Abstract :

The COVID-19 pandemic is mostly responsible for the decline in business financial performance. It is believed that the company’s survival is contingent upon the organization’s readiness to integrate digital technology at the operational and strategic levels. Despite the abundance of literature in this field, there has been no empirical research to characterize previous studies or provide guidance for future studies that have a significant impact. Therefore, we have designed this investigation to fill this gap. The bibliometric analysis method employed in the research involves the initial step of conducting a search of the Scopus-indexed journal database using the title, abstract, and keywords “organizational readiness”, “readiness to change”, “digital maturity” or “digital capability”. We selected a total of 3528 articles from a pool of 93,307 by applying filters based on specific topics and time periods. Following this, we compiled the meta data using the Publish and Perish (PoP) program and generated research trend visualizations using Vosviewer. The research findings indicate that Parida, V., a Swedish writer, is the most productive. However, we discovered that the authors who published the most impactful articles were not necessarily the most prolific authors or countries. Following the COVID-19 pandemic, research on organizational readiness that can assist small and medium-sized businesses in gaining a competitive advantage and enhancing their value could be the next area of investigation.

---

Keywords :

Bibiliometric Analysis, Future Direction, Maturity, Organizational Readiness, VosViewer

---

References :

1. Review Global Economy During Pandemic,” Dev. Econ., vol. 5, no. 2, p. 86, 2020, doi: 10.20473/jde.v5i2.23641.
2. K. Cordes and N. Musies, “Accelerating the transformation? the impact of COVID-19 on the digital maturity of retail businesses,” Proc. – 2021 IEEE 23rd Conf. Bus. Informatics, CBI 2021 – Main Pap., vol. 1, pp. 102–110, 2021, doi: 10.1109/CBI52690.2021.00021.
3. Yu, M. Jacobs, R. Chavez, and Y. Song, “Leveraging supply chain visibility for implementing just-in-case practices: the roles of knowledge and digital resources bundling,” Supply Chain Manag., 2024, doi: 10.1108/SCM-12-2023-0607.
4. Faraj, W. Renno, and A. Bhardwaj, “Unto the breach: What the COVID-19 pandemic exposes about digitalization,” Inf. Organ., vol. 31, no. 1, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.infoandorg.2021.100337.
5. Irimiás and A. Mitev, “Change management, digital maturity, and green development: Are successful firms leveraging on sustainability?,” Sustain., vol. 12, no. 10, 2020, doi: 10.3390/SU12104019.
6. Gurbaxani and D. Dunkle, “Gearing up for successful digital transformation,” MIS Q. Exec., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 209–220, 2019, doi: 10.17705/2msqe.00017.
7. Ram, D. Corkindale, and M.-L. Wu, “Examining the Role of Organizational Readiness in Erp Project Delivery.” 2015.
8. G. and S. VanBoskirk, “The Digital Maturity Model 4 . 0,” Forrester, pp. 0–17, 2016.
9. Zhen, Z. Yousaf, M. Radulescu, and M. Yasir, “Nexus of digital organizational culture, capabilities, organizational readiness, and innovation: Investigation of smes operating in the digital economy,” Sustain., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 1–15, 2021, doi: 10.3390/su13020720.
10. Nair, A. Chellasamy, and B. N. B. Singh, “Readiness factors for information technology adoption in SMEs: testing an exploratory model in an Indian context,” J. Asia Bus. Stud., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 694–718, 2019, doi: 10.1108/JABS-09-2018-0254.
11. Liao, J. Chen, X. Chen, and M. Song, “Digital platform capability, environmental innovation quality, and firms’ competitive advantage: The moderating role of environmental uncertainty,” Int. J. Prod. Econ., vol. 268, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2023.109124.
12. Zhang et al., “Top of tide: Nexus between organization agility, digital capability and top management support in SME digital transformation,” Heliyon, vol. 10, no. 10, p. e31579, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e31579.
13. Eremina, N. Lace, and J. Bistrova, “Digital maturity and corporate performance: The case of the Baltic states,” J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex., vol. 5, no. 3, 2019, doi: 10.3390/joitmc5030054.
14. Schumacher, S. Erol, and W. Sihn, “A Maturity Model for Assessing Industry 4.0 Readiness and Maturity of Manufacturing Enterprises,” Procedia CIRP, vol. 52, pp. 161–166, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2016.07.040.
15. L. V. Voß and J. M. Pawlowski, “Current State of the Art and Research Opportunities,” pp. 503–514, 2019, doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-21451-7.
16. Motwani, D. Mirchandani, M. Madan, and A. Gunasekaran, “Successful implementation of ERP projects : Evidence from two case studies,” vol. 75, pp. 83–96, 2002.
