Search results

The purpose of this study is to ascertain the drivers of digital disruption and its consequences from a managerial viewpoint. Understanding the drivers and consequences of digital disruption can help business managers modify and align their organizational structures and strategies with digital disruptors to promote survival in the marketplace.

This study used survey data from US managers. Of 1,000 managers, 272 provided responses eligible for use in the analysis. The study used EQS 6.2 software to analyze the data.

Eight hypothesized relationships were tested in this study. The results of this study indicate that convergence of intelligence, convergence of technology, support from C-level executives, organizational cultures of innovation and managerial skills act as drivers of digital disruption. The results also show that digital disruption improves both user experience and firms’ digital disruptive performance.

This study builds upon the disruptive innovation theory. This study demonstrates that both technology- and organization-induced drivers serve as predictors of digital disruption. Digital disruption affects user experience and firms’ digital disruptive performance. In addition, user experience influences firms’ digital disruptive performance. Overall, this study improves our understanding of the role of technology- and organization-induced drivers of businesses’ responses to digital disruption and provides contributions to theory and practice.

This article aims to understand the dynamics between disruptive innovations and innovation ecosystems, using disruption business models as a catalyst.

This study presents an integrative literature review and a theoretical framework in order to integrate the theories of disruptions and ecosystems.

The dynamics of disruptive innovation, within an ecosystem, as an essential driver of creating new markets. The effect of creative destruction from a disruption influences business models in a coopetitive dynamic that drives the ecosystem as a whole.

Limited to theoretical research and suggested the application of the proposed model in an empirical study.

Understand the formation of new ecosystems based on the occurrence of a disruption as a way for organisations to prepare for the arrival of this new market.

The contribution of this study is based on joining the literature of disruptive innovation and innovation ecosystem, pointing to a theoretical framework and a flow of Evolution and Adaptation to the Disruptive Ecosystem that integrates this complex dynamic.

This paper aims to explore the extent to which technology and disruption has been considered within the accounting literature, to introduce the five papers which compose this special issue and to provide an agenda for future research on technology and disruption.

To explore previous works on the disruptive potential of technology in accounting, the study compares topics in accounting research articles that contain variations of the term “disrupt” with those articles containing variations of the term “technology”. Based on the method first proposed in Marrone and Hammerle (2016), an entity linker application was used to extract key topics from the top 50 accounting journals, and these topics were then compared to determine the extent of thematic intersection.

A key finding is that accounting academic articles featuring “disruption” are rarely linked with “technology”. The concept of “disruption” has been largely synonymous with crisis, and the crises endured to date have had predominantly social or environmental causes (e.g. the GFC and natural disasters). The literature on technology has coalesced around three broad themes – creation, deployment and protection – which have not been identified as crises triggers so far. This finding underscores the importance of the papers comprising this special issue, which explore enhanced data visualisation, blockchain and social media, as well as considering how such technologies might be managed and their potential for either emancipation or enslavement.

In relation to the review of prior literature, the primary limitation is that a quantitative approach was taken. Whilst this allows for a greater sample size and replication, a qualitative thematic review may reveal additional findings. The primary implication of this research and this special issue collectively is that there is much more to be done in exploring both the potential benefits and limitations of new technologies for accounting.

In relation to the review of prior literature, no previous studies have undertaken a quantitative analysis of the intersection of technology disruption in accounting research. In relation to this special issue, these papers collectively provide a multi-faceted view of how technology can and will transform the practice and potential of accounting in the years ahead. Finally, the provision of a thematic framework and research agenda will assist future researchers in exploring this dynamic and important field.

This study aims to examine the relationship between the influence of technological disruption and the transformation of business models mediated by adaptive organization and organization learning.

In total, 116 top management teams from the member of the Indonesian Advertising Association (P3I) were recruited for this study. The data was obtained through an online survey and analyzed using the PLS-structural equation modeling (SEM) technique.

This study revealed the importance of organizational learning and adaptive organization in minimizing technology disruption and enabler of the business model transformation. In an always-changing environment, the adaptive organization is the core element and catalyst of firm transformation. The acceleration of business model transformation is empowered through establishing an organization's learning system by exploiting existing knowledge, exploring new knowledge and cultivating a learning culture.

In today’s fast-paced digital world and a constant state of flux, advertising agencies need to build a sustainable business model and structure that allows them to be flexible, adaptive to changes and efficient.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study was the first to develop a model to mitigate technology disruption and enable necessary elements to create a transformation business model.

The article explores what forms of disruption are prioritized by top executives of large manufacturing companies in Finland and what strategies they consider appropriate for the management of disruptive threats and opportunities.

The empirical study was based on interviews with top executives in some of Finland's largest manufacturing companies.

Based on the data, we identify exploitative and explorative strategies in four dimensions that executives consider important in anticipating and responding to disruptions: internal development efforts, stance on new entrants, ecosystems and institutional change. Due to the presence of multiple potential disruptions, which often generate conflicting demands, executives have to consider them simultaneously and balance between them when making strategic decisions. They therefore do not necessarily have a specific response strategy, but their aim is to develop their companies' capabilities so that they are well-placed to face the future with confidence.

The findings indicate that the executives envision a disruption landscape that is more complex than typically described in the literature. In addition, it answers the call for a more systematic understanding of incumbents' response strategies by linking different disciplinary views with well-grounded empirical data.

Supply chain resilience capabilities are usually considered in light of some anticipated events and are as passive assets, which are “waiting” for use in case of an emergency. This, however, can be inefficient. Moreover, the current COVID-19 pandemic has revealed difficulties in the timely deployments of resilience assets and their utilization for value creation. We present a framework that consolidates different angles of efficient resilience and renders utilization of resilience capabilities for creation of value.

