Digital [Business|Transformation] Strategy: A
Systematic Review
Could companies benefit from a consolidated road to transformation?
João Bosco Araújo Pinto Filho, Tiago Beltrão Lacerda
CESAR School
Recife, Brazil
{jbapf, tbl}@cesar.org.br
Abstract — New reality imposed by months of quarantine days
caused by the global spread of COVID-19 affected mostly every
industry. In this new digital age, new technologies are being
incorporated continuously introducing new shapes of businesses.
Companies able to adapt have a high probability of survival but,
even now, digital transformation is still a challenge for traditional
nondigital companies. A digital business strategy could guide the
inevitable transformations that digital technologies trigger. This
paper presents a systematic review of current literature on digital
(business and/or transformation) strategies with the objective to
identify, evaluate and interpret published research that could
bring some light to the relevant aspects and pitfalls that should be
considered in a digital transformation initiative. The review
investigates what is known about the risks and multi-industry
aspects in a digital strategy and the results show statistical data,
gaps in current research and models of successful implementation.
Keywords - Digital Business Strategy, Digital Transformation
Strategy, Digital Strategy
I. INTRODUCTION
Many traditional firms have been surpassed by innovative
fast-growing digital entrants and suffered as a result of this.
Online retailers, such as Alibaba and Amazon, have strongly
affected traditional retailers, as evidenced by the bankruptcies of
several former retail giants such as Toys ‘R’Us, Claire’s and
RadioShack. However, these new online retailers do not limit
their reach to the traditional retail industry and use their digital
resources to enter markets that were previously thought to be
completely unrelated, such as banking or global shipping [1].
Although traditional companies were financially successful
in their pre-digital era, the digital economy has unquestionably
threatened their survival [2]. Therefore, to sustain their
competitive advantage, traditional organizations operating in
various sectors are constantly under pressure to add digital
products, services and/or processes to their offerings [3].
In fact, almost any existing business is being confronted with
the need to engage in digital transformation (DT) [4]. May it be
the provision of digital services for physical products, such as
manufacturer collecting maintenance data via remote interfaces
in the vehicles [5], the digitalization of government services that
companies need to interact with [6] or the transformation of
entire value chains, like banks operating without any physical
presence [7], corporates are required to constantly innovate in
products, services and also in business operations due to ever
2022 17th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI)
22 – 25 June 2022, Madrid, Spain
ISBN: 978-989-33-3436-2
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Industrial de Santander. Downloaded on July 12,2023 at 22:12:54 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Silvio Romero de Lemos Meira
UFPE
Recife, Brazil
slrm@cin.ufpe.br
changing market conditions. Examples of such market
disruptions affecting other industries are easy to list: Spotify in
the music industry, Netflix in TV broadcasting and film industry
and Booking.com or Airbnb in hotel industry [1].
All over the world, the new reality imposed by the spread of
the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) made mandatory the
need for adoption of digital innovations (DI). Months of
lockdown, closure of schools, commerce and offices forced
alternatives such as online education, online working, online
medical services, affecting mostly every industry. In this new
digital age, it became crystal clear that only companies that can
adapt to a DI have a high probability of success, if not, survival.
Changes in company valuations strongly reflect this shift.
Just a decade ago, the five most valuable firms of the S&P 500
Index included only one digital company, Microsoft, while the
other four were: Exxon, GE, Gazprom and Citigroup. By May
2018, the same S&P’s Index listed only digital firms: Apple,
Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon and Facebook [1].
Companies apply digital technologies for different purposes
and industries have embraced technology to different extents as
the hype cycle of emerging technologies differently impacts
industries from the time a concrete technology has been
discovered and introduced, to the time when technology reaches
its full potential of use in real [8][9].
However, it seems that companies still have to invest in a
strategic approach to the DT as the current practice reveals
failures in the attempts made by non-born digital organizations
to be digitally transformed and highlights either the difficulties
or inability to achieve digital transformation, often followed by
both economic loss and technological failures [2] [3].
A DT involves more than just the use of technology. The
change of products, services, and processes to digitally-enabled
versions requires fundamental modifications in the overall
organization as well as its business model and technology
infrastructure [10] [11] [12].
