IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL.

71, 2024 7815

Triad of Digital Transformation: Holistic

Orchestration for People, Process,
and Technology
Abhijeet Satwekar , Mario Miozza , Chiara Abbattista , Sabrina Palumbo , and Mara Rossi

Abstract—Digital transformation (DT) is a critical area of fo- orchestration [2], [12], and strategic response to disruptions
cus as it disruptively transforms organizational business models, from digital technologies [10], [13], as crucial elements toward
processes, and products. Despite being a prominent topic among the success of DT. However, the focus has often been directed
information system scholars, the research has mostly centered
around technological aspects, and there is a need to broaden the toward technological aspects, overlooking the interdisciplinary
research approach to increase the understanding of DT’s intricate nature and relationships across different levels of analysis [14].
dynamics, interdisciplinary nature, and cross-level perspectives, Despite being a prominent topic within the information sys-
with practical guidance, while providing actionable insights for or- tem (IS) research, there is not enough research performed on
ganizations. Through action design research, we elaborate a prac-
theoretical frameworks guiding and driving a successful DT.
tical Digital-by-Design (DbD) framework grounded in theoretical
foundations, to emphasize the interconnected dimensions of people, Numerous studies [2], [15], [16], [17] have elaborated this
process and technology for enhancing DT feasibility and viability. insufficiency and emphasized the need for more comprehensive
This research contributes to a deeper understanding of DT initia- investigations. Academic scholars have consequently advocated
tives by recognizing the significance of: 1) diverse organizational, for a redirection of focus within DT research by calling for a
process, and industry needs; 2) individual uniqueness concerning
cross-level perspective analyses, interdisciplinary contributions,
DT; 3) technology integration and scale-up patterns; 4) cross-level
empirical perspectives; and 5) an interdisciplinary approach by and an emphasis on the unique technology interests [14]. Fur-
supporting organizations when navigating DT complexities and dy- thermore, design thinking is gaining attention to innovate and
namics. Recognizing the practical managerial challenges, the study reduce failures in digital innovation by focusing on understand-
offers a comprehensive guidance for designing and implementing ing customer needs, developing customized solutions, and using
a DT into the business processes.
prototyping techniques [18], [19], [20]. The iterative and agile
Index Terms—Action design research (ADR), business process nature of design thinking aligns user/customer requirements
management (BPM), design thinking, digital by design (DbD), with technological feasibility and business viability [21]. This
digital innovation management (DIM), digital transformation creates a necessity for a comprehensive elucidation of the main
(DT), health-care industry, people process technology framework,
technology adoption, technology management. elements as people, process, and technology to complement with
design thinking for the effective implementation and utilization
of digital technologies to generate value from the DT initiatives.
I. INTRODUCTION
The people, process, and technology (PPT) framework has been
IGITAL transformation (DT) has garnered significant at-
D tention within the literature, and recent research has high-
lighted the formulation of a phased digital strategy [1], [2], [3],
widely applied for the process improvements [22], higher ed-
ucation [23], IS risk management in small- to medium-sized
enterprises [24], smart tourism [25], and manufacturing process
[4], [5], [6], [7], [8], understanding digital maturity and readiness innovation deployment readiness [26]. The PPT framework
[7], [9], [10], recognizing diverse drivers [3], [11], effective provides a comprehensive approach for effectively managing the
complex changes prompted by digital technologies and enables
Manuscript received 6 November 2023; revised 7 February 2024 and 25 March organizations to adopt a holistic perspective to drive positive out-
2024; accepted 26 March 2024. Date of publication 4 April 2024; date of current comes by considering the intricate interactions and relationships
version 17 April 2024. This work was supported by Merck Serono S.p.A., Italy
(A Business of Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany). The internship of Mario
among the elements of people, process, and technology.
Miozza was supported by the INPS-LUISS scholarship program. Review of As the paradigm on DT continues to evolve, it necessitates
this manuscript was arranged by Department Editor T. Daim. (Corresponding for a broader and more comprehensive research approach to
author: Abhijeet Satwekar.)
Abhijeet Satwekar, Chiara Abbattista, Sabrina Palumbo, and Mara Rossi
enrich our understanding of the intricate dynamics underlying
are with the Department of Analytical Excellence and Program Manage- successful DT endeavors. To facilitate the intricate process, there
ment, Merck Serono S.p.A., 00012 Rome, Italy (e-mail: abhijeet.satwekar@ is a need for practical frameworks that: 1) consider addressing
merckgroup.com).
Mario Miozza was an intern with the Merck Serono S.p.A., 00012 Rome,
unique organizational needs [3], [5], [6], [7], [9] [11], [27];
Italy. He is now with the Department of Business and Management, LUISS 2) provide guidance for different technology exploration
Guido Carli University, 00197 Rome, Italy (e-mail: [email protected]). patterns [2], [28]; 3) consider the evolving needs of individuals
This article has supplementary downloadable material available at
https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2024.3384995, provided by the authors.
[3] [1], [2], [10], [13], [27]; 4) clearly elucidate processes [1],
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TEM.2024.3384995 [2], [8], [10], [29] [11], [27]; and 5) provide multiple empirical
1558-0040 © 2024 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.

Authorized licensed use limited to: TONGJI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2024 at 14:59:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
7816 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 71, 2024

perspectives [4], [9], [30]. Due to the complex dynamics transformation journey. The DT stages encompass digitization,
of digital technologies within business processes, there is a digitalization, and DT and necessitate the focus on digital re-
need for deeper guidance to tailor successful DT outcomes. sources, organizational structure, digital growth strategies, and
Consequently, a holistic comprehension of the interrelationships the establishment of metrics and goals as crucial factors for suc-
among the people, process, and technology dimensions would cessful DT implementation [5]. Furthermore, the establishment
significantly contribute to the success of DT initiatives. and scale-up of digital innovation require a hybrid stage-gate
Grounded on the above literature relevance, our study addresses model that allows holistic perspective, contextual adaptability,
the following research question: “How can the integration flexibility, orchestrated collaboration, and incremental growth
of antecedent dimensions (people, process, and technology) across phases [2]. This reflects the importance of gaining a
facilitate a successful DT? and thus, what are the implications of comprehensive understanding of practical aspects throughout
this integration for practitioners and the broader understanding the key stages of DT implementation [8]. These stages and
of DT processes?” imperatives offer a road map for organizations to navigate the
We focused our work to elucidate a digital-by-design (DbD) complex process of DT. Second, to effectively navigate DT
framework and provide a comprehensive theoretical and practi- objectives, it is essential to comprehend digital maturity and
cal basis to the use of antecedent dimensions (people, process, readiness. Previous studies have examined different levels of
and technology) and their interrelationships to suffice a suc- digital maturity and interaction between external pressures and
cessful DT. We have applied an action design research (ADR) resource orchestration [10]. Similarly, distinct DT strategies
methodology [31] to frame the antecedent dimensions (people, based on technology utilization and business model readiness
process, and technology) for a case study in a biopharmaceutical have been investigated [7]. These studies highlight the sig-
company [32], resulting in the creation of theoretical foundation nificance of evaluating organizational readiness and maturity
for DbD [33]. The implications of our work extend primarily to drive the success of DT initiatives. Third, understanding
in two directions. First, through the instantization on a case the driving forces and motivations behind DT is crucial for
study, we enhance the existing literature on DT by translating aligning strategies and initiatives within organizations. Various
theory to practice and fine-tune the existing frameworks toward drivers for DT have been identified, including technology orien-
the demonstration of a practical application using a holistic tation, customer-driven approaches, governance-led initiatives,
approach. This addresses the current need for guidance in the and capability-based motivations [11]. Recommendations are
DT initiatives utilizing the emerging considerations, theoretical provided for the assessment of technological capabilities [1]
concepts, new logics, and existing frameworks [1], [2], [10], along with the consideration of DT drivers as employee informa-
[13], [14], [21], [28], [34], [35], [36]. Second, the study illumi- tion technology (IT) skills, digital strategy, and financial perfor-
nates the incorporation of design thinking into the antecedent mance [3]. Furthermore, the alignment between IT and digital
dimensions (people, process, and technology) to facilitate a strategy is highlighted as a crucial driver to effectively leverage
successful DT. We provide a comprehensive understanding of technological investments. These alignments provide insights
the complex dynamics in the integrated use of design thinking, into actions, such as sensing, seizing, and transforming, to ensure
PPT framework, DIM framework, and the DT theories. This that technology initiatives contribute to overall DT objectives
elucidation contributes to the literature on DT by emphasizing [4]. Recognizing these diverse drivers enables organizations
the use of design thinking and underscores the importance of to tailor their DT strategies for developing a clear strategic
taking a holistic and integrated approach considering the an- direction, deliver value, and sustain the transformation process.
tecedent dimensions of people, process, and technology. This Finally, the orchestration plays a vital role in facilitating suc-
understanding is crucial for managers to effectively manage cessful DT implementation. Investigations on the orchestration
the complex dynamic structures between innovation processes of digital innovation ecosystems and the importance of central
and innovation outcomes [28], [37] to foster a successful DT in actors or orchestrators highlight various routines involved in
today’s rapidly changing and complex business environment. ecosystem orchestration [12]. These findings contribute to our
understanding of the DT complexities involved in managing di-
II. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND verse actors and resources within digital innovation ecosystems
[2], [10], [28]. Disruptions caused by the implementation of dig-
A. Navigating DT ital technologies necessitate strategic responses. Examinations
Technological evolution has ushered a significant wave of dis- of disruptions and strategic responses within the context of DT
ruption for both society and companies, leading to the emergence emphasize changes in value creation and organizational struc-
of DT, that encompasses strategic [1], [13], [38], cultural [13], ture [13]. Digital transformative capabilities, including digital
[39], and organizational [13], [40] changes aimed at creating sensing, seizing, and reconfiguring, have been proposed [9] to
new value [13], [41]. Several IS scholars have provided valuable provide insights for strategically managing disruptions during
insights with different DT approaches and have put forward the DT process. Overall, the current research has highlighted
several recommendations. First, it is important to formulate the essential considerations that encompass the formulation of
a digital strategy and have a phased execution. A continuous a digital strategy with phased execution, understanding digital
dynamic process model has been proposed for the develop- maturity and readiness, recognizing diverse drivers, orches-
ment and implementation of the DT strategies by encompass- tration, and strategically responding to disruptions by digital
ing multiple stages/phases [6]. The stages and imperatives of technologies. These insights are indicative for organizations
DT play a critical role in guiding organizations through their to structure their DT journeys and navigate the complexities.
Authorized licensed use limited to: TONGJI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2024 at 14:59:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
SATWEKAR et al.: TRIAD OF DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION: HOLISTIC ORCHESTRATION FOR PEOPLE, PROCESS, AND TECHNOLOGY 7817