We conceptualise the design of the AURA (Active Usage of Resilience Assets) framework for post-COVID-19 supply chain management through collating the extant literature on value creation-oriented resilience and practical examples and complementing our analysis with a discussion of practical implementations.

Building upon and integrating the existing frameworks of VSC (Viable Supply Chain), RSC (Reconfigurable Supply Chain) and LCNSC (Low-Certainty-Need Supply Chain), we elaborate on a new idea in the AURA approach – to consider resilience as an inherent, active and value-creating component of operations management decisions, rather than as a passive “shield” to protect against rare, severe events. We identify 10 future research areas for lean resilience integrating management and digital platforms and technology.

The outcomes of our study can be used by supply chain and operations managers to improve the efficiency and effectiveness by turning resilience from passive, cost-driving assets into a value-creating, inclusive decision-making paradigm.

We propose a novel approach to bring more dynamics to the notion of supply chain resilience. We name our approach AURA and articulate its two major advantages as follows: (1) reduction of disruption prediction efforts and (2) value creation from resilience assets. We offer a discussion on ten future research directions towards a lean resilience.

Under current market conditions of corporate foresight, turbulence is a key element of the business landscape. Turbulence can be summarised using the trendy managerial acronym “VUCA”: volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity. This paper aims to combine, for the first time, scientific discussion of technological disruption with the VUCA approach. Gartner Hype Cycle is used as a case example of technological turbulence and “vucability”.

First, the authors present the key concepts of technological disruption and radical innovation. Both these concepts are highly relevant for modern corporate foresight. Second, the authors discuss the key elements of current technological transformation and summarise it to create a bigger picture. Third, the authors link this discussion to the VUCA approach. Fourth, the authors present the new corporate foresight framework, which is highly relevant for corporations and takes current technological transformation more seriously than previous proposals, which expect more stable business and a technological landscape.

Key issues in modern VUCA management are agility (response to volatility), information and knowledge management (response to uncertainty), restructuring (response to complexity) and experimentation (response to ambiguity). Useful foresight tools are challenging tools, decision-making tools, aligning tools, learning tools and the ability to combine these management tools in the practices of corporate foresight and management systems. The VUCA approach is a key solution concept to technological disruption.

The authors present the new corporate foresight framework and management tool based on foresight, which help leaders to manage VUCA – especially under the conditions of hyper-competition and technological disruption.

Corporate leaders should reinvent the strategic planning framework and adjust it to the VUCA conditions and simply be more strategic. Traps and typical failures of foresight are adopting it too early, giving up too soon, adapting too late and hanging on too long. In particular, technological transformation with disruptive technologies is changing and challenging many basic assumptions of business management and strategic planning. Our comparative analysis with Gartner Hype Cycle (fast technological changes from 2008 to 2016) verifies this important aspect of technological disruption.

Digital transformation is a foundational change in how firms operate and deliver value to customers by using digital technologies to create new business opportunities. The purpose of this study is to offer a conceptual framework by reorganizing the elements of digital transformation, including resources, technology, capabilities and performance, into a workable process and investigating how firms integrate these resources, build new capabilities and transform them into enhanced performance.

This framework builds three blocks: resource integration, organizational capabilities and outcomes, exploring the impact of resource integration on outcomes through organizational capabilities. For resource integration, this study adopts a resource-based view (RBV) and service-dominant logic (SDL) to integrate organizational resources, including information technology (IT)-based resources, which play a role in moderating the effect of resource integration. Moreover, the author argues that firms’ capabilities have two levels: higher-order capabilities and lower-order capabilities, which will convert these resources through the capabilities into organizational performance.

This framework is built to understand the process of digital transformation and its antecedents for firms’ performance in business environments. Drawing on RBV, it provides a more holistic perspective that has been linked to resource integration, organizational capabilities and outcomes at the firm level. In this way, the theoretical basis for diminishing implicitness associated with the current perspective of digital transformation can be strengthened.

This paper offers a coherent discussion of digital transformation and explains the process of digital transformation, thus advancing prior work. The major contribution is connecting the process of digital transformation through which firms integrate resources, i.e. digital technologies and valuable, rare, inimitable and nonsubstitutable (VRIN) and nonVRIN resources as well, to build organizational dynamic capabilities based on RBV and SDL.

With the overarching idea of disruptive technology and its effects on business, this paper focuses on how companies strategically consider meeting the challenge of a disruptive technology such as additive manufacturing. The purpose of this paper is to describe and discuss changes in positions and roles related to the implementation of a disruptive technology.

Additive manufacturing could be expected to have different consequences for parties based on their current supply chain positions. The paper therefore investigates companies’ strategies related to various supply chain positions and does so by departing from a position and role point of view. Three business cases related to metal 3D printing - illustrating sub-suppliers, manufacturers and logistics firms - describe as many strategies. Data for the cases were collected through meetings, interviews, seminars and secondary data focusing on both current business activities related to additive manufacturing and scenarios for the future.

The companies attempted to defend their current positions, leading to new roles for them. This disconnects the change of roles from that of positions. The changed roles indicate that all parties, regardless of supply chain positions, would move into competing producing roles, thereby indicating how a disruptive technology may disrupt network structures based on companies’ attempts to defend their positions.

The paper contributes to previous research by reporting a disconnect between positions and roles among firms when disruption takes place. The paper further denotes how the investigated firms largely disregarded network consequences at the disruptive stage, caused by the introduction of additive manufacturing. The paper also contributes to research on additive manufacturing by including a business dimension and linking this to positions and roles.