digital strategy, and creating sub-strategies such as a digital-marketing strategy.
Pagani (2013) demonstrated the impact of incremental innovations on the execution of digital
business strategy. These innovations may shift the value networks from being static and
vertically integrated to being more loosely coupled. Pagani 2013 provided insights into how
digital ecosystems evolve and what their dynamics of value creation are, which may serve as a
theoretical lens through which to clarify the actions that organizations can take to use
pe
er
re
v
environmental uncertainty to their advantage.
Bankewitz et al. 2017 stated that boards are involved in the changing strategic context and can
no longer ignore or avoid major strategic decisions concerning digital technologies (Valentine
et al., 2014). They also check the use of digital technologies and tools to maximize the returns
and performance of the company. They need to challenge the current assumptions and sense
and seize digital opportunities that can be implemented by management through digital
strategies.
In the same vein, Kane et al. (2017) highlighted the importance of digital maturity when
defining digital strategy. They argued that organizations need to align their strategy, culture,
human force, structure, and technology to respond to the needs of different clients. They
ot
highlighted that digitally maturing firms might take a longer view of developing digital
strategies. In fact, effective digital strategies are not only about the implementation of new
opportunities.
tn
technologies to become more digital, but they also concern the identification of new digital
The analysis of the data has revealed many emergent concepts as well as the theories used to
rin
study this phenomenon and the relationship among the related concepts.
3) Management theories used:
ep
The literature assessed alternative views on how to study this emerging concept. In table 5,
various authors explained digital strategy and supported their interpretations and elucidations
of the data using many different theoretical approaches. Next, we concisely catalog the top 7
Pr
theories used in digital strategy research. It is important to note that 25 of the selected articles
were not based on a clearly identified existing theoretical approach.
17
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
Management theories
Resource-based
Authors examples
view,
iew
ed
Table 5. Management theories used – Digital strategy
dynamic Bharadwaj et al. (2013), Yeow et al. 2018, Ross
et al. 2016
Configurational approach
El Sawy el al. 2010
Phenomenon based approach
Chanias et al. 2016, Horlacher et al. 2016
Strategy as practice approach
Pelletier et Raymond. 2020, Chanias et al. 2019
pe
er
re
v
capabilities
The approach that was used most often to discuss digital strategy, the resource-based view, was
provided by Bharadwaj et al. (2013). These authors adopted the dynamic capabilities
perspective (Teece 2007) to narrow the traditional views of IT strategy, recognize the
importance of digital resources and provide a general view of digital business strategy. They
expected to provide a more detailed understanding of digital technologies as resources and their
role in creating value. According to Bharadwaj et al. (2013), one of the major challenges
regarding DBS is knowing the adaptive dynamic capabilities that are needed to manage the
process. Similarly, Ross et al. (2016) discussed capabilities as one of the most important
components of digital strategy. They showed that organizations should have the right
ot
capabilities to build a successful digital strategy.
Consequently, Yeow et al. (2018) used a dynamic capability approach to examine the aligning
tn
process between IT and business because it focuses on the actions taken by organizations to
change their resources to adapt to changing environments. They highlighted the misalignments
between the emergent strategy and the existing resources. Their aim was to show how the
rin
aligning process unfolds in the digital strategy context through organizational actions.
El Sawy el al. (2010) tried to use a configurational approach as an apt paradigmatic lens to
better understand digital eco dynamics while stressing the role of IT in triggering environmental
ep
turbulence and shaping dynamic capabilities to build strategic advantage, which provides a
better view of digital business strategy. Additionally, Chanias et al. (2016) adopted a
phenomenon-based approach to investigate the formation of digital transformation strategies in
Pr
organizations using an activity-based process model. Chanias et al. (2019) used strategy as
practice theory to highlight the strategizing activities and processes that may impact the
formation of this strategy through a bottom-up process.