Furthermore, Nambisan et al. [14] emphasize the importance adapted and refined the definitions of the PPT framework [22]
of considering three key implications for IS scholars engaging for a comprehensive design-thinking-based business-centric ap-
with DT. First, DT entails different levels of analysis (e.g., proach toward DT. By holistically understanding the intricate
individual, organizational, community, regional, and societal). relationships between people, process, and technology, organi-
Therefore, research should integrate DT constructs across dif- zations can leverage insights to navigate the complexities of DT,
ferent empirical settings to provide significant contributions. enabling successful implementation of digital technologies and
Second, DT affects a broad range of disciplinary fields (e.g., achieving superior business performance.
marketing, operations management, strategy, ISs, etc.). Thus, To bridge the gap between theory and practice, we have
an interdisciplinary approach is needed to deliver more compre- adopted an interdisciplinary approach that leverages design
hensive perspectives. Third, research should identify the crucial thinking principles and considers a user-centric approach to
role played by each digital technology to develop theoretical provide a comprehensive understanding for the dimensions of
foundations for DT. This includes examining the interactions people, process, and technology. The design thinking approach
between design processes, stakeholder’s needs, and desired out- ensures alignment between business needs and technological
comes. Practitioners and scholars have predominantly focused requirements, ultimately delivering value within the business
on the technological aspects of DT [29], with less consideration process [42], [43]. Design thinking recognizes the crucial role
given to the relationships across different levels of analysis and played by the digital technology and facilitates its appropriate
interdisciplinary fields [14]. Limited exploration on technol- positioning. However, organizations typically employ a project
ogy integration patterns [8] and empirical perspectives leads to review methodology based on stage gate to build technological
insufficient attention to diverse technology attributes and the innovations, and recently, there has been an emphasis on the
holistic elements for facilitating the transition from proof of use of hybrid approaches consisting of agile stage-gate method-
concept/pilot to routine [5], [7], [10], [13], within the complex ologies [44], [45], [46], [47]. To address the need for a phased
organizational environments. Hence, further research is needed structure, we adopted the DIM framework [2] that is based on
to understand how to effectively guide organizations in devel- new logics of digital innovations [28] and guides the creation
oping, executing, and assessing DT initiatives [1], [5], [8], [10], of the digital innovations through phase-appropriate and incre-
[13], [14], [27], [30]. mental setup [2]. While the DIM framework empowers organi-
zations to build digital innovations toward DT, it lacks structured
granulation into relationships between people, process, and tech-
B. People, Process, and Technology as Anecdotal Dimensions nology. We have attempted to enrich the DIM framework with
for DT explicit attention to the interplay between people, process, and
To delve into a deeper understanding of a business, the PPT technology dimensions and provide a practically usable DbD
framework can provide a comprehensive elaboration, particu- framework. Our work considers the literature recommendations
larly in the context of DT. The PPT framework is a holistic model along with practitioner’s experience to operationalize the DbD
that has been widely recognized and utilized across various in- framework. DbD is grounded on the principles of quality by
dustries for years [22]. The three dimensions of people, process, design [48] and includes quality-risk-based foundations to guide
and technology are regarded as key areas to facilitate process and analyze the interplay between technology, business rele-
improvement [22]. The PPT framework has been proven valu- vance, and stakeholders to deliver tangible value. DbD has been
able in various contexts, i.e., DT in higher education [23], IS risk preliminarily applied on an artificial-intelligence-based case
management in small- to medium-sized enterprises [24], smart study, as outlined in a scientific technical article [33]. While DbD
tourism [25], and manufacturing process innovation deployment has demonstrated the potential to facilitate the implementation
readiness [26]. The integrative nature of the PPT framework has of a digital innovation, it is still an emerging concept and lacks
the potential to drive successful DT outcomes by effectively robust theoretical foundations in the management literature. This
balancing and coordinating the interactions and relationships research aims to strengthen the theoretical grounding of DbD,
between people, processes, and technology. Recently, the use of providing a rationale and practical guidance for organizations
design thinking has been discussed to address the complexities engaged in digital innovation design and deployment in DT
of building digital innovation. Organizations are increasingly initiatives. In the next sections, we elaborate the DbD framework
interested in the use of design thinking principles as a new way and its theoretical underpinnings by instantiation on a case study.
to innovate and reduce the prospects of failure [18], [19], [20].
Design thinking emphasizes the importance of need finding,
developing individualized solutions, and utilizing prototyping III. DBD FRAMEWORK
techniques [21]. A design process is widely used for creating and The pursuit of digital innovations follows a complex process
developing ideas for products, services, systems, or processes from ideation, development, deployment, and management of
that are according to the needs and desires of end users [42]. The digital technologies within a holistic DT initiative. IS research
user-centric design approach focuses on understanding customer highlights the paradoxes and dilemmas that are encountered by
needs [42], while the iterative “design thinking” approach is the organizations during the digitalization process [28], [49],
sensible to align customer needs with technology feasibility [50], [51], [52], [53], with an increased focus on the materiality
and business viability to deliver value [43]. In our work, we of the innovation process and outcomes [28], [37], [54]. The

Authorized licensed use limited to: TONGJI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2024 at 14:59:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
7818 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 71, 2024

TABLE I
CONNECTING THE LOGICS AND PHASES OF DIM WITH DBD

DT initiatives are based on digital innovations that require a strategic and coordinated management of various elements to
more flexible innovation process, where the scope, features, and match the problem/opportunity with the digital innovation so-
value of benefits evolve dynamically [2], [28]. By considering lution. By structuring roles and responsibilities, integration of
the literature recommendations, and the practicality of the im- various stakeholders, and tackling any systemic barriers, orches-
plementations, we considered an integrated approach based on tration facilitates the smoother transition of the digital innovation
the existing theories, practical experience, and leveraging design into adoption and shapes the digital value [2], [28]. The integra-
thinking principles to elucidate the DbD framework. Scholars tion of the DbD steps within the main phases of DIM [2] along
have advocated for a phased approach in driving DT to deliver the new logics of digital innovations [28] enables organizations
value through continuous improvement [2], [5], [6], [8]. To to leverage the strengths of both frameworks to develop a more
structure the main phases, we considered the DIM framework comprehensive and effective DT approach. Elaboration of the
due to its relatability, practicality, and simplicity, offering a DbD steps within the DIM phases of proof of concept, proof of
phase-appropriate and incremental setup approach [2]. The DIM feasibility, and proof of value has been further described (see
framework is built on the new theoretical logics on digital in- Table I).
novation: a) dynamic problem–solution design pairing; b) tech- The DbD framework encompasses six main steps that guide
nology affordances and constraints; c) sociocognitive sensemak- the process of digitalization from initiation to its continuous
ing; and d) orchestration [2], [28]. Dynamic problem–solution evolution as per the changing dynamics of the business. The
design pairing emphasizes the iterative reshaping of scope and first step involves defining the target digitalized business
functionalities throughout the digital innovation journey. Setting profile (TDBP), which outlines the desired digitalized business
phase-specific objectives and navigating between divergence profile and its associated characteristics. It serves as a strategic
and convergence of digital innovation opportunities facilitates vision for the future digitalization state with the identification
the successful creation of value-generating digital innovations. of high-level expectations and value. This coincides with
Sociocognitive sensemaking plays a crucial role in defining and proof-of-concept phase of DIM and relates to the elaboration of
discovering new opportunities with extended benefit scenarios, an initial understanding and confidence in the value proposition.
which needs to be negotiated and justified for stable adoption The second step in DbD entails delving into a comprehensive
within organizations. Technology affordances and constraints exploration of the people, process, and technology dimensions
consider the use of necessary IT systems and architecture on to gain a deeper understanding. Through the adaptation of
a need basis and allow step-by-step experience-based evalu- the PPT framework [22], we consider “People” as individuals
ation and building of digital technologies. It emphasizes the possessing the necessary skills and knowledge to execute tasks
structuring of phase-appropriate business needs for new digital within a business process and contribute to the success of
technologies, as well as repurposing existing digital technolo- an organization. “Process” entails a series of interconnected
gies for different benefit outcomes. Orchestration focuses on value-added business activities that involve specific inputs

Authorized licensed use limited to: TONGJI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2024 at 14:59:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
SATWEKAR et al.: TRIAD OF DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION: HOLISTIC ORCHESTRATION FOR PEOPLE, PROCESS, AND TECHNOLOGY 7819