Although digital transformation is increasingly popular
among companies, the mere incorporation of technology into
business processes does not safeguard organizations to be
innovative and remain competitive in the Digital Age. In truth,
many traditional organizations have been struggling to
implement these digital technologies and the subsequent
transformational initiatives they undertake. Cases of well-
known organizations demonstrate that they too failed to make
effective decisions to create an integrated approach to digital
transformation and develop a sustainable competitive advantage
through DT [13] [14] [3].
One possible factor of failure is the absence of adequate
digital business strategy (DBS), tailored to the corporate
structure and thought to offer a continuous approach, as DT
implies that at some point in time the transition to a new state
has been accomplished and a sufficient level of maturity is
attained [15].
Reference [16] refers to this state after DT as digital ubiquity,
highlighting that, in such a scenario, the major challenge is not
become acquainted with digital technologies, but rather quickly
assess the potential of any new technical development and adapt
to them when necessary, replacing existing digital components
through updated ones. Thus, the question that arises is: how to
sustain a DBS after this state of ubiquity has been reached and
which challenges lie beyond it?
This work is organized as such: first, basic concepts related
to digital transformation and digital business strategy will be
presented. In the following session, methods, processes and
protocol used in this systematic review will be described, as well
as the results of the conducted research will be detailed. The last
session is reserved for conclusions and future works.
II. DIGITAL [BUSINESS| TRANSFORMATION] STRATEGY
Although the term “Digital Transformation” is frequently
used in business research and marketing, scholars do not always
agree on a common definition [17]. Nevertheless, it is often
referred to in the context of a complete change in how firms
employ digital technologies to develop a new digital business
model that helps to create more value for the organization [1].
New technologies are being incorporated continuously into
our day-to-day life, introducing new shapes for traditional and
original kinds of businesses. DT has been directly influencing
these new relations and forms of consumption in our society.
[18].
Digital transformation directly affects the organization's
core, its business model, leading to an organization driven by
digital technology. It engages all enterprise resources - human,
technological, physical, organizational and financial – in a
complex and demanding process [8]. It is, in general, the result
of a profound Digital Strategy, with new strategic technology
and innovation goals and constraints [13] [19].
Digital business strategy is the fusion of business and
technology strategies to guide the inevitable transformations that
digital technologies trigger [20].
DBS is a strategy focusing on innovative ways that can
enable organizations to thrive in the digital age. It involves
leveraging digital resources to create differential business value
[21]. Many organizations, however, still struggle to attain value
with a DBS and could benefit from more research in the area.
III. APPLIED PROTOCOL
A systematic review seeks to evaluate and interpret all the
relevant research available for a specific subject area, research
2022 17th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI)
22 – 25 June 2022, Madrid, Spain
ISBN: 978-989-33-3436-2
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Industrial de Santander. Downloaded on July 12,2023 at 22:12:54 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
question or phenomenon of interest [22]. The definition of a
review protocol is important to reduce the possibility of
researcher bias, as the protocol specifies the methods used to
carry out the systematic review. This protocol is a critical
element of any systematic review and must include all elements
of the proposed analysis.
The present study was constructed based upon the guidelines
for the development of systematic reviews in software
engineering described by Kitchenham and S. Charters [22]. Our
review methodology is composed of six steps:
1) development of the protocol,
2) identification of inclusion and exclusion criteria,
3) search for relevant studies,
4) critical assessment,
5) extraction of data, and
6) synthesis.
The objective of this review is to identify primary studies
that focus on the key aspects of a digital (business and/or
transformation) strategy from the corporate point of view,
following this central question:
 What are the key aspects to be considered regarding a
Digital [Business or Transformation] Strategy for
companies?
We are also concerned with the integration aspects among
platforms and/or digital ecosystems and for a strategy that could
fit different companies or industries, so, from this central
question, others secondary questions were developed to help in
a better comprehension of the problem:
 Is there an accordance of key risk and relevant aspects
that should be considered in DS? If so, does it consider
a platform ecosystem integration aspect?
 Is there a multi-industry approach for DS tested in real
use case scenarios?
A. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
For this review, we considered studies that aim at analyzing
the use of a digital strategy to improve the efficiency and
effectiveness of a digital transformation journey for companies.
Although the expression “digital business strategy” has been
used since the early days of the Internet [23], we were interested
in the last four years of research (2018 – 2022) as it is a rapid
developing area, and we are focusing on the research edge. Were
also excluded:
 Studies based on a specific region, industry or enterprise
size.
