IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/113391.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Podnikanie na Slovensku v dobe digitalizácie optikou generácií
[Doing business in Slovakia in the era of digitalization through the lens of generations]

Author

Listed:
  • Pilková, Anna
  • Kovačičova, Zuzana

Abstract

In line with the main objective of the scientific monograph, which is to provide, based on quantitative and qualitative research methods, characterization of intergenerational entrepreneurship in Slovakia and, at the same time, the state of digitalization and digital transformation from the perspective of the generations, the summary contains key findings related to the investigated areas. Characteristics of the state of youth and senior entrepreneurship in Slovakia, Europe, and the Slovak regions The key differences in the entrepreneurial characteristics, as well as the level of entrepreneurial activity of the youth and senior generations in Slovakia and in comparison with Europe, are as follows: Social attitudes towards entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial talent: • The ability to identify suitable entrepreneurial opportunities as well as the entrepreneurial career (entrepreneurship as a good career choice and the status of an entrepreneur) are spheres where Slovakia has been lagging behind Europe for a long time, for both generations, but this difference, logically due to historical development, is higher among seniors in our country than among the youth. The youth and seniors perceive the most opportunities for entrepreneurship in the Bratislava region and the least in the Banská Bystrica region. On the contrary, entrepreneurship is perceived worst in terms of social attitudes in the Bratislava region and best in the Trnava and Trenčín regions. • One of the important factors that influence the ability to identify entrepreneurial opportunities is entrepreneurial talent as an individual’s intrinsic/individual ability to be entrepreneurial. Research on this factor has shown that youth in Slovakia have a lower intrinsic ability to identify entrepreneurial opportunities and are less responsive to profitable opportunities than seniors. However, they are more confident in their high level of innovation and are also more likely to make decisions that are part of their long-term career plan. However, the comparison with Europe 18 again confirms the fact that both generations in Slovakia lag behind Europe in this kind of talent, i.e. in the intrinsic ability to identify opportunities, and are also less flexible in responding to profitable opportunities. On the other hand, they are better at making decisions that are part of their long-term career plan. However, this contradicts the finding that both generations have relatively high self-confidence in their own entrepreneurship-related knowledge, skills, and abilities and thus exceed the European average. • Youth in Slovakia have a significantly lower fear of failure than youth in Europe, but also seniors. However, seniors in Slovakia have a significantly higher fear of failure than European seniors. This complex of factors affects the entrepreneurial activity of both generations in different ways and intensities. • The entrepreneurial process is also influenced differently by other factors of social attitudes towards entrepreneurship, namely networking, which is better in Slovakia than in Europe, and youth exhibit a stronger position at it, and equality in living standards (egalitarianism), with youth in Slovakia preferring more equality than seniors. This trend in Slovakia is opposite to that in Europe. Intention to start a business and entrepreneurial activity • The intention to start a business in the next three years is twice as high among the youth generation than among seniors in Slovakia and is higher for both generations than in Europe. The highest intention to start a business among both youth and seniors is in the Bratislava region and the lowest in the Nitra and Banská Bystrica regions. This is further reflected in the level of entrepreneurial activity. • The total early-stage entrepreneurial activity (up to 42 months of business existence) is significantly higher in Slovakia than in Europe for both generations, mainly due to the higher growth rate of nascent entrepreneurs (up to 3 months). However, significantly more nascent entrepreneurs in Slovakia than in Europe exit their business within 3 months and do not move on to the next stage of start-up. While in Slovakia a higher percentage of seniors exit their business in this period than youth, the trend is reversed in Europe. Youth show the highest early-stage entrepreneurial activity in the Bratislava region and the lowest in the Banská Bystrica region. Seniors are most involved in early-stage entrepreneurial activity in the Prešov region and least involved in the Nitra region. • The rate of established entrepreneurship (over 42 months of business existence) in Slovakia is significantly higher among seniors than among the youth. Although the 19 trend is similar in Europe, the difference between the percentage of established youth entrepreneurs and established senior entrepreneurs is significantly smaller. Similarly, the business discontinuation rate for both cohorts is lower in Europe than in Slovakia. This suggests that the sustainability of entrepreneurship is worse in Slovakia compared to Europe. The highest rates of established entrepreneurship for both seniors and youth are in the Bratislava region and the lowest in the Trnava region. • The highest motive for starting a business for both generations, both in the early stage and for established entrepreneurs in Slovakia, is the need to earn a living because jobs are scarce. This motivation is particularly strong among seniors in Slovakia. An interesting finding is that only for youth early-stage entrepreneurs in Europe the main motivation is to build a large fortune or a very high income, and the second strongest reason is to change the world for the better, with earning a living