and produce specific outputs. “Technology” refers to the IV. RESEARCH DESIGN
hardware, software, instrumentation, machines, systems, and
A. Case Study
the necessary conducive elements (for proper functioning and
utilization of the technology) to perform tasks effectively Our study was conducted at Merck Healthcare’s Global An-
and efficiently within business processes. These dimensions alytical Development organization and within the Analytical
have been considered crucial for achieving successful process Excellence and Program Management Department to address
innovation outcomes [26], [58]. Through the design thinking the challenges and complexities associated within the operations
principles, the critical workforce attributes (CWAs) for people, of the life cycle management (LCM) center of excellence func-
critical process attributes (CPAs) for the business process, and tional unit. The LCM unit is based at the Guidonia-Rome, Italy
critical technology attributes (CTAs) for the use of technology site and manages analytical methods for 21 biotech products
are necessary to be identified based on their critical relevance in from eight sites with at least 40 functions. Analytical methods
achieving the TDBP. By focusing on these key critical attributes, are of utmost importance in the pharmaceutical industry, as
organizations can effectively align the considerations from peo- they play a critical role in ensuring the quality, safety, and
ple, process, and technology with the desired DT outcomes. The efficacy of drugs [60], [61], thereby ensuring compliance with
process of digitalization involves dependencies with technology regulatory needs [62], [63], [64], [65]. Analytical data generated
that facilitates the improvement of the existing activities to by the analytical methods are essential for assessing the quality
bring efficiency into the new or established business process. attributes, identifying impurities, and measuring the potency of
The touch points between the business process and technology pharmaceutical products throughout their life cycle [61], [66].
are critical to define the positioning of the technology to deliver Analytical methods enable pharmaceutical companies to moni-
value. This relates to an understanding around the unique tor and control the manufacturing process, detect any deviations
technology interests that enables the DT [14]. DT is driven by or failures, and take appropriate corrective actions. The LCM
people and requires specific capabilities to embrace change and unit operates to coordinate the troubleshooting, failure investi-
adopt new digital technologies in the business processes. In the gations, and changes to the manufacturing process/technologies
third step, the interrelationships among the CWA, CPA, and CTA due to the constantly evolving state-of-the-art analytical meth-
comprise characteristics for defining the critical business at- ods and the need to adapt to new regulatory recommendations.
tributes (CBAs) with a risk-driven approach. CBAs play a crucial The complex and challenging operative process of the LCM unit
role in guiding business strategies and operations by enabling highlighted the need for efficiency and simplification. Recogniz-
organizations to adopt a focused approach, make informed ing the limitations of the current basic IT tools, it was deemed
decisions, prioritize user/customer expectations, ensure business necessary to implement an advanced Industry 4.0 technology to
continuity, foster competitiveness, and drive value generation. improve the LCM unit’s operations. The research group recog-
Thus, CBA elucidates the relationships across different levels of nized the significance of digitalization in LCM operations, from
analysis and interdisciplinary fields [14] within the DT initiative. both academic and practitioner perspectives, and acknowledged
The fourth step is focused to define a digitalization design space the relevance for DT. The LCM use case presented a valuable op-
(DDS) to manage the transformation with a degree of flexibility, portunity to investigate from practical lens the suitability of the
by considering the dynamic nature of digital innovation, with existing frameworks and theoretical guidance from the DT liter-
evolving scopes, features, and value of benefits [52], [59]. This ature. By combining academic rigor with practical implementa-
provides a region to establish a digitalization control strategy tion considerations, this study serves to bridge the gap between
(DCS) to monitor tangible benefit outcomes as the fifth DbD theoretical concepts and practical applications [13], while simul-
step. DbD steps 2–5 correspond within the proof-of-feasibility taneously providing valuable managerial insights and guidance
phase of the DIM framework by focusing on the feasibility/pilot in leveraging digital technologies within the DT initiatives.
demonstration of the digital innovation to assess its real-world
applicability. This phase includes comprehensive stakeholder
involvement and streamlining the digital innovation within B. Methodology
the established business setup. Finally, the digitalization life We employed the ADR methodology [31] to integrate a new
cycle management (DLM) ensures that the deployed digitalized IT artifact into an ongoing operational context while advanc-
process is continuously evaluated for evolving business needs ing theoretical understanding. We adopted an engaged inquiry
and upcoming technologies as the sixth DbD step. This aligns approach [32] involving collaboration between practitioners
to the proof-of-value phase of the DIM framework, wherein (company managers, scientists) and academic scholars over a
the digital innovation is integrated and adopted within the 12-month period. This collaboration enabled abductive reason-
day-to-day operations of the business process and additional ing [31], resulting in the creation of theoretical foundation for
benefit synergies are continuously explored and evaluated. DLM DbD [33] and improvement in the DIM framework [2]. The
fosters a structured and systematic approach for continuous methodological flowchart (see Fig. 1) elucidates the research
evaluation and adaptation across the anecdotal dimensions of approach, featuring the main phases of the DIM framework
people, process, and technology to ensure organizational agility [2] on the right-hand side. These phases intricately correspond
and responsiveness to changing dynamics. In the following to the detailed steps within the DbD framework depicting the
sections, we provide elaboration into the research design sequential research activities conducted in alignment with ADR
and the operational instantization of DbD framework on a methodology [31], offering a comprehensive exploration of
use case. solution design and implementation in a real-world setting. The
Authorized licensed use limited to: TONGJI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2024 at 14:59:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
7820 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 71, 2024

Fig. 1. Engagement between scholars and practitioners—connecting DbD with DIM.

research was performed on a practice-inspired problem, drawing TABLE II

SURVEY CATEGORIZATION AND RESPONSES
methodological insights from design thinking [20], [21], [42],
[43], [67], principles of quality by design [48], and business
process management (BPM) [68], [69], [70], [71], [72] literature.
An iterative bidirectional exchange of knowledge between the
academic scholars and practitioners was instrumental in syn-
thesizing insights from the literature and practitioner feedback
[31]. To comprehend the knowledge on the LCM use case, ten
semistructured interviews were conducted with knowledgeable
individuals actively involved in the LCM operations. The in- representing indicators, such as balanced scorecard, and finally
terviews employed nondirective questioning, triangulation with into “items” encompassing the specific constructs relevant to
informants at various hierarchical levels, and anonymity to en- the use case. By triangulating the literature, CWA, CPA, CTA,
sure interview validity [73]. From the interactions, a thorough and interview information, we developed a reflective seven-point
understanding on the LCM process, challenges, gaps, and op- Likert measurement scale (where “1” indicates strongly disagree
portunity areas was developed. This collaborative process aimed and “7” indicates strongly agree) and constructed the “items”
to achieve a holistic and profound understanding of the research suitable for the use-case-specific survey research. We collected
problem and thereby facilitated the creation of TDBP as the 14 survey responses and categorized the target population into
first structured step of DbD. The investigation in the subsequent roles (execution, coordinators, and sponsors) and IT expertise
proof-of-feasibility phase (DIM framework) involved the iden- levels (not frequent, comfortable, and proficient) to gain insights
tification and elaboration of CWA, CPA, and CTA within the and cross-reference critical areas (see Table II).
second step of DbD. To define these attributes, we developed the The survey dataset was analyzed looking at descriptive statis-
constructs based on the literature adopted from BPM [74] and tics, such as mean, median, and standard deviation, categorizing
technology acceptance and adoption [82], [83], [97], [98]. The answers ≤4 as negative (neutral and below) and >4 as positive
constructs were structured hierarchically, organized into “macro (above neutral). To delve deeper, we conducted frequency anal-
areas” representing people, process, and technology dimensions. ysis and clustered the negative and positive counts for each item,
The macro areas were further granulated into “micro areas” micro and macro areas, respectively. The outcome of the Likert

Authorized licensed use limited to: TONGJI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2024 at 14:59:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
SATWEKAR et al.: TRIAD OF DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION: HOLISTIC ORCHESTRATION FOR PEOPLE, PROCESS, AND TECHNOLOGY 7821

survey along with the measurement construct was elaborated TABLE III
TDBP FOR THE OPERATIVE LCM PROCESS
by plotting the percentage difference between the positive and
negative frequencies to observe the trending pattern for the con-
structs. We applied weights to the survey items mapping it to the
macro and micro areas to enable a balanced comparison. Macro
dimensions of people, process, and technology was assigned
the weight of 1, and it was further broken down accordingly
into respective micro areas and then into items. The use of these
design weights was essential for equitable comparison across
the macro dimensions of people, process, and technology. This
was particularly important because the macro areas comprised
different numbers of micro areas and their varying correspond-
ing items, resulting in an uneven distribution. This methodology
ensured that our findings accurately reflected the characteris-
tics and trends for elaborating within the main dimensions of
people, process, and technology. A prioritization score for the
CWA, CTA, and CPA was computed through a qualitative risk
assessment analysis (QRAA) [75], and CBAs were defined from
a workshop between academic scholars and practitioners. Al-
though many authors and practitioners have regarded “analytic
hierarchy process” as the most promising technique for prioriti-
zation [76], [77], this technique has limitations when handling
numerous criteria and requires overwhelming efforts for evalua-
tion [76]. Similarly, the “minimal spanning tree” technique was
a potentially faster alternative, but more sensitive to judgmental
errors [76]. Therefore, QRAA was included in our study as
it is a simpler, faster, and reliable technique favoring routine
practical use. Integration of the QRAA with the survey data was
implemented to leverage expert judgment in providing nuanced
insights into risk interdependencies and contextual intricacies.
Survey outcome was able to identify prevalent scenarios but a business unit [68], [71] and also encompasses participative
presented limitations in characterizing and capturing qualitative styles that involve users in the design of activities [68], [70].
dimensions inherent in complex scenarios and interrelationships Therefore, a participative BPM approach was adopted with a
among the elements. The QRAA elucidated qualitative factors combination of workshops, one-on-one interviews, and design
intrinsic to risks, offering insights into subjective judgments, and thinking techniques to comprehensively gain knowledge on the
fostered expert opinions to perform near-accurate quantification LCM use case and identify the shortcomings of the existing LCM
of scenarios with respect to the associated risk, likelihood, process. These collaborative efforts allowed us to define the
and impact. Academic scholars and practitioners contributed TDBP for the first DbD step within the proof-of-concept phase of
together to frame the DDS by iteratively reviewing literature and the DIM framework (see Table III). This participatory approach
the information from the practical experience. The information ensured that the insights and perspectives of stakeholders were
from the QRAA provided flexibility in considering response integrated into our assessment, ultimately contributing to a more
strategies for high-ranked scenarios. This facilitated the formu- holistic and informed understanding of the use case needs in
lation of the IT user requirements for the development of the rel- terms of digitalization.
evant IT artifact. Our inclusive approach allowed us to leverage Scouting efforts were undertaken to identify and evaluate
both academic rigor and practical relevance, ultimately enhanc- internal and external IT solutions. However, achieving a close
ing the robustness and applicability of our research findings. alignment with the TDBP proved to be a challenge. Within
the exploration, cloud-based platforms emerged as a promis-
V. EXPOSITORY INSTANTIZATION ON USE CASE ing option due to their ability to enhance the efficiency and
effectiveness of business processes by guaranteeing remote ac-
A. Defining the TDBP
cess to data and business applications, real-time collaboration,
A BPM approach was utilized to gain insights into the current process automatization, enhanced data security, and scalability
operational activities, tools, and challenges of the LCM process [78]. Recognizing this potential, the organization established a
[68], [69], [70], [71], [72]. BPM involves employing methodolo- team of IT developers to collaboratively build a simple meeting
gies to analyze, model, execute, and monitor a business process management application based on the cloud technologies. This
with the aim of enhancing efficiency and end-user satisfaction application aimed to instill confidence in the cloud technology
[70]. The BPM approach converges on the idea of analyzing and showcase its potential to customize and digitize the complex
performance metrics to achieve continuous improvement within steps of the LCM operational process. Further discussions were