18
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
The fact that there are different approaches to explain the same issue reflects its importance and
iew
ed
the different scientific communities that are interested in it. This helps to explain the possible
epistemologies and how authors have studied the construction of science, its origin, its content,
and the way knowledge is organized, structured, and developed (methodology, research). This
epistemological knowledge opens the door for the scientific use of concepts and highlights
possible research avenues and links for studying this issue. This is also important to clearly
state the scope conditions of the constructs to coherently build strong definition (Suddaby
4) Definition and framework
pe
er
re
v
2010).
Thanks to this categorization of definitions, it becomes easier to understand and reconcile how
scholars in IS view digital strategy with how strategy scholars ought to view digital strategy. IS
scholars approach this issue from the angle of IT strategy. Strategy scholars likely approach it
from the perspective of applying the existing principles and theories of strategy to digital
transformation. This is implicitly explained through other articles and by relating other topics
like digital maturity or digital value creation. However, researchers often utilized different
perspectives to integrate the role of digital technologies in the design, formulation, or
implementation of the strategy.
In the categorization of digital strategy definitions there is an acknowledgment that IT is
ot
currently a crucial part of business and increasingly plays a strategic role in organizations. From
the definitions, we can observe that there are many aspects of the IT function that are functional-
tn
level or support the ongoing management of systems. Therefore, digital strategy differs from
IT strategy, and they might be aligned or fused together. Many authors (Bharadwaj et al. 2013,
Mithas et al. 2013) believe that the role of IS/IT strategy should move from a functional-level
rin
strategy to a fusion of business strategy and IT strategy. The role of an IT strategy continues to
exist as a functional strategy for traditional organizations, but for digital ones, we are now
talking about digital strategy. However, those traditional organizations may face a
ep
transformational phase defined as a digital transformation that might be assured through a welldefined digital strategy.
In order to develop a more holistic understanding of digital strategies, we suggest a new
Pr
definition: "Digital strategy is leveraging on digital technologies which allows for new
strategies achieved through the digital redesign of the organization”. In this definition, the
focus is on the internal transformation of the company, means the change of the processes and
19
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
the organization. From this definition we can also note a strong relationship between the three
as summarized in the following schema (figure 2).
iew
ed
definitions in the organization of the company, as well as a missing digital strategizing approach
pe
er
re
v
Figure 4: The relationship between the three schools of definition
In this framework, we can understand that digital strategy is a strategy that links different
management levels. From a top management function, it is about strategy decision making
which is highly strategic level. In this stage, we are missing a strategizing approach in defining
the digital strategy. From an IT function, digital strategy is defined as an IT centric strategy
ot
based on leveraging digital resources which is a strategic task too. From an organization level,
we are talking about using digital to redesign or retransform the business organization which is
tn
the digital transformation approach to define digital strategy and finally the last approach is
more oriented on processes because it is about creating business value. These findings have
shown the basic components that define a digital strategy from different perspectives (digital
technologies, creating value, digitally enabled processes, and services) and highlight some
rin
aspects (digital strategizing) that were neglected. So, the relationship between all the
characteristics of digital strategy can be also explained by the relationship between l the
management levels and the company’s structure starting from making decision to delivering
ep
business value.
Therefore, from the framework, we can notice that all three schools of definition are
Pr
complementary and overlapping. They focus mainly on the combination of digital and strategy
content or of digital and strategy implementation through the structure and management levels
of the company. However, they do not include a thorough understanding of the potential of
digitalization on strategy making which is the top management level which has been recently
20
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
introduced in theory as digital strategizing (Morton et.al 2022). That’s why it is also important
iew
ed
to explore the strategizing approach to provide a more holistic definition of digital strategy and
understand the use of this term from different approaches. In contrast, the selected studies have
rarely considered how digital technologies could also improve or reconfigure the process of
strategy making. However, this specific combination of digital and strategy has not been
explored further. This is curious because, due to their alleged power, digital technologies could
have a significant impact on practices of strategy making that’s why we included this level of
V.
DISCUSSION
pe
er
re
v
definition in our framework.
The aim of this paper is to improve the construct clarity of digital strategy. Consequently, we
presented a more holistic definition and framework that concisely capture the main
characteristics of this phenomenon.