only in the third place for this age cohort. The other groups of entrepreneurs surveyed (established youth, established seniors, starting seniors) in Europe express earning a living as the main motive for starting a business. This suggests that the predominant group of entrepreneurs in the surveyed cohorts in Slovakia and Europe will not be explicitly innovative, but will see entrepreneurship as a substitute for employment, which is clearly reflected in their contribution to innovation and creative change. From the analysis of the GEM special questions focusing on digital and intergenerational entrepreneurship from the perspective of early-stage and established entrepreneurs, the most important findings are: • The role of digitalisation in entrepreneurship does not differ significantly between early-stage and established entrepreneurs. Nevertheless, early-stage entrepreneurs attribute a more significant role to digital processes, products, and business models in their business than established entrepreneurs. • We also analysed the importance of digitalisation in entrepreneurship through the share of revenue generated from the sale of products and/or services online. The results showed that more than 4 out of 10 early-stage entrepreneurs do not use online sales, while for established entrepreneurs this figure rises to almost 65%. Thus, early-stage entrepreneurs rely more on online sales, with more than 22% declaring that online sales will account for more than 75%. For established entrepreneurs, it’s only nearly 10% of them. • Early-stage and established entrepreneurs perceive the greatest contribution to digitalisation to be knowledge of the internet and media, including social media. 20 • Almost the same, relatively high proportion of early-stage and established entrepreneurs do not foresee the involvement of the older generation in their business (about 74%). Early-stage entrepreneurs make more use of people from the older generation who are investors intervening in the business management, but also of those who do not intervene in the business management. They also use senior persons to a greater extent as mentors of their business. Conversely, established entrepreneurs have persons from the older generation as their co-owners or employees. • The contribution of a person from the older generation to the business is perceived by early-stage entrepreneurs mainly in access to the necessary resources, furthermore, it is due to the knowledge of the subject of the business, the industry, and/or the market. Established entrepreneurs perceive the contribution of the older generation mainly in access to a network of contacts and then to the necessary resources. Based on the special questions in the GUESSS project focusing on digital and intergenerational entrepreneurship from the perspective of starting and active student entrepreneurs, the most important findings are: • The role of digitalisation in entrepreneurship does not differ significantly between starting and active student entrepreneurs. Digital processes play an important or key role in the business of about 4 out of 10 starting and active student entrepreneurs. It is similar for digital products in entrepreneurship, but digital products are slightly more prominent for active entrepreneurs. Finally, digital business models are important to key for slightly more than 4 in 10 both starting and active student entrepreneurs, while in contrast, they play no or a minor role in slightly more than a third of student businesses at both stages surveyed. • Almost a third of active student entrepreneurs do not use online sales, about a quarter of them report online sales as a share of sales between 25% and 75%, and for another quarter online sales account for more than 75% of sales. Slightly more ambitious in their anticipated use of online sales are starting student entrepreneurs. • Only about half of the student entrepreneurs, both starting and active, reported that a person from the older generation is not involved in their business. This means that up to half of student entrepreneurs also involve a person from an older generation in their business. Most often such a person acts as a mentor or advisor. • The contribution of a person from the older generation to entrepreneurship is seen by both starting and active student entrepreneurs mainly in their knowledge of the 21 market or business. The next most strongly perceived contribution of persons from the older generation is their possession of the personal characteristics necessary for entrepreneurship. Conversely, the least frequent starting and active student entrepreneurs see a benefit in the form of access to the resources needed for entrepreneurship. Digital transformation in the context of intergenerational entrepreneurship in Slovakia From the systematic processing of the responses from the phenomenological qualitative survey, three aggregated dimensions emerged, which are a) Digitalisation status, impact, and barriers to digitalization; b) Generations and intergenerational aspects; c) Processes and practices in the process of digitalization and intergenerational collaboration. Digitalisation status, impact, and barriers to digitalization Responses within the first aggregate dimension culminated around the following themes: • Digitalisation status - respondents declared that digitalisation and digital transformation are part of their business to varying degrees. The results showed three different modes exhibited by the entrepreneurs namely 1.) Basic use of digitalization; 2.) Digitalization for commercial purposes; 3.) Digital transformation and development of advanced processes. The interviews further revealed that SMEs do not necessarily belong to only one mode but can operate independently in different modes. • Factors of digitalisation – they serve as a catalyst for change within companies and strongly influence the status of digitalisation. The SMEs surveyed identified technology, firm-level triggers, external and regulatory framework, and the digitalisation of supply chains and business