Authorized licensed use limited to: TONGJI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2024 at 14:59:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
7822 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 71, 2024

TABLE IV
INTERVIEW INFORMATION PROCESSING AND MAPPING TO LITERATURE REPORTED DT INSIGHTS

conducted with stakeholders to identify the relevant function- by the interviewees are typically related to four key clusters:
alities for best fitting the purpose and value to the final users. 1) learning and adoption support; 2) integration and compati-
The simple cloud-based prototype was the end result of DIM bility; 3) task management and collaboration; and 4) process
proof-of-concept phase that provided a confidence to pave the streamlining. These clusters emerged as common themes and
way for stakeholder approvals for proceeding into the DIM areas for improvement identified through the triangulation of
proof-of-feasibility phase. interview information and literature.
To further granulate within the macro areas, we extended
our literature evaluation to explore the effective promotion of
B. Comprehensive Exploration of People, Process, and technology adoption among end users, with a specific focus on
Technology Dimensions the technology acceptance and adoption literature [82], [83],
During the proof-of-feasibility phase of the DIM framework, [97], [98]. Introduction of digital innovations bringing a sig-
a significant focus was on identifying and defining CWA, CPA, nificant transformation necessitates the critical assessment of
and CTA. This was accomplished through the approach of design how people respond to the changes [82]. The existing routines
thinking [20], [21], [42], [43], [67]. Design thinking facilitated of people within a business process may have established be-
the feedback from the users and a detailed understanding of their havioral patterns and have a tendency to resist to changes [99],
specific needs [21], [67], [79]. Using the ADR methodology [100]. Understanding and managing people’s responses to these
[31], an in-depth understanding of the challenges inherent in the changes are vital for successful technology implementation and
daily routines of the current (AS-IS) LCM process was deducted integration into the business process to ensure that the desired
provided a structured and systematic approach for investigating outcomes and benefits are realized. Among the various theories
and analyzing the complexities and issues associated within and models on technology acceptance, unified theory of accep-
the daily practices [2], [80], [81]. The utilization of the ADR tance and use of technology (UTAUT) [82] has been recognized
methodology facilitated a rigorous examination of the existing and regarded as effective in explaining why users accept or reject
processes, enabling the identification of areas for improvement a technology in a given context [101]. Therefore, we readapted
and the development of effective strategies for addressing those the features from UTAUT with relevant construct definitions
challenges. People, process, and technology are pivotal elements and operationalized these to fit within our LCM use case for
for digital innovation adoption [33], and by aligning the inter- the technology micro areas (see Table V). Through the iterative
view data with literature analysis, the study revealed relevant analysis of the interview information and the BPM literature
DT insights within the macro areas (see Table IV). Analysis [68], [69], [70], [72], we identified relevant constructs for the
of the interview data showed that the DT insights reported micro areas under the process and people [71], [74], [96], [102],

Authorized licensed use limited to: TONGJI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2024 at 14:59:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
SATWEKAR et al.: TRIAD OF DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION: HOLISTIC ORCHESTRATION FOR PEOPLE, PROCESS, AND TECHNOLOGY 7823

TABLE V
DEFINITIONS OF CONSTRUCTS FOR SURVEY MEASUREMENT

[103]. The balanced scorecard model [71] is a widely adapted 1) Macro Area’s Perspectives: Frequency analysis for the
framework to translate strategic objectives into operational terms AS-IS operative LCM process from the survey indicated a
[68]. However, the model can become too abstract and may positive trend for people and negative trend for the process
not provide concrete indicators [74], [96]. To address this, we and technology macro areas. This reflects that the LCM pro-
adopted the early work of Van Looy and Shafagatova [74], which cess has inefficiencies, and the use of current technology has
provided an extensive list of operationalized metrics based on the significant challenges and areas for improvement. The respon-
balanced scorecard. By triangulating our interview information, dent’s negative expression on the current digital tools highlights
we readapted the literature metrics to build our measurement a technology gap in facilitating the LCM operations. These
constructs relevant for the LCM use case. Starting from a large findings emphasize the need for improvements in the process
list of operational indicators, we have fine-tuned to select a and technology aspects of the operative LCM process. By fo-
measurement construct consisting of three macro areas, 11 micro cusing on these macro areas, organizations can identify and
areas, and 28 items (see Table V). implement targeted interventions and strategies to enhance the
The comprehensive analysis of the AS-IS state of the oper- operations, mitigate challenges, and optimize the utilization of
ative LCM process was performed by using the measurement technology for improved outcomes. On the other side, people
constructs across the macro areas, micro areas, and items. The showing a positive trend indicate the establishment of their
outcome of the Likert survey along the measurement construct comfort zone with the existing process and technology setup.
provided the positive and negative frequencies as clustered for This may pose as a challenge during the introduction of new
macro areas, micro areas, and items. Likert responses (>4) technologies and routines in the context of digitalization. Special
were calculated for positive frequencies and (≤4) for negative attention is needed to balance the existing people attributes
frequencies. These data were processed considering the appli- and effectively navigate the change process to ascertain people
cation of design weights (each macro dimension corresponding engagement throughout the DT journey. A deeper understanding
to 1 signifying 100%) and elaborated as percentage difference into the micro areas was further assessed for each of the macro
(positive – negative). The outcome provided the prevalent trends dimensions.
that reflected the inclination of the constructs toward the positive 2) Micro Area’s Perspectives: People showed a positive
or negative side (see Fig. 2). trend for “performance expectancy, effort expectancy, and social
Authorized licensed use limited to: TONGJI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2024 at 14:59:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
7824 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 71, 2024

Fig. 2. Perspectives from the survey responses.

influence.” This indicates that the operative LCM process is per- In addition, it was recommended to enhance information ac-
ceived as easier and facilitating within the internal community. cessibility and reduce response time by implementing better
The negative trend on the “facilitating conditions” reflects the IT tools/digital technologies that enable intelligent insights and
inefficient organizational and technical infrastructure support for facilitate seamless information access. These recommendations
the LCM operations. This aligns with the overall negative trend aimed to provide a practical direction and support to practitioners
observed in the process and technology macro areas. Process in enhancing operational performance and achieving improved
micro areas only showed a positive trend for the “planning” outcomes for DT initiatives by catering to the holistic needs of
micro area, indicating that organizations have been successful in people, process, and technology.
establishing effective planning regarding the LCM tasks. How- 3) Item Perspectives: The item perspectives provided a de-
ever, the remaining micro areas on “trivial workload, process tailed granularity for the micro areas of people, process, and
waiting, and process efficiency” showed a negative trend and technology. From the overall 28 items, ten items indicated a
reflected challenges with the workload and efficient execution positive trend with six for people, three for process, and one for
of the LCM process. Technology micro area of “interoperability” technology. Among the top five positive items, the respondents
showed a minorly positive trend and indicated that the existing perceived the AS-IS process to be easier and was facilitated by
basic technology used within the LCM operations is interoper- a good understanding of the current IT tools (E_exp3, E_exp1),
able with other systems/tools. This was indeed expected as the with the adoption supported by colleagues (Si_2). The current IT
AS-IS process does not have a complex digital tool, but is based tools have been helpful to users in terms of work scheduling and
on simple Microsoft office applications as Word, Power Point, prioritization within the LCM task planning process (Plan_2).
Project, Excel, Outlook, Teams, Sharepoint, etc. However, the Since basic IT tools were used in the AS-IS process, it favored
“information accessibility and response time” showed a negative the sharing of information/data integration across the systems
response and indicated that the current IT tools are not efficient to (Int_2). These positive findings reflected the strengths and ad-
process information and provide intelligent insights, and there is vantages of the current operative LCM process. Respondents’
no two-way interaction with the current digital tools. The LCM positive experiences with ease of use and understanding of
coordinators were the primary source of information and the IT tools, as well as the support they receive from colleagues,
use of existing Microsoft Office applications required significant contributed to a more efficient and effective workflow. The top
effort to enhance information accessibility. Overall, these find- five negative items were predominantly from the macro cate-
ings highlighted the need for improvements in various aspects gories of technology and process, indicating a critical need for
of the operative LCM process. Hence, a managerial guidance attention and improvement. Observing the technological front,
was offered for several areas, including enhancing facilitating respondents expressed concern regarding the time lapse for the
conditions, aligning processes with performance expectations, system to identify and address problems (Resp_1), signifying a
improving workload management, addressing process block- need for quicker issue resolution by the IT tools. Similarly, a
ages/waiting times, and promoting greater process efficiency. negative trend with the efficacy of alarms for failure events

Authorized licensed use limited to: TONGJI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2024 at 14:59:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
SATWEKAR et al.: TRIAD OF DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION: HOLISTIC ORCHESTRATION FOR PEOPLE, PROCESS, AND TECHNOLOGY 7825

(Resp_2) indicated a necessity for a timely alert mechanism. TABLE VI

CBAS FOR THE OPERATIVE LCM PROCESS
Within the process dimension, respondents highlighted that
significant time is taken by problem solving (Eff_1), potentially
affecting productivity. Furthermore, the time required to rectify
errors originating from human mistakes (Eff_2) and instances
of document processing errors (Eff_3) were also reflected neg-
atively. These findings underscore the importance of refining
technology and optimizing processes to minimize delays, en-
hance reliability, and streamline workflows in the LCM opera-
tions for improving operational outcomes and delivering value
through DT.