Following Suddaby 2010’s recommendations, we must check the boundary conditions of our
framework. Boundary conditions have been debated for long as an important element in
construct development, referring to the “Who, Where, When” aspects of a conceptual theory.
Boundaries in scope can be tested to our framework. Is this applicable to all types of companies?
Is this the same for large, medium or small enterprises? The structure is different depending on
ot
the nature and size of the company. In digital companies, IT function can be embedded into the
business or the organization level. The approach to define a digital strategy can differs because
tn
of the different aims and use of IT.
Is this framework applicable to all types of strategies or management? Let’s take the example
of ITIL1 (Information Technology Infrastructure Library). This ITIL process is about planning
rin
a service delivery strategy in companies like Walt Disney company. It includes understanding
the needs of customers, defining the offered services, and examining the required resources to
assure these services. So, the structure of management levels from our framework cannot be
ep
applicable to this strategy. This concept is based on designing services and IT solutions that
meet the objectives of organizations not making decisions and implement them using digital
Pr
technologies as explained in our framework.
1 ITIL is a crucial standard in IT Service Management. It
is designed to standardize the selection, planning, delivery
maintenance, and lifecycle of IT services in an organization. The main objective of this framework is to enhance the
efficiency and performance of IT services. https://www.simplilearn.com/itil-key-concepts-and-summary-article
21
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
We stress the importance of continuous studies about digital strategies. We suggest an agenda
iew
ed
to encourage researchers to further follow this phenomenon. As we have deduced from our
framework there is an apparent gap; it could be interesting to explore whether and how digital
has been used in strategy making process. We may focus on two of the main practice-based
approaches of strategy: strategy-as-practice (Whittington, 2006) and open strategy (Hautz et al.
2017).
Some studies have begun to explore digital strategizing, which could be defined as “the
pe
er
re
v
interplay between digital technologies and people at different levels of organizations in
processes that form, transmit, implement, host, and support strategy” (Morton et al., 2022).
Digital strategizing represents the use of digital technologies to improve strategy decisions.
They explained the nexus of strategy practice dimensions and Information systems. Their
definition addresses that digital strategizing is considered as a domain and that practices,
practitioners, and praxis (strategy-as-practice framework) are located broadly in the interplay
involving technologies, people, and varied processes. Morton et al., 2022 have shown that “in
the case of digital strategizing, more can be done to explicate the role that digital technologies
play in the elaboration and implementation of strategy”. This interest is nascent since much of
the literature to date has explored the use of digital technologies to improve operational
processes.
ot
Other gaps that have been identified during the literature review process include insufficient
literature on the effects of digital technologies on firms in specific industries or certain types of
tn
firms (small, medium, and large). While digital strategy involves the use of digital technologies
to create value, it is also important to understand how different types of digital technologies2,
paired with capabilities, specifically impact aspects of an organization and phases of their
rin
strategy. Moreover, it is important to understand the nature of the value that is created through
this disruption. Such research would have a significant impact on both theory and practice.
In addition, it was clear that digitalization induces to the participation of new actors and
ep
practitioners. One of the main mechanisms for reacting to these disruptive organizational
conditions may be found at the top of an organization, particularly in the board of directors.
Pr
2 (i) Digital tools and infrastructures “offer communication, collaboration, and/or computing capabilities to support
innovation and entrepreneurship.” (Nambisan, 2016: 1032) (e.g. cloud computing, data analytics, online communities, social
media, 3D printing, digital makerspaces, etc.). (ii) Digital platforms are “shared, common set of services and architecture that
serves to host complementary offerings” (Nambisan, 2016: 1032). Examples include Apple’s iOS or Google’s Android. (iii)
Finally, digital artifacts are “digital component, application, or media content that is part of a new product (or service) and
offers a specific functionality or value to the end-user” such as an app on a smartphone; a digital component on a classical
product (toy, clothe, cars or toothbrush) (Nambisan, 2016: 1031).
22
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
They are involved throughout the different phases of the strategic process and influence the
iew
ed
decision-making process. Future questions may also concern the future role of boards in this
digital era: are they still needed, and if so, how should they be composed, and what will they
do? Which digital technologies does the board use to monitor the implementation of strategy in
the digital area? With such a research topic, we can contribute to the understanding of corporate
governance in general and boards of directors in a digitalized world.