models as the most important drivers of digitalisation. • Benefits of digitalisation - are manifold, but mainly relate to four key areas, which are efficiency, customers, flexibility, and general improvements in business management. • Key barriers to digitalisation - respondents identified key barriers to digitalisation that arose from their views and experiences in the digitalisation process and were 22 based on the external environment of the organisation. These include the national policy on digitalisation and digital transformation and industry specifics. • Options to overcome key barriers to digitalisation - building on the previous theme, the research focused on different options for overcoming the identified key barriers to digitalisation. The main options that emerged from the respondents’ views were support from the state, adjustments to legislation in the area of a family business, outreach and awareness raising, upbringing and education, and financing. Generations and intergenerational aspects Roles of generations were explored as one of the main themes from three perspectives. • The younger generation usually has good ICT competences and the ability to learn new knowledge quickly. They are also more proactive, often take a leadership role, and have a greater drive and motivation for digitalisation. It is clear that technological progress is very fast and therefore it is also very difficult for the younger generation to keep up with this progress. Knowledge of foreign languages is crucial in this process. For this reason, offspring in family businesses have an indispensable role in bringing new stimuli and ideas for digitalisation. • The older generation has its own role and contribution to make in the digitalisation process. They are able to think in a broader context, taking into account their lifelong professional and managerial experience. In the digitalisation of enterprises, success requires the older generation to pass on their professional and managerial experience and knowledge to the younger generation, but also to delegate competences to them. However, it is not enough to delegate competences and pass on knowledge and experience, but the older generation must also show a certain degree of flexibility. Even if they are rarely the leaders of digitalisation in their companies, they must at least try to understand and embrace digitalisation as an inevitable trend for the current and future success of the company. • In terms of intergenerational cooperation, competence and experience are the most important aspects, regardless of age and generation. Equally important is the intergenerational transfer of knowledge and experience. In addition, respondents indicated that different generations have complementary skills that are essential for successful digitalisation within companies. 23 Processes and practices in the process of digitalisation and intergenerational cooperation In general, processes and practices can be divided into two groups. • Formal processes and practices are defined by internal or external institutions. Within this category, key areas have been identified that are essential for successful digital transformation. These include project management, existing norms and standards, training and coaching. • Informal processes and practices include senior management support and awareness raising, which have been identified as key in the process, forming structurally wellbalanced teams with prior knowledge of digitalisation or at least good experience of collaboration and cooperation. On the one hand, following best practices is a source of inspiration, motivation, but also a guide on how to effectively lead the digitalisation and digital transformation process and what to avoid in the process. Respondents also consider external help to be important. Another popular view was not to introduce robust binding and therefore inflexible digital solutions so that companies proceed gradually and do not undergo major changes in a short time. The systematic analysis of the respondents’ views presented in the phenomenological study and the subsequent synthesis and categorisation resulted in the design of a complex model of digitalisation and digital transformation of SMEs with respect to intergenerational collaboration (Chapter 6.4). An overview of policies aimed at promoting intergenerational entrepreneurship and digital transformation in Europe and Slovakia is systematically elaborated in chapters 7.1 and 7.2. Key stakeholders of intergenerational entrepreneurship and digital transformation in entrepreneurship • The draft conceptual framework of stakeholders in the digitalisation and/or digital transformation of business organisations includes the following actors: a) Policymakers and regulators; b) Technology suppliers; c) Digital infrastructure providers; 24 d) Education and training providers; e) Funding providers; f) Providers of professional and advisory services; g) Support providers; h) The business sector and cross-sectoral organisations. • The lower social, professional, and political interest in the area of intergenerational entrepreneurship and cooperation is also confirmed by the results of our mapping, which indicate a significantly lower number of stakeholders in all elementary components of the entrepreneurial ecosystem. Examples of good practice in supporting intergenerational entrepreneurship considering digital transformation • Examples from abroad show how changes can be made at the level of individual policies, initiatives, and businesses themselves. • A good example for Slovakia is the Federation of Finnish Enterprises - FFP (SME United, 2019) or the establishment of the Digitalisation Support Agency in Austria (Boog, 2019). • Supporting the digital transformation of businesses is also facilitated by so-called online diagnostic tools, which are cheap, accessible, and allow policy makers to reach a wider group of entrepreneurs. • An example of combining digitalisation and intergenerational cooperation at the level of individual companies can be seen in Bosch.