C. Risk-Driven Approach to DT—Creation of the CBAs

The survey results provided valuable insights into the positive
and negative aspects of the AS-IS LCM process. However, it
is important to recognize that these findings represent a single
dimension and provide prevalent trends. For a comprehensive
understanding, it is necessary to consider qualitative information
on risk interdependencies and contextual intricacies. Therefore,
we combined the survey insights and QRAA [75] to gain a deeper
understanding of the identified areas. QRAA was conducted
with a five-member team comprising diverse LCM stakeholders,
and the assessment provided a criticality score to prioritize the
CWA, CPA, and CTA of the AS-IS state (QRAA outcome;
see Appendix Table 1 of the Supplementary Material). The
QRAA enabled the cross-reference and cross-validation of the
survey findings and reduced the potential for bias, with a more
comprehensive view on the LCM operations. CBAs were defined
the intricacies of information, provide accessibility, and facili-
by clustering the ranked CWA, CPA, and CTA using a qualitative
tate a transparent process with the tracking of accountabilities.
approach based on similarities and relevance. The clustering
Monitoring along the constructs of macro/micro items provides
provided the identification of six CBAs (see Table VI).
a comprehensive overview of the LCM operations, aiding in
CBA 1 and CBA 2 indicated the challenges of information
tracking and identifying areas for improvement. Continuous
overload and the influence of community acceptance, which
monitoring of user satisfaction [109], [110], [111], [112] was
might lead to frustration, reduced productivity, and resistance
recommended as an intervention strategy. Finally, CBA 6 was
to adoption [82], [100]. Information overload can be managed
related to the challenges imposed by siloed systems and compat-
by properly structuring the knowledge, setting boundaries, and
ibility with legacy systems for data exchange. Interoperability
leveraging technology-based tools to curate specific informa-
will be needed to enable different systems to work seamlessly
tion. Furthermore, practical training and hypercare support can
together and prevent data fragmentation [115], [116]. As the
facilitate successful adoption and effective use of the new dig-
number of systems interconnected within the operational en-
ital technology. Comprehensive and tailored training packages
vironment increases, it becomes paramount to not only ensure
[105], [106] were recommended to accommodate varying levels
seamless data exchange but also to carefully manage the security
of technical proficiency and the specific roles of individuals
of these applications [117], [118].
within the LCM operations. In addition, establishment of a
hypercare phase was suggested for continuous user support,
feedback, and guidance [107], along with the frequent upskilling D. Flexibility With DDS
training sessions for the effective use of digital technologies The DDS represents a conceptual region where design options
[99], [100]. Such a support system helps to build confidence, and decisions are explored to digitally transform the operative
overcome resistance, and provide insights into best practices business process, ensuring the delivery of business value within
for technology utilization [108]. CBA 3, CBA 4, and CBA a range of flexibility. The DDS was constructed based on the
5 reflected the need for equipping the LCM operations with AS-IS state of the process, potential risks, and elaborated for
technology to manage information complexity, reduce delays the elements that are crucial for the successful DT of the current
and errors, efficiently manage stakeholders, ensure transparency LCM process (see Appendix Table 1 of the Supplementary Ma-
in LCM status, assign clear accountabilities for action track- terial). The DDS provided the initial boundaries that are flexible
ing, and streamline processes for rapid responses. The digital to accommodate the evolving scopes, features, and benefits in
technologies are needed to be designed to address these mul- DT initiatives. The DDS was structured to be adaptable and
tifaceted needs with a user-centric approach that can manage scalable to accommodate changes in the LCM operations over

Authorized licensed use limited to: TONGJI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2024 at 14:59:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
7826 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 71, 2024

time that may be due to technology upgradation or changes in and its establishment into the business, from an initial proof of
work practices. Further details are provided in Appendix Table 1 concept/pilot phase to the routine use [1], [2], [5], [7], [10], [13],
of the Supplementary Material. [14], [28], [34], [35]. We extend the granularity into the DIM
framework [2] with the DbD framework [33] by investigating the
E. Establishing DCS orchestration and emphasizing the crucial attributes that ensure
the viability of digital innovation, by considering multiple em-
Through the understanding of the DDS, IT user requirements pirical lens of analysis [4], [9], [30] across the three antecedent
were defined for the digital technology dedicated to LCM dimensions (people, process, and technology) [24], [26], and
operations (data confidential, not included). These requirements elucidate their interplay by recognizing the interdisciplinary
were based on CBAs, thereby relating to the CWA, CPA, and nature of DT [14]. Grounded on the principles of quality by
CTAs. The requirements were systematically classified to design [48], our approach brings quality-risk-based foundations
facilitate prioritization, and the features were considered with to examine the interactions between design processes and de-
flexibility that ensured the delivery of the expected value. Unique sired outcomes [28] to offer practical guidance to organizations
technology needs of the business were translated into IT re- in developing, executing, and assessing DT initiatives [1], [13].
quirements for developing into a digital technology, thus setting We fine-tune existing theories and demonstrate their practical
a DCS. The DCS served as an alignment between the business application to address the current need for guidance in DT
needs and technology features necessary for bringing tangible initiatives [1], [2], [10], [13], [14], [21], [28], [34], [35], [36].
value. The DCS sets a guideline for building digital innovation Bridging the theory with practice, we provide the elucidation of
as purpose-driven and intricately linked with the overarching the DbD framework with conceptual understanding and practical
DT goals. demonstration of how digitalization can be effectively designed
and implemented in organizations. Our contribution to the DT
F. Digitalization Life Cycle Management literature brings an enhanced understanding of DT by elucidat-
DLM is focused on the continuous monitoring and evolution ing the vital role of antecedent dimensions (people, process, and
of digitalized business processes. In a rapidly evolving techno- technology). We also emphasize the significance of technology
logical landscape, the ability to adapt and capitalize on emerging integration, organizational transformation, and the interplay of
technologies is vital for an organization’s competitiveness. Digi- various dimensions throughout the DT journey. By examining
tal technologies are continuously changing with evolving benefit these aspects, our research provides valuable insights into the
scenarios. For instance, the emergence of natural language pro- multifaceted nature of DT and its implications for organizations.
cessing (NLP), a subfield of artificial intelligence dedicated to The elaboration on each step of the DbD framework, based on
computer–human language interaction, holds a great potential its underlying theoretical foundations, is further provided with
in health care [119], [120]. NLP extends its capabilities to detailed managerial guidance that addresses the challenges faced
content generation, language translation, sentiment analysis, by practitioners (see Table VII).
data extraction, and classification, encompassing a wide array From a managerial perspective, we provide valuable guidance
of functions from automating report generation to facilitating for decision makers and practitioners on navigating the complex-
global communication [119], [120]. In the context of the LCM ities of DT (see Table VII). The DbD framework is articulated
use case, the inclusion of NLP within the digital LCM appli- by recognizing the practical challenges faced by practitioners
cation would bring multifaceted advantages, thereby enhancing in implementing DT initiatives such as unclear vision and
operational efficiency and elevating user experiences throughout strategy, difficulty in understanding interconnected dimensions,
the DT journey. The continuous monitoring and upgrading of inability to prioritize based on business needs, rigid practices
digitalized business processes is essential for ensuring that they hindering adaptability, lack of alignment between business and
remain relevant and effective in a rapidly changing world. By technology, and challenges in monitoring and controlling ben-
taking a proactive approach to digitalization, organizations can efits. The DbD framework provides a comprehensive approach
ensure that their DT initiatives are continuously successful in for organizations to design and implement DT into their busi-
the long term. ness processes by providing a clear vision, identifying holistic
attributes (people, process, and technology), defining flexible
boundaries, and positioning technology need effectively. This
VI. DISCUSSIONS guidance can help organizations to overcome DT challenges and
Our study aims to bridge the gap between theory and practice develop a comprehensive tangible DT strategy grounded on the
in DT by translating theoretical concepts into practical applica- principles of quality by design [48] with quality-risk-based foun-
tions and providing guidance for organizations. We provide the- dations to guide and analyze the interplay between technology
oretical contribution by providing significant insights to enhance and business relevance. The DbD framework acknowledges the
existing theories and frameworks on DT. In our study, we have interconnectedness of different disciplines and guides managers
operationalize the use of PPT framework [24], [26], BPM [11], in addressing the multifaceted challenges and opportunities
[74], [78], [88], [91], [92], [93], and technology acceptance [38], associated with the integration of digital technologies in or-
[82], [83], [84], [85], [86], [87] based on design thinking prin- ganizations. This understanding is crucial for managing the
ciples [20], [42], [43], [67], to effectively address the need for a complex dynamics between innovation processes and outcomes
structured and practical guidance toward technology integration [28], [37].

Authorized licensed use limited to: TONGJI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2024 at 14:59:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
SATWEKAR et al.: TRIAD OF DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION: HOLISTIC ORCHESTRATION FOR PEOPLE, PROCESS, AND TECHNOLOGY 7827

TABLE VII
DBD: THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS, MANAGERIAL GUIDANCE, AND PRACTITIONER’S CHALLENGE

While the DbD framework can be generalized to other use approach effectively addresses the specific needs, challenges,
cases, it is essential to recognize that assessing CWA, CPA, and and opportunities of each organization, promoting successful
CTA requires tailored evaluations aligned with the unique char- DT initiatives. Furthermore, how to measure the success for a
acteristics of each use case. Therefore, the adaptation of micro DT initiative and structuring a standardized criterion to evaluate
areas and items should be performed on a case-by-case basis to the DT success is an important research area necessitating
suit the particular business context and effectively design value further exploration. Future research is necessary to assess the
from digital innovation. For instance, within the macro area of DbD framework’s effectiveness and efficiency across different
technology, our study focused on micro areas—interoperability, industries and contexts. A distinct set of challenges may exist
information accessibility, and response time—which aligned in a particular sector or industry, and it would be interesting to
well with our specific use case. Pertaining to the digital technolo- investigate how the DbD framework adapts to these unique cir-
gies and its perceived use toward generating value, practitioners cumstances to tailor the DT strategies based on industry-specific
might need to consider other micro areas like security, automa- characteristics. This research avenue would further enhance the
tion, scalability, etc. This customization ensures that the DbD generalizability of the DbD framework, enrich the literature on

Authorized licensed use limited to: TONGJI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2024 at 14:59:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
7828 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 71, 2024