In addition to that, the COVID-19 crisis suddenly provided a new perspective for the digital
pe
er
re
v
world, in which digital has become central to every exchange and interaction, forcing both
individuals and organizations to adopt digital channels and tools for work. Digital work has
become a primary driver of productivity. The quick shift to working from home has caused
new challenges for many workers. End users just had to adapt to new practices and learn
video call etiquette. However, those in charge of technology and digital strategy faced much
larger considerations. Due to this unpredictable crisis, the digital transformation of work
styles is accelerating using many technologies: IOT, AI, 5G, and cloud services.
Agility and high technology are becoming a prerequisite for meeting daily changes in customer
behavior, which raises many questions for research, such as how to offer services for customers
based on advanced digital technologies. Agile methodologies are built to maintain the digitally
enabled solutions that the enterprise needs to use in the digital era. Future research may focus
ot
on understanding how agility plays a role in the process of strategy development and whether
or not it impacts the content of the strategy.
CONCLUSION
tn
VI.
In this research, we conducted a systematic literature review on digital strategy in the fields of
rin
IS and strategic management and proposed a framework of different definitions of digital
strategy. The paper has several contributions. First, through the literature review, we revealed
that all three approaches are close and overlapping but focus mainly on the combination of
ep
digital and strategy content or of digital and strategy implementation. We suggested a more
holistic definition that clarify the concept for both strategic management and IS communities.
Second, we suggested a new framework and highlighted four main digital strategy
Pr
characteristics and illustrated sub-characteristics of each school of definitions; these are digital
technologies, value creation, organizational scope, and strategic aspects. These characteristics
can be seen as a guide for practitioners and scholars to differentiate between different
23
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
definitions of digital strategy. For example, when digital tools are used as a supporter, we can
iew
ed
understand that the focus is the IT-centric definition of strategy in which IT is used to support
strategic goals.
Third, this paper also provides future suggestions. For example, this specific combination of
digital and strategy has not been explored further. This is curious because, due to their alleged
power, digital technologies could have a significant impact on practices of strategy making
(referred to as digital strategizing). Several scholars (e.g., Bharadwaj et al., 2013; Yoo et al.,
pe
er
re
v
2010) have reported that digital technologies play an important role in the formulation of
strategy. To better analyze this apparent gap, we can explore whether and how digital
technology has been considered in two main practice-based approaches to strategy: strategy-aspractice and open strategy.
Despite these contributions, this study has some limitations. We must be careful about
generalizing the results. we have selected Web of Science and EBSCO as the databases for this
systematic literature review. As a result, other contributions and conclusions may appear
beyond our selected papers. The research implications for literature reviews are to uncover
research gaps and highlight possible avenues for future research. For strategy scholars, future
research directions encompass how digital strategy is understood and which digital technologies
ep
rin
tn
business strategy.
ot
are used more often to implement it to give a holistic picture of new technologies under digital
Pr
REFERENCES3
3 * In front of the SLR identified papers
24
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
*Ahmad, A., Alshurideh, M. T., Al Kurdi, B. H., & Alzoubi, H. M. (2021). Digital strategies:
Computer Vision (pp. 807-822). Springer, Cham.
iew
ed
a systematic literature review. In The International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and
Balkesen, C., Teubner, J., Alonso, G., & Özsu, M. T. (2013, April). Main-memory hash joins
on multi-core CPUs: Tuning to the underlying hardware. In 2013 IEEE 29th International
Conference on Data Engineering (ICDE) (pp. 362-373). IEEE.
*Bankewitz, M., Aberg, C., & Teuchert, C. (2016). Digitalization and boards of directors: a
pe
er
re
v
new era of corporate governance. Business and Management Research, 5(2), 58-69.
*Becker, W., & Schmid, O. (2020). The right digital strategy for your business: an empirical
analysis of the design and implementation of digital strategies in SMEs and LSEs. Business
Research, 13(3), 985-1005.