 Studies based on a specific technology subject, such as
artificial intelligence (AI), blockchain or internet-of-
things (IoT), for instance.
 Studies focused on the human aspects of digital strategy,
such as leadership or team skills.
 Noncorporative studies focused on the Public Sector or
conducted exclusively in academic environment.
  Systematic literature reviews not direct related to our
study objectives.
 Others, such as prefaces, journal introductions,
biographies and book of contents.
B. Search Strategies
The search strategy to find the search strings started with
automatic searches in electronic databases and a manual search
in conference proceedings and journals to ensure that relevant
studies would be included, even if this caused redundancy in the
results.
As a result, two search strings were created with terms to
guarantee that relevant information would not be excluded when
querying different search engines and databases, but also that the
result of queries would not be polluted with irrelevant studies:
1. “Digital Business Strategy”
2. “Digital Transformation Strategy”
We did not consider the search string “Digital Strategy” as it
title and abstract of all works. At this stage, all works whose
titles and abstracts did not confirm to the scope of the review or
met any exclusion criteria were then eliminated.
Since we are interested in the most comprehensive digital
strategies, we excluded from this study restrictive articles that
were concentrated on a specific industry (financial services,
industry 4.0, hospitality or health, for instance), region (e.g.,
case studies of Kavala/Greece, current state of Portuguese
organizations or mHealth apps adoption in Bangladesh) or
enterprise size.
After using all exclusion criteria, we ended this stage with
274 studies excluded as summarized on Table II. The 27 works
remaining were submitted to further analysis.
TABLE II. AMOUNT OF STUDIES EXCLUDED ON EACH CRITERIA
Exclusion Criteria Total
Restrictive articles
119
(by region, industry or size)

returned a great volume of articles from many different subject Technical study 60
areas and regarding various aspects not related to this enterprise Previous to 2018 33
study, during a pre-search through the databases. Noncorporate 23
Focus on human aspects 17
The search strings were used separately on each database in Academic environment 9
the process of extracting information. The searches were Systematic Literature Review (SLR) 5
conducted on February 06, 2022 and found studies as late as Duplicates 3
February 02, 2022. The databases considered were: Others 5
1. ACM Digital Library. Total Excluded: 274
2. IEEE Xplore.
3. ScienceDirect – Elsevier. D. Quality Assessment
In the quality assessment stage, studies went through a more
The results of each search were grouped together according critical analysis, where the complete studies were analyzed in
to database and search string (Table I) and, later, examined order to check if any additional exclusion was necessary.
closer for exclusion criteria.
After the quality assessment, relevance grades were
TABLE I. AMOUNT OF STUDIES FOUND ON EACH DATABASE attributed to the remaining works. Five questions were used to
help in the quality assessment. The first three are useful to
Database Total
establish whether the work is relevant for the review, reason why
ACM Digital Library 30 they were the only ones used as exclusion criteria. The
Digital Business Strategy 9 remaining questions are more useful for determining quality of
Digital Transformation Strategy 21 the work, reason why they were used to grade the work
IEEE Xplore 20 according to quality. The questions were:
Digital Business Strategy 7
Digital Transformation Strategy 13  Does the study examine impacts and/or aspects related
ScienceDirect – Elsevier 251
Digital (Business or Transformation) Strategy in an
Digital Business Strategy 109
Organizational view?
Digital Transformation Strategy 143  Does the study describe challenges or opportunities on
adoption of a Digital Strategy?
Total Studies: 301
 Does the study suggest or create any best practice,
C. Studies Selection Process framework, maturity model to be adopted?
This section describes the selection process from initial  Is the context and results of the study adequately
search using the Search Strategies described below to explained and described?
identification of primary studies.  Was the study applied in any real case (not only
At the first step, the studies returned in each combination of theoretical), with methods for data gathering correctly
‘search string’ + databases were exported to Zotero’s citation used and described?
management tool. Of the 27 remaining studies that were analyzed in the quality
assessment stage, a total of 16 works were excluded for the
Secondly, we exported all 301 studies from Zotero to Rayyan following reason:
QCRI web application [24], where we conducted the analysis of

2022 17th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI)

22 – 25 June 2022, Madrid, Spain
ISBN: 978-989-33-3436-2
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Industrial de Santander. Downloaded on July 12,2023 at 22:12:54 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
  Seven were focused on aspects such as organizational 28 topics, being “Digital Transformation” the most common and
capabilities, marketing needs or digital maturity, not present in a total of 5 publications.
considered for this work.