Suggested Citation

  • Pilková, Anna & Kovačičova, Zuzana, 2021. "Podnikanie na Slovensku v dobe digitalizácie optikou generácií [Doing business in Slovakia in the era of digitalization through the lens of generations]," MPRA Paper 113391, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:113391
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/113391/1/MPRA_paper_113391.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/113391/8/MPRA_paper_113391.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ahmed Bounfour, 2016. "Digital Futures, Digital Transformation," Progress in IS, Springer, edition 1, number 978-3-319-23279-9, February.
    2. Dolton, Peter J & Makepeace, G H, 1990. "Self Employment among Graduates," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(1), pages 35-53, January.
    3. Hess, Thomas & Matt, Christian & Benlian, Alexander & Wiesböck, Florian, 2016. "Options for Formulating a Digital Transformation Strategy," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 81032, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    4. Chun-Liang Chen, 2019. "Value Creation by SMEs Participating in Global Value Chains under Industry 4.0 Trend: Case Study of Textile Industry in Taiwan," Journal of Global Information Technology Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(2), pages 120-145, April.
    5. Oksana S. Karashchuk & Elena A. Mayorova & Alexander F. Nikishin & Olena V. Kornilova, 2020. "The Method for Determining Time-Generation Range," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, October.
    6. Wenjie Li & Wenyu Du & Jiamin Yin, 2017. "Digital entrepreneurship ecosystem as a new form of organizing: the case of Zhongguancun," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 1-21, December.
    7. Elisa Ughetto & Mariacristina Rossi & David Audretsch & Erik E. Lehmann, 2020. "Female entrepreneurship in the digital era," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 305-312, August.
    8. Koellinger, Philipp & Minniti, Maria & Schade, Christian, 2007. ""I think I can, I think I can": Overconfidence and entrepreneurial behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 502-527, August.
    9. Minniti, Maria, 2005. "Entrepreneurship and network externalities," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 1-27, May.
    10. Dunn, Thomas & Holtz-Eakin, Douglas, 2000. "Financial Capital, Human Capital, and the Transition to Self-Employment: Evidence from Intergenerational Links," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(2), pages 282-305, April.
    11. Sandra Ferrando-Latorre & Jorge Velilla & Raquel Ortega, 2019. "Intergenerational Transmission of Entrepreneurial Activity in Spanish Families," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 390-407, September.
    12. Nan Langowitz & Maria Minniti, 2007. "The Entrepreneurial Propensity of Women," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 31(3), pages 341-364, May.
    13. Marian Holienka & Jana Holienková & Miroslav Holienka, 2018. "Sports as a Stepping-Stone for Entrepreneurship: Examining Sports University Students," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 66(6), pages 1485-1496.
    14. Saadat Saeed & Moreno Muffatto & Shumaila Y. Yousafzai, 2014. "Exploring intergenerational influence on entrepreneurial intention: the mediating role of perceived desirability and perceived feasibility," International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 18(2/3), pages 134-153.
    15. Unger, Jens M. & Rauch, Andreas & Frese, Michael & Rosenbusch, Nina, 2011. "Human capital and entrepreneurial success: A meta-analytical review," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 341-358, May.