*Bharadwaj, A., Sawy, O.A., Pavlou, P.A., Venkatraman, N., 2013. Digital business strategy:
toward a next
generation of insights. MIS Quart. 37 (2), 471–482.
*Canhoto, A. I., Quinton, S., Pera, R., Molinillo, S., & Simkin, L. (2021). Digital strategy
aligning in SMEs: A dynamic capabilities perspective. The Journal of Strategic Information
Systems, 30(3), 101682.
ot
Certo, S. T., Holcomb, T. R., & Holmes Jr, R. M. (2009). IPO research in management and
entrepreneurship: Moving the agenda forward. Journal of management, 35(6), 1340-1378.
tn
*Chanias, S., Myers, M. D., & Hess, T. (2019). Digital transformation strategy making in predigital organizations: The case of a financial services provider. The Journal of Strategic
rin
Information Systems, 28(1), 17-33.
Coleman, P., & Papp, R. (2006, March). Strategic alignment: analysis of perspectives. In
Proceedings of the 2006 southern association for information systems conference (pp. 242-
ep
250).
*Coreynen, W., Matthyssens, P., & Van Bockhaven, W. (2017). Boosting servitization through
digitization: Pathways and dynamic resource configurations for manufacturers. Industrial
Pr
Marketing Management, 60, 42-53.
Croteau, A., Bergeron, F., 2001. An information technology trilogy: business and
organizational performance. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 10 (2), 77–99.
25
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
*D'Cruz, M., Timbrell, G., & Watson, J. (2016). Strategy in a digital world. arXiv preprint
iew
ed
arXiv:1606.03530 presented In Australasian Conference on Information Systems
*Dang, D., & Vartiainen, T. (2022). Digital Strategy in Information Systems: A Literature
Review and an Educational Solution Based on Problem-Based Learning.
Eder, M. A., Belloni, F., Tesauro, A., & Hanis, T. (2017). A multi-frequency fatigue testing
method for wind turbine rotor blades. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 388, 123-140.
pe
er
re
v
*El Sawy, O. A., Malhotra, A., Park, Y., & Pavlou, P. A. (2010). Seeking the configurations of
digital ecodynamics: It takes three to tango. Research Commentary. Information Systems
Research, 21(4), 835-848.
*Fitzgerald, M., Kruschwitz, N., Bonnet, D. and Welch, M., 2014. Embracing digital
technology: A new strategic imperative. MIT sloan management review, 55(2), p.1.
Frank, A. G., Mendes, G. H., Ayala, N. F., & Ghezzi, A. (2019). Servitization and Industry 4.0
convergence in the digital transformation of product firms: A business model innovation
perspective. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 141, 341-351
Gass, O. et.al., (2015); Conceptualizing Individualization in Information Systems – A
Literature Review; Communications of the Association for Information Systems, Vol 37 No.
ot
3, Pp. 64- 88
Gerow, J. E., Grover, V., Thatcher, J., & Roth, P. L. (2014). Looking Toward the Future of IT–
tn
Business Strategic Alignment through the Past. MIS quarterly, 38(4), 1159-1186.
*Gobble, M. M. (2018). Digital strategy and digital transformation. Research-Technology
rin
Management, 61(5), 66-71.
*Grover, V., & Kohli, R. (2013). Revealing Your Hand: Caveats in Implementing Digital
ep
Business Strategy. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 655–662.
Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for
systematic reviews or meta‐analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar,
Pr
PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research synthesis methods, 11(2), 181-217.
Hautz, J., Seidl, D., & Whittington, R. (2017). Open strategy: Dimensions, dilemmas,
dynamics. Long Range Planning, 50(3), 298-309.
26
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
Henderson, J. C., & Venkatraman, H. (1993). Strategic alignment: Leveraging information
iew
ed
technology for transforming organizations. IBM systems journal, 32(1), 472-484.
*Hess, T.; Matt, C.; Benlian, A. Wiesböck, F (2016), Options for Formulating a Digital
Transformation Strategy, MIS Quarterly Executive
*Holgeid, K. K., Krogstie, J., Stray, V., & Thompson, M. (2018, December). Strategizing for
Successful IT Projects in the Digital Era. In International Research Workshop on IT Project
pe
er
re
v
Management 2018
*Holotiuk, F., & Beimborn, D. (2017). Critical success factors of digital business strategy.