DT, and provide valuable DT guidance for organizations within REFERENCES

specific sectors. The use of Likert-scale survey and QRAA [1] C. Matt, T. Hess, and A. Benlian, “Digital transformation strategies,” Bus.
was effective in capturing key insights within the scope of Inf. Syst. Eng., vol. 57, pp. 339–343, 2015.
our investigation. However, it is important to recognize that [2] A. Satwekar, T. Volpentesta, P. Spagnoletti, and M. Rossi, “An orches-
tration framework for digital innovation: Lessons from the healthcare
organizations often vary in their practices and preferences for industry,” IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage., vol. 70, no. 7, pp. 2465–2479,
assessment methodologies. Therefore, as long as the overarching Jul. 2023, doi: 10.1109/TEM.2022.3167259.
aim of understanding prevalent trends in business processes [3] R. Eller, P. Alford, A. Kallmünzer, and M. Peters, “Antecedents,
consequences, and challenges of small and medium-sized enter-
and gathering qualitative information on risk interdependencies prise digitalization,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 112, pp. 119–127, 2020,
and contextual intricacies on the attributes remains coherent, doi: 10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2020.03.004.
the organizations may adopt to flexible tools that are best [4] A. Yeow, C. Soh, and R. Hansen, “Aligning with new digital strategy:
A dynamic capabilities approach,” J. Strategic Inf. Syst., vol. 27, no. 1,
suited to their use cases or established assessment practices. pp. 43–58, Mar. 2018, doi: 10.1016/J.JSIS.2017.09.001.
The emphasis would be on sustaining contextual coherence in [5] P. C. Verhoef et al., “Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection
the outcomes, enabling organizations to seamlessly interchange and research agenda,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 122, pp. 889–901, Jan. 2021,
doi: 10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2019.09.022.
tools within the DbD framework, thus enhancing the broader [6] S. Chanias, M. D. Myers, and T. Hess, “Digital transformation strategy
applicability and adaptability of the DbD framework. Our study making in pre-digital organizations: The case of a financial services
is limited by its focus on cloud technology, and further studies provider,” J. Strategic Inf. Syst., vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 17–33, Mar. 2019,
doi: 10.1016/J.JSIS.2018.11.003.
may be undertaken to elaborate the DbD framework on other [7] Z. Tekic and D. Koroteev, “From disruptively digital to proudly ana-
emerging digital technologies, such as artificial intelligence, log: A holistic typology of digital transformation strategies,” Bus.
blockchain, and Internet of Things. Understanding how various Horiz., vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 683–693, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.1016/J.
BUSHOR.2019.07.002.
technologies interact and differently impact the DT initiatives [8] M. Baslyman, “Digital transformation from the industry perspective: Def-
can provide valuable insights for tailoring the DT strategies initions, goals, conceptual model, and processes,” IEEE Access, vol. 10,
for organizations. pp. 42961–42970, 2022, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3166937.
[9] S. Ghosh, M. Hughes, I. Hodgkinson, and P. Hughes, “Digital
transformation of industrial businesses: A dynamic capability ap-
proach,” Technovation, vol. 113, 2022, Art. no. 102414, doi: 10.1016/J.
VII. CONCLUSION TECHNOVATION.2021.102414.
[10] H. Chen and Z. Tian, “Environmental uncertainty, resource orchestration
The health-care sector is on its way for a rapid DT with and digital transformation: A fuzzy-set QCA approach,” J. Bus. Res.,
the continuous emergence of new technologies and innovations. vol. 139, pp. 184–193, 2022.
While this presents a wealth of opportunities to improve patient [11] L. Brkić, K. Tomičić Pupek, and V. Bosilj Vukšić, “A frame-
work for BPM software selection in relation to digital transforma-
outcomes and revolutionize health-care delivery, there are chal- tion drivers,” Tehnicki vjesnik, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 1108–1114, 2020,
lenges associated with the uncertainty around these advanced doi: 10.17559/TV-20190315193304.
digital technologies, which leads to slowness in adoption. As [12] B. Kindermann, T. O. Salge, D. Wentzel, T. C. Flatten, and
D. Antons, “Dynamic capabilities for orchestrating digital innova-
technology races forward, at an unprecedented pace, the gap tion ecosystems: Conceptual integration and research opportunities,”
between the technology’s potential and its actual utilization is Inf. Org., vol. 32, no. 3, 2022, Art. no. 100422, doi: 10.1016/J.
widening. To circumvent these challenges, our study provides a INFOANDORG.2022.100422.
[13] G. Vial, “Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research
practical and comprehensive approach for designing and build- agenda,” J. Strategic Inf. Syst., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 118–144, Jun. 2019,
ing the DT. Grounded on the existing theories and frameworks doi: 10.1016/J.JSIS.2019.01.003.
on DT, we emphasize the pivotal role played by the antecedent [14] S. Nambisan, M. Wright, and M. Feldman, “The digital transforma-
tion of innovation and entrepreneurship: Progress, challenges and key
dimensions of people, process, and technology in the successful themes,” Res. Policy, vol. 48, no. 8, Oct. 2019, Art. no. 103773,
implementation of the DT initiatives. The findings from our doi: 10.1016/J.RESPOL.2019.03.018.
study not only contribute to the academic understanding of DTs [15] B. Ding, “Pharma industry 4.0: Literature review and research opportuni-
ties in sustainable pharmaceutical supply chains,” Process Saf. Environ.
but also offer valuable managerial insights for organizations, Protection, vol. 119, pp. 115–130, 2018.
researchers, and practitioners when navigating the complexities [16] G. Festa, I. Safraou, M. T. Cuomo, and L. Solima, “Big data for big
of DT and harnessing its potential for creating value. Our study pharma: Harmonizing business process management to enhance am-
bidexterity,” Bus. Process Manage. J., vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 1110–1123,
opens up new avenues for further research in the field of DT 2018, doi: 10.1108/BPMJ-10-2017-0272.
facilitating ongoing progress in the ever-evolving landscape of [17] Q. Wu and Q. He, “DIY laboratories and business innovation ecosystems:
technology-based transformation. The case of pharmaceutical industry,” Technol. Forecasting Soc. Change,
vol. 161, 2020, Art. no. 120336.
[18] C. Nakata, “Design thinking for innovation: Considering distinctions, fit,
and use in firms,” Bus. Horiz., vol. 63, no. 6, pp. 763–772, Nov. 2020,
ACKNOWLEDGMENT doi: 10.1016/J.BUSHOR.2020.07.008.
[19] J. Liedtka, “Perspective: Linking design thinking with innovation out-
The authors would like to thank all the Merck colleagues comes through cognitive bias reduction,” J. Product Innov. Manage.,
from the project team for their participation in the interviews, vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 925–938, Nov. 2015, doi: 10.1111/JPIM.12163.
workshops, and discussions, the IT developers from external [20] U. Johansson-Sköldberg, J. Woodilla, and M. Çetinkaya, “Design think-
ing: Past, present and possible futures,” Creativity Innov. Manage.,
supplier, and L. Fumei for the English language proofreading. vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 121–146, Jun. 2013, doi: 10.1111/CAIM.12023.
The authors would also like to thank the leadership team at [21] L. Przybilla, K. Klinker, M. Lang, M. Schreieck, M. Wiesche, and
Merck—Klaus Kunath—and the LUISS Guido Carli University H. Krcmar, “Design thinking in digital innovation projects—Exploring
the effects of intangibility,” IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage., vol. 69, no. 4,
professors Valentina Meliciani, Federica Brunetta, and Matteo pp. 1635–1649, Aug. 2022, doi: 10.1109/TEM.2020.3036818.
De Angelis.

Authorized licensed use limited to: TONGJI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2024 at 14:59:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
SATWEKAR et al.: TRIAD OF DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION: HOLISTIC ORCHESTRATION FOR PEOPLE, PROCESS, AND TECHNOLOGY 7829