17. Mouzakitis and D. Askounis, “A knowledge-based framework for measuring organizational readiness for the adoption of B2B integration systems,” Inf. Syst. Manag., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 253–266, 2010, doi: 10.1080/10580530.2010.493842.
18. K. Stratman and A. V. Roth, “Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Competence Constructs: Two-Stage Multi-Item Scale Development and Validation,” Decis. Sci., vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 601–628, 2002, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5915.2002.tb01658.x.
19. Zhu, Y. Li, W. Wang, and J. Chen, “What leads to post-implementation success of ERP? An empirical study of the Chinese retail industry,” Int. J. Inf. Manage., vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 265–276, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2009.09.007.
20. Bag, S. Gupta, and Z. Luo, “Examining the role of logistics 4.0 enabled dynamic capabilities on firm performance,” Int. J. Logist. Manag., vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 607–628, 2020, doi: 10.1108/IJLM-11-2019-0311.
21. M. Croteau and P. Li, “Critical success factors of CRM technological initiatives,” Can. J. Adm. Sci., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 21–34, 2003, doi: 10.1111/j.1936-4490.2003.tb00303.x.
22. Garrido-Moreno, V. García-Morales, S. King, and N. Lockett, “Social Media use and value creation in the digital landscape: a dynamic-capabilities perspective,” J. Serv. Manag., vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 313–343, 2020, doi: 10.1108/JOSM-09-2018-0286.
23. G. Majhi, A. Anand, A. Mukherjee, and N. P. Rana, “The Optimal Configuration of IT-Enabled Dynamic Capabilities in a firm’s Capabilities Portfolio: a Strategic Alignment Perspective,” Inf. Syst. Front., 2021, doi: 10.1007/s10796-021-10145-5.
24. Paré, C. Sicotte, P. Poba-Nzaou, and G. Balouzakis, “Clinicians’ perceptions of organizational readiness for change in the context of clinical information system projects: Insights from two cross-sectional surveys,” Implement. Sci., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2011, doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-15.
25. Snyder, “Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 104, no. March, pp. 333–339, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039.
26. Donthu and A. Gustafsson, “Effects of COVID-19 on business and research,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 117, no. June, pp. 284–289, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.06.008.
27. Heersmink, J. van den Hoven, N. J. van Eck, and J. den van Berg, “Bibliometric mapping of computer and information ethics,” Ethics Inf. Technol., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 241–249, 2011, doi: 10.1007/s10676-011-9273-7.
28. N. Sifa, “The Bibliometric Analysis on The Worldwide Agricultural Financing Literature: The Mapping and Direction,” Int. J. Curr. Sci. Res. Rev., vol. 05, no. 04, pp. 1104–1115, 2022, doi: 10.47191/ijcsrr/v5-i4-33.
29. Wong, “VOSviewer,” Tech. Serv. Q., vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 219–220, 2018, doi: 10.1080/07317131.2018.1425352.
30. W. Aksnes, L. Langfeldt, and P. Wouters, “Citations, Citation Indicators, and Research Quality: An Overview of Basic Concepts and Theories,” SAGE Open, vol. 9, no. 1, 2019, doi: 10.1177/2158244019829575.
31. Ding and B. Cronin, “Popular and/or prestigious? Measures of scholarly esteem,” Inf. Process. Manag., vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 80–96, 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.ipm.2010.01.002.
32. González-Pereira, V. P. Guerrero-Bote, and F. Moya-Anegón, “A new approach to the metric of journals scientific prestige: The SJR indicator,” J. Informetr., vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 379–391, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2010.03.002.
33. C. Verhoef et al., “Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 122, no. July 2018, pp. 889–901, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022.
34. Ding and B. Cronin, “Popular and / or prestigious ? Measures of scholarly esteem,” Inf. Process. Manag., vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 80–96, 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.ipm.2010.01.002.
35. Kent Baker, N. Pandey, S. Kumar, and A. Haldar, “A bibliometric analysis of board diversity: Current status, development, and future research directions,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 108, no. August 2019, pp. 232–246, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.025.
36. C. Verhoef, T. Broekhuizen, Y. Bart, and …, “Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda,” Journal of Business …. Elsevier, 2021, [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296319305478.