*Horlacher, A., Klarner, P., & Hess, T. (2016). Crossing boundaries: Organization design
parameters surrounding CDOs and their digital transformation activities.
*Ismail, M. H., Khater, M., & Zaki, M. (2017). Digital business transformation and strategy:
What do we know so far. Cambridge Service Alliance, 10.
*Ivančić, L., Vukšić, V. B., & Spremić, M. (2019). Mastering the digital transformation
process: Business practices and lessons learned. Technology Innovation Management
Review, 9(2), 36-50.
ot
*Kahre, C., Hoffmann, D., & Ahlemann, F. (2017, January). Beyond business-IT alignmentdigital business strategies as a paradigmatic shift: a review and research agenda. In
tn
Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
*Kane, G. C., Digital Maturity, Not Digital Transformation. MIT Sloan Management Review,
(2017, April).
rin
*Kane G. C, D. Palmer, A. N. Phillips, D. Kiron and N. Buckley, “Strategy, Not Technology,
Drives Digital Transformation” MIT Sloan Management Review and Deloitte University
ep
Press, July 2015.
*Kane, G.C., Palmer, D., Phillips, A.N. and Kiron, D., 2015. Is your business ready for a digital
future?. MIT Sloan Management Review, 56(4), p.37.
Pr
*Kontić, L., & Vidicki, Đ. (2018). Strategy for digital organization: Testing a measurement tool
for digital transformation. Strategic Management, 23(1), 29-35.
27
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
Transformation Strategy Building (IMFDS).
iew
ed
*Korachi, Z., & Bounabat, B. 2019. Integrated Methodological Framework for Digital
*Lucas Jr, H., Agarwal, R., Clemons, E. K., El Sawy, O. A., & Weber, B. (2013). Impactful
research on transformational information technology: an opportunity to inform new
audiences. Mis Quarterly, 371-382.
*Matt, C.; Hess, T.; Benlian, A. (2015): Digital Transformation Strategies, Business and In-
pe
er
re
v
formation Systems Engineering, 57(5), 339–343
Mayring, P. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: theoretical foundation, basic procedures and
software solution.
*Mithas, S., Tafti, A., Mitchell, W., 2013. How a firm’s competitive environment and digital
strategic posture influence digital business strategy. MIS Quart. 37 (2),511–536.
*Mithas, S., & Lucas, H. C. (2010). What is your digital business strategy?. IT professional,
12(6), 4-6.
Morton, J., Amrollahi, A., & Wilson, A. D. (2022). Digital strategizing: An assessing review,
definition, and research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 101720.
ot
*Nambisan, Satish; Lyytinen, Kalle; Majchrzak, Ann; and Song, Michael. 2017. "Digital
Innovation Management: Reinventing Innovation Management Research in a Digital
tn
World," MIS Quarterly, (41: 1) pp.223-238.
Newell, S., & Marabelli, M. (2015). Strategic opportunities (and challenges) of algorithmic
decision-making: A call for action on the long-term societal effects of ‘datification’. The
rin
Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 24(1), 3-14.
*Pagani, M. (2013). Digital business strategy and value creation: Framing the dynamic cycle
ep
of control points. Mis Quarterly, 617-632.
*Paulus-Rohmer, D., Schatton, H., & Bauernhansl, T. (2016). Ecosystems, strategy and
business models in the age of digitization-how the manufacturing industry is going to change
Pr
its logic. Procedia CIRP, 57, 8-13.
28
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
*Pelletier, C., & Raymond, L. (2020, January). Orchestrating the digital transformation process
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
iew
ed
through a ‘strategy-as-practice’lens: A revelatory case study. In Proceedings of the 53rd
*Peppard, J. and Ward, J., 2016. The Strategic Management of Information Systems: Building
a Digital Strategy. New York: Wiley
*Rauser, A., 2016.: Digital strategy: A guide to digital business transformation. North
pe
er
re
v
Charleston: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.