[22] M. Prodan, A. Prodan, and A. A. Purcarea, “Three new dimen- [44] A. F. Sommer, C. Hedegaard, I. Dukovska-Popovska, and K.
sions to people, process, technology improvement model,” Adv. In- Steger-Jensen, “Improved product development performance through
tell. Syst. Comput., vol. 353, pp. 481–490, 2015, doi: 10.1007/978-3- agile/stage-gate hybrids: The next-generation stage-gate process?,”
319-16486-1_47/COVER. Res.-Technol. Manage., vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 34–44, Jan. 2015,
[23] A. Taher, “Stakeholders’ opinions support the people-process-technology doi: 10.5437/08956308X5801236.
framework for implementing digital transformation in higher educa- [45] R. G. Cooper and A. F. Sommer, “The Agile–Stage-Gate hybrid
tion,” Technol., Pedagogy Educ., vol. 32, pp. 555–567, Oct. 2023, model: A promising new approach and a new research opportunity,”
doi: 10.1080/1475939X.2023.2248134. J. Prod. Innov. Manage., vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 513–526, Sep. 2016,
[24] M. I. Javaid and M. M. W. Iqbal, “A comprehensive people, pro- doi: 10.1111/JPIM.12314.
cess and technology (PPT) application model for information sys- [46] L. A. de Vasconcelos Gomes, R. A. Seixas Reis de Paula, A. L.
tems (IS) risk management in small/medium enterprises (SME),” in Figueiredo Facin, V. Chagas Brasil, and M. Sergio Salerno, “Design
Proc. Int. Conf. Commun. Technol., 2017, pp. 78–90, doi: 10.1109/ principles of hybrid approaches in new product development: A sys-
COMTECH.2017.8065754. tematic literature review,” R&D Manage., vol. 52, pp. 79–92, 2021,
[25] Z. Chen, I. C. C. Chan, F. Mehraliyev, R. Law, and Y. Choi, “Typology doi: 10.1111/radm.12476.
of people–process–technology framework in refining smart tourism from [47] R. Bierwolf, “Project excellence or failure? Doing is the best kind of
the perspective of tourism academic experts,” Tourism Recreation Res., learning,” IEEE Eng. Manage. Rev., vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 26–32, Second
vol. 49, pp. 105–117, Aug. 2021, doi: 10.1080/02508281.2021.1969114. Quarter 2016, doi: 10.1109/EMR.2016.2568745.
[26] F. T. Sunmola and A. Javahernia, “Manufacturing process innovation [48] L. X. Yu et al., “Understanding pharmaceutical quality by design,”
deployment readiness from an extended people, process, and technology AAPS J., vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 771–783, May 2014, doi: 10.1208/
framework viewpoint,” Procedia Manuf., vol. 55, no. C, pp. 409–416, S12248-014-9598-3/TABLES/2.
Jan. 2021, doi: 10.1016/J.PROMFG.2021.10.056. [49] T. Bresnahan and S. Greenstein, “Mobile computing: The next plat-
[27] M. Spremic, H. Zentner, and R. Zentner, “Measuring digital business form rivalry,” Amer. Econ. Rev., vol. 104, no. 5, pp. 475–480, 2014,
models maturity: Theory, framework, and empirical validation,” IEEE doi: 10.1257/AER.104.5.475.
Trans. Eng. Manage., vol. 71, pp. 6553–6567, 2024, doi: 10.1109/ [50] J. Kallinikos, A. Aaltonen, and A. Marton, “The ambivalent ontol-
TEM.2022.3226864. ogy of digital artifacts,” MIS Quart., vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 357–370,
[28] S. Nambisan, K. Lyytinen, A. Majchrzak, and M. Song, “Digital in- Jun. 2013.
novation management: Reinventing innovation management research in [51] Y. Yoo, O. Henfridsson, and K. Lyytinen, “The new organizing logic of
a digital world,” MIS Quart., vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 223–238, Jan. 2017, digital innovation: An agenda for information systems research,” Inf. Syst.
doi: 10.25300/misq/2017/41:1.03. Res., vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 724–735, 2010, doi: 10.1287/ISRE.1100.0322.
[29] D. Lis, M. Arbter, M. Spindler, and B. Otto, “An investigation of [52] K. Lyytinen, Y. Yoo, and R. J. Boland, “Digital product innovation within
antecedents for data governance adoption in the rail industry—Findings four classes of innovation networks,” Inf. Syst. J., vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 47–75,
from a case study at Thales,” IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage., vol. 70, no. 7, Jan. 2016, doi: 10.1111/ISJ.12093.
pp. 2528–2545, Jul. 2023, doi: 10.1109/TEM.2022.3166109. [53] S. Nambisan, “Information technology and product/service innovation:
[30] D. F. Peruchi, D. A. de Jesus Pacheco, B. V. Todeschini, and C. S. ten A brief assessment and some suggestions for future research,” J. As-
Caten, “Moving towards digital platforms revolution? Antecedents, de- soc. Inf. Syst., vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 215–226, 2013, doi: 10.17705/1JAIS.
terminants and conceptual framework for offline B2B networks,” J. Bus. 00327.
Res., vol. 142, pp. 344–363, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.12.036. [54] J. Lee and N. Berente, “Digital innovation and the division of innovative
[31] M. Sein, O. Henfridsson, S. Purao, M. Rossi, and R. Lindgren, “Action labor: Digital controls in the automotive industry,” Org. Sci., vol. 23,
design research,” JSTOR, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 37–56, 2011. no. 5, pp. 1428–1447, 2012, doi: 10.1287/ORSC.1110.0707.
[32] A. H. Van De Ven, Engaged Scholarship: A Guide For Organizational [55] E. C. Conforto and D. C. Amaral, “Agile project management and
and Social Research. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford Univ. Press, 2007. stage-gate model—A hybrid framework for technology-based com-
[33] A. Satwekar, A. Panda, P. Nandula, S. Sripada, R. Govindaraj, and M. panies,” J. Eng. Technol. Manage., vol. 40, pp. 1–14, Apr. 2016,
Rossi, “Digital by design approach to develop a universal deep learning AI doi: 10.1016/J.JENGTECMAN.2016.02.003.
architecture for automatic chromatographic peak integration,” Biotech- [56] J. Grönlund, D. R. Sjödin, and J. Frishammar, “Open innovation and
nol. Bioeng., vol. 120, pp. 1822–1843, 2023, doi: 10.1002/bit.28406. the stage-gate process: A revised model for new product develop-
[34] F. Svahn, L. Mathiassen, R. Lindgren, and G. C. Kane, “Mastering the ment,” California Manage. Rev., vol. 52, no. 3, pp. 106–131, May 2010,
digital innovation challenge,” MIT Sloan Manage. Rev., vol. 58, no. 3, doi: 10.1525/cmr.2010.52.3.106.
p. 14, 2017. [57] K. Ulrich, S. Eppinger, and M. C. Yang, Product Design and Develop-
[35] A. Hanelt, R. Bohnsack, D. Marz, and C. Antunes Marante, “A Sys- ment, 7th ed. New York, NY, USA: McGraw-Hill, 2019.
tematic review of the literature on digital transformation: Insights and [58] D. R. Sjödin, V. Parida, M. Leksell, and A. Petrovic, “Smart factory
implications for strategy and organizational change,” J. Manage. Stud., implementation and process innovation,” Res. Manage., vol. 61, no. 5,
vol. 58, no. 5, pp. 1159–1197, Jul. 2021, doi: 10.1111/JOMS.12639. pp. 22–31, Sep. 2018, doi: 10.1080/08956308.2018.1471277.
[36] M. L. Markus and F. Rowe, “Is IT changing the world? conceptions of [59] O. Hanseth and K. Lyytinen, “Design theory for dynamic complexity
causality for information systems theorizing,” MIS Quart., vol. 42, no. 4, in information infrastructures: The case of building internet,” J. Inf.
pp. 1255–1280, Dec. 2018, doi: 10.25300/MISQ/2018/12903. Technol., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 1–19, Mar. 2010, doi: 10.1057/jit.2009.19.
[37] R. J. Boland, K. Lyytinen, and Y. Yoo, “Wakes of innovation in project [60] G. P. Martin et al., “Lifecycle management of analytical procedures:
networks: The case of digital 3-D representations in architecture, en- Method development, procedure performance qualification, and proce-
gineering, and construction,” Org. Sci., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 631–647, dure performance verification,” Pharmacopeial Forum, vol. 39, 2013.
Aug. 2007, doi: 10.1287/orsc.1070.0304. [61] T. Verch et al., “Analytical quality by design, life cycle management,
[38] A. Bharadwaj, O. A. El Sawy, P. A. Pavlou, and N. v Venkatraman, and method control,” AAPS J., vol. 24, no. 1, Feb. 2022, Art. no. 34,
“Digital business strategy: Toward a next generation of insights,” MIS doi: 10.1208/S12248-022-00685-2.
Quart., vol. 37, pp. 471–482, 2013. [62] I. Heikkinen et al., “Role of innovation in pharmaceutical regulation: A
[39] J. Karimi and Z. Walter, “The role of dynamic capabilities in responding proposal for principles to evaluate EU General Pharmaceutical Legisla-
to digital disruption: A factor-based study of the newspaper industry,” J. tion from the innovator perspective,” Drug Discov. Today, vol. 28, no. 5,
Manage. Inf. Syst., vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 39–81, 2015. May 2023, Art. no. 103526, doi: 10.1016/J.DRUDIS.2023.103526.
[40] L. Selander and S. L. Jarvenpaa, “Digital action repertoires and trans- [63] G. A. Van Norman, “Drugs, devices, and the FDA: Part1: An overview
forming a social movement organization,” MIS Quart., vol. 40, no. 2, of approval processes for drugs,” JACC. Basic Transl. Sci., vol. 1, no. 3,
pp. 331–352, 2016. pp. 170–179, Apr. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.jacbts.2016.03.002.
[41] F. Svahn, L. Mathiassen, and R. Lindgren, “Embracing digital innovation [64] T. Volpentesta, M. Miozza, and A. Satwekar, “Blockchain in the bio-
in incumbent firms,” MIS Quart., vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 239–254, 2017. pharmaceutical industry: Conceptual model on product quality control,”
[42] H. G. Nelson and E. Stolterman, The Design Way: Intentional Change in Blockchain Technol. Appl. Bus. Org., P. De Giovanni, Ed. IGI Global,
an Unpredictable World. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press, Jan. 2012. 2022, pp. 119–140.
[43] T. Brown, “Design thinking,” Harvard Bus. Rev., 2008, Accessed: [65] G. N. K. Ganesh and S. K. Mohankumar, Pharmaceutical Regulatory
Dec. 29, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://hbr.org/2008/06/design- Requirements of Nonregulated Markets. Amsterdam, The Netherlands:
thinking Elsevier, 2022.

Authorized licensed use limited to: TONGJI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2024 at 14:59:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
7830 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ENGINEERING MANAGEMENT, VOL. 71, 2024