 Five were confirmed Systematic Literature Reviews
(SLRs) that would not address our research questions.
 Three were written by the same author, with over 70%
of self-references.
 One was disregarded for being an editor's introduction
to a special issue of a Journal.
After this, 11 studies passed to the stage of Data Extraction
and Synthesis and were, thus, considered primary studies. The
quality assessment process will be presented in detail in the
result section along with the assessment of the remaining works.
IV. RESULTS
The research process that was developed resulted in 11 Figure 4. Themes word cloud
primary studies: [1], [3], [25]–[33]. Each one deals with a wide
array of research topics and utilizes a wide set of exploration B. Quality Analysis
models for each different scenario. As was described in the previous section, each of the primary
A. Quantitative Analysis studies was assessed according to five quality criteria that relate
to rigor and credibility as well as to relevance.
The primary studies were published between 2018 and 2022,
in 6 journals, as shown on Figures 1 and 2. If considered as a whole, these five criteria provide a
trustworthiness measure to the conclusions that a particular
study can bring to the review. The classification for each of the
criteria used a scale of ones (1) and zeros (0) and is presented in
Table III.

TABLE III. QUALITY ANALYSIS OF PRIMARY STUDIES

Figure 1. Total publications per year Work Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Total

[1] 1 1 1 0 0 3
[3] 1 1 1 1 0 4
[25] 1 1 1 1 1 5
[26] 1 1 1 1 1 5
[27] 1 1 1 1 1 5
[28] 1 1 1 0 1 4
[29] 1 1 1 0 0 3
[30] 1 1 1 0 0 3
[31] 1 1 1 1 0 4
[32] 1 1 1 1 0 4
[33] 1 1 1 1 0 4
Figure 2. Total publications per journals
All studies that were analyzed in this step had positive
Primary studies were written by 35 authors from 12 countries answers for questions 1, 2 and 3 as these questions summarize
(Fig. 3). Most of the authors affiliation is from Germany with 11 the inclusion criteria. Consequently, all studies with negatives
authors in three different publications. The large number of answers to at least one of these three quality criteria were already
countries working on the subject indicates a global topic. removed during the selection stage.
All studies that were analyzed provided information on the
context of the work and contributed in some way to research and
the field development. A small part, 3 out of 11 works ([1], [28],
[30]), did not correspond to neither questions 4 and 5, indicating
a poor quality for the present study.
Works [3], [31]–[33] adequately explained and described the
context and results of their study, but did not apply their
Figure 3. Corresponding authors affiliation country
propositions in any real case scenario. In reverse, [28] applied
The word cloud generated from titles and abstracts of the their study in a real use case scenario, but did not explain the
context of their work properly. Studies [25]–[27] obtained the
primary studies is displayed in Fig. 4. It suggests a grouping into

2022 17th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI)

22 – 25 June 2022, Madrid, Spain
ISBN: 978-989-33-3436-2
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Industrial de Santander. Downloaded on July 12,2023 at 22:12:54 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
maximum score in quality analysis for achieving positive
valuation on questions 4 and 5.
V. DISCUSSION
After the analysis and data extraction steps performed on the
primary studies, we were able to identify some aspects relating
to this subject of study. First, it was possible to conclude that the
research on DBS is global and that it will increase from now on,
possibly potentialized by the effects of the recent pandemic.
Second, a great quantity of theoretical solutions and
conceptual models are available, but not many were applied to
real case scenarios. This shows that the research field is active
but also that concrete efforts to implement what was theorized
are rare.
Each following topic presents the findings of a sub-research
question, highlighting evidence gathered from the data
extraction process when possible.
A. A common ground for Digital Strategies
By analyzing the primary studies, we have found a wide
variety of process models [25], [26], [30], frameworks [3][34],
orientation construct [27], flow models [1], roadmap [28] and
typology [29].