*Ross, J. W., Sebastian, I., Beath, C., Mocker, M., Moloney, K., & Fonstad, N. (2016).
Designing and executing digital strategies.
*Schallmo, D., Williams, C. A., & Lohse, J. (2018). Clarifying digital strategy–Detailed
literature review of existing Approaches. In ISPIM Conference Proceedings (pp. 1-21). The
International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM).
*Schallmo, D., Williams, C. A., & Lohse, J. (2019). Digital Strategy—Integrated Approach and
Generic Options. International Journal of Innovation Management, 1940005.
*Sebastian, I., Ross, J., Beath, C., Mocker, M., Moloney, K., & Fonstad, N. (2017). How big
ot
old companies navigate digital transformation.
*Setia, P., Setia, P., Venkatesh, V., & Joglekar, S. (2013). Leveraging digital technologies:
How information quality leads to localized capabilities and customer service performance.
tn
Mis Quarterly, 565-590.
Suddaby, R. (2010) Editor’s Comments: Construct Clarity in Theories of Management and
rin
Organization. Academy of Management Review, 35, 346-357.
*Sia, S. K., Soh, C., & Weill, P. (2016). How DBS Bank Pursued a Digital Business Strategy.
ep
MIS Quarterly Executive, 15(2).
Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of
(sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic management journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.
Pr
Teubner, R. A. (2013). Information systems strategy: Theory, practice, and challenges for future
research. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 5, 243-257
*Uhlig, M., & Remané, G. (2022). A systematic literature review on digital business strategy.
29
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
Valentine, E., Stewart, G., & Shiang-Yen, T. (2014). Enterprise business technology
directors. ACIS.
iew
ed
governance: a validation of three technology-governance competencies for boards of
Venkatraman, N. 1994. “IT-Enabled Business Transformation: From Automation to Business
Scope Redefinition,” Sloan Management Review (35:2), pp. 73-87.
*Verhoef, P. C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., Bhattacharya, A., Dong, J. Q., Fabian, N., &
Haenlein, M. (2019). Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research
pe
er
re
v
agenda. Journal of Business Research.
*Vial, G. (2019). ‘Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda’.
Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28, 118–44
*von Briel, F., Davidsson, P., & Recker, J. (2018). Digital technologies as external enablers of
new venture creation in the IT hardware sector. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 42(1),
47-69.
*Warner, K. S., & Wäger, M. (2019). Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation:
An ongoing process of strategic renewal. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 326-349.
*Webster, J. and Watson, R. (2002). ‘Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a
ot
literature review’. MIS Quarterly, 26, 18–23.
*Weinrich, T. (2017). Reviewing organizational design components for digital business
tn
strategy. BLED.
*Westerman, G. et. al. (2011); Digital Transformation: A Roadmap for Billion-Dolllar
rin
Organization; MITSloan Management Review
*Westerman, G. et.al. (2014); The Nine Elements Of Digital Transformation; MITSloan
ep
Management Review
Whittington, R. (2006). Completing the practice turn in strategy research. Organization
studies, 27(5), 613-634.
Pr
*Woodard, C. J., Ramasubbu, N., Tschang, F. T., & Sambamurthy, V. (2013). Design capital
and design moves: The logic of digital business strategy. Mis Quarterly, 537-564.
30
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
*Yoo, Y., Henfridsson, O., & Lyytinen, K. (2010). Research commentary—the new organizing
research, 21(4), 724-735.
iew
ed
logic of digital innovation: an agenda for information systems research. Information systems
*Yeow, A., Soh, C., & Hansen, R. (2018). Aligning with new digital strategy: A dynamic
capabilities approach. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 27(1), 43-58.
*Zomer, T., Neely, A., & Martinez, V. (2018). Enabling digital transformation: An analysis
Pr
ep
rin
tn
ot
pe
er
re
v
framework. Working Paper. University of Cambridge.
31
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090
iew
ed
pe
er
re
v
ot
tn
rin
ep
Pr
32
This preprint research paper has not been peer reviewed. Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4711090