Digital Innovation and Institutional Entrepreneurship: Chief Digital Officer Perspectives of their Emerging Role
Abstract
In this study, we explore the role of Chief Digital Officer (CDO) through the perspectives of CDOs in thirty-five organizations. In enacting their emerging role, CDOs must navigate the existing institutionalized context of established information technology (IT) roles and respective jurisdictional claims. We find that CDOs intentionally draw on the term “digital” to distance themselves from existing executive roles in order to gain legitimacy. CDOs as institutional entrepreneurs take a focal role in both: (1) articulating and developing the emerging “digital” logic of action and (2) enacting this digital logic through strategies such as grafting, bridging, and decoupling to navigate tensions between the existing and emerging approaches to innovation with digital technologies.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
There are usually three approaches to the interface and transition between old and new HRM systems: grafting, bridging, and decoupling.
“There are usually three approaches: grafting, bridging, and decoupling (Tumbas et al., 2018).”
From Exploring Human Resource Management Digital Transformation in the Digital Age (2024) · cites this paper as Tumbas et al., 2018
Prior research has discussed how big data analytics technologies become generative digital technologies that enable service innovation, how hybrid intelligent decision support systems should be designed, and how the underlying logic of work is changing.
“In this context, prior research has discussed how big data analytics technologies become generative digital technologies that enable service innovation (Lehrer et al. 2018), how hybrid intelligent decision support systems should be designed (Dellermann et al. 2018), and how the underlying logic of work is changing (Tumbas et al. 2018).”
From How affordances of chatbots cross the chasm between social and traditional enterprise systems (2020) · cites this paper as Tumbas et al. 2018
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 81 · Cited by 242
- Authors
- Tumbas, S., Berente, N., & Brocke, J. V.
- Affiliations
- IESE Business School (ES)
- University of Georgia (US)
- University of Liechtenstein (LI)
- Corresponding author
- Tumbas, Sanja
- Venue
- Journal of Information Technology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2018-09
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 188-202
- ISSN
- 0268-3962 (ISSN-L)
- 1466-4437
- OpenAlex
- W2800716745
- Semantic Scholar
- c5dfa2f26e67e5f4af98407afee8f325ccb66277
- Cited by
- 242
- References
- 81
- Citations by year
- 2026: 25 · 2025: 37 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 46 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 3
- FWCI
- 23.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Information Technology (publishedVersion)
- Journal of the Association for Information Systems (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Information Technology Governance and Strategy
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Information Systems Theories and Implementation
- Keywords
- chief digital officer, institutional entrepreneurship, digital innovation, executive roles, legitimacy, grafting, bridging, decoupling, organizational change, digital transformation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