    16. Yanling Chang & Eleftherios Iakovou & Weidong Shi, 2020. "Blockchain in global supply chains and cross border trade: a critical synthesis of the state-of-the-art, challenges and opportunities," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(7), pages 2082-2099, April.
    17. Donald F. Kuratko, 2005. "The Emergence of Entrepreneurship Education: Development, Trends, and Challenges," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 29(5), pages 577-597, September.
    18. Hopp, Christian & Minarikova, Dana & Speil, Alexander, 2019. "A chip off the old block? How parent-child interactions affect the intergenerational transmission of entrepreneurial intentions," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 11(C), pages 1-1.
    19. Miller, Danny & Le Breton-Miller, Isabelle & Lester, Richard H. & Cannella Jr., Albert A., 2007. "Are family firms really superior performers?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 829-858, December.
    20. Hess, Thomas & Matt, Christian & Benlian, Alexander & Wiesböck, Florian, 2016. "Options for Formulating a Digital Transformation Strategy," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 82423, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    21. Matt, C. & Hess, Thomas & Benlian, Alexander, 2015. "Digital Transformation Strategies," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 75002, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    22. Rosie Cox, 2018. "Gender, work, non-work and the invisible migrant: au pairs in contemporary Britain," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-4, December.
    23. Christian Matt & Thomas Hess & Alexander Benlian, 2015. "Digital Transformation Strategies," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 57(5), pages 339-343, October.
    24. Francis J. Greene, 2021. "Stimulating Youth Entrepreneurship," Springer Books, in: Thomas M. Cooney (ed.), The Palgrave Handbook of Minority Entrepreneurship, edition 1, pages 159-178, Springer.
    25. Ciampi, Francesco & Faraoni, Monica & Ballerini, Jacopo & Meli, Francesco, 2022. "The co-evolutionary relationship between digitalization and organizational agility: Ongoing debates, theoretical developments and future research perspectives," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    26. Lin, Chinho & Tsai, Hua-Ling & Wu, Ju-Chuan, 2014. "Collaboration strategy decision-making using the Miles and Snow typology," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(9), pages 1979-1990.
    27. Carlos Benavides-Velasco & Cristina Quintana-García & Vanesa Guzmán-Parra, 2013. "Trends in family business research," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 41-57, January.
    28. Matt, C. & Hess, Thomas & Benlian, Alexander, 2015. "Digital Transformation Strategies," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 75202, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    29. Seco Matos, Catarina & Amaral, Miguel & Baptista, Rui, 2018. "Impact: Senior Entrepreneurship: A Selective Review and a Research Agenda," Foundations and Trends(R) in Entrepreneurship, now publishers, vol. 14(5), pages 427–554-4, December.
    30. James Curran & Robert A Blackburn, 2001. "Older People and the Enterprise Society: Age and Self-Employment Propensities," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 15(4), pages 889-902, December.
    31. Pia Arenius & Maria Minniti, 2005. "Perceptual Variables and Nascent Entrepreneurship," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 233-247, February.
    32. Chien-Chiang Lee & Swee Yoong Wong, 2005. "Inflationary Threshold Effects In The Relationship Between Financial Development And Economic Growth: Evidence From Taiwan And Japan," Journal of Economic Development, Chung-Ang Unviersity, Department of Economics, vol. 30(1), pages 49-69, June.
    33. Schmidt, Xenia & Muehlfeld, Katrin, 2017. "What’s So Special About Intergenerational Knowledge Transfer? Identifying Challenges of Intergenerational Knowledge Transfer," management revue - Socio-Economic Studies, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 28(4), pages 375-411.
    34. Anna Pilkova & Marian Holienka, 2017. "Entrepreneurship Development in Slovakia," Societies and Political Orders in Transition, in: Arnis Sauka & Alexander Chepurenko (ed.), Entrepreneurship in Transition Economies, pages 225-241, Springer.
    35. Simon Parker & Jonathan Rougier, 2007. "The retirement behaviour of the self-employed in Britain," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(6), pages 697-713.