[66] M. K. Parr and A. H. Schmidt, “Life cycle management of analyt- [90] C. Matt et al., “Employees’ acceptance of wearable devices: To-
ical methods,” J. Pharmaceut. Biomed. Anal., vol. 147, pp. 506–517, wards a predictive model,” IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage., vol. 28, no. 4,
Jan. 2018, doi: 10.1016/J.JPBA.2017.06.020. pp. 985–1006, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.1109/TEM.2021.3087724.
[67] U. Lichtenthaler, “A conceptual framework for combining agile and [91] M. Szelagowski,
˛ P. Biernacki, J. Berniak-Woźny, and C. R. Lipinski,
structured innovation processes,” Res. Technol. Manage., vol. 63, “Proposal of BPMN extension with a view to effective modeling of clini-
pp. 42–48, 2020, doi: 10.1080/08956308.2020.1790240. cal pathways,” Bus. Process Manage. J., vol. 28, no. 5/6, pp. 1364–1390,
[68] J. Vom Brocke and M. Rosemann, Handbook On Business Process 2022, doi: 10.1108/BPMJ-11-2021-0743.
Management 1: Introduction, Methods, and Information Systems. Berlin, [92] M. Szelagowski and J. Berniak-Woźny, “The adaptation of business
Germany: Springer, 2014. process management maturity models to the context of the knowledge
[69] G. Zellner, “A structured evaluation of business process improvement economy,” Bus. Process Manage. J., vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 212–238, 2020,
approaches,” Bus. Process Manage. J., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 203–237, doi: 10.1108/BPMJ-11-2018-0328.
Apr. 2011, doi: 10.1108/14637151111122329. [93] D. Ulas, “Digital transformation process and SMEs,” Procedia
[70] M. Hammer, “What is business process management?,” in Handbook On Comput. Sci., vol. 158, pp. 662–671, Jan. 2019, doi: 10.1016/
Business Process Management 1: Introduction, Methods, and Informa- J.PROCS.2019.09.101.
tion Systems. Berlin, Germany: Springer, 2014, pp. 3–16. [94] R. Gabryelczyk, J. C. Sipior, and A. Biernikowicz, “Motivations to
[71] R. S. Kaplan and D. P. Norton, “Strategic learning & the balanced adopt BPM in view of digital transformation,” Inf. Syst. Manage., 2022,
scorecard,” Strategic Leadership, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 18–24, Mar. 1996, doi: 10.1080/10580530.2022.2163324.
doi: 10.1108/EB054566/FULL/XML. [95] J. Pridmore and J. Godin, “Business process management and digital
[72] R. S. Aguilar-Savén, “Business process modelling: Review and frame- transformation in higher education,” Issues Inf. Syst., vol. 22, no. 4,
work,” Int. J. Prod. Econ., vol. 90, no. 2, pp. 129–149, Jul. 2004, pp. 168–177, 2021, doi: 10.48009/4_iis_2021_180-190.
doi: 10.1016/S0925-5273(03)00102-6. [96] A. Butler, S. R. Letza, and B. Neale, “Linking the balanced scorecard
[73] K. M. Eisenhardt, “Building theories from case study research,” Acad. to strategy,” Long Range Plan., vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 242–153, Apr. 1997,
Manage. Rev., vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 532–550, 1989. doi: 10.1016/S0024-6301(96)00116-1.
[74] A. Van Looy and A. Shafagatova, “Business process performance [97] J. L. Farr and C. M. Ford, “Individual innovation,” in Innovation and Cre-
measurement: A structured literature review of indicators, measures ativity at Work: Psychological and Organizational Strategies. Hoboken,
and metrics,” SpringerPlus, vol. 5, no. 1, Dec. 2016, Art. no. 1797, NJ, USA: Wiley, 1990.
doi: 10.1186/S40064-016-3498-1. [98] V. Venkatesh, J. Y. L. Thong, and X. Xu, “Consumer accep-
[75] A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, Project Manage. tance and use of information technology: Extending the unified the-
Inst., Newtown Square, PA, USA, 2018. ory of acceptance and use of technology,” MIS Quart., vol. 36,
[76] J. Karlsson, C. Wohlin, and B. Regnell, “An evaluation of methods for pp. 157–178, 2012.
prioritizing software requirements,” Inf. Softw. Technol., vol. 39, no. 14– [99] C. Bicchieri and A. Funcke, “Norm change: Trendsetters and social
15, pp. 939–947, 1998. structure,” Soc. Res. Int. Quart., vol. 85, no. 1, pp. 1–21, 2018.
[77] M. A. Mustafa and J. F. Al-Bahar, “Project risk assessment using the [100] C. Bicchieri, Norms in the Wild: How to Diagnose, Measure, and Change
analytic hierarchy process,” IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage., vol. 38, no. 1, Social Norms. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford Univ. Press, 2016.
pp. 46–52, Feb. 1991. [101] G. D. M. Samaradiwakara and G. Chandra, “Comparison of existing
[78] H. Yang and M. Tate, “A descriptive literature review and classification technology acceptance theories and models to suggest a well improved
of cloud computing research,” Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst., vol. 31, no. 1, theory/model,” Int. Tech. Sci. J., vol. 1, pp. 21–36, Jan. 2014.
p. 2, 2012. [102] A. Neely et al., “Performance measurement system design: Devel-
[79] J. Liedtka, “Why design thinking works,” Harvard Bus. Rev., vol. 96, oping and testing a process-based approach,” Int. J. Oper. Prod.
no. 5, pp. 72–79, 2018. Manage., vol. 20, no. 10, pp. 1119–1145, 2000, doi: 10.1108/
[80] T. Bardon, A. Brown, and S. Peze, “Identity regulation, identity work 01443570010343708/FULL/XML.
and phronesis,” Hum. Relations, vol. 70, no. 8, pp. 940–965, Aug. 2017, [103] K. F. Cross and R. L. Lynch, “The ‘SMART’ way to define and sustain
doi: 10.1177/0018726716680724. success,” Nat. Product. Rev., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 23–33, Dec. 1988, doi: 10.
[81] L. Dobusch, L. Dobusch, and G. Müller-Seitz, “Closing for the ben- 1002/NPR.4040080105.
efit of openness? The case of Wikimedia’s open strategy process,” [104] L. Shah, A. Etienne, A. Siadat, and F. B. Vernadat, “(Value, Risk)-
Org. Stud., vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 343–370, Mar. 2019, doi: 10.1177/ based performance evaluation of manufacturing processes,” IFAC
0170840617736930. Proc. Vol., vol. 45, no. 6, pp. 1586–1591, May 2012, doi: 10.3182/
[82] V. Venkatesh, M. G. Morris, G. B. Davis, and F. D. Davis, 20120523-3-RO-2023.00145.
“User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view,” [105] A. M. Asfaw, M. D. Argaw, and L. Bayissa, “The impact of training and
MIS Quart. Manage. Inf. Syst., vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 425–478, 2003, development on employee performance and effectiveness: A case study
doi: 10.2307/30036540. of District Five Administration Office, Bole Sub-City, Addis Ababa,
[83] P. C. Lai, “The literature review of technology adoption models and Ethiopia,” J. Hum. Resour. Sustain. Stud., vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 188–202,
theories for the novelty technology,” J. Inf. Syst. Technol. Manage., 2015.
vol. 14, pp. 21–38, 2017. [106] A. Elnaga and A. Imran, “The effect of training on employee perfor-
[84] A. Robles-Gómez, L. Tobarra, R. Pastor-Vargas, R. Hernández, and J. M. mance,” Eur. J. Bus. Manage., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 137–147, 2013.
Haut, “Analyzing the users’ acceptance of an IoT cloud platform using [107] Y.-H. Lee, Y.-C. Hsieh, and C.-N. Hsu, “Adding innovation diffusion
the UTAUT/TAM model,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 150004–150020, theory to the technology acceptance model: Supporting employees’
2021. intentions to use e-learning systems,” J. Educ. Technol. Soc., vol. 14,
[85] M. D. Williams, N. P. Rana, and Y. K. Dwivedi, “The unified theory no. 4, pp. 124–137, 2011.
of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT): A literature review,” J. [108] T. A. Sykes, V. Venkatesh, and S. Gosain, “Model of acceptance with peer
Enterprise Inf. Manage., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 443–488, 2015. support: A social network perspective to understand employees’ system
[86] V. Venkatesh, “Adoption and use of AI tools: A research agenda grounded use,” MIS Quart., pp. 371–393, 2009.
in UTAUT,” Ann. Oper. Res., vol. 308, pp. 641–652, 2022. [109] W. Poon, “Users’ adoption of e-banking services: The Malaysian per-
[87] D. Magni, V. Scuotto, A. Pezzi, and M. D. Giudice, “Employ- spective,” J. Bus. Ind. Marketing, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 59–69, 2008.
ees’ acceptance of wearable devices: Towards a predictive model,” [110] E. Lwoga, “Critical success factors for adoption of web-based learning
Technol. Forecasting Soc. Change, vol. 172, 2021, Art. no. 121022, management systems in Tanzania,” Int. J. Educ. Develop. Inf. Commun.
doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121022. Technol., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 4–21, 2014.
[88] J. K. Adjei, S. Adams, and L. Mamattah, “Cloud computing adoption in [111] O. Isaac, Z. Abdullah, T. Ramayah, and A. M. Mutahar, “Internet usage,
Ghana; accounting for institutional factors,” Technol. Soc., vol. 65, 2021, user satisfaction, task-technology fit, and performance impact among
Art. no. 101583, doi: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101583. public sector employees in Yemen,” Int. J. Inf. Learn. Technol., vol. 34,
[89] M. Szelagowski
˛ and J. Berniak-Woźny, “How to improve the as- no. 3, pp. 210–241, 2017.
sessment of BPM maturity in the era of digital transformation,” [112] J. J. P.-A. Hsieh, A. Rai, S. Petter, and T. Zhang, “Impact of user
Inf. Syst. E-Bus. Manage., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 171–198, 2022, satisfaction with mandated CRM use on employee service quality,” MIS
doi: 10.1007/s10257-021-00549-w. Quart., vol. 36, pp. 1065–1080, 2012.

Authorized licensed use limited to: TONGJI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2024 at 14:59:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
SATWEKAR et al.: TRIAD OF DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION: HOLISTIC ORCHESTRATION FOR PEOPLE, PROCESS, AND TECHNOLOGY 7831

[113] S. Balasubramanian and M. Gupta, “Structural metrics for goal based [118] D. Craigen, N. Diakun-Thibault, and R. Purse, “Defining cybersecurity,”
business process design and evaluation,” Bus. Process Manage. J., vol. 11, Technol. Innov. Manage. Rev., vol. 4, no. 10, pp. 13–21, 2014.
pp. 680–694, 2005. [119] R. Sivarethinamohan, S. Sujatha, and P. Biswas, “Envisioning the poten-
[114] G. Valiris and M. Glykas, “Business analysis metrics for business process tial of natural language processing (NLP) in health care management,”
redesign,” Bus. Process Manage. J., 10, pp. 445–480, 2004. in Proc. 7th Int. Eng. Conf. “Res. Innov. Amid Glob. Pandemic”, 2021,
[115] N. Loutas, E. Kamateri, F. Bosi, and K. Tarabanis, “Cloud computing pp. 189–193, doi: 10.1109/IEC52205.2021.9476131.
interoperability: The state of play,” in Proc. IEEE 3rd Int. Conf. Cloud [120] B. Zhou, G. Yang, Z. Shi, and S. Ma, “Natural language processing
Comput. Technol. Sci., 2011, pp. 752–757. for smart healthcare,” IEEE Rev. Biomed. Eng., vol. 17, pp. 4–18, 2022,
[116] D. Bernstein, E. Ludvigson, K. Sankar, S. Diamond, and M. Morrow, doi: 10.1109/RBME.2022.3210270.
“Blueprint for the intercloud-protocols and formats for cloud computing [121] O. Volkoff, D. M. Strong, and M. B. Elmes, “Technological embedded-
interoperability,” in Proc. 4th Int. Conf. Internet Web Appl. Serv., 2009, ness and organizational change,” Org. Sci., vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 832–848,
pp. 328–336. Oct. 2007, doi: 10.1287/orsc.1070.0288.
[117] P. W. Singer and A. Friedman, Cybersecurity: What Everyone Needs to
Know. New York, NY, USA: Oxford Univ. Press, 2014.

Authorized licensed use limited to: TONGJI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on June 07,2024 at 14:59:28 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.