Although works were all contextualized as tools to guide a
successful Digital Transformation, they look at different aspects
or areas of study, e.g. Strategic Interdependence and Absorptive
Capacity [3], business model innovation (BMI) [26] or IT and
business alignment [25].
The need to consider key risks in a DT were mentioned in
almost every study, but the level of relevance given to the
subject contrasted. As for those who gave some attention to the
subject, [26] mentions risk management as one of the many
activities and capabilities need to be considered in a digital
innovations-driven process while [30] compared the risks in a
pure top-down with a bottom-up approach to conclude that a
combination of these both approaches in terms of a so-called
down-up approach has to be used for the successful development
of a digital strategy. Reference [29] presented different risks and
challenges associated with each of the four types of digital
transformation strategies proposed by the authors (disruptive,
business model led, technology led and proud to be analog).
On the other hand, [3] gave special attention to the risks
involved in a lack of knowledge of traditional companies
towards a digital transformation, presenting mutual
interdependence in strategic alliances to be a boundary condition
that would minimize these risks.
A more complete analysis was presented in [28], where
authors outline nine of the most common pitfalls and provided
‘facts’, ‘pitfalls’, ‘best practices’ and ‘use cases’ for each,
focusing on how to avoid them while giving practical examples
of how to secure quick digital wins.
Only one study was dedicated to the platform ecosystem
integration aspect. Work [32] employed a panel data regressions
to a longitudinal cross-industry dataset in order to complement
a existent theoretical framework on boundary resources and
provide insights to managers reflecting about deploying
boundary re-sources in a beneficial way.
2022 17th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI)
22 – 25 June 2022, Madrid, Spain
ISBN: 978-989-33-3436-2
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Industrial de Santander. Downloaded on July 12,2023 at 22:12:54 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
B. Multi-industry approach
Some studies did not mention the possibility of applying
their results in any industry at all, leaving no clue whether the
work could benefit from a multi-industry approach.
Reference [25] suggests future research that could
investigate the extent to which the different dynamic capabilities
and its aligning actions of the proposed aligning process model
differ in other industry settings, thus, denying a multi-industry
approach of the study.
Some were theoretical propositions [3] [34] and, thus,
supposed to be multi-industry but it is possible to claim an
answer as they were not tested on a real case scenario.
Reference [1] takes a multidisciplinary but not multi-
industry focus on his work. [29] presents a typology of four
generic DTS in terms of usage of digital technologies and
readiness of a business model for digital operation, and mentions
different industries all along the work, but does not state the
multi-industry aspect of his typology. Reference [30] offers a
process model with which any company could carry out their
digital transformation holistically and strategically.
Nevertheless, these three studies were not applied to a real case
scenario as well.
In contrast, [26] offered a stage method for digital
innovations-driven business model regeneration that also
considers the differences among industries. The multi-industry
facet is evidenced, for example, when the component analysis
stage considers that components are more important for certain
industries than for others, e.g., service industries give more
importance to customer relationships while resources are more
important for product industries.
VI. CONCLUSION
The aim of the review was to identify key risks and aspects
of a digital (business and/or transformation) strategy, benefiting
companies across different industries. In the search phase, 301
works were found of which 27 were analyzed in the quality
assessment stage and 11 were classified as primary studies after
selection and quality criteria were applied.
Overall, this present study suggests that academic studies
dedicated to the risk component of a DT are in short supply and,
when exists, have been limited to certain domains. It reveals a
lack of studies focused on a cross-industries approach to
consolidate a wider strategy.
It is not possible to answer affirmatively to none of the
research questions as we proposed for this research. We did not
find a common sense on key aspects to be considered regarding
a Digital (Business or Transformation) Strategy for enterprises,
as we did not also find a multi-industry approach tested in real
use case scenario. We also did not find any study other than [32]
alerting for the integration needs of a DS.
A limitation of the current study is the potential bias that
exists when only one researcher is responsible for deciding
selection criteria and analyzing quality of the works. Even
though, measures were taken to keep the analysis impartial, such
as defining search questions and protocol beforehand, more
strict validation would benefit future research efforts.
 One particular SLR discarded during Quality Assessment
went through across eight disciplines, to develop a framework
of current themes in digital innovation research [35]. Although
rejected for the purpose of this study, it could help future works
by providing a full picture of research in DBS and DTS,
including infrastructures, platforms, and ecosystem research.