    36. Teemu Kautonen & Erno Tornikoski & Ewald Kibler, 2011. "Entrepreneurial intentions in the third age: the impact of perceived age norms," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 219-234, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Peter van der Zwan & Ingrid Verheul & Roy Thurik & Isabel Grilo, 2009. "Entrepreneurial Progress: Climbing the Entrepreneurial Ladder in Europe and the US," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 09-070/3, Tinbergen Institute, revised 17 Mar 2010.
    2. Mishra, Deepa Bhatt & Haider, Imran & Gunasekaran, Angappa & Sakib, Md. Nazmus & Malik, Nishtha & Rana, Nripendra P., 2023. "“Better together”: Right blend of business strategy and digital transformation strategies," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    3. Swen Nadkarni & Reinhard Prügl, 2021. "Digital transformation: a review, synthesis and opportunities for future research," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 233-341, April.
    4. Ander, Veronika & Cihelka, Petr & Tyrychtr, Jan & Novák, David, 2022. "Towards Compromise User Experience Design in Ambient Intelligent Environment," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 14(2), June.
    5. Coskun-Setirek, Abide & Tanrikulu, Zuhal, 2021. "Digital innovations-driven business model regeneration: A process model," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    6. Sascha Kraus & Paul Jones & Norbert Kailer & Alexandra Weinmann & Nuria Chaparro-Banegas & Norat Roig-Tierno, 2021. "Digital Transformation: An Overview of the Current State of the Art of Research," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, September.
    7. Piepponen, Amanda & Ritala, Paavo & Keränen, Joona & Maijanen, Päivi, 2022. "Digital transformation of the value proposition: A single case study in the media industry," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 311-325.
    8. Burström, Thommie & Parida, Vinit & Lahti, Tom & Wincent, Joakim, 2021. "AI-enabled business-model innovation and transformation in industrial ecosystems: A framework, model and outline for further research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 85-95.
    9. Florian Diener & Miroslav Špaček, 2021. "Digital Transformation in Banking: A Managerial Perspective on Barriers to Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-27, February.
    10. Sodamin, Dino & Vaněk, Jiří & Ulman, Miloš & Šimek, Pavel, 2022. "Fair Label versus Blockchain Technology from the Consumer Perspective: Towards a Comprehensive Research Agenda," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 14(2), June.
    11. Abdul Karim Feroz & Hangjung Zo & Ananth Chiravuri, 2021. "Digital Transformation and Environmental Sustainability: A Review and Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-20, February.
    12. Saarikko, Ted & Westergren, Ulrika H. & Blomquist, Tomas, 2020. "Digital transformation: Five recommendations for the digitally conscious firm," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 63(6), pages 825-839.
    13. Monica Molino & Claudio G. Cortese & Chiara Ghislieri, 2021. "Technology Acceptance and Leadership 4.0: A Quali-Quantitative Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-18, October.
    14. Fertő, Imre & Bojnec, Štefan & Podruzsik, Szilárd, 2022. "Do Subsidies Decrease the Farm Income Inequality in Hungary?," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 14(2), June.
    15. Robert Fabac, 2022. "Digital Balanced Scorecard System as a Supporting Strategy for Digital Transformation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-26, August.
    16. Tran, Lam Quynh Trang & Phan, Dai Thich & Herdon, Miklos & Kovacs, Levente, 2022. "Assessing the Digital Transformation in Two Banks: Case Study in Hungary," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 14(2), June.
    17. René Riedl & Alexander Benlian & Thomas Hess & Dirk Stelzer & Hermann Sikora, 2017. "On the Relationship Between Information Management and Digitalization," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 59(6), pages 475-482, December.
    18. Ali Naimi-Sadigh & Tayebeh Asgari & Mohammad Rabiei, 2022. "Digital Transformation in the Value Chain Disruption of Banking Services," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(2), pages 1212-1242, June.
    19. Gong, Cheng & Ribiere, Vincent, 2021. "Developing a unified definition of digital transformation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    20. Blanka, Christine & Krumay, Barbara & Rueckel, David, 2022. "The interplay of digital transformation and employee competency: A design science approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    digitalizácie; digitalization;

    JEL classification:

    • M15 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - IT Management
    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:113391. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.