Another SLR that could be helpful for an extension of this work
is [36].
Given the topic of digital business strategy and digital
transformation has attracted the attention of management
scholars, further research with an expanded scope should
include general management journals listed on the Financial
Times Top 50 is required. Also, as a future work, more effort
could be made with the analysis of solutions to enable the
findings in real cases.
REFERENCES
[1] P. C. Verhoef et al., “Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary
reflection and research agenda,” Journal of Business Research, vol. 122, pp.
889–901, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022.
[2] S. Chanias, M. D. Myers, and T. Hess, “Digital transformation
strategy making in pre-digital organizations: The case of a financial services
provider,” The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 17–
33, Mar. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jsis.2018.11.003.
[3] E. Siachou, D. Vrontis, and E. Trichina, “Can traditional
organizations be digitally transformed by themselves? The moderating role of
absorptive capacity and strategic interdependence,” Journal of Business
Research, vol. 124, pp. 408–421, Jan. 2021, doi:
10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.11.011.
[4] C. Legner et al., “Digitalization: opportunity and challenge for the
business and information systems engineering community,” Business &
information systems engineering, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 301–308, 2017.
[5] R. Dhall and V. Solanki, “An IoT Based Predictive Connected Car
Maintenance.,” International Journal of Interactive Multimedia & Artificial
Intelligence, vol. 4, no. 3, 2017.
[6] M. C. Cano, “Swiss taxpayers confident about mandatory vat e-
filing,” International Tax Review, 2019.
[7] R. M. Stulz, “Fintech, bigtech, and the future of banks,” Journal of
Applied Corporate Finance, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 86–97, 2019.
[8] A. Kutnjak, I. Pihiri, and M. T. Furjan, “Digital Transformation
Case Studies Across Industries – Literature Review,” in 2019 42nd
International Convention on Information and Communication Technology,
Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO), May 2019, pp. 1293–1298. doi:
10.23919/MIPRO.2019.8756911.
[9] “Gartner Identifies Key Emerging Technologies Spurring
Innovation Through Trust, Growth and Change,” Gartner.
https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2021-08-23-gartner-
identifies-key-emerging-technologies-spurring-innovation-through-trust-
growth-and-change (accessed Feb. 20, 2022).
[10] A. Caetano et al., “Representation and analysis of enterprise models
with semantic techniques: an application to ArchiMate, e3value and business
model canvas,” Knowledge and Information Systems, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 315–
346, 2017.
[11] B. Pittl and D. Bork, “Modeling digital Enterprise ecosystems with
ArchiMate: a mobility provision case study,” in International Conference on
Serviceology, 2017, pp. 178–189.
[12] C. Ebert and C. H. C. Duarte, “Digital Transformation.,” IEEE
Softw., vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 16–21, 2018.
[13] A. Van Looy, “A quantitative study of the link between business
process management and digital innovation,” in International Conference on
Business Process Management, 2017, pp. 177–192.
[14] J. Loonam, S. Eaves, V. Kumar, and G. Parry, “Towards digital
transformation: Lessons learned from traditional organizations,” Strategic
Change, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 101–109, 2018.
[15] S. Berghaus and A. Back, “Stages in Digital Business
Transformation: Results of an Empirical Maturity Study.,” in MCIS, 2016, p.
22.
[16] H.-G. Fill, “Enterprise Modeling: From Digital Transformation to
2022 17th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI)
22 – 25 June 2022, Madrid, Spain
ISBN: 978-989-33-3436-2
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Industrial de Santander. Downloaded on July 12,2023 at 22:12:54 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Digital Ubiquity,” in 2020 15th Conference on Computer Science and
Information Systems (FedCSIS), Sep. 2020, pp. 1–4. doi: 10.15439/2020F001.
[17] D. Schallmo, C. A. Williams, and L. Boardman, “Digital
transformation of business models—best practice, enablers, and roadmap,”
International journal of innovation management, vol. 21, no. 08, p. 1740014,
2017.
[18] J. Hagberg, M. Sundstrom, and N. Egels-Zandén, “The
digitalization of retailing: an exploratory framework,” International Journal of
Retail & Distribution Management, 2016.
[19] S. B. Gomes, F. M. Santoro, M. M. da Silva, and M. Iacob, “A
Reference Model for Digital Transformation and Innovation,” in 2019 IEEE
23rd International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference
(EDOC), Oct. 2019, pp. 21–30. doi: 10.1109/EDOC.2019.00013.
[20] S. Mithas and H. C. Lucas, “What is Your Digital Business
Strategy?,” IT Professional, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 4–6, Nov. 2010, doi:
10.1109/MITP.2010.154.
[21] A. Bharadwaj, O. A. El Sawy, P. A. Pavlou, and N. Venkatraman,
“Digital business strategy: toward a next generation of insights,” MIS quarterly,
pp. 471–482, 2013.
[22] B. Kitchenham and S. Charters, “Guidelines for performing
systematic literature reviews in software engineering,” 2007.
[23] J. Braiterman, S. Verhage, and R. Choo, “Business: designing with
users in Internet time,” interactions, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 23–27, Sep. 2000, doi:
10.1145/345242.345253.
[24] M. Ouzzani, H. Hammady, Z. Fedorowicz, and A. Elmagarmid,
“Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews,” Systematic Reviews,
vol. 5, no. 1, p. 210, 2016, doi: 10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4.
[25] A. Yeow, C. Soh, and R. Hansen, “Aligning with new digital
strategy: A dynamic capabilities approach,” The Journal of Strategic
Information Systems, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 43–58, Mar. 2018, doi:
10.1016/j.jsis.2017.09.001.
[26] A. Coskun-Setirek and Z. Tanrikulu, “Digital innovations-driven
business model regeneration: A process model,” Technology in Society, vol. 64,
p. 101461, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101461.
[27] B. Kindermann, S. Beutel, G. Garcia de Lomana, S. Strese, D.
Bendig, and M. Brettel, “Digital orientation: Conceptualization and
operationalization of a new strategic orientation,” European Management
Journal, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2020.10.009.
[28] F. Mielli and N. Bulanda, “Digital Transformation: Why Projects
Fail, Potential Best Practices and Successful Initiatives,” in 2019 IEEE-
IAS/PCA Cement Industry Conference (IAS/PCA), Apr. 2019, pp. 1–6. doi:
10.1109/CITCON.2019.8729105.
[29] Z. Tekic and D. Koroteev, “From disruptively digital to proudly
analog: A holistic typology of digital transformation strategies,” Business
Horizons, vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 683–693, Nov. 2019, doi:
10.1016/j.bushor.2019.07.002.
[30] A. Lipsmeier, A. Kühn, R. Joppen, and R. Dumitrescu, “Process for
the development of a digital strategy,” Procedia CIRP, vol. 88, pp. 173–178,
Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2020.05.031.
[31] G. Vial, “Understanding digital transformation: A review and a
research agenda,” The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, vol. 28, no. 2,
pp. 118–144, Jun. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003.
[32] P. Zapadka, A. Hanelt, and S. Firk, “Digital at the edge –
antecedents and performance effects of boundary resource deployment,” The
Journal of Strategic Information Systems, vol. 31, no. 1, p. 101708, Mar. 2022,
doi: 10.1016/j.jsis.2022.101708.
[33] N. Brown and I. Brown, “From Digital Business Strategy to Digital
Transformation - How: A Systematic Literature Review,” in Proceedings of the
South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists
2019, New York, NY, USA, Sep. 2019, pp. 1–8. doi:
10.1145/3351108.3351122.
[34] G. Vial, “Understanding digital transformation: A review and a
research agenda,” The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, vol. 28, no. 2,
pp. 118–144, 2019, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003.
[35] A. Hund, H.-T. Wagner, D. Beimborn, and T. Weitzel, “Digital
innovation: Review and novel perspective,” The Journal of Strategic
Information Systems, vol. 30, no. 4, p. 101695, Dec. 2021, doi:
10.1016/j.jsis.2021.101695.
[36] S. Kraus, S. Durst, J. J. Ferreira, P. Veiga, N. Kailer, and A.
Weinmann, “Digital transformation in business and management research: An
overview of the current status quo,” International Journal of Information
Management, vol. 63, p. 102466, Apr. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102466.
2022 17th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI)
22 – 25 June 2022, Madrid, Spain
ISBN: 978-989-33-3436-2
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Industrial de Santander. Downloaded on July 12,2023 at 22:12